Text Processing Differences

Denton, C. A., Enos, M., York, M. J., Francis, D. J., Kulesz, P. A., Fletcher, J. M., & Carter, S. (2016). Text-processing differences in adolescent adequate and poor comprehenders reading accessible and challenging narrative and informational text. Reading Research Quarterly, 50(4), 3-13. doi: 10.1002/rrq.105

Background

The authors noted that a lot of research had been conducted on the reading processes of adults showing that better comprehenders generated more inferences and engage in more paraphrasing than weak comprehenders. The former were more likely to spot textual inconsistencies and evaluate text ideas. The authors noted that little was known about the reading processes of adolescents.

Aims

The study examined students’ engagement in inference generation, paraphrasing, verbatim text repetition, and monitoring while they read informational or narrative texts, some of which were challenging and others accessible.

Sample

The participants were 325 American students in grades 7, 9, and 11, ranging from 12 to 18 years in eight different schools in the southern United States.

Method

Based on reading comprehension test scores, the students were designated as either poor or adequate comprehenders. They were randomly assigned to read narrative or informational texts. This resulted in four different groups of students. For each genre, they read one text that was at their grade level and another that was above their grade level. The think-aloud approach was used to identify factors that characterized poor and adequate comprehenders. The students were instructed to read each text aloud and to stop at each prompt line to verbalize whatever they were thinking at that point. All the transcribed think-aloud protocols were coded into three categories: inference generation, monitoring, and other responses to text. Multivariate analyses were conducted to determine the conditions that best differentiated the text processes used by the four groups.

Findings

The authors found that adequate comprehenders applied critical text processes such as inference generation, monitoring, integration of text information across the text, and integration of text information with background knowledge. None of the students used these critical text processes consistently in all types of text. Poor comprehenders had greater difficulty in inference generation and paraphrasing, especially in informational texts, than their more proficient counterparts. The former also had more difficulty monitoring while reading both narrative and informational texts than the latter.

Implications

The authors recommended that teachers pay attention to text difficulty and genre when planning comprehension instruction. They suggested that students might benefit from instruction in inference generation and paraphrasing in grade-level texts before progressing to more difficult narratives and informational texts. Teachers of poor comprehenders should also consider providing background knowledge related to information texts, using audiovisual resources or photographs, prior to students reading the texts.

Original article retrieved from Wiley Online Library.