Individual differences in children's knowledge of expository text structures: A review of literature

International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 67-82

  Ray, Melissa N ^b   Meyer, Bonnie J F ^a  

^a Pennsylvania state university   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Expository text; Structure strategy; Text structure

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857067671     PISSN: None     EISSN: 13079298     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (60)

1. Alvermann, D. E., & Hague, S. A. (1989). Comprehension of counterintuitive science text: Effects of prior knowledge and text structure. The Journal of Educational Research, 82, 197-202.
2. Armand, F. (2001). Learning from expository texts: Effects of the interaction of prior knowledge and text structure on responses to different question types. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 16, 67-86.
3. Armbruster, B. B., Anderson, T. H., & Ostertag, J. (1987). Does text structure/summarization instruction facilitate learning from expository text? Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 331-346.
4. Best, R. M., Floyd, R. G., & McNamara, D. S. (2008). Differential competencies contributing to children's comprehension of narrative and expository texts. Reading Psychology, 29, 137-164.
5. Birkmire, D. P. (1985). Text processing: The influence of text structure, background knowledge, and purpose. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 314-326.
6. Britton, B. K., Meyer, B. J., Hodge, M. H., & Glynn, S. M. (1980). Effects of the organization of text on memory: Tests of retrieval and response criterion hypotheses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 620-629.
7. Coté, N., Goldman, S. R., & Saul, E. U. (1998). Students making sense of informational text: Relations between processing and representation. Discourse Processes, 25, 1-53.
8. Danner, F.W. (1976). Children's understanding of intersentence organization in the recall of short descriptive passages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 174-183.
9. Duke, N. K. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 202-224.
10. Englert, C. S., & Hiebert, E. H. (1984). Children's developing awareness of text structures in expository materials. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 65-74.
11. Englert, C. S., & Thomas, C. C. (1987). Sensitivity to text structure in reading and writing: A comparison between learning disabled and non-learning disabled students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10, 93-105.
12. Frederiksen, C. H. (1975). Representing logical and semantic structures of knowledge acquired from discourse. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 371-458
13. Garner, R., & Gillingham, M. G. (1987). Students' knowledge of text structure. Journal of Reading Behavior, 19, 247-259.
14. Garner, R., Alexander, P., Slater, W., Hare, V. C., Smith, T., Reis, R. (1986). Children's knowledge of structural properties of expository text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 411-416.
15. Goldman, S. R., Rakestraw J. A. (2000). Structural aspects of constructing meaning from text. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume 3 (pp. 311-335). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16. Hiebert, E. H., Englert, C. S., & Brennan, S. (1983). Awareness of text structure in recognition and production of expository discourse. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15, 63-79.
17. Kardash, C. M., & Noel, L.K. (2000). How organizational signals, need for cognition, and verbal ability affect text recall and recognition. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 317-331.
18. Kintsch, W. (2004). The construction-integration model of text comprehension and its implications for instruction. In R. B. Ruddell, & U. J. Norman (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1270-1327). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
19. Kintsch, W., & Yarbrough, J. C. (1982). Role of rhetorical structure in text comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 828-834.
20. Loman, N. L., & Mayer, R. E. (1983). Signaling techniques that increase the understandability of expository prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 402-412
21. Lorch, R.F. (1989). Text-signaling devices and their effects reading and memory processes. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 209-234.
22. Lorch, R. F., & Lorch, E. P. (1985). Topic structure representation and text recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 137-148.
23. Lorch, R. F., Lorch, E. P., & Inman, W. E. (1993). Effects of signaling topic structure on text recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 281-290.
24. Lorch, R.F., & Lorch, E.P. (1996). Effects of headings on text recall and summarization. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 261-178.
25. McGee, L. M. (1982). Awareness of text structure: Effects on children's recall of expository text. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 581-590.
26. McNamara, D.S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N.B., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 1-43.
27. Meyer, B. J. F. (1975). The organization of prose and its effects on memory. Amsterdam: North Holland.
28. Meyer, B. J. F. (1985a). Prose analysis: Purposes, procedures, and problems. In B. K. Britton, & J. Black (Eds.), Analyzing and understanding expository text (pp. 11-64, 269 304). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Meyer, B. J. F. (1985b). Signaling the structure of text. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), The technology of text (pp. 64-89). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
30. Meyer, B. J. F. (2003). Text coherence and readability. Topics in Language Disorders, 23, 204-224.
31. Meyer, B. J. F., Brandt, B. J., & Bluth, G. J. (1980). Use of top-level structure in text: Key for reading comprehension of ninth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 72-103.
32. Meyer, B. J., & Freedle, R. O. (1984). Effects of discourse type on recall. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 121-143.
33. Meyer, B. J. F., Middlemiss, W., Theodorou, E., Brezinski, K. L., McDougall, J., & Bartlett, B. J. (2002). Effects of structure strategy instruction delivered to fifth grade children using the internet with and without the aid of older adult tutors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 486-519.
34. Meyer, B. J. F., & Rice, G. E. (1982). The interaction of reader strategies and the organization of text. Text, Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 2, 155-192.
35. Meyer, B. J. F., & Rice, G. E. (1989). Prose processing in adulthood: The text, the reader, and the task. In L. W. Poon, D. C. Rubin, & B. A. Wilson (Eds.), Everyday cognition in adulthood and later life. (pp. 157-194). New York: Cambridge University Press.
36. Meyer, B. J. F., Wijekumar, K., Middlemiss, W., Higley, K., Lei, P., Meier, C., & Spielvogel, J. (2010). Webbased tutoring of the structure strategy with or without elaborated feedback or choice for fifth- and seventh-grade readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 62-92.
37. Meyer, B. J. F., Wijekumar, K., & Lin, Y. -C. (2011). Does individualization of web-based structure strategy instruction increase fifth graders' reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 140-168
38. Ohlhausen, M. M., & Roller, C. M. (1988). The operation of text structure and content schemata in isolation and in interaction. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 70-88.
39. Ozuru, Y., Dempsey, K., & McNamara, D. S. (2009). Prior knowledge, reading skill, and text cohesion in the comprehension of science texts. Learning and Instruction, 19, 228-242.
40. RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Retrieved April 27, 2009 from http://www.rand.org/multi/achievementforall/reading/readreport.html
41. Ray, M.N. (2011). The development of structural awareness: The relationship between age, skill, and text (Unpublished Master's Thesis). The Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
42. Richgels, D. J., McGee, L. M., Lomax, R. G., & Sheard, C. (1987). Awareness of four text structures: Effects on recall of expository text. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 177-196.
43. Ritchey, K., Schuster, J., & Allen, J. (2008). How the relationship between text and headings influences readers' memory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 859-874.
44. Roller, C. M. (1990). The interaction between knowledge and structure variables in the processing of expository prose. Reading Research Quarterly, 25, 79-89.
45. Rossi, J. P. (1990). The function of frame in the comprehension of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 727-732.
46. Sanders, T. J. M., & Noordman, L. G. M. (2000). The role of coherence relations and their linguistic markers in text processing. Discourse Processes, 29, 37-60.
47. Smith, T. F., & Hahn, A. L. (1989). Intermediate-grade students' sensitivity to macrostructure intrusions. Journal of Reading Behavior, 21, 167-180.
48. Spooren, W., Mulder, M., & Hoeken, H. (1998). The role of interest and text structure in professional reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 21, 109-120.
49. Taylor, B.M. (1980). Children's memory for expository text after reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 15, 399-411.
50. Taylor, B. M., & Samuels, S. J. (1983). Children's use of text structure in the recall of expository material. American Educational Research Journal, 20, 517-528.
51. Vauras, M., Kinnunen, R., & Kuusela, L. (1994). Development of text-processing skills in high-, average-, and low-achieving primary school children. Journal of Reading Behavior, 26, 361-389.
52. Van Dijk, T. A. & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
53. van den Broek, P., Young, M., Tzeng, Y., & Linderholm, T. (2004). The landscape model of reading: Inferences and the online construction of a memory representation. In R. B. Ruddell, & U. J. Norman (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1249-1269). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
54. Voss, J. F., & Silfies, L. N. (1996). Learning from history text: The interaction of knowledge and comprehension skill with text structure. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 45-68.
55. Weaver, C. A. I., & Kintsch, W. (1991). Expository text. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research volume II (pp. 230-245). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
56. Williams, J. P., Hall, K. M., Lauer, K. D., Stafford, K. B., DeSisto, L. A., & deCani, J. S. (2005). Expository text comprehension in the primary grade classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 538-550.
57. Williams, J. P., Nubla-Kung, A. M., Pollini, S., Stafford, K. B., Garcia, A., & Snyder, A. E. (2007). Teaching cause-effect text structure through social studies content to at-risk second graders. Journal of Learning Disabilities. Special Issue: Teaching History--in all its Splendid Messiness--to Students with LD: Contemporary Research, 40, 111-120.
58. Wylie, J., & McGuinness, C. (2004). The interactive effects of prior knowledge and text structure on memory for cognitive psychology texts. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 497-514.
59. Yekovich, F. R., Walker, C. H., Ogle, L. T., & Thompson, M. A. (1990). The influence of domain knowledge on inferencing in low-aptitude individuals. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 25, 259-278.
60. Yochum, N. (1991). Children's learning from informational text: The relationship between prior knowledge and text structure. Journal of Reading Behavior, 23, 87-108.