Sentence Elaboration and Retention of Good,Average and Poor Readers

Abstract

This paper reports two studies designed to replicate previous findings by Bransford and his associates. These investigators found that good readers produced reliably more precise sentence elaborations than average and poor readers; average readers surpassed poor readers. Poor readers were also effectively trained to produce precise elaborations. Sixty-one good, average and poor readers participated in Study I. In groups of 5/6, subjects were given sentences containing arbitrary relations between agents and events, and asked to generate elaborations to aid comprehension and retention. The results indicated that compared to average and poor readers, good readers generated substantially more precise elaborations and recalled more information. However, the groups of average and poor readers did not differ from one another in sentence elaboration or recall. This finding was attributed to low-average readers constituting the vast majority of the average reader group. Prior research indicates that low-average or low-achieving students and poor readers demonstrate much overlap in their cognitive and metacognitive deficits. Study II reports successful training of low-average and poor readers in precise sentence elaboration through a self-questioning procedure modelled on cognitive behavior modification. The results from both studies replicated previous research by Bransford and his associates, except for the performance and subsequent training of the low-average readers. Implications of the results for research and practice are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Algozzine

Ysseldyke

J.E.

Learning disabilities as a subset of school failure: The oversophistication of a concept. Technical Report, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities, University of Minnesota, 1982.

Anderson

R.C.

Shirey

Mason

J.M.

An experimental analysis of round robin reading. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Philadelphia, November 1981.

Andre

M.E.D.A.

Anderson

T.H.

The development and evaluation of a self-questioning study technique. Reading Research Quarterly, 1978–1979, 14, 605–623.

Bransford

J.D.

Stein

B.S.

Vye

N.J.

Franks

J.J.

Auble

P.M.

Mezynski

K.J.

Perfetto

G.A.

Differences in approaches to learning: An overview. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, in press.

Bransford

J.D.

Stein

B.S.

Shelton

T.S.

Owings

R.A.

Cognition and adaptation: The importance of learning to learn. In Harvey

(Ed.), Cognition, social behavior and the environment. Hillsdale, NJ: NJ, 1981.)

Brown

A.L.

Palincsar

A.S.

Armbruster

B.B.

Inducing comprehension-fostering activities in interactive learning situations. In Mandl

Stein

Trabasso

(Eds.), Learning from texts. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, in press.)

Collins

Gentner

Rubin

Teaching study strategies. Report No. 4794. Cambridge, MA: Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc., October 1981.

Huey

E.B.

The psychology and pedagogy of reading. Cambridge, MA: MA, 1968.

Kendall

J.R.

Mason

J.M.

Metacognition from the historical context of teaching reading. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 1982, July issue, 82–89.

10.

Palincsar

A.S.

Improving the reading comprehension of junior high students through reciprocal teaching of comprehension-monitoring strategies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, 1982.

11.

Paris

S.G.

Landauer

B.K.

Constructive aspects of children's comprehension and memory. In Kail

R.V.

Hagen

J.W.

(Eds.), Perspectives on the development of memory and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: NJ, 1977.)

12.

Singer

Active comprehension: From answering to asking questions. The Reading Teacher, 1978, May 31, 901–908.

13.

Smiley

S.S.

Oakley

D.D.

Worthen

Campione

J.C.

Brown

A.L.

Recall of thematically relevant material by adolescent good and poor readers as a function of written vs oral presentation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1977, 69 (4), 381–387.

14.

Thorndike

E.L.

Reading as reasoning: a study of mistakes in paragraph reading. Journal of Educational Research, 1917, 8, 323–332.

15.

Warner

M.M.

Schumaker

J.B.

Alley

G.R.

Deshler

D.D.

Learning disabled adolescents in the public schools: Are they different from other low achievers?

Exceptional Education Quarterly, 1980, 1, 27–36.

16.

Warner

M.M.

Alley

G.R.

Schumaker

J.B.

Deshler

D.D.

Clark

F.L.

An epidemiological study of learning disabled adolescents in secondary schools: Achievement and ability, socioeconomic status, and school experiences, (Research Report No. 13) Lawrence, KS: KS, 1980.

17.

Whimbey

Lockhead

Problem solving and comprehension: A short course in analytical reasoning. Philadelphia: The Franklin Institute Press, 1979.

18.

Whimbey

L.S.

Intelligence can be taught. Stanford, CT: Innovative Sciences, 1975.

19.

Wittrock

M.C.

The cognitive movement in education. Educational Psychologist, 1980, 13, 15–29.

20.

Wittrock

M.C.

Generative reading comprehension. Invited address, Division C. American Educational Research Association Convention, Montreal, April 1983.

21.

Wong

B.Y.L.

Cognitive and metacognitive determinants of reading comprehension in gifted, average and disabled readers. Colloquium address at the University of Texas at Dallas and Northern Texas State University, October 11, 1982.

22.

Wong

B.Y.L.

Jones

Increasing metacomprehension in learning disabled and normally achieving students through self-questioning training. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1982, 5, 228–240.

23.

Ysseldyke

J.E.

Algozzine

Shinn

McGue

Similarities and differences between underachievers and students labelled learning disabled: Identical twins with different mothers. Technical Report, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities, University of Minnesota, 1979.