Reading Comprehension Strategies: An International Comparison of Teacher Preferences

Research in Comparative and International Education
Volume 8 Number 4 2013
www.wwwords.co.uk/RCIE
437 http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2013.8.4.437
Reading Comprehension Strategies:
an international comparison of teacher preferences
SCOTT KISSAU
College of Education,
University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA
FLORIAN HILLER
Pädagogische Hochschule Ludwigsburg, Germany
ABSTRACT In response to international concern over poor reading skills among adolescent learners,
teachers of these students are encouraged to integrate reading comprehension instruction into their
classrooms. To increase the likelihood that reading comprehension strategies are effectively used in
schools, teachers in all content areas need extensive practice using targeted strategies that are viewed as
beneficial in regard to their particular area of expertise. To better understand what strategies are
viewed as beneficial in different content areas, two teacher educators investigated the preferred reading
comprehension strategies of teacher-candidates in Germany and the United States of America in regard
to a variety of different contexts. Using a survey to collect both quantitative and qualitative data, the
researchers were able to identify common preferences among participants from both countries. While
supporting the reported benefits of teaching reading comprehension strategies, the results of the study
also suggested that some of these strategies are better suited to specific content area instruction than
others.
Strong reading comprehension skills are critical to students’ success in twenty-first century
classrooms (Ness, 2009; Programme for International Students Assessment, 2009). The ability of
students to comprehend what they have read is truly an inter-disciplinary skill. In addition to being
required to comprehend stories, novels, and poems in language arts classes, successful students in
today’s classrooms must be able to read and understand math problems to find the correct
solution. They need to understand written directions to successfully complete experiments in
science, and they must be able to interpret vast amounts of information available on the Internet
and in textbooks to complete projects in social studies. Reading comprehension skills are
particularly critical for students as they progress in school and the focus becomes no longer on
learning to read, but rather reading to learn (Lapp et al, 2008; Ness, 2009). Given this reality, it is
troubling that so many adolescent learners struggle to read. According to the National Assessment
of Educational Progress, more than two thirds of all 14-year-old students in the United States of
America (USA) read below grade level, and more than six million students in the USA between the
ages of 12 and 18 are struggling readers (Alliance for Excellent Education, 2006). The USA is not the
only industrialized nation concerned about the reading skills of its youth. For example, the
Programme for International Students Assessment (PISA) reported that nearly one fifth of 15-year-
olds in Germany are reading below grade level expectations (PISA, 2009).
In response to this concern, there has been growing demand for teachers of adolescent
learners in the USA to focus more on the teaching of reading comprehension skills that emphasize
the activation of student prior knowledge via the use of interactive reading strategies (Richardson
et al, 1991; National Reading Panel, 2000; Ness, 2009; Pilonieta, 2010). Similar concerns have been
voiced in other countries around the world. For example, studies conducted in Australia (Morris,
at Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) on March 30, 2015rci.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Scott Kissau & Florian Hiller
438
1986), the United Kingdom (Lunzer & Gardner, 1979), and Ireland (Concannon-Gibney & Murphy,
2011) have all shown that when children are taught reading comprehension strategies and given
multiple opportunities to practice them, their reading comprehension scores increase.
While decoding and word recognition skills are frequently emphasized when working with
very young students (ages 5-10), this type of instruction does not necessarily result in improved
reading comprehension ability (Scarborough, 2001; Pressley & Block, 2002). Catts and Hogan
(2002), for example, found that 20% of 10-year-old weak readers in the USA read fluently, but
lacked adequate comprehension skills. Boulware-Gooden et al, (2007) added, ‘Reading instruction
does not end when students can decode the words. They continue to need instruction that will
support their understanding of what they are reading’ (p. 71).
Despite evidence in support of teaching reading comprehension strategies, research
conducted in countries such as the USA (Ness, 2009; Pilonieta, 2010), Australia (Morris, 1986), and
Ireland (Concannon-Gibney & Murphy, 2011) has shown that many teachers are not implementing
reading comprehension instruction in their classrooms. In a study investigating the extent to which
teachers of adolescent students integrate reading comprehension instruction in their classes, Ness
(2009) found that only 3% of 2400 minutes of instruction time was spent on reading strategies.
Even more disturbing, Ness reported that the teenage, high school students in the study received
no instructional time devoted specifically to reading comprehension strategies.
Reasons for Lack of Strategy Instruction
While attempting to better understand why so few teachers provide reading comprehension
instruction to their students, researchers have reported that teachers of adolescent students
incorrectly assume that their students are all able readers (Ness, 2009). In the previously mentioned
study by Ness that investigated teacher use of and attitudes toward reading comprehension
instruction, one science teacher of 14-17-year-old students stated, ‘We don’t really talk strategies in
my class. I operate under the assumption that they can read it. If they get stuck, I’ll help them, but
I’m not spending a lot of time getting them to read’ (p. 155).
A more common explanation, however, for lack of reading instruction among teachers of
adolescent learners is the belief that reading instruction is not their responsibility (Greenleaf et al,
2001). These teachers often identify themselves as content specialists who became teachers to share
their expertise, not to teach reading (Lapp et al, 2008). In the study by Ness (2009), the participating
teachers from the USA commented that covering course content in preparation for state tests was
their primary instructional responsibility.
Due to a heavy curriculum in the content area and pressure to have students do well on
standardized tests, other teachers of adolescent students have reported to have insufficient time to
spend on teaching reading comprehension skills (Bulgren et al, 1997, 2000). The issue of time was
also raised by teachers while explaining why they avoid specific reading comprehension strategies.
In their study involving at-risk college-level students in the USA, Marks et al (1993) argued that
Reciprocal Teaching, while a beneficial strategy, is too time-consuming for teachers to use and often
requires modifications.
Given that they are content and not reading specialists, another explanation among teachers
of adolescent students for neglecting to address reading comprehension strategies is that they are
unprepared for this task. Mehigan (2005) stated that many teachers have not been adequately
trained in their teacher preparation to help students improve their reading comprehension skills.
Supporting this claim, a social studies teacher in the study by Ness (2009) commented, ‘My students
have to be able to read. However, I’m not qualified to teach them how to read. In my training, I
didn’t learn to teach children to read’ (p. 157).
Need for Research
Given that content area teachers of adolescent students are pressed for time and have unique
curricular demands, it would be beneficial to better understand what reading comprehension
strategies these teachers find appropriate in their chosen area of expertise. Building upon the work
of Marks et al (1993), it would be useful to know what strategies are deemed by teachers to be too

Reading Comprehension Strategies
439
time-consuming to incorporate in their instruction, or what strategies are perceived as less relevant
or less applicable in given content areas. Recent research has suggested that certain strategies are
more suited to specific content area instruction than others. For example, Lapp et al (2008) stated,
‘A social studies teacher might focus on different dimensions of interactive comprehension
modeling than an art or a science teacher’ (p. 380). Having such information would allow
methodology instructors in teacher education programs to share with their teacher-candidates only
those select strategies that have been deemed by fellow content-area practitioners as practical and
relevant for their area of expertise. Supporting this claim, Ness (2009) reported that teacher training
programs should show teacher-candidates in varying content areas how specific reading
comprehension strategies can support and improve their students’ reading comprehension of
course content.
While some educators may believe that teachers should be trained in a large number of
reading comprehension strategies, so that they can choose from a wide-variety of possible
strategies, recent research has suggested that training teachers in a small number of content-specific
strategies may be advantageous. For example, in an article discussing strategies for teaching reading
comprehension in social studies, Massey and Heafner (2004) proposed that by limiting the number
of strategies and techniques taught, teachers gain increasing competence and independence while
using these strategies.
Understanding in what context to use a given strategy relates to what Paris et al (1983) refer
to as ‘conditional knowledge’. According to the researchers, understanding when to use a reading
comprehension strategy is as important as understanding what the strategy is, and how it is applied.
To better understand what reading comprehension strategies are perceived as beneficial in a variety
of contexts, and to better understand what strategies are most likely to be used by teachers in these
contexts, the preferred reading comprehension strategies of two groups of teacher-candidates were
investigated. More specifically, the researchers involved in the present study investigated which
interactive reading comprehension strategies teacher-candidates in the USA and Germany prefer to
use in specific contexts and why.
Method
A mixed method design was used to examine the preferred strategies of teacher-candidates to
support content area reading comprehension. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected
from teacher-candidates who were enrolled in a graduate level teacher training program in the USA
and in Germany. The researchers first taught the teacher-candidates the details of eight reading
comprehension strategies that involve interaction among peers and use of the academic vocabulary
found in texts. Once these strategies were explained, the teacher-candidates were then given the
opportunity to participate in a demonstration of each strategy. This procedure follows the
framework provided by Paris et al (1983) that emphasizes the importance of declarative and
procedural knowledge of reading comprehension strategies. Declarative knowledge is knowledge
of what the strategy is about, and procedural knowledge refers to one’s knowledge of how to
implement a strategy. As previously mentioned, Paris et al (1983) also stressed the importance of
conditional knowledge, or knowledge of when to use a strategy. By tapping the knowledge and
experiences of teacher-candidates who teach in a variety of content areas, the researchers aimed to
enhance conditional knowledge associated with each of the reading comprehension strategies
targeted in the study. To ensure that both groups received similar instruction with respect to the
various strategies, the initial session involving the students from the USA was recorded on video.
The recording was sent to the researcher in Germany who then viewed the recorded session and
followed a very similar instructional procedure when presenting the strategies to his own students.
The session conducted in Germany was also recorded. In the summer of 2012, during a conference
attended by both researchers, the videos were compared to further ensure that similar procedures
were followed in both sessions.

440
Participants
In the fall of 2011, all teacher-candidates enrolled in a graduate level reading course at a German
institution of higher education (IHE) were invited to participate in the study, as were all teacher-
candidates in a graduate level methodology course for aspiring teachers of English as a Second
Language (ESL) at an IHE in the USA. A total of 58 teacher-candidates participated in the study,
representing a response rate of 100%. Due to the relatively small size of the graduate-level classes at
the participating IHE in the USA, the German teacher-candidates significantly outnumbered their
counterparts in the USA. In total, 20 of the 58 participants were from the USA and 38 were from
Germany.
While the students from the USA were still pursuing their license to teach ESL, they all had
some previous experience working as ESL teachers. The state in which the study took place has
one of the fastest growing immigrant populations in the country (Passel & Cohn, 2011). Due to the
rapid influx of children, primarily from Mexico, whose first language is not English, state school
districts have struggled to find enough qualified ESL teachers. As a result, unlicensed teachers,
referred to as Lateral Entry Teachers, are frequently hired to fill ESL vacancies, and are given three
years to complete their licensure requirements. Of the 20 teacher-candidates from the USA who
participated in the study, 12 were Lateral Entry Teachers with 1 to 3 years of experience teaching
English language learners (ELLs). The remaining 8 teacher-candidates from the USA had some
experience teaching ESL to adults or teaching English overseas. Only 2 of the 20 were male and 18
were female.
The inclusion of ESL teachers in the study is significant for a number of reasons. In the USA,
ESL teachers rarely focus strictly on the development of language skills in isolation, but rather
provide support to their ELLs in a wide variety of content areas. Instead of removing or ‘pulling
out’ ELLs from their mainstream classes to receive additional English language instruction, ESL
teachers now frequently go into the mainstream classroom to work collaboratively with the
content teacher in support of students with limited English proficiency. This ‘push-in’ model of
ESL instruction exposes ESL teachers to texts in a variety of content areas, and as a result makes
them well positioned to judge what reading comprehension strategies would be most effective in
different contexts.
The 38 participants from Germany were all seeking a license to teach children ranging in age
from 5 to 17. At the time of data collection, these 38 participants were enrolled in an elective course
aimed at diagnosing and enhancing reading comprehension at a university in southern Germany
that focuses on teacher preparation. Unlike their counterparts from the USA, the German teacher-
participants had no prior teaching experience, other than that obtained during their teacher-
training practicum. Of the 38 total German participants, 10 were male (26%) and 18 were female
(74%).
Survey
Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected from the participants via a survey [1] (see
Appendix) that was administered at the conclusion of the class session in which the eight reading
comprehension strategies were explained and demonstrated. The survey took approximately 15
minutes to complete.
The first section of the survey sought demographic information relating to the gender and
teaching experience of the participants. The second section of the survey allowed for the collection
of both quantitative and qualitative data. First, participants were presented with a variety of
different reading contexts (poetry, novel, short story, science experiment, math word problem,
social studies text), and asked to indicate which one of the eight reading comprehension strategies
they were most likely to use in that situation. Next, qualitative data were collected via open-ended
questions. More specifically, in regard to each of the above-mentioned contexts, the participants
were asked to explain their choice. While the quantitative data helped to identify preferred
strategies among the participants, the qualitative data from the open-ended questions helped to
explain why these strategies were preferred. A small amount of qualitative data was also collected
in the third and final section of the survey. This section included two additional open-ended
questions that sought information about the strategies that the participants were most or least

441
likely to use with their students. The researchers hoped that these two questions might shed light
on key characteristics that the teacher-candidates looked for when choosing a preferred strategy.
Furthermore, while the six initial open-ended questions focused on why participants prefer certain
strategies, the final open-ended question explored the topic from a different perspective by
soliciting information about strategies that they would not want to use in their classrooms. Having
a better understanding of what reading comprehension strategies are not viewed as appropriate or
beneficial is as informative as understanding those that are viewed positively.
The eight reading comprehension strategies described below were explained and modeled in two
three-hour graduate-level classes. One class was conducted in the USA and the other in Germany.
All eight of the strategies were interactive in nature and served to activate student prior knowledge.
In this respect, the strategies aligned with current thinking in reading comprehension instruction.
In opposition to approaches that emphasize decoding and word recognition skills, reading
comprehension instruction in recent years has focused on activating student prior knowledge via
peer interaction (Richardson et al, 1991). Furthermore, the eight strategies required students to
interact using the related academic vocabulary to further their understanding of the associated text.
Studies have demonstrated that reading comprehension and knowledge of vocabulary are strongly
correlated (Biemiller, 2001).
In addition to being interactive in nature, the eight strategies addressed different points in the
reading process. For example, the first strategy described below, Tea Party, is typically used prior to
reading a text. Say Something, Reciprocal Teaching, and Fascinating Facts, on the other hand, are
implemented during the reading process, and Two Word Strategy, Alphabox, Art of Understanding, and
Jigsaw are used as post-reading strategies. Graves et al (2001) suggested teachers use before, during,
and after reading comprehension strategies to help students to recognize that reading is an active
and on-going process.
Tea Party. This strategy encourages students to think about, discuss, and make predictions about a
text that they are going to read (Beers, 2003). Prior to having students read, the teacher selects a
number of key statements from the text and writes them on pieces of paper or cardstock. The
number of sentences selected by the teacher depends upon the length of the text and the number of
students in the class. The teacher then proceeds to give each student a card and has him or her
display the card so that the sentence is visible to others. The students are then encouraged to walk
around the room sharing their sentences with each other and discussing how the sentences are
related. Next, the students work in small groups. They discuss the sentences and the ideas of other
classmates and share their predictions with each other.
Say Something. Say Something (Short et al, 1996) is a strategy that interrupts a student’s reading and
holds him or her accountable for what has been read. Weak readers are often so focused on
understanding and correctly pronouncing individual words in texts that they lose sight of the
general message. Say Something requires students to stop frequently while reading and to reflect
upon what they have read. To implement this strategy, students should get into groups of two or
three and take turns reading a portion of a text aloud. During this time the teacher occasionally
stops the students and asks them to turn to their partner(s) and to say something about what they
have read. The students may express what they liked or disliked, what they understood, or they
may even make a prediction or ask a question. The reading partners are to then respond to the
reader’s comments before selecting another student to begin reading. Students who are unable to
say something about what they have read are asked to re-read their section.
Fascinating Facts. Students are given a number of small Post-it notes. As they are reading, they are
asked to attach Post-it notes to sections or words that they understand. In each case, they are to jot
down on the Post-it note what they understand. Upon completion of reading the text, the students
are then put into small groups of two to four people and asked to share what they wrote down on
their Post-it notes. Similar to Say Something, this strategy can serve to interrupt student reading and

442
to help ensure that students are processing what they read. By sharing what they have understood
with each other, students gain further background knowledge related to the text. This increased
background knowledge should facilitate enhanced comprehension of the text when students are
asked to read the text an additional time.
Reciprocal Teaching. Reciprocal Teaching (Palincsar & Brown, 1984) involves students working
together to better understand the meaning of a text. Students are placed in small groups, and each
student in the group is assigned a role. The roles associated with Reciprocal Teaching traditionally
relate to the four cognitive strategies: summarizing, clarifying, predicting, and questioning (Meyer,
2010). After reading a section of the assigned text the students are asked to stop and to assume their
assigned role. The summarizer, for example, would be required to summarize what happened in
that section of the text. After each person has played his or her role, the students exchange roles,
and then read another section of the text before performing their new role in the group. This
process continues until each student in the group has played each role, or until students have
completed reading the text.
Two Word Strategy. As the name implies, the Two Word Strategy only requires students to write two
words to participate (Hoyt, 1999). After reading a text, students are asked to write on a piece of
paper two different words that are, in their interpretation of the text, very meaningful or
significant. Students are then called upon to share their two words and to explain why they feel the
words are important. The teacher writes the words and the brief explanation on the board. While
reviewing key vocabulary and summarizing parts of the text, this strategy also allows students to
see that there can be multiple interpretations of a text.
Alphaboxes. Alphaboxes (Hoyt, 1999) can be used by students individually, but are more engaging
and interactive when completed in groups. After reading a text, the teacher gives each student or
each group of students a chart with one letter of the alphabet in each box of the chart. For less
common letters that rarely appear at the beginning of words, such as x, y, and z, the teacher may
choose to combine those letters together in the same box. Next, the teacher asks the students to
think of words from the text that begin with the letters in the alphabet, and has them write the
words in the corresponding box of their chart. The teacher should inform students that the words
must have significance in the story and that they should be able to explain the significance. After
several minutes individual students or groups are called upon to share the words they wrote under
the various letters of the alphabet and to explain their significance in the text. The teacher should
write these words on a large Alphabox chart at the front of the classroom to create a visual reference
of key words and important facts related to the text.
Art of Understanding. After reading a text students are asked to quickly draw their interpretation of
its meaning. To emphasize that the purpose of the activity is to demonstrate comprehension and
not artistic ability, students should be given only two minutes to complete the drawing and should
be required to use only a pencil. After two minutes, the students get into small groups to share and
explain their drawing. Later, each group can select one person to share his or her drawing and
interpretation of the text with the class.
Jigsaw. To implement a Jigsaw (Clarke, 1994) a text must first be broken down into distinct, smaller
parts. Students are then put into small groups and assigned one of the parts. Students should also be
given a graphic organizer divided into sections for each part of the text. The students are then
asked to read their assigned part and to take brief notes in the corresponding section of their
graphic organizer. Once the students have had sufficient time to read and take their notes they are
encouraged to discuss their interpretation of the text with the other members of their group. In
essence, the students become experts for their assigned part of the text. Next, one or two members
from each group are asked to be ‘traveling experts’ and to rotate to a neighboring group where
they are to share what they learned about their assigned section of the text, as well as to listen to
what the other group learned about its assigned section. The ‘traveling experts’ continue to rotate
from group to group until they have learned about all of the other sections of the text and they

443
return to their original group. At the end of the activity, each student’s graphic organizer should be
completely filled in.
Data Analysis
The preferred strategies for each of the six reading contexts presented in the survey (poetry, novel,
short story, science experiment, math word problem, social studies text) were tabulated by the
researchers. The indicated preferences for the teacher-candidates from both countries were
graphed separately and inter-group comparisons were made. Preferred strategies shared by both
groups of teacher-candidates were identified.
The qualitative data obtained from the open-ended questions were then analyzed. As the
researchers intended to examine and compare responses to the open-ended questions to detect
emerging themes that helped to explain the quantitative findings, a grounded theory approach
(Glaser, 1992) was felt to be appropriate. As Glaser stated (1992), the aim of grounded theory is to
understand the research situation, and to discover the theory implicit in the data. Once the hand-
written responses of each participant were recorded in a Word document, the researchers followed
the procedures outlined by Emerson et al (1995) for reading and compressing the collected data.
Participant responses to the open-ended questions were first grouped according to the question. In
other words, all of the responses explaining participant preferences for the science context were
grouped together, as were all of the open-ended responses for each of the other five contexts, and
for each of the two final open-ended questions. Next, the responses in each group were analyzed
line by line and coded using the comment function in Microsoft Word to identify themes. These
themes were then compressed into larger themes.
Results
Poetry
As can be seen in Figures 1 and 2, the teacher-candidates from the USA and Germany shared a
preference for Art of Understanding. A total of 50% or more of both groups indicated that they
would prefer to use this reading comprehension strategy when having their students read poetry. A
smaller percentage of teacher-candidates from both countries expressed a preference for Tea Party,
Say Something, Two Word Strategy, and Fascinating Facts. Neither group of teacher-candidates
expressed a preference for the Jigsaw strategy (see Figures 1 and 2).
Two themes emerged when analyzing the qualitative data related to the poetry. First, the
teacher-candidates felt it was important to choose a strategy that allowed students to express
different opinions. A teacher-candidate from the USA commented, ‘I think I would use Art of
Understanding because it allows for multiple interpretations’. While also indicating a similar reason
for his preference for Art of Understanding, one German teacher-candidate cautioned that this
strategy alone may not be sufficient. He explained, ‘The Art of Understanding is useful but it should
be combined with another strategy that also involves a writing activity’.
Figure 1. Poetry: American preferences. Figure 2. Poetry: German preferences.

444
The second identified theme related to the brief nature of poems. Candidates from both countries
frequently reported that a reading strategy for poetry should take into account the length of poems
and, therefore, should not require elaborate and lengthy student responses. A female Lateral Entry
teacher from the USA commented, ‘Two Word Strategy is best here because ... [it] only requires two
words and lets kids express their own ideas’. A similar comment was expressed by a German
teacher-candidate [2] when explaining her preference for the Two Word Strategy. She commented,
‘The Two-Word Strategy is very useful because it helps students to reflect on the content of the text
... with only a few words’.
Novel
When it comes to reading a novel, Reciprocal Teaching was the reading comprehension strategy of
choice for teacher-candidates from both countries. In total, 40% of the participants from the USA
and 37% of the German participants indicated Reciprocal Teaching to be their preferred strategy
when having students read a novel. Say Something was also a preferred reading comprehension
strategy among both groups with 25% of the participants from the USA and 21% of the Germans
indicating this to be their strategy of choice. As can be seen in Figures 3 and 4, some interest, albeit
to a lesser degree, was also expressed by both groups of teacher-candidates in using Tea Party,
Fascinating Facts, Two Word Strategy, and Art of Understanding in the context of reading a novel.
Active participation was a theme that surfaced when analyzing the open-ended responses.
Teacher-candidates preferred the above-mentioned strategies when having students read a novel
because they encourage active participation. For example, when commenting on why she prefers
Reciprocal Teaching a female Lateral Entry Teacher from the USA explained, ‘I really like that
everyone has a job while reading’. The four preferred strategies common among both groups of
participants also were reported to help keep students engaged throughout the reading process. One
female teacher-candidate from the USA with experience teaching English to adults commented,
‘Say Something would be a great strategy when reading a novel, because it has the students stop
periodically to discuss what they read’. For a similar reason, a teacher-candidate from Germany
stated, ‘When reading a novel I think I will use Fascinating Facts because it requires students to
think while they are reading’.
Figure 3. Novel: American preferences. Figure 4. Novel: German preferences.
Short Stories
There was no definitive favorite strategy shared by teacher-candidates from both countries with
respect to students reading short stories. That being said, both groups expressed common interest
in Two Word Strategy, Tea Party, Reciprocal Teaching, and Say Something. While Two Word Strategy
was the clear favorite among participants from the USA (45%), only 12% of the Germans indicated
it as their preference. Both groups of teacher-candidates expressed similar degrees of interest in Tea
Party, with 30% of those from the USA preferring the strategy along with 33%of the Germans. Say
Something and Reciprocal Teaching also garnered similar degrees of interest from both groups (see

445
Figures 5 and 6). No teacher-candidate from either country chose Fascinating Facts as the preferred
strategy.
Motivation and ease of use were two themes that permeated teacher-candidate responses
when explaining why they chose their preferred strategy. As short stories are frequently read in
school, the participants from both countries seemed to look for strategies that would be easy to use
and that would help to motivate their students. One participant from the USA commented, ‘I think
I would use Two Word the most, simply because it is so easy and doesn’t require a lot of preparation
on my part. I also really like the Tea Party idea because the students would enjoy it and they would
be excited to read the story afterwards’. When asked what strategy he would prefer to use when
having his students read a short story, a German teacher-candidate responded with the following:
‘Tea Party: The students’ movement in the classroom and the discussions will motivate them and
support their mental activities to comprehend the text’.
Figure 5. Short story: American preferences. Figure 6. Short story: German preferences.
Science Experiments
With respect to reading science experiments, the German teacher-candidates expressed greater
variety in their preferred strategies than did their counterparts from the USA. Common preferences
were, nevertheless, still visible. Both the participants from the USA (40%) and Germany (62%)
reported preferring Fascinating Facts in this context. When examining participant responses to the
open-ended question of why they chose a particular strategy in this context, the words ‘challenging’
and ‘difficult texts’ were mentioned multiple times. Both groups of teacher-candidates felt that
Fascinating Facts would be helpful to students when reading challenging texts with lots of difficult
vocabulary. Take for example the following comment from a teacher-candidate from the USA:
Fascinating Facts would be really helpful when reading a text with lots of technical jargon. Even if
the students only understood a few words, they could still participate in a group discussion, learn
from their classmates, and then go back and re-read the text. The second time around they
should get more out of it.
The motivational properties of Fascinating Facts represented another recurring theme in the data.
One German teacher-candidate provided the following rationale for his choice: ‘I suppose the
students will be motivated by using Fascinating Facts because they can choose those parts of the text
that they really understand. The exchange in the groups will then support the deeper
understanding of the whole text’.
In addition to liking Fascinating Facts, a large percentage of the participants from the USA
(35%) reported to prefer Reciprocal Teaching, a preference that was shared by only 5% of their
German peers. The rationale provided for this preference was that the strategy would allow for
cooperative learning among students to enhance their understanding. As is demonstrated in
Figures 7 and 8, both groups also expressed some minimal interest in Say Something and Art of
Understanding.

446
Figure 7. Science experiment: American preferences. Figure 8. Science experiment: German preferences.
Math Word Problems
The preferred reading comprehension strategies reported by teacher-candidates from both
countries with respect to the reading of math problems were very similar to those mentioned
earlier in regard to reading science experiments. As demonstrated in Figures 9 and 10, Fascinating
Facts was again quite popular among both teacher-candidates from the USA (35%) and from
Germany (20%), as was Reciprocal Teaching and Art of Understanding.
Once again, the theme of challenging texts surfaced in the data. According to both groups,
these three strategies would be helpful when dealing with the technical vocabulary often found in
word problems. A German teacher-candidate commented, ‘I like Fascinating Facts because math
problems often contain words that students do not understand. You need to understand the words
to find the right answer’. The concept of differentiation was another, albeit less pronounced, theme
in the open-ended responses. The fact that these strategies allowed for students of all abilities to be
actively involved in the learning process appeared to be a determining factor in why they were
preferred by the teacher-candidates. When explaining why he preferred Reciprocal Teaching, one
teacher-candidate from the USA commented, ‘I have used a similar strategy before with my
students. Each student has a job to do. I like it because it allows for differentiation. The weaker
students can be asked to draw a picture representing the problem’. It is interesting to note that
while one-fifth of all teacher-candidates from the USA indicated Two Word Strategy as their strategy
of choice when having students read a math problem, none of their German counterparts
expressed a preference for this strategy.
Figure 9. Math problem: American preferences. Figure 10. Math problem: German preferences.

447
Social Studies Text
As can be seen in Figures 11 and 12, both groups of teacher-candidates expressed a strong
preference for the Jigsaw strategy in a social studies context. Almost half of each group indicated a
preference for this reading comprehension strategy. The theme that emerged in the data analysis
related to the length of texts. As was mentioned by teacher-candidates from both countries, Jigsaws
help to break lengthy texts into manageable chunks of information. Reflecting this theme, a
teacher-candidate from the USA explained, ‘Social studies texts tend to be really long and can
overwhelm kids. A Jigsaw breaks the text into smaller sections’.
Common interest was also expressed with regard to Fascinating Facts and Alphaboxes. With respect to Alphaboxes, the
strategy was viewed more favorably by the participants from the USA (30%) than by the German cohort (11%). Here
again, the theme of text length was apparent. As was explained by one teacher-candidate from the USA, ‘Social studies
texts are long and kind of boring. With Alphaboxes students can compete with each other to complete the box, so they
might be more motivated to read’.
Figure 11. Social studies text: American preferences. Figure 12. Social studies text: German preferences.
Discussion
The eight reading comprehension strategies discussed in this study were perceived by the teacher-
candidates from both countries as beneficial in enhancing student reading comprehension skills.
This finding supports the growing body of literature indicating the value of reading comprehension
strategy instruction (National Reading Panel, 2000; Biancarosa & Snow, 2006). Furthermore, in
support of claims made by Lapp et al (2008), the results of this study suggest that certain reading
comprehension strategies are better suited to specific content area instruction than others. As
summarized in Figure 13, specific reading comprehension strategies were preferred by both groups
of teacher-candidates in various contexts. Say Something, Two Word Strategy, and Tea Party were the
preferred strategies of the teacher-candidates from the USA and Germany when having students
read texts commonly associated with language arts (poetry, novels and short stories). The data
suggested that these three strategies are particularly beneficial in a language arts context because
they allow for diverse interpretations of texts, keep students engaged in the process of reading,
cater to different lengths of texts, such as novels and poems, and are motivational in nature.
Indicative of the unique nature and domain-specificity of the various reading comprehension
strategies targeted in this study, different strategies were preferred by the teacher-candidates in the
context of a science or math class. Say Something, Fascinating Facts, Reciprocal Teaching, and Art of
Understanding were reported to be preferred strategies by teacher-candidates from both countries
when having students read science experiments, and Fascinating Facts, Reciprocal Teaching, and Art of
Understanding were common preferences in the context of reading math word problems. The
results suggested that these four strategies were preferred by both groups of teacher-candidates due
to their motivational properties and their ability to help students comprehend mathematical and
scientific texts that contain lots of technical vocabulary.
The demands of reading texts associated with social studies were also found to be unique in
nature. For the first time in the study, the Jigsaw was strongly endorsed by the teacher-candidates

448
from Germany and from the USA. The Alphabox and Fascinating Facts strategies were also preferred
strategies among participants from both countries. The data suggest that these strategies involving
student interaction and competition help to develop social skills among students and are especially
beneficial in the context of social studies, where texts are sometimes perceived as long and lacking
appeal among students.
While the above-mentioned strategies were preferred by teacher-candidates in various
reading contexts, analysis of the teacher-candidates’ responses to the two final open-ended survey
questions suggest that the reading-related benefits of these strategies were not the sole factors
influencing their choice. When asked to identify the strategies they would use most and least often,
and to provide a rationale for their choice, issues surrounding student behavior frequently surfaced.
Based on this repeated theme, classroom management concerns appeared to play an important role
when choosing preferred reading comprehension strategies. Although several participants
mentioned that they were excited to implement Tea Party due to its engaging nature and because it
helped to motivate students to read, others expressed concern over the effect it might have on
student behavior. One teacher-candidate from the USA made the following comment: ‘I like Tea
Party, but I am nervous about how my class may act out rather than think through it’. Another
teacher-participant thought that Tea Party would be too difficult to explain and would result in
confusion among her students.
Figure 13. Summary of preferred reading comprehension strategies.
Convenience was a second theme that emerged when analyzing the final two open-ended
questions. The convenience of using various strategies also appeared to influence teacher-candidate
preferences. When asked what reading comprehension strategies she feels that she would use most
often with her students, one participant remarked, ‘I really like the Alphaboxes, Two Word Strategy,
Fascinating Facts, and Art of Understanding. These check comprehension, but have little preparation
needed’. In fact, in some cases, convenience appeared to be a more influential factor than the
perceived reading benefits of a particular strategy. Take for example, the following quote from a
male teacher-candidate from the USA when asked what strategy he would never use: ‘I probably
wouldn’t use the Tea Party, only because it takes more preparation’. Two German teacher-
candidates also stated that the instructions for the Tea Party were too complex, and, as a result, they
would probably not use the strategy with their future students.
Implications and Applications
The results of the study support a constructivist and Vygotskian framework for reading
comprehension instruction. According to constructivists like Vygotsky (1978), learning is most
effective when students have the opportunity to construct meaning through social interaction. The
participating teacher-candidates from both countries frequently mentioned that they found a
particular reading comprehension strategy to be beneficial for students due to its interactive nature.
Jigsaw x x x x x 
Art of Understanding  x x   x
Alphabox x x x x x x
Two Word Strategy    x x x
Reciprocal Teaching x  x   
Fascinating Facts   x   
Say Something     x x
Tea Party    x x x
Poetry Novel Short Story Science
Experiment
Math
Problem
Social
Studies
Text

449
Explanations for why they preferred a strategy often included the word ‘discussion’. Take for
example the following quote from a teacher-candidate from the USA when explaining why she
liked Fascinating Facts in the context of reading a science experiment: ‘Even if the students only
understood a few words, they could still participate in a group discussion, learn from their
classmates, and then go back and re-read the text’. A similar rationale was provided by a German
teacher-candidate when discussing why he preferred the Tea Party strategy in the context of reading
short stories. He commented, ‘[The] discussions will motivate them and support their mental
activities to comprehend the text’.
The study’s findings also align closely with the influential work of Echevarria et al (2004) that
emphasizes the importance of providing students with opportunities to interact with peers using
the academic vocabulary found in texts. In this study, a common explanation given for preferring a
given strategy was that it allowed students to discuss challenging vocabulary. Consider the
following response from a German participant: ‘I like Fascinating Facts because math problems
often contain words that students do not understand. You need to understand the words to find the
right answer’. Given this growing body of evidence in support of the benefits of reading
comprehension strategies that involve interaction and the use of academic vocabulary, it is
important that teachers and teacher-candidates be trained in the use of such strategies. It is worth
reiterating that many teachers of adolescent students do not feel adequately prepared to provide
reading comprehension instruction (Mehigan, 2005; Ness, 2009).
While supporting the use of interactive reading strategies to enhance student comprehension,
the study’s results also shed light on which of these interactive strategies may be more beneficial in
various contexts than others. Teachers and teacher-educators may wish to become familiar with
the reading comprehension strategies identified in Figure 13 that were preferred by the teacher-
candidates from both countries with regard to specific content areas. While the preferences of this
small number of inexperienced teacher-candidates should not be used to guide teacher education
programs, they do provide interesting direction for future research. Additional research involving
larger numbers and more experienced teachers that supports the beliefs expressed by the teacher-
candidates in this study could lead to a growing professional agreement with regard to which
reading comprehensions strategies may be most beneficial in given contexts. By focusing on the
strategies deemed particularly beneficial in their area of expertise, teacher-candidates may become
more comfortable and confident in their use, and, as result, more likely to effectively use them in
their future classrooms. This claim is bolstered by the earlier work of Massey and Heafner (2004)
that reported teachers should be exposed to a limited number of reading strategies, so that they
become more competent and independent in their use of those strategies.
While the study’s results suggest that certain strategies may be more beneficial with regard to
specific content areas than others, they also underscore the influence of context. Although the
intercultural comparisons between the teacher-candidates from both countries highlighted reading
comprehension strategies viewed as beneficial by both groups, they also drew attention to some
interesting differences. For example, almost half (45%) of the teacher-candidates from the USA
expressed a preference for the Two Word Strategy in the context of reading short stories, whereas
only 8% of the German participants expressed the same preference. A total of 35% of the teacher-
candidates from the USA indicated a preference for using Reciprocal Teaching when having students
read a science experiment, yet only 5% of their German counterparts indicated the same
preference. Attempting to rationalize these differences, it could be hypothesized that the teacher-
candidates’ prior experience in school may have influenced their personal beliefs about the
suitability of various strategies. For example, the German teacher-candidates may have experienced
a more structured form of science instruction in Germany, as opposed to a more interactive
approach in the USA. These experiences could possibly explain why the German teacher-candidates
would see less benefit in a highly interactive strategy like Reciprocal Teaching. These stark
differences between the two groups of teacher-candidates speak to the importance of taking
context into consideration. Methodology instructors who teach or who wish to teach abroad
should keep in mind that strategies that are viewed very positively by teacher-candidates in their
native lands, may not be as favorably viewed by those in other countries.

450
Limitations of the Study
The study involved only one university in the USA and one in Germany. As a result of this narrow
sample, its findings cannot be generalized to all teacher-candidates in all universities in the USA,
Germany, or elsewhere. To build upon the results presented in this article, future research should
involve participants from a greater number of universities and from a variety of different countries.
A common risk associated with conducting research that involves participants from different
countries and who speak different languages is that some miscommunication may occur when
translating between languages. While the researchers took steps to prevent miscommunication by
means of video-recording instructional procedures to be followed and via sharing of instructional
resources, the large percentage of German teacher-candidates who indicated a preference for the
Jigsaw strategy when having students read math problems suggests that some misinterpretation
may have occurred. As was mentioned by several participants in the study, Jigsaws are highly
appropriate when reading lengthy texts that can be broken into parts. Despite the apparent
misalignment between Jigsaws and math problems, one quarter of the German teacher-candidates
indicated this to be their preferred strategy when having students read word problems. No
participants from the USA made the same choice. Some misunderstanding of this reading strategy
by the German teacher-candidates may have occurred.
Conclusion
Despite mounting evidence that reading strategy instruction improves reading skills among
students, research has shown that very little instructional time is spent teaching adolescent students
to use specific reading comprehension strategies. Chief among the reasons provided for this
omission is that teachers lack the training and the time to integrate reading strategy instruction into
their content classes. Clearly, teacher training programs need to familiarize future teachers in all
content areas with reading comprehension strategies. That being said, it is insufficient to provide
teacher-candidates with a superficial understanding of a large number of reading strategies that in
some cases may have little practicality or relevance in their chosen area of expertise. To increase
the likelihood that reading strategies are effectively used by teachers, teacher-candidates in all
content areas need extensive practice using strategies that are viewed as beneficial and applicable in
regard to their particular subject matter.
In support of the earlier work by Lapp et al (2008), the results of this study have suggested
that certain reading comprehension strategies may be better suited to specific content area
instruction than others. Building upon Lapp et al’s work, the study identified preferred reading
comprehension strategies among two distinct groups of teacher-candidates with regard to a variety
of different content areas. Adding to the strength of these findings, intergroup comparisons were
made that highlighted specific strategies that were preferred by both groups. In the context of
language arts instruction, the teacher-candidates from the USA and Germany indicated a
preference for Say Something, Two Word Strategy, and Tea Party. With respect to math and science
classes, both groups felt that Fascinating Facts, Reciprocal Teaching, and Art of Understanding would be
especially beneficial when having students read word problems and science experiments. In a social
studies context, Jigsaw, Alphabox, and Fascinating Facts were the preferred strategies among teacher-
candidates from both countries.
In light of these findings, methodology instructors may wish to familiarize their aspiring
teachers with the reading comprehension strategies that were identified by both groups of teacher-
candidates as beneficial. By exposing teacher-candidates to these strategies it is the hope of the
researchers that the prospective teachers would become more competent in their use of the
strategies and more likely to use them in their future classrooms.
Notes
[1] The English version of the survey provided in the Appendix was translated into German for the
German teacher-candidates by one of the researchers who is a native speaker of German and fluent in
English. The translation was then verified for accuracy by a bilingual colleague.

451
[2] All quotes provided by German participants were translated from German to English by the same
researcher who translated the survey. Once again, the translations were then verified by a bilingual
colleague who was not involved in the study.
References
Alliance for Excellent Education (2006) Why the Crisis in Adolescent Literacy Demands a National Response.
http://www.all4ed.org/files/StrivingBrief3_numbers_02.pdf
Beers, K. (2003) When Kids Can’t Read, What Teachers Can Do: a guide for teachers 6-12. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Biancarosa, G. & Snow, C. (2006) Reading Next - a vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy:
a report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Biemiller, A. (2001) Teaching Vocabulary: early, direct, and sequential, American Educator, 25(1), 24-28.
Boulware-Gooden, R., Carreker, S., Thornhill, A. & Joshi, M. (2007) Instruction of Metacognitive Strategies
Enhances Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary Achievement of Third-grade Students, The Reading
Teacher, 61(1), 70-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1598/RT.61.1.7
Bulgren, J.A., Deshler, D.D. & Schumaker, J.B. (1997) Use of a Recall Enhancement Routine and Strategies in
Inclusive Secondary Classes, Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 12, 198-208.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.426
Bulgren, J.A., Deshler, D.D., Shumaker, J.B. & Lenz, B.K. (2000) The Use and Effectiveness of Analogical
Instruction in Diverse Secondary Content Classrooms, Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 426-441.
Catts, H.W. & Hogan, T.P. (2002) The Fourth Grade Slump: late emerging poor readers. Paper presented at
the annual meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading, June 27-30, in Chicago, USA.
Clarke, J. (1994) Pieces of the Puzzle: the jigsaw method, in S. Sharan (Ed.) Handbook of Cooperative Learning
Methods. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Concannon-Gibney, T. & Murphy, B. (2011) School-based Teacher Professional Development to Transform
the Teaching of Reading Comprehension: an Irish case study, Professional Development in Education, 38,
131-147. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2011.576264
Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. & Short, D.J. (2004) Making Content Comprehensible for English Learners: the SIOP model.
2nd edn. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Emerson, R.M., Fretz, R.I. & Shaw, L.L. (1995) Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226206851.001.0001
Glaser, B.G. (1992) Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis: emergence vs. forcing. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Graves, M., Juel, C. & Graves, B. (2001) Teaching Reading in the 21st Century. 2nd edn. Boston, MA: Allyn &
Bacon.
Greenleaf, C., Schoenbach, R., Cziko, C. & Mueller, F. (2001) Apprenticing Adolescent Readers to Academic
Literacy, Harvard Educational Review, 71, 79-129.
Hoyt, L. (1999) Revisit, Reflect, Retell. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Lapp, D., Fisher, D. & Grant, M. (2008) ‘You can read this text – I’ll show you how’: interactive
comprehension instruction, Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(5), 372-383.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.51.5.1
Lunzer, E.A. & Gardner, W.K. (1979) The Effective Use of Reading. London: Heinemann.
Marks, M., Pressley, M., Coley, J.D., Craig, S., Gardner, R., DePinto, T., et al (1993) Three Teachers’
Adaptations of Reciprocal Teaching in Comparison to Traditional Reciprocal Teaching, The Elementary
School Journal, 94, 267-283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/461766
Massey, D. & Heafner, T. (2004) Promoting Reading Comprehension in Social Studies, Journal of Adolescent &
Adult Literacy, 48(1), 26-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.48.1.3
Mehigan, K.R. (2005) The Strategy Toolbox: a ladder to strategic teaching, The Reading Teacher, 58(6),
552-566. http://dx.doi.org/10.1598/RT.58.6.5
Meyer, K. (2010) ‘Diving into reading’: revisiting reciprocal teaching in the middle years, Literacy Learning,
18(1), 41-52.
Morris, B. (1986) Thinking through Text, in N. Stewart-Dore (Ed.) Writing and Reading to Learn, pp. 53-67.
Rozelle, NSW: Primary English Teachers Association.

452
National Reading Panel (2000) Teaching Children to Read: an evidence-based assessment of the scientific research
literature on reading and its implication for reading instruction: reports of the subgroups. Washington, DC:
National Institute of Child Health and Development.
Ness, M. (2009) Reading Comprehension Strategies in Secondary Content Area Classrooms: teacher use of
and attitudes towards reading comprehension instruction, Reading Horizons, 49(2), 143-164.
Palincsar, A. & Brown, A. (1984) Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-fostering and Comprehension-
Monitoring Activities, Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1
Paris, S.G., Lipson, M.Y. & Wixson, K.K. (1983) Becoming a Strategic Reader, Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 8(3), 293-316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(83)90018-8
Passel, J. & Cohn, D. (2011) How many Hispanics? Comparing Census Counts and Census Estimates. Washington,
DC: Pew Hispanic Center.
Pilonieta, P. (2010) Instruction of Research-based Comprehension Strategies in Basal Reading Programs,
Reading Psychology, 31, 150-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02702710902754119
Programme for International Students Assessment (PISA) (2009) PISA 2009 Executive Summary: reading
literacy over ten years. http://www.oh.gov.hu/orszagos-nemzetkozi/pisa/pisa2009-executive
Pressley, M. & Block, C.C. (2002) Summing Up: what comprehension instruction could be, in C.C. Block &
M. Pressley (Eds) Comprehension Instruction: research-based best practices. New York: Guilford Press.
Richardson, V., Anders, P., Tidwell, (D). & Lloyd, C. (1991) The Relationship between Teachers’ Beliefs and
Practices in Reading Comprehension Instruction, American Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 559-586.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312028003559
Scarborough, H.S. (2001) Connecting Early Language and Literacy to Later Reading (Dis)Abilities: evidence,
theory, and practice, in S.B. Neuman & D.K. Dickinson (Eds) Handbook of Early Literacy Research. New
York: Guilford.
Short, K.G., Harste, J. & Burke, C. (1996) Creating Classrooms for Authors and Inquirers. 2nd edn. Portsmouth,
NH: Heinemann.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: the development of higher psychological processes, ed. M. Cole, V. John-
Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
APPENDIX
Preferred Reading Strategy Survey
Instructions: Please take your time to complete all sections to the best of your ability.
Section A: Background Information
Please provide the following information:
1. What is your gender?
________ Male _________Female
Have you prior teaching experience?
_______ yes ________ no
If yes, please explain.
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

453
Section B: Teacher Preferences
Directions: For each of the following contexts indicate the number that represents the reading
comprehension strategy that you are most likely to use with your current/future students. In the
space provided below, please explain why you chose that strategy.
1 = Tea Party 2 = Say Something 3 = Fascinating Facts 4 = Reciprocal Teaching
5 = Two Word Strategy 6 = Alphaboxes 7 = Art of Understanding 8 = Jigsaw
1. When having students read a poem which one of the above reading comprehension strategies
would you prefer to use with your students? __________________________________________
Explanation: ___________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
2. When having students read a scientific text/experiment which one of the above reading
comprehension strategies would you prefer to use with your students? ______________________
Explanation: ___________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
3. When having students read a novel which one of the above reading comprehension strategies
would you prefer to use with your students? __________________________________________
Explanation: ___________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
4. When having students read a short story which one of the above reading comprehension
strategies would you prefer to use with your students? __________________________________
Explanation: ___________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
5. When having students read a word problem in math class which one of the above reading
comprehension strategies would you prefer to use with your students? ______________________
Explanation: ___________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
6. When having students read a social studies text about different countries or regions which one of the
above reading comprehension strategies would you prefer to use with your students? __________
Explanation: ___________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
Section C: Additional Information
Directions: Please answer the following questions to the best of your ability:

454
1. Of all the reading comprehension strategies that you have learned today what strategy do you
feel you will use the most often with your students? Explain.
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
2. Is there a reading comprehension strategy or strategies that you learned today that you feel you
would never or rarely use with your students? Explain.
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
SCOTT KISSAU* is an Associate Professor and the Coordinator of the Master of Arts in Teaching
Foreign Languages Program at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. His primary research
interests relate to gender and language learning, teacher education, and online language
instruction. Correspondence: spkissau@uncc.edu
FLORIAN HILLER is a lecturer in the fields of reading, writing and German as a second language
at the Pädagogische Hochschule in Ludwigsburg, Germany. His major research interests include
reading comprehension and the preparation of K-10 teacher-candidates.
Correspondence: hiller@ph-ludwigsburg.de
*Contact author

Reading Comprehension Strategies: An International Comparison of Teacher Preferences

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (17)

Similar a Reading Comprehension Strategies: An International Comparison of Teacher Preferences

Similar a Reading Comprehension Strategies: An International Comparison of Teacher Preferences (20)

Más de juraikha

Más de juraikha (16)

Último

Último (20)

Reading Comprehension Strategies: An International Comparison of Teacher Preferences