supporting children with reading comprehension impairments · 2015-09-08 · supporting children...
TRANSCRIPT
Dr. Paula Clarke University of York [email protected]
Supporting Children with Reading Supporting Children with Reading Comprehension ImpairmentsComprehension Impairments
Turning Research Findings into Practical SolutionsTurning Research Findings into Practical Solutions
Lecture Plan
• Simple view of reading
• Specific reading comprehension impairments• How do we identify ‘poor comprehenders’?• What causes specific reading comprehension impairments?
• Interventions to support poor comprehenders• Small scale intervention studies• Large scale RCT – The York READing for MEaning Project
• Intervention materials & teaching approaches
• Application to school setting
Primary Framework for Literacy
• Rose Review (2006) – emphasises the importance of language to literacy development
• Move towards Simple View of Reading (Gough & Tunmer, 1986)
• Two components of reading:• Decoding• Language Comprehension• Both skills are necessary• Neither skill alone is sufficient for reading
Poor Comprehenders
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Comprehension Accuracy
Normal Readers Poor Comprehenders
Nation & Snowling, 1997, BJEP
Poor comprehenders often go unnoticed in the classroom because of their good
decoding ability
10% of primary school aged children
Rose Review ‐ Recommendations
More emphasis on oral language activities in classroomHigh quality systematic phonic work◦ Includes training in phoneme awareness
Speaking and listeningVocabulary Language comprehensionBalance will shift with development from word recognition processes to comprehension processesOral language fundamental to literacy development
What does reading comprehension involve?
Working Memory
Selecting and Manipulating Information
Inferencing
Vocabulary
Monitoring
Reading Comprehension
What does reading comprehension involve?
Jack was very happy. He was going on a holiday to somewhere far away. Jack had never flown before. He clicked shut his seatbelt and then looked out of the window. The cars and people became smaller and smaller. Suddenly the plane bumped and Jack trembled. “What was that Mum?” he asked. “It’s just a cloud” she replied and gave him a hug.
1. How was Jack going to get to his holiday destination?
2. Why did Jack need to go on an aeroplane?
3. Who did Jack go with?
What does reading comprehension involve?
Jack was elated. He was going on a holiday to somewhere very remote. Jack had never flown before. He clicked shut his belt device and then peeped out of the window. The cars and people became miniaturised. Unexpectedly the plane bumped and Jack trembled. “What was that Mum?” he asked. “It’s just a Cumulus” she acknowledged and gave him a hug.
1. How was Jack feeling about going on holiday?
2. Why did the cars and people get smaller?
3. Was Jack surprised when the plane bumped?
The importance of reading for meaning
• Which areas of the curriculum have the strongest reading comprehension demands?
• Literacy – KS2 SATs
• History – researching, finding key ideas
• Geography
• RE
• PSHCE
• Topic work
• Science
• Numeracy – problem solving
Based on responses of 30 KS2 teachers in York and North Yorkshire
• Decoding• Spelling
• Regular words• Exception words• In isolation and context
• WIAT II
• Comprehension• Listening comprehension• Multiple choice responses
• Range of question types
• Adapted NARA II, YARC or WIAT II
Identifying Poor Comprehenders
Large group/Class assessments
• Decoding• Single word reading accuracy• YARC or BAS
• Reading efficiency• TOWRE
• Nonword reading• GNWRT
• Comprehension• Reading Comprehension• NARA II or YARC or WIAT II
• Listening Comprehension • CELF IV Listening to paragraphs
Identifying Poor Comprehenders
Individual assessments
Assessing Reading Comprehension
Kim stopped on her way to school. In the middle of the traffic lay two children. Their bicycles had crashed into each other. Kim ran quickly to help. She saw that no‐one was hurt. The children pointed to a television camera. ‘We are taking part in a road safety lesson’ they said.
1. Where was Kim going?2. Why did Kim stop?3. What had happened to the bikes?4. How do you think Kim felt?5. What did Kim do?6. Were the children hurt?7. What were the children really doing?8. How did Kim find out what was happening?
Neale Analysis of Reading Ability (NARA II)
• Children read aloud short passages (narrative only).
• Includes literal and inferential open ended questions.
Assessing Reading Comprehension
Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (WIAT II)
• Children read (aloud or silently) a range of passages and sentences. (narrative, adverts, non‐fiction information etc.)
• Includes literal, inference and vocabulary dependent question types.
• Also involves summarization (finding key themes and ideas), prediction, and question generation.
Science fun you can do at home!HOW TO MAKE GOBBLEDEEGLUE
1.Put 2 teaspoons of water and 4 teaspoons of white glue in a cup. Stir with a spoon.2.In another cup, Add 2 teaspoons of borax powder to 1 cup of water. Stir with a spoon until the borax has dissolved. 3.Add 4 teaspoons of the borax and water into the cup that has the glue and water, and mix for three minutes.4.Add 2 drops of food colouring to the mixture. You may choose your favourite colour. Stir until the colour is mixed well. 5.Put the Gobbledeeglue mix on a piece of plastic and leave it alone for 3 minutes.6.Pick up the Gobbledeeglue, roll it into a ball, and watch it bounce!7.Sit the Gobbledeeglue on the piece of plastic and see what happens next.
• What three ingredients must you have to make Gobbledeeglue?• Why must you do Steps 1 and 2 before you can do Step 3?• How does Gobbledeeglue change after step 4?• What do you do straight after the first time you put Gobbledeeglueon a sheet of plastic?• What would you predict would happen if you tried to pull Gobbledeeglue apart?• What is the meaning of the word dissolved in Step 2?
Assessing Reading Comprehension
York Assessment of Reading for Comprehension (YARC)
• Children read aloud short passages (alternating narrative and non fiction).
• Includes literal, inference and vocabulary dependent question types.
Anita stood quite still, transfixed by the repeated sequence of the blue‐grey water: the swell, the surge forward, the roaring crash and then the ebb. It reminded her of her fight with her older brother: the build up of petty irritations, the taunting remarks followed by an explosive row, and afterwards, the false calm as they each retreated to brood on real, or imagined, grievances. Sometimes she hated Chris.
As she turned to throw a stick for Patch, she noticed the mist beginning to swirl in; she could no longer make out the pier. A dank murkiness could quickly replace sunshine on this remote northern coast. Half way down the beach, she shivered, partly from cold and partly from fear, as the thickening fog isolated her from the rest of the world: even Patch had deserted her. Suddenly from the depths of the gloom, an arm reached out and a hand gripped her shoulder. Anita could feel her heart racing wildly. Anxiously, she stood rooted to the spot.
“Hi sis,” said a familiar voice, “I was getting worried about you.”
Literal Q• What two things made Anita
shiver?
Inference Qs• What is the ‘repeated sequence
of the blue‐grey water’?• Why did Anita’s heart race
wildly?
Vocabulary Q• What does a dank murkiness
mean?
Poor comprehender criteria
• Non verbal IQ in average range
• Cut off • Reading accuracy/efficiency greater than 100• Reading comprehension below 85
• Discrepancy based• Reading accuracy/efficiency in average range• Reading accuracy/efficiency in advance of reading comprehension
• Listening comprehension • YARC or CELF IV
• Understanding grammatical structure • CELF IV or TROG II
• Vocabulary• Expressive
• CELF IV (Naming) or WPPSI (definitions) • Receptive
• BPVS
Early Identification
Evidence of impairments on a range of different oral language tasks:
Vocabulary Nation, Clarke & Snowling, 2002; Nation, Clarke, Marshall & Durand, 2004, Stothard & Hulme,1992
Oral expression Nation, Clarke, Marshall & Durand, 2004
Figurative language Nation, Clarke, Marshall & Durand, 2004
Narrative skills Cragg & Nation, 2006; Cain & Oakhill, 1996; 2006
Grammatical development Nation, Clarke, Marshall & Durand, 2004; Nation & Snowling, 2000
Verbal reasoning Nation, Clarke, Marshall & Durand, 2004
Inferencing Oakhill, 1984; Cain & Oakhill, 1999; Nation, Clarke, Marshall & Durand, 2004
Evidence of impairments in other areas:
Comprehension monitoring Erlich, Remond & Tardieu 1996; Yuill, Oakhill & Parkin, 1989; Cain, Oakhill & Bryant, 2004; Oakhill, Hart & Samols, 2005
Verbal working memory Nation, Adams, Bowyer‐Crane & Snowling, 1999; Cain & Oakhill, 2006; Cain, 2006
Suppression/Inhibition Cain, 2006
Poor comprehender profile
Evidence of impairments
• Although converging evidence from studies using group means, poor comprehender profiles vary across individuals
• Not all poor comprehenders will necessarily have difficulties in all areas• Is there a core cognitive deficit in poor comprehenders?
Previous intervention research
Yuill and Oakhill (1988) Inference Training
McGee & Johnson (2003) Inference Training
Yuill and Joscelyne (1988) Story Structure & Inference Training
Oakhill & Patel (1991) Mental Imagery Training
Johnson‐Glenberg (2000) Verbal RT vs. Visualising Training
• Yuill and Oakhill (1988) developed an intervention to specifically target inferencing skills. Replicated by McGee and Johnson (2003).
Inference training included:
• Lexical training – attending to each word in a sentence and discussing how the words contribute to the overall meaning of the sentence
• Question generation – examples of how questions can be derived from text – followed by generation of own questions
• Prediction – Sentences obscured, pupils guess missing segments
Inference training
• Yuill and Oakhill (1988) ‐ Skilled and less skilled comprehenders aged 7 years each received 7 sessions of training in 1 of 3 intervention conditions
• In the inference training condition gains in individual scores on the NARA were on average 17 months.
• McGee and Johnson (2003) ‐ Skilled and less skilled comprehenders aged 6y6m ‐9y11m years each received 6 sessions of training in 1 of 2 intervention conditions
• In the inference training condition gains in individual scores on the NARA were on average 20 months.
Inference Training
ComprehensionTraining
Rapid Decoding= >
Inference training
Inference Training
ComprehensionTraining>
Story Structure & Inference training
• Yuill and Joscelyne (1988)
• Experiment 1• Using verbal and pictorial text organisers to support understanding.
• Compared effects of integrated and non integrated organisers.
• Experiment 2 • Identifying clues to solve inferences in text.
• Less skilled comprehenders showed significant improvements in comprehension questions but not story recall.
• Oakhill and Patel (1991) focused on mental imagery training as a potential method for improving the reading comprehension skills of poor comprehenders.
• 22 poor comprehenders and 22 good comprehenders, taught in small groups were instructed using representational and transformational drawings, to picture stories in their minds.
• They were then encouraged to use their mental images to answer comprehension questions.
• They found that poor comprehenders benefited more from imagery training than good comprehenders and suggested that “the ability to use imagery strategies may give poor comprehenders a way of helping to circumvent their memory limitations…”(p.114)
Mental Imagery training
• Johnson‐Glenberg (2000)
• Compared a verbally based reciprocal teaching (RT) program (Palincsar & Brown, 1984) to a visually based visualising/verbalising program (Bell, 1986)
• Verbal RT• Children assigned roles. Clarifier, Summariser, Predictor, Question Generator.
Roles initially modelled by tutor, scaffolding reduced over time.
• Visualising/Verbalising
• Bell's (1986) instructional book, Visualizing and Verbalizing for Language Comprehension and Thinking. Students were trained to create mental images from the text and to discuss these images with the group.
Reciprocal teaching & visualising training
Reciprocal teaching & visualising training
• Johnson‐Glenberg (2000)
• 59 poor comprehenders assigned to either one of the training programmes or a control group. Small group teaching took place over 16 weeks.
• They found that both training programmes were similarly effective in improving poor comprehenders’ reading, language and memory skills associated with reading comprehension ability.
• They suggested that a combination of the two strategies might beparticularly powerful.
Limitations of intervention work to date
• Interventions teaching specific components of reading comprehension have generated some impressive results in poor comprehenders. However…
• Promising findings have not yet been replicated.
• Studies have focused largely on text level and metacognitive skills. Very little on oral language training.
• No studies have pulled these components together to create a comprehensive reading comprehension training programme.
• The only study to include an untreated control group did not use a RCT design.
Research questions
Text level training in written language
domain
Oral language training in spoken language domain
Improvements in text
comprehension
Text level training in written language
domain
Oral language training in spoken language domain
• To investigate three approaches to improving reading comprehension skills in poor comprehenders.
• To compare these approaches to existing classroom practice by monitoring the performance of an untreated waiting control group.
• To address the objectives of the primary framework (NLS) and equip teaching assistants with a wide range of skills and materials, useful in supporting children with reading comprehension and oral language difficulties.
OralLanguage
(OL)
Text Comprehension
(TC)
Combined(COM)
Project aims
Text Comprehension Programme
Metacognitive StrategiesReading ComprehensionInferencing from Text Written Narrative
Oral Language Programme
VocabularyListening Comprehension
Figurative Language Spoken Narrative
Combined Programme
All eight components connecting oral language and text‐based activities in an integrated and naturalistic approach.
All sessions contained both reading and listening comprehension to support complementary components.
Opportunities for children to encounter new vocabulary/idioms/inferences in both written and spoken language.
Programme components
• If the focus for the session is the development of comprehension, then practitioners should concentrate on plot, character, and motive, and features of language such as vocabulary, figurative language and sequence.
• Children benefit if they can make links to their previous experience, or they are supported where the text deals with matters that are beyond their immediate experience.
• Over time the practioner will model how readers predict, question, clarify, summarise and imagine as they read; and in time, children should internalise these mental activities. Modelling one or twostrategies really well is preferable to overloading children with multiple approaches.
Primary National Strategy (2006)
1. Understanding & interpreting texts
Objective Corresponding Components
Retrieve, select and describe information, events and ideas
RT (Clarification, Summarisation)Metacognitive strategies
Deduce, infer and interpret information, events and idea
RT (Prediction)Inferencing from text
Use syntax, context, word structures and origins to develop understanding of word meanings
Vocabulary Figurative language Inferencing from text
Identify and comment on structure and organisation of texts
Narrative
Explain and comment on writer’s use of language including vocabulary, grammatical and literary features
Vocabulary Figurative language
Links to Primary Framework (NLS)
2. Engaging & responding to texts
Objective Corresponding Components
Read independently for purpose, pleasure and learning
All TC Components
Respond imaginatively using different strategies to engage with texts
Metacognitive strategies Narrative
Evaluate writer’s purposes and viewpoints and the overall effect of the text on the reader
RT (Summarisation)Narrative
Links to Primary Framework (NLS)
3. Text structure and organisation
Objective Corresponding Components
Organise ideas into coherent structure including layout, sections and paragraphs
RT (Summarisation)Narrative
Write cohesive paragraphs linking sentences within and between them
Written Narrative
Links to Primary Framework (NLS)
• Two 10‐week blocks of intensive teaching in individual and pair sessions.
• Each session is 30 mins.
• Children receive 2 pair sessions and 1 individual session per week (1½hours per week).
• Teaching took place in designated areas within school (small classrooms/meeting rooms etc.).
• Teaching times varied depending upon existing timetabled commitments.
• All fully funded by ESRC.
Intervention delivery
Activity Approx. time per session
Introduction 3 mins
Vocabulary 5 mins
Listening comprehension
7 mins
Figurative language
5 mins
Spoken narrative 7 mins
Plenary 3 mins
Activity Approx. time per session
Introduction 3 mins
Metacognitive strategies
5 mins
Reading comprehension
7 mins
Inferencing from text
5 mins
Written narrative 7 mins
Plenary 3 mins
Session structure
Session structure
Activity Approx. time per session
Introduction 2.5 mins
Metacognitive strategies
5 mins
Reading comprehension
5 mins
Inferencing from text
5 mins
Listening comprehension
5 mins
Spoken narrative 5 mins
Plenary 2.5 mins
Activity Approx. time per session
Introduction 2.5 mins
Vocabulary 5 mins
Listening comprehension
5 mins
Reading comprehension
5 mins
Inferencing from text
5 mins
Spoken narrative 5 mins
Plenary 2.5 mins
Oct 2006
8‐9years
Oct 2007
9‐10years
Oct2008
10‐11years
Oct2009
ScreeningIntervention development T1 assessment
Block 1 Block 2
T2 assessment T3 assessment T4 assessment
ControlBlock 1
ControlBlock 2
Project timetable
Not meeting inclusion criteria (n = 634)
Excluded (n = 45) 2 schools excluded due to low numbers of children showing poor comprehender profile
Absent for key measures (n=13)
Refused to be assessed (n = 2)
Not meeting inclusion criteria
(n = 114)
Excluded on behavioural grounds (n =1)
Declined to participate in intervention (n = 7)
Individual Screening (Jan‐Feb 2007)
21 schools; eligible for assessment (n = 296)
Individual assessments: NARA reading comp (n = 284); TOWRE (n = 282); WASI Verbal IQ (n = 277)
Complete data on key measures (n= 282)
Individual Screening (Jan‐Feb 2007)
21 schools; eligible for assessment (n = 296)
Individual assessments: NARA reading comp (n = 284); TOWRE (n = 282); WASI Verbal IQ (n = 277)
Complete data on key measures (n= 282)
Selection & Pre‐test (Feb‐Apr 2007)
21 schools ‐ Selected for intervention (n =168)
Selection & Pre‐test (Feb‐Apr 2007)
21 schools ‐ Selected for intervention (n =168)
Group Screening (Oct‐Dec 2006)
Y4 children in 23 schools in York & N.Yorks; eligible for assessment (n = 1120)
Group assessments: Listening Comp (n = 1042); Ravens (n = 1054);Spelling (n = 1045); Numerical ops (n = 1050)
Complete data on key measures (n= 977)
Group Screening (Oct‐Dec 2006)
Y4 children in 23 schools in York & N.Yorks; eligible for assessment (n = 1120)
Group assessments: Listening Comp (n = 1042); Ravens (n = 1054);Spelling (n = 1045); Numerical ops (n = 1050)
Complete data on key measures (n= 977)
Participant flow
• Discrepancy in standard score points between NARA II reading comprehension and TOWRE real word reading efficiency.
• NARA II reading accuracy standard scores of 85 and above. • NARA II reading comprehension scores of 105 and below.• Age appropriate spelling ability.• Non‐Verbal IQ of 85 or above.
• Of these children, we selected eight children within each school with the greatest discrepancies.
Sample size
Power calculations for this study were carried out using estimates of effect sizes from previous studies of a similar nature.
A sample size of 40 children in each arm of the intervention provides 90% power to detect a difference of 0.6 standard deviations between the control group and the three intervention groups combined (with alpha = 0.05 two‐tailed).
Eligibility criteria
Selection & Pre‐test (Feb‐Apr 2007)21 schools
Selected for intervention (n =168)
Selection & Pre‐test (Feb‐Apr 2007)21 schools
Selected for intervention (n =168)
(Apr‐Jul 2007)
20 schools
Block 1 of intervention programmes(n = 157)
Mid‐Intervention Assessments(n = 159)
(Apr‐Jul 2007)
20 schools
Block 1 of intervention programmes(n = 157)
Mid‐Intervention Assessments(n = 159)
Random allocation to intervention groups
OL programme
Took part in block 1 of intervention (n = 39)
COM programme
Took part in block 1 of intervention (n = 39)
Waiting Control
n = 39
TC programme
Took part in block 1 of intervention (n = 40)
Intervention:Excluded (n = 8) 1 school withdrawn from project
Declined to participate in intervention (n = 1)
Moved school (n = 2)
(Sept‐Dec 2007)
Block 2 of intervention programmes(n = 155)
Post‐Intervention Assessment(n = 159)
(Sept‐Dec 2007)
Block 2 of intervention programmes(n = 155)
Post‐Intervention Assessment(n = 159)
OL programme
Took part in block 2 of intervention (n = 38)
Post‐intervention assessments T3 (n = 38)
TC programme
Took part in block 2 of intervention (n = 40)
Post‐intervention assessments T3 (n = 40)
COM programme
Took part in block 2 of intervention (n = 38)
Post‐intervention assessments T3 (n = 38)
Intervention:Moved school (n = 2)
Post‐intervention Assessments (wave 1) (n=155)In new schools (n = 4)
Participant flow
Waiting Control
Post‐intervention assessments (n = 39)
OL programme
Post‐intervention assessments T4 (n = 35)
TC programme
Post‐intervention assessments T4 (n = 37)
COM programme
Post‐intervention assessments T4 (n = 36)
(Nov‐Jan 2008/09)
Maintenance Post‐Intervention
Assessment(n = 159)
(Nov‐Jan 2008/09)
Maintenance Post‐Intervention
Assessment(n = 159)
Waiting Control
Post‐intervention assessments T4 (n = 38)
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Whole sample
TOWRE Real words 110.48 108.88 108.30 108.70 109.09
TOWRE Nonwords 106.45 106.33 109.13 106.18 107.02
TOWRE Total 110.20 109.18 110.48 108.85 109.68
NARA II Reading accuracy 102.93 102.93 104.33 101.55 102.93
NARA II Reading comprehension 92.95 93.36 92.82 92.82 92.99
WIAT II Reading comprehension 94.31 95.43 96.38 97.77 95.96
CELF Listening comprehension 78.75* 80.42 87.36* 83.06 82.40
WASI Vocabulary (t score) 38.31 40.32 39.44 38.26 39.07
WASI Similarities (t score) 47.40 49.05 49.97 49.49 48.97
WASI VIQ 89.41 92.03 91.89 91.00 91.07
Ravens Matrices NVIQ 99.26 100.23 100.66 100.78 100.23
WMTBC Listening recall 94.50 94.19 93.08 92.19 93.49
WOND Numerical operations 97.53 98.98 97.59 95.30 97.35
*Statistically significant between groups difference (p<0.05)
Baseline characteristics of sample
• ManualsDetailed, prescriptive manual and pre‐prepared worksheets, readers and resources
• Training Training took place over 3.5 days. Delivered by the research team.
• Fortnightly tutorialsOpportunity to monitor delivery of programmes by discussing experiences, ideas and observations. Some sessions took the form of top up training in which we focused on particular components of the programmes.
• ObservationsEach TA was observed by a member of the research team at least twice in each intervention block. Careful records were kept and onsite feedback and support was given.
• Filmed sessionsFive TAs gave us permission to film teaching sessions.
Treatment fidelity
• T1 data was collected in school by the research team (blind) andthe trained teaching assistants (blind at this point).
• T2 & T3 data was collected by the research team (blind).• Testing conditions varied across schools. • Some assessments were individually administered, others were group administered.
• All score sheets analysed blind. • 10% double marking for reliability where necessary.
Data collection & reliability
Statistical technique
• Regression based approach used, controlling for performance at T1.
• Report 95% robust confidence intervals.
• Cluster variable = School
• Comparing each group to the control group
Control group change in performancefrom T1 –T2
Change in performance of intervention group from T1‐T2relative to control group.
Distant from 0 = significant
Crosses 0 = non significant
Results – Summary 1
• All three interventions groups have improved significantly compared to controls on one measure of reading comprehension ability (WIAT II).
• Importantly these gains have maintained over an 11 month period.
• In particular the difference between the OL group and the control group has increased in significance.
• On the second primary outcome measure a significant gain for the COM group is only observed when alternate forms of the NARA II are used.
Measure Corresponding Component
TOLC Inferencing Inferencing from text
CMS Story Recall Listening Comprehension
WASI Vocabulary Vocabulary
WASI Verbal Similarities Vocabulary
CELF Listening to Paragraphs Listening Comprehension
Measure
WMTBC Listening Recall Complex Working Memory
NARA II Passage Reading Accuracy
TOWRE Reading Efficiency
WOND Numerical Operations CONTROL TASK
Myself as a Learner Self Esteem
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire
Teacher report of behaviour
Measure Corresponding Component
Story Writing Written Narrative
Beaver & Hedgehog Stories Metacognitive Strategies
Reading Attitudes Questionnaire Reading Comprehension
Storytelling Spoken Narrative
Vocabulary (target & non‐target) Vocabulary
Idioms (target & non‐target) Figurative Language
Secondary measures
Results – Summary 2
• Intervention groups showed no significant gains relative to control group on a measure of listening comprehension.
• Significant gain for the OL group on WASI Vocabulary at T3 only.
• Bespoke measures of vocabulary and idioms revealing significant gains, importantly on both targeted and non targeteditems.
• No significant differences on the control measure.
• In poor comprehenders, 20‐week intervention programmes can produce significant gains in:
• Text comprehension • Oral language
• Importantly these gains are relative to an untreated waiting control group.• The gains maintain over time and for the OL programme the difference between
intervention group and controls increases in significance.
Overall Summary & Conclusions
Implications for education
• Evidence that the skills that underpin oral language and text comprehension are trainable in children aged 8‐11 years.
• Evidence that teaching assistants with a relatively small amountof training can deliver high quality effective teaching.
Future research directions
• To examine the role of vocabulary training as a mediating factor in improvements in text comprehension.
• To consider the impact of early oral language intervention on later text comprehension skills. http://www.york.ac.uk/res/crl/languageforreading.html
• To explore the prevalence and profiles of poor comprehenders in secondary school with a view to developing intervention materials. http://www.york.ac.uk/res/crl/readingaloud.html
• To apply this work to individuals with high functioning ASD, many of whom have poor comprehender profiles.
Results – Parent Feedback
He has enjoyed learning the meaning of new words and testing my understanding of
them
Sometimes the things she has learnt pop up in conversation – she makes a connection
This project has increased her awareness – She has been talkative about what’s been happening – She questions more
and opens conversations
It has been a pleasure to see her grow in confidence – she has read more at home for
pleasure
XXX has improved so much in her school work and enjoys all the learning that is given to her – I think the whole course has been very worth while
It has given him a thirst for learning – he is much more enthusiastic than last year
I think it was an excellent and enjoyable project for my
daughter
• Listening• Vocabulary• Figurative Language• Narrative
• Reciprocal Teaching• Metacognitive strategies
• Inferencing
Practical Approaches
Research context
• Nuffield • Evaluation of two intervention programmes for children at‐risk of literacy
difficulties because of poor speech and language skills at school entry. • Bowyer‐Crane, C., Snowling, M.J., Duff, F.J., Fieldsend, E., Carroll, J.M., Miles, J.,
Goetz, K., & Hulme, C. (2008).
• REVI• Reading with vocabulary intervention for children who had a poor
response to Reading Intervention (Hatcher et al., 2006b)• Duff, F. J., Fieldsend, E., Bowyer‐Crane, C., Hulme, C., Smith, G., Gibbs, S., &
Snowling, M. J. (in press).
• READ ME
Listening Skills: Nuffield
• Activities that encourage active listening:• Spotting deliberate mistakes in stories
• One morning, Sam was getting ready for school. There was a knock at the door. The milkman had a parcel for Sam. Mum let Sam open it. Inside the parcel was a big ball. Mum said, “Sam, you can take the doll to school”…
• Following instructions• growing cress• origami dogs
• Chinese whispers• Listening to then answering questions about a story• Performing an action upon hearing a certain word during a story‐telling
Vocabulary Instruction: Nuffield
• Teaching Session 1: Introduction of new vocabulary• Children try to guess the word from context
• Verbal clue; picture; action• Reinforce correct guesses, or supply correct word if necessary• Every child says the word aloud• Provide formal definition of the word
• Teaching Session 2: Reinforcement of vocabulary• Opportunity to revise the vocabulary work
• Consolidation sessions• Further reinforcement of vocabulary
Vocabulary Instruction: Nuffield
• Teaching Session 1: Introduction of new vocabulary ‐‐ journey• Children try to guess the word from context
• It was a long _________ to London• We went on a _________ at the start of our holiday
• Reinforce correct guesses, or supply correct word if necessary• Every child says the word aloud• Provide formal definition of the word
• When we travel from one place to another place
Vocabulary Instruction: Nuffield
• Teaching Session 2: Reinforcement of vocabulary• Ask children to recall the words learnt in the last session• Reinforcement activity e.g.:
We’re going on a journeyTo a place we’ve never been.We’re going on a journeyOn a bus to see the queen.The passengers are ready,The driver’s in his chair.We’re going on journey,Oh when will we be there?!
• Ask children to define the word journey
Vocabulary Instruction: REVI
TA contextualises word
TA uses alternative context
Child uses word in context
Child repeats word
TA defines word
Child repeats word
Vocabulary Instruction: REVI
TA contextualises word
TA uses alternative context
Child uses word in context
Child repeats word
TA defines word
Child repeats word
TA: Kipper kept on trying until he could do up his laces himself – he persisted
TA: Even though I was tired I persisted with my work until it was finished
Child: I persisted with my work, even though it was hard
Child: persisted
TA: If you persist you go on doing something even if it is difficult
Child: persisted
Vocabulary Consolidation: REVI
• Call My Bluff• Give the child 3 or 4 possible definitions of a target word, and ask
them to choose the right one• Donate
• Is a type of cake• Means to give money or things to help people• Is a very rich person• Means to be worried or scared about something
• Same or Different• Ask the child to explain how two target words are similar or different.
• How are these different? Astonished vs. Terrified• How are these similar? Greedy/Selfish
Vocabulary Consolidation: REVI
• Beat the Clock• True/false quiz: Child has to correctly answer as many questions
relating to target vocabulary as possible in 90s• If someone won’t let you play with him, you might feel
rejected: True or False?• If you give up easily, you have persisted: True or False?
• Or• How would you feel if you were worried about
something? Anxious or Relieved?• How do we describe people who think only of
themselves? Mischievous or Selfish?
• Magic Sack• Teacher/child draws pictures/objects out of a sack and describe
them for the other person to guess identity
Word of the day:magnificent (adjective)
• Say “Today we are going to learn a new word. The word of the day is magnificent.”
•Write the word on the board and circle it.
• Ask “Have you heard the word magnificent before?” Discuss the context of the word.
• Say “Can you say magnificent with me?” Encourage the child to repeat the word with you. Then ask “Now can you repeat the word on your own?” Praise and correct.
• Ask “Can you tell me what you think this word means? Or what you think of the word? Or what type of word you think it is?”Encourage responses. If no response, ask “Do you know when we might use the word magnificent?”
• Praise the child’s efforts. Say “the word magnificent is used to describe something that is very good or beautiful, for example, a magnificent palace.”
• Say “The word magnificent is an adjective which is a describing word it tells you what someone or something is like.”
The slugs and snails had been busy in the night, too, and the yard outside Old Molly’s house was patterned in shining silver. On the roof white fluffy doves, rosy finches and tiny bluetits preened themselves and twittered and cooed. “What amagnificent sight!” cried the Mayor, rubbing the bluebottles on his waistcoat. “Two hundred out of fifty, without any doubt.”
Multiple Context LearningBeck, McKeown & Kucan, 2002
Vocabulary: READ ME
Necessity
“At school, books and
pencils are a necessity.”
Food, water and
air
warmth & shelter
Graphic Organisers Nash & Snowling, 2006
Picture CardsMnemonic Strategies Levin, 1993; Peters & Levin, 1986; Graves & Levin, 1989
Verbal Reasoning
• Generating synonyms & antonyms
Multiple Context LearningBeck, McKeown & Kucan, 2002
Vocabulary: READ ME
Word Wizard (Beck, McKeown & Kucan, 2002)
• To encourage the children to use new vocabulary outside of the intervention sessions.
Vocabulary: READ ME
“There never was a row as pretty as ours,”complimented Mrs Gordon, who lived in the first cottage. “And our gardens are a sight for sore eyes,” said Mr Bennett, who lived in the second cottage. “All except for one,” sighed Mr and Mrs Bunce, who lived in the third cottage. “And that’s not a sight for sore eyes; it’s nothing but an eyesore.” And they pointed to the fourth cottage, where Old Molly lived.
Post cards through smart chute and reveal the answer! Then put the idiom into a sentence
To be at sixes and sevens
6
66
77
7
http://www.smartkids2.co.uk/ukshop/
• Idioms• Jokes & Riddles • Simile & Metaphor
The more of them you take, the more of them you leave behind. What are they?
Footsteps
Why do cows have bells?Because their horns don’t work!
Figurative Language
Narrative Instruction: Nuffield
• Oral narrative task• Assessment and training of ability to produce a coherent story• Promotes:
• knowledge of story structure• use of grammar e.g. verb tenses• temporal sequencing• use of connectives
Narrative Instruction: Nuffield
• Target ideas:– Boy getting undressed– Going to have a bath– Boy in bath– Boy playing/splashing– Boy getting dried– Water dripping on floor Pictures courtesy of Black Sheep Press
Narrative Instruction: Nuffield
• Sample narrative:
• There’s a boy. His clothes are on the floor. The bath there. The boy is in the bath. The boy is out of the bath. He has a towel. It is snuggly. The boy getted dry.
• Teaching Points:• Story Opening: One day, Tom
played outside and got very messy. His mum told him to go and have a bath.
• Elaboration: So Tom ran himself a nice hot bath with his favourite bubble bath. While the bath was running Tom took off his dirty clothes.
• Connectives: Then he climbed into the bath.
• Correct Verb Use: Tom climbed out of the bath and got himself dry
• Story structure (Beck & McKeown,1981; Pearson, 1982; Idol & Croll, 1987)
• Sequencing• Story production
The Story MountainMuch of the narrative work centred around the Story Mountain. For example, sequencing story cards onto the mountain and using the stages of the mountain the support story production.
Children used story planners to map out their ideas then using digital voice recorders created cds of their stories.
Children presented their stories to one another and reflected on them at the end of the programme.
Narrative Instruction: READ ME
Children used story planners to map out their ideas. They then wrote their stories out in full, illustrated them and turned them into books.
Children presented their stories to one another and reflected on them at the end of the programme.
• Story structure (Beck & McKeown,1981; Pearson, 1982; Idol & Croll, 1987)
• Sequencing• Story production
Narrative Instruction: READ ME
Narrative activities were always linked to the passage of the day. Many different types of activity were included:
The Story Maker's Chest: Creative Writing Set by
Pie Corbett
Narrative Instruction: READ ME
RT refers to an instructional activity that takes place in the form of a dialogue between teachers and students regarding segments of text
The teacher and students take turns assuming the role of the teacher in this dialogue
Palinscar & Brown (1984)Review by Rosenshine & Meister (1994)
Reciprocal Teaching (RT)
RT resources
• Reciprocal Teaching at Work: Strategies for Improving Reading Comprehension by Lori D. Oczkus(2003) International Reading Association. ISBN 0‐87207‐514‐1
• Re‐read(Garner, et al., 1984)
• Look‐back (Garner, 1982)
• Think aloud (Farr & Connor, 2004)
• Mental imagery (Oakhill & Patel, 1991)
• Explain & reflect (McNamara, 2004)
Metacognitive Strategies
• Lexical inferencing• Bridging inferencing• Activating prior knowledge• Elaborative inferencing• Guessing missing information • Evaluative inferencing
Inferencing from text
Supporting students with learning difficulties
• Klinger, Vaughn & Boardman (2007) Guildford Press
• Includes advice and ideas on:• Assessing comprehension• Vocabulary instruction • Text structure • Multicomponent approaches to strategy teaching (e.g. RT)
Summary of intervention approaches
• Little and often distributed practice. • Routine activities, varied presentation. • Embedding oral language activities into spoken passages.• Using different text types to explore inferencing and strategy
use. • Building an evidence base for the Beck, McKeown & Kucan
(2002) multiple context learning approach to vocabulary instruction. Amassing a wealth of materials suitable for a wide age and ability range.
• Both REVI and READ ME included oral and written narrative and encourage links between the two. Activities to support understanding of narrative structure that translate directly to narrative production work.
Applications in school
• READ ME, Nuffield and REVI are all most suited to Wave 3 style intensive intervention. Individual, pair and small group work.
• Techniques and ideas could be embedded into guided reading sessions.
• General principles can be applied to Wave 1 classroom practice. Particularly reciprocal teaching and vocabulary.
The importance of training
• All of the CRL interventions require specialist training.
• To date this has been delivered by the research team.
• Regular support is extremely important if the interventions are to be successful.
• Intervention manuals are highly prescribed. However, it is very important that teaching assistants tailor the support to the individual children they are working with and contexts they are in.
The importance of evaluation
• Good pre, mid and post intervention assessments are crucial.
• Where possible use a range of different measures• Expressive
• Receptive
• Self paced
• Timed
• Teaching assistant administered
• Independent assessor administered
• Important to monitor progress in the specific skills being taught as well as the more general outcome measures of reading and attainment.
Take home message
• Interventions to support poor comprehenders have been successful in improving both oral language and reading comprehension.
• These interventions have been highly supported by researchers and funded by research councils.
• Cost implications have yet to be explored.
• Training package and intervention manuals are in development not yet readily available.
• Any ideas and input gratefully received!
For more information:
http://www.york.ac.uk/res/crl/
Dr. Paula Clarke University of York [email protected]