邀请学生讨论说明文:两种话语环境的比较及其对理解的影响

Linda L. Kucan, Isabel L. Beck
{"title":"邀请学生讨论说明文:两种话语环境的比较及其对理解的影响","authors":"Linda L. Kucan, Isabel L. Beck","doi":"10.1080/19388070309558388","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The purpose of this study was to investigate three questions related to talk and text comprehension. First, does the context in which students talk about text during reading affect their comprehension? Second, does talking about texts with peers influence the quality of students’ talk? Third, do experiences talking about text influence individual thinking about text? To address these questions, the present study engaged students in pretest, intervention, and posttest sessions that involved reading and talking about expository texts. In the pretest, students thought aloud during reading. During the intervention, two discourse environments were set up: one for individuals and another for small groups. In both environments, students responded to prompts about the texts as they read them. In the posttest, students again thought aloud during reading. In all sessions, after reading, students were asked to recall and answer questions about what they had read. All student talk was recorded and subsequently transcribed. The intervention transcripts were analyzed for the kind of discourse that developed in the individual and group discourse environments. The pretest/posttest transcripts were analyzed to trace possible influences of the intervention discourse on the internal discourse, or thinking, of students. Student recall and question‐response scores were analyzed as indications of students’ comprehension. Although no condition‐related differences for after‐reading recall and question‐response scores were found, all students improved from pretest to posttest. Condition‐related differences were found in the kind of talk in which students engaged as they read the intervention texts. These differences in talk reappeared in the posttest transcripts. These results are discussed, and implications for research and for education are explored.","PeriodicalId":88664,"journal":{"name":"Reading research and instruction : the journal of the College Reading Association","volume":"42 1","pages":"1 - 31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19388070309558388","citationCount":"43","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inviting students to talk about expository texts: A comparison of two discourse environments and their effects on comprehension\",\"authors\":\"Linda L. Kucan, Isabel L. Beck\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/19388070309558388\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The purpose of this study was to investigate three questions related to talk and text comprehension. First, does the context in which students talk about text during reading affect their comprehension? Second, does talking about texts with peers influence the quality of students’ talk? Third, do experiences talking about text influence individual thinking about text? To address these questions, the present study engaged students in pretest, intervention, and posttest sessions that involved reading and talking about expository texts. In the pretest, students thought aloud during reading. During the intervention, two discourse environments were set up: one for individuals and another for small groups. In both environments, students responded to prompts about the texts as they read them. In the posttest, students again thought aloud during reading. In all sessions, after reading, students were asked to recall and answer questions about what they had read. All student talk was recorded and subsequently transcribed. The intervention transcripts were analyzed for the kind of discourse that developed in the individual and group discourse environments. The pretest/posttest transcripts were analyzed to trace possible influences of the intervention discourse on the internal discourse, or thinking, of students. Student recall and question‐response scores were analyzed as indications of students’ comprehension. Although no condition‐related differences for after‐reading recall and question‐response scores were found, all students improved from pretest to posttest. Condition‐related differences were found in the kind of talk in which students engaged as they read the intervention texts. These differences in talk reappeared in the posttest transcripts. These results are discussed, and implications for research and for education are explored.\",\"PeriodicalId\":88664,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reading research and instruction : the journal of the College Reading Association\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 31\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19388070309558388\",\"citationCount\":\"43\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reading research and instruction : the journal of the College Reading Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/19388070309558388\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reading research and instruction : the journal of the College Reading Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19388070309558388","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 43

摘要

摘要本研究的目的是探讨与会话和文本理解有关的三个问题。首先,学生在阅读过程中谈论文本的语境会影响他们的理解吗?第二,与同伴谈论课文是否会影响学生的谈话质量?第三,讨论文本的经历是否会影响个人对文本的思考?为了解决这些问题,本研究让学生在测试前、干预和测试后参与阅读和讨论说明文。在预测中,学生们在阅读时大声思考。在干预过程中,设置了两种话语环境:一种是针对个人的,另一种是针对小团体的。在这两种环境中,学生在阅读时都会根据提示做出反应。在后测中,学生们再次在阅读过程中自言自语。在所有的课程中,在阅读之后,学生们被要求回忆并回答关于他们所阅读的内容的问题。所有学生的谈话都被记录下来,随后被转录。对个体话语环境和群体话语环境中话语类型的干预文本进行分析。对测试前/测试后的成绩单进行分析,以追踪干预话语对学生内部话语或思维的可能影响。学生回忆和问题反应得分作为学生理解的指标进行分析。虽然没有发现阅读后回忆和问题反应得分的条件相关差异,但所有学生从测试前到测试后都有所提高。在学生阅读干预文本时所参与的谈话类型中发现了与条件相关的差异。谈话中的这些差异在测试后的记录中再次出现。讨论了这些结果,并探讨了对研究和教育的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Inviting students to talk about expository texts: A comparison of two discourse environments and their effects on comprehension
Abstract The purpose of this study was to investigate three questions related to talk and text comprehension. First, does the context in which students talk about text during reading affect their comprehension? Second, does talking about texts with peers influence the quality of students’ talk? Third, do experiences talking about text influence individual thinking about text? To address these questions, the present study engaged students in pretest, intervention, and posttest sessions that involved reading and talking about expository texts. In the pretest, students thought aloud during reading. During the intervention, two discourse environments were set up: one for individuals and another for small groups. In both environments, students responded to prompts about the texts as they read them. In the posttest, students again thought aloud during reading. In all sessions, after reading, students were asked to recall and answer questions about what they had read. All student talk was recorded and subsequently transcribed. The intervention transcripts were analyzed for the kind of discourse that developed in the individual and group discourse environments. The pretest/posttest transcripts were analyzed to trace possible influences of the intervention discourse on the internal discourse, or thinking, of students. Student recall and question‐response scores were analyzed as indications of students’ comprehension. Although no condition‐related differences for after‐reading recall and question‐response scores were found, all students improved from pretest to posttest. Condition‐related differences were found in the kind of talk in which students engaged as they read the intervention texts. These differences in talk reappeared in the posttest transcripts. These results are discussed, and implications for research and for education are explored.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Five-year Pan-European, longitudinal surveillance of Clostridium difficile ribotype prevalence and antimicrobial resistance: the extended ClosER study. Bringing television back to the bedroom: Transactions between a seventh grade struggling reader and her mathematics teacher “Kiss your brain”: A closer look at flourishing literacy gains in impoverished elementary schools “I talk them through it”: Teacher mediation of picturebooks with sparse verbal text during whole‐class readalouds Becoming technologically literate through technology integration in PK‐12 preservice literacy courses: Three case studies
×
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