Comprehension Monitoring, memory, and study strategies of Good and Poor Readers
Open Access
- 1 March 1981
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Journal of Reading Behavior
- Vol. 13 (1) , 5-22
- https://doi.org/10.1080/10862968109547390
Abstract
Comprehension and memory skills of fourth grade good and poor readers were compared in two studies. Their ability to monitor comprehension of difficult and anomalous information was measured in three ways; by spontaneous self-corrections during oral reading, by directed underlining of incomprehensible words and phrases, and by study behaviors. Poor readers engaged in significantly less monitoring on all three measures and this was correlated with poorer comprehension and recall scores. An additional metacognitive measure of perceived reading strategy effectiveness indicated that poor readers are often unaware of the negative influences of some strategies. The patterns of responses on the multiple measures suggest that poor readers may adopt decoding rather than meaning comprehension goals during reading and they are less accurate in applying monitoring skills towards resolving comprehension failures.Keywords
This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- Realizing That You Don't Understand: Elementary School Children's Awareness of InconsistenciesChild Development, 1979
- Developmental Trends in Monitoring Text for ComprehensionChild Development, 1979
- Children's metacognitive knowledge about reading.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1978
- Memorization processes in reading-disabled children.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1977
- Sensitivity to syntactic and semantic cues in good and poor comprehenders.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1976
- A Comparison of Reading Comprehension Processes in Good and Poor ComprehendersReading Research Quarterly, 1975
- The Development of Memory: Knowing, Knowing About Knowing, and Knowing How to KnowAdvances in Child Development and Behavior, 1975
- Reading as reasoning: A study of mistakes in paragraph reading.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1917
- How we think.Published by American Psychological Association (APA) ,1910