A STUDY TO COMPARE GROWTH OF FIFTH GRADE STUDENTS WHO STRUGGLE

WITH READING COMPREHENSION THAT WERE TAUGHT USING THE

TRANSACTIONAL STRATEGIES INSTRUCTION (TSI) MODEL AND STRUGGLING
READERS THAT WERE TAUGHT USING CONVENTIONAL READING INSTRUCTION.
A thesis submitted by:
BRANDI B. CRAVER
to
SALEM COLLEGE
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the
degree of
MASTER OF ARTS in
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
This thesis has been accepted for the faculty of Salem College by:

________________________________________________

________________________________________________

________________________________________________

Table of Contents
ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................v
DEDICATION....................................................................................................................vi
LIST OF FIGURES...........................................................................................................vii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION........................................................................................1
Statement of the Problem.........................................................................................1
Background and Need..............................................................................................2
Purpose of the Study................................................................................................4
Research Questions..................................................................................................5
Definition of Terms..................................................................................................5
Limitations.............................................................................................................10
Ethical Considerations...........................................................................................10
Summary................................................................................................................11
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE....................................................................12
Introduction............................................................................................................12
Reading Comprehension........................................................................................12
Strategy Use and Reading Comprehension............................................................15
ii

Transactional Strategies Instruction (TSI).............................................................18

Summary................................................................................................................21
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY.....................................................................................22
Introduction............................................................................................................22
Research Method and Design................................................................................23
Setting....................................................................................................................24
Participants.............................................................................................................25
Instrumentation......................................................................................................26
Data Collection Procedures....................................................................................27
Limitations.............................................................................................................28
Data Analysis.........................................................................................................29
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS................................................................................................31
Introduction............................................................................................................31
Research Question One..........................................................................................31
Research Question Two.........................................................................................33
Summary of Findings.............................................................................................36

iii

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS, SUMMARIES & RECOMMENDATIONS................37

Introduction...........................................................................................................37
Limitations of this Study.......................................................................................37
Suggestions for Future Research...........................................................................38
Summary................................................................................................................38
REFERENCES..................................................................................................................40
APPENDICES...................................................................................................................44

iv

Abstract

Comprehension is a essential component of reading in intermediate grades and beyond. Students

must become proficient readers. Proficient readers make sense of a text by interacting with the
text as they read through strategy use. This study examines whether the Transactional Strategies
Instruction (TSI) model of literacy instruction promotes more growth in reading comprehension
than conventional literacy models of literacy instruction. Transactional Strategies Instruction
involves teachers explicitly teaching and modeling the use of a powerful repertoire of reading
strategies that enable students to monitor their comprehension as they read. TSI teachers
gradually release the responsibility of strategy use on the students to use as independent readers.
Qualitative data was collected by means of informal running records and formal running records.
This study analyzed the growth in running record levels as means of growth in reading
comprehension in participants from a TSI classroom and participants from a non-TSI classroom.
The setting for this study was an elementary school in the piedmont region of North Carolina.
Results of this study indicate the TSI literacy model is effective in increasing reading
comprehension in readers that struggle with comprehension.

Dedication
I would like to dedicate this thesis to my beautiful daughters, Madisyn and Paisley, and my
husband, Rob. My family encouraged and loved me even when I was unavailable to give them
my all like they were accustomed to. Thank you for giving up so much so that I could pursue my
goal. I am sincerely grateful that you understand my passion for education and support me in my
endeavors.

vi

List of Figures
Page
1. Percentage of Students At or Above Grade Level Proficiency in Reading.............................25
2. Running Record Levels for Participants for the Beginning of the Year and
End of 1st Quarter...................................................................................................................32
3. Percentage of Growth of TSI Participants vs. Non-TSI Participants......................................34
4. Running Record Level Growth of TSI Participants................................................................35
5. Running Record Level Growth of Non-TSI Participants.......................................................35

vii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Statement of the Problem
Elementary students in grades three through five take standardized tests in the areas of
mathematics and reading comprehension. These standardized tests measure academic progress
over a school year and growth over multiple years. Test scores have become increasingly
important over the past several years due to programs that pay schools for student performance
on standardized tests and sanctions schools receive if students do not meet growth based on their
test scores. Meadowbrooke Elementary School received a designation of School of Progress in
the 2011-12 school year, which indicates that 60-80% of students performed at grade level
(Public Schools of North Carolina, 2012). Based on data discussed by the schools principal,
students at Meadowbrooke Elementary School continue to perform significantly better on
mathematics assessments than reading comprehension. NC Report Cards indicated that
percentage scores for Meadowbrooke fourth grade students on the 2011-12 End-of-Grade
Reading Comprehension test was 64.1% compared to overall 75.3% for the school district and
overall 71.6% for the state. They also indicated the percentage scores for Meadowbrooke fifth
grade students on the 2011-12 EOG reading comprehension test were 69.7% compared to overall
75.6% for the school district and overall 71.2% for the state (2012). Since Meadowbrooke
Elementary School receives funding based on student performance on standardized tests, it is
imperative that reading comprehension scores improve. Teachers must employ strategies that
are research-based and proven to improve reading comprehension. This action research study

has helped me determine effective reading instruction practices that will enable me to address a
current issue in my classroom as well as the school-wide issue of low reading comprehension.
Background and Need
Comprehension is a crucial part of reading in the intermediate grades. Many students
struggle with comprehension and are unable to become a proficient reader due to this struggle.
Comprehending a text is a complicated process, however, it is one of the most important skills to
develop in order to become a successful reader (Pardo, 2004, p. 278). In fact, comprehension is
main goal that a reader has when interacting with a text. Students must understand or
comprehend what they are reading, otherwise they are simply calling words or seeing symbols
(Snowball, 2006).
Comprehension instruction is an essential part of teaching literacy. Many researchers
suggest that is critical for teachers to support readers by explicitly teaching and modeling
strategies that will enable readers monitor their comprehension. Teachers can explicitly teach
and model text structures so that students can understand the unique features of each genre. For
example, students should understand what figurative language is so that they do not take the
words or phrases literally, which could alter the readers understanding of the text. One of the
most important aspects of teaching reading is providing students with ample time for
independent reading so that students can practice strategies that enable students to understand
texts and become proficient readers. In addition, teachers can foster a love for reading by
providing students choices in reading materials so that they will have access to reading materials
that interest them. (Pardo, 2004).

Many researchers have shown a positive correlation between reading strategy use and
improved comprehension. Strategy use involves employing strategies that were explicitly taught
and modeled by the teacher while reading independently to make meaning of a text. However, it
is important that teachers have a deep understanding of the effective practices in reading
comprehension instruction in order to help readers that struggle with comprehension to make
meaning of a text (McKeown, 2009). Many teachers do not have knowledge on these effective
practices. Unless teachers are provided information on effective practices in comprehension
instruction, they would need to take the initiative to research them which can be very time
consuming (Liang, 2006).
Transactional Strategies Instruction (TSI) has been shown to be an effective model for
comprehension instruction. Research studies have proven that the TSI model improves reading
comprehension, interpretation of a text, memory of what is read, and strategy knowledge and use
(Pressely, Brown, Van Meter, and Schuder, 1995). TSI is based on research studies that
explored the reading behaviors of proficient readers (Brown, 2008, p. 539). Teachers that
employ this comprehension instruction model explicitly teach students and model powerful
strategies, i.e. predicting, visualizing, summarizing, monitoring, etc. that enable students to
interact with a text and understand what they read in the text (Brown, El-Dinary, Pressley, et.al,
1995). Once teachers model strategies, they gradually release responsibility of using the
strategies to the students so that they become independent readers that actively interact with a
text. The TSI literacy model differs from other models in that students are taught many powerful
strategies to monitor comprehension and students are expected to pull from that repertoire of
strategies as they read to help them understand the text. This is based on the premise that

proficient readers use multiple strategies concurrently as they read, which has been validated by
research to help with comprehension of a text (Brown, 2008).
In the researchers classroom, the TSI model of literacy instruction is employed. The
researcher employs this method of literacy instruction to help students become proficient readers.
The researcher teaches and models how proficient readers are metacognitive and use strategies to
interact with a text as they read. This study is directly related to the researcher since all of the
students in the researchers fifth grade classroom must be effective at reading comprehension to
show growth on reading comprehension standardized tests.
Purpose of the Study
The researcher is a fifth grade teacher who teaches English Language Arts on a daily
basis. It is essential for English Language Arts teachers to stay abreast of effective practices in
reading comprehension. This study will investigate whether there is a positive correlation
between reading comprehension growth and the Transaction Strategies Instruction literacy
model.
The specific purpose of this study is to investigate whether students that struggle with
reading comprehension and receive reading instruction using the TSI model show more growth
in comprehension than students who were taught using conventional literacy models. The
intention of this study was to compare growth of fifth grade students who struggle with reading
comprehension that were taught using the Transactional Strategies Instruction (TSI) model and
struggling readers that were taught using conventional reading instruction to determine whether
the TSI is particularly effective in increasing reading comprehension.

Research Questions
This study will explore the following research questions:
1. Do fifth grade students who struggle with reading comprehension show more
growth if they are taught using the TSI literacy model than their peers who
struggle with comprehension in a non-TSI classroom?
2. Is there a positive correlation between reading comprehension in struggling
readers and the TSI model of literacy instruction?

Definitions of Terms
Transactional Strategies Instruction (TSI)
Effective readers use multiple strategies as they read to improve their understanding of a
text. Conventional teaching models tend to teach students to practice reading strategies in
isolation and students are told when to practice the strategies. In contrast, TSI educators teach
students to apply multiple strategies as needed to make meaning of a text. Students are taught
that strategies should be blended to enhance meaning in a text (Cartwright, 2010). TSI educators
teach students to draw upon a few incredibly powerful strategies to help derive meaning from
text, which includes: make predictions about upcoming events, relate to the text to prior
knowledge by making connections, ask questions about the information they encounter in the
text, seek clarification when the reader gets confused, visualize the meaning and summarize to
remember the most important points of the text (Pressley, 1995).

Transactional Strategies Instruction involves teaching students how, why and when to use
powerful reading strategies that will enable them to make meaning of a text (Casteel, 2000).
This model combines four components: comprehension strategies use, gradual release of
responsibility, collaborative learning, and interpretive discussion (Brown, 2008). Initially, TSI
teachers model reading strategies by consistently emphasizing their own thinking of the text that
they are reading while thinking aloud. They also explain reasoning for utilizing each strategy so
that students gain a strong understanding of how, why and when to use each strategy (Cartwright,
2010). After TSI teachers model and explain effective comprehension strategies, they release
responsibility of strategy use to students as quickly as they can. At this point students are
strategic readers, however, teachers continue to assist students by cueing students to choose a
strategy that makes sense in a context, clarifying through reteaching, seizing teaching moments,
and continuing to plan instruction to meet the students needs (Brown, 2008). The TSI differs
from conventional reading instruction models in that it is not teacher-directed. TSI teachers
facilitate student learning by acting as knowledgeable guides, cueing students on strategies to
employ, and explaining their thinking to students (Cartwright, 2010). The last component
involves preparing students to interpret a text by asking students to share their thoughts and
feelings about the text. TSI teachers guide student thinking and promotes students contributions
to a discussion.
Conventional Reading Instruction
Conventional reading instruction is a traditional approach to reading instruction.
Teachers tend to focus on one comprehension skill or standard at a time in isolation. Students
are not taught to use a powerful repertoire of comprehension strategies to make meaning of the
6

text in addition to the skill/standard that they are focusing on. For example, a traditional reading
teacher would focus on a skill/standard such as determining main idea. The teacher would model
and teach students how to determine main idea of a text, but students would not be expected to
use reading strategies in addition to derive meaning from the text. In the TSI model, students
must employ comprehension strategies, i.e. visualizing, predicting, etc. to make meaning of a
text while they read and determine the main idea (Cartwright, 2010).
Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment
Students read a book to the teacher that is leveled based on a letter A -Z. The assessment
kit provides a running record form for each leveled book, which is referred to as a formal
running record. As the student reads the book aloud to the teacher, they teacher records any
miscues, errors, omissions, insertions, etc on the formal running record form. Once the students
reads the text, the teacher calculates the accuracy rate based on number of errors, self-correction
ratio, and fluency rate. Next, the teacher asks students specific questions included on the form to
determine within the text, about the text and beyond the text comprehension. The teacher
records the students responses for each question on the form and gives the student a
comprehension score. Then, students complete a written response to a prompt that the teacher
provides, which is also part of the kit. Each score that the student receives, i.e. accuracy, fluency,
comprehension and written expression determines whether the level is instructional, independent
or too difficult for the student.
Informal Running Record
Teachers use a form entitled Informal Running Record to document various aspects as a
student reads a text. It involves sitting with a student, listening to the student read and recording

information that the teacher notices. For example, fluency, miscues, strategy use, strengths,
weaknesses, etc. Teachers also ask students comprehension questions about the text and record
the students responses to each question. Teachers use this information to determine a students
growth in reading levels, fluency, accuracy, strategy use, comprehension skills/strategies, etc.
(Frost, 2013).
Think-Alouds
Think-alouds are conscious disclosures of thought processes while reading. They have
been proclaimed as an effective technique in helping readers acquire the metacognitive
comprehension strategies such as evaluating understanding, predicting and verifying, and self
questioning before, during and after reading (Ghaith, 2004, p.49). Furthermore, think-alouds
tend to enable readers to understand how to use a variety of strategies that will enhance their
comprehension and enable them to overcome struggles with comprehension (Ghaith, 2004).

Predicting
Proficient readers use a strategy called predicting, which means readers predict or infer
what will happen next in a text as they read. They use background knowledge or schema to
relate to a text and predict what will occur next (Brown, 2008). Proficient readers also confirm
predictions as they read and revise their predictions as needed (Snowball, 2006).
Questioning
Questioning is a reading strategy that proficient readers use as they interact with a text.
Readers ask questions about the text when they are curious and/or confused by parts of a text.

This strategy keeps readers connected with the text and helps them to monitor their
comprehension (Brown, 2008).
Visualizing
Visualizing is a powerful reading strategy that involves creating mental images as the text
is read. This strategy enables readers to stay connected to a text and understand what they are
reading better (Brown, 2008).
Summarizing
Summarizing is one of the most important reading strategies that proficient readers use.
It is more difficult that other strategies because it involves readers constructing a retell of the
most important ideas in the text. In order to summarize a text, a reader must be able to determine
the main idea of the text, even when it is not directly stated (Casteel, Isom, and Jordan, 2000).
Teachers must spend quite a bit of time teaching students how to get the gist of the reading
selection. Students must understand the structure of the text in addition to the main idea and
most important ideas or details, which must also be explicitly taught and modeled by the teacher
(Brown, 2008).
Clarifying
Proficient readers recognize when they read a part of a text that they did not understand,
thus use clarifying strategies to help them understand. Readers often go back and reread when
the meaning of a section of text is unclear. Readers also use clarifying to help determine the
meaning of unfamiliar words, which could cause the reader to lose meaning of the text (Brown,
2008).

Limitations
This study has a few limitations. First, the researcher used a limited number of
participants within only two classrooms. The participants were selected by the teachers in each
of the two classroom used in this study. This allows some teacher subjectivity of formal Running
Record levels for participants since they selected the students to participate in the study.
However, the Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment kit involves subjectivity from teachers
since they score their students assessments.
This study was further limited due to the short time period that participants were studied.
Due to the short period of time that the researcher had to collect and analyze data, the researcher
was unable to collect some types of data that would indicate growth in reading comprehension.
For example, all North Carolina students in grades 3-5 take End of Year tests in Reading
Comprehension. This standardized test compares each students score to other students in the
state that took the same test, which is the students percentile score. Students also receive a
achievement score, which indicates whether the student passed the test or not. The researcher
was unable to use End of Grade test scores for the previous grade as they were not released by
the State of North Carolina during this study.
Ethical Considerations
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Salem College. The
researcher received further consent from the principal at Meadowbrooke Elementary to conduct
the study on the participants involved in this study. Written consent was also obtained from
parents of participants involved in this study (see Appendix A).

10

The researcher maintained confidentiality by not revealing the names of students that
participated in this study or any other identifying information. A number was assigned to each
participant in order to identify each participant. The researcher further ensured confidentiality
was maintained by using pseudonyms for the school and school district.

Summary
Research indicates that lack of reading comprehension is a growing issue. This issue is
particularly problematic at Meadowbrooke Elementary as evidenced by low scores on reading
comprehension standardized tests. This study attempted to determine whether students that
struggle with reading comprehension show more growth in reading comprehension when they
are taught using the Transactional Strategies Instruction. TSI teachers explicitly teach students
and model several powerful reading strategies, i.e. visualizing, predicting, connecting,
questioning, summarizing, etc. that students learn to employ independently as they read to make
meaning of a text. Several researchers have suggested that Transactional Strategies Instruction
increases reading comprehension by helping readers make meaning of a text as they read. The
following literature review links the TSI model and reading comprehension further by looking at
the importance of strategy use to increase comprehension.

11

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Introduction
The purpose of this study is to identify whether students who struggle with reading
comprehension that receive reading instruction using the Transactional Strategies Instruction
model show more growth in comprehension than students who were taught using conventional
literacy models.
The review of literature links the TSI model and reading comprehension. This chapter
looks at reading comprehension and the importance of strategy use to increase reading
comprehension. This chapter also looks specifically at the Transactional Strategies Instruction
model of reading instruction and how this model of reading instruction improves reading
comprehension.
Reading Comprehension
According to Pardo, Comprehension is the complex process in which readers construct
meaning by interacting with text through the combination of prior knowledge and previous
experience, information in the text, and the stance the reader takes in relationship to the
text (2004, p. 272). All readers construct meaning or comprehend a text based on their
background knowledge and life experiences. Our life experiences and schema affect our
comprehension of a text, therefore, all readers construct meaning in difference contexts. Pardo
further states that comprehension occurs between the reader and a text. Each reader is unique
and brings certain traits that are distinctly applied with each text and situation. The most
important trait or characteristic is the readers world knowledge (Pardo, 2004, p.273). Readers
12

that possess a great deal of background knowledge are able to connect with the text and are more
likely to make sense of the text that they are reading. This process of making connections to a
text is called schema. Background knowledge, or schema, is a very important factor in
constructing meaning; therefore, teachers should assist students in building background
knowledge using strategies (Pardo, 2004).
Another crucial component of comprehension is the text itself. The features of a text-its
genre, vocabulary, language, even specific word choices- influence the transaction where
comprehension occurs. Text features vary among different types of texts, so teachers assist their
students with understanding various types of texts by teaching specific elements that make each
genre unique. Additionally, teachers model strategies that students should use to monitor their
comprehension when reading expository texts as well as nonfiction texts (Pardo, 2004). In order
to construct meaning of a text, readers apply a variety of strategies while reading a text to
support their construction of meaning, i.e. summarizing, clarifying, questioning, visualizing,
predicting, and organizing. Readers apply these strategies at various moments as they interact
with a text and meaning emerges (Pardo, 2004).

Since comprehension occurs in the

transaction between a reader and a text within a sociocultural context, transaction is vital to
comprehension (Pardo, 2004, p. 277). Teachers must explicitly teach comprehension
strategies, such as monitoring, predicting, inferring, questioning, connection, summarizing,
visualizing, and organizing. Proficient readers interact with a text as they determine the various
comprehension strategies that they need to employ as they read. Thus, comprehension occurs
when readers stay connected with the text and interact with the text while using metacognitive

13

strategies to make sense of the text. Studies have shown that teaching students to interact with a
text by employing multiple strategies as needed is essential to comprehension.
There is very strong scientific evidence that the instruction of more than one
strategy in a natural context leads to the acquisition and use of reading
comprehension strategies and transfer to standardized comprehension tests
(Trabasso & Bouchard, 2002, p.184).
Readers that use multiple strategies as needed to make sense of a text tend to gain a deeper
understanding of text, which increases reading comprehension. Reading comprehension
essentially means understanding what the text says. Students may be able to increase their scores
in reading comprehension on standardized tests when they are able to employ multiple strategies
that they need to monitor their comprehension of a text (Pardo, 2004).
According to Van Keer , Reading comprehension can be defined as constructing a
mental representation of textual information and its interpretation or, in other words, as
extracting meaning from written words, sentences, and texts (2004, p. 38). Readers construct
meaning of the words and symbols within a text by understanding what the words in sentences
and paragraphs mean. Proficient readers set a purpose for reading and use strategies to monitor
their comprehension while reading. Proficient readers always reflect as they read to make sure
they understand the text as they read. Furthermore, they use strategies to help clarify meaning
when they notice that comprehension is limited or unclear (Van Keer, 2004). Proficient readers
use both metacognitive and cognitive strategies that help facilitate text comprehension (Van
Keer, 2004, p.38). Readers employ cognitive strategies, such as rereading when the meaning is
unclear, activating schema, and adjusting rate to aid in comprehension of a text. Readers also
employ metacognitive strategies, which enable them to self monitor as they read a text. This

14

includes knowing when to utilize comprehension strategies that help a reader make meaning of a
text (Van Keer, 2004).
Conventional reading instruction models involve a great deal of testing and questioning
about the content of a text once a student has read it. This model involves hardly any explicit
and continuous instruction that enables students to select appropriate strategies to use in order to
make meaning of a text. Research has shown that comprehension strategies instruction is
particularly effective in teaching students strategies needed to aid in comprehension of a text.
Using this model, students are explicitly taught how, when, and why to use specific strategies
that enable them to monitor understanding and support comprehension of a text. (Van Keer,
2004).
Strategy Use and Reading Comprehension
Many researchers have shown a positive correlation between reading strategy use and
improved comprehension. Strategy use involves employing strategies that were explicitly taught
and modeled by the teacher while reading independently to make meaning of a text. However, it
is important that teachers have a deep understanding of the effective practices in reading
comprehension instruction in order to help readers that struggle with comprehension to make
meaning of a text (McKeown, 2009).
Reading comprehension instruction is vital due to the decline of students reading
comprehension abilities past third grade (Bishop, Reyes & Pflaum, 2006). The recent RAND
Corporation report called attention to this when it stated,

15

Research has shown that many children who read at the third grade level in grade
3 will not automatically become proficient comprehenders in later grades.
Therefore, teachers must teach comprehension explicitly, beginning in the primary
grades and continuing throughout high school (RAND Reading Study Group,
2002, p.10).
This research review indicated the dire need for explicit comprehension strategies instruction,
particularly for students who struggle with comprehension (Bishop, 2006).
Comprehension strategies are an essential component to reading comprehension.
Students who engage in comprehension strategies, i.e. activating prior knowledge, predicting,
organizing information, summarizing, and creating mental images, tend to gain a better
understanding of a text and are able to recall more of what they read (Dougherty, 2004). It is
believed that students that receive instruction on comprehension strategies will become
accustomed to them and employ them appropriately while reading independently. Effective
strategy instruction involves explicitly teaching the strategies that students need, allowing
students to practice the strategies and then gradually releasing responsibility of strategy use to
the students (Dougherty, 2004).
According to Snowball, research has shown that explicit comprehension instruction can
improve the reading comprehension of all readers, even beginning readers and struggling older
readers (2006, p.62). Comprehension strategies instruction involves teaching readers how to
use strategies that will help them make meaning of a text, remember what the text says,
communicate the ideas in the text to others. All readers should be taught the following reading
strategies to monitor comprehension :
1. Predicting/prior knowledge use;
2. Answering and forming questions;
16

3.
4.
5.
6.

Thinking aloud about reading;

Using text structures and features
Visualizing and creating visual representations
Summarizing

Teachers should continue to model and teach these strategies until students are able to employ
them independently (Snowball, 2006). While modeling and teaching, teachers must explain the
purpose of each strategy and describe how it is useful. Teachers should think aloud as they
model each strategy in meaningful ways (Snowball, 2006). Modeling strategies using thinkalouds enables students to understand the important of strategy use and become more strategic
readers (Bishop, 2006). According to Ghaith, think alouds are conscious disclosures of thought
processes while reading. They have been proclaimed as an effective technique in helping readers
acquire the metacognitive comprehension strategies such as evaluating understanding, predicting
and verifying, and self questioning before, during and after reading (2004, p.49). Furthermore,
think- alouds tend to enable readers to understand how to use a variety of strategies that will
enhance their comprehension and enable them to overcome struggles with comprehension
(Ghaith, 2004).
Teachers should ensure that students understand that various strategies may be used in
various situations and that multiple strategies may be used to make meaning of a text. Students
should be provided opportunities to use the comprehension strategies while monitoring student
understanding of each strategy (Snowball, 2006).
Eventually, even though teachers explicitly model one strategy at a time, students will
begin to use multiple strategies to figure out the meaning of a text (Snowball, 2006). Research

17

has shown that good readers use multiple strategies when reading to make sense of a text
(Pressley, 2002).
Transactional Strategies Instruction (TSI)
Pardo stated that, researchers have found that teaching multiple strategies
simultaneously may be particularly powerful. Transactional Strategies Instruction (TSI) is one of
the most common multiple strategies approach (2004). The TSI model is comprised of four
components: (1) explicitly teaching and modeling the strategies that proficient readers use, (2)
gradually releasing the responsibility to the students, (3) providing ample opportunities for
collaborative learning experiences, and (4) fostering interpretive discussions about texts (Brown,
2008).
Research suggests that proficient readers are strategic in that they combine multiple
strategies to maximize comprehension of a text. TSI teachers enable their students to become
strategic readers by explicitly teaching and modeling several research-validated strategies,
including monitoring, predicting, inferring, questioning, connecting, summarizing, visualizing,
and clarifying. Once strategies are taught and modeled by the teacher, students are given ample
opportunities to practice using the strategies while the teacher coaches the students. Coaching
enables the reader to evaluate why they chose specific strategies and how the strategies helped
the reader in understanding the text. After students receive direct instruction, modeling and
coaching, students are expected to assume responsibility for strategy use. Students are expected
to employ various strategies as they read independently to aid in comprehension of a text.
Teachers continue to provide modeling and instruction as needed when students begin using

18

comprehension strategies independently (Casteel, 2000). Throughout instruction, students are

taught to think about the usefulness of each strategy and become metacognitive about their own
reading processes (Pardo, 2004, p. 278). This enables students to understand why strategy use
is crucial while reading and help them determine the strategies needed to aid in comprehension
as they read a text.
After several research studies were conducted, Brown concluded transactional
strategies instruction can improve student comprehension (2008, p. 538). During the multiple
studies, the researcher examined TSI model for reading instruction and how it benefited students.
A yearlong study by Brown compared two groups of students-one where the teacher taught TSI
and the other conventional reading instruction. The students in both groups completed three
assessments and a task that required them to think aloud. Brown stated that the results indicated
that the TSI students outperformed the non-TSI students in standardized test performance,
interpretive abilities, and knowledge and use of strategies (Brown, 2008, p.540).
A study by Anderson in 1992 indicated that research on adolescents in grades 6-11, lowachieving students who received TSI instruction made greater gains on the comprehension
portion of the Stanford Achievement Test than students in classes in which TSI was not
used (Brown, 2008, p.540). This study supports the idea that TSI instruction enables students to
become more strategic readers, which helps improve reading comprehension.
A further study on TSI by Collins (1991) concluded that fifth and sixth graders that
received strategies instruction three days per week in one semester showed significantly more
improvement on standardized comprehension tests than students that did not receive such

19

instruction (Brown, 2008). The results of Collins study suggests that comprehension strategies
instruction is powerful in increasing reading comprehension, even in a short period of time.
According to Brown, transactional strategies instruction (TSI) involves teaching a few
research-based strategies within the context of collaborative text discussions (2004, p.546). As
teachers teach and model strategy use, the teacher and students have collaborative discussions
about strategies and the text. Once teachers have taught research-validated comprehension
strategies, they gradually release the responsibility of using the strategies to the readers as
quickly as possible. Brown indicated the research-based strategies include:
Good readers make connections and inferences based on background knowledge.
Good readers predict what happens next in a text.
Good readers visualize text content.
Good readers self-question when confused or curious about content.
Good readers construct gists statements or summarize important information.
Good readers enact problem-solving and clarifying (i.e. fix-it) strategies (Brown,
2008).
Proficient readers employ these strategies simultaneously as they, which enables the reader to
connect and interact with the text. A reader increases their comprehension of the text by
employing cognitive and metacognitive strategies as they read.
The TSI model for reading instruction models thinking processes and guides students in
gradual learning to monitor their own comprehension processes. Students become more selfefficacious as readers in the process offers promise as means of improving
comprehension (Casteel, 2000). Transactional Strategies Instruction involves a great deal of
interaction with the teacher and other students, which may promote more confidence in readers.
Readers that display confidence may become more competent readers (Casteel, 2000).
20

Furthermore, greater understanding and increased confidence can foster the lifelong love of
reading in students (Baumann, 1999).
Summary
In conclusion, research indicates that lack of reading comprehension in students is
becoming a growing issue. Students must be proficient in reading comprehension to demonstrate
proficiency on standardized tests. However, students are unable to reach proficiency without
strategy use. Students need to be taught explicitly how to use strategies to aid in their
comprehension of a text. Research has shown that the Transactional Strategies Instruction model
is an effective way to assist students that struggle with comprehension. Students are explicitly
taught good reader strategies, i.e. predicting, inferring, questioning, connecting, summarizing,
visualizing. Then, the teacher gradually releases responsibility of strategy use on the student.
Students employ strategies needed to make meaning of a text as they read independently.
Students are given ample opportunities for collaborative learning experiences with other students
and opportunities for interpretive discussions about texts (Brown, 2008).

21

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to identify whether students that struggle with reading
comprehension and receive reading instruction using the TSI model show more growth in
comprehension than students who were taught using conventional literacy models.
The data collected by the researcher indicated that the Transactional Strategies Instruction
model of reading instruction is effective in improving reading comprehension. Transactional
Strategies Instruction involves teaching students how, why and when to use powerful reading
strategies that will enable them to make meaning of a text (Casteel, 2000). This model combines
four components: comprehension strategies use, gradual release of responsibility, collaborative
learning, and interpretive discussion (Brown, 2008). Initially, TSI teachers model reading
strategies by consistently emphasizing their own thinking of the text that they are reading while
thinking aloud. They also explain reasoning for utilizing each strategy so that students gain a
strong understanding of how, why and when to use each strategy (Cartwright, 2010). After TSI
teachers model and explain effective comprehension strategies, they release responsibility of
strategy use to students as quickly as they can. At this point students are strategic readers,
however, teachers continue to assist students by cueing students to choose a strategy that makes
sense in a context, clarifying through reteaching, seizing teaching moments, and continuing to
plan instruction to meet the students needs (Brown, 2008).
The TSI differs from conventional reading instruction models in that it is not teacherdirected. TSI teachers facilitate student learning by acting as knowledgeable guides, cueing

22

students on strategies to employ, and explaining their thinking to students (Cartwright, 2010).
This literacy instruction model also involves preparing students to interpret a text by asking
students to share their thoughts and feelings about the text. TSI teachers guide student thinking
and promote students contributions to a discussion about a text.
This chapter outlines the methods and procedures that were used in this study. This
chapter includes a description of the setting and participants, the research design, and the
instrumentation that were used. It also outlines the procedures used by the researcher in
gathering and analyzing the data and limitations to the study.
Research Method and Design
This was an action research study that gathered and analyzed qualitative and quantitative
data. The data collected in this study was analyzed to determine whether fifth grade students
who were taught reading comprehension using the TSI model showed greater achievement in
comprehension than fifth grade students who were taught using conventional reading instruction
models. The researcher collected the following reading data from each participants teacher:
informal running records (see Appendix B) and formal running records (see Appendix C). The
researcher compared and analyzed the data of the eighteen fifth grade participants that struggle
with comprehension, ten of which were taught in the classroom where the teacher employed the
TSI literacy model and eight that were taught using a traditional reading instruction model.
After the data was collected and analyzed, the researcher was able to determine whether the TSI
model positively effected reading comprehension growth in students who struggled with
comprehension.

23

The researcher was granted consent to complete this study by the Institutional Review
Board at Salem College. The researcher received further consent from the principal at
Meadowbrooke Elementary to conduct the study on participants at that particular school. In
addition, the researcher obtained parental consent prior to receiving the sample items for use in
the study (see Appendix A for informed parental consent letter and form).
Setting
This study was conducted on students at a low performing Title One school located in a
rural part of the Piedmont Triad region of North Carolina. According to the US Census Bureau,
the population in the area was approximately 162,697 people in 2011. Among the 162,697
people, approximately 87% Caucasian, 9% African American, 1 % American Indian, 1% Asian,
1% Multi-racial and 7% Latino. The persons per household from 2006-2010 was 2.46%. The
median household income from 2006-2010 was $44,249, which is about $1,321 less than the
median household income for North Carolina. The county had a poverty level of about 15%
during the years 2006-2010. Approximately 79% of students achieved a high school diploma
and 16% achieved a bachelors degree or higher from 2006-2010.
The research was conducted at Meadowbrooke Elementary School (pseudonym). The
total student population at Meadowbrooke Elementary during the 2010-11 school year was about
510. Among the 510 students, approximately 89% of the students were Caucasian, 6% Hispanic,
1% Asian, and 4% African American. The number of students eligible for free or reduced lunch
was about 52% during the 2011-12 school year. Meadowbrooke Elementary is considered a
Title One school due to the high number of economically disadvantaged students.

24

Meadowbrooke Elementary has two full-time Title One Reading Specialists, one part-time Title
One Reading Specialist and two Title One Math Specialists. These specialists provide additional
instruction and practice for struggling learners in math and/or reading. According to NC Report
Cards, this school is considered a School of Progress (2011). The number of students at or above
grade level for reading at this school is as follows: 80% of third graders, 64% of fourth graders,
70% of fifth graders and 71% overall (grades 3-5 during the 2011-12 school year.) This study
will focus on fifth grade students during the 2013-14 school year.
Figure 1: Percentage of Students at or above grade level proficiency in Reading

Grade Level

Percent of students at or above grade

level

Third

80%

Fourth

69%

Fifth

70%

3-5 Overall

71%

Participants
The eighteen participants in this study were fifth grade students at Meadowbrooke
Elementary School. The participants received explicit instruction on reading strategies that
assisted with comprehension of text prior to this study, which included, but not limited to;
making predictions, making connections, asking questions, visualizing, summarizing and
clarifying.

25

Formal and informal reading data was collected for all eighteen participants. Of the
eighteen students who participated in this study, nine were boys and nine were girls. Ages range
from 9-12 years depending on birthdays and retentions from previous grades. Fifteen of the
participants have received extra support in reading comprehension from Title One Reading
Specialists in the past, however, no Title One Specialist support was offered for fifth grade
students at the time of this study. Fifteen of the participants were identified as White, one
student as Hispanic, one student as African American, and one student as bi-racial.
Instrumentation
The first data collection instrument used was informal running records (see Appendix B).
This form was completed by the participants teacher on a weekly basis to record reading data
that the teacher observed. Teachers recorded data such as the students strengths and weaknesses
that were observed during the reading conference. Teachers also recorded information about the
participants growth in reading comprehension that was observed during conferences.
Another data collection instrument that was used was formal running records. Formal
running records were completed routinely for each quarter as part of the schools Benchmark
Reading Assessment. According to the Fountas & Pinnell website, running records are Oneon-one, comprehensive assessment that determine independent and instructional reading levels
and for placing students on the F&P Text Gradient, A-Z (2013). Each participants teacher
completed a Fountas & Pinnell Running Record form (see Appendix C) for each participant at
the beginning of the school year and for each quarter to determine the students running record
level. The form was completed to assess the readers accuracy rate, fluency rate as well as the

26

comprehension score as the reader read aloud to the teacher. Students moved up to the next
reading level if they met the minimum criteria for the benchmark level. For example, a student
that read Amazing Animal Adaptations would be independent on level S if that student had an
accuracy score of 98%-100% and a comprehension score of 7-10 out of 10. However, that
student would be instructional on level S if that students had an accuracy score of 95%-97% and
a comprehension score of 7-10 out of 10. The Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment was
used as means to determine reading comprehension growth of students at Meadowbrooke
Elementary since reading comprehension was the primary factor of the assessment. The formal
running record form used to collect the data as the reader read from the book included in the
Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment kit was collected and analyzed by the researcher to
determine the growth in levels of each participant.
Data Collection Procedures
The researcher collected Informal Running Record forms from both teachers that had
participants involved in this study.
The researcher also collected formal running records on all participants for the beginning
of the year and first quarter. The data was graphed using a table to show the Fountas & Pinnell
Running Record level for each participant at the beginning of the year and at the end of the first
quarter. Pie charts were created to compare the growth in reading comprehension in the
participants that received reading instruction in the TSI classroom versus the growth of
participants from the traditional reading instruction classroom.

27

Limitations
This study has a few limitations. First, the researcher used a limited number of
participants within only two classrooms. The participants were selected by the teachers in each
of the two classroom used in this study. Also, the there is a possibility that teachers could inflate
their formal Running Record levels for participants since they selected the students to participate
in the study. The Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment kit does involve some subjectivity
from teachers since they score their students assessments.
This study was further limited due to the short time period that participants were studied.
Due to the short period of time that the researcher had to collect and analyze data, the researcher
was unable to collect some types of data that would indicate growth in reading comprehension.
For example, all North Carolina students in grades 3-5 take End of Year tests in Reading
Comprehension. This standardized test compares each students score to other students in the
state that took the same test, which is the students percentile score. Students also receive a
achievement score, which indicates whether the student passed the test or not. According to
NCDPI, students that perform at an Achievement Level III, consistently demonstrated a mastery
of grade-level subject matter and skills and are well prepared for the next grade level (2008).
Likewise, students who perform at an Achievement Level IV consistently performed in a
manner clearly beyond that required to be proficient at grade-level work (2008). However,
students that perform at an Achievement Level I or II demonstrate inconsistent mastery of
knowledge (2008). The researcher was unable to use End of Grade test scores for the previous
grade as they were not released by the State of North Carolina during this study.

28

Generalization beyond the participants in this study group is not justified. Despite the
limitations, this study suggests that the Transactional Strategies Instruction model for teaching
literacy is effective in helping students grow in reading comprehension. To enhance the validity
of this study, study would be conducted in many schools comprised of diverse group of students.
The study would also be conducted for at least one entire school year to determine how the
participants grow in reading comprehension from the previous school years End of Grade test
scores to the next school years End Of Grade test scores.
Data Analysis
The researcher collected informal running records and formal running records for each
participant. After the data the was collected, the research analyzed the data using the following
procedures: (1) organize the data; (2) generate categories, themes and patterns; (3) and examine
the data to answer the research question identified in the introduction of this study.
Formal running records (Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessments) provided
quantitative data for this study. A table was created to show the Fountas & Pinnell Running
Record level for each participant at the beginning of the year and at the end of the first quarter.
Pie charts were created to compare the growth in reading comprehension in the participants that
received reading instruction in the TSI classroom versus the growth of participants from the
traditional reading instruction classroom.
The researcher also analyzed informal running records, which provided qualitative data
on each participant. The researched analyzed the these records to determine any growth in
strategy use as observed by each participants teacher. The researcher made a list during the

29

analysis process to note any growth of strategy use for participants as indicated in the informal
running records.
The researcher presented the data in a variety of formats, including charts and tables.
Growth in reading levels during the first quarter of fifth grade to the end of the first quarter for
each participant was displayed in a table. Two separate pie charts were created to compare the
percentages of growth of running record levels from participants in the TSI model classroom to
participants in the non-TSI model classroom.

30

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS
Introduction
This chapter is divided into two sections, which will present the collected data and
provide answers to the two research questions investigated in this study. The first section will
answer research question one: Do fifth grade students who struggle with reading comprehension
show more growth if they are taught using the TSI literacy model than their peers who struggle
with comprehension in a non-TSI classroom? It will include data analysis of the running records
for each participant. The second section will will answer research question two: Is there a
positive correlation between reading comprehension in struggling readers and the TSI model of
literacy instruction? and will include a data analysis of the running records for participants based
on each classroom instruction model.
Research Question One
Data from running records was used to answer question one: Do fifth grade students who
struggle with reading comprehension show more growth if they are taught using the TSI literacy
model than their peers who struggle with comprehension in a non-TSI classroom?
Running records were collected for each of the 10 fifth grade participants in the TSI
model classroom and the 8 fifth grade participants in the non-TSI model classroom. The running
record data was completed by each students classroom teacher who was trained to assess
students using the Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment kit. The teacher indicated the
Fountas & Pinnell alphabetical level that corresponded with each students instructional level,
which was used by the researcher to show the students running record level.

31

The researcher then analyzed the data collected and compiled the running record
information in a table. Figure 2 shows the running record level for each participant at the
beginning of the year and at the end of the first quarter.
Figure 2: Running Record Levels for Each Participant for the Beginning of the Year and
End of 1st Quarter

Student
Participants
T: TSI
N: Non-TSI

Beginning of Year
Fountas & Pinnell
Running Record
Level

End of 1st Quarter

Fountas & Pinnell
Running Record
Level

Number of
Reading Levels
Increased in 1st
Quarter

Student 1T

Student 2T

Student 3T

Student 4T

Student 5T

Student 6T

Student 7T

Student 8T

Student 9T

Student 10T

Student 11N

Student 12N

Student 13N

Student 14N

Student 15N

Student 16N

Student 17N

32

Student
Participants
T: TSI
N: Non-TSI

Beginning of Year
Fountas & Pinnell
Running Record
Level

End of 1st Quarter

Fountas & Pinnell
Running Record
Level

Number of
Reading Levels
Increased in 1st
Quarter

Student 18N

The results of data analysis revealed that the fifth grade students (as indicated by a
number with a T) who were taught using the TSI literacy model showed more substantial
growth in reading levels than students who were taught in non-TSI classrooms. All of the
participants in the TSI classroom grew at least one reading level, except one. However, one
student in the TSI classroom grew three reading levels, which is major growth in a short period
of time. It is also notable that three students grew two reading levels in the TSI classroom,
which is also major growth in such a short time period. The majority of the ten students grew one
or more levels in only two months of being instructed using the TSI model. Data indicated that
several of the students in the non-TSI classroom grew one reading level, but two students out of
eight did not grow a level at all.

Research Question Two

Data from running records was used to answer question one: Is there a positive
correlation between reading comprehension in struggling readers and the TSI model of literacy
instruction?
The data revealed that students that struggle with reading comprehension showed a
considerable amount more growth when taught using the TSI model for literacy instruction as
measured by running record levels. Forty percent of students that struggled with reading

33

comprehension and were taught in the TSI classroom grew two or more levels in only two
months. Fifty percent grew only one level. Only one student out of ten failed to grow at least
one reading level. However, the majority of participants in the non-TSI classroom showed some
growth as well. About seventy-five percent of students grew one reading level, but twenty-five
percent did not grow a level at all. Although growth was present in both classrooms, growth in
the non-TSI classroom was minimal growth, i.e. one reading level, whereas the TSI classroom
had more significant growth in reading levels. The growth in reading levels indicates growth in
reading comprehension since Meadowbrooke Elementary School uses reading levels as a major
factor to indicate reading comprehension growth.

Figure 3: This pie chart that indicates the running record level growth for participants in
the TSI classroom
3 Levels

2 Levels

1 Level

0 Levels

10% 10%

30%
50%

This pie chart indicates about half of the participants in the TSI classroom moved up 1
level in running record levels. A large portion moved up 2 reading levels in this classroom. One
student did not move reading levels, but one moved up an astonishing 3 reading levels. This
indicates substantial growth.

34

Figure 4: This pie chart that indicates the running record level growth for participants in
the non-TSI classroom

3 Levels

2 Levels

1 Level

0 Levels

25%

75%

This pie chart indicates three-fourths of the participants in the non-TSI classroom moved
up only 1 level. However, one-fourth of the participants did not move up a reading level at all.
One reading level indicates some growth, but none of the students in the non-TSI model grew
beyond one reading level.

Figure 5: TSI Classroom v. Non-TSI Classroom percentages for reading level growth
TSI Classroom

Non-TSI Classroom

40 % grew 2+ levels

0 % grew 2+ levels

50 % grew 1 level

75 % grew 1 level

10 % did not grow a level

25 % did not grow a level

Data in Figure 5 indicates that the TSI participants showed significantly more growth in
reading levels than the participants in the non-TSI classroom. In addition, only ten percent of the

35

TSI participants did not grow a reading level whereas twenty-five percent of the non-TSI
participants did not grow.
Summary of Findings
The purpose of this study was to investigate whether students that struggle with reading
comprehension and receive reading instruction using the TSI model show more growth in
comprehension than students who were taught using conventional literacy models.
The data revealed that students who were taught in using the TSI literacy model showed a
substantial amount more growth than students who were taught using a traditional literacy
model. However, growth in running record levels was shown in both participant groups.
According to the data collected and analyzed in this study, most students in the study
showed growth in reading comprehension as evidenced using a running record. However, many
of the students in the TSI classroom showed substantial growth in reading levels as evidenced by
running records. The reading level/running record growth correlates with an increase in reading
comprehension since students must show growth in comprehension to move reading levels on
the running record. The TSI model of literacy instruction has shown in this study that it has a
positive effective on increasing reading comprehension.

36

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS, SUMMARIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction
Chapter 4 presented the findings from the research on the effectiveness of the
Transactional Strategies Instruction literacy model for students that struggle with comprehension.
This study investigated whether students that struggle with reading comprehension and receive
reading instruction using the TSI model show more growth in comprehension than students who
were taught using conventional literacy models. Conclusions for this study include limitations of
the study, suggestions for further research, and a summary.
Limitations of this Study
This study had a few limitations. First, the researcher used a limited number of
participants within only two classrooms. There were ten participants from the TSI classroom and
only eight participants from the non-TSI classroom. This research should be replicated with
larger groups of students within many schools to verify the study.
Also, due to time constraints of the study, the researcher was able to collect only running
records as a unit of measure for growth in reading comprehension. This research should be
replicated using many units of measure for reading comprehension growth, i.e. standardized
testing scores, quarterly benchmark scores, etc. At the time of this study, the researcher did not
have access to Meadowbrooke Elementarys first quarter benchmark scores. The researcher was
unable to use End of Grade test scores for the previous grade as they were not released by the
State of North Carolina during this study.

37

Suggestions for Future Research

1.

This study could be repeated in multiple settings, multiple grade levels (grade 3 or
higher), and over a longer period of time. This researcher believes that a longer time
period is needed to allow students to practice reading strategies and show more growth
with comprehension and test the effectiveness of the TSI model.

2.

This study might also be conducted using many different instruments to compare and
measure growth. This researcher believes that reading comprehension growth, or lack
thereof, would be more substantiated if there were many instruments to compare
comprehension scores for participants instead of a single measure, i.e. two years of End
of Grade Test reading comprehension scores, quarterly reading comprehension
benchmark scores, etc.
Summary
Comprehension is a crucial part of the reading process. All readers must understand the

meaning of the text that they are reading to comprehend the text. However, reading
comprehension can be a particularly difficult skill for students to develop. Proficient readers use
multiple strategies as they interact with a text, which enables the readers to make sense the the
text they are reading. Comprehension strategies, such as monitoring, visualizing, predicting,
questioning, inferring, summarizing and clarifying, must be explicitly taught to students to help
them make meaning of a text as they read. (Pardon, 2004). The Transactional Strategies
Instruction literacy model involves explicitly teaching and modeling these strategies and
gradually releasing the responsibility for using them on the readers. The TSI teacher supports

38

the reader in their effort to become proficient reader by pulling from their knowledge of these
powerful strategies as they read. In addition, TSI classroom teachers have students engage in
collaborative learning experiences and interpretive discussions about texts. These experiences
enable students to think deeply about the text as they read and engage in meaningful
conversation about the text with others (Brown, 2008).
A study needs to be designed that compares reading comprehension instruction models
that work with research that supports increased comprehension. This present study confirms
growth in comprehension with the TSI model. Research from this study provided insights on the
effectiveness of Transactional Strategies Instruction with reading comprehension growth.
However, further research is required before educators can fully understand whether the TSI
model is the most effective method that increases reading comprehension.

39

References
Baumann, J.F., Jones, L.A., & Seifert-Kessell, N. Using think alouds to enhance children's
!
comprehension. (1993). The Reading Teacher, 47(3), 184. Retrieved from http://
!
search.proquest.com/docview/203267690?accountid=13657.
Barlow, D. (2010). Explaining reading: A resource for teaching concepts, skills, and strategies,
!
second edition. The Education Digest, 75(6), 70. Retrieved from http://
!
search.proquest.com/docview/218190984?accountid=13657.
!
Beckman, P. (2002). Strategy Instruction. ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted
!
Education. Retrieved September 9, 2013, from http://hoagiesgifted.org/eric/e638.html.
Bishop, P. A., Reyes, C., & Pflaum, S. W. (2006). Read smarter, not harder: Global reading
!
comprehension strategies. The Reading Teacher, 60(1), 66-69. Retrieved from
!
http://search.proquest.com/docview/203280900?accountid=13657.
Brown, R., Pressley, M., Van Meter, P., & Schuder, T. (1996). A quasi-experimental validation of
!
transactional strategies instruction with low-achieving second-grade readers. Journal of
!
Educational Psychology, 88(1), 18. Retrieved from
!
http://search.proquest.com/docview/210953318?accountid=13657.
Brown, R. (2008). The road not yet taken: A transactional strategies approach to comprehension
!
instruction. The Reading Teacher, 61(7), 538-547. Retrieved from http://
!
search.proquest.com/docview/203287794?accountid=13657.
Brown, R., El-Dinary, P., Pressley, M., & Coy-Ogan, L. (1995). A transactional strategies
!
approach to reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, 49(3), 256-256. Retrieved from
!
http://search.proquest.com/docview/203274682?accountid=13657.
Cartwright, K.B. (2010). Word Callers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Casteel, P. C., Bess, A. I., & Kathleen, F. J. (2000). Creating confident and competent readers:
!
Transactional strategies instruction. Intervention in School and Clinic, 36(2), 67-67.
!
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/211721042?accountid=13657.
Collins, C. (1991). Reading instruction that increases thinking abilities. Journal of Reading,
!
34(7), 510. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/216910573?
!
accountid=13657.
Dewitz, P., & Dewitz, P. K. (2003). They can read the words, but they can't understand:
!
Refinging comprehension assessment. The Reading Teacher, 56(5), 422-435. Retrieved
!
from http://search.proquest.com/docview/203277971?accountid=13657.

40

Dougherty Stahl, K.,A. (2004). Proof, practice, and promise: Comprehension strategy instruction
!
in the primary grades. The Reading Teacher, 57(7), 598-609. Retrieved from
!
http://search.proquest.com/docview/203278777?accountid=13657.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlet, C.L., Waltz, L. & Germann, H. (1993). Formative evaluation of
!
academic progress: How much growth can we expect? School Psychology Review, 22,
!
27-48.
!
Frost, S., Buhle, R., & Blachowicz. (2009). Taking a Running Record. Association for
!
Supervision and Curriculum Development. Retrieved September 9, 2013, from
!
http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/109044/chapters/Taking-a-Running!
Record.aspx.
Ghaith, G. (2003). Effect of think alouds on literal and higher-order reading comprehension.
!
Educational Research Quarterly, 26(4), 13-21. Retrieved from http://
!
search.proquest.com/docview/216182742?accountid=13657.
Heinemann, a division of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. (2013). About Leveled Texts. Retrieved
!
September 9, 2013, from http://www.fountasandpinnellleveledbooks.com/
!
aboutLeveledTexts.aspx.
Heinemann, a division of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. (2013). Benchmark Assessment System 2,
!
2nd Edition. Retrieved September 9, 2013, from
!
http://www.heinemann.com/products/E02796.aspx.
Hilde, V. K. (2004). Fostering reading comprehension in fifth grade by explicit instruction in
!
reading strategies and peer tutoring. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74,
!
37-70. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/216958233?accountid=13657.
Hilde, V. K., & Verhaeghe, J. P. (2005). Effects of explicit reading strategies instruction and peer
!
tutoring on second and fifth graders' reading comprehension and self-efficacy
!
perceptions. The Journal of Experimental Education, 73(4), 291-329. Retrieved from
!
http://search.proquest.com/docview/217669497?accountid=13657.
Kintsch, W., & Kintsch, E. (2005). Comprehension. In S.G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds.),
!
Childrens Reading Comprehension and Assessment (pp. 71-92). Routledge, NY.
Klinger, J.K., & Vaughn, S. (1998). Collaborative strategic reading during social studies in
!
heterogeneous fourth-grade classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 99 3-21.
Lass, S. E. H. (2010). EXPLAINING READING: A resource for teaching concepts, skills, and
!
strategies (2nd ed.). Childhood Education, 86(3), 183. Retrieved from http://
!
search.proquest.com/docview/721733400?accountid=13657.

41

Laura, S. P. (2004). What every teacher needs to know about comprehension. The Reading
!
Teacher, 58(3), 272-280. Retrieved from
!
http://search.proquest.com/docview/203278923?accountid=13657.
Leigh, V. H. (2003). Teaching strategic processes in reading. Voices from the Middle, 11(1),
!
68-69. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/213931843?accountid=13657.
Liang, L. A., & Dole, J. A. (2006). Help with teaching reading comprehension: Comprehension
!
instructional frameworks. The Reading Teacher, 59(8), 742-753. Retrieved from
!
http://search.proquest.com/docview/203280848?accountid=13657.
McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., & Blake, R. G. K. (2009). Reading comprehension instruction:
!
Focus on content or strategies? Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 35(2), 28-32.
!
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/200236512?accountid=13657.
Margaret, G. M., Isabel, L. B., & Ronette, G. K. B. (2009). Rethinking reading comprehension
!
instruction: A comparison of instruction for strategies and content approaches. Reading
!
Research Quarterly, 44(3), 218-253. Retrieved from
!
http://search.proquest.com/docview/212125526?accountid=13657.
Morrison, V., & Wlodarczyk, L. (2009). Revisiting read-aloud: Instructional strategies that
!
encourage students' engagement with texts. The Reading Teacher, 63(2), 110-118.
!
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/203284151?accountid=13657.
Oster, L. (2001). Using think -aloud for reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, (55), 64-69.
Pardo, L. S. (2004). What every teacher needs to know about comprehension. The Reading
!
Teacher, 58(3), 272-280. Retrieved from
!
http://search.proquest.com/docview/203278923?accountid=13657.
Parsons, L. T. (2006). Visualizing worlds from words on a page. Language Arts, 83(6), 492-500.
!
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/196887329?accountid=13657.
Pearson, P.D., & Spiro, R.J. (1980). Toward the theory of reading comprehension instruction.
!
Topics in Language Disorders, 1, 71-88.
Pressley, M., Brown, R., Van Meter, P., & Schuder, T. (1995). Transactional strategies.
!
Educational Leadership, 52(8), 81-81. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/
!
docview/224851913?accountid=13657.
Pressley, M., Gaskins, I., & al, e. (1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of
!
reading comprehension strategies. The Elementary School Journal, 92(5), 513. Retrieved
!
from http://search.proquest.com/docview/224526315?accountid=13657.

42

Public Schools of North Carolina. (2012). NC School Report Cards. In Churchland Elementary.
!
Retrieved October 7, 2012, from http://www.ncreportcards.org/src/schDetails.jsp?
!
pYear=2011-2012&pLEACode=290&pSchCode=312.
Schoenbach, R. (2000). In Reading for Understanding: A Guide to Improving Reading in Middle
!
and High School Classrooms. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Susan, M. G. (2000). Making connections. Teaching Pre K - 8, 30(4), 100-103. Retrieved from
!
http://search.proquest.com/docview/231946322?accountid=13657.
Snowball, D. (2006). Comprehension for all. Teaching Pre K - 8, 36(8), 62-63. Retrieved from
!
http://search.proquest.com/docview/231942401?accountid=13657.
Susan, M. G. (2000). Making connections. Teaching Pre K - 8, 30(4), 100-103. Retrieved from
!
http://search.proquest.com/docview/231946322?accountid=13657.
United States Census Bureau. (2011). State & County Quick Facts. Davidson County, North
!
Carolina. Retrieved October 7, 2012, from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/
!
37/37057.html.
VanTassel-Baska, J., Bracken, B., Feng, A., & Brown, E. (2009, Fall). A longitudinal study of
!
enhancing critical thinking and reading comprehension in title I classrooms. Journal for
!
the Education of the Gifted, 33, 7-37,144-145. Retrieved from
!
http://search.proquest.com/docview/222370153?accountid=13657.
Wade, S. (1990). Using think alouds to assess comprehension (International Reading
!
Association, Trans.) The Reading Teacher, 1, 442-451.

43

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A:
PARENTAL CONSENT LETTER AND FORM
Dear Parents/Guardians:
I am a graduate student in Elementary Education at Salem College. I must complete an
Action Research Study to fulfill the requirements of my degree. The study must reflect
current educational issues that directly relate to students. I am writing to request your
consent for your child to participate in this research study. I have chosen to investigate
the relationship of the Transactional Strategies Instruction (TSI) literacy model and
reading comprehension. This study will help me determine if this literacy model
promotes higher student achievement in reading comprehension.
This study will not impact your student in any way. I will use reading data (i.e. running
records) that your childs teacher will provide me. The data that I collect will only be
used for this study and destroyed after the research analysis. To ensure confidentiality,
the names of the students participating in this study will not be used, nor will any other
kind of identifying information. I will use pseudonyms for the students, school, and
school district to maintain confidentiality. Results of the study will be completed in
December 2013.
Christa DiBonaventura, the principal at Churchland Elementary, and the Salem College
Institutional Review Board have approved this study. This study is being conducted for
the purpose of my masters thesis under the supervision of Dr. Sydney Richardson in
the Department of Teacher Education at Salem College.
Thank you for your consent and assistance with this study. Please return the form
attached with your signature to your childs teacher by Friday, September 27, 2013. If
you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at (336) 242-5690
or by email at brandi.craver@salem.edu.
Respectfully,

Brandi B. Craver
Fifth Grade Teacher
Churchland Elementary

44

By signing this consent form I agree that I am 18 years of age or older and understand
that my permission for my childs participation in this study is completely voluntary and
that I am free to withdraw my consent and to discontinue participation at any time
without penalty. I have read and understand the above procedures involved in the
research and hereby consent to my childs participation in this study.

__________________________________! !

____________________________________

Students Name

Students Teacher

__________________________________! !

____________________________________

Signature of Parent/Guardian

Date

45

APPENDIX B:
INFORMAL RUNNING RECORD FORM

Informal Reading Data For: _____________________________

Fluency

Comprehension:
3(excellent)

0 Word by word
1 2 Word Phrases/

Within:

Almost no smooth Summarize:

2 3-4 Word Phrases/
Some Smooth
Meaningful Phrases/ Beyond:

Mostly Smooth

Observations:
Meaning:
Rereads
Reads On:
Meaningful
Subs:
Pics/Text
Features:
Structure:
Noun/Verb
Visual:
Beginnings:
Endings:
Chunks:

Predict:
Connection:
Inference:
Synthesis:
About:
Analyze:
Critique:

46

0 (no)

1 (very limited)

2(partial)

Comments:

Level:

%:

SC:

Title(s):

47

F/NF:

APPENDIX C:
FOUNTAS & PINNELL RUNNING RECORD (FORMAL RUNNING RECORD)

48