RESEARCH-BASED READING INSTRUCTION SUPPORT FOR CULTURALLY DIVERSE CLASSROOMSLori Vanden Berghe, MEdWTAMUAugust 2010

Content Literacy

AndThe Reading

Process

Vocabulary Comprehension

REPRESENTING KNOWLEDGE

LITERATURE REVIEW (HYERLE 2009) Visual tools illustrate patterns of thinking Used to examine processes and interactions Best when student generated

Visual tools communicate rich patterns of thinking : Cycles Relationships Hierarchies Processes

Rationale:

GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS (ELLIS 2002)

Advantages Content easier to

understand and learn

Focused information Students more

strategic

Rationale:

VOCABULARY

THREE PRINCIPLES OF TEACHING VOCABULARY (STAHL & NAGY 2006)

Include definitional and contextual information

Be active in word learning

Provide multiple exposures to the word

VISUAL – VERBAL ASSOCIATIONS (EEDS & COCKRUM 1985)

Sort-out multiple meaning words

Make a personal association to their background knowledge

Build individualized word banks

Rationale:

VOCABULARY SQUARES (HOPKINS & BEAN, 2000)

Prefix

Picture

Definition

Example

VOCABULARY AND CONCEPTUAL GROWTH

CONCEPT CIRCLES (WANDERSEE, 1987)RATIONALE Visually represent hierarchal and nested

conceptual relationships among vocabulary words

Position of the circles represent relationshipsConcept

1

Concept 2

Concept 3

Concept 4

Central Concep

t

ELEMENTS OF FICTION USED TO REVEAL THEME

REVIEW OF REAL NUMBERS

real numbers

irrational numbers

rational numbers

integers

whole numbers

naturalnumbers

COMPREHENSION

DISCUSSION WEBS (ALVERMANN 1992)

Keeps discussions focused

Ensures support for assertions

Avoids generalizations, emotional arguments, intimidation

Rationale:

DISCUSSION WEB

Present a central issue

Provide reasonable evidence

Represent opposing views

Draw a conclusion

Strategy:

DISCUSSION WEBS (ALVERMANN 1992)

ReasonsReasons

NO YES

CONCLUSION

Central Question

CUBING (COWAN & COWAN 1980)

Encourages critical thinking

Different perspectives

Rationale:

CUBING

Create a six sided cube

Describe it Compare it Associate it Analyze it Apply it Argue for or against

it

Strategy:

FRAME ROUTINE (ELLIS 2002)

Organize key topics Main ideas Details Adaptable to all

content areas

Rationale:

TEXT STRUCTURES (JONES, PIERCE, HUNTER 1988)

Students can’t see basic structure of text

Identify important structural elements

Find patterns

Rationale:

PROCEDURES FOR GRAPHING TEXT STRUCTURES (JONES, PIERCE, HUNTER 1988)1. Present at least

one good example of a completed graphic outline

2. Model 3. Provide procedural

knowledge4. Coach5. Practice

SERIES OF EVENTS CHAIN

Key Frame Questions What is the object,

procedure, or initiating event?

What are the stages or steps?

How do they lead to one another?

What is the final outcome?

CYCLE

34

512

Key Frame Questions

What are the critical events in the cycle?

How are they related?

In what ways are they self-reinforcing?

COMPARE/CONTRAST MATRIX

Key Frame Questions: What things are being compared? How are they similar? How are they different?

Name 1 Name 2

Attribute 1

Attribute 2

Attribute 3

CAUSE / EFFECT FISHBONE MAP

Key Frame Questions

What are the factors that cause X?

How do they interrelate?

Are the factors that cause X the same as those that cause X to persist?

PROBLEM-SOLUTION OUTLINE

Attempted Solutions

Results

1. 1.2. 2.

Who?What?

Why?

End Result

Key Frame Questions• What was the

problem?• Who had the problem?• Why was it a problem?• What attempts were

made to solve the problem?

• Did those attempts succeed?

CONCLUSION: WHO BENEFITS? English Language Learners Learning Disabled Low Achievers Struggling Readers All students

REFERENCESAlverman, Donna, Phelps, Stephen, Gillis, Victoria. (2010) Content Area Reading

and Literacy: Succeeding in Today’s Diverse Classrooms. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Block, C., & Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension instruction: Research-based Best Practices. Guilford Press: New York, NY.

Ellis, E. S. (1998). “Framing Main Ideas and Essential Details to Promote Comprehension.” Retrieved 2008, February 6, from http://www.ldonline.org/article/5765

Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., Short, D. (2009) Making Content Comprehensible for

English Language Learners: The SIOP Model. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Fisher, K., Wandersee, J., & Moody, D. (2000) Mapping Biology Knowledge. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

REFERENCESHopkins and Thomas W. Bean. (Dec., 1998-Jan., 1999) “Vocabulary Learning

with the Verbal-Visual Word Association Strategy in a Native American Community” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, Vol. 42, No. 4 , pp. 274-281.

Hyerle, D. (2009) Visual Tools for Transforming Information Into Knowledge. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.

Jones, B.F., Pierce, J. & Hunter, B. (Dec., 1988- Jan.,1989) “Teaching Students to Construct Graphic Representations,” Educational Leadership, 46, 20-25,

Stahl, Steven and Nagy, William.(2006) Teaching Word Meanings. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.