COR Literacy Framework Pt 3a - Questions

In teaching, questions are like seeds that fall on fertile ground and germinate. They focus attention and they anticipate the types of meanings that are most likely to be constructed when answering them. The National Reading Panel (2002) investigation of recent reading research found that asking and answering questions were two of the most powerful reading comprehension strategies. One the most important elements of the COR Literacy Framework is the strategic use of questioning. This is because getting answers to questions is at the heart of comprehension. Obviously, you are more able to build better comprehension if you ask the most appropriate questions.

From research conducted in conjunction with the COR Literacy Framework a number of Australian schools found that most children were not able to ask strategic questions when given the opportunity in class. They could often ask literal or surface level questions such as 'what', 'when' or 'where'  questions but seldom asked 'why' or 'how'. It was assumed that the children were used to answering questions and were not usually required to ask questions in class. The impression that children often have is that the most powerful person in the classroom, the teacher, usually asks all the questions. However, by giving the children the responsibility for devising their own questions the teacher is actually transferring the learning responsibility to the children. This is often referred to as transferring the locus of control and it is one contributing factor for developing learning self-regulation.

Good self-questioning needs to be modelled and practiced by individuals on a regular basis. Teachers should develop a habit of asking higher order questions during class discussions so that the children become familiar with the various types of questions that can be generated. When teachers actively promote discussion in class using open ended questions it promotes divergent thinking, creativity and enjoyment in an atmosphere of inquiry. This will provide fertile ground for the children to explore learning by seeking to ask their own questions when given the opportunity.

One way to scaffold questioning for the children is to provide question stem cue cards that give a sample beginning of different question types for the children to use as a guide. For example, "How do you think...?" or "Why do you think that...?" It is, however, not just a matter of providing a random set of question stems for children to choose from but explicitly teaching when and how they can be used most effectively.

In the COR Literacy Framework there are three levels of questions that are related to the three cognitive or thinking levels. At the surface level (stepping foreword) the question will have a literal focus and will relate to factual knowledge. They will also relate to the decoding process. For example, self-questioning such as "Is this making sense?" or "Does this sound right?" will focus on the confirming or correcting during the reading process.

At the deeper level (stepping into) the questions will often relate to making connections of old knowledge with the new knowledge to enable comprehension and create new meaning.  The QAR (question-answer relationship) strategy (Raphael, 1984) is a particularly good method to demonstrate to students that not all the answers can be found in the text, whether they are literal or inferential. It requires students to connect text information to their prior knowledge.

Students need to ask:

1.     Is the answer right there in the text? Answers to literal questions can be answered there in the text.

2.   Do I need to think and Search the text? The answer is in the text but the reader must tie it together from two or more sentences in the passage.

3.   Is the answer found in my head? The answer is not in the text. The reader needs to use his/her own background experiences to answer the question. Is there a part of this text that reminds me of something else I have read? or Is there a part of the text that reminds me of something else?

4.   Is the answer a combination of the author and me? The answer is not in the passage. It is found in the reader’s own prior knowledge and also from the text.

The questions that you ask will anticipate the type of information that you are seeking. This is a type of stepping back - it is a metacognitive process that operates at the third cognitive level. They focus attention and act as anticipation guides. This self-regulating process usually enhances the efficiency of  the stepping forward and stepping into processes.

After thought:
I have recently been reading several blogs or articles about exploring a problem first before researching possibles ways to solve the problem.  Why not explore a problem first using background knowledge and intuition and then devise questions (goals) to research and find possible solutions. Go to
http://meaning2mean.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/three-examples-of-creativity-through.html

For some question ideas go visit my Pinterest site:
http://www.pinterest.com/garywoolley/reading-comprehension-ideas/

References:

National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children to read: Report of the comprehension instruction subgroup to the National Institute of Child Health and Development. Washington, DC: NICD.

Raphael, T. E. (1984). Teaching learners about sources of information for answering questions. The Reading Teacher, 28, 303-311.

COR Literacy Framework Pt2 - Feedback

Feedback is any information provided by a teacher, parent, book, experience, or peer that gives the recipient knowledge about their performance on a particular learning activity. It is given before, during or after instruction so that learners can be encouraged and informed about ways to improve performance and to develop further the ability to perform to higher levels.

Feedback is often given in classrooms, however, some forms of feedback are ineffective and often quite counter-productive. Feedback considered as praise, for example, carries very little feedback information about student performance and will have very little impact upon learning. Praise is often directed at the self and is far too general and uninformative to be of any use for meaningful learning. Expressions such as, "Good boy!" or "Great effort!" often seeks to convey a positive message but can sometimes give a very negative impression. For example, if the teacher says, "Good girl!" at a time when the performance does not meet what the learner expects then the impression the student perceives is that the teacher does not expect any better from her. As a consequence, the student may begin to have doubts about her own future performance. Consequently, over a period of time, the student may develop poor self-efficacy with the expectation that it is not worth trying in the future if a lower level of performance is the expected outcome.

I have recently read Hattie and Timperley's (2007) seminal article on feedback and have noted that teachers (or others) can effectively direct feedback to three different levels of cognitive functioning that will enable students to engage, comprehend, or to become more self-supporting in the learning process. Hattie's three levels: task, process, and self-regulation closely correspond to the three levels in the COR literacy framework. In other words, feedback should be aimed at moving learners from the task level to the process level and then to the regulation level. The task level (perceptual) is more often addressed and seeks to provide students with information about how well a task is being accomplished, for example, how well the surface information is being gained, distinguishing correct from incorrect answers, and acquiring new or different information. At the performance level (cognitive) the student receives feedback on the learning process itself, such as the efficacy of certain strategies or learning processes that the student employs to perform a learning task. This feedback tends to be more effective than task level feedback because the information can be applied to future learning tasks. This process is often referred to as deep learning because it is more endurable. The third level is self-regulation (metacognitive) feedback. However, it is seldom addressed in classrooms but is the most enduring because it is directed toward developing self-regulated learning.

Hattie and Timperley proposed that effective feedback should be directed to all three levels and that it should answer three strategic questions. The three questions are: "Where am I going?", "How am I going?", and " Where to next?". Once again this is consistent with the COR Literacy Framework in that these questions can be modelled by the teacher and directed at both the task and process levels. When the students generate questions concerning the task (or product) and process they are automatically operating at the self-regulation level. For this process to be effective there needs to be clear task(product) and clear process goals set at the beginning of the activity.  The goals need to be authentic and attainable for each student and so "Where am I going?" should address these goals. "How am I going?" is a self-monitoring question that seeks information about comprehension at processing level. It also monitors and regulates the learning strategies employed during the learning task. "Where to next?" is a reflective question that promotes self-efficacy and focuses on future challenges.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.

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). 

Assisting Reading Infographic

For more information about assisted reading see my Assisted Reading blog series called 10 Principles for Assisting Reading.

This infographic was created using tools from www.easel.ly

Book Review - Dyslexia and Inclusion

Dyslexia and Inclusion: Classroom approaches for Assessment, Teaching and Learning (2nd Ed.) by Gavin Reid

Dyslexia is a vexing problem for many children and one that can cause lifelong difficulties with reading. Gavin Reid's book has the potential to influence teachers and parents and make a positive contribution to the overall wellbeing of struggling readers.

A key issue is the inclusion of students in the mainstream classroom and the inclusive practices that support these students. This will be of particular concern for many teachers who may feel they do not have specialised skills and knowledge to adequately assist these children.

I enjoyed reading this book because it was easy to read and the ideas were expressed clearly and succinctly. No doubt it will make a valuable contribution to the body of knowledge related to the area of literacy and learning difficulties. As the title implies, the focus is on dyslexia and inclusion in mainstream classrooms. Reid notes that dyslexia is clouded by confusion and misconceptions. However, he is able to chart a clear course though this mine field of uncertainty and conflicting ideas. He does this by taking a realistic and balanced view of the current body of research and proven practice.

After reading this book the reader should come away with a good understanding of the nature of dyslexia and gain the knowledge required to assist individuals with reading difficulties. He acknowledges that children with dyslexia exhibit a range of learning problems. Despite these differences he gives the teacher a range of practical teaching tips and ideas to help those  struggling with reading.