Page 1

Running Head: Journal Critique.

1

By: Ivan Castellanos Casandra Joiner Idania Perez

An essay submitted to the Ana G. Mendez University System For Research EDU 600

Ana G. Mendez University System-South Florida Campus 2012


Running Head: Journal Critique.

2 Introduction

The purpose of this article study is discuss and critique review an project that investigate the effect of two approach for providing reading comprehension strategies instructions to seventh and eighth grade ESL students with LD on comprehension of English language text. This article was written by Janette Kattmann Klingner and Sharon Vaughan. This study was published on The Elementary School Journal vol.96, No3, 1966 by The University of Chicago. The aspects to be described and analyzed here are: the research design, the sampling, the measure, the data analysis procedure, findings and results The journal’s title, “Reciprocal Teaching of Reading Comprehension Strategies for Students with Learning Disabilities, Who Use English as a Second Language is appropriate and clear. The abstract is presented in a specific and correct form about the efficacy of the research, including the topic problem, sample, methodology, finding and recommendation. The goal of the research study was to measure a) reciprocal teaching in combination with cross-age tutoring and b) reciprocal teaching in combination with cooperative grouping. Descriptive measures were administrated individually prior to the intervention also one additional quantitative measures. The Gates –MacGinitie and the strategy interview were administrated as pre- and posttests. The findings reveled in that initial reading ability, and oral language proficiency seemed related to gains in comprehension, that a greater range of students benefited from the strategies. This approach was based on at least a decade of development in other's settings where problems have been addressed. In the study is no information about students or parents’ consent. The participants were selected from an original amount of 42 possible subjects to then 26


Running Head: Journal Critique.

3

students and were randomly placed into two groups of seventh and eighth graders with learning disabilities. Research Design The research design of this study is guided by a theory that researcher has that students if shown in reciprocal teaching, cooperative learning and cross- age tutoring can be guided through supervision to helping each other out in different ways possible with strategies they are shown to improve their reading comprehension. They are using previous studies that have been used but in this case are adding a different variable, which is that the subjects have learning disabilities and use English as a second language. The authors begin by choosing their samples, which of course they must select, their candidates which at the end of their meticulous selection remain with 26, which makes up their case study. The author goes overboard in their in depth and over analytical explanations of the different types of methods of learning that will be used in the study. At times less is more and would have been a great tactic to have followed. I understand that it is crucial for your audience to understand what you are trying to do and understand the terminology of everything but in this case it was just too much. One part of the journal that was not of any type of relevancy was why the students who have learning disabilities and on top of that use English as a second language subjected to take the amount of test they had to take to tell them that that all but two were not making progress. They could have administered a uniquely designed test to measure the improvements of the students in the study instead of submitting them to an over standardized test that those students are not even ready for with all the language barriers they may have or learning disabilities.


Running Head: Journal Critique.

4

Another bothersome and poor execution of the journal article was the vast amount of referencing there is. Every other line is full of it. At times your feel it is necessary to take a break from all the line jumping to give your sight a break because there are just too many. You feel like you forget most of the material previously read because you are trying to get to the next real sentence to get a better understanding of what the previous material read. We believe the study could have been better formatted to get the attention of the reader and keep them reader while many people just want to put the journal article down. Conclusion The researcher took a Reciprocal teaching as variable and diversified it in two strategies, with the intention of obtaining more effective results. Although there were not significant differences in the levels of comprehension between strategies, the research emphasizes that the presence of the tutor was significant. This investigation used different tests, preceding research, statistic; graphs to get scientific results, making this research a serious investigation. Reciprocal teaching is an appropriate strategic tool for improving the comprehension levels in the students. Finally, we can point out that this research is very important and beneficial in the field of education, taking in consideration a high percentage of students with reading problems. Future research can take it as reference and apply this in different contexts.


Running Head: Journal Critique.

5 References

Sierra Center Writing. (2002, February). Guidelines for Writing a Literary Critical Analysis. Retrieved February 10, 2012, from http://lrc.sierra.cc.ca.us/writingcenter/litcrit.htm The OW at Perdue University. (1995-2011). What Makes a Good Literature Paper. Retrieved February 8, 2012, from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/618/01/

Journal Article Critique EDUC 600  

By: Ivan Castellanos Casandra Joiner Idania Perez Ana G. Mendez University System-South Florida Campus 2012 Running Head: Journal Critique....

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you