Online+Reading+Comprehension

**Online Reading Comprehension (Tuesday)**

 * Julie Coiro, University of Rhode Island**

In this session, we will discuss the key components of online reading comprehension, identify skills and strategies demonstrated by skilled online readers, and explore instructional strategies you can use/adapt to address several online reading challenges associated with conducting online inquiry. You will learn strategies to support students as they generate high-level inquiry questions, navigate search results, negotiate multiple perspectives, and synthesize information from online sources. Each of these components are integral elements of the Common Core State Standards, as depicted in this two page summary of our current efforts to authentically assess performance in online reading and research.

Leu, D. J., Jr., Coiro, J., Castek, J., Hartman, D. K., Henry, L. A., & Reinking, D. (2008). Research on instruction and assessment of the new literacies of online reading comprehension. In C. C. Block, S. Parris, and P. Afflerbach, (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 321-346). New York: Guilford Press.
 * For additional information about online reading comprehension and our checklist for teaching internet comprehension to adolescents, download the following chapter:**

Powerpoint Slides
 * Overview of The New Literacies Of Online Reading Comprehension (10 minutes) **

**How does reading and learning change on the Internet?** >
 * You begin by identifying an important question
 * There are new ways of reading to locate information;
 * There are new reasons for reading to critically evaluate the usefulness of that information;
 * There are new contexts for reading to synthesize information to answer those questions; and
 * There are new sources/ways of reading in order to communicate the answers to others.
 * [[file:newlitinstitute/TICA Basic Skills.pdf|TICA Basic Skills Checklist (Download PDF)]]


 * Challenge 1: Posing Questions – What Questions Are Worth Asking? (10 minutes) **

**Strategies for Posing Interesting and Important Questions:** > thick questions (to expand your thinking) > to all of your questions!
 * Activate what you already know about the topic
 * What do you wonder about this topic?
 * Understand the difference between thin questions (to clarify vocabulary or key details) and
 * Actively pose questions before, during, and after reading – it’s okay if you don’t find the answers



SOURCE: []
 * Crafting a Range of High Level Questions With A Q-Matrix Chart **




 * Challenge 2: Reading Search Engine Results (10 minutes) **






 * Challenge 3: Reading Across Multiple Perspectives (Critical Evaluation and Synthesis) (15 mins) **


 * Detecting Bias/Stance: Separating Fact From Opinion and Determining Author's Purpose**

A. Screenshot of Ray Redington Dog Care (Alternative Source: [|Iditarod Dog Care Measures)] B. [|Racing for the Grave: The Iditarod's Trail of Dog Deaths] C. [|Is the Iditarod for the Dogs?]

Take a few minutes to explore each of the above websites. Then answer the questions below.


 * LEVEL 1 - Detecting Fact versus Opinion:**
 * Tell which website you think has the STRONGEST opinions about the use of sled dogs in the Iditarod.
 * Tell whether you think the author of the website you chose is for or against racing sled dogs for competition.
 * Select a quote from the website you chose and explain why you think it is an example of the author sharing strong opinions.


 * LEVEL 2 - Detecting Bias and Considering the Author’s Affiliation:**
 * Tell which website (Site A, B, or C) gives opinions from more than one side of the issue.
 * Who are the two people whose opinions are given in the website you chose?
 * What factors might make these two people feel the way they do about the treatment of sled dogs?


 * LEVEL 3 - Detecting and Determining Author’s Purpose in Relation to Affiliation**:
 * Answer each question about each website with yes, no, or don’t know. Be prepared to provide evidence from the website to support each “yes” answer.
 * Does the website provide factual information?
 * …try to persuade you to think or feel a certain way?
 * …try to sell you something?
 * …try to raise money or collect donations?
 * In your opinion, what is the specific purpose (stated or unstated) of the site?

[|Promoting Positive Change for the Iditarod] (a response to PETA)


 * Challenge 4: Synthesizing Without Plagiarizing (5 minutes) **




 * Wrapping Up With A Quick Write (5 minutes) **

Link to one of the notes pages for your school based teams and work with 1-2 partners to post a quick-write reflection about these questions.
 * //What are the implications of these ideas for your own teaching?// **
 * //What questions do you have now?// **


 * Additional Readings to Explore **
 * Coiro, J. (2003). [|Rethinking comprehension strategies to better prepare students for critically evaluating content on the Internet.] //NERA Journal, 39,// 29-34.
 * Coiro, J. (2005). [[file:newlitinstitute/EdLeadership2005.pdf|Making sense of online text]]. //Educational Leadership, 63,// 30-35.
 * Coiro, J. (2009). [[file:newlitinstitute/Coiro EL2009.pdf|Rethinking online reading assessment]]. //Educational Leadership, 66//, 59-63.
 * Coiro, J. (2009). [|Instructional Strategies for Critically Evaluating Online Information]. Online workshop and handouts to support aspects of critical evaluation including evaluating relevancy, accuracy, reliability, and perspective.
 * Coiro, J. (2011). [|Talking about reading: Modeling the hidden complexities of online reading comprehension.] //Theory Into Practice, 50//(2), 107-115.
 * Coiro, J. & Kennedy, C. (2011). [|The online reading comprehension assessment (ORCA) project: Preparing students for common core standards and 21st century literacies.] White paper based on work supported by the United States Department of Education under Award No. R305G050154 and R305A090608.
 * Leu, D. J., O'Byrne, W. I., Zawilinski, L., McVerry, J. G., & Everett-Cocapardo, H. (2009). [[file:newlitinstitute/Leu et al ER 2009|Expanding the new literacies conversation]]. //Educational Researcher, 38//, 264-269.
 * McVerry, J. G., Zawilinski, L., & O'Byrne, W. I. (2009). [|Internet Reciprocal Teaching: Navigating the C’s of change.] //Educational Leadership, 67//(1).