 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The body of
research on literature groups is rapidly growing. Unfortunately, these studies
appear under so many names (literature studies,
literature circles, book clubs, cooperative book discussion groups, literature
discussion groups, peer group discussions, literature study groups,
instructional conversations) and often combine many divergent ingredients
(teacher control versus student autonomy, assigned versus chosen
books, student roles versus no roles), that finding research on the topic is a
daunting task. However, there is a plethora of evidence to support the
effectiveness of literature circles.
Comprehension
is a complicated process, yet it is one of the most important skills for
students to develop if they are to become successful and productive adults.
According to Pardo (2004) it is the process of simultaneously extracting and
constructing meaning through interaction and
involvement with written language. It is a complex process in which readers
construct meaning by interacting with text through the combination of
prior knowledge and previous experience, information in the text, and the stance
the reader takes in relationship to the text (Pardo, 2004).
When a student has acquired decoding skills, reading comprehension is the
product of three main factors: (1) considerate texts, (2) the
compatibility of the reader’s knowledge and text content, and (3) the active
strategies the reader employs to enhance understanding and retention,
and to circumvent comprehension failures. Also, comprehension is influenced by
the extent of overlap between the readers’ prior knowledge and
the content of text (Palinscar & Brown, 1984).Skilled reading involves fluent
word recognition (Pressley, 2000). Good comprehenders are extremely
active as they read, using a variety of comprehension strategies in an
articulated fashion as they read challenging text. As good readers go through
a text, they are active (Rosenblatt, 1994). They relate ideas in text to their
prior knowledge, construct images, and generate summaries (Pressley,
2000). To best support elementary-age-readers to become competent comprehenders,
teachers should teach decoding skills, help students build
fluency, build and activate background knowledge, teach vocabulary words,
motivate students, and engage them in personal responses to text
(Pardo, 2004). According to Wilkinson & Silliman (2000) assumptions about
classroom language and literacy learning are:
1. Learning is a social activity- interpersonal behaviors, both observed and
enacted in the classroom, are the basis
for new conceptual understandings in cognition and communication;
2. Learning is integrated- strong interrelationships exist between oral and
written language learning;
3. Learning requires active student engagement in classroom activities and
interaction-engaged students are
motivated for literacy learning and have the best chance for achieving full
communicative competence across the
broad spectrum of language and literacy skills.
The literacy dictionary (1995) defines at-risk students as a person or group
whose prospects for success are marginal or worse. Students who
are defined at-risk generally are placed in Title One programs and/or receive
Special Education services (Parker, Quigley & Reilly, 1999). The
need for early intervention to help at-risk students has generated concern at
the State and National levels. Negative consequences occur when
reading problems are not identified and addressed as early as possible (Jeffreys
& Spang, 2001). It is important that schools identify problems
before children experience failure and before expensive remedial programs are
needed (Snowe, cited in Jefferys & Spang, 2001). The right help
needs to be given before a pupil wastes valuable learning time, falls further
behind, and becomes a permanent slow reader
(Jefferys & Spang, 2001).
Research has shown that all children use the same skills to
learn to read (Jefferys & Spang, 2001). Children who experience difficulty in
reading
do not need different instruction but rather a more focused, more intense, more
responsive, and more individual application of the same principles
(Snowe, cited in Jefferys & Spang, 2001).
The
importance of social interaction as a key to learning was emphasized by a social
researcher named Lev S. Vygotsky (1978). Vygotsky’s
social development theory explained the importance of social interaction in
students’ social and cognitive development. Vygotsky argued that
instead of merely reflecting thought, language develops higher order thinking
because learning occurs first on a social plane and only then is
internalized. Further, Vygotsky argued that true learning first occurs on a
social level where content becomes meaningful and personally relevant
(Alwood, 2000). His zone of proximal development theory states that: (1)
learners accomplish more through assistance of a more knowledgeable
other than alone, and (2) there should be transference of control from the more
knowledgeable other to the learner through modeling and
scaffolding (Pitman, 1997).
Social constructivist theory as
developed by Vygotsky (1978) emphasizes learning as a social process. From the
perspectives of sociocultural
theory, teaching and learning are regarded as culturally sensitive, interactive
processes in which both the teacher and learner play significant and
critical roles. Students appropriate skills and understandings through guided
participation in cultural activities where development of a child’s
knowledge and understanding is shaped by their interactions and relationships
with others, both peers and adults (Maloch, 2002). Therefore,
comprehension is facilitated when students interact using oral and written
language to construct meaning about what they have read (Raphael &
McMahon, 1994).
Reciprocal
teaching is an instructional procedure designed to enhance students’ reading
comprehension. The procedure is best characterized as
a dialogue between teacher and students. The term reciprocal describes the
nature of the interactions: each person acts in response to the other(s)
(Hashey & Connors, 2003). This dialogue is structured by the use of four
strategies: predicting, questioning, clarifying, and summarizing. Research
indicates that when the role of reciprocal teaching expert is released from the
teacher to students, richer discussions in literature circles occur
(Hashey & Connors, 2003).
Collaborative literacy is a multidimensional term used to describe how engaging
students in group activities to read, discuss, and analyze
literature on the theme of working together can help them learn many of life’s
important lessons (Wood, Roser & Martinez, 2001). An essential
element of collaborative literacy is collaborative book talk. Students share
their thinking through collaborative book talks and then learn how to
foster and strengthen the need to get along and cooperate by exploring how the
stories’ themes apply to them, the classroom, their homes, and their
communities (Wood, Roser & Martinez, 2001).
There is considerable theoretical
support for the need to explore students’ own perspectives of their educational
experiences. As Dewey (1938)
stated, an experience is always a transaction between an individual and her
environment. The environment, according to Dewey, is “whatever
conditions interact with personal needs, desires, purposes, and capacities to
create the experience that is had” (Dewey, cited in Evans, 2002). In
other words, the personal sense-making processes and value systems that people
bring to any experience influence which aspects will be most
salient and provide the means for interpreting the experience (Evans, 2002).
Rosenblatt’s Transactional Theory
Rosenblatt’s Transactional Theory considers the reader’s role in the
reading process as critical to developing an understanding of and responses to
text. Rosenblatt (1994) explains that there are two streams of responses
involved in any reading event, the evocation and the response. Rosenblatt’s use
of the term transactions refers to the dynamic ways in which text and reader
come together as meaning is constructed. The experience and understanding that
readers bring to a literature discussion group greatly affect students’
responses and the outcome of the
discussion (Alwood, 2000).
The theoretical base for literature study in the elementary
school has most often been that associated with reader response, focusing on
reading
as transaction, the idea that a reader brings meaning to and takes meaning from
a text (Rosenblatt, 1994). Currently, literacy professionals readily
accept the idea that children and teacher can sit down and collaboratively
construct meaning and share interpretations and hypotheses about a text,
although the notion is a major departure from traditional reading groups (Eeds &
Peterson, 1991).
Literature study groups stand in contrast to traditional
reading groups in several ways. In traditional reading groups there is little
choice of
reading material, and the teacher’s main role is to ask comprehension questions
to test whether or not the students have read a selection in the
same way he or she has (Eeds & Peterson, 1991). However, in a literature study
group, questions with predetermined correct answers are not
asked; instead the teacher is a participant in a book group, a fellow reader who
shares insights and speculations, and asks only those questions she
or he genuinely wonders about (Eeds & Peterson, 1991).
Raphael & McMahon (1994) state that current beliefs about the
goals of reading instruction recognize that instruction in decoding and
comprehension are important; however, it is not sufficient for bringing students
into the community of readers. It is necessary to maintain a balance
between whole language and direct instruction in order to develop successful
readers (Parker, Quigley & Riley, 1999). It is also important to
provide opportunity for personal response, to encourage students to construct
meaning with their peers, and to question whether meaning is
inherent in the text (Raphael & McMahon, 1994).
Vygotsky’s (1978) notion of scaffolds for learning has played a critical role in
the development of theory and research on language and literacy
learning. Scaffolding functions as an interactional mechanism for learning and
development (Maloch, 2002). The process of scaffolding is the
gradual release of teacher support; an effective scaffold provides support at
the edge of a child’s competence, defining children’s zone of proximal
development or their potential for new learning (Wilkinson & Silliman, 2000).
According to Wilkinson & Silliman (2000) scaffolding occurs when teachers
provide graduated assistance to novice learners to achieve higher
levels of conceptual and communicative competence. With scaffolding, the learner
can experiment with new concepts and strategies in ways that
normally would not be possible without assistance.
In her study on scaffolding student talk in literature discussion groups, Maloch
(2002) found that the shift from a teacher-led discussion format
to a student-led discussion format was not easily accomplished. Continuous
support, modeling and definitive explanations of tasks, roles, and
responsibilities of students and the teacher are needed in order to facilitate a
smooth transition. Therefore, it is critical that teachers recognize the
difficulty students may face as they shift to more student-directed formats.
Llyod (2004) found that when teachers implemented the gradual release of
responsibilities model students were provided with the ability to
engage in meaningful “real” conversations about texts. The author further states
that when teachers begin with the most supportive instructional
technique of providing explicit modeling of asking questions and modeling
language processes through think-alouds, while providing clear guidelines
and behavioral expectations, students are provided with sufficient skills to
carry on student-led meaningful literature conversations within small
groups.
`The engagement perspective highlights the importance of motivation in
learning to read and underscores the social basis of classroom learning (Guthrie
& Alverman, cited in Wilkinson & Silliman, 2000). Classroom activities should be
designed to motivate students for reading and writing
and to provide them with opportunities to use oral language for meaningful
communicative purposes (Wilkinson & Silliman, 2000). Guthrie & Alverman (1999)
defined two essential features of the engagement perspective:
1. Classrooms are social, providing
opportunities for students to learn particular content
and contributing to their motivation
to learn.
2. Social interaction influences
reading strategies.
Engagement strategies encourage students and teachers to use
their imagination to question, investigate, and interpret particular text events
in
order to enhance and deepen meaning making with fiction and nonfiction (Gove &
Long-Wies, 2003/2004). According to Gove & Long-Weis (2003/2004) by using the
following three engagement strategies, teachers can help guide students (at
every
level of comprehension) to significantly reflect upon, and connect more
profoundly with, anything that can be read and interpreted:
1. Ask open-ended questions: listen
to, honor, and respond to students; and encourage
students to read between the lines of
the text.
2. Invite students to investigate and
find out about explicit or implicit text information- to
dig a little deeper into the text’s
meaning.
3. Encourage students to pose and
solve problems about important text events.
The form
taken by literature circles varies according to students’ needs, their
abilities, and the characteristics of individual classrooms.
However, all literature circles share the following three basic elements:
diversity, self-choice, and student initiative (Daniels, 2002). When teachers
implement literature circles they are able to see the process of comprehension
unfold. Comprehension deepens and expands as students share their
experiences and questions with a group. Discussions help strong readers gain
more control over comprehension strategies by explaining ideas to
their peers, which allows struggling readers to see comprehension modeled and
then practice it (Pollack-Day, Spiegel, McLellan & Brown, 2002).
The benefits of literature circles: (1) help teachers teach, not merely check
comprehension; (2) allow teachers to teach many facets of
comprehension; (3) encourage students to learn from one another; (4) motivate
students naturally; and (5) promote discussion more effectively than
whole groups (Pollack-Day, Spiegel, McLellan & Brown, 2002).
A primary function of literature circles is to create a
classroom community in which students and teachers can learn from and with each
other
(Leal, 1993). Literature circles promote classroom climates, which are
cooperative, responsible, and enjoyable because students are given the
responsibility for working with each other to make decisions in accordance with
their needs and interests (Leal, 1993). In addition, as students learn
to work cooperatively with each other, to be responsible for their own learning,
and to respect multiple perspectives on topics and issues, they also
learn to be better listeners and more honest with peers (Leal, 1993). According
to these views, the classroom then becomes a place that is
conducive to democracy and diversity (Leal, 1993).
Daniels (1994/2002) defines literature circles as small,
temporary discussion groups who have chosen to read the same book. The circles
have
regular meetings with discussion roles rotating each session providing each
member of the group the opportunity to share in the discussions and
facilitate meaning. Daniels (2002) provides eleven key features of implementing
authentic and mature literature circles:
· Children choose their own reading
materials.
· Small temporary groups are formed,
based on book choice.
· Different groups read different
books.
· Groups meet on a regular,
predictable schedule.
· Children use written or drawn notes
to guide both their reading and discussion.
· Discussion topics come from the
students.
· Group meetings aim to be open,
natural conversations.
· The teacher serves as a
facilitator.
· Evaluation is by teacher
observation and student self-evaluation.
· A spirit of playfulness and fun
pervades the room.
· New groups form around new reading
choices.
From his work on literature circles Daniels (1994) created a
list of required and optional roles for effective literature circle discussions.
Required roles include: (1) discussion director; (2) literary luminary/passage
master; (3) connector; and (4) illustrator. Optional roles include: (1)
researcher; (2) summarizer/essence extractor; (3) character captain; (4)
vocabulary enricher/word master; and (5) travel tracer/scene setter.
Daniels (1994) states that once students have used a variety of roles and had
successful group meetings, then the structured roles are less
necessary and can be phased out, replacing them with reading logs.
Eeds & Peterson (1991) define literature study groups as the
process in which teacher and students gather to talk about a book they have all
read. The following categories of questions, from Eeds & Peterson (1991) are
representatives of the types of questions teachers might wish to focus
and model during literature study groups. (1) structure: think about tension or
conflict and events that produce them; (2) character: how do the
characters emerge; (3) place: think about whether the characters or the mood or
the movement of the story is influenced by place; (4) time: think
about how time is marked; (5) point of view: think about the author’s position
in the work; (6) mood: think about your emotional or feeling state at a
particular moment in the book; and (7) symbol and extended metaphor: think about
meaning suggested through symbol, not directly stated, and how
it affects you.
Samway, Whang, Cade, Melindevic, Lubandina & Phommachanh
(1991) found that students who participated in literature circles were
profoundly impacted. The experience had positively influenced how they
understood themselves and others and their membership in a multicultural
world; and viewed themselves as readers. Further, results indicate that the
reading and open-ended discussions stimulated natural and profound
discussions that allowed students to raise and begin to answer questions for
themselves.
Goldenberg (1992/1993) investigated the role Instructional
Conversations play in helping students think, reason, comprehend and understand
important ideas of text; while providing opportunities to discuss complex and
different views of a concept to further develop their linguistic and
conceptual skills.
Elements of Instructional Conversations are divided into two
groups: (1) Instructional elements which include: activation and use of
background
and relevant schemata, thematic focus, direct teaching of a skill or concepts,
promotion of more complex language; and expression and elicitation of
bases for statements or positions. (2) Conversational elements include:
responsivity to student contributions; connected discourse; a challenging,
but non-threating atmosphere; fewer “known-answer” questions; and general
participation, including self-selected turns.
Goldenberg (1992/1993) found that Instructional Conversations
did not constitute an all-encompassing instructional method; therefore, they
should be used as part of a balanced program to help students comprehend texts,
learn complex concepts, and consider various perspectives on
issues.
Research indicates that the teacher’s role in literature
circles will vary based upon students’ skills and learning needs (Alwood, 2000).
McCormack (1993) investigated the teacher’s role in peer response groups and
found that all students practiced the functions of discourse and all
emerged as leaders at one time or another by engaging in various task-leadership
roles within the small group without the presence of a teacher.
Elements which led to successful peer-discussions were: (1) sufficient teacher
modeling; (2) explicit instruction of comprehension strategies; (3)
various forms of leadership roles; and (4) frequent opportunities to monitor
discourse within the peer-led discussions (McCormack, 1993). Based on
the presentation of the research it can be concluded that the implementation of
literature circles enhance student’s literacy skills.
Although research indicates that literature circles are
conducive to literacy learning, potential problems may arise when implementing
them in a
balanced program. Difficulty sometimes arises when teachers need to go beyond
book sharing and take on the role of good critic, of literacy leader,
in order to help their students develop literary insight and aesthetic judgment
(Eeds & Peterson, 1991). According to Parker, Quigley & Reilly
(1999) the following should be considered when incorporating literacy circles
into a classroom:
1. Literacy circles seem to work best
when they are part of the daily reading curriculum
at least in regard to making an
impression on the students.
2. An appropriate amount of planning
time for each novel that would be incorporated for
literacy circles might be considered.
3. Strategies such as multiple
intelligences, cooperative learning, scaffolding, authentic
assessment, the use of graphic
organizers are instrumental in bringing desired changes.
4. For literacy circles to succeed, a
great deal of class time is needed. A suggestion would
be to use novels that can cross over
into other content areas so that other subjects are
equally covered.
A primary function of literature circles is to create a
classroom community in which students and teachers can learn from and with each
other (Leal, 1993). Literature circles promote classroom climates which are
cooperative, responsible, and enjoyable because students are given the
responsibility for working with each other to make decisions in accordance with
their needs and interests (Leal).