Collaborative strategic reading (csr) within cognitive and metacognitive strategies perspectives

European Journal of Business and Management www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1905 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2839 (Online)
Vol 4, No.1, 2012

Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR) within Cognitive and
Metacognitive Strategies perspectives
Mohamad Jafre Zainol Abidin*, Riswanto
School of Educational Studies
Universiti Sains Malaysia
*Email: jafre@usm.my
Abstract
The main purpose of this paper is to discuss the Philosophical concept of Collaborative Strategic Reading
(CSR), in regard with its rationale and operational context of teaching reading. It also discusses a number
of researches that have been done in the area of this field. It will also look at the significance usage of CSR
as a prominent strategy in teaching reading based on conceptual and theoretical frameworks of cognitive
and metacognitive theories, which have been proven by reading researchers in L1, ESL and EFL teaching
contexts. Hopefully, this basic research provides clear description about CSR within the cognitive and
metacognitive theories point of view.
Key Words: CSR, Cognitive, Metacognitive

1. Introduction

It is believed that reading strategy is one of the fundamental factors in gaining success in the
academic field. Reading strategies play prominent roles in comprehension because readers use them to
construct the coherent mental representation and explanation of situation described in texts (Graesser,
2007). Comprehension strategies are regarded as deliberate and goal oriented processes used to construct
meaning from text (Afflerbach, Pearson & Paris, 2008). In particular, the use of deeper level of strategies
such as predicting upcoming text content, generating and answering questions, constructing self
explanation and clarification, capturing the gist of the text, and monitoring comprehension, have been
shown to promote good reading comprehension (McNamara, 2007; National Reading Panel, 2000; Presley
& Haris, 2006).
In spite of the importance of reading comprehension strategies, it is not a surprise that reading
researchers paid much attention on reading comprehension instructions (Murphy, et al., 2009). Levine et al.
(2000), stated that the ability to read academic texts is considered one the most essential skills that
university students of English as a second language (ESL) and English as a foreign language (EFL) need to
acquire. However, the process of reading achievement such as the employment of strategies in reading is
not a major concern by many EFL/ESL college students ( Mokhtary & Reichard, 2002).
The exposure of using more strategies in reading should be strongly promoted by facilitating the
students with a number of strategies as well as how they work in a real reading practice such as the one
being discussed in this paper, Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR).
2. Review of Literature

2.1 What is CSR?
Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR) was found and developed by Klinger & Vaughn (1998).
CSR is the comprehension strategy which combines modification of Reciprocal Teaching (RT) (Palincsar
& Brown, 1984) and Cooperative Learning (CL) strategy (Johnson & Johnson, 1987).

The concept of this strategy is engaging students to work in small cooperative groups (3-5) and applying
four reading strategies: Preview, Click & Clunk, Get the Gist and Wrap Up. Preview allows students to
generate interest and activate background knowledge in order to predict what they will learn. Click &
Clunk is self- monitoring strategy which controls their understanding about words, concepts and ideas that
they understand or do not understand or need to know more about. Get the Gist is a strategy in which
students identify the main ideas from reading to confirm their understanding of the information. Wrap Up
provides students with an opportunity to apply metacognitive strategies (plan, monitor and evaluate) for

61

Vol 4, No.1, 2012

further extend comprehension (Elkaumy, 2004). Figure 1 describes the four steps of CSR, Adopted from
Sopris West Educational Services

Figure.1 CSR’s Plan for Strategic Reading Includes Before, During, and After Reading

Click and Clunk Wrap-Up
Preview # were there any parts that we # Ask Questions:
#Brainstorm:What hard to understand (Clunks)? What questions check
do we already know # How can we fix the clunks? whether we
about the topic? # Use fix-up strategies: understand the most
# Predict: What do important in the
we predict we will
1. Reread the sentences and passage?
learn about? look for kea ideas to help # Review:
you understand What are the most
2. Reread the sentences important ideas?
before and after looking
for clues
3. Look for the prefix, root
word, or suffix in the
word
2.2. How is CSR Implemented? 4. Break the word apart and
look for smaller words
Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR) teaches students to use comprehension strategies while
Get the Gist: What is the previewing the text; place ongoing feedback by
working cooperatively. Students’ strategies include most important person,giving or thing?What is
deciding "click" (I get it) or "clunk" (I don't get it) at the about the person, place, or thing? the gist" of the
the most important idea end of each paragraph; "getting
most important parts of the text; and "wrapping up" key ideas. Find out how to help students of mixed
achievement levels apply comprehension strategies while reading content area text in small groups.

Initially, the teacher presents the strategies (preview, click and clunk, get the gist, and wrap up) to
the whole class using modelling, role playing, and teacher think- aloud. After students have developed
proficiency applying the strategies through teacher-facilitated activities, the teacher asks them to form
heterogeneous groups, where each student performs a defined role as students collaboratively implement
the strategies. Although CSR was designed to be used with expository text, it can also be used with
narrative text. It is highly compatible with a range of reading programs, including literature-based
instruction, basal reading programs, and eclectic or balanced approaches.

Principally, the goals of CSR are to improve reading comprehension and increase conceptual
learning in ways that maximize students' involvement. Developed to enhance reading comprehension skills
for students with learning disabilities and students at risk for reading difficulties, CSR has also yielded
positive outcomes for average and high average achieving students (Klingner & Vaughn, 1996; Klingner,
Vaughn, & Schumm, in press).

Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR) employs four comprehension strategies, they are:

Strategy 1: Preview

Students preview the entire passage before they read each section. The goals of previewing are (a)
for students to learn as much about the passage as they can in a brief period of time (2-3 minutes), (b) to
activate their background knowledge about the topic, and (c) to help them make predictions about what

62

Vol 4, No.1, 2012

they will learn. Previewing serves to motivate students' interest in the topic and to engage them in active
reading from the onset.

Introducing preview step to students by asking them whether they have ever been to the movies and
seen previews. Prompt students to tell you what they learn from previews by asking questions like the
following:

• Do you learn who is going to be in the movie?
• Do you learn during what historical period the movie will take place?
• Do you learn whether or not you might like the movie?
• Do you have questions about what more you would like to know about the movie?

When students preview before reading, they should look at headings; words that are bolded or
underlined; and pictures, tables, graphs, and other key information to help them do two things: (a)
brainstorm what they know about the topic and (b) predict what they will learn about the topic. Just as in
watching a movie preview, students are provided minimal time to generate their ideas and discuss their
background knowledge and predictions.

Strategy 2: Click and clunk

Students click and clunk while reading each section of the passage. The goal of clicking and
clunking is to teach students to monitor their reading comprehension and to identify when they have
breakdowns in understanding. Clicks refer to portions of the text that make sense to the reader: "Click,
click, click" – comprehension clicks into place as the reader proceeds smoothly through the text. When a
student comes to a word, concept, or idea that does not make sense, "Clunk" – comprehension breaks
down. For example, when students do not know the meaning of a word, it is a clunk.

Many students with reading and learning problems fail to monitor their understanding when they
read. Clicking and clunking is designed to teach students to pay attention to when they understand – or
failing to understand – what they are reading or what is being read to them. The teacher asks, "Is everything
clicking? Who has clunks about the section we just read?" Students know that they will be asked this
question and are alert to identify clunks during reading, after students identify clunks, the class uses "fix-
up" strategies to figure out the clunks. The students use "clunk cards" as prompts to remind them of various
fix-up strategies. On each of the clunk cards is printed a different strategy for figuring out a clunk word,
concept, or idea:

• Reread the sentence without the word. Think about what information that is provided that would
help you understand the meaning of the word.
• Reread the sentence with the clunk and the sentences before or after the clunk looking for clues.
• Look for a prefix or suffix in the word.
• Break the word apart and look for smaller words you know.

As with the other strategies, students can be taught the click and clunk strategy from the beginning of the
year and use it in various contexts. Students apply these fix-up strategies at first with help from the teacher
and then in their small groups.

Strategy 3: Get the gist

Students learn to "get the gist" by identifying the most important idea in a section of text (usually a
paragraph). The goal of getting the gist is to teach students to re-state in their own words the most

63

Vol 4, No.1, 2012

important point as a way of making sure they have understood what they have read. This strategy can
improve students' understanding and memory of what they have learned.

When the students "get the gist," prompt them to identify the most important person, place, or
thing in the paragraph they have just read. Then ask them to tell you in their own words the most important
idea about the person, place, or thing. Teach students to provide the gist in as few words as possible while
conveying the most meaning, leaving out details.

Strategy 4: Wrap up

Students learn to wrap up by formulating questions and answers about what they have learned and
by reviewing key ideas. The goals are to improve students' knowledge, understanding, and memory of what
was read.

Students generate questions that ask about important information in the passage they have just
read. The best way to teach wrap up is to tell students to use the following question starters to begin their
questions: who, what, when, where, why, and how (the 5 Ws and an H).

It is also a good idea to tell students to pretend they are teachers and to think of questions they
would ask on a test to find out if their students really understood what they had read. Other students should
try to answer the questions. If a question cannot be answered, that might mean it is not a good question and
needs to be clarified.

To review, students write down the most important ideas they learned from the day's reading
assignment in their CSR Learning Logs. They then take turns sharing what they learned with the class.
Many students can share their best idea in a short period of time, providing the teacher with valuable
information about each student's level of understanding.

2.3. Why CSR?

CSR is not only teaching readers with cognitive (top down and bottom up) approach but also
teaching readers how to use the strategies metacognitively. CSR provides readers with dual reading
approaches simultaneously, bottom up and top down model. In CSR, readers are engaged to generate their
pre-existing knowledge by previewing overall look of the text while looking at non linguistics features such
as ; charts, pictures and diagrams. Through this process, the readers predict what they will learn from the
text
CSR provides readers on how to decode the words, letters, take a note in the margins, underlining
as part of cognitive strategies which are very fundamental factors in comprehending the texts (Dogan,
2002).
AS Paran (1996), refers to the bottom up model as the 'common sense' notion. In this approach,
reading is meant to be a process of decoding; identifying letter, words, phrases and then sentences in order
to get the meaning. According to Dhieb (2006) Cognitive or cognition is the scientific term for “the
process of thought”. It usually refers to an information processing view an individual’s psychological
functions. Other interpretations of meaning of cognition link it to the development of concepts, individual
minds, groups, and organizations.
CSR is taught metacognitively by principle of planning, self-monitoring, and evaluating. Elkaumy
(2004) defines metacognitive strategies in three ways: Planning, self-monitoring and evaluating or think
about thinking. Planning is to have reading purpose in mind and to read the text in the terms of this
purpose, so the readers are more selective and focus the desired information. Self-monitoring is to regulate
the reading process and use the strategy at the right time. Evaluating is the reform phase of reading process
such as: changing the strategy if necessary, control whether the purpose is reached or not.

64

Vol 4, No.1, 2012

CSR engages students to work in small group cooperatively, so they have opportunity to discuss
and share the ideas among the members of the groups as well as develop their social skills (Johnson &
Johnson, 1987., Slavin 1995). Research has shown that cooperative learning techniques has benefited on:
1. Promoting student and academic achievement
2. Increasing students retention
3. Enhancing student satisfaction with their learning experience
4. Helping students develop skills in oral communication
5. Developing students’ social skills
6. Promoting students self –esteem
7. Helping to promote positive race relation

Cooperative learning concept in CSR promotes students to be active, collaborative as well as
cooperative in achieving similar learning goals.

3. Researches on CSR
There have been a number of researches that have been done on the area of Collaborative Strategic
Reading (CSR). The findings are summarized as follows:

8. Mokhtari & Sheorey (2001) conducted a study on native and non-native students in
respect with strategies, gender and reading proficiency. This was the first research reported
on applying SORS as the instrument. The study involved 304 university students, 152
English speaking students and 152 ESL students. They asked three primary research
questions: 1). Are there any differences between ESL students and US students in reading
academic text?, 2). Are there any differences between male ESL and female US students
in reading academic text? and 3). Is there any relationship between reported strategy use
and self rated reading ability?.The result showed that ESL students reported higher use of
strategies than US students. ESL students used more support strategies than US students in
reading academic materials. For entire groups there is no significant difference between
male and female students of two groups in using the strategies but it was reported that
female ESL students used strategies more frequently than US female students. The last,
students who have higher reading ability employed higher frequency of reading strategies
than those who had lower reading rates.

9. Imtiaz (2004) with 20 Indian students, taken place at Aligarh Muslim University. The
metacognitive questionnaires of fifth likert scales was used to measure students’
metacognitive awareness. The findings reported that L2 students’ reading speed is better
than L1. Besides, the majority students use prior knowledge to understand the text besides
skimming and recognizing the topic sentences. However, the students had difficulties in
guessing the meaning from context due to lack of syntactical and grammatical knowledge.
The research finding would suggest that the issue of cognitive strategies like identifying
words, phrases and sentences in term of grammatical rules among the low ESL achieving
readers are important to be exposed when reading is taught.

10. Monos (2005). A study on metacognitive awareness among first and second year of 86
Hungarian university students by using Survey of Reading Strategies (SORS). The study
investigated the correlation between strategies awareness towards the students’ reading
proficiency. The research result showed that students have fairly high awareness in using
the overall strategies, global, problem solving and support reading support reading
strategies. However, the research reported that there was no significant relationship
between metacognitive awareness and students’ reading proficiency when it was tested
with other instruments.

65

Vol 4, No.1, 2012

11. Phakiti (2006) investigated the relationship between cognitive and metacognitive towards
the students’ reading test performance. The study involved 358 students of Government
University in Thailand. The instruments of the research were reading comprehension test,
cognitive and metacognitive questionnaire with structural Equation Modelling (SEM) was
applied as a research approach. It was found that the memory and recovery strategies
assisted EFL reading test performance through comprehending strategies, monitoring
strategies performed an executive function on memory strategies, while evaluating
strategies adjusted retrieval, and planning strategies did not directly regulate memory. The
researcher found that only comprehending strategies directly influenced reading test
performance.

12. Asraf & Ahmad (2004) reported on their study about how readers used the strategies in
approaching reading materials in both L1 (Malay) and L2 (English) and why they used
these strategies in comprehending reading texts. The data were collected through think
Aloud Protocol (TAP) where the students were asked to verbalize their feeling and thought
through series of face to face interview. The findings suggested that students should be
provided more on comprehension monitoring strategies and vocabulary mastery in order to
enhance better reading comprehension.

13. Klinger & Vaughn (1998). The first study using CSR was conducted with 26 seventh-
and eighth graders with low learning abilities who used English as a second language. In
this study, students learn to use modified reciprocal teaching methods in cooperative
learning groups (i.e., brainstorm, predict, clarify words and phrases, highlight main idea,
summarize main ideas and important detail, and ask and answer the questions. The
researchers found that CSR was effective in improving reading comprehension for most of
the students with low learning abilities.

14. Bryant et al., 2000. CSR research has also been combined with other approaches to
address the range of skills needed for reading competence in middle school and high
school. In a study of 60 sixth-grade middle school students with varied reading levels in
inclusive classrooms, a multi component reading intervention was used to address the
range of reading. CSR was used in conjunction with two other research-based strategies:
Word Identification and Partner Reading Results revealed that students with low learning
abilities significantly improved their word identification and fluency, but not reading
comprehension.

15. Klingner, Vaughn & Schumm ( 2000) implemented CSR with fourth graders with a
wide range of reading levels. Students in the CSR group significantly outperformed those
in the control group on comprehension. In a subsequent study, fifth-grade students were
taught to apply CSR by trained classroom teachers during English as a Second Language
(ESL) science classes. It was shown that the students significantly increased their
vocabulary from pre- to post-testing. Furthermore, students in CSR groups spent greater
amounts of time engaged in academic-related strategic discussion and assisted one and
another while using CSR.

16. Klingner, et (1998) CSR was implemented in conjunction with other research-based
reading strategies (writing process approach, class wide peer tutoring, making words) for
elementary students with low learning abilities (Klingner, Vaughn, Hughes, Schumm, &
Elbaum, 1998). In this study, trained teachers implemented CSR with their students. The

66

Vol 4, No.1, 2012

results also confirmed that use of CSR has resulted in improvement in reading
comprehension and vocabulary for elementary students.

17. Fan (2010) conducted a research on 110 Taiwanese students from two intact classes. The
purpose of the research is to investigate the impact of CSR towards EFL Taiwanese
students’ reading comprehension. Mixed method is used as a research design. The
questionnaire and standardised reading pre-test, post test and interviews were used to
gather the data. The research findings showed that the statistical results confirm CSR is
more effective than the traditional teacher-led reading approach which focuses on
vocabulary and grammar teaching in improving the students’ reading comprehension
scores. The findings indicated that CSR had a positive effect on the Taiwanese university
learners’ reading comprehension particularly in relation to the comprehension questions on
getting the main idea and finding the supporting details. Moreover, a detailed analysis of
qualitative data suggested that the learners with relatively homogenous English ability
provided collaborative scaffolding for text comprehension through co-construction,
elaboration, and appeal for assistance, corrective feedback and prompts.

18. Wang (2008) examined the effect of CSR on sixth-graders’ reading comprehension and
learning attitudes. Sixty-two pupils from two intact classes were divided into a control
group receiving the traditional teacher-directed reading instruction and an experimental
group of CSR instruction in combination with story retelling strategy training for fifteen
weeks. Multiple measures were used in this study. They consisted of a questionnaire of
English learning background, pre-tests and post-tests of reading comprehension, five post-
tests administered after reading stories, a story reading post-test which students had not
ever read in the class and a questionnaire of students’ attitudes towards the intervention. It
was reported that modified CSR approach was effective in fostering her six-graders’
overall reading comprehension and understanding of the meaning of the stories, and that it
increased their English learning motivation.

19. Huang (2004) investigated the feasibility and efficacy of CSR in inquiry-based pedagogy
to improve high school students’ strategic reading and develop their critical thinking
ability. This study involved 2 classes of 42 EFL learners. The quantitative findings derived
from researcher-made periodic achievement tests showed that the CSR group did not
significantly outperform the control group. However, qualitative data analysis of the post-
reading writing samples indicated that CSR was facilitative in developing students’ critical
thinking and writing ability in terms of content and idea exploration. In addition, a
majority of the participants self-reports from the post-intervention questionnaire
considered that CSR was an effective method to promote their autonomous learning and
social skills.

20. Fitri (2010) investigated the effectiveness of Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR)
towards the students’ reading comprehension achievement by using quasi experimental
research design with 56 intact students of PGSD Suryalaya, west Java, Indonesia. The
result showed that means score between CSR and conventional reading activities are
significantly different. It means that the CSR is effective to increase students’ reading
comprehension achievement.

4. Conclusion

67

Vol 4, No.1, 2012

Successful readers use variety of strategies in understanding the texts. The more complex
the texts are, the more strategies are supposed to be implemented. Dogan (2002) points out that
good readers use a lot of strategies before, during and after reading. It is believed that the reading
strategies can be effective tools to achieve the learning target. Therefore, EFL and EFL education
practitioners as well as curriculum stakeholders in particular should take these issues into high
priority in teaching and learning program at any level of education.

References

Fitri, A. (2010), “The Effectiveness of Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR) on the Reading
Comprehension Achievement of the Fourth Semester Students of PGSD Suryalaya, West Java,
Indonesia”, Unpublished Thesis, Post Graduate Program of UM, http://karyai-
lmiah.um.ac.id/index.php/disertasi/article/view/8238/0 [accessed on Dec 2010].

Asraf, R.M., Ahmad, (2004), “Making Sense of Text: Strategies Used by Good Average Readers”,
Reading matrix, pp. 26-37, http://www.Readingmatrix.com/articles/asrafahmad/article/pdf [accessed
on Dec 2010].

Dhieb, H.N. (2006), “Applying Metacognitive Strategies to Skimming Research Articles in an ESP
Context”. Language Teaching Forum, (1).

Dogan, B. (2002), “The Effect of Strategy Teaching on Reading Comprehension Motivation and
Retention in Cooperative and Traditional Classes”, Unpublished Doctorate thesis, Dokuz Eylul
University.

ElKaumy, A.S.K. (2004), “Metacognition and reading comprehension: current trends in theory and
research”, [online at www.eric.ed.gov [accessed on Sep 2011].

Fan, Y.C. (2010), “Implementing Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR) in an EFL Context in
Taiwan”, Unpublished Thesis. http://Ira.le.ac.uk/handle/2381/434 [accessed on Sep 2011].

Huang, C.Y. (2004), “Think to Win: An Inquiry-based Approach via Collaborative Strategic Reading
Technique to Teach Reading in a Senior High EFL Classroom”

Imtiaz, S. (2004), “Metacognitive Strategies of Reading among ESL Learner”, South Asian Language
Review, XIV.

Johnson, D.W & Johnson, R.T. (1987), “Learning and Alone (2nd edition)”, Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.

Klinger, J.K., & Vaughn, S. (1998), “Using CSR”, http://www.idonline.org/id in depth/teaching
technique/collab reading.html [accessed on June 2010].

Klinger, J.K., Vaughn, S. & Schumn, J.S. (1998). Collaborative Strategic Reading during Social
Studies in Heterogeneous Fourth Grade Classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 99(1), pp. 3-22.

Levine, A., Ferenz, O., & Reves, T. (2000), “EFL Academic Reading and Modern Technology. How
Can We Turn Our Students into Independent Critical Readers?”, TESL-EJ, 4(4), [online at http://www-
writing.berkley.edu/TESL-EJ/ej16/al.html accessed on Oct 2011].

68

Vol 4, No.1, 2012

Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C.A. (2002), “Assessing Students’ Metacognitive Awareness of Reading
Strategy, Journal of Education Psychology, 94(2), pp. 249-259. In Mokhtari, K., & Richard, C. (2004),
Investigating the strategic reading process of first and second language readers in two different cultural
contexts. System, 32(4), pp. 379-394.

Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (2001), “Measuring ESL Students’ Awareness of Reading Strategies”,
Journal of Developmental Education, 25(3), pp. 2-10.

McNamara, D.S. (ed.) (2007), “Reading Comprehension Strategies: Theories, Intervention, and
Technologies”, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Monos, K. (2005), “A Study of the English Reading Strategies of Hungarian University Students with
Implication for Reading Instruction in an Academic Context”.
Murphy, P.K., Wilkinson, I.A.G., Soler, A.O., Hennessey, M.N., & Alexander, J.F. (2009),
“Examining the Effect of Classroom Discussion on Students’ Comprehension of Text: A Meta-
analysis”, Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, pp. 740-64.
National Reading Panel (2000), “Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the
Scientific Research Literature on Reading and its Implication for Reading Instructions”, Washington,
DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
Paran, S. (1996), “Reading in EFL: Fact and Fiction”, ELT Journal, 50.
Pressley, M., & Harris, K.R. (2006), “Cognitive Strategies Instruction: From Basic Research to
Classroom Instruction”. In Andreassen, R., & Braten, I. (2011), Implementation and Effects of Explicit
Reading Comprehension Instruction in Fifth-Grade Classrooms. Internet journal. [online at
http//www.elseviers.com/locate/learninstruc accessed on Oct 2011].

Phakiti, A. (2006), “Modeling Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies and their Relationship to EFL
Reading Test Performance”, Melbourne papers in language testing, 1, pp. 53-95.

Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001), “Differences in the Metacognitive Awareness of Reading
Strategies among Native and Non-native Speakers”, System, 29(4).

Slavin, R.E. (1995), “Cooperative Learning Theory, Research and Practice”, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Wang, T.H. (2008), “The Effect of Modified Collaborative Strategic Reading on EFL Learners’
Reading Comprehension”, Unpublished MA dissertation, National Changhua University of Education,
Changhua, Taiwan.

Wosley, T.D. (2010), “Reading skills and strategies defined”, Internet journal, [ online at http//:
www.suite101.com/profile.cfm/twelsey accessed on Nov 2010].

69

Collaborative strategic reading (csr) within cognitive and metacognitive strategies perspectives

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (7)

Similar to Collaborative strategic reading (csr) within cognitive and metacognitive strategies perspectives (20)

More from Alexander Decker (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Collaborative strategic reading (csr) within cognitive and metacognitive strategies perspectives