Reconnecting Strategy Instruction With Its Theoretical Roots

Palincsar, Annemarie Sullivan; Schutz, Kristine M.

doi:10.1080/00405841.2011.558432

Cited by 20 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Greater academic talk in CSR lessons—more specifically, talk about the content of what students were reading—suggests that the collaborative structure of CSR in conjunction with the availability of strategies allowed teachers and students to shift their discourse toward knowledge building. Strategies became integral tools within the discussion, directing both teachers and students to the text for understanding (Palincsar & Schutz, ). Further, for teachers like Matt, in his second year of teaching, and for others who struggled to maintain a productive use of class time, CSR appeared to provide structure and routines that facilitated more time spent engaged in academic tasks and talk.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, mediational tools have the potential to both constrain and facilitate (Gee, ). Yet, the theoretical foundation of strategy instruction promotes the use and flexible application of strategies to facilitate meaning construction for the purpose of knowledge building over merely acquiring knowledge of the strategies (Brown & Dewitz, ; Palincsar & Schutz, ).…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the ideal, strategy users are agentic and tenaciously working; however, in practice, being strategic often requires a framework to guide the process. Effective strategy use is not rote or random, but applied judiciously across contexts to serve the end goal of knowledge building (Palincsar & Schutz, ). Thus, it is essential to consider the ways in which strategy instruction may and may not be useful and how application is enacted in practice.…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Strategy Instruction Shifts Teacher and Student Interactions During Text‐Based Discussions

Boardman

Boelé

Klingner

2017

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TThis study examined how teacher and student interactions were influenced by a multistrategy reading model, Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR), where students learn to apply before-, during-, and after-reading strategies in small cooperative learning groups. Five middle school English language arts teachers and their students (N = 184) participated as part of a two-year efficacy trial of CSR. Discourse analysis was used to compare the differences in teacher-student talk when the teacher and the text remained the same across typical instruction and CSR lessons. Results indicated that strategybased collaborative practices offered opportunities for discourse patterns that were not observed in typical lessons. Overall, a higher proportion of talk in CSR lessons focused on discussing the text when compared with lessons without CSR. Features of student-teacher interactions during strategy-based instruction included more student and teacher academic talk turns, a higher ratio of student talk to teacher talk, longer sequences of student-student exploratory talk, less teacher talk focused on giving information, and the use of reading strategies to facilitate discussion about text content. Findings suggest that strategy instruction models can increase the dialogic nature of classrooms by resituating the location of knowledge as distributed among students, with talk and strategies as tools to improve comprehension.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Strategy Instruction Shifts Teacher and Student Interactions During Text‐Based Discussions

Boardman

Boelé

Klingner

2017

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thereby, according to McKeown et al (2009) and Shanahan (2014), it is not a question of whether or not to teach reading comprehension strategies. Instead, depending on the text and the reader's needs, the reading strategies should be carefully chosen if the text is complex for the students to grasp (Palinscar & Schutz, 2011). However, according to Siebert and Draper (2008), previous content-area literacy instructions tend to mostly focus on activities, text and genres that deemphasize and misrepresent mathematics, such as historical and popular texts involving little mathematical content and few involve mathematical texts which differs from these texts.…”

Section: Teaching Comprehension Strategies To Support Students' Reasomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This can lead to a deeper kind of reading involving the analysis and critical thinking of the text itself (Keene & Zimmermann, 2003), which is essential in the process of reasoning (Palinscar & Brown, 1984). Palinscar and Schutz (2011) point out that the goal of direct instruction in reading comprehension is mainly to develop the students' skills to become more effective problem solvers when reading texts. Another important aspect concerning teaching about reading comprehension strategies involves connecting the strategies to the content provided in the text (Palinscar & Schultz, 2011).…”

Section: Teaching Comprehension Strategies To Support Students' Reasomentioning

confidence: 99%

Supporting mathematical reasoning through reading and writing in mathematics : making the implicit explicit

Segerby¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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

Davis

2013

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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...

show abstract

Reconnecting Strategy Instruction With Its Theoretical Roots

Cited by 20 publications

References 9 publications

Strategy Instruction Shifts Teacher and Student Interactions During Text‐Based Discussions

Strategy Instruction Shifts Teacher and Student Interactions During Text‐Based Discussions

Supporting mathematical reasoning through reading and writing in mathematics : making the implicit explicit

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About