comprehension and strategy acquisition. However, there were no differences on
perception of study skills. In secondary analyses, poorer readers in the reciprocal teaching
group benefited more on both reading comprehension and strategy acquisition than poorer
readers in the control group.
In conclusion, the results from the studies on reciprocal teaching in L1 context
were positive for all age groups. In primary schooling, students could decode words
adequately, but comprehend text poorly. In high schools and universities, students had
problems in reading comprehension. After receiving reciprocal teaching, their scores on
reading comprehension tests were significantly better than the ones in the control group.
Additionally, the general results from these studies point to the fact that using reciprocal
teaching with the four main strategies combined with explicit instruction was the most
successful method to help students improve their reading comprehension.
Reciprocal Teaching in ESL and EFL Context
Primary school level.
Russell (1998) studied the effects of reciprocal teaching on reading and oral
language proficiency. Forty-eight 6th-grade students were randomly assigned to an
experimental and a control group, respectively 25 and 23 in each group. The experimental
group received 20 days of reciprocal teaching treatment while the control group received
traditional ESL reading instruction. Both groups used the same materials. The instruments
in this study consisted of the Language Assessment Scales (LAS) Standardized Reading
Test, the oral language proficiency (LAS - O) test, and the Self-Perception Scale (RSPS).
Each instrument was administered as pre– and posttests. This study extended the positive
effects of reciprocal teaching on reading comprehension and it was additionally found