Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice - 12(4) • Autumn • 2822-2828 ©2012 Educational Consultancy and Research Center www.edam.com.tr/estp Comparing the Word Processing and Reading Comprehension of Skilled and Less Skilled Readers İ. Birkan GULDENOĞLU Tevhide KARGINa Paul MILLER Ankara University Ankara University University of Haifa Abstract The purpose of this study was to compare the word processing and reading comprehension skilled in and less skilled readers. Forty-nine, 2nd graders (26 skilled and 23 less skilled readers) partici- pated in this study. They were tested with two experiments assessing their processing of isolated real word and pseudoword pairs as well as their reading comprehension skills. Findings suggest that there is a significant difference between skilled and less skilled readers both with regard to their word processing skills and their reading comprehension skills. In addition, findings suggest that word processing skills and reading comprehension skills correlate positively both skilled and less skilled readers. Key Words Reading, Reading Comprehension, Word Processing Skills, Reading Theories. Reading is one of the most central aims of school- According to the above mentioned phonologi- ing and all children are expected to acquire this cal reading theory, readers first recognize written skill in school (Güzel, 1998; Moates, 2000). The words phonologically via their spoken lexicon and, ability to read is assumed to rely on two psycho- subsequently, apply their linguistic (syntactic, se- linguistic processes: a) a word recognition process, mantic, pragmatic) knowledge in order to make and b) a sentence comprehension process. The sense of them within the context of a sentence. word recognition process is implemented as a cog- Given this to be true, reading comprehension nitive procedure that converts graphemes into cor- problems may originate from a processing failure responding phonemes whereas the sentence com- at the word decoding level, from failure at the word prehension process is implemented as a process integration level, or both (Abott & Berninger, 1999; that integrates the meaning of recognized printed Torgesen & Hudson, 2006; Vaughn, Linan-Thomp- words into a meaningful whole (Hoover & Gough, son, & Hickman-Davis, 2003; Wauters, Van Bon, 1990; Lewis & Doorlag, 1983; Ross, 1976). & Tellings, 2006). More specifically, the efficient decoding of written words is hypothesized to be a Tevhide KARGIN, Ph.D., is currently a professor at contingent upon the reader’s phonemic awareness the Department of Special Education. Her rese- (Ehri, Nunes, Stahl, & Willows, 2001; Report of the arch interests include mainstreaming, assess- National Reading Panel, 2000; Share, 1995; Shay- ment and individualized educational programs, witz & Shaywitz, 2005Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998; early childhood special education, deaf studies, Stanovich, 2000; Troia, 2004; Vellutino, Fletcher, supporting reading and reading comprehension Snowling, & Scanlon, 2004) whereas his/her abil- skills. Correspondence: Prof. Dr. Tevhide KARGIN, ity to integrate recognized words into a meaning- Ankara University, Educational Sciences Faculty, ful whole is assumed to be intrinsically linked to Department of Special Education, Ankara/Turkey. his/her basic language skills (Bradley & Bryant, E-mail: [email protected] Phone: +90 312 363 1983; Caravolas, Hulme, & Snowling, 2001; Høien, 3350/3019 Fax: +90 312 3636145. Lundberg, Stanovich, & Bjaalid, 1995; Stothard & GULDENOĞLU, KARGIN, MILLER / Comparing the Word Processing and Reading Comprehension of Skilled and... Hulme, 1996; Torgesen & Hudson, 2006; Torgesen, ers (Redd & Vaughn, 2012; Schiff, Schwartz, & Wagner, & Rashotte, 1997). Nagar, 2011; Therrien, 2004; Young-Suk, Richard, Strong phonological reading theories hypoth- & Danielle, 2012). Given this to be true, a question esize that the recognition of a written word pro- of central interest is, of course, whether there is a ceeds along a reading route that converts written causal relationship between readers’ basic written words into phonological code via the application word processing skills and their ability to under- of grapheme-to-phoneme conversion rules (Frost, stand connected text? In other words, are readers’ 1998, 2006; Ramus, Pidgeon, & Frith, 2003; Ziegler word processing skills powerful predictors of their & Goswami, 2005, 2006). On the other hand, reading comprehension skills and vice versa? some theoreticians assume that processing written Clarification of the above research question has par- words phonologically may not be the only way to ticular appeal with regard to Turkish orthography their recognition. Instead, they theorize that word that – due to complete orthographic transparency recognition is possible along two distinct reading (Spencer & Henley, 2003) – requires the mastery of routes, a nonlexical reading route and a lexical only a simple set of grapheme-to-phoneme conver- reading route (Jackson & Coltheart, 2001). The rec- sion rules in order to sustain the processing of writ- ognition process of written words along the non- ten words at the lexical level (Durgunoğlu & Öney, lexical reading route – as stated above – involves a 1999, 2002; Peynircioğlu, Durgunoğlu, & Öney, grapheme-to-phoneme conversion procedure that 2002; Raman, 2006; Raman, Baluch, & Besner, outputs phonological forms the reader is able to 2004; Raman & Weekes, 2005; Spencer & Henley, recognize in his/her phonological lexicon (spoken 2003). On the other hand, Turkish is highly com- vocabulary) as known or unknown words. In con- plex at the morpho-syntactic level (Durgunoğlu trast, word recognition along the lexical reading & Öney, 2002), a complexity that my fail reading route is assumed to rely on a process that connects comprehension even in instances in which Turk- the letter strings of written words with permanent ish readers recognize written words with great ef- orthographic knowledge (representations) that ficiency. Taking this into consideration, comparing mediates their meaning (Paap & Noel, 1991). the word processing and reading comprehension According to the dual route reading theory, the skills of proficient and less proficient Turkish read- lexical and the nonlexical reading routes operate ers may prove to be particularly helpful in provid- in parallel (simultaneously). However, proficient ing satisfactory answers to whether there is a causal readers – in the majority of instances – are hypoth- relationship between these two domains. These esized to recognize written words along the fast or- answers eventually may facilitate the development thographic-knowledge-based reading route. Word of more adequate reading instruction methods for recognition along the indirect nonlexical reading those who fail to make sense of what they read. route is assumed to be restricted to low-frequency In order to elucidate how skilled and less skilled words for which the reader has not yet established Turkish readers’ word processing skills predict well-internalized orthographic representations or their reading comprehension, we administered two to instances in which the reader encounters an un- research paradigms, one assessing the efficiency familiar word or a nonsense letter strings. with which such readers determine the identical- The efficient and accurate recognition of written ness of written words or pseudowords, and another words is undoubtedly a prerequisite for proper testing their comprehension of sets of semantically reading comprehension, but not sufficient on its plausible and semantically implausible sentences. own. In order to comprehend a sentence or para- graph, the final meaning of correctly recognized words has to be elaborated with reference to the Aim reader’s syntactic and semantic knowledge (Miller, The present study was designed to compare the 2000, 2005a, 2010b; Tily, Fedorenko, & Gibson, word processing and reading comprehension skills 2010), which the reader acquires to a large extent of skilled and less skilled readers. According to this within the general development of his/her spoken aim, present study was designed to answer the fol- language (MacLeod & Masson, 2000; Weldon, lowing research questions and hypothesis; 1993). In addition, research indicates that there is a positive relationship between the phonological 1. Are there any meaningful differences in word abilities, word knowledge, word reading accuracy, processing skills of skilled and less skilled read- and the reading comprehension of proficent read- ers? 2823 EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES: THEORY & PRACTICE 1a. Participants will process real words faster presented on a computer monitor; and the second and more accurately in comparison to the testing the participants’ comprehension of 16 pseudowords, (b) In comparison to less syntactically complex sentences with half of them skilled readers, skilled readers will be faster conveying a semantically plausible message and and more accurate in both the processing of the remainder a semantically implausible message. real words and pseudowords. Both paradigms were originally developed within 2. Are there any meaningful differences n the read- a large-scale international reading study executed ing comprehension of skilled and less skilled in four different countries (Israel, Turkey, Germany readers ? and USA) with the goal to bring about a better understanding of the factors underlying reading 2a. In comparison to less skilled readers, skilled comprehension failure in individuals reading in readers will demonstrate