Action Research

Running head: READING COMPREHENSION THROUGH EXPLICIT INSTRUCTION
ESTABLISHING READING COMPREHENSION STRATEGIES IN FIRST GRADE
STUDENTS THROUGH EXPLICIT INSTRUCTION
A Research Project
Presented to the
Faculty of the School of Education
Viterbo University
Catherine G. Bell-Robertson, Ph.D.

Research Advisor
Susan R. Hughes, Ed. D.

Coordinator of Graduate Research in Education
Tracy Stewart, Ph.D.

Vice President for Academic Affairs
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Arts in Education
By
Heather Wirkus
July 2018
READING COMPREHENSION THROUGH EXPLICIT 2
INSTRUCTION
Abstract
This study sought to clarify what socioeconomically disadvantaged, urban, first grade students,
who participated in an explicit comprehension strategy instruction, learned about comprehension
strategies and how this knowledge supports self-monitoring utilization. This study was also
designed to compare the knowledge of these students with first grade students who did not
receive explicit comprehension strategy instruction, as well as student reactions to various
groupings and peer dialogue. Students who participated in explicit comprehension strategy
instruction appeared to have more cognizance and understanding of the strategies than their first
grade counterparts, therefore displaying increased comprehension scores, reading accuracy, and
fluency. Discrepancies in student attitude, engagement, and effort were also discovered when
grouping students according to economic status and ethnicity versus grouping students randomly,
by reading level, and gender.

INSTRUCTION
Establishing Reading Comprehension Strategies in First Grade Students through Explicit
Instruction
Introduction
Reading is essential in a student’s academic success. As reading is a sequential learning
process for students, it is vital that educators are aware of each component. One of these
significant components is reading comprehension. To display effective reading comprehension
instruction, educators will, as a result, have instructed students on how to become strategic,
independent, and problem solving readers. Students are then able to cultivate, regulate, and
utilize a vast variety of comprehensive strategies in order to ensure that what they are reading is
understood appropriately. It becomes a teamwork scenario between educator and student, where
the educator supplies numerous literacy tools and the student stockpiles his or her literacy
toolbox.
As a child, I established an affection and appreciation for reading well before
establishment within the formal education system. I eagerly awaited the opportunity to fill my
literacy toolbox by establishing skills to become an avid and successful reader. This adoration
continued alongside my education into present time. However, I believe that without the
appropriate instruction in reading education that I received, my dedication to the activity would
have had an extremely different outcome. The reading confidence that was inspired within me at
a young age allowed me to be sculpted into this voracious reader.
As a primary, elementary educator in a largely urban area, it has now become my
responsibility to instill this same affection, appreciation, and confidence within my developing,
inquisitive students. Many of these students come from socioeconomically disadvantaged
households, containing either numerous, extended family members or a single, accountable

INSTRUCTION
parent. These households often speak little or no English with children who are deprived of
tangible materials due to little income.
While there are numerous components to reading instruction, I feel that comprehension is
among one of the most valued when empowering young students. As so eloquently put by
Mahdavi and Tensfeldt (2013) “truly understanding what one reads is a complex endeavor, so
efforts to improve comprehension must be made in a variety of ways” (p. 77). Because reading
comprehension is complex and involves a number of methods for improvement, variations in
instruction are of great importance, especially for the students who do not find reading
comprehension to occur naturally (Mahdavi & Tensfeldt, 2013). This variety allows for students
to be more flexible in their reading, choosing from a stockpile of strategies, rather than relying
on one strategy to carry them through an entire text.
Problem Statement
After three prior years of teaching experience at the first grade level and one year of prior
experience at the second grade level, I realized the importance of comprehension instruction
during the reading block. I quickly noticed the alarming number of students that were coming
into my classroom each day with very limited prior knowledge and very few life experiences
from which to draw inspiration. After discussions with colleagues more familiar to the district
than myself, I discovered that much of this deprivation was due to the impoverished status within
the majority of students. It was also apparent that much of the comprehension issues were due to
the language barriers that many of the students faced at home and at school, in connection to the
lack of common, English vocabulary.
Without explicit instruction in these areas, students struggled to understand what was
being asked of them. While these students were lacking the understanding of the end goal, they
INSTRUCTION
were also lacking the understanding of what they were reading. Students needed to be separated
into smaller groups for guided reading time, allowing for explicit comprehension strategy
instruction. Prado and Plourde (2011) stated within their study that learning how to read, while a
very lengthy and difficult process, is one of the most vital skills a child will obtain throughout
the years. As comprehension is a major piece of achievement in reading, the learning of
comprehension strategies is vital to early reading accomplishment.
The problem that I identified in my practice was that students lacked the prior
knowledge, life-experiences, and language needed to make adequate achievements in reading.
While there was not much I could do in terms of providing my students with life-experiences, I
was able to provide them with the comprehension strategies needed to make meaningful text
connections, scaffold upon prior knowledge, and build their language repertoire. I found that I
needed to assist my students in constructing their comprehension skills by utilizing the best
practices available to me.
Purpose Statement
The specific purpose of this action research study was to investigate what first grade
students, who participated in an explicit comprehension strategy instruction format, learned
about comprehension strategies and how this knowledge supports self-monitoring strategy use.
Research Questions and Sub-Questions
Based on the problem that I identified in my practice and my dedication to examine my
practice, I designed a study that addressed the following overarching question: In what ways will
incorporating explicit instruction in reading comprehension strategies influence student reading
achievement in first grade? In addition to the primary questions for the study, I identified and
posed several sub-questions that included: (a) what did first grade students who participated in
INSTRUCTION
the study using explicit instruction learn about comprehension strategies, (b) how does the
comprehension strategy knowledge of explicitly taught first grade students compare to other first
grade students who did not receive explicit instruction, and (c) how does peer dialogue and
grouping assist in comprehension strategy knowledge? The independent variable in this study
was the implementation of explicit comprehension strategy instruction. The dependent variable
in this study was reading achievement in first grade students.
Definitions
Ability Grouping. Children are divided and grouped together based on their needs and
skill levels.
Comprehension Strategies. Steps or tools utilized by students to accurately understand,
decipher, and decode text. Direct instruction on these various strategies allows for students to
become active, controlled readers.
Decoding. The ability to translate a printed word into sound by applying letter-sound
relationship knowledge. This also refers to letter patterns and pronunciation.
Explicit Instruction. This form of instruction is holistic and skill based with active
participation from the students within the learning process with constant monitoring and support
from the educator.
Limitations
While this study was arranged with the purpose of discovering precise and dependable
outcomes, there were several limitations that may have impacted or implicated the results that
were achieved. One limitation of this study was the sample size. Due to the classroom
population parameters set by the district, the number of students participating in the study was
restricted. Due to this district’s population, it cannot be generalized that the same outcomes
INSTRUCTION
would occur among other populations. This district also has a history of transient students,
specifically within this school building, with numerous transfers throughout the school year.
Another potential limitation in this study was time. The data pieces from the action research
study were gathered over a span of 12 weeks. Numerous building-wide activities, assemblies,
holiday breaks, staff professional development days, and classroom field trips occurred over the
instructional time, interfering with the amount of instruction completed. Additionally, student
behaviors and attendance may also have been a factor in the results of the study. Due to these
various limitations, it is unknown whether the results of the study would be the same had the
limitations been eliminated.

INSTRUCTION
Review of Literature
Introduction
Numerous goals are set by educators throughout each school year and throughout their
careers. These goals tend to range according to the specific academic area that is being taught or
the specific students whom are being taught. King and Stuart (2012) noted that when it comes to
reading instruction, early elementary educators are inclined to having a common goal, which is
to mold students into independent and thoughtful readers with the capabilities of engaging in
meaningful reading. We expect students to be able to process and recall information from a text,
after having read it, in order to answer questions posed that will allow an educator to assess a
student’s knowledge and comprehension of his or her reading. However, many early reading
students lack the natural ability to comprehend what they are reading while also decoding words,
making a connection to the text, and acquiring new vocabulary. In comparison, Pilonieta (2017)
agreed that due to this challenging aspect of reading, advocating for comprehension strategy
instruction within the classroom setting has been occurring over the last three decades.
With an abundance of articles and books to document the success of comprehension
strategy instruction with upper elementary students and adolescents (Pilonieta, 2017), it would be
the assumption that success would be found in the early elementary levels as well. However,
there is a very limited amount of research that has been conducted for the primary readers
(Pilonieta, 2017). With that being said, there are studies that show an alarming amount of
contradicting and varying teaching styles wittnessed in institutions around the world. In a study
performed by Uibu, Kikas, and Tropp (2011), one hundred and thirty-three Estonian educators
were asked to complete questionnaires that addressed their teaching preferences and instructional
approaches. It was found that kindergarten and first grade educators preferred to utilize a
INSTRUCTION
cognitive-constructivist approach due to their appreciation for comprehension, application, and
indivualistic activities (Uibu et al., 2011). The cognitive-constructivist approach refers to the
ability of a student to actively construct their own knowledge through experiences. Furthermore,
it was found that other primary educators were in favor of more traditional practices, along with
some constructivist ideas, within their classroom (Uibu et al., 2011). Very little emphasis was
placed on the social-constructivist approach, which allows students to utilize their knowledge in
order to problem solve in situations with their peers through active learning (Uibu et al., 2011).
Many of these results could possibly be related to educational and teaching experiences in
Estonia, however, these results can also be witnessed in other institutions around the world (Uibu
et al., 2011). A lack of educational and academic consistency within instruction and assessment
is a constant occurrence within education. Wouldn’t some consistency allow for students to gain
a no-holds-barred education by eliminating the politics?
Another observational study performed by Ness (2011) focused on and attacked the issue
of infrequent reading comprehension instruction frequency in elementary classrooms. Over the
course of a school year, Ness and a doctoral student observed 3,000 minutes of classroom
instruction within 20 different first through fifth grade participating classrooms (Ness, 2011).
Not only did the work address the subject of comprehension and the numerous tasks and steps
that are involved with the comprehension process, but also focused on the instructional choices
made by classroom teachers with specific interest in explicit instruction (Ness, 2011). Even with
a wealth of knowledge emphasizing effective comprehension strategies, there are too many
instances when elementary students miss out on important instruction (Ness, 2011). Ness (2011)
also went on to describe how consequences of not providing explicit comprehension strategy
instruction are costly not only to elementary students, but later in life. “By short-changing our
INSTRUCTION
elementary students of reading comprehension, we leave them ill-prepared for the academic
demands of secondary school” (Ness, 2011, p. 100). The study found that the highest amount of
reading comprehension instruction occurred in the fourth grade classroom, and the least amount
of reading comprehension instruction occurred in the third grade classroom (Ness, 2011). With
these trends, first through third grade, a vital time and age range in acquiring reading knowledge,
were lacking in reading instruction time compared to the fourth grade classroom. It warrants the
question, would educators have focused on reading comprehension that much longer in fourth
grade had the tables been turned and that amount of time was spent on reading comprehension in
first and second grade? Furthermore, answering questions, summarization, predicting, and prior
knowledge were the most frequently occurring reading comprehension strategies addressed
during that explicit instruction time (Ness, 2011). Will these trends in explicit comprehension
strategy instruction continue to rise or will they fall by the wayside like so many other
educational expenditures?
Explicit Instruction
Reading comprehension achievement is not an easy task to accomplish, however, the
ability to read is an important piece to creating success in one’s life with its necessity in
acquiring a career and maintaining an operational existence (Mahdavi & Tensfeldt, 2013).
Reading is a complex endeavor, especially for early literacy learners. It is the job of educators to
provide early literacy learners with a variety of pathways to achieving success in reading. With
comprehension as a particularly complex variable for numerous young learners, educators are
tasked with training and educating students in various comprehension strategies. Mahdavi and
Tensfeldt (2013) came to the conclusion that the improvement of reading comprehension can be
INSTRUCTION
performed in numerous methods, and because reading comprehension does not transpire
naturally for all students, explicit comprehension strategy instruction comes into play.
A study completed by Prado and Plourde (2011) set out to research the effects of explicit
reading instruction for comprehension strategies. Prior to explicit instruction, 57 fourth grade
students from an elementary school in eastern Washington were given a reading pretest (Prado &
Plourde, 2011). After receiving explicit instruction in visualization, making connections through
prior knowledge, asking questions, inferencing, drawing conclusions, main ideas, synthesis, and
monitoring reading strategies, students were given a reading posttest. Test results displayed a
substantial surge in mean scores of the posttests to the pretests, in turn, supporting the idea that
intentional instruction of reading strategies positively impacted student achievement in
comprehension (Prado & Plourde, 2011). With these results, Prado and Plourde (2011) made the
recommendation that students become familiar with reading strategies through instruction and
practice opportunities.
Furthermore, Gutierrez-Braojos, Rodriguez Fernandez, and Salmeron-Vilchez (2014)
found in their study that students taught by a direct instructional approach attained more
advanced levels of comprehension strategies and text recall than that of their peers who simply
received the more traditional instruction approach. This was a quasi-experimental study with 48
students, ranging in ages six to eight years old, from a school located in Spain (Gutierrez-Braojos
et al., 2014). The researchers measured the control and experimental groups with a tool called
the Contextualized Scale of Learning Strategies on Reading Comprehension Tasks, or ESEAC,
after explicit instruction was implemented (Gutierrez-Braojos et al., 2014). While the tool itself
is given a lengthy title, the information it provides educators is invaluable. The ESEAC is a
contextualized assessment where participants are provided with a task to complete and the
INSTRUCTION
evaluator is able to measure strategic thinking and performance (Gutierrez-Braojos et al., 2014).
Through the analysis of their data, the researchers discovered the ability of the participating
students to internalize the comprehension strategies that were taught and learned, along with the
possibility to utilize and implement this instructional program to benefit the specific needs of
students (Gutierrez-Braojos et al., 2014).
It is apparent through these studies that participants flourished and great achievements in
comprehension were noticed after explicit instruction was provided. One wonders why
educators continue to eliminate the direct and explicit instruction of comprehension strategies
within their literacy block when others have shown it to cause such success.
Comprehension Variables
According to Mahdavi and Tensfeldt (2013) “reading ability transcends the mere skills of
decoding letters and words, and into the more complex realm of comprehension, which is the
goal of reading related activities” (p. 77). Comprehension is comprised of numerous variables.
Without containing and maintaining each of these variables, comprehension can become more of
a chore for the reader than an enjoyable activity. A study completed by Cartwright, Marshall,
and Wray (2015) examined the role of reading motivation in comparison to reading
comprehension by assessing their participants with the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests, the
Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test Verbal Subscale, the Graphophonological-Semantic Cognitive
Flexibility Task, and the Early Reading Motivation Assessment. The study displayed how
important just a few of these variables are when looking at a reader as a human being, lacking
confidence in their abilities. After assessing reading motivation in 68 first and second grade
students from a mid-Atlantic, urban school district, the researchers found that the participants’
reading motivation and perceived reading competence were noticeably related to their ability to
INSTRUCTION
read words (Cartwright et al., 2015). In other words, students were creating attitudes and
judgements about their personal reading skills based on their word recognition abilities. Young
readers deserve the right to be directly educated in vocabulary knowledge prior to such
outrageous self verdicts. Since vocabulary plays a vital role in comprehension, explicit
instruction would benefit numerous participants from this study. This study displayed an early
connection between reading confidence and motivation to effective and efficient reading
comprehension skills. With confidence and motivation being two of the leading characteristics
in determining a person’s personal achievement, how can we allow this to affect reading?
Aside from these emotional struggles that numerous students face, there are also the
actual variables that students struggle with at an early age. Many of these variables can be
assessed immediately and are utilized as predictors, placing an assumption on how students will
perform in reading later on in their academic careers. Gentaz, Sprenger-Charolles, and Theurel
(2015) examined some of these variables as predictors in connection to reading comprehension
through their study on 392 French students with an average age of 6 years old. After
implementing specific tasks to evaluate nonverbal IQ, vocabulary, listening and reading
comprehension, isolated work and pseudoword reading, along with phonemic and syllabic
awareness, it was discovered that decoding skills perform a critical role in reading
comprehension (Gentaz et al., 2015). Assessments completed in decoding, listening
comprehension, and vocabulary can and should be utilized to allow educators to gain more
information and knowledge about students who are struggling with reading comprehension
(Gentaz et al., 2015).
Babayigit and Stainthorp (2013) found much of the same results, stating that decoding
skills play a critical role in a student’s comprehension skills and achievement with accuracy and
INSTRUCTION
recognition of words also playing important roles within reading comprehension. This study
revolved around the comparison and relationships of reading and listening comprehension, word-
reading skills, vocabulary, grammatical skills, and verbal short-term memory (Babayigit &
Stainthorp, 2013). In their study of 56 Turkish kindergarten students on these focused
components, the researchers found that the assessment of vocabulary, grammar, listening
comprehension, and verbal short-term memory were strong predictors for reading
comprehension skills, with a connection between early learning listening comprehension skills
and later reading comprehension skills (Babayigit & Stainthorp, 2013).
Quinn, Wagner, Petscher, and Lopez (2015) also found the importance of vocabulary
knowledge in association to reading comprehension in their longitudinal study from first through
fourth grade of 316 students (Quinn et al., 2015). The focus of the researchers was to evaluate
and relate the active progress between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension skills
(Quinn et al., 2015). The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales V: Vocabulary Subtest, the
Wechsler Abbreviated Scales of Intelligence: Vocabulary Subtest, the Woodcock Reading
Mastery Test: Passage Comprehension, and the WJ-III Tests of Achievement: Passage
Comprehension were administered annually to the students to measure vocabulary knowledge
and reading comprehension (Quinn et al., 2015). With 219 remaining original participants, the
researchers discovered that the growth of reading comprehension had a partial dependency upon
vocabulary knowledge (Quinn et al., 2015).
After assessing reading variables such as these, educators are provided with an
abundance of information when creating lessons for students based on their abilities and needs.
Given direct instruction on such variables, in correlation with reading comprehension, students
are provided the comprehension strategies they need to demonstrate appropriate achievements.
INSTRUCTION
The assessment of reading comprehension precursors and comprehension variables allow
educators to supply students with comprehension strategies that best suit their needs.
Peers and Grouping
According to Oostdam, Blok, and Boendermaker (2015), guided oral reading has become
a staple in numerous classroom literacy blocks, but originally, guided oral reading was
established as an intervention for students with reading struggles. However, there are many
forms of guided oral reading, with educators approaching it in various ways across the globe.
With communication playing a large role in the success of student achievement, what is the most
successful form of these guided reading groups, and how do students use this form to learn from
their educators, as well as their peers?
It was so powerfully put by Buttaro, Catsambis, Mulkey, and Steelman (2010) when they
referred to segregation in the classroom by saying that for over 60 years, segregation within the
school system has been deemed unlawful and prohibited, but continues to remain at large in
American education. As students are grouped and denied access to the majority of their peers for
various reasons, we are witnessing a profound, yet serious form of segregation. Ability grouping
is one form of segregation. Buttaro, Catsambis, Mulkey, and Steelman (2010) found in their
study that ability grouping of students in the primary grades may have negative consequences for
minority and struggling students by depriving them of learning strong academic foundations. By
piloting a secondary examination of national data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study
from the kindergarten class of 1998, the researchers involved 12,176 students and 2,244 teachers
from 768 various schools (Buttaro et al., 2010). Within this plethora of data, the researchers
discovered that with ability grouping found primarily in schools servicing minority students and
INSTRUCTION
academically struggling students, higher average gains were discovered at the end of the school
year within minority students (Buttaro et al., 2010).
Ability grouping was also studied from a sample of the Early Childhood Longitudinal
Study from students attending kindergarten in the fall of 1998 by Adelson and Carpenter (2011),
but from the opposite end of the spectrum. Adelson and Carpenter (2011) found that ability
grouping at the primary level benefited students positively. The researchers discovered that
students placed in smaller ability groups found more growth over the course of the school year
(Adelson & Carpenter, 2011). This research contradicts much of what was said in the study by
Buttaro Catsambis, Mulkey, and Steelman. Furthermore, the researchers went on to find that
ability grouping allowed gifted and talented students greater reading achievement than was
gained in a specific gifted and talent program (Adelson & Carpenter, 2011). Due to these two
differing studies, it continues to raise the question of pronounced impact during ability grouping.
Will the grouping of our students allow them to gain from their peers in a positive way?
More specific grouping research was completed by Oostdam, Block, and Boendermaker
(2015) when they broke small group and individual guided oral reading down into three variants:
a repeated reading format; a continuous reading format; and a randomly assigned, small group
format. This study was broken into two experiments. Experiment number one was an
intervention delivered to 143 second through fourth grade students at 8 various schools in the
Netherlands containing at least 6 needy readers in each of the grade levels (Oostdam et al.,
2015). Five assessments were administered throughout the one-on-one intervention sessions that
focused on the retention of fluency, reading comprehension, vocabulary, and reading attitude
(Oostdam et al., 2015). Students who participated in the continuous reading format were
allowed to choose and read new books for 20 minutes during each of the 48 individual sessions
INSTRUCTION
(Oostdam et al., 2015). Participants in the repeated reading format had much of the same
experience, with the exception of repeatedly reading a passage from their book until fluency was
improved (Oostdam et al., 2015).
The second experiment, while similar in design to the first experiment, offered the
interventions to small groups of three students rather than one-on-one (Oostdam et al., 2015).
The researchers found that all three formats, continuous reading, repeated reading, and control,
were similarly effective (Oostdam et al., 2015). Unfortunately, the study was not able to produce
accurate effects of reading comprehension or vocabulary, but did find that fluency in word
reading, fluency in text reading, and reading attitude were positively impacted in all three
variants (Oostdam et al., 2015). These results allow for teacher choice and flexibility when
establishing their small group or individual guided oral reading groups in accordance to what
works best for their students.
While the last study displayed little variation in small group instruction versus individual
instruction, it is obvious and common knowledge that students can often learn more from
dialogue with their peers than from an individual instruction situation. Peer dialogue can help
students to instill an idea, make a connection, scaffold a teaching point, or activate prior
knowledge. In a study conducted by Maine (2013) on student dialogue, the researcher used a
qualitative design to observe and analyze discussions about text between eight pairs of primary-
aged participants from a small school in England. While ethnicity and socio-economic status is
not discussed, the researcher makes it clear within the study that each of the participants
approached the texts while embedded with differing cultural influences and life experiences,
allowing them to interpret the texts individually (Maine, 2013). After reading an appropriately
leveled text, the participants were invited to participate in a discussion with their partner about
INSTRUCTION
their thoughts on the meaning of the text (Maine, 2013). It was discovered that the student
participants engaged in their reading and discussions through oral language, questioning, and
creativity (Maine, 2013). The conversations that they brought to the table were unique to their
abilities to comprehend and make connections. Maine (2013) discovered that students were able
to pose questions, make suggestions, explore ideas, and provoke discussion. The thought-
provoking questions that the students asked of one another could not be answered with a literal
response, but instead challenged the students to engage in conversation and look for a deeper
meaning (Maine, 2013). Who would have thought that dialogue could cause students to become
the teachers?
While peer dialogue plays a significant role in learning, teacher language can also make a
difference. Another study on dialogue conducted by Maine and Hofmann (2015) set out to
examine how teachers interact with students in small groups, from student idea engagement to
the discussion and evaluation of comprehension. The researchers presented themselves with a
close-up analysis of three different teachers during their interactions with small groups while
instructing lessons with a similar focus (Maine & Hoffman, 2015). It was discovered that
reading comprehension instruction varies greatly from one lesson to another, depending on the
concept being taught, and these various lessons influence the language a teacher utilizes (Maine
& Hofmann, 2015). Teacher talk cannot be scripted and premediated because it is fluid and
spontaneous according to the conversations, questions, and ideas (Maine & Hofmann, 2015).
However, once again, the conclusion can be drawn that Maine’s two studies on dialogue
proved that conversation is important to students. Within these small group settings, students
and teachers are allowed to collaborate and learn through communication. These conversations
and discussions bring another level of comprehension to the classroom through meaningful
INSTRUCTION
connections being made. Allowing students the opportunity to utilize oral language
appropriately can make for learning that is not taught from a book. Chatter within the classroom,
while seen as a disruption in the eyes of many, can be beneficial and silencing our students can
hinder their learning experiences in the end.
Conclusion
According to Carlisle, Kelcey, Berebitsky, and Phelps (2011) a student’s reading
comprehension development is directly influenced and nurtured by the reading comprehension
instruction that is provided by the educator. Within their observational study on six high
poverty, low reading achieving schools, the researchers set out to discover whether instructional
actions impacted reading comprehension achievement (Carlisle et al., 2011). Through their
observations of second and third grade classrooms, the researchers discovered that not only did
lesson duration and teacher knowledge positively impact student success, but direct instruction
and support also increased student achievement in reading (Carlisle et al., 2011). These findings
assist in proving that teacher instruction and the approach of the instruction play a significant
role in effective reading. Numerous variables come into play when providing this instruction.
Decoding, vocabulary, prior knowledge, making predictions, and monitoring are among some of
the few important variables. With explicit instruction on each of these variables, students can
retain the concepts and ideas needed to become successful readers.
Explicit comprehension strategy instruction has been proven as a successful model
through guided reading groups. Various studies (Oostdam et al., 2015; Buttaro et al., 2010;
Adelson & Carpenter, 2011; Maine, 2013; Maine & Hofmann, 2015) have shown the importance
of communication, language, and grouping between students, peers, and educators. These
meaningful conversations allow for students to make connections to their knowledgeable

INSTRUCTION
experiences and reinforce their awareness of the comprehension skills. Pilonieta’s (2017) work
with 44 first and second grade urban, African American students sums these ideas up perfectly.
After 36 lessons of implementing explicit comprehension strategy instruction, the researcher
found that students were more cognizant and knowledgeable of comprehension strategies that
they were utilizing on a daily basis (Pilonieta, 2017). This awareness allows students to become
efficient, independent readers. The combination of explicit comprehension strategy instruction
with peer dialogue and grouping can only benefit students throughout their reading career.
INSTRUCTION
Methods
Introduction
This mixed-methods action research project was designed to address the following
overarching question: in what ways will incorporating explicit instruction in reading
comprehension strategies influence student achievement in first grade? In addition to the
primary question for the study, I identified and posed several sub-questions that included: (a)
what did first grade students who participated in the study using explicit instruction learn about
comprehension strategies, (b) how does the comprehension strategy knowledge of explicitly
taught first grade students compare to other first grade students who did not receive explicit
instruction, and (c) how does peer dialogue and grouping assist in comprehension strategy
knowledge?
Participants
This study took place in a socioeconomically disadvantaged, urban, eastern Wisconsin
school district. According to WISEdash, (2017) in the 2015 and 2016 school year, 79% of first
grade students came from a socioeconomically disadvantaged household. Within this transient
school district, 60% of students in the 2016 and 2017 school years were of a different race and
ethnicity then Caucasian (WISEdash, 2017). The participants in this study were 26 six and seven
year-old first grade students. Twelve of the participants made up the control group, with the
remaining 14 participants making up the focus group. The control group of 7 males and 5
females participated in the pre-interview and post-interview. Of these 12 students, there were
eight Caucasian, one African American, two Hmong, and one Hispanic participants, with one
receiving special education services for Speech and Language Pathology. The focus group
participants consisted of six males and eight females. Of these 14 students, there were seven
INSTRUCTION
Caucasian, four Hmong, and three Hispanic participants, with one receiving special education
services for Speech and Language Pathology. Five of the focus group participants were also
labeled as English Learners. According to WISEdash, (2017) approximately 74% of students
received Free and Reduced Lunch. The parents and guardians of the participants agreed to
involvement in this action research study by signing a letter of consent for their child prior to any
data collection, as well as the children signing a letter of assent for participation.
Procedure
The purpose of this study was to establish reading comprehension strategies with first
grade students through explicit instruction during small group intervention. The design of this
study was mixed-methods, using qualitative and quantitative data. Data collection began at the
beginning of the school year, during the third full week of instruction, with a pre-interview of the
participants.
After the implementation of the pre-interview, students were broken up into small
intervention groups. While students were initially separated into small groups based on their
reading level, throughout the 12 weeks of instruction and data collection, the participants were
also divided into groups according to gender, ethnicity, economic status, and mixed reading
ability. Final groups were formed through the random assignment of students. Groups were
changed and surveyed at the end of every two weeks. Table 1, shown below, depicts the dates
during which groupings took place.

INSTRUCTION
Table 1
Explicit Instruction and Peer Grouping
Date Strategy Grouping

September 25 to October 6 Activating Prior Knowledge Reading Level
October 9 to October 20 Predicting Gender
October 23 to November 3 Connections Ethnicity
November 6 to November 21 Monitor and Clarify Economic Status
November 27 to December 8 Inferring Mixed Reading Ability
December 11 to December 22 Summarize Random Assignment
Students participating in the control group, received instruction from another first grade
teacher utilizing the school curriculum, Lucy Calkins Units of Study for Teaching Reading. The
control group teacher instructed students on a daily basis with the scripted Lucy Calkins
materials, while also implementing large group, reading component time for 15 minutes on a
daily basis and small, guided reading group instruction on a weekly basis.
While students in the focus group received this exact formatted instruction as the control
group, focus group students also received explicit comprehension strategy instruction in six
specific areas: activating of prior knowledge, making connections, making predictions,
monitoring and clarifying, inferring, and summarizing. Each specific component was taught
over a period of two weeks for the full twelve weeks, switching instruction focus on a biweekly
basis. Explicit instruction included a framework of declarative, procedural, and conditional
knowledge of each strategy, teacher modeling, guided practice, coordinated strategy use,
independent practice, and review. At the end of each biweekly period, students were
individually assessed, with a grade level text running record, including comprehension questions,
on their achievement. In reference to Table 1, as shown above, the researcher depicts when
exactly each strategy was taught to the participants.

INSTRUCTION
At the completion of the twelve week instruction process, participants of the control
group and focus group were given the post-interview containing the same questions as the pre-
interview.
Research Design
The various forms of data collection throughout the process of this mixed methods study
were triangulated to ensure validity and reliability. The data collected assisted in the
measurement of first grade student achievement when taught comprehension strategies through
explicit instruction within small intervention groups.
Numerous forms of data were collected over the twelve week process. The first tool
implemented with the participants was an open-ended, pre-interview (Appendix A). The pre-
interview was utilized to assess the declarative, procedural, and conditional knowledge of the six
specific comprehension strategies that were to be explicitly taught. The second tool utilized
within this study was a framework developed to organize the mini-lessons established and record
observational notes (Appendix B). This framework allowed for the researcher to organize the
teaching points of each lesson and observational notes taken during the lesson. A checklist was
also utilized to quickly observe the characteristics of the students within each small group and
the environment (Appendix C).
Running records were completed as an assessment at the end of each biweekly instruction
period (Appendix D). Running records were performed on each participant in the focus group to
assess for student achievement. Also, at the end of each biweekly period, rating scale surveys
were implemented to each of the focus group participants (Appendix E). Surveys were utilized
to ask students how they felt about the instruction they received during those two weeks and how
INSTRUCTION
they felt about working with that small group. Due to groups being altered on a biweekly basis,
the main focus of the survey was to analyze grouping through the eyes of the participants.
Finally, an open-ended, post-interview was implemented to the control group and focus
group. The post-interview was identical to the pre-interview to measure achievement in
comprehension strategy knowledge between the two groups.
Data Analysis
Qualitative and quantitative data was collected over the twelve week time period, making
this research project a mixed methods design. The pre-interview and post-interview portion was
administered to the same participating students within the control group and focus group. The
information was coded for themes and analyzed for similarities and differences in
comprehension strategy knowledge between the two groups. Surveys were administered and
analyzed to assess student perceptions within the focus groups. Running records taken after
reading instruction were utilized to measure growth in student comprehension achievement and
knowledge of strategy practice. To ensure validity and reliability within the study, the researcher
utilized three various forms of data to measure, triangulate, and analyze in order to appropriately
compare student achievement in explicit instruction to non-explicit instruction.

INSTRUCTION
Results
Introduction
This mixed-methods action research project was designed to address the following
overarching question: in what ways will incorporating explicit instruction in reading
comprehension strategies influence student achievement in first grade? In addition to the
primary question for the study, the researcher identified and posed several sub-questions that
included: (a) what did first grade students who participated in the study using explicit instruction
learn about comprehension strategies, (b) how does the comprehension strategy knowledge of
explicitly taught first grade students compare to other first grade students who did not receive
explicit instruction, and (c) how does peer dialogue and grouping assist in comprehension
strategy knowledge? This study took place from September 2017 to the end of December 2017.
It included a total of 26, six and seven year-old, first grade students. The focus group was
comprised of 14 students, while the control group was comprised of 12 students. The
independent variable in this study was the implementation of explicit comprehension strategy
instruction. The dependent variable in this study was reading achievement in first grade
students.
The purpose of the primary question was to examine how the incorporation of explicit
instruction in reading comprehension strategies influenced student achievement in first grade.
The students were given Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Reading Assessments at the beginning
of September 2017 and at the end of December 2017 to determine growth in reading levels and
comprehension. The researcher calculated the average growth in student reading levels and
comprehension achievement for the focus group and the control group. The results for reading
INSTRUCTION
level and comprehension growth are found in Table 2 below. The researcher discovered a
growth of 2.75 average comprehension points in the control group and a growth of 3.43 average
comprehension points in the focus group.
Table 2
Average Growth with Explicit Instruction
Average September Average December Average

Levels of Comprehension Score Comprehension Score
Growth (7 total points) (7 total points)
Control Group (N=12) 3.92 2.08 4.83
Focus Group (N=14) 4.57 2.5 5.93
______________________________________________________________________________
Comprehension Strategies
The purpose of the first sub-question was to determine what first grade students who
participated in the study using explicit instruction learned about comprehension strategies. Table
2 above displays the average reading level growth of students in the control group versus the
average reading level growth of students in the focus group. The researcher found that, on
average, students in the focus group grew .65 more levels than the students who participated in
the control group. Table 2, shown above, also displays the difference of average comprehension
score growth between the control group and the focus group from September 2017 to December
2017.
Upon conducting interviews prior to the explicit instruction, the researcher found that an
average of 1.2 students from the control group and an average of 1.8 students from the focus
group believed they knew the meaning of each comprehension strategy. When asked to perform
INSTRUCTION
the comprehension strategy, the researcher was given answers such as “I forgot”, “I don’t know”,
or responses that referred to expectations during reading time such as “no talking” from both of
the participating groups. Upon the completion of explicit instruction, the same interview was
administered to the participants in the focus group and the control group. The researcher found
that an average of 3.8 students from the control group and an average of 9.8 students from the
focus group believed they knew the meaning of each comprehension question. The researcher
discovered that the focus group was able to accurately perform the comprehension strategy 40%
of the time. The control group was able to perform the comprehension strategy 98% of the time.
Comparison of First Graders
The purpose of the second sub-question was to determine how the comprehension
strategy knowledge of explicitly taught first grade students compared to other first grade students
who did not receive explicit instruction. At the beginning of September, prior to instruction and
assessment, a pre-interview was administered to each student in the control group and the focus
group to determine the knowledge of activating prior knowledge, making predictions, making
connections, monitoring and clarifying, inferencing, and summarizing. The same interview was
administered at the end of December to assess the accumulation of knowledge. Figure 1 below
displays the researcher’s findings for the control group. Figure 2 below displays the researcher’s
findings for the focus group.

INSTRUCTION
Control Group Interviews

Pre-Interview Post-Interview
6
Number of Students
1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
Prior Knowledge Prediction Connection Monitor/Clarify Inference Summarize

Comprehension Strategy
Figure 1. Control group pre-interview and post-interview knowledge of comprehension
strategies.
Focus Group Interviews

Pre-Interview Post-Interview
12
11 11
10
Number of Students
3
2
1
0 0 0

Comprehension Strategy
Figure 2. Focus group pre-interview and post-interview knowledge of comprehension
strategies.
INSTRUCTION
Dialogue and Grouping
The purpose of the final sub-question was to determine how peer dialogue and grouping
assisted in comprehension strategy knowledge. Participants in the study were provided a rating
scale survey to complete at the end of the bi-weekly explicit instruction period to assess their
opinions of their reading groups and their confidence in his or her comprehension skills that were
taught for that week. Figure 3 below depicts the confidence each student in the focus group had
in his or her comprehension strategy skills that were explicitly taught for the week and the
growth of their overall comprehension skill confidence. Figure 4 below displays the results the
participants reported about their feelings towards their specific groupings at the end of each bi-
weekly explicit instruction.
Confidence in Comprehension Skills Survey

Unhappy Content Happy
13 13
11
Number of Students
8
7
5 5 5 5
4
3
2
1 1 1
0 0 0

Bi-Weekly Survey
Figure 3. Bi-weekly comprehension strategy confidence rating scale survey.

INSTRUCTION
Student Grouping Opinions Survey

Unhappy Content Happy
14 14 14
12
Number of Students
8
6
5 5
3
2
1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reading Level Gender Ethnicity Economic Status Mixed Reading Random

Level
Bi-Weekly Survey
Figure 4. Bi-weekly student grouping opinion rating scale survey.
The researcher performed informal observations for the duration of the small group
lessons in the form of a checklist to watch for engaged discussion, active reading, asking
questions, positive attitude peer encouragement, independent effort, and the use of the taught
strategy. During instruction, ten students were randomly chosen to observe. Figure 5 below
displays the researcher’s observations during specific small group, explicit instruction. The
researcher recorded notes on the checklist signifying teamwork and engagement. According to
the noted observations, grouping by gender, mixed reading levels, and randomized appeared to
achieve the greatest amount of teamwork and engagement, while grouping by reading level,
ethnicity, and economic status lacked teamwork and engagement.

INSTRUCTION
Informal Observation Checklist

12
10
Number of Students
8
Reading Level
Gender
6 Ethnicity
Economic Status
4 Mixed Reading Level
Random
0
Engaged Active Questioning Positive Encourage Effort Strategy Use
Discussion Reading Attitude Peers
Figure 5. Informal observation checklist.
Conclusion
The purpose of this mixed methods action research study was to determine in what ways
incorporating explicit instruction in reading comprehension strategies will influence student
achievement in first grade. The results suggested that explicit comprehension strategy
instruction impacted the growth of student progress in comprehension knowledge. Particular
groupings of students also impacted the quality of dialogue and perceived student attitude during
small group reading instruction. In the following section, the researcher will discuss the findings
and thoughts on the results of the research conducted.

INSTRUCTION
Discussion
Introduction
The primary idea for my study was essentially based on my knowledge of the importance
for reading instruction in the primary grades. In a study done by Prado and Plourde (2011), it
was mentioned that learning how to read, while a very lengthy and difficult process, is one of the
most vital skills a child will obtain throughout the years. After four years of teaching at the first
and second grade levels, I quickly realized the importance of reading instruction for student
success and progress in reading levels and reading comprehension. Within our district, student
achievement is measured through the Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Reading Assessment,
which measures and compares students by reading level. The reading level for our district is
determined by accuracy and reading comprehension. As comprehension is a major piece of
achievement in reading, the learning of comprehension strategies is vital to early reading
accomplishment.
With comprehension being especially prominent at the first grade level, I wondered if the
explicit instruction of specific comprehension strategies would impact the reading achievement
of students. Being employed in a largely urban, transient community, I discovered many of my
students coming from socioeconomically disadvantaged, multi-linguistic households, containing
either numerous, extended family members or a single, accountable parent. I couldn’t help but
feel concern for my students and their reading habits at home. With instruction and practices not
being carried over into the afterschool hours, I wondered if more explicit instruction during
school hours would benefit the reading needs of my individual students.

INSTRUCTION
King and Stuart (2012) noted that when it comes to reading instruction, early elementary
educators are inclined to have a common goal, which is to mold students into independent and
thoughtful readers with the capability of engaging in meaningful reading. Molding students into
thoughtful, independent readers allows for students to work on the skills and strategies they have
mastered at school. Carrying these skills into their independent work allows for students to grow
self-sufficiently, attaining accountability and responsibility. Due to explicit instruction’s ability
to engage students through direct instruction, I decided to explicitly teach first grade students six
vital comprehension strategies: activating prior knowledge, making predictions, making
connections, monitoring and clarifying, making inferences, and summarizing.
At the beginning of the 2017 school year, first grade students entering my classroom
were assessed with the Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Reading Assessment. Of the 14
participants in the study, six students were labeled as below grade level readers, five students
were labeled as meeting grade level expectations, and three students were labeled as exceeding
grade level expectations according to the assessment and the district requirements. The average
comprehension score for students was 2.5 points out of a possible 7 points, with three of the
below grade level students receiving 0 points and six more students receiving 3 or less points.
Assuming that comprehension skills are a dependent factor in reading achievement and word
reading accuracy, I began to provide small group, explicit instruction to students on activating
prior knowledge, making predictions, making connections, monitoring and clarifying,
inferencing, and summarizing on a bi-weekly basis, accounting for nine full days of instruction
before assessing achievement and knowledge.

INSTRUCTION
In December of 2017, after completing twelve weeks of explicit comprehension strategy
instruction, the Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Reading Assessments were administered to the
students in the focus group again. I discovered that all fourteen participants in the focus group
were now labeled as meeting or exceeding expectations according to the assessment and the
district requirements. Nine of the fourteen students made five levels of growth, with two of the
students coming from Hmong speaking homes. Four of the students made four levels of growth,
with one student from a Spanish speaking home and another student receiving Speech and
Language services. There was also an average growth of 3.43 comprehension points. At the
beginning of the year, students who received a score of 0 comprehension points received a score
of 6 or more comprehension points after receiving explicit comprehension strategy instruction. I
feel this increase was due to the explicit instruction received throughout the 12 week
instructional period, where students were able to gain a more thorough understanding of how to
accurately and efficiently understand their reading. By gaining more comprehension tools for
their individual reading toolboxes, students were able to utilize various comprehension strategies
that were appropriate for the pieces they were reading, instead of working with a single
comprehension strategy learned in large group instruction.
Another amazing, unintentional discovery was the increased reading fluency scores.
Although the focus of the research study was not on reading fluency I did notice and
improvement. I discovered that students, at the beginning of the school year, on average scored
a fluency rating of 1 out of 3, meaning the student was reading primarily in two-word phrases,
lacking expression and appropriate pausing. The average fluency rating grew to 2 out of 3, with
a bulk of the students reading with a level 3 fluency rating, meaning the student was primarily
reading in meaningful phrases, with expression and appropriate pausing. I believe that the
INSTRUCTION
combination of comprehension strategy knowledge and word reading skills allowed students to
increase their reading fluency. For example, I noted one student in particular struggling at the
beginning of the school year to read words in large scoops. By mid-November, the student’s
reading fluency went from monotone, robotic, one-word phrases to four-word phrases with voice
inflections and appropriate pausing.
Overall, with the results from my study, I discovered that incorporating explicit
instruction in reading comprehension strategies influences student achievement positively within
the first grade. Reading level, reading accuracy, reading comprehension, and reading fluency
were each positively affected.
Comprehension Strategies
According to Mahdavi and Tensfeldt (2013) “reading ability transcends the mere skills of
decoding letters and words, and into the more complex realm of comprehension, which is the
goal of reading related activities” (p. 77). Comprehension is comprised of numerous variables.
Without containing and maintaining each of these variables, comprehension can become more of
a chore for the reader than an enjoyable activity. To avoid students feeling as though reading is a
chore rather than an enjoyable adventure, students received explicit instruction on the various
comprehension strategies in order to engage through active participation and instill positivity.
Prior to explicit instruction of the specific comprehension strategies in the month of
September, 2017, a pre-interview was administered to students participating in the control and
focus groups. I discovered that, on average, 12 of the 14 students interviewed for the focus
group were unable to define the meaning of the specific comprehension strategy I questioned
them on, nor were they able to tell me how to perform that specific comprehension strategy. In
fear of looking foolish or coming off embarrassed, students often responded by saying, “I don’t
INSTRUCTION
remember what that is” or “I forgot how to do that” after answering that they were familiar with
the strategy. I found that many students were cautious and hesitant when responding to the
interview questions. On average, an interview with a student lasted only one minute. Identical
results were noticed with the students interviewed for the control group in terms of responses and
time taken for each individual interview.
Upon the completion of explicit instruction and data collection, the same interview was
administered to the control and focus groups in the month of December, 2017. While over 50%
of the students participating in the control group continued to respond to the interview questions
with quick caution and uncertainty, all students who participated in the focus group responded
with steady confidence and finesse. Students from the focus group spent much longer than a
minute to complete the interview, going into much more depth to define the specific
comprehension strategy and demonstrate his or her ability to utilize it. I believe this occurred
due to a combination of the explicit instruction received and a student’s undying need to display
knowledge and strength. One student in particular, though rather reluctant to participate and shy
to converse at the beginning of the school year, was eager to provide numerous examples for
each of the comprehension strategies.
I discovered from my study that, overall, first grade students who participated in the
focus group of the study learned the definitions and procedures of the specific comprehension
strategies that were explicitly taught. This positively impacted the reading scores of the
participants in the focus group.
Comparison of First Graders
The comparison of the focus group to the control group differed greatly. Students who
participated in the focus group were able to communicate their understanding of the
INSTRUCTION
comprehension strategies much more clearly than students in the control group. When
comparing the reading achievement of students in the focus group to the reading achievement of
students in the control group, it was discovered that students in the focus group displayed more
growth in reading levels. On average, students in the focus group grew 4.57 reading levels,
while students in the control group grew, on average 3.92 reading levels. It was also discovered
that the average comprehension score for students in the focus group grew from 2.5 points to
5.93 points out of 7 possible points. The average comprehension score for students in the control
group grew from 2.08 points to 4.83 points out of 7 possible points. These obvious scoring
differences lead me to believe that the explicit instruction positively impacted the comprehension
scores and reading accuracy rates of the students in the focus group, while students in the control
group not receiving explicit instruction in comprehension strategies did not show similar growth.
These results make me question the effectiveness of our school’s reading curriculum.
While I taught the required Lucy Calkins Units of Study for Teaching Reading, as did the teacher
of the control group, I wonder if the supplementation of explicit instruction of comprehension
strategies is beneficial. It makes me question what our curriculum is missing and how it will
affect our students in the long run if they continue to lack important components.
Dialogue and Grouping
When examining how peer dialogue and strategic grouping affects the learning of
comprehension skills and reading knowledge, I noticed some fascinating areas of importance that
struck me. When referring back to the study done by Buttaro, Catsambis, Mulkey, and Steelman
(2010), they found that ability grouping of students in the primary grades may have negative
consequences for minority and struggling students by depriving them of learning strong
academic foundations. This is the same group of researchers that referred to segregation in the
INSTRUCTION
classroom by saying that for over 60 years, segregation within the school system has been
deemed unlawful and prohibited but continues to remain at large in American education (Buttaro
et al., 2010). Ability grouping, although ever popular within the classroom for time and
organizational purposes, is one form of this type of segregation.
Every two weeks, students learned a new comprehension strategy within their small
groups. However, as the comprehension strategy changed, so did the grouping of the students.
For example, when students learned how to activate prior knowledge, they were working with a
small group of students who were at their same reading level. When students were learning
about how to make predictions two weeks later, they were working with a small group of
students who were of the same gender as them (see Table 1). It was discovered that students
were more engaged, actively reading, asking questions, making connections, encouraging others,
and maintaining positive attitudes when working with students according to mixed reading
levels, identical reading levels, and gender. Students also displayed these same results and
actions when working in completely randomized grouping.
When students were grouped according to their economic status and ethnicity, there was
an obvious problem. When students were grouped according to ethnicity, there was a lack of
discussion and experiences from which to draw connections and questions. Due to many of the
students receiving English Language Learning services, there was also a lack of vocabulary.
Each of these factors mixed together to create poor attitudes and meager effort. The same results
were noticed when students were grouped together according to economic status. Students from
lower economic statuses were grouped together and found great difficulty in making
connections, establishing questions, and engaging in discussion due to lack of experiences. This,
in turn, negatively affected their attitudes and effort.

INSTRUCTION
While these groupings seemed to affect the peer dialogue piece of the observation, it was
obvious that the comprehension strategy use was not affected. Students continued to utilize their
comprehension and word reading strategies appropriately. Students also made it obvious within
their surveys that their overall confidence in their comprehension skills and reading skills grew
as they learned more explicitly taught comprehension strategies. However, I do believe that
student discussion, vocabulary knowledge, and life-experiences need to be taken into
consideration when grouping. Student conversations, attitudes, and efforts were affected by
groupings, along with student confidence in their groupings when asked if the student felt that
their group assisted them in learning the strategy and how their overall feelings were towards
their group members. Various studies (Oostdam et al., 2015; Buttaro et al., 2010; Adelson &
Carpenter, 2011; Maine, 2013; Maine & Hofmann, 2015) have shown the importance of
communication, language, and grouping between students, peers, and educators. These
discussions and conversations allow for students to make meaningful connections.
Conclusion
The results of this study demonstrated that explicitly taught comprehension strategies
benefited student reading achievement and impacted student ability in reading accuracy, reading
fluency, and comprehension assessment. It was also noticed how grouping of students affected
their learning of the comprehension strategies, their socialization within the group, and their
confidence in their reading performance and understanding. With the results from my study and
the inspiration from other competent researchers, I believe the combination of explicit
comprehension strategy instruction with peer dialogue and grouping can only benefit students
more throughout their reading career.

INSTRUCTION
INSTRUCTION
Conclusion and Future Implications
Comprehension is a key component of successful reading. While reading comprehension
can be a component that is naturally learned, direct instruction of comprehension skills and
strategies can lead to success being established more quickly and accurately. Through years of
administering assessments, I have discovered that the comprehension piece of an assessment can
hold a student back from moving on to a higher reading level. I have witnessed this having a
drastic impact on a student’s reading confidence. Students are able to read the words by utilizing
their decoding strategies, however, their understanding of the story is conflicted, obscured, or
nonexistent. By explicitly instructing students on various comprehension strategies, they are
able to gain knowledge of the story’s meaning more precisely and swiftly.
Significance of the Study
Prior to conducting this investigation, the problem that I identified in my practice was
that some students lack the prior knowledge, life-experiences, and language needed to make
adequate achievements in reading. Due to these concerns, I began to research the effects of
explicit instruction on early elementary students and comprehension strategies. This then lead to
my curiosity of student grouping and dialogue. I was inspired by a study completed by Paola
Pilonieta in 2017. This study examined the effects of explicit comprehension strategy instruction
on first and second grade students. The researcher found that students were more aware and
knowledgeable of comprehension strategies that they were utilizing on a daily basis (Pilonieta,
2017). This awareness allows students to become efficient, independent readers.
Much like Pilonieta, I discovered the positive effects of explicit comprehension strategy
instruction with my first grade students. The combination of explicit comprehension strategy
instruction with peer dialogue and grouping proved to benefit students, not only in terms of their
INSTRUCTION
reading comprehension, reading accuracy, and reading fluency, but also their reading confidence,
reading engagement, individual effort, and attitude positivity.
I became passionate about this study upon witnessing the struggle of student confidence
when reading is not considered a strength for that individual student. Reading and
comprehension are vital pieces of academic achievement throughout the content areas. Reading
can be thought of as a puzzle, made up of numerous pieces; comprehension, accuracy, fluency,
and vocabulary being the primary corner pieces. As a professional, I am now much more aware
of the implications reading instruction can have on students when a particular piece is absent.
The same case can be argued for student grouping and dialogue. The realizations made from this
study and key components taken away from this study can be easily transferred to other
professionals within my department and district, especially when it comes time to adjust the
curriculum. The most obvious impact, however, is the enhanced growth in achievement with
students knowing the information attained through the action research study.
Lessons Learned
While I discovered numerous positive implications within this study, there were also a
number of areas that needed adjustments. Due to the highly transient nature of my school
district, students were forced to join and abandon the study at various points. With this
inconsistency, plus the number of absences and tardiness, many students lacked small group
instruction days, affecting their overall views when participating in the survey and affecting their
performance on the reading assessments. These missing days of instruction directly impacted the
knowledge and understanding of the comprehension strategies being taught at that time. I would
have also liked to have had a larger control group and a larger focus group to take samples and
INSTRUCTION
information from. However, lack of communication from families or unwillingness to
participate interrupted this opportunity.
Along with this are the number of instructional days missed due to professional
development in-services, holiday vacations, holiday concerts, field trips, and miscellaneous
assemblies. Due to the time frame allowed for this study, I was unable to stray from my strict
instruction and assessment deadlines. This impacted the amount of time that was allowed for
instruction on many of the comprehension strategies. The two most negatively impacted by this
were the comprehension strategies of inferencing and summarizing because they occurred in the
weeks following Thanksgiving and prior to the weeks of Christmas, allowing for many missed
instructional times and changes in work ethic.
The greatest lessons learned from this study are those that were made by me as a
professional educator and those that were made by the students participating in the focus group.
Through the assessments, surveys, and observations performed, I came to realize the importance
that explicit instruction, in general, can have on a group of young learners. Explicit instruction
allows for students to make more meaningful connections to their learning, while becoming
engaged with the content. As an educator, I was able to see my student’s understanding form
and grow in front of my very eyes, as well as their reading comprehension confidence expand
with the learning of each new strategy. The outcomes of student grouping assist me in making
small groups in the future that are most beneficial to the students and not because they are groups
that are easier for me to work with as an educator. I have learned how certain groups of students
work more efficiently together versus other groups of students, as well as how these groups
impact the attitude and effort of all individual students. Experiences, engagement, and dialogue
each assist in allowing a student to gain more information in their learning.

INSTRUCTION
It is evident that these positive realizations and reflections made about the study also
positively impacted the growth and knowledge of the participating students. Student growth and
achievement in the participating focus students is astonishing. Even students who were not
labeled as participating focus group students, but still receiving the explicit instruction
interventions, showed exceptional growth and achievement in reading accuracy and
comprehension skills. The participating students received more and valuable instruction than
those of their first grade counterparts, resulting in evident growth. Growth that continued to
push these students to exceed expectations at later points in the school year beyond the action
research study dates. On this trajectory, many of these students will be considered well above
exceeding expectations for an incoming second grader.
Future Implications
As the researcher and having immersed myself in this study for the past year, I look
forward to being able to share my results and discoveries with my coworkers. In an ever-
changing profession, I believe it is my responsibility to inform the educators, administrators, and
school board of our school district on the results I have discovered. It is obvious that more
research will need to be done in order to establish a dire need for explicit instruction of
comprehension strategies, or at least for a change to our reading curriculum. I discovered
through my research that what is happening is not quite enough. These results could help to
positively impact the reading scores of students in our district, a district that is not in the top
percentile of readers in the state according to the numerous tests administered.
Mahdavi and Tensfeldt (2013) referred to reading comprehension achievement as a
difficult task to accomplish; however, the ability to read is an important piece to creating success
in one’s life with its necessity in acquiring a career and maintaining an operational existence.
INSTRUCTION
Reading is utilized within every aspect of learning. Comprehension is a main component within
this large realm. Additionally, it is also a key component in life. The ability to comprehend is
vital in growing meaning and establishing understanding. It is a piece of education that will
continue to be studied in order to allow students to reach their highest individual form of
successful achievement.
INSTRUCTION
References
Adelson, J. L., & Carpenter, B. D. (2011). Grouping for achievement gains: For whom does
achievement grouping increase kindergarten reading growth?. Gifted Child Quarterly,
55(4), 265-278. doi:10.1177/0016986211417306
Babayiğit, S., & Stainthorp, R. (2014). Correlates of early reading comprehension skills: A
componential analysis. Educational Psychology, 34(2), 185-207.
doi:10.1080/01443410.2013.785045
Buttaro Jr., A., Catsambis, S., Mulkey, L., & Steelman, L. C. (2010). An organizational
perspective on the origins of instructional segregation: School composition and use of
within-class ability grouping in American kindergartens. Teachers College Record,
112(5), 1300-1336.
Carlisle, J., Kelcey, B., Berebitsky, D., & Phelps, G. (2011). Embracing the complexity of
instruction: A study of the effects of teachers' instruction on students' reading
comprehension. Scientific Studies Of Reading, 15(5), 409-439.
doi:10.1080/10888438.2010.497521
Cartwright, K. B., Marshall, T. R., & Wray, E. (2016). A longitudinal study of the role of reading
motivation in primary students’ reading comprehension: Implications for a less simple
view of reading. Reading Psychology, 37(1), 55-91. doi:10.1080/02702711.2014.991481
Gentaz, E., Sprenger-Charolles, L., & Theurel, A. (2015). Differences in the predictors of
reading comprehension in first Graders from low socio-economic status families with
either good or poor decoding skills. PLoS ONE, 10(3), 1-16.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0119581
INSTRUCTION
Gutierrez-Braojos, C., Rodriguez Fernandez, S., & Salmeron-Vilchez, P. (2014). How can
reading comprehension strategies and recall be improved in elementary school students?.
Estudios Sobre Educacion, 269-31.
King, S., & Stuart, D. H. (2012). Action research: A first grade teacher's journey of deepening
comprehension through response activities during reading workshop. Ohio Reading
Teacher, 42(1), 34-46.
Mahdavi, J. N., & Tensfeldt, L. (2013). Untangling reading comprehension strategy instruction:
Assisting struggling readers in the primary grades. Preventing School Failure, 57(2), 77-
92. doi: 10.1080/1045988X.2012.668576
Maine, F. (2013). How children talk together to make meaning from texts: A dialogic
perspective on reading comprehension strategies. Literacy, 47(3), 150-156.
doi:10.1111/lit.12010
Maine, F., & Hofmann, R. (2016). Talking for meaning: The dialogic engagement of teachers
and children in a small group reading context. International Journal Of Educational
Research, 7545-56. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2015.10.007
Ness, M. (2011). Explicit reading comprehension instruction in elementary classrooms: Teacher
use of reading comprehension strategies. Journal of Research in Childhood Education,
25, 98-117. doi: 10.1080/02568543.2010.531076
Oostdam, R., Blok, H., & Boendermaker, C. (2015). Effects of individualised and small-group
guided oral reading interventions on reading skills and reading attitude of poor readers in
grades 2–4. Research Papers In Education, 30(4), 427-450.
doi:10.1080/02671522.2014.953195
INSTRUCTION
Pilonieta, P. (2017). First and second grade urban students' path to comprehension strategy use:
A practitioner's framework. Reading Psychology, 38(4), 369-389.
doi:10.1080/02702711.2016.1278415
Prado, L., & Plourde, L. A. (2011). Increasing reading comprehension through the explicit
teaching of reading strategies: Is there a difference among the genders?. Reading
Improvement, 48(1), 32-43.
Quinn, J. M., Wagner, R. K., Petscher, Y., & Lopez, D. (2015). Developmental relations between
vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension: A latent change score modeling
study. Child Development, 86(1), 159-175. doi:10.1111/cdev.12292
Uibu, K., Kikas, E., & Tropp, K. (2011). Instructional approaches: differences between
kindergarten and primary school teachers. Compare: A Journal Of Comparative &
International Education, 41(1), 91-111. doi:10.1080/03057925.2010.481121

INSTRUCTION
Appendix A
Pre/Post Interview
Circle Group: FOCUS / CONTROL Date _______________________
What does it mean to activate prior knowledge?
How do you activate prior knowledge?
What does it mean to make a prediction?
How do you make a prediction?
What does it mean to make a connection?
How do you make a connection?
What does it mean to monitor and clarify?
How do you monitor and clarify?
What does it mean to make an inference?
How do you make an inference?
What does it mean to summarize?
How do you summarize?

INSTRUCTION
Appendix B
Lesson Framework and Observational Notes
Group
Today, I am going to teach you:
Knowledge of Target
Strategy Because:
Watch me as I:
Teacher Model
Did you see how I:
Let’s try this together:
Guided Practice
Now it’s your turn to try:
Independent Practice
Today, we learned:
Wrap Up
Observation Notes
Notes:
Notes:
Engaged in discussion Engaged in discussion
Actively reading Actively reading

INSTRUCTION
Asking questions Asking questions
Student _____________________
Student _____________________
Positive attitude Positive attitude
Making connections Making connections

Appendix C
Encouraging peers Encouraging peers

READING COMPREHENSION THROUGH EXPLICIT
Independent effort Independent effort

Group Reading Observation Checklist
Group ___________________
Group ___________________
Using strategy: Using strategy:
Using Strategy: Using Strategy:
Using strategy: Using strategy:

Date _____________
Date _____________
52
INSTRUCTION
Appendix D
Running Record
Date _________________
Name _____________________________ Strategy ___________________________
Page Title E SC MSV MSV
Observation Notes
INSTRUCTION
Appendix E
Student Survey
Group ________________________ Date _________________________
How do you feel about the new strategy you learned?
How do you feel about the group you worked with?
Did your group help you learn the new strategy?
How do you feel about your comprehension skills?
How do you feel about your reading skills?

INSTRUCTION

Action Research

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Action Research

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Running head: READING COMPREHENSION THROUGH EXPLICIT INSTRUCTION

ESTABLISHING READING COMPREHENSION STRATEGIES IN FIRST GRADE

STUDENTS THROUGH EXPLICIT INSTRUCTION

Faculty of the School of Education

Catherine G. Bell-Robertson, Ph.D.

Susan R. Hughes, Ed. D.

Tracy Stewart, Ph.D.

of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Arts in Education

who participated in an explicit comprehension strategy instruction, learned about comprehension

receive explicit comprehension strategy instruction, as well as student reactions to various

by reading level, and gender.

Establishing Reading Comprehension Strategies in First Grade Students through Explicit

Reading is essential in a student’s academic success. As reading is a sequential learning

significant components is reading comprehension. To display effective reading comprehension

As a child, I established an affection and appreciation for reading well before

a young age allowed me to be sculpted into this voracious reader.

As a primary, elementary educator in a largely urban area, it has now become my

inquisitive students. Many of these students come from socioeconomically disadvantaged

households, containing either numerous, extended family members or a single, accountable

tangible materials due to little income.

comprehension is complex and involves a number of methods for improvement, variations in

on one strategy to carry them through an entire text.

lack of common, English vocabulary.

the years. As comprehension is a major piece of achievement in reading, the learning of

comprehension strategies is vital to early reading accomplishment.

knowledge, life-experiences, and language needed to make adequate achievements in reading.

practices available to me.

students, who participated in an explicit comprehension strategy instruction format, learned

Research Questions and Sub-Questions

Based on the problem that I identified in my practice and my dedication to examine my

incorporating explicit instruction in reading comprehension strategies influence student reading

in this study was reading achievement in first grade students.

Comprehension Strategies. Steps or tools utilized by students to accurately understand,

become active, controlled readers.

relationship knowledge. This also refers to letter patterns and pronunciation.

from the educator.

limitations been eliminated.

With an abundance of articles and books to document the success of comprehension

cognitive-constructivist approach due to their appreciation for comprehension, application, and

a no-holds-barred education by eliminating the politics?

of infrequent reading comprehension instruction frequency in elementary classrooms. Over the

Reading comprehension achievement is not an easy task to accomplish, however, the

intentional instruction of reading strategies positively impacted student achievement in

Furthermore, Gutierrez-Braojos, Rodriguez Fernandez, and Salmeron-Vilchez (2014)

the Contextualized Scale of Learning Strategies on Reading Comprehension Tasks, or ESEAC,

students (Gutierrez-Braojos et al., 2014).

Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test Verbal Subscale, the Graphophonological-Semantic Cognitive

(2015) examined some of these variables as predictors in connection to reading comprehension

comprehension (Gentaz et al., 2015). Assessments completed in decoding, listening

(Gentaz et al., 2015).

Stainthorp, 2013). In their study of 56 Turkish kindergarten students on these focused

and later reading comprehension skills (Babayigit & Stainthorp, 2013).

Wechsler Abbreviated Scales of Intelligence: Vocabulary Subtest, the Woodcock Reading

Comprehension were administered annually to the students to measure vocabulary knowledge

vocabulary knowledge (Quinn et al., 2015).

The assessment of reading comprehension precursors and comprehension variables allow

Peers and Grouping

their educators, as well as their peers?

year within minority students (Buttaro et al., 2010).

improved (Oostdam et al., 2015).

works best for their students.

hinder their learning experiences in the end.