References

Applegate, M. D., Quinn, K. B., & Applegate, A. J. (2006).  Profiles in comprehension.  The Reading Teacher, 60, 48-57.

Fullan, M., Hill, P., & Crévola, C. (2006). Breakthrough. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Schmitt, M. C. (1990).  A questionnaire to measure children’s awareness of strategic reading processes.  The Reading Teacher, 43, 454-461.

Figure 4.1. Sample Interest Inventory 

Figure 4.2

Profiles, Cognitive Strategies, and Instructional Routines
Profile Description Cognitive Strategies Instructional Routines
1.        Literalists Look for all answers to all types of questions to be stated in the text. Accessing background and prior knowledge, making inferences, making connections, making and asking for clarifications. KWL, QAR, DR-TA, reciprocal teaching
2.       Fuzzy Thinkers Provide vague, ambiguous, or trite responses. Visualizing, summarizing, attending to text features, generating questions, making and asking for clarifications. Reciprocal teaching, graphic organizers, anticipation guides
3.        Left Fielders Generate unpredictable ideas that seem to have no real connection to the text. Summarizing, Making inferences. Metacognitive double-entry journals, guided reading and summarizing procedure.
4.        Quiz Contestants Provide answers that are logically correct but disconnected from the text. Making textually-implicit inferences, generating questions. QAR, reciprocal teaching, Metacognitive double-entry journals.
5.        Politicians Use slogans or platitudes that sound meaningful but are not text connected. Generating and responding to questions. QAR, anticipation guides, cliffhanger
6.        Dodgers Change the question and then respond to the new one. Responding to questions, making textually-implicit inferences, attending to text features. QAR, hot seat
7.        Authors Create their own story lines and story details. Visualizing, summarizing, attending to literary devices. QAR, guided reading and summarizing procedure, KWL.
8.        Minimalists Provide no elaboration of responses, resulting from lack of confidence or fear of failure. Summarizing, visualizing, making inferences, accessing background and prior knowledge. Think aloud, hot seat, reciprocal teaching.

 

Source: Adapted from Applegate, M. D., Quinn, K. B., & Applegate, A. J. (2006).  Profiles in comprehension.  The Reading Teacher, 60, 48-57.

Appendix: Metacomprehension Strategy Index

[Insert 3 page tool]

Source: Adapted from Schmitt, M. C. (1990).  A questionnaire to measure children’s awareness of strategic reading processes.  The Reading Teacher, 43, 454-461.

[Metacognitive Strategy Index, page 2]
[Metacognitive Strategy Index, page 3]

Applegate, M. D., Quinn, K. B., & Applegate, A. J. (2006).  Profiles in comprehension.  The Reading Teacher, 60, 48-57.

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2007).  Scaffolded Writing Instruction: Teaching with A Gradual-Release Framework.  New York, NY: Scholastic.

Fullan, M., Hill, P., & Crévola, C. (2006). Breakthrough. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Goodman, Y. (1985). Kid watching: Observing children in the classroom. In A. Jaggar & M.T. Smith-Burke (Eds.), Observing the language learner (pp. 9-18).  Newark, DE: International Reading Association and the National Council of Teachers of English.

Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007).  The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research,77, 81-112.

Henry, O. (1910/1994).  The ransom of Red Chief. O. Henry: Selected stories. New York, NY: Book-of-the-Month Club.

Schmitt, M. C. (1990).  A questionnaire to measure children’s awareness of strategic reading processes.  The Reading Teacher, 43, 454-461.

Figure 4.1. Observation Tool

OBSERVATIONS OF STUDENTS AT WORK

The host teacher will use this during the pre-observation meeting to explain the focus of the lesson. Attached will be a lesson plan for visiting Teacher to understand and follow the lesson. The Lesson Plan will identify the standard(s), goals and objectives, strategy/strategies for the learning activity, and materials.

FOCUS Strategy:

 

FOCUS Student(s):

 

What the Teacher says/does: How the Students respond: Questions I have:
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source: Emily Schell, 2007.  Used with permission.
Permission to duplicate for classroom use is granted. Wolsey & Fisher (2018) Available www.iaieus.com

 

Figure 4.2:  Sample Interest Inventory

Name:                     Date:            

  1. Who is a good reader you know?
  2. What makes him or her a good reader?
  3. If your friends could only say one word about you, what would it be?
  4. Do you prefer to be inside or outside?
  5. What is the best way to spend your free time?
  6. When you go to a library or bookstore, what type of books do you look for?
  7. Who is your favorite author?
  8. What is your all-time favorite book?
  9. What is your favorite type of book to read?
  10. What was the last book you read?
  11. Where is your favorite place to read?
  12.  Think about science, what’s your favorite topic?
  13. Think about social studies, what’s your favorite topic?
  14. Do you like art, music, or physical education?  What would you like to learn more about in these areas?

Permission to duplicate for classroom use is granted.  From Wolsey & Fisher (2018) Available: www.iaieus.com

Figure 4.3

Profiles, Cognitive Strategies, and Instructional Routines
Profile Description Cognitive Strategies Instructional Routines
1.        Literalists Look for all answers to all types of questions to be stated in the text. Accessing background and prior knowledge, making inferences, making connections, making and asking for clarifications. KWL, QAR, DR-TA, reciprocal teaching
2.       Fuzzy Thinkers Provide vague, ambiguous, or trite responses. Visualizing, summarizing, attending to text features, generating questions, making and asking for clarifications. Reciprocal teaching, graphic organizers, anticipation guides
3.        Left Fielders Generate unpredictable ideas that seem to have no real connection to the text. Summarizing, Making inferences. Metacognitive double-entry journals, guided reading and summarizing procedure.
4.        Quiz Contestants Provide answers that are logically correct but disconnected from the text. Making textually-implicit inferences, generating questions. QAR, reciprocal teaching, Metacognitive double-entry journals.
5.        Politicians Use slogans or platitudes that sound meaningful but are not text connected. Generating and responding to questions. QAR, anticipation guides, cliffhanger
6.        Dodgers Change the question and then respond to the new one. Responding to questions, making textually-implicit inferences, attending to text features. QAR, hot seat
7.        Authors Create their own story lines and story details. Visualizing, summarizing, attending to literary devices. QAR, guided reading and summarizing procedure, KWL.
8.        Minimalists Provide no elaboration of responses, resulting from lack of confidence or fear of failure. Summarizing, visualizing, making inferences, accessing background and prior knowledge. Think aloud, hot seat, reciprocal teaching.

 

Source: Applegate, M. D., Quinn, K. B., & Applegate, A. J. (2006).  Profiles in comprehension.  The Reading Teacher, 60, 48-57. Permission granted for classroom use.

 

Read More

             

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *