Best Practices in Reading Comprehension Instruction

Seminar Paper Overview

Carolyn Wooster
May 3, 2012

Too often, comprehension instruction has taken the form of teacher

questioning that serves only to assess comprehension, not to provide
comprehension instruction. Quality comprehension instruction should involve
a combination of the following two approaches:
Explicit Strategy Instruction

Meaning-Focused Instruction

Class, today we are going to make

text-to-self connections as we read.
Use these post-it notes to mark the
places where you read something
that reminds you of something in
your own life.

The teachers goal is for students to

use the reading strategies that have
been explicitly taught.

The teacher models a particular

comprehension strategy and then
students practice utilizing that
strategy.
An explicit strategy focus can
make instruction more
manageable for teachers and
students.
The core reading programs utilized
by many teachers have an explicit
strategy focus.

Modeling: When I read this, I

think
Promoting discussion: What
do you think about that?

The teachers goal is to develop

students who read strategically.

If comprehension strategies are

explicitly used, students are taught
to see the strategy as one of many
tools that can be used for the
ultimate goal of understanding the
text.
Practices other than strategy
instruction have also been shown
to improve reading comprehension:
o A focus on content
o Student engagement
o Rich discussion

Teachers must provide reading comprehension instruction that focuses on

helping students to create meaning, rather than on the arbitrary use of
comprehension strategies. To provide this quality instruction, teachers to be
properly trained, and their work must be guided by principles that adhere to
this meaning-focused instructional philosophy. Additionally, schools and
standards must be structured in a way that promotes comprehension

instruction that is truly focused on helping students to create meaning from

the complexities of text.
References
Almasi, J. F., O'Flahavan, J. F., & Arya, P. (2001). A comparative analysis of
student and

teacher development in more and less proficient

discussions of literature. Reading

Research Quarterly, 36(2), 96.

Applebee, A. N., Langer, J. A., Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (2003).

Discussion-Based Approaches to Developing Understanding: Classroom
Instruction and Student Performance in Middle and High School
English. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 685-730.
Caldwell, JoAnne Schudt. (2008). Reading assessment: A primer for teachers
and coaches, 2nd edition. New York: The Guilford Press.
Conley, M. W. & Wise, A. (2011). Comprehension for what? Preparing
students for their

meaningful future. Theory into Practice, 50(2), 93-99.

Center on Education Policy. (2008). Instructional time in elementary schools:

A closer look at changes for specific subjects. Washington, DC: Center
on Education Policy. Retrieved April 15, 2012 from http://www.cepdc.org/_data/n_0001/resources/live/InstructionalTimeFeb2008.pdf.
Dahl, Roald. (2001). The BFG. London: Puffin Books.
Daniels, H. (2002). Literature circles: Voice and choice in book clubs and
reading groups.
Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Dewitz, P., Jones, J., & Leahy, S. (2009). Comprehension strategy instruction
in core reading

programs. Reading Research Quarterly, 44 (2), 102-126.

Durkin, D. (1978-1979). What classroom observations reveal about reading

comprehension

instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 14(4), 481-533.

Fountas, I. & Pinnell, G. (2006). Teaching for Comprehending and Fluency:

Thinking, Talking, and Writing About Reading, K-8. : Heinemann.
Keene, E. (2010). New horizons in comprehension. Educational Leadership,
67(6), 69-73.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A
constructionintegration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163182.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Kintsch,W. (2009). Learning and constructivism. In S. Tobias & T. Duffy (Eds.),
Constructivist instruction (pp. 223241). New York: Routledge.
Lloyd, S. (2004). Using comprehension strategies as a springboard for
student talk. Journal Of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(2), 114-124.
Lin, Grace. (2006). Year of the Dog. New York: Little, Brown and Company.
McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., & Blake, R. K. (2009). Rethinking reading
comprehension

instruction: A comparison of instruction for

strategies and content approaches.

Reading Research Quarterly, 44(3),

218-253.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of
the National

Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-

based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its

implications for reading instruction. Reports of the

subgroups.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Ness, M. (2011). Explicit reading comprehension instruction in elementary
classrooms:

Teacher use of reading comprehension strategies. Journal

of Research in Childhood

Education, 25(1), 98-117.

Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the

research. Review of

Educational Research, 64(4), 479-530.

Wigfield, A., Guthrie, J. T., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., Klauda, S., McRae,
A., & Barbosa,

P. (2008). Role of reading engagement in mediating effects

of reading comprehension

instruction on reading outcomes. Psychology in

the Schools, 45(5), 432-445.

Palincsar, A., & Schutz, K. M. (2011). Reconnecting strategy instruction with
its theoretical

roots. Theory Into Practice, 50(2), 85-92.

Stilton, Geronimo. (2000). Geronimo Stilton: Lost Treasure of the Emerald

Eye. New York:

Scholastic, Inc.

Thorndike, E. (1917). Reading as reasoning. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 8(6), 323-332.
Villaume, S., & Brabham, E. (2002). Comprehension instruction: Beyond
strategies. Reading

Teacher, 55(7), 672-675.