The effects of strategy training on high school students’ learning from science texts
This research examines the effects of a reciprocal teaching intervention aimed at providing high school students. with a repertoire of strategies to integrate text and visual aid information (graphs, diagrams) while learning in science. Experimental subjects received an hour of instruction each week for 7 weeks using SLIC (Summarise, Link, Image, Check) strategies to integrate the written word with the visual aid while Controls were taught under normal class teaching methods using the same materials. Post test ANOVA’s with Treatment (Experimental, Control) and Reading Ability (Average, Below average) as the factors showed superior recall of details by average ability students in the Experimental group but no significant differences in main idea recall nor on comprehension questions. All Experimental students included a graph in their recalls and they also significantly included more linking information in their texts on the graphs. The quality of their recall graphs was superior to those of the Control group. The results of a far transfer test showed no effects of training on transfer. Implications for future research and for teaching are discussed.
Key wordsLearning Metacognition Science Strategy Training
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Baker, L., & Brown, A.L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P.D. Pearson (Ed.),Handbook of reading research (pp. 353–394). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
- Cole, P., & Char, L. (1990).Teaching methods and techniques in special education. Sydney: Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar
- Evans, G. (1988). Getting learning under control.Australian Educational Researcher, 15, 1–18.Google Scholar
- Garner, R. (1990). When children and adults do not use learning strategies: Towards a theory of settings.Review of Educational research, 60, 517–529.Google Scholar
- Guri-Rosenblit, S. (1989). Effects of a tree diagram on students’ comprehension of main ideas in a multi-thematic expository text.Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 237–247.Google Scholar
- Holley, C.D., & Dansereau, D.F. (1984).Spatial learning strategies. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- McLeod, J., & Anderson, J. (1972).GAPADOL Reading Comprehension Test. Richmond: Heinemann.Google Scholar
- Moore, P. (1991). Reciprocal teaching of study skills. In J. Biggs (Ed.),Learning processes and training contexts (pp. 177–194). Hawthorn: ACER.Google Scholar
- Palincsar, A. (1986, April).Interactive cognition to promote listening comprehension. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
- Reinking, D., Hayes, D.A., & McEneaney, J.E. (1988). Good and poor readers’ use of explicitly cued graphic aids.Journal of Reading Behavior, 20, 229–247.Google Scholar
- van Oostendorp, H. (1993). Text processing in terms of semantic cohesion monitoring. In H. van Oostendorp & R.A. Zwaan (Eds.),Naturalistic text comprehension (pp. 35–55). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.Google Scholar
- van Oostendorp, H., & Zwaan, R.A. (1993). Constructing and updating spatial situational models in story comprehension. Paper presented at the European Association for Research in Learning and Instruction Conference, Aix-en-Provence, France, September.Google Scholar