Wu Yan, Barquero Laura A, Pickren Sage E, Barber Ana Taboada, Cutting Laurie E
Northeast Normal University, School of Psychology, Changchun, Jilin 130024, China.
Peabody College of Education and Human Development, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37203, USA.
Learn Individ Differ. 2020 May;80. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101848. Epub 2020 May 18.
Following the increased emphasis on expository text in early grades, this study examined narrative and expository reading comprehension growth in a sample of children who were followed longitudinally from grades 1 to 4, with the goals of explaining potential differences in children's overall performance and growth of narrative and expository text comprehension and identifying the cognitive factors that distinctly contribute to comprehension for each text type. We hypothesized that differences in reading comprehension growth of narrative and expository texts would be explained by various cognitive factors, specifically those related to executive functions (EF; e.g., working memory, planning/organization, shifting, and inhibition). At four annual time points, children (= 94) read, retold (Recall), and answered questions (CompQ) about expository and narrative passages. Growth curve modeling was used to explore reading comprehension development across the two types of text. On average, results showed that children scored better on reading comprehension of narrative passages than they did on expository passages across all time points. After controlling for socioeconomic status (SES), vocabulary in 1 grade predicted 4 grade comprehension scores (Recall) for both narrative and expository passages, while word reading efficiency (WRE) in 1 grade predicted 4 grade comprehension scores (CompQ) for expository passages only. Additionally, WRE was associated with the growth of expository reading comprehension: children with higher WRE showed a faster growth rate for expository CompQ. The contribution of EF to text comprehension was largely confined to expository text, although planning and organization (measured using a direct cognitive assessment) in 1 grade also predicted 4 grade comprehension scores for narrative text Recall. For expository text comprehens ion, working memory, planning and organization, shifting, and inhibition (measured using a parent rating scale), predicted reading comprehension outcomes. Critically, 1 grade shifting and inhibition not only predicted 4 grade expository text comprehension (CompQ), but also modulated its growth rate: children with stronger shifting and inhibition had faster rates of growth. Together, these findings suggest that expository reading comprehension is (1) more difficult than narrative reading comprehension and (2) is associated with unique cognitive skills.
随着早期年级对说明文文本的重视增加,本研究考察了从一年级到四年级纵向跟踪的一组儿童的叙事和说明文阅读理解增长情况,目的是解释儿童在整体表现以及叙事和说明文文本理解增长方面的潜在差异,并确定对每种文本类型理解有显著贡献的认知因素。我们假设叙事和说明文文本阅读理解增长的差异将由各种认知因素来解释,特别是那些与执行功能(EF;例如,工作记忆、计划/组织、转换和抑制)相关的因素。在四个年度时间点,94名儿童阅读、复述(回忆)并回答了关于说明文和叙事文段落的问题。使用生长曲线模型来探索两种文本类型的阅读理解发展。平均而言,结果表明,在所有时间点上,儿童在叙事文段落阅读理解上的得分都高于说明文段落。在控制了社会经济地位(SES)后,一年级的词汇量预测了四年级叙事文和说明文段落的理解得分(回忆),而一年级的单词阅读效率(WRE)仅预测了四年级说明文段落的理解得分(回答问题)。此外,WRE与说明文阅读理解的增长相关:WRE较高的儿童说明文回答问题的得分增长速度更快。EF对文本理解的贡献主要局限于说明文文本,尽管一年级的计划和组织(使用直接认知评估测量)也预测了四年级叙事文文本回忆的理解得分。对于说明文文本理解,工作记忆、计划和组织、转换和抑制(使用家长评定量表测量)预测了阅读理解结果。至关重要的是,一年级的转换和抑制不仅预测了四年级说明文文本理解(回答问题),还调节了其增长速度:转换和抑制能力较强的儿童增长速度更快。总之,这些发现表明,说明文阅读理解(1)比叙事文阅读理解更难,(2)与独特的认知技能相关。