Peer feedback mediates the impact of self-regulation procedures on strategy use and reading comprehension in reciprocal teaching groups

The goal of this research was to highlight the role social regulatory processes play in making students' teamwork in reciprocal teaching (RT) groups (a classroom activity in which students take the teacher's role in small group reading sessions) effective. In addition to teamwork quality,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Instructional science 2017-08, Vol.45 (4), p.395-415
Hauptverfasser: Schünemann, Nina, Spörer, Nadine, Völlinger, Vanessa A., Brunstein, Joachim C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 415
container_issue 4
container_start_page 395
container_title Instructional science
container_volume 45
creator Schünemann, Nina
Spörer, Nadine
Völlinger, Vanessa A.
Brunstein, Joachim C.
description The goal of this research was to highlight the role social regulatory processes play in making students' teamwork in reciprocal teaching (RT) groups (a classroom activity in which students take the teacher's role in small group reading sessions) effective. In addition to teamwork quality, we expected peer feedback to be a key factor in enhancing students' reading comprehension achievements. Because previous research (Schünemann et al. in Contemp Educ Psychol 38:289–305, 2013) has shown that procedures of self-regulated learning (SRL) augment the effects of RT methods, we further assumed that such procedures would promote the quality of students' collaborative efforts. In a cluster-randomized trial, students in 12 fifth-grade classes practiced a strategic approach to reading either in a RT condition or in a RT + SRL condition. In one of the 14 sessions, students' interactive behavior was videotaped. Strategy use and reading comprehension were assessed at pretest, posttest, and maintenance. Performance differences between conditions were reliable only at maintenance. A multilevel mediation analysis showed that relative to RT students, RT + SRL students were better able to provide their teammates with informative feedback and organize their group work in a task-focused manner. Only feedback quality mediated the sustainability of treatment effects on strategy use and reading comprehension. In essence, this research suggests that effective reading comprehension trainings should integrate explicit instruction and practice in reading strategies, SRL, and focus on supportive peer processes in small groups with extensive instruction and practice in peer feedback.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s11251-017-9409-1
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1919073919</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1148139</ericid><jstor_id>26302947</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26302947</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-e00de18bfdec06763966c33bb0c841e93b1cf07544b48aef3a69ad56d1b9c1bb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkM1u1DAQxy0EEkvbB-CAZImz6UycxOsjqkqhqgQHerb8Mclm2U2C7Rz6BH1tHAVV3LiMNfp_jPVj7D3CJwRQ1wmxalAAKqFr0AJfsR02SgrUTfWa7QAqEHWl1Fv2LqUjAGC9hx17_kEUeUcUnPW_-JnCYDMlng_Eh_NsfeZTxxOdOhGpX042D9PI5zh5CkssxrKlHEumf-JLIm7HwCPZMIw999N5jnSgMa2hYSyCH9asPfFM1h9WUx-nZU6X7E1nT4mu_r4X7PHL7c-br-Lh-923m88PwssWsiCAQLh3XSAPrWqlblsvpXPg9zWSlg59B6qpa1fvLXXSttqGpg3otEfn5AX7uPWWb_xeKGVznJY4lpMGNWpQssziws3l45RSpM7McTjb-GQQzMrbbLxN4W1W3gZL5sOWoTj4F__tPRbQKNfOatNT0cae4j-X_196THmKL61VK6HStZJ_APnqmQg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1919073919</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Peer feedback mediates the impact of self-regulation procedures on strategy use and reading comprehension in reciprocal teaching groups</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Education Source</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Schünemann, Nina ; Spörer, Nadine ; Völlinger, Vanessa A. ; Brunstein, Joachim C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Schünemann, Nina ; Spörer, Nadine ; Völlinger, Vanessa A. ; Brunstein, Joachim C.</creatorcontrib><description>The goal of this research was to highlight the role social regulatory processes play in making students' teamwork in reciprocal teaching (RT) groups (a classroom activity in which students take the teacher's role in small group reading sessions) effective. In addition to teamwork quality, we expected peer feedback to be a key factor in enhancing students' reading comprehension achievements. Because previous research (Schünemann et al. in Contemp Educ Psychol 38:289–305, 2013) has shown that procedures of self-regulated learning (SRL) augment the effects of RT methods, we further assumed that such procedures would promote the quality of students' collaborative efforts. In a cluster-randomized trial, students in 12 fifth-grade classes practiced a strategic approach to reading either in a RT condition or in a RT + SRL condition. In one of the 14 sessions, students' interactive behavior was videotaped. Strategy use and reading comprehension were assessed at pretest, posttest, and maintenance. Performance differences between conditions were reliable only at maintenance. A multilevel mediation analysis showed that relative to RT students, RT + SRL students were better able to provide their teammates with informative feedback and organize their group work in a task-focused manner. Only feedback quality mediated the sustainability of treatment effects on strategy use and reading comprehension. In essence, this research suggests that effective reading comprehension trainings should integrate explicit instruction and practice in reading strategies, SRL, and focus on supportive peer processes in small groups with extensive instruction and practice in peer feedback.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0020-4277</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-1952</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11251-017-9409-1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer</publisher><subject>Classrooms ; Comparative Analysis ; Cooperation ; Cooperative Learning ; Education ; Educational Psychology ; Feedback ; Feedback (Response) ; Grade 5 ; Group Dynamics ; Group work ; Interaction ; Learning ; Learning and Instruction ; Maintenance ; ORIGINAL RESEARCH ; Pedagogic Psychology ; Peer review ; Peer Teaching ; Peers ; Pretests Posttests ; Randomized Controlled Trials ; Reading Comprehension ; Reading Instruction ; Reading Strategies ; Reciprocal Teaching ; Self regulation ; Small Group Instruction ; Small groups ; Student Role ; Students ; Teachers ; Teaching ; Teamwork ; Video Technology</subject><ispartof>Instructional science, 2017-08, Vol.45 (4), p.395-415</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media 2017</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017</rights><rights>Instructional Science is a copyright of Springer, 2017.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-e00de18bfdec06763966c33bb0c841e93b1cf07544b48aef3a69ad56d1b9c1bb3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-e00de18bfdec06763966c33bb0c841e93b1cf07544b48aef3a69ad56d1b9c1bb3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26302947$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26302947$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1148139$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schünemann, Nina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spörer, Nadine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Völlinger, Vanessa A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brunstein, Joachim C.</creatorcontrib><title>Peer feedback mediates the impact of self-regulation procedures on strategy use and reading comprehension in reciprocal teaching groups</title><title>Instructional science</title><addtitle>Instr Sci</addtitle><description>The goal of this research was to highlight the role social regulatory processes play in making students' teamwork in reciprocal teaching (RT) groups (a classroom activity in which students take the teacher's role in small group reading sessions) effective. In addition to teamwork quality, we expected peer feedback to be a key factor in enhancing students' reading comprehension achievements. Because previous research (Schünemann et al. in Contemp Educ Psychol 38:289–305, 2013) has shown that procedures of self-regulated learning (SRL) augment the effects of RT methods, we further assumed that such procedures would promote the quality of students' collaborative efforts. In a cluster-randomized trial, students in 12 fifth-grade classes practiced a strategic approach to reading either in a RT condition or in a RT + SRL condition. In one of the 14 sessions, students' interactive behavior was videotaped. Strategy use and reading comprehension were assessed at pretest, posttest, and maintenance. Performance differences between conditions were reliable only at maintenance. A multilevel mediation analysis showed that relative to RT students, RT + SRL students were better able to provide their teammates with informative feedback and organize their group work in a task-focused manner. Only feedback quality mediated the sustainability of treatment effects on strategy use and reading comprehension. In essence, this research suggests that effective reading comprehension trainings should integrate explicit instruction and practice in reading strategies, SRL, and focus on supportive peer processes in small groups with extensive instruction and practice in peer feedback.</description><subject>Classrooms</subject><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Cooperation</subject><subject>Cooperative Learning</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Educational Psychology</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Feedback (Response)</subject><subject>Grade 5</subject><subject>Group Dynamics</subject><subject>Group work</subject><subject>Interaction</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Learning and Instruction</subject><subject>Maintenance</subject><subject>ORIGINAL RESEARCH</subject><subject>Pedagogic Psychology</subject><subject>Peer review</subject><subject>Peer Teaching</subject><subject>Peers</subject><subject>Pretests Posttests</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials</subject><subject>Reading Comprehension</subject><subject>Reading Instruction</subject><subject>Reading Strategies</subject><subject>Reciprocal Teaching</subject><subject>Self regulation</subject><subject>Small Group Instruction</subject><subject>Small groups</subject><subject>Student Role</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Teachers</subject><subject>Teaching</subject><subject>Teamwork</subject><subject>Video Technology</subject><issn>0020-4277</issn><issn>1573-1952</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkM1u1DAQxy0EEkvbB-CAZImz6UycxOsjqkqhqgQHerb8Mclm2U2C7Rz6BH1tHAVV3LiMNfp_jPVj7D3CJwRQ1wmxalAAKqFr0AJfsR02SgrUTfWa7QAqEHWl1Fv2LqUjAGC9hx17_kEUeUcUnPW_-JnCYDMlng_Eh_NsfeZTxxOdOhGpX042D9PI5zh5CkssxrKlHEumf-JLIm7HwCPZMIw999N5jnSgMa2hYSyCH9asPfFM1h9WUx-nZU6X7E1nT4mu_r4X7PHL7c-br-Lh-923m88PwssWsiCAQLh3XSAPrWqlblsvpXPg9zWSlg59B6qpa1fvLXXSttqGpg3otEfn5AX7uPWWb_xeKGVznJY4lpMGNWpQssziws3l45RSpM7McTjb-GQQzMrbbLxN4W1W3gZL5sOWoTj4F__tPRbQKNfOatNT0cae4j-X_196THmKL61VK6HStZJ_APnqmQg</recordid><startdate>20170801</startdate><enddate>20170801</enddate><creator>Schünemann, Nina</creator><creator>Spörer, Nadine</creator><creator>Völlinger, Vanessa A.</creator><creator>Brunstein, Joachim C.</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>8A4</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170801</creationdate><title>Peer feedback mediates the impact of self-regulation procedures on strategy use and reading comprehension in reciprocal teaching groups</title><author>Schünemann, Nina ; Spörer, Nadine ; Völlinger, Vanessa A. ; Brunstein, Joachim C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-e00de18bfdec06763966c33bb0c841e93b1cf07544b48aef3a69ad56d1b9c1bb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Classrooms</topic><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Cooperation</topic><topic>Cooperative Learning</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Educational Psychology</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Feedback (Response)</topic><topic>Grade 5</topic><topic>Group Dynamics</topic><topic>Group work</topic><topic>Interaction</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Learning and Instruction</topic><topic>Maintenance</topic><topic>ORIGINAL RESEARCH</topic><topic>Pedagogic Psychology</topic><topic>Peer review</topic><topic>Peer Teaching</topic><topic>Peers</topic><topic>Pretests Posttests</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials</topic><topic>Reading Comprehension</topic><topic>Reading Instruction</topic><topic>Reading Strategies</topic><topic>Reciprocal Teaching</topic><topic>Self regulation</topic><topic>Small Group Instruction</topic><topic>Small groups</topic><topic>Student Role</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Teachers</topic><topic>Teaching</topic><topic>Teamwork</topic><topic>Video Technology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schünemann, Nina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spörer, Nadine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Völlinger, Vanessa A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brunstein, Joachim C.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Periodicals</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Instructional science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schünemann, Nina</au><au>Spörer, Nadine</au><au>Völlinger, Vanessa A.</au><au>Brunstein, Joachim C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1148139</ericid><atitle>Peer feedback mediates the impact of self-regulation procedures on strategy use and reading comprehension in reciprocal teaching groups</atitle><jtitle>Instructional science</jtitle><stitle>Instr Sci</stitle><date>2017-08-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>45</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>395</spage><epage>415</epage><pages>395-415</pages><issn>0020-4277</issn><eissn>1573-1952</eissn><abstract>The goal of this research was to highlight the role social regulatory processes play in making students' teamwork in reciprocal teaching (RT) groups (a classroom activity in which students take the teacher's role in small group reading sessions) effective. In addition to teamwork quality, we expected peer feedback to be a key factor in enhancing students' reading comprehension achievements. Because previous research (Schünemann et al. in Contemp Educ Psychol 38:289–305, 2013) has shown that procedures of self-regulated learning (SRL) augment the effects of RT methods, we further assumed that such procedures would promote the quality of students' collaborative efforts. In a cluster-randomized trial, students in 12 fifth-grade classes practiced a strategic approach to reading either in a RT condition or in a RT + SRL condition. In one of the 14 sessions, students' interactive behavior was videotaped. Strategy use and reading comprehension were assessed at pretest, posttest, and maintenance. Performance differences between conditions were reliable only at maintenance. A multilevel mediation analysis showed that relative to RT students, RT + SRL students were better able to provide their teammates with informative feedback and organize their group work in a task-focused manner. Only feedback quality mediated the sustainability of treatment effects on strategy use and reading comprehension. In essence, this research suggests that effective reading comprehension trainings should integrate explicit instruction and practice in reading strategies, SRL, and focus on supportive peer processes in small groups with extensive instruction and practice in peer feedback.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer</pub><doi>10.1007/s11251-017-9409-1</doi><tpages>21</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0020-4277
ispartof Instructional science, 2017-08, Vol.45 (4), p.395-415
issn 0020-4277
1573-1952
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1919073919
source Jstor Complete Legacy; Education Source; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
subjects Classrooms
Comparative Analysis
Cooperation
Cooperative Learning
Education
Educational Psychology
Feedback
Feedback (Response)
Grade 5
Group Dynamics
Group work
Interaction
Learning
Learning and Instruction
Maintenance
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Pedagogic Psychology
Peer review
Peer Teaching
Peers
Pretests Posttests
Randomized Controlled Trials
Reading Comprehension
Reading Instruction
Reading Strategies
Reciprocal Teaching
Self regulation
Small Group Instruction
Small groups
Student Role
Students
Teachers
Teaching
Teamwork
Video Technology
title Peer feedback mediates the impact of self-regulation procedures on strategy use and reading comprehension in reciprocal teaching groups
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T17%3A18%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Peer%20feedback%20mediates%20the%20impact%20of%20self-regulation%20procedures%20on%20strategy%20use%20and%20reading%20comprehension%20in%20reciprocal%20teaching%20groups&rft.jtitle=Instructional%20science&rft.au=Sch%C3%BCnemann,%20Nina&rft.date=2017-08-01&rft.volume=45&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=395&rft.epage=415&rft.pages=395-415&rft.issn=0020-4277&rft.eissn=1573-1952&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11251-017-9409-1&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E26302947%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1919073919&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1148139&rft_jstor_id=26302947&rfr_iscdi=true