Affiliation:
1. Leuphana University Lueneburg, Lüneburg, GERMANY
2. University of Bochum, Bochum, GERMANY
Abstract
Previous studies suggest that sentence-linking elements, like connectives, enhance text comprehension since they help produce a context of meaning. However, there is no evidence yet on whether connectives influence the understanding and solving of reality-based mathematical tasks. In this study, reality-based tasks were varied to create two versions with identical content, differing only in whether coherence relations were expressed explicitly by connectives or implicitly. The investigation aimed to determine if this variation affected students’ ability to comprehend the described situation and solve mathematical tasks based on the provided information. Initial results indicate that connectives do increase the rate of correct answers to comprehension questions, particularly for students with lower linguistic skills. Nevertheless, the use of connectives did not significantly influence mathematical task performance. This suggests that while connectives aid in understanding and organizing information, they may not contribute to students translating this advantage into improved mathematical task outcomes.
Reference37 articles.
1. Alhamdu, A. (2016). Interest and reading motivation. Psikis Jurnal Psikologi Islami, 1(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.19109/psikis.v1i1.552
2. Bates, D., Mächler, M., & Dai, B. (2011). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/lme4.pdf
3. Becker, A. & Musan, R. (2014). Leseverstehen von Sachtexten: Wie Schüler Kohärenzrelationen erkennen [Reading comprehension of non-fiction texts: How students recognize coherence relations]. In M. Averintseva-Klisch, & C. Peschel (Eds.), Aspekte der Informationsstruktur für die Schule. Thema Sprache–Wissenschaft Für Den Unterricht 12 (pp. 129-155). Schneider Hohengehren.
4. Blum, W., & Leiß, D. (2007). How do students and teachers deal with modelling problems? In C. Haines, P. Galbraith, W. Blum, & S. Khan (Eds.), Mathematical modelling (ICTMA 12): Education, engineering and economics (pp. 222-231). Horwood. https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857099419.5.221
5. Crible, L. (2021). Negation cancels discourse-level processing differences: Evidence from reading times in concession and result relations. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 50(6), 1283-1308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-021-09802-2