Powerpoint template for scientific posters Swarthmore College

1
Look Whos Talking and Thinking
Nicole Koonce Alicia WycheUniversity of
Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60607
Discourse based instruction Reciprocal Teaching,
Book Club, Questioning the Author (QtA), and
Collaborative Reasoning (CR) are types of
instructional methodologies that use classroom
discussion to facilitate text comprehension, in
part, through the use of carefully crafted
questions posed by the classroom teacher to
students (Chinn et al., 2001 Wolf, 2005). These
approaches seek to engage students and their
teachers in dialogues that deepen comprehension
(Wolf, 2005).

• Introduction
• Two main types of discussion approaches occur in
  classrooms. In traditional classrooms there is a
  reliance on Initiation-Response-Evaluation (IRE)
  or Recitation styles of instruction which has the
  following features
• the teacher asks questions with known answers in
  a test-like format
• style of instruction lends itself to short
  answers from students and limits teacher-student
  and student-student interaction
• the unintended effect of shutting down rich,
  productive discourse in favor of pedantic
  learning and the illusion of classroom
  management.
• orientation toward IRE and Recitation styles of
  inquiry is deeply ingrained in classroom
  pedagogy.
• Discourse-based approaches to content area and
  reading comprehension instruction are an
  alternative instructional method. Book Club,
  Questioning the Author (QtA), Collaborative
  Reasoning (CR), and Reciprocal Teaching are types
  of instructional methodologies that use classroom
  discussion to facilitate text comprehension
  (Chinn et al., 2001 Wolf, 2005). These
  approaches seek to engage students and their
  teachers in dialogues that deepen comprehension
  (Wolf, 2005).

• Conclusions
• The research literature in the area of discourse
  based instructional methodologies strengthens the
  argument that teaching approaches that tap into
  higher-level thinking positively impacts student
  performance on a variety of levels.
• Quantity and quality of student discourse was
  greatly improved as teachers asked challenging
  questions and selectively transferred control and
  responsibility for classroom discourse to
  students.
• Two studies (Greenway, 2002 Kong Fitch, 2002)
  provided evidence of improved reading
  comprehension or oral word recognition.
  Unclear whether gains would translate to high
  stakes testing (Applebee et al, 2003).
• Students gained the opportunity to engage in more
  extended forms of discourse by explaining,
  supporting, and justifying their answers as well
  as connecting to the contributions of other
  students
• Discourse-based instruction that embraces
  effective teacher questioning engages students
  and builds a community of learners. One thing is
  clear. Getting students talking through sound
  instructional practices gets students thinking.

QtA 7 month intervention Bo
ok Club 9 month intervention (1 school
year) Slosson Oral Reading Test Students
gained more than one grade level on average on
SORT. Students also completed a
meta-comprehension strategy index. Mean
difference values were reported indicating that
students gained the ability to use comprehension
strategies more effectively (Predicting/Verifying-
1.45 mean difference, Drawing from background
knowledge- 1.15 mean difference,
Self-questioning- 1.05 mean difference). Collabor
ative Reasoning 7 week intervention

• Purpose
• The purpose of this inquiry was to gain an
  understanding of the effects of specific types of
  discourse-based instruction during classroom
  instruction on classroom discourse and related
  reading and academic outcomes. Specifically
• can discourse-based instruction be implemented
  in classrooms where IRE was previously used?
• what are the effects of implementing
  discourse-based instruction on the quality and
  quantity of teacher and student discourse?
• what outcomes related to reading and reading
  comprehension are affected by discourse-based
  instruction?

Literature cited Applebee, A. N., Langer, J. A.,
Nystrand, M., Gamoran, A. (2003).
Discussion-based approaches to developing
understanding Classroom instruction and student
performance in middle and high school English.
American Educational Research Journal, 40(3),
685. Chinn, C. A., Anderson, R. C. (1998).
The structure of discussions that promote
reasoning. Teachers College Record, 100(2),
315-368. Chinn, C. A., Anderson, R. C.,
Waggoner, M. A. (2001). Patterns of discourse in
two kinds of literature discussion. Reading
Research Quarterly, 36(4), 378-411. Greenway, C.
(2002). The process, pitfalls, and benefits of
implementing a reciprocal teaching intervention
to improve the reading comprehension of a group
of year 6 pupils. Educational Psychology in
Practice, 18(2), 113-137. Kong, A., Fitch, E.
(2002). Using Book Club to engage culturally and
linguistically diverse learners in reading,
writing, and talking about books. The Reading
Teacher, 56, 352-363. McKeown, M. G., Beck, I.
L. (2004). Transforming knowledge into
professional development resources Six teachers
implement a model of teaching for understanding
text. The Elementary School Journal, 104(5),
391-408. Wolf, M. K., Crosson, A. C.,
Resnick, L. B. (2005). Classroom talk for
rigorous reading comprehension instruction.
Reading Psychology, 26(1), 27-53.
Table 1. Discourse Based Instructional Methods.

Research Reviewed Reciprocal Teaching 3 month
intervention Neale Analysis of Reading
Ability (revised British Edition) Form 1. This
measure was chosen because it uses both
inferential and factual comprehension questions
and is respected as a research instrument when
measuring comprehension. Locus of Control
measure was used to see whether these pupils
developed a greater internal locus of control as
a result of this intervention. This would
indicate that the pupils felt that they had
greater control over their behavior and
actions.
Methodology Two main methods were used to locate
relevant studies. First, computerized database
searches of the literature on classroom discourse
were conducted. Descriptors used for the
computerized searches included the following
combinations classroom discourse, classroom
talk, teacher-student interaction, reading
comprehension, literacy, teaching methods,
teacher instruction, and instructional
methodology. Second, reference lists from
previously published major studies on classroom
discourse and literacy (Applebee, Langer,
Nystrand, Gamoran, 2003 Chinn Anderson,
1998 Chinn, Anderson, Waggoner, 2001) were
reviewed. The articles included in the current
inquiry described the four instructional methods
outlined , quantified teacher-student
interactions, and presented data on student
language, reading, or reading comprehension
related to teacher instructional methods. These
studies were then analyzed for outcomes along the
dimensions of oral language, oral reading, and
reading comprehension.
For further information Please contact
nkoonc2_at_uic.edu for more detailed analysis
regarding the data associated with this poster.