Material Selection1

This article was downloaded by: [Universiti Utara Malaysia]On: 03 March 2014, At: 05:56Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Literacy Research and InstructionPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ulri20

Examining Sixth Grade Students ReadingAttitudes and Perceptions of TeacherRead Aloud: Are All Students on theSame Page?Sarah K. Clark a & Lindi Andreasen aa Utah State University , Logan , UtahPublished online: 28 Feb 2014.

To cite this article: Sarah K. Clark & Lindi Andreasen (2014) Examining Sixth Grade Students ReadingAttitudes and Perceptions of Teacher Read Aloud: Are All Students on the Same Page?, LiteracyResearch and Instruction, 53:2, 162-182, DOI: 10.1080/19388071.2013.870262

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2013.870262

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (theContent) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Literacy Research and Instruction, 53: 162182, 2014Copyright Association of Literacy Educators and ResearchersISSN: 1938-8071 print / 1938-8063 onlineDOI: 10.1080/19388071.2013.870262

Examining Sixth Grade Students Reading Attitudesand Perceptions of Teacher Read Aloud: Are All

Students on the Same Page?

SARAH K. CLARK AND LINDI ANDREASENUtah State University, Logan, Utah

The purpose of this embedded mixed methods study was to examine how sixth graders with high andlow reading attitudes perceive teacher read aloud. We utilized quantitative data by surveying sixthgraders (N = 87) about their reading attitudes and then collected qualitative data by interviewingfive students, interviewing the teacher, conducting classroom observations, and reviewing read aloudmaterials. Students with lower reading attitudes enjoyed the relaxed classroom setting, while thosewith higher attitudes enjoyed the books being read. Other themes suggested that all students engagedinconsistently with the text, and that students are indeed aware of the potential instructional benefitsof reading aloud. Implications are discussed including the importance of pairing teacher read aloudwith other strategies to help students engage more explicitly with the text.

Keywords adolescent literacy, teacher read aloud

IntroductionKnowing how to read is an essential skill for students to be successful in other aca-demic areas as well as in future career goals. However, recent reports from the NationalAssessment of Education Progress (NAEP) indicate that only 34% of fourth graders in theUnited States are at or above the proficient level (National Center for Education Statistics[NCES], 2011). These disturbing results raise questions about the literacy instruction thatstudents receive. One frequently used instructional strategy is the teacher reading aloudto his or her students. Teacher read aloud is intended to increase student motivation forreading, build background knowledge, and to expand student vocabulary. In 1985, theCommission on Reading stated that, the single most important activity for building theknowledge required for eventual success in reading is reading aloud to children (Anderson,Hiebert, Scott, & Wilkinson, 1985, p. 23). Yet federal legislation such as the No ChildLeft Behind Act (NCLB, 2002) mandated the amount of time and instructional activitiesthat were to be emphasized during literacy instruction (Teale, Paciga, & Hoffman, 2007),and teacher read aloud was not included in these recommendations, leaving many teacherswondering about its efficacy.

There is no shortage, however, of recommendations touting the benefits of teacherread aloud (Fisher, Flood, Lapp, & Frey, 2004). Most of these are intended for students inkindergarten through fifth grade with limited recommendations for middle school students(Albright & Ariail, 2005). We have less information about how effective the teacher readaloud strategy is in increasing student reading achievement by the time students reach sixthgrade. Further complicating the matter is that sixth grade students in the United States are

Address correspondence to Dr. Sarah K. Clark, Utah State University, School of Teacher Education andLeadership, 2805 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322-2805. Email: [email protected]

162

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014

Sixth Grade Reading Attitudes and Teacher Read Aloud 163

often attending either elementary school or middle school depending on how local schooldistricts are structured, thus leaving sixth grade teachers caught between instructional rec-ommendations intended for elementary school and those intended for middle school. Thepurpose of the current study was to examine more closely the experiences that sixth gradersare having with the teacher read aloud strategy and how sixth graders interpret and describethe instructional benefits of and the student participation during teacher read aloud.

Daisy (1993) concurred with other researchers that teacher read aloud is one of threeinstructional strategies teachers use to encourage literacy for students regardless of theirage. But by the time students reach sixth grade, they are either successful readers or theyare not, and they have definite opinions and attitudes toward reading and may be lessengaged during teacher read aloud than one might assume. We learn from Rosenblatt (1978)that the reader needs to be fully engaged in the text in order to fully create meaning andunderstanding. As a result, we wondered if students who were less engaged with read-ing in general were also less engaged about and during teacher read aloud. While teacherread aloud is touted in the research literature as valuable at the middle school level (e.g.,Richardson, 2000; Sanacore, 2000), only limited information is available that examineshow sixth graders with different attitudes towards reading respond to and participate duringteacher read aloud. Teachers need to know how teacher read aloud is actually perceived andreceived at this level.

Theoretical Framework

Transactional Theory of ReadingWe framed our study using Rosenblatts (1978) transactional theory of reading. Rosenblattarticulated that reading is a transaction between the text and the reader. She explained:

. . . the reader brings to the text his past experience and present personal-ity. Under the magnetism of the ordered symbols of the text, he marshals hisresources and crystalizes out from the stuff of memory, thought, and feeling anew order, a new experience, which he sees as the poem. (p. 12)

Prior to these ideas, it was assumed that the meaning of the text resided in the text itself.However, the transactional theory explains that the reader must transact with the text inorder to make meaning. Therefore, when applying this theory to the teacher read aloudstrategy, the students listening to the reading are just as important as the book selected orthe reader providing the narration. For this reason, how engaged and motivated a student isduring teacher read aloud is related to how much the student gets out of the teacher readaloud experience. Reading motivation, therefore, is centered on the reader and includes boththe reading context (where the reading takes place) and text choice (Guthrie & Wigfield,2000; Pressley, 2006).

A variety of comprehension strategies must also be employed by the students duringteacher read aloud, much like those employed by the reader when he/she is reading ontheir own. These strategies include the use of prior knowledge (Pearson, Hansen, & Gordon,1979), questioning techniques (Chan, Burtis, Scardamalia, & Bereiter, 1992; Durkin, 1978),think alouds (Baumann, Seifert-Kessel, & Jones, 1992), and the making of connections(King, Staffieri, & Adelgais, 1998). Interaction is also a key component of the transactionaltheory. The reader takes meaning from the text but gives meaning as well. Not only ismeaning found in the interaction between the reader and the text (Mills & Stephens, 2004),

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014

164 S. K. Clark and L. Andreasen

but also in the interaction and collaboration with others in the creation of meaning. Hoyt(1999) recommended that students participate in some sort of collaborative activity before,after, and during a teacher read aloud to help students make connections and to derivemeaning from the text. This recommendation further illustrates how important interactionswith others are in deriving meaning from and transacting with the text.

While many teachers perceive teacher read aloud as valuable and meaningful to stu-dents (Albright & Ariail, 2005), and educators and researchers alike promote the valueof teacher read aloud (Richardson, 2000; Sanacore, 2000), many unanswered questionsremain about how students connect with and derive meaning from texts during teacher readaloud. Rosenblatt (1978) further explained:

No two readings, even by the same person are identical. Still, someone can reada text differently and paraphrase it for us in such a way as to satisfy our efferentpurpose. But no else can read aesthetically, that is experience the evocation of,a literary work of art for us. (p. 1375)

This quote suggests that the teacher reading aloud can indeed influence and affect a stu-dents understanding of the text but it cannot replace the students own connection andreading of the text. With Rosenblatts transactional theory in mind, we reviewed first whatresearchers have discovered about teacher read aloud and elementary school readers andthen we looked at the research on teacher read aloud and middle school students.

Teacher Read Aloud in Elementary School

In 1991, Routman stated definitively that, reading aloud improves listening skills, buildsvocabulary, aids reading comprehension, and has a positive impact on students attitudestoward reading. . . . Reading aloud is a powerful technique for promoting story enjoymentand literature appreciation . . . (pp. 3233). To support these claims, there has been sub-stantial research documenting the benefits of teacher read aloud in the preschool and earlyelementary grades.

Research has established that effective teacher read aloud experiences contribute tothe development of reading comprehension skills (Fisher et al., 2004; Hickman, Pollard-Durodola, & Vaughn, 2004; McGee & Schickedantz, 2007; Santoro, Chard, Howard, &Baker, 2008), background knowledge (Beck & McKeown, 2001), listening comprehensionskills (Beck & McKeown, 2001), concepts about print and story structure (Rog & Burton,2001), vocabulary (Franzese, 2002; Hargrave & Senechal, 2000, McGee & Schickedanz,2007; Purcell-Gates, McIntyre, & Freppon, 1995; Robbins & Ehri, 1994; Santoro et al.,2008), language and literacy (Adams, 1990; Anderson et al., 1985; Chomsky, 1972; Durkin,1966; Goldfield & Snow, 1984), concept development (Beck & McKeown, 2001; Wasik &Bond, 2001), and allows for modeling fluent reading (Trelease, 2006). Teacher read aloudhas also been positively associated with providing the motivation students need to read(Morrow & Brittain, 2003). In contrast, however, Meyer, Wardrop, Stahl, and Linn (1994)determined from a longitudinal study examining reading comprehension development thatthere was a negative relationship between the amount of time kindergarten teachers spentreading aloud to students and student achievement in reading.

The way teacher read aloud is conducted in the elementary school also seems to makea difference. McGee and Schickedanz (2007) explained that . . . Merely reading booksaloud is not sufficient for accelerating childrens oral vocabulary development and listeningcomprehension. Instead, the way books are shared with children matters (p. 742). The

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


most effective forms of teacher read aloud happen when students are involved in askingand answering questions, making predictions, and making inferences instead of just pas-sively listening (Dickinson, 2001). Dialogic or interactive dialogues associated with teacherread aloud have been shown to result in vocabulary gains (Hargrave & Senechal, 2000). Themore frequently students engage in dialogic and analytical thinking, the more growth theyexperience in their literacy development (Dickinson & Smith, 1994). Additionally, invitingstudents to retell or act out stories (Cornell, Senechal, & Brodo, 1988; Pellegrini & Galda,1982), reading multiple books on the same topic (Wasik & Bond, 2001), repeating readalouds (Crago & Crago, 1976; McGee & Schickedanz, 2007), and providing definitions ofunknown words while reading (Collins, 2004; Elley, 1989) seems to be highly beneficialto students. For the most part, there seems to be ample evidence suggesting that at the ele-mentary school level when young children are exposed to teacher read aloud, their readingskills increase. We wondered if these same benefits were found at the intermediate elemen-tary and middle school levels. We do know that Rosenblatts transactional theory applies toboth elementary school students and middle school students as they engage with the text.Therefore, we next turned to the research literature centering on middle school students andteacher read aloud.

Teacher Read Aloud in Middle School

In the case of intermediate elementary and middle school students, an extensive literaturereview revealed positive support for teacher read aloud activities, but there is a paucity ofresearch studies available for review, especially strong experimental designs that can beused to make causal claims, as well as qualitative research that adds insight to what ismostly survey research. We did learn that motivation, interest, and engagement are oftenenhanced when the teacher spends time reading aloud in middle school (Albright & Ariail,2005; Ariail & Albright, 2006), that reading a variety of materials can also increase studentunderstanding of content material and student engagement (Roser & Keehn, 2002), and thatteacher read aloud can be used to introduce topics and help students make connections withcontent (Alvermann & Phelps, 1998). Lesesne (2001) also explained that teacher read aloudprovides a way for teachers to introduce students to new books and materials they wouldnot find on their own. Zehr (2010) pointed out that teachers of adolescents use teacherread aloud to improvise for middle school students poor reading abilities. They need thecontent and therefore the teacher reads it to them. In other words, teacher read aloud isseen as an equalizer for those who can and will read the assigned material, and those whocannot or will not. Ivey (1999) further emphasized the importance of teacher read aloudwith middle school students so that the struggling readers have opportunities to interactwith both teachers and other students in order to more fully comprehend what they arereading. We also know teacher read aloud is less likely to occur at the middle school level.Jacobs, Morrison, and Swinyard (2000) reported that teachers in intermediate grades do notread aloud as much to their classes as do elementary school teachers.

Evidence suggests that older students do enjoy teacher read aloud and that many adultsand middle school students have fond memories of teacher read aloud. For example, whenArtley (1975) asked college graduates about their most memorable experiences from ele-mentary school, teacher read aloud was listed as one of the favorite memories. Ivey andBroaddus (2000) reported that when asked a similar question, middle school students listedteacher read aloud as being a motivator to read more. Likewise, Livaudais (1985) surveyedthousands of middle school students and found that when asked to rate reading motivationactivities, students who were considered below average readers rated teacher read aloud as

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


the highest. In an ethnographic study, Beers (1998) reported that seventh grade students,who were also struggling readers and had very negative attitudes about reading, identifiedteacher read aloud as the most enjoyable activity. Beers study suggests that the attitude stu-dents have about reading in general may influence their response to instructional strategiesand whether students find them helpful or not. Cunningham (2005) encouraged teachers toconsider what books they were reading aloud to their students explaining that strugglingreaders may not enjoy literature in the same way that proficient readers do. Cunninghamfurther suggested that struggling readers were not as motivated by teacher read aloud in thesame way that proficient readers were.

Collectively, these findings suggest that teacher read aloud seems to be motivating andhave lasting memories for studentseven students who report a poor reading attitude. Fromthese results, however, we began to question why middle school students found teacher readaloud enjoyable. Ivey (1999, p. 373) explained, young adolescent readers do represent awide range of abilities and habits and that by this age, middle school students can havespecific reading preferences suggesting that a one size fits all book used for teacher readaloud may not be as interesting or motivating to all students. Do middle school studentsfind teacher read aloud to be motivating because they had more experience engaging in andinteracting with text, or is there something else about the classroom context during teacherread aloud that is different than it is during other types of reading instruction?

Rosenblatts theory (1978) emphasized the importance of the context in which readingtakes place. Probst (1988, p. 380) stated, students are encouraged to enter into a recipro-cal, mutually defining relationship in their discussions with students and teachers as well asin their readings of texts, indicating that students should be highly involved during teacherread aloud in order for the appropriate transaction with the text to occur. As students age,their reading abilities and attitudes are more pronounced which led us to think that onesattitude toward reading might influence the transactions the students experience with thetext during teacher read aloud. Do middle school students who have a more positive read-ing attitude perceive teacher read aloud differently than students who have a more negativeattitude toward reading? Do these older students participate more or less during teacherread aloud? Furthermore, do these students understand the instructional benefits associatedwith teacher read aloud, which in turn helps them more fully engage? If not, teacher readaloud may only be having minimal impact on reading achievement. While the studies in thiscollection of research literature suggest many benefits associated with teacher read aloudfor sixth graders, these studies did not address questions about how reading attitude mayinfluence student transactions with the text and participation during teacher read aloud. Forthese purposes, the following research questions were employed for the current study:

1. How do sixth graders describe their experiences with teacher read aloud in the sixthgrade classroom?

2. How do sixth graders describe student participation during teacher read aloud?3. How do sixth graders describe the instructional benefits of teacher read aloud?

Methods

Study Design

To answer these research questions, we employed an embedded mixed methods (Creswell& Plano Clark, 2011) research design. This mixed methods approach integrated bothquantitative and qualitative data in order to examine how sixth graders describe teacher

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


read aloud and how the reading attitudes of sixth graders can influence these perceptions.When used in conjunction, both quantitative and qualitative research methods complementeach other, resulting in a more complete picture of the research problem (Greene, Caracelli,& Graham, 1989; Johnson & Turner, 2003). In an embedded design, the supplementalstrand is added to enhance the overall design in some way (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011,p. 72). In the current study, the supplemental quantitative strand (survey data) enhanced thequalitative sample selection and data. See Table 1 for an outline of the steps and proceduresused in this research study.

Setting and Context

This study was conducted within a suburbanurban public school district in the WesternUnited States. The sixth grade students in our study were recruited from Franklin MiddleSchool (pseudonym), which is the only middle school (grades 68) in this district. Thetotal number of students enrolled at Franklin Middle School is 1,369 students with approx-imately 400 of these being sixth grade students. Of these 400 students, 87 were surveyed.At this school, 48% of the students are eligible for free lunch, and 12% are eligible forreduced lunch. Students in this middle school are white (66%), Hispanic (27%), Asian(4%), African American (2%), or categorized as other (1%).

One of the limitations from the research studies conducted previously on teacher readaloud is the lack of description about what the teacher read aloud setting is like. This lack ofinformation makes it difficult to make comparisons and to derive conclusions regarding the

Table 1Model for Mixed Methods Embedded Design Procedures

Phase Procedure Product

Quantitative DataCollection

Administer Survey (N = 87) Numeric Data

Quantitative DataAnalysis

SPSS (version 20) Descriptive Data

Case Selection Purposeful Selection ofParticipants (High, medium,and low reading attitudescore)

Cases (N = 5)

Interview ProtocolDevelopment

Sample/Practice InterviewQuestions

Interview Protocol

Qualitative DataCollection

Student Interviews Interview TranscriptsTeacher Interview Interview TranscriptsClassroom Observations Observation NotesInterview Verification Confirmation/changesReview Texts/Books Artifact Notes

Qualitative DataAnalysis

Coding and Thematic Codes and ThemesAtlis.ti Software Analysis Cross Theme Matrix

Integration ofQuantitative andQualitative Data

Interpretation and Explanationof Results

Findings, Discussion,Conclusion

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


effects of teacher read aloud. In this study, there were three types of teacher read aloud expe-riences that were observed and examined. Book selections were made by the teacher andwere part of the planned curriculum. In each setting, the book being read by the teacher waseither displayed on a document camera or the students had an individual copy at their desk.First, there was teacher read aloud from an information text presented using a social studiestextbook. The teacher in the current study described the teacher read aloud experience thisway:

. . . [So] when I read aloud in my social studies text, I read and then Ill cometo a bolded word and Ill say, You know, Im not quite sure what that boldedword is. And I know that when its bolded, off to the left hand column theyare going to have a definition. And so I do a lot of think aloud with my readaloud for my class in particular . . . So, Im trying to teach them to read anduse graphic organizers and try to teach them to use illustrations, and captions,and headings, and bolded words [to understand the text].

Second, the teacher described how she read aloud from a literature book entitled MiddleSchool: The Worst Years (Patterson, Park, & Tebbetts, 2012) to the sixth graders:

I read aloud with expression, and I read really slowly. There are illustrations inthis book and I actually read and emphasize the illustrations and so that theytake this whole thing and get comprehension. But they also have that opportu-nity to follow along with me as well . . . and so I use this read aloud [for] moreof a life skills [lesson for students] to make connections.

Finally, the third type of teacher read aloud setting that took place in this classroom waswhen the students read along silently from their own copy of the book while the teacherplayed an audiotaped version of a historical fiction entitled, Crispin (Avi, 2002).

Quantitative PhaseData Collection. In this quantitative phase, we began by administering the ElementaryReading Attitude Survey (McKenna & Kear, 1990) to sixth graders attending FranklinMiddle School. We randomly selected a block of sixth grade students representing foursixth grade classes of students (N = 87) at this school. The survey was designed to measurethe recreational and academic reading attitude of students in grades kindergarten throughsixth grade. The survey was read aloud to the students so that there would not be any lim-itations to completing the survey related to reading ability or comprehension. The surveycontains a total of 20 questions with 10 of these addressing academic reading attitude andthe other 10 addressing recreational reading attitude. Sample questions on the recreationalscale include: How do you feel about reading during summer vacation? How do you feelabout spending free time reading? Sample questions on the academic reading scale include:How do you feel about reading in school? How do you feel when you read out loud in class?See Appendix A for the full survey.

Data Analysis. We used the Cronbach-alpha analysis (Cronbach, 1951) to determine theinternal consistency of items on the instrument. Nunnaly (1978) indicated that a measureof 0.7 or greater is an acceptable reliability coefficient. The reliability coefficient for thisscale was .91, indicating that the different items on this scale measured the same general

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


construct and produced similar scores suggesting an internal consistency among the itemson the overall scale. The overall mean score (N = 87) on this survey was 54.39 with astandard deviation of 10.75. The range of scores was 3076, with a possible range of2080 points. We used the results of the survey to then identify and recruit sixth gradestudents who reported high, medium, and low reading attitude scores on this survey basedon the percentile scores provided on the survey.

Qualitative PhaseIn the qualitative phase of the study, we wanted to examine more closely the perceptionsof sixth graders based on their reading attitude scores on the Elementary Reading AttitudeSurvey (see Appendix A). Therefore, a multiple case study, using purposeful sampling,was needed. In a multiple, or a collective case study, several cases are used to understandthe similarities and differences between cases (Stake, 1995). Yin (1984, p. 23) defined acase study as an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon withinits real life context . . . and in which multiple sources of evidence are used. With thisdesign, we were able to identify issues within each case, and then look for common themesthat transcended the cases (Yin, 2003). A detailed description of each case (a within-caseanalysis) was conducted as well as a thematic analysis across the cases (cross-case analysis)in order to make assertions and to interpret the meaning of each case. The bounded systemwe used for this study was sixth graders attending middle school and the cases includedstudents with various reported attitudes toward reading.

Participants. Creswell (2006) recommends that in a collective case study, no more thanfour or five participants should be used. Using the survey data that we collected in thequantitative phase, we identified and recruited five sixth graders (with varying reading atti-tude scores) to participate in this multiple case study. Following university institutionalreview board (IRB) procedures, we obtained parental permission for these sixth gradersto participate in this study. The sixth grade students we selected were two students witha lower score, one student with an average score, and two students with a higher readingattitude score on the Elementary Reading Attitude Survey. See Table 2 for demographics ofsixth graders interviewed in this study.

The sixth grade teacher who was interviewed in this study is assigned to teach areading/language arts course and a separate social studies course to the group of 87 stu-dents who were all surveyed in the current study. The teacher is a white female and had beenteaching for 22 years. She has a K8 teaching license with an English as a Second LanguageEndorsement. The reading/language arts and social studies courses last approximately

Table 2Student Demographic Information of Sixth Graders

Student Gender Ethnicity/Race Reading attitude score Percentile rank

A Male Hispanic 41 15B Female White 47 37C Male White 64 88D Female White 69 95E Female White 76 99

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


45 minutes each with separate homework assignments in each class. These courses aretaught separately from each other and do not overlap curriculum.

Data Collection. Triangulation of data sources, data types, and resources was implementedso that the teacher read aloud experience and sixth grade student reading attitudes could beviewed and explored from multiple perspectives in order to have convergence and confir-mation of findings (Knafl & Breitmayer, 1989). Four forms of qualitative data sources thatwere collected in this study included the following: (1) semi-structured interviews withfive sixth grade students, (2) classroom observations during teacher read aloud, (3) a semi-structured interview with the sixth grade teacher, and (4) a review of the textbook and twoliterature books used for teacher read aloud. The semi-structured interview questions usedfor the student and teacher interviews are listed in Appendix B and Appendix C.

Interviews took place at the middle school where students were enrolled. We held themin a teacher workroom next to the students classroom during a homeroom class time des-ignated for students to learn study skills and catch up on homework. We met the studentsfor the first time at the interview and did not have a previous relationship with any students.Classroom observations took place during the three different teacher read aloud settingsdescribed previously. Notes during classroom observations were taken to record what stu-dents were doing during teacher read aloud, the types of discussions that occurred, and howmany students seemed to be engaged and participating.

Data Analysis. The sixth grade student interview transcriptions, the notes from theclassroom observation, the transcription of the sixth grade teacher interview, and thedescriptions of the textbook and literature books used for teacher read aloud in this studywere added to an Atlis.ti qualitative software data base. In the preliminary reading ofthe interview transcriptions, the classroom observation and artifact notes, both researcherswrote brief memos attached to various sections of each text. The memos were our initialthoughts about the data and what was relevant to our research questions. We then createdinitial codes that were developed from each transcript and notes based upon our concep-tual framework, our memos, emerging themes, and a constant comparison between andwithin the data sources and cases. We removed overlapping and redundant initial codes andrefined codes following recommendations articulated in the constant comparative method(Charmaz, 2006). Both researchers independently coded the data and then met togetherto come to consensus on the emerging codes and themes (Baxter & Jack, 2008). We alsoimplemented the process of double coding where a set of data are coded and then after aperiod of time (in this study we waited six months) the researchers recode the same dataset and compared results (Krefting, 1991). Additionally, we incorporated member checkingwith the sixth grade teacher to ensure that we had captured her thoughts and descriptionsfrom the interview correctly.

FindingsIn this study, we wondered about how a sixth graders attitude toward reading wouldinfluence his or her perceptions of teacher read aloud experiences. Findings indicate thatdifferences in the perceptions sixth graders have about teacher read aloud are often based ontheir reported reading attitude, but we also found similarities among students with differentreading attitudes as well. First, regardless of their reading attitude score, students reportedenjoying teacher read aloud for a variety of reasons, some of these educational and somenot. Second, sixth graders (regardless of their reading attitude) reported that not all students

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


respond to teacher read aloud in the same way, with some stating they are less engaged andothers reporting they are fully engaged with the text. Finally, sixth graders (regardless oftheir reading attitude) were able to identify instructional benefits associated with teacherread aloud. Listed next to each student in the following sections, we put his/her readingattitude score in parentheses (ranging from 4176) to assist the reader in determining if thecomments shared are from students with high, medium, or low reading attitudes.

Teacher Read Aloud is Enjoyable for a Variety of ReasonsThe first research question sought to determine how sixth graders describe their experienceswith teacher read aloud. We noted that all of the students we interviewed reported likingteacher read aloud. If the students had a lower reading attitude score, however, the reasonfor liking teacher read aloud seemed to be because of the more relaxed setting in the class-room during teacher read aloud. For example, the student who had the lowest attitude score(41) explained that he enjoyed teacher read aloud time because I draw. He went on toexplain that teacher read aloud was a break from having to do school work. Another studentwith a low reading attitude score (47) reported enjoying teacher read aloud because she feltless pressure and did not have to work. She explained, I like it because you can just relaxand listen to the teacher read. Probing these students a bit further, we noted there seemedto be a different tone in the classroom detected by these students during teacher read aloudthat hinted at a more relaxed classroom setting. Teacher read aloud seemed to require lessof these students and the students also reported feeling less accountable for the text beingread. Teacher read aloud was seen as different than the regular reading instruction time.There were fewer expectations during teacher read aloud time, thus allowing strugglingreaders or students with a lower reading attitude to blend in during this group activity.The students with a lower reading attitude felt like their lack of reading ability was notemphasized as much during teacher read aloud as it was during other reading instructiontimes.

Sixth graders with higher reading attitudes also reported enjoying teacher read aloud.For example, one student (69) explained, I love [teacher read aloud]. I enjoy it a lot.Students could usually explain why they enjoyed teacher read aloud. For instance, thestudent with the highest reading attitude score (76) reported enjoying teacher read aloudspecifically when the teacher engaged the students in conversations about the text. Shedescribed it this way, I enjoy teacher read aloud when the teacher like stops and discusses itwith us. This student also described enjoying teacher read aloud so much that she asked theteacher where he got the book so she could pick it up and read it again. These students alsoidentified the teachers expression during teacher read aloud as one of the things that madeteacher read aloud enjoyable. A student with a higher score (69) explained, [My teachers]use great expression, and every once in a while, the teacher even make[s] us jump in ourchairs and another student with a bit higher reading attitude score (71) identified teacherexpression as enjoyable as well stating that, The teachers expression makes teacher readaloud memorable.

The teacher we interviewed also felt that for the most part, her students enjoyed teacherread aloud. She described her feelings this way, I think they enjoy it. I think. Overall, thekids really like it. . . . I only have three or four groans out of the whole class of my 31.Clearly, elements of teacher read aloud are considered enjoyable and appreciated by allstudents regardless of their reading attitude or ability. Our findings, however, suggest thatnot all students are experiencing teacher read aloud in the same way and that students enjoyteacher read aloud for a variety of reasons. Those with a lower reading attitude identifiedthe relaxed classroom setting with less pressure to perform, while students with a higher

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


attitude listed class conversations and reader expression as reasons for why they enjoyedteacher read aloud. This led us to our next question about student participation duringteacher read aloud.

Students With High and Low Reading Attitudes Engage Inconsistently With Read Aloud

The second research question asked how sixth grade students described student participa-tion during teacher read aloud. Employing Rosenblatts theory (1978) about the importanceof the reader engaging with text in order for true comprehension to occur, we wonderedhow engaged students actually were during teacher read aloud and if there was a differencebased on reading attitude. We know from our previous section that the student reportingthe lowest reading attitude enjoyed teacher read aloud because he could draw. This findingsuggests that the student is probably less engaged with the text. We also found evidencein our interviews to suggest that other students were not as engaged during teacher readaloud either. The student with the highest reading attitude score (76) explained, [Duringteacher read aloud], most students are not paying attention. While another student withan average reading attitude score (64) indicated that students are quiet during teacher readaloud suggesting that there might be some engagement on the part of the students, but healso acknowledges that at times students are talking quietly to each other. He describedthe teacher read aloud setting this way: Mostly everybody is quiet. Usually I think thereare a couple [of students] who talk, but usually everybody is quiet. Even though studentsare quiet during teacher read aloud, this does not necessarily mean that students are alsoengaging with the text.

We do know, however, that students with both high and low reading attitude scoresreported engaging with the text inconsistently (paying more or less attention) as the text isread aloud. For example, the student with the lowest reading attitude score (41) reported thathe did not engage with the teacher read aloud text until the end of the book. He explains,I hate [teacher read aloud] at the beginning because it is so slow, but then at the end Ireally like it [and I pay attention] because theres more adventure. A student with thehighest reading attitude score (76) reported being less engaged at times during teacher readaloud as well. She said, When I didnt enjoy teacher read aloud, it was mostly becauseI wasnt paying attention, but when I started paying attention, it was interesting. Both ofthese examples illustrate how students engage with the text inconsistently during teacherread aloud. The more they seem to be engaged with the text, the more they seem to enjoyhaving the teacher read aloud the text.

The teacher in our study also noticed that students do not participate consistently withteacher read aloud texts. She especially found this to be true with her students who have alow reading attitude. She described it as follows:

. . . I think that students who can read sometimes think that its a little slow forthem, but they have great conversations and really participate. The kids whocant read . . . I really struggle with them following along. In my mind I think,Oh I hope they are learning something just by hearing me read. But you knowthats not always true. Its only going to help them if they are following along.

As a teacher, she describes how challenging it can be to meet the needs of all of her stu-dents during teacher read aloud. She explained, . . . I am hitting the more medium/low tomedium/high [students] by [using] reading aloud as part of instruction. She also describedstrategies she used to help struggling readers engage with the read aloud text, [With my]low kids . . . I am constantly using proximity, pointing to where we are, constantly trying

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


to get them to go with me. We noticed these same behaviors during teacher read aloud inour classroom observations. Overall, students with a higher reading attitude seemed moreengaged with the text being read during teacher read aloud, yet they too were inconsistent,depending on what seemed to be their interest with the text. We also noted that studentswith higher reading attitudes relayed descriptions of teacher read aloud texts that were morevivid and these students could name titles and authors that had been shared during teacherread aloud, whereas the students with a lower reading attitude could not. Again, these find-ings suggest the students with a lower reading attitude demonstrate less engagement withthe text than the students with higher reading attitudes.

Sixth Graders Recognize Instructional Benefits Associated With Teacher Read AloudThe final question in our study was to determine how sixth graders described the instruc-tional benefits associated with teacher read aloud. We wondered if students were awarethat teacher read aloud was considered instructional or if they thought it was only forrecreational purposes. All of the sixth grade students we interviewed, regardless of theirreading attitude score, were able to identify specific instructional benefits they associatedwith teacher read aloud and many of their comments reflected those that have been iden-tified previously by researchers. The student with one of the lower reading attitude scores(47) recognized that teacher read aloud was used to motivate students to read and that italso aided vocabulary. She explained, They always encourage [reading], and when thereis a new word, the teacher explains it to us. A student with an average reading attitudescore (64) explained that teachers used read aloud for comprehension purposes. He stated,[We] get to read lots of books, and usually our teachers ask questions about it. Anotherstudent with a higher reading attitude score (69) identified the instructional benefits to bemotivation, vocabulary, and fluency. She explained, [I learn] that you can enjoy books andthat you can increase your vocabulary and fluency by reading aloud instead of just readingthem in your head. Originally, this student wondered about the purposes of teacher readaloud explaining that she felt that perhaps teacher read aloud was used to teach life skillsas well. She explained: When I first heard them reading to me, I was like, Why are theyreading to me? And then I realized they wanted me to read good books at a high level.They want me to be a better reader and they want me to get a job in the future.

Students with the highest reading attitude scores were also able to describe howteacher read aloud provided reading practice for students and that comprehension skillswere also being taught. For example, the student with the highest reading attitude score(76) explained, We read mostly every day so the class can understand what the book isabout . . . when we read the book about Sacajawea, we read about the coin and about howthey kidnapped her, and how they discovered her. This student went on to explain that theteacher reading aloud helped the students comprehend better. She concluded, They readbooks to us so that we can understand what we are reading. In conclusion, all of the stu-dents (regardless of their reading attitude) were able to identify the instructional purposesassociated with teacher read aloud and could articulate multiple skills being taught thathelped students become better readers.

DiscussionDetermining the reading attitude of the participants in our study before we interviewedthem about their read aloud experiences enabled us to determine how different studentsperceive these experiences and to answer questions that have not yet been discussed in the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


research literature. Similar to the findings of Beers (1998), Ivey and Broaddus (2001), andLivaudais (1985) who found that middle school students enjoyed teacher read aloud andthat it is often considered a favorite reading activity, the sixth graders in our study alsoreported that read aloud time was enjoyable. We did find out, however, that the reasons whystudents enjoy teacher read aloud might not be for the sheer enjoyment as described byteachers and researchers alike. For example, Fisher et al. (2004, p. 8) capture this romanticnotion of teacher read aloud as follows: The ahhs that follow when the [read aloud]session is over and the promise of more tomorrow demonstrate the joy associated witha good read aloud. Students in our study indicated that they enjoyed teacher read aloudmore because of the relaxed setting in the classroom and because they felt less accountablefor their reading performance and ability. This was especially true for those students whohad a lower reading attitude. Teachers in Albright and Airails (2005) study reported thatteachers saw teacher read aloud as a way to manage the classroom and this finding wasreflected in what sixth graders in our study seemed to be noticing as well. These findingssuggest that teachers need to consider the expectations they have during teacher read aloud.If teachers are using teacher read aloud to deliver a brief break from the rigors of theclassroom while simultaneously providing students access to reading texts they would notencounter otherwise, then these expectations are probably being fulfilled. But if teachersare using teacher read aloud as a key element of their reading instruction, then the studentsmay not understand this as its purpose thus limiting the instructional impact of teacher readaloud. Of course studies with an experimental design would be needed to determine thecausal connections between teacher read aloud and student reading achievement, but thefindings from this study suggest that students with a lower reading attitude enjoy teacherread aloud for the classroom environment and not necessarily for the pleasurable readingexperience.

Next, we learned that sixth graders, students with both high and low reading attitudes,were less engaged or were inconsistently engaged with the text during teacher read aloudthan has been previously thought. If teacher read aloud is enjoyable, it might be because notmuch is expected from the students and that students are less engaged. Previous researchhas indicated that teacher read aloud in the middle grades can be helpful in introducingtopics and helping students connect with the content (Alvermann & Phelps, 1998; Lesesne,2001), improvising for middle school students poor reading abilities (Zehr, 2010), and pro-viding struggling readers with opportunities to interact with teachers and students to betterunderstand what they are reading (Ivey, 1999; Roser & Keehn, 2002). Yet for teacher readaloud to have these effects, the students need to be more engaged and not passively listen-ing. Therefore, based on findings from the current study, we recommend that teachers lookfor ways to engage more students instead of allowing teacher read aloud time to become atime to relax and not learn. Students should not just be passively listening. Teachers shouldlook for ways to involve students through discussion and engaging in a myriad of ways withthe text. Hoyt (1999) recommended that students participate in some sort of collaborativeactivity before, after, and during teacher read aloud to help students engage, make con-nections, and to derive meaning from the text. Finding ways to implement a variety ofreading instructional methods in conjunction with teacher read aloud is important in orderfor students to engage more fully with the text.

Finally, we noted in the current study that sixth graders are indeed able to identifypotential instructional benefits associated with teacher read aloud. Our findings reflectthose found by other researchers who have reported multiple instructional benefits result-ing from teacher read aloud activities. The sixth graders in our study identified thesebenefits to include the development of reading comprehension skills (Fisher et al., 2004;

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


Hickman et al., 2004; McGee & Schickedantz, 2007; Santoro et al., 2008), backgroundknowledge (Beck & McKeown, 2001), listening comprehension skills (Beck & McKeown,2001), vocabulary (Franzese, 2002; Hargrave & Senechal, 2000; McGee & Schickedanz,2007; Purcell-Gates et al., 1995; Robbins & Ehri, 1994; Santoro et al., 2008), and conceptdevelopment (Beck & McKeown, 2001; Wasik & Bond, 2001).

Sixth graders in our study explained that they appreciated it when teachers took thetime to discuss what was going on in the book (Hargrave & Senechal, 2000), to shareword meanings and definitions (Collins, 2004; Elley, 1989), and to discuss complex ideas(Dickinson & Smith, 1994). Being more explicit and intentional about these instructionalbenefits during teacher read aloud may be another key to engaging more students in thetext. We noted that in order for teacher read aloud to be considered meaningful, it neededto be paired with other instructional techniques and that it was perhaps not as helpful if theteacher was only reading from a book. Teacher read aloud would engage more students ifthe teacher asked questions, had discussions about the book, encouraged discussion aboutvocabulary words and concepts, and used think alouds to model engagement with text.We saw a need for more empirical research to help us understand how these instructionalpairings with teacher read aloud can influence student reading attitudes and student readingachievement.

Limitations, Conclusions, and Teacher Read Aloud RecommendationsOne limitation of our study is the read aloud texts selected by the teacher. Results mayhave been different had different teacher read aloud texts been used. Our study was alsolimited in that it was theoretical and in its lack of generalizability to a larger population.Although the assumptions of qualitative research do not lend themselves to generalizability,Yin (2003) explains that the findings of a study such as this can be generalizable to theory.We hope that the findings of the current study can afford teachers with greater insight onhow students perceive and receive teacher read aloud experiences. There have been manyassumptions made about teacher read aloud with limited empirical research available. Forone, it is collectively assumed that teacher read aloud directly influences student attitudeand motivation to read. However, students in this study did not necessarily identify this as itspurpose. We hope that future research can look more closely at the connection and/or cor-relation between student reading attitudes and teacher read aloud to provide more definitiveanswers.

We also learned that teacher read aloud may not be having the kind of influence on allstudents as originally expected. One cannot assume all students are engaged just becausethey are quiet. Further research is needed to learn more about what happens when teach-ers are more explicit about what they are trying to teach during teacher read aloud. Doesteacher read aloud play a more influential role when students are explicitly taught spe-cific skills? Are there other areas where teacher read aloud may be used in more effectiveways (e.g., using teacher read aloud as mentor text?). We also determined from previousresearch that teachers approach teacher read aloud as an almost magical in that the sheerpleasure of reading should not be disturbed experience, but students actually expresseda desire for more interactions between teacher and students to discuss ideas and conceptswhile reading a book together. Discussion and instruction as a part of teacher read alouddoes not necessarily make the activity less pleasurable for students. Research studies suchas these have important implications for the role and influence of teacher read aloud in theclassroom.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


The current study provides the following recommendations for teacher read aloud:

Teachers should clarify student expectations during teacher read aloud activities sothat students understand these purposes.

Teachers should provide opportunities for students to actively engage with the readaloud text. There should be some sort of collaborative activity before, during, andafter the teacher read aloud experience.

Teachers need to be more explicit and intentional about the instructional benefits ofteacher read aloud so that students understand these benefits.

Teacher read aloud should be paired with other instructional techniques such as ask-ing questions, discussing issues presented in the text, discussing the meaning ofvocabulary words, and modeling through think aloud how to engage more fully withthe text.

ReferencesAdams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Albright, L. K., & Ariail, M. (2005). Tapping the potential of teacher read-alouds in middle schools.

Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(7), 582591.Alvermann, D. E., & Phelps, S. F. (1998). Content reading and literacy. Needham Heights, MA:Allyn

& Bacon.Anderson, R. C., Hiebert, E. H., Scott, J. A., & Wilkinson, I. A. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers:

The report of the Commission on Reading. Washington, DC: The National Institute of Education.Ariail, M., & Albright, L. K. (2006). A survey of teachers read-aloud practices in middle schools.

Reading Research and Instruction, 45(2), 6989.Artley, A. S. (1975). Good teachers of reading: Who are they? The Reading Teacher, 29(1), 2631.Baumann, J. F., Seifert-Kessel, N., & Jones, L. H. (1992). Effect of think-aloud instruction on

elementary students comprehension monitoring abilities. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24,143172.

Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementationfor novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544559.

Beck, I., & McKeown, M. (2001). Text talk: Capturing the benefits of read-aloud experiences foryoung children. The Reading Teacher, 55(1), 1020.

Beers, K. (1998). Choosing not to read: Understanding why some middle schoolers just say no. InK. Beers & B. G. Samuels (Eds.), Into focus: Understanding and creating middle school readers(pp. 3763). Norwood, MA: Christopher Gordon.

Chan, C. K. K., Burtis, P. J., Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1992). Constructive activity in learningfrom text. American Educational Research Journal, 29(1), 97118.

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Chomsky, C. (1972). Stages in language development and reading exposure. Harvard EducationalReview, 42(1), 133.

Collins, M. (2004). ESL preschoolers English vocabulary acquisition and story comprehension fromstorybook reading. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Boston University, Boston MA.

Cornell, E., Senechal, M., & Brodo, L. (1988). Recall of picture books by 3-year-old children: Testingand repetition effects in joint reading activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 537542.

Crago, H., & Crago, M. (1976). The untrained eye? A pre-school child explores Felix HoffmansRapunzel. Childrens Literature in Education, 22, 135151.

Creswell, J. W. (2006). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nded.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika,16,297334.

Cunningham, P. (2005). If they dont read much, how they ever gonna get good? The ReadingTeacher, 59(1), 8890.

Daisy, P. (1993). Three ways to promote the values and uses of literacy at any age. Journal of Reading,36(6), 436440.

Dickinson, D., & Smith, M. (1994). Long-term effects of preschool teachers book readings onlow-income childrens vocabulary and story comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 29,104122.

Dickinson, D. K. (2001). Book reading in preschool classrooms: Is recommended practice com-mon? In D. K. Dickinson & P. O. Tabors (Eds.), Beginning literacy with language: Youngchildrenlearning at home and school (pp. 175204). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Durkin, D. (1966). Children who read early. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Durkin, D. (1978). What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction.

Reading Research Quarterly, 14(4), 481533.Elley, W. (1989). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 24,

174187.Fisher, D., Flood, J., Lapp, D., & Frey, N. (2004). Interactive read-alouds: Is there a common set of

implementation practices? The Reading Teacher, 58(1), 817.Franzese, R. (2002). Reading and writing in kindergarten: A practical guide: Lessons and strategies

that help young learners develop literacy skills through shared reading,guided reading, interactivewriting, read-alouds, and more. New York, NY: Scholastic.

Goldfield, B. A., & Snow, C. E. (1984). Reading books with children: The mechanics of potentialinfluence on childrens reading achievement. In J. Flood (Ed.), Promoting reading comprehension(pp. 204215). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixedmethod evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 255274.

Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P.B.Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Reading research handbook, vol. III (pp.403424).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Hargrave, A. C., & Senechal, M. (2000). A book reading intervention with preschool children whohave limited vocabularies: The benefits of regular reading and dialogic reading. Early ChildhoodResearch Quarterly, 15, 7590.

Hickman, P., Pollard-Durodola, S., & Vaughn, S. (2004). Storybook reading: Improving vocabularyand comprehension for English-language learners. The Reading Teacher, 57(8), 720730.

Hoyt, L. (1999). Revisit, reflect, retell: Strategies for improving reading comprehension. Portsmouth,NH: Heinemann.

Ivey, G. (1999). A multi-case study in the middle school: Complexities among young adolescentreaders. Reading Research Quarterly, 34(2), 172192.

Ivey, G., & Broaddus, K. (2001). Just plain reading: A survey of what makes students want to readin middle school classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 350377.

Jacobs, J. S., Morrison, T. G., & Swinyard, W. R. (2000). Reading aloud to students: A national prob-ability study of classroom reading practices of elementary school teachers. Reading Psychology,21(3), 171193.

Johnson, B., & Turner, L. A. (2003). Data collection strategies in mixed methods research. In A.Tashakkori and C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research(pp. 297319). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

King, A., Staffieri, A., & Adelgais, A. (1998). Mutual peer tutoring: Effects of structuring tutorialinteraction to scaffold peer learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(1), 134152.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


Knafl, K. A., & Breitmayer, B. J. (1989). Triangulation in qualitative research: Issues of conceptualclarity and purpose. In J. Morse (Ed.), Qualitative nursing research: A contemporary dialogue.(pp. 193203). Rockville, MD: Aspen.

Krefting, L. (1991). Rigor in qualitative research: The assessment of trustworthiness. The AmericanJournal of Occupational Therapy, 45(3), 214222.

Lesesne, T. S. (2001). Timing: The right book at the right moment. Voices From the Middle, 9, 6872.Livaudais, M. F. (1985). A survey of secondary (grades 712) students attitudes toward reading

motivational activities. (Doctoral dissertation). University of HoustonUniversity Park, Houston,TX.

McGee, L. M., & Schickedanz, J. A. (2007). Repeated interactive read-alouds in preschool andkindergarten. The Reading Teacher, 60(8), 742751.

McKenna, M. C., & Kear, D. J. (1990). Measuring attitude toward reading: A new tool for teachers.The Reading Teacher, 43(9), 626639.

Meyer, L. A., Wardrop, J. L., Stahl, S. A., & Linn, R. L. (1994). Effects of reading storybooks aloudto children. Journal of Educational Research, 88, 6985.

Mills, H., & Stephens, D. (2004). Theory in practice: The legacy of Louise Rosenblatt. LanguageArts, 52(1), 4755.

Morrow, L. M., & Brittain, R. (2003). The nature of storybook reading in the elementary school:Current practices. In A. van Kleeck, S. A. Stahl, & E. B. Bauer (Eds.), On reading books tochildren: Parents and teachers (pp. 140158). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

National Center for Education Statistics (2011). Nations Report Card. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs/main2011/2012457.asp

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107110, 115, Stat. 1425 (2002).Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Pearson, P. D., Hansen, J., & Gordon, C. (1979). The effect of background knowledge on young

childrens comprehension of explicit and implicit information. Journal of Literacy Research, 11(3),201209.

Pellegrini, A. D., & Galda, L. (1982). The effects of thematic-fantasy play training on the devel-opment of childrens story comprehension. American Educational Research Journal, 19(3),443452.

Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching. New York, NY:The Guilford Press.

Probst, R. E. (1988). ERIC/RCS: Transactional theory in the teaching of literature. Journal ofReading, 31(4), 378381.

Purcell-Gates, V., Mclntyre, E., & Freppon, P.A. (1995). Learning written storybook languagein school: A comparison of low-SES children in skills-based and whole language classrooms.American Educational Research Journal, 32, 659685.

Richardson, J. S. (2000). Read it aloud! Using literature in the secondary content classroom. Newark,DE: International Reading Association.

Robbins, C., & Ehri, L. C. (1994). Reading storybooks to kindergartners helps them learn newvocabulary words. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 5464.

Rog, L. J., & Burton, W. (2001). Matching texts and readers: Leveling early reading materials forassessment and instruction. The Reading Teacher, 55(4), 348356.

Rosenblatt, L. M. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work.Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

Roser, N. L., & Keehn, S. (2002). Fostering thought, talk, and inquiry: Linking literature and socialstudies. The Reading Teacher, 55(5), 416426.

Routman, R. (1991). Invitations: Changing as teachers and learners, K12. Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann.

Sanacore, J. (2000). Promoting the lifetime reading habit in middle school students. The ClearingHouse, 73(3), 157161.

Santoro, L. E., Chard, D. J., Howard, L., & Baker, S. K. (2008). Making the very most of classroomread-alouds to promote comprehension and vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 61(5), 396408.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


Stake, R. (1995). The art of case research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Teale, W. H., Paciga, K. A., & Hoffman, J. L. (2007). Beginning reading instruction in urban schools:

The curriculum gap ensures a continuing achievement gap. The Reading Teacher, 61(4), 344348.Trelease, J. (2006). The read-aloud handbook. New York, NY: Penguin Group USA.Wasik, B. A., & Bond, M. A. (2001). Beyond the pages of a book: Interactive book reading and

language development in preschool classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 243250.Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.Zehr, M. (2010). Reading aloud to teens gains favor among teachers. The Education Digest, 76(1),

47.

References for Childrens Literature

Avi, B. (2002). Crispin: The cross of lead. New York, NY: Hyperion Books for Children.Patterson, J., Park, L., & Tebbetts, C. (2012). Middle school: The worst years of my life. Boston, MA:

Little Brown and Company.

Appendix A. Elementary Reading Attitude Survey

Date________________ Grade ______ Name___________________

1. How do you feel when you read a book on a rainy Saturday?

2. How do you feel when you read a book in school during free time?

3. How do you feel about reading for fun at home?

4. How do you feel about getting a book for a present?

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


5. How do you feel about spending free time reading?

6. How do you feel about starting a new book?

7. How do you feel about reading during summer vacation?

8. How do you feel about reading instead of playing?

9. How do you feel about going to a bookstore?

10. How do you feel about reading different kinds of books?

11. How do you feel when the teacher asks you questions about what you read?

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


12. How do you feel about doing reading workbook pages and worksheets?

13. How do you feel about reading in school?

14. How do you feel about reading your school books?

15. How do you feel about learning from a book?

16. How do you feel when it is time for reading class?

17. How do you feel about the stories you read in reading class?

18. How do you feel when you read out loud in class?

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014


19. How do you feel about using a dictionary?

20. How do you feel about taking a reading test?

GARFIELD: 1978 United Feature Syndicate, Inc.Kear, D.J. & McKenna, M. C. (1999). Measuring attitude toward reading: A new tool for teachers.In S. J. Barrentine (Ed.), Reading assessment: principles and practices for elementary teachers. Acollection of articles from The Reading Teacher (pp. 199214). Newark, DE: International ReadingAssociation.

Appendix B. Student Interview Questions1. How would you describe teacher read aloud in your classroom?2. What types of books do you remember from teacher read aloud experiences?3. How much time is spent on teacher read aloud in your classroom?4. What do you do during teacher read aloud time?5. What are other students doing during teacher read aloud time?6. Why do teachers read aloud to their students?7. How do you feel about your teacher reading aloud to the class?8. How would you describe yourself as a reader?9. How would you rate your ability to read on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being the lowest and a

10 being the highest)?10. What do you learn from teacher read aloud time?11. Do you enjoy teacher read aloud time? Why or why not?12. What are your memories of teacher read aloud in elementary school?

Appendix C. Teacher Interview Questions1. Can you describe how you use teacher read aloud in the classroom?2. How much time do you spend reading aloud in class?3. What types of reading materials do you use for teacher read aloud?4. Do you consider read aloud as part of your instructional time or recreational time? What

is your rationale?5. Do you think students enjoy being read to? How can you tell?6. What kind of effects do you see read aloud time having on your students?7. Do you feel like there is a difference in reading ability related to attitude?8. Has NCLB or similar legislation caused any change in how often you read aloud or what

you read to your students? If so, why?

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

iti U

tara M

alays

ia] at

05:56

03 M

arch 2

014

Material Selection1

Documents

Transcript of Material Selection1