In order to examine the relative importance of vocabulary difficulty and prior knowledge to the comprehension of a narrative passage taken from a social studies text, 61 sixth graders were given either an easy vocabulary or a difficult vocabulary version of a text. They also were given either relevant or irrelevant preinstruction about the culture described in the text. Both vocabulary difficulty and type of preinstruction had significant effects on comprehension, but the two effects did not significantly interact, partially replicating the findings of Freebody and Anderson (1983b). The results indicate that knowledge-based preinstruction can significantly improve comprehension of a text written about an unfamiliar topic but cannot compensate for the effects of text difficulty in itself.
References
1.
AndersonR. C.FreebodyP. (1981). Vocabulary knowledge. In GuthrieJ. T. (Ed.), Comprehension and teaching: Research reviews (pp. 77–117). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
2.
BeckI. L.OmansonR. C.McKeownM. G. (1982). An instructional redesign of reading lessons: Effects on comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 462–481.
3.
ChallJ. S. (1958). Readability: An appraisal of research and application. Columbus: Bureau of Educational Research, Ohio State University.
4.
ChallJ. S.ConardS. S.HarrisS. (in press). Textbooks and challenge: A report to the Spencer Foundation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
5.
DaleE.O'RourkeJ. P. (1976). The living word vocabulary. Chicago: Field Enterprises.
6.
FreebodyP.AndersonR. C. (1983a). Effects of differing proportions and locations of difficult vocabulary on text comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15, 19–40.
7.
FreebodyP.AndersonR. C. (1983b). Effects of vocabulary difficulty, text cohesion, and schema availability on reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 277–294.
8.
GlassG. V.McGawB.SmithM. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
9.
GravesM. F. (in press). Vocabulary learning and instruction. In RothkopfE. Z.EhriL. C. (Eds.), Review of Research in Education (Vol. 13). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
10.
GravesM. F.CookeC. L.LaBergeM. J. (1983). Effects of previewing difficult short stories on low ability junior high school students' comprehension, recall, and attitudes. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 262–276.
11.
KintschW.GreeneE. (1978). The role of culture-specific schemata in the comprehension and recall of stories. Discourse Processes, 1, 1–13.
12.
LappD.FloodJ.GleckmanG. (1982). Classroom practices can make use of what researchers learn. The Reading Teacher, 35, 578–585.
13.
LuitenJ.AmesW.AckersonG. A. (1980). A meta-analysis of the effects of advance organizers on learning and retention. American Educational Research Journal, 17, 211–218.
14.
MacGinitieW. H. (1978). The Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests. Chicago: Riverside Publishers.
15.
OwenR. C. (1972). Inquiring about cultures. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
16.
PearsonP. D.HansenJ.GordonC. (1979). The effects of background knowledge on young children's comprehension of explicit and implicit information. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11, 201–209.
17.
PearsonP. D.JohnsonD. D. (1978). Teaching reading comprehension. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
18.
RumelhartD. E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In DornicS. (Ed.), Attention and performance VI (pp. 573–603). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19.
RumelhartD. E.OrtonyA. (1977). The representation of knowledge in memory. In AndersonR. C.SpiroR. C.MontagueW. E. (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 99–135). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
20.
SchallertD. L. (1982). The significance of knowledge: A synthesis of research related to schema theory. In OttoW.WhiteS. (Eds.), Reading expository material (pp. 13–48). New York: Academic Press.
21.
WittrockM. C.MarksC.DoctorowM. (1975). Reading as a generative process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 481–489.
