Multiple comprehension strategies instruction in the intermediate grades: three remarks about content and pedagogy in the intervention literature

Abstract

This conceptual article provides an overview and critique of the major versions of multiple comprehension strategies instruction (MCSI) that have been studied since 1980. The author argues that MCSI is a multifaceted instructional approach that takes on many different forms in the research literature. Even intervention studies that ostensibly examine the same brand of MCSI can have drastic variability in content and pedagogy. The author claims that independent and self-regulated reading practices are underemphasized in this literature despite strong conceptual roots in self-regulation and metacognitive learning theory. Finally, the author concludes that many MCSI studies present a proceduralized view of strategic reading, characterized by repeated use of common strategies taught to students in a prescribed sequence. While previous reviews and critiques of the reading comprehension literature have focused on the effectiveness of MCSI and the way it has been inadequately translated into typical practice, this article comments on the way MCSI is carried out in the intervention literature itself with the goal of understanding the pedagogical features that are prioritized by MCSI researchers. The interpretive remarks in this article provide directions for future work on reading comprehension instruction. IntroductionMultiple comprehension strategies instruction (MCSI) is the term used in this article to refer to the wide body of instructional approaches for teaching upper elementary and middle school students to orchestrate two or more comprehension strategies to actively construct meaning from text. Multiple strategies approaches have been studied extensively in numerous countries during the past 30 years (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHD], 2000), beginning with Palincsar and Brown's (1984) influential Reciprocal Teaching approach and Paris et al. 's (1984) Informed Strategies for Learning curriculum. The strategies that often get included in these approaches include: comprehension monitoring, making predictions, attending to main ideas, and making connections across texts and experiences, to name a few.The strategies that are taught in MCSI are used consciously and volitionally during reading (Alexander et al., 1998;Afflerbach et al., 2008;Afflerbach & Cho, 2009) Review of Education Vol. 1, No. 2, June 2013, pp. 194-224 DOI: 10.1002 and enhancing their textual interaction. Strategies serve a metacognitive purpose by helping a reader notice when a comprehension breakdown occurs and to set into motion a strategic plan for resolving the problem (Wagoner, 1983;Palincsar & Brown, 1984). For example, a reader might put her or himself in a 'watcher' state and carefully look for inconsistencies in the meaning that is drawn from the text (Bereiter & Bird, 1985). Once a comprehension breakdown has been identified, one or more cognitive strategies can deployed to serve a repair-or fix-up-role (Duffy & Roehler, 1987; Casteel et al., 2000). Strategy use does not always presuppose a breakdown in...

Fostering Self‐Regulation of Students with Learning Disabilities: Insights from 30 Years of Reading Comprehension Intervention Research

“…The complexity of the reading comprehension process is mirrored in the complexity of interventions designed to improve it. The variability of essential ingredients utilized within comprehension strategy interventions was documented in a recent review of research with middle school learners (Davis, ). This variability is reflected in the current review as well, even though the inclusion criteria are narrower both by population (students with LD) and by scope of strategies (interventions that allowed an opportunity for independent self‐regulation by students).…”

Text Comprehension and Study Method Acquisition for Students with Specific Learning Disorder: Development and First Application of the SUST Program

“…Reciprocal teaching is a multiple strategy (Davis, 2013) that actively engages the teacher and the student in a co-construction of meaning of the text.…”

A dialogic account of reader–text interactions

“…The literature is replete with lists of preferred strategies (Davis, 2013;Block and Duffy, 2008;McNamara et al, 2007). Strategies that have garnered favor in the literature include those that facilitate identifying and learning information, monitoring comprehension and evaluating (Afflerbach and Cho, 2009).…”