Project Design
Prior to the teaching of the reciprocal teaching method I took a baseline reading of each student's ability to use these strategies independently. In learning logs I asked the students to write down anything that wasn't understood that needed to be made clear, what would be good questions to ask as review of the material, what were the most important facts about the reading, and what are some predictions for where the story is going.
I chose to demonstrate for the students the four strategies of the reciprocal teaching method (clarification, question generation, summarization and prediction) in stages and then scaffold off of the previous knowledge to incorporate each new strategy as it was introduced. (For an example of a small vignette using prediction, click here.)
All four strategies were incorporated into my regular reading plans and used with curriculum material, with the majority of the time working from a choice of three novels: The Giver, The Westing Game and Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH. The strategies were continually discussed and applied throughout the months of November through March.
Clarification - the First Strategy
To begin with, I chose to introduce and model the strategy of clarification. The students were introduced to clarification by deciphering the meaning of this new vocabulary word and how it can be effectively used when encountering text. We discussed at great length what happens to readers when they come across difficult or new vocabulary words and how to attack these obstacles with the use of context clues within the selection. We also discussed how it is necessary to clarify the author's voice within the selection, and the author's choice of phrasing. I explained how each are integral components for comprehending text and without applying this strategy, many important facts are lost on the reader. All of these clarifying points were then written on the board along with all student suggestions on how best to identify when clarification is needed.
Over the next week and a half I modeled aloud how to talk through the clarification process as selected texts were read. I chose to read to the whole class during this time so that they can see how a good reader uses the clarification process. (This was the most difficult of the strategies for the students to take ownership of; in fact, it took almost until the end of December for most of the students to internalize this strategy completely. When this occurred it was a pivotal turning point in the student's comprehension, which was very exciting to observe.)
After the modeling of the strategy I had students read independently short fiction pieces and identify any words or phrases that were unclear to them. They recorded this information into a graphic organizer which was later discussed and clarified within cooperative groups of 3 to 4 students.
To scaffold off of this, students were then assigned partners to work with and clarify a more difficult piece of text that demonstrated that clarification was used. They read the pieces aloud and verbalized any important pieces of information that either needed to be clarified or identified as being a significant clue for where the story was going. This piece right here is what challenges students the most with comprehension. Many students are too literal at this age and find it difficult to master the art of the author's choice of wording. Students recorded their thoughts into their own learning logs and I walked around to monitor their thought process.
A comprehensive quiz was administered by me that dealt explicitly with what needed to be clarified. This demonstrated to me whether or not the students were able to comprehend the key components of their text.
Question Generation - the Second Strategy
Question Generation was the second strategy that was introduced to the students. I discussed with the students how questions are created by assessors as a way of measuring what is being comprehended by a reader. I informed them that a person can create their own review questions as they read if they concentrate on the essential details of the plot only.
To begin with, I read with them short pieces of fiction then modeled and demonstrated the ability to create review questions that reflect on the important aspects of what has been read. As an initial step I would ask the students to identify something significant that was taking place in the plot line and to then think of a question to best review that piece of information. I always stressed how important it was to focus on the key elements of the plot line - not insignificant facts that were inconsequential to how the plot developed. I also demonstrated that certain question starters, like "what", "why" and "how" are better to begin higher-level thinking questions. Students practiced creating their own review questions independently and then discussed in cooperative groups the quality of the question: was it important to plot; does it show a review of the story line; is it a literal type question or an inferential type question. After a few days I introduced a rating scale to the students as a way of assessing their own type of question that has been generated. The rating scale was:
3 Question is important to plot line and is an inferential type question (need to read between the lines for comprehension)
2 Question is important to plot line and is a literal type question (stated clearly within story)
1 Question is not important to the plot line and is not a helpful review question
0 Question has nothing to do with plot at all
To scaffold off of this for the next week and a half students were then assigned independent reading passages and asked to create their own review questions and supply the answers. These were completed in their graphic organizers. Afterward in cooperative groups students worked together to discuss the answers to the questions and rate their types of questions from the rating scale above. They discussed orally why they chose each rating and how to improve on the type of question for next time.
As students were working on creating more comprehensive questions they were continuing to build off of the clarification process. This strategy is pertinent for the development of quality question generation.
Summarization - The Third Strategy
As students continued to work on the strategies of clarification and question generation while reading narrative text I introduced the strategy of summarization. Most students were aware of the process of summarization so we began the discussion with what kind of information is important to summarize while reading narrative text. We narrowed it down to just the information that was important to the development of the plot line. This can best be found by asking the six question generation key words: who, what, when, where, why and how. Then we discussed the importance of constantly reviewing and summarizing (like in chapter form to chunk it) so that the plot line is easier to follow and the flow of the story becomes more evident. I wrote down on the board four good questions to look for when summarizing:
-Who is the passage/chapter about?
-What important events are happening in the passage/chapter?
-Where does the majority of the action take place?
-Why does this action take place and how does it affect the plot line?
This process was modeled by me over the next week and a half and the students saw how it is important to record this information into a graphic organizer for better comprehension of the text. Students were assigned text to read independently and to record their summarizations into the graphic organizer. In cooperative groups they shared their thoughts and worked together to add any significant information.
It is important to note that cooperative groups were still clarifying any text that was unclear and creating good review questions that could also be discussed within the cooperative groups. These strategies are influential in the development of better quality summarizations.
Prediction - The Fourth and Final Strategy
Prediction was the last strategy introduced to the students. This is another strategy that students were familiar with but did not necessarily grasp the true value of while reading text. To begin with we discussed what prediction was and why it would be important to use when reading fiction. I discussed how prediction builds off of clarification because the author is intentionally leaving clues behind by using certain choices of phrasing that does lead the reader to formulate how the story should be progressing. These clues can easily be overlooked if a reader is not comprehending the text being read.
I modeled through short passages how prediction can be very precise, based on the author's choice of words. After reading the short passages aloud I asked the students to predict what would happen next. When predictions were made students were required to defend their hypotheses with facts or details from the passage. This is an important element when predicting in text. Evidence supports the thought process and helps fine tune the path of comprehension.
For the next week and a half the students were assigned the task of predicting what would happen next from the chapter currently being read and record their thoughts in the graphic organizer. Not only were they to hypothesize what would happen next in the story but they also needed to supply details to support their theories based on previously-read material. Each person would share their thoughts in cooperative groups and were able to add to their graphic organizer if the need arose.
Assessment of the Four Strategies
Students were required to take three comprehension quizzes that I created to reflect on the chapters read and discussed in cooperative groups. Students were allowed to use their books and their graphic organizers while taking the quiz. Proper use of all four strategies became evident in the answering of the questions, especially the clarification process (which, in my opinion, is the foundation for true comprehension).
Application of All Four Strategies
After a considerable amount of modeling, scaffolding and practicing the students were required to utilize all four strategies, not only with narrative text, but with expository as well.
Narrative:
As the students continued to read their classroom novels each was expected to complete a think-aloud activity sheet. Each student recorded their thoughts as they read independently. After a few chapters of independent work the students would form cooperative groups based on who was reading the same book. Students took turns sharing their thoughts and jotting down any new pieces of information that another team member might have shared that sounded important.
After about four weeks of using the think-aloud activity sheet, I wanted to examine the students ability to metacomprehend these strategies so I did not allow them to use any prepared graphic organizers. As they read their novels independently, I informed them that they may use white paper and record any thoughts they deemed necessary to help guide them through the remaining chapters. I explained how I would create one: I said, "If I were to make my own graphic organizer, I would do the following. Anything that seemed confusing as I read, be it vocabulary or phrasing, I would jot it down on my paper. If a certain episode or detail seemed important to the plot line, I would jot it down on my paper. If I sat back and reflected on what was really important about the section and thought up a good review question, I would jot it down on paper. If clues led me to predict where the plot was going, I would jot it down on paper." Students then read and designed independent organizers that were most useful for them.
Expository:
Throughout the weeks of being taught the reciprocal teaching method, the students were assigned MCAS style material to complete. These were a series of multiple choice questions that were created to assess the comprehension of a piece of nonfiction material. The students were required to read the passages carefully, analyze the questions and all the choices, then choose what they considered to be the best answers. In addition the Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome curriculum was introduced and reinforced in my reading classroom as an interdisciplinary approach to the social studies class each of them attended. Graphic organizers were used as a way of assessing each students' thought process as they read the material independently. In cooperative groups the students repeated the process of discussing items of difficulty and important sections of text.