161 Guided Reading Strategies

TEACHING
AND
LEARNING
RESEARCH EXCHANGE
Guided Reading Strategies to Improve Students Critical Thinking Skills in Grades Three, Four and Five
Jocelyn Olson, Lori Larsen, Lorrie Bolton, Sherrill Verhelst
Project #161 July 2007
This research was partially funded through a grant from the McDowell Foundation. However, the points of view and opinions expressed in project documents are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Foundation. The purpose of the Dr. Stirling McDowell Foundation for Research into Teaching is to fund research, inquiry and dissemination of information focusing on instruction (both teaching and learning) in the context of the public elementary and secondary education system. Specifically, it will: 1) contribute to knowledge about teaching and learning; 2) encourage educational inquiry through a wide range of methodologies; 3) support the involvement of practising teachers in active research projects; 4) encourage organizations as well as individuals to determine and act in areas of research and inquiry; and 5) encourage experimentation with innovative ideas and methodologies related to teaching and learning. The Foundation is an independent charitable organization formed by the Saskatchewan Teachers Federation in 1991. It is governed by a Board of Directors with the assistance of an Advisory Committee of representatives from the educational and business communities. The selection and evaluation of projects funded by the Foundation is carried out by a teacher-led Project Review Committee. Inquiries concerning research supported by the McDowell Foundation may be directed to the following address: Research Coordinator Dr. Stirling McDowell Foundation 2317 Arlington Avenue Saskatoon SK S7J 2H8 Telephone: 1-800-667-7762 or (306) 373-1660
2007 by the Dr. Stirling McDowell Foundation for Research into Teaching Inc. Permission is given to use this work for educational purposes, except that authorization from the original source must be obtained for the use of any material that appears in the work with credit to another source.
Acknowledgments
First of all, the researchers would like to thank the following individuals for their support: Shelley Rowein, Director of Holy Family RCSSD #140 for totally endorsing the project; Darrell Perras, Principal of St. Olivier School for creating an atmosphere in which teachers have an opportunity to try new ideas and both coteaching and cooperative learning are encouraged; Starla Strebinsky, Principal of Sacred Heart School in Regina for providing the researchers with the opportunity to see Guided Reading in action within the setting of multi-grade groupings; Lisa Kuntz, Superintendent of Education for the Holy Family RCSSD for recommending that the researchers visit Sacred Heart School in the first place, and for teaching the researchers how to use the computerized Vocabulary and Literacy quizzes from Renaissance Learning to measure student outcomes; and last but not least, Lana Bourassa, Educational Assistant at St. Olivier School, for the many additional hours she spent keyboarding Guided Reading activities and the final report, as well as downloading books, and compiling and organizing them for students to read. Second, thanks also goes to the staff at the Stewart Resource Centre, STF Building, Saskatoon for lending not only professional training videos, but also many books on Guided Reading so the researchers could grow professionally. Third, thank you to the parents of students in Grades Three, Four, and Five at St. Olivier School for their permission to publish examples of their childrens work and take photographs of students involved in Guided Reading activities. Fourth, thank you to all the students who inspired us with their thinking, discussions, questions and learning. Last, thank you to the Dr. Stirling McDowell Foundation for Research into Teaching for providing the grant to make this kind of action research project possible. The support for this project is very much appreciated.
RESEARCH REPORT: Guided Reading Strategies to Improve Students Critical Thinking Skills in Grades Three, Four and Five
Executive Summary
Four teachers at St. Olivier School in Radville, Saskatchewan, collaborated in order to identify the best Guided Reading strategies available to improve student learning out-comes in a variety of subject areas. The objective of this action research project was to help fill in some of the gaps identified in the Spring 2005 Grade Five provincial reading assessment by developing students critical thinking skills in Grades Three, Four and Five through the teaching of Guided Reading strategies. The project was both data-driven and student-centered and was designed to inform teaching practices and improve students reading comprehension. As part of the researcher training for this project, Guided Reading strategies were studied in the professional literature, a training video on using Guided Reading strategies was viewed and discussed, and teachers who successfully use Guided Reading to enhance critical thinking skills in their classrooms were visited. Specific strategies to teach students how to answer higher-level kinds of questions, and also to infer or read between the lines, were identified. After students reading levels were measured using both informal reading inventories and the Star test, students were grouped, where appropriate, and received direct instruction according to their needs and interests. A variety of texts, both fictional and informational, were used to help improve students literacy skills. Throughout the project, data collection methods, including interviews, surveys, informal reading inventories, the Star test, graphic organizers, and student work samples, were used to measure growth in students critical thinking skills. The researchers also reflected on their experiences by maintaining journals about the project. When the researchers compiled and evaluated the data, the results demonstrated not only a marked growth in reading comprehension skills but also a greater ability to infer in most students. The researchers reflections on the project were also very favorable. The opportunity to collaborate and learn from each other was a positive experience for the researchers. They saw the project as a valuable learning opportunity for themselves and their students, and they plan to apply their new knowledge by continuing to teach Guided Reading strategies in the future.
ii
Table of Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Research Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Research Methodology Parental Consent . . . . . . . . Researcher Training . . . . . Benchmarks . . . . . . . . . . . Strategy Instruction . . . . . . School Visit . . . . . . . . . . . . Assessment and Evaluation
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
.12 .12 .13 .13 .19 .20
Summary of Data Student Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Informal Reading Inventory Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . Student Survey Results from Grade Five Fantasy Unit Computerized Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Literary Skills Quiz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
.21 .22 .25 .25 .25
Researcher Reflections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 Appendices Appendix 1: Parent Letter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix 2: Release Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix 3: Sentence Stems for Before, During and After Reading Appendix 4: Student Work Samples: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a) Imagery with Owls in the Family, Grade 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . b) I wonder I think with Mice at centre ice, Grade 4 . . . . . c) Before-, During- and After-Reading Activities using Legends, Grade 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d) Student Survey Results from Fantasy Unit, Grade 5 . . . . . Appendix 5: Guided Reading Evaluation Checklist . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .
.34 .35 .36 .37 .37 .38
. .39 . .40 . .42
iii
iv
Introduction
THE RESEARCHERS
Four teachers from St. Olivier School collaborated on this project. Lori, the Grade Three teacher, had seventeen years of teaching experience; Jocelyn, the Student Services teacher and Resource Based Learning Consultant, had eight years of teaching experience along with eight years of experience as a librarian; Lorrie, the Grade Five teacher, had eight years of teaching experience; and Sherrill, the Grade Four teacher, had five years of teaching experience. The total number of years of teaching experience was 38 years. This was their first action research project.
THE LEARNING COMMUNITY

The students involved in the project attended St. Olivier School in Radville, a small rural community of about 900 people located about 70 kilometers south of Regina, Saskatchewan. There was a total population of 110 students at the beginning of the 2006/2007 school year. There were 16 students in the Grade Three class, 11 students in the Grade Four class, and 14 students in the Grade Five class. For the last five years, instruction occurred in the alternate-four day school week format with a total of 197 instructional days. In the past, the researchers had collaborated on implementing new curriculum, teaching library skills and computer skills, and doing Literature Circles, as well as working on GrassRoots projects in Math, Science, and Social Studies designed to integrate technology into the curriculum. Full support to collaborate on this project, in order to develop students literacy and thinking skills, was provided by both our Director of Education and our school principal.
FIGURE 1. SCHOOL LOGO.
Background
WHAT WAS THE INSPIRATION AND CONTEXT FOR THIS PROJECT?
The idea for this research project came about as a result of other research that was being conducted both provincially and division-wide. At the provincial level in Saskatchewan, results of the 2005 AFL Reading Assessment: Holy Family RCSSD 140 Grade Five Report indicated that students inferencing skills were lower than other reading skills. According to page 1 of the report,
The purpose of the 2005 Assessment for Learning Project is to gather data about student reading proficiency that school divisions may use for improving student learning.
A closer look at the Detailed Item Analysis from the Multiple-choice Test Results on pages 14 and 15 revealed specific areas in which students experienced difficulty at the inferential level. The table below was created for this report, in the order the items were presented. Type of Text Poetic Persuasive Visual/Technical Student Success Rate in Percent drawing inferences 63 drawing inferences 69 drawing inferences, interpreting 31 recognizing the overall message 69 interpreting vocabulary from context 50 interpreting figurative language 56 using background information 50 using background knowledge 44 using background knowledge 69 synthesizing information 13 interpreting figurative language 6 drawing inferences 63 drawing inferences about a character 50 making predictions 25 Reading Skill
Procedural Informative
Narrative
Figure 1. Results on Multiple-choice Questions at the Inferential Level, Grade 5. Results on the multiple-choice questions ranged from 6% to 69% correct. Interpreting figurative language, synthesizing information, making predictions, using background knowledge, drawing inferences about a character, and interpreting vocabulary from context had a particularly low success rate with students of 50% or less correct. The type of text students read appeared to have an impact on the amount of inferring they could do, since the results tended to be higher on some types than others.
RESEARCH AT THE DIVISION LEVEL

Within the Holy Family School Division, two other action research projects were already underway. Sheila Dosch at St. Marys School in Estevan was investigating Guided Reading to Improve Reading Instruction in a Grade One Classroom while a group of primary teachers, from across the division, were involved in Kindergarten to Grade Three: Improved Literacy Success Through Assessment and Evaluation. Both focused on improving students literacy outcomes. The goal of the Holy Family School Divisions Kindergarten to Grade Three Reading Initiative was that 95% of students would be reading at grade level or higher by the end of Grade Three, starting with the Kindergarten class of 2005/2006. As a result, the following question was posed:
How could further research be used to help improve students comprehension levels, particularly higher level thinking skills, given the results of the 2005 AFL Reading Assessment, and within the framework of the other research being conducted within the school division?
GATHERING TEACHER SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT

In March of 2006 the Student Services teacher started gathering professional reading and training materials on Guided Reading and critical thinking. The idea of doing a project was discussed with teachers following the 2006 Term 2 reporting period, when the Student Services teacher met individually with each teacher to follow-up student needs after report cards. The interest and support from teachers in Grades Three, Four and Five was very positive. A research question was formulated and a proposal submitted to the Dr. Stirling McDowell Foundation by the end of March.
Research Question
How can Guided Reading strategies be used to improve students critical thinking skills in Grades Three, Four and Five?
PURPOSE AND RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The researchers collaborated in order to identify the best Guided Reading strategies available to improve student-learning outcomes in a variety of subject areas. The objective of this action research project was to help fill in some of the gaps identified by the Grade Five provincial reading assessment (2005) by developing students critical thinking skills in Grades Three, Four and Five through explicit teaching of Guided Reading strategies. The project was intended to be both data-driven and student-centered and was designed both to inform teaching practices and to develop students higher-level comprehension skills. By deepening students involvement and understanding of what they were reading and providing lots of opportunities to practice the strategies, it was hoped that students would never respond to a question with I dont know; instead they would think critically, choose one of the wide varieties of strategies at their disposal and respond positively.
Literature Review
WHAT IS GUIDED READING?
Guided Reading is a direct method of teaching employed with a small group of students to explicitly teach a variety of reading strategies through teacher modeling and student practice using materials at the independent level. The researchers identified the following questions about Guided Reading: What did the literature say about using Guided Reading strategies to teach higher level thinking skills at these specific grade levels? What had already been done? What still remained to be done? What ideas could be implemented with students at St. Olivier School?
A review of the literature began with an online search, during Easter break of 2006. Thanks to a National Library Week Trial, whole ranges of educational databases from Thomson Gale were available to search. A huge body of literature was available. Several attempts to redefine the search terms, and narrow the search led to some valuable hits. Specifically, a bibliography entitled, Reading Comprehension Instructional Strategies Elementary Level, compiled by Kyong-Jee Kim, a Reference Specialist with the ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading, English and Communication, proved an excellent starting point. Of particular interest from this bibliography were the results of two Masters action research projects that helped us to answer the question about what had been done already. The first project, Improving students inferential and literal reading comprehension (1999), involved third, fourth, and fifth grade students from the mid-western United States. The projects literature review emphasized: allowing students a choice of reading materials to increase motivation, the use of teacher read-alouds, the use of a K-W-L chart to help students activate prior knowledge and connect to new knowledge, the use of self-monitoring questions before, during, and after reading, and the use of Literary Circles and story maps. The researchers, Fabrikant, Siekierski and Williams (1999), also identified some probable causes as to why students had low literal and low inferencing skills, including: both parents work, students have less time to read for enjoyment, poor motivation, students experience failure by trying to read material above their reading level,
poor word recognition skills, limited vocabulary, failure to activate prior knowledge, limited life experiences, and difficulty communicating thoughts.
They collected data from teacher observations and results from the Star standardized test. A 16-week intervention program that built on previously taught skills was created. Direct teaching of specific strategies included teaching Reading five days a week in 60 to 90 minute blocks. Strategies included: activation of prior knowledge, teaching inferential thinking skills, use of Direct Reading Thinking Activity (D.R.T.A.), use of Question Answer Relationship (Q.A.R.), use of Self-Monitoring questions, and use of Literary Circles.
The Accelerated Reader program was also implemented along with the incentive of eating dessert with the teacher, after reading goals had been met. In their literature review the researchers quoted Dole, Duffy, Pearson and Roehler (1990) from Technical Report No. 143, Developing expertise in reading comprehension: what should be taught? How should it be taught? from the Center for the Study of Reading at the University of Illinois, as saying,
Despite the persistent conventional wisdom that implicitly argues for delaying giving children inferential activities until they have mastered literal comprehension, both basic and applied research in reading clearly support a strong emphasis on inferential activities from the outset of instruction (p. 14, quoted in Fabrikant, Siekierski and Williams 1999, p. 26).
Fabrikant, Siekierski and Williams found that both the students instructional reading levels as well as their grade equivalent scores increased with direct teaching. Students intrinsic motivation to read also improved. The other action research project that we found of special interest was Increasing reading comprehension through the use of Guided Reading (Anderson, OLeary, Schuler and Wright 2002). Anderson, OLeary, Schuler and Wright implemented Guided Reading with first grade to fourth grade students in four different schools in the mid-western United States. When the teachers were surveyed, and the students were tested with the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests (1989) and end of selection (story) tests, the researchers found students reading comprehension was weak, and there was inconsistent use of fall and spring reading tests, and end of selection (story) testing. A Guided Reading program was implemented in 30-minute blocks, 5 days a week for 4 months. The specific format used during lessons was: introduce the story, and any new vocabulary, read the story independently, and discuss and respond to the story.
6
Students were taught how to use graphic organizers to record the main character, the setting, the problem, the solution, and the resolution of a story. Afterwards, students were given end of selection (story) tests and their reading comprehension skills were measured with the Qualitative Reading Inventory (1995) in second and third grade. Anderson, OLeary, Schuler, and Wright concluded that consistent use of graphic organizers, and an effective Guided Reading program increased students comprehension skills. Several journal articles also shed some light on other ways to improve reading comprehension using higher level thinking skills. Ketch (2005) argued that conversation can be a vehicle to practice and learn comprehension skills. In research conducted on proficient readers, seven common strategies that good readers use to comprehend text were identified: making connections to the text, the world, and oneself, questioning as one reads, using mental imagery to make a movie in ones mind, determining importance, inferring, retelling and synthesizing, and employing fix-up strategies to correct and monitor meaning.
Explicit modeling of the strategies, authentic student discussions, practice and student reflection time, Ketch noted, helped students to build empathy, understanding, respect for different opinions, and ownership of the learning process. Five common formats used for classroom conversations were: 1) whole group, 2) small group, 3) Literature Circles, 4) think/pair/share, and 5) individual conferences between teachers and students. After over 30 years observing students using the strategies, Ketch came to the following conclusion: Students actively engaged in the conversation process can, over time, become reflective critical thinkers. Applegate, Quinn and Applegate (2002) promoted the idea of creating thoughtful literacy by studying different kinds of open-ended questions, and thinking levels used on eight of the most widely used informal reading inventories (IRIs). Four types of open-ended questions were classified: literal, low-level inference, highlevel inference, and response items. Two narrative passages and comprehension questions from pre-primer through sixth grade were analyzed. Narrative passages were used because the researchers felt that higher-level items are more likely to be found in response to narrative text. The researchers were particularly interested in what type of message the kind of questions asked on IRIs conveyed to students about reading. They found that most of the questions on IRIs (91%) were recall or low-level inferences. On the most demanding IRIs, less than a fifth of the questions required more than basic recall or low-level thinking. The researchers argued,
If the IRIs that we use to assess children are insensitive to the differences between recalling and thinking about text, our ability to provide evidence of any given childs instructional needs, let alone have an impact upon instruction, is severely limited.
The researchers called for an assessment revolution in reading, with a need for the assessment and teaching of thoughtful responses to text in classrooms, rather than literal ones. Approaches such as Literature Circles and response journals with modeling were recommended to promote thoughtful literacy. They concluded that,
Open-ended questions can take the reading teacher where multiple-choice items cannot: to the childrens ability to use their experiences to construct meaning in response to text.
Primeaux (2000) studied the use of explicit reader response instruction with nine sixth grade struggling readers in one mid-west middle school, using a social constructivist approach. Simply stated, in this approach, learners strengths were emphasized; the approach was student-centered; students learned through interaction with others in the environment; and assessment was designed to inform instruction. In the study, three components were emphasized: 1) a responsive literary environment, 2) the use of explicit comprehension strategy instruction, and 3) time spent engaged with text. Primeaux quoted from an article by Anderson, Wilson, and Fielding (1988), Growth in reading and how children spend their time outside of school, Reading Research Quarterly, 23: Time spent reading books has been found to be the best predictor of a childs growth as a reader from second to the fifth grade (p. 540). In Primeauxs study, comprehension strategies included pre-reading, duringreading, and post-reading strategies. A core set of these strategies for any grade level or ability included: For narrative text, VCR or movie in your head strategy, story retell where students rewind their mind tapes for retelling, after reading, fall into a book and walk around with the characters, the characters fall out of a book and walk around with you, and use of story maps, and For expository text, setting a purpose, building on what you know, wondering silently, and putting it all together.
Primeaux recommended that: teaching strategies be taught the way they are used, rather than as a sequence of steps; all teachers in a school use the same terminology, Reading class be extended from 38 minutes of instruction to a 76 minute Language Arts block, and students be taught to identify their reading interests.
8
The researcher discovered that [t]he sixth-grade struggling readers involved in open-ended reader response instruction actually found it easier and more interesting than their previous reading instruction, which sought one predetermined right answer (p. 540). Within a social constructivist approach, Primeaux discovered there were many opportunities to help struggling readers comprehend text. Pitts (1991) pointed out that functional illiteracy is a pervasive problem in American society and with many changes to educational programs and services, the onus has been placed on classroom teachers to create a nation of readers. Using classroom examples from fourth to eleventh grade, and documentation from leading reading specialists, Pitts called for a shift in instruction. Seven straightforward strategies were recommended: 1) Teach students how to use a textbook by brainstorming, and discussing the various parts, before reading, 2) Teach background vocabulary, use warm-up drills to teach students how to spell key content area words, and review them daily, 3) Prepare study guides with inquiry-type questions to help students understand content area subjects, 4) Teach students how to adjust their reading pace, (read to skim, analyze, or read for details) depending on the text, 5) Teach students to summarize content in their own language, 6) Teach students to outline using the main idea, and supporting details, and 7) Teach students to read about different disciplines in their recreational reading, and to share what they learn at school. According to Pitts, Comprehension is the nucleus of learning. She summarized her findings by indicating that effective use of these strategies can aid comprehension, enhance vocabulary, and promote critical thinking. Block (1993) wrote about the effects of a program designed to improve thinking strategies, reading comprehension achievement, self-esteem, and critical thinking abilities. Based on the work of Baron and Sternberg; Beyer; Collins; de Bono; Marzano, Jones and Brandt; and Paul, eight categories were identified. They were: 1) basic cognitive operations, 2) fundamental thinking processes, 3) decision-making strategies, 4) problem-solving strategies, 5) metacognitive strategies, 6) creative thinking strategies, 7) strategies for working effectively with groups, and 8) strategies for studying and working. Sixteen lessons, based on these strategies, were designed to explicitly teach Kindergarten through eleventh grade students in several schools in the southwestern United States for 1 1/2 hours a day, 2 days a week, for 32 weeks, throughout the school year.
After a teacher explanation and modeling of a thinking and reading comprehension strategy, students selected childrens literature from eight genres (fiction, nonfiction, poetry, autobiographies, biographies, folk literature, periodicals, and science fiction) in order to read and apply the strategy. Students were given one-page thinking guides to put on their desks as they read. The guides had a chart and a diagram of a thinking strategy. Students discussed how to use the thinking guide while reading and in their own lives. Finally, students set their own reading objectives and self-assessed their use of the strategy, and how they could apply it outside school. The 178 students involved in the study did better than the 174 controls on reading comprehension standardized tests, on transferring thinking strategies outside of school, as well as on self-esteem, and on critical and creative thinking measures. Block recommended concentrating on 4 or 5 strategies so students could become masters of them, teaching a strategy in a Language Arts block, and then continuing strategy instruction with a Science or Social Studies text later in the day. Making predictions was the strategy, promoted in an article by Blevins (1990), to enhance students reading comprehension. He recommended: providing explicit instruction about how, when, and why the strategy can be used, modeling by using a think-aloud, allowing for practice, and having students articulate their use of the strategy, asking probing questions, before reading, using story maps for fiction, and using lists of main ideas so students can fill in supporting details for nonfiction. One source discussed the use of specific anchor lessons and teacher modeling to teach young children to infer, based on the work of Keene and Zimmerman (1997) in Mosaic of thought: Teaching comprehension in a readers workshop, published by Heinemann. The source was Reading with meaning: Teaching comprehension in the primary grades by Miller (2002). Through direct instruction, students were taught how to: infer meanings of unknown words, make predictions, confirm or contradict them by reading on, use prior knowledge, text, and picture clues to draw conclusions, infer the meaning of poetry, know when to infer (when the answers they need are not stated in the text), ask questions as they read, create interpretations to enrich and deepen their experience in a text, and make connections to their own lives to enhance understanding. Specific examples were given of multi-column charts, which were frequently used in the classroom: a word what we infer what helped us, our predictions and the thinking behind them,
10
a poem, on one side what the words mean, on the other side Im inferring. . ., below, as well as questions we have answers to these questions. Many student writing and drawing samples were used effectively to demonstrate how primary students could be taught to infer.
COMMON THEMES IN THE LITERATURE

As researchers, we asked ourselves:
What common themes appeared in the literature on comprehension and critical thinking instruction? Which strategies were the most effective?
According to Bird (1989), who was concerned about the ability of university and community college students to think critically, In the area of critical thinking and comprehension, there exists no single approach to student mastery (p. 745). However, a lot of common themes were evident in this literature review. Many of the approaches involved the use of before reading, during reading, and after reading activities. Instruction was explicit. The teacher modeled the strategy. Students were taught when and how to use the strategy, and were also given opportunities to practice and reflect on their use of the strategy. Instruction was also studentcentered. Reading materials were at the students reading levels and based on students interests. Critical thinking skills were used to engage students in reading, writing, listening, and discussions about their ideas. As far as the teaching of specific strategies is concerned, several strategies came up repeatedly in the literature. The most effective ones that improved students reading comprehension and critical thinking skills appeared to be: visualizing or making a movie in ones mind, teaching background vocabulary, using graphic organizers (story maps, in particular), using Literature Circles, questioning when reading, making connections with the characters, retelling, and teaching inferring.
From a practical point of view, the frequency and duration of the instruction varied considerably. The length of instruction varied from 30 minutes at a time up to a 76 minute block, from two to five days a week, and from four months to all year.
11
Research Methodology
PARENTAL CONSENT
The researchers wrote a letter to inform parents of students in Grades Three, Four and Five about their intent to conduct an action research project on Guided Reading (see Appendix 1). The letter also reassured parents that the results for individual students would be kept confidential. The information was shared with parents at an Open House, early in September 2006. Parents were also asked to sign a permission form to release student work and to allow photographs of their child(ren) to be taken (see Appendix 2). The letter and permission form were sent home to any parents who were unable to attend the Open House. Parental support was unanimous. Interestingly enough, one high school teacher commented that if the researchers were able to teach students to infer, she would like us to share that information since she was trying to teach the same skills to middle years students. Her comment raised the question:
If students are taught how to infer now, will they be able to later on, when the material is more difficult?
RESEARCHER TRAINING
As researchers, how did we begin the process of learning about Guided Reading strategies? The researcher-training portion of the project had five main components: 1) studying specific strategies used to teach Guided Reading in the professional literature, 2) viewing and discussing a training video on using Guided Reading strategies, 3) visiting other teachers who successfully use Guided Reading in their classrooms to enhance critical thinking, 4) keeping reflective journals to document insights about Guided Reading, and 5) sharing key findings with the other researchers during regular meetings throughout the project. After the Student Services teacher gathered resources and previewed professional videos, the researchers met for training in late September of 2006. The purposes of the training were to learn more about what Guided Reading is, identify some of the key strategies available, and determine practical ways to use the strategies in the classroom. An education student from the University of Regina, Jessica La Pointe, also attended the training session. The researchers met outside the school at a local church and watched an informative video, Instructional strategies for Guided Reading that enhance students reading comprehension, Grades 3-6 (2002). The accompanying resource guide served as the basis for discussion. The video presented six instructional strategies:
12
I wonder, good reader strategies, and the keyword strategy on Tape 1, as well as making it real,
word sorts, and anticipation guides on Tape 2. Uses of the strategies were demonstrated using a variety of fiction and non-fiction texts. Linda Hoyt effectively emphasized that reading is thinking and showed how the strategies could be utilized to improve reading comprehension by stimulating deeper, more critical thinking. During the viewing, the researchers stopped the tapes, made notes, discussed each of the strategies, and began to consider which ones they would implement in their classrooms. Several questions were raised: How are students grouped for Guided Reading? How does it work when siblings of different ages read at similar levels? What are other students doing while the teacher is working with a group? How are quieter students involved in the discussions? What materials are used? How can enough copies of reading materials be made available?
BENCHMARKS
Students were given the Star test in August 2006 to help determine their reading levels and grade equivalents. Testing occurred again before each of the reporting periods in November, February/March, and May to follow up these initial benchmarks.
STRATEGY INSTRUCTION
Explicit teaching of the strategies was the next focus of the research project. After the researcher training, each researcher chose to focus on selected strategies that would best meet the needs of her students and fit with the work in the units being taught in the classroom. The individual approach each researcher took was discussed and compared during reflection meetings. Highlights were as follows.
THE TEACHING APPROACH
IN
GRADE THREE
In the Grade Three classroom, the researcher used a variety of strategies to bring the written word alive. I wonder was used across the curriculum, either before reading, during reading or after reading. Students completed this sentence stem by recording their responses. The strategy became routine throughout the day whether it was during read-aloud by the teacher or in Science class. The Keyword strategy was used to teach students to identify key words or phrases. It was especially useful when students were reading Science-related information sheets or doing Math story problems. Students were asked to highlight key words or phrases after reading the information over once or twice. Another strategy the researcher focused on was teaching students to visualize the written word in their minds. A poster was displayed in each classroom to remind students to read and then to stop and make a picture. The novel, Owls in the Family, was read chapter by chapter to the students. After listening and reading
13
the chapter, students illustrated a scene from it (see Appendix 4a: Imagery with Owls in the Family). The novel was brought to life. Students enjoyed illustrating an event from the chapter, and the book became very real to them. Every student was able to complete this task; artistic ability did not matter. As visualizing continued throughout the year, students became very adept at making pictures in their minds. It was a valuable reading comprehension strategy to make the written word become real.
Figure 2. Visualizing poster used by the researchers.

After seeing the leveled books available through subscriptions from the web site, Reading a-z, used for Guided Reading, the Grade Three researcher used the stories, lesson plans, worksheets including story maps, and the Reader Quick Check with the Grade Three class as a whole, instead of using them with small groups. An Educational Assistant helped prepare the materials. The students found the books and the variety of accompanying activities interesting and fun to do. Students completed these activities easily and independently. The Reader Quick Check was an excellent instrument for assessing reading comprehension including higher level thinking skills such as inferencing and synthesizing. These printable books and teaching materials were a very successful addition to a folktale unit.
14
IN
GRADE FOUR
Direct Guided Reading instruction was the focus for a novel study on Stone fox by John Reynolds Gardiner (1980). Students participated in a variety of activities designed to promote higher level thinking skills from Literature and critical thinking, Book 1 by John Carratello. Students read up to Chapters 5 and 6, and then did an activity about being a responsible person. In the novel, they learned that the main character had many responsibilities so then the students had to connect the book to their own lives. Students had to think of how and in what ways they were responsible. They also had to write if they thought they could care for their Grandpa like the character Little Willy had to and answer why or why not. Then they had to think of five ways that they could earn $500, like Little Willy. The ideas had to be real ways and not make-believe. The students also had to write a prediction of whom they thought would win the big race, and what they thought would happen. Then they read the book to find out. Afterwards, they watched the video, Stone Fox. Students recorded the similarities and differences between the book and the video.
Students reading the novel, Stone Fox, Grade 4.

After reading, the Grade Four students filled in a Literature Log. This page included the following stems: the best part was, the worst part was, the main problem was, problem was solved when, my favorite character was, my least favorite character was, I laughed when, and I cried when. Following the novel study, the Grade Four students comprehension levels were assessed on the computer in a variety of ways. Students did an Accelerated Reader quiz with ten questions on the novel to help measure their basic comprehension skills. Then they did a Vocabulary quiz, and something new a Literacy Skills quiz. The Vocabulary test had five multiple-choice type questions on the meaning of a variety of words from the novel. On the Literacy skills quiz, students were asked to answer 12 questions. There were four categories on the Stone Fox Literacy Skills quiz, each with three questions: 1) initial understanding, 2) literacy analysis, 3) inferential comprehension, and 4) constructing meaning.
15
Inferential comprehension included comparing and contrasting, drawing conclusions, extending meaning, making inferences, making predictions, and recognizing cause and effect. This was the first time a class at St. Olivier School had done a Literacy Skills quiz. Questions went beyond basic recall to challenge students to think more deeply. The Class Summary Report provided useful information that will be discussed in the Data Summary section of this report.
Computer assessment of Grade 4 students with Literacy quizzes.
THE STUDENT SERVICES TEACHERS APPROACH IN GRADE FOUR

To begin with, students were told that the researchers goal, at the beginning of the year, was to teach them how to think. Throughout the year, visualizing by making mind movies, the use of a variety of graphic organizers, the application of the I wonder and I think strategies, direct instruction on inferring using text and visual clues, and many opportunities to practice the strategies paved the way for the implementation of a researcher-made Guided Reading unit at the end of the year. Students participated in a seven-week unit: Meet the Canadian Author and Illustrator, C. J. Taylor. Guided Reading occurred in 30-minute periods four times a week. The Star test, and results from informal reading inventories were used to determine students reading levels and to create three reading groups: the Warriors, the White Buffalos, and the Wigwams. Picture cards based on the legends students would be reading were posted on the whiteboard to indicate what groups students were in, and what their daily tasks were.
INSERT PHOTO #3
Students involved in a small Guided Reading group on Native legends, Grade 4.
16
HOW WOULD STUDENTS REACT TO BEING GROUPED ACCORDING TO ABILITY?

The researcher explained what kinds of books and the specific kinds of activities students would be doing. For example, the Warriors were students who liked longer chapter books with challenging vocabulary and who created more detailed kinds of writing. The White Buffalos read shorter books including a few collections of creation stories with some new words; they enjoyed shorter writing tasks. The Wigwams were those students who liked reading a short story, learning a few new words, and who were capable of writing good answers with fewer details. The students readily accepted these explanations, and they were keen to get started.
HOW COULD STUDENTS BE MOTIVATED TO THINK CRITICALLY AT THE END OF THE DAY? WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO STAY ON TASK IN THEIR GROUPS, AND AT TIMES WORK INDEPENDENTLY?
Because the Guided Reading groups were small, the materials for this unit consisted of picture books borrowed from the Public Library system. Students were given books to read at their independent level, ranging from Grade 3.3 to 5.9. The paintings on the covers were very appealing. Checklists were created for each legend so students could self-monitor the tasks they had completed. Tasks were developed for before, during and after reading. These tasks provided opportunities for lots of discussion, vocabulary building, writing answers to higher-level questions, and creating products such as songs, drawings, and puppet plays. Several graphic organizers were used including: a K-W-L chart to gather information about C. J. Taylor, pictures with lines for quick writes to determine students background knowledge, prediction and confirmation charts, Venn diagrams and charts to compare characters, and webs to categorize kinds of legends. Questioning included a limited number of basic recall-type questions. Instead, the researcher focused on more open-ended questions and posed several kinds of higher-level questions that encouraged students to: make predictions by giving evidence from the text and picture clues, relate legends to their own experience, apply what they had learned about a character to their own lives, raise questions as they read, identify the authors message, determine meaning by reading and writing words in context, draw conclusions at the end of the legends, evaluate favorite legends and paintings, and answer lots of why do you think questions.
This line of questioning kept students interested and challenged. Discussions were lively and students had to think more critically. The researcher took turns working with each group, and observations were recorded.
17
Each group read three legends, and took Accelerated Reader tests on the books, when available, at the end of the activities. The unit concluded with a lunch featuring First Nations food. Some students retold a few of the legends they had read by performing puppet shows on the last day of school for students in Grades One through Three. Students in the audience were asked to infer what the authors message was at the end of each legend. Each legend was well received by the audience.
IN
GRADE FIVE
Instruction started with a fantasy themed unit in English Language Arts. A Literature Circle approach with small manageable groups with students each reading at their levels, performing critical and creative thinking tasks, and answering inferential questions was used. Novels included Tuck everlasting by Natalie Babbitt (1975), A stranger came ashore (1975) by Mollie Hunter, published by Harper Trophy, and Allisons ghost by Canadian authors Mary Alice and John Downie (1984). Sentence stems from an English Language Arts workshop were enlarged, reproduced and laminated. Color-coding was used for before, during, and after reading activities. Cards were made for each of the researchers to use with any English Language Arts unit (see Appendix 3 for a detailed list of the sentence stems). Students also used response journals to record I wonder, I think, and to draw a picture or make notes about their reading under a section called, My Space.
The Grade Five researcher engages a Literature Circle group with sentence stem cards.
The Grade Five researcher continued to develop students critical and creative thinking and inferencing skills in a variety of areas across the curriculum beginning with a cross-curricular Heroes unit. Students did four lessons from the book, Heroes: 21 true stories of courage and honor with exercises for developing reading comprehension and critical thinking skills (1999) by Henry Billings and Melissa Billings from Jamestown Publishers. According to Heroes, When you combine your own experience and information from a text to draw a conclusion that is not directly stated in that text, you are making an inference (p.58). Students practiced making inferences by: identifying cause and effect relationships, theme categories, predictions, as well as fact and opinion,
18
identifying the main idea of each story, recalling details, working with new vocabulary, summarizing and paraphrasing, responding to critical thinking exercises, raising questions, and making personal responses to learn about heroes.
In English Language Arts, a Guided Reading approach was employed using short stories, poetry, and essays on Canadian and world heroes. In Social Studies, students learned about Canadian War Heroes/Remembrance Day by reading and responding to several information cards from Lest we forget, grades 4-6 (2000) by Ruth Solski, published by S & S Learning Materials. In Guidance, students made personal reflections on the Stations of the Cross and drew posters to represent each station. In Mathematics, personal dictionaries were used to help students understand vocabulary, and problem solving duotangs were created to help students think more critically. Students did the Written Assessment Task, Understanding the Problem on pages 77 through 83 of Alberta Educations Diagnostic mathematics program: elementary: division II: problem solving (1990). This assessment included determining what information was not needed to solve problems and answering a variety of multiple-choice questions about tables, charts, signs, diagrams, and word problems. Students also made their own tables, lists, pictures, and diagrams, or used guess and check to answer problems from The Problem Solver 3: Activities for Learning Problem-Solving Strategies (1987) by Shirley Hoogeboom and Judy Goodnow, published by Creative Publications.
SCHOOL VISIT
In January 2007, three of the researchers, armed with questions, visited Sacred Heart, an inner-city school in Regina, to observe a highly successful Guided Reading program in action. The program was intensive and involved all of the students in Kindergarten to Grade Eight. The program was facilitated by 18 dedicated teachers and three educational assistants and occurred four days a week. Benchmarking was conducted three times a year. Students were grouped according to their reading levels and expected to improve one reading level per term. Reading materials consisted of benchmarking tools, books, and activity sheets downloaded from the Reading a-z website. The enthusiasm of all the participants was clearly evident.
19
Sacred Heart Community School, Regina, Saskatchewan taken by Lorraine Brecht. Reprinted with permission.
After observing Guided Reading at Sacred Heart, the researchers met with two of the teachers to get answers to any remaining questions. Seeing first-hand how a Guided Reading program using multi-grade groupings was conducted was an invaluable experience. Practical ideas about how to implement it were gathered and continued enthusiasm for the project was generated.
ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION

Students comprehension and thinking skills were assessed in a variety of ways. Computerized assessment included the Star test to identify instructional levels and grade equivalent scores, Accelerated Reader quizzes to measure basic understanding of the books read, and Literacy quizzes to measure higher-level thinking skills including inferring. Both types of quiz had multiple-choice questions. We also assessed students daily work, i.e., their writing, which included story maps and other graphic organizers, responses to written questions, response journals, and interviews, their speaking skills in discussions, oral reading, and retellings, and their representational skills in artwork. A Guided Reading Evaluation checklist was also created (see Appendix 5). Student self-assessment included a Fantasy Unit survey in Grade Five (see Appendix 4d), and a Looking Back at the Unit sheet to evaluate the Guided Reading unit on Native legends in Grade Four.
20
Summary of Data
STUDENT INTERVIEWS
WHAT WAS THE STUDENT SAMPLE LIKE? WHAT WERE THE STUDENTS INTERESTS? HOW DID THEY SEE THEMSELVES AS READERS? HOW DID THE GRADE THEY WERE IN AFFECT THEIR PERCEPTIONS?
In September 2006, the students in Grades Three, Four and Five were given the Student Interview, Kindergarten Fourth Grade from The Critical reading inventory (2004) to gather some background information, including students perceptions of themselves as readers. Students wrote their responses on an interview sheet. An analysis of their responses followed, and the results are summarized below. There was an even balance of boys and girls in the sample, with a total of 22 boys (one boy moved before the March 2007 reading assessment) and 21 girls. Reading was the students third favorite home activity, rated below watching TV and playing on the computer. Students explained that they like reading at home because the book is interesting, reading teaches you stuff, Im good at reading, I like reading because its exciting, and I relax. The number of students who were read to at home dropped as the students got older. The majority of Grade Three students were read to at bedtime, while the majority of Grade Four and Five students were not. While it was parents who read to most of the Grade Three students, a grandparent read to several of the students, and a brother or sister read to a few. Whether students liked to read or not depended on the grade they were in. The majority of students in Grade Three and Four liked to read, while only about half the students in Grade Five liked to read. There was a wide range of favorite books and authors that depended on the grade students were in. The most popular books in Grade Three were the Magic Tree House series and Junie B. Jones; in Grade Four students preferred fantasy, animal stories, and books by Lemony Snicket; and J. K. Rowlings Harry Potter books were the favorites in Grade Five. The students perceptions of themselves as good readers varied according to grade. The majority of Grade Three and Four students saw themselves as good readers, while the Grade Five students were split as to whether they saw themselves as good readers or not. According to the majority of the students, no matter what grade they were in, the hardest part of reading was reading words that were hard or long. Other difficulties listed were taking an Accelerated Reader test, finding the perfect book, understanding a book, the fine print in a book, pages that are too long, and the middle of a book. Several students indicated that nothing about reading was hard for them.
21
When students were asked what they do when they come to a word they do not know, they gave a variety of responses. The majority of students indicated they sound the word out. This response was followed by those who ask someone for help, usually an adult and sometimes a friend, those who re-read the same sentence, those who tried their best; those who split the word into groups or broke it up, those who looked at the word, those who thought, and those who kept reading or skipped the word. The Grade Five students tended to list more strategies for dealing with unfamiliar words than the younger students. When students were asked where they got the books they read at home, most of them recorded the school library as their source of books. Other popular responses were classroom book orders, gifts, stores, a bookshelf at home, siblings, and last on the list, the public library, which was mentioned by only a few students. When students were asked what they liked most about school, reading was among the top five things listed, regardless of the grade the students were in. The majority of students in all three grades thought that reading would be important when they were older. However, several students in Grade Three and Five thought that it would not be important. A few students responded to this question with maybe, sometimes or a little.
INFORMAL READING INVENTORY RESULTS

How did the students perform on the informal reading inventories? What was the baseline data like? Did results vary due to any of the following:

When the passage was administered? Who administered the passage? The students gender? The students grade level? How the passage was read? The difficulty of the passage? The kind of passage, i.e., whether it was narrative or informative?
Most important, did the students improve their inferencing skills?

Students reading comprehension skills, particularly their inferencing skills, were assessed through informal reading inventories three times during the course of the project. Initially, the researchers decided to use a new assessment, The Critical Reading Inventory (2004), with students as a benchmark in September. Substitute teachers, a Grade Twelve student doing work experience, and an Educational Assistant administered Word lists and passages. However, after reviewing the results, the researchers found that the passages were much more difficult than the ones used before and they questioned some of the choices in the passages that the students were given. Deciding that this approach did not assess the students fairly, the researchers chose to use inventories that were familiar to them instead.
22
In November, with the support of release time, the researchers administered informal reading inventories of their own choosing. Narrative and/or informative passages from the Basic Reading Inventory (2001) and the Diagnostic Reading program (1989) were used. Each passage had a few inferencing questions. Students were reassessed in March and May. Inferring results were graphed to compare the students results in November and May. (See graphs for each grade below.)
Note:
The sources of the passages were as follows: The Noise Form B, Johns (2001), Cricket Song Form D, Johns (2001), A Visit to Earth 3B-2, Alberta Education (1989), Just One More 4A-N, Alberta Education (1989) and Jens Rotten Day 4D-N, Alberta Education (1989).
Grade Three students read three narrative passages in November and two narrative passages in May. The percentage of students who were inferring in November improved significantly when the passage was read orally. A total of 88% of the students succeeded in making inferences compared to 38% and 25% when the passage was read silently. The percentage increased to a total of 94% of students making inferences successfully in May on the passage read orally. However, the percentage of students inferring in May rose significantly to 81% on the passage read silently.
23
Note:
The sources of the passages were as follows: Just One More 4A-N, Alberta Education (1989), Grizzly Bears 4D-I, Alberta Education (1989) and Jens Rotten Day 4D-N, Alberta Education (1989).
Grade Four students read a narrative passage in November and both an informational and a narrative passage in May. Students appeared to experience difficulty with an informational passage that was read orally in May, since only 70% of students succeeded on the inferring questions. However, the total percentage of students inferring successfully when narrative passages were read silently improved from 80% in November to 90% in May.
Note:
The sources of the passages were as follows: Through the Storm 5A-N, Alberta Education (1989), Breakaway 5B-N, Alberta Education (1989), Roller Skating 5C-I, Alberta Education (1989) and Two Famous Brothers Form LE I, Johns (2001).
24
Grade Five students read one informational passage orally in November; and one narrative passage orally, and two informational passages silently in May. Results varied from a total of 57% of students inferring in November to a total of 86, 50 and 86% in May, depending on the passage.
STUDENT SURVEY RESULTS FROM GRADE FIVE FANTASY UNIT

The results of the survey given to Grade Five students at the end of the Fantasy unit can be summarized as follows. The majority of Grade Five students liked working in groups, predicting, and sharing their opinions. The response to before, during, and after reading cards was mixed. Some students appeared to need more time and practice to develop their ability to fill in the answers to these sentence stems. Response journals with writings or drawings appeared to help most of the students remember or understand what they were reading. It should be noted that Grade Five students perceptions of themselves as good readers improved compared to their perceptions during the student interviews given in September.
COMPUTERIZED TESTING
Students did well on their Accelerated Reader tests after learning Guided Reading strategies. The tests included novel study books and Native legends. Results from the Literacy Quiz for the novel, Stone Fox, provided detailed information about Grade Four students inferring skills, including where the students were successful and where improvement was needed. These results are shown in the table below.
LITERACY SKILLS QUIZ

SUMMARY REPORT ON INFERRING SKILLS, GRADE FOUR
June 25, 2007 Inferential Comprehension Correct Comparing and Contrasting 5 Drawing Conclusions 3 Extending Meaning 6 Making Inferences 4 Making Predictions 6 Recognizing Cause and Effect 2 Group Totals 26 Possible 5 4 6 5 6 4 30 % 100 75 100 80 100 50 87
25
Researcher Reflections
What did the researchers learn from collaborating on this project?
The researchers maintained reflection journals throughout the project. The following insights are drawn from their unpublished journals for the 2006/2007 school year. The project proved to me we are good Reading teachers willing to learn new strategies to improve and build on what we are already doing everyday in our classrooms. Perhaps our greatest resource for teaching Reading already exists in our school the knowledge that we all have in teaching Reading. I do believe that critical and creative thinking can be taught just to the mind that is developed and ready for it. Some children were excellent readers; but were not comfortable or confident in creative or critical thinking. They appeared to be better at learning factual information rather than using personal judgment or taking guesses at things. It is important that each teacher collect his/her own data with each child when screening the children. Having release time to assess students and to meet with the other researchers was very beneficial. It is time consuming to organize Guided Reading initially creating units, gathering materials and determining student groupings. One highlight of this project was to visit Sacred Heart School in Regina. The opportunity to discuss resources, benchmarks, screens, M.I.R. (Major Integrated Resources) and assessments was in itself invaluable. To see the before, during and after posters hanging in the classrooms and being used was an affirmation of the many years I spent on the Saskatchewan Learning K-5 ELA renewal team. Because of the visit, all my fears of how to implement this strategy were alleviated and I have the confidence to immerse my class into it. Im finding resources more readily now. The use of technology to measure comprehension skills, and specifically the ability to inference was a valuable tool that not only kept the students motivated, and provided immediate feedback; but created diagnostic printouts that could be used to inform teaching practices as well. The kinds of questions I ask now are more open-ended, and encourage students to dig deeper, and think more critically. The process of learning about the theory of Guided Reading strategies with the other researchers and implementing a Guided Reading program was an exciting one.
26
Teaching a small class of 11 students originally and then only 10 students, after one moved, was definitely an advantage to pilot a researcher-made Guided Reading program. Teaching students to infer by giving evidence from the text and/or picture clues when they are young provides a good foundation for the kinds of higher level thinking they will be expected to do when they are older. Teaching Guided Reading strategies really helped students to develop their vocabulary skills and to read words in context. The opinions students presented during their discussions were interesting and helped them to understand other students points of view. The more students predicted what would happen next, the more students learned to take risks. Guided Reading helps the teacher to get to know students on a more personal level, especially when students were given lots of opportunities to relate stories to their own experience, and it provided insights into students successes, interests, fears, etc. Some students were better able to relate stories to movies they had seen, rather than to other stories. The structure provided by Guided Reading makes teacher expectations very clear. The skill of reading short paragraphs silently in a group needed to be taught to some students who are used to answering a question after reading aloud as a class. Grouping students by their independent reading levels meant everyone in the class was included and could experience success in Reading. This experience has proven to be beneficial not only to myself as an educator, but also to my students who have experienced growth in their critical and creative thinking skills due to the exposure of different strategies and CCT questions across the curriculum. Next year, I plan to try and implement small Guided Reading groups in other themed units. I would like to use the Literacy Quizzes next year for novel studies in my classroom. We can learn from each other, pool our ideas together, discuss what works and doesnt work, identify what needs to be changed, and teach kids to read so that they come to love reading and will become hooked on reading. This research project has been an excellent learning opportunity, and very worthwhile.
27
Conclusions
The use of Guided Reading strategies to teach students to infer and think critically was just one of a multitude of approaches available. The researchers found that cross-curricular (Language Arts, Math, Social, Science, and Guidance) critical thinking questions, assignments, and tasks when combined with Guided Reading strategies, could indeed increase students critical thinking and inferring skills. In order to be successful, Guided Reading strategies needed to be taught explicitly and modeled by the teacher, and the students needed to be given lots of opportunities to practice them. The way Guided Reading strategies were taught was very individual, depending on several factors: the researcher (level of experience, comfort level, and focus of the teaching units), the students (their reading levels, interests, ability to work independently, and skills in cooperative group work), classroom organization (what tasks the other students were doing, e.g., keyboarding, Creative Writing or participating in another Guided Reading group), the availability of materials (access to multiple copies and books at students independent reading levels, and availability of computer accessible materials), time (a period of at least 30 minutes, more than one day in a row or in a block of several weeks, and enough time to download, print and assemble books), and scheduling (overlapping of the timetable or flexible timetabling, particularly where teachers wanted to team or co-teach).
It definitely took a lot of time to learn the theory behind Guided Reading and the wide variety of strategies available to implement it, as well as prepare the units and gather, create, and organize the necessary reading materials. The improvement in student outcomes made the effort worthwhile. The researchers concluded that this action research project was just a beginning and they were very much in an awareness/exploration phase. They inferred that their work with Guided Reading strategies would continue in 2007/2008, as they shared what they had learned with other teachers and continued to apply the strategies in their teaching practice. They expected to continue building on this knowledge and applying it in the years ahead.
28
Limitations
The research was not without limitations related to the administration of the informal reading inventories, the timing of the school visit, as well as when and how Guided Reading strategies were taught. These limitations are described in more detail below. 1) The administration of The Critical Reading Inventory could have been better handled. Overall, the researchers were dissatisfied with how the passages were administered. For instance, difficult questions were not repeated or rephrased, and foreign names were not told to the students. The passages were much longer than the passages administered in the past, and the retelling portion of the inventory took more time. Students were not asked to expand on their retellings through further questions, such as then what happened? or what else? 2) The informal reading inventories were not used consistently. The researchers administered passages from two different inventories (the Diagnostic Reading Program and the Basic Reading Inventory) and some used two types of passages (narrative and informational), but not consistently. The graphs helped the researchers to see how many passages had been administered, from what reading inventories, and the kinds of passages used. 3) The visit to Sacred Heart School would have been better organized for the fall as planned rather than in January. This timing would have given the researchers more practical information about teaching Guided Reading strategies sooner. 4) The Guided Reading Author Study in Grade 4 should have been completed before the Star test and the last informal reading inventories were administered at the end of May. 5) Two of the researchers used a whole class approach to teaching Guided Reading strategies, while the other two used a small group approach. Multi-grade groupings were not attempted, given the number of siblings that read at similar levels. Flexible groupings were also not used. 6) Parent questionnaires were not part of the research, as originally planned. Parent reflections would have been a useful way to involve parents more in their childrens reading and thinking.
29
Recommendations
This action research project led the researchers to formulate the following recommendations: 1) That the researchers continue to collaborate by sharing best practices for teaching Guided Reading strategies through Professional Learning Communities (PLCs); 2) That provisions continue to be made for teacher release time to allow for the administration of individual reading assessments; 3) That the researchers share what they have learned from this project with other teachers who teach Grades Three, Four and Five in the Holy Family RCSSD, and at the Learning from Practice Exchange of Teacher Knowledge and Research, sponsored by the McDowell Foundation; 4) That other teachers in the Division be encouraged to use Guided Reading strategies to help improve student reading outcomes, particularly the development of higher level thinking skills; and 5) That additional Division-level funding be given to each school that implements Guided Reading strategies for the purchase of Guided Reading materials, including multiple copies of books for students to use.
30
References
Assessment Tools Alberta Education. (1989). Diagnostic reading program. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Education, Student Evaluation Branch. Applegate, M. D., Quinn, K. B. & Applegate, A. J. (2004). The critical reading inventory: assessing students reading and thinking. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Johns, J. L. (2001). Basic reading inventory: Pre-primer through grade twelve and early literacy assessments (Eighth Edition). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt. MacGinitie, W. H. & MacGinitie, R. K. (1989). Gates MacGinitie Reading tests (1989). Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Publishing. Kim, K-J. (n.d.). Comp. Reading comprehension instructional strategies elementary level. ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading. English and Communication. Books Block, C. C., & Pressley, M. (Editors). (2002). Comprehension instruction: researchbased best practices. New York, NY: The Guildford Press. Daly, J., Chafouleas, S., & Skinner, C. H. (2005). Reading comprehension, Interventions for reading problems: designing and evaluating effective strategies. New York, NY: The Guildford Press. Dole, J. A. Explicit and implicit instruction in comprehension. In Taylor, B.M., Graves, M.F., & Van Den Brock, P. (Eds.) (2000). Reading for meaning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Fogarty, R. (1994). The mindful school: How to teach for metacognitive reflection. Palatine, IL: IRI/ Skylight. Fountas, I. C. & Pinnell, G. S. (1996). Guided reading: good first teaching for all children. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Fredericks, A. D. (2001). Guided reading in grades 3-6: 300+ guided reading strategies, activities, and lesson plans for reading success. Austin, TX: Harcourt Achieve. Haack, P. (1999). Guided reading to help your students become better readers (Grades 3-6). Bellevue, WA: Bureau of Education & Research. Herrell, A. L., & Jordan, M. (2006). Inferences, 50 strategies for improving vocabulary, comprehension, and fluency: an active learning approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Jamison Rog, L (2003). Guided reading basics: Organizing, managing, and implementing a balanced literacy program in K-3. Markham, ON: Pembroke Publishers.
31
McLaughlin, M. & Allen, M. B. (2002). Guided comprehension: A teaching model for grades 3-8. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Miller, D. (2002). Inferring, Reading with meaning: Teaching comprehension in the primary grades. Portland, ME: Stenhouse. Patterson, L., Santa, C. M., Short, K. G., & Smith, K. (1993). Teachers are researchers: reflection and action. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Reithaug, D. (2002). Orchestrating success in reading. West Vancouver, BC: Stirling Head Enterprises. Reutzel, D. R., & Cooter, R. B. (2004). Improving reading comprehension, Teaching children to read: putting the pieces together. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Robb, L. (2000). Teaching reading in middle school: a strategic approach to teaching reading that improves comprehension and thinking. New York, NY: Scholastic. Saunders-Smith, G. (2003). The ultimate guided reading how-to book: building literacy through small-group instruction. Tuscon, Arizona: Zephyr. Tankersley, K. (2005). Comprehension and Higher-order thinking, Literacy strategies for grades 4-12: reinforcing the threads of reading. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Widmer, K., & Buxton, S. (2004). Workshops that work! 30 days of mini-lessons that help launch and establish all-important routines for an effective reading and writing workshop. New York, NY: Scholastic. Zimmerman, S., & Hutchins, C. (2003). Weaving sense into words: key 4: drawing inferences, Keys to comprehension: how to help your kids read it and get it! New York, NY: Three Rivers. Curriculum Guide Saskatchewan Education. (January 2002). English language arts: a curriculum guide for the elementary level (K-5). Regina, SK: Saskatchewan Education. Applegate, M. D., Quinn K. B., & Applegate, A. J. (2002). Levels of thinking required by comprehension questions in informal inventories: Informal reading inventories may not be the tool of assessing higher level thinking skills. The reading teacher, 56 (2), 174-181. Bird, M.D. (1989). Helping students think and read more critically. Journal of Reading, 32 (8), 743-745. Blevins, W. Strategies for struggling readers: Making predictions. Instructor. (1990).108 n2 (September1998): 49 (1). Thomson Gale National Library Week Trial. 22 April 2006. Block, C. C. (1993). Strategy instruction in a literature-based reading program. The elementary school journal, 94 (2), 139-151. Callison, D. (1998). Critical thinking. School libraries media activities monthly, 15 (3), 40-42.
32
Journal Articles
Ketch, A. (2005). Conversation the comprehension connection. Reading teacher, 59 (1), 8-13. Pitts, E. T. (1991). But teacher! You can teach Johnny to read. Reading Improvement, 28 (4), 283-286. Pressley, M., Johnson, C. J., Symons, S., McGoldrick, J. A., & Kurita, J. A. (1989). Strategies that improve childrens memory and comprehension of text. The School elementary journal, 90 (1), 3-32. Primeaux, J. (2000). Shifting perspectives on struggling readers. Language arts, 77 (6), 537-542. Novels Babbitt, N. (1975) Tuck everlasting. Toronto, ON: Collins. Downie, M.A. & Downie, J. (1984). Allisons ghost. Scarborough, ON: Nelson Canada. Gardiner, J. R. (1980). Stone fox. New York, NY: Harper Trophy. Hunter, M. (1975). A stranger came ashore. New York, NY: Harper Trophy. Mowat, F. (1961). Owls in the family. Toronto, ON: McClelland & Stewart. Salata, E. (1984). Mice at centre ice. Scarborough, ON: Nelson Canada. Research Reports
2005 AFL reading assessment: Holy Family RCSSD 140-Grade Five Report.
Anderson, T., OLeary, D., Schuler, K. & Wright, L. (2002). Increasing reading comprehension through the use of guided reading. Master of Arts Action Research Project. Chicago, IL: Saint Xavier University & Sky Light. Fabrikant, W., Siekierski, N. & Williams, C. (1999). Improving students inferential and literal reading comprehension. Masters Action Research Project. Chicago, IL: Saint Xavier University and IRI/Skylight.
Teaching Materials
Billings, H. & Billings, M. (1999). Heroes: 21 true stories of courage and honor with exercises for developing reading comprehension and critical thinking skills. Lincolnwood, IL: Jamestown Publishers. Jamestown Publishers. Carratello, J. (1984). Literature and critical thinking: book 1. Huntington Beach, CA: Teacher Created Materials. Hoogeboom, S. & Goodnow, J. (1987). The problem solver 3: activities for learning problem-solving strategies: Mountain View, CA: Creative Publications. Solski, R. (2000). Lest we forget, grades 4-6: Napanee, ON: S & S Learning Materials
Video
Hoyt, L. & Forman, K. (2002). Instructional strategies for guided reading that enhance students reading comprehension grades 3-6: video training program. Bellevue, WA: Bureau of Education & Research.
33
Appendix 1: Parent Letter

September 12, 2006 Dear Parents/Guardians: This letter is to let you know about an exciting project we are involved in during the 2006/2007 school year. Four teachers at St. Olivier School are teaming up to do an action research project. The project is called, Guided Reading Strategies to Improve Students Critical Thinking Skills in Grades Three, Four and Five. The project is sponsored by the Dr. Stirling McDowell Foundation for Research into Teaching. A grant of several thousand dollars has been received to fund the project. The purpose is to identify the best Guided Reading strategies to improve student learning in a variety of subject areas. Guided Reading involves direct instruction on specific reading strategies. The project will focus on higher level thinking skills including making inferences or reading between the lines. Teachers will study Reading methods and strategies by reading articles and books, watching training videos, and by visiting other classrooms where teachers use Guided Reading to enhance critical thinking skills. Students reading levels will be measured; strategies taught; and student and teacher surveys used to measure growth in students critical thinking skills. Data will be compiled, evaluated and the results shared. The results will be published by the McDowell Foundation. All students in Grade Three, Four and Five will be participating. A parental permission form is attached that explains how the collected data will be used. We look forward to working closely with you this year to improve student learning. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact your childs teacher. Sincerely, Mrs. Olson Mrs. Larsen Mrs. Bolton Mrs. Verhelst
34
Appendix 2: Release Form

Release Form for Guided Reading Strategies to Improve Students Critical Thinking Skills in Grades Three, Four and Five
I hereby authorize St. Olivier School to use the following with my permission: A photograph of my child A videotape with my child A quote from me from the Parent Questionnaire
K K K
Yes Yes Yes
K No K No K No
I consent that these items will be used in the following: in a PowerPoint presentation in publications about the Guided Reading project
K K
Yes Yes
K No K No
I understand that names of all students and parents participating in the project will be kept confidential.
Name _____________________________________________________________
Address ___________________________________________________________
Phone ________ - ____________ Signature ____________________________
35
Appendix 3: Sentence Stems for Before, During and After Reading

BEFORE READING
I wonder if I already know that This reminds me of This relates to Because of the title I think The title of this text makes me think of I want to questions answer these
DURING READING
The message is The big idea is The author believes The authors view of the world is An important key word in this passage is The idea of this sentence is The purpose of this text is to The idea that Im getting is I experienced this once when If, then I need to listen again to the part where I need to skim this part to learn I got lost because This reminds me of I can relate to this because I see why I bet I wonder My thinking changed when I heard, saw, read Based on the clues in this text, I think the character felt In my mind I see, hear, smell, taste, feel The important ideas in what I hear, read and view are I can picture If this were a movie
AFTER READING
My first reaction was What I learned was I learned This text was about The overall message was The main idea is The most important message is So the point is I thought I felt This could be more effective if I do not like because I would add or delete This is important and relevant because I enjoyed I really like This relates to This reminds me of I can also see how A question that I have is I wonder if I want to know more about I still wonder
I think that I will learn I want to know I want to know if Because of the text, I think Because of the pictures, I think I think the author will say
36
Appendix 4: Student Work Samples

A) IMAGERY WITH
OWLS IN THE FAMILY, GRADE 3
ST. OLIVER SCHOOL
37

B) I WONDER I THINK
Examples of I wonder what happens when they get caught, how are they going to get the Cheddar Cup, where its at, who wins, if they go on a holiday, how many goals they will get, if theyre good at playing hockey, if the Big M. will come back, if the Rink Rats are going to give up, what the end of the story is going to be about, how they are going to get rid of the guards, why is it called, Trapped? if they live in a house, if Big Boris will cheat again, and how theyll get the cup.
MICE AT CENTRE ICE, GRADE 4
Examples of I think its about hockey and the Cheddar Cup, they are going to have a hockey game, the mice will win, they are smart, the mice are going to visit the Big M., the Rink Rats are going to lose!!!, they are trying very hard, they are going to feed the guards, its good so far, it is interesting, it is a very smart idea, Big Boris will quit for a while, and this book is funny.
Grade Four St. Olivier School November/December 2006
38

C)
BEFORE-, DURINGLEGENDS, GRADE 4
AND
AFTER-READING ACTIVITIES USING
39

D)
STUDENT SURVEY RESULTS FROM FANTASY UNIT, GRADE 5
1. Did you like the Fantasy Literature Circle unit? Yes (11) a) Why? I like being in groups and the book and the activities. I got to read a good book with friends and we got to share opinions. I got to work in a group and I got to tell what I predicted and how I think the story is going to end. It was fun working in groups and answering some of the questions. We got to work in groups and the book was an adventure. It took me to a different place. It was about a ghost and I think ghosts are cool. It was fun because we were in groups and I liked doing the projects. I like fantasy stuff. b) Why not? The part I didnt like was the part where we had to answer the questions and do the summary. 2. Did you like using the Before, During and After cards for our reading assignments? Yes (4) a) Why? I got to hear what everybody else predicts and I got to tell what I predicted. They gave a good picture of what might happen in the book. You got to share your answer with the class. I improved on answering questions. It helps you think and listen a little better. b) Why not? I wasnt really good at it and maybe I could of tried harder. Sometimes I didnt know what to say. Some of the questions I didnt get. They kinda confused me. I cant answer some of them. I wanted to keep on reading and not stop. It didnt help. Okay (20) Kind of (1) Not really (4) No (1) A little bit (1) Kind of (1)
40
3. Did writing or drawing in your A. R. duotang help you to understand and to remember what you read better? Yes (6) a) Why? Its a really handy thing. I like to remember things by pictures. It made me remember because I wrote it down. But we didnt get enough time to fill them out. Because some of the stuff I didnt get. Before you take a test you can look at it and see what you read. Its kind of like studying for your A. R. test. Some of the stuff I didnt get. It did help me understand and remember the book. It was mostly just fun to keep track of the stories. A little bit (1) Not really (4).
b) Why not? I just know the answers (I do not know why). There are hard words and I read slower than everyone else. Usually I can remember what I read the last time so I didnt really need it. It just stopped us from reading. I already picture it in my head and make predictions in my head. All it did was remind me of what happened in the chapters.
4. Are you a good reader? Yes (8) a) Why? My Star test says I can read up to 12.9 - 13.0 books. Ive been reading novels since I was in Grade 1 and I love to read. It is just I dont have the time to and reading isnt my favorite unless it is a good book that I enjoy. I think Im a decent reader but should read more at home and school. Im always challenging myself to read in less time. People listen to me and tell me Im good, I just need to read more. Harry Potter is not hard for me but its just long! I rarely make mistakes. I guess I was born with it. b) Why not? Sometimes it hurts my eyes. I dont have 50 points (on A. R.). I havent reached my 25 points yet. Sometimes (1) Okay (1) Not really (1) No (2)
41
Appendix 5: Guided Reading Evaluation Checklist

Students Name: ________________________________ Grade: ____ EX VG K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K G K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K
COMPREHENSION SKILLS
makes predictions matches story vocabulary with definitions compares characters makes inferences about a character relates stories to his/her own experience identifies the authors message identifies story problem and solution sequences story events
K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K
ORAL READING SKILLS

reads with expression reads fluently
WRITING SKILLS
uses graphic organizers (Venn diagram, & charts) writes sentences with correct mechanics creates a well-written paragraph interprets vocabulary by writing words in context uses jot notes to brainstorm ideas creates chapter titles writes questions after reading uses correct spelling works neatly so writing is legible corrects work, after being edited
SPEAKING SKILLS
speaks clearly expresses his/her ideas retells stories
LISTENING SKILLS
follows directions listens carefully to others opinions
WORK HABITS
cooperates with other group members participates voluntarily in discussions works well independently completes work on time Comments:
Date:
42
43
44
2317 Arlington Avenue Saskatoon SK Canada S7J 2H8 Phone: 306-373-1660 Toll Free: 1-800-667-7762 Fax: 306-374-1122 E-mail: mcdowell@stf.sk.ca www.mcdowellfoundation.ca

161 Guided Reading Strategies

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

161 Guided Reading Strategies

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

TEACHING

Jocelyn Olson, Lori Larsen, Lorrie Bolton, Sherrill Verhelst

Project #161 July 2007

.12 .12 .13 .13 .19 .20

.21 .22 .25 .25 .25

.34 .35 .36 .37 .37 .38

. .39 . .40 . .42

THE LEARNING COMMUNITY

FIGURE 1. SCHOOL LOGO.

RESEARCH AT THE DIVISION LEVEL

GATHERING TEACHER SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT

PURPOSE AND RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

COMMON THEMES IN THE LITERATURE

THE TEACHING APPROACH

Figure 2. Visualizing poster used by the researchers.

THE TEACHING APPROACH

Students reading the novel, Stone Fox, Grade 4.

Computer assessment of Grade 4 students with Literacy quizzes.

THE STUDENT SERVICES TEACHERS APPROACH IN GRADE FOUR

Students involved in a small Guided Reading group on Native legends, Grade 4.

HOW WOULD STUDENTS REACT TO BEING GROUPED ACCORDING TO ABILITY?

THE TEACHING APPROACH

ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION

INFORMAL READING INVENTORY RESULTS

Most important, did the students improve their inferencing skills?

STUDENT SURVEY RESULTS FROM GRADE FIVE FANTASY UNIT

LITERACY SKILLS QUIZ

Appendix 1: Parent Letter

Appendix 2: Release Form

Yes Yes Yes

Phone ________ - ____________ Signature ____________________________

Appendix 3: Sentence Stems for Before, During and After Reading

Appendix 4: Student Work Samples

OWLS IN THE FAMILY, GRADE 3

ST. OLIVER SCHOOL

Appendix 4: Student Work Samples

MICE AT CENTRE ICE, GRADE 4

Grade Four St. Olivier School November/December 2006

Appendix 4: Student Work Samples

BEFORE-, DURINGLEGENDS, GRADE 4

AFTER-READING ACTIVITIES USING

Appendix 4: Student Work Samples

STUDENT SURVEY RESULTS FROM FANTASY UNIT, GRADE 5

Appendix 5: Guided Reading Evaluation Checklist

ORAL READING SKILLS

Вам также может понравиться

Phone - Signature ____________________