Browsing by Subject "reading comprehension"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Characteristics of Students with Persistent Intensive Needs in Reading Comprehension and the Impact of Response Criteria
    (2021-09) Bresina, Britta
    Data from a randomized control trial of a multi-component intensive reading intervention were analyzed to determine the proportion of students nonresponsive to intervention and to identify predictors of nonresponse. Participants included 216 first-grade students identified as at-risk for reading difficulties. Response to intervention was operationalized by two methods: normalized final status and reliable change index (RCI). Nonresponsive students were separated into two theoretically-guided subgroups: (a) those with difficulties in both decoding and comprehension and (b) those with difficulties in comprehension only. Domain-general cognitive and language and literacy constructs were investigated as predictors of nonresponse. Results showed that the two response criteria identified largely different students as nonresponsive. Further, the predictors of nonresponse varied by response criteria. Implications for use of final status and growth response criteria are discussed as well as the relations of various domain-general cognitive and language/literacy constructs to intervention nonresponse.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The Promise of Refutation Texts for Science and Literacy Learning in the Primary Grades: A Descriptive Study of Extratextual Talk during the Read-Aloud
    (2024) Burger, Kristin
    Knowledge supports all aspects of reading including decoding, fluency, and comprehension (Cervetti & Hiebert, 2015; Cervetti & Wright, 2020; Duke & Cartwright, 2021; Kintsch, 1988, 1988; McNamara & Kintsch, 1996; Priebe et al., 2012). Early knowledge predicts reading growth, and science knowledge and reading have a mutually beneficial relationship throughout elementary school (Hwang, 2020; Hwang et al., 2023). Evidence also shows that students benefit when content learning and literacy instruction are integrated (Hwang et al., 2022). For these reasons, educators must focus on building students' knowledge in topics like science and social studies as early as possible. This is especially true for language minority students and students from economically disadvantaged homes (Morgan et al., 2016). Children’s science misconceptions are widely documented (Carey, 2000; Chi & Roscoe, 2002; Kuhn & Pearsall, 2000; Vosniadou & Ioannides, 1998). If not directly addressed, they can persist and interfere with knowledge building (Kendeou & van den Broek, 2005; Vosniadou, 2013). Through instruction students can revise their knowledge to align with scientific findings. This is a process known as knowledge revision (Kendeou et al., 2014). Knowledge revision has been supported with the use of refutation texts with older students (Kendeou & O’Brien, 2014; Kim & Kendeou, 2021). No empirical studies have looked at the use of refutation texts with primary students. This study, part of a larger study called RAISE Learning (Read-aloud Instruction for Science Learning), examines how Kindergarten and first grade teachers use two genres of informational science text in read aloud sessions with small groups of students. One text is a standard informational text, the other is a refutation text. Both texts cover the same information about birds, however the refutation text was designed to activate common misconceptions about birds, explicitly refute them, and provide further facts to support children in building an accurate knowledge network about birds (Guzzetti et al., 1993). From transcripts of 15 video recorded read-aloud sessions with two text conditions, seven with refutation text and eight with standard informational text, student and teacher extratextual talk was analyzed with qualitative and quantitative techniques. Results showed that teacher questioning was the most common form of extratextual talk across both read-aloud conditions. Some types of teacher questioning were productive while others were less conducive to learning. A paired-sample Wilcoxen test revealed that teachers asked more questions with higher levels of abstraction and students produced more inferential talk in the refutation text condition. Descriptive statistics indicated that teachers’ talk patterns varied widely by amount and type. Qualitative themes included high levels of student interest, lack of teacher comfort with the science topic, presence of student misconceptions, and the persistence of initiation-response-feedback (IRF) classroom discourse structure. Teacher interview analysis highlighted a spectrum of beliefs about student capacity, the purpose of the read aloud, the use of informational text, and what misconceptions arose during the read aloud sessions. This study supports the literature concerning how teachers can best leverage the read aloud to engage students with science texts and knowledge revision in the early grades. The findings from this study have implications for the integration of science and literacy with refutation texts in primary grades, teacher professional learning on the use of discussion to support engagement and knowledge acquisition, and policy to emphasize the use of informational text in the primary grades during the literacy block.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Sources of Variance In Reading Comprehension Research: the Role of Measures and Interventions
    (2020-05) Diggs, Calvary
    The purpose of this study was to examine if differences in reading comprehension measures’ response formats were associated with differential outcomes for reading comprehension interventions. Specifically, this study used meta-analysis to evaluate the overall treatment effect of reading comprehension interventions, the association between a measure’s response format and measured intervention outcomes, and whether specific intervention effects varied based on the measure’s response format. A systematic review of the literature identified 66 published and unpublished research reports and studies conducted since 2000. All studies administered a reading comprehension intervention for students in the primary grades and measured the effects using a reading comprehension measure. Meta-analytic findings suggested an overall positive effect of reading comprehension interventions for both intervention to control group comparisons at posttest (Hedge’s g = 0.20) and pretest to posttest comparisons in the intervention group (Hedge’s g = 0.71). The response format of a reading comprehension measure, specifically retell/summary formats, was significantly associated with intervention outcomes, even after controlling for purposively selected variables. Findings also indicated that improving background knowledge and multicomponent interventions were significantly associated with performance on measures of reading comprehension with retell/summary response formats. The results of this study provide additional evidence that measures using the retell/summary response formats value reading comprehension differently, specifically in the context of interventions. Findings may also be used to caution against the interchangeable use of retell/summary formats with other measures of reading comprehension.