Metacognition: Comprehension monitoring, or metacognition, an emerging construct in educational research referring to the awareness of one’s thinking and the strategies one is using as a means to comprehension. Research and experience clearly shows that students need to be able to test comprehension continuously during study so as too be fully aware of what they do understand and what they do not understand and be able to employ methods of correcting failed comprehension. The use of metacognition has been validated in the research on text comprehension, it has been written about most comprehensively in the publications provided by the National Institute for Literacy and the U.S. Department of Education in the Put Reading First publications for all grade levels of students.

Additionally there is independent research available validating metacognition and the need for comprehension monitoring and fix up strategies particularly in literacy and mathematics. There is enough research to clearly demonstrate that instruction and support in the process of thinking and comprehension can have a strong impact on achievement. (Ambruster et all 2001; Chamot and O’Malley 1994; Palincsar et all 1991; Paris, Wasik, Tuner, 1991; Schoenfield, 192, Marzano 2000).

Vocabulary Development: There has been a tremendous amount of research surrounding the importance of vocabulary acquisition, vocabulary usage, the importance of words and the importance of subject vocabulary. Words not known or defined or understood are the single most virulent source if comprehension failure and “because content domains have their own vocabulary that students must negotiate if they are to perform competently” (Lampart et all. 1998), vocabulary instruction has to occur in all content areas and not only as a component of reading instruction. Today’s learning research supports strong emphasis on vocabulary learning as well as explicit, systematic multi-faceted approach to vocabulary development employed in learning. “Vocabulary should be taught both directly and indirectly. Repetition and multiple exposures to vocabulary items are important” (Baker, Simmons & Kameenui, 1995). “Vocabulary instruction should be explicit and systematic and include word-learning strategies” (Armbruster et all., 2001). “Using a multi-faceted approach to vocabulary development is recommended. It should include extensive reading and the teaching of word consciousness along with word-learning strategies” (Nagy, n.d.).

Recently larger educational zones have gone so far as to adopt the procedures of identifying and defining through their classroom endeavors the words that must be known at each grade level in order for students to proceed effectively in comprehending their subject matter. Tennessee and California notably have adopted the most extensive procedures going so far as to publish lists for educators to reference. A free list for K – 6th grade is provided on open web by California Technical Assistance Center under their Reading First site. It contains base words and learning them dates back to the 1930’s and the most recent efforts at providing manageable lists have come from both notable educational researchers such as Marzano, Fry and Dolch and organizations such as Data Works.

Strategic Reading: The research on reading instruction and strategic reading – reading with the purpose of improving comprehension – is essential for comprehension of school subjects and success in school is also widely published. Students need “well-articulated concepts about effective strategies to enhance comprehension” and need to develop “more detailed knowledge about what strategies are available, how they function, when they should be applied and why they help comprehension”(Paris, Wasik, & Turner, 1991. p619). Furthermore, strategic reading includes the repairing of failed comprehension. When comprehension failed, strategic readers were able to “use a variety of strategies to repair their understanding”(Dole, 200, p.56) “… explicit or formal instruction in the application of comprehension strategies has been shown to be highly effective…(National reading Panel, 2000, p 14).

Mathematics: Learning mathematics as outlined by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) includes that students be able to apply procedures, processes and concepts and that students “must learn mathematics with understanding, actively building new knowledge from experience and prior knowledge”. (NCTM 2000) Recent research indicates that conceptual understanding, in addition to factual knowledge and procedural facility, is an important component of proficiency (Bransford, Brown and Cocking, 1999). A summary of recommended teaching practices for mathematics that are both research-based and consistent with NCTM principles and standard include the following: * problem-solving approach * discussion about mathematics * writing about mathematics * use of manipulatives * cooperative group work (Zemelman, Daniels and Hyde, 1998).

Comprehensive, Systematic and Explicit Instruction: A comprehensive program for reading instruction and/or remediation teaches the five skills identified by the National Reading Panel (NRP) as critical for success in learning to read – Phonemic Awarenss, Phonics, Fluency, Vocabulary and Comprehension. Also in keeping with NRP recommendations, materials should be explicit, leaving nothing to chance, and the approach is systematic, beginning with a thorough assessment to pinpoint the student’s problem areas and followed up with curriculum embedded progress testing (NRP, 2000, pp. 8, 9, 14).

Armbruster, B.B.; Lehr, F.; Osborn, J. (2001) Put Reading First: The Research Building Blocks for Teaching Children to Read. Jessup, MD: National Institute for Literacy.

Baker, S.K.; Simmons, D.C.; Kameenui, F.G., (1995). Vocabulary acquisition: Synthesis of the research (Technical Report No. 13). Eugene, OR: National Center to Improve the Tools of Educators, Retrieved October 30, 2002. Web site: http://idea.uoregon.edu/cite/documents/techrep/tech134.html

Chamot, A.U.; O’Malley, J.M. (1994). Language Learning and Learning Strategies. In N.C. Ellis (F.D.), Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages (pp. 371-392). London: Academic.

Dole, J.A. (2000) Explicit and implicit instruction in comprehension. In B.M. Taylor: M.F. Graves: P. van den Broek (Eds.), Reading for meaning: Fostering comprehension in the middle grades (pp. 52-69) New York: Teachers College Press.

Lampert, M.: Blank, M.L. (1998). Talking Mathematics in Schools. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Paris, S. G.: Wasik, B.A., Turner, J.C., (1991). The development of strategic readers. In R. Barr, M.L.. Kamil, P. Rosenthal, & P.D. Pearson (Eds.). Handbook of reading research, volume II (pp. 609-640), Mahwah, Mj: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Schoenfield, A (1992) Learning to think mathematically: problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D.A. Grows (Eds.) Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, (pp. 334-370). New York: Macmillan.

Marzano, R.J. (2000) Designing a new Taxonomy of educational objectives. Thousand Oaks, Ca. Ca: Corwin Press.

Nagy (n.d.) Promoting Students” Vocabulary Growth -an Overview. Retrieved April 8, 2004, from Seattle Pacific University web site: http://www.myhonme.spu.edu/wnagy/promoting-students.htm

National Reading Panel Summary Report (2000). Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research on Reading and its Implications for Reading Instruction. Retrieved April 8, 2004. Web site: http://www.nationalreadingpanel.org/publications/Summary.htm

Palincsar, A.S.; David, Y.M.; Winn, J.A.; Stevens, D.D. (1991). Examining the context of strategy instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 12 (3), 43-53.

Intel Education provided a recent compilation regarding Designing Effective Projects. Thinking Skills that provides a discussion of the various parts of thinking with discussions of comprehension and logic. http://www97.intel.com/en/ProjectDesign/ThinkingSkills/ThinkingFrameworks/Marzano_New_Taxonomy5.htm