Using Reading Response Journals for Reading Comprehension
Response Journals for Reading Comprehension
by Lauree M. Buus
Lauree M. Buus is a student in the MCSI program at Black
Hills State University, at Spearfish, South Dakota, U.S.A.
Abstract
This action research study is aimed at addressing the memory
issues that are seen daily in the classroom. Students in a literature-based
reading program used reading response journals to assist in their reading
comprehension. Anecdotal observations, journal writing, conferencing, interest
surveys, and knowledge-based comprehension tests were used to determine the
effectiveness of this approach.
Memory has three components: sensory memory storage,
short-term memory storage, and long-term memory storage. It is desirable for
students to get major concepts into long-term memory and back out when needed.
This process includes the steps of encoding, storage, retrieval, and reporting.
Many factors can influence these steps. Teaching memory strategies could help improve
a student's memory ability. In this study, keeping a reading response journal
was the strategy used to reach this goal and
subsequently to improve reading comprehension.
Research into Literature
A student reads a book. She says it is very good and is not
having any problems as she reads it. When she takes a knowledge-based test on
it she scores four correct out of ten.
Yet another student, after reading two chapters, cannot tell
the name of the main character of the story. When reading orally with this same
student, I did not find him to have any problem with pronunciation and in most
cases he can tell what the words mean, but he cannot relate what just happened
in the story.
These issues seem to point to a problem with this student's
memory ability to remember what was read. This can be and often is very
frustrating to a teacher. So what can be done? Some teachers do such things as
verbal rehearsal or use manipulatives. But when that is not enough, what then?
Would having the student write about what they read help him or her comprehend
it? These are the questions I have had. The experiences mentioned have happened
in my own classroom. I have become very frustrated with students who just do
not seem to get it, especially in the area of reading comprehension.
My research into the literature was two-pronged. I felt it
necessary to investigate the role of memory and what memory is as well as
investigate reading response journals.
What is memory? According to the Random House College
Dictionary, (1982), it is "the mental capacity of retaining and reviving
impressions, or of recalling or recognizing previous experiences." In
other words, it is remembering. Memory has three main steps to memory storage:
sensory memory storage, short-term memory storage, and long-term memory storage
(Turkington & Harris, 2001). Turkington and Harris go on to say that
short-term memory storage is the temporary storage of information while it is
being processed and that important information must then be pushed on to long
term memory storage. The short-term memory has also been referred to as the
working memory. It is here as a "mental work space" (p.256) that we
sort and encode information before adding it to long-term memory, or we pull
information from long-term memory to reprocess it, (Zimbardo, Weber, &
Johnson, (2003). Levine (2002) says that long-term memory is "the
warehouse for more or less permanent knowledge," (p.93). It is in the
long-term memory that storage involving associations with words or meaning
occurs (Turkington & Harris, 2001).
To take this idea a step further, the memory process can be
looked at as having three parts, encoding, storage, and retrieval (Battle &
Labercane, 1985). Gillam (1997) adds one more part, reporting. The encoding
would be to attend to and interpret the information. The storage would be the
holding on of information. The retrieval would be the process of recalling
information or bringing it back to mind, and reporting it would be the giving
out of the information either verbally or in written form (Gillam, 1997).
Each person differs in his/her long-term memory abilities.
Influences such as maturation, age, and genetic differences in the speed of
processing information, play a role in how an individual develops memory
(Weinert & Helmke, 1998). So a young child will have a lesser memory
ability than an older child. Also, certain influences can specifically affect
each step of the memory process. Prior knowledge experience, degree of
participation, and discussion of an event during the event happening can affect
the encoding of information (Hudson & Gillam, 1997). Encoding is also
influenced by the degree of attention being given to a task by a person
(Levine, 2002; Gillam, 1997; Davis, & Cochran, 1989). The research also
suggests that if a student is not paying attention then he or she will not
retain what is being learned. Time, changes in knowledge base, repetition of
similar experiences, experience reenactment, and re-experiencing part of an
event can influence the storage of information (Hudson & Gillam, 1997).
Influence on retrieval can be affected by the use of props, drawing, and age
difference (Hudson & Gillam, 1997). Narrative skills and frequency of
opportunities to participate in memory type conversation influence the reporting
step (Hudson & Gillam, 1997).
By knowing about such influences, can a teacher then
implement strategies to enhance a student's memory? Yes, it seems that some do
agree that it is possible to teach strategies to enhance a student's memory. It
is argued that the teaching of memory strategies is important and enhances the
use of higher order skills (Scruggs & Mastropieri, 1992). Scruggs and
Mastropieri (1992) also note that a strong knowledge base is an important
beginning to higher order skills and the using memory strategies can help
develop this strong knowledge base. Students who have been exposed to high
memory strategy usage have better comprehension especially for low and average
achievers (Moley et al., 1992). Memory strategies are needed for success in school
so it is important to train children in their use (Arabsolghar & Elkins,
2000). But, it should not stop there. Students need to also know when to use a
strategy and know the value of using it (Cox, 1994).
Memory strategies are activities that are used to improve a
memory outcome (Arabsolghar & Elkins, 2000). So what and how does a teacher
need to teach? Scruggs and Mastropieri (1992) suggest ways teachers can improve
their students' abilities to remember. Two of these ways are on what I chose to
focus. The first, according to Scruggs and Mastropieri (1992), is to promote
memory by writing things down such as taking notes and journal writing. The
other given by Scruggs and Mastropieri (1992) is to increase practice and
review by focusing on the important concepts and provide a brief but regular
review. Chunking and rehearsal strategies help to retain material and then to
transfer it to long-term memory (Zimbardo, Weber, & Johnson, 2003). These
suggestions seem to point to the use of reading response journals.
Perkins (1992), in his book Smart Schools, From Training
Memories to Educating Minds gives three goals for education: retention of
knowledge, understanding of knowledge, and active use of knowledge. He notes
that these three goals can occur only by learning events in which students must
"think about and think with what they are learning" (p.8). These
thoughts scaffold the use of reading response journals to the role of memory on
learning. The retention of knowledge encompasses memory and the understanding
and active use of knowledge. This retention could come from keeping a reading
response journal. For students to have the opportunity to express a response to
their reading helps develop memory, therefore, several professional resources
have stressed the use of reader response journals (Asselin 2000).
A reading response journal, according to Fountas &
Pinnell (2001), is a place that students can write about their reading. The
journal allows students to record their thoughts so that they can review and
reflect on them. Another definition describes them as a journal where students
respond to any reading by writing summaries of what they read or personal
reactions to what they read (Manning, 1999). Manning (1999) went on to explain
that the purpose for such a journal offers the teacher a way to see the amount
of meaning of a text that the reader has constructed. It has also been stated
that the purpose for a reader's journal is to write about, and respond to
reading and to hold on to the information (Rief, 2003).
Study Plan
I used the students in my fifth grade classroom as my
research population. The students ranged in age from ten years to twelve years.
I had students with reading abilities ranging from second grade to sixth grade.
There were ten girls and ten boys represented in this study. The ethnic background
was approximately 66% white and 33% Native American. The students came from low
to middle income families. The families were two-parent, single-parent, or
guardianship by another family member.
This study took place for a three nine-week period. The
first nine-week period was spent getting the preliminary data and surveying
completed, as well as laying the ground work for other data collection. The
second nine-week period was when the bulk of my anecdotal observations, reading
conference observations, and monitoring of their journals took place. The third
nine-week period was used for collecting the ending data and analysis of that
data.
I started my project by informing my principal of my
research study. I then sought parental permission of my students by way of a
letter and permission form sent to the home with the student. I sent reminders
for the return of the permission form. If after three weeks, a student did not
return the permission form, I considered the student as not having permission and
excluded them from the study. Only one student did not return the form.
The next step was to establish the requirements involved
with beginning the students in the Accelerated Reading program, keeping student
reading logs, and reading conference procedures. I also laid the groundwork and
expectations of using a reading response journal. The expectations included
writing daily about what they read, and answering questions or comments I may
have made to their responses. I chose to keep the writing limited to them
summarizing what they read and to elicit their feelings about what they read
through my questions and comments. I also expected them to reread what they had
written on a particular book prior to reading further the next day or testing
on the book. This reinforced the suggestions of Scruggs and Mastropieri (1992)
of promoting external memory by writing things down and increasing practice and
review by providing brief but regular review.
I triangulated my data collection. To begin with I had
students fill out a survey on their reading habits and attitudes. This was done
before and after the study. I used a Likert scale of zero to four and tally
marks to help visualize changes if any in their responses. My assumption was
that the more confident students felt about their reading the more attentive
they may be to their reading and attention to task increases retention of
material (Levine, 2002).
As referenced before, I kept anecdotal observations of the
students as they read and responded in their journals. I watched for time on
task in comparison the amount and quality of writing they produced. I then
watched for an increase or decrease in frequency.
On average, I conducted reading conferences on an individual
basis four times during the nine-week period,with students over the books they
had read. This helped me to monitor their thinking and to personally discuss
their feelings about using a reading response journal. Through the book
summaries and character descriptions done during these conferences, I was able
to also detect improvement in a student's ability to recall information.
I used the Accelerated Reading program as part of my
literature-based reading instruction. Within this program students read books
of their choice at their level and then are tested on the computer. The program
gave reports on their testing averages at any given time. The questions on
these tests tend to be low level comprehension type questions and are therefore
highly dependent on a student's ability to recall information from the stories
they had read. The higher the average score was for testing, the better their
recall of information.
It would not be fair to assume that there was no anxiety or
risk with this project. Some students experienced frustration in having to keep
a journal. Some also had feelings of inadequacy from low test scores.
One-on-one assistance was given to those students who needed it. It was the
sincere hope of this researcher that using reading response journals would
improve my students' reading comprehension. I felt that keeping such a journal
could assist my students in any of their academic endeavors as well as their
reading outside of school.
Results
I first have to admit that, on paper, my proposal seemed so
workable but putting it into practice was another story. The frustrations that
some students had with keeping a journal and with reading on a daily basis in
general erupted some days into out and out refusal to comply. This happened
regardless of how much compromising was done. I often found myself tending to
these difficulties instead of collecting anecdotal data or making conference
observations.
After the first couple weeks, I analyzed my notes and
noticed I had dwelled more on the repeated lack of motivation on the part of
several students. I then chose to break my students into two groups for closer
study. I felt that those students who were on task would be give me one picture
of my research and those who were not on task another view. Students who were
on task but had tested poorly had not reviewed their responses in their
journals. When they went back and reviewed, they tested again with much better
results. I observed other students developing the habit of looking over their
responses before continuing to read. When I asked them about this, they
responded that it helped them to refocus on the story. One student even said
that it was handy because she had lost her bookmark and by rereading her last
response she could tell where she was in the book. During their reading
conferences, a repeated comment from many of the students was that keeping the
reading response journal was helpful for remembering what they had read. I also
noticed that the summaries the students wrote about their books and brought to
the reading conference were better written with more detail in a more
sequential manner.
Analysis of the journals themselves revealed growth for most
of the students. I took a sample from the beginning of the nine-week period and
another from the end of the nine-week period. The length of the entries grew
from one line to several lines and even paragraphs. The following is an example
of an early entry; "So far in my book Merlin has finally got back to the
dark hills." A later entry from the same student read; "Mrs. Buus,
Jeff is at home and was reading a letter from Lucy and Lucy is getting good at
milking the cow. And she likes Jeff's dog." To some this difference may
not seem like much, but for this student it was significant. Another student's
beginning entry was; "I read Tales of a Fourth Grade Nothing and I liked
it." The ending entry read; "Matilda's dad was mean to her but in the
morning Matilda's dad told her that she was as brilliant as Shakespear while he
was styling his hair and Matilda said Shakespear was bald and her dad was about
to cut his hair." Again, this student showed growth by adding more detail
and showing a better understanding of what was read. One student started out
writing three pages telling almost every little thing that happened. By the end
of the research period this student was down to one page or less telling the
important details worth remembering. Those students who were not as motivated
tended not to show much difference at all in their entries.
With the reading surveys, I was hoping to get an idea of my
student's attitudes about reading and writing about their reading. In general
there was not much change between the pre and post surveys. In October, out of
twenty students surveyed, all but four students rated being able to read was
very important. In January this changed to all but one student, and that
student rated it as just important. When asked how well they liked to read,
scores went from twelve students saying "well" or "very
well" in October, to fifteen students saying "well" to
"very well" in January. The question of how much they thought writing
about what they read would influence how well they remembered what they read
resulted in a slight decrease between October and January. On a scale of zero
to four, with zero being "not at all" and four being "very
much", sixteen students marked three or four in October. In January, that
number went down to fourteen. When students were asked to write out responses
on how they remembered what they have read, the answers were quite varied on
the pre-survey in October, but nine of them did say "writing about
it." On the post-survey in January this response had only increased to
ten.
The testing scores from the Accelerated Reading program had
twelve students with lower test scores at the end of the research period than
at the beginning. Of those twelve, five decreased less that five percent, but
these students had increased their reading levels so a slight decrease would be
expected due to the fact that they were new to experiencing the more difficult
text. The other students experienced a decrease of ten percent or more. I also
called it a decrease if a student failed to read and test on a book during the
nine-week period, two students fell into this category. On the flip side of
this, eight students showed an increase in their testing averages. Four of the
eight students had increased their reading levels, while two students had lower
reading levels and two students remained the same on their reading levels. I
would note here that the eight students who showed an increase in their testing
averages were also students who were consistently on task with reading and
writing in their reading response journals.
My final part of data collecting was the completion by the
students of a making meaning about reading response journals worksheet. This
worksheet was designed to get a feeling for how the students were perceiving
the use of the journals. It was completed about midway through the research
period. I read the questions orally to the students as they read along and
filled in their responses. This worksheet started out with the students giving
one-word descriptors of what reading response journals are to them. Answers
ranged from "cool," "fun,",and "educational," to
"boring," "stupid," and "dumb." There were far
more positive responses given than negative responses. The final question had
students write a two-word statement to give their opinion about the journals.
Seventeen students wrote a positive statement and only three wrote a negative
statement. Again, I noted that the negative statements came from students who
were not motivated to keeping the reading response journals.
Conclusion
In analyzing the data and notes, I discovered an underlying
factor that seemed to be an important issue in the results. That factor was
motivation on the part of the student. I describe motivation here as the desire
to read and respond consistently in their reading response journals.
If I were to ignore the results of students who were
consistently not motivated, I would find the use of reading response journals a
worthy strategy to enhance memory and thus increase reading comprehension.
Almost all of my motivated students exhibited some positive results. For some,
the increases were slight. I do feel that by the end of the year these
increases would be greater.
The disturbing result was those students who were
consistently not wanting to participate. They should not be ignored. These
students found keeping the journals too much work, or boring, or just not worth
their time. They are also the students in my room that tend to balk at any
writing assignment and are slow to finish their work. They found the responding
just one more thing to do.
With this in mind, I feel that the use of reading response
journals is not for every student. Adjustments need to be made for those who
find it not for them. Some suggestions I gathered from colleagues were to not
have them write daily, allow them to draw about what they read, or vary the
writing by giving them specific things to write about. One colleague also
suggested a form that they just fill in to cut down on the amount of writing
the student had to do. This would also give the student direction on what to
write. I shall continue to explore this strategy by trying some of these
suggestions.
References
Arabsolghar, F., & Elkins, J. (2000). Comparative
expectations of teachers and parents with regard to memory skills in children
with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental
Disability, 25(3), 169-179.
Asselin, M. (2000). Reader response in literature and
reading instruction. Teacher Librarian, 27(4), 62-63.
Battle, J., & Labercane, G. (1985). Comparing
achievement, ability, with visual memory and visual association. Reading
Horizons, 25(2), 87-94.
Cox, B. D. (1994). Children's use of mnemonic strategies:
variability in response to metamemory training. The Journal of Genetic
Psychology, 155(4), 423-433.
Davis, J. K., & Cochran, K. F. (1989). An information
processing view of field dependence-independence. Early Child Development and
Care, 43, 129-145.
Fountas, I. C., Pinnell, G. S. (2001). Guiding Readers and
Writers Grades 3 - 6. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Gillam, R. B. (1997). Putting memory to work in language
intervention: implications for practitioners. Topics in Language Disorders,
18(1), 72-76.
Hudson, J. A., & Gillam, R. B. (1997). "Oh, I
remember now!": facilitating children's long-term memory of events. Topics
in Language Disorders, 18(1), 1-10.
Levine, M., M.D. (2002). A Mind At a Time. New York, NY:
Simon & Schuster.
Manning, M. (1999). Too many journals. Teaching Pre K-8,
30(2), 89-91.
Moley, B. E., Hart, S. S., Leal, L., Santulli, K. A, Rao,
N., Johnson, T., et. al (1992). The teacher's role in facilitating memory and
study strategy development in the elementary school classroom. Child
Development, 63(3), 653-672.
Perkins, D. (1992). Smart Schools, From Training Memories to
Educating Minds. New York, NY:Maxwell MacMillan International.
Reif, L., (2003). A reader's-writer's notebook: it's a good
idea. Voices From the Middle, 10(4), 40.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1992). Remembering
the Forgotten Art of memory. American Educator: The Professional Journal of the
American Federation of Teachers, 16(4), 31-37.
Stein, Jess, (Ed). (1982). The Random House College
Dictionary (Revised Edition). New York: Random House, Inc.
Turkington, C. And Harris, J. R. Ph.D. (2001). Understanding
Memory: The Source Book for Memory and Memory Disorders. New York, NY:
Checkmark Books.
Weinert, F. E., & Helmke, A. (1998). The neglected role
of individual differences in theoretical models of cognitive development,
Learning and Instruction, 8(4), 309-23.
Zimbardo, P. G., Weber, A. L., and Johnson, R. L. (2003).
Psychology Core Concepts (4th ed).
Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar