Narrative and Expository Text Reading Comprehension by Fourth Grade Spanish-Speaking Children

Authors: Mariela V. De Mier, Veronica S. Sanchez Abchi, Ana M. Borzone

Abstract:

This work aims to explore the factors that have an incidence in reading comprehension process, with different type of texts. In a recent study with 2nd, 3rd and 4th grade children, it was observed that reading comprehension of narrative texts was better than comprehension of expository texts. Nevertheless it seems that not only the type of text but also other textual factors would account for comprehension depending on the cognitive processing demands posed by the text. In order to explore this assumption, three narrative and three expository texts were elaborated with different degree of complexity. A group of 40 fourth grade Spanish-speaking children took part in the study. Children were asked to read the texts and answer orally three literal and three inferential questions for each text. The quantitative and qualitative analysis of children responses showed that children had difficulties in both, narrative and expository texts. The problem was to answer those questions that involved establishing complex relationships among information units that were present in the text or that should be activated from children’s previous knowledge to make an inference. Considering the data analysis, it could be concluded that there is some interaction between the type of text and the cognitive processing load of a specific text.

Keywords: comprehension, textual factors, type of text, processing demands.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1082895

References:

[1] Weaver, C. A., & Kintsch, W. (1991). Expository text. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P.D. Pearson (Eds.). The handbook of reading research.Vol. 2, pp. 230-245). White Plains, NY: Longman.
[2] Flesch, R. (1951). How to test readability. Harper.
[3] Duran, N. D.; McCarthy, P.M.; Graesser, A.C., & McNamara, D.S. (2007). Using temporal cohesion to predict temporal coherence in narrative and expository texts. Behavior Research Methods, 39 (2), 212¬223.
[4] Otero, J.; Leon, J. A., & Graesser, A. C. (Eds.) (2002). The psychology of science text comprehension. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
[5] Nelson, T.O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed.). The psychology of learning and motivation.Vol. 26, pp. 125-173. San Diego: Academic Press.
[6] Weaver, C. A., & Bryant, D.S. (1995). Monitoring of comprehension: The role of text difficulty in metamemory for narrative and expository text. Memory & Cognition, 23 (1), 12-22. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[7] De Mier, M.V.; Borzone, A.M. & Cupani, M. (2012). La fluidez lectora en los primeros grados: un estudio piloto con niflos hablantes de Revista Neuropsicologia Latinoamericana. Vol. 4 (1), 18-33.
[8] van den Brock, P.; Rapp, D.N., & Kendeou, P. (2005). Integrating Memory-Based and Constructionist Processes in Accounts of Reading Comprehension. Discourse processes, 39(2&3), 299-316.
[9] van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
[10] Stein, N. L., & Glenn, C. G. (1979). An analysis of story comprehension in elementary school children. R.O. Freedle (ed.), New directions in discourse processing. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
[11] Parodi, G. (2009). Generos discursivos y lengua escrita: Propuesta de una concepcion integral desde una perspectiva sociocognitiva. Letras. Vol.51, 80, p.19-56. ISSN 0459-1283.