TEACHER GENERATED QUESTIONS

Welcome back!Please sign in.

TEACHER QUESTIONS CAN HELP INCREASE STUDENT COGNITIVE FUNCTIONING

After Strategy Instruction

LeftRight

normalized

Good Strategy Instruction Normalizes Brain Activation Patterns.

Before Strategy Instruction

First-Grade

Seventh-Grade

5

An fMRI Study of Strategic Reading Comprehension

• While there have been neuroimaging studies of text comprehension in the past, little was known about the brain mechanisms underlying strategic learning from text.

• Up until recently these studies have not examined the differences in brain activity associated with different reading strategies.

WHAT DO THESE BRAIN IMAGING STUDIES TELL US ABOUT QUESTIONING IN OUR

CLASSROOMS?

• Teacher questions help students understand what they are reading.

• Teacher questions help students elaborate, or link information to what they already know.

• Teacher questions help students bridge or link different parts of the text together.

6

TEACHING STUDENTS TO THINK AS THEY READ

Strategy Purpose Brain Function

Teacher Sets a Purpose and Reads Aloud for at

least 10 minutes per day from text

Get a sense of what the text is about

Link new information to background knowledge

Students read a range of text daily from 300-1500

words individually or collaboratively

Relate what is already known to what is being

read

Hook new information to what is already known.

Manage short term memory with long term

memory

Directed Note TakingConstantly monitor,

think and react to the text as it is being read

Brain needs to understand information to accept it, stay clearly focused to help commit information to memory

Adapted from Irene Gaskins7

TEACHING STUDENTS TO THINK AS THEY READ

Strategy Purpose Helps the Brain

Question Generation

To check own understanding or clarify what is not

understood

Must understand information for it to be committed to memory

Teacher teaches from written cognitively complex question

To check own understanding or clarify what is not

understood

Must understand information for it to be committed to memory. Working memory can only hold limited ideas

at one time

Adapted from Irene Gaskins

8

DIRECT TEACHING

• Research shows that reading comprehension can be improved through direct instruction in cognitive strategies (or ways of thinking about the ideas in text)

• Our focus will be teaching students how to think during reading through questioning.

• How do you use questioning in your classroom? Do you have a system you use? Discuss at your table.

9

ONE TEACHER’S SYSTEM EXPLAINED:BLOOM’S TAXONOMY

10

11

Bloom’s Taxonomy is not about the Verb.

BLOOM’S TAXONOMY

• Knowledge – You must KNOW key vocabulary, concepts, ideas, people, etc., in order to understand the ideas presented in a text.

• Comprehension – You must UNDERSTAND the basic ideas and literal meaning of the text before you can interpret the author’s objectives, the hidden meanings, etc.

• Application – You must be able to apply the ideas to your own world and experience to have a frame of reference for the text.

•

12

BLOOM’S TAXONOMY

• Analysis – You cannot understand the author’s purpose or the main idea unless you first take the text apart and study it.

• Synthesis – Once you have taken the text apart, you are in a better position to pull all the ideas together to determine the main idea or author’s purpose.

• Evaluation – You must study all aspects of a document before you can intelligently make judgments about the author’s message.

13

DEVELOPING A SYSTEM

• What is the “big idea” you want the students to take away from the text? Develop an overarching question for your text. (SYNTHESIS, EVALUATION)

• Review the text to determine the knowledge level ideas that could be an obstacle to comprehension. Highlight or mark those passages and develop questions for your students. (KNOWLEDGE, COMPREHENSION)

14

DEVELOPING A SYSTEM

• Are there places in the text where students will lack background knowledge or experience? Mark or highlight those passages. Create a question that links student experience with the new idea. (APPLICATION)

• Are there places in the text that are complex and need to be broken down for students? If so, create a question that asks students to study different parts to develop meaning. (ANALYSIS)

15

DEVELOPING A SYSTEM

• It is now time to bring the text together. Pose questions about the theme, author’s purpose, explicit or implicit main idea. (SYNTHESIS)

• Pose questions that get students to think about right or wrong, agree or disagree, or questions that get students to evaluate the author’s point of view. (EVALUATION)

16

LET’S APPLY THIS SYSTEM TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

17

SOURCES

Anderson, R.C., Wilson, P.T., & Fielding, L.G. 1988. “Growth in reading and how children spend their time outside of school.” Reading Research Quarterly 23 (3), p. 292.

Armbruster, B., Lehr, F; Osborne. J. 2001. Putting reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read, kindergarten through grade 3. National Inst. for Literacy, Washington, DC.; National Inst. of Child Health and Human Development (NIH), Bethesda, MD.; Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC.; Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement, Ann Arbor, MI.

Beck, I., & McKeown, M. 2001. “Text talk: Capturing the benefits of read-aloud experiences for young children.” Reading Teacher, 55:1.

Baumann, J. & Kame’enui, E. 2004. Vocabulary Instruction. Research to Practice. New York: Guilford Press

18

SOURCESBaumann, J. & Kame’enui, E. 2004. Vocabulary

Instruction. New York: Guilford PressBeck, I., McKeown, M., & Kucan, L. 2002. Bringing

Words to Life. New York: Guilford Press.Biemiller, Andrew. 1999. Language and reading

success. Newton Upper Falls, Massachusetts: Brookline Books.

Carlisle, Joanne & Rice, Melinda. 2002. Improving reading comprehension: Research-based principles and practices

Felton, R., & Lillie, D. (2002). Teaching Students with Persistent Reading Problems (a multi-media CD-ROM). Greensboro, NC: Guilford County Schools.

Fielding, L., & Peason, D. 1994. “Reading comprehension: What works.” Educational Leadership, 51:5, pp. 62-68.

Florida Center for Reading Research – fcrr.org. Researchers presentations link.

19

SOURCESGaskins, Irene. et al. 2002. “Helping struggling readers

make sense of reading” in Block, C., Gambrell, L., & Pressley, M. Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association

Gunning, Thomas. 1998. Assessing and Correcting Reading and Writing Difficulties. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Hart,B. & Risley, T. 1995. Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children. Baltimore: Brookes Publishing.

Maria, Katherine. 1990. Reading comprehension instruction: Issues and strategies. Parkton, Maryland: York Press.

Morris, Darrell. 1999. The Howard Street tutoring manual: Teaching at-risk readers in the primary grades. New York: Guilford Press.

20

SOURCES

National Reading Panel. 2000. Report of the National Reading Panel:Teaching children to read – Reports of the subgroups. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH Pub. No. 00-4764.

Oczkus, L. 2003. Reciprocal Teaching at Work. Delaware: International Reading Association.

Palinscar, A. & Brown. A. 1986. “Interactive teaching to promote learning from text.” Reading Teacher 39, April, pp.771-777.

Pearson, D., & Gallagher, M. 1983. “The instruction of reading comprehension.” Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8:3, pp. 317-344.

21

SOURCES

Reutzel, D., Camperell, K., & Smith, J. 2002. “Hitting the wall: Helping struggling readers comprehend” in Block, C., Gambrell, L., & Pressley, M. Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.

Smith, Margaret. 1999. “Teaching comprehension from a multisensory perspective” in Birsh, Judith, Ed. Multisensory Teaching of Basic Language Skills. Baltimore: Brooks.

Stahl, K. “Proof, Practice, and promise: Comprehension strategy instruction in the primary grades.” The Reading Teacher Vol.57. No.7, April 2004

Stahl,S. & Nagy, William. Teaching Word Meanings. Lawrence Ehrlbaum Assoc., 2006.

22

SOURCES

Stahl, K. and McKenna, M. Reading Research at Work. New York: Guilford Press. 2006

Spires, H., & Stone, P. “The directed note taking activity: A self-questioning approach.” Journal of Reading, 33:1, pp. 36-39.

Sweet, A., & Snow, C. 2002. “Reconceptualizing reading comprehension” in Block, C., Gambrell, L., & Pressley, M. Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.

Hiebert E. and Kamil, M. 2006 Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. Lawrence Ehrlbaum Assoc.

Block & Pressley. 2002 Comprehension Instruction. Guilford Press.

23