Comprehension and learning from science texts: Why refutation texts work and analogy texts don't

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Fulton ◽  
Panayiota Kendeou
Keyword(s):  
Science Texts ◽  
Refutation Texts

When Do Analogies Promote Learning From Science Texts?

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew R. Taylor ◽  
Jennifer Wiley
Keyword(s):  
Science Texts

EXPRESS: The Effects of Experimentally Induced Emotions on Revising Common Vaccine Misconceptions

2021 ◽  
pp. 174702182110178
Author(s):  
Greg Trevors ◽  
Catherine Bohn-Gettler ◽  
Panayiota Kendeou
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Positive Emotions ◽  
Educational Practice ◽  
Empirical Knowledge ◽  
Emotion Induction ◽  
Correct Information ◽  
Knowledge Revision ◽  
Refutation Texts ◽  
Experimentally Induced

Knowledge revision is the process of updating incorrect prior knowledge in light of new, correct information. Although theoretical and empirical knowledge has advanced regarding the cognitive processes involved in revision, less is known about the role of emotions, which have shown inconsistent relations with key revision processes. The present study examined the effects of experimentally induced emotions on online and offline knowledge revision of vaccination misconceptions. Before reading refutation and non-refutation texts, 96 individuals received either a positive, negative, or no emotion induction. Findings showed that negative emotions, more than positive emotions, resulted in enhanced knowledge revision as indicated by greater ease of integrating correct information during reading and higher comprehension test scores after reading. Findings are discussed with respect to contemporary frameworks of knowledge revision and emotion in reading comprehension and implications for educational practice.

Materials Matter: An Exploration of Text Complexity and Its Effects on Middle School Readers' Comprehension Processing

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Amanda C. Dahl ◽  
Sarah E. Carlson ◽  
Maggie Renken ◽  
Kathryn S. McCarthy ◽  
Erin Reynolds
Keyword(s):  
Middle School ◽  
Science Classroom ◽  
Deep Level ◽  
Informational Text ◽  
Think Aloud ◽  
Text Complexity ◽  
Science Texts ◽  
Complex Syntax ◽  
Abstract Words ◽  
Complex Features

Purpose Complex features of science texts present idiosyncratic challenges for middle grade readers, especially in a post–Common Core educational world where students' learning is dependent on understanding informational text. The primary aim of this study was to explore how middle school readers process science texts and whether such comprehension processes differed due to features of complexity in two science texts. Method Thirty 7th grade students read two science texts with different profiles of text complexity in a think-aloud task. Think-aloud protocols were coded for six comprehension processes: connecting inferences, elaborative inferences, evaluative comments, metacognitive comments, and associations. We analyzed the quantity and type of comprehension processes generated across both texts in order to explore how features of text complexity contributed to the comprehension processes students produced while reading. Results Students made significantly more elaborative and connecting inferences when reading a text with deep cohesion, simple syntax, and concrete words, while students made more evaluative comments, paraphrases, and metacognitive comments when reading a text with referential cohesion, complex syntax, and abstract words. Conclusions The current study provides exploratory evidence for features of text complexity affecting the type of comprehension processes middle school readers generate while reading science texts. Accordingly, science classroom texts and materials can be evaluated for word, sentence, and passage features of text complexity in order to encourage deep level comprehension of middle school readers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document