scholarly journals Socioeconomic Status, Culture, and Reading Comprehension in Immigrant Students

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joaquín A. Ibáñez-Alfonso ◽  
Juan Andrés Hernández-Cabrera ◽  
Jon Andoni Duñabeitia ◽  
Adelina Estévez ◽  
Pedro Macizo ◽  
...  

Research on reading comprehension in immigrant students is heterogeneous and conflicting. Differences in socioeconomic status and cultural origins are very likely confounds in determining whether differences to native pupils can be attributed to immigrant status. We collected data on 312 Spanish students of Native, of Hispanic origin–therefore with the same family language as native students- and Non-Hispanic origin, while controlling for socioeconomic status, non-verbal reasoning and school membership. We measured reading comprehension, knowledge of syntax, sentence comprehension monitoring, and vocabulary. Differences among groups appeared only in vocabulary and syntax (with poorer performance in the non-Hispanic group), with no differences in reading comprehension. However, regression analyses showed that most of the variability in reading comprehension was predicted by age, socioeconomic status, non-verbal reasoning, and comprehension monitoring. Group membership did not significantly contribute to explain reading comprehension variability. The present study supports the idea that socioeconomically disadvantaged students, both native and immigrants from diverse cultural backgrounds, irrespective of the language of origin, are probably equally at risk of poor reading comprehension.

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Panayiota Metallidou ◽  
Vaitsa Giannouli ◽  
Mara Gioka ◽  
Anthi Borodimou ◽  
Maria Valougeorgi

2020 ◽  
pp. 002221942098324
Author(s):  
Ana Taboada Barber ◽  
Susan Lutz Klauda ◽  
Weimeng Wang ◽  
Kelly B. Cartwright ◽  
Laurie E. Cutting

This study centered on emergent bilingual (EB) students with specific reading comprehension deficits (S-RCD), that is, with poor reading comprehension despite solid word identification skills. The participants were 209 students in Grades 2 to 4, including both EBs and English Monolinguals (EMs) with and without S-RCD. Mean comparisons indicated that EBs and EMs with S-RCD showed weaknesses relative to typically developing (TD) readers in oral language, word identification, inference making, and reading engagement, but not in executive functioning. Longitudinal analyses indicated that across two academic years S-RCD persisted for 41% of EBs and EMs alike. Altogether, the study extends research on EBs with S-RCD by identifying variables beyond oral language that may account for their reading comprehension difficulties and providing insight into the extent to which their reading comprehension and word identification performance levels evolve during elementary school. Furthermore, the findings point to the importance of early identification and intervention for weaknesses in reading comprehension and its component elements in both EBs and EMS.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aiping Zhao ◽  
Ying Guo ◽  
Shuyan Sun ◽  
Mark H. C. Lai ◽  
Allison Breit ◽  
...  

This study examined how vocabulary, syntactic knowledge, and orthographic knowledge are related to comprehension monitoring and whether comprehension monitoring mediates the relations between these language skills and reading comprehension. Eighty-nine Chinese children were assessed on their vocabulary, syntactic knowledge, orthographic knowledge, and comprehension monitoring in Grade 1. Their reading comprehension skills were assessed in Grade 1 and Grade 3. Results showed that in Grade 1, comprehension monitoring mediated the relations between vocabulary and syntactic knowledge and reading comprehension. For Grade 3 reading comprehension, syntactic knowledge in Grade 1 was the only significant predictor. These findings indicate that multiple language skills make direct and indirect contributions via comprehension monitoring to Chinese reading comprehension, and the relations would change as children’s reading skills develop.


2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-67
Author(s):  
Juan Pablo Barreyro ◽  
Irene I. Ricle ◽  
Jesica Formoso ◽  
Debora I. Burin

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane Caroline Meziere ◽  
Lili Yu ◽  
Erik Reichle ◽  
Titus von der Malsburg ◽  
Genevieve McArthur

Research on reading comprehension assessments suggests that they measure overlapping but not identical cognitive skills. In this paper, we examined the potential of eye-tracking as a tool for assessing reading comprehension. We administered three widely-used reading comprehension tests with varying task demands to 79 typical adult readers while monitoring their eye movements. In the York Assessment for Reading Comprehension (YARC), participants were given passages of text to read silently, followed by comprehension questions. In the Gray Oral Reading Test (GORT-5), participants were given passages of text to read aloud, followed by comprehension questions. In the sentence comprehension subtest of the Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT-4), participants were given sentences with a missing word to read silently, and had to provide the missing word (i.e., a cloze task). Results from linear models predicting comprehension scores from eye-tracking measures yielded different patterns of results between the three tests. Models with eye-tracking measures always explained significantly more variance compared to baseline models with only reading speed, with R-squared 4 times higher for the YARC, 3 times for the GORT, and 1.3 times for the WRAT. Importantly, despite some similarities between the tests, no common good predictor of comprehension could be identified across the tests. Overall, the results suggest that reading comprehension tests do not measure the same cognitive skills to the same extent, and that participants adapted their reading strategies to the tests’ varying task demands. Finally, this study suggests that eye-tracking may provide a useful alternative for measuring reading comprehension.


2015 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Åsa Elwér ◽  
Stefan Gustafson ◽  
Brian Byrne ◽  
Richard K. Olson ◽  
Janice M. Keenan ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document