Reading Comprehension Performance of Adolescents Withlearning Disabilities

Abstract

A study was conducted to examine the effects of prior knowledge on the reading comprehension performance of students with learning disabilities. Instruction in information and vocabulary concepts was provided to 13 junior-high school students with learning disabilities who had been predetermined to lack the prior knowledge required by an experimental test of reading comprehension. The effect of prior knowledge was examined by comparing the performance of an experimental group (high prior knowledge group) to a control group (low prior knowledge group). The effect of text structure was also examined by comparing reading comprehension performance on three types of reading passages - textually explicit, textually implicit, and scriptually implicit. The results indicated that students in the experimental group increased their prior knowledge and, as a result of instruction, demonstrated superior reading comprehension performance. In addition, text structure was found to affect reading comprehension performance. When comprehension questions tapped information provided in the text, reading comprehension performance improved for all students. Educational implications of the results are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

R.C.

Spiro

R.J.

Anderson

M.C.

(1978). Schemata as scaffolding for the representation of information in connected discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 15, 434-440.

Baker

Brown

A.L.

(1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In Pearson

P.D.

(ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 353–394). New York: Longman.

Bos

C.S.

Filip

(1984). Comprehension monitoring in learning disabled and average students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 229-233.

Chall

(1983). Stages of reading development. New York: McGraw Hill.

Engelmann

Hanner

(1983). Reading mastery. Chicago: Science Research Associates.

Fox

Routh

D.K.

(1980). Phonemic analysis and severe reading disability. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 9, 115-119.

Gagné

Bell

Weidman

Yarbrough

(1980). The role of prior knowledge in retrieval of information from long-term memory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.

Glaser

(1984). Education and thinking. The role of knowledge. American Psychologist, 39, 93-102.

Hansen

(1984). The role of prior knowledge in content area learning. Topics in Learning and Learning Disability, 3, 66-72.

10.

Hansen

Pearson

P.D.

(1983). An instructional study: Improving the inferential comprehension of good and poor fourth-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 821-829.

11.

Holmes

B.C.

(1983). The effect of prior knowledge on the question answering of good and poor readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(4), 1-17.

12.

Johnston

(1984). Prior knowledge and reading comprehension test bias. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 220-239

13.

Kauffman

N.J.

(1981). The comprehension monitoring abilities of learning disabled children compared to non-disabled children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

14.

LaBerge

Samuels

S.J.

(1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293-323.

15.

Langer

(1984). Examining background knowledge and text comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 468-481.

16.

Liberman

I.Y.

Shankweiler

(1979). Speech, the alphabet, and teaching to read. In Resnick

Weaver

(eds.), Theory and practice of early reading (Vol. 2, pp. 109–132). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

17.

Nicholson

(1984). You get lost when you gotta blimmin' watch the damn words: The low progress reader in the junior high school. Topics in Language and Learning Disabilities, 3, 16-30.

18.

Owings

Peterson

Bransford

J.D.

Morris

C.D.

Stein

B.S.

(1980). Spontaneous monitoring and regulation of learning: A comparison of successful and less successful fifth-graders. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 249-256.

19.

Pearson

P.D.

(1982). A primer for schema theory. Volta Review, 84, 25-33.

20.

Pearson

P.D.

Hansen

Gordon

C.J.

(1979). The effect of background knowledge on young children's comprehension of explicit and implicit information. The Journal of Reading Behavior, 40, 201-209.

21.

Pearson

P.D.

Johnson

D.D.

(1978). Teaching reading comprehension. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

22.

Rumelhart

D.E.

Norman

D.A.

(1981). Analogical processes in learning. In Anderson

J.R.

(ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 335–359). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

23.

Rumelhart

D.E.

Ortony

(1977). The representation of knowledge in memory. In Anderson

R.C.

Spiro

R.J.

Montague

W.E.

(eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 99–135). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

24.

Samuels

S.J.

(1981). Some essentials of decoding. Exceptional Education Quarterly, 2, 11-25.

25.

Smith

R.G.

Schulz

M.F.

(1982). Journeys: A reading and literature program. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

26.

Snider

V.E.

Tarver

S.G.

(1987). The effect of early reading failure on acquisition of knowledge among students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 351-356.

27.

Stanovich

K.E.

(1982). Individual differences in the cognitive process of reading I: Word decoding. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 485-493.

28.

Steffensen

M.S.

Joag-Dev

Anderson

R.C.

(1979). A cross-cultural perspective on reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 15, 10-29.

29.

Taft

M.L.

Leslie

(1985). The effects of prior knowledge and oral reading accuracy on miscues and comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 27, 163-179.

30.

Wagner

R.K.

Sternberg

R.J.

(1984). Alternative conceptions of intelligence and their implications for education. Review of Educational Research, 54, 179-223.

31.

Walker

C.H.

(1987). Relative importance of domain knowledge and overall aptitude on acquisition of domain-related information. Cognition and Instruction, 4(1), 25–42.