The Road Not Yet Taken: A Transactional Strategies Approach to Comprehension InstructionAuthor(s): Rachel BrownSource: The Reading Teacher, Vol. 61, No. 7 (Apr., 2008), pp. 538-547Published by: International Reading AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20204627Accessed: 03/11/2009 13:43
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ira.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
International Reading Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TheReading Teacher.
http://www.jstor.org
The Road Not Yet Taken: A
Transactional Strategies Approach // to
Comprehension Instruction
X^
^\^^ Rachel Brown <^^^^
Transactional strategies instruction can
improve student comprehension, and it
can be implemented across various
reading events in the school day and
applied to different text types.
L
iz Savoca (all names are pseudonyms) started
her comprehension lesson by addressing her stu
dents in the following way:
Well, today's reading group is almost at the end of the
second grade. And we have spent the whole year learn
ing so much about being good readers, and you have be come so much better readers than you were at the
beginning of second grade?it's incredible. And I think
the reason why you've become such good readers is be
cause of what you've learned this year. Let's just sum
marize what we've learned about being a good reader
this year, an expert reader?what you learned that you
know now [that] you didn't know before the second
grade. Let's talk.
Her students jumped in, describing the compre
hension strategies they practiced all year. In quick suc
cession, they called out asking questions, predicting,
making connections to prior knowledge, summariz
ing, visualizing, and using "fix-it" strategies for figuring out unknown words and for clarifying confusions.
After this introduction, Liz remarked that the focal
strategy for that day's lesson was visualizing, or making mental images, of the text's content. She read the first
page from a text called Mushroom in the Rain (Ginsburg,
1991). In this story, creatures of increasing size crowd
under an expanding mushroom during a storm.
After reading a page, Liz described how she pic
tured a little ant seeking shelter from the rain. Without
prompting, Max volunteered a text-to-text connection
to The Mitten (Brett, 1989), another story read earlier
that year: "I have a prediction, urn, this is gonna be
like, urn, like The Mitten one, like urn, these urn, all
these insects are gonna try to come in [the mush
room] ." Liz replied, "You think so? What makes you think that?" Max, alluding to a picture clue, answered,
"Well I see another insect."
"You made that connection? Well, we'll see if
you're right," said Liz, who took this opportunity to
highlight for others how Max coordinated making con
nections, using picture clues, and predicting while
reading. In the process, the students learned not only from their teacher but also from their deep-thinking
and strategy-using peer. At this point, Liz shifted responsibility for modeling
and enacting strategies to her students, "Do you want
to take charge now?" The students assumed control,
alternating reading with discussion. During discussion,
students referred to the various strategies they drew
upon when constructing and defending interpreta tions. For the most part, student voices dominated the
conversation; however, when needed, Liz intervened
to cue strategy use.
When the group finished, they debriefed their use
of strategies. Liz concluded the lesson by praising students:
Well, what I'm so impressed with is the fact [that] I heard some strategies that you used that I didn't help you
[with]. In the beginning of second grade I had to say, "OK, today we're all going to make predictions; today
we're all going to summarize; today we're all going to
try to visualize...." Do you remember when I, we, prac
ticed, practiced, and practiced? And I don't have to do
that anymore because now you're the bosses of your
reading. You choose the strategies that help you under stand. And I am very proud of your thinking. I hope you carry all these strategies in your strategy bag, which is
The Reading Teacher, ?7(7), pp. 538-547 ? 2008 International Reading Association
538 DOM0.1598/RT.61.7.3 ISSN: 0034-0561 print /1936-2714 online
sort of imaginary, isn't it? I hope you carry them to third
grade, and to fourth grade, and to fifth grade, and the rest of your life because they'll always help you. They help me. And if they help me, and I'm a grown-up, they
certainly are gonna help you every step along the way.
As I viewed this reading event, I thought, "Now
here is a classroom that links reading and thinking." At
the same time, I noted four essential components of
instruction: (1) the teaching of comprehension strate
gies, (2) the shifting of strategy use from teacher to stu
dent, (3) the valuing of group learning, and (4) the
lively sharing of ideas.
What I observed was transactional strategies instruc
tion (TSI), an instructional approach that forefronts the
teaching of a small set of research-based strategies with
in the context of collaborative text discussions.
Responsibility for using strategies to construct meaning is shared among all group members. It is a flexible
framework; TSI can be introduced in whole-class, small
group, or one-on-one formats and can be practiced in
teacher-guided or student-managed settings. TSI is based on studies that explored the reading
behaviors of proficient readers. In investigations span
ning several decades, researchers studied skilled read
ing to learn more about interpretive thinking and
strategic actions. From this research, two models of ex
pert reading emerged, the Constructively Responsive Reader Model (Pressley & Afflerbach, 1995) and the
Good Strategy User Model (Almasi, 2003). Both theories
depict the knowledge and strategic resources that capa ble readers rely upon when reading. According to these
models, good readers tap their academic and nonacad
emic knowledge, monitor their comprehension (i.e.,
they are metacognitive), and pursue their goals even
when confronted with challenging texts (i.e., they are
motivated). In addition, good readers orchestrate their
use of a small set of research-based strategies:
Good readers make connections and inferences based
on background knowledge. Relating information in the text to personal experiences and to knowledge
about the world and other texts helps readers better
understand what they are reading. Making connec
tions helps because comprehension is all about asso
ciating information on the page with what is stored in one's head.
Good readers predict what happens next in a text.
Making predictions gives the reader a goal for read
ing (i.e., to locate information that verifies the predic
tion) and thus helps the reader stay actively involved
during reading.
Good readers visualize text content. Making mental
images of descriptive passages helps readers connect
the words on the page to their prior knowledge. This
process helps them better understand what they read because they use their prior knowledge to flesh out de tails not provided by the author.
Good readers self-question when confused or curious
about content. Asking questions during reading helps readers to monitor their comprehension. In the
process, they think about other strategies they could use to answer their questions. Asking questions when
curious helps readers attend to the text and stay
motivated?and motivated readers persist with read
ing even when faced with comprehension barriers.
Good readers construct "gist" statements ox summarize
important information, often using their knowledge
of various text structures to construct summaries.
Narrative structures, such as story grammars, or expos
itory text structures, such as comparison-contrast or
cause-effect, signal the most important ideas in a text.
Readers can use these structures to generate
summaries.
Good readers enact problem-solving and clarifying
(i.e., fix-it) strategies. They use strategies such as skip
ping, guessing, sounding out, using context or picture
clues, or rereading when they come across unknown
words or confusing passages. These strategies let read
ers resolve problems on their own rather than requir
ing the assistance of others.
TSI, which is grounded in these theories, prepares
students to become active, independent readers, sim
ilar to the ones described previously. Although teach
ers sometimes introduce the strategies one by one,
students quickly learn to coordinate their use?just as good readers do.
Strategies instruction occurs within the context of
real reading events. That is, strategies are not taught or
practiced in isolation, but rather they are blended into
meaning-oriented text discussions. Although a teacher
initially contributes more than students do to these
discussions?explaining and demonstrating strategic
reasoning?he or she transfers responsibility for strate
gy use as quickly as possible to students. This process
of incrementally shifting control of strategic thinking from teachers to students is known as the Gradual
Release of Responsibility Model (for more informa
tion, see Duke & Pearson, 2002). As the teacher phas es out responsibility, students begin to model and
scaffold effective use of strategies for one another. Yet
even with substantial support, it takes years for
The Road Not Yet Taken: A Transactional Strategies Approach to Comprehension Instruction 539
students to become strategic, motivated, metacogni
tive, and knowledge-exploiting readers.
Several research studies have examined TSI's ben
efits for students. In one yearlong study, I compared the beliefs and instructional practices of two groups of
teachers?one that taught TSI and the other that fur
nished high-quality but conventional reading instruc
tion (Brown, Pressley, Van Meter, & Schuder, 1996). The vignette presented at the beginning of this article
features one of the TSI participants. In the yearlong study, I explored how instruction
al differences between the two groups affected stu
dents' learning and performance. At the beginning and end of the academic year, students completed three assessments: the Stanford Achievement Test, a
retelling task, and a student interview. Students also
participated in a think-aloud task in the late spring. The results showed that TSI students outperformed their non-TSI counterparts in terms of standardized
test performance, interpretive abilities, and knowl
edge and use of strategies. Other studies also indicated advantages for TSI stu
dents. In research on adolescents in grades 6-11, low
achieving students who received TSI instruction made
greater gains on the comprehension subtest of the
Stanford Achievement Test than students in classes in
which no TSI was present (Anderson, 1992). Also,
Collins (1991) found that fifth and sixth graders pro
vided with three days a week of comprehension strate
gies instruction in one semester showed significantly more improvement from pre- to posttesting on a stan
dardized comprehension test than students not receiv
ing such instruction.
A more recent study compared second-grade stu
dents who learned to use strategies as a coordinated
set (i.e., the TSI group) with students who learned the
same strategies one at a time (Reutzel, Smith, & Fawson,
2005). While TSI and non-TSI students did not differ on
standardized reading, motivation, or main-idea meas
ures, the TSI students recalled and retained more infor
mation when reading science texts.
Despite its potential for enhancing comprehension with elementary and high school students, TSI is some
times overlooked in favor of other comprehension
fostering approaches. For example, in a recent article
on comprehension instructional frameworks, TSI did
not make the list (Liang & Dole, 2006). What is more
disconcerting is that TSI was named less often by teach
ers as a comprehension framework that they enacted
with primary-level students (Dougherty Stahl, 2004).
What might account for this situation? For one
thing, teacher educators may be unfamiliar with TSI or
have inadequate time to teach an approach to pre service students that combines four different compo nents (e.g., comprehension strategies use, gradual release of responsibility, collaborative learning, and
interpretive discussion; see Figure 1). Conceivably, the approach may be daunting for practicing teach
ers who juggle multiple, competing demands (Hilden & Pressley, 2007). Or perhaps practicing teachers may lack sufficient support to figure out how to connect
TSI to ongoing instruction.
Thus, this article has two purposes. First, I describe
what TSI instruction entails by presenting the results
from a secondary data analysis of the yearlong study that I conducted with TSI and non-TSI teachers.
Second, I use that information to explain how both
preservice and practicing teachers can begin the
process of teaching TSI.
A Closer Look at TSI Teachers1 Instructional Practices
So what exactly do TSI teachers do? What accounts
for the improved gains experienced by their students?
To shed light on the approach, I revisited the yearlong
study of TSI (Brown et al., 1996) that compared teach
ing practices and their impact on students' learning and performance.
The Participants Participating in the study were 10 teachers?5 in the
TSI group and 5 in the non-TSI group. All teachers
were experienced and worked in different schools in
the same school district. At the start of the study, the
5 TSI teachers had been teaching the approach for a
minimum of two to a maximum of five years. The non
TSI teachers, who were nominated as effective teach
ers by district personnel, did not include explicit
strategies instruction in their teaching. The participating students were six low-achieving,
second graders in each class. All students spoke
English as their first language. All teachers met regular
ly with these and their other students in homoge neous, guided reading groups.
The Context In one part of the yearlong study, all teachers were
videotaped teaching the same two stories in the sec
540 The Reading Teacher Vol. 61, No. 7 April 2008
Figure 1
Dimensions of Transactional Strategies Instruction
"Good strategy user" dimension
Teachers explain that good readers are strategy users.
Teachers share their personal experiences with strategy use.
Teachers point out the importance of thinking while reading. Teachers teach students to coordinate their use of several research-based strategies. Teachers may emphasize one strategy in a given lesson, but they still model and review other strategies to demonstrate how good readers coordinate their strategy use.
Teachers emphasize the role of personal choice, effort, and persistence in enacting strategies. Teachers motivate students' strategy use by showing how applying strategies improves comprehension. Teachers highlight the vital role of prior knowledge activation and connection in comprehension. Teachers emphasize how students' knowledge of their strengths and needs as readers can inform the strategic choices they make.
Teachers stress that good readers set goals for reading, monitor their comprehension, use strategies to overcome
difficulties, and evaluate their progress toward goals.
Gradual release of responsibility model dimension Teachers promote independent strategy use by shifting responsibility for using strategies to students as quickly as
they can.
Teachers explain the benefits of strategy use in general and the value of using specific strategies. Teachers describe when (before, during, or after) and where (with fiction or nonfiction texts) to apply strategies. Teachers mentally model (e.g., think-aloud) to make their thinking apparent to students. Teachers explain and model how interpretations are made using comprehension strategies. Teachers assist students by (a) cueing them to choose a strategy that makes sense in the context, (b) clarifying through reexplanations, (c) seizing teachable moments, (d) modeling use of strategies repeatedly, and (f) tailoring instruction and tasks to meet students' needs and understandings.
Teachers provide guided and independent practice so that students learn to use strategies when cued by a diverse array of goals, needs, task demands, and texts.
Collaborative learning dimension Teachers cue students to support their interpretations by asking "What makes you say so?" or requesting them to use strategies to support their claims, which enables less able students to observe the processes of more capable peers.
Teachers and students construct meaning together. Teachers serve as discussion facilitators, not as directors.
Teachers avoid scripted lessons. They establish a priori objectives, identify one or two focal strategies for a given lesson, and prearrange where and when to explain and model them. However, the teacher is flexible in meeting
set goals depending on the needs of students and the flow of the interpretive discussion.
Interpretive discussion dimension Teachers frequently ask "What are you thinking?" and "What are you feeling?" Teachers do not direct students toward one "correct" interpretation. Teachers promote extended dialogues among participants rather than fostering recitation-style interactions.
Teachers prepare students for discussion by explaining, modeling, and establishing guidelines for active, equitable, and considerate participation in interpretive discussions.
Teachers often refrain from adding interpretive responses to minimize the impact of their statements on students'
comments.
Teachers do not say "You're right" or "That's wrong." Instead they restate students' comments to encourage ?
additional responses. ? - .*
ond half of the year. I examined the teaching prac
tices in one of these lessons in detail. I extracted and
transcribed a five-minute segment from the begin
ning, middle, and end of each lesson. I then analyzed
the transcribed segments, recording the frequency
of recurrent teacher actions. The accuracy of this
analysis was later checked, resulting in 88% agree ment between raters.
The Results TSI and non-TSI teachers differed in their teaching prac tices as revealed from analysis of the videotaped
The Road Not Yet Taken: A Transactional Strategies Approach to Comprehension Instruction 541
lessons. A summary of the differences with respect to
the four intersecting dimensions can be found in Table
1.
In terms of the strategies dimension, TSI teachers
differed from non-TSI teachers in their teaching of
comprehension strategies. Practically every TSI
teacher mentioned predicting, making connections to
prior knowledge, summarizing, visualizing, and clari
fying confusions using picture clues. In comparison, the non-TSI teachers focused on teaching prior knowl
edge connections and predicting. TSI and non-TSI teachers differed in the ways they
communicated information to students using the grad ual release of responsibility model. Whereas non-TSI
teachers provided information without describing the
processing or purpose involved, TSI teachers ex
plained strategic processing far more frequently to stu
dents. They also verbalized their thinking and
scaffolded students' thinking considerably more than
their non-TSI counterparts (i.e., only one instance of
either thinking aloud or scaffolding thinking was ob
served). In addition to cuing and coaching, TSI teach
ers elaborated on students' comments, highlighting
strategy use and capitalizing on teachable moments.
In TSI, teachers value collaborative learning and
strategic "transactions" among reading participants. To boost collaborative learning in this study, TSI teach
ers, substantially more than non-TSI teachers, prompt ed students to explain their reasoning during text talk.
When students clarified, extended, or justified their
comments, they drew from personal experience or tex
tual evidence. In the process, they used strategies such
as visualizing, making connections to background
knowledge, and using picture or word clues to support their interpretations. Once students consistently sup
ported their claims, they modeled and reinforced for
one another the kind of strategic discourse good read
ers engage in when talking about texts.
In terms of interpretive discussion, as students col
laborate, group members discuss and negotiate their
interpretations. In TSI classes, teachers have students
think aloud or respond to a text without prompting.
Table 1 A Comparison of Teaching Practices by Group
Code
Strategies: Teachers taught this number of strategies in the videotaped lessons
Explains explicitly: Teacher overtly explained strategic processing or reasoning
Tells: Teacher told information without explaining processing or purpose
Think-alouds: Teacher modeled thinking by verbalizing strategic reasoning Elaborates by explaining: Teacher elaborated by explaining strategic benefits or taking advantage of teachable moments
Seeks extension:
Teacher sought clarification or justification of comment by same or another student
Questions:
Teacher posed initial questions?typically text or reader based
Drills: Teacher drilled for automaticity or checked on knowledge Praises:
Teacher complimented a student's response
Evaluates:
Teacher evaluated accuracy of a student's response
TSI means
5
10
1
4
14
21
9
0
3
5
Non-TSI
means
2
1
18
0
1
14
17
6
11
10
Note. Means are calculated from the raw number of instances observed for each instructional action.
542 The Reading Teacher Vol. 61, No. 7 April 2008
This preference for student initiation was evident in
the study's results. More than TSI teachers, non-TSI
teachers posed initial questions after reading and
drilled students on literal content knowledge. In addi
tion, TSI teachers evaluated and praised students' in
terpretations less often than non-TSI teachers because
they believed that students participated more when
teachers did not interject their own views.
Becoming a TSI Teacher Comprehension instruction, which features as its aim
the development of independent readers, is by defi
nition complex. So, how does a teacher initiate TSI
when faced with such complex demands? My answer
is this: Do not attempt to accomplish everything right from the start. When first learning to teach TSI, teach
ers who participated in the yearlong study incorpo rated aspects from each of the dimensions into
instruction. Once they became comfortable integrat
ing foundational aspects, they "upped the ante" by
adding more elements to the mix.
In the next section, I provide guidelines for devel
oping and practicing teachers as they embark on TSI.
These suggestions are presented in the context of the
four interrelated dimensions of TSI.
The "Good Strategy User" Dimension As you get started, examine your current teaching
practices in relation to the four dimensions presented in Figure 1. Then, following the lead of the TSI teach
ers, try focusing on teaching strategies in some way
every day. When planning lessons, TSI teachers preview their
texts, whether teaching a basal selection to a small
group of students or reading a trade book to an entire
class. These teachers determine in advance which
strategies make sense to emphasize in conjunction with the readings for that week.
For example, when Liz taught Mushroom in the
Rain (Ginsburg, 1991) she chose visualizing because
of the descriptive nature of the text. Because she want
ed to stress points about how good readers use strate
gies, she planned right from the start to reinforce the
notion that good readers intentionally select strategies for particular purposes. As such, she introduced this
idea early in her lesson:
How do you know which one to pull out? How do you know? A carpenter doesn't pull out a hammer when he
wants to screw in a screw. You have to make those deci
sions don't you? Now as expert readers you have to de
cide which strategy to use?which one will work. Do you want to make a prediction at the end of the story neces
sarily? Do you want to use a fix-up strategy if you know all
the words and you understand what the story's about? Do
you want to visualize? If there's a picture right there and,
Gee, that's exactly what you're thinking is happening in
the story, it looks just like what you're imagining, how do you know when to use a connection?
When TSI was first researched, teachers did not
have access to professional texts on TSI or books that
describe the practices of good readers. Luckily, that
situation has changed. If you are interested in TSI, you
might want to read some foundational materials by
yourself or, even better, with others in a study group or
book club. Some great resources to start with include
an historical overview (Pressley et al., 1992) and a
quick description of effective comprehension instruc
tion (Pressley, n.d.). As you experiment with TSI, you also might want
to think more about the nature of good reading. For
example, TSI teachers regularly consider how their pri or knowledge, motivation, metacognition, and strate
gy use come into play while reading. They note how
they apply strategies under diverse conditions; they amass authentic examples for instructional purposes.
Like TSI teachers, you might want to notice and
record instances of your strategic reading to reference
during future instruction.
The Gradual Release of Responsibility Model Dimension
In addition to knowing what good strategy users do, TSI
teachers adopt an instructional framework that gradual
ly moves students from reliance on the teacher to inde
pendence as strategic readers. First of all, TSI teachers
reframe the way they convey information to students.
Instead of simply telling students the name of a strategy and demonstrating its use through a set of fixed proce
dures, TSI teachers explicitly explain the benefits of the
strategy and where and when it can be used.
Very often I hear teachers start their reading les
sons by saying, "Today we will practice how to make
predictions when reading. Vicki, tell me what this sto
ry will be about." In cases like these, the teacher does
not explain any purposes for predicting or reveal the
thinking that underlies the strategy use. In comparison,
The Road Not Yet Taken: A Transactional Strategies Approach to Comprehension Instruction 543
listen to how Liz explicitly explains visualizing in her
lesson:
Do you know what I do when I'm reading? I try, as I'm
reading a novel, to make a picture in my mind of the
events that are taking place. If the story takes place in
the setting of woods, I try to visualize the woods in my brain, and I try to visualize what's happening. It helps
me remember when I want to summarize?when I want
to look back and try to think what's happened so far. I
try to think with my brain but also use my visualizing
strategy to picture, "Oh yes, this is what happened first.
Yes, this is what happened second." That helps me
remember.
Here, Liz explained the purpose for using the visu
alizing strategy, linking it to what she knew about her
self as a good reader. She supplemented her initial,
explicit explanation with a think-aloud; she verbalized
her reasoning so students could "see" how she used
the strategy:
Liz: Well, I know what a clearing is?it's where, in
the woods, where they've taken down a lot of
trees, or it's an open space where there aren't
a lot of tall bushes and trees and things like
that. Well, I guess for an ant, though, that could
be pretty small. I'm visualizing a clearing as a
grown-up, and that would be a big place with
out trees. But I'll bet a clearing for a little tiny ant would be just a place [where] there are
maybe bits of leaves to make shadows, but
maybe just grass, just growing around. And so
he's looking?he's looking for something to act
sort of like a...
Marissa: Cover.
Devon: Umbrella.
Liz: Like an umbrella, like an umbrella, to keep him, to keep him dry until the rain stops.
When TSI teachers introduce a strategy, they take
time to explain and model strategies. The large amount
of teacher talk fades as students demonstrate that they can use the strategy with less support. However, TSI
teachers will return to explaining and modeling when
confusions arise. This kind of responsive teaching rep
resents one way that teachers begin to shift responsi
bility from themselves to their students.
For example, Eric skips over many words when he
reads. The teacher suggests that the group reread the
last page together. A student concurs with this decision
by saying, "[It] doesn't really make sense because he
skipped a few words." The teacher, seizing the mo
ment, elaborates, inserting an explicit explanation:
Well, let's...why don't we...why don't we read it. I think
that is good. I think that's a good idea. I do that. I do that. I go back and reread when I don't understand. That's
what good readers do. Let's go back to the top of the
page then.
An Example of Releasing Responsibility to
Students. Teachers support strategy use not just with
in particular lessons but also across time. What follows
is an example of how one teacher might use the grad ual release of responsibility throughout the week.
On Friday afternoon, the teacher previews the texts
she plans to use the following week. She identifies an
appropriate target strategy and then inserts sticky notes
in the text to remind her of what she plans to say during
explicit explanations and modeling. On Monday, the
teacher explains and models the strategy for students
as planned in a whole-class setting?perhaps during an
interactive read-aloud with a story. As she models, she
sometimes mentions or reviews other strategies, but
she maintains her focus on the target strategy. After modeling her thinking on the first page, she
invites students to try to use the strategy. Each student
who reads aloud takes a first crack at thinking aloud in
response to the text just read. If the student does not
respond after a bit of wait time, she asks, "What are
you thinking?" If the student still has trouble respond
ing, she cues that child to select a strategy that makes
sense to use in that context. Then, other students are
invited to share their thinking. Before the end of the
lesson, the class members discuss how using strategies
supported their comprehension. On Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, the
teacher meets with students in small, guided reading
groups. She starts each day, reviewing the target strat
egy's benefits and modeling a small segment of text.
As soon as possible, she engages students in discus
sions about the text they are reading, cuing them to
use the target and other strategies. When possible, she
catches students in the act of using strategies and
transforms those moments into teaching opportuni ties. Aside from these interjections, she lets students
do most of the talking. She will, however, reexplain and re-model when necessary.
While she meets with one guided reading group, the other students use the time to practice the target
strategy. On the first day, students read in pairs and
discuss the assigned text. Before the end of class, stu
dents record their thinking in reading logs, referencing a concrete example in which they used the focal strat
544 The Reading Teacher Vol. 61, No. 7 April 2008
egy. On the second day, as they read from the same
or another text, they describe three instances when
they used the strategy. On Friday, the entire class reconvenes. The
teacher debriefs regarding students' reading experi ences during that week, specifically addressing the
benefits of using the target strategy. Students talk
about what they learned that week about themselves;
they also share how they used other strategies when
reading on their own. As students exchange ideas,
they refer to their reading logs and sticky notes to help them recall their strategy selections.
The teacher takes notes during the debriefing ses
sion and collects students' sticky notes and logs. From
these materials, she assesses students' learning. She
will use this information to determine which students
require additional support and practice. As students move toward independence, the
teacher will provide many opportunities for students
to learn more about when and where to apply a strat
egy. She will support students as they use a strategy with others to support interpretive responses to text. In
addition, students will be expected to use this strate
gy and others when reading diverse texts across the
day, both in school and at home.
An Example of Teaching the Coordinated Use of
Strategies. Research has shown that good readers
use multiple strategies when reading. In keeping with
that premise, TSI teachers help students coordinate
their use of several strategies right from the start in
stead of introducing individual strategies to them one
at a time (Pressley, 2002). Although teachers might tar
get a specific strategy in a given lesson, teachers con
stantly remind students that good readers use many
strategies to make sense of what they read.
How do TSI teachers introduce individual strate
gies while moving students (with the gradual release
of responsibility model) toward coordinated use of
several strategies? Liz's instruction offers some clues
about how to do this. For one, her strategy instruction
always takes place in the context of real reading;
strategies are taught in conjunction with fiction or
nonfiction texts. They might be picture books, nov
els, magazines, textbooks, or basal selections.
Second, when Liz introduces a strategy, she re
minds students that it is just one of several they need
to master. At the beginning of a lesson, Liz explains that while good readers draw on multiple strategies,
today's instruction focuses on a specific strategy. After
providing explicit information about that strategy, she
models its use. However, she also models other strate
gies that are cued by the text. Thus, even if the focal
strategy is visualizing, she makes predictions and per sonal connections?sometimes without supplemen
tary explanations. Using this approach, Liz can reserve
much of her explicit talk for the focal strategy while
still demonstrating what good readers do.
Later in a lesson, Liz coaches students to use the
focal strategy. However, she also cues and reinforces
previously taught strategies. In addition, she takes ad
vantage of teachable moments to highlight students'
spontaneous use of the focal strategy and others.
What is most important is that she promotes flexible
and coordinated use by urging students to select ap
propriate strategies for specific reading conditions.
For instance, even when the focal strategy is making
connections, she has students choose a strategy from
their fix-it kits when they are confused or come across
an unknown word.
Throughout the year, Liz cycles through various
strategies while stressing their roles in a good reader's
total "strategies bag" or "toolkit." By revisiting different
strategies, Liz deepens her students' metacognitive
knowledge and sharpens their strategy use. For exam
ple, in an initial lesson on making connections she
may focus her instruction entirely on making text-to
self connections. In subsequent lessons, she may in
troduce making text-to-world and text-to-text
connections while strengthening students' under
standing and use of text-to-self connections. This re
cursive and cumulative process enables Liz, like other
TSI teachers, to strike a balance. They accentuate the
teaching of a single strategy while helping students to
use a repertoire adaptively. To scaffold students' use of strategies, Liz initiates in
struction with easy text. When introducing a new strat
egy, she explains, models, and cues its use with a
picture book. In this way students concentrate their cog nitive energies on practicing the strategy rather than
being taxed by the demands of complex text (Almasi,
2003). Once students become adept with simpler ma
terials, they can rehearse the strategy with harder ones.
As students begin to orchestrate their strategy use,
Liz's explicit talk and modeling diminishes. She reallo
cates instructional time to interpretive discussions in
which students apply strategies to construct meaning.
Annotated Lesson Plans. One way to become famil
iar with the gradual release of responsibility model is
through the use of annotated lesson plans. I encourage
The Road Not Yet Taken: A Transactional Strategies Approach to Comprehension Instruction 545
developing and practicing teachers to insert annota
tions in the margins of plans that correspond to this
model, such as explicit explanations, modeling or
thinking aloud, guided practice, and independent
practice. Using annotations like these sensitizes indi
viduals to think more about how and when to gradual
ly release responsibility. To read examples of
annotated lessons and to learn more about scaffolding instruction in the short and long terms see Almasi
(2003). Another excellent resource is Duffy's
Explaining Reading (2003).
Collaborative Learning Dimension In Liz's classroom, students worked together to make
sense of the text. To facilitate student ownership of
discussion, students took turns as discussion man
agers. As they conversed, they used strategies to gen erate connections, opinions, and predictions.
Periodically, Liz cued students to use evidence to sup
port their claims.
When a fox appeared in the story, the conversa
tion focused on whether the animal wanted to enter
the mushroom to escape the storm or to get a rabbit
dinner. One student immediately suspected the fox's
motives. Another student supported his view by mak
ing a personal connection; he described an incident
in which his pet rabbit was chased by a fox. A third
student extended the discussion, describing, what he
felt, was a comparable situation. He likened the ani
mals in the mushroom to a fox that approached his sis
ter's tent as she and her friends huddled inside.
As these students collaborated, the less able read
ers observed how their more capable peers made use
of strategies. They learned to rely not only upon their
teacher but also upon one another.
As you experiment with TSI, provide opportunities for students to learn from one another by increasing
opportunities for student talk. Pay attention to how
long you talk compared with the time you allocate for
student sharing. The teachers I work with are always amazed at how much they talk in comparison with
their students. Therefore, as soon as you have spent sufficient time explaining and modeling strategies, let
your students take more control. Let them see the true
purpose for strategies instruction: to provide them with
the tools they need to think and talk meaningfully about text and to provide a way for them to learn from
one another.
Interpretive Discussion Dimension The notion that social interaction promotes learning is
not new. However, not all communication patterns af
fect learning in the same way. As a consequence, TSI
teachers opt for more discussion and minimize recita
tion. That is, they steer clear of repetitive cycles of
teacher questioning, student responding, and teacher
evaluating because that communication pattern stifles
interpretative discussion.
Through interpretive discussions, students learn to
apply their strategies to construct meaning. However, one of the trickiest goals for new TSI teachers is to re
lease control of discussion to students. New TSI teach
ers generally ask a series of directed questions after
reading. Students tend to respond to these questions with brief responses instead of engaging one another
in thoughtful discussions.
To encourage interpretive discussion, TSI teachers
often ask just one question if the student reading the
text segment does not automatically respond. That
question is, What are you thinking? I also suggest that
they avoid evaluating the accuracy of students' re
sponses in favor of letting students support and chal
lenge one another using textual or experiential evidence. As students defend their claims, misconcep tions tend to resolve themselves.
Teachers can strive to create an atmosphere in
which everyone's views are respected and interpretive discussion is promoted. The following are the discus
sion guidelines Liz sets at the beginning of the year:
Everyone gets to participate without dominating. The
reader discusses first after an oral reading experience.
Following a reader's think-aloud, others may "jump in." No one is right or wrong. Reading time is also a
talking time. All students must participate.
Make Your Students
Independent Readers Teaching comprehension strategies the transactional
strategies way is demanding. Just as it takes years for
students to internalize and manage their use of strate
gies, it also takes teachers time to coordinate TSI's four
dimensions: (1) highlighting what good strategy users
do, (2) gradually releasing responsibility for strategic
processing to students, (3) promoting opportunities for collaborative learning, and (4) fostering interpre tive discussions. However, unlike students whose TSI
teachers pilot them toward independence, teachers
546 The Reading Teacher Vol. 61, No. 7 April 2008
frequently do not have similar levels of support when
they begin to teach TSI. Therefore, I include some sug
gestions for teachers willing to get started with TSI.
The vignettes illustrate how teachers might ease
into teaching TSI. Of course, I only provide a brief
snapshot of how to mesh TSI with existing reading pro
grams. As you begin the integration process, it is worth
remembering that TSI is a flexible approach and not
a rigid program. It does not follow a specific regimen in lock-step fashion. Rather, TSI proposes a set of guid
ing principles?a framework that can be implement ed across various reading events in the school day and
applied to different text types. In addition, my experi ences suggest that as teachers adopt TSI, they find a
way to make it work best with their current practices,
structures, and students.
Although the route to becoming an effective and
innovative TSI teacher can be fraught with challenges, I have witnessed teachers who have navigated past
impediments and emerged successfully on the other
side. It does, however, require taking those first few
steps and committing to a road not yet taken?one
that helps students evolve into independent readers.
Note\ I would like to thank Ray Reutzel for reviewing an earlier version of this article.
Brown teaches at Syracuse University, New York,
USA; e-mail rfbrown @syr. edu.
References Almasi, J.F. (2003). Teaching strategic processes in reading. New
York: Guilford.
Anderson, V. (1992). A teacher development project in transac
tional strategy instruction for teachers of severely reading disabled adolescents. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8(4), 391-403.
Brown, R., Pressley, M., Van Meter, P., & Schuder, T. (1996). A quasi
experimental validation of transactional strategies instruction
with low-achieving second-grade readers. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 88(\), 18-37.
Collins, C. (1991). Reading instruction that increases thinking abil
ities. Journal of Reading, 34(1), 510-516.
Dougherty Stahl, K.A. (2004). Proof, practice, and promise:
Comprehension strategy instruction in the primary grades. The
Reading Teacher, 57(7), 598-609.
Duffy, G.G. (2003). Explaining reading: A resource for teaching con
cepts, skills, and strategies. New York: Guilford.
Duke, N., & Pearson, P.D. (2002). Effective practices for developing
reading comprehension. In A.E. Farstrup & S.J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (pp.
205-242). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Ginsburg, M. (1991). Mushroom in the rain. In D. Alvermann, C.A.
Bridge, B.A. Schmidt, L.W. Searfoss, P. Winograd, & S.G. Paris
(Eds.), My best bear hug (pp. 144-154). Lexington, MA: D.C.
Heath.
Hilden, K., & Pressley, M. (2007). Self-regulation through transac
tional strategies instruction. Reading and Writing Quarterly,
23(\), 51-75.
Liang, L.A., & Dole, J.A. (2006). Help with teaching reading com
prehension: Comprehension instructional frameworks. The
Reading Teacher, 59(8), 742-753.
Pressley, M. (n.d.). Comprehension strategies instruction. East
Lansing: Michigan State University; Literacy Achievement
Research Center. Retrieved April 30, 2007, from www.msularc
.org/docu/5-page_comprehension.pdf
Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension strategies instruction: A turn
of-the-century status report. In C.C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.),
Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp.
11-27). New York: Guilford.
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P.P. (1995). Verbal protocols of read
ing: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P.B., Gaskins, I., Schuder, T., Bergman, J.L.,
Almasi, J., et al. (1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of reading comprehension strategies. The Elementary SchoolJournal, 92(5), 513-555.
Reutzel, D.R., Smith, J.A., & Fawson, P.C. (2005). An evaluation of
two approaches for teaching reading comprehension strategies in the primary years using science information texts. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 20(3), 276-305.
Literature Cited Brett, J. (1989). The mitten. New York: G.P. Putnam.
i www.sittonspelling.coro I
I Your source for- H K fca spelling and word-skills program that
^B addresses state standards-with a FREE WE fl Overview Video package ^H
ASOME WOftDS-a NEW vocabulary mini- S tt coarse series for grades Y and above
S| A sample pages of all our materials HD
I &FREE Instant Activities for classroom use ^H
ft Appleseed Rebecca's FREE e-newsletter IH B with teaching tips and activity ideas
^B
The Road Not Yet Taken: A Transactional Strategies Approach to Comprehension Instruction 547