Using speaking and listening activities to
support the development of reading
comprehension skills
Dr. Paula Clarke
School of Education, University of Leeds
Emma Truelove, Professor Maggie Snowling
& Professor Charles Hulme
Centre for Reading and Language, University of York
Overview of presentation


Reading comprehension impairments
Supporting reading comprehension
 Previous
research
 The York Reading for Meaning Project
 Project design
 Teaching
techniques
 Results

Implications for education contexts
Reading Comprehension Weaknesses
Primary Framework for Literacy
Rose Review (2006) emphasises the importance of
language to literacy development
• Move towards Simple View of Reading (Gough & Tunmer,
•
1986; Hoover & Gough, 1990)
•
Two components of reading:
•
•
•
•
Decoding
Language Comprehension
Both skills are necessary
Neither skill alone is sufficient for reading
Simple View of Reading
Successful Reading – Reading for Meaning
Simple View of Reading
Dyslexia
Simple View of Reading
Poor Comprehenders
Simple View of Reading
Generally Poor Readers
Poor comprehender profile
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
Comprehension
Normal Readers
Accuracy
Poor Comprehenders
Nation & Snowling (1997)
Poor comprehender profile
Evidence of impairments on a range of different oral language tasks:
Vocabulary
Nation, Clarke & Snowling, 2002; Nation, Clarke, Marshall & Durand, 2004, Stothard &
Hulme,1992
Oral expression
Nation, Clarke, Marshall & Durand, 2004
Figurative language
Nation, Clarke, Marshall & Durand, 2004
Narrative skills
Cragg & Nation, 2006; Cain & Oakhill, 1996; 2006
Grammatical development
Nation, Clarke, Marshall & Durand, 2004; Nation & Snowling, 2000
Verbal reasoning
Nation, Clarke, Marshall & Durand, 2004
Inferencing
Oakhill, 1984; Cain & Oakhill, 1999; Nation, Clarke, Marshall & Durand, 2004
Evidence of impairments in other areas:
Comprehension monitoring
Ehrlich, Remond & Tardieu, 1999; Yuill, Oakhill & Parkin, 1989; Cain, Oakhill & Bryant, 2004;
Oakhill, Hartt & Samols, 2005
Verbal working memory
Nation, Adams, Bowyer-Crane & Snowling, 1999; Cain & Oakhill, 2006; Cain, 2006
Suppression/Inhibition
Cain, 2006
Supporting Reading Comprehension
Previous intervention research
Yuill and Oakhill (1988)
Inference Training
McGee & Johnson (2003)
Inference Training
Yuill and Joscelyne (1988)
Story Structure & Inference Training
Oakhill & Patel (1991)
Mental Imagery Training
Johnson-Glenberg (2000)
Verbal RT vs. Visualising Training
Our Research Study
Clarke, P.J., Snowling, M.J., Truelove, E., &
Hulme, C. (2010) Ameliorating children’s
reading comprehension difficulties : A
randomized controlled trial. Psychological
Science, 21, 1106-1116.
Research questions
Text level training
in written
language domain
Oral language
training in spoken
language domain
Text level training
in written
language domain
Improvements in
text
comprehension
Oral language
training in spoken
language domain
Project aims
• To investigate three approaches to improving reading comprehension skills
in poor comprehenders.
Oral
Language
(OL)
Text
Comprehension
(TC)
Combined
(COM)
• To compare these approaches to existing classroom practice by monitoring
the performance of an untreated waiting control group.
• To address the objectives of the primary framework (NLS) and equip
teaching assistants with a wide range of skills and materials, useful in
supporting children with reading comprehension and oral language
difficulties.
Programme components
Oral Language Programme
Text Comprehension Programme
Vocabulary
Listening Comprehension
Figurative Language
Spoken Narrative
Metacognitive Strategies
Reading Comprehension
Inferencing from Text
Written Narrative
Combined Programme
All eight components connecting oral language and text-based activities in an
integrated and naturalistic approach.
All sessions contained both reading and listening comprehension to support
complementary components.
Opportunities for children to encounter new vocabulary/idioms/inferences in both
written and spoken language.
Intervention delivery
•
Two 10-week blocks of intensive teaching in individual and pair sessions.
•
Each session is 30 minutes long.
•
Children receive 2 pair sessions and 1 individual session per week (1½
hours per week).
•
Teaching took place in designated areas within school (small
classrooms/meeting rooms etc.).
•
Teaching times varied depending upon existing timetabled commitments.
•
All fully funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC).
Session structure
Activity
Approx. time
per session
Activity
Approx. time
per session
Introduction
3 mins
Introduction
3 mins
Vocabulary
5 mins
Metacognitive
strategies
5 mins
Listening
comprehension
7 mins
Reading
comprehension
7 mins
Figurative
language
5 mins
Inferencing from
text
5 mins
Spoken narrative
7 mins
Written narrative
7 mins
Plenary
3 mins
Plenary
3 mins
Session structure
Activity
Introduction
Approx. time
per session
Activity
Approx. time
per session
2.5 mins
Introduction
2.5 mins
Metacognitive
strategies
5 mins
Vocabulary
5 mins
Reading
comprehension
5 mins
Listening
comprehension
5 mins
Inferencing from
text
5 mins
Reading
comprehension
5 mins
Listening
comprehension
5 mins
Inferencing from
text
5 mins
Spoken narrative
5 mins
Spoken narrative
5 mins
Plenary
2.5 mins
Plenary
2.5 mins
Links to Primary Framework (NLS)
1. Understanding & interpreting texts
Objective
Corresponding Components
Retrieve, select and describe information,
events and ideas
RT (Clarification, Summarisation)
Metacognitive strategies
Deduce, infer and interpret information,
events and idea
RT (Prediction)
Inferencing from text
Use syntax, context, word structures and
origins to develop understanding of word
meanings
Vocabulary
Figurative language
Inferencing from text
Identify and comment on structure and
organisation of texts
Narrative
Explain and comment on writer’s use of
language including vocabulary, grammatical
and literary features
Vocabulary
Figurative language
Links to Primary Framework (NLS)
2. Engaging & responding to texts
Objective
Corresponding Components
Read independently for purpose, pleasure
and learning
All TC Components
Respond imaginatively using different
strategies to engage with texts
Metacognitive strategies
Narrative
Evaluate writer’s purposes and viewpoints
and the overall effect of the text on the
reader
RT (Summarisation)
Narrative
Links to Primary Framework (NLS)
3. Text structure and organisation
Objective
Corresponding Components
Organise ideas into coherent structure
including layout, sections and paragraphs
RT (Summarisation)
Narrative
Write cohesive paragraphs linking sentences
within and between them
Written Narrative
Oral Language Teaching Materials
Vocabulary
Mnemonic Strategies
Levin, 1993; Peters & Levin, 1986; Graves & Levin, 1989
Picture Cards
Multiple Context Learning
Beck, McKeown & Kucan, 2002
warmth &
shelter
“At school,
books and
pencils are a
necessity.”
Necessity
Food,
water and
air
Verbal Reasoning
Graphic Organisers
Nash & Snowling, 2006
• Generating synonyms & antonyms
Listening
RT refers to an instructional
activity that takes place in the
form of a dialogue between
teachers and students regarding
segments of spoken language
The teacher and students take
turns assuming the role of the
teacher in this dialogue
Palinscar & Brown (1984)
Review by Rosenshine & Meister (1994)
Listening
•
Reciprocal Teaching at Work: Strategies for Improving Reading Comprehension by Lori D. Oczkus (2003)
International Reading Association. ISBN 0-87207-514-1
Figurative Language
• Idioms
• a piece of cake
• a frog in your throat
• the apple of my eye
• Jokes
To be at
sixes and
sevens
• why do cows have bells?
• because their horns don’t work!
• Riddles
• the more of them you take, the more of them
you leave behind. What are they?
• footsteps
• Simile
• like a bull in a china shop
• as wise as an owl
• Metaphor
• he was boiling mad
• it was a recipe for disaster
Post cards
through the
smart chute and
reveal the
answer! Then
use the idiom in
a sentence
http://www.smartkids2
.co.uk/ukshop/
Narrative
•
Story structure
(Beck & McKeown,1981; Pearson, 1982;
Idol & Croll, 1987)
•
Sequencing
•
Story production
The Story Mountain
Much of the narrative work centred around the Story
Mountain. For example, sequencing story cards onto
the mountain and using the stages of the mountain
the support story production.
Children used story planners to map out
their ideas then using digital voice
recorders created cds of their stories.
Children presented their stories to one
another and reflected on them at the end
of the programme.
Text Comprehension Teaching Materials
Metacognitive Strategies
•
Re-read
(Garner, et al., 1984)
•
Look-back
(Garner, 1982)
•
Think aloud
(Farr & Connor, 2004)
•
Mental imagery
(Oakhill & Patel, 1991)
•
Explain & reflect
(McNamara, 2004)
Reading
RT refers to an instructional
activity that takes place in the
form of a dialogue between
teachers and students regarding
segments of text
The teacher and students take
turns assuming the role of the
teacher in this dialogue
Palinscar & Brown (1984)
Review by Rosenshine & Meister (1994)
Inferencing from text
•
Lexical inferencing
•
Bridging inferencing
•
Activating prior knowledge
•
Elaborative inferencing
•
Guessing missing information
•
Evaluative inferencing
Narrative
•
Story structure
(Beck & McKeown,1981; Pearson, 1982;
Idol & Croll, 1987)
•
Sequencing
•
Story production
Children used story planners to map out their
ideas. They then wrote their stories out in full,
illustrated them and turned them into books.
Children presented their stories to one another
and reflected on them at the end of the
programme.
Randomised Controlled Trial Design
Group Screening (Oct-Dec 2006)
Y4 children in 23 schools in York & N.Yorks; eligible for assessment (n = 1120)
Group assessments: Listening Comp (n = 1042); Ravens (n = 1054);
Spelling (n = 1045); Numerical ops (n = 1050)
Screening
Complete data on key measures (n= 977)
Individual Screening (Jan-Feb 2007)
21 schools; eligible for assessment (n = 296)
Individual assessments: NARA reading comp (n = 284); TOWRE (n = 282); WASI
Verbal IQ (n = 277)
Complete data on key measures (n= 282)
Oct - April
2006
July
2007
Dec-Jan
2007
Dec
2008
8-9
years
9
years
9-10
years
10-11
years
July
2009
Randomised Controlled Trial Design
Eligibility Criteria
Pre test
Screening
• Discrepancy in standard score points between NARA II reading comprehension
and TOWRE real word reading efficiency.
•
•
•
•
NARA II reading accuracy standard scores of 85 and above.
NARA II reading comprehension scores of 105 and below.
Age appropriate spelling ability.
Non-Verbal IQ of 85 or above.
• Of these children, we selected eight children within each school with the
greatest discrepancies.
• Average discrepancy = 15 standard score points.
Oct - April
2006
July
2007
Dec-Jan
2007
Dec
2008
8-9
years
9
years
9-10
years
10-11
years
July
2009
Randomised Controlled Trial Design
TC block 1
OL block 1
Pre test
Screening
Random Allocation
At this point 20 schools, 160 children selected
Within each school 2 children were randomly allocated to each of the four groups
COM block 1
40 children per group
Control
Oct - April
2006
July
2007
Dec-Jan
2007
Dec
2008
8-9
years
9
years
9-10
years
10-11
years
July
2009
Randomised Controlled Trial Design
Intervention Block
• 10 weeks
• 3x 30 minute sessions per week (2 pair, 1 individual)
• Delivered by trained teaching assistants
OL block 1
Pre test
Screening
TC block 1
COM block 1
Control
Oct - April
2006
July
2007
Dec-Jan
2007
Dec
2008
8-9
years
9
years
9-10
years
10-11
years
July
2009
TC
OL block 1
OL block 2
OL
COM block 1
Control
COM block 2
Control
COM
Maintenance test
TC block 2
Post test
TC block 1
Mid test
Pre test
Screening
Randomised Controlled Trial Design
Control block
1
Control
Oct - April
2006
July
2007
Dec-Jan
2007
Dec
2008
8-9
years
9
years
9-10
years
10-11
years
Control block
2
July
2009
Treatment fidelity
• Manuals
Detailed, prescriptive manual and pre-prepared worksheets, readers and resources
• Training
Training took place over 3.5 days. Delivered by the research team.
• Fortnightly tutorials
Opportunity to monitor delivery of programmes by discussing experiences, ideas and
observations. Some sessions took the form of top up training in which we focused on
particular components of the programmes.
• Observations
Each TA was observed by a member of the research team at least twice in each
intervention block. Careful records were kept and onsite feedback and support was
given.
• Filmed sessions
Five TAs gave us permission to film teaching sessions.
Statistical technique
• Regression based approach
used, controlling for
performance at T1.
• Report 95% robust
confidence intervals.
Control group change in performance
from T1 –T2
Distant from 0 = significant
Crosses 0 = non significant
• Cluster variable = School
• Comparing each group to
the control group
Change in performance of
intervention group from T1-T2
relative to control group.
Effect sizes

An effect size helps to determine whether a
statistically significant difference is a difference of
practical concern

Cohen’s d
0.2 to 0.3 - a "small" effect
0.5 - a "medium" effect
0.8 and above - a "large" effect
Results – WIAT II
Results – NARA II
Results – Vocabulary
Results – Control task (arithmetic)
Results – Vocabulary as a mediator
Overall Summary & Conclusions
• In poor comprehenders, 20-week intervention programmes can
produce significant gains in Text comprehension and Oral language.
• Importantly these gains are relative to an untreated waiting
control group.
• The gains maintain over time and for the OL programme the
difference between intervention group and controls increases in
significance.
• Evidence to suggest a causal relationship between vocabulary and
text comprehension. Improvements in text comprehension can be
explained, at least in part, by improvements in vocabulary skill.
Implications for Education
Implications for education
Evidence that the skills that underpin oral language
and text comprehension are trainable in children aged
8-10 years.
•
Evidence that teaching assistants with a relatively
small amount of training can deliver high quality
effective teaching.
•
Parent Feedback
It has given him a thirst for
learning – he is much more
enthusiastic than last year
I think it was an excellent and
enjoyable project for my
daughter
Sometimes the things she has
learnt pop up in conversation –
she makes a connection
XXX has improved so much in her school
work and enjoys all the learning that is
given to her – I think the whole course
has been very worth while
He has enjoyed learning the
meaning of new words and
testing my understanding of
them
It has been a pleasure to see
her grow in confidence – she
has read more at home for
pleasure
This project has increased her awareness –
She has been talkative about what’s been
happening – She questions more and
opens conversations
The York Assessment of Reading for
Comprehension

A new assessment tool for teachers and researchers

Developed by the team at the Centre for Reading and
Language in York

Published by GL assessment

See: http://shop.gl-assessment.co.uk/home.php?cat=428
Thank you for reading!
References

Beck, I.L. & McKeown, M.G. (1981) Developing questions that promote comprehension: The story map. Language Arts, 58,
8, 913-918.

Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G. & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life. New York: Guildford Press.

Cain, K. (2006). Individual differences in children’s memory and reading comprehension: An investigation of semantic and
inhibitory deficits. Memory, 14, 553-569.

Cain, K. and Oakhill, J.V. (1996) The nature of the relationship between comprehension skill and the ability to tell a story.
British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 14, 187-201.

Cain, K., & Oakhill, J.V. (1999). Inference making ability and its relation to comprehension failure. Reading and Writing, 11,
489-503.

Cain, K. & Oakhill, J.V. (2006). Profiles of children with specific reading comprehension difficulties. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 76, 683-696.

Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. E. (2004). Children's reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working
memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 31-42.

Clarke, P.J., Snowling, M.J., Truelove, E., & Hulme, C. (2010) Ameliorating children’s reading comprehension difficulties : A
randomized controlled trial. Psychological Science, 21, 1106-1116.

Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159.

Cragg, L., & Nation, K. (2006). Exploring written narrative in children with poor reading comprehension. Educational
Psychology, 21, 55-72.

Ehrlich, M. F., Remond, M. & Tardieu, H. (1999). Processing of anaphoric devices in young skilled and less skilled
comprehenders: Differences in metacognitive monitoring. Reading and Writing, 11, 29-63.
References

Farr, R. & Conner, J. (2004) Using Think-Alouds to Improve Reading Comprehension
http://www.readingrockets.org/article/102 (accessed 01/07/10)

Garner, R. (1982). Resolving comprehension failure through text look backs: Direct training and practice effects among
good and poor comprehenders in grades six and seven. Reading Psychology, 3, 221-223.

Garner, R., Chou Hare, V., Alexander, P., Haynes, J., & Winograd, P. (1984) Inducing use of a text lookback strategy among
unsuccessful readers. American Education Research Journal, 21, 4, 789-798.

Gough, P. B. & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6-10.

Graves, A. W. & Levin, J. R. (1989). Comparison of monitoring and mnemonic strategies in learning disabled students.
Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 232-236.

Hoover, W. A. & Gough, P.B. (1990) The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 127160.

Idol, L., & Croll, V. J. (1987). Story-mapping training as a means of improving reading comprehension. Learning Disability
Quarterly, 10, 214-229.

Johnson-Glenberg, M. C. (2000). Training reading comprehension in adequate decoders/poor comprehenders: Verbal versus
visual strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 772-782.

Levin, J. R. (1993). Mnemonic Strategies and Classroom Learning: A Twenty-Year Report Card. Elementary School
Journal, 94, 235.

McGee, A. & Johnson, H. (2003). The effect of inference training on skilled and less skilled comprehenders. Educational
Psychology, 23, 49-59.

McNamara, D.S. (2004). SERT: Self-explanation reading training. Discourse Processes, 38, 1-30.
References

Nash, H. & Snowling, M. J. (2006). Teaching new words to children with poor existing vocabulary knowledge: A controlled
evaluation of the definition and context methods. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 41, 335354.

Nation, K., Adams, J. W., Bowyer-Crane, C. A., & Snowling, M. J. (1999). Working memory deficits in poor comprehenders
reflect underlying language impairments. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 73, 139-158.

Nation, K., Clarke, P., Marshall, C. M., & Durand, M. (2004). Hidden Language Impairments in Children: Parallels Between
Poor Reading Comprehension and Specific Language Impairment? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47,
199.

Nation, K., Clarke, P., & Snowling, M. J. (2002). General cognitive ability in children with poor reading
comprehension. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 549-560.

Nation, K. & Snowling. M.J. (1997) Assessing reading difficulties: the validity and utility of current measures of reading skill.
British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 359-370.

Nation, K. & Snowling, M. J. (2000). Factors influencing syntactic awareness in normal readers and poor
comprehenders. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 229-241.

Oakhill, J. V. (1984). Inferential and memory skills in children’s comprehension of stories. British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 54, 31-39.

Oakhill, J.V., Hartt, J., & Samols, D. (2005) Levels of comprehension monitoring and working memory in good and poor
comprehenders. Reading and Writing, 18, 657-686.

Oakhill, J. V. & Patel, S. (1991). Can imagery training help children who have comprehension problems? Journal of Research
in Reading, 14, 106-115.

Oczkus, L.D. (2003). The Four Reciprocal Teaching Strategies. In Reciprocal Teaching at Work (pp. 13-28). Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.
References

Palinscar, A. S. & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring
activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.

Pearson, P. D. (1982). A context for instructional research on reading comprehension. Urbana: University of Illinois, Center
for the Study of Reading.

Peters, E. E. & Levin, J. R. (1986). Effects of a mnemonic imagery strategy on good and poor readers' prose recall. Reading
Research Quarterly, 21, 179-192.

Rose, J. (2006). Independent review of the teaching of early reading: Final report. Department for education and skills.

Rosenshine, B. & Meister, C. (1994) Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 64, 479530.

Snowling, M.J., Stothard, S.E., Clarke, P., Bowyer-Crane, C., Harrington, A., Truelove, E., Nation, K. & Hulme, C. (2009). York
Assessment of Reading for Comprehension: Passage Reading. GL Assessment.

Snowling, M.J., Stothard, S.E., Clarke, P., Bowyer-Crane, C., Harrington, A., Truelove, E., Nation, K. & Hulme, C. (2010). York
Assessment of Reading for Comprehension: Passage Reading - Secondary Version. GL Assessment.

Stothard, S.E. & Hulme, C. (1992). Reading comprehension difficulties in children: The role of language comprehension and
working memory skills. Reading and Writing, 4, 245-256.

Yuill, N. & Joscelyne, T. (1988). Effect of organizational cues and strategies on good and poor comprehenders' story
understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 152-158.

Yuill, N. & Oakhill, J. V. (1988). Effects of inference training on poor reading comprehension. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2,
33-45.

Yuill, N., Oakhill, J.V. & Parkin, A. (1989). Working memory, comprehension ability and the resolution of text anomaly. British
Journal of Psychology, 80, 351-361.