1

Research Synthesis

Lacey S. Suey

University of Nevada Las Vegas

CIL 699: Literacy Research Seminar

Dr. April Douglass

December 7, 2021
 2

Reasoning and Importance

Adam Fletcher, an expert on student involvement, has a powerful quote, “Meaningful

student involvement is the process of engaging students as partners in every facet of school

change for the purpose strengthening their commitment to education, community, and

democracy.” I believe that students who are engaged during instruction are able to make

meaning of their world, think critically, and become leaders. With that being said, the topic I

have chosen to research is literacy teaching strategies that are most engaging for students. This

topic is important to me because it is imperative that I am involving my students in their

learning. If students are not involved, they are less likely to retain information. In my opinion,

literacy is an area that I struggle with when trying to make lessons engaging. I wanted to research

more about this topic, so that I could share it with other teachers. Teachers are always looking

for creative and innovative ways to engage their students in instruction because not all students

learn the same way. The curriculum that teachers are handed are not always the most engaging,

but there are ways that they can make it their own and provide authentic learning experiences for

their students.

Overview

For my research synthesis, I am focusing specifically on engagement strategies in

literacy. The broader topic would be engagement strategies in general, or the idea that learning

should be engaging, relatable, and contagious. I am using the broader topic as background to

move into more specific areas of research, which are instructional strategies for literacy. I found

a few different articles that identified effective literacy instructional strategies, such as the use of

visuals, graphic organizers, relevant texts, real-world experiences, collaborative learning, forms

of self-expression, differentiation, modeling, and teacher support.

Synthesis

“Engagement is a vital component of classroom instruction because it is explicitly

associated with reading achievement” (Parsons, et al. 2015, p. 224). If students are engaged in

instruction, they will be able to apply what they know in different contexts. The article Students’

Engagement in Literacy Tasks identified specific aspects associated with student engagement,

which include authenticity, collaboration, choice, appropriate challenge, and continuous learning.

If a task is authentic, students can apply it in real-world situations, which encourages student

engagement. Guthrie and Humenick (2004), “found collaboration and choice as two of only four

components of classroom instruction to have significant empirical support for motivating

students to read” (Parsons, et al., 2015, p. 225). Most students enjoy working together and their

“…collaborations enhance their understanding, confidence, and regulation of learning” (Parsons,

et al., 2015, p. 225). Also, it is important to provide choice for students because as the teacher,

you are not only differentiating instruction, but you are also allowing students to choose what

they are confident with to produce authentic work. Pressley and Allington (2015) explained,

“The data are overwhelming that tasks a little bit beyond the learner’s current competence level

are motivating” (Parsons, et al., 2015, p. 225). This reminds me of Vygotsky’s Social

Constructivism theory because a learner’s Zone of Proximal Development is what the student

can do with some guidance. Lastly, tasks that are sustained over time are advantageous for

student engagement. According to Barron and Darling-Hammond (2008), “As students become

engaged as producers of complex products and organizers of long-term projects, they begin to

recognize within themselves capacities that lead them to identify as authors, designers, critical

consumers, and analysts. These identities, or possible selves, in turn can lead to development of

learning goals that support continued engagement” (Parsons, et al., 2015, p. 225). Just as I have
 4

stated before, when students are interested or engaged in instruction, they are able to think

critically, and become leaders.

The next article, 10 Content-Area Literacy Strategies for Art, Mathematics, Music, and

Physical Education discusses the importance of using literacy in content-area instruction.

According to Vacca, Vacca, and Mraz (2011), “Content area literacy is the ability to use

listening, speaking, reading, writing, and viewing to gain information within a specific

discipline” (Ming, 2012, p. 214). This article provides examples of how each of the literacy

strategies can be used in other content areas. There are ten content-area literacy strategies, but I

am going to focus on four of them, including collaboration, discussion, graphic organizers, and

modeling think alouds. The first strategy, collaboration, focuses on putting students into groups.

According to Ming (2012), “When students are deliberately placed into groups, the teacher

accounts for students’ ability levels, their personal characteristics, and the task that is expected of

them as they work with group members” (p. 216). When students are collaborating, they are

working together toward a specific end goal. The second strategy, discussion, allows students

and teachers to participate in discourse on a topic. According to Ming (2012), “This ensures that

students are actively engaged in learning, and teachers serve as facilitators instead of dispensers

of knowledge” (p. 216). Since the teacher is serving as a facilitator, this fits with the Unfoldment

Theory. Rosseau believed that “…adults should intervene as little as possible in children’s

education and instead just let children “unfold” (Tracey & Morrow, 2017, p. 25). The third

strategy, using graphic organizers, allows information to be arranged in a visual way. Ming

(2012) states that a graphic organizer, “is used before, during, and after instruction by students

and teachers to demonstrate meaningful connections across concepts” (p. 216). Graphic

organizers scaffold learning for students, as well as show relationships among concepts. Graphic
 5

organizers can be linked to the theory of Associationism because they can build on students’

prior knowledge. The final strategy I will be focusing on is modeling think alouds. When

teachers do a think aloud, they are modeling their thought processes for students. “As teachers

read, model, and engage in instructional activities, they verbalize exactly what is going on in

their minds” (Ming, 2012, p. 217). According to Bock and Israel (2004), “This practice helps

students understand what proficient learners should think about as they actively seek

information” (Ming, 2012, p. 217). The idea of modeling aligns with the Social Learning Theory

because students learn from others, in this case, the teacher. Just as Tracey and Morrow (2017)

state, “When teachers read aloud from big books, lead a morning message, or implement a think-

aloud strategy, they are hoping that their students will engage in observational learning” (p. 172).

Another article titled, Enhancing Students’ Engagement: Report of a 3-Year Intervention

with Middle School Teachers identified the sources of academic engagement which included,

belongingness, competence, autonomy, and meaningfulness. According to Martin & Dowson

(2009), “In school, perceptions of belonging with both teachers and peers predict greater

engagement” (Turner, et al., 2014, p. 1199). The authors provided a couple of ways for teachers

to promote belongingness, which included modeling and encouraging mutual respect towards

others as well as teaching students to work collaboratively and productively. Many studies have

“confirmed that when students are working productively in cooperative groups, they are more

likely to participate, to develop positive attitudes towards others and toward content, and to exert

more effort” (Turner, et al., 2014, p. 1199). Also, through group work, studies have shown that

students think deeply about the content, ask questions about the content, and provide

explanations that are meaningful. The next source of academic engagement is competence.

“Competence is the need to be successful in meeting one’s goals and in interacting with the
 6

environment” (Turner, et al., 2014, p. 1199). The authors explained that self-efficacy is a major

component of competence. According to Schunk & Mullen (2012) and Schunk & Pajares (2005),

“Students who report higher self-efficacy are more likely to set learning goals, use effective

learning strategies, monitor comprehension, and evaluate goal progress, leading to greater

engagement” (Turner, et al., 2014, p. 1200). The instructional practices that the authors provided

include “appropriately challenging tasks and scaffolding and informational feedback, such as

open-ended questions and using formative assessment for self-monitoring and evaluation” and

“demonstrating that mistakes are informational, encouraging students’ effort and persistence”

(Turner, et al., 2014, p. 1200). Appropriately challenging tasks and scaffolding relate to

Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development because “children learn during experiences within

the zone of proximal development as a result of others’ scaffolding” (Tracey & Morrow, 2017, p.

168). The next source of academic engagement is autonomy. “Autonomy is the psychological

need to behave according to one’s interests and values” (Turner, et al., 2014, p. 1200). According

to Jang, Kim & Reeve (2012), “In a longitudinal study of eighth-grade students, early-semester

perceived autonomy support from teachers predicted increased midsemester student autonomy

need satisfaction, which then predicted increased end-of-semester engagement and achievement”

(Turner, et al., 2014, p. 1200). “Strategies for supporting autonomy include nurturing students’

inner motivational resources (i.e., interest, competence, or relatedness), providing explanatory

rationales for tasks, using noncontrolling language, allowing students the time they need to learn,

and acknowledging the student’s perspective” (Turner, et al., 2014, p. 1200). When reviewing

these specific strategies, I thought of Dewey’s theory of Inquiry Learning, which was based on

the Unfoldment Theory. According to Cobb & Kallus (2011), “…Inquiry Learning also

emphasizes a problem-based learning approach to education, central to which was motivating

learner’s interest” (Tracey & Morrow, 2017, p. 58). John Dewey believed that the student should

actively construct his or her learning with the teacher as a facilitator. The last source of academic

engagement that these authors discuss is meaningfulness. “Meaningful learning involves

developing interest in or appreciation for content and experiencing its authentic application”

(Turner, et al., 2014, p. 1200). When I think about meaningful or authentic learning, I think

about students being able to apply their knowledge in real-world situations. Again, students will

deem content as meaningful if it is related to their interests or values. When thinking about

instructional strategies that can provide meaningful experiences, Newmann, et al. (1996)

suggests “building on students’ prior knowledge, providing opportunities for students to do

complex thinking by addressing the central ideas of a subject, and offering opportunities for

students to participate in extended conversations that build shared understanding” (Turner, et al.,

2014, p. 1201). These ideas can be aligned with the theory of Associationism because

“Associationism examines how events or ideas can become associated with one another in the

mind, to result in a form of learning” (Tracey & Morrow, 2017, p. 20). Building on prior

knowledge and facilitating discussion allows students to connect what they know with new ideas.

The last article titled, Teaching for Literacy Engagement, highlights some engaging

instructional strategies including choice, collaboration, and discourse. Guthrie (2004) makes the

point that allowing students to make choices within the classroom affects their investment in

learning. Guthrie (2004) states, “With minor forms of ownership, over their literacy, students dig

deeper for meaning, monitor their understanding, and express their newfound knowledge more

elaborately than do students without these choices and decisions about their learning” (p. 12).

When students are interested and invested in their learning, it becomes authentic and meaningful

for them. The next two strategies are collaboration and the use of discourse in the classroom.
 8

According to Guthrie (2004), “Motivation for using comprehension strategies and reading deeply

is increased when students are afforded opportunities to share their questions, opinions, and

newly gained information” (p. 13). When students work collaboratively in groups, they have the

opportunity to view other perspectives and gain new knowledge. These strategies of choice,

collaboration, and discourse can also be aligned with the Whole Language Theory. According to

Bergeron (1990), “This concept includes the use of real literature and writing in the context of

meaningful, functional, and cooperative experiences in order to develop students’ motivation and

interest in the process of learning” (Tracey & Morrow, 2017, p. 67). The Whole Language

Theory builds on the motivational characteristics of the Unfoldment Theory. This is important to

note because the Unfoldment Theory focuses on learners’ interests and autonomy.

Conclusion

Some of the major findings from the articles I have reviewed are that some of the

engagement strategies discussed are the same. The major ideas from these articles are that

authenticity, collaboration, choice, appropriate challenge, discussion, modeling, and

belongingness are all key components to engaging students in literacy. In order for teachers to

make tasks or lessons authentic, they need to build on students’ prior knowledge, identify

students’ interests, and provide real-life experiences. Not all collaboration between students is

effective or productive. Teachers need to be strategic when putting students into groups.

Teachers can put students into groups based on academic ability levels, interests, learning styles,

etc. Giving students choices in their learning can be motivating and empowering for them;

however, teachers need to create choices which allow students to feel like the decision they are

making impacts their learning. Teachers need to challenge their students in an appropriate way,

meaning that tasks should not be too easy or too hard. Tasks should be within the student’s zone
 9

of proximal development and instruction should be scaffolded as necessary. Teachers should

differentiate learning for students. Discussion and discourse should be productive and on-topic.

During discussions, students can view other perspectives and gain new knowledge. Teachers

need to model the behavior desired for students. Modeling a read aloud with expression, a

writing sample, or a think aloud for students shows them what they need in order to be

successful. Lastly, when students are in a safe environment and feel a sense of belongingness,

they will be more likely to take risks within the classroom. Teachers should create a safe

environment by learning students’ values and interests.

References

Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Teaching for literacy engagement. Journal of Literacy Research, 36(1), 1–

30. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15548430jlr3601_2

MING, K. (2012). 10 content-area literacy strategies for art, mathematics, music, and physical

education. The Clearing House, 85(6), 213–220. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23268430

Parsons, S. A., Malloy, J. A., Parsons, A. W., & Burrowbridge, S. C. (2015). Students’

engagement in literacy tasks. The Reading Teacher, 69(2), 223–231.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/24575053

Tracey, D.H., & Morrow, L.M. (2017). Lenses on reading: An introduction to theories and

models. (3rd ed.). The Guilford Press.

Turner, J. C., Christensen, A., Kackar-Cam, H. Z., Trucano, M., & Fulmer, S. M. (2014).

Enhancing students’ engagement: Report of a 3-year intervention with middle school

teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 51(6), 1195–1226.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/24546715