nach oben

Erschienen in:

18.03.2019 | Original Paper

Impact of Bridging Strategy and Feeling of Knowing Judgments on Reading Comprehension Using COMPRENDE: an Educational Technology

verfasst von: Christian Soto, Antonio P. Gutierrez de Blume, M. Fernanda Rodríguez, Rodrigo Asún, Mauricio Figueroa, Marian Serrano

Erschienen in: TechTrends | Ausgabe 5/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The main purpose of the present investigation was to explore the effects of a newly-developed educational technology, COMPRENDE, on adolescents’ (N = 85) reading comprehension. More specifically, we explored whether exposure to COMPRENDE significantly improved students’ reading comprehension performance gains as measured by Lectum (a standardized reading test), and to what degree this was effective on struggling readers when compared to proficient readers. Further, we sought to better understand whether planning, monitoring, and evaluation (as metacognitive skills), bridging strategy, contextual vocabulary, perception of COMPRENDE, confidence judgments for performance judged to be correct, and confidence judgments for performance judged to be incorrect (as cognitive skills) significantly predicted reading comprehension performance. Confidence judgments were collected as indices of feeling of knowing (FOKs). Results revealed that COMPRENDE was successful at improving reading comprehension performance but only for struggling readers, and that bridging strategy was the best predictor of reading comprehension performance across both local (item-by-item) and global (holistic) FOKs. Implications for educational practice, technology use in the classroom, research, and theory are discussed.

Vorheriger Artikel What Do We Mean by Blended Learning?

Nächster Artikel Faculty Perceptions of the Usefulness of Integrating Graduate Student-Created Resources into Teacher Preparation Coursework

Aarnoutse, C., van Leeuwe, J., Voeten, M., & Oud, H. (2001). Development of decoding, reading comprehension, vocabulary and spelling during the elementary school years. Reading and Writing, 14, 61–89.CrossRef

Azevedo, R., & Witherspoon, A. M. (2009). Self-regulated use of hypermedia. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 319–339). New York: Routledge.

Barnes, M. A., Faulkner, H., Wilkinson, M., & Dennis, M. (2004). Meaning construction and integration in children with hydrocephalus. Brain and Language, 89, 47–56.CrossRef

Barnes, M. A., Huber, J., Johnston, A. M., & Dennis, M. (2007). A model of comprehension in spina bifida meningomyelocele: Meaning activation, integration, and revision. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 13, 854–864.CrossRef

Berkeley, S., Mastropieri, M., & Scruggs, T. (2011). Reading comprehension strategy instruction and attribution retraining for secondary students with learning and other mild disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(1), 18–32.CrossRef

Boekaerts, M., & Rozendaal, J. S. (2010). Using multiple calibration measures in order to capture the complex picture of what affects students’ accuracy of feeling of confidence. Learning and Instruction, 20, 372–382.CrossRef

Bol, L., & Hacker, D. J. (2001). A comparison of the effects of practice tests and traditional review on performance and calibration. The Journal of Experimental Education, 69, 133–151.CrossRef

Cain, K., Oakhill, J. V., Barnes, M. A., & Bryant, P. E. (2001). Comprehension skill, inference making ability, and the relation to knowledge. Memory and Cognition, 29, 850–859.CrossRef

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

Dascalu, M., Jacovina, M., Soto, C. M., Allen, L. K., Dai, J., Guerrero, T. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2017). Teaching iSTART to understand Spanish. In B. Boulay, R. Baker, & E. Andre (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED 2017) (pp. 485–489). Wuhan: Springer.

Efklides, A. (2008). Metacognition: Defining its facets and levels of functioning in relation to self-regulation and co-regulation. European Psychologist, 13, 277–287.CrossRef

Garner, R., & Alexander, P. (1989). Metacognition: Answered and unanswered questions. Educational Psychologist, 24, 143–158.CrossRef

Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371–395.CrossRef

Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M., & Cai, Z. (2004). Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 36, 193–202.CrossRef

Gutiérrez Calvo, M. (1999). Inferencias en la comprensión del lenguaje. En M. de Vega y F. Cuetos (Coords.), Psicolinguistica del español (231-270). Madrid: Trotta.

Gutiérrez de Blume, A. P. (2017). The effects of strategy training and an extrinsic incentive on fourth- and fifth- grade students’ performance, confidence, and calibration accuracy. Cogent Education, 4, 1–17.CrossRef

Gutiérrez, A. P., & Schraw, G. (2015). Effects of strategy training and incentives on students’ performance, confidence, and calibration. The Journal of Experimental Education, 83, 386–404.CrossRef

Gutiérrez, A. P., Schraw, G., Kuch, F., & Richmond, A. S. (2016). A two-process model of metacognitive monitoring: Evidence for general accuracy and error factors. Learning and Instruction, 44, 1–10.CrossRef

Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., & Bahbahani, K. (2008). Explaining calibration accuracy in classroom contexts: The effects of incentives, reflection, and explanatory style. Metacognition & Learning, 3, 101–121.CrossRef

Hansen, J., & Pearson, P. D. (1983). An instructional study: Improving the inferential comprehension of good and poor fourth-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 821–829.CrossRef

Harris, T., & Hodges, R. (Eds.). (1995). The literacy dictionary: The vocabulary of reading and writing. Newark: International Reading Association.

Jackson, G. T., & McNamara, D. S. (2013). Motivation and performance in a game-based intelligent tutoring system. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 1036–1049.CrossRef

Jackson, G. T., Boonthum, C., & McNamara, D. S. (2010). The efficacy of iSTART extended practice: Low ability students catch up. In J. Kay & V. Aleven (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 349–351). Berlin: Springer.CrossRef

Johnson, A., Jacovina, M., Rusell, D., & Soto, C. (2016). Challenges and solutions when using technologies in the classroom. In S. Crossley & D. Mcnamara (Eds.), Adaptive educational technologies for literacy instruction (pp. 13–31). New York: Taylor & Francis, Routledge.CrossRef

Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension. A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McCarthy K.S., Soto C., Malbrán C., Fonseca L., Simian M., McNamara D.S. (2018) iSTART-E: Reading Comprehension Strategy Training for Spanish Speakers. In: Penstein Rosé C. et al. (eds) Artificial Intelligence in Education. AIED 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, (p. 215–219). eBook ISBN 978-3-319-93846-2 Springer International Publishing.

McGee, A., & Johnson, H. (2003). The effect of inference training on skilled and less skilled comprehenders. Educational Psychology, 23(1), 49–59.CrossRef

McNamara, D. S. (2004a). SERT: Self-explanation reading training. Discourse Processes, 38, 1–30.CrossRef

McNamara, D. (2004b). iSTART: Interactive strategy training for active reading and thinking. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 222–233.CrossRef

McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. P. (2009). Self-explanation and metacognition. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 60–81). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

McNamara, D. S., Levinstein, I. B., & Boonthum, C. (2004). iSTART: Interactive strategy trainer for active reading and thinking. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 222–233.CrossRef

McNamara, D. S., O’Reilly, T., Best, R., & Ozuru, Y. (2006). Improving adolescent students’ reading comprehension with iSTART. Journal of Educ. Computer Research, 34, 147–171.CrossRef

Murnane, R., & Levy, F. (1993). Why today's high-school-educated males earn less than their fathers did: The problem and an assessment of responses. Harvard Educational Review, 63(1), 1–19.CrossRef

Oakhill, J. V. (1984). Inferential and memory skills in children’s comprehension of stories. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 31–39.CrossRef

Otero, J. (2002). Noticing and fixing difficulties while understanding. In J. Otero, J. A. León, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 281–308). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Palinscar, A., & Brown, A. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 117–175.CrossRef

Palma, D., Soto, C., Gutiérrez, F., Rodríguez, F. (2018). A new method for summaries evaluation on a reading comprehension tool. Computer Assisted Language Learning (Word call 5), Universidad de Concepción, Chile.

Pressley, M., & Ghatala, E. S. (1990). Self-regulated learning: Monitoring learning from text. Educational Psychologist, 25, 19–33.CrossRef

Raphael, T. E., & Pearson, P. D. (1985). Increasing students’ awareness of sources of information for answering questions. American Educational Research Journal, 22, 217–236.CrossRef

Riffo, B., Véliz, M., Castro, G., Reyes, F., Figueroa, B., Salazar, O. & Herrera, M. O. (2011). LECTUM. Prueba de comprensión lectora. Conicyt, Proyecto Fondef D08i1179.

San Martín, E., Jara, I., Preiss, D., Claro, M., & Farina, P. (2012) ¿Cuán relevante es el aporte de diversos usos de TIC para explicar el rendimiento lector en PISA?. Modelando el aporte neto TIC en Chile, Uruguay, España, Portugal y Suecia. Informe de investigación Proyecto FONIDE N°: FE11124. Chile.

Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460–475.CrossRef

Snow, E. L., Jacovina, M. E., Jackson, G. T., & McNamara, D. S. (2016). iSTART-2: A reading comprehension and strategy instruction tutor. In D. S. McNamara & S. A. Crossley (Eds.), Adaptive educational technologies for literacy instruction (pp. 104–121). NY: Taylor & Francis, Routledge.CrossRef

Soto, C. M., McNamara, D. S., Jacovina, M. E., Snow, E. L., Dai, J., Allen, L. K., Perret, C. A., … Russell, D.G. (2015). iSTART-E: Desarrollando un tutor inteligente para la comprensión lectora de estudiantes de habla hispana. In: M. García (Ed.), Proceedings of the 15th annual colloquium on peninsular and Spanish American literature, linguistics and culture. Orlando.

Soto, C., Gutierrez de Blume A. P., Riffo, B., & Figueroa, M. (2017). COMPRENDE, hacia un entrenamiento cognitivo-metacognitivo de la comprensión lectora. VII Coloquio Lenguaje y Cognición. Universidad de Concepción, Chile.

Soto, C., Gutierrez de Blume, A., Asun, R., Jacovina, M., & Vásquez, C. (2018a). A deeper understanding of metacomprehension in reading: Development of a new multidimensional tool. Frontline Learning Research, 6, 32–53.

Soto, C., Rodríguez, M. F., & Gutierrez de Blume, A. P. (2018b). Exploring the metacomprehension abilities of students with intellectual disabilities. International Journal of Special Education, 33(2), 233–247.

Soto, C., Gutierrez de Blume, A. P., Jacovina, M., McNamara, D., Benson, N., & Riffo, B. (2019). Reading comprehension and metacognition: The importance of inferential skills. Cogent Education, 6(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1565067.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Cleaning up your act: Screening data prior to analysis. Using multivariate statistics (6th ed., pp. 676–780). New York: Pearson.

Vidal-Abarca, E., Gilabert, R., Ferrer, A., Ávila, V., Martínez, T., Mañá, A., Llorens, A.-C., Gil, L., Cerdán, R., Ramos, L., & Serrano, M.-A. (2014). TuinLEC, an intelligent tutoring system to improve reading literacy skills / TuinLEC, un tutor inteligente Para mejorar la competence lector. Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 37(1), 25–56.

Winne, P. H., & Nesbit, J. C. (2009). Supporting self-regulated learning with cognitive tools. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 259–277). New York: Routledge.

Yuill, N. M., & Oakhill, J. V. (1988). Effects of inference awareness training on poor reading comprehension. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2, 33–45.CrossRef

Titel: Impact of Bridging Strategy and Feeling of Knowing Judgments on Reading Comprehension Using COMPRENDE: an Educational Technology
verfasst von: Christian Soto
Antonio P. Gutierrez de Blume
M. Fernanda Rodríguez
Rodrigo Asún
Mauricio Figueroa
Marian Serrano
Publikationsdatum: 18.03.2019
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: TechTrends / Ausgabe 5/2019
Print ISSN: 8756-3894
Elektronische ISSN: 1559-7075
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00383-5

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2019

What Do We Mean by Blended Learning?

Elementary School Student Development of STEM Attitudes and Perceived Learning in a STEM Integrated Robotics Curriculum

Navigating Paradigms in Educational Technology

Accessibility in Online Courses: Understanding the Deaf Learner

Is the Maker Movement Inclusive of ANYONE?: Three Accessibility Considerations to Invite Blind Makers to the Making World

Trade-Offs in Using Mobile Tools to Promote Scientific Action with Socioscientific Issues