The purpose of this study was to identify the skill areas in which secondary students with learning disabilities exhibit differential reading performance on narrative versus expository text. For this study, 111 high school students in special and remedial education classes were administered two narrative and two expository passages, with the order of presentation counterbalanced across subjects. Results indicated that students had more difficulty with expository text than with narrative text in terms of reading fluency and comprehension, However, effects for comprehension were mediated by the type of question asked. Implications for the reading instruction of secondary students with learning disabilities are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Armbruster, B., & Nagy, W.E. (1992). Vocabulary in content area lessons. The Reading Teacher, 7, 550-551.
2.
Barton, M.L. (1997). Addressing the literacy crisis: Teaching reading in the content areas. National Association of Secondary School Principals, 81 (587), 22-30.
3.
Bender, W.N. (1998). Learning disabilities: Characteristics, identification, and teaching strategies. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
4.
Berkowitz, S.J., & Taylor, B.M. (1981). The effects of text type and familiarity on the nature of information recalled by readers. In M. Kamil (Ed.), Directions in reading: Reading and instruction (pp. 157-167). Washington, DC: National Reading Conference .
5.
Boyle, J.R., & Weishaar, M. (1997). The effects of expert-generated versus student-generated cognitive organizers on the reading comprehension of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice , 12, 228-235.
6.
Bryant, D.P., Ugel, N., Thompson, S., & Hamff, A. (1999). Instructional strategies for content-area reading instruction. Intervention in School and Clinic, 34, 293-302.
7.
Carr, S.C., & Thompson, B. (1996). The effects of prior knowledge and schema activation strategies on the inferential reading comprehension of children with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 19, 48-61.
Englert, C.S., & Hiebert, E.H. (1984). Children's developing awareness of text structure in expository materials. Journal of Education Psychology, 68, 65-75.
10.
Englert, C.S., & Thomas, C.C. (1987). Sensitivity to text structure in reading and writing: A comparison between learning disabled and non-learning disabled students . Learning Disability Quarterly, 10, 93-105.
11.
Espin, C.A., & Deno, S.L. (1993a). Content-specific and general reading disabilities: Identification and educational relevance. The Journal of Special Education, 27, 321-337.
12.
Espin, C.A., & Deno, S.L. (1993b). Performance in reading from content area text as an indicator of achievement. Remedial and Special Education , 14, 47-59.
13.
Espin, C.A., & Foegen, A. (1996). Validity of general outcome measures for predicting secondary students' performance on content-area tasks. Exceptional Children, 62, 497-514.
14.
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (1986). Effects of systematic evaluation: A meta-analysis . Exceptional Children, 53, 199-208.
15.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C.L. (1989). Effects of instrumental use of curriculum-based measurement to enhance instructional programs. Remedial and Special Education, 10, 43-52.
16.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C.L. (1994). Strengthening the connection between assessment and instructional planning with expert systems. Exceptional Children, 61, 138-146.
17.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Kazdan, S. (1999). Effects of peer-assisted learning strategies on high school students with serious reading problems. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 309-318.
18.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9, 20-28.
Gajria, M., & Salvia, J. (1992). The effects of summarization instruction on text comprehension of students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 58, 508-516.
21.
Garner, R. (1987). Strategies for reading and studying expository text. Educational Psychologist, 22, 299-312.
22.
Garner, R., & McCaleb, J.L. (1985). Effects of text manipulations on quality of written summaries. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10, 139-149.
23.
Gordon, C.J. (1990). Contexts for expository text structure use. Reading Research and Instruction, 29(2), 55-72.
24.
Graesser, A., Golding, J.M., & Long, D.L. (1991). Narrative representation and comprehension. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 171-204). White Plains, NY: Longman.
25.
Graves, A.W. (1986). Effects of direct instruction and metacomprehension training of finding main ideas. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 1, 90-100.
Griffin, C.C., Simmons, D.C., & Kameenui, E.J. (1991). Investigating the effectiveness of graphic organizer instruction on the comprehension and recall of science content by students with learning disabilities. Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities, 7, 355-376.
28.
Hansen, C.L. (1978). Story retelling used with average and learning disabled readers as a measure of reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1, 62-69.
29.
Hiebert, E.H., Englert, C.S., & Brennan, S. (1983). Awareness of text structure in recognition and production of expository discourse. Journal of Reading Behavior , 15, 63-79.
30.
Horton, S.V., & Lovitt, T.C. (1994). A comparison of two methods of administering group reading inventories to diverse learners. Remedial and Special Education, 15, 378-390.
31.
Horton, S.V., Lovitt, T.C., & Bergerud, D. (1990). The effectiveness of graphic organizers for three classifications of secondary students in content area classes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 12-22.
32.
Hudson, P., Lignugaris-Kraft, B., & Miller, T. (1993). Using content enhancements to improve the performance of adolescents with learning disabilities in content classes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 8, 106-126.
Kent, C.E. (1984). A linguist compares narrative and expository prose . Journal of Reading, 28, 232-235.
35.
Lapp, D., Flood, J., & Farnan, N. (1989). Content area reading and learning: Instructional strategies. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
36.
Malone, L.D., & Mastropieri, M.A. (1992). Reading comprehension instruction: Summarization and self-monitoring training for students with learning disabilities . Exceptional Children, 58, 270-279.
37.
Mastropieri, M.A., Leinart, A., & Scruggs, T.E. (1999). Strategies to increase reading fluency. Intervention in School and Clinic, 5, 278-283, 292.
38.
Mastropieri, M.A., & Scruggs, T.E. (1996). Reflections on "Promoting thinking skills of students with learning disabilities: Effects on recall and comprehension of expository prose."Exceptionality, 6, 53-57.
39.
McCormick, S. (1992). Disabled readers' erroneous responses to inferential comprehension questions: Description and analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 55-77.
40.
McCormick, S. (1999). Instructing students who have literacy problems . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Simon & Schuster.
41.
Meyer, B.J.F., Brandt, D.H., & Bluth, G.J. (1980). Use of top level structure in text: Key for ninth-graders' comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 72-103.
42.
Meyer, B.J.F., & Rice, G.E. (1984). The structure of text. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 1, pp. 319-351). White Plains, NY: Longman.
43.
Microsoft Word 98 [Computer software]. (1998). Richmond, WA: Microsoft.
44.
Nagy, W.E. (1998). Teaching vocabulary to improve reading comprehension . Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
45.
Nathan, R.G., & Stanovich, K.E. (1991). The causes and consequences of differences in reading fluency. Theory Into Practice, 30, 176-184.
46.
Nelson, J.R., Smith, D.J., & Dodd, J.M. (1992). The effects of teaching a summary skills strategy to students identified as learning disabled on their comprehension of science text. Education and Treatment of Children, 15, 228-243.
47.
O'Shea, L.J., Sindelar, P.T., & O'Shea, D.J. (1987). The effects of repeated reading and attentional cues on the reading fluency and comprehension of learning disabled readers. Learning Disabilities Research,2, 103-109.
48.
Parmar, S., Deluca, C.B., & Janczak, T.M. (1994). Investigations into the relationship between sceince and language abilities of students with mild disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 15, 117-126.
49.
Pearson, D.P., & Fielding, L. (1991). Comprehension instruction. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil , P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 815-860). White Plains, NY: Longman.
50.
Rasinski, T.V. (1990). Investigating measures of reading fluency. Education Research Quarterly, 14(3), 37-44.
51.
Rose, T.L. (1984). The effects of two prepractice procedures on oral reading. Journal of Reading Disabilities,17, 544-548.
52.
Rupley, W.H., & Wilson, V.L. (1996). Content, domain, and word knowledge: Relationship to comprehension of narrative and expository text. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 8, 419-432.
53.
Samuels, S.J. (1987). Information processing abilities and reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 18-22.
54.
Seidenberg, P.L. (1982). Implications of schema theory for learning disabled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 352-354.
55.
Seidenberg, P.L. (1989). Relating text-processing research to reading and writing instruction for learning disabled students. Learning DisabilitiesFocus, 5(1), 4-12.
56.
Shinn, M.R., Good, R.H. III, Knutson, N., & Tilly, W.D. III. (1992). Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency: A confirmatory analysis of its relation to reading. School Psychology Review, 21, 459-479.
57.
Simmons, D.C., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S., Hodge, J.P., & Mathes, P.G. (1994). Importance of instructional complexity and role-reciprocity to Classwide Peer Tutoring. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 9, 203-212.
Sindelar, P.T., Monda, L.E., & O'Shea, L.J. (1990). Effects of repeated readings on instructional- and mastery-level readers. Journal of Educational Research, 83, 220-226.
60.
Snider, V.E. (1989). Reading comprehension performance of adolescents with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly , 12, 87-96.
61.
Spargo, E. (1989). Timed reading series (3rd ed.). Providence, RI: Jamestown .
62.
Spiro, R.J., & Myers, A. (1984). Individual differences and underlying cognitive processes in reading. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 471-501). White Plains, NY: Longman.
63.
Stanovich, K.E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360-407.
64.
Stevens, R.J. (1988). Effects of strategy training on the identification of the main idea of expository passages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 21-26.
65.
Taylor, B.M. (1980). Children's memory for expository text after reading . Reading Research Quarterly, 3, 399-411.
66.
Taylor, B.M. (1982). Text structure and children's comprehension and memory for expository material. Journal of Educational Psychology , 74, 323-340.
67.
Taylor, B.M., & Beach, R.W. (1984). The effects of text structure instruction on middle-grade students' comprehension and production of expository text. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 134-146.
68.
Taylor, B.M., & Samuels, S.J. (1983). Children's use of text structure in the recall of expository material. American Educational Research Journal , 20, 517-528.
69.
Taylor, B.M., & Williams, J.P. (1983). Comprehension of learning-disabled readers: Task and text variations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 743-751.
70.
Walker, B.J. (2000). Diagnostic teaching of reading (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
71.
Weaver, C.A., & Kintsch, W. (1991). Expository text. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 230-244). White Plains, NY: Longman.
72.
Wixon, K.K., & Lipson, M.Y. (1991). Perspectives on reading disabilities research . In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Monsenthal, & P. D. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 539-570). White Plains, NY: Longman.
73.
Wong, B.Y.L. (1980). Activating the inactive learner: Use of questions/ prompts to enhance comprehension and retention of implied information in learning disabled children. Learning Disability Quarterly, 3, 29-37.
74.
Wong, B.Y.L., & Wilson, M. (1984). Investigating the awareness of and teaching passage organization in learning disabled children. Journal of Reading Behavior, 17, 477-482.
75.
Zabrucky, K., & Ratner, H.H. (1992). Effects of passage type on comprehension monitoring and recall in good and poor readers. Journal of Reading Behavior , 24, 373-391.
