Prep Procedure (Pre-reading Strategy)

  • 430 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
430
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. SacrificeDLSU ENG616M: Methods of Teaching Reading and Writing
  • 2. Langer, 1981
  • 3. Prep Procedure• assesses students’ background knowledgeon a topic prior to starting a new text/topic• helps teacher assess students priorknowledge/ schema
  • 4. • generates interest in a topic• fosters group discussion and anawareness of the material to be coveredPrep Procedure
  • 5. Phases of PRePProcedure• Phase 1: The initial Associations with theConcept• Phase 2: Reflections on InitialAssociations• Phase 3: Reformulation of Knowledge
  • 6. Phase 1: The initial Associationswith the Concept• brainstorm what students knowabout the topic or the stimulus
  • 7. Phase 2: Reflections on InitialAssociations• reflect on initial associations• "What made you think this way?"• "Why did this response come to mind?"
  • 8. Phase 3: Reformulation of Knowledge• verbalize associations that have beenelaborated or changed• reformulate prior knowledge in thelight of the new information
  • 9. Steps in using PReP Procedure1. Select a Stimulus2. Initial Association3. Reflection4. Reformation of Knowledge5. Evaluation of Response
  • 10. 5. Evaluation of Response• determines whether or not further conceptbuilding is needed prior to reading or teachinga text/ unit/chapter
  • 11. 5. Evaluation of ResponseMuch Knowledge-responses reflecting super-ordinate conceptsabout the topic or related topic, definitions,analogies(type of geographical region:: desert)
  • 12. 5. Evaluation of ResponseSome Knowledge-responses concerning examples andcharacteristics***comprehension may be adequate but shouldbe supported with activities that strengthenthe association of prior and new knowledge
  • 13. 5. Evaluation of ResponseLittle Knowledge-responses are based on word associationsrather than "concept associations"-responses are unrelated experiences***instructional activities are required to enrichstudents knowledge
  • 14. Why is it essential toassess students priorknowledge/ schema?
  • 15. • Prior knowledge affects how oneunderstands what he reads, and maybe what is most important inunderstanding what he reads.
  • 16. • Dialogue between the prior knowledgeand new information greatly increasesthe students ability to comprehend atext and to retain new information.
  • 17. • Reading process involves identification ofgenre, formal structure and topic:activate schemata and allows the readerto comprehend the text (Swales, 1990).
  • 18. • Text on a familiar topic is better recalledthan a similar text on an unfamiliar topic.(Johnson, 1983)
  • 19. What may happen if studentslack schema about the text?
  • 20. • Where relevant schemata are notactivated, some disruption incomprehension may occur.(Stott, 2001)
  • 21. • If the topic is outsidethe students baseknowledge orexperience, they areadrift to an unknownsea. (Aebersold, andField, 1997)
  • 22. • Some students mayovercompensate by reading in aslow, text-bound manner or bywild guessing.(Carell, 1988a: 101)
  • 23. • One of the most obvious reasons why aparticular content schema may fail to existfor a reader is that the schema is culturallyspecific and is not part of a particularreaders cultural background. (Carell andEisterhold, 1983:1980)
  • 24. • Does this mean that if students lackthe schema about the topic of thetext, one should not use the textanymore?
  • 25. No. Not really…• Schema Deficiencies could be usefulto provide texts which are developedfrom readers own experiences.
  • 26. No. Not really…• Help students build their backgroundknowledge on the topic prior toreading, through appropriate pre-readingactivities. (Carell, 1988)
  • 27. No. Not really…• "Prereading activities must accomplish bothgoals: building new background knowledge aswell as activating existing backgroundknowledge" (Carrell 1988b:248)
  • 28. Prep Procedure
  • 29. Finally,• These theories not only affect the wayinformation is interpreted, thus affectingcomprehension, but also continue tochange as new information is received.(Stott, 2001)
  • 30. Let’s Review!• What are the three phases of Prep Procedure?• How does one choose the stimuli for Phase 1?• What happens to the ideas of the students inthe third phase?
  • 31. Let’s Review!• How important is it to activate the students’schema before reading the text?• What can a teacher do when the students’schema is not enough for the text?
  • 32. Thank you!!!!
  • 33. References:• Langer, J. A. (1981). From theory to practice: A prereading plan.Journal of Reading, 25, 152-156.• Langer, J. A. (1984). Examining background knowledge and textcomprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 468-481.• Mather, N., & Jaffe, L. (2002). Woodcock-Johnson III:Reports, Recommendations, and Strategies. New York: John Wiley& Sons.• Porter, Karla, M.Ed., Pre-reading strategies, funded by the StateBoard of Education from Federal Funds, Weber State University.• Stott, N. (2001). Helping ESL Students Become Better Readers:Schema Theory Applications and Limitations. The Internet TESLJournal. Retrieved from http://iteslj.org/Articles/Stott-Schema.html• Temple, C. & Gillet, J. (1996). Language and literacy: A livelyapproach. New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.