Reciprocal Teaching Strategy

Naturally, in order for any strategy to work the way it was intended; teachers must know how to use it, and provide students with specific and direct instructions,so that when they read, their cognitive thinking and comprehension skills will be significantly improve.

Indeed, since comprehension plays a significant role in iteracy; the use of effective metacognitive strategies is of critical importance for all learners. Moreover, when strategy instruction is integrated into core subject matter learning, it can undeniably improve students comprehension of text

In other studies, reciprocal teaching has been found to be an effective comprehension technique to use with students with learning disabilities during social studies period of instruction (Lederer, Jeffrey, 2000). Arguably, comprehension is of tremendous importance, since it enables the reader to fully grasp the content and thus form critical hypothesis from the related facts.

PROCEDURES

Arguably, by providing them with various comprehension strategies, teachers can engage students in the instructional routines that revolve around question answering and question generation (Vacca & Vacca, 2000). The core concept of reciprocal teaching, are three essential elements: (a) instruction and application of four comprehension-fostering and comprehension monitoring strategies (predicting, questioning, clarifying, and summarizing), (b) instruction and application of the four strategies using meaningful dialogues, and (c) providing scaffolded instruction of the strategies than gradually relinquish control to the students (Hacker & Tenent, 2002).

The first step in implementing reciprocal teaching is to- model to students how to effectively use the strategy to increase their comprehension. Naturally, as with any strategy, the best way to ensure its effectiveness is to use it in stages over the semester so as not to overload your students with too much information. Many teachers might agree that students tend to learn procedures when they are carefully organized, demonstrated, rehearsed, and then put into motion. RT procedure is teacher directed at first where an aide or high level reader is designated as tutor for the group. The leader demonstrates the strategies for the students, monitoring students understanding, with instant feedback, and engaging their minds through brainstorming and questioning (Palincsar & Brown, 1984).

After placing students in small groups, the teacher instructs them on the four components of questioning, predicting, clarifying, and summarizing. While the students are in their groups of four to six; they read the assigned passage text aloud or silently, while taking into consideration the reader’s comprehension level. After reading the passage, the “learning leader” helps the group comprehends what they read by verbally engaging all four strategies (Palincsar & Brown, 1991). The RT strategy allows students to fully engage their minds, by activating their background knowledge, and focusing on the content, draw conclusions, and predicting the outcome of the text content.

In the pilot study of RT conducted by Palincsar & Brown (1991), concrete activities were selected that could be engaged by novice learners that would employ the overlapping functions of the strategy. In addition an adult teacher worked individually with poor readers assigned a segment of the passage to read silently. After completing the assignment, the teacher or leader would then ask the reader to summarize the content, and make predictions about future content (Palincsar & Brown, 1991). he instructor provides the group leader with the necessary guidance to complete the activity through a variety of techniques; prompting, “What questions did you think the teacher might ask” (Palincsar & Brown, 1991).

Throughout the use of the strategy; the authors’ discover that many students had difficulty assuming the role of dialogue leader when their turn came to implement the process (Palincsar & Brown, 1986). However, as they become more used to the procedures, their comprehension level improved dramatically. In another study; they tested students with a base performance correctness of 15%; but within a short time they significantly improved during training to accuracy levels of 85% (Palincsar & Brown, 1991).

So why are the four strategies so effective in improving comprehension? One might argue that the strategy allows students to think and brainstorm activities while expanding their metacognitive learning skills as they explore new ideas. However, the primary purpose of reciprocal teaching is to convince all students to become actively involved in using the strategies themselves (Slater & Horstman, 2000). Overall, the RT strategy has been successful, because the process uses dialogue between students, and teachers who work to improve understanding of text to form hypothesis and predict the outcome. But one could also argue that it is successful, because inept readers now know what to look for, and how to analyze and interpret the text content.

Questioning

The first component of the strategy is questioning. When students know prior to reading that they each need to think of a question about the text, they read with an awareness of the text’s important ideas (Oczuks, 2003). They automatically increase their reading comprehension when they read the text, process the meaning, make inferences and connections to prior knowledge, and finally, generate a question (Oczuks, 2003).

Finally, after all revisions have been made, they then collaborate on the final answers to aid them in their comprehension of the text content.

Clarifying

The next strategy is clarifying, which is design to spell out problems, difficult concepts, vocabulary or confusion about the text. Students are asked to identify problems areas or ambiguous issues in the text (Slater & Horstman, 2000). This is the area of great importance, because it hinges understanding of the main idea of the text, or difficult vocabulary terms. The leader clears up all questions and asks for examples to ensure comprehension of the text. This is the area where many students get lost in translation because some of the vocabulary words are foreign to them, and thus above their level in interpretation.

Predicting

The next strategy is predicting, which involves previewing the text in anticipating what will happens next. The thinking process involves in predicting, assist students in making meaning of the text (Block, Rodgers, & Johnson, 2004). Readers must make logical predictions based on information from the text and their prior knowledge. Knowledge of fictional text structures such as characters, setting, problem, resolution, theme or lesson assist students in making predictions (Oczkus, 2003). But not many students are good at making inferences from what they read. In one of my tenth grade history class; one study asked me, “What is this inference you keep talking about?” Some studies have found that less-skilled comprehenders were less able to answer questions requiring inference from a text, even when they were able to look back over the text, than good comprehenders (Greenway, 2002).

Before reading, advance readers will attempt to predict what the passage or text is about. Asking students, "Based on the information you have seen, what do you think you will learn?" Ask students for their rationale. The leader might ask questions like, "What information in the text makes you think this way?" "Did you use any other information aside from the text to formulate your prediction?" (Oczkus, 2003). During reading, students learn to make predictions, through anticipation, revising, or forming new hypothesis from what they have read. Students should then be asking themselves, "Does the text support this prediction?" If evidence to support their prediction is not in the text, should the prediction be revised or abandoned? (Oczkus, 2003). Once all of their concerns have been covered, the leader moves to the final strategy of summarizing.

Summarizing

Summarizing allow students to draw final conclusions or hypothesis from the information they have read. Summarizing is extremely important in helping all students' with reading comprehension by helping them construct an overall understanding of the text (Oczuks, 2003). But rather than summarize the whole passage; students must learn to select the most critical pieces of information along with the main idea and other facts which supports the content. To assess the student’s ability to summarize; the teacher might observe a retelling of what the student has read. When observing the students summarize; the teacher will hear the language of summarizing (Oczuks, 2003). The leader might ask questions like: What does the author want me to remember or learn about the passage? What message does the story convey? What are main points the author wants me to remember about “Little Red Riding Hood?”

Implementation and overall assessment

In order to test the effectiveness of the information gathered in the research; I implemented the strategy in my first period class with eighteen seventh and eight students over the last two months. After modeling the strategy, I assigned selected books from the Townsend Press “Bulford” series, and worksheets. In the assignment over fifty percent of the students simply read the book “the bully” but failed to answer the questions effectively. Indeed, they enjoyed reading the book, but were unmotivated about finding the required answers.

In the second trials, I gave the same students a new book from the series titled “Someone to love me.” I broke down the class in three (four) person groups to read and use the strategy. Upon completion of the main lesson I would allow them to read the book in their groups. I began to notice immediately the students’ eagerness to read the assigned books; one student even refused to put the book down during the national anthem. After evaluating the results of assigned tasks, I saw a tremendous amount of improvement in the number of correct answers to the questions about the main idea, and the author’s intent.

In further evaluation of the summarizing strategy which was implemented over the last two months; I began to see some major improvement in the responses to questions about the other books I had assigned them and in the literacy assessments. Overall, the students learned how to make inference, to question and analyze written text, and work in collaboration with others.

Conclusion

Although reciprocal teaching is an effective tool to improve reading comprehension; caution should be used by not rushing the strategy. Too many reciprocal teaching lessons generate mostly literal questions and little in the way of evidence that learners are monitoring their comprehension (Slater & Horstman, 2000). According to (Vacca & Vacca, 2003); at the literal level, students read the lines of the content material, and get only the gist of the author’s message. For example, the student might read “Anne Frank’s diary” but might not understand what the whole message conveys to the reader. Interpretive readers focus not only on what author say, but also on what authors’ mean by what they say (Vacca & Vacca, 2003).

Reciprocal teaching when teacher model and monitored can produce a significant improvement in reading comprehension. In one study Palinscar and Brown (1984) found that when reciprocal teaching was used with groups of students for 15-20 days, the students’ reading scores on a standardized assessment of reading comprehension increased from 30 percent to 80 percent. It is no wonder than that The National Reading Panel National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (2000), highly recommends reciprocal teaching as an effective teaching practice that improves students’ reading comprehension. The importance of the reciprocal teaching strategy should not be undermined. It is a proven tool to use, which provides students with the ability to use a variety of higher level cognitive skills to read and comprehend text content.

References

process: Creating reading success In grades K-3. New York:

The Guilford Press.

114-137.

the classroom. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 91-106.

teaching in the classroom:Overcoming obstacles and making

modifications. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4),

699-718.

Teaching children to Read: An evidenced-based assessment of

scientific research literature on reading and its

Implications for reading instructions. (NIH Publication

No. 00-4769).Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing

Office.

improving reading comprehension. Newark: International

Reading Association.

scaffolded instruction. Educational Psychology, 21, 73-98.

comprehension-fostering

and comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and

Instruction, 1(2) 117-175.

writing to struggling middle school and high school students:

the case for reciprocal teaching,

Preventing School Failure, 46(4), 163-164.

Literacy and Learning across

the curriculum (8th ed.). New York: Pearson.