Taylor, B. M., & Beach, R. W. (1984). The Effects of
Text Structure Instruction on Middle-grade Students' Comprehension and
Production of
Expository Text. Reading Research Quarterly, 19
(2), 134-173.
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of instruction that
focused on text structure in reading on junior high students' comprehension
and memory for content area textbook material. The study examines the effects of
this instruction on the quality of students' exposition writing.
Method
This study involved 114 seventh-grade students from three social
studies-English classes at a suburban junior high school.
One of the two classes with the same teacher was randomly assigned to the
experimental instruction condition, the other class was randomly assigned to the
conventional condition. The third
class, which had another teacher was the control group. The analyses of the
students' reading comprehension scores from the California Achievement Test
revealed that students were reading at an 8.5 grade level. All classes
participated in the pretests and posttests.
The students were asked to complete a pretest in reading and writing.
For the reading pretest, students were asked to read a 1,500 word passage
on the women's movement. The next day, students were asked to write as much as
they could remember about the passage and complete a 17-item short answer test.
For the writing pretest, students were asked to write an opinion essay.
They were instructed to list ideas and write an essay on another assigned
topic.
The experimental reading instruction group received one hour a week for seven weeks instruction and practice on how to produce and study a hierarchical summary of social studies material read. The students were introduced to the topic, read the assigned passage, and wrote a summary. The students were taught how to generate a hierarchical summary by making a skeleton outline. During the first four weeks, the teacher assisted in the development of summaries, then by week five the students were on their own. Each week the students discussed their summaries with the teacher about main idea, thesis statement, and supportive details. Also, the students practiced retelling with peers. By week seven, the students practiced recalling in writing instead of orally.
The conventional reading instruction group received one hour a week for seven weeks instruction in the form of directed reading lessons. The students were introduced to the topic, read the assigned passage, and completed 15 practice comprehension questions. During the first two weeks, the students worked with the teacher or in groups to complete questions. By week three, students answered questions on their own. Each week the teacher discussed answers to the questions. Students were asked to review questions and tell a classmate everything they could remember about the passage. By week seven, the students practiced recalling in writing instead of orally.
The control group received no special instruction.
The reading and writing posttests were conducted during week eight to all three groups. Students were randomly assigned to read Posttest Passage A about U.S. 200 Years ago and Today or Posttest Passage B about the Energy Crisis. Students in the experimental group were instructed to read the passage, prepare a hierarchical summary, and study their summary. Students in the conventional group were instructed to read the passage, answer a set of short questions, and review their questions and answers. The students in the control group were instructed to read the passage, reread the passage, and study the passage. The following day, all students were asked to recall in writing and answer 13 short answer test questions on the passage.
Each pretest and posttest in writing was rated by a 4-point overall quality rating scale employed by Educational Testing Service. The data analysis consisted of separate 3 (groups) by 2 (passage) by 2 (test time) analyses of variances (ANOVA) for the students' recall, short answer scores, and writing scores.
Results
The 3 x 2 x 2 analyses of variance (ANOVA) for students' recall scores
revealed no differences among groups on the pretest recall scores. However, the
experimental students' reading Posttest Passage A had significantly higher
recall scores than the conventional group and control group. Experimental and
conventional groups reading Posttest Passage B had significantly higher recall
scores than the control group, but the scores did not differ significantly.
All groups recalled more on the posttest passage compared to the pretest
passage.
The 3 x 2 x 2 analyses of variance (ANOVA) for students' short answer test scores revealed no differences among group on short answer pretest scores. However, the experimental and conventional groups had significantly higher short answer scores compared to the control group for both Posttest Passage A and Posttest Passage B. The posttest scores of the experimental and conventional groups did not differ significantly from each other.
The 3 x 2 x 2 analyses of variance (ANOVA) for students' writing scores revealed no differences among the three groups on the writing pretest in ratings of overall quality. The experimental group and conventional group did not differ significantly from each other on the writing posttest. However, the experimental group had significantly higher ratings on writing posttest compared to the control group. No other differences between the groups were significant.
The 3 x 2 x 2 analyses of variance (ANOVA) for students' ratings of their degree of familiarity with the contents of Posttest Passage A and Posttest Passage B revealed that students had significantly higher familiarity ratings for Posttest Passage B than Posttest Passage B.
In sum, the results of the data analyses revealed that reading instruction that focuses on text structure was effective in enhancing student's recall. The experimental group did not differ from the conventional group on the reading scores, pretest recall scores, or pretest short answer scores. Yet, after instruction in text structure, the experimental group received higher posttest scores compared to the conventional group or control group for Posttest Passage A, a passage that was rated to be unfamiliar.
Discussion
In conclusion, based on the findings of this study, the hierarchical
summarization strategy enhanced students' recall for relatively unfamiliar
social studies reading material and had a positive effect on the quality of
students' expository writing.
Since the results of this study were limited to one pretest and one posttest, additional research on the effects of instruction in the hierarchical summarization strategy is needed.