Comprehension of Text Structures

1
Comprehension of Text Structures

• By
• P. David Pearson and Kaybeth Camperell
• In Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading
• (Ruddell, Ruddell, and Singer, Eds.)
• Presented by Liz Guzniczak and Sue Sharma

2
Overview

• 20 year review of theoretical and empirical
  development of text structures
• Suggestionsfor classroom practice, educational
  researchers
• Leading questions
• What would we recommend if we found that by
  holding content of a passage constant and
  altering the surface structure of a passage
  constant we could increase comprehension from 25
  to 75?
• What would we recommend if we found that
  variations in text structure made a big
  difference for young children but the differences
  between the various levels of complexity
  decreased as the function of age?
• What would we change if we found that we could
  help students overcome difficult text structures
  by providing direct instruction about text
  structure?

3
That text structure influences comprehension,
therefore is not really the issue what is at
issue is the precise way in which the influence
is exerted, why the influence exists, and what
the influences have to say about the practical
matters of teaching and writing instructional
materials. P. David Pearson and K. Camperell
4
Variations of Text Structure

• Microstructures of text
• Active or passive voice
• Lexical or semantic variations-underlying meaning
• Grammatical variations-clauses
• Structural variation/semantic meaning
• Macrostructure of Text
• Case Grammar and propositional scheme to identify
  relations between and within sentences.
• Entire text examined in hierarchical
  structure-ideas scaled according to importance in
  hierarchy.
• Expository-how main or subordinate the idea is
• Narrative-importance or centrality to the
  story

5
Two expectations The level of hierarchy will
predict or explain the comprehension or
memorability of text segments. Surface
structures that violate this canonical structure
will diminish comprehension and recall.
6
Microstructure 1 Primacy of Sentence

• 1940s and 50s-Chomsky-study sentence units
  instead of single words
• 1960s Miller Studies-deep/surface structure
• Derivation of sentences surface structure from
  its underlying deep structure predicted
  processing difficulty
• 1970s-Pearson, Fagan-Derivational theory of
  complexity-scale to assess students ability to
  comprehend text structure
• Long complex sentences were associated with
  passages that rated high in readability and low
  in comprehensibility
• 1970s-Bransford Franks Sachs -memory of
  structure vs. gist semantic chunking

7
Microstructure 2 Linguistic Connectives

• Connectives-increase complexity,establishes cue
  relationship
• Robertson (1968)-Gr. 4-6 comprehension of
  connectives increased-listening reading ability
• Kautz Brent 1968, Pearson (1974-75) 4th gr.,
  students prefer specific causal cues
• 50 drop when causal cues not available that they
  would not be recalled at all
• Marshall and Glock (1978-79)-causal and
  relational structure facilitated recall for not
  so fluent readers
• Differences are due to the fact that good
  readers have a more well established schemata
  that they use to interpret and story meaning for
  discourse, poor readers have a less complete
  structure, and therefore must depend to a greater
  extent on information explicitly encoded in the
  surface structure of the text. Marshall and
  Glick

8
Microstructure 3 Sentence Combining

• Sentence combining instruction (SC)
• Formal grammar-no lasting effect on writing
  ability
• Researchers look at SC to increase syntactic
  maturity in writing (Combs Melon OHare)
• Recently,effects of SC training on comprehension
  (Combs Fisher Hughes Hunt)
• Sentence combining as it influences listening
  reading, and writing
• Attention to cohesion rather than atomization of
  sentence elements pays greater dividends.

9
Macrostructures 1 Narratives

• Influence of overall structure on student
  comprehension and recall
• Propositions in stories related by
• Relative position within hierarchy of story
  (story sentence diagram, high/low levels)effects
  on recall memory
• Rhetorical function
• Story recall-moving theme and goal to end
• As children grow older - recall more of the low
  level information
• Well formed stories elicited stronger recall

10
Macrostructure 2 Exposition

• Research not as abundant
• Meyer-text structure system that emphasizes
  relationship of propositions
• Order of ideas in a text to hierarchical
  relationships
• High/low level of hierarchical relationships
  placement-prediction of recall and comprehension
• Four types of structures adversative
  (contrastive), covariance(cause-effect),
  response(problem-solution), attributive
  (list-like)
• Adversative,covariance, response structures
  provide additional schema to help them process
  and remember

11
Macrostructures 2 Expository

• Signaling Devices
• Title of passage
• Signaling words-in contrast to, first, second
• Authors schema superior on recall than
  vocabulary or standardized comprehension tests
• Bartlett (1978)-Students can be taught to
  identify top level structures and the training
  can improve comprehension

12
Students who are familiar with the way texts
are typically organized can use that knowledge to
comprehend and remember by relating the
organizational structure or schema, of the text
to their prior knowledge about how text are
organized and what to expect from the text
organized in certain ways.
Meyer and Freedle
13
Implications for Reading Practice

• For those who prepare reading materials
• Read stories that are highly predictable in
  conformity to conical story schema
• Complexity may add comprehensibility-(watering
  down of sentence structure)
• For Educators
• More than one way to express any given idea
• Authors message-model framework or
  structure-allow them to practice discovering the
  message on their own

14
Instructional Research in Reading

• Point when students can handle increasing
  complexity in text structures
• Study of structures that are difficult-direct
  instruction/systematic practice
• Direct Instruction with poor readers will improve
  abilities of comprehension and recall
• Different plans of organization in various
  disciplines (adversative, covariance,
  attributive, response)
• Story schema training (Gordon, 1980) extending to
  younger students and improvement in writing.
• Teaching and learning variables time on task,
  direct instruction as they effect comprehension

15
The point is simple when we identify a
variable including text structure variable, that
looks like it may make a difference in
comprehension, we ought to adopt a frontal
assault when including its instructional
power-teach about it systematically and make sure
that certain students have a chance to practice
it. The time for a renaissance of the
methodological study is now-now that we have
better ideas of what to look at.