Running head: USING PARTNER READING
Using Partner Reading to Increase Reading Comprehension Scores
Jessica Cox
Valdosta State University
1
USING PARTNER READING
2
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine whether reading comprehension would be improved
by implementing partner reading in the classroom. Student attitudes toward reading were also
measured. Seventh-grade students (N = 20) in the southeastern United States participated in the
study. For the first 4 weeks of the study, the students read short stories and various trade books
on their own and the last 4 weeks, partner reading was implemented. The STAR reading test,
Accelerated Reader tests, short story comprehension test scores, an attitude survey, and field
notes were used to assess student performance and attitude. Results indicated comprehension
scores did not increase with partner reading; however, students’ attitudes did improve.
USING PARTNER READING
3
USING PARTNER READING TO INCREASE READING COMPREHENSION SCORES
Reading comprehension is a very important skill that all readers should master. Burns
(2006) stated, “A large proportion of 11- and 12-year olds entering secondary schools are not
functionally literate and they are unable to read sufficiently well to profit from the curriculum”.
These students encounter problems throughout school and associate school with failure,
frustration, lack of confidence, and related behavior problems. These negative behaviors can turn
many students away from reading. However, peer tutoring in reading can improve students’
attitudes in reading and the understanding of the text. Peer tutoring in reading can have a positive
impact on all students, tutors, and tutees. One researcher notes that peer tutoring has been found
to improve the reading ability of both the tutee and tutor (Nugent, 2001). Improved social
behaviors, more positive attitudes to other students, an increase in students’ self-esteem, and an
increase in school attendance are ways peer tutoring has had a positive impact on students.
Partner reading is a form of peer reading used to increase reading comprehension. Not only does
partner reading allow the students time to interact with their peers, it also provides the teacher an
opportunity to monitor student’s reading progress by listening to students read with their partners
(Meisinger, 2004).
Reading comprehension is more than answering questions at the end of a chapter in a
textbook (Onofrey & Theurer, 2007). Skills and strategies that are independently transferable are
needed in order for students to become proficient in reading comprehension. Onofrey and
Theurer suggest two unique ways for teachers to teach comprehension strategies. For example,
“visualized creations” is a strategy used to help students create mental images and associations
using background knowledge. A small text with strong visual images should be chosen and
displayed on the overhead projector for all of the students to view. The sentences are revealed
USING PARTNER READING
4
one at a time and the class discusses the mental images that are being created in each other’s
mind. This strategy teaches each student how to visualize text. The second strategy, “In the
moment” read-aloud journal partners, is an instructional strategy that allows students to work
with others. They are paired with a partner to journal about text being read together. At certain
times, under the teacher’s instruction, the students pass their papers back and forth and respond
to their peers’ written thoughts. The researchers noted that this practice benefited students greatly
because they were able to receive immediate feedback on their ideas about the text (Onofrey &
Theurer, 2007). With the practice of these two strategies and peer tutoring in reading, students
can become confident in reading together and understanding the text. Katz and Bohman (2007)
gave their students a “confirm comprehension” bookmark to remind them to support their
partner’s reading. The text on the bookmark reads, “Word or Wait?" Count to 3. Then ask, ‘Do
you want me to give you a word, or do you want me to wait?” These bookmarks served as a
reminder to each student that their job was to help their partner if he or she was struggling with
the passage.
MacGillivray and Hawes (1994) addressed peer reading and offered suggestions on how
to obtain positive results. They note that partner reading requires students to rely less on the
teacher and more on themselves. Their class participated in a 5-month study with an ethnically
diverse student population. Four mornings a week, during a 3-hour reading-writing block, the
researcher took field notes, conducted interviews, and gathered weekly drawing and writing
samples. From these observations, the researchers developed role sets to assign to students. For
example, coworkers, fellow artists, teacher/student, and boss/employee were some of the role
sets utilized. The students then began to fill these roles when peer reading. The role sets helped
the researchers see patterns during peer reading that offered insights into how each child viewed
USING PARTNER READING
5
him/herself and his/her view of the reading process. They found that students enjoyed reading
and writing with each other, discussing the books, and role-playing. The social interaction had a
positive impact on the researcher’s classroom. Daley (2005) also addressed the fact that mutual
book talks instead of individual writing responses help students comprehend text.
Lapp, Fisher, and Grant (2008) describe how reading achievement can increase through
think-alouds based on shared readings. Students share what they learned as they read each
section of text together and model with a peer how they are making sense of their reading. This
benefits both students because they are each listening and offering support when needed. Shared
reading allows a higher skilled reader to show a less proficient reader how to grasp unfamiliar
vocabulary, new concepts, text features, and text structures. Lapp, Fisher, and Grant (2008)
pointed out that when shared reading is implemented, students are learning strategies for
comprehending text, which also leads to an increase of motivation to read. While Lapp, Fisher,
and Grant paired their students with a higher reader to a lower reader, Daley (2005) realized that
pairing should be done after careful consideration of individual reading capabilities. She also
noted that not all pairs should read the same text because of the various levels within a single
grade. Katz and Bohman (2007) paired their students randomly using like objects. The students
reached into the like objects bowl and selected an object. Then they found a student in the
classroom with the same object. The two students with like objects became reading partners for
that day.
Another study by Fisher, Frey, and Lapp (2008) focused on shared reading. Shared
reading is often described as echo reading, choral reading, or cloze reading. Shared reading was
observed with 25 teachers in 25 schools in grades 3-8. Each teacher was observed modeling
shared reading on three different occasions. As they finished shared reading, the teacher
USING PARTNER READING
6
provided the students with a discussion or writing prompt to be completed in groups. The
researchers found that not all teachers focused on the four main components (reading
comprehension, vocabulary, text structures, and text features) in each of the shared reading
lessons. They concluded that teacher modeling through shared reading should be based on a
specific, identified purpose. However, the shared reading strategy allowed students time to grasp
what was being read.
Peer tutoring in reading has been used as a tool to boost the learning of students. (Burns,
2006). One-to-one attention from a more skilled reader helps the lower level reader by providing
support and encouragement. Burns showed how peer tutoring in reading could help students who
are reading below grade level. The pause, prompt, and praise (PPP) model of peer tutoring has
been identified as successful. Students in the study attended a secondary school for students with
moderated learning difficulties. One boy and one girl, both below grade level in reading, were
selected as tutees. The tutors, one boy and one girl, had a high reading level. Each pair held 14
tutoring sessions for 15 minutes each. Audio and video recordings were made of the tutoring
sessions to record the tutor and tutee’s performance. Burns found that the tutees’ rates of selfcorrection began to rise. The tutors’ skills and confidence also increased. Burns’ hypothesis was
proven to be true. Students receiving extra help with their reading will receive certain benefits.
While Burns’ study reports findings from special education students, the researcher’s study
focused on regular education students.
A study conducted by Nugent (2001) also shows an increase in reading comprehension
scores when using peer tutoring in reading. The study, The Reading Partner’s Scheme, involved
cross-age peer tutoring in reading. Participants of the study included moderate learning
difficulties ranging in age from 8-18. The first phase of the project was implemented in the
USING PARTNER READING
7
summer term of 1998. Students were assigned to the peer reading project as they were nominated
by their teacher. Positive results from students and teachers were noted after the tutors and tutees
completed a questionnaire. Phase II occurred in 1999. Nugent noted that it was easier to work
with students who had volunteered to participate in the project. Nugent found there were
multiple benefits to both the learners and the helpers, including progress in reading, enhanced
feelings of self-worth, and more positive attitudes in school. Although Nugent reported benefits
of peer reading with students ages 8-18, this research focused on 7th graders ages 12-14.
Ezell and Kohler (1994) completed a study finding positive results with reading
comprehension when peer tutoring in reading was used. A total of 14 students with special
disabilities from Kindergarten through 5th grade participated as tutees. Twenty-six typical
students participated as the tutors in the peer reading interventions. Teachers nominated both the
tutors and the tutees. Peer tutoring took place in four different settings: a self-contained
classroom, a regular education classroom, mainstream setting, and a school cafeteria for 4 to 5
days a week for 10-20 minutes. Interventions focused on improving reading accuracy, fluency,
comprehension, and vocabulary. Tutor training was conducted in small groups or individual
sessions. The tutors were instructed on various areas such as the following: obtaining the
tutoring materials, setting the timer, how to correct reading errors, redirection of the tutee, asking
comprehension questions, and providing praise. At the end of each week, student progress was
measured. A posttest of the reading material covered and a pretest of the following week’s
material was given. Results were positive. In all cases, each student’s posttest scores exceeded
their pretest scores. The average scores for all interventions were 42% accuracy for the pretests
and 85% accuracy for the posttest. The tutees reported a positive impression of peer tutoring in
reading and overall were satisfied with the activity. The tutors also gave a positive review
USING PARTNER READING
8
through a questionnaire. They reported enjoying the responsible role in enhancing others’
learning. Like Ezell and Kohler’s study, the researcher also focused on student attitudes toward
partner reading.
The school involved in the current study is a middle school located in rural southeast
Georgia. This school is a public, Title I middle school. The 2008-2009 school improvement plan
focused on the increase of CRCT scores in Math, Language Arts, and Reading.
Based on current CRCT results, students often have a hard time understanding what they
read. Whether students are reading short stories, novels, or short passages, it seems that they
struggle with reading comprehension. This research focused on how to help students improve
reading comprehension and understand what they read. The purpose of this study was to
determine whether reading comprehension would be improved by implementing partner reading
in the classroom. Goals for this study were for students to improve in academics, to enjoy
reading, and to want to excel in reading.
Research Questions
Research question 1. Does partner reading increase reading comprehension scores?
Research question 2. Will partner reading improve student’s attitudes toward reading?
Definition of Variables
Partner reading. Partner reading is reading with a partner and discussing what is being
read.
Reading comprehension. Reading comprehension is the ability to understand what is
being read as measured by the STAR Reading Test, AR comprehension tests, and teacher
generated quizzes.
USING PARTNER READING
9
Attitudes. Attitudes are the thoughts and feelings of the students toward partner reading
as measured by a teacher-created survey.
Methods
Participants
The instructor holds a Master’s degree, had 7 years of teaching experience, and was also
the researcher. Seventh grade regular education students (N=20) from a middle school grades 6-8
in southeast Georgia participated in this study. Students were assigned to seventh grade classes at
the beginning of the school year. Students who enrolled or were withdrawn during the course of
the study were not included in the data collected. Convenience sampling was used to select the
participants. For this study, the researcher focused on 20 low-achieving readers struggling with
reading comprehension. Parents gave permission for their children to be surveyed. Table 1 shows
the demographic data for the student participants. The class was almost evenly divided in terms
of ethnic makeup and gender.
Table 1
Demographic Data of Participants (N = 20)
Ethnicity
Gender
Black
N
White
N
Other
N
Male
N
Female
N
10
8
2
7
13
Intervention
The intervention that was implemented was partner reading on short stories from the
reading textbook and from various trade short story books. The study took place over an 8 week
time period. For the first 4 weeks of the study, the students read short stories and various trade
USING PARTNER READING
10
books on individual reading levels on their own at least 3 times a week for 20-30 minutes. For
the remainder of the study, 4 weeks, partner reading was implemented replacing independent
reading. The researcher paired students according to ability levels. Students who read on or
above grade level were paired with students that read below grade level. Ability levels were
based on the individual’s performance of the STAR reading test. The researcher modeled partner
reading and the discussion of the reading at the beginning of the intervention process daily. The
teacher also instructed students on the basic procedures of partner reading, such as knowing how
to listen to their partners, making positive remarks to their partners, and discussing effective
reading strategies together.
Data Collection Techniques
Several data collection techniques were used to analyze reading comprehension scores
and student’s attitudes towards reading. The STAR reading test, Accelerated Reader, AR
comprehension tests, and short story comprehension tests were used to compare reading
comprehension scores before and after peer reading intervention. The partner reading survey and
field notes observation log were both used to measure students’ attitudes toward reading.
STAR Reading Test (Renaissance Learning, 2001). The STAR reading test is a
computer-based assessment in which students read a sentence with a missing word and choose
the correct word to fill in the blank. This test is used to measure comprehension. The computer
software allows the teacher to view each student’s grade-equivalent scores, percentile rank, and
normal curve equivalent (NCE) scores. For this study, the STAR test was given at the beginning
and end of the study. Those scores were used to compare achievement gains before and after the
study.
USING PARTNER READING
11
Accelerated Reader Comprehension Tests (Renaissance Learning, 2001). Accelerated
Reader, AR, is a computer-based assessment in which students complete a 5-20 question quiz
after reading a story. The computer software allows the teacher to assess students’ reading with
four types of quizzes: Reading Practice, Vocabulary Practice, Literacy Skills, and Textbook
Quizzes. After the student completes the quiz, a grade is given. Reading comprehension scores
are recorded electronically. In this study, AR tests were administered after students read various
stories during the 4 weeks of independent reading and during the 4 weeks of intervention.
Short Story Comprehension Tests. The short story comprehension tests consist of a 10 to
20-item teacher-developed comprehension test over various short stories. The reading
comprehension tests were administered after students read various short stories. Tests were given
after independent reading and after partner reading weekly.
Partner Reading Attitude Survey. The partner reading attitude survey is a 10-item teacherdeveloped attitude survey (Appendix A) about partner reading. The questions relate to students’
feelings toward the understanding of the reading material as well as students’ attitudes toward
partner reading. It was administered to the students at the beginning of the study and after partner
reading intervention was implemented. The survey was piloted with five students and revised
based on student feedback. The survey was analyzed by determining the means and standard
deviations for each question. A t-test analysis was conducted to determine if the intervention
made a significant difference in the students’ attitudes toward reading.
Field Notes observation log. The researcher collected field notes during the study as
students participated in partner reading five times. The researcher completed the observation log
during the partner reading intervention. Each student was identified by his or her last name and a
number. The researcher noted the level of participation, student’s attitude toward the
USING PARTNER READING
12
intervention, any comments that the student made, and any additional comments that the
researcher needed to report (Appendix B). The field notes were analyzed by determining
common themes throughout the notes taken by the researcher. A list of codes was used to help
the researcher determine identify the themes.
Results
The purpose of this research was to determine whether reading comprehension would be
improved by implementing partner reading in the classroom. Results of this study are based on
the researcher’s analysis of the data: STAR reading test scores, Accelerated Reader
comprehension test scores, short story comprehension test scores, a partner reading attitude
survey( Appendix A), and field notes (Appendix B).
To determine the effectiveness of partner reading on reading comprehension scores, the
STAR test was administered at the beginning of the 8-week study and at the end of the study.
The scores were used to compare achievement gains before and after the study. The scores were
reported by the grade equivalency (GE) score. Means and standard deviations on the STAR
reading test are given in Table 2. The mean GE score before intervention (M = 6.23) was not
significantly different (t(20) = -0.25, p = 0.80) from the mean GE score after intervention (M =
6.30). Grade equivalency scores were slightly higher after implementation of partner reading, but
the difference was not significant.
Table 2
Achievement on STAR Reading Test Results
GE Scores Before
Intervention
GE Scores After
Intervention
*p<.05; **p<.01
N
21
M
6.23
SD
0.30
21
6.30
0.42
t-value
-0.25
p
0.80
USING PARTNER READING
13
Accelerated Reader (AR) comprehension test scores were used to determine the
effectiveness of partner reading on reading comprehension test scores. AR test scores were
averaged after independent reading and after the intervention of partner reading. Means and
standard deviations on the Accelerated Reader reading comprehension test are given in Table 3.
The mean AR score before intervention (M = 84.10) was not significantly different (t(20) = 2.00,
p = 0.06) from the mean AR score after intervention (M = 78.52). AR scores were slightly lower
after the intervention, but the difference was not statistically significant.
Table 3
Accelerated Reader Comprehension Test Score Results
AR scores before
intervention
AR scores after
intervention
N
M
SD
t-value
p
21
84.10
14.19
2.00
0.06
21
78.52
21.36
*p<.05; **p< .01
Short story comprehension test scores were used to determine the effectiveness of partner
reading on reading comprehension test scores. Short story comprehension test scores were
averaged after independent reading and after the intervention of partner reading. Means and
standard deviations on the short story reading comprehension tests are given in Table 4. The
mean short story reading comprehension test score before intervention (M = 84.10) was
significantly higher (t(39) = 2.12, p = 0.04) than the mean short story reading comprehension test
score after intervention (M = 78.85). Student short story comprehension test scores were
significantly better without the use of partner reading than scores when that strategy was used.
Table 4
Short Story Reading Comprehension Results
N
M
SD
t-value
p
USING PARTNER READING
Short story scores
before intervention
Short story scores
after intervention
14
20
84.10
7.22
21
78.85
8.54
2.12
*0.04
*p<.05; **p< .01
The Partner Reading Attitudes Survey was given to students at the beginning of the study
and at the end of the study. The survey was conducted to determine if students’ attitudes
improved after partner reading implementation. Nineteen students participated in the survey at
the beginning of the study and 20 students participated in the survey at the end of the study.
Results of student answers are shown in Table 5. Twenty-one percent of students reported they
liked discussing stories with others before the study and 65% of students reported they liked
discussing stories with others after the study (Question 3). The survey at the end of the study
showed that 55% of students learn more when working with a partner in reading (Question 5).
Thirty-two percent of students reported they liked reading before the study compared to 40% of
the students after the study (Question 1). Survey results showed there was an increase in
students’ positive attitudes in reading.
Table 5
Partner Reading Attitudes Survey Results
Question
% of Answers at Beginning of Study
% of Answers at End of Study
Yes
No
Sometimes
Yes
No
Sometimes
Q1. I like reading.
32%
16%
52%
40%
20%
40%
Q2. I like reading
silently.
Q3. I like discussing
stories with others.
Q4. I feel more
comfortable asking
my partner for help
rather than asking my
teacher.
Q5. I learn more
when working with a
partner in reading.
58%
32%
10%
35%
25%
40%
21%
37%
42%
65%
10%
25%
37%
26%
37%
20%
35%
45%
42%
21%
37%
55%
15%
30%
USING PARTNER READING
15
Field notes were collected five times during the study as students participated in partner
reading and were analyzed to determine if students’ attitudes improved after partner reading
implementation. Analysis of those notes showed that the majority of the time each individual
student was on task and reading with a partner. There were very few off task behaviors noted.
However, when a partner was off task, the other partner helped get him/her back on task. The
researcher observed comments such as “stop playing” and “it is your turn to read.” It was also
noted that many students who had trouble reading silently participated in partner reading and
were excited about it. The partners helped each other with certain words they did not understand
and they participated in discussing the story throughout the lessons. Many students were excited
about reading with a partner. One student commented, “I don’t mind reading out loud with a
partner.” This particular student is very shy and does not like reading out loud in a whole group
setting, but reads very well with a partner.
Discussion
Conclusions
Does partner reading increase reading comprehension scores? The STAR reading test,
Accelerated Reader comprehension test scores, and short story comprehension test scores were
used to determine if partner reading would help increase reading comprehension scores. There
was a slight increase (0.07) of the grade equivalency score on the STAR reading test from the
beginning of the study and at the end of the study. Accelerated Reader scores were no higher
after partner reading than before implementation, in fact, they decreased 5.58 points. The short
story reading comprehension test results before intervention proved to be higher than after
intervention by 5.25 points. The study results show that partner reading did not make a
USING PARTNER READING
16
difference on student’s reading comprehension scores. Nugent (2001) noted that peer tutoring
has been found to improve the reading ability of both the tutee and tutor but comprehension
scores over the short period of the intervention did not show a significant gain compared to
reading without partners.
Will partner reading improve student’s attitudes toward reading? The results of the
Partner Reading Attitudes Survey (Appendix A) indicated that students’ attitudes improved after
partner reading implementation. There was an increase of 8% when the students stated they like
reading. Noteworthy are the findings that 65% of the students liked discussing stories with
others. Field notes (Appendix B) were collected to determine if students’ attitudes improved after
partner reading implementation. Analysis of field notes showed the majority of the time each
individual student was on task and reading with a partner. It was noted that many students were
excited about reading with a partner. It was also noted that many students who were usually shy
requested partner reading. The findings supported the research by Nugent (2001) and Meisinger
(2004) that students enjoy partner reading as it improves students’ attitudes toward reading and
had a positive impact on them socially and academically.
Significance/Impact on Student Learning
Reading comprehension is an important skill for all students to master. However, many
at-risk and lower achieving students encounter problems throughout school and associate school
with failure, frustration, lack of confidence, and related behavior problems. These negative
behaviors can turn many students away from reading, which can cause them to fail at reading
comprehension. This research focused on how to help students improve reading comprehension
scores, to enjoy reading, and to want to excel in reading. This study provided evidence (STAR
reading test scores, Accelerated Reader test scores, and short story reading comprehension test
USING PARTNER READING
17
scores) that partner reading during this 8-week study did not result in higher reading
comprehension scores. Overall, there was a slight decrease on the average scores. However, this
study provided evidence that partner reading does improve students’ attitudes towards reading.
Sixty-five percent of the students reported that they liked discussing the stories with others and
55% reported that they learned more when working with a partner in reading.
Factors that Influenced Implementation
The lack of time was a critical factor in this study. If partner reading intervention had
been sustained for a longer period of time than 4 weeks, the results may have been different.
Reading short stories and partner reading could have been implemented for a longer period.
Implications and Limitations
Based on the results of this study, the researcher intends to use partner reading in
instruction in the future to improve students’ attitudes in reading as well as reading
comprehension scores. The researcher believes that with more time, test scores after partner
reading could show a positive impact on reading comprehension scores. The findings of the
study will be shared with other reading teachers in the same school setting. Social Studies and
Science teachers may be interested in the results as well, as many of their lessons revolve around
reading comprehension. One limitation of the study could have been the short length (8 weeks)
of the project and intervention only lasting 4 weeks. The researcher is confident that the
successes of this study could be repeated by allowing more time for partner reading in the
classroom.
USING PARTNER READING
18
References
Burns, E. (2006). Pause, prompt and praise–peer tutored reading for pupils with learning
difficulties. British Journal of Special Education, 55(2), 62-67. Retrieved May 29, 2008
from EBSCO database.
Daley, A. (2005). Partner reading: A way to help all readers grow, grades 1-3. Retrieved
September 1, 2008 from http://www.lib.msu.edu/corby/reviews/posted/
daley2.htm.
Ezell, H. K. & Kohler, F. W., (1994). A program description and evaluation of academic peer
tutoring for reading skills of children with special needs. Education & Treatment of
Children 07488491, 17(1). Retrieved May 29, 2008 from EBSCO database.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Lapp, D. (2008). Shared readings: modeling comprehension, vocabulary,
text structures, and text features for older readers. The Reading Teacher, 61(7), 548-556.
Retrieved May 22, 2008 from EBSCO database.
Katz, C. A., & Bohman, S. (2007). Partner reading: Building confidence, releasing
responsibility. Book Links, July 38-40. Retrieved September 4, 2008 from
www.ala.org/ala/booklinksbucket/partnerreading.pdf.
Lapp, D., Fisher, D., & Grant, M., (2008). “You can read this text-I’ll show you how”:
Interactive comprehension instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(5),
372-383. Retrieved May 22, 2008 from EBSCO database.
MacGillivray, L. & Hawes, S., (1994). “I don’t know what I’m doing – they all start with B”:
First graders negotiate peer reading interactions. The Reading Teacher, 48(3), 210-217.
Retrieved May 29, 2008 from EBSCO database.
USING PARTNER READING
19
Meisinger, E. B. (2004). Interaction quality during partner reading. Journal of Literacy Research.
Summer 2004, 1-18. Retrieved June 8, 2008 from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/
mi_qa3785/is_200407/ai_n9419923/print?tag=artBody;col1.
Nugent, M. (2001). Raising reading standards – the reading partners approach: Cross-age peer
tutoring in a special school. British Journal of Special Education, 28(2), 71-79. Retrieved
May 29, 2008 from EBSCO database.
Onofrey, K. A. & Theurer, J. L. (2007). What’s a teacher to do: Suggestions for comprehension
strategy instruction. The Reading Teacher, 60(7), 681-684. Retrieved May 22, 2008 from
EBSCO database.
USING PARTNER READING
20
Appendix A
Partner Reading Survey
The purpose of this survey is to find out how you feel about partner reading. In order to protect
your privacy, PLEASE DO NOT WRITE YOUR NAME ON THIS PAPER.
DIRECTIONS: Read each statement. If you agree with the statement, circle the letter A. If you
disagree with the statement, circle the letter B. If you are not sure, or if you sometimes agree or
sometimes disagree with the statement, circle the letter C. This survey will not affect your grade.
Please be honest in your responses.
1. I like reading.
A. Yes
B. No
C. Sometimes
2. I do not like reading.
A. Yes
B. No
C. Sometimes
3. Reading can be fun and enjoyable.
A. Yes
B. No
C. Sometimes
4. I like reading silently.
A. Yes
B. No
C. Sometimes
5. I like discussing stories with others.
A. Yes
B. No
C. Sometimes
6. I learn less when working with a partner in reading.
A. Yes
B. No
C. Sometimes
7. I dislike reading with a partner.
A. Yes
B. No
C. Sometimes
8. I feel more comfortable asking my partner for help
rather than asking my teacher.
A. Yes
B. No
C. Sometimes
9. I learn more when working with a partner in reading.
A. Yes
B. No
C. Sometimes
10. I would rather work in-groups when reading short
A. Yes
B. No
C. Sometimes
stories.
USING PARTNER READING
21
Appendix B
Field Notes Observation Log
Date: __________________
Student
Name/Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Student Comments
Participation
Attitude
Teacher
Comments