Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comprehension Is Strategic

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Reading Comprehension

  • 5246 Accesses

Abstract

For students with comprehension difficulties their outcomes quite often are related to the quality of instruction given to them. Rather than merely having students introduced to a comprehension skill and then being tested on them skills should be taught using explicit teaching techniques. Explicit teaching should contain elements of explanation, modelling, guided practice, and independent practice. The teaching of reading comprehension should also provide declarative, procedural, and conditional knowledge, while students are given adequate guided practice with a range of texts and different genres. The more explicit the comprehension instruction and self-regulation practices the more likely children are to use the strategies. Unlike many decoding skills, comprehension strategies take time and adequate practice to develop. The emphasis should be placed on the gradual release of responsibility so that children will have a wide range of strategies in their repertoire so that they can exercise choice and control of their strategy use. Teachers should complement direct teaching approaches to provide implicit learning opportunities so that readers can exercise self-discovery to develop self-determination.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Afflerbach, P., P.D. Pearson, and S.G. Paris. 2008. Clarifying differences between reading skills and reading strategies. The Reading Teacher 61(5): 364–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alfassi, M. 2004. Reading to learn: Effects of combined strategy instruction on high school students. The Journal of Educational Research 97: 171–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. 1977. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behaviour change. Psychological Review 84: 191–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. 1999. Social cognitive theory of personality. In The coherence of personality: Social-cognitive bases of consistency, variability, and organisation, ed. D. Cervone and Y. Shoda, 185–241. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, D.V.M., and M.J. Snowling. 2004. Developmental dyslexia and specific language impairment: Same or different? Psychological Bulletin 130: 858–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Block, C.C., S.R. Paris, K.L. Reed, C.S. Whiteley, and M.D. Cleveland. 2009. Instructional approaches that signify increase reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology 101(2): 262–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Center, Y., L. Freeman, G. Robertson, and L. Outhred. 1999. The effect of visual imagery training on the reading and listening comprehension of low listening comprehenders in year 2. Journal of Research in Reading 22(3): 241–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, K.F., and M.F. Graves. 2004. Scaffolding students’ comprehension of text. The Reading Teacher 58(6): 570–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, C., and L. Bornholt. 2003. Reading self-concepts and task choices for student with reading difficulties. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties 3: 24–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corno, L., and J. Rendi. 1997. Motivation, volition, and collaborative innovation in classroom literacy. In Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction, ed. J.T. Guthrie and A. Wigfield, 1–11. Newark: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dole, J.A., K.J. Brown, and W. Trathen. 1996. The effects of strategy instruction on the comprehension performance of at-risk students. Reading Research Quarterly 31: 62–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N.K. 2004. The case for informational text. Educational Leadership. (March) Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development 61: 40–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N.K., and P.D. Pearson. 2002. Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In What research has to say about reading instruction, 3rd ed, ed. A.E. Farstrup and S.J. Samuels, 205–242. Newark: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gajria, M., A.K. Jitendra, S. Stood, and G. Sacks. 2007. Improving comprehension of expository text in students with LD: A research synthesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities 40(3): 210–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gambrell, L.B., B.A. Kapinus, and R.M. Wilson. 1987. Using mental imagery and summarization to achieve independence in comprehension. Journal of Reading 30(7): 638–642.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambrell, L.B., B.M. Palmer, R.M. Codling, and S.A. Mazzioni. 1996. Assessing motivation to read. The Reading Teacher 49: 518–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaskins, I.W. 2003. Taking charge of reader, text, activity and context variables. In Rethinking reading comprehension, ed. A.P. Sweet and C.E. Snow, 141–165. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gersten, R., L.S. Fuchs, J.P. Williams, and S. Baker. 2001. Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: A review of research. Review of Educational Research 71: 279–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glenberg, A.M., and W.E. Langston. 1992. Comprehension of illustrated text: pictures help to build mental models. Journal of Memory and Language 31: 129–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J.T. 1996. Educational contexts for literacy engagement in literacy. The Reading Teacher 49: 432–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J.T., W. Schafer, Y.Y. Wang, and P. Afflerbach. 1995. Relationships of instruction to amount of reading: An exploration of social, cognitive, and instructional connections. Reading Research Quarterly 30(1): 8–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J.T., K.E. Cox, K.T. Knowles, M. Buehl, S.A. Mazzoni, and L. Fasulo. 2000. Building toward coherent instruction. In Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation, ed. L. Baker, M.J. Dreher, and J.T. Guthrie, 209–236. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hareli, S., and B. Weiner. 2002. Social emotions and personality inferences: A scaffold for a new direction in the study of achievement motivation. Educational Psychologist 37: 183–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J.A. 1992. Self-concept. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J., and H. Timperley. 2007. The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research 77(1): 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay, I., A. Ashman, and C.E. van Kraayenoord. 1997. Investigating the influence of achievement on self-concept using intra-class design and a comparison of the PASS and SDQ-1 self-concept tests. British Journal of Educational Psychology 67: 311–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horner, S.L., and C.S. Shwery. 2002. Becoming an engaged, self-regulated reader. Theory into Practice 41(2): 102–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamhi, A., and H. Catts. 2002. The language basis of reading: Implications for classification and treatment of children with reading disabilities. In Speaking, reading, and writing in children with language learning disabilities: New paradigms in research and practice, ed. K.G. Butler and E. Silliman, 45–72. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. 1998. Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laing, S.P., and A.G. Kamhi. 2002. The use of think-aloud protocols to compare inferencing abilities to average and below-average readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities 35(5): 436–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linnenbrink, E.A., and P.R. Pintrich. 2003. The Role of self-efficacy beliefs in student engagement in the classroom. Reading and Writing Quarterly 19: 119–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manset-Williamson, G., and J.M. Nelson. 2005. Balanced, strategic reading instruction for upper- elementary and middle school students with reading disabilities: A comparative study of two approaches. Learning Disability Quarterly 28: 59–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald Connor, C., F.J. Morrison, and P.S. Underwood. 2007. A second chance in second grade: The independent and cumulative impact of first - and second-grade reading instruction and students’ letter-word reading skill growth. Scientific Studies of Reading 11(3): 199–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • McTigue, E.M., and J.L. Washburn. 2009. Academic resilience and reading: Building successful readers. The Reading Teacher 62(5): 422–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Reading Panel. 2000. Teaching children to read: Report of the comprehension instruction subgroup to the National Institute of Child Health and Development. Washington, DC: NICD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oster, L. 2001. Using think-alouds for reading instruction. The Reading Teacher 55: 64–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A.S., and A.L. Brown. 1984. Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction 1: 117–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A.S., and A.L. Brown. 1987. Enhancing instructional time through attention to metacognition. Journal of Learning Disabilities 20: 66–75 (February).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, P.D., and D.D. Johnson. 1978. Teaching reading comprehension. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, P.D., L.R. Roehler, J.A. Dole, and G.G. Duffy. 1992. Developing expertise in reading comprehension. In What research has to say about reading instruction, ed. S.J. Samuels and A.E. Farstrup, 101–144. Newark: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pilonieta, P., and A.L. Medina. 2009. Reciprocal teaching for the primary grades: “We can do it too!”. The Reading Teacher 63(2): 120–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M. 2002a. At-risk students: Learning to break through comprehension barriers. In Improving comprehension instruction, ed. C. Collins Block, L.B. Gambrell, and M. Pressley, 354–369. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M. 2002b. Improving comprehension instruction: A path for the Future. In Improving comprehension instruction, ed. C. Collins Block, L.B. Gambrell, and M. Pressley, 385–389. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M. 2002c. Comprehension instruction: What makes sense now, what might make sense soon. International Reading Association Online Document, http://www.readingonline.org/articles/handbook/pressley/index.html.

  • Quandt, I., and R. Selznick. 1984. Self concept and reading, 2nd ed. Newark: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R.M., and E.L. Deci. 2000. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25: 54–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. 2003. Self-efficacy for reading and writing: Influence of modelling, goal setting, and self-evaluation. Reading and Writing Quarterly 19: 159–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D.H., and M.J. Rice. 1991. Learning goals and progress feedback during reading comprehension instruction. Journal of Reading Behaviour 23: 351–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shute, V.J. 2008. Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research 78(1): 153–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C.E. 2002. Reading for understanding: Toward a research and development program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica: Rand Corp. Retrieved 12 Dec, 2002, from http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1465/.

  • Stetter, M.E., and M.T. Hughes. 2010. Using story grammar to assist students with learning disabilities and reading difficulties improve their comprehension. Education and Treatment of Children 33(1): 115–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taboada, A., and J.T. Guthrie. 2006. Contributions of student Questioning and prior knowledge to construction of knowledge from reading information text. Journal of Literacy Research 38(1): 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, T. 1997. Do we need to train teachers how to administer praise? Self-worth theory says we do. Learning and Instruction 7: 49–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trabasso, T. 1981. On the making of inferences during reading and their recall. In Comprehension and teaching: Research reviews, ed. J.T. Guthrie, 56–75. Chicago: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Schoot, M., A.L. Vasbinder, T.M. Horsley, A. Reijntjes, and E.C.D.M. Van Lieshout. 2009. Lexical ambiguity resolution in good and poor comprehenders: An eye fixation and self-paced reading study in primary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology 101(1): 21–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Kraayenoord, C., J. Elkins, C. Palmer, F. Rickards, and P. Colbert. 2004. Literacy learning in the middle years for students with disabilities. Literacy Learning in the Middle Years 9: 9–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., R. Gersten, and D. Chard. 2000. The underlying message in LD intervention research: findings from research syntheses. Exceptional Children 67: 99–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vellutino, F.R., J.M. Fletcher, M.J. Snowling, and D.M. Scanlon. 2004. Specific reading disability (dyslexia): what have we learned in the past four decades? Journal of Child Psychiatry 45(1): 2–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A. 2000. Facilitating children’s reading motivation. In Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation, ed. L. Baker, M.J. Dreher, and J.T. Guthrie, 140–158. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A., J.T. Guthrie, S. Tonks, and K.C. Perencevich. 2004. Children’s motivation for reading: Domain specificity and instructional influences. The Journal of Educational Research 97(6): 299–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, K.D., and C. Endres. 2010. Motivating student interest with the image, Elaborate, Predict, and Confirm (IEPC) strategy. The Reading Teacher 58(4): 346–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woolley, G. 2007. A comprehension intervention for children with reading comprehension difficulties. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties 12(1): 43–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woolley, G. 2008. The assessment of reading comprehension difficulties for reading intervention. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties 13(1): 51–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, L. 2002a. Thinking styles: Their relationships with node of thinking and academic performance. Educational Psychology 22(3): 331–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durkin, D. 1978. What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction. Reading Research Quarterly 14:481–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dweck, C.S. 1975. The role of expectations and attributions in the alleviation of learned helplessness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31:674–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garner, R. 1992. Metacognition and self-monitoring strategies. In What research has to say about reading instruction, ed. S.J. Samuels, and A.E. Farstrup, 101–144. Newark: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadoski, M., E.T. Goetz, and M. Rodriguez. 2000. Engaging texts: Effects of concreteness on comprehensibility, interest, and recall in four text types. Journal of Educational Psychology 92: 85–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D.H. 2000. Coming to terms with motivation constructs. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25: 116–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slater, W.H. 2002. Teaching reading and writing to struggling middle school and high school students: The case for reciprocal teaching. Preventing Reading Failure 46: 163–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, R.J., R.E. Slavin, and A.M. Farnish. 1991. The effects of cooperative learning and direct instruction in reading comprehension strategies on main idea identification. Journal of Educational Psychology 83: 8–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J.E., J. Husman, and D.L. Schallert. 2002. The importance of student goals in their emotional experience of academic failure: Investigating the precursors and consequences of shame. Educational Psychologist 37: 79–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, J.J., and R.J. Taylor. 1996. Techniques for reading assessment and instruction. Saddle River: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ysseldyke, J.E., and S.L. Christenson. 1987. Evaluating student’s instructional environments. Remedial and Special Education 8:17–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cain, K., and J. Oakhill. 1999. Inference making ability and its relation to comprehension failure in young children. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal 11: 489–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cain, K., and J. Oakhill. 2007. Reading comprehension difficulties: Correlates, causes, and consequences. In Students’s comprehension problems in oral and written language: A cognitive perspective, ed. K. Cain and J. Oakhill, 41–75. London: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cambourne, B. 1999. Explicit and systematic teaching of reading – A new slogan? The Reading Teacher 53: 126–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B.J. 2000. Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25: 82–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B.J. 2002. Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice 41: 64–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B.J., and D.H. Schunk. 2001. Reflections on theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement. In Self-regulated learning and academic achievement, ed. B.J. Zimmerman and D.H. Schunk, 289–307. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education and Professional Studies, Griffith University, Mt. Gravatt Campus, Brisbane, Queensland, 4111, Australia

    Dr. Gary Woolley

Authors
  1. Dr. Gary Woolley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gary Woolley .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Woolley, G. (2011). Comprehension Is Strategic. In: Reading Comprehension. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1174-7_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation