THE EFFECTIVENESS OF RECIPROCAL TEACHING AS READING COMPREHENSION INTERVENTION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Abstract

Background and Purpose: This paper presents a comprehensive review of the research on reading comprehension interventions for ESL learners. Although numerous reviews have reported the effectiveness of reciprocal teaching in improving reading outcomes, only few reviews focused on the use of these strategies in ESL contexts. Hence, this review identified, evaluated and synthesized relevant literature in search of the effectiveness of reciprocal teaching and the features that are associated with improved reading comprehension outcomes.

 

Methodology: Guided by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), a thorough search was performed on five major databases using the search terms “reciprocal teaching” or “reciprocal reading” and “reading comprehension” or “text comprehension”.

 

Findings: The comprehensive search resulted in a total of 18 articles. The analysis coded these articles  into eight main themes with four main themes concentrated on the features of the reciprocal teaching interventions: (a) purposes, (b) learning environment, (c) comprehension-monitoring, and (d) scaffolding, and another four main themes on the outcomes of the interventions: (e) results, (f) comprehension outcome measures, (g) reading strategies, and (h) conceptual change.

 

Contributions: Conclusively, reciprocal teaching fulfilled the key features of effective intervention as significant gains were mostly observed in the research using reciprocal teaching as intervention. The versatility of reciprocal teaching makes the technique adaptable to learners of varying backgrounds, ages and levels of education.

 

Keywords: reciprocal teaching, reading strategies, interventions, ESL learners, comprehension.

 

Cite as: Dew, T. P., Swanto, S., & Pang, V. (2021). The effectiveness of reciprocal teaching as reading comprehension intervention: A systematic review.  Journal of Nusantara Studies, 6(2), 156-184. http://dx.doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol6iss2pp156-184

Author Biographies

Ting Pick Dew, Faculty of Psychology and Education, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Jalan UMS, 88400, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia

Ting Pick Dew is currently a TESL PhD student at the Faculty of Psychology and Education, Universiti Malaysia Sabah with a passion for module development, teaching pedagogies and educational evaluation.

Suyansah Swanto , Faculty of Psychology and Education, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Jalan UMS, 88400, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia

Suyansah Swanto is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Psychology and Education, Universiti Malaysia Sabah. He holds a PhD in TESL from the University of Nottingham. His research interests are language teacher education, ESL pedagogy and, innovations and intervention in second language teaching.

Vincent Pang, Faculty of Psychology and Education, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Jalan UMS, 88400, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia

Vincent Pang is a Professor at the Faculty of Psychology and Education, Universiti Malaysia Sabah. He is also a Professorial Fellow of the School of Education, Charles Darwin University, Australia. He is also an editor of the Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction and has authored more than 100 academic publications.

References

Alfassi, M., Weiss, I., & Lifshitz, H. (2009). The efficacy of reciprocal teaching in fostering the reading literacy of students with intellectual disabilities. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 24(3), 291–305.

AlSaraireh, M. Y., & Ku Hamid, K. M. N. (2016). The effect of the reciprocal teaching model on developing Jordanian students' reading comprehension at Mutah University. International Journal of Linguistics, 8(6), 69-93.

Anderson, N. J. (1999). Exploring second language reading: Issues and strategies. Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Bemboom, C. M., & McMaster, K. I. (2013). A comparison of lower-and-higher resourced-tier 2 reading interventions for high school sophomores. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28(1), 184-195.

Berrang-Ford, L., Pearce, T., & Ford, J. D. (2015). Systematic review approaches for climate change adaptation research. Regional Environmental Change, 15(5), 755–769.

Cain, K. (2010). Reading development and difficulties. BPS Blackwell.

Carrell, P. L. (1989). Metacognitive awareness and second language reading. The Modern Language Journal, 73(2), 121-134.

Carter, C. J. (1997). Why reciprocal teaching? Educational Leadership, 54(6), 64–68.

Chang, M. M., & Lan, S. W. (2019). Exploring undergraduate EFL students’ perceptions and experiences of a moodle-based reciprocal teaching application. The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 36(1), 29-44.

Choo, T. O. L., Eng, T. K., & Ahmad, N. (2011). Effects of reciprocal teaching strategies on reading comprehension. The Reading Matrix, 11(2), 140–149.

Cuartero, Z. R. R. (2018). Reciprocal cooperative learning in the teaching of reading comprehension. International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development, 3(1), 526-547.

Elbaum, B., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M. T., & Watson Moody, S. (2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 92(1), 605-619.

Faggella-Luby, M., & Wardwell, M. (2011). RTI in a middle school: Findings and practical implications of a tier 2 reading comprehension study. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34(1), 35-49.

Gorlewski, J., & Moon, S. (2011). Research for the classroom - Trying on reciprocal teaching: A novice's struggle becomes a veteran's success. The English Journal, 101(2), 97-100.

Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 375-406.

Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Research on teaching reading. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 44-69.

Gu, P. Y. (2003). Fine brush and freehand: The vocabulary-learning art of two successful Chinese EFL learners. TESOL Quarterly, 37(1), 73-104.

Haddaway, N. R., Collins, A. M., Coughlin, D., & Kirk, S. (2015). The role of google scholar in evidence reviews and its applicability to grey literature searching. PLoS ONE, 10(9), e0138237.

Hamdani, B. (2020). Teaching reading through reciprocal teaching method. Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature, & Linguistics, 7(1), 23-34.

Huang, C. T., & Yang, S. C. (2015). Effects of online reciprocal teaching on reading strategies, comprehension, self-efficacy, and motivation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 52(3), 381–407.

Humaira, R., Mikeng, D., & Ting, S. H. (2015). Reciprocal teaching and comprehension of struggling readers. International Journal of Education, 7(1), 131-142.

Izadi, M., & Nowrouzi, H. (2016). Reciprocal teaching and emotional intelligence: A study of Iranian EFL learners' reading comprehension. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 16(1), 133-147.

Kamdideh, Z., Vaseghi, R., & Talatifard, S. (2019). The effects of 'reciprocal teaching of reading' and 'cooperative integrated reading and composition' on the reading comprehension of Iranian EFL intermediate students. Theory and Practice in
Language Studies, 9(1), 1111-1117.

Klingner, J. K., & Vaughn, S. (1996). Reciprocal teaching of reading comprehension strategies for students with learning disabilities who use English as a second language. The Elementary School Journal, 96(3), 275-293.

Komariah, E., Ramadhona, P. A. R., & Silviyanti, T. M. (2015). Improving reading comprehension through reciprocal teaching method. Studies in English Language and Education, 2(2), 99-115.

Lowry, P. B., Roberts, T. L., Romano, N. C., Cheney, P. D., & Hightower, R. T. (2006). The impact of group size and social presence on small-group communication: Does computer-mediated communication make a difference? Small Group Research,
37(6), 631–661.

Mallett, R., Hagen-Zanker, J., Slater, R., & Duvendack, M. (2012). The benefits and challenges of using systematic reviews in international development research. Journal of Development Effectiveness, 4(3), 445-455.

Mason, L. H. (2004). Explicit self-regulated strategy development versus reciprocal questioning: Effects on expository reading comprehension among struggling readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 283-296.

McAllum, R. (2014). Reciprocal teaching: Critical review on practice. Kairaranga, 15(1), 26-35.

McBee, M. (2010). Examining the probability of identification for gifted programs for students in Georgia elementary schools: A multilevel path analysis study. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54(4), 283–297.

McWhorter, K. T. (1998). Academic reading. Longman.

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and MetaAnalyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med, 6(7), e1000097.

Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259.

Moore, P. (1988). Reciprocal teaching and reading comprehension: A review. Journal of Research in Reading (1988), 11(1), 3-14.

Muijselaar, M., Swart, N., Steenbeek-Planting, E., Droop, M., Verhoeven, L., & de Jong. P. (2017). The effect of a strategy training on reading comprehension in fourth-grade students. The Journal of Educational Research, 111(6), 690-703.

Navaie, L. A. (2018). The effects of reciprocal teaching on reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 5(4), 26-30.

Nielsen, D. C., & Friesen, L. D. (2012). A study of the effectiveness of a small-group intervention on the vocabulary and narrative development of at-risk kindergarten children. Reading Psychology, 33(1), 269-299.

Ningrum, A. W. C., & Chakim, N. (2020). Enhancing EFL students' reading comprehension using online-based reciprocal teaching strategy. RETAIN, 8(4), 61-72.

Oczkus, L. D. (2003). Reciprocal teaching at work: Strategies for improving reading comprehension. International Reading Association.

OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 results (Volume I): Excellence and equity in education. PISA, OECD Publishing.

OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 results (volume I): What students know and can do. PISA, OECD Publishing.

Okkinga, M., Steensel, R. V., Van Gelderen, A. J. S., & Sleegers, P. J. C. (2016). Effects of reciprocal teaching on reading comprehension of low-achieving adolescents: The importance of specific teacher skills. Journal of Research in Reading, 41(1), 20–
41.

Park, H. (2008). Critical review: The use of reciprocal teaching to improve reading comprehension of both normal-learning and learning disabled individuals in reading to learn stage. www.uwo.ca/fhs/lwm/ebp/reviews/.../Park,H.pdf

Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(1), 117-175.

Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Blackwell Publications.

Phantharakphong, P., & Pothitha, S. (2014). Development of English reading comprehension by using concept maps. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116(1), 497-501.

Pilten, G. (2016). The evaluation of effectiveness of reciprocal teaching strategies on comprehension of expository texts. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(10), 232-247.

Pollock, P. H., Hamann, K., & Wilson, B. M. (2011). Learning through discussions: Comparing the benefits of small-group and large-class settings. Journal of Political Science Education, 7(1), 48-64.

Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 545–562). Lawrence Erlbaum.

Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.

Qutob, M. M. S. (2020). The influence of implementing reciprocal teaching in L2 classes on female students' perception of their reading skills and motivation to read. Arab World English Journal, 11(1) 432- 443.

RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Towards an R & D program in reading comprehension. http://www.rand.org/pubs/ monograph_reports/MR1465.html

Rawengwan, W., & Yawiloeng, R. (2020). Reciprocal teaching method for enhancing Thai EFL learners’ reading comprehension ability. Sripatum Review of Humanities and Social Sciences, 20(1), 105-123.

Ray, R. D., & Belden, N. (2007). Teaching college level content and reading comprehension skills simultaneously via an artificially intelligent adaptive computerized instructional system. The Psychological Record, 57(1), 201-218.

Robinson, P., & Lowe, J. (2015). Literature reviews vs systematic reviews. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 39(1), 103-103.

Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 479–530.

Schroth, S. T., & Helfer, J. A. (2009). Practitioners’ conceptions of academic talent and giftedness: Essential factors in deciding classroom and school composition. Journal of Advanced Academics, 20(3), 384–403.

Schünemann, N., Spörer, N., & Brunstein, J. C. (2013). Integrating self-regulation in whole-class reciprocal teaching: A moderator–mediator analysis of incremental effects on fifth graders’ reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 38(4), 289–305.

Seymour, J. R., & Osana, H. P. (2003). Reciprocal teaching procedures and principles: Two teachers’ developing understanding. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(1), 325-344.

Shaffril, H. A. M., Krauss, S. E., & Samsuddin, S. F. (2018). A systematic review on Asian's farmers' adaptation practices towards climate change. Science of the Total Environment, 644(1), 683-695.

Shaffril, H. A. M., Samsuddin, S. F., & Abu Samah, A. (2020). The ABC of systematic literature review: The basic methodological guidance for beginners. Quality & Quantity, 1(1), 1-28.

Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in metacognition awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 431-449.

Smagorinsky, P. (2001). If meaning is constructed, what is it made from? Toward a cultural theory of reading. Review of Educational Research, 71(2), 133–169.

Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Voeller, K. K. S., & Conway, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(1), 33–58.

Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356–367.

Tseng, S. S., & Yeh, H. C. (2017). Integrating reciprocal teaching in an online environment with an annotation feature to enhance low-achieving students’ English reading comprehension. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(6), 789-802.

Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., Kouzekanani, K., Bryant, D. P., Dickson, S., & Blozis, S. A. (2003). Reading instruction grouping for students with reading difficulties. Remedial and Special Education, 24(1), 301-315.

Westera, J., & Moore, D. (1995). Reciprocal teaching of reading comprehension in a New Zealand high school. Psychology in the Schools, 32(3), 225-232.

Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(1), 546-553.

Woolley, G. (2011). Reading comprehension: Assisting children with learning difficulties. Springer.

Yang, Y. F. (2010). Developing a reciprocal teaching/learning system for college remedial reading instruction. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1193-1201.

Yeh, H. C., Hung, H. T., & Chiang, Y. H. (2017). The use of online annotations in reading instruction and its impact on students’ reading progress and processes. ReCALL, 29(1), 1–17.
Published
2021-06-30
How to Cite
Dew, T. P., Swanto , S., & Pang, V. (2021). THE EFFECTIVENESS OF RECIPROCAL TEACHING AS READING COMPREHENSION INTERVENTION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW. Journal of Nusantara Studies (JONUS), 6(2), 156-184. https://doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol6iss2pp156-184