Text Comprehension Processes in Reading: Appendix
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 234 361 CS 007 296 AUTHOR Danks, Joseph H. TITLE Text Comprehension Processes in Reading: Appendix. INSTITUTION Kent State Univ., Ohio. SPONS AGENCY National Inst. of Education (ED), Washington, DC. PUB DATE Sep 82 GRANT NIE-G-78-0223 NOTE 388p.; For related document, see CS 007 295. Parts may be marginally legible. ' PUB TYPE Reports - Research/Technical (143) -= Collected Works General (020) EARS PRICE MF01/PC16 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Adults; Beginning Reading; *Cognitive Processes; Comparative Analysis; Learning Theories; Oral Reading; Primary Education; *Reading Comprehension; *Reading Instruction; *Reading Processes; *Reading Research; *Reading Strategies; Research Methodology IDENTIFIERS *Reader Text Relationship ABSTRACT The readings in this collection were prepared to accompany a report of a series of experiments conducted to determine what information readers, both skilled adults and children beginning to read, use when they read to understand a story. Titles of the readings are are (I) "Oral Reading: Does It Reflect Decoding or Comprehension?" (2) "Models of ,Language Comprehension," 13) "Experimental PsychoIinguistics," (4) "Comprehension in Listening and Reading: Same or Different?" (5) "An Interactive Analysis of Oral Reading," (6) "Comprehension of Prose Texts during Reading," (7) "Comprehension Processes in Oral Reading," (8) "Integration of Sentence Meanings in Stories," (9) "Comprehension of Metaphors: Priming the Ground," (10) "An Information Processing Analysis of the Cognitive Processes Involved in Oral Reading," (11) "Reading Comprehension Processes in Polish and English," (12) "A Comparison of Reading Comprehension Processes in Polish and English," and (13) "Memory and Metamemory Processes: Levels of Processing and Cognitive Effort in the Retention of Prose." (FL) *********************************************************************** * Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * * from the original document. * *********************************************************************** U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EOUCATION EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) ;..< This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. : Minor changes have boon made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in rhis docu. merit do not necessarily represent cfficial NIE position or policy. Text Comprehension Processes in Reading: Appendix Joseph H. DankS Kent State University National Institute of Education roc NIE-G-78-0223 r- 0 September 1982 LA Contents Danks, J. H., & Fears. R. Oral- reading: DoeS it reflect decoding or com- prehension?In L. B._Resnick_& P. A4__Weaver (Eds.). Theory and practice-of-early-reading. Vol. 3. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1979. Pp. 89=108. Danks. J. H. Models of language comprehension. Po -lish Psychological Bulletin, 1978, 9; 183-192; Danks, J. H., & Glucksberg, S. Experimental psycholinguistics. Annual Review of Psychology. 1980, 2Li 391-447; Danks4 J. R. Comprehension in listening and reading! Same or different? In_J. DankS & K. Pezdek, Reading and Understanding.Newark; International Reading Association., 1980. Pp. 1-39. Danks; J. H., & Hill, -G._0. An interactive analYSis of oral reading. In A. M. Lesgold &_C. A.Perfetti (Eds.), Interactive processes in reading. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum ASSOciateS, 1981. P. 131-153. Danks, J. H. Comprehension of prose texts dUring teadihg. XXIInd_Inter= national Congress of Psychology; Leipzig; 1980. Abstract guide, Vol. 1. p. 162. Danks. J. H., Bohn; L.. & Fears; R. Comprehension processes in oral reading. In G. B. Flores d'Arcais & R. J. Jarvella (Eds.); The process of language understanding. Chichester: Wiley, in press. Danks, J. H.. Bohn, L., End; L., & Miller, R.Integration of sentence meanings_ in stories. Psychonomic Society. St. Louis. 1980. (Abstract.)Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1980, 16, 150. End; L. J., & Danks, J. H. Comprehension of_metaphorss Priming the ground. Midwestern Psychological Association, Minneapolis, 1982. Danks, J. H._An information-processing analysis of the cognitive pro cesses involved in oral reading. American Educational Research Association, New York, 1982; Kurkiewicz, D., Kurczi I., & Danks, J. H. Reading comprehension processes in Polish and English. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 1981, 12, 25-31. Danks, J. H.. & Kurcz,_I. A comparison of reading comprehension processes in Polish and English. Submitted for publication, 1982. Bohn, E. A. Memory and metamemory processes: Levels_of processing and cognitive effort in the retention of prose. Submitted for publica- tion, 1982. Orã Reading: In L,_B. Resnick & P.Ai Weaver (Edt.),11galel Does It Reflect Practiced Early Reading, Vol.3. Hil Wale, N.J.: Lawrence Er lbaumASSOolates,1979. Decodingor Comprehension? Joseph H. Danks Ramona Fears Kent State University How do most elementary school teachers determine whethera child can read? It is likely that the teacher hands the childa book at the child's estimated reading level and asks the child to read. That thereading is to be aloud is usually not stated but understood implicitly by bothteacher and child, What reading activity is commonly found inmost traditional lower-elementary- grade classrooms?--children reading aloud individuallyor in unison. Oral reading provides the teacher witha quick evaluation of each child's progress and provides the child with practiceon at least some aspects of reading. Although oral reading is a widely used procedureswe lack well-develOped theories concerning what specificcomponents of the reading processare assessed and what reading skillsare developed by oral reading-. TWO HYPOTHESES ABOUT ORALREADING A general model of readingthat is commonly assumedproposes thi.t print input is first deeded into a phonological code thathas most of the characteristics of an oral verbal input. This code is t hen comprehended bythe usual routines of language comprehension that the child has developedfor speech. These two stages of reading are usually seen as discrete stages thatcan be taught independently. This assumptionhas led to a division of reading instruction into teaching decoding and comprehension. Decodingdepends only minimally 4 on comprehension. although some ingrtigatorsposit "downstream" effectson the basis of top-down models of comprehension. For example, a major aspect of Goodman's (1%7) informed-guessingmodel 90 DANKS ANDFEARS 4. ORAL READING 91 is that previously comprehended material facilitates the deioding However, these of print. downstream influences The comprehension hypothesis of comprehension is that oral productionis initiated only after usually not thought on decoding are to be essential for comprehension processes have successful decoding constructed a semantic representation when the contextual but only helpful of the inform iiiiiiii message (point B in Fig. 4.1). Oral is available.On the other prOdtiOtion is initiated fromthe semantic comprehension is hand, necessarily dependent representation and not from the on decoding for pliiiticihitical code thatexisted at an Wier on which to operate. the representation Except for providing point in the process. In factthe verbal code the input for may no longer exist at the timeat however, the decoding arnprnsion, process does not directly Which oral production isinitiated. The oral production _affect thecomprehension process beginning Process [Eds,note: See alio Frederiksen. with the semantic and Goodman representation resemblessentence production in Volume 1, this and Goodman, its series], essential -cciinponenti. A speaker has an ideato express, and he Gen this rough or she two-stage model of translates that idea into lingusiticform and then reading. where doesoral production expresses it in Speech, In oral fit? Themotor production aspect of oral reading reading, the semantic representationof the printed must be"tacked on"to the message constitutes the model of the reading idea that serves as the input process, because thereis no production to the productionprocess. component explicit in theModel. There These two hypotheses are two general represent climes of hypotheses asto when oral hypotheses, with Variations production is initiatedin the reading depending on the specific proceSt. These conceptions Of decoding; in Fig. 4.1. hypothesesare illustrated comprehensicin, and speech production. For example, comprehensionis described The decoding as if it were a hypothetis, is thatoral production single process witha fixed beginning and ending. is initiatedimmediately H °Weyer; comprehension following decoding(point A in Fig. may be a lobte etillection of 4.1). Oral production processing strategiesrather than a single routine. hasis of the is initiatedon the phonological "code The _possible that is theoutput of decoding, variationsin these two classes (Oral reading of hypothiiiis willbecome then servesas practice during the initial decoding evident. For the'moment, they serve stage.) In thiscase, there as convenient touchstonesfor might beno comprehension of the textat conceptualizing the questionof how oral production or oral production meshes with the reading compreheritiOn might and progress in parallel; prOcess. The twohypotheses can be differentiated or comprehension further by comparing much later than might_ occur two the oral production, types of readers thatappear to embody each perhaps as the hypothesis. herself talk. Children reader hears him-or sometimes imitatespeed