Before Reciprocal Teaching can be used successfully by your students, they need to have been taught and had time to practice the four strategies that are used in reciprocal teaching (summarizing, questioning, predicting, clarifying).
Reciprocal Teaching Palincsar Pdf Download
At Frank Love Elementary School, reading expert Shira Lubliner uses reciprocal teaching to guide students in learning to lead a classroom discussion. But first, Ms. Lubliner shows them how to guide a conversation about a book.
CSR is a reading comprehension practice that combines two instructional elements: (a) modified reciprocal teaching (Palincsar & Brown, 1984), and (b) cooperative learning (Johnson & Johnson, 1987) or student pairing. In reciprocal teaching, teachers and students take turns leading a dialogue concerning key features of text through summarizing, questioning, clarifying, and predicting. Reciprocal teaching was developed with the intention of aiding students having difficulty with reading comprehension. Palincsar and Brown found that seventh graders with poor reading comprehension skills achieved sizable gains through use of the reciprocal teaching method. More recent studies using reciprocal teaching have found it to be effective with struggling middle school and high school readers (Alfassi, 1998; Lysynchuk, Pressley, & Vye, 1990). Klingner and Vaughn (1996) originally designed CSR by combining modified reciprocal teaching with cooperative learning. Through a number of research trials, CSR has been refined and currently consists of four comprehension strategies that students apply before, during, and after reading in small cooperative groups. These reading strategies are: (a) preview (before reading), (b) click and clunk (during reading), (c) get the gist (during reading), and (d) wrap up (after reading).
The effects of CSR on reading comprehension for students with learning disabilities, including secondary students with learning disabilities, have been examined in a series of intervention studies by Vaughn, Klingner, and their colleagues. Most intervention studies demonstrated that CSR was associated with improved reading comprehension for students with learning disabilities. The first study using CSR was conducted with 26 seventh- and eighth-graders with learning disabilities who used English as a second language. In this study, students learned to use modified reciprocal teaching methods in cooperative learning groups (i.e., brainstorm, predict, clarify words and phrases, highlight the main idea, summarize the main idea(s) and important detail, and ask and answer questions). CSR was effective in improving reading comprehension for most of students with learning disabilities (Klingner & Vaughn, 1996).
Alfassi, M. (1998). Reading for meaning: The efficacy of reciprocal teaching in fostering reading comprehension in high school students in remedial reading classes. American Educational Research Journal 35(2), 309-322.
The reciprocal teaching method is one of the effective approaches that teach learners to become responsible for their reading and employ metacognitive reading strategies over cognitive reading strategies (Cohen, 1998). Palincsar and Brown initiated it in the early 1980s in English classrooms of native speakers.
Characteristics of Reciprocal Teaching: According to Palincsar and Brown (1984), reciprocal teaching is an instructional approach that can be best characterized by three main features:
For example, a strategy such as monitoring comprehension of sentences depends for a large part on the degree of accuracy of knowledge of the words used in these sentences. From the literature about reading comprehension, it is known that the reading process including the conscious use of strategies for comprehension is cognitively highly demanding (Kendeou et al., 2014). Perfetti and Hart (2002) point to the role of lexical quality in the reading process and to the consequences for readers suffering from low lexical quality. Lexical quality pertains to the connections made between the orthographic, phonological and semantic properties of words. For readers who have a low lexical quality, which may pertain to each of these properties of vocabulary knowledge, overcoming word-level comprehension problems can be cognitively demanding. Therefore, it is plausible that poor readers have to use their working memory primarily for word-level issues and therefore lack working memory space for the application of more general strategies for comprehension. Adolescents suffering from insufficient vocabulary knowledge will therefore be at a disadvantage in the use of strategies for monitoring comprehension, one of the most important activities in the approach of reciprocal teaching practiced by Palincsar & Brown (1984).
Following this line of reasoning, we hypothesize that adolescents with low academic achievement differing in their level of vocabulary knowledge will not benefit similarly from an intervention aimed at instructing reading strategies to foster reading comprehension. In other words, these adolescents may differ in vocabulary knowledge and this may influence their response to a reciprocal teaching intervention directed at the improvement of reading strategies. Specifically, we hypothesize that students with a smaller vocabulary will benefit less from the intervention than students with a larger vocabulary.
Al-Makhzoomi, K., & Freihat, S., (2012). The effect of the reciprocal teaching procedure (RTP) on enhancing EFL students reading comprehension behavior in a university setting. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(5), 275-291.
Al-Harby, J.S.S., (2016). The effect of reciprocal-teaching strategy on learning outcomes and attitudes of Qassim-University students in Islamic Culture. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(6), 213-231.
Di Lorenzo, K. E. (2010). The effects of reciprocal teaching on the science literacy of intermediate elementary students in inclusive science classes. Retrieved from _of_reciprocal_teaching_on_the_science_literacy_of_intermediate_elementary_students_in_inclusive_science_classes.pdf.
Abstract: The article aims to investigate the efficacy of Reciprocal Teaching Method (RTM) on reading comprehension to EFL students. The subject of the study was two classes from the second grade students of Ilmu Agama Islam (IAI) in Probolinggo. There were 44 students emerging from XI IAI 1 and XI IAI 2 which consisted of 22 each. Nonrandomized sampling was chosen to select the group. To decide the groups into control and experimental, coin was used. The XI IAI 1 class then became the experimental group (taught using reciprocal teaching method), meanwhile the XI IAI 2 was the control group (taught using conventional as it is). Both classes acquired mixed levels of reading achievement. It means that both classes were at the same level of reading comprehension. After the treatment, it revealed that those who were taught using RTM gained better result than those were taught using the conventional one.
For the most part, the reciprocal teaching process we discussed helps students improve their reading comprehension strategies in language-based subjects. Is it possible to adapt these strategies to other subjects? 2ff7e9595c
Comments