Children's Ability to Use Three Standards to Evaluate Their Comprehension of Text.

THIS STUDY examined the ability of children in the fourth, fifth, and sixth grades to evaluate their comprehension of text using three standards. The authors measured children's ability to detect nonsense words, which requires use of a lexical standard; their ability to detect falsehoods (violations of prior knowledge), which requires a standard of external consistency; and their ability to detect inconsistencies, which requires a standard of internal consistency. Children's age, reading ability, and the kind of instructions they were given all affected their comprehension evaluation performance. Children more often used the standards of lexical and external consistency, which required integration of the information in the text with prior knowledge (either vocabulary knowledge or factual knowledge), than the standard of internal consistency of the text. Different developmental and reading ability patterns were found for the three standards. The authors also included several commonly used verbal report measures, but the results from most of these measures were inconsistent with the results of the performance measure. The authors suggest that results from verbal reports should be interpreted with caution.

[1]  Steven A. Stahl,et al.  Metacognitive Abilities of Above and below Average Readers: Effects of Conceptual Tempo, Passage Level, and Error Type on Error Detection , 1985 .

[2]  Bruce Carter,et al.  Development of comprehension monitoring as a function of context. , 1981 .

[3]  Shirley A. Wagoner.  Comprehension Monitoring: What It Is and What We Know About It. , 1983 .

[4]  John H. Flavell,et al.  The development of comprehension monitoring and knowledge about communication. , 1981 .

[5]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. , 1977 .

[6]  L. Baker,et al.  Children's Effective Use of Multiple Standards for Evaluating Their Comprehension. , 1984 .

[7]  Ron Reis,et al.  The Detection of Reader-Based versus Text-Based Inconsistencies and the Effects of Direct Training of Comprehension Monitoring among Upper-Grade Poor Comprehenders , 1983 .

[8]  H. Ratner,et al.  Children's comprehension monitoring and recall of inconsistent stories. , 1986 .

[9]  Ruth Garner,et al.  Monitoring of Understanding: An Investigation of Good and Poor Readers' Awareness of Induced Miscomprehension of Text , 1980 .

[10]  Karen K. Wixson.  Vocabulary instruction and children's comprehension of basal stories. , 1986 .

[11]  Ellen M. Markman,et al.  Children's Ability to Adjust Their Standards for Evaluating Comprehension. , 1981 .

[12]  Nancy E. Taylor,et al.  Monitoring of Understanding: An Investigation of Attentional Assistance Needs at Different Grade and Reading Proficiency Levels. , 1982 .

[13]  Edward Fry.  The Readability Graph Validated at Primary Levels. , 1969 .

[14]  Ruth Garner,et al.  Monitoring of Passage Inconsistency among Poor Comprehenders: A Preliminary Test of the “Piecemeal Processing” Explanation , 1981 .

[15]  Ellen M. Markman,et al.  Realizing That You Don't Understand: A Preliminary Investigation. , 1977 .

[16]  Ellen M. Markman,et al.  Realizing that you don't understand: elementary school children's awareness of inconsistencies. , 1979 .

[17]  Patricia A. Herman,et al.  Incidental acquisition of word meaning from expositions with varied text features , 1987 .

[18]  N. R. Schultz,et al.  Evaluation of comprehension in young and old adults. , 1987 .

[19]  Patricia A. Herman,et al.  Learning Words from Context. , 1985 .

[20]  Peter Johnston,et al.  Comprehension Monitoring and the Error Detection Paradigm , 1982 .