Integrated Models of Reading Comprehension: Understanding to Impact Teaching: The Teacher’s Central Role

Authors: Sally A. Brown

Abstract:

Over the last 30 years, researchers have developed models or frameworks to provide a more structured understanding of the reading comprehension process. Cognitive information processing models and social cognitive theories both provide frameworks to inform reading comprehension instruction. The purpose of this paper is to (a) provide an overview of the historical development of reading comprehension theory, (b) review the literature framed by cognitive information processing, social cognitive, and integrated reading comprehension theories, and (c) demonstrate how these frameworks inform instruction. As integrated models of reading can guide the interpretation of various factors related to student learning, an integrated framework designed by the researcher will be presented. Results indicated that features of cognitive processing and social cognitivism theory—represented in the integrated framework—highlight the importance of the role of the teacher. This model can aide teachers in not only improving reading comprehension instruction but in identifying areas of challenge for students.

Keywords: Explicit instruction, integrated models of reading comprehension, reading comprehension, teacher’s role.

References:

[1] Alexander, P. A., & Fox, E. (2013). A historical perspective on reading research and practice. In D. E. Alvermann, N. Unrau, & R. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (6thed., pp. 33-68). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
[2] Alley, G. R., & Deshler, D. D. (1979). Teaching the learning disabled adolescent strategies and methods. Denver, CO: Love.
[3] Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
[4] Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.New York, NY: Freeman.
[5] Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review Psychologist, 52,1-26. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.
[6] Bean, T. W., & Steenwyk, F. L. (1984). The effect of three forms of summarization instruction on sixth graders’ summary writing and comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16(4), 297-306. doi:10.1080/10862968409547523
[7] Brown, A. L., & Day, J. D. (1983). Macrorules for summarizing texts: The development of expertise. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 1-14. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(83)80002-4
[8] Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Rintamaa, M., Pennington, J., Buckman, D. M. (2014). The impact of supplemental instruction on low-achieving adolescents’ reading engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 107(36), 36-58. doi:10.1080/00220671.2012.753859
[9] Carnegie Council on Advancing Adolescent Literacy. (2010). Time to act: An agenda for advancing adolescent literacy for college and career success. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
[10] Edmonds, M. S., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebach, C., Cable, A., Tackett, K. K., & Schnakenber, J. W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 262-300. doi:10.3102/0034654308325998
[11] Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Williams, J. P., & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: A review of research. Review of Educational Research, 71(2), 279-320. doi:10.3102/00346543071002279
[12] Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6-10. doi:10.1177/074193258600700104
[13] Hare, V. C., & Borchardt, K. M. (1984). Direct instruction of summarization skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(1), 62-78. doi:10.2307/747652
[14] Jitendra, A. K., Burgess, C., & Gajria, M. (2011). Cognitive strategy instruction for improving expository text comprehension of students with learning disabilities: The quality of evidence. Exceptional Children, 77(2), 135-159. doi:10.1177/001440291107700201
[15] Joseph, L. M., Alber-Morgan, S., Cullen, J., & Rouse, C. (2016). The effects of self-questioning on reading comprehension: A literature review. Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 32(2), p. 1-22. doi:10.1080/10573569.2014.891449
[16] Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
[17] Kintsch, W. (2004). The construction-integration model of text comprehension and its implications for instruction. In R. Ruddell, & N. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1270-1324). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
[18] Kintsch, W. (2013). Revisiting the construction-integration model of text comprehension and its implications for instruction. In D. E. Alvermann, N. J. Unrau, & R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (6th ed., pp. 807-839). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
[19] Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978b). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363-394. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.36
[20] LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293-323. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(74)90015-2
[21] Mayer, R. E. (1996). Learners as information processors: Legacies and limitations of educational psychology’s second metaphor. Educational Psychologist, 31(3/4), 151-161.
[22] McMaster, K. L., Espin, C. A., & van den Broek, P. (2014). Making connections: Linking cognitive psychology and interventions research to improve comprehension of struggling readers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(1), 17-24. doi:10.1111/ldrp.12026
[23] McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. (2009). Towards a comprehensive model of comprehension. In B. H. Ross (Eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 51, pp. 297-384). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(09)51009-2
[24] Neuman, S. B. (2011). Single-subject experimental design. In N. K. Duke & M. H. Mallette (Eds.), Literacy research methodologies (pp. 383-403). New York, NY: Guilford.
[25] Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543-578. doi:10.3102/00346543066004543
[26] Pajares, F. (2002). Overview of social cognitive theory and of self-efficacy. Retrieved fromhttp://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/eff.html
[27] Pearson, P. D., & Cervetti, G. N. (2015). Fifty years of reading comprehension theory and practice. In P. D. Pearson & E. H. Hiebert (Eds.), Research-based practices for teaching common core literacy (pp. 1-24). New York, NY: Teachers College.
[28] Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 317-344. doi:10.1016/0361-476X(83)90019-X
[29] Prat-Sala, M., & Redford, P. (2012). Writing essays: Does self-efficacy matter? The relationship between self-efficacy in reading and in writing and undergraduate students’ performance in essay writing. Educational Psychology, 32(1), 9-20. doi:10.1080/01443410.2011.621411
[30] RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
[31] Reutzel, D. R. & Cooter, R. B. (2012). Teaching children to read: The teacher makes the difference(6thed.). Boston, MA. Pearson.
[32] Reynolds, G. A., & Perin, D. (2009). A comparison of text structure and self-regulated writing strategies for composing from sources by middle school students. Reading Psychology, 30(3), 265-300. doi:10.1080/02702710802411547
[33] Rinehart, S. D., Stahl, S. A., & Erickson, L. G. (1986). Some effects of summarization training on reading and studying. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 422-438. doi:10.2307/747614
[34] Rogevich, M. E., &Perin, D. (2008). Effects on science summarization of a reading comprehension intervention for adolescents with behavior and attention disorders. Council for Exceptional Children, 74(2), 135-154. doi:10.1177/001440290807400201
[35] Ruddell, R. B., & Unrau, N. J. (Eds.). (2004). Theoretical models and processes of reading(5thed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
[36] Scammacca, N. Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., Edmonds, M., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C. K. & Torgesen, J. K. (2007). Interventions for adolescent struggling readers: A meta-analysis with implications for practice. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.
[37] Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2007). Influencing children’s self-efficacy and self-regulation of reading and writing through modeling. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23(1), 7-25. doi:10.1080/10573560600837578
[38] Schwanenflugel, P. J., &Knapp, N. F. (2016). Theoretical models of reading comprehension. In P. J. Schwanenflugel, & N. F. Knapp (Eds.), The psychology of reading (pp. 165-191). New York, NY: Guilford.
[39] Shell, D. F., Murphy, C. C., & Bruning, R. H. (1989). Self-efficacy and outcome expectancy mechanisms in reading and writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(1), 91-100.
[40] Sinatra, G. M., & Broughton, S. H. (2011). Bridging reading comprehension and conceptual change in science education: The promise of refutation text. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(4), 374-393. doi:10.1002/RRQ.005
[41] Singer, M., & Kintsch, W. (2001). Text retrieval: A theoretical exploration. Discourse Processes, 31(1), 27-59. doi:10.1207/S15326950dp3101_2
[42] Skinner, B. F. (1987). Whatever happened to psychology as the science of behavior? American Psychologist,42(8), 780-786.doi:10.1037/0003-066X.42.8.780
[43] Slavin, R. E. (2003). Educational psychology: Theory and practice(7thed.) Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
[44] Tracey, D. H., Storer, A. W., & Kazerounian, S. (2010). Cognitive processing perspectives on the new literacies. In E. A. Baker (Ed.), The new literacies: Multiple perspectives on research and practice (pp. 106-130). New York, NY: Guilford.
[45] Wang, C. W., & Neihart, M. (2015). Academic self-concept and academic self-efficacy: Self-beliefs enable academic achievement of twice-exceptional students. Roeper Review, 37, 63-73. doi:10.1080/02783193.2015.1008660
[46] Wong, B. Y. L. (1985). Self-questioning instructional research: A review. Review of Educational Research, 55(2), 227-268. doi:10.3102/00346543055002227