História
Os objetivos de Cori são apoiar:
Reading Comprehension via activating background knowledge, questioning, summarizing, searching, organizing graphically, and interpreting storiesScience Inquiry via observation, using knowledge, questioning, designing investigations, collecting data, drawing conclusions, and explaining results conceptually. The science theme was the survival concepts (ecology) of feeding, locomotion, defense, predation, respiration, reproduction, competition, communication, and adjustment to habitat.Motivation via knowledge goals for reading, hands-on experiences, interesting books, choices about learning, and collaboration with classmatesReading and Science Integration via relating observations in hands-on science activities to contents and characters in literary and information books and connecting students' interests in the environment to their motivations for book readingStudent Writing via writing entries in portfolios that demonstrated the following: information text reading, literary text reading, science concepts, science processes, and motivation for reading.
“Há quase 20 anos, Guthrie e colegas refinam Cori, um programa projetado para promover uma série de metas de alfabetização através do uso de amplos temas interdisciplinares, extraídos principalmente dos currículos científicos, como explorar o impacto dos humanos nos habitats animais. O CORI fornece instruções explícitas sobre estratégias de leitura, esse questionamento, ativação do conhecimento de fundo, buscando informações, resumo e sintetizando informações para se comunicar com outras pessoas. A instrução envolve investigações práticas, investigação com texto, instrução de estratégia, trabalho em equipes de consulta colaborativa e redação para publicar e apresentar descobertas. Demonstrou -se que a CORI aumenta as estratégias de investigação científica dos alunos e a compreensão geral de texto em comparação com as salas de aula de controle com currículos de ciência e alfabetização separados e/ou instrução de estratégia apenas na leitura. De particular interesse na pesquisa da CORI é o papel fundamental que a motivação, em todas as suas instanciações (interesse, autoeficácia e motivação da conquista), interpreta na aprendizagem da ciência e da alfabetização. ”
A CORI investigou as motivações, competências cognitivas e apoio instrucional necessário para aumentar a compreensão da leitura e o engajamento de estudantes do ensino médio em conceitos científicos (ecologia) e estudos sociais (Guerra Civil dos EUA) por meio do projeto de engajamento de leitura para a aprendizagem de adolescentes (real). As estratégias de compreensão de leitura incluíram: ativação do conhecimento de fundo, questionamento, resumo, inferência e mapeamento conceitual. As motivações intrínsecas incluíram envolvimento, desafio, curiosidade, interações sociais e o ensino de conceitos e habilidades de investigação. Livros, vídeos educacionais, sites e outros materiais suplementares foram usados para ajudar na aprendizagem dos alunos e nas instruções dos professores.
O programa CORI equipou os professores participantes com as habilidades para atingir esses objetivos em sala de aula por meio de oficinas interativas de desenvolvimento profissional. Esses workshops foram dados várias vezes durante o ano letivo com esses resultados desejados em professores nas seguintes áreas:
Práticas de sala de aula: apoio à motivação; promover o envolvimento com o texto; sustentar o engajamento da leitura ao longo do ano; energizar o aprendizado do texto da informação; conectar os padrões do Estado Central Common à motivação; Use abordagens baseadas em pesquisa
Práticas de motivação e engajamento: estabelecendo parcerias, colaborações e equipes; fornecendo escolhas produtivas, grandes e pequenas; construir relevância para a leitura e a escrita; incentivar valores de leitura; permitir os alunos a desenvolver suas identidades; Aumentando a aprendizagem nos padrões do Estado Central Comum
A integração da instrução de estratégia cognitiva inclui orientação para: ensinar habilidades de leitura de ordem superior, melhorar a compreensão de texto de informações dos alunos, integrar a leitura em domínios de conteúdo, fornecer instrução de estratégia em assuntos, alvo literacias digitais e livros tradicionais
O objetivo de Cori é aumentar a quantidade de leitura engajada através do uso de apoios ou andaimes cognitivos e motivacionais explícitos. Cognativamente, o programa CORI enfatiza o aprendizado de idéias conceituais.
Especificos do programa
A instrução CORI pode ocorrer dentro do domínio de qualquer assunto em qualquer nível. As lições são desenvolvidas com o objetivo expresso de aumentar o envolvimento dos alunos. Por sua vez, a quantidade de leitura dos alunos aumenta e, finalmente, o uso de estratégias de leitura, motivação intrínseca e conquista aumentam. Os textos sobre um tópico são disponibilizados para os alunos e, juntamente com a instrução estratégica e o apoio motivacional, o profundo entendimento de um conceito se desenvolve. Isso mostra a ênfase de Cori no aprendizado temático.
De acordo com um modelo de instrução de leitura guiada, foram fornecidas lições para pequenos grupos no leitor em dificuldades, no nível de grau e nos níveis avançados de leitores. A escrita e a leitura independente fazem parte do programa CORI, assim como uma atividade culminante para uma unidade de estudo.
Módulos de treinamento de professores, vídeos em sala de aula, artigos e livros de pesquisa relacionados e descobertas de pesquisa em escolas de ensino fundamental e médio no site da CORI www.corilearning.com fornecem as informações necessárias para se tornar mais informado sobre este programa.
Leitura adicional
Livros
Guthrie, J. T. (Ed.). (2008). Engaging adolescents in reading. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & Perencevich, K. C. (Eds.) (2004). Motivating reading comprehension: Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Artigos de periódicos revisados por pares
Ho, A. N., & Guthrie, J. T. (2013). Patterns of association among multiple motivations and aspects of achievement in reading. Reading Psychology, 34, 1-47.Guthrie, J. T., Coddington, C. S., & Wigfield, A. (2009). Profiles of motivation for reading among African American and Caucasian students. Journal of Literacy Research, 41, 317–353. Download – for personal use onlyGuthrie, J. T., McRae, A., Coddington, C. S., Klauda, S. L., Wigfield, A., & Barbosa, P. (2009). Impacts of comprehensive reading instruction on diverse outcomes of low-achieving and high-achieving readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 195–214.Download – for personal use onlyCoddington, C. S., & Guthrie, J. T. (2009). Teacher and student perceptions of boys’ and girls’ reading motivation. Reading Psychology, 30, 225–249.Download – for personal use onlyTaboada, A., Tonks, S. M., Wigfield, A. & Guthrie, J. T. (2009). Effects of motivational and cognitive variables on reading comprehension. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 85–106.Klauda, S. L. & Guthrie, J. T. (2008). Relationships of three components of reading fluency to reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 310–321.Download – for personal use onlyGuthrie, J. T., Hoa, L. W., Wigfield, A., Tonks, S. M., Humenick, N. M., & Littles, E. (2007). Reading motivation and reading comprehension growth in the later elementary years. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 282–313.Download – for personal use onlyGuthrie, J. T., Hoa, L. W., Wigfield, A., Tonks, S. M., & Perencevich, K. C. (2006). From spark to fire: Can situational reading interest lead to long-term reading motivation? Reading Research and Instruction, 45, 91–117. Download – for personal use onlyLutz, S. L., Guthrie, J. T., & Davis, M. H. (2006). Scaffolding for engagement in learning: An observational study of elementary school reading instruction. Journal of Educational Research, 100, 3-20.Download – for personal use onlyGuthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Humenick, N. M., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., & Barbosa, P. (2006). Influences of stimulating tasks on reading motivation and comprehension. Journal of Educational Research, 99, 232–245. Download – for personal use onlyGuthrie, J. T. (2004). Teaching for literacy engagement. Journal of Literacy Research, 36, 1-30.Ozgungor, S., & Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Interactions among elaborative interrogation, knowledge, and interest in the process of constructing knowledge from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 437–443.Download – for personal use onlyWang, J. H., & Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Modeling the effects of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, amount of reading, and past reading achievement on text comprehension between U.S. and Chinese students. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 162–186.Wigfield, A., Guthrie, J. T., Tonks, S., & Perencevich, K. C. (2004). Children's motivation for reading: Domain specificity and instructional influences. Journal of Educational Research, 97, 299–309.Download – for personal use onlyGuthrie, J. T., & Davis, M. H. (2003). Motivating struggling readers in middle school through an engagement model of classroom practice. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19, 59–85.Download – for personal use onlyGuthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & VonSecker, C. (2000) Effects of integrated instruction on motivation and strategy use in reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 331–341.Download – for personal use onlyGuthrie, J. T., Van Meter, P., Hancock, G. R., McCann, A., Anderson, E., & Alao, S. (1998). Does Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction increase strategy-use and conceptual learning from text? Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 261–278.Download – for personal use onlySwan, E. (1998). Motivational and cognitive influences on conceptual knowledge: The combination of science observation and interesting texts. (Doctoral dissertation). Download – for personal use onlyGuthrie, J. T., Van Meter, P. McCann, A. D., & Wigfield, A. (1996). Growth of literacy engagement: Changes in motivations and strategies during Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 306–332.
Capítulos
Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & You, W. (2012). Instructional contexts for engagement and achievement in reading. In S. Christensen, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 601–634). New York: Springer Science.Guthrie, J. T., & McRae, A. (2011). Reading engagement among African American and European American students. In S. J. Samuels & A. E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (4th ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Swan, E. A., Coddington, C. S., & Guthrie, J. T. (2010). Engaged silent reading. In E. H. Hiebert & D. R. Reutzel (Eds.), Revisiting silent reading (pp. 95–111). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2010). The impact of Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction on students’ reading motivation, reading engagement, and reading comprehension. In J. L. Meece & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Handbook of research on schools, schooling, and human development (pp. 463–477). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Guthrie, J. T., & Coddington, C. S. (2009). Reading motivation. In K. Wentzel & A. Wigfield, (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 503–525). New York: Routledge.Wigfield, A., Tonks. S., & Klauda, S. L. (2009). Expectancy-value theory. In K. R.Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 55–75). New York: Routledge.Guthrie, J. T., Rueda, R. S., Gambrell, L. B., & Morrison, D. A. (2009). Roles of engagement, valuing, and identification in reading development of students from diverse backgrounds. In L. Morrow & R. S. *Rueda, (Eds.), Handbook of reading and literacy among students from diverse backgrounds (pp. 195–215). New York: Guilford.McRae, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2009). Promoting reasons for reading: Teacher practices that impact motivation. In E. H. Hiebert (Ed.), Reading more, reading better (pp. 55–76). New York: Guilford.Taboada, A., Guthrie, J. T., & McRae, A. (2008). Building engaging classrooms. In R. Fink & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), Inspiring reading success: Interest and motivation in an age of high-stakes testing (pp. 141–166). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Guthrie, J. T., Taboada, A., & Coddington, C. S. (2007). Engagement practices for strategy learning in Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction. In D. S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies: Theory, interventions, and technologies (pp. 241–266). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Guthrie, J. T. & Wigfield, A. (2005). Roles of motivation and engagement in reading comprehension assessment. In S. Paris, & S. Stahl (Eds.), Children's Reading Comprehension and Assessment (pp. 187–213). Mahwah: NJ: Erlbaum.Guthrie, J. T. & Humenick, N. M. (2004) Motivating students to read: Evidence for classroom practices that increase reading motivation and achievement. In. P. McCardle & V. Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research (pp. 329–354). Baltimore: Brookes.Guthrie, J. T. (2003). Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction: Practices of Teaching Reading for Understanding. In C. Snow & A. Sweet (Eds.), Reading for Understanding: Implications of RAND Report for Education (pp. 115–140). New York: Guilford.
Leitura adicional
Guthrie, J. T., & Klauda, S. L. (2012). Making textbook reading meaningful. Educational Leadership, 69, 64–68.Pearson, P. D., Moje, E., & Greenleaf, C. (2011). Literacy and science: Each in the service of the other. Science, 328, 459–463.Guthrie, J. T., & Anderson, E. (1999). Engagement in reading: Processes of motivated, strategic, knowledgeable, social readers. In J. T. Guthrie & D. E. Alvermann (Eds.), Engaged reading: Processes, practices, and policy implications (pp. 17–45). New York: Teachers College Press.Wigfield, A. (1997). Children's motivations for reading and reading engagement. In J. T. Guthrie & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction (pp. 14–33). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Elementary GradesBitter, C., O’Day, J., Gubbins, P., & Socias, M. (2009). What works to improve student literacy achievement? An examination of instructional practices in a balanced literacy approach. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 14(1), 17–44.Clark, A-M., Anderson, R. C., Kuo, L., Kim, I., Archodidou, A., & Nguyen-Jahiel, K. (2003). Collaborative reasoning: Expanding ways for children to talk and think in school. Educational Psychology Review, 15(2), 181–198.Duke, N. K. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(2), 202–224.Duke, N. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2002). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In A. E. Farstup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed., pp. 205–242). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Duke, N. K., Martineau, J. A., Frank, K. A., & Bennett-Armistead, V. S. (2009). The impact of including more informational text in first grade classrooms. Unpublished.Guthrie, J. T., & McCann, A. D. (1998). Characteristics of classrooms that promote motivations and strategies for learning. In J. T. Guthrie & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction (2nd ed., pp. 128– 148). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Guthrie, J. T., Anderson, E., Alao, S., & Rinehart, J. (1999). Influences of concept-oriented reading instruction on strategy use and conceptual learning from text. Elementary School Journal, 99(4), 343–366.Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Barbosa, P., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., Davis, M. H., et al. (2004). Increasing reading comprehension and engagement through concept-oriented reading instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 403–423.Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Humenick, N. M., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., & Barbosa, P. (2006). Influences of stimulating tasks on reading motivation and comprehension. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(4), 232–245.Hansen, J. (1981). The effects of inference training and practice on young children's reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 16(3), 391–417.Linnenbrink, L. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in student engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19, 119–137.National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.Perfetti, C. A., Landi, N., & Oakhill, J. (2005). The acquisition of reading comprehension skill. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 227–247). Oxford: Blackwell.Pressley, M., Burkell, J., Cariglia-Bull, T., Lysynchuk, L., McGoldrick, J. A., Shneider, B., et al. (1990). Cognitive strategy instruction that really improves children's academic performance. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.Pressley, M., Dolezal, S. E., Raphael, L. M., Mohan, L., Roehrig, A. D., & Bogner, K. (2003). Motivating primary-grade students. New York: Guilford Press.Reutzel, D. R., Smith, J. A., & Fawson, P. C. (2005). An evaluation of two approaches for teaching reading comprehension strategies in the primary years using science information texts. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 20, 276–305.Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement c across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 571–581.Slavin, R. E.(1990). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, & practice. Englewood, NJ: Prentice Hall.Williams, J. P., Staggord, K. B., Lauer, K. D., Hall, K. M., & Pollini, S. (2009). Embedding reading comprehension training in content-area instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 1–20.Middle School and AboveAdler, M., & Rougle, E. (2005). Building literacy through classroom discussion: Research-based strategies for developing critical readers and thoughtful writers in middle school. New York: Scholastic.Applebee, A. N., Langer, J. A., Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussion-based approaches to developing understand¬ing: Classroom instruction and student performance in middle and high school English. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 685–730.Artley, S. (1944). A study of certain re¬lationships existing between general reading comprehension and reading comprehension in a specific subject matter area. Journal of Educational Re¬search, 37, 464–73.Biancarosa, C., & Snow, C. E. (2006). Reading next: A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next: A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.Guthrie, J. T., & Humenick, N. M. (2004). Motivating students to read: Evidence for classroom practices that increase reading motivation and achievement. In P. McCardle & V. Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research (pp. 329–54). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.Guthrie, J. T., & McCann, A. D. (1997). Characteristics of classrooms that promote motivations and strategies for learning. In J. T. Guthrie & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction (pp. 128–48). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Guthrie, J. T., Anderson, E., Alao, S., & Rinehart, J. (1999). Influences of Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction on strategy use and conceptual learning from text. Elementary School Journal, 99(4), 343–66.Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & VonSecker, C. (2000). Effects of integrated instruction on motivation and strategy use in read¬ing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 331–41.Heller, R., & Greenleaf, C. L. (2007). Literacy instruction in the content areas: Getting to the core of middle and high school improvement. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.Kamil, M. L. (2003). Adolescents and literacy: Reading for the 21st century. Washington DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.Kingery, E. (2000). Teaching metacognitive strategies to enhance higher level thinking in adolescents. In P. E. Linder, E. G. Sturtevant, W. M. Linek, & J. R. Dugan (Eds.), Literacy at a new horizon: The twenty-secondary yearbook. (pp. 74–85) Commerce, TX: College Reading Association.Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., & Schumm, J. S. (1998). Collaborative strategic reading during social studies in heterogeneous fourth-grade classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 99(1), 3–22.Koury, K. A. (1996). The impact of pre¬teaching science content vocabulary using integrated media for knowledge acquisition in a collaborative class¬room. Journal of Computing in Child¬hood Education, 7(3–4), 179–97.Langer, J. A. (2001). Beating the odds: Teaching middle and high school students to read and write well. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 837–80.Lee, J., Griggs, W. S., & Donahue, P. L. (2007). Nation's report card: Reading (NCES 2007–496). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics.Scammacca, N., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., Edmonds, M., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C. K., & Torgesen, J. K. (2007). Interventions for adolescent struggling readers: A meta-analysis with implications for practice. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.Schunk, D. H. (2003). Self-efficacy for read¬ing and writing: Influence of modeling, goal setting, and self-evaluation. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 159–72.Zwiers, J. (2004). Building reading compre¬hension habits in grades 6–12: A toolkit of classroom activities. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
