Influence of Reading-Comprehension Strategy Information on Children's Achievement Outcomes

Abstract

Two experiments investigated the effects of sources of strategy information on children's acquisition and transfer of reading outcomes and strategy use. Children with reading-skill deficiencies received comprehension instruction on main ideas. In Experiment 1, some students were taught a comprehension strategy, while others received strategy instruction and strategy-value feedback linking strategy use with improved performance; controls received comprehension instruction without the strategy. In Experiment 2, children were taught the comprehension strategy or received instruction without strategy training; they were then given comprehension instruction on details. Some children were taught how to modify the strategy; others did not employ the strategy on details. Children who received strategy-value feedback (Experiment 1) and strategy-modification instruction (Experiment 2) demonstrated the highest self-efficacy, skill, strategy use, and transfer. These results support the idea that remedial readers benefit from information about strategy usefulness.

The effectiveness of verbal self‐guidance as a transfer of training intervention: its impact on presentation performance, self efficacy and anxiety

“…Similarly, Schunk and Rice found that VSG training improved children's listening (Schunk & Rice, 1984) and reading comprehension skills (Schunk & Rice, 1985). These latter researchers also found that VSG increased self-efficacy concerning these skills.…”

Using strategy instruction and confidence judgments to improve metacognitive monitoring

“…Perhaps the lack of significance relates to the fact that, in the present study, reading comprehension was measured using a standardized reading test. Many prior studies that have reported significant increases in reading comprehension have used teacher or researcher created reading tests instead of standardized reading tests (Graves 1986;Schunk andRice 1992, Malone andMastropieri 1992). Another likely possibility and limitation of the study is that the duration of the intervention was not long enough to show such effects.…”

“…The regulation dimension of metacognition is generally viewed as effortful, motivated control of one's cognition, memory, or learning that can be subdivided into at least three different components: planning, monitoring, and evaluation (Schraw and Moshman 1995). A great deal of research in the area of reading comprehension suggests that the ability to regulate performance can be enhanced via instruction (Schraw 1998;Collins et al 2005;Schunk and Rice 1992;Malone and Mastropieri 1992;Van Keer and Verhaeghe 2005;Casteel et al 2000). Pressley and Harris (1990) reported that strategies such as summarization, imagery, story grammar, prior knowledge activation, self-questioning, and question-answering have been experimentally evaluated and have been shown to improve memory and comprehension.…”

Working Smarter, Not Harder: Reaching the Tough to Teach

“…Students at risk for school failure benefit from explicit instruction designed to link prior knowledge with new content (Weisberg 1988;Coyne et al 2007), make connections between skills and concepts within and among content areas (Chan, Cole, and Morris 1990;Schunk and Rice 1992;Simmonds 1990;Deshler and Schumaker 2006), and engage in activities that compensate for insufficient prior experiences (Weisberg 1988;Deshler and Schumaker 2006;Coyne et al 2007). …”