Teacher Talk Enhances Learning

The 9th Australasian Institute of Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis Conference (November 20th & 22nd), the University of Waikato.

When quantitative and qualitative research methods are used quite often it can result in better insights. In this case dual analysis appears to reinforce the COR Literacy Framework notion that teacher talk contributes to student learning at three levels.

I recently had the privilege of presenting at this conference held in Hamilton, New Zealand. Hamilton is a beautiful city situated along the Waikato River (see the river walk in the picture). The city's Hamilton Gardens, which won the International Garden of the Year - 2014 award for their internationally unique concept of telling 'The Story of Gardens' (in picture), is well worth a visit. Although New Zealand and Australia are close, I noticed many contrasting details. In Kiwiland the grass and the gum trees are greener and more uniform. The farms are neater with huge hedges instead of barbed wire fences enclosing them.

Associate Professor Rod Gardner (an accomplished author and researcher in the field of conversational analysis) and I presented some preliminary findings from our continuing research centred around the COR Literacy Framework. In the research project we video taped six small group lessons using three camcorders and two voice recorders. There were two teachers trained in using the COR Literacy Framework who consented to teach three small group lessons each. Some of the recordings have been transcribed and coded according to conversational analysis conventions. This methodology is quite a contrast to my previous research where my perspective has been from a cognitive psychology approach. The cognitive psychology methodology is primarily a top-down approach based on theoretical assumptions whereas the CA methodology is a bottom-up approach that attempts to make no prior assumptions but is more concerned with close observation of meaningful conversations.

The presentation of our ongoing research project was in two parts: I presented the background to the COR Literacy Framework and the research findings to date from a cognitive psychology perspective and Assoc. Prof. Gardner presented the preliminary findings using  the Conversational Analysis methodology.  One of the research questions was: Do good teachers focus their questions on the three COR levels: perception (factual), cognitive, and metacognitive? At this stage we are beginning to see that this is the case and that this happens in various ways and over relatively short segments of time and sometimes this can be over more extended segments.

Diversity, Inclusion & Engagement

Students with Literacy Difficulties

Earlier this year I published a chapter in "Diversity, Inclusion & Engagement". In the chapter I contend that readers process written text at three levels of cognition. Below I have reprinted a copy of the chapter summary.

"Students with learning difficulties in literacy are affected by a range of factors within themselves and also by other factors outside themselves. These factors interact in a number of ways that will often lead to disengagement from literacy learning. This then becomes a cycle of failure that is often quite difficult to overcome. To reverse this trend students should be shown how to develop self-regulation strategies leading to independence and academic success. For this to be effective teachers need to develop broader assessment practices by looking beyond the notion of learning difficulties residing solely within the learner. Thus, teachers should also consider other factors outside the learner such as texts, tasks and instructional practices within the social context of the classroom and community.

Assessment should acknowledge students’ strengths and consider their educational needs in response to instructional practices. A thorough and responsive assessment should lead to appropriate accommodations and adjustments to the curriculum that focus on three levels of engagement: surface, cognitive and behavioural. Most accommodations and adjustments not only help individuals but also benefit the wider community of learners. Literacy is a social activity and there are cooperative methods that can support students with learning difficulties within the classroom and beyond. Family-literacy programs, for example, extend learning beyond the classroom walls and give impetus to the literacy development of students who may be at risk of academic failure."

Woolley, G. (2014). Students with Literacy Difficulties. In M. Hyde, L. Carpenter, & R. Conway (Eds.), Diversity, inclusion and engagement (2nd ed., pp. 107-127). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

COR Literacy Framework Part 1

Recently I was invited to present my research on reading comprehension at the 18^th International Lindamood-Bell Conference in Anaheim, California.  High profile guest speakers included Professor Allan Paivio and Professor Mark Sadoski (see link http://www.lindamoodbell.com).

Lindamood-Bell Learning Processes is an organisation dedicated to helping children and adults learn to their potential. Their research-validated instructional programs have proven successful for individuals with a wide range of learning challenges, including previous, third-party diagnoses of learning disabilities such as dyslexia, hyperlexia, ADHD, CAPD, and autism spectrum disorders.

In my presentation I mentioned that teachers generally know what works in teaching reading comprehension but the difficulty has been in knowing how to orchestrate comprehension strategies. Unlike phonics instruction, comprehension strategies need to be used simultaneously and practised over a long period of time with different text types in order to be successful. The question that many theorists and practitioners have been asking is how can this be done most effectively and what is the best combination of strategies for reading comprehension to be most effective? 

To answer this question I presented the findings from a joint project between Griffith University and Independent Schools Queensland that was conducted over a four-year period to provide a professional development package to teachers in a number of ISQ affiliated schools throughout the state. This involved the implementation of the COR Literacy Framework (see 'Catalyst' p24-27) which is a systematic approach to teaching reading comprehension. 

The COR Framework is based on three levels of cognition; stepping foreword (Consider), Stepping into (Oganise), and stepping back (Reflect) which can operate simultaneously or in combination during a learning task. A reading activity, for example, can also have three phases: before reading, during reading, and after reading that require different strategies. The framework also has an embedded self-regulation focus involving goal setting, monitoring, and reflection process that relate to all three levels. The combination of the two dimensions (phases and levels of cognition) provides a flexible framework that enables teachers to fill the nine cells with pedagogical practices (or questions) that will orchestrate effective learning by integrating the three cognitive levels.

For example, in the table (COR Literacy Framework - above) the nine cells have been filled in with elements from two well known reading comprehension procedures: Reciprocal Teaching and the KWL strategy. The Reciprocal Teaching strategies (Predicting, Clarifying, Questioning, and Summarising) have been inserted into the cells that correspond to the particular level and reading phase that they target. The KWL procedure asks the questions: 'What  do I know?' 'What do I want to know?' and 'What have I learned?' These questions have also been inserted into the appropriate cells. The other two remaining cells have been filled with other elements to reflect an overall self-regulation focus. As a flexible framework other items can be substituted as long as they fit with the two dimensions (phase and level of cognition).  

More ideas about reading comprehension can be found in my recently published book, 'Reading Comprehension: AssistingChildren with Learning Difficulties’, Springer International. 
See full review by Peter Westwood: This book deserves a place on the bookshelf of every teacher and researcher concerned with improving literacy standards. … I recommend this book most highly to everyone with a genuine concern for raising standards in literacy. (Peter Westwood, Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, Vol. 17 (1), May, 2012). 

Reading: Stepping Forward, Stepping Into, Stepping Back

Article review

Recently I read a research article on reading by Dinsmore and Alexander (2012) in which they reviewed the research on how readers process text while reading. They found that most researchers generally agreed that reading is a thinking activity that takes place on two different levels simultaneously. They proposed that when good readers read they engage with the text at a surface-level and also at a deep-level of processing.

On reflection

On reflection, these two processes are important for effective reading comprehension to take place. However, reading involves more than decoding and interpreting a written message, it also involves an analysis of the reading process itself and how the message will impact the reader's view of the world.    What I am proposing is that there are not two but three levels of processing during reading: a stepping forward, a stepping into, and a stepping back.

At the surface-level readers decode the surface or physical features of the text itself. They generally do this by focusing on the written message by identifying letters, clusters of letters, words, and clusters of words in order to follow the text discourse. As they do this they often sub-vocalise or speak the written words in their heads. I refer to this process as a stepping forward. In stepping forward the reader must process larger amounts of text in order to decode the message more efficiently because working memory has a limited capacity and too many small bits of information can stifle this stepping forward process. Thus, for reading to progress well the reader must touch as fewer bases as possible by sampling some of the surface features of the text and filling in the missing details from their long-term memory. This recognition process eliminates redundancy and ignores the non essential information that would clutter their working-memory. The surface information is processed not as verbatim strings of letters and words or word-for-word but as small chunks of meaning called propositions. Many children step forward with their reading but many do not go any deeper than merely decoding the surface features of the text.

The stepping into of text processing operates when readers enter a deep-level of processing. This is the mental space where information is transacted and transformed. For example, the propositions made during the stepping forward are transformed by the reader's ability to develop inferences while reading. Usually inferences are formed when readers link ideas from one part of the text to another or by creating bridging inferences by combining existing information from the reader's own background knowledge to fill in the gaps. This mental activity is often required because texts would be too long and copious if all the information were to be supplied. Therefore, authors naturally expect that readers will draw from their own world experience. This is a type of two way constructive mental process that seeks to build a situation model of what the reader is comprehending during reading.

Stepping back is a third level of processing but is not often included in discussions about levels of processing. However, this is possibly the most important element of information processing. The term stepping back implies that readers step back, or change their perspective from a focus on the surface features and on the meaning of the text to one of examining the reader's own thinking processes before, during, and after reading. In other words, it is like having a bird's eye view of the reading terrain. Readers do this by; setting goals for the reading, monitoring their reading, and then reflecting on their reading performance and reading goals. This stepping back also affects the readers' ideas, opinions, and responses. It may also affect the readers' self-efficacy and their self-perception as a reader (see next blog series).

Mother and son using the 10 Principles for Assisting Reading.

What does this mean for the reader?

1. Obviously unless you can step forward it is not possible to step into or to step back. The reader must be able to negotiate the surface features of the text. In my first series of blogs (10 Principles for Assisting Reading) I describe how to assist novice or reluctant readers. In another 10 part series I discuss fluency, another important aspect of stepping forward.
2. Stepping into involves  using working memory more efficiently, as discussed in my 10 part series on working memory. The next series, Visualizing and Reading Comprehension, discusses the use of visualization techniques as way to bring together many aspects of stepping into reading.
3. Some basic aspects of stepping back were also discussed in the working memory series. For example, goal setting, monitoring, and reflection were stepping-back skills (more ideas in the next 10 part series on metacognition). 

Dinsmore, D., & Alexander, P. A. (2012).  A critical discussion of deep and surface processing: What it means, how is measured, the role of context, and model specification. Educational Psychology Review, 24, 499-567.