hypothesis abstract - faculty of education
TRANSCRIPT
1
HYPOTHESIS
Explicitly teaching Year 2 students to visualise a text, using a R.I.D.E.R. procedure
(Read, Image, Describe, Evaluate and Repeat the steps) during and after reading will
lead to an improved ability to comprehend a fiction text.
ABSTRACT
Many students in Year 2 are capable of decoding the alphanumeric symbols required
to be a decoder but experience difficulty at the semantic level of reading and
consequently are poor at comprehension.
The hypothesis of the study postulates that the explicit teaching of year 2 students to
visualise (create images from what is read), will help then to unlock the meaning.
Through the images, the reader is able to draw conclusions, make predictions,
interpret information and remember details, which in turn will assist in the overall
comprehension.
Research on the development of comprehension strategies suggests that the explicit
teaching of the visualisation strategy is an effective tool for increasing
comprehension.
In this study, a teaching group of eight students were trained in the visualisation
strategy through modeling and explicit instruction. The sessions immersed the
students in the reading process.
Visualisation helps each reader try to make sense of what the text presents in words
by the reader creating mental images of those words. When children draw their
images, we can also help them label their pictures to strengthen both concepts and the
vocabulary connected to those concepts. Borgia, L. & Owles, C, (2009).
Students in these sessions were given extra encouragement to create images with lots
of detail and go beyond the literal information in the text. The role of the researcher
(teacher) was to provide support and help students to revise their images when new
information was gained and to help students to check for accuracy.
The sessions gave opportunity to share their images and talk about how creating
images helps them gain a better understanding of the text.
The student were taught the acronym RIDER in order to assist them to remember the
strategy
R read first sentence, paragraph episode, and complete text
I imagine make a picture in your mind, think about what you already know
and
add this to your picture
D describe your image or picture
E evaluate your image for its completeness by checking against the text
R repeat steps 1,2,3,4 ; read on, continue the process while you are
reading
2
This was further encouraged by teaching a poem with actions to reinforce the
procedures and to strive to move the students to the metacognitive level of operation
so that he/she is able to transfer the strategy to other settings.
It will assist the students to gain more meaning from the text and have a prescribed
pathway and key words in order to self manage.
The study compared the results of two groups of year 2 students: a teaching group
(intervention) who were taught to use visualisation and a control group of eight
students who remained in the normal classroom literacy session.
Results indicated that there was an improvement in the visualisation scores of the
teaching group. In addition, the teaching group’s comprehension ability improved but
not dramatically. The direct instruction in the use of the RIDER acronym could
indicate a benefit for the students by providing them with a pathway to unlock the text
and help them with reading comprehension.
These findings support the concept that visualisation improves comprehension.
The implications for teaching is that the visualization strategy is beneficial in
improving comprehension and should be included as part of the classroom literacy
learning in Year 2. The teaching group consisted of eight students which is sizeable
but this reflects the reality of a normal classroom where the numbers in the class are
large.
The teaching sessions should be conducted as a modeling approach with explicit
demonstration, on-going scaffolding and opportunities to practise and apply reading
strategies so that the student learns to prepare for, monitor and adjust their reading. It
is essential that in explaining the visualisation process the ‘when’ and ‘how’ to use it
is shown. Plus opportunities to practise are given. The teacher’s role is ensuring that
all students build a back- up knowledge that they can access whilst participating in the
reading process.
“Visualisation is a strategy that may strengthen reading comprehension” Manning
(2002)
3
INTRODUCTION
“Mastery of reading has become a passport to participation in the 21st century.”
Neale (1999)
The teaching of reading has assumed enormous importance in society and throughout
the world. Reading involves a complex processing of creating, interpreting and
analysing meaning from the text and then integrating three courses of information
using semantic(meaning) syntactic cues ( grammar) and grapho phonic cues – (sound
symbols)
A good reader must actively integrate these three courses of information and integrate
a range of strategies of both word identification and comprehension strategies and
draw upon all of these whilst reading. They also must be able to access their prior
knowledge during reading and have automated many of the reading strategies: in
many cases these behaviours occur automatically and subconsciously. A good reader
is an effective reader!
On the other hand the understanding of the text is a difficulty that many students
encounter. Many students are capable at decoding the alphanumeric symbols but have
difficulty at the semantic level in understanding the meaning of the words, the
sentence level, conceptual level and the knowledge of what the piece of writing is
about.
As Munro(2006) has indicated “ reading begins with what the reader already knows.”
This can be contextualized and consists of typical prototypes that the reader already
has. However, as the reader reads he/she needs to retrieve the more abstract
knowledge that is contained within the print. The reader takes on all the networks of
meaning shown in the text. By using what the reader already knows in various ways
and acting on the text the reader can comprehend the text.
Poor comprehension inhibits students in becoming efficient readers. Efficient readers
have often automated many reading strategies that enhance their reading. They have a
resource bank of reading behaviours that may occur simultaneously for this process to
take place.
This study’s purpose is to examine what a student does when he/she is unable to
reveal fully the message of the print and therefore has poor comprehension. It is a
study of average to below average ability students who are able to decode. Its purpose
is to scrutinize one strategy – visualising –creating images from what is read to help
them unlock the meaning. However, it does acknowledge that this is only one of
many comprehension strategies that a good reader utilizes whilst reading.
The motive for undertaking this study was to investigate whether the precise teaching
of visualisation at the lower primary level – year 2, would enhance reading
comprehension. To date most research has been in the middle and upper end of the
primary school. In addition, to observe whether past Reading Recovery students who
usually struggle with comprehension would benefit from explicit instruction in the
visualisation strategy.
Finally, examining the size of the group to witness whether it was possible to
incorporate this teaching of the strategy to a larger group.
4
Many researchers have concluded that greater gains comprehension could occur if all
readers were taught to use the comprehension strategies that good readers use. Being a
good reader requires active involvement and using a variety of strategies as they read.
(Block, Gambrell & Pressley 2002: Keene and Zimmermann 1997: Pearson Roehler,
Dole, & Duffy, 1992) cited in Scharlach (2008) all support this notion.
It also concludes that comprehension strategies should be taught to students when
they are immersed in the reading process. Students need to be taught effectively so
that they may become strategic metacognitive readers.
Johnson-Glenberg (2000) defines a strategy as a conscious, intentional and yet
flexible tool that readers use to update their understanding of a text. Strategies are
different from a skill in that they are reflective rather than routinised and involve
multiple cognitive subroutines.
Visualisation is such a strategy. It is a comprehension strategy for helping young
children think and make meaning from a text. We can encourage children to make a
picture in their heads of what they hear and think as a selection is read. It helps to put
the vocabulary and concepts presented into pictures (Stead, 2006 . 68) as cited in
Borgia (2009)
Visualising helps each reader try to make sense of what the text presents in words by
creating mental images of these ideas. When children draw their images, we can also
help them label their pictures to strengthen both concepts and the vocabulary
connected to those concepts.
In the article by Johnson- Glenberg (2000) it cites Bell’s (1986) protocol for the
procedure where the students initially started with one word, moved next to sentences
and then to short paragraphs. Using guided words to help them create the images and
display them so they could use the words as prompts when reading.
Pearson (2000) sees that the sessions need to balance with both specific explicit
instruction and a good deal of time for reading.
Johnson-Glensberg (2000) study shows that students taught the strategy of
visualisation answered significantly more implicit, inferential open-ended questions.
This study postulates that small group training in reading strategies enhances the
performance of adequate decoders who are poor comprehenders.
Many researchers such as Almasi and Gambrell(1997) cited in Fisk and Hurst (2003)
, Munro (2002) and Borgia ( 2006) believe that the listening and speaking or social
interaction aids comprehension as the students interaction challenged others’ ideas
causing a higher level of thinking. In addition, it enabled all students to learn from
each other, strengthen their ideas, and increase their understandings. Learning from
each other helped them to remember the material. The students listened to the ideas of
each other and were able to check whether the picture they had was the same. This
interchange of ideas enabled the teacher to ascertain that the students had actually the
correct ideas, the ‘big ’picture or ‘important ’ideas in the text.
In Scharlack (2008) the research talks about the best course of delivery and teaching
an instruction. The optimum process is through modeling and explaining when and
how to use the strategy. In the course of the instruction, many repeated opportunities
for guided visualization practice and extended independent reading should occur.
Munro (2006) in his visualisation lessons and the E.R.I.K. Progam claims this
philosophy and is the foundation of these successful programs. They have been key
elements in the design of the intervention study presently being undertaken.
5
Furthermore, Munro (2002) encourages the use of reading out aloud. He sees having
students read aloud as a key literacy teaching procedure. When the students articulate
whet they have visualized they are provided with auditory feedback for the text read.
It also helps students to retain sentences in short term memory and to use their oral
language to reason about what they read.
The duration of the intervention is seen as important and Johnson Glensberg study
(2000)
recommends that future interventions for poor comprehenders last longer than 16
weeks duration. This is also endorsed by the research in E.R.I.K (2009) where 50
sessions is considered to have the most significant result. There seems to be a
requirement that a frequent length of practice is allowed in order to make a difference.
Related research with the problem you are researching A number of studies have examined poor comprehension and a salient feature they
have found was the failure of the reader to remember the text. Manning (2002) states
that many students require assistance to build mental pictures of settings and
characters whilst reading and they have difficulty understanding the connected text.
Many factors may reduce a student’s ability to visualise. The student may have a
lack of background knowledge and this would impede the student’s ability to build a
picture of an event or situation. If the topic is not within the students’ range of
experience, it may be difficult to understand, as it would not be familiar to them.
Conversely, if the student does not have a little personal involvement with the text it
is likely that the student will be a passive reader who needs help in becoming
involved in the text. The explicit teaching process in the teaching of the strategy will
require discussions before, during and after whilst reading to help these students to
make personal connections to the text.
Munro (2006) concurs with this. In his study the students who have difficulty learning
by reading do so because their existing knowledge is not in a form that can be easily
aligned or linked with a text. Their knowledge is mainly in imagery form or in action
form. The students are assisted to recode their nonverbal knowledge into a verbal
form; they do this by putting their non-verbal knowledge of the topic into sentences.
The procedure includes opportunities for them to visualise the topic and learn to ask
themselves. “What does it remind me of?”
Studies by Borgia (2006) and Johnson- Glensberg (2000) further endorse the
importance of having material that is relevant to the students. Their studies also spoke
of using self-selected text during independent reading time. Johnson-
Glensberg(2000) additionally spoke in his study of using informational texts that
present facts about the world around us to motivate and interest readers, stimulate
wonder and encourage children to think about and have conversations and
discussions. This in turn will broaden children’s knowledge and interest.
Another problem that impedes visualisation is the inattention to punctuation and
phrasing during the reading process. The student may race through the ‘read’ like a
race to be won or a chore to be finished. Reading must be at such a pace so that they
6
can activate the pictures in their heads. Each end punctuation mark should be seen as
a time for the reader to stop and develop a picture of what is happening. The
children’s rate of reading impinges on their ability to comprehend the text and make
connections. If too slow, they lose the continuity – their energies are going into the
cognitive process of decoding the words, and not the links and connections.
The metacognitive level can be a problem in the student’s poor ability in
comprehension.
The strategy of comprehension in which visualisation is one facet, teaches the
students to perform a particular strategy in a particular context. However, we must
strive to move the student to the metacognitive level of operations so that he/she is
able to transfer this strategy to other settings once we are no longer providing support.
It is important that the student practises so that the strategies will gradually become
self regulated and students will reach a level of metacognition where they will not
only be able to use the strategies but will also know when and where to apply them.
If the students do not know when, where and how to apply them in different situations
this can cause a problem in comprehension.
Initially there is scaffolding instruction- a teacher provides scaffolds or supports to
facilitate student’s ability to build on prior knowledge and internalise new
information.
It is important that the scaffolds are temporary and are progressively withdrawn until
the learner is able to complete the task independently.
The goal is to help the students to become independent and self- regulated learners.
The teaching sessions explicitly modeled the strategy of visualisation as per Munro
(2006) procedures.
Like this research and the study, the purpose of scaffolding was to increase student’s
metacognitive ability to transfer the strategy to their own independent reading. If this
does not occur, a problem arises.
Another cause of the problem as Munro (2006) says is at the ‘sentence level’ process.
Many psycholinguistic aspects may inhibit the comprehension of a sentence. These
may be syntax, verbal semantic networking and a range of information processing and
organisational strategies such as visualising.
Syntactic knowledge facilitates both word recognition and text comprehension. This
can assist the readers to anticipate particular words or to recognise that some words
are more likely to occur than others are.
Readers who do not use information efficiently are less able to use a knowledge of
text structure as a template for generating expectations prior to reading. Students who
do not have processing and organizational strategies are less able to remember the
text, and less able to elaborate and to infer.
Consequently, students will have difficulty with extended sentences of a more
complex nature and are less likely to comprehend the written text.
A final problem that causes a difficulty in comprehension is the students inability to
automatise the orthographic process therefore freeing up the mind to act on the
cognitive processes. They are so involved deciphering the words they are not
attending to the meaning.
7
HYPOTHESIS
Explicitly teaching Year 2 students to visualise a text, using a R.I.D.E.R. procedure
(Read, Image, Describe, Evaluate and Repeat the steps) during and after reading
will lead to an improved ability to comprehend a fiction text.
The present investigation aims to examine the effect of teaching the visualising
strategy to a group of students who can decode at an age appropriate level but did
have trouble in completing comprehension tasks at times
It will assist the students to gain more meaning from the text and to set out a detail
pathway and key words to follow.
By teaching the procedure of RIDER strategy as outlined in Whitehead (1986) as
cited in Lewis & Lewis (2006) as articulated in E.R.I.K ( 2003) it will hopefully give
the students visual cues to reflect back to so the students can self- manage future
events.
Additionally the study will observe the management, progress of past reading
recovery students, and monitor how reading recovery students are progressing.
8
METHOD
Design : The study uses a case study Test, Teach Test design, 0.X.0
An Outline of the Study
All students in Year 2 were assessed for their reading text level by the classroom
teacher in February using the CEOM prescribed ‘Alpha Assess’ materials and
screened for comprehension ability using the ‘Progressive Reading Test’ in March.
Additionally the ‘Burt Word Test’ data was reviewed to determine whether word
recognition and decoding skills were automatic enough for students to focus beyond
the word level to higher order comprehension skills
Selections of likely candidates were made in consultation with the classroom teacher
and after parental consent was received further screening measures were
administered.
The selected students in both the teaching group (intervention group) and control
group were administered individually Pre tests over a period of two weeks.
The teaching group were taught for 12 sessions over a three week period at the
commencement of Term 2.
All participants were retested using ‘reading text level’ and comprehension
assessment using ‘Progressive Reading Test’.
Finally, all were individually post tested in the series of prior tests .i.e. Neale
Analysis, visualisation and synonym test.
A total of 17 students were involved in the study but one student was removed
because he was clearly above average for comprehension when screened with the
Neale Analysis,
scoring in the 96-percentile rank.
Participants : The students involved are in Year 2 of a single stream primary school in metropolitan
Melbourne and all are in their third year of school. The teaching group (intervention)
and control group consists of sixteen children with eight students placed in each
group. The Teaching group consists of 3 girls and 5 boys; and the control group
consists of 4 girls and 4 boys. They were “regular” learners in the sense that none of
the students had identifiable disabilities or impairments such as sensory, intellectual,
physical or emotional problems that would exclude them from membership of a
regular class.
Selection :
The first step in participant recruitment involved requesting the classroom teacher to
identify students who were most likely to be age appropriate decoders with some
comprehension difficulties.
Further to this a screening of all students in their Reading Text level was undertaken
at the commencement of each year so this gave further data for selection.
Additionally, the Progressive Reading test was administered to the whole class to
determine comprehension ability. Children who scored either too low or above the
average of the class were not selected.
9
The matching of students in the teaching group (intervention) and control group
was undertaken to reflect as closely as possible students with similar abilities and
needs. Five students who fitted the criteria of being past reading recovery students
in the study were split and allocated into both groups. Two students participating in
reading recovery this year were not chosen as they did not pass the comprehension
criteria ability and their text level was 0 at the time of commencing.
More credence was given to the results of the Progressive Reading Test for
comprehension ability than reading text level. A number of students had achieved
the 28 reading recovery level in the February assessment. The year 2 class has 27
members so the researcher wanted to have a substantial number in the teaching and
control groups. Believing my research would be more reflective of the ‘real life’
situation faced in a natural school environment.
Both groups consisted of matched students of high, average and lower reading
ability.
CHARACTERISTICS OF SELECTED STUDENTS
The information regarding the sixteen students involved in the study follows in Table
1. (more detail Appendix 1, Table 7 part A,B,C& D)
It is important to note that except for two students in the teaching group who were
easily distracted and distracted others if they could, the other students were fully
engaged and keen to participate in the teaching sessions. An added bonus is that the
researcher is a co classroom teacher and has a strong rapport with the students.
It was important to ascertain the reading ability of the students in the study. Assessing
the students ability the researcher used the reading text level provided by the Alpha
Assess, Burt Reading Test to indicate words reading and the Progressive Reading T
est for comprehension. These measures were used to benchmark candidates.
TABLE 1 Demographics of Students in Study
LNSLN
FUND-
ING
PRO –
GRESSIVE
READING
TEST
PRE
Name
Of
Students
Teaching
group =
0
Control
group
=1
Age
Months
Gen
der
0=
Fem
ale
1=
Mal
e
Year
s
Of
schoo
l
ESL
No =0
Yes
=1
0=N/A
1=SLD
2=ID
3=ASP
Earlier
Inter-
vention
No=0
RR=1
Bridges
=2
ERIK
=3
Text
Read
Level
Feb
2009
T
E
X
T
R
E
A
D
L
E
V
E
L
M
A
y
B
U
R
T
W
O
R
D
T
E
S
T
E
M
A
N
o
=
0
Y
es
=
1
A
T
T
E
N
D
A
N
C
E
N
O.
O
F
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
S
R
A
W
S
C
O
R
E
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
S
C
O
R
E
%
I
L
E
S
A 0 88 1 3 0 0 1 18 21 33 0 12 8 75 5
B 0 90 1 3 0 0 0 28 28 56 0 12 21 91 27
C 0 94 0 3 0 0 0 21 25 36 0 12 19 88 20
D 0 87 0 3 0 0 1 21 23 36 0 12 18 86 18
E 0 91 1 3 0 0 0 18 24 34 0 12 20 89 23
F 0 90 0 3 0 0 0 25 27 36 1 12 22 92 30
10
G 0 96 1 3 0 0 1 20 22 31 0 12 12 80 9
H 0 95 1 3 0 0 0 28 28 60 0 12 24 96 38
I 1 92 1 3 0 0 0 28 28 43 0 12 25 98 43
J 1 88 0 3 0 0 1 25 27 40 0 12 18 86 18
K 1 95 0 3 0 0 0 28 28 51 0 12 19 88 20
L 1 91 0 3 0 0 0 28 28 51 0 12 21 91 27
M 1 90 0 3 0 0 0 28 28 51 0 12 26 100 49
N 1 85 1 3 0 0 1 15 18 25 0 12 15 83 12
O 1 92 1 3 0 0 0 28 28 48 0 12 25 98 43
P 1 91 1 3 0 0 0 28 28 49 0 21 25 82 43
TEACHING GROUP CONTROL GROUP
Materials Testing Material
Tests for Reading text levels - Classroom text levels Alpha Assess Feb and
May
Tests of Reading Comprehension - Progressive Reading Test 1 Pre and
Post Task for Visualisation Visualisation test John Munro Pre and
Post Task for Synonym Synonym Test 1-14 John Munro Pre and
Post Tests for Comprehension,
Accuracy and Rate Neale Analysis Pre From 1
and Post Form 2 Tests for Self Efficacy Self Efficacy Pre
The materials used
1) Written selected texts material taken from ERIK with pictures removed
Names A Picnic at the Dam No 9
A Day at the Beach No. 19
A Walk in the Park No. 23
The Shopping Trip No. 27
On the Lake No. 36
Grandma and Grandpa No. 40
The Farm No. 46
The Missing Pets Part 1,2,3,&4 No. 51-54
2) The last four sessions involved reading a chapter style book. Year 2 students were
introduced to this format and the researcher chose to implement this arrangement
giving students the experience and procedure for visualizing in this setting.
3)Researcher made materials -Appendix 4
Key Word Sheet
Created Poem with Actions
11
Procedure All students in year 2 were assessed using Burt Reading Test, CEOM, and
Reading Text Level at the commencement of 2009. Discussion was held with the
class teacher and the students were short-listed to seventeen students eligible to be
involved.
These students were pre-tested using the following
- Progressive Reading test
- Visualisation Task
- Synonym Task
- Self Efficacy
- Neale Analysis
This enabled information to be gathered about the comprehension levels of the
students and it provided the basis for selecting and matching students in the control
and teaching (intervention) group.
The initial Burt Reading Test was administered so that it could be determined whether
the students in both groups had word recognition and decoding skills that were
automatic, enough for the students to focus beyond the word level to higher order
comprehension scores.
All students were assessed in a class situation as in the case of the Progressive
Reading Test. Selection of students was made with eight students to be allocated to
the teaching (intervention) group and eight students to the control group. All other
assessments were conducted on an individual basis and completed over a number of
days.
At the conclusion of assessing, the teaching sessions were organized to coincide
with Literacy sessions in the morning in the Year 2 room, and the students were
withdrawn to the Literacy room next door to the classroom. This is a familiar place to
all students.
There were 12 sessions in total occurring four times per week over a three-week
period. The session operated for approximately 40 minutes.
The source for the teaching sessions principally came from three sources,
Visualisation Teaching Procedure, Munro ( 2006 ) principally, ERIK(2002)
visualisation procedure and Bell’s instruction book. Bell (1986) cited in Johnson-
Glensberg (2000)
The research identifies the procedure to follow using the protocol of Bell’s (1986
instruction book where the students initially started with one word then moved on
next to sentences and then to short paragraphs . Initially, in the teaching sessions the
key words were used to guide the student’s ability to create the images from the text.
The key words were then displayed to support and cue the students. The purpose was
to prompt students with the visualization process while reading.
A key component was that the teacher modeled the strategy and then reinforced the
skills using guided practice where the students worked together. By session 3 & 4
practice was provided in the form of guided and collaborative practice. This allowed
12
the students the opportunity to have practice supported by the teacher, then to have
the opportunity to work in pairs and try out their skills.
In the later sessions, the students were given the prospect to work independently but
always an opportunity was given to come together and express their ideas in an oral
language function.
Over the series of sessions students worked through the stages of visualisation
procedure as suggested by Munro( 2006) The components of the session were
followed in reasonable detail and additional material was incorporated in sessions to
augment.eg
“The little man ”where the guided words were an extra addition, Appendix 3
Teaching Session & Appendix 4 plus the R.I.D.E.R. poem where we used actions to
recall the procedures we would do when visualising Appendix 3 Teaching Session
3? were all incorporated in the sessions to provide cues and additional prompts to aid
visualisation but more importantly, comprehension. Cues were also given
individually in the form of a bookmark which the child could take home and use
with their take- home reader and the visualisation glasses.
Additionally within the class setting displays and signs advertising benefits and the
prompt for the strategy were displayed around the learning environment.
During the introduction, the teacher modeled the reading and the students observed
the teacher making a ‘picture in her mind.’
The text materials were chosen from the ERIK program because they were age
appropriate, grade appropriate and relevant to the age group being researched.
Particularly the texts were selected because the topics were relevant to their
experiences and ones that these children would find a connection with. In the
Synonym task I found all students (teaching group and control group) had very
limited knowledge and language experience and as the study was focusing on
visualisation I wanted the texts to stimulate their prior knowledge and experiences and
to be able to bring this knowledge to the teaching sessions. All material was at an easy
level for students to read and manage independently plus the final four sessions
incorporated a text that imitated a chapter format.
How you use the data you collected. The initial data of Year 2 enabled the students to be selected into the study. Pre-
testing enabled the formation of the two groups namely the teaching (intervention
)group and the control group.
At the conclusion of the teaching sessions which lasted approximately three weeks
all students in the study-teaching group and control group were post- tested using the
following assessments
- Progressive Reading test No. 1
- Neale Analysis of reading Ability Form 2
- Visualisation Task
- Synonym Task
In both the control and the teaching group, the Progressive Reading Test and the
Neale Analysis were used to determine if there was a change in comprehension
scores. The control teaching scores were graphed so that comparisons could be made
and to see whether the intervention had impacted on the comprehension level of the
teaching group.
13
The Visualisation Task was administered again to measure if there was any
improvement in the awareness and use of the strategic process. These results were not
only compared against the control group and the teaching ( intervention ) group but
also in evaluating the results in pre and post testing with the teaching group to gauge
if there had been any measurable difference due to the visualisation teaching.
Additionally all students were assessed using the Synonym task to determine if in the
course of the intervention there was a secondary component where the children in the
teaching group would improve their synonym understanding.
RESULTS The results indicate support generally for the hypothesis, “that teaching Year 2
students to visualize the text that they have read will improve comprehension.” The
Progressive Reading Test and the Neale Analysis show a trend for improvement in
comprehension for most of the students in the teaching group (intervention.)
TEXT LEVEL RESULTS
The students in the teaching group were matched as closely to the control group in
ability to read a text. However, generally the control group exhibited a higher reading
text and comprehension ability when we scored the Progressive Reading Test with the
exception of Student N.
(Appendix 1, Table 7a& 7b)
BURT WORD
The Burt Reading Test results were used to show student’s skills in readability.
(Appendix 1, Table 7a) All students scored above 31 in the reading Burt test in the
teaching group. Student N in the control group scored 25.
Gains made by the intervention students were greater than those of the control group
as shown through the comparison of the pre and post testing scores using Progressive
Reading Test.
In the pre testing of the Progressive Reading Test the students in the teaching group
had a lower ability of comprehension as measured by the Progressive Reading Test. A
standard score of 96 was the top score and the range was from 75 to 96- 70 being the
minimum standard score.
FIGURE 1 RESULTS OF COMPREHENSION PRE & POST TEST
PROGRESSIVE READING TEST
14
0102030405060708090
PERCENTILE
SCORES
A C E G I K M O
STUDENTS : TEACHING
GROUP A TO H:
CONTROL GROUP I TO P
PROGRESSIVE READING TEST-
COMPREHENSION PRE & POST TEST RESULTS
PROGRESSIVE
READING TEST
PERCENTILES
SCORES PRE
PROGRESSIVE
READING TEST
PERCENTILES
POST
In the pre testing of the Progressive Reading Test the students in the teaching group
had a lower ability of comprehension as measured by the Progressive Reading Test. A
standard score of 96 was the top score and the range was from 75 to 96- 70 being the
minimum standard score.
In the control group, there were four students whose standard score was over 98,
three students above 86 and the only student to score below 86 was Student N who
scored 83.
At the conclusion of the teaching sessions, the trend for the students in the teaching
group was that six of the eight students gained six and above percentiles with a top
score of 57, whilst 2 students remained at the same level. However, in the control
group three students Students I, N and P results dropped significantly by more than 5,
13 and 20 percentiles . O ne student remained constant and Students M’s percentile
score was increased by 27 and Student O’s percentile score was increased by 44.
As a measure of achievement relative to the students of the same age, the Progressive
Reading Test provides both a Standardized score and Percentile score based on the
normal curve.
The Progressive Reading Test also measures student’s progress over time in
achievement of specific skills. Using the descriptive categories corresponding to
grouped Stanine levels we can deduce that
- The students in the Teaching Group in the prior sessions were
4 students average ability
4 students below average
- At the conclusion of the intervention the Teaching Group
7 students displayed average ability
1 student remained in the below average category.
On the other hand the Control Group
- Results in the prior assessment
5 students average ability
3 students below average
At the conclusion of the study
1 student above average
5 students average
2 students below average
15
FIGURE 2. RESULTS OF PRE & POST TEST COMPREHENSIION
– NEALE ANALYSIS
NEALE ANALYSIS COMPREHENSION
PERCENTILES PRE & POST TEST
0
20
40
60
80
100
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P
STUDENTS A TO H TEACHING
GROUP:STUDENTS I TO P CONTROL
GROUP
PE
RC
EN
TIL
E S
CO
RE
S
NEALE ANALYSIS
Comprehension
PERCENTILE PRE
NEALE ANALYSIS
COMPREHENSION
PERCENTILE POST
The results from the Neale Analysis Comprehension (FIGURE 2 )assessment clearly
show that the students in the teaching group were significantly poorer at
comprehension with most of the student in the pre test scoring around the 20
percentile.
Overall the trend for the Teaching group was some advancement in comprehension
ability with the exception of Student B. An increase of 10 to 30 percentile points was
made by six of the seven remaining students and Student D increased by 1.
The trend for The Control group showed a decrease for three of the students from 8 to
12. Minor gains were shown by two students and only three students scored
sufficiently high and could be matched to the teaching group. Student K made
exceptional gains.
Reading Recovery Students A and G in the teaching group made gains but student D
remained static . In the control group reading recovery student J increased by 26
percentile points and Student N decreased by 12 percentile points.
Gains made by the teaching (intervention) students were greater than those of the
control group as shown through the comparison of the pre testing and post-testing
scores .
However, it should be noted that students in the control group demonstrated higher
comprehension scores initially
RESULTS OF VISUALISATION TASK
In comparing the pre, visual test the control group was more skilled than the teaching
group.
TABLE 2 RESULTS OF VISUALISATION TASK PRE AND POST TEST
16
STUDENTS TEACHING GROUP
VISUAL PRE
VISUAL POST
A 32 37
B 21 31
C 23 37
D 19 42
E 26 33
F 29 39
G 30 35
H 22 36
STUDENTS CONTROL
GROUP
I 28 30
J 30 30
K 27 33
L 30 36
M 24 28
N 14 19
O 30 34
P 31 29
It was noticeable after the intervention that the teaching group’s visualisation ability
had increased considerably. An increase in the mean in pre test of 25.2 to a mean of
36.2 in the post test. The range of improvement moved from 5 at the lowest to 23 at
the highest and five of the eight students improved to a two digit number. The control
group showed a decline by one student, a ‘same’ score and an increase from 2 to 6
with that being the top improvement.
FIGURE 3
TEACHING GROUP VISUALISATION TASK PRE & POST
TEST RESULTS
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
A B C D E F G H
TEACHING GROUP STUDENTS
RA
W S
CO
RE
VISUAL PRE
VISUAL POST
RESULTS OF SYNONYM TASK
All students in the teaching group and the control group were very low in their
synonym testing, scoring well below half of the optimum score of 84. Overall, the
teaching group were slightly better than the control group in the initial testing. Two
17
students achieved high teens, four in low twenties, one at 26 and a high of 31 – this
being the highest score of the two groups. The control group had low teens, five
students in low twenties and the highest recorded 29.
TABLE 3 : RESULTS FROM THE PRE & POST SYNONYM TEST
The teaching group students increased their synonym scores across the group –at the
lowest end 2 to 18, with five students increasing their score by 10 or more. In the
control group one student showed no increase and all the rest increased by less than
ten. However, it should be noted that all, even at the end of the intervention, scored
significantly lower than half of the possible score.
TABLE 4 READING
ACCURACY – NEALE
ANAYSIS
Students TEACHING GROUP
Synonyms PRE Test
TOTAL= 84
Synonyms POST
A 18 24
B 17 32
C 31 33
D 26 38
E 20 38
F 22 37
G 20 36
H 22 26 Students CONTROL GOUP
I 23 30
J 24 28
K 13 24
L 20 20
M 22 24
N 14 21
O 24 33
P 29 34
STUDENTS TEACHING GROUP
NEALE READING RAW SCORE ACCURACY PRE
NEALE READING ACCURACY PERCENTILE PRE
NEALE READING RAW SCORE ACCURACY POST
NEALE READING ACCURACY PERCENTILE POST
A 30 23 31 29
B 51 71 60 79
C 26 18 36 36
D 24 17 28 27 E 24 17 40 46
F 31 24 42 51
G 23 16 23 20
H 50 69 57 75 CONTROL GROUP STUDENTS
CONTROL GROUP STUDENTS
I 40 44 39 44
J 28 21 31 29
K 41 48 42 51
L 61 79 72 90
M 41 48 46 59 N 20 14 15 10
O 32 25 58 77
P 44 58 45 57
18
The students in the
control group were
generally more accurate
decoders with the
exception of Student N.
In the course of the
intervention, the
teaching group
maintained their levels
and student E increased
29 percentiles.
READING RATE
TABLE 5 Results of Reading Rate – Neale Analysis
STUDENTS TEACHING GROUP
NEALE READING RATE RAW SCORE PRE
NEALE READING RATE PERCENTILE PRE
NEALE READING RAW SCORE RATE POST
NEALE READING RATE PERCENTILE POST
A 26 13 42 34
B 66 64 104 99
C 36 24 41 33
D 31 17 31 20 E 72 72 43 35
F 32 19 45 38
G 41 34 49 43
H 54 48 63 63 CONTROL GROUP STUDENTS
I 76 80 67 70
J 32 19 30 19 K 58 55 40 33
L 59 56 81 89
M 77 83 77 83
N 29 16 31 20
O 37 26 52 48
P 60 58 69 72
19
SELF EFFICACY
All students in both teaching and control groups saw themselves as confident readers
and knowledgeable of which actions they would apply in reading. Most articulated the
correct behaviors of what to do when given a choice of two scenarios when reading.
All students in both the teaching group and the control group felt quite comfortable
when reading. Most scored in the positive spectrum, with a few items in the mid
range.
All students had a positive self- efficacy and were able to articulate the correct
responses.
TABLE 6 SELF EFFICACY
Reading Action Teaching
Group
Control
Group
When you didn’t know a word that you try and work it out 6/8 7/8
If you make a mistake in reading you fix it up 8/8 8/8
A hard word you work it out 8/8 8/8
Reread a sentence to try and understand it better 7/8 8/8
Try harder to understand a story even if it is hard 8/8 7/7
Find a way to work out how to say words 8/8 8/8
The table 6 above illustrates that for both groups there did not seem to be any
difference.
The learning trend for each student
Student A
The learning for Student A in the teaching group did support the prediction that the
teaching of the strategy of visualisation will improve comprehension. Student A is a
former Reading Recovery student.
During the sessions, the student was very distracted and needed prompting to check
the work and evaluate the image against the text when completing the tasks. The
student had difficulty locating information.
Student A improved in visualization – increasing by 5, and synonym work, increasing
by 6. Comprehension improved in written tasks as in the Progressive Reading Test
scoring an additional 6 percentiles and the Neale Analysis in comprehension scoring
up seven percentile points-not a dramatic increase but still an improvement.
The results from the Neale Analysis on Reading Accuracy showed that the student’s
score is very low performing at Pre 23 percentiles and Post 29 percentiles. The
Reading rate is very low as well, performing at a Stanine 3 level at the Pre test and
20
increasing to stanine 4 in the post test. Consequently, the student loses the meaning of
what he has read. (Appendix 2, Table 8, A)
The Self Efficacy test showed that Student A considered that “ to go on reading the
sentence was the best course of action even if what you read did not make sense.”
Student B
This student was included in the Teaching Group because the score in the Progressive
Reading Test was not in the highest sector of the class. When conducting the Pre
Assessments the student’s visualisation score was quite low in comparison to others in
the grade. Likewise, so was the score for student B’s synonym test result.
Student B improved in these two areas but the scores for the comprehension remained
the same for the pre and post test in both the Progressive Reading test and Neale
Analysis.
(Appendix 2, Table 8, B)
Student C
The learning for Student C was supported by the intervention - not only the
visualisation strategy but also, the student increased in confidence as the teaching
session progressed.
Considerable improvement was displayed in visualisation results from the pre- test to
the post-test as well as the synonym test.
Reading Accuracy improved, doubling the student’s percentile. Reading rate
increased by 9 percentiles . The student’s comprehension improved with the Neale
Analysis indicating that the student moved from a stanine 5 to a stanine 6. (Appendix
2, Table 8, C)
Student D
This student was very confident in all sessions and was very enthusiastic but at times
needed to be curbed.
Although the student demonstrated great advancements between the Pre and Post tests
in visualisation and synomyns achievement could not be superimposed into the
comprehension tasks (written as a class and individual assessment with a teacher)
The results remained the same between the Pre- test and the post-test. The student’s
stanine was 3 on comprehension at the Pre-test and was ranked as a performance
indicator of below average.
Between the assessments, there was a slight improvement in student’s reading
accuracy as assessed in the Neale Analysis.
There was no change in the reading rate.
In visualisation assessment the student confidently created the images from simple
sentences in the visualisation task but there was a marked decline when the sentence
21
length increased and the sentences were compound and complex. The student did not
appear to hold the meaning.
The student appears to use meaning to gain access to print and is very weak in
phonological and orthographic processing and as a result of this intervention I will
be recommending that this student is assessed using ERIK.
In the Self Efficacy Test Student D chose the option that if you came to a word in
reading that you did not know you would wait for someone to tell you.
Student D was a former student of the Reading Recovery intervention.
(Appendix 2 Table 8, D )
Student E
The learning trend for Student E supports the prediction that teaching visualisation
will improve comprehension. In visualization test, synonym test, comprehension
written Progressive Reading Test and individual Neale Analysis there were gains in
all assessments from pre to post testing.
Student E’s Reading Rate decreased in the post-test so, we would expect a positive in
that the student would be able to hold the meaning of the text.
Also, Student E’s reading accuracy improved from the pre test to the post test moving
from a stanine 3 – below average to stanine 5 – average . (Appendix 2, Table 8, E)
Student F
Student F wanted to engage in sessions but tended to miss the important features of
the passage, lock into a minor aspect of the passage and then go off on other irrelevant
tangents.
However, student F’s results from pre test to post test does support the teaching of
visualisation. As can be seen in (Appendix 2 Table 8, F) gains were made in
visualisation task, synonym and in turn in the comprehension measure by Progressive
Reading Test and Neale Analysis. Student F moved from a stanine 4 to stanine 5 in
comprehension . In addition reading accuracy improved moving from a stanine 4 to
stanine 5.
Student G
Student G, another past Reading Recovery participant was very distracted during all
sessions.
Yet Student G’s learning trend does support the prediction that visualisation will
improve comprehension.
Improvement in visualisation between pre test and post- test was moderate but quite
dramatic in the synonym test.
Advancement occurred in comprehension with an increase occurring in the
Progressive Reading Test which is a pencil paper assessment and the individual
assessment as measured by the Neale Analysis.
22
The results show that the visualisation lessons certainly supported the student’s
learning. Student G’s results increased substantially. However, reading accuracy and
reading rate did not alter.
It is also important to note that although there was significant improvement the
comprehension level is still low. At pre-test on Neale Analysis the student was stanine
3 with a performance descriptor of below average and the advancement to the post-
test where the score was stanine 4 which is classified as a ‘low average ‘ description.
(Appendix 2, Table 8,G)
Student H
Student H’s learning reflects overall support for the prediction that teaching a
visualisation strategy supports comprehension. Although always engaged it could be
noted in the teaching session that this students gained a more confident approach to
tackle the work – a greater self-efficacy, speaking out in the group, raising hand ( this
student has always been on the cautious side in class.)
In all measures an improvement could be noted particularly in visualisation and
synonyms.
In (Appendix 2 Table8, H) results of the Neale Analysis in comprehension Student H
moved from a stanine 6t o stanine 7.
DISCUSSION
In contemplation of the results of this study, there is support for the hypothesis and
the research, which suggests that, teaching students strategies to use when reading
improves r their comprehension ability. In order for a long term and significant
change to eventuate my belief is that the teaching procedures would need to occur
over an extended period.
To train for students to use the visualization strategy competently requires more time.
A longer duration of intervention would enable the students to self- manage and
employ the visualization strategy unprompted. This increase of time would effect a
considerable change in results.
Generally, the Control group were more fluent readers who approached texts with
confidence; they demonstrated many strategies of re-reading, locating text and re-
reading to answer the questions
23
In the teaching sessions and the subsequent post testing many of the comprehension
strategies are intertwined. Paraphrasing and synonyms integrate so closely
when working on visualising .
SUMMARY OF TRENDS
• Results from the Post test in comprehension using Neale Analysis showed 6/8
students in teaching group and 5/8 students in Control Group improved.
• The weakest students ( Student D, G and A all past Reading Recovery)
Students A and G teaching group showed improvement plus Student D
remained the same. Whilst in control group Student N decreased..
• In teaching group a greater improvement noticed in the visualisation task.
• In teaching group a greater improvement was noted in the synonym test.
• In control group a number of students showed great gains, this trend may be
attributed to the focus of the classroom teaching program and in part to the
students themselves.
In reflecting on the results of this study there is support for the hypothesis and the
research, which suggests the explicit instruction in visualisation helped to improve
comprehension ability. Students improved in the use of synonyms and visualisation
as well as demonstrated some gains in reading comprehension.
The innovation that the researcher taught to this group of students in order to produce
a change was the independent variable – visualisation.
In the course of the sessions, the researcher was hoping to see a change in the
student’s behaviours thereby allowing the students, after creating images in their
heads to be able to understand and remember what they have read.
The study then chose to measure the comprehension ability by two independent
means. Firstly, using the Progressive Reading Test where the control is firmly in the
students hands . Assessment is carried out in a classroom and the student answers
independently and without support from the teacher.
Secondly, in this research the Neale Analysis was chosen because it is an independent
test, which enables the administrator to measure a change in skill or knowledge, by
two means. Measurement can be described by an interval measurement when it tells
‘how much’ and where the student is positioned in relation to other students- the
order. At times, I have used also the category form as shown by stanines so as to
describe more clearly the student’s abilities. The Neale Analysis enabled all three
styles of measurement to be included in this research.
The results lend support for the work of Scharlach (2008),Johnson- Glensberg( 2000),
Borgia & Owles (2009) and Munro (2002) and (2003) who suggest that explicit
teaching of a strategy in reading will support students to remember the text and
improve comprehension.
The teaching sessions were arranged in accordance with and followed rather closely
Munro’s ( 2006) teaching framework where he explicitly modelled the strategy of
visualisation . In addition other supplements were added to reinforce the strategy and
help scaffold the students.
In scaffolding instruction, a teacher provides scaffolds or supports to facilitate
students’ ability to build on prior knowledge and internalise new information.
24
It is important that the scaffolds are temporary and are progressively withdrawn until
the learner is able to complete the task independently.
The goal is to help the students to become independent and self- regulated learners.
This was the aim of the sessions and in parts this was achieved in a limited success. I
agree with Johnson – Glensberg ( 2002) whose study recommends that there would
be more success for poor comprehenders if the intervention was to last 16 weeks. The
ERIK Intervention summary (2009) supports the need for a longer duration (50
sessions) and consistency of three sessions per week.
Like this research and the study the purpose of scaffolding was to increase students
metacognitive ability to transfer the strategy to their own independent reading.
In Scharlach (2008), the study teaches the students to perform a particular strategy in
a particular context. However, we must strive to move the students to the
metacognitive level of operations so that he/she is able to transfer this strategy to
other settings once we are no longer providing support. This was attempted by the
guiding sessions of Munro (2006) where the student was gradually weaned from the
teacher group, to act individually.
It is important that the student practices these strategies so that they will gradually
become self- regulated and will reach a level of metacgonition where they will not
only be able to use the strategies but will also know when and where to apply them.
A long-term aim of the teaching was for students to learn to use the sequence of
literacy strategies spontaneously and selectively as part of their self-talk to
comprehend written texts. The teacher taught the students to talk about what they did
when they use the strategies and to evaluate their usefulness. Students wrote on small
cards and used these to self cue. This was part of Munro( 2003) research. In the
present study the students were given reflective books , RIDER bookmarks to be
interleaved in their readers and the RIDER poem and actions so the students would
have self cues to call upon at another time.
Even though the trends in the results are positive, the visualisation strategy would
need to be embedded in an instruction program and taught over a longer period of
time to bring about significant change for all students.
In the course of the teaching sessions, it became apparent that there was a need to
include work on enriching vocabulary. The students were able to use the strategy of
visualisation to help work out the meaning of the unfamiliar word but it was the group
dynamics, the oral language, the context of the text and the sharing of ideas that
helped to unlock and understand the unknown word. Borgia L and Owles,C. ( 2009)
were of this opinion and also suggested that by listening to their responses you could
check whether they had picked up the important ideas in the text. This was
particularly useful for Student E and F who at times missed the important aspects.
Another important result that this study found was that the students in both Teaching
Group and Control group scored quite poorly in the synonym test. This endorsed the
work of Munro(2002) where the relationship between reading comprehension and
vocabulary knowledge is strong and unequivocal (Baumann&Kameenui 1991 )
Vocabulary knowledge contributes to reading comprehension and grows through
reading experiences (Cunningham & Stanovich , 1998.
The research agrees that if a students is without a large vocabulary of sight words,
recognized both accurately and fluently, that these children with phonologically based
25
difficulties will expend too much cognitive effort at the word level to be able to
effectively extract meaning from a written passage.
This was very much the case with Student D and G in the teaching group and also
noted by Student N in the control group. All these students are past Reading Recovery
students.
This is further proved by the research of Munro (2002) who asserted that a major
reason why many students have reading difficulties is that they cannot read words
accurately and automatically. They have not learnt and stored in their memories sets
of letter clusters that they can use to work out unfamiliar words.
Another point noted in my research was the reading material. The text was taken from
ERIK materials as they were more likely to reflect Australian cultural views, more
appropriate age level and were an appropriate readability for year 2 students. These
texts were chosen because as Manning (2002) says it is very important for students to
have the background ‘prior’ knowledge. It is difficult to build a picture of an event or
situation that you don’t understand or which is unfamiliar. The topic needs to be
within a range of the student’s experiences
Another point noticed in the research was that many students did not pay attention to
punctuation when reading .Manning( 2002) sees the inattention to punctuation and
phrasing – a race to be won or a chore to be finished. Reading must be at a pace so
that the reader can activate the pictures in their heads. Each end punctuation mark
should be seen as a time for the reader to stop and develop a picture of what is
happening. In the teaching sessions, this was encouraged but, many students are
concentrating so much on decoding the text that little energy is expended on
punctuation – more to get the task finished. This may be particularly in the case of
Student B whose reading rate is very high and may be too high to hold the meaning of
the text.
An additional finding in Munro (2003) research showed that while all readers gained
in reading comprehension the less able readers made greater gains in their reading.
This study suggests that the literacy teaching procedures are most effective in
targeting the comprehending needs of the students who are less able. Those students
did not use their existing knowledge in systematic ways when reading in order to
learn. The present study certainly agrees with this finding. In the teaching group many
of the students increased their ability while the better students remained the same as
in the case of Student B.
While administrating the visualisation test Student D expressed that she could not
remember what the finale parts of the test said, she indicated she could not remember
the complex sentences. Student D had difficulty in the visualisation test with the more
complex sentences even when the passage was decoded by the researches. The
student was unable to hold the complex oral message. This suggests the student’s
listening comprehension is limited as well.
26
The readers had difficulty comprehending syntactic knowledge in the complex
sentences such as embedded clauses and relative clauses. Student N exhibited this
problem and this further reiterates Munro (2003).
In this study there was a range of mixed abilities in the teaching group. This enabled
the students stronger at decoding, (the more able students with text decoding) to
support the weaker students and allow the students with more experiential knowledge
to support the group. This dynamic allowed a positive outcome to be achieved where
students gained from each other. This policy reflects the good teaching practices of
having larger groups rather than individuals. Using a group of eight students is a valid
and appropriate mechanism allowing opportunities for students to learn off each other.
This method of having higher achievers supporting lower achievers in a mixed ability
group is seen as good teaching practice and has much research to support it. The
E.R.I.K. intervention Summary (2009) bears testimony to the benefits and gains of
having small group intervention following this.
In summing up it is easy to implement an instructional framework that provides
appropriate strategy instruction for all readers regardless of reading achievement. This
study delivers a framework that meets the student’s diverse needs through modeling,
scaffolding and interaction appropriate to their age level and interest.
The conclusion from this study is that visualisation is an advisable strategy for
supporting comprehension and its benefits to children’s learning is very worthwhile.
Implications for teaching practice suggested by your study.
The implication for teaching practice is that as a strategy for comprehension
visualisation is a very important one . A number of factors would need to be
addressed if implementing this strategy or continuing teaching sessions.
The duration of time where 12 sessions is not enough time to embed the self-talk and
metacognitive aspects. The frequency of four sessions per week is more than enough
but may be more beneficial three times a week for four weeks.
The researcher believes for the students to perform this visualisation strategy
independently, a longer duration would need to be allowed.
The reflection time and reflection books were important but were not sufficient to
enable the strategy to become embedded.
27
The researcher believes it requires more prompting to take to the next step
Although many visuals were used, they were not incorporated in the ordinary
classroom belonging to the students. The teaching group only had an opportunity to
view them when they were in the actual sessions. They had the bookmark RIDER in
their own personal space but that was more for home use. Therefore, a strong
recommendation would be to have visuals in prominent positions to be viewed
frequently.
In the course of the assessment and further exhibited in the Teaching session it
became clear that additional work on developing the student’s word knowledge and
vocabulary became apparent. All students in the study had a very restricted word
knowledge and synonym awareness.
The selection of texts for the study were very appropriate as the researcher felt that
the topics chosen were appropriate to the students. In future sessions the researcher
thought that a few sessions where the students were able to select an independent text
would be beneficial. It is important to allow the children to use self-selected reading
material during independent reading time. Another point to consider if there was no
restriction to time would be to include informational texts. Borgia & Owles (2009)
mentions this in their study.
It is important to allow students thinking time – a waiting time. I noted particularly in
the post visualization test and synonym test that the children need time to think
through their responses. Frequently these students required thinking time and their
responses were not automatic. The sessions need to allow for this and some degree of
rate- automaticity needs to be built in.
The size of the group of eight students worked well which is important when
considering realistically the size of a normal classroom and the importance of catering
for all students in our normal classroom. It is pleasing to note that this approach works
and could be incorporated into a normal classroom as in a learning centre.
As a result of this study the visualisation strategy will be incorporated into the year
two classroom and the rest of the class of nineteen students will be exposed to this
learning. Perhaps we could speculate that with the whole class talking the language
that it may become the self- talk of most of the students in that grade.
Possible directions for future research that are suggested by the results of the
study.
In the course of the study and research a number of possible directions have been
revealed by this investigation.
As this study was to investigate the strategy of visualisation and its impact on reading
comprehension some possible avenues of research that have flowed as an outcome of
this study’s conclusions could be :
1) How visualization strategy impacts on the world of ‘visual literacies.’
28
As we are part of the 21st century a comprehension study into the visual literacies that
children are exposed to everyday would be va.uable and should include an
investigation into the common threads and the differences associated with these
different mediums. Questions like;
Are there new strategies required to decipher the new reading and how do we take in
the texts? Do we visualise visualisations? Provide further thought, particularly if we
look at the premise of Neale quoted in the opening line of this study.
In our world, students are presented with countless input of visualised material all the
time. Is it hindering their ability to visualise? Are they waiting for people to give it to
them all the time as they have grown to expect this- just sit in front of a screen and
wait?
2) This study incorporated the visualization strategy with non- fiction texts.
A suggested possible supplementary path would be to research how visualization
strategy could be linked to informational texts.
It would be exciting to provide a teaching procedure that may motivate and excite
students who are not naturally draw to literature, especially boys.
3) The sample size of six past reading recovery students in this research is insufficient
to draw satisfactorily statistical conclusions. It would be very interesting to conduct a
longitudinal study on their progression and monitor their ongoing progress over their
primary years.
Alternatively, an investigation at a school of all past reading recovery students would
be useful. It could focus on trends and possible implications on their management and
treatment in the future.
4) The impact of retaining what the student has experienced and how the student
stores this into a working memory.
Along with Johnson-Glensberg (2000), this study reveals the links of visualizing
strategy in supporting students to remember what he/she has read.
Further research would provide insight into whether it is a short-term memory or
long-term memory. Moreover, will explicit teaching of the encoding support long-
term memory?
5) The implication of the effect of reading accuracy and reading rate has on
comprehension could be further investigated
The influence of reading fluency would possibly effect the time restrictions and the
cognitive ability in comprehension. To read too slowly would violate the syntactic of
the piece and therefore stop the processing. To look at fluency not only reading rate
but phrasing, intonation and word reading automaticity.
The effect of decoding words and how the automatising of the orthographic process
influences comprehension would be worthy of note.
6) In the course of the study, it was suggested that visualisation is only just one of the
many strategies that ‘good’ readers use.
Future directions would be the possible incorporation of Scharlach (2008) START
program that could be implemented into a whole school scenario. An examination of
explicitly teaching all eight-comprehension strategies simultaneously in the course of
a normal classroom literacy program would be beneficial.
29
7) A further consideration would be to investigate how explicitly teaching the students
to locate words in the text that gives the answers to the comprehension questions.
8) Finally to research, analyse and make a study into what is an active learner as a
reader. To further identify and articulate these qualities and teach these strategies. The
explicit teaching of active learner strategies could have long-term benefits rather than
students remaining a passive learner. As a result, the student will be able to self-
manage and direct his/her learning. So that the student can, articulate back in his or
her own words –say what they are doing-talk about it and know how to apply it in
their future learning.
In summing up, this study has shown that the explicit teaching of the visualisation
strategy to year 2 students and directly linked to the reading process will improve
comprehension. Particularly when carried out as an integrative procedure
incorporating reading, writing and oral language.
BIBLIOGRAPHY & REFERENCES Manning, M. (2002).Teaching Reading and Writing. Visualizing When Reading
Teaching K-8, May, 89-90.
Fisk, C. & Hurst, B. (2003).Paraphrasing for Comprehension. Teaching Tips. Reading
Teacher. October, Vol 57, Issue 2, 182 – 195.
Scharlach,T.(2008). START Comprehending: Students and Teachers Actively
Reading text. The Reading Teacher, Vol: 62, Issue 1, 20-31.
30
Johnson-Glensberg ,M.(2000).Training Reading Comprehension in Adequate
Decoders/Poor comprehenders: Verbal versus Visual Strategies Journal of
Educational Psychology 2000, Vol 92, No 4 p772-786
Borgia, L. & Owles, C. (2009). Terrific teaching Tips. Illinois Reading Council
Journal,
Spring , Vol 37, Issue 2, pp38-42.
Munro, J. (1999), Plumbing the Levels of reading ; An information processing model
of literacy learning Summary of Keynote presentation Biennial Conference of the
Australian Resource Educators Association June 1999 pp74-78
Munro, J. (2002). High Reliability Literacy teaching procedures: A means of
Fostering Literacy learning across the Curriculum. Idiom, 38, 1, June 2002, pp 23-31
Munro John, (2003).Fostering Literacy learning Across the Curriculum International
Journal Of Learning, Volume 10 July 2003
Munro,J., (2006) p 6 Course Notes Literacy Intervention Strategies
Munro ( 2006 ) Visualisation Teaching Procedures
Center, Y., Freeman, L., Robertson, G.& Outhred, L., (1999).The Effect of Visual
training on the reading and Listening Comprehension of Low listening
Comprehenders in Year 2 . Journal of research in Reading, Vol 22, Issue 3,241-256
Duke, N. & Pearson, D., (2002) Effective Practices for Developing Reading
Comprehension; Michigan Reading Association. U.S.A
Mc Cusker, H., Connell J., & Dalheim, B., (2009) Early Reading Intervention
Knowledge (ERIK) Summary of Intervention Data. C.E.O.M. & Lewis and Lewis,
Australia
Mc Cusker, M. and Oliver, Lee. (2006) RIDER strategy Language Support Program
Teaching Procedure, (Lewis & Lewis)
TESTS
Vincent, D., Crumpler, M.,& De La Mare, M.,(2004) Reading Progress Tests, Manual
for Dtage 1 . Hodder Murray.UK
De Lemos, M.M. (2002) Stage 1 Reading Progress Tests Australian Norms
Supplement . ACCER
31
Neale, M.D.(1999). Neale Analysis of Reading Ability: Revised. Melbourne.
A.C.E.R.
Munro,J. (2006) Visualisation Test
Munro,J. ( 2006) Synonym Test
Burt Word Reading Test ,(NZCER),1981
MATERIALS
ERIK. (2003). Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge. Catholic Education
Office and the University of Melbourne.
APPENDICES Appendix 1 a) Demographic Table of Students involved in Research b) Pre & Post testing of all Assessments Part a, b, c,& d Appendix 2 Tables of Teaching Group Individual Students Profiles Appendix 3 Teaching Sessions for Visualisation Sessions 1 to 12
32
Appendix 4 Teaching Materials Key words RIDER format RIDER Poem and actions LORIS STONE Student No 341036 INTAKE 15
33
Appendix 1 TABLE 7`PART A Demographic Data and Results of Pre & Post Assessment
Name
0 or 1 Teaching/Control Group
Age in MONTHS
Gender 0= Female 1=Male
Years of Schooling
ESL No=0 Yes=1
LNSLN funding 0=N/A 1=SLD 2=ID 3=Asp
Earlier Intevention No=0 RR=1 Bridges=2 ERIK=3…
TEXT Reading Level Feb 2009
BURT WORD READING SCORES
TEXT READING LEVEL MAY 2009
Attendance No. of sessions
EMA Educational MaintenaceAllowance NO= 0 YES= 1
A 0 88 1 3 0 0 1 18 33 21 12 0
B 0 90 1 3 0 0 0 28 56 28 12 0
C 0 94 0 3 0 0 0 21 36 25 12 0
D 0 87 0 3 0 0 1 21 36 23 12 0
E 0 91 1 3 0 0 0 18 34 24 12 0
F 0 90 0 3 0 0 0 25 36 27 12 1
G 0 96 1 3 0 0 1 20 31 22 12 0
H 0 95 1 3 0 0 0 28 60 28 12 0
I 1 92 1 3 0 0 0 28 43 28 0 0
J 1 88 0 3 0 0 1 25 40 27 0 0
K 1 95 0 3 0 0 0 28 51 28 0 0
L 1 91 0 3 0 0 0 28 54 28 0 0
M 1 90 0 3 0 0 0 28 51 28 0 0
N 1 85 1 3 0 0 1 15 25 18 0 0
O 1 92 1 3 0 0 0 28 48 28 0 0
P 1 91 1 3 0 0 0 28 49 28 0 0
34
TABLE 7 PART B
Students
Teaching Group= 0 Control Group =1
PROGRESSIVE READING TEST RAW SCORE PRE
PROGRESSISVE READING STANDARD SCORE PRE
PROGRESSIVE READING TEST %ILES SCORES PRE
PRT STANINE PRE
PROGRESSIVE READING Test RAW SCORE POST
PROGRESSIVE READING TEST STANDARD SCORES POST
PROGRESSIVE READING TEST %ILES POST
PROGRESSIVE READING TEST STANINES POST
A 0 8 75 5 2 14 82 11 3
B 0 21 91 27 4 21 91 27 4
C 0 19 88 20 3 22 92 30 4
D 0 18 86 18 3 18 86 18 3
E 0 20 89 23 4 23 94 34 4
F 0 22 92 30 4 26 100 49 5
G 0 12 80 9 2 23 94 34 4
H 0 24 96 38 4 27 103 57 5
I 1 25 98 43 5 28 92 30 4
J 1 18 86 18 3 18 86 18 3
K 1 19 88 20 3 21 91 27 4
L 1 21 91 27 4 26 100 49 5
M 1 26 100 49 5 29 110 76 6
N 1 15 83 12 3 10 78 7 2
O 1 25 98 43 5 30 117 87 7
P 1 25 98 43 5 22 89 23 4
35
TABLE 7 PART C
STUDENTS
TEACHING GROUP = 0 CONTROL GROUP = 1
NEALE ANAYSIS Comprehension RAW SCORE PRE
NEALE ANALYSIS Comprehension PERCENTILE PRE
NEALE ANALYSIS COMPREHENSION STANINE PRE
NEALE ANALYSIS COMPREHENSION RAW SCORE POST
NEALE ANALYSIS COMPREHENSION %ILES POST
NEALE ANALYSIS COMPREHENSION STANINE POST
VISUAL PRE
VISUAL POST
Synonyms PRE Test TOTAL= 84
Synonyms POST
A 0 11 26 4 13 39 4 32 37 18 24
B 0 22 79 7 21 73 6 21 31 17 32
C 0 14 47 5 18 63 6 23 37 31 33
D 0 9 19 3 9 20 3 19 42 26 38
E 0 11 26 4 16 55 5 26 33 20 38
F 0 10 22 3 15 52 5 29 39 22 37
G 0 7 12 3 10 24 4 30 35 20 36
H 0 18 68 6 23 78 7 22 36 22 26
I 1 17 63 6 16 55 5 28 30 23 30
J 1 11 26 4 15 52 5 30 30 24 28
K 1 8 15 3 19 65 6 27 33 13 24
L 1 27 86 7 20 69 6 30 36 20 20
M 1 15 53 5 19 65 6 24 28 22 24
N 1 8 15 3 3 3 1 14 19 14 21
O 1 24 83 7 26 86 7 30 34 24 33
P 1 13 42 5 14 46 5 31 29 29 34
36
TABLE 7 PART D
NEALE READING ACCURACY RAW SCORE PRE
NEALE ANALYSIS ACCURACY %ILE PRE
NEALE READING ACCURACY STANINE PRE
NEALE READING ACCURACY POST
NEALE READING ACCURACY PERCENTILE POST
NEALE ANALYSIS READING ACCURACY STANINE POST
NEALE ANALYSIS RAW SCORE Reading Rate PRE
NEALE READING RATE PERCENTILE PRE
NEALA ANALYSIS READING RATE STANINE PRE
NEALE ANALYSIS READING RATE RAW SCORE POST
NEALE READING RATE PERCENTILE POST
NEALE ANALYSIS READING RATE STANINE POST
30 23 4 31 29 4 26 13 3 42 34 4
51 71 6 60 79 7 66 64 6 104 99 9
26 18 3 36 36 4 36 24 4 41 33 4
24 17 3 28 27 4 31 17 3 31 20 3
24 17 3 40 46 5 72 72 6 43 35 4
31 24 4 42 51 5 32 19 3 45 38 4
23 16 3 23 20 3 41 34 4 49 43 5
50 69 6 57 75 6 54 48 5 63 63 6
40 44 5 39 44 5 76 80 7 67 70 6
28 21 3 31 29 4 32 19 3 30 19 3
41 48 5 42 51 5 58 55 5 40 33 4
61 79 7 72 90 8 59 56 5 81 89 7
41 48 5 46 59 6 77 83 7 77 83 7
20 14 3 15 10 2 29 16 3 31 20 3
32 25 4 58 77 6 37 26 4 52 48 5
44 58 5 45 57 5 60 58 5 69 72 6
Highlighted indicates Teaching Group ( Intervention )
37
38
APPENDIX 2 TEACHING GROUP INDIVIDUAL STUDENT PROFILES TABLE OF PRE & POST RESULTS FOR STUDENTS IN TEACHING
(INTERVENTION ) GROUP
Table 8 Results for Student A
Student A TEXT
LEVEL
BURT
VISUALISATION SYNONYM PROGRESSIVE READING TEST
STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE
PRE POST PRE PRE POST PRE POST PRE PRE PRE POST POST POST
18 21 33 32 37 18 24
75 5 2 82 11 3
NEALE ANALYSIS READING ACCURACY COMPREHENSION READING RATE RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
.
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S T
P
O
S T
P
O
S T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S T
P
O
S T
P
O
S T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S T
P
O
S T
P
O
S T
30 23 4 31 29 4 11 26 4
13 39 4 26 13 3 42 34 4
TABLE 8 of results for Student B
Student B TEXT LEVEL
BURT
VISUALISATION SYNONYM PROGRESSIVE READING TEST
STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE
PRE POST PRE PRE POST PRE POST PRE PRE PRE POST POST POST
28 28 56 21 31 17 32
91 27 4 91 27 4
NEALE ANALYSIS
READING ACCURACY COMPREHENSION
READING RATE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
.
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
51
71 6 60 79 7 22 79 7 21 73 6 66 64 6 104 99 9
39
TABLE 8 of results for Student C
Student C TEXT
LEVEL
BURT
VISUALISATION SYNONYM PROGRESSIVE READING TEST
STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE
PRE POST PRE PRE POST PRE POST PRE PRE PRE POST POST POST
21 25 36 23 37 31 33 88 20 3 92 30 4
NEALE ANALYSIS READING ACCURACY COMPREHENSION READING RATE RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
.
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
26 18 3
36 36 4 14 47 5 18 63 6 36 24 4 41 33 4
TABLE 8 of results for Student D
Student B TEXT LEVEL
BURT
VISUALISATION SYNONYM PROGRESSIVE READING TEST
STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE
PRE POST PRE PRE POST PRE POST PRE PRE PRE POST POST POST
21 23 36 19 42 26 38 86 18 3 86 18 3
NEALE ANALYSIS
READING ACCURACY COMPREHENSION
READING RATE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
.
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
24 17
3 28 27 4 9 19 3 9 20 3 31 17 3 31 20 3
40
TABLE 8 of results for Student E
Student B TEXT LEVEL
BURT
VISUALISATION SYNONYM PROGRESSIVE READING TEST
STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE
PRE POST PRE PRE POST PRE POST PRE PRE PRE POST POST POST
18 24 34 26 33 20 38
89 23 4 94 34 4
NEALE ANALYSIS
READING ACCURACY
COMPREHENSION READING RATE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
.
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
24 17 3 40 46 5 11 26 4 16
55 5 72 72 6 43 35 4
TABLE 8 of results for Student F
Student B TEXT LEVEL
BURT
VISUALISATION SYNONYM PROGRESSIVE READING TEST
STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE
PRE POST PRE PRE POST PRE POST PRE PRE PRE POST POST POST
25 27 36 29 39 22 37 92 30 4 100 49 5
NEALE ANALYSIS
READING ACCURACY COMPREHENSION
READING RATE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
.
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
31 24 4 42 51 5 10 22 3 15 52
5
32 19 3 45 38 4
41
TABLE 8 of results for Student G
Student B TEXT LEVEL
BURT
VISUALISATION SYNONYM PROGRESSIVE READING TEST
STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE
PRE POST PRE PRE POST PRE POST PRE PRE PRE POST POST POST
20 22 31 30 35 20 36 80 9
2 94 34 4
NEALE ANALYSIS
READING ACCURACY
COMPREHENSION READING RATE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
.
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
23 16 3 23 20 3 7 12 3
10 24 4 41 34 4 49 43 5
TABLE 8 of results for Student H
Student B TEXT LEVEL
BURT
VISUALISATION SYNONYM PROGRESSIVE READING TEST
STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE STANDARD
SCORE
%ILE STANINE
PRE POST PRE PRE POST PRE POST PRE PRE PRE POST POST POST
28 28 60 22 36 22 26
96 38 4 103 57 5
NEALE ANALYSIS
READING ACCURACY
COMPREHENSION READING RATE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
.
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
ST
AN
INE
RAW
SCOR
E
%
ILE
STAN
INE
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
R
E
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
P
O
S
T
50 69 6 57 75 6
18 68 6 23 78 7 76 80 7 67 70 6
42
APPENDIX THREE
TEACHING SESSIONS (INTERVENTION) ONE TO TWELVE FOR
VISUALISATION
VISUALISATION READING COMPREHENSION
YEAR 2 TEACHING GROUP SESSION NUMBER 1
PARTICIPANTS 8 students TIME 40 minutes Morning session
SESSION OUTLINE
FOCUS: Based on John Munro 2006 Session 1
• Teacher/.students read aloud each paragraph (Modeling)
• Teacher /students visualize and describe sentence by sentence in
whole group
• In small groups visualize each sentence by sentence and describe their
images
TEXT:
PRESENTATION
Copied onto large paper for all to view (no pictures)
Rest of story presented so that it can be grouped into group work
MATERIALS
Story enlarged
Activity Task Description Time
Visualisation
Teacher explains
The strategy we are learning is to visualize what we have
read. This helps us to remember what we have read.
How I do it :
I make a picture in my mind and say what the picture is
Special
decorative
glasses
To highlight that they are making pictures in their mind
the glasses we make do not have lenses are covered in.
LOOKING IN THEIR HEAD
Decorate and write the word visualisation
Give children
diagram of key
words
Using pictorial
representation
How we put the pictures in your mind
Use key words taken form Bell ( 1986)
WHAT include number, size , colour, shape and look
WHEN time
WHERE place
HOW movement
MOOD
SENSORY smell, sound, touch
43
Look at the key
words
Visualise
Boat
What pictures do you have in your mind when you think
of a boat
Teacher models and draws
Children as a group offer ideas to the group
Use Key words diagram to make sure you have taken
into account all possibilities
Visualise
Beach
Teacher models but tries to encourage students to offer
their pictures more
REFLECTION
BOOKS
Children are then asked to verbalize what they learnt
today.
Individually each child records into their own special
What I have learnt today book ?
Teacher checks what they have written
To clear up their understandings and maybe take an
individual opportunity to help a student to clarify their
ideas.
COMMENTS
Student D very enthusiastic and excited and tended to want to do all the talking
Student B and Student H Needed to be drawn into the conversation – tended to sit back
and just listen to the others
Student F not really sure – tending to be talking about other things that did not
necessarily fit with the word
Student C could be AAAAA
Student A and Student G were disruptive during the session
44
VISUALISATION READING COMPREHENSION
YEAR 2 SESSION NUMBER 2
PARTICIPANTS 8 students TIME 40 minutes Morning session
SESSION OUTLINE
FOCUS: Based on John Munro 2006 Session 2
• Teacher/.students read aloud each paragraph (modeling)
• Teacher /students visualise and describes sentence by sentence in
whole group
• In small groups visualize each sentence and describe their images
TEXT: Text from Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge “ERIK”
A Picnic at the Dam Session 9
PRESENTATION
Copied onto large paper for all to view (no pictures)
Rest of story presented so that it can be grouped
MATERIALS
Story enlarged Internet to show pictures of a Dam
Activity Task Description
TEXT: Text from Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge
“ERIK”
A Picnic at a Dam Session 9
Review of
previous
section
Look at the key
words on our
little man to
help us
visualize
Visualisation
Repeat
The strategy we are learning is to visualise what we have read and it
helps us to remember what I have read. I make a picture in my mind
and say what the picture is
Look at Display of little man with Key words in Session 1
Paragraph 1
Teacher with
students
Teacher and students read aloud paragraph 1 of the story
Key Words
Dam
Rim
Discuss words
Students with
Teacher
Students / Teacher visualize and describe sentence by sentence in a
whole group
45
In small
groups
Students read sentence by sentences visualise and describe their image
See groups in comments
Whole Group
Targeted
content words
Dam
Rim
Internet
pictures
Each group reads sentence by sentence and tell their visual image
Discussed words to ensure meaning and other words that could mean
the same
Group read final sentence
and visualized and described
This formed
part of the
Reflection
Children talked about how they visualized the picture in their mind
from the text.
Record what they learnt into special book
COMMENTS
Students had difficulty understanding a rim- used a glass to demonstrate.
Students had no real concept of a dam so found pictures of a dam on the internet.
Mostly trying to picture the situation but found I needed to question further their images
to get to the real core of the text.
Particularly Student F
Student D very responsive particularly as the text was read aloud with the teacher
Organised Partners
Students E & B: Students F & G : Students C& H and Students D & A
Find that I need to go over at the end of the session to remind them what they have
learnt. They are concentrating on the passage that they have read rather than how they
have gone about the session.
46
VISUALISATION READING COMPREHENSION
YEAR 2 SESSION NUMBER 3
PARTICIPANTS 8 students TIME 40 minutes Morning session
SESSION OUTLINE
FOCUS: Based on John Munro 2006 Session 2
• Teacher/.students read aloud each paragraph (modeling)
• Teacher /students visualise and describes sentence by sentence in
whole group
• In small groups visualize each sentence and describe their images
TEXT: Text from Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge “ERIK”
A Day at the Beach Session 19
PRESENTATION
Copied onto large paper for all to view
Rest of story presented so that it can be grouped into pairs for group work
MATERIALS
Story enlarged Cardboard with word R.I.D.E.R placed on it as a Bookmark
DISPLAYED KEY WOD CHART
Activity Task Description
TEXT: Text from Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge
“ERIK”
A Day at the Beach Session 19
Review of
previous
section
Look at the key
words on our
little man to
help us
visualize
Visualisation
Repeat
The strategy we are learning is to visualize what we have read and it
helps us to remember what I have read. I make a picture in my mind
and say what the picture is
Look at Display of little man with Key words in Session 1
Paragraph 1
Teacher with
students
Teacher and students read aloud paragraph 1 of the story
Key Words
Mesh
Chill
Flesh
Discuss words
Students with
Teacher
Students / Teacher visualize and describe sentence by sentence in a
whole group
47
In partners
Students read sentence by sentences visualize and describe their
image
See groups in comments
Whole Group
Targeted
content words
Stroll
sunny
snack
Each group reads sentence by sentence and tell their visual image
Discussed words to ensure meaning and other words that could mean
the same
Group read final sentence
and visualized and described
RIDER
Bookmark
This formed
part of the
Reflection
Students make a bookmark to take home to remind themselves when
they read to visualize.
R read
I imagine
D describe
E evaluate
R read on and repeat
COMMENTS
Spoke to Student A and G before session about my expectations and they seemed more
co-operative
Student D & C very enthusiastic
Student H offering more ideas
Student F is not forthcoming – need to ensure that the students understands
Organised groups
Students A , C & F : Students E & B: Students D, H & G
Find that I need to go over at the end of the session to remind them what they have
learnt. They are concentrating on the passage that they have read rather than how they
have gone about the session.
R read I imagine D describe E evaluate R read on and
48
VISUALISATION READING COMPREHENSION
YEAR 2 SESSION NUMBER 4
PARTICIPANTS 8 students TIME 40 minutes Morning session
SESSION OUTLINE
FOCUS: Based on John Munro 2006 Session 3
• Teacher/.students read aloud each paragraph (modeling)
• Teacher /students visualise and describes pairs of sentence in whole
group
• In small groups visualise sentence and describe their images
TEXT: Text from Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge “ERIK”
A Walk in the Park Session 23
PRESENTATION
Copied onto large paper for all to view ( no pictures)
Rest of story presented so that it can be grouped into pairs for group work
MATERIALS
Story enlarged Displayed KEY WORD CHART
Activity Task Description
Review of
previous section
Look at the key
words on our
little man to
help us
visualize
Visualisation
Repeat
The strategy we are learning is to visualize what we have read and it
helps us to remember what I have read. I make a picture in my mind
and say what the picture is
RIDER
REVIEW aconym R.I.D.E.R
Paragraph 1
Teacher with
students
Teacher and students read aloud paragraph 1 of the story
Students with
Teacher
Students / Teacher visualize and describe pairs of sentences in a
whole group
Small groups
Students reads pairs of sentences visualise and describe their image
Whole Group
Targeted
content words
In small group read their sentences and describe their visual image
Discussed words to ensure meaning and other words that could mean
the same
Group read final sentence
and visualized and described
49
Backpack
Snack
Stroll
dam
Students visualised what these words mean.
Teacher was required to help as many of the students could not work
out the meaning of these words
REFLECTION Students write into special booklet what they learnt.
COMMENTS
Incorporated small groups Students A,C & F; Students B&E ; Students C,G &H
Students had difficulty of concept of what a dam is
Text was very appropriate
50
VISUALISATION READING COMPREHENSION
YEAR 2 SESSION NUMBER 5
PARTICIPANTS 8 students TIME 40 minutes Morning session
SESSION OUTLINE
FOCUS: Based on John Munro 2006 Session 4
• Students read aloud each paragraph (modeling)
• Students visualise and describes pairs of sentences in whole group
• In small groups visualise pairs of sentences and describe their images
TEXT: Text from Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge “ERIK”
The Shopping Trip Session 27
PRESENTATION
Copied onto large paper for all to view
Rest of story presented so that it can be grouped into pairs for group work
MATERIALS
Story enlarged (no Pictures)
Activity Task Description
Review of
previous
section
Look at the key
words on our
little man to
help us
visualize
Visualisation
Repeat
The strategy we are learning is to visualize what we have read and it
helps us to remember what I have read. I make a picture in my mind
and say what the picture is
RIDER
Talk about R.I.D.E.R read, imagine, describe , evaluate& read on
Help to check what we have read .
Emphasis on E evaluate check in text
Paragraph 1
Teacher with
students
Students read aloud paragraph 1 of the story
Target Words
Mist
Check-out
Bar
Picture what these words mean
Children add the pictures they see in their minds. Other add to the
picture
Students with
Teacher
Students visualise and describe pairs of sentences in a whole group
Teacher checks that the image is correct
In partners
Students read pairs of sentences visualise and describe their image
complete paragraph 2
Whole Group
Each group read their pair of sentences and tell their visual image
Discussed words to ensure meaning and other words that could mean
51
the same
Group read final sentence
and visualized and described
REFLECTION
At the end of the session students record how they have visualize and
how it helped them to learn in their Learning Booklet
COMMENTS
Partners Students A &D ; Students C & H: Students F & G and Students E & B
This text was more familiar as they all had experiences of shopping and having to wait at
some stage when shopping.
Need to go over at the end to remind them what they have learnt in the session. It is not
the passage that they have read is important but the process that we went through
52
VISUALISATION READING COMPREHENSION
YEAR 2 SESSION NUMBER 6
PARTICIPANTS 8 students TIME 40 minutes Morning session
SESSION OUTLINE
FOCUS: Based on John Munro 2006 Session 5
• Students read aloud each paragraph
• Teacher /students visualize and describe each paragraph in whole
group activity
• In partners visualize paragraph and describe their images
TEXT: Text from Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge “ERIK”
Grandma and Grandpa Session 40
PRESENTATION
Copied onto large paper for all to view (no pictures )
Rest of story presented so that it can be grouped into pairs for group work
MATERIALS
Story enlarged RIDER SHEET
Activity Task Description
Review of
previous
section
Look at the key
words on our
little man to
help us
visualize
Visualisation
Repeat
The strategy we are learning is to visualise what we have read and it
helps us to remember what I have read. I make a picture in my mind
and say what the picture is
RIDER
All children to explain in own words R.I.D.E.R
Paragraph 1
Teacher with
students
Students read aloud paragraph 1 of the story
Students with
Teacher
Students / Teacher visualise and describe each paragraph in a whole
group
In partners
Paragraph 2
Students visualise paragraph and describe their image to their partner
Whole Group
Paragraph 3
Targeted
content words
Handy man
Each group visualises paragraph and describes their image
Discussed words to ensure meaning and other words that could mean
the same
Group read final sentence
53
Handrails
Playpens
Rugs
Handpick
Brand new
and visualized and described
Teacher was required to support this sessions as students had difficulty
understanding some of the experiences
Reflection
Colour in the little man with the Key words form Session 1
COMMENTS
All students found the passage hard. Some of the ideas they had difficulty
Teacher was required to support this sessions as students had difficulty understanding
some of the experiences
Some of the words they did not have a concept of e.g. handy man. The teacher had to
questions quite extensively to draw out the student’s knowledge about Dad or someone
fixing things around the house.
54
VISUALISATION READING COMPREHENSION
YEAR2 SESSION NUMBER 7
PARTICIPANTS 8 students TIME 40 minutes Morning session
SESSION OUTLINE
FOCUS: Based on John Munro 2006 Session 6
• Students read aloud each paragraph
• students visualize sentence by sentence in whole group activity
• Each student individually visualizes sentence by sentence and
describe their images
TEXT: Text from Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge “ERIK”
The farm Session 46
PRESENTATION
Individual texts without pictures and arranges into three paragraphs
MATERIALS
INTRODUCED RIDER POEM & ACTIONS
Individual texts of the Farm arranged in two paragraphs
Activity Task Description
Review of
previous
section
Look at the key
words on our
little man to
help us
visualize
Visualisation
R.I.D.E.R Poem- Help them to remember. Something they will
remember
Repeat
The strategy we are learning is to visualize what we have read and it
helps us to remember what I have read. I make a picture in my mind
and say what the picture is
Paragraph 1
Teacher with
students
students read aloud paragraph 1 of the story
Targeted
content words
Dozen
Flash
Discussed words to ensure meaning and other words that could mean
the same
Group read final sentence
and visualized and described
Students with
Teacher
Students / visualize and describe sentence by sentence in a whole
group
Individually
Students read next paragraph and
for each sentence visualizes and
draws their image
Whole Group Then in groups the students then
55
go and describe their image.
The others in the group check
what the child saying against the
text. EVALUATE (Does it make
sense) Read sentence by
sentence and tell their visual
image
Discussed words to ensure
meaning and other words that
could mean the same
Group read final sentence
and visualized and described
Session taken
as a leaning
centre within a
whole class
As we were part of a whole class
we did not have time to do the
reflection at the end of the session
COMMENTS
All except Student G were enthusiastic and able to manage the task
Student C & D very enthusiastic
Partners Student B and E : Student F & G: Student C and H; Student A and D
RIDER POEM
POEM ACTION
R Read it Point to your eyes
I Put picture in your head Point fingers to you head - brain
D
E Check it Evaluate it Point one finger in the air
Does it make sense Point one finger to your head.
R Read On Form fingers around eyes like glasses
56
VISUALISATION READING COMPREHENSION
YEAR 2 SESSION NUMBER 8
PARTICIPANTS 8 students TIME 40 minutes Morning session
SESSION OUTLINE
FOCUS: Based on John Munro 2006 Session 7
• Students read silently each paragraph
• students visualize each paragraph and describe their images in
whole group activity
• In small groups visualizes each paragraph and describe their
images
TEXT: Text from Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge “ERIK”
On the Lake Session 36
PRESENTATION
Individual texts without pictures and arranges into three paragraphs simpler text because
students are reading individually
MATERIALS
Individual texts of On the Lake arranged in three paragraphs no pictures
Poem sheet
Activity Task Description
Review of
previous
section
Look at the key
words on our
little man to
help us
visualize
Visualisation
Repeat
The strategy we are learning is to visualize what we have read and it
helps us to remember what I have read. I make a picture in my mind
and say what the picture is
Recite the RIDER poem with actions
Target words in
passage
On the lake
Whirl
Moat Visualise these words talk as a
whole group
Drag
bank
Paragraph 1
Teacher with
students
Teacher and students read silently paragraph 1 of the story
Students with
Teacher
Students / Teacher visualize and describe each sentences in a whole
group
In partners In partners visualize each paragraph and describe their images.
57
Set partners
Whole Group
Targeted
content words
Each group read their pair of sentences and tell their visual image
Discussed words to ensure meaning and other words that could mean
the same
Group read final sentence
and visualized and described
REFLECTION Write down the process in special books
COMMENTS
Group Work Students B,D,E& G : Students A,C,F & H
Partner Work Student B & E: Student F & G ; Student C and H: Student A & D
Student G had difficulty focusing so in the reading section read to teacher.
All students were able to articulate the process
Student c and D contributed a lot to discussions
58
VISUALISATION READING COMPREHENSION
YEAR2 SESSION NUMBER 9
PARTICIPANTS 8 students TIME 40 minutes Morning session
SESSION OUTLINE
FOCUS: Based on John Munro 2006 Session 8
• Read silently each paragraph
• Students visualize each paragraph and describe their images in
whole group activity
• Each student individually visualizes each paragraph and describes
image to a partner TEXT: Text from Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge “ERIK”
The Missing Pets Part 1 Session
PRESENTATION
Individual texts without pictures and arranges into three paragraphs simpler text because
students are reading individually
MATERIALS
Individual texts of The Missing Pets arranged in three paragraphs Chapter 1
Activity Task Description
Review of
previous
section
Look at the key
words on our
little man to
help us
visualize
Visualisation
Repeat
The strategy we are learning is to
visualize what we have read and it
helps us to remember what I have
read. I make a picture in my mind
and say what the picture is
On display
Repeat RIDER poem and actions
Explain introducing a Chapter
style format .
Model the sequence you would
follow
Target words in
passage
The Missing
Pets
Vanish attack
Mayor attempt
Thefts suspect
Blame bait
Visualise these words
Paragraph 1
Read silently paragraph 1 of the
story
Talk to their partners
Students with
Teacher
Students visualise and describe
each paragraph in a whole group
Students visualize their paragraph
and describe it to their partner
Draws pictures and partners
checks
59
EVALUATION
Partner
Describe image
Paragraph 2
Targeted
content words
Paragraph 3
Individually read the nest
paragraph and tell their visual
image to their partner
Discussed words to ensure
meaning and other words that
could mean the same
Group read final sentence
and visualized and described
Individually read the nest
paragraph and tell their visual
image to their partner
REFLECTION Write down the process in special books
COMMENTS
Students found the words in this text difficult to work out – they did not have the vocab
to suggest alternatives
Students enjoyed the story
Found it necessary to bring back to the whole group to help work it out.
Students enjoyed drawing the pictures and included a great deal of detail .
60
VISUALISATION READING COMPREHENSION
YEAR2 SESSION NUMBER 10
PARTICIPANTS 8 students TIME 40 minutes Morning session
SESSION OUTLINE
FOCUS: Based on John Munro 2006 Session 8
• Students read silently each paragraph
• Students visualize each paragraph and describe their images in
whole group activity
• In small groups visualizes each paragraph and describe their
images
TEXT: Text from Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge “ERIK”
The Missing Pets Part 2 Session
PRESENTATION
Individual texts without pictures and arranges into three paragraphs simpler text because
students are reading individually
MATERIALS
Individual texts of The Missing Pets arranged in three paragraphs (No pictures )
Activity Task Description
Review of
previous
section
Look at the key
words on our
little man to
help us
visualize
Visualisation
Repeat
The strategy we are learning is to
visualize what we have read and it
helps us to remember what I have
read. I make a picture in my mind
and say what the picture is
RIDER poem and actions to
remind students of the process
REVIEW the story so far
Target words in
passage
The Missing
Pets
Event expense
Prevent suspect
express
Visualize what the words mean
Paragraph 1
Teacher with
students
Students read silently paragraph 1
of the story
Students visualize each paragraph
and describe their image
Draws
61
Paragraph 2 Read, describe image and draw
and partner checks against text
Paragraph 3 Read, describe image and draw
and partner checks against text
Whole Group
The whole group reviews the
chapter
REFLECTION Talk about process and record in
special booklets
COMMENTS
All students enjoying the story – can’t wait to find out who stole the pets.
All students happily draw the pictures and include great detail
Very responsive in discussion
62
VISUALISATION READING COMPREHENSION
YEAR 2 SESSION NUMBER 11
PARTICIPANTS 8 students TIME 40 minutes Morning session
SESSION OUTLINE
FOCUS: Based on John Munro 2006 Session 9
• Read silently each paragraph
• students visualize each paragraph and draws their image
• Each student individually writes down their visualization of each
paragraph.
TEXT: Text from Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge “ERIK”
The Missing Pets Part 3 Session
PRESENTATION
Individual texts without pictures and arranges into three paragraphs simpler text because
students are reading individually
MATERIALS
Individual texts of The Missing Pets arranged in three paragraphs
Activity Task Description
Review of
previous
section
Look at the key
words on our
little man to
help us
visualize
Visualisation
Repeat
The strategy we are learning is to
visualize what we have read and it
helps us to remember what I have
read. I make a picture in my mind
and say what the picture is
Recite the RIDER poem and
actions
Target words in
passage
The Missing
Pets
Towns people
Fake
Arrest
Control
Students visualize these words
Paragraph 1
read silently paragraph 1 of the
story
Children draw their image
Individually Children write down their image
63
Paragraph 2
Students draw their visual picture
to their partner
Children write down visualization
Partners check against the text -
evaluate
Paragraph 3
Targeted
content words
Students draw their visual picture
to their partner
Children write down visualization
Partners check against the text -
evaluate Each group read their
pair of sentences and tell their
visual image
REFLECTION Tell and record what they did in
special learning book
COMMENTS
All students happily drew the picture but as soon as they were asked to write about it the
descriptions were limited.
Student would not write and visibly withdrew from the session. He needed to be kidded
to do something. I allowed him to do the drawing as he would not do anything.
Student A also found this part very difficult
When the children read out their sentences, the teacher found that they needed to be
directed to the important parts.
While they included detail in their pictures this detail was not as clear in the written texts
64
VISUALISATION READING COMPREHENSION
YEAR 2 SESSION 12
PARTICIPANTS 8 students TIME 40 minutes Morning session
SESSION OUTLINE
FOCUS: Based on John Munro 2006 Session 9
• Students read silently each paragraph
• students visualize each paragraph and describe their images in
whole group activity
• In small groups visualizes each paragraph and describe their
images and then write their visualize of each paragraph.
TEXT: Text from Enhancing Reading Intervention Knowledge “ERIK”
The Missing Pets Part 4 Session
PRESENTATION
Individual texts without pictures and arranges into three paragraphs simpler text because
students are reading individually
MATERIALS
Individual texts of The Missing Pets arranged in three paragraphs
Activity Task Description
Review of
previous
section
Look at the key
words on our
little man to
help us
visualize
Visualisation
Repeat
The strategy we are learning is to
visualise what we have read and it
helps us to remember what I have
read. I make a picture in my mind
and say what the picture is
Say Poem of RIDER and do the
actions.
Target words in
passage
The Missing
Pets
Actions
Inspect
Protect
Intend
Paragraph 1
Teacher with
students
Teacher and students read silently
paragraph 1 of the story
Children on their own draw their
image
Share their picture with another .
Check RIDER – make sure you
have the important parts
Write their image and share
Class offer further import
Students with Students / Teacher visualize and Children move onto next
65
Teacher
describe each paragraph in a
whole group
paragraph. Read silently
Draw image
Check use RIDER
Write down in words
Share with class
Individually Continue reading a further two
paragraphs
Draw image after reading each
paragraph
Check using RIDER
Write down you image in words
Check with a partner
Read to whole class
Whole Group
REFLECTION
At the end of session
Say what the process was
involved
Complete Reflection Booklets and
show to teacher
Children now have the complete
Story of Missing Pets
COMMENTS
Student A much more engaged story more suited
Student B on task- could have included more detail in written image
Student C really focused and able to select appropriate detail and gave a good written
image
Student D finds reading the passage difficult and requires the teacher to support the read
as she has a problem decoding the text. enjoys the oral talking about the story
but not so much the picture. In written work tended to leave out a lot of
detail
Student E tended to rush through the read and did not put a great amount of detail.
Tended to want to just get it finished
Student F very engaged and really trying to check in the text written work good
Student G quite happy to read, talk about it and draw some pictures but as soon as
An expectation came that he would have to write I down balked
Student H good work , image drawn and wrote it down well.
Using the Chapter format was very worthwhile as it gave students a detail procedure of
our to go about reading when they are reading their take-home books independently
which usually have a chapter format.
66
APPENDIX 4 TEACHING MATERIALS
KEY WORDS TO HELP WITH VISUALISATION
1,2,3 Numbers size
Shapes colour
67
RIDER POEM ACTION
R Read it Point to your eyes
I Imagine it
Put the picture in your head Point fingers to you
head -
brain
D Describe it
E Evaluate it Point one finger in the
air
Check it
Does it make sense Point one finger to your
head.
R Repeat and keep on reading Form fingers around
eyes like glasses
68
R read
I image
D describe
E evaluate
R repeat &
read on
69
EYES NOSE SEE
SMELL
LOOK
TOUCH EARS
FEEL HEAR
SOUND
70
71
You read and then you make a picture of it in you mind and say what the picture is.
This is something that you can do to help you remember what you have read.