Fourth and Fifth Graders Representing the Argument Structure in Written Texts

This study examines how children represent the global discourse structure of arguments, an important type of exposition. Adults represent a written argument according to its hierarchical global discourse structure. In contrast, previous work has shown children to focus on the sentence level of exposition and represent it as a list. Sixty-five fourth and fifth graders read and recalled 1 of 3 texts with an argument structure. Predictably, some children recalled a list of details with no global structure. However, over two thirds of the children recalled the hierarchical global discourse structure in the argument, although recall accuracy varied from a close text match to 2 types of partial matches. Both grade level and the familiarity and vividness of text content were related to children's accuracy, suggesting developmental changes as children learn to represent exposition and important text features that can affect their performance.

[1]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Strategies of discourse comprehension , 1983 .

[2]  B. Meyer.  Use of Top-Level Structure in Text: Key for Reading Comprehension of Ninth-Grade Students. , 1980 .

[3]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Toward a model of text comprehension and production. , 1978 .

[4]  James F. Baumann,et al.  Effect of Rewritten Content Textbook Passages on Middle Grade Students' Comprehension of Main Ideas: Making the Inconsiderate Considerate , 1986 .

[5]  Robert C. Calfee,et al.  Textbooks for learning : nurturing children's minds , 1998 .

[6]  Susan R. Goldman,et al.  Students making sense of informational text: Relations between processing and representation , 1998 .

[7]  R. Lomax,et al.  Awareness of four text structures: Effects on recall of expository text. , 1987 .

[8]  Children's Knowledge of Structural Properties of Expository Text. , 1986 .

[9]  Donna M. Merkley,et al.  Guidelines for Implementing a Graphic Organizer. , 2001 .

[10]  Sandra J. Phifer,et al.  The Effect of Details on the Recall of Major Ideas in Text , 1983 .

[11]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  Discourse comprehension. , 1997, Annual review of psychology.

[12]  Peter Afflerbach,et al.  Verbal Protocols of Reading: The Nature of Constructively Responsive Reading , 1996 .

[13]  Marilyn J. Chambliss,et al.  Text cues and strategies successful readers use to construct the gist of lengthy written arguments. , 1995 .

[14]  Categorization, Macrostructure, and Finding the Main Idea. , 1984 .

[15]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  Effects of Vocabulary Difficulty, Text Cohesion, and Schema Availability on Reading Comprehension. Technical Report No. 225. , 1981 .

[16]  J. Glover,et al.  The Effect of Related and Unrelated Details on the Recall of Major Ideas in Prose , 1984 .

[17]  C. S. White,et al.  Effects of 'Seductive Details' on Macroprocessing and Microprocessing in Adults and Children , 1989 .

[18]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF READING Technical Report No . 628 ON THE LOGICAL INTEGRITY OF CHILDREN ' S ARGUMENTS ' , 2012 .

[19]  Gregory Schraw,et al.  Seduction of the strategic reader: effects of interest on strategies and recall , 1993 .

[20]  Sonia Ganger,et al.  Text Variations at the Level of the Individual Sentence and the Comprehension of Simple Expository Paragraphs. , 1981 .

[21]  Isabel L. Beck,et al.  Four Fourth Graders Thinking Aloud: An Investigation of Genre Effects , 1996 .

[22]  Bonnie J. F. Meyer,et al.  Effects of Discourse Type on Recall , 1984 .

[23]  Improvement,et al.  Adult literacy in America : a first look at the results of the National Adult Literacy Survey , 1993 .

[24]  Richard T. Vacca,et al.  Content Area Reading: Literacy and Learning Across the Curriculum , 1998 .

[25]  F. Danner,et al.  Children's Understanding of Intersentence Organization in the Recall of Short Descriptive Passages. , 1976 .

[26]  Susan R. Goldman,et al.  Extending capacity-constrained construction integration: Toward "smarter" and flexible models of text comprehension , 1996 .

[27]  B. Meyer,et al.  The interaction of reader strategies and the organization of text , 1982 .

[28]  David E. Kieras,et al.  The role of major referents and sentence topics in the construction of passage macrostructure , 1981 .

[29]  John C. Bean,et al.  Writing Arguments : A Rhetoric with Readings , 1997 .

[30]  Victoria Chou Hare.  Text Effects on Main Idea Comprehension. , 1989 .

[31]  V. Dijk,et al.  Pragmatics of language and literature , 1978 .

[32]  John S. de Cani,et al.  Constructing Macrostructure for Expository Text. , 1984 .

[33]  Susan R. Goldman,et al.  Paragraphing, reader, and task effects on discourse comprehension , 1995 .

[34]  Barbara A. Emmel,et al.  Argument Revisited; Argument Redefined: Negotiating Meaning in the Composition Classroom , 1996 .

[35]  Lea M. McGee,et al.  Awareness of Text Structure: Effects on Children's Recall of Expository Text. , 1982 .

[36]  Carol Sue Englert,et al.  Children's Developing Awareness of Text Structures in Expository Materials. , 1984 .

[37]  M. Martello.  The effect of illustrative details on the recall of main points in simple fictional and factual passages , 1984 .

[38]  D. Kuhn.  Thinking as Argument , 1992 .