Abstract
The aim of this study was to explore comprehension monitoring and perceived use of reading strategies as factors of reading comprehension. Participants were elementary school students from the fifth to the eighth grade. Error correction and text sensitivity tasks from the Metacomprehension test (Pazzaglia, De Beni, & Cristante, 1994). and the cloze-task were used as measures of comprehension monitoring during reading. A Strategic reading questionnaire (Kolić-Vehovec & Bajšanski, 2001b) was applied as a measure of perceived use of strategies during reading. Girls had better results than boys on text comprehension, all measures of comprehension monitoring, as well as on the Strategic reading questionnaire. Significant developmental improvements in comprehension monitoring occurred after the fifth grade and between the sixth and the eighth grade. A similar change was evident in reading comprehension. All measures of comprehension monitoring were significantly related to text comprehension in all age groups. However, perceived use of reading strategies was significantly related to reading comprehension only in eighth-grade students.
Résumé
Le but de cette étude a été d’explorer le monitorage de la compréhension et l’usage des stratégies de la lecture perçu en tant qu’éléments de la compréhension lors de la lecture. Les participants dans cette recherche étaient les élèves de la cinquième à la huitième année de l’école primaire. Comme mesures de monitorage de la compréhension lors de la lecture on a adopté les devoirs de la correction d’erreurs et les devoirs pour examiner la sensibilité envers le texte, pris du Test de la méta compréhension (Pazzaglia, De Beni, et Caccio, 1999). Le Questionnaire de la lecture stratégique (Kolić-Vehovec et Bajšanski, 2001b) a été adopté comme mesure de l’usage des stratégies perçu lors de la lecture. Les filles ont eu de meilleurs résultats que les garçons sur les tests de la compréhension du texte, sur toutes les mesures du monitorage de la compréhension ainsi que sur le Questionnaire de la lecture stratégique. Des améliorations significatives dans le monitorage de la compréhension apparaissent après la cinquième année et entre la sixième et la huitième année. Des changements similaires sont visibles aussi dans la compréhension lors de la lecture. Toutes les mesures du monitorage de la compréhension étaient reliées de manière significative avec la compréhension du texte auprès de tous les groupes de différent âge. Toutefois, l’usage des stratégies perçu était significativement relié avec la compréhension de la lecture seulement chez les élèves de la huitième année.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alexander, P.A., & Jetton, T.L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.),Handbook of reading research (vol. 3, pp. 285–310). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
Alexander, P.A., Graham, S., & Harris, K.R. (1998). A perspective on strategy research: Progress and prospects.Educational Psychology Review, 10, 129–154.
Anderson, G., & Beal, C.R. (1995). Children’s recognition of inconsistencies in science texts: Multiple measures of comprehension monitoring.Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 261–272.
Auerbach, E., & Paxton, D. (1997). “It’s not the English thing”: Bringing reading research into the ESL classroom.TESOL Quarterly, 31, 237–261.
August, D.L., Flavell, J.H., & Clift, R. (1984). Comparison of comprehension monitoring of skilled and less skilled readers.Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 39–53.
Baker, L. (1979). Comprehension monitoring: Identifying and coping with text confusions.Journal of Reading Behavior, 11, 366–374.
Baker, L. (1984). Spontaneous versus instructed use of multiple standards for evaluating comprehension: Effects of age, reading proficiency, and type of standard.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 38, 289–311.
Baker, L., & Brown, A.L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P.D. Pearson, M. Kamil, R. Barr, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.),Handbook of reading research (vol. 1, pp. 353–394). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Beal, C.R. (1990). The development of text evaluation and revision skills.Child Development, 61, 247–258.
Bezinović, P. (2002).Škola iz perspektive učenika: Kako srednjoškolci vide svoju školu [School from students perspective: How high-school students perceive their school?]. Unpublished manuscript.
Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills.Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 31–42.
Carrell, P., Pharis, B.G., & Liberto, J.C. (1989). Metacognitive strategy training for ESL reading.TESOL Quarterly, 23, 646–678.
Eccles, J.S., Wigfield, A., Midgley, C., Reuman, D., MacIver, D., & Feldlanfer, H. (1993). Negative effects of traditional middle schools on student’s motivation.The Elementary School Journal, 5, 553–574.
Elliot-Faust, D.J., & Pressley, M. (1986). How to teach comparison processing to increase children’s short- and long-term listening comprehension monitoring.Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 27–33.
Garner, R. (1980). Monitoring of understanding: An investigation of good and poor readers’ awareness of induced misconceptions of text.Journal of Reading Behavior, 12, 55–63.
Garner, R., & Kraus, C. (1982). Good and poor comprehenders’ differences in knowing and regulating reading behaviors.Educational Research Quarterly, 6, 5–12.
Garner, R., & Reis, R. (1981). Monitoring and resolving comprehension obstacles: An investigation of spontaneous text lookbacks among upper-grade good and poor readers’ comprehension.Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 569–582.
Garner R., & Tylor, N. (1982). Monitoring and understanding: An investigation of attentional assistance needs at different grade and reading proficiency levels.Reading Psychology, 3, 1–6.
Garner, R., Hare, V.C., Alexander, P., Haynes, J., & Winograd, P. (1984). Inducing use of a text lookback strategy among unsuccessful readers.American Educational Research Journal, 21, 789–798.
Grabe, M., & Mann S. (1984). A technique for the assessment and training of comprehension monitoring skills.Journal of Reading Behavior, 16, 131–144.
Halpern, D.F. (2000).Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities. Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
Kolić-Vehovec, S. (2000).Evaluacija projekta “Kvalitetna škola” [Evaluation of the project “Quality school”]. Unpublished manuscript.
Kolić-Vehovec, S., & Bajšanski, I. (2001a). Children’s metacognition as predict or of reading comprehension at different developmental levels.ERIC database, 19, p., ED456422.
Kolić-Vehovec, S., & Bajšanski, I. (2001b). Konstrukcija upitnika strategijskog čitanja [Construction of Strategic Reading Questionnaire].Psihologijske teme, 9, 51–61.
Kolić-Vehovec, S., & Bajšanski, I. (in press). Dobne i spolne razlike u nekim vidovima metakognicije i razumijevanja pri čitanju [Age and gender differences in some aspects of metacognition and reading comprehension].Društvena istraživanja.
Kuhn, D. (2000). Metacognitive development.Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 178–181.
Markman, E.M. (1977). Realizing that you don’t understand: A preliminary investigation.Child Development, 48, 986–992.
Markman, E.M. (1979). Realizing you don’t understand: Elementary school children’s awareness of inconsistencies.Child Development, 50, 643–655.
Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C.A. (2002). Assessing students metacognitive awareness of reading strategies.Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 249–259.
Otero, J., & Campanario, J.M. (1992). The relationship between academic achievement and metacognitive comprehension monitoring ability.Educational & Psychological Measurement, 52(2), 419–431.
Paris, S.G., & Myers, M. (1981). Comprehension monitoring in good and poor readers.Journal of Reading Behavior, 13, 5–22.
Paris, S.G., Wasik, B.A., & Turner, J.C. (1996). The development of strategic readers. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, & P.D. Pearson (Eds.),Handbook of Reading Research (vol. 2, pp. 609–640). Mahwah: LEA.
Pazzaglia, F., De Beni, R., & Caccio, L. (1999). The role of working memory and metacognition in reading comprehension difficulties. In T.E. Scruggs & M.A. Mastropieri (Eds.),Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities (vol. 13, pp. 115–134). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Pazzaglia, F., De Beni, R., & Cristante, F. (1994).Prova di metacomprensione [Metacomprehension test]. Firenze, Italia: Organizzazioni Speciali.
Wagoner, S.A. (1983). Comprehension monitoring: What it is and what we know about it.Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 328–346.
Walczyk, J.J. (1990). Relation among error detection, sentence verification, and low-level reading skills of fourth graders.Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 491–497.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis.Developmental Review, 12, 265–310.
Winograd, P., & Johnston, P. (1982). Comprehension monitoring and error detection paradigm.Journal of Reading Beahvior, 14, 61–74.
Zabrucky, K., & Ratner, H.H. (1986). Children’s comprehension monitoring and recall of inconsistent stories.Child Development, 57, 1401–419.
Zimmerman, B.J., & Pons, M.M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies.American Educational Research Journal, 23, 614–628.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kolić-Vehovec, S., Bajšanski, I. Metacognitive strategies and reading comprehension in elementary-school students. Eur J Psychol Educ 21, 439–451 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173513
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173513