Wow, Half of this stuff is in DCPS's Teaching and Learning Framework, which is partner of the IMPACT teacher evaluation instrument, i.e. activities that teachers are expected to have the students do in class every day.

Good thing the creators didn't see the chart; otherwise all of those items would have been included

Interesting points about reading comprehension Dr.Willingham. I think you're making the point that teaching kids to deeply analyze text by asking questions about it gives little to no benefit and that doing so removes the joy from reading.

I don't understand what you mean about students not getting any benefit from being taught decoding strategies after 7th grade. I teach in a school that has a high proportion of ELL students past grade 10. Is teaching them decoding text not something I should be teaching them?

Is the list of strategies what you mean by teaching reading comprehension? I find these very useful (or thought I did) in teaching high school science. Summarizing, active reading by asking questions and having students try to figure out the meaning of words in context are things I thought were useful. Data says otherwise?

Thanks for the reply Dr.Willingham. I missed the points about the limited measures of effectiveness. It makes sense now.
Data on effectiveness of the strategies in the figure you posted on reading comprehension would be interesting.

I'm glad Dan is paying attention to exactly how the research defines "effectiveness." But even more important is his other point: Does this kind of teaching turn kids off to reading over the long term? Any research that doesn't factor that question into its definition of "effectiveness" is meaningless.

Extended rant <a href="http://ablogaboutschool.blogspot.com/2012/04/educational-thalidomide-or-whats-wrong.html">here</a>.

I developed my own strategy as a part of my approach to teaching science. I found that students in my 7th and 8th grade classes had learned to 'read' words and could do so, but also the information simply went in and made no cognitive impression whatsoever. They could also appear to be listening while thinking about something totally at odds with my class presentation. So I devised an exercise that got all the students involved. And it became a worthwhile part of my approach, teaching reading/thinking/learning/test taking as an integrated approach which could apply to science as well as other classes.
This is how I did it. I picked a page from the science text and asked for a volunteer to read a paragraph aloud. You'll get lots of volunteers, but some won't volunteer and it's important not to select them for this exercise. They'll be the ones you talk to privately later to see if they can, in fact, read. I didn't want to humiliate them.
As soon as the selected student finishes reading the paragraph and looks up, I would then say "Stop! Now look at me." Lots of puzzled looks the first time. I would then direct the reader to cover the paragraph he/she had just read with their hands, and then ask them to explain what they had just read. Astonishingly, most of them could not.
I would then select another volunteer to repeat the exercise with a different paragraph. After three or more of these, the students could tell you what they'd read. The next step after once again telling them to stop was to select a student (usually from the ones who gravitate toward the back of the classroom for their seating choice) and ask HIM what the reader had just read. Again, the first two or three couldn't tell me. But by the time I finished one class, about an hour in duration, they were reading, able to restate what the paragraph was about, and able to discuss what had been read aloud. The lesson got reinforcement later in the form of 10-minute review activities that I could use to get a class off to a good start.

I think you commenters are missing an important part of this article: reading comprehension is an either-you-have-it-or-you-don't skill. Those students who don't have it--no matter how old--still need to attain it. Those student who have mastered it (realized that the point of reading is communication) do not need additional reading comprehension teaching. There comes a time when students no longer need to do a "picture walk" through every story they begin. Indeed, eventually there will be no pictures to walk through. Similarly, there will come a time when students should be allowed to read a novel (at their reading level) without having to stop and write a summary and prediction of each chapter as they go. This usually happens around the time they can remember their questions through the whole reading session because they're not using so much brain to decode. Texts which are challenging for the students' reading level will always need additional comprehension strategies. But the determination of whether comprehension needs to be taught should be made on a case-by-case, child-by-child basis, otherwise we risk turning kids off of reading.`

These findings would be really helpful when I was still studying. I find this very true and I think if we can provide the proper solution or cater the students needs we can assure students learning.

Would you be able to provide the citation for the research about reading strategies not being helpful after 7th grade? Very interested in this topic. Thanks.

Interesting discussion. …I teach upper elementary reading. I am disappointed at the degree with which teachers over teach the use of strategies. The strategies themselves have become the end rather than the means. Hard working, devoted teachers devise and purchase “games” with names like ‘the monitor and clarify game’, or- my favorite- ‘prediction bingo’. There is an entire industry created around this stuff—workshops, books, activities. Kids are tested several times per year over these skills; yet they never take a test over the content of a novel or short story. The tests themselves have titles like ‘text features assessment for learning’ or ‘author’s purpose common assessment.’’ Imagine you are a fifth grader and as you are handed your graded quiz you are told that your predictions are wrong because they are not based on details from the text. Perhaps you’ve lost some points because the answers you wrote didn’t include your schema as stated in the question. Sadly, some of our best readers are baffled by this stuff and would just like to discuss the ‘story’. Often these short-sighted tests discourage creative answers or outside-of- the- box thinking. Frankly, I’d rather put great literature in their hands, allow them to read it, act it, wonder about it, draw it—anything rather than kill it with this mind-numbing nonsense. But, alas—I’ll hit the hallway early tomorrow morning and kindly shrug my shoulders when my well intentioned fellow teacher asks me if I’ve seen the Jumbo Inferenceing Concentration Card Game.

Cathy: Your comment is extremely interesting. It sounds like teachers in your environment are trying very hard using the latest methodologies.
I don't believe that there is one strategy that is best for all students.
Do you feel that these methods do not work for any students, or that they are generally marginal in their success?

The reading may increase the capacity of communication and their knowledge .

This is what I have been searching in many websites and I finally found it here. Amazing article. I am so impressed. Could never think of such a thing is possible with it.

Summarizing, active reading by asking questions and having students try to figure out the meaning of words in context are things I thought were useful. Data says otherwise?

Thanks for informative post. <a href="http://www.wondershare.com/pdf/top-5-free-adobe-acrobat-alternatives.html">alternatives to Adobe Acrobat for Mac</a>