Primary Reading || Guidelines for Teaching Comprehension

Guidelines for Teaching ComprehensionAuthor(s): Helen J. CaskeySource: The Reading Teacher, Vol. 23, No. 7, Primary Reading (Apr., 1970), pp. 649-654, 669Published by: Wiley on behalf of the International Reading AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20196390 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 03:27

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Wiley and International Reading Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to The Reading Teacher.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.157 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 03:27:56 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ira

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20196390?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Helen Caskey is with the University of Cincinnati, Ohio.

Guidelines for teaching comprehension

HELEN J. CASKEY

the importance of developing pupils' abilities in reading compre hension is not questioned. There may well be uncertainties about

the contributions of this or that approach to beginning reading, or

differences of opinion among those who support programmed texts,

teaching machines, individualized reading, or ability grouping,

early or delayed instruction. Few persons question that the ultimate

objective of teaching a child to read is to make him able to read

with maximum power to comprehend what the writer intended to

have understood by his readers.

Teachers are generally aware that comprehending a given

passage, or indeed an entire book, can be on different levels. At a

simpler level the reader is expected to recall the facts given in the

selection he has read, and to make a decently accurate summary of

the gist of the passage. He is expected to tell how many boys in the

troop went on the overnight hike, and to tell in his own words what

happened after they reached their destination. This level of compre hension has sometimes been referred to as passive understanding

(Covington, 1967). At another level reading comprehension which

involves making evaluative judgments, making inferences about

what is not directly stated in the selection, and drawing conclusions

based upon the information given has been referred to as critical

reading or active reading, or creative reading, or more simply as a

higher level of comprehension skill. As far as teachers are con

cerned, the nomenclature used is not of great importance. Whether

these aspects of comprehension are termed critical, active, or crea

tive, some kind of reading activity exists which goes beyond both

the grasp of literal meaning of the passage and the recall of specific details. Of course, the grasp of the central idea and the clear under

standing of basic details is essential; no analytical or evaluative

procedures by the reader are possible without such basic under

standing. The important consideration is to decide whether or not

more than passive understanding is to be developed, and how the

development of such higher levels of understanding is to be

brought about. The choice is an important one and is based upon the values held concerning reading, and concerning education of the young.

In the present state of society the choice to develop the high

649



650 THE READING TEACHER Volume 23, No. 7 April 1970

est possible level of comprehension seems inescapable. Problems of

stunning magnitude press for effective solutions if man is to sur

vive, let alone prevail, and a good deal of the information needed on which to base decisions is found in print. Thus the passive read

er who is limited to simple recall of detail, or even the recognition of the main content of a message is not able to cope with the read

ing tasks he is likely to face. The good reader, perhaps even more

in the future than at present, will be the one who is able to hold a sort of "summit meeting" with the writer, engaging in an alert

dialogue as he encounters an author through the printed page.

ACHIEVING HIGHER LEVELS OF COMPREHENSION

It is one thing, of course, to indicate an ideal outcome for

teaching, and another thing to accomplish it. Two questions par

ticularly come to mind. First, are the higher levels of comprehen sion in reading teachable? Does such comprehension depend almost

completely upon the reader's background of experience (about which the teacher can do some things, but certainly not all things), or the intellectual ability of the learner (about which the teacher

can do considerably less). For children limited in these areas, must

teaching of necessity be limited largely to developing a more passive kind of reading? Secondly, if higher levels of comprehension are

thought to be desirable, what factors in the reading situation should

be of chief concern to the teachers? Reduced to its simplest terms, the problem of improving comprehension involves three interrelated

factors: the pupil himself, the items he reads, and the kind of

instruction in reading which he receives. The teacher in any subject area, as well as the teacher of reading, is vitally concerned with all

three of these if power in comprehending is to be enhanced.

With respect to the pupil himself, it is clear that there are some

fundamental skills that are basic to his effective comprehension. These include sufficient skill to handle word recognition problems,

experiences which he can relate to meanings of words in their pres ent context, and a meaning vocabulary sufficiently accurate and

extensive to enable him to cope with his reading materials. Further, he is helped by having a disposition to seek additional information

when he feels uncertain as to the accuracy of his present interpreta tions. These factors influencing power of comprehension are evident

both in research and in everyday teaching experience. There is, however, some uncertainty respecting the relationship

of mental abilities and higher levels of comprehension. A high level

of comprehension involves thinking activities that are more complex than those required in passive reading. Assume that you as a reader

are at some time asked to respond to such questions as: "Why do

you think the author repeated the word green in this description of



CASKEY; Guidelines for teaching comprehension 651

the fields and mountains?" or, "If the person in this story of colon

ial times were living today, how do you think he would earn his

living?" or, "How do you think Jim felt when Mr. Jones discovered

the missing boat?" or, "What did Launcelot mean when he said, 'Diamond me no diamonds'?" In responding you are evidently

expected to go beyond what is specifically given in the selection in

order to project the ideas into a different setting, to relate what is

said there to what you already know, or what you have felt yourself in a similar circumstance. You are asked to infer why a deliberate

choice of words was made, and are expected to expand or to trans

late a cryptic remark into language which reveals the same idea,

put into idioms equally revealing, but in a currently conversational

tone. Perhaps Launcelot in a baseball uniform, and putting on a

catcher's mitt instead of an azure and silver shield might well have

said, "Don't give me any of that stuff!"

It is possible that many teachers feel that questions like these

may be suggested only for the most able pupils, since they obviously

require ability to take a kind of forward mental leap, and to per ceive relationships that are far from obvious. Should those of us

who teach the "average" or the "below average" pupils in any age

group be discouraged from making efforts to help these children

to comprehend in this more complex set of situations?

Fortunately, there is evidence that achievement in higher level

comprehension skills is not limited to gifted pupils only. The nature

of the stimulation and guidance which has been received by the

pupil appears to be more important. In the teaching of critical read

ing at the elementary level Wolf, et al (1968) noted, for example, the importance of the teacher in "determining the depth of pupils'

thinking." In comparing the responses of two subgroups of good and poor readers in a twelfth grade to questions posed by the inves

tigator, Smith (1967) found that subjects whose intelligence quo tients were within approximately the same range differed in success in reading, and that difference appeared to be more closely related to reading achievement than to the mental ability of the

students. Covington ( 1967) reported that a group of pupils in grade five with lower I.Q. scores (below 100) was not specifically handi

capped in what was termed "creative understanding." The conclu

sion was drawn that: "the fact that these same low I.Q. children were reading on the average almost two years below grade level

strongly suggests that students can benefit from such instruction (in creative understanding) in reading proficiency, provided, of course, that the reading level of the materials is adjusted accordingly."

Thus it appears that if the pupil has skills adequate for deal

ing with the material at his level, a higher level of comprehension is dependent not so much upon intellectual ability as it is upon the

kind of instructional assistance that is given him.




GUIDING PUPILS' READING

What kinds of instruction and guidance are most likely to be

helpful in bringing about higher levels of comprehension? The first

step is to note the range of skills involved in comprehending. For

tunately, information on this point is readily available; lists of com

prehension skills exist in abundance, as every teacher who has used

a workbook, looked into a teacher's manual for a reading series, or

consulted a book on the teaching of reading at any level will quick

ly tell you. A helpful recent analysis of eight comprehension skills

by Davis (1968) showed two significant and independent abilities:

"memory of word meanings," and "drawing inferences about the

content of material read." While no aspect of reading skill neces

sary to the best development of the reader may be neglected, here

are two particular reading abilities in which specific help given the

pupil will be likely to yield results in development of comprehen sion at higher levels.

Acquiring a broad and accurate vocabulary, one rich in depth and range of meanings is a life-time job. The language grows, new

terms are added and meanings shift, or become current in a new

context. Yesterday Medicare came into the language and the words

to be used wherever possible were charisma and relevant. Tomor

row?who knows what words will be in a newly minted, or repol

ished, verbal currency? The speaker and listener, the writer and

reader, will have to know them and to use them in their new

settings. Field trips call attention to new words, and develop concepts,

particularly if both planning for the experience and subsequent dis

cussion are assured. Such experiences give pupils at all levels a

chance to learn new terms and to use them with precision and accu

racy. Such first hand experience can also lend vitality to the "book

bait" that teachers have used for a long time : "You were interested

in the fossils we saw yesterday. . . . here are some books you might

like to read that tell a good bit more about fossils."

Self-help devices also help the learner to acquire greater pre cision in using words. Many teachers and pupils develop class word

lists to help with words they are likely to need in their writing at a

given time. A pupil's own word list is also useful. Furthermore, wide

reading has a great deal to offer in this area. The reader finds many words which have recently been introduced to him, and meanings are more likely to be retained than would be the case with one or

two exposures. Also, words are used in instruction and in general conversation for the express purpose of adding to the pupils' stock

of word meanings. The youngster who hears quite frequently such

transitional phrases as "on the other hand," "on the contrary," "in

addition to," especially if attention is called to them specifically, finds that he can use them as aids in structuring his own ideas in



caskey: Guidelines for teaching comprehension 653

speaking or in writing. Word meanings, important as they are in developing higher

levels of comprehension that go beyond remembering and restating factual details of the content, need to be supplemented by addi

tional learnings. What do teachers consider important respecting levels of thinking and reading in elementary and secondary class

rooms? Guszak (1967) examined nearly two thousand questions asked by a dozen teachers in grades four, five, and six. Over one

half of the questions asked required the pupils to recall some

specific detail mentioned in the selection. This proportion may not

reflect the situation in classrooms familiar to the reader, but it

tallies pretty closely with the candid evaluations of many teachers

with whom the writer has worked during recent years. Since pupils master early the art of doing what they think

teachers are going to ask them to do in class, or more particularly on written examinations, it appears that many of them stand a

good chance of getting thorough preparation in avoiding any kind of thinking that would lead to habits of judging, evaluating, or

drawing inferences or conclusions from their reading. The second

ary pupils are also likely to be in the same condition. Smith ( 1967) comments that: "This study showed that the teachers' questions and examinations are important determinants of the manner in

which students read. It further pointed out that the preponderance of questions asked by teachers were those requiring students to

recall details or factual information."

It is not too helpful to say merely "Don't ask so many questions

requiring the recall of specific details." A more positive approach is called for. If pupils are to increase their power in making infer

ences, they must have guided practice in doing so.

It is especially useful to think about the kinds of assignments that are made in any subject area involving reading. They can be

managed so as to set up situations that require judging, evaluating and making inferences. For example, pupils may be asked to

respond to this situation: "Many people who have read this short

story consider the author a master in choosing and describing inci dents which add, bit by bit, to our understanding of the character. Do you agree? Can you give some examples of how the author pro ceeds to make us better understand the persons in the story?" Or another: "Is there any indication in this story as to what season of the year it is? Does the time of year make any particular difference in the story? Why do you think so?"

A social studies class is challenged to discover what is involved in the statement "The frontier had ceased to be a factor in American life." A science class may try to describe a plan for a simple, work

able, and easily visible demonstration of convection.

Another fruitful area for development of thinking is in guided




classroom discussion, or in individual conferences that are a plan ned part of instruction. A good "first step" may be to seek a cure

for the "right answer syndrome"?the hardened conviction that any

question must have a quite visible answer directly stated in the

text. There are two reasons why such a fixed idea needs to be over

come. First, reliance upon questions of such factual nature estab

lishes the habit of the teacher's preparing evaluations which rely

solely upon easily verifiable questions. Such items can be undeni

ably right or wrong, with no possibility of haggling argument, a

thing to be dreaded as papers are returned to their writers. Admit

tedly, it is difficult to phrase questions which require judgment, evaluation, and inference, and still avoid ambiguities.

In the second place, pupils thoroughly conditioned to respond

ing with an easily verifiable "right answer" are likely to be afraid to

make any bolder attempts to speculate, to inquire, to test out the

possibilities of understandings that go beyond involvement in the

literal sense meaning. The final results of such conditioning appear in college students who complain bitterly that they "don't make the

grades" because their responses do not exactly agree with those

expected by their instructors.

Furthermore, the learner can acquire an unfortunate habit of

needing to lean on the teacher's question. "Don't you think the boy felt lonely?" or, "Look again; that's not what the story tells us."

There is not very much to be done in situations like this other than to guess as quickly as possible the response that will meet with

approval. A possibility for the more fruitful guidance of development in

reading comprehension is in the use of a question that widens the

range of possible response. "Did Jim feel different, in some way, at

the end of the story?" may induce some pupils to think whether

there was or was not a difference. Once this small response is

unearthed another probing must follow. "How different?" "Why?" Good enough, but perhaps a better tool would be a question that

tickles the imagination, as well as calls for recall of a set of related

circumstances. "Suppose you were the illustrator for this story. What expression would you show on Jim's face as the story ends?"

The "Why," of course, follows as a most important adjunct. Hope

fully, the net result of such stimulation is to involve all children in

the group in the thinking that must accompany any reasoned

responses. There is a strong temptation, however, to feel that the

situation will be challenging to Bob and Sue and Harry, but that it

is not really right for poor Jane and Willard. They, it is feared, will

be left out entirely as unequal to the task of what is hoped to be

some fairly high-powered thinking. These pupils who are "slower"

than others can also be a part of the thinking and responding. Any (Continued on page 669)



669

Guidelines for teaching comprehension (Continued from page 654)

experience background possessed by any in the group can also be

Jane's or Willard's if they share the same conversations and discus

sions, if they see the same pictures, and talk about them, or if they

manipulate the same tools, or hold the same objects in hand.

All pur concern for the individual and his guidance will be of

little help if materials read are not chosen wisely and carefully. The

level of difficulty of a given reading selection can be lowered mark

edly, while the level of thinking about it can be genuinely evalua tive and interpretative. Beginners can cope with such problems as

"Does this story have too many persons in it to make a good drama tization for our small group?" "Would this be a good story to read aloud? Do you think other children would enjoy hearing the parts

we think are especially funny?" Older pupils can deal with such

questions as: "Is the author accurate and realistic in describing a

tense moment in the basketball game?" "How does the author fore

shadow the tragic ending of the play?" Any of these questions can

be considered about relatively short and easy selections and in all of them the implicit next item is "Why?" The objective is not only to respond in some fashion. To be "involved" is commendable, but to sort out reasons, to note relationships, to predict consequences and to substantiate judgments with a statement of the reasons why they are held is indeed to grow in the acts of reading and thinking.

REFERENCES

Covington, M. V. Some experimental evidence on teaching for creative under

standing. The Reading Teacher, 1967, 20, 390-96.

Davis, F. B. Research in comprehension in reading. Reading Research Quar

terly, 1968, 499-543.

Guszak, F. J. Teacher questioning and reading. The Reading Teacher, 1967, 21, 227-234.

Smith, Helen K. The responses of good and poor readers when asked to read for different purposes. Reading Research Quarterly, 1967, 53-83.

Wolf, Willavene, King, Martha L., and Huck, Charlotte. Teaching critical

reading to elementary school children. Reading Research Quarterly, 1968, 495.

Commitment in the next decade (Continued from page 610)

An essential initial step in achieving the right to read goal, then, is to see

that the goal is approached realistically, with full knowledge of individual differ ences in capabilities, interests, values, life goals, etc. Any attempt to standardize

the instructional program, the achievement level, the materials to be read, or the nature of the desire to read will make efforts to reach the real goal self-defeating. The goal and the opportunity to commit ourselves to it are both too great for us to allow this to happen.

msj/rak



Documents

Primary Reading || Guidelines for Teaching Comprehension