Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Moving from recitation to open-format literature discussion in Chinese classrooms

Abstract

A study involving 106 fourth graders and two teachers from a school in Beijing investigated the impact of a peer-led, open-format discussion approach, called collaborative reasoning (CR), on students’ reading comprehension and teacher’s professional learning. Mixed results of effects of CR on children’s reading comprehension were found. After participating in eight discussions over an eight-week period, the CR group performed significantly better than the control group on the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study constructed-response items requiring integrating and evaluating information, but no better on multiple-choice items calling for information retrieval and simple inferences. No CR group’s advantage was found on the National Assessment of Educational Progress items. Compared to the baseline discussions prior to the intervention, CR increased the volume, complexity, and fluency of student talk, decreased teacher talk and teacher control of topic. Both CR teachers successfully altered the traditional recitation discourse pattern and adapted to an open-format discussion. CR teachers’ weekly reflections and interviews showed that teachers experienced four developmental stages from being lost to applying CR in subsequent reading instruction practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B. (2009). Identifying and describing constructively responsive comprehension strategies in new and traditional forms of reading. In S. E. Israel & G. G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 69–90). New York: Routledge.

  2. Anderson, R. C., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., McNurlen, B., Archodidou, A., Kim, S., Reznitskaya, A., et al. (2001). The snowball phenomenon: Spread of ways of talking and ways of thinking across groups of children. Cognition and Instruction, 19, 1–46.

  3. Applebee, A. N., Langer, J. A., Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussion-based approaches to developing understanding: Classroom instruction and student performance in middle and high school English. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 685–730.

  4. Au, K. H., & Mason, J. (1981). Social organizational factors in learning to read: The balance of rights hypothesis. Reading Research Quarterly, 17(1), 115–152.

  5. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., Sandora, C., Kucan, L., & Worthy, J. (1996). Questioning the Author: A year-long classroom implementation to engage students with text. The Elementary School Journal, 96, 385–414.

  6. Bennett, W. J. (1995). How the Brazilian beetles got their coats. New York: Simon & Schuster Adult Publishing Group.

  7. Blumenthal, M. (1990). Nature’s way. New York: The Reader’s Digest Association.

  8. Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of learning and teaching (2nd ed.). Portsmouth: Heinemann.

  9. Chang-Wells, G. L. M., & Wells, G. (1993). Dynamics of discourse: Literacy and the construction of knowledge. In E. A. Forman, N. Minick, & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in children’s development (pp. 58–90). New York: Oxford University Press.

  10. Chinn, C. A., Anderson, R. C., & Waggoner, M. A. (2001). Patterns of discourse in two kinds of literature discussion. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 378–411.

  11. Clark, A. M., Anderson, R. C., Kuo, L. J., Kim, I. H., Archodidou, A., & Nguyen-Jahiel, K. (2003). Collaborative reasoning: Expanding ways for children to talk and think in school. Educational Psychology Review, 15(2), 181–198.

  12. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdalee: Erlbaum.

  13. Conner, B. E. (1988). The Box in the Barn. Columbus: Highlights for Children Inc.

  14. dePaola, T. (1979). Oliver button is a sissy. San Diego: Harcourt Brace & Company.

  15. De Vries, S., Van de Grift, W., & Jansen, E. (2014). How teachers’ beliefs about learning and teaching relate to their continuing professional development. Teachers and Teaching, 20(3), 338–357.

  16. Dong, T., Anderson, R. C., Kim, I., & Li, Y. (2008). Collaborative reasoning in China and Korea. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(4), 400–424.

  17. Dong, T., Anderson, R. C., Lin, T. J., & Wu, X. (2009). Concurrent student-managed discussions in a large class. International Journal of Educational Research 48, 352–367.

  18. Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371–395.

  19. Hohler, F. (2003). An unbelievable night. Munchen: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag.

  20. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163–182.

  21. Kintsch, W., & Rawson, K. A. (2005). Comprehension. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 209–226). Oxford: Blackwell.

  22. Kong, A., & Pearson, P. D. (2003). The road to participation: The construction of a literacy practice in a learning community of linguistically diverse learners. Research in the Teaching of English, 38, 85–124.

  23. Kucan, L., Hapgood, S., & Palincsar, A. S. (2011). Teachers’ specialized knowledge for supporting student comprehension in text-based discussions. Elementary School Journal, 112(1), 61–82.

  24. Kucan, L., Palincsar, A. S., Khasnabis, D., & Chang, C. I. (2009). The video viewing task: A source of information for assessing and addressing teacher understanding of text-based discussion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(3), 415–423.

  25. Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  26. Li, Q., Zhu, X., & Zhao, P. (2013). A survey on the professional development satisfaction and needs of rural primary and secondary school teachers in Beijing. Teacher Education Research, 25, 35–40. (in Chinese).

  27. Li, Y., Anderson, R. C., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., Dong, T., Archodidou, A., Kim, I., et al. (2007). Emergent leadership in children’s discussion groups. Cognition and Instruction, 25(1), 75–111.

  28. Lin, T. J., Horng, R. Y., & Anderson, R. C. (2014). Effects of argument scaffolding and source credibility on science text comprehension. The Journal of Experimental Education, 82(2), 264–282.

  29. McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., & Blake, R. G. K. (2009). Rethinking reading comprehension instruction: A comparison of instruction for strategies and content approaches. Reading Research Quarterly, 44(3), 218–253.

  30. Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  31. Mullis, I. V. S., Kennedy, A. M., Martin, M. O., & Sainsbury, M. (2006). PIRLS 2006 assessment framework and specifications (2nd ed.). Chestnut Hill: Boston College.

  32. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Kennedy, A. M., & Foy, P. (2007). IEA’s progress in international reading literacy study in primary school in 40 Countries. Chestnut Hill: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.

  33. Murphy, P. K., Wilkinson, I. G., Soter, A. O., Hennessey, M. N., & Alexander, J. F. (2009). Examining the effects of classroom discussion on students’ comprehension of text: a meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 740–764.

  34. NCES report (2012). What does the NAEP reading assessment measure? Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/reading/whatmeasure.aspx

  35. Nguyen-Jahiel, K., Anderson, R., Waggoner, M., & Rowel, B. (2007). Using literature discussions to reason through real life dilemmas: A journey taken by one teacher and her fourth-grade students. In R. Horowitz (Ed.), Talking texts: Knowing the world through the evolution of instructional discourse (pp. 187–205). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

  36. Nystrand, M. (1997). Opening dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.

  37. Nystrand, M. (2006). Research on the role of classroom discourse as it affects reading comprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 40(4), 392–412.

  38. Opfer, V., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407.

  39. PIRLS 2006 Taiwan report. Reading literacy of fourth grade Taiwan students. Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/site/reading8learning01/pirls/pirls-2006

  40. Reznitskaya, A., Anderson, R. C., Dong, T., Li, Y., Kim, I., & Kim, S. (2008). Learning to think well: Applications of argument schema theory. In C. Block & S. Parris (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (2nd ed., pp. 196–213). New York: Guilford Publishing.

  41. Reznitskaya, A., & Clark, A. (2001). A trip to the zoo. Champaign: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Center for the Study of Reading.

  42. Royer, J. M., & Carlo, M. S. (1991). Assessing the language acquisition progress of limited English proficient students: Problems and a new alternative. Applied Measurement in Education, 4(2), 85–113.

  43. Soter, A. O., Wilkinson, I. A. G., Murphy, P. K., Rudge, L., Reninger, K., & Edwards, M. (2008). What the discourse tells us: Talk and indicators of high-level comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 47, 372–391.

  44. Van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.

  45. Wu, X., Anderson, R. C., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., & Miller, B. (2013). Enhancing motivation and engagement through collaborative discussion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 622–632.

  46. Wu, X., Li, W., & Anderson, R. C. (1999). Reading instruction in China. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31, 571–586.

  47. Zhang, J., Anderson, R. C., & Nguyen-Jahiel, K. (2013). Language-rich discussions for English language learners. International Journal of Educational Research., 58(1), 44–60.

  48. Zhao, M., Zhou, J., & Zhu, X. (2009). A survey on the participation and needs of primary and secondary school teachers’ professional development. Teacher Education Research, 21, 62–67. (In Chinese).

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the participating principal, teachers and children who facilitated this research. This research was supported by Key Project of Philosophy and Social Sciences Research, Ministry of Education (11JZD041), was partially supported by the Fundamental Research Fund for the Central Universities. In addition, we are grateful to Jan Elen and four anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on our manuscript.

Author information

Correspondence to Hong Li.

Additional information

Yahua Cheng and Jie Zhang have contributed equally to this work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cheng, Y., Zhang, J., Li, H. et al. Moving from recitation to open-format literature discussion in Chinese classrooms. Instr Sci 43, 643–664 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9358-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Collaborative reasoning
  • Small-group discussions
  • Reading comprehension
  • Teacher learning
  • Chinese children