Improving Adolescent Literacy: Effective Classroom and Intervention Practices

IES PRACTICE GUIDE WHAT WORKS CLEARINGHOUSE

Improving Adolescent Literacy:
Effective Classroom and
Intervention Practices

NCEE 2008-4027
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) publishes practice guides in education
to bring the best available evidence and expertise to bear on the types of systemic
challenges that cannot currently be addressed by single interventions or programs.
Authors of practice guides seldom conduct the types of systematic literature searches
that are the backbone of a meta-analysis, although they take advantage of such work
when it is already published. Instead, authors use their expertise to identify the
most important research with respect to their recommendations, augmented by a
search of recent publications to ensure that research citations are up-to-date.

Unique to IES-sponsored practice guides is that they are subjected to rigorous exter-
nal peer review through the same office that is responsible for independent review
of other IES publications. A critical task for peer reviewers of a practice guide is to
determine whether the evidence cited in support of particular recommendations is
up-to-date and that studies of similar or better quality that point in a different di-
rection have not been ignored. Because practice guides depend on the expertise of
their authors and their group decisionmaking, the content of a practice guide is not
and should not be viewed as a set of recommendations that in every case depends
on and flows inevitably from scientific research.

The goal of this practice guide is to formulate specific and coherent evidence-based
recommendations that educators can use to improve literacy levels among adoles-
cents in upper elementary, middle, and high schools. The target audience is teach-
ers and other school personnel with direct contact with students, such as coaches,
counselors, and principals. The guide includes specific recommendations for edu-
cators and the quality of evidence that supports these recommendations.

IES PRACTICE GUIDE

E ective Classroom and
Intervention Practices

August 2008

Panel
Michael L. Kamil (Chair)
STANFORD UNIVERSITY

Geo rey D. Borman
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN—MADISON

Janice Dole
UNIVERSITY OF UTAH

Cathleen C. Kral
BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Terry Salinger
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH

Joseph Torgesen
FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY

Sta
Xinsheng “Cindy” Cai
Fiona Helsel
Yael Kidron
Elizabeth Spier
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH

NCEE 2008-4027
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

This report was prepared for the National Center for Education Evaluation and Re-
gional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences under Contract ED-02-CO-0022.

Disclaimer
The opinions and positions expressed in this practice guide are the authors’ and do
not necessarily represent the opinions and positions of the Institute of Education Sci-
ences or the U.S. Department of Education. This practice guide should be reviewed
and applied according to the specific needs of the educators and education agency
using it, and with full realization that it represents the judgments of the review
panel regarding what constitutes sensible practice, based on the research that was
available at the time of publication. This practice guide should be used as a tool
to assist in decisionmaking rather than as a “cookbook.” Any references within the
document to specific education products are illustrative and do not imply endorse-
ment of these products to the exclusion of other products that are not referenced.

U.S. Department of Education
Margaret Spellings
Secretary

Institute of Education Sciences
Grover J. Whitehurst
Director

National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance
Phoebe Cottingham
Commissioner

August 2008

This report is in the public domain. While permission to reprint this publication is
not necessary, the citation should be:

Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C., Salinger, T., and Torgesen, J. (2008).
Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and intervention practices: A Prac-
tice Guide (NCEE #2008-4027). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evalu-
ation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of
Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc.

This report is available on the IES Web site at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc.

Alternative Formats
On request, this publication can be made available in alternative formats, such as
Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette. For more information, call the
Alternative Format Center at (202) 205–8113.

Effective Classroom and Intervention Practices

Contents
Introduction 1

The What Works Clearinghouse standards and their relevance to this guide 3

Improving Adolescent Literacy: Effective Classroom and Intervention Practices 4

Overview 4

Scope of the practice guide 8

Checklist for carrying out the recommendations 9

Recommendation 1. Provide explicit vocabulary instruction 11

Recommendation 2. Provide direct and explicit comprehension
strategy instruction 16

Recommendation 3. Provide opportunities for extended discussion of text
meaning and interpretation 21

Recommendation 4. Increase student motivation and engagement in
literacy learning 26

Recommendation 5. Make available intensive and individualized interventions
for struggling readers that can be provided by trained specialists 31

Conclusion 37

Appendix A. Postscript from the Institute of Education Sciences 38

Appendix B. About the Authors 41

Appendix C. Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest 42

Appendix D. Technical information on the studies 43

References 52

( iii )

IMPROvIng ADOLESCEnT LITERACy: EffECTIvE CLASSROOM AnD InTERvEnTIOn PRACTICES

List of tables
1. Institute of Education Sciences levels of evidence for practice guides 2

2. Recommendations and corresponding levels of evidence to support each 7

( iv )

Introduction reading instruction, we use this informa-
tion to make broader points about im-
The goal of this practice guide is to present proving practice. In this guide we have
specific and coherent evidence-based rec- tried to take findings from research or
ommendations that educators can use to practices recommended by experts and
improve literacy levels among adolescents describe how recommendations might ac-
in upper elementary, middle, and high tually unfold in school settings. In other
schools. The panel purposefully included words, we aim to provide sufficient detail
students in 4th and 5th grades within the so that educators will have a clear sense
realm of adolescents because their in- of the steps necessary to make use of the
structional needs related to literacy have recommendations.
more in common with those of students
in middle and high school than they do A unique feature of practice guides is the
with students in early elementary grades. explicit and clear delineation of the qual-
Many students in grades 4 and up experi- ity—as well as quantity— of evidence that
ence difficulty acquiring the advanced lit- supports each claim. To do this, we used
eracy skills needed to read in the content a semi-structured hierarchy suggested by
areas.1 The target audience for the practice IES. This classification system uses both
guide is teachers and other school person- the quality and the quantity of available
nel who have direct contact with students, evidence to help determine the strength of
such as coaches, counselors, and princi- the evidence base grounding each recom-
pals. The practice guide includes specific mended practice (table 1).
recommendations for educators along with
a discussion of the quality of evidence that Strong refers to consistent and generaliz-
supports these recommendations. able evidence that a practice causes bet-
ter outcomes for students in measures of
We, the authors, are a small group with reading proficiency.2
expertise on this topic. The range of evi-
dence we considered in developing this Moderate refers either to evidence from
guide is vast, ranging from experimental studies that allow strong causal conclu-
studies in which reading was the depen- sions but cannot be generalized with as-
dent variable, to trends in the National As- surance to the population on which a rec-
sessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) ommendation is focused (perhaps because
data, to correlational and longitudinal the findings have not been widely repli-
studies, again with reading as the major cated) or to evidence from studies that
variable of interest. For questions about are generalizable but have more causal
what works best, high-quality experimen- ambiguity than offered by experimental
tal and quasi-experimental studies—such designs (statistical models of correlational
as those meeting the criteria of the What data or group comparison designs for
Works Clearinghouse (http://www.ies. which equivalence of the groups at pretest
ed.gov/ncee/wwc)—have a privileged is uncertain).
position. In all cases we pay particular
attention to findings that are replicated Low refers to expert opinion based on rea-
across studies. sonable extrapolations from research and
theory on other topics and evidence from
Although we draw on evidence about
the effectiveness of specific practices in 2. Following What Works Clearinghouse guide-
lines, we consider a positive, statistically signifi-
1. Biancarosa and Snow (2004); Heller and Green- cant effect or large effect size (greater than 0.25)
leaf (2007). as an indicator of positive effects.

(1)

InTRODuCTIOn

Table 1. Institute of Education Sciences levels of evidence for practice guides

In general, characterization of the evidence for a recommendation as strong requires both studies with
high internal validity (i.e., studies whose designs can support causal conclusions) and studies with high
external validity (i.e., studies that in total include enough of the range of participants and settings on
which the recommendation is focused to support the conclusion that the results can be generalized to
those participants and settings). Strong evidence for this practice guide is operationalized as:
• A systematic review of research that generally meets the standards of the What Works Clearing-
house (WWC) (see http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/) and supports the effectiveness of a program, prac-
tice, or approach with no contradictory evidence of similar quality; OR
Strong
• Several well-designed, randomized controlled trials or well designed quasi-experiments that gen-
erally meet the WWC standards and support the effectiveness of a program, practice, or approach,
with no contradictory evidence of similar quality; OR
• One large, well-designed, randomized controlled, multisite trial that meets the WWC standards
and supports the effectiveness of a program, practice, or approach, with no contradictory evi-
dence of similar quality; OR
• For assessments, evidence of reliability and validity that meets the Standards for Educational and
Psychological Testing.a

In general, characterization of the evidence for a recommendation as moderate requires studies with
high internal validity but moderate external validity, or studies with high external validity but mod-
erate internal validity. In other words, moderate evidence is derived from studies that support strong
causal conclusions but where generalization is uncertain, or studies that support the generality of a
relationship but where the causality is uncertain. Moderate evidence for this practice guide is opera-
tionalized as:
• Experiments or quasi-experiments generally meeting the WWC standards and supporting the ef-
fectiveness of a program, practice, or approach with small sample sizes and/or other conditions
of implementation or analysis that limit generalizability and no contrary evidence; OR
• Comparison group studies that do not demonstrate equivalence of groups at pretest and there-
Moderate
fore do not meet the WWC standards but that (a) consistently show enhanced outcomes for par-
ticipants experiencing a particular program, practice, or approach and (b) have no major flaws
related to internal validity other than lack of demonstrated equivalence at pretest (e.g., only one
teacher or one class per condition, unequal amounts of instructional time, highly biased outcome
measures); OR
• Correlational research with strong statistical controls for selection bias and for discerning influ-
ence of endogenous factors and no contrary evidence; OR
• For assessments, evidence of reliability that meets the Standards for Educational and Psychological
Testingb but with evidence of validity from samples not adequately representative of the popula-
tion on which the recommendation is focused.

In general, characterization of the evidence for a recommendation as low means that the recommenda-
tion is based on expert opinion derived from strong findings or theories in related areas and/or expert
Low
opinion buttressed by direct evidence that does not rise to the moderate or strong levels. Low evidence
is operationalized as evidence not meeting the standards for the moderate or high levels.

a. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measure-
ment in Education (1999).

b. Ibid.

(2)

InTRODuCTIOn

studies that do not meet the standards for studies with no design flaws and ran-
moderate or strong evidence. domized controlled trials that have
problems with randomization, attri-
The What Works Clearinghouse tion, or disruption.
standards and their relevance to
this guide • Does Not Meet Evidence Screens for
studies that do not provide strong evi-
In terms of the levels of evidence indicated dence of causal validity.
in table 1, we rely on What Works Clearing-
house (WWC) evidence standards to assess Appendix D provides more technical in-
the quality of evidence supporting educa- formation about the studies and our de-
tional programs and practices. The WWC cisions regarding the level of evidence
addresses evidence for the causal validity for each recommendation. To illustrate
of instructional programs and practices the types of studies reviewed, we de-
according to WWC standards. Informa- scribe one study for each recommenda-
tion about these standards is available at tion. Our goal in doing this is to provide
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc. The technical interested readers with more detail about
quality of each study is rated and placed the research designs, the intervention
into one of three categories: components, and the way impact was
measured.
• Meets Evidence Standards for random-
ized controlled trials and regression Dr. Michael Kamil
discontinuity studies that provide the Dr. Geoffrey D. Borman
strongest evidence of causal validity. Dr. Janice Dole
Cathleen C. Kral
• Meets Evidence Standards with Res- Dr. Terry Salinger
ervations for all quasi-experimental Dr. Joseph Torgesen

(3)

Improving Adolescent attention to the challenges of improving
Literacy: Effective reading instruction in upper elementary,
middle, and high school. Yet reading in-
Classroom and struction as a formal part of the curricu-
Intervention Practices lum typically decreases as students move
beyond upper elementary grades.

Overview To acquire the skills they need, students
must work hard to refine and build upon
Data from the 2007 National Assessment their initial reading skills, and teachers
of Educational Progress (NAEP) in read- in upper elementary grades and in mid-
ing report that 69 percent of 8th grade dle and high school classes should help
students fall below the proficient level in students acquire more advanced skills
their ability to comprehend the meaning once they understand the demands that
of text at their grade level.1 Equally alarm- content area tasks actually present, es-
ing, 26 percent of students read below the pecially to students who struggle with
basic level, which means that they do not reading.7 However, many teachers re-
have sufficient reading ability to under- port feeling unprepared to help their stu-
stand and learn from text at their grade dents or do not think that teaching read-
level. When these data are coupled with ing skills in content-area classes is their
reports showing that even high school responsibility.8
students with average reading ability are
currently unprepared for the literacy de- For more than 50 years9 the realities of stu-
mands of many workplace and postsec- dent reading difficulties and teacher lack
ondary educational settings, the need for of preparation to address them have been
improved literacy instruction of adoles- met by calls for more instruction in higher-
cents is apparent.2 level reading skills for adolescents and
for professional development in content-
Reading ability is a key predictor of achieve- area reading instruction for middle and
ment in mathematics and science,3 and the high school teachers. Although the debate
global information economy requires to- about the role of content-area teachers in
day’s American youth to have far more ad- reading instruction continues,10 the time
vanced literacy skills than those required has come to consider seriously the support
of any previous generation.4 However, as that needs to be given to struggling read-
long-term NAEP data5 and other studies ers and the role that every teacher needs
show,6 improvements in the literacy skills to play in working toward higher levels of
of older students have not kept pace with literacy among all adolescents, regardless
the increasing demands for literacy in the of their reading abilities.
workplace. These studies, and those men-
tioned earlier, suggest the need for serious A significant difficulty in working toward
higher levels of literacy involves struc-
tural barriers at the middle and high
1. Lee, Griggs, and Donahue (2007).
school levels that need to be overcome.
2. Pennsylvania Department of Education (2004);
Williamson (2004).
7. Heller and Greenleaf (2007).
3. ACT (2006).
8. Heller and Greenleaf (2007).
4. Snow, Burns, and Griffin (1998).
9. Artley (1944); Moore, Readence, and Rickman
5. Perie and Moran (2005). (1983).

6. ACT (2006). 10. Heller and Greenleaf (2007).

(4)

OvERvIEW

Researchers11 have found that some teach- English.15 The search for sources focused
ers circumvent the need for students to only on studies of reading programs con-
read texts by adjusting their assignments ducted within a school or clinical setting
or methods of presenting content, rather and excluded those offered in organized
than helping students learn the discipline- after school programs. These decisions
specific strategies needed for content-area narrowed the number of empirical stud-
work. Another researcher12 found that ies from which recommendations could
content-area teachers expressed resis- be drawn.
tance to the work of the high school read-
ing specialists, whose job is to provide Finally, the research that met the crite-
students with additional help outside their ria for inclusion in this guide included
regular class structure. And still others13 few studies involving the use of com-
have suggested that teachers who strive puter technology. Despite great inter-
primarily to cover the content of their est in and increasing use of software for
disciplines are unaware that by increas- reading instruction in middle and high
ing students’ ability to read their assign- schools, there is little experimental or
ments they could actually increase the quasi-experimental research demonstrat-
depth and breadth of content that could ing the effectiveness of that work. Most
be covered efficiently. A final barrier14 recently, the National Evaluation of Edu-
is that when schools actually institute cational Technology16 assessed the ef-
programs to help struggling adolescent fectiveness of four software packages for
readers, they are housed within special literacy instruction at the 4th grade level,
education programs and thus serve only using an experimental design with a na-
a small proportion of the students whom tional sample of 45 schools, comprising
they could benefit. 118 teachers and 2,265 students. Although
the individual products were not identi-
In determining what to include in the ado- fied by specific results, none of the tested
lescent literacy practice guide, the panel software products produced statistically
recognized that recommendations for in- significant improvements in student read-
structional strategies must be evidence- ing achievement at the end of the first of
based. That is, rigorous studies have two years of the study. At the same time,
shown the practices to be associated with the National Reading Panel suggested that
improvements in students’ reading pro- there is some promise in using computers
ficiency. While fully understanding that to supplement classroom instruction; how-
all aspects of literacy are important for ever, these conclusions do not rise to the
success in middle and high school, panel level of a supported endorsement.
members decided to focus specifically on
studies about reading, that is, studies in A major source for identifying strategies
which reading was a dependent variable. that can have an immediate impact on
Although aware of the challenges faced by student reading achievement was the Re-
English language learners, we also focused port of the National Reading Panel,17 es-
on students whose first language was pecially its sections on comprehension

15. The Institute of Education Sciences has pub-
11. Schoenbach et al. (1999).
lished a practice guide on effective literacy in-
12. Darwin (2003). struction for English language learners, which
can be accessed at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee.
13. Kingery (2000); O’Brien, Moje, and Stewart
(2001). 16. Dynarski et al. (2007).

14. Barry (1997). 17. National Reading Panel (2000a).

(5)

OvERvIEW

and vocabulary. What makes the National marginal at best, and also those who strug-
Reading Panel evidence so important is gle with reading. The first two recommen-
that the eligible research for vocabulary dations focus on strategies for vocabulary
consisted mostly of studies of students in and comprehension instruction: Provide
grades 3 and above, while the research on explicit vocabulary instruction (Level of
comprehension involved mostly students evidence: Strong) and provide direct and
in grades 4 and above. The analysis of explicit comprehension strategy instruc-
adolescent literacy practices presented in tion (Level of evidence: Strong) (table 2).
summary form in Reading Next: A Vision
for Action and Research in Middle and High Although its research base is not as strong
School Literacy18 has also been influential as that for vocabulary and comprehension,
in shaping discussions on adolescent lit- the third recommendation concerns dis-
eracy and has provided a starting point cussion of and about texts. Most, if not all,
for developing this guide. the studies that examined instruction in
comprehension strategies indicated the im-
Adolescent literacy is a complex concept portance of practicing those strategies in
because it entails more than the scores the context of discussions about the mean-
that students achieve on standardized ing of texts. Further, there is evidence that
reading tests. It also entails reading to encouraging high-quality discussion about
learn in subjects that present their ideas texts, even in the absence of explicit in-
and content in different ways. Students struction in reading comprehension strate-
need to be able to build knowledge by gies, can have a positive impact on reading
comprehending different kinds of texts, comprehension skills. Small- and large-
mastering new vocabulary, and sharing group discussions also provide teachers
ideas with others. Although causal links with an important window into students’
have not been empirically established thinking that can inform future instruc-
between improvements in reading and tion. Therefore, the third recommendation
increases in course grades and scores on focuses on the use of discussion in improv-
subject-based tests, students’ reading dif- ing the reading outcomes of students: Pro-
ficulties will obviously impede their ability vide opportunities for extended discussion
to master content-area coursework fully. of text meaning and interpretation (Level
Test score data and research continually of evidence: Moderate).
confirm that many adolescents first need
to improve their reading comprehension The fourth recommendation concerns stu-
skills before they can take full advantage dent motivation and engagement. These
of content-area instruction. two factors are widely recognized as im-
portant moderators for learning, but there
In determining what to include in this is limited scientific evidence that links
practice guide, panel members also recog- these factors directly to student achieve-
nized that recommendations must be prac- ment in reading. Nonetheless, all teachers
tical. Teachers must perceive the value of can recognize the importance of bolster-
each recommendation so that they envi- ing students’ motivation and finding ways
sion themselves integrating the recom- to increase students’ engagement with
mendations into their instruction to make the material they are asked to read. The
content-area reading assignments acces- recommendation provided in this prac-
sible to all students—those who are learn- tice guide ties motivation and engage-
ing to make sense of new and unfamiliar ment specifically to literacy outcomes:
academic areas, those whose skills are Increase student motivation and engage-
ment in literacy learning (Level of evi-
18. Biancarosa and Snow (2004). dence: Moderate).
(6)

OvERvIEW

Table 2. Recommendations and corresponding levels of evidence to
support each

Recommendation Level of evidence

1. Provide explicit vocabulary instruction. Strong

2. Provide direct and explicit comprehension strategy instruction. Strong

3. Provide opportunities for extended discussion of text meaning and
Moderate
interpretation.

4. Increase student motivation and engagement in literacy learning. Moderate

5. Make available intensive and individualized interventions for strug-
Strong
gling readers that can be provided by trained specialists.

Panel members also recognized that some strong and focused instruction, they will
students need more intense help to im- continue to struggle to make sense of the
prove literacy skills than classroom teach- materials assigned to them in their course-
ers can provide. Because of this, our fifth work, and they are at serious risk of being
recommendation concerns struggling read- unable to use literacy skills successfully in
ers, those students who probably score well their postsecondary lives. However, if they
below their peers on state reading tests and are identified from among their peers as
whose reading deficits hinder successful being struggling readers and if their weak-
performance in their coursework. Under nesses in reading are carefully assessed by
normal classroom instructional conditions, trained specialists using measures that de-
these students are unable to make needed tect strengths and weaknesses, and this as-
improvements in their reading skills, so sessment is followed by intensive interven-
they typically cannot meet grade-level tions that are focused on their particular
standards in literacy throughout middle needs, they will have more opportunities to
and high schools. They need additional improve their literacy skills substantially.
help that the classroom teacher cannot This improvement should then translate
be expected to provide. Unless their read- into gains in content-area achievement
ing growth is dramatically accelerated by (Level of evidence: Strong).

(7)

Scope of the because the formal evidence base for these
practice guide methods is not yet sufficiently developed.
The fifth recommendation refers to read-
ing interventions that in many cases must
This practice guide provides five recom- be provided by reading specialists or spe-
mendations for increasing the reading cially trained teachers.
ability of adolescents. The first three rec-
ommendations are strategies that class- In offering these recommendations, we re-
room teachers can incorporate into their mind the reader that adolescent literacy is
instruction to help students gain more complex. There are many reasons why ad-
from their reading tasks in content-area olescents have difficulty making sense of
classes. The fourth recommendation offers texts, and there are many manifestations
teachers strategies for improving students’ of these difficulties. Addressing students’
motivation for and engagement with learn- needs often requires coordinated efforts
ing. Together, the recommendations offer from teachers and specialists.
a coherent statement: specific strategies
are available for classroom teachers and Readers should also note that appropri-
specialists to address the literacy needs of ate professional development in read-
all adolescent learners. The fifth recom- ing has been shown to produce higher
mendation refers specifically to adolescent achievement in students.19 Providing pro-
struggling readers, those students whose fessional development to content-area
poor literacy skills weaken their ability to teachers focused on instructional tech-
make sense of written material. niques they can use to meet the literacy
needs of all their students, including those
Although not an exhaustive list, the rec- who struggle, is highly recommended in
ommendations are representative of panel this practice guide. Professional develop-
members’ thinking about methods that ment also needs to address the specific
have the strongest research support and literacy demands of different disciplines.
those that are appropriate for use with One attempt at specifying these demands
adolescents. The first four recommenda- describes specific skills in mathematics,
tions can be implemented easily by class- science, social studies, and English.20 Fo-
room teachers within their regular in- cusing on these skills would be an ideal
struction, regardless of the content areas starting point for professional develop-
they teach. Recommendations for teaching ment for content-area teachers who want
students about the discourse patterns of to incorporate elements of literacy instruc-
specific subjects that adolescents study tion in their content area instruction.
(for example, different ways of present-
ing information, creating arguments, or
19. National Reading Panel (2000a).
evaluating evidence in science compared
with history) are not included in this guide 20. International Reading Association (2006).

(8)

Checklist for carrying out the Recommendation 3.
recommendations Provide opportunities for extended
discussion of text meaning and
Recommendation 1. interpretation
Provide explicit vocabulary instruction
Carefully prepare for the discussion by
Dedicate a portion of regular classroom selecting engaging materials and developing
lessons to explicit vocabulary instruction. stimulating questions.

Provide repeated exposure to new words Ask follow-up questions that help pro-
in multiple contexts, and allow sufficient vide continuity and extend the discussion.
practice sessions in vocabulary instruction.
Provide a task or discussion format that
give sufficient opportunities to use new students can follow when they discuss text
vocabulary in a variety of contexts through in small groups.
activities such as discussion, writing, and
extended reading. Develop and practice the use of a spe-
cific “discussion protocol.”
Provide students with strategies to make
them independent vocabulary learners. Recommendation 4.
Increase student motivation and
Recommendation 2. engagement in literacy learning
Provide direct and explicit
comprehension strategy instruction Establish meaningful and engaging
content learning goals around the essential
Select carefully the text to use when ideas of a discipline as well as around the
beginning to teach a given strategy. specific learning processes used to access
those ideas.
Show students how to apply the strate-
gies they are learning to different texts. Provide a positive learning environ-
ment that promotes student autonomy in
Make sure that the text is appropriate learning.
for the reading level of students.
Make literacy experiences more relevant
use a direct and explicit instruction les- to student interests, everyday life, or impor-
son plan for teaching students how to use tant current events.
comprehension strategies.
Build classroom conditions to promote
Provide the appropriate amount of higher reading engagement and conceptual
guided practice depending on the difficulty learning through such strategies as goal set-
level of the strategies that students are ting, self-directed learning, and collaborative
learning. learning.

Talk about comprehension strategies
while teaching them.

(9)

ChECkLIST fOR CARRyIng OuT ThE RECOMMEnDATIOnS

Recommendation 5. Make available
intensive individualized interventions Select an intervention that provides an
for struggling readers that can be explicit instructional focus to meet each stu-
provided by qualified specialists dent’s identified learning needs.

use reliable screening assessments to Provide interventions where intensive-
identify students with reading difficulties ness matches student needs: the greater
and follow up with formal and informal as- the instructional need, the more intensive
sessments to pinpoint each student’s instruc- the intervention. Assuming a high level of
tional needs. instructional quality, the intensity of inter-
ventions is related most directly to the size
of instructional groups and amount of in-
structional time.

( 10 )

Recommendation 1. One caveat is critical to interpreting the
Provide explicit research on vocabulary instruction. While
all of these studies show effects on vo-
vocabulary instruction cabulary learning, only some show that
explicit vocabulary instruction has effects
on standardized measures of reading com-
Teachers should provide students prehension. Although reading comprehen-
with explicit vocabulary instruction sion is clearly the ultimate goal of reading
both as part of reading and language instruction, it is important to note that the
arts classes and as part of content- construct of comprehension includes, but
area classes such as science and social is not limited to, vocabulary. While it is
studies. By giving students explicit likely that the cumulative effects of learn-
instruction in vocabulary, teachers help ing vocabulary would eventually show
them learn the meaning of new words effects on reading comprehension, we be-
and strengthen their independent skills lieve additional research is necessary to
of constructing the meaning of text. demonstrate this relationship.

Level of evidence: Strong Brief summary of evidence to
support the recommendation
The panel considers the level of evidence
supporting this recommendation to be In the early stages of reading most of the
strong, based on six randomized con- words in grade-level texts are familiar to
trolled experimental studies and three students as part of their oral vocabulary.
well designed quasi-experiments that dem- However, as students progress through
onstrated group equivalence at pretest.1 the grades, print vocabulary increasingly
An additional six studies with weaker de- contains words that are rarely part of oral
signs provided direct evidence to support vocabulary. This is particularly the case
this recommendation.2 A single subject de- for content-area material. In many content-
sign study also provided evidence about area texts it is the vocabulary that carries a
the effect of vocabulary instruction on stu- large share of the meaning through special-
dents’ outcomes.3 The research supporting ized vocabulary, jargon, and discipline-re-
explicit vocabulary instruction includes lated concepts. Learning these specialized
students in upper elementary, middle, vocabularies contributes to the success of
and high schools from diverse geographic reading among adolescent students. Re-
regions and socioeconomic backgrounds search has shown that integrating explicit
and addresses a wide variety of strategies vocabulary instruction into the existing
of vocabulary instruction. curriculum of subject areas such as science
or social studies enhances students’ ability
1. Barron and Melnik (1973); Baumann et al. (2002); to acquire textbook vocabulary.4
Baumann et al. (2003); Bos and Anders (1990);
Brett, Rothlein, and Hurley (1996); Lieberman Children often learn new words inciden-
(1967); Margosein, Pascarella, and Pflaum (1982); tally from context. However, according
Nelson and Stage (2007); Xin and Reith (2001). to a meta-analysis of the literature, the
2. Beck, Perfetti, and McKeown (1982); Jenkins, probability that they will learn new words
Matlock, and Slocum (1989); Koury (1996); Rud- while reading is relatively low—about 15
dell and Shearer (2002); Stump et al. (1992); Ter- percent.5 Therefore, although incidental
rill, Scruggs, and Mastropieri (2004).

3. Malone and McLaughlin (1997). The standards
4. Baumann et al. (2003); Bos and Anders (1990).
for judging the quality of a single subject design
study are currently being developed. 5. Swanborn and de Glopper (1999).

( 11 )

1. PROvIDE ExPLICIT vOCABuLARy InSTRuCTIOn

learning helps students develop their vo- prose, expository texts, and specialized
cabulary, additional explicit instructional word lists.9
support needs to be provided as part of
the curriculum to ensure that all students Explicit vocabulary instruction is a name
acquire the necessary print vocabulary for for a family of strategies that can be di-
academic success. In many academic texts, vided into two major approaches: direct in-
students may use context clues within the struction in word meaning and instruction
text, combined with their existing seman- in strategies to promote independent vo-
tic and syntactic knowledge to infer the cabulary acquisition skills. Direct instruc-
meaning of unfamiliar words.6 Explicit tion in word meaning includes helping stu-
vocabulary instruction may be essential dents look up definitions in dictionaries
to this development of these types of in- and glossaries, read the words and their
ference skills. definitions, match words and their defini-
tions, participate in oral recitation, memo-
Words are best learned through repeated rize definitions, and use graphic displays
exposure in multiple contexts and do- of the relationships among words and con-
mains. Many content-area texts, such as cepts such as semantic maps. Strategies to
those in biology and physics, however, promote independent vocabulary acqui-
include specialized vocabulary, jargon, sition skills include analyzing semantic,
and discipline-related concepts that stu- syntactic, or context clues to derive the
dents may not encounter outside their meaning of words by using prior knowl-
textbooks. This aspect of presenting edge and the context in which the word is
content-area material limits the amount presented. Research shows that both ap-
of exposure students will have with these proaches can effectively promote students’
unfamiliar terms. If students encounter vocabulary.10 The first approach can add
unknown words in almost every sen- to students’ ability to learn a given set of
tence in a textbook, learning the content words, whereas the second approach has
becomes daunting and discouraging. Ex- the added value of helping students gen-
plicit instruction in specialized vocabu- eralize their skills to a variety of new texts
laries is an important way to contribute in multiple contexts. In that respect, the
to successful reading among adolescent two approaches are complementary rather
students.7 than conflicting.

Research has shown that integrating ex- Some students acquire words best from
plicit vocabulary instruction into the ex- reading and writing activities, whereas
isting content-area curriculum in content other students benefit more from visual
areas such as science or social studies and physical experiences.11 For exam-
enhances students’ ability to acquire text- ple, short documentary videos may help
book vocabulary.8 Additional studies that students learn new concepts and terms
examined students’ scores on the vocab- because they provide a vivid picture of
ulary subtests of standardized reading how the object looks in the context of its
tests demonstrated that explicit vocabu-
lary instruction had a substantial effect
on students’ vocabulary acquisition in the 9. Barron and Melnik (1973); Baumann et al.
(2002); Beck et al. (1982); Brett et al. (1996); Nel-
context of a variety of texts, including
son and Stage (2007)

10. Baumann et al. (2003); Bos and Anders (1990);
6. Swanborn and de Glopper (1999).
Jenkins et al. (1989)
7. Beck et al. (1982).
11. Barron and Melnik (1973); Xin and Reith
8. Baumann et al. (2003); Bos and Anders (1990) (2001).

( 12 )


environment or specialized use.12 Using respect to the effects of such instruction
computer software to teach vocabulary is on general measures of comprehension.
an effective way to leverage instructional Only a small number of the studies on
time and provide a variety of practice explicit vocabulary instruction included
modes—oral, print, and even multimedia comprehension outcome measures and
elaborations of words and concepts. Pro- found meaningful increases in students’
grams that allow students to engage in reading comprehension. It may be that
independent practice can free teachers to whereas limited vocabulary interferes
work with other students in other instruc- with comprehension, additional literacy
tional modes. skills are needed for successful reading
comprehension.
Other studies have shown that students
also learn vocabulary through rich discus- How to carry out the
sions of texts (see recommendation 3). For recommendation
instance, one study showed that discus-
sion improved knowledge of word mean- 1. Dedicate a portion of the regular class-
ings and relationships for students reading room lesson to explicit vocabulary instruc-
biology texts.13 Discussion was also used tion. The amount of time will be dictated by
in another study as part of the interven- the vocabulary load of the text to be read
tion.14 Discussion seems to have its effects and the students’ prior knowledge of the
by allowing students to participate as both vocabulary. Making certain that students
speakers and listeners. While this is not are familiar with the vocabulary they will
explicit instruction, it does have some encounter in reading selections can help
additional benefits. For example, discus- make the reading task easier. Computer in-
sion might force students to organize vo- struction can be an effective way to provide
cabulary as they participate, even testing practice on vocabulary and leverage class-
whether or not the vocabulary is used ap- room time.
propriately. It also presents opportunities
for repeated exposure to words, shown to 2. use repeated exposure to new words in
be a necessary condition for vocabulary multiple oral and written contexts and allow
learning. Vocabulary learning in these sufficient practice sessions.15 Words are usu-
cases did not result from explicit instruc- ally learned only after they appear several
tion, but teachers who recognize potential times. In fact, researchers16 estimate that it
of this kind of learning can supplement could take as many as 17 exposures for a
these interactions with new vocabulary student to learn a new word. Repeated ex-
with brief, focused explicit instruction posure could be in the same lesson or pas-
to ensure that students share a common sage, but the exposures will be most effec-
understanding of unfamiliar words and tive if they appear over an extended period
terms and have an opportunity to practice of time.17 Words that appear only once or
new vocabulary. twice in a text are typically not words that
should be targeted for explicit instruction
Although the research noted so far dem- because there may never be enough prac-
onstrates the positive effects of explicit tice to learn the word completely. Students
vocabulary instruction on vocabulary should be provided with the definitions of
acquisition, there are mixed results with these infrequent words.

12. Xin and Reith (2001). 15. Jenkins et al. (1989).

13. Barron and Melnik (1973). 16. Ausubel and Youssef (1965).

14. Xin and Reith (2001). 17. Ausubel and Youssef (1965).

( 13 )


3. give sufficient opportunities to use new Content-area textbooks are loaded with too
vocabulary in a variety of contexts through much specialized vocabulary and jargon.
activities such as discussion, writing, and Teachers need to select carefully the most
extended reading. This will ensure that stu- important words to teach explicitly each
dents begin to acquire a range of productive day. Several popular methods of selecting
meanings for the words they are learning words for vocabulary instruction are avail-
and the correct way to use those words in able. Two methods seem important for ado-
addition to simply being able to recognize lescent readers:
them in print.
• One method uses as a criterion the
4. Provide students with strategies to make frequency of the words in instruc-
them independent vocabulary learners. One tional materials.20 This, again, is more
way is to give them strategies to use com- important for elementary materials
ponents (prefixes, roots, suffixes) of words where the vocabulary is selected from
to derive the meaning of unfamiliar words; a relatively constrained set of instruc-
another is to make use of reference ma- tional materials. For most adolescents,
terial such as glossaries included in their this constraint on vocabulary in in-
textbooks.18 structional materials diminishes over
time, making the frequency method of
Potential roadblocks and solutions selecting words less useful for teach-
ing adolescent students reading con-
1. Students may vary in their response to tent. However, for adolescent students
different vocabulary instruction strategies. who have limited vocabularies, select-
for example, some students respond better ing high-frequency, unknown words
to sensory information than to verbal infor- remains an important instructional
mation about word meaning. Teachers need strategy.
to combine multiple approaches in provid-
ing explicit vocabulary instruction.19 for in- • Another method uses three categories
stance, as described above, it is helpful to of words: Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III.
expose students to vocabulary numerous This concept has been applied most
times either in one lesson or over a series of effectively for literary texts with stu-
lessons. It is also helpful to combine this re- dents at elementary levels. Tier I words
peated exposure with a number of different are those typically in readers’ vocab-
explicit instruction strategies, such as using ularies and should not be the focus
direct instruction techniques (getting stu- of instruction. These high-frequency
dents to look up definitions in dictionaries), words are usually acquired very early.
helping promote students to independently Tier III words are rare words that are
acquire vocabulary skills (using context clues recommended for instruction only
to derive meaning), offering students the when they are encountered in a text.
opportunity to work on the computer using That leaves Tier II words as the focus
various software, and allowing students to of explicit vocabulary instruction prior
discuss what they have read. to reading a text. The criteria for what
constitutes membership in each tier
2. Teachers may not know how to select are not sharply defined, but are loosely
words to teach, especially in content areas. based on frequency and the utility for
future reading.21

18. Baumann et al. (2002); Baumann et al.
(2003). 20. Biemiller (2005); Hiebert (2005).
19. Lieberman (1967). 21. Beck et al. (1982).

( 14 )


• For adolescent readers of content mate- 3. Teachers may perceive that they do not
rials, vocabulary should be selected on have time to teach vocabulary. Teachers are
the basis of how important the words often focused on the factual aspect of stu-
are for learning in the particular disci- dents’ content-area learning and find little
pline, rather than the tier in which the time to focus on other issues in reading.
word is located. For example, in a 9th- Whenever reading is part of a lesson, a few
grade biology text, the word “cytoskel- minutes spent on explicit vocabulary in-
eton” might be a target for prereading struction will pay substantial dividends for
instruction in a chapter on cell biology, student learning. Some effort in teaching
even though it would generally be con- students to become independent vocabu-
sidered a Tier III word because it al- lary learners will lessen the amount of time
most never appears in general reading required by teachers as part of the lesson.22
or conversation. Most of the words for Making students even slightly more inde-
adolescent readers should be selected pendent vocabulary learners will eventually
on the basis of how important they are increase the amount of content-area instruc-
to understanding the content that stu- tional time.
dents are expected to read. For much
content material, the words that carry Using computers can give teachers the op-
the burden of the meaning of the text portunity to provide independent practice
are rare words, except in texts and ma- on learning vocabulary. Teachers will be
terials related to a specific discipline. able to leverage instructional time by hav-
Despite the rarity of the words, they are ing students work independently, either
often critical to learning the discipline before or after reading texts.
content and thus should be the subject
of explicit instruction, which is almost 22. Baumann et al. (2002); Baumann et al.
the only way they can be learned. (2003).

( 15 )

Recommendation 2. Level of evidence: Strong
Provide direct and The panel considers the level of evidence
explicit comprehension supporting this recommendation to be
strategy instruction strong, on the basis of five randomized
experimental studies25 and additional evi-
dence from a single subject design study26
Teachers should provide adolescents that examined the effects of teaching main
with direct and explicit instruction in idea summarization on adolescents’ com-
comprehension strategies to improve prehension of narrative and informational
students’ reading comprehension. texts. In addition, this body of research
Comprehension strategies are is supported by numerous other studies
routines and procedures that readers that vary in research design and quality
use to help them make sense of and by additional substantive reviews of
texts. These strategies include, but the research.27
are not limited to, summarizing,
asking and answering questions, Brief summary of evidence to
paraphrasing, and finding the main support the recommendation
idea. Comprehension strategy
instruction can also include specific Approaches for teaching reading com-
teacher activities that have been prehension to adolescents are a common
demonstrated to improve students’ concern among middle and high school
comprehension of texts. Asking teachers because many adolescent stu-
students questions and using graphic dents have a hard time comprehending
organizers are examples of such their content-area textbooks.28 Therefore,
strategies. Direct and explicit teaching helping students comprehend these texts
involves a teacher modeling and should be a high priority for upper elemen-
providing explanations of the specific tary, middle, and high school teachers.
strategies students are learning, giving Using comprehension strategies may be
guided practice and feedback on the a new idea for many teachers. However,
use of the strategies, and promoting comprehension strategy instruction has
independent practice to apply the been around for some time and is the topic
strategies.23 An important part of of a number of resource books available
comprehension strategy instruction
is the active participation of students 25. Hansen and Pearson (1983); Katims and Har-
in the comprehension process. In ris (1997); Margosein et al. (1982); Peverly and
addition, explicit instruction involves Wood (2001); Raphael and McKinney (1983).
providing a sufficient amount of
26. Jitendra et al. (1998). The standards for judg-
support, or scaffolding, to students ing the quality of a single subject design study
as they learn the strategies to ensure are currently being developed.
success.24
27. Dole et al. (1991); Gersten et al. (2001); Na-
tional Reading Panel (2000b); Paris, Lipson, and
Wixson (1983); Paris, Wasik, and Turner (1991);
Pearson and Fielding (1991); Pressley, Johnson
23. Brown, Campione, and Day (1981); Dole et al. (1989); Pressley, Symons et al. (1989); Rosen-
et al. (1991); Kame’enui et al. (1997); Pearson shine and Meister (1994); Rosenshine, Meis-
and Dole (1987); Pressley, Snyder, and Cariglia- ter, and Chapman (1996); Weinstein and Mayer
Bull (1987). (1986).

24. Brown et al. (1981); Palincsar and Brown 28. Biancarosa and Snow (2006); Chall and Con-
(1984); Pearson and Gallagher (1983). rad (1991); Kamil (2003); Moore et al. (1999).

( 16 )

2. PROvIDE DIRECT AnD ExPLICIT COMPREhEnSIOn STRATEgy InSTRuCTIOn

to help teachers teach strategies to their the page because they are not actively
students.29 Four ideas about teaching com- processing the meaning of what they are
prehension strategies that are important reading. Instruction in the application of
for teachers to understand can be gleaned comprehension strategies may help these
from the research: students become active readers.

The effectiveness of a number of different Most of the research studies compared
strategies has been demonstrated in the the use of one or more strategies against
small set of experimental studies meet- a control condition that typically included
ing the WWC standards. These strategies traditional, or “business as usual” instruc-
included having students summarize main tion. So, it is really not possible to compare
ideas both within paragraphs and across one or more strategies against another.
texts, asking themselves questions about We cannot say that paraphrasing is more
what they have read, paraphrasing what powerful than main-idea summarizing,
they have read, drawing inferences that or that drawing inferences on the basis of
are based on text information and prior text information and prior knowledge is
knowledge, answering questions at dif- better than answering questions at differ-
ferent points in the text, using graphic or- ent points in the text. Very little research
ganizers, and thinking about the types of tells us that. We can say that it appears
questions they are being asked to answer. that asking and answering questions, sum-
It appears that teaching these specific marizing, and using graphic organizers
strategies is particularly powerful. How- are particularly powerful strategies. But
ever, other strategies have been evaluated even with these strategies we cannot say
in the literature and demonstrated to be which ones are the best or better than
useful as well.30 The point here is that it others for which students and for which
may not be the particular strategies that classrooms.
make the difference in terms of student
comprehension. Many researchers think It appears that multiple-strategy training
that it is not the specific strategy taught, results in better comprehension than sin-
but rather the active participation of stu- gle-strategy training. All the strong stud-
dents in the comprehension process that ies that support this recommendation in-
makes the most difference on students’ clude teaching more than one strategy to
comprehension.31 The strategies listed the same group of students. For example,
above might be particularly useful for one study used finding the main ideas and
middle and high school teachers students summarizing to help students compre-
who are passive readers. These students’ hend texts better.32 Another study taught
eyes sometimes glaze over the words on students to make connections between
new text information and prior knowledge,
29. Blanchowicz and Ogle (2001); Harvey and make predictions about the content of the
Goudvis (2000); Keene (2006); Keene and Zim- text, and draw inferences.33 This finding
merman (1997); McLaughlin and Allen (2001); is consistent with those from the National
Oczkus (2004); Outsen and Yulga (2002); Stebick Reading Panel, which also found benefits
and Dain (2007); Tovani (2004); Wilhelm (2001); from teaching students to use more than
Zwiers (2004). one strategy to improve their reading com-
30. Brown et al. (1996); Cross and Paris (1988); prehension skills.34
Dewitz, Carr, and Patberg (1987); Idol (1987);
Klingner, Vaughn, and Schumm (1998); Paris,
32. Katims and Harris (1997).
Cross, and Lipson (1984); Pressley (1976); Re-
utzel (1985). 33. Hansen and Pearson (1983).
31. Gersten et al. (2001); Pressley et al. (1987). 34. National Reading Panel (2000a).

( 17 )


Direct and explicit instruction is a power- 1. Select carefully the text to use when first
ful delivery system for teaching compre- beginning to teach a given strategy. Although
hension strategies. This finding comes strategies can be applied to many different
from one of the five strong studies and texts, they cannot be applied blindly to all
from a number of other studies.35 Direct texts. for example, using main-idea summa-
and explicit instruction involves a series rizing is difficult to do with narrative texts
of steps that include explaining and mod- because narrative texts do not have clear
eling the strategy, using the strategy for main ideas. Main-idea summarizing should
guided practice, and using the strategy be used with informational texts, such as a
for independent practice. Explaining and content-area textbook or a nonfiction trade
modeling include defining each of the book. Similarly, asking questions about a
strategies for students and showing them text is more easily applied to some texts
how to use those strategies when reading than to others.
a text. Guided practice involves the teacher
and students working together to apply the 2. Show students how to apply the strate-
strategies to texts they are reading. This gies they are learning to different texts, not
may involve extensive interaction between just to one text. Applying the strategies to
the teacher and students when students different texts encourages students to learn
are applying the strategies to see how to use the strategies flexibly.36 It also allows
well they understand the particular text students to learn when and where to apply
they are reading. Or, it may involve having the strategies and when and where the strat-
students practice applying the strategies egies are inappropriate.37
to various texts in small groups. Indepen-
dent practice occurs once the teacher is 3. Ensure that the text is appropriate for the
convinced that students can use the strat- reading level of students. A text that is too
egies on their own. At that point, students difficult to read makes using the strategy
independently practice applying the strat- difficult because students are struggling
egies to a new text. with the text itself. Likewise, a text that is
too easy eliminates the need for strategies
How to carry out the in the first place. Begin teaching strategies
recommendation by using a single text followed by students’
applying them to appropriate texts at their
Upper elementary, middle, and second- reading level.
ary school teachers can take several ac-
tion steps to implement explicit strategy 4. use direct and explicit instruction for
instruction, which involves helping stu- teaching students how to use comprehen-
dents actively engage in the texts they sion strategies. As the lesson begins, it is
read. A number of different strategies can important for teachers to tell students spe-
be taught directly and explicitly to stu- cifically what strategies they are going to
dents and applied to content-area texts learn, tell them why it is important for them
they read. Assisting students in learn- to learn the strategies,38 model how to use
ing how to apply these strategies to their the strategies by thinking aloud with a text,39
texts will empower them and give them provide guided practice with feedback so
more control over their reading and un- that students have opportunities to practice
derstanding. Specifically, to implement
explicit strategy instruction, teachers can 36. Pressley and Afflerbach (1995).
do the following: 37. Duffy (2002); Paris et al. (1983).

38. Brown et al. (1981)
35. Duffy et al. (1987); Fuchs et al. (1997); Kling-
ner et al. (1998); Schumaker and Deshler (1992). 39. Bereiter and Bird (1985)

( 18 )


using the strategies, provide independent Potential roadblocks and solutions
practice using the strategies, and discuss
with students when and where they should 1. Most teachers lack the skills to provide di-
apply the strategies when they read and rect and explicit comprehension strategy in-
the importance of having the will to use the struction. Most teacher education programs
strategies along with the skill. Even if stu- do not prepare preservice teachers to teach
dents know how to use strategies as they strategies. In addition, teachers may find it
read, research demonstrates that they have particularly challenging to model their own
to make the effort to actually use them when thinking by providing thinkaloud of how
they read on their own.40 they use strategies as they read. Many teach-
ers use various strategies automatically as
5. Provide the appropriate amount of guided they read and are not aware of how they
practice depending on the difficulty level of use the strategies they are teaching. Profes-
the strategies that the students are learn- sional development in direct and explicit in-
ing. for example, the strategy of predict- struction of comprehension strategies will
ing can be demonstrated briefly and with assist all teachers, including language arts
a few examples. however, summarizing a and content-area teachers, in learning how
paragraph or a passage may require several to teach strategies. One component of pro-
steps within guided practice. first, provide fessional development should be coaching
support for students in cooperative learning teachers in the classroom as they teach. In
groups. As students work in these groups, addition, it is often helpful for teachers to
assist them directly if necessary by modeling practice thinking aloud on their own. They
how to use a given strategy again or by ask- can take a text and practice explaining how
ing questions to generate ideas about how they would go about summarizing the text
they would use it. If necessary, give students or finding the main idea. Teachers will need
direct answers and have them repeat those to become conscious of many of the reading
answers. Second, as students become better processes that are automatic for them.
at using the strategies, gradually reduce the
support, perhaps by asking them to break 2. Content-area teachers may believe that they
the cooperative learning groups into pairs are not responsible for teaching comprehen-
so they have fewer peers to rely on. Third, sion strategies to their students. They may
reduce support further by asking students also believe that they do not have enough
to use the strategies on their own with texts time to teach these strategies because they
they read independently.41 have to cover the content presented in their
curriculum guides and textbooks. Because
6. When teaching comprehension strategies, teaching comprehension strategies improves
make sure students understand that the goal students’ ability to comprehend their text-
is to understand the content of the text. Too books, it is a valuable classroom activity for
much focus on the process of learning the content-area teachers, not just language arts
strategies can take away from students’ un- teachers. Teaching comprehension strategies
derstanding of the text itself.42 Instead, show should expand students’ long-term learning
students how using the strategies can help abilities. Although it may take a short time
them understand the text they are reading. to teach several strategies, that time should
The goal should always be comprehending pay off in the long term by helping students
texts—not using strategies. learn more independently from their text-
books and other source material they are
40. Paris et al. (1991); Pressley et al. (1987) asked to read in their classrooms. After all,
the goal of using comprehension strategies
41. Brown et al. (1981)
is improved comprehension—of all text ma-
42. Pearson and Dole (1987) terials that students read.
( 19 )


3. Some teachers and students may “lose the A critically important part of professional
forest for the trees.” Teachers may misunder- development is the focus on the end goal
stand or misinterpret the research on teach- of comprehension. As teachers learn how
ing comprehension strategies, such that they to teach the various strategies, they need
think teaching comprehension is all about to keep this goal in mind. Likewise, teach-
teaching a specific sequence of comprehen- ers need to emphasize to students the idea
sion strategies, one after the other. Likewise, that the end goal of strategy use is compre-
students too may misunderstand and misin- hension, not just the use of many strate-
terpret teachers’ emphasis on strategies, such gies. It is important for teachers to ensure
that they inappropriately apply strategies to that students understand that using strat-
the texts they are reading. Teachers and stu- egies is a way to accomplish the goal of
dents may miss the larger point of the strate- comprehension.
gies, that is, active comprehension.

( 20 )

Recommendation 3. the quasi-experimental studies45 as well
Provide opportunities as the large correlational study is that the
quality of written responses to writing
for extended discussion prompts was the outcome assessment,
of text meaning and rather than a more direct standardized
test of reading comprehension. Among the
interpretation four quasi-experimental studies, one used
rigorous design that demonstrated pretest
group equivalence46 and the other three
Teachers should provide opportunities used less rigorous designs with low inter-
for students to engage in high- nal validity. 47 The small body of research
quality discussions of the meaning identified to directly support this recom-
and interpretation of texts in various mendation is supplemented by a recently
content areas as one important way to completed meta-analysis of 43 studies
improve their reading comprehension. that used slightly more lenient inclusion
These discussions can occur in whole criteria than the literature search for this
classroom groups or in small student practice guide,48 as well as a large descrip-
groups under the general guidance tive study of middle and high schools that
of the teacher. Discussions that are were selected because they were “beating
particularly effective in promoting the odds” in terms of their student literacy
students’ comprehension of complex text outcomes.49
are those that focus on building a deeper
understanding of the author’s meaning Brief summary of evidence to
or critically analyzing and perhaps support the recommendation
challenging the author’s conclusions
through reasoning or applying Arguably the most important goal for lit-
personal experiences and knowledge. eracy instruction with adolescents is to
In effective discussions students have increase their ability to comprehend com-
the opportunity to have sustained plex text. Further, the goal is not simply
exchanges with the teacher or other to enable students to obtain facts or lit-
students, present and defend individual eral meaning from text (although that is
interpretations and points of view, use clearly desirable), but also to make deeper
text content, background knowledge, interpretations, generalizations, and con-
and reasoning to support interpretations clusions. Most state and national literacy
and conclusions, and listen to the points standards require middle and high school
of view and reasoned arguments of students to go considerably beyond literal
others participating in the discussion. comprehension to be considered proficient
readers. For example, the revised frame-
Level of evidence: Moderate work for the NAEP indicates that 8th grad-
ers who read at the proficient level should
The panel considers the level of evidence be able to “summarize major ideas, pro-
for this recommendation to be moderate, on vide evidence in support of an argument,
the basis of four small quasi-experimental
studies 43 and one large correlational
45. Reznitskaya et al. (2001).
study.44 A potential limitation in one of
46. Reznitskaya et al. (2001).

47. Bird (1984); Heinl (1988); Yeazell (1982).
43. Bird (1984); Heinl (1988); Reznitskaya et al.
(2001); Yeazell (1982). 48. Murphy et al. (2007).
44. Applebee et al. (2003). 49. Langer (2001).

( 21 )

3. PROvIDE OPPORTunITIES fOR ExTEnDED DISCuSSIOn Of TExT MEAnIng AnD InTERPRETATIOn

and analyze and interpret implicit causal students’ interactions with one another,
relations.”50 They should also be able to and with the teacher as they apply various
“analyze character motivation, make in- strategies give students multiple opportu-
ferences…, and identify similarities across nities to discover new ways of interpreting
texts.”51 and constructing the meaning of text. One
brief study of strategy instruction with a
The theory underpinning discussion- diverse group of 4th graders mentioned
based approaches to improve reading explicitly that the assignment to practice
comprehension rests on the idea that stu- making predictions, clarifying confusions,
dents can, and will, internalize thinking and paraphrasing in small groups was a
processes experienced repeatedly during very useful way to stimulate high-quality
discussions. In high-quality discussions discussions of the meaning of texts.52
students have the opportunity to express
their own interpretations of text and to The most convincing evidence for the
have those positions challenged by others. effectiveness of discussion-oriented ap-
They also have the opportunity to defend proaches to improve reading comprehen-
their positions and to listen as others de- sion comes from studies that focused on
fend different positions. Good discussions developing interpretations of text events
give students opportunities to identify or content or on a critical analysis of text
specific text material that supports their content.53 Within these general guidelines,
position and to listen as other students do one feature of effective discussions is that
the same. In the course of an effective dis- they involve sustained interactions that
cussion students are presented with mul- explore a topic or an idea in some depth
tiple examples of how meaning can be con- rather than quick question and answer
structed from text. Thus, for teachers one exchanges between the teacher and stu-
key to improving comprehension through dents.54 One large study of the extent of
discussion is to ensure that students expe- this type of sustained discussion in lan-
rience productive ways of thinking about guage arts classes in middle and high
text that can serve as models for them to schools found, on average, only 1.7 min-
use during their own reading. utes out of 60 devoted to this type of ex-
change, with classrooms varying between
A challenge to finding empirical research 0 and slightly more than 14 minutes. Class-
to demonstrate the unique value of high- rooms that were more discussion-oriented
quality discussions in improving compre- produced higher literacy growth during
hension is that in instructional research, the year than those in which sustained
discussion is often combined with strategy discussions were less frequent.55
instruction. Most successful applications
of strategy instruction involve extended Another characteristic of high-quality dis-
opportunities for discussing texts while cussions is that they are usually based on
students are learning to independently text that is specifically selected to stimu-
apply such strategies as summarizing,
making predictions, generating and an-
swering questions, and linking text to pre-
vious experience and knowledge. In effect,
52. Klingner et al. (1998).

53. Murphy et al. (2007).
50. National Assessment Governing Board (2007,
p. 46). 54. Applebee et al. (2003); Reznitskaya et al.
(2001).
51. National Assessment Governing Board (2007,
p. 46). 55. Applebee et al. (2003).

( 22 )


late an engaging discussion.56 Questions 1. Carefully prepare for the discussion. In
that lead to good discussions are fre- classes where a choice of reading selections
quently described as “authentic” in that is possible, look for selections that are en-
they ask a real question that may be open gaging for students and describe situations
to multiple points of view, such as “Did or content that can stimulate and have mul-
the way John treat Alex in this story seem tiple interpretations. In content-area classes
fair to you?” or “What is the author trying that depend on a textbook, teachers can
to say here?” or “How does that informa- identify in advance the issues or content that
tion connect with what the author wrote might be difficult or misunderstood or sec-
before?”57 Very different from questions tions that might be ambiguous or subject to
asked primarily to test student knowledge, multiple interpretations. Alternatively, brief
this type of question is designed to pro- selections from the Internet or other sources
vide an opportunity for exploration and that contain similar content but positions
discussion. Although it should be possible that allow for critical analysis or controversy
to identify expository texts that could be can also be used as a stimulus for extended
the basis for productive discussion, most discussions.
experimental studies of discussion-based
approaches thus far have used narrative Another form of preparation involves se-
texts, a limitation in the research base at lecting and developing questions that can
present. stimulate students to think reflectively
about the text and make high-level connec-
Discussions that have an impact on stu- tions or inferences. These are questions
dent reading comprehension feature ex- that an intelligent reader might actually
changes between teachers and students wonder about—they are not the kind of
or among students, where students are questions that teachers often ask to de-
asked to defend their statements either by termine what students have learned from
reasoning or by referring to information the text. Further, the types of discussion
in the text.58 In a large-scale investigation questions appropriate for history texts
of classrooms that produced strong liter- would probably be different from those
acy outcomes, it was noted that teachers for science texts, as would those for social
provided many opportunities for student studies texts or novels. Because part of the
to work together to “sharpen their under- goal of discussion-based approaches is
standings with, against, and from each to model for students the ways that good
other.”59 readers construct meaning from texts, it
seems reasonable to suggest that discus-
How to carry out the sions of history texts might be framed dif-
recommendation ferently from those of science texts.

To engage students in high-quality discus- 2. Ask follow-up questions that help pro-
sions of text meaning and interpretation, vide continuity and extend the discussion.
teachers can: Questions that are used to frame discussions
are typically followed by other questions
56. Bird (1984); Heinl (1988); Reznitskaya et al. about a different interpretation, an expla-
(2001); Yeazell (1982). nation of reasoning, or an identification of
the content from the text that supports the
57. Applebee et al. (2003); Bird (1984); Heinl
student’s position. In a sustained discussion
(1988); Reznitskaya et al. (2001); Yeazell (1982).
initial questions are likely to be followed
58. Bird (1984); Heinl (1988); Reznitskaya et al. by other questions that respond to the stu-
(2001); Yeazell (1982).
dent’s answer and lead to further thinking
59. Langer (2001, p. 872). and elaboration.
( 23 )


If the reading comprehension standards their positions and the reasoning behind
that students are expected to meet in- them, model reasoning processes by think-
volve making inferences or connections ing out loud, propose counter arguments or
across different parts of a text or using positions, recognize good reasoning when
background knowledge and experience it occurs, and summarize the flow and main
to evaluate conclusions, students should ideas of a discussion as it draws to a close.
routinely have the opportunity to discuss To be effective these types of discussions
answers to these types of questions in all do not need to reach consensus; they just
their reading and content-area classes. need to give students the opportunity to
think more deeply about the meaning of
3. Provide a task, or a discussion format, that what they are reading.
students can follow when they discuss texts
together in small groups. for example, as- Potential roadblocks and solutions
sign students to read selections together and
practice using the comprehension strategies 1. Students do not readily contribute their
that have been taught and demonstrated. In ideas during discussions because they are
these groups students can take turns playing either not engaged by the topic or afraid of
various roles, such as leading the discussion, getting negative feedback from the teacher
predicting what the section might be about, or other students. Students might not ac-
identifying words that are confusing, and tively participate in text-based discussions
summarizing. As these roles are completed, for a number of reasons, but these two are
other students can then respond with other the most important. One strategy to deal
predictions, other things that are confusing, with the first problem is to create opportu-
or different ways of summarizing the main nities for discussion by using text that has
idea. While students are working together, a very high interest level for students in the
the teacher should actively circulate among class but may only be tangentially related to
the groups to redirect discussions that have the topic of the class. for example, a news-
gone astray, model thinking strategies, or paper article on the problem of teen preg-
ask students additional questions to probe nancy might be integrated in a biology class,
the meaning of the text at deeper levels. one on racial profiling in a social studies
class, or one on child labor practices in a his-
4. Develop and practice the use of a specific tory class. Students typically find discussion
“discussion protocol.” Because it is challeng- and interaction rewarding, and once a good
ing to lead the type of discussion that has an pattern is established, it can be generalized
impact on students’ reading comprehension, to more standard textbook content.
it may be helpful for teachers to identify a
specific set of steps from the research or best It is also important to establish a non-
practice literature.60 This could be done ei- threatening and supportive environment
ther individually or collaboratively in grade- from the first class meeting. As part of this
level or subject-area teams. An example of supportive environment, it is important
a discussion protocol is provided in one of to model and encourage acceptance of di-
the research studies used to support this verse viewpoints and discourage criticism
recommendation.61 In this study teachers and negative feedback on ideas. Teachers
were trained to follow five guidelines: ask can help students participate by calling
questions that require students to explain on students who may not otherwise con-
tribute, while asking questions they know
these students can answer.
60. Adler and Rougle (2005); Beck and McKeown
(2006).
Student-led discussions in small groups
61. Reznitskaya et al. (2001). can be another solution for students who
( 24 )

Improving Adolescent Literacy: Effective Classroom and Intervention Practices

Improving Adolescent Literacy: Effective Classroom and Intervention Practices

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (17)

Destacado

Destacado (18)

Similar a Improving Adolescent Literacy: Effective Classroom and Intervention Practices

Similar a Improving Adolescent Literacy: Effective Classroom and Intervention Practices (20)

Más de Miami-Dade County Public Schools

Más de Miami-Dade County Public Schools (20)

Improving Adolescent Literacy: Effective Classroom and Intervention Practices