Learning Disabled and Nondisabled College Students' Use of Structure in Recall of Stories and Text

1989 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 108-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen H. Bacon ◽  
Dale Carpenter

This study compared LD and average college students' use of expository text structure and story grammar to recall social studies text passages. Students simultaneously read and listened to three passages with different structures: story grammar, comparison, and causation. Results were analyzed for structure use in immediate oral recall. No difference was found between the groups on the use of story grammar and comparison structure. However, the LD students scored significantly lower than their average peers on the causation structure. The results support research showing that LD students use story structure as well as nondisabled students and suggest that structure use is developmental, with use of comparison structures preceding use of causation.

1992 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 281-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas R. Williams ◽  
Earl C. Butterfield

Part I of this article, pp. 259–272, reviewed the relevant literature on advance organizers and suggested that methodological problems in previous advance organizer studies has not resolved the question of whether advance organizers facilitate the acquisition of subordinate information from text. This question is not an unimportant issue to technical communicators, whose readers often need to acquire factual information as well as more general concepts from the expository text they read. In two studies we investigated the influences of reader's background knowledge, advance organizers, relative importance of idea units, and idea units' position within a text structure on the recall of textual information. Subjects read introductory and text materials and subsequently were tested for their recognition of idea units that were structurally high and important, structurally high and unimportant, structurally low and important, or structurally low and unimportant. In the first study, forty-eight college students were randomly assigned to conditions consisting of relevant or irrelevant background, organizer or no organizer, and text or no text. There were significant main effects for having read a relevant text and for importance of idea units, and an interaction between structural level and importance. A significant organizer by text or no text interaction and absence of a significant main effect for the organizer indicated that the organizer influenced text processing rather than priming relevant prior knowledge, which is a previously undocumented requirement of advance organizer research. In the second study, conducted with eighty-eight college students, we substituted a purpose, no purpose condition for the text, no text condition of the first study. We observed a significant main effect for importance and a significant four-way interaction involving structure, importance, background, and organizer. The more relevant knowledge a reader had, the less dependent he or she was on text structure, and an advance organizer compensated for the absence of relevant prior knowledge.


1983 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 63-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elfrieda H. Hiebert ◽  
Carol Sue Englert ◽  
Sharon Brennan

This study had three purposes in examining college students' awareness of four expository text structures. The first was to determine whether students were more aware of some text structures than of others in reading and writing. A second was to determine how performance on these text structure measures related to performance on a general comprehension measure. The third was to examine the relationship between awareness of these text structures in reading and writing. Fifty-two college students who were equally divided into two ability groups were given two tasks, one which assessed their awareness of the text structures in reading and the other which assessed awareness in writing. Findings related to the first aim indicated that awareness of the four text structures varied in both the recognition and production of relevant information. With respect to the second aim, performance on both recognition and production measures was related to performance on a general comprehension measure, with high-ability students more sensitive to intrusive information in the recognition task and more able to produce missing text structure information than low-ability students. Findings related to the final aim indicated that the relationship between recognition and production performances was moderate.


1986 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 539-555 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penny L. Griffith ◽  
Danielle N. Ripich ◽  
Sondra L. Dastoli

Reading ◽  
2014 ◽  
pp. 129-144
Author(s):  
Joanna P. Williams ◽  
Kendra M. Hall ◽  
Kristen D. Lauer

1989 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine J. Gordon

1979 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 262-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Crocker ◽  
Donald Klopf ◽  
Ronald Cambra

About 20 per cent of American college students suffer from debilitating communication apprehension (McCroskey, 1977) and, if a sampling of Australian college students typifies the larger population, Australia has a similar incidence. In America, the communication apprehensives are being classed as learning disabled or handicapped and are beginning to receive specialized instruction in order to maximize their learning potential (Hurt and Preiss, 1978). Australian college students may benefit from similar training. The purpose of this article is to describe the nature of communication apprehension (CA) and its academic implications, to present initial data on its prevalence in Australia, and to indicate some methods used to reduce its effects.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document