EDLA369: Literacy Education 2 Assessment Task 2Questioning was the comprehension strategy used in my first lesson as Miller (2002) recognises the importance of good readers purposefully and spontaneously asking questions before, during and after the read to make sense of what they are reading. I was aware of the levels of questioning within the class, while some students were still at the literal level, others were moving towards inferential and evaluative questions. I was able to extend upon these deeper levels of questioning in my teaching focus group, as Hill (2012) provided evidence on the importance of catering for differentiation.

Read aloud was used as the instructional strategy for questioning at the whole class instruction level to motivate students to want to learn to read, extending upon their oral language and providing opportunities to connect new information to what they already knew (Miller, 2002). Boushey and Moser (2009) describe reading aloud as an imperative way to ensure children understand what is happening in the text, thus, using this strategy as an opportunity to model that good readers ask questions before, during and after reading the text to make sense of what they are reading.

The Department of Education (2004) explore the importance of students taking part in guided reading after a modelled read/read aloud. Thus, informing my decision to use guided reading as the instructional strategy for the teacher focus group with the comprehension strategy questioning, aiming to provide a text that posed a 10% challenge for children and 90% accuracy. Harvey and Goudvis (2007) explored the importance of encouraging confident readers to extend upon understandings and categorize questions they may have, recognising that some questions are answered in the text, others require discussion between one another, some require further research, others can be inferred from the text. Harvey and Goudvis (2007) provided evidence of the benefits to students to learn of, and use inferential and evaluative questions, moving beyond literal questions to comprehend texts at a deeper level.

The use of two different thinking routines was evident in teaching the comprehension strategy questioning. Thinking routines were adapted to suit a range of learning needs, as Hill (2012) explores diverse abilities within the classroom, emphasizing the importance of teachers planning for differentiation. 3-2-1 Bridge routine was chosen for students to use in pairs as it activated prior knowledge, encouraging children to ask questions to develop a deeper understanding of the text. MacDonald (2010) supported my decision of children working in pairs, describing how students develop proficiency in reading, improving fluency and accuracy in paired reading. Red Light, Yellow Light was the thinking routine for students in the focus group, providing an extension for students to dig deeper, required to independently monitor their own thinking by asking and categorizing questions to make sense of the text (Speizman-Wilson and Smetana, 2011).

Ritchhart and Perkins (2008) explore using visible thinking strategies to make connections, as they emphasize the importance in encouraging students to become effective thinkers, making their thinking visible and externalizing their thoughts through writing or drawing. Thus using the connect-extend-challenge thinking routine with students in the class. This routine assists students to make connections between themselves, other texts and what they have seen in the world, connecting ideas and information to previously learned knowledge, identifying ideas that extends the thinking in new directions and documents what is still challenging the learner. However, the thinking routine used with the focus group was 3-2-1 bridge. This was scaffolded throughout, as the teacher orally prompted students, as evidence from Miller (2002) explores how it is through explicit prompts and continuous modelling that students will understand a range of comprehension strategies.

Mary BuffonS00134651