The effects of reciprocal teaching on reading comprehension, retention on learning and self-efficacy perception

This study was carried out to test the effects of reciprocal teaching on reading comprehension skills, learning retention and self-efficacy perception of reading comprehension. Research was conducted in 4th grade Turkish lessons of a primary school located in the Central Anatolia region of Turkey with experimental and control groups of 25 randomly assigned students. Experimental method was used in the research and findings were supported with qualitative data. Data were collected through the Reading Comprehension Skills Achievement Test, Self-efficacy Perception Scale for Reading Comprehension and Student Interview Form, each developed by the researchers. According to the findings of the research, there was a significant difference between students in the experimental group where the reciprocal teaching technique was implemented and students in the control group where the traditional teaching process was continued in terms of the achievement level and retention scores of the reading comprehension in favor of the experimental group. However, no significant difference was found between the groups in terms of self-efficacy levels. The students in the experimental group expressed that they were pleased to have the opportunity to lead their friends, to have a say in guiding the lesson, this technique facilitated their understanding of the texts they read and it provided them with a group work environment.

Karşılıklı öğretimin okuduğunu anlamaya, öğrenme kalıcılığına ve öz yeterlik algısına etkisi

Bu araştırma karşılıklı öğretim tekniğinin ilkokulda okuduğunu anlama becerilerinin gelişmesine, kalıcılığa ve okuduğunu anlama öz yeterlik algısına etkisini test etme amacıyla yapılmıştır. Araştırma, Türkiye’de İç Anadolu Bölgesinde bulunan bir ilkokulunun 4. sınıf Türkçe derslerinde, yansız atama yoluyla elde edilen deney ve kontrol grubu olmak üzere yirmi beşer öğrenciden oluşan iki grupla yürütülmüştür. Araştırmada deneysel yöntem kullanılmış olup, nitel verilerle de bulgular desteklenmiştir. Veriler, araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilen Okuduğunu Anlama Becerileri Başarı Testi, Okuduğunu Anlamaya İlişkin Öz Yeterlik Algısı Ölçeği ve Öğrenci Görüşme Formu aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Araştırma bulgularına göre karşılıklı öğretim tekniğinin uygulandığı deney grubundaki öğrenciler ile geleneksel öğretim sürecinin devam ettirildiği kontrol grubundaki öğrenciler arasında okuduğunu anlamaya ilişkin başarı düzeyi ve kalıcılık puanları arasında deney grubu lehine anlamlı bir fark bulunurken, öz yeterlik düzeyleri arasında anlamlı fark gözlenmemiştir. Karşılıklı öğretim tekniğinin uygulandığı deney grubunda yer alan öğrenciler karşılıklı öğretim tekniğinin diğer arkadaşlarına liderlik etmelerine fırsat vermesinden memnun olduklarını, dersi yönlendirme konusunda söz sahibi olmalarını sağlamasının onlara keyif verdiğini, bu tekniğin, okudukları metinleri anlamalarını kolaylaştırdığını ve grupla çalışma ortamı sağlamasının kendilerine katkı getirdiğini ifade etmişlerdir.

PDF

___

Acat, M.B. (1996). The level of relationship between reading difficulties and reading comprehension skills.Unpublished master thesis, Hacettepe University, Ankara. Alfassi, M. (2004). Reading to learn: Effects of combined strategy instruction on high school students. The Journal of Educational Research, 97(4), 171.

Alvermann, D., & Earle, J. (2003). Comprehension instruction. In A. P. Sweet & C. Snow (Ed.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 12-30). New York: Guilford.

Ateş, S. (2006).The effect of visuals in primary school fourth grade texts on reading comprehension and summarization. Unpublished master thesis, Gazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.

Ateş, S., & Akyol, H. (2013).The evaluation of Turkish language arts course wıth regard to comprehension instruction.Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 11(3), 268-300.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215

Brady, P. L. (1990). Improving the reading comprehension of middle school students through reciprocal teaching and semantic mapping strategies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, Eugene.

Brown, A. L., Day, J. D., & Jones, R. S. (1983).The develoment of plans for summarizing texts. Child Development, 54, 968-979.

Bruce, M. E., & Robinson, G. L. (2000). Effectiveness of a metacognitive reading program for poor readers. Issues In Educational Research, 10(1), 1-20.

Budak, Y. (2016). Temel kavramlar. In Y. Budak (Ed.), Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri (pp. 1-26). Ankara: Pegem.

Coolican, H. (2009). Research methods and statistics in psychology. London, United Kingdom: Hodder.

Cooper, T., & Greive, C. (2009).The effectiveness of the methods of reciprocal teaching. Teach, 3(1), 45- 52.

Çelenk, S. (2003).The relationship between school-family cooperation and reading comprehension achievement. Hacettepe University Journal of Faculty of Education, 24, 33-39.

Çelik, S.; Şenocak, E.; Bayrakçeken, S.; Taşkesenligil, Y., & Doymuş, K. (2005).A review on active learning strategies. Kazım Karabekir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11, 155-185.

Çıkrıkçı, S. S. (2008). Development of primary school students summarizing skill. Dil Dergisi, 141, 19-35.

Çiftçi, Ö. & Temizyürek, F. (2008).Measurement understanding of reading skills in 5th classes of primary schools. Mustafa Kemal Journal of University Social Sciences Institute, 5(9), 109-129.

Dermody, M. (1988). Metacognitive strategies for development of reading comprehension for young children. Paper presented in American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New Orleans. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED292070.

Doğan, B. (2002). Okuduğunu anlama stratejilerinin öğretimi ile ilgili alanyazın taraması (Literature review related to the teaching of reading comprehension strategies). Uludağ University Journal of Educational Faculty, XV(1), 97-107.

Dokur, K. (2017). The impact of reciprocal teaching strategies on language proficiency of young EFL learners. Unpublished master thesis, Cukurova University, Adana.

Gilbert, F. (2018). Riding the reciprocal teaching bus a teacher’s reflections on nurturing collaborative learning in a school culture obsessed by results.Changing English, 25(2), 146-162.

Görgen, İ. (2014). The effects of reciprocal teaching and direct instruction approaches on knowledge map (k-map) generation skill. Educational Research and Reviews, 9(9), 255-261.

Gravetter, F. J., & Wallnau, L. B. (2013). Statistics for the behavioral sciences. USA: Cengage Learning.

Greenway, C. (2002). The process, pitfalls and benefits of implementing a reciprocal teaching intervention to improve the reading comprehension of a group of year 6 pupils, Educational Psychology in Practice, 18(2), 113-137.

Güldenoğlu, B., & Kargın, T. (2012). Explore the effectiveness of reciprocal teaching method on teachingreading comprehension to students with mild intellectual disabilities. Ankara University Faculty of Educational Sciences Special Education Journal, 13(1), 17-34.

Güler, Ö., & Özmen, R. G. (2010). Using the brief experimental analysis to determine the effective reading comprehension strategy in story comprehension of students with mental retardation.International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2(3), 930-954.

Güneyli, A. (2007). The Effect of Active Learning Approach on Developing Reading and Writing Skills in Native Education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Institute of Social Sciences, Ankara University.

Güngör, A., & Ün-Açıkgöz, K. (2006).Effects of cooperative learning on using reading comprehension strategies and attitudes towards reading. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 48, 481- 502.

Hashey, J. M., & Connors, D. J. (2003). Learn from our journey: reciprocal teaching action. The Reading Teacher, 57(3), 224-232.

Karasar, N. (2012). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel. Kelly, M., Moore, D. W. & Tuck, B. F. (1994). Reciprocal teaching in a regular primary school classroom.The Journal of Educational Research, 88(1), 53-61.

King, C. M., & Johnson, L. M. P. (1999): Constructing meaning via reciprocal teaching. Reading Research and Instruction, 38(3), 169-186.

Kirsch, I., Jong, J., LaFontaine, D., McQueen, J., Mendelovits, J., & Monseur, C. (2002). Reading for change: Performance and engagement across countries. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press

Klingner, J. K., & Vaughn, S. (1996). Reciprocal teaching of reading comprehension strategies for students with learningdisabilities who use English as a second language.The Elementary School Journal, 96(3), 275-293.

Koch, H. & Spörer, N. (2017). Students improve in reading comprehension by learning how to teach reading strategies. An evidence-based approach for teacher education. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 16(2), 197–211.

Köklü, N. (1995). Measurement of attitudes and options used in Likert-type scales.Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 28(2), 81-93.

Kula, S. S. & Budak, Y. (2020). Self-efficacy perceptions scale for reading comprehension of 4th grade students in primary school: Validity and reliability study. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 9(1), 106-120.

Le Fevre, D. M., Moore, D. W., & Wilkinson, I. A. G. (2003). Tape-assisted reciprocal teaching: cognitive bootstrapping for poor decoders. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 37-58.

Lederer, J. M. (2000). Reciprocal teaching of social studies in inclusive elementary classrooms.Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(1), 91-106.

Lubliner, S. (2004). Help for struggling upper-grade elementary readers. The Reading Teacher, 57(5), 430-438.

Lysynchuk, L.M., Pressley, M., & Vye, N. J. (1990). Reciprocal teaching improves standardized readingcomprehension performancein poor comprehenders. The Elementary School Journal, 90(5), 469-484.

MEB.(2017). Türkçe dersi öğretim programı. Ankara: MEB.

MEB (2019). PISA 2018 Turkey Pre Report. Retrieved from http://www.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2019_12/03105347_PISA_2018_Turkiye_On_Raporu.pdf

Miles, M., B., & Huberman, A., M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods.(2nd ed.). Thousand Oak, CA: Sage.

Miller, C. D.; Miller, L. F., & Rosen, L. A. (1988).Modified reciprocal teaching in a regular classroom. The Journal of Experimental Education, 56(4), 183-186.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Ness, M. (2011). Teachers’ use of and attitudes toward informational text in K-5 classrooms. Reading Psychology, 32, 28-53.

Neuman, S. B. (2001). The role of knowledge in early literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 468- 475.

Oczkus, L. D. (2003). Reciprocal teaching at work: strategies for ımproving reading comprehension. USA: International Reading.

Özbay, M., & Akdağ, E. (2013).The Effect of active learning on teaching of idioms.Journal of Mother Tongue Education, 1(2), 46-54.

Özçelik, D. A. (2013). Test hazırlama kılavuzu. Ankara: Pegem Akademi. Palincsar, A. S. (1987). Collaborating for collaborative learning of text comprehension. Presented by American Educational Research Association. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED285123.

Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension fostering and comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117– 175.

Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS survival manual. Australia: McGraw-Hill. Pearson, P. D., & Duke N. K. (2002).Comprehension instruction in the primary grades. In C. C. Block & S. R. Parris (eds.), Comprehension instruction: research-based best practices (pp. 247-258). New York: The Guildford.

Pilonieta, P., & Medina, A. L. (2009). Reciprocal teaching for the primary grades: “We can do it, too!”. The Reading Teacher, 63(2), 120-129.

Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 479-530.

Rowe, K. (2005). Teaching reading: The report and recommendations from the Commitee for the National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy. Australian Council for Educational Research.

Sarasti, I. A. (2007).The effects of reciprocal teaching comprehension-monitoring strategy on 3rd grade students’ reading comprehension. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, North Texas University, USA.

Senemoğlu, N. (2009). Gelişim öğrenme ve öğretim: Kuramdan uygulamaya. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

Schunk, D. H. (1981). Modeling and attributional effects on children’s achievement: A self-efficacy analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 93-105.

Schunk, D. H. (2014).Learning theories an educational perspective. (M. Şahin, Trans.Ed.). Ankara: Nobel.

Sidekli, S. (2010).Developing reading and comprehension skills of fifth grade students in primary school (Action research). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Gazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.

Spörer, N., Brunstein, J. C., & Kieschke, U. (2009). Improving students’ reading comprehension skills: effects of strategy instruction and reciprocal teaching. Learning and Instruction, 19(2009), 272-286.

Şimşek, Ö. F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş. Ankara: Ekinoks.

Takala, M. (2006). The effects of reciprocal teaching on reading comprehension in mainstream and special (SLI) education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(5), 559-576.

Taylor, B. M.,& Frye, B. (1992). Comprehension strategy instruction in the intermediate grades. Reading Research and Instruction, 92, 39-48.

Todd, R. B. (2006). Reciprocal teaching and comprehension: A single subject research study. Unpublished master thesis, Kean University, USA.

Türkiye Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2009). İlköğretim Türkçe dersi öğretim programı ve kılavuzu (1-5. sınıflar). Ankara: MEB.

Ünlü, M., & Aydıntan, S. (2011). The views of 8th grade students related to students teams-achievement divisions technique in mathematics education. AİBÜ, Journal of Faculty of Education, 11(1), 101-117.

Viau, R. (2015). Motivation in school. (Y. Budak, Trans.) Ankara: Anı.

Yatani, K. (2018). Kruskal-Wallis and Friedman test. Retrieved from http://yatani.jp/teaching/doku.php?id=hcistats:kruskalwallis

Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2008). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.

Yılmaz, M. (2006).Effect of repetitive reading method in improving reading comprehension and reading comprehension skills of 3rd grade elementary school students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Gazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.