Reciprocal Teaching
2. Generating questions. When students generate questions, they must first identify the kind of information that is significant enough that it
could provide the substance for a question. In order to do this, they must identify significant information, pose questions related to this informa-tion, and check to make sure they can answer their own questions.
3. Clarifying. When teaching students to clarify, their attention is called to the many reasons why text is difficult to understand; for example, new vocabulary, unclear reference words, and unfamiliar or difficult con-cepts. Recognizing these blocks to understanding, students may clarify or ask for clarification in order to make sense of the text.
4. Predicting. This strategy requires the reader to hypothesize about what the author might discuss next. This provides a purpose for the reading: to confirm or disapprove the hypothesis. An opportunity has been created for the students to link new knowledge they will encounter in the text with the knowledge they already possess. It also facilitates the use of the text structure as students learn that headings, subheadings, and questions em-bedded in the text are useful means of anticipating what might occur next.
The four strategies are used in a session when the discussion leader gener-ates a question to which the group has to respond. The leader then summa-rizes the text and asks other members if they would like to elaborate upon or revise the summary. Clarifications are discussed. Then, in preparation for
156 Chapter 14
moving on to the next portion of text, the groups generate predictions. The goal is flexible use of the strategies.
INTRODUCING RECIPROCAL THINKING STRATEGIES
When introducing the strategies to the students, in the initial stage, the teacher assumes primary responsibility for leading the dialogues and implementing the strategies (Taylor, 2002). Through modeling, the teacher demonstrates how to use the strategies while reading the text. During guided practice, the teacher supports students by adjusting the demands of the task based on each student’s level of proficiency. Eventually, the students learn to conduct the di-alogues with little or no teacher assistance. The teacher assumes the role of a coach/facilitator by providing students with evaluative information regarding their performance and prompting them to higher levels of participation (Orm-rod, 1999; Slavin, 2000).
Students should be taught in small heterogeneous groups to ensure that each student has ample opportunity to practice using the strategies while re-ceiving feedback from other group members. The optimal group size is be-tween six and eight students. Frequent guided practice is essential in helping students become more proficient in their use of the strategies.
The instructional materials selected should be appropriate based on certain criteria. The teacher should select material based on the student’s reading/lis-tening comprehension. The material used should be sufficiently challenging.
Incorporate text that is representative of the kinds of material students are ex-pected to read in school, and on their level. Generally, students have been taught the reciprocal teaching procedure using expository or informational text. The story structure in narrative text lends itself quite well. Also, students are taught to use the four strategies incorporating the elements of story gram-mar (e.g., character, plot, problem, and solution).
There are no specific guidelines for a time frame. The first day of instruc-tion is spent introducing the students to the four strategies. The length of each session will depend upon the age and the attention of the students, but will usually fall within the range of twenty to forty minutes per session. It is rec-ommended that the initial instruction take place on consecutive days. After this point, instruction can be provided on alternate days if needed.
INSTRUCTIONAL USES OF RECIPROCAL TEACHING
The primary goal of reciprocal teaching is to improve the reading compre-hension skills for students who have not benefited from traditional reading
Reciprocal Teaching 157
instructional methods. This is achieved through establishing a collaborative discourse in order to help students acquire strategies useful to construct meaning from texts (Alverman & Phelps, 2005; Ozkus, 2003; Palincsar &
Klenk, 1991).
Content area texts have been found useful, especially at the middle school level. Palincsar and Klenk (1992) explained that shared texts contribute to the development of a learning community in which groups explore principles, ideas, themes, and concepts over time. They report improved results of recip-rocal teaching when using texts related by themes and/or concepts, for exam-ple, science concepts related to animal survival themes, such as adaptations, extinctions, and the use of camouflage and mimicry. They also explain that shared texts contribute to the development of a learning community in which groups explore principles, ideas, themes, and concepts over time.
The participants of reciprocal teaching vary according to their reading abil-ities. Reciprocal teaching is most compatible with classrooms that are social, interactive, and holistic in nature. Because of the importance of helping stu-dents connect their personal background experiences with the text, reciprocal teaching can be used in diverse classrooms and communities. Research con-ducted by Palincsar and Klenk (1992) illustrated that small groups of six to eight students work best using reciprocal teaching dialogue. On the other hand, middle-school-level teachers have used reciprocal teaching dialogue with as many as seventeen students. Teachers have also trained students as tu-tors and have successfully monitored several groups led by the tutu-tors. Recip-rocal teaching has been used with students ranging in age from seven to adult-hood. Reading levels and grade levels of students also varied (Rosenshine &
Meister, 1994). Palincsar and Klenk (1992) reported that since the beginning of the research program in reciprocal teaching in 1981, nearly 300 middle school students and 400 first to third graders have participated. The early studies focused on students who were successful at decoding but scored poorly on tests of comprehension. The program was designed primarily for students considered at risk for academic failure. Many of the participating students in the reciprocal teaching research program had been identified as medial or special education students. Later studies tested the success of re-ciprocal teaching for students who were only learning to decode (Brown &
Palincsar, 1987). Studies have also considered the success of reciprocal teach-ing in content areas such as social studies and science. Many research repli-cations have been conducted at the high school and junior college level (Brown & Campione, 1992).
Teachers begin reciprocal teaching by reflecting on their current instruc-tional strategies and activities that teach students reading comprehension.
158 Chapter 14
Next, theory supporting reciprocal teaching is introduced. Key theoretical el-ements include teachers’ modeling the strategies by thinking aloud and con-sciously striving to have students control the dialogue. All students are ex-pected to participate and develop skill at using the strategies and critical thinking. Variation exists in the amount of scaffolding the teacher must pro-vide. Next, teachers watch tapes, examine transcripts of reciprocal teaching dialogues, and role play. Teachers and researchers coteach a lesson. After the formal instruction, coaching is provided to teachers as they begin imple-menting reciprocal teaching (Palincsar & Klenk, 1992).
RESEARCH FINDINGS
Palincsar and Klenk (1992) reported that the criterion for success was the at-tainment of an independent score of 75 to 85 percent correct on four out of five consecutively administered measures of comprehension, assessing recall of text, ability to draw inferences, ability to state the gist of material read, and application of knowledge acquired from the text to a novel situation. Using this criterion, approximately 80 percent of both the primary and middle school students using reciprocal teaching strategies were judged successful following three months of instruction. Furthermore, these gains were main-tained for up to six months to a year following instruction.
Palincsar and Brown (1986) reported that quantitative and qualitative analy-ses of transcripts showed substantial changes in the dialogue during the twenty instructional days. In addition, students improved criterion-referenced test scores over a five-day period of reciprocal teaching while control students made no gains. Students improved in the writing of summaries, generating text-related questions, and identifying discrepancies in texts.” Students who had been at the twentieth percentile or below in social studies and science in-creased their scores in these subject areas to or above the 50th percentile.
Reciprocal teaching, according to Rosenshine and Meister (1994), is de-pendent on quality of dialogue among participants. The quality of the dia-logue is determined through observation and by assessing the students’
questions and summaries during the discussion. Students’ reading compre-hension is also measured by standardized tests or experimenter-made tests that can be multiple choice, require short answers, or ask students to sum-marize essays.
Palincsar and Brown (1986) attributed success of reciprocal teaching to its interactive nature. Understanding the text and providing scaffolding (guided instruction) while the students acquire the skills are important to the success
Reciprocal Teaching 159
of reciprocal teaching. Palincsar, Ransom, and Derber (1989) cited the align-ment of instructional strategies with assessalign-ment criteria as a major contribu-tor to the success of reciprocal teaching.
Soto (1989) attributed the success of reciprocal teaching to the social con-struction of knowledge. Students collaborate to construct meaning of texts.
This allows them to focus on information in texts that is meaningful to them and to use their diverse background and experiences to introduce multiple perspectives. In addition, through reciprocal teaching dialogues, teachers are better able to assess students’ understandings of texts and utilize nonmain-stream students’ perspectives. When these perspectives are given merit in dis-cussions, status differentiation based on ethnicity and home language is re-duced.
KEY TERMS AND VOCABULARY LIST
Palincsar and Brown (1984, 1989) have compiled an excellent list of terms and vocabulary for reciprocal teaching. The terms and vocabulary can be eas-ily applied in the classroom. They are as follows:
1. Inert knowledge: encapsulated information rarely accessed again unless you need it for an exam
2. Theory change: paradigm shift, conceptual upheaval 3. Restructuring: modifying the knowledge base
4. Self-directed learning: conceptual development that is inner directed and inner motivated
5. Social learning: conceptual development that is other directed and has an intrinsically social genesis
6. Cooperative learning: an environment of group explanation and discus-sion, often with tasks or responsibilities divided up
7. Participant structures: interactive environments with agreed-upon rules for speaking, listening, and turn-taking
Thinking roles:
Executive—designs plans for action and suggests solutions Skeptic—questions premises and plans
Instructor—takes on tasks of explanation and summarization for less-able group members
Record Keeper—keeps track of events that have passed and resolves conflicts
8. Epistemic consideration: organize knowledge by defining the problem, isolating variables, referring to previous knowledge, and using an eval-uation process
160 Chapter 14
9. Jigsaw method: children are divided into groups of five or six. Each group is held responsible for a large body of knowledge, on which each member will be tested individually. Each member is assigned a topic area. Subject matter experts in the same topic area from different groups share information, then return to their groups and share that in-formation with their group.
10. Elaboration: an explanation, an new proposition formed by linking old ones
11. Preoperational thought: the period below five years old, during which children can’t comprehend concepts such as conservation of volume, conservation or spatial extent, perspective, and so forth
12. Concrete operational thought: nonabstract thinking for kids seven and up 13. Intrapersonal function of language: language turned inward; the per-son checks and demonstrates his or her ideas to a hypothetical oppo-nent (internalized socialization); silent verbalization
14. Zone of proximal development: the difference between potential and actual learning, between what a novice can do unaided versus in a sup-portive cooperative environment with an expert
15. Proleptic teaching: group apprenticeship: novices participate in group activity before they’re able to perform the task unaided
16. Expert scaffolding: the expert provides support as needed, commensu-rate with the novice’s expertise and the difficulty of the task, then re-moves it as the novice progresses
17. Scaffolding structure: (usually individual) apprenticeship or mother/child: aid decreases as learner’s skill increases, activity is shaped by the expert, scaffolding is internalized, expert doesn’t verbalize 18. Socratic dialogue: discovery learning, teacher probes for novel
infer-ences and applications of knowledge by the student
19. Tripartite teaching goals: facts, rules, and methods for deriving rules 20. Knowledge-worrying activities: testing hypotheses
21. Reciprocal teaching: an expert-led cooperative learning procedure in-volving four activities: questioning, clarifying, summarizing, predicting 22. Heuristics: rules of thumb that evolve from experience
23. Self-testing mechanisms: assess your own level of experience: try to paraphrase some text; if you fail, you need to work on it
24. Emergent skill: a skill that is partly learned
SUMMARY
Reciprocal teaching strategies involve implementing cognitive theories as summarized in chapter 9. The unique feature of reciprocal teaching is that the
Reciprocal Teaching 161
teacher and the students take turns leading a discussion that focuses on appli-cation of the four reading strategies. It also focuses on several different tech-niques used throughout teaching: modeling, scaffolding, direct instruction, and guided practice. Teachers should purposefully model their use of strate-gies so that students can emulate them. “Think Alouds” allow teachers to ver-balize all their thoughts for students as they demonstrate skills or processes.
Some key points to include in the Think Alouds are making predictions or showing students how to develop hypotheses; describing visual images; shar-ing an analogy that links prior knowledge with new information; verbalizshar-ing confusing points; and demonstrating fixup strategies. These points should be identified by teachers so that students will realize how and when to use them.
After several modeling experiences, students should practice using the egy in pairs. Ultimately, students should work independently with the strat-egy, using a checklist to monitor usage of the critical points for Think Alouds.
Scaffolding is the process of providing strong teacher support and gradu-ally removing it until students are working independently (Collins, Brown, &
Newman, 1987; Pearson, 1985). This instructional strategy is effective in helping students accelerate their learning. Scaffolding can be applied by se-quence texts and through teacher modeling that gradually leads to students’
independence.
Palincsar, Ransom, and Derber (1989) outlined strategies for mastering re-ciprocal teaching skills:
1. Make sure the strategies are overt, explicit, and concrete through mod-eling.
2. Link the strategies to the contexts in which they are to be used and teach the strategies as a functioning group, not in isolation.
3. Instruction must inform students. Students should be aware of what strategies work and where they should use particular strategies.
4. Have students realize that strategies work no matter what their current level of performance is.
5. Comprehension must be transferred from the teacher to the pupil. The teacher should slowly raise the demands made upon the students and then fade into the background. Students gradually take charge of their learning.
Teachers in Highland Park, Michigan, decided to implement reciprocal teaching as part of their reading instruction program at the elementary through high school levels (Carter, 1997), and they were very well rewarded for their efforts. At the school level, dramatic improvements were observed on the Michigan assessment instrument in reading comprehension. At the
fac-162 Chapter 14
ulty level, teachers themselves used reciprocal teaching on each other to en-hance their proficiency in acquiring a second language (a goal for their staff development).
Generally, research on using reciprocal teaching with children at risk and children with disabilities has shown that it has increased their achievement (Al-fassi, 1998; Carter, 1997; Lysynchuk et al., 1990; Palincsar & Brown, 1984).
Reciprocal Teaching 163
INTRODUCTION
I
n ancient empires the roles and functions of the brain in learning were given much recognition. It was believed that the brain was indispensable where ephemeral spirits roamed. This belief dominated learned thinking until around the early part of the seventeenth century, when French philosopher René Descartes conducted experiments with the brain. He codified the sepa-ration of conscious thought from the physical flesh of the brain. These exper-iments shed important information on the functions of the brain well into the present century. Another philosopher, Thomas Willis, expanded the work of Descartes. He was the first to suggest not only that the brain was the center of control for the body, but that different parts of the brain controlled specific cognitive functions, although a given mental task may involve a completed web of circuits, which interact with others throughout the brain. These early attempts to understand the working of the brain are responsible for our pres-ent understanding of brain functioning (Shore, 1997; Shreeve, 2005).In a more recent study, Polley and Heiser (2004) experimented with how the brain responds to the intensity of sound. These researchers found that the brains of rats can be trained to learn alternate ways of processing changes in the loudness of sound. The discovery, they say, has potential for the treatment of hearing loss, autism, and other sensory disabilities in humans. It also gives clues, they say, about the process of learning and the way we perceive the world. Experiments over the centuries have shown that the brain responds to all physical stimuli by converting them into electrical impulses that are processed by neurons in the area of the brain that controls the stimuli. Neu-rons fire faster or slower depending upon the intensity of the stimuli and the
165