THE CEA FORUM - Winter/Spring 2014 - The Strategy Use of Struggling Readers in the First-Year Composition Classroom - What We Know and How We Can Help Them

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by pop out

Winter/Spring 2014 issue of The CEA Forum presents research-informed discussion on how struggling readers should be supported in first-year composition classrooms. It explains the central relationship between reading and writing and argues that reading instruction is often neglected, likely due to misconceptions about pedagogy and assumptions about incoming students. It then contrasts successful and struggling readers through differences in strategy use, self-monitoring, comprehension approaches, goal setting, rereading, and engagement with main ideas. Evidence from multiple studies supports the need for more explicit, strategy-centered support to improve academic reading and writing performance.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryExam

FormatPDF

Pages27

Reading Time1 h 8 min

AccessFree to download

The Strategy Use of Struggling Readers in the First-Year Composition Classroom: What We Know and How We Can Help Them

Reading in First-Year Composition Programs

Struggling vs. Successful Readers: What Is the Difference?

THE CEA FORUM Winter/Spring 2014 The Strategy Use of Struggling Readers in the FirstYear Composition Classroom: What We Know and How We Can Help Them Alex Poole Western Kentucky University Reading in First-Year Composition Programs: Its Importance, Instructor Attitudes toward It, and Students’Ability to Do It The proliferation of composition readers alone is evidence that reading plays an important role in first-year composition programs. In my experience, most instructors use them and other texts to stimulate students’ interest in a topic, model rhetorical patterns, and generate essay ideas. In short, instructors recognize the intrinsic connection between reading and writing and desire for their students to do the same. Linda Adler-Kassner and Heidi Estrem’s assertion that “good reading”“ is evidenced by a dialogue between the writer’s ideas and those in the text she is using, as well as demonstrated through writing, of the conventions of source use—from interpretation to citational practices”(37) highlights this symbiosis of language comprehension and production and their indivisibility in first-year writing curricula. Not surprisingly, research has shown that college students who enjoy reading and view themselves as strong readers generate more grammatically-varied and content-rich essays than those who dislike reading and find it difficult (Daane 185) . Given the centrality of reading in first-year courses, it would seem counterintuitive for instructors to reject reading instruction as part of their pedagogical responsibilities. However, Lisa Bosley’s review of reading instruction in English departments shows such rejection to be THE CEA FORUM Winter/Spring 2014 widespread. In her own investigation of seven English professors at a large southern university, she found that they often deny explicitly teaching reading. Bosley’s results suggest such a position could be caused by simplistic notions of reading pedagogy—i.e., teaching students bottom-up skills such as how to decode words (296)—and the expectation that incoming students will already possess “the reading skills necessary to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate complex academic texts”(286) . While Bosley acknowledges that both her participants and composition instructors across the country probably do provide some sort of reading instruction, she asserts that the inability of first-year students to comprehend texts and evaluate their contents necessitates that it be done more explicitly (298) . Several studies support her contention that this demographic is unable to contend with the rigors of first-year reading assignments. In 1996, The National Center for Education Statistics reported that 30% of college students took a reading or study strategies course (Martino and Hoffman 310) . Of the students who started college in the year 2000, 11% enrolled in remedial reading courses, and more than half of all undergraduate institutions offered them (Parsad and Lewis tables 1 and 2). Finally, a report recently issued by the Alliance for Excellent Education estimates that roughly 33% of first-year college students need remedial work in math, English, or reading (Spak par. 3) . Struggling vs. Successful Readers: What Is the Difference? THE CEA FORUM Winter/Spring 2014 In light of the above-cited statistics on remedial education and the legions of composition instructors on discussion boards, at academic conferences, and in departmental meetings who bemoan first-year students’ reading skills, it is clear that many students are unable to converse with text and accurately reflect that conversation in their own writing. While the end goal of reading instruction should indeed be to see assigned texts accurately and critically represented in writing—as Adler-Kassner and Estrem assert (37)—students first need to comprehend what they read. How do we help them do that? The answer to this question is multifaceted, but one important action involves helping th

FAQs

Why are reading and writing closely connected in first-year composition programs?

Reading helps students engage with ideas from texts, model rhetorical patterns, and generate essay ideas, while writing demonstrates understanding through source use conventions and comprehension-to-production links.

What reasons are suggested for instructors rejecting or minimizing reading instruction?

Research reviewed in the forum suggests rejection may come from simplistic views of reading pedagogy focused on bottom-up decoding, along with expectations that incoming students already have the reading skills needed for complex academic texts.

How do successful readers differ from struggling readers in strategy use?

Successful readers use flexible strategies, planful thinking, periodic self-monitoring, prior knowledge, and reading goals; they also reread and check understanding. Struggling readers tend to be inflexible, cannot overcome comprehension problems, and often fail to monitor comprehension while focusing too much on reading time and lacking lexical knowledge.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by pop out