Title: Guided Practice in TechnologyBased Summary Writing
1Guided Practice in Technology-Based Summary
Writing
- Donna Caccamise, Eileen Kintsch, Marita Franzke,
Angela Eckhoff - and Walter Kintsch
- University of Colorado
2Summary Street Research Group
- Meghan Tobias
- Maryanne DeHart
- Angela Eckhoff
- Diana Rangl
3Overview
- Introduction guided practice approach
- Review of research findings
- Effects of Summary Street use on quality of
written summaries - Transfer to independent summary writing
- Impact on metacognition
- General conclusions
4Background
- Successful decoding does not guarantee good
comprehension - Passive reading strategies often an obstacle to
deep learning - Texts that are deceptively easy to read - short
sentences, familiar words - may give a false
sense of understanding. - When faced with texts with difficult to grasp
concepts and unfamiliar vocabulary, many students
just muddle through, hoping the comprehension
problems will eventually resolve themselves.
5Background, cont.
- In contrast, expert readers rely on active
problem solving - Paraphrase, restate the meaning in their own
words - Clarify unfamiliar terms and concepts
- Use the rhethorical structure to build a
macrostructure - Self explain difficult ideas
- Find analogies
- Visualize
- Predict outcomes, and so on
- How to get non-expert readers to adopt these
active reading strategies is the problem
addressed here.
6Different pathways to expert reading
- Some get it on their own - kids who read a lot
with deep interest in certain topics - Direct instruction of good comprehension
strategies - Live interventions
- Automated ones
- Guided practice is an important component of all
these interventions - scaffold the process - Summary Street environment depends entirely on
this approach.
7Summary Street - an environment for guided
practice
- Direct instruction plays a minimal role, if at
all Use of guidelines for how to summarize is
optional, often ignored. - Summary writing, through the development of
macrostructure, builds a foundation for learning
new content. - Students are guided via feedback on content as
they work to improve their summaries through
several iterations.
8Summary Street Feedback
- Content feedback
- - does the summary contain the right content?
- - enough information on each of the main
- topics?
- - does it include redundant sentences?
- - sentences that are not relevant to the topic,
or - too detailed?
- - sentences that are copied from the text?
- Additional feedback on length and spelling errors
9(No Transcript)
10Research findings
- Summary Street does improve the quality of
students written summaries. - Franzke et al. study with 8th graders
- The beneficial effects of practice with Summary
Street also transfer to independent summary
writing. - Pre-post summaries from Grades 7, 8, 9
- Does knowledge about how to summarize emerge from
guided practice in summary writing? - Think-aloud study with college students
111. Effect on summary quality
- Procedure 8th-grade students summarized texts
with SS or word processor during twice weekly
sessions over 4-week period. - Students students completed summaries of 6 texts
on average. - Texts formed a sequence acc. to difficulty.
12Summary quality, cont.
- Summary Street summaries covered content better
and maintained high scores as texts became more
difficult, fewer details. - Especially effective for medium-to-low performing
students.
13(No Transcript)
14(No Transcript)
15(No Transcript)
16Summary Quality Data Conclusions
- Practicing summary writing is a valuable
activity, but students do better when guided
through the process. - Summary Street provides individualized feedback
that lets students debug many writing problems on
their own. - The task of getting the right content is
challenging and supportive environment helps
students succeed.
172. Independent summary writing
- The beneficial effects of practice with Summary
Street also transfer to independent summary
writing. - Pre-post summaries from Grades 7, 8, 9
18(No Transcript)
19(No Transcript)
20(No Transcript)
213. Think-aloud study
- Does knowledge about how to summarize emerge from
guided practice in summary writing? - Think-aloud study with college students
22Procedure
- Undergraduate students provided oral reports
while using Summary Street or a word processor to
summarize texts 10 each - 4 texts (1200-2000 words) on different sources of
energy (coal, biomass, hydropower, propane) -
same order - Told to revise at least 3 times.
23Scoring
- TA comments classified into 3 main categories
indicating metacognitive thinking - Evaluation
- Planning
- Regulation
24Significant Findings
Summary Street
Control M M Strategy
(SD)
(SD) F Total Strategy Use Total Strategy
84.1
61.1 Use
(12.7) (29.4) p .05, p
.025, p .01
25Significant Findings Cont.
Summary Street Control M
M F STRATEGY
Evaluation Strategies Monitor Task
Performance 19.8 8.3 Planning
Strategies Employ Macro Strategies 1.9
.5 Regulation
Strategies Monitor Record Use 1.1
0 Transform Written Text
8.3 3.1
26Metacognitive data Conclusions
- Both groups engaged in an equivalent number of
revision cycles - Summary Street 4 cycles. Control 3 cycles
- But Summary Street users employed planning,
regulation and evaluation strategies at a
significantly higher rate than did control
participants. - Summary Street feedback that targets problems
with the content of students summaries also
encourages more metacognitive reflectivity.
27General Conclusions
- Summary writing is a valuable learning activity
because it helps readers build a coherent
textbase understanding, which is the foundation
for true learning. - We dont think that these macrostrategies must
necessarily be explicitly taught. - We believe that all pathways to expertise require
a great deal of practice. - However practice alone does not make perfect.
Practice is more effective when guided by an
intelligent, or even a semi-intelligent agent
like Summary Street.