An advance organizer, TELLS Fact or Fiction, was used to orient students to stories prior to reading them. The steps represented by the acronym were: (T) study story titles, (E) examine and skim pages for clues as to what stories were about, (L) look for important words, (L) look for hard words, (S) think about the story settings, and (Fact or Fiction) decide whether stories were factual or fictional. Teachers used the probing technique to guide 4 LD elementary students and 2 secondary students from general special education classes.
Analysis of performance on comprehension questions showed that, in general, students' average performance on factual, sequential, and inferential questions improved when they used the technique. The two older students maintained acceptable performance on inferential questions when the technique was removed; the remainder of the subjects were unable to maintain their improved performance after teacher-guided assistance was removed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonR.C. (1977). Schema-directed processes in language comprehension (Tech. Rep. No. 50). Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 142 977)
2.
AndersonR.C.PearsonP.D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension (Tech. Rep. No. 36). Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading.
3.
AndersonR.C.ReynoldsR.E.SchallertD.L.GoetzE.T. (1977). Frameworks for comprehending discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 14, 367–382.
4.
AndersonR.C.SpiroR.J.AndersonJ.C. (1978). Schemata as scaffolding for the representation of information in connected discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 15, 433–440.
5.
ArmbrusterB.B.EcholsC.H.BrownA.L. (1983). The role of metacognition in reading to learn: A developmental perspective (Reading Education Report No. 40). Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading.
6.
AusebelD.P. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. New York: Grune & Stratton.
7.
AusebelD.P. (1978). In defense of advance organizers. A reply to the critics. Review of Educational Research, 48, 251–258.
8.
BartlettF.C. (1932). Remembering. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
9.
BeanT.PardiR. (1979). A field test of a guided reading strategy. Journal of Reading, 23, 144–147.
10.
BransfordJ.D.JohnsonM. (1973). Considerations of some problems of comprehension. In ChaseW.G. (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 383–459). New York: Academic Press.)
11.
BransfordJ.D.McCarrellN.S. (1974). A set sketch of a cognitive approach to comprehension. In WeimerW.PalermoD.S. (Eds.), Cognition and the symbolic processes (pp. 189–229). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.)
12.
DuffyG.RoehlerL. (1980). Classroom teaching is more than opportunity to learn. Unpublished manuscript, Michigan State University.
13.
DurkinD. (1978–79). What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 481–533.
14.
DurkinD. (1983). Is there a match between what elementary teachers do and what basal reader manuals recommend? (Reading Education Report No. 44). Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading.
15.
HansenJ.PearsonP.D. (1983). An instructional study: Improving the inferential comprehension of fourth grade good and poor readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75 (6), 821–829.
16.
Idol-MaestasL. (1983). Special educators' consultation handbook. Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems Corp.
17.
Idol-MaestasL.LloydS.RitterS.(in press). A model for direct, data based reading instruction. Journal of Special Education Technology.
18.
JenkinsJ.R.JenkinsL.M. (1981). Cross age and peer tutoring: Help for children with learning problems. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional children.
19.
JonesM.B. (1974). Children's reading achievement as a function of varying specificity of purpose setting directions. Unpublished manuscript, University of Delaware. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 112 369)
20.
LeeP.AlleyG.R. (1980). Training junior high school LD students to use a test taking strategy (IRLD Research Report No. 38). Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.
21.
LovittT.C.HansenC.L. (1976). Round one — Placing the child in the right reader. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 9 (6), 18–24.
22.
LuitenJ.AmesW.S.AckersonG. (1979). The advance organizer: A review of research using Glass' technique of meta-analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Reading Conference, San Antonio, TX.
23.
MasonJ.OsbornJ. (1982). When do children begin “reading to learn?” A survey of classroom reading instruction practices in grades two through five. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading.
24.
OsbornJ. (1981). The purposes, uses, and content of workbooks and some guidelines for teachers and publishers (Reading Education Report No. 27). Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading.
25.
PearsonP.D.GallagherM.C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 317–344.
26.
PearsonP.D.HansenJ.GordonC. (1979). The effect of background knowledge on young Children's comprehension of explicit and implicit information. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11, 201–210.
27.
PearsonP.D.SpiroR.J. (1980). Toward a theory of reading comprehension instruction. Topics in Language Disorders, 1 (1), 71–88.
28.
RauchM. (1980). The relationships between selected discourse analysis tasks, reviewing strategies, and subsequent fifth grade students' performance in measures of reading comprehension. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Reading Assoc., St. Louis, MO. (ERIC Reproduction Service No. ED 186 880)
29.
RitterS.A. (1984). Teaching middle school students to use a test taking strategy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
30.
RitterS.A.Idol-MaestasL. (1983). Training senior high school students labeled educable mentally handicapped to use a test-taking strategy. Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
31.
RumelhartD.E. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In SpiroR.J.BruceB.C.BrewerW.F. (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 33–58). Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Assoc.)
32.
SchumakerJ.B.DeshlerD.D.DentonP.AlleyG.R.ClarkF.L.WarnerM.M. (1981). Multipass: A learning strategy for improving reading comprehension (IRLD Research Report No. 33). Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.
33.
SchumakerJ.DeshlerD.D.NolanJ.ClarkF.L.AlleyG.R.WarnerM.M. (1981). Error monitoring: A learning strategy for improving academic performance of LD adolescents (IRLD Research Report No. 32). Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.
34.
WarnerM.M.AlleyG.R. (1981). Teaching learning disabled junior high students to use visual imagery as a strategy for facilitating recall of reading passages (IRLD Research Report No. 49). Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.
35.
AaronI.E.. (1978). Batter up (level 8). Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman & Co.
36.
ClymerT.VenezkyR.L. (1982). Ten times round (level 10). Lexington, MA: Ginn and Co.
37.
ClymerT.VenezkyR.L.IndrisanR. (1982). Ride the sunrise (level 12). Lexington, MA: Ginn and Co.
38.
EarlyM. (1974). Reading power (level 5) (2nd ed.). New York: Harcourt Brace, Janovich, Inc.
