Back to review of the literature                                      Back to homepage

Almasi, J. F. (1995). The nature of fourth graders' sociocognitive conflicts in peer-led and teacher-led discussions of literature. Research Reading Quarterly 30 (3) 314-351.

        The purpose of this study was to explore and describe the nature of episodes of sociocognitve conflict in 97 fourth grade readers in peer led and teacher led discussions about narrative text. Three areas were examined. One area was students' ability to recognize and resolve episodes of sociocognitive conflict. The second area was the nature of these episodes and (three), the nature of the discourse that occurred during these episodes.

        The participants in the eleven-week investigation included ninety-seven fourth grade students that comprised six classrooms, and six teachers in a suburban elementary school. The heterogeneous groups were classified as average and below average readers.  The school, on the east coast of the United States, served primarily middle-class and working class families.

        Teachers selected twelve pieces of literature that could be read in a twenty-minute sitting and were judged to be thought provoking and interesting to students. Two types of social /cultural contexts set the environment for this study; peer led contexts and teacher led contexts. In the peer led contexts the goals focused on learning how to interact with others in a manner that fostered meaningful interpretation of literature while supporting each other during the process, and setting agendas for interaction in conversational style. The discussion format began with a 5-minute introductory preview phase, followed by a 20-minute discussion and concluding with a 5-minute debriefing. During the peer-led discussions the teacher functioned as a knowledgeable other who provided momentary scaffolding for students and conducted the debriefing by focusing the students on reflecting upon how they interacted and adhered to established guidelines for discussion. In teacher led discussions, goals focused on identifying and comprehending literal, inferential, and critical aspects of the text. Other goals were sharing responses to questions, and locating references within texts to verify ideas in student responses.  In the teacher-led groups the teacher directed discussions by asking comprehension questions then allowing ample time for students to verbalize responses.

        Baseline data on students' ability to recognize and resolve conflict was gathered during the first two weeks of the investigation. During the time base line data was gathered, teachers participated in a two-hour training session on the manner in which peer-led and student-led contexts would be created.  For the remaining nine weeks teachers and researchers maintained contact in the form of written notes and informal discussions. The three types of data that were gathered were, cognitive conflict scenario task, (an individual interview designed by the researcher to measure a student's ability to recognize and resolve conflict during fictitious classroom discussions), transcripts of videotaped discussions, and semi-structured interviews.  At the end of nine weeks similar tests and procedures were conducted and they allowed for a comparison between peer led and teacher led contexts.

        In analyzing data, several frames of interpretive perspectives were used to gain a thorough understanding of the cognitive, social, and cultural practices that were occurring. The investigation was designed to adhere to quantitative standards for use with quasi-experimental methods that permit statistical inferences regarding cognitive and sociolinguistic differences between peer led and teacher led discussions. A constant comparative method that provided analytic induction to gain insight into the way sociocognitive conflict appeared in peer led and student led discussion was used. Additionally, sociolinguistic methods were used to analyze students' language and interaction patterns during times of sociocognitve conflict. Three types of socioconflicts emerged from the data: Conflicts within self, conflicts with others, and conflicts with text.  

       The results revealed variations between peer-led and teacher-led discussions in the areas of student recognition and resolution of conflicts. Students in peer-led discussion groups were significantly better able to recognize and resolve episodes of conflict than students in teacher-led discussions. Sociolinguistic analysis revealed that the type of discourse that occurred in peer-led discussion groups was such that it enabled students to express themselves more fully and to explore topics of interest. The implication of these results is that the decentralization of group discussion allows for richer and more complex discussion than those discussions centralized with the teacher, and therefore result in the internalization of cognitive processes of engaged reading.

   Back to review of the literature                                            Top of Page

 

Almasi, J. F., O'Flahavan, J. F., & Poonam, A. (2001). A comparative analysis of student and teacher development in more and less proficient discussions of literature. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 96-129.

        The purpose of this study was to depict and describe the factors in peer discussion groups that enabled a group of students to be more successful in collaborating to construct meaning from text, and to explore how those factors develop over time. Three areas of inquiry guided the research in comparing proficient and less proficient peer discussion. One was the comparison was how proficient and less proficient groups manage topics. The second was how they manage group process during discussion and the third was how they develop discussion over time.

        The participants in the study were forty-nine fourth graders and their teachers from a school in middle to upper middle class bedroom community on the east coast of the United States. From September through December each classroom had peer discussions that involved nine identical pieces of fourth grade teacher selected literature from their basal.   Student were grouped heterogeneously and ranged from average to below average reading ability. Each teacher followed identical procedures for each text. On the first day of each week teachers introduced the text and activated prior knowledge. The second day of each week students read the text silently and made an entry in a personal journal that included concerns, reactions and questions of the text. On the third day the teachers and students gathered for discussion regarding the text and this day was the focus of the investigation studied here.

        The process for the discussions included three steps, first a five minute introductory and review phase followed by a twenty minute discussion of the text, and then concluded with a five minute debriefing. Videotaped sessions of the weekly discussion groups served as the principal source of data. From the total of fifty-four videotapes, five were selected from the beginning,( weeks one and two), one from the middle, (weeks five or six),  and two from the end, (weeks seven and eight), for each of the six groups. Each tape was transcribed and checked for accuracy.

        Levels of proficiency were determined by these nine characteristics, (a) students add on to interaction and interpretation charts, (b) students refer to text, (c) students respond to one another, (d) students relate to personal experience, (e) students ask questions, (f) students monitor group process, (g) students extend comments by adding on or asking questions, (h) students critically evaluate the text or author, and (i) teacher scaffolds instruction.  Once the levels of proficiency were determined, a microanalysis was used to analyze the specific patterns of discourse to gain insight into the factors that contributed to each proficiency level. This microanalysis considered ways that coherence and sustainment of topic was attained during peer discussions, and the way groups changed or shifted to new topics.

        The findings reveal that more proficient groups engaged in a substantial amount more of shifts to old topics than less proficient groups. This allowed them to revisit a topic until they felt satisfied with the meaning they had constructed for the text. The more proficient group also was better able to sustain topics by using linkages in the text more frequently than less proficient groups. The amount of metatalk when groups decided what to talk about was substantially less in the more proficient groups. It was felt, and the literature on discussions suggests, that large amounts of metatalk can be disruptive to the group's ability to discuss. While, some metatalk is required too much can impair the flow of discussion. The development of discussion overtime seemed to be greatly influenced by the amount of involvement of the teacher. Teacher's dialogue was determined to be ineffective scaffolding when it caused disjuncture in conversation increased metatalk, or caused students to rely on the teacher to solve interaction problems. Development of discussion over time was also affected by the number of time a group met and established conventions for discussion practices.

        The conclusions from this study indicate that peer discussion, while worthwhile is difficult to implement successfully. The study suggests that groups need to meet for at least five times before the members of the more proficient groups could function well together. This would give the groups time to gel and work through the establishment of a set of routines and procedures. The more proficient groups would revisit old topics and make greater linkages between topics and embedded topics within one another for greater coherence. These issues of coherence also needed time to develop for the more proficient groups. Finally the teacher must be extremely careful to ensure that the scaffolding used to facilitate group discussion does not hinder or short-circuit the students ability to take ownership of, or function independent of the teacher. 

 Back to review of the literature                                               Top of Page

Chin, C. A., Anderson, R. C., & Waggoner, M. A., (2001). Patterns of discourse in two kinds of literature discussion. Reading Research Quarterly; 36 (4), 378-411. 

        The study compares two instructional frames of discourse, Recitation and Collaborative Reasoning, to determine the answer to two areas of inquiry. One being whether teachers and students can successfully adopt the student centered, student led approach of Collaborative Reasoning, as opposed to the more traditional teacher directed instructional format of Recitations. And secondly, to determine if Collaborative Reasoning discussion fosters more engagement on the part of the students and the use of higher-level cognitive processing skills when compared to Recitation.  

         Four fourth grade classes from Illinois were involved in the study. Two of the classrooms were from a small parochial school described as above average academically, middle income, and European American with the exception of one Asian child. The other two participating classes were from a public school described as academically average on standardized tests, located in a socioeconomically diverse rural area, and all the children were European American. There were ten homogeneous reading groups with in the four fourth grades, which collectively had 84 students.

          The researchers observed each teacher over a seven-week period as teachers conducted twelve discussions with each reading group. The first two and last two discussions of each group were video taped. The researchers provided the stories that were used in the discussions, but the teachers developed their own questions for the discussions. They videotaped the first two discussions of each group (a total of 20) with teachers using their usual method of discussion. All were analyzed and classified as Recitation discussions.

         Then, all the teachers attended a half-day workshop where they observed a presentation on Collaborative Reasoning and practiced, by role-playing, the Collaborative Reasoning form of discussion. Teachers practiced ten sessions of Collaborative Reasoning discussions in their classrooms, and the final two were videotaped.

        In total, there were 40-videotaped sessions; sixteen of these were selected for quantitative analysis. Data was analyzed by number of utterances, turns taken in speaking, questions raised, and cognitive processes in student talk. The first question was as to whether students and teachers could implement the Collaborative Reasoning frame of instruction successfully.  The results supported that students and teachers could successfully implement the Collaborative Reasoning frame of discussion. Teachers had more difficulty shifting control of topic and turn taking to students than they did shifting interpretive authority to students.

        The second question was as to whether Collaborative Reasoning discussions would foster more engagement of students and higher level cognitive processing than Recitations. The results indicated that during Collaborative Reasoning discussions, the patterns of discourse indicate greater student engagement, and greater intellectual productivity by using more elaboration, predictions and use of textual support and prior knowledge than in Recitation discussions.

        The implications drawn from the study are that typical teachers can use Collaborative Reasoning successfully. Collaborative Reasoning discussions enhance student engagement and encourage the use of productive cognitive processes integral to learning. Collaborative Reasoning may be a useful way to engage lower proficiency students in higher levels of academic discourse.

        Various frames of discourse can be used for varying purposes. Recitation, for example, may help with story understanding where Collaborative Reasoning would promote reasoning skills. The study indicates that Collaborative Reasoning can be used with positive effects in upper elementary school.

Back to review of the literature                                                  Top of Page
 

Eeds, M., Wells, D. (1989). Grand Conversations: An exploration of meaning construction in literature study groups. Research in the Teaching of English, 23, 4-29. 

        The purpose of the study was to explore what happens when children and teachers come together to talk about a work they had all read. The researchers were curious to see if the theories that support reader response and discussion would be readily apparent in promoting literacy during these “grand conversations.” The focus of this naturalistic study was specifically whether or not groups of young children, talking with their teachers in a collaborative group, would indeed address themselves to literary issues. And, would these issues of literacy immerge in as a natural part of conversation and include talk that reflected and related to what they had personally experienced.

        The participants in the study were 17 college students enrolled in undergraduate reading practicum, who were being taught by the researchers, acting as literature study leaders for student groups of four to eight fifth and sixth grade students. Book talks were presented for the students after which students could choose which group they would attend. Children were heterogeneously grouped and met twice a week for thirty minutes (number of weeks not specified in study). The college students had no previous working with children and this was felt to allow for a more fresh view of how discussion groups should proceed as opposed to experienced teachers who were used to conducting “gentle inquisitions” over weekly basal stories. Two of the groups were dropped from the study and the fifteen remaining were audio taped. Researchers were participant observers and took field notes. Group leaders generated journals that the researchers responded to. All the audiotapes were transcribed providing a large set of data. Four studies were selected for an in depth analysis. Instances of transaction that showed teachers and students building meaning from what they and the author brought to the text were sought. The following categories were identified for coding purposes: 1. Conversation maintenance, talk which included comments that began conversation, kept it going, or in some cases stopped it. 2. Involvement, which included comments that inspired a personal association. 3. Literal comprehension, which included all literal retellings, references to descriptors, and reiterated facts. 4. Inference, which included all comments, which seem to have required interpretation. 5. Evaluation, which included several types of evaluation depending on the degree of support given to an evaluative comment.

        The data analysis revealed that the children and leaders carried out what is traditionally called comprehension skills even when the teacher refrained from posing traditional questions of an efferent nature. In the four studies that were analyzed, four major categories of talk were identified in varying proportions in each group. Talk that represented constructing simple meaning, where groups sought an agreed upon group constructed meaning. Talks that recounted personal involvement and helped students develop personal significance the text had for them. Talk that involved inquiry which arose in the form of active hypothesizing, interpreting and verifying of the text to uncover meaning. Talk that addressed what was liked and why led to the fourth category called critique.

        The results of this study indicate that young heterogeneously grouped students are capable of addressing themselves to literacy practices during rich discussions of works of literature. The results support the assertion that talk helps to validate, broaden, or transform individual interpretations and promotes greater understanding of the text. While all the groups engaged in the four types of talk in varying degrees, they were not all perceived as equally successful. Success was dependent upon the teachers' ability to recognize, seize and utilize teachable moments as they arose in discussion to develop literacy skills. The implication this holds for teachers is the importance of skilled questioning and awareness of these teachable moments during these types of “grand conversation”.

Back to review of the literature                                                          Top of Page

Evans, K. S. (2002). Fifth-grade students' perceptions of how they experience literature discussion groups. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 46-69.

        This study investigated the perceptions of fifth grade students in response to their participation in peer-led discussion groups. The researcher in this study wished to gain a clearer perspective on the students' perceptions of peer-led discussion to better understand the complex instructional context of such discussions groups.

        The study, which was conducted over a year, took place in a fifth grade classroom and involved 11 boys and 11 girls. The class was culturally diverse and was located in a working class neighborhood. The classroom teacher was in her third year of teaching fifth grade and a former graduate student of the researcher who also had previously taught fifth grade.

        Literature study periods occurred two days a week and followed the following teacher designed framework, which drew from numerous models of literature discussion rather than one pure from. The daily structure included read-aloud by the teacher or researcher for 20 minutes, a mini lesson 10-15 minutes in length, independent reading time of literature study book/writing in logs (30 minutes), literature discussion groups for 20-30 minutes, and a whole class debriefing about literature discussions.

        Data was collected throughout the year and included primary and secondary sources. Primary data included transcribed literature discussions and the transcriptions of the group's reflection on their discussion to provide information on the student's perception and perspective. Videotapes of discussion were made and analyzed for the problem solving behavior groups used when they encountered difficulties. Students viewed these videotapes and then they reflected upon their perceptions of the study. The reflection questions that prompted student discussion were aimed at addressing the development of reading/literacy and group process in discussion. Secondary sources of data collection were field notes and student work. Students were also given a sociometric measure that asked them to select three students they would like to be grouped with and why.

        The analysis of the data was conducted simultaneously and after all data had been collected. A constant comparative method was used to collect and compare data with emerging themes being formed. One theme that emerged was that students have a clear notion of the conditions that are conductive to effective discussions. Students identified five conditions for effective discussion; basic requirements, respect issues, people you can work with, task structure assigned by the teacher, and the text being read.

        The second theme was the students said that the gender makeup of their discussion groups influenced how they participated in and experienced their discussions. Students used gender as a reason that the group was working well or experiencing difficulty.

        The third theme was that students said the presence of a bossy group member influenced their participation in discussions. Students felt bossy members were a negative influence in their group. Differentiated from leaders, bossy members were not conducive to turn taking or including everyone.  The trustworthiness of the final three themes that emerged from data analysis was checked by presenting the for a whole class discussion, to obtain their perspective and perceptions.

        The results of the study reveal that fifth grade students can identify and describe the conditions and needs for successful literature discussions groups. Implications from these findings for educators relate to the usefulness of student input into constructing effective discussion groups.

 Back to review of the literature                                                  Top of Page

Goatley, V. J., Brock, C. H., & Raphael, T. E. (1995). Diverse learners participating in regular education “ Book Clubs”. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 352-380.

        This study investigates the interaction of a diverse group of fifth grade students as they read and respond to a novel in their reading program in a regular education setting using the Book Club format of student-led discussion. The questions were specifically: 1. How do student-led discussion groups provide diverse students with the opportunities for participation? What is the nature of students' participation as they assume different roles, responsibilities, and means for negotiation? 2. What opportunities to develop text interpretation abilities, central to literature-based instruction, occur for diverse students within student-led discussion groups?

        While focusing on a small group of diverse five fifth grade students, the dynamics of classroom discourse were investigated. The students were from a midwestern urban k-5 neighborhood school with students from a range of cultural backgrounds.  Three of the five students were traditionally being given reading instruction in a pull out program (ESL, special education resource room, and chapter  one). The ESL student was in her third year in an American school. One boy was a special needs student who had a school history of   academic problems. The third read child independently but had difficulty with comprehension. 

        The researchers used qualitative and sociolinguistic methods to collect data. Data sources included: interviews and questionnaires of student perception of their roles in Book Club, researchers' field notes on Book Club, Audiotapes of discussions and whole class activities, and video tapes of Book Clubs to view physical interactions and expressions, and students written work in response to literature.

        Analysis of data was done in four phases. First the researchers met and discussed the research question and how the data source addressed each question. Next, they individually examined the data to identify aspects that gave information about the diverse students interactions and construction of meaning in the group. Third, the researchers compared their notes and constructed two categories for organizing information across sources. These categories were, (a) “how to discuss” during book clubs in terms of participation modes, and (b) “what to discuss” (i.e., clarifying confusions, constructing meaning, locating information. Fourth, they examined the data from various sources for each of the two categories and looked for patterns, triangulating the data and unfolding the reading circumstances.

        Five of the thirteen book club sessions representing the book club across time were selected and analyzed for student levels of participation. These were analyzed for number of turns taken in speaking and the length of time the student held the floor.  The number of turns taken was stronger for the more experienced book clubbers. They began the year with confidence and displayed more turns taken during each book club session. Analysis of the data also disclosed that the interests, strengths and skills of the individual was reflected in their responses and that these did not necessarily map onto the students ability, school experience, facility with English or the regular education classroom. The ESL student for example, frequently assumed a leadership role in the group posing questions and making statements that focused the group on the book and initiated or changed a topic being discussed since her Vietnamese heritage allowed her to relate personally to a book that drew on the Vietnam War.  She answered many questions about Vietnam for the group. Data showed that the focus for discussion was often related to personal experience to clarify events from the story. The group negotiated among themselves to define ways to get the floor to speak. The data revealed that the students in the group drew on each other's knowledge and together scaffold each other's meaning construction. They would also challenge each other's interpretations and valued the knowledge of their peers.

        The implication of this study for diverse learners participating in regular education Book Club groups is that students not typically included in regular education settings can participate in this format to the mutual benefit of all students. The diverse backgrounds and prior knowledge of students helped scaffold the learning experiences of all learners.  The discussion contributions of the special or diverse learners were similar to that of their regular education peers. The diverse students in the study constructed their knowledge of text through social interactions that transpired in their Book Club discussions.

Back to review of the literature                                                      Top of Page       

 

Maloch, B. (2002). Scaffolding Student Talk: One teacher's role in literature discussion groups. Reading Research Quarterly, 37 (1) 94-112.

        The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the teacher's role and the students' participation in literature discussion groups. The study explores the dynamics of literature discussion groups, and the role of the teacher in facilitating and supporting students in the transition to student centered/led discussion.

        The qualitative study analyzed data of teacher student interactions collected from a third grade classroom over a five-month period. The participants in the study included a third grade class that contained 29 students (14 males and 15 females), with varying ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds, in a school that draws its student population from working and middle class neighborhoods, lower income areas, and the inner city. The mix of students contained four English as second language students, four special needs students, and one student identified as gifted and talented. The teacher in the study was in her fifth year and from a middle class background. The researcher was an observer in the class for the purpose of gathering information of the literature discussion groups.

        The data was collected by use of participant observation, interviews with the teacher, and collection of artifacts such as literature response logs, teacher handouts and notes. Field notes, along with video and audio recordings were other methods of data collection. Approximately 30-literature discussion groups were videotaped over two different sets of discussion cycles. Three interviews with the teacher were conducted, one at the beginning before literature groups were initiated, one during the literature group process, and one at the conclusion of the year. The formal interviews with the teacher were transcribed.

        A constant comparative method, and microanalysis of pertinent episodes of teacher/student participation patterns was used to analyze the data. Field notes were reviewed weekly to identify initial and developing patterns of the teacher's role in discussion groups, and how she fostered group discussion as the study progressed. Raw data such as videotapes and transcripts were shared informally with the teacher for purposes of triangulation and member checking. Discourse was analyzed in a manner that focused on scaffolding, and the construction of shared knowledge by the group. The teacher's interventions and student responses were analyzed for metalinguistic value (how they fostered the acquisition of exploratory talk by the discussion groups). The researcher selected Mercer's (1995,1998) framework for analyzing classroom talk, which allowed for the clarification of knowledge building and discourse appropriation as it occurs over time. Mercer's notion of “exploratory talk”, discussion in which participants engage in critical, but constructive conversation with each other ideas, was the desired outcome for student's discussions. Two significant themes evolved from the analysis of the study. One being the difficult nature of moving from a teacher led to a student led format of discussion, and two being the reactive and metalinguistic nature of teacher interventions that helped move students along in the task of leading the discussions productively.

        The implication of this study is that the process of moving from a recitation style structure of discussion to one more student centered is a challenging task. Still, the implementation is possible with responsive scaffolding and support by the teacher.  The need for metalinguistic interventions by the teacher, that teach students conversational and discussion strategies, decreased over time indicating that the students internalized the strategies that were explicitly taught to them during literature discussion groups. The scaffolding approaches were direct and indirect elicitations, modeling, highlighting of strategies, and reconstructive recaps. The type and length of the intervention varied in response to the students needs. A shared knowledge and common vocabulary that developed due to the scaffolding interventions by the teacher enabled the students to require less and less explicit forms of the intervention, and gradually assume more leadership of discussion.

Back to review of the literature                                                  Top of Page

McMahon, S. I., Goatley, V. J. (1995). Fifth graders helping peers discuss text in student-led groups. Journal of Educational Research 89, 23-35.

        The purpose of this investigation was to determine how fifth graders with prior experience in student-led discussion experiences acted as “knowledgeable others” for peers whose discussion experiences had been teacher-led and grounded in the basal reading program. The focus was on how students who ere experienced in participating in the Book Club program the previous year could interact in an instructional context in student led discussions with inexperienced peers.

        The participants in this study were five fifth grade students who represented the cultural diversity in the classroom, and ranged in reading ability from students who qualified for Chapter 1 services to a girl who qualified for the gifted program. Two of the students were in their second year of the Book Club program and three students were new to the program.

        Data was collected over a four-week period in September of 1991.   The study collected data in the from of audio taped discussion and transcripts, researchers' field notes of all components of Book Club, video tapes of book club meeting to show physical interactions and expressions, interviews to illicit student perceptions f their roles within book clubs, and students written work in response to the literature. An in depth analysis of students discussion on three days was conducted. The three days represented one at the beginning of the book, one in the middle, and one during the final chapter.

        The student-led discussions were the primary focus of the study so tapes transcripts, and field notes of the discussions were analyzed first for pattern in student discourse and reactions. Students were interviewed and their answers probed to identify their perceptions of their role in the discussions.

        The analysis of the data was inductive in nature as the data highlighted emerging themes and patterns was catalogued. Triangulation of data was used to verify sources between transcripts field notes and videotapes as patterns of talk were examined. Finally student interviews added the students' own perspective to the identified patterns.

        The teacher provided two types of instructional support as students began their student-led book clubs. One was the teacher providing directions and modeling on how and what to share and how to encourage others share ideas. The teacher provided specific directions on how to include log entries into discussions and how to decide what types of ideas might be topics for discussions.

        Over the course of four-week period a series of transitions began to emerge in student discourse patterns. There was an initial reliance on the traditional I-R-E (Initiate, Respond, Evaluate) pattern with one of the students who was experienced in Book Club discussions taking on a teacher-like role. Then there was a movement toward other students taking on the role of initiator, and finally a movement away from an IRE pattern that included more elaboration, clarification, and debate. The teacher's input during community share that stressed the student leadership was reflected in the shift to shared leadership.

        The findings from this study indicates that the student-led discussion group can initially simulate the teacher led pattern of I-R-E interaction pattern, students need continual teacher and peer support to adjust to new expectations and roles, and with time and support students will adopt alternative discourse formats.

        One implication of this study is that students have the tendency to follow the same pattern of discussion that they participate in in the classroom. Students may define discussion as the I-R-E pattern that limits the interpretation of text to what the more knowledgeable other determines as important or that students may become passive in classroom participating only when called upon. The definition of discussion for students should include the students' expression of their own ideas and thoughts and these types of discussions need to be supported and facilitated by teachers.
 

Back to review of the literature                                                  Top of Page
 

Mizerka, P. M. (1999). The impact of teacher-directed literature circles versus student-directed literature circles on reading comprehension at the sixth grade level. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Ilinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1999). Dissertation Abstracts International, 60, 3307.

        The purpose of this study was to determine how student-directed and teacher-directed literature circles affect reading comprehension and to focus on the advantages or disadvantages in reading comprehension between the two groups.

        The major research question was: What are the differences in student-directed literature circles and teacher-directed literature circles in reading comprehension at the sixth grade level as measured on the pre and post California Achievement Test? There were also related questions that compared comprehension growth as measured by evaluating student portfolios and audio tape transcripts, criterion reference tests, attitude surveys, number of pages read independently, and choices in types of ways students chose to verify books, in both student-led and teacher-led literature circles.

        The participants in the study were sixth grade students from the school where the researcher taught, a neighborhood school on the west side of Chicago where the student body is 50% African-American and 50% Hispanic. The 50 students involved in the study were members of two heterogeneously mixed classrooms. Students ranged in ability from below average to above-average levels. The classrooms are referred to a room T and room S for identification in this study. The students in room T were in teacher-directed literature circles, and room S was student-directed literature circles.

        Qualitative and Quantitative research was conducted for this study. Raw scores and percentile ranks were gathered from the California Achievement Test as a pretest for reading comprehension. A survey was given to measure students' attitude toward reading. Students in room S were given an oral reading inventory. Training was provided to class S in student directed literature circle format. The model of student-directed literature groups used assigned roles to students. The teacher visited with the group to make sure they had divided their roles and were on task. All discussions were taped. At the completion of a book a group project was done and presented, a criterion reference test was given and each student was asked to rate their participation in the group in reading, written work, discussion cooperation and time on task. Five books were completed in this manner in the student led groups.

        The teacher led groups involved the teacher modeling comprehension strategies, answering comprehension questions on paper and using these questions as a focus for discussions. Students kept response journals, retold stories in the first person and wrote letter to main characters. At the conclusion of each book students in room T took criterion-referenced tests and placed their papers and journals in their portfolios. At the end of the twenty-first week both groups took the same California Achievement Test as a posttest for reading comprehension. A combination of pre and post California Achievement Test scores, student portfolios, analysis of literature circle discussions, performance on criterion reference tests, pre and post attitudinal surveys and records of daily reading were used to create and compare student-directed and teacher-directed literature circles.

        Quantitative comparison of the California Achievement test for reading comprehension scores there was no difference between the teacher-directed and student-directed literature circle groups.  Therefore there were advantages for both groups in reading comprehension. Student portfolios were evaluated on a four-point rubric.

        The result of rubric comparison showed no significant difference in the portfolio scores between student-directed and teacher-directed literature groups. The fact that  the student directed group worked independently and still scored as well as the teacher directed group is seen as an advantage for student-directed groups.

        Transcripts analyzed from literature discussion groups showed that the student-directed discussion group participated in discussions at a far greater frequency than the students in the teacher-directed discussion groups.  This is a disadvantage to the teacher directed group.

        Criterion reference tests showed that room T scored higher on three of the five criterion reference tests. This finding translates as an advantage for teacher-directed literature circles.

        Changes in attitude measured by a pre and post reading survey showed advantages for both teacher-directed and student-directed literature circles, while the number of pages read by students independently showed neither advantages or disadvantages for either group. Method of book reading verification varied from room S and T, with S being more likely to electronic verification and room T to verify books in writing and oral conferences with the teacher. It was felt the students in room S were used to working independently and felt comfortable with the use of Electronic Bookshelf. The students in both classes had the advantage of choice in how they went about verifying books.

        The implications of this study for educators is that advantages exist for both student-directed and teacher-directed literature circles, and it is up to the teacher to know her students well enough to use the strengths from both methods effectively in the classroom.

      Back to review of the literature                                               Top of Page   

Van den Branden, K. (2000). Does negotiation of meaning promote reading comprehension? A study of multilingual primary school classes. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 426-443.

        This quasi-experimental study investigated whether, the negotiation of meaning had an affect on the comprehension of written input. The study was directed to answer these two main research questions. One, does negotiation of meaning promote the comprehension of Dutch written input by primary school pupils and two, under which conditions does negotiation of meaning optimally promote the comprehension of written input in the context of the real-life language classroom.

        The questions in this study were investigated through the examination of a multilingual primary school setting. The participants in this study were 151 primary school children that ranged in age from 10 to 12 years. The 76 boys and 75 girls were drawn form the fifth grades of eight Flemish primary schools. The children were from heterogeneous socioeconomic groups and diverse in ethnicity as well. Due to this ethnic diversity the students were tested for Dutch language proficiency prior to the actual experiment. And assigned to one of four proficiency levels: very high, (level A), moderately high, (level B), moderately lo, (level C), and very low, (level D). The pupils were given a Dutch detective story to read that was written by the researcher for the occasion of the study. The teachers who work with the children showed through an interview, a clear consensus that detective stories were the children's favorite when it came to reading. It was felt this partialness to detective stories would be highly motivating to students to want to understand the input with which they were confronted. The story was twelve chapters long and each chapter followed the same pattern with a comprehension test at the end of the main ideas in the chapter.  

        The procedure for the study presented four different reading conditions. Two involved modification of the text and two did not.  They are unmodified input condition where the pupils were asked to read a chapter in silence and answer the accompanying comprehension test.. Premodified input condition where students were presented with modified chapters regarding changes in simplified vocabulary, simplified syntax, with more verbatim repetitions. Collective negotiation condition where the student read unmodified chapters than was given the opportunity to negotiate about the meaning of unfamiliar words and phrase with the rest of the class where the teacher incited the pupils to search for meaning collectively. Pair negotiation condition, where the students read an unmodified version and then negotiated with another pupil before taking the comprehension test.

        The participants all worked through each condition with the twelve chapters, with three chapters of each condition mentioned. 

        The result showed a consistent picture. All classes showed the lowest mean scores in the unmodified input condition. Mean scores for the premodified input condition were better than the unmodified condition but not as good as for the two negotiated conditions, collective negotiation and pair negotiation.

        The following conclusions can be made from the findings: input modifications, specifically simplification of vocabulary and syntax, enhance comprehension; negotiation of meaning of difficult words and phrases (collectively and in pairs) enhanced comprehension; students did better when they negotiated than when they worked on premodified text; collective negotiation was significantly more effective than pair negotiation. Negotiation of meaning of unmodified material resulted in higher comprehension than premodifying the same text. The results also indicated that results for students who worked with a peer of a different level of language proficiency were higher than those who negotiated with a peer of similar language proficiency. Implications for classroom settings seem to be favorable for collective and peer negotiation to assist with comprehension of text for multilingual students.

 Back to review of the literature                                                      Top of Page

Villaume, S.K., Hopkins, L. (1995). A Transactional and Sociocultural View of Response in a Fourth-Grade Literature Discussion Group. Reading Research and Instruction, 34, 190-203.

        This study investigated two areas. One inquiry was about the types of transactions between text and personal knowledge that appear in literature discussions of elementary students, and secondly, how social dialogue about literature impacts personal response.

        The participants were five fourth grade students and a reading specialist. The students were a racially mixed group of three girls and two boys who ranged from above average to low average according to their teacher. The participants were part of a classroom that met weekly in five small discussion groups for 25 minutes. An adult facilitated each group. Students prepared for discussions by reading and then writing in literature response journals. Prior to the discussion taking place a mini-lesson of discussion strategies was conducted. These lessons covered topics such as the attributes of a good listener, differences between less effective and more effective discussion topics and how to stay on topic.

        Researchers collected data over a ten-week period. Discussions were videotaped, and two of these (on the fifth and eight weeks of the study), were targeted for analysis. Using the research questions as a guide, vignettes were constructed that were categorized as transactions along with information from audiotapes, literature response logs, students' written comments about discussion groups, field notes of actual discussion groups, and researchers dialogue about the discussion groups. The four types of transactions that were used for coding were:  Text world transactions, which focused on evoking details of the books. Personal world transactions in which a students personal knowledge or personal experience was related to the text. Improvised world transactions in which students altered text   by placing themselves in place of the characters or transferring text events to their own personal lives. Related text transactions, which represented responses in which students related the text to other books or movies they had seen.

        The results of the coding procedure revealed that    elementary students are capable of engaging in student centered discussions and creating multiple bridges between text, personal experiences, imagined experiences, and could relate text to other texts or story scenes in movies. The results suggest that social encounters around literature affect personal response and that observing how others transact with text can impact group participation by scaffolding one another's responses. This finding supports prior research that in-depth and critical thinking is developed through interactions with other people.

        The implications of this study's findings indicate the classroom teacher should strive to create social contexts where mixed ability groups can work together to scaffold personal response, and thus enable students to grow into the intellectual life around them.

 Back to review of the literature                                                    Top of Page

Wollman-Bonilla, J. E. (1994). Why don't they just speak? Attempting literature discussion with more and less able readers. Research in the Teaching of English, 28, 321-256.

        This study analyzes two literature discussion groups in a sixth grade classroom. The groups were constructed homogeneously with students of more able and less able reading ability. By examining two out of eight literature discussion groups in a sixth grade classroom, the researcher seeks to show how the resulting discourse reflected the differences in success of the teachers intended goal to make a space for the students' voice and foster collaborative discussion.

        The participants in the study were sixth grade students from an alternative public school in a large city. The socioeconomic composition of the class was diverse. The teacher had twenty years experience with nine of them being at the school where the study took place. Two groups out of the classes eight groups were selected for the investigation. One group consisted of relatively weak readers and the other group consisted of grade level and above readers. The lower group read James and the Giant Peach. This group consisted of two boys and two girls with a fourth grade reading ability as determined in an Informal Reading Inventory. The higher group consisted of students who tested at reading levels ranging from sixth to tenth grade level. The teacher never explained the purpose for the groups or why they were grouped the way they were to the students, but allowed for these aspects to take shape and evolve by the interaction of the participants.

        Data was collected from field notes, and interview transcripts that were coded into emerging categories of themes which were then used to help direct data collection from analysis of discussion transcripts. Four types of codes were established from the transcripts; procedural ( e.g., read chapter three for next time); read aloud ( participants read aloud from their text); discussion (substantive contributions of talk of the text);  And back channel( talk which signaled attention but did not contribute to discussion content).

        After the turns were coded only the discussion turns were analyzed further.  Four types of discussion turns were identified; Introducing topic (IT): turns that introduce a new topic, Topic incorporating (TI); turns that incorporate prior speakers topic, reintroducing topic (RT); turns that reintroduce a topic raised earlier, Topic collaborating (TC); turns that sustain the prior speakers topic.

        The results of the data revealed distinct differences in the way students of the two groups viewed the purpose of literature discussion groups, and the way they constructed and maintained group discussions. The higher ability group viewed discussion groups as a time to eagerly share and learn from one another's views on the book discussed. They viewed the teacher as more of an equal in discussion and not as the ultimate authority in the group. They collaboratively constructed meaning and exhibited confidence about their reading, and were comfortable in responding to and sharing ideas with their peers. The stated they all found reading pleasurable and read for that reason daily.

        The less able readers constructed a more teacher-dominated group. They usually waited to be questioned or called on before participating in the group. They resisted engaging in informal discussion even after repeated urging by the teacher to just speak-up without raising their hands. They openly discussed their reading weakness and lack of confidence in reading and comprehension and were afraid to offer their ideas unless questioned by the teacher. They stated they read when they were bored, had no other options or before bed, but none of them found reading personally gratifying.

        The study highlights the dilemmas teachers face when trying to implement literature based discussion groups in the classroom with a wide range of reading levels. The suggestion of teachers providing explicit guidance for students on how to engage in informal talk, by explaining exactly what teachers intend to happen during informal discussion groups is made.  The teacher's choice of text and grouping methods are suggested as other areas of influences of the outcomes in literature discussions.