Helping College Students Read: An Investigation of the SOAR Strategy

Q3 Social Sciences College Teaching Pub Date : 2023-10-25 DOI:10.1080/87567555.2023.2271619
Somer R. Davis, Kristin A. Ritchey
{"title":"Helping College Students Read: An Investigation of the SOAR Strategy","authors":"Somer R. Davis, Kristin A. Ritchey","doi":"10.1080/87567555.2023.2271619","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractThe SOAR study method (Selection, Organization, Association, Regulation) has proven effective, yet students are typically reluctant to use reading interventions or study aids. This study compared each of the components of the SOAR strategy to determine if they produce reading comprehension scores as strong as the combined SOAR strategy. Undergraduates from a Midwestern university were trained on one of six study methods: selection, organization, association, regulation, SOAR, or rereading, and were tested with fact, concept, and relationship questions. Concept and relationship comprehension were the same across conditions, and fact comprehension was highest for the SOAR and regulation groups. Participants’ reported likelihood of completing all four steps of the SOAR strategy was low, even while they acknowledged its effectiveness. Implications include developing reading interventions that maximize comprehension and efficiency while increasing students’ willingness to use those interventions.Keywords: ComprehensionreadingSOARstudy strategy Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).","PeriodicalId":53429,"journal":{"name":"College Teaching","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"College Teaching","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2023.2271619","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

AbstractThe SOAR study method (Selection, Organization, Association, Regulation) has proven effective, yet students are typically reluctant to use reading interventions or study aids. This study compared each of the components of the SOAR strategy to determine if they produce reading comprehension scores as strong as the combined SOAR strategy. Undergraduates from a Midwestern university were trained on one of six study methods: selection, organization, association, regulation, SOAR, or rereading, and were tested with fact, concept, and relationship questions. Concept and relationship comprehension were the same across conditions, and fact comprehension was highest for the SOAR and regulation groups. Participants’ reported likelihood of completing all four steps of the SOAR strategy was low, even while they acknowledged its effectiveness. Implications include developing reading interventions that maximize comprehension and efficiency while increasing students’ willingness to use those interventions.Keywords: ComprehensionreadingSOARstudy strategy Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
帮助大学生阅读:对SOAR策略的调查
摘要SOAR学习方法(选择、组织、联合、规范)已被证明是有效的,但学生通常不愿意使用阅读干预或学习辅助工具。这项研究比较了SOAR策略的每个组成部分,以确定它们是否产生与综合SOAR策略一样高的阅读理解分数。来自中西部一所大学的本科生接受了六种学习方法之一的培训:选择、组织、关联、调节、SOAR或重读,并接受了事实、概念和关系问题的测试。概念理解和关系理解在不同条件下是相同的,事实理解在SOAR组和规整组是最高的。参与者报告的完成SOAR策略所有四个步骤的可能性很低,即使他们承认其有效性。影响包括开发阅读干预,最大限度地提高理解和效率,同时增加学生使用这些干预的意愿。关键词:综合阅读研究策略披露声明作者未报告潜在利益冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
College Teaching
College Teaching Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: College Teaching provides an interdisciplinary academic forum on issues in teaching and learning at the undergraduate or graduate level. The journal publishes three kinds of articles. Regular, full-length articles of up to 5,000 words reporting scholarship on teaching methods, educational technologies, classroom management, assessment and evaluation, and other instructional practices that have significance beyond a single discipline. Full-length articles also describe innovative courses and curricula, faulty development programs, and contemporary developments. Quick Fix articles, up to 500 words, present techniques for addressing common classroom problems. Commentaries, up to 1,200 words, provide thoughtful reflections on teaching.
期刊最新文献
The Powerful Impact of Positive and Negative Interactions with STEM Faculty on Undergraduates, Especially Underrepresented and Transfer Students The Life Happens Pass: Use of a Flexible and Fair Assignment Extension Policy A Quick Fix for Promoting Reading Compliance and Improved Class Discussions: Quizgecko and Low-Stakes Quizzes Teaching Advanced Undergraduate Classes in a Problem-solving Context: The Cognitive Sherlock Approach Iteratively-Designed Exit Tickets Enhances Student Learning
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1