Additional information
Cover | Paperback |
---|---|
Dimensions (W) | 8 1/2" |
Dimensions (H) | 11" |
Page Count | 60 |
Publisher | CRL |
Year Printed | 1997 |
Requirements |
Cover | Paperback |
---|---|
Dimensions (W) | 8 1/2" |
Dimensions (H) | 11" |
Page Count | 60 |
Publisher | CRL |
Year Printed | 1997 |
Requirements |
Overview
The Survey Routine is used by teachers as a pre-reading activity to orient students to reading assignments in their subject-area textbooks. For example, it can be used to introduce a textbook chapter to students before they read the chapter. Essentially, use of the routine involves the teacher guiding students through the use of the learning strategy on which this routine was based. The research study on the Survey Strategy was conducted with eight secondary students with LD. Their ages ranged from 14 to 18 years, and they were enrolled in grades 7 through 12. They participated in a multiple-baseline across-strategies design. All eight students received instruction in a resource room with their regularly assigned teacher. Two types of reading materials were used: published textbooks written at each student’s instructional reading level, and published textbooks written at each student’s grade level from one of the courses in which the student was currently enrolled. Students were taught the strategy using the ability level chapters. They were tested using the grade-level chapters to determine whether they could generalize their use of the strategy to the more difficult chapters.
Results
Several measures were gathered in this study, one corresponding to each of the strategies taught. For the Survey Strategy, the two measures were (a) an observation measure of the student’s use of the strategy and (b) the student’s oral report of what he/she learned while surveying the chapter.
With regard to observed strategy use, prior to instruction, the students used an average of 30% of the behaviors included in the strategy on an ability-level chapter and 31% of the behaviors on a grade-level chapter. After instruction, they used an average of 100% of the behaviors included in the strategy on an ability-level chapter and 98% of the behaviors on a grade-level chapter.
With regard to their oral report of information learned prior to instruction, they reported 20% of the information required after surveying an ability-level chapter and 9% of the information required after surveying a grade-level chapter. After instruction, they reported 87% of the information required after surveying an ability-level chapter and 82% of the information required after surveying a grade-level chapter.
Students also took a criterion-based chapter test over each chapter which they were instructed to study independently. They had 24 hours to study the chapter. During baseline, the students earned a mean score of 53% on the chapter test over the ability-level chapter and 40% on the chapter test over the grade-level chapter. After instruction in the strategies, the students earned a mean score of 87% on the chapter test over the ability-level chapter and 91% on the chapter test over the grade-level chapter.
Conclusions
All of the students learned to survey the chapter above mastery levels, and they reported the large majority of the required information after they had surveyed each chapter. In addition, their scores on chapter tests improved substantially after they had learned the strategies.
Reference
Schumaker, J. B., Deshler, D. D., Alley, G. R., Warner, M. M., & Denton, P. H. (1982). Multipass: A learning strategy for improving reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 295-304.
Donald D. Deshler, Ph.D.
Affliations
My Background and Interests
Since my early childhood, I’ve loved to learn about new things and new ideas. As an undergraduate in the 1960s, I saw the power of knowledge when it was used to mobilize people to action. Upon graduation from college, my new wife, Carol, and I went to a poverty-stricken village on the Barren Sea in northern Alaska to teach Eskimo children. I was soon sobered by the fact that I was totally overmatched by the situation that confronted me. Many of my students came from dysfunctional homes with parents who were not supportive of what was occurring in school, most lacked the necessary skills to learn the curriculum, and all but a few had given up on school, including anything I could offer as their teacher. In short, the “light in their eyes had gone out.” While I was frustrated in my inability to reach most of these students, my frustration was magnified when I learned that neither my fellow teachers nor the professional literature offered much in the way of viable solutions.
As I pondered the magnitude of the problems that existed in this remote village and multiplied that by the hundreds of thousands of students living in similar circumstances throughout the world, I decided to devote my life to making sure that children’s futures were not being foreclosed because they didn’t know how to learn. I wanted to find answers that would make learning easier for students who struggled with learning how to learn and, as a result, never experienced the joy of learning about new ideas, places, and things that I experienced and never would be in a position to acquire knowledge that would empower them to shape what was happening in their lives. While I have continued to be a teacher, I began to seek out situations where I could do research and develop and promote effective ways of teaching.
The Story Behind the Survey Routine
At the beginning of our work at the Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities in the 1970s, we did a descriptive study where we tested the academic skills of two groups of students at the junior high and high school levels: students who had been diagnosed as having learning disabilities (LD), and students who were receiving failing or barely passing grades on their report cards in subject-area classes (low-achievers). We learned that both groups of students had severe reading deficits. The students with LD were reading on average at the fourth-grade level in seventh grade. The low achievers were reading on average at the fifth-grade level in seventh grade. What was even more distressing is that these groups of students did not make progress in reading skills across the remaining grade levels. As twelfth graders, the students with LD were reading at the fourth-grade level, and the low achievers were reading at the fifth-grade level on average. We also analyzed textbooks used in required secondary courses and found that they were written at the students’ grade levels or above. We found, for example, that the most widely used U.S. History textbook was written at the 17+ grade level. We reasoned that students reading at the fourth- and fifth-grade levels were not going to be able to gain much information in textbooks written at these high grade levels.
Since our team had been charged with developing instructional materials and methods that can be used to dramatically improve outcomes for secondary students, we knew that we would have to design methods that would enable students to gain information from their textbooks in their required courses if they were to succeed in those courses. We reasoned that secondary subject-area teachers could introduce chapters in textbooks to students in a way that would provide a preview of the information in each chapter as well as teach students how to gain information from textbook chapters independently. As a result, the Survey Routine was born. It was based on a cognitive reading strategy that we had tested with students in the early years of our work. Through the use of the Survey Routine, subject-area teachers guide students through a series of steps with regard to analyzing and familiarizing themselves with a textbook chapter. The students and teacher simultaneously fill out a graphic organizer related to parts of the chapter, and through several repetitions of the routine, students learn to fill out the organizer themselves so that they can study a chapter independently.
My thoughts about Content Enhancement Instruction
Content Enhancement instruction is one of the few instructional methods that have been shown to be effective through empirical research to produce student improvement in learning and in academic performance at the secondary level in general education classes. Research on the Content Enhancement Routines has consistently shown that the performance of all types of students, including high achievers, normal achievers, low achievers, and students with disabilities, improves when teachers use the routines. The purpose of all the routines is to make instruction in subject-area courses more “learner friendly.” As a result, students are more able to learn and remember the information in their courses.
Teacher Feedback on this Product
This routine and the other Content Enhancement Routines have been readily adopted by thousands of teachers across the nation. When teachers use this routine, not only do students earn higher scores on their unit tests, they also learn how to approach textbook chapters on their own. They become more independent and more confident as learners.
My Contact Information
Please contact me at ddeshler@ku.edu.