"Are You a Good Reader Now?": Secondary school remedial readers' perceptions of their own reading ability and their frames of reference for "good" and "poor" readers

Literacy ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 17-25
Author(s):  
Ann Henshaw
Keyword(s):  
Secondary School ◽  
Reading Ability ◽  
Frames Of Reference ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Good Reader ◽  
Remedial Readers ◽  
Good And Poor Readers

The Effect of Prior Knowledge on the Question Answering of Good and Poor Readers

1983 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Betty C. Holmes
Keyword(s):  
Prior Knowledge ◽  
Reading Ability ◽  
Question Answering ◽  
Reading Level ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Fifth Grade ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
Fifth Grade Students ◽  
New Information ◽  
Good And Poor Readers

The purpose of this investigation was to compare the question answering of good and poor readers when their prior knowledge for the answers to questions was determined before reading to be accurate, inaccurate, incomplete, or missing. Fifty-six fifth-grade students with equivalent I.Q.'s, but varying in reading ability and extent of general prior knowledge for the passage topics, participated in the study. Subjects read an expository passage written on their approximate instructional reading level. The results indicated that poor readers did not use prior knowledge to the same extent as did good readers. This was especially true when students were learning new information. The results also suggest that poor readers have difficulty answering text implicit questions even if they possess adequate prior knowledge for passage topics.

Effects of Reading Ability on Children's Comprehension Evaluation and Regulation

1989 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Zabrucky ◽  
Hilary Horn Ratner
Keyword(s):  
Reading Ability ◽  
Verbal Report ◽  
Sixth Grade ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Comprehension Monitoring ◽  
Verbal Reports ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
On Line ◽  
Good And Poor Readers ◽  
Multidimensional Process

Good and poor readers in the sixth grade ( M age = 11.92 years) were videotaped reading inconsistent stories presented one sentence at a time. Children's comprehension evaluation was assessed with on-line (reading times) and verbal report measures; comprehension regulation was assessed by examining look-backs during reading. All children read inconsistencies more slowly than consistent control information but good readers were more likely than poor readers to look back at inconsistencies during reading, to give accurate verbal reports of passage consistency following reading, and to recall text inconsistencies. Results highlight the importance of using multiple comprehension monitoring measures in assessing children's abilities and of treating comprehension monitoring as a multidimensional process.

scholarly journals Effects of Document Simplification on the Reading Comprehension of the Elderly

1981 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 237-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean A. Walmsley ◽  
Kathleen M. Scott ◽  
Richard Lehrer
Keyword(s):  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Reading Ability ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Poor Indicator ◽  
Aged Subjects ◽  
Good And Poor Readers ◽  
Readability Formula

Good and poor readers (aged 60+) were tested on three versions of documents describing social services—the original document, a version simplified by a readability formula, and a version simplified ‘subjectively’ by skilled writers. Results indicate that in only one of the four documents (the longest one) was comprehension improved by subjective rewriting; simplification by readability formula had no effect on comprehension. Reading ability, however, was a significant covariate for comprehension. The study concludes that the ‘readability’ of a document is a poor indicator of its comprehensibility for aged subjects, and that simplifying the language of documents may not be sufficient in easing their comprehension difficulties.

Monitoring of Understanding: An Investigation of Good and Poor Readers' Awareness of Induced Miscomprehension of Text

1980 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Garner
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Poor Reader ◽  
Interaction Effects ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Good Reader ◽  
Disruptive Effect ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
Repeated Measures Anova ◽  
Good And Poor Readers

Good and poor junior high readers were directed to process two expository passages as editors. Each passage had been divided into four segments, and in two of the four segments of one passage, material had been altered to introduce inconsistency with the overall message. Comprehension-miscomprehension monitoring was assessed after each segment; the readers were asked to rate each chunk as “very easy to understand,” “ok,” or “difficult to understand,” and to explain instances of the latter two ratings after completion of the entire passage at hand. A material × segment × reader repeated-measures ANOVA revealed numerous significant main and interaction effects. Both quantitative and qualitative analysis of data supported the original hypothesis of good reader/poor reader differences in comprehension-miscomprehension monitoring. It seems that good readers noticed the disruptive effect of the altered material and poor readers did not.

Flexibility in the Use of Graphic and Contextual Information by Good and Poor Readers

1981 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 263-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert M. Schwartz ◽  
Keith E. Stanovich
Keyword(s):  
Reading Ability ◽  
Contextual Information ◽  
Single Letter ◽  
Task Demands ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Processing Demands ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Actual Stimulus ◽  
Good And Poor Readers ◽  
Accurate Reading

Two studies are reported that investigate the use of graphic and contextual information in word recognition. Subjects orally read stories that contained ten words that were altered by substituting a single letter, so that another word was formed that was anomalous within the sentence. The critical dependent variable was the proportion of times the subject read the contextually appropriate word rather than the actual stimulus word. The first study used different orienting instructions to manipulate subjects' response set. In the second experiment, instructions for either contextually appropriate reading or accurate reading were given in order to examine the relationships between information processing demands and reading ability. The results indicated that good and poor readers were equally able to conform to task demands for contextually appropriate reading responses, but poor readers were less able to suppress contextual information when accurate reading was required.

Dichotic Listening to Temporal Tonal Stimuli by Good and Poor Readers

1997 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 467-473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Harel ◽  
Israel Nachson
Keyword(s):  
Reading Disability ◽  
Reading Ability ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Hemispheric Dominance ◽  
Poor Reading ◽  
Ear Advantage ◽  
Temporal Stimuli ◽  
Right Ear Advantage ◽  
Good And Poor Readers ◽  
Tonal Stimuli

The hypothesis that reading disability is associated with impairment in the lateralization of temporal stimuli was tested by presenting 123 good- and poor-reading boys (Grades 4 through 6) with dichotic sets of temporal and nontemporal tonal stimuli for recognition. Reading ability was assessed by measuring proficiency in reading consonants, vowels, words, sentences and short stories. On the tone test, good readers showed a right-ear advantage in reporting the temporal stimuli, and a left-ear advantage in reporting the nontemporal stimuli. Poor readers showed the reversed pattern of response. Since right-ear advantage in report of given stimuli indicates left-hemispheric dominance for processing those stimuli, the data seem to suggest a link between reading disability and left-hemispheric dysfunction in processing temporal stimuli.

Picture-Naming Interference with Good and Poor Readers

1979 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert E. Guttentag
Keyword(s):  
Picture Naming ◽  
Reading Ability ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Third Grade ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
Pictures And Words ◽  
Good And Poor Readers

22 third grade children of high and low reading ability ( ns = 11) were tested for their ability to name pictures while trying to ignore words or nonword strings of letters printed inside the pictures. Nonoverlapping sets of pictures and words were used as stimuli to avoid the possibility of sensitizing subjects to the particular words used in the experiment (Neisser, 1976). Both groups experienced mote interference from intra-category than extra-category words, indicating that they processed the words automatically. Only the good readers experienced more interference from pseudowords than consonant strings, suggesting that poor readers are less sensitive than good readers to orthographic regularity.

Grammatical knowledge of third grade good and poor readers

2000 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
DAVA E. WALTZMAN ◽  
HELEN S. CAIRNS
Keyword(s):  
Reading Ability ◽  
Sentence Type ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Third Grade ◽  
Matching Task ◽  
Grammatical Knowledge ◽  
Good Readers ◽  
Reading Groups ◽  
Good And Poor Readers ◽  
And Control

The relationship between grammatical knowledge and reading ability in third grade good and poor readers was investigated. Two aspects of grammar – binding and control – were assessed to determine whether poor readers had syntactic deficits. These principles both relate to the interpretation of pronominal elements. Interpretations were assessed through a sentence–picture matching task in which picture depictions of all the possible interpretations of pronominal elements in verbally presented sentences were included. The only sentence type that differentiated the two reading groups was performance on sentences related to one of the binding principles, Principle B. Since obedience to Principle B probably involves pragmatic as well as syntactic principles, this finding suggests another way that good readers may differ from poor readers.

scholarly journals MOCCA College: An assessment of inferential narrative and expository comprehension

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark L. Davison ◽  
Ben Seipel ◽  
Sarah E. Carlson ◽  
Virginia Clinton ◽  
Patrick C. Kennedy
Keyword(s):  
Reading Intervention ◽  
Reading Ability ◽  
Poor Readers ◽  
Reading Problems ◽  
Reading Improvement ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Adult Reading ◽  
Intervention Planning ◽  
Good And Poor Readers ◽  
Over Time

MOCCA-C is an assessment of adult reading ability designed for early diagnosis of reading problems, for formative assessment in reading intervention planning, for assessment of reading improvement over time, and for assessment of reading intervention outcomes.  It uses both narrative and expository reading passages and it currently has four forms.  Two goals of this research were to compare narrative and expository passages on (a) their difficulty and (b) their ability to discriminate between good and poor readers.  An additional goal was to assess whether narrative and expository passages measure the same or different comprehension dimensions. A final goal was to assess the reliability of forms. We randomly assigned students to forms with between 274 – 279 college students per form.   Across the several forms, results suggest that narrative passages are easier and better discriminate between good and poor readers.  However, both narrative and expository passages measure a single dimension of ability.  MOCCA-C scores are reliable.  Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document