Abstract
AbstractReading comprehension is an essential skill for learning in general and in science classes. Problems with reading comprehension might hinder students’ participation in learning science. Text in science includes specific language features that distinguishes it from narrative text, so should reading instruction be part of teaching science? The direct and inferential mediation (DIME) model of reading comprehension subsumes factors that influence reading comprehension. It was tested separately regarding narrative text as well as expository text in English; however, both have not been tested by directly comparing them to each other. In this study, we investigated to what degree general reading comprehension of narrative text is directly comparable to topic-specific reading comprehension of science text. Hence, first the applicability of the DIME model of reading comprehension in another language (i.e. German) was tested. Second, a general reading comprehension model was directly compared to a topic-specific model for reading comprehension of science text. Participants across the two studies were 704 German Grade 8 students who completed measures of comprehension and the DIME predictor variables. Results of two path analyses indicate the general applicability of the model for another language and additionally for both genres. However, some differences are highlighted that may be of importance in future science-specific studies as well as for teaching science.
Funder
deutsche forschungsgemeinschaft
Universität Duisburg-Essen
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Mathematics,Education
Reference59 articles.
1. Abedi, J., Hofstetter, C. H., & Lord, C. (2004). Assessment accommodations for English language learners: Implications for policy-based empirical research. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 1–28.
2. Ahmed, Y., Francis, D. J., York, M., Fletcher, J. M., Barnes, M., & Kulesz, P. (2016). Validation of the direct and inferential mediation (DIME) model of reading comprehension in grades 7 through 12. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44–45, 68–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.02.002
3. Artelt, C., & Schlagmüller, M. (2004). Der Umgang mit literarischen Texten als Teilkompetenz im Lesen? Dimensionsanalysen und Ländervergleiche [Reading comprehension of narrative texts – Dimensional analyses and state comparisons]. In U. Schiefele, C. Artelt, W. Schneider, & P. Stanat (Eds.), Struktur, Entwicklung und Förderung von Lesekompetenz (pp. 169–196). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
4. Arya, D. J., Hiebert, E. H., & Pearson, P. D. (2011). The effects of syntactic and lexical complexity on the comprehension of elementary science texts. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(1), 107–125.
5. Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2001). Item parceling issues in structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: New developments and techniques (pp. 269–296). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献