Pen Academic Publishing
Journals • Publish with us • Publishing Partnership • About Us • English
Araştırma Makalesi | Açık Erişim
Okul Öncesi ve Temel Eğitim Dergisi 2023, Cilt 4(2) 55-66

Scaffolding Constructivism and Reciprocal Instruction (CAR): A Multi-instruction to Improve Elementary Students’ Comprehension Skills

Mahdi Taheri Asl • Mohammad Setayeshi
Bu makaleye atıf yap
Makale Türü
Araştırma Makalesi
Yayın Tarihi
December 31, 2023
Sayfa Sayısı
55-66
DOI
10.29329/jpee.2023.645.2

Öz

In this study, we examine the effect of two Constructionist model And Reciprocal instructions (CAR) to typical fourth grade language arts instructional practices. 12 weeks, cluster randomized study was conducted to estimate effect of CAR instructions. fourthly students in two groups assigned by school to those instruction spontaneously. The research design was employed using two Interact classes: control (n=20) and experimental (n=20). The control class taught by traditional instruction whereas CAR class receives comprehension principles equivalent 90 mins per weeks in instructor guided small group students who participated CAR instruction in small groups outperformed students in traditional instruction groups on standardized reading comprehension tests.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Reading Comprehension Instruction Multi Comprehension Instruction Constructivism and Reciprocal Instruction
Bu makaleye atıf yap
Taheri Asl, M. & Setayeshi, M. (2023). Scaffolding Constructivism and Reciprocal Instruction (CAR): A Multi-instruction to Improve Elementary Students’ Comprehension Skills. Okul Öncesi ve Temel Eğitim Dergisi, 4(2), 55-66. https://doi.org/10.29329/jpee.2023.645.2

  • Ahmadi, M. R., & Gilakjani, A. P. (2012). Reciprocal Teaching Strategies and Their Impacts on English Reading Comprehension. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 2(10). [Google Scholar]
  • Asadi, I. A. (2018). Reading comprehension subgroups in Arabic: A simple but not a multiplicative model. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 34(4), 281-290. [Google Scholar]
  • Bano, J., Jabeen, Z., & Qutoshi, S. B. (2018). Perceptions of teachers about the role of parents in developing reading habits of children to improve their academic performance in schools. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 5(1). [Google Scholar]
  • Baxter, S., & Reddy, L. (2007). What content-area teachers should know about adolescent literacy. Jessup, MD: National Institute for Literacy. [Google Scholar]
  • Brown, G., Brown, G. D., Yule, G., Brown, G. R., & Gillian, B. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge university press. [Google Scholar]
  • Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (2004). Reading comprehension difficulties. In Handbook of children’s literacy (pp. 313-338). Springer. [Google Scholar]
  • Catts, H. W., & Kamhi, A. G. (2017). Prologue: Reading comprehension is not a single ability. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 48(2), 73-76. [Google Scholar]
  • Duke, N. K., & Del Nero, J. R. (2011). Best practices in literacy instruction. Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Edmonds, M. S., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Cable, A., Tackett, K. K., & Schnakenberg, J. W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of educational research, 79(1), 262-300. [Google Scholar]
  • Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., & Louwerse, M. M. (2003). What do readers need to learn in order to process coherence relations in narrative and expository text. Rethinking reading comprehension, 82, 98. [Google Scholar]
  • Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & VonSecker, C. (2000). Effects of integrated instruction on motivation and strategy use in reading. Journal of educational psychology, 92(2), 331. [Google Scholar]
  • Hashey, J. M., & Connors, D. J. (2003). Learn from our journey: Reciprocal teaching action research. The Reading Teacher, 57(3), 224-232. [Google Scholar]
  • Mafarja, N., & Zulnaidi, H. (2022). Relationship between Critical thinking and academic self-concept: An experimental study of Reciprocal teaching strategy. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 45, 101113. [Google Scholar]
  • McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1986). Inferences about predictable events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, memory, and cognition, 12(1), 82. [Google Scholar]
  • Meyer, K. (2014). Making meaning in mathematics problem-solving using the Reciprocal Teaching approach. Literacy learning: the middle years, 22(2), 7-14. [Google Scholar]
  • Mullis, I. V., Martin, M. O., & Sainsbury, M. (2016). PIRLS 2016 reading framework. PIRLS, 11-29. [Google Scholar]
  • Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (2003). Handbook of children’s literacy. Springer Science & Business Media. [Google Scholar]
  • Oczkus, L. D. (2018). Reciprocal teaching at work: Powerful strategies and lessons for improving reading comprehension. ASCD. [Google Scholar]
  • Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and instruction, 1(2), 117-175. [Google Scholar]
  • Panel, N. R., Health, N. I. o. C., & Development, H. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National …. [Google Scholar]
  • Parlindungan, F., & Prasetya, W. (2022). Literature Review on Trends of Comprehension Instruction for Elementary School Students. Education and Human Development Journal, 7(01), 42-54. [Google Scholar]
  • Priatna, N., Martadiputra, B., & Wibisono, Y. (2018). Developing geogebra-assisted reciprocal teaching strategy to improve junior high school students’ abstraction ability, lateral thinking and mathematical persistence. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, [Google Scholar]
  • Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Rand Corporation. [Google Scholar]
  • Spörer, N., Brunstein, J. C., & Kieschke, U. (2009). Improving students' reading comprehension skills: Effects of strategy instruction and reciprocal teaching. Learning and instruction, 19(3), 272-286. [Google Scholar]
  • Springer, S. E., Harris, S., & Dole, J. A. (2017). From Surviving to Thriving: Four Research‐Based Principles to Build Students’ Reading Interest. The Reading Teacher, 71(1), 43-50. [Google Scholar]
  • Steiner, R., Wiener, M., & Cromer, W. (1971). Comprehension training and identification for poor and good readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 62(6), 506. [Google Scholar]
  • Urquhart, V., & Frazee, D. (2012). Teaching reading in the content areas: If not me, then who? ASCD. [Google Scholar]
  • Van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. [Google Scholar]
  • Wigfield, A., Guthrie, J. T., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., Klauda, S. L., McRae, A., & Barbosa, P. (2008). Role of reading engagement in mediating effects of reading comprehension instruction on reading outcomes. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 432-445. [Google Scholar]
  • Wilson, S. G., Rinck, M., McNamara, T. P., Bower, G. H., & Morrow, D. G. (1993). Mental models and narrative comprehension: Some qualifications. Journal of memory and language, 32(2), 141-154. [Google Scholar]
  • Woolley, G. (2010). A multiple strategy framework supporting vocabulary development for students with reading comprehension deficits. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 34(2), 119-132. [Google Scholar]
  • Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological bulletin, 123(2), 162. [Google Scholar]