This study investigated 4 developing readers' processing of text by asking them to think aloud as they read 5 narratives and 5 expository texts over the course of a school year. Five general categories of processing were identified: paraphrasing, questioning, elaborating, hypothesizing, and monitoring. The reading of narratives was compared to the reading of expository texts. While reading narratives, students hypothesized a greater percentage of the time, and while reading expository texts, they elaborated a greater percentage of the time. When reading narratives, students made more inferences, predictions, and interpretations, which seemed to be based on a developing synthesis and integration of incoming text information. When reading expository texts, students focused more on personal knowledge and experiences, providing commentary about or creating comparisons in response to details and more local text information. Students were also asked to provide a summary. Student summaries differed by genre, with narrative summaries including a greater percentage of important ideas than the summaries of expository texts which, like the students' on-line processing, focused more on local text information.
References
1.
AfflerbachP.JohnstonP. (1984). On the use of verbal reports in reading research. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16, 307–322.
2.
AlvermannD.E. (1984). Second graders' strategic preferences while reading basal stories. Journal of Educational Research, 77(3), 184–189.
3.
AlvermannD.E.PhelpsS. (1983). Elementary readers' strategic activity in processing story-length material. In NilesJ.HarrisL. (Eds.), Searches for meaning in reading/language processing and instruction: Thirty-second yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 182–186). Rochester, NY: National Reading Conference.
4.
AndersonJ.R.RederL. (1979). An elaborative processing explanation of depth of processing. In CermakL.S.CraikF.I.M. (Eds.), Levels of processing in human memory (pp. 385–403). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5.
AokiE.M.ArnoldV.A.FloodJ.HoffmanJ.V.LappD.MartinezM.PalincsarA.S.PriestleyM.RoserN.SmithC.B.TealeW.HTinajeroJ.T.WebbA.W.WilliamsP.E.WoodK.W. (1993). A New View: Macmillan/McGraw-Hill Reading/Language Arts.New York: Macmillan/McGraw-Hill.
6.
ArmbrusterB.B. (1984). The problem of “inconsiderate text.” In DuffyG.G.RoehlerL.R.MasonJ. (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Perspectives and suggestions (pp. 202–217). New York: Longman.
7.
ArnoskyJ. (1979). A kettle of hawks and other wildlife groups.New York: Lothrop, Lee, & Shepard.
8.
de BeaugrandeR. (1981). Design criteria for process models of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 261–315.
9.
BeckI.L.CarpenterP.A. (1986). Cognitive approaches to understanding reading: Implications for instructional practice. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1098–1105.
10.
BeckI.L.McKeownM.G. (1989). Expository text for young readers: The issue of coherence. In ResnickL. B. (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 47–65). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11.
BeckI.L.McKeownM.G.WorthyJ.SandoraC.A.KucanL. (1996). Questioning the author: A year-long implementation to engage students with text. The Elementary School Journal, 96, 385–414.
12.
BlackJ.B. (1985). An exposition on understanding expository text. In BrittonB.K.BlackJ.B. (Eds.), Understanding expository text: A theoretical and practical handbook for analyzing explanatory text (pp. 249–267). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
GraesserA.GoldingJ.M.LongD.L. (1991). Narrative representation and comprehension. In BarrR.KamilM. L.MosenthalP. B.PearsonP.D. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 171–205). New York: Longman.
20.
HiebertE.H.EnglertC.S.BrennanS. (1983). Awareness of text structure in recognition and production of expository discourse. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(1), 63–79.
21.
KintschW. (1986). Learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 3(2), 87–108.
22.
KlareG.R. (1984). Readability. In BarrR.KamilM. L.MosenthalP.PearsonP.D. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 681–774). New York: Longman.
23.
KletzienS.B. (1994, November). Adolescents' comprehension strategy use for expository and narrative text. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Reading Conference, San Diego, CA.
24.
KucanL. (1993, December). Uncovering cognitive processes in reading. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Reading Conference, Charleston, SC.
25.
LangerJ.A. (1990). The process of understanding reading for literary and informative purposes. Research in the Teaching of English, 24(3), 229–260.
26.
LappD.FloodJ.FarnanN. (Eds.). (1989). Content area reading and learning: Instructional strategies.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
27.
LouieA. (1982). Yeh-Shen: A Cinderella story from China.New York: Philomel.
28.
LytleS. (1982). Exploring comprehension style: A study of twelfth-grade readers' transactions with text. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
29.
MacLachlanP. (1985). Sarah, plain and tall.New York: Harper Collins.
30.
McNamaraT.P.MillerD.L.BransfordJ.D. (1991). Mental models and reading comprehension. In BarrR.KamilM. L.MosenthalP.PearsonP.D. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 490–511). New York: Longman.
31.
MeyerB.J.F. (1975). The organization of prose and its effects on memory.Amsterdam: North-Holland.
32.
MeyerB.J.F.FreedleR.O. (1984). Effects of discourse type on recall. American Educational Research Journal, 21(1), 121–143.
33.
MeyersJ.LytleS.PalladinoD.DevenpeckG.GreenM. (1990). Think-aloud protocol analysis: An investigation of reading comprehension strategies in fourth- and fifth-grade students. Psychoeducational Assessment, 8, 112–127.
34.
OlshavskyJ.E. (1976/77). Reading as problem solving: An investigation of strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 12, 654–674.
35.
PearsonP.D.HansenJ.GordonC. (1979). The effect of background knowledge on young children's comprehension of explicit and implicit information. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11(3), 201–209.
36.
PiekarzJ.A. (1956). Getting meaning from reading. The Elementary School Journal, 56, 303–309.
37.
PressleyM.AfflerbachP. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
38.
RosenblattL.M. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
39.
RyanS.M. (1985). An examination of reading and writing strategies of selected fifth-grade children. In NilesJ.A.LalikR.V. (Eds.), Issues in literacy: A research perspective: Thirty-fourth yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 386–390). Rochester, NY: National Reading Conference.
40.
SayA. (1989). The lost lake.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
41.
ScardamaliaM.BereiterC. (1984). Development of strategies in text processing. In MandlH.SteinN.L.TrabassoT. (Eds.), Learning and comprehension of text (pp. 379–406). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
42.
ShanahanT. (1992). Reading comprehension as a conversation with an author. In PressleyM.HarrisK.GuthrieJ. (Eds.), Promoting academic competence and literacy: Cognitive research and instructional innovation (pp. 129–148). San Diego: Academic Press.
43.
SimonS. (1989). Whales.New York: HarperCollins.
44.
SpiroR.J.TaylorB.M. (1987). On investigating children's transition from narrative to expository discourse: The multidimensional nature of psychological text classification. In TierneyR.J.AndersP.L.MitchellJ.N. (Eds.), Understanding readers' understanding: Theory and practice (pp. 77–93). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
45.
SquireJ.R. (1964). The responses of adolescents while reading four short stories (Research report no. 2). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
46.
StrangR. (1967). Exploration of the reading process. Reading Research Quarterly, 2(3), 33–45.
47.
SussmanS.JamesR. (1989). Big friend, little friend: A book about symbiosis.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
48.
TrabassoT.SuhS. (1993). Understanding text: Achieving explanatory coherence through on-line inferences and mental operations in working memory. Discourse Processes, 16, 3–34.
49.
Van AllsburgC. (1968). Two bad ants.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
50.
WadeS.E. (1990). Using think alouds to assess comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 43, 442–451.
51.
WaernY. (1978). Thought processes during reading (Working papers from the cognitive seminar, no. 2). Stockholm, Sweden: University of Stockholm, Department of Psychology.
52.
WaltersM.P. (1986). Justin and the best biscuits in the world.New York: Lothrop, Lee, & Shepard.
53.
WeaverC.A.IIIKintschW. (1991). Expository text. In BarrR.KamilM. L.MosenthalP.PearsonP.D. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 230–245). New York: Longman.
54.
WittgensteinL. (1953). Philosophical investigations: The English text of the third edition (AnscombeG.E.M., Trans.). New York: Macmillan.
55.
WrayD. (1994). Text and authorship. The Reading Teacher, 48, 52–57.
56.
YochumN. (1991). Children's learning from informational text: The relationship between prior knowledge and text structure. Journal of Reading Behavior, 23(1), 87–108.
57.
ZabruckyK.RatnerH.H. (1992). Effects of passage type on comprehension monitoring and recall in good and poor readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24(3), 373–391.
