SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Özel Eğitim Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 20 Sayı: 2

İyi ve Zayıf Okuyucular için Okuduğunu Anlama: Kuramsal ve Ampirik Açıdan Bir Bakış

Mustafa Kocaarslan(Bartın Üniversitesi)0000-0003-3918-6589
Pages
369–393
Publication Date
2019-06-01
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Okumanın Temel Teorisi, temel ve üst düzey dil becerileri ve göreve özgü süreçler olarak bilinen yürütücü işlevlerin okuduğunu anlama üzerindeki etkileri ele alınarak önemli bilgi ve açıklamalara yer verilmiştir.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Okuma becerisi bireylerin akademik ve yaşamsal başarısı açısından eşsiz bir yere sahiptir. “Matthew Ekisi” adlı bir teori, iyi ve zayıf okuyucuların uzun bir zaman diliminde birbirlerinden nasıl farklılaştığını ve iyi okuyucuların zayıf okuyuculara göre başta kademik başarı olmak üzere diğer pek çok alanda nasıl belirgin üstünlükler kazandığını gözler önüne sermektedir.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Okuma becerisinin özünü ise grafiksel sembolleri çözümleyip seslendirme yapmanın ötesinde bir anlam arayışı ve ona ulaşma süreci olan okuduğunu anlama becerisi oluşturmaktadır.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Okumanın Temel Teorisi, temel ve üst düzey dil becerileri ve göreve özgü süreçler olarak bilinen yürütücü işlevlerin okuduğunu anlama üzerindeki etkileri ele alınarak önemli bilgi ve açıklamalara yer verilmiştir.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:İyi ve zayıf okuyucular · okuduğunu anlama · Mattew Etkisi

Özet

Okuma becerisi bireylerin akademik ve yaşamsal başarısı açısından eşsiz bir yere sahiptir. “Matthew Ekisi” adlı bir teori, iyi ve zayıf okuyucuların uzun bir zaman diliminde birbirlerinden nasıl farklılaştığını ve iyi okuyucuların zayıf okuyuculara göre başta kademik başarı olmak üzere diğer pek çok alanda nasıl belirgin üstünlükler kazandığını gözler önüne sermektedir. Okuma becerisinin özünü ise grafiksel sembolleri çözümleyip seslendirme yapmanın ötesinde bir anlam arayışı ve ona ulaşma süreci olan okuduğunu anlama becerisi oluşturmaktadır. Okuduğunu anlama, odak noktası okunan şeylerin anlamını yapılandırma ve yorumlama olan karmaşık, çok boyutlu ve dinamik bir süreçtir. Güncel literatüre dayalı bir derleme çalışması olan bu araştırmada, iyi ve zayıf okuyucular için okuduğunu anlam süreci hem teorik ve hem de güncel araştırmalar ışığında çok yönlü ve bütünsel bir bakış açısıyla incelenmiştir. Okumanın Temel Teorisi, temel ve üst düzey dil becerileri ve göreve özgü süreçler olarak bilinen yürütücü işlevlerin okuduğunu anlama üzerindeki etkileri ele alınarak önemli bilgi ve açıklamalara yer verilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kocaarslan, M. (2019). İyi ve Zayıf Okuyucular için Okuduğunu Anlama: Kuramsal ve Ampirik Açıdan Bir Bakış. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Özel Eğitim Dergisi, Cilt: 20 Sayı: 2, 369–393. https://doi.org/10.21565/ozelegitimdergisi.433448

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (64)

  1. Beck, I. L.,& McKeown, M. G. (1998). Comrehension: The sine qua none of reading. In S. Patton & M. Holmes (Eds.), The keys to literacy (pp.40-52). Washington, DC: Council for Bassic Education.
  2. Bowers, P. N., Kirby, J. R., & Deacon, S. H. (2010). The effects of morphological instruction on literacy skills: A systematic review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 80, 144–179.
  3. Cain, K. (2016). Reading comprehension development and difficulties: An overview. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 42(2), 9-16.
  4. Cain, K. E., & Oakhill, J. V. (1999). Inference making ability and its relation to comprehension failure in young children. Reading and Writing, 11(5/6), 489–503. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008084120205
  5. Cain, K., & Nash, H. M. (2011). The Influence of Connectives on Young Readers’ Processing and Comprehension of Text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(2), 429–441. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022824
  6. Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (2006). Assessment matters: Issues in the measurement of reading comprehension. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 697–708. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709905X69807
  7. Carney, J. J., Anderson, D., Blackburn, C., & Blessing, D. (1984). Pre-teaching vocabulary and the comprehension of social studies materials by elementary school children. Social Education, 48, 195–196.
  8. Catts, H. W., Adlof, S. M., & Weismer, S. E. (2006). Language Deficits in Poor Comprehenders: A Case for the Simple View of Reading. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 49(2), 278. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2006/023)
  9. Catts, H. W., Fey, M. E., Zhang, X., & Tomblin, J. B. (1999). Language Basis of Reading and Reading Disabilities: Evidence From a Longitudinal Investigation. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3(4), 331–361. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0304_2
  10. Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1997). Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later. Developmental Psychology, 33(6), 934–945. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.33.6.934
  11. Dickinson, D. K., & Snow, C. E. (1987). Interrelationships among prereading and oral language skills in kindergartners from two social classes. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 2(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/0885-2006(87)90010-X
  12. Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., & Pearson, P. D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research, 61, 239–264.
  13. Duke, N. K. (2000). 3.6 Minutes per Day: The Scarcity of Informational Texts in First Grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(2), 202–224. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.35.2.1
  14. Duke, N. K. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in the first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 202–224.Elbro, C., & Petersen, D. K. (2004). Long-term effects of phoneme awareness and letter sound training: An intervention study with children at risk for dyslexia. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 660–670.
  15. Florit, E., Roch, M., & Levorato, M. C. (2011). Listening text comprehension of explicit and implicit information in preschoolers: The role of verbal and inferential skills. Discourse Processes, 48(2), 119–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2010.494244
  16. Freedle, R. O. (Ed.) (1979). New directions in discourse processing (Vol. 11). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation
  17. García, J. R., Bustos, A., & Sánchez, E. (2015). The contribution of knowledge about anaphors, organisational signals and refutations to reading comprehension. Journal of Research in Reading, 38(4), 405–427. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12021
  18. Geva, E., & Ryan, E. B. (1985). Use of conjunctions in expository texts by skilled and less skilled readers. Journal of Literacy Research, 17(4), 331–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862968509547549
  19. Goldman, S. R., & Rakestraw, J. A. (2000). Structural aspects of constructing meaning from text. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 311–335). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  20. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, Reading, and Reading Disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258600700104
  21. Hall, K. M., Sabey, B. L., & McClellan, M. (2005). Expository text comprehension: Helping primary-grade teachers use expository texts to full advantage. Reading Psychology, 26(3), 211–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710590962550
  22. Heilman, A. W., Blair, T.R., & Rupley, W. H. (1998). Principles and practices of teaching reading (9th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice Hall
  23. Hogan, T. P., Cain, K., & Bridges, M. S. (2012). Young children’s oral language abilities and later reading comprehension. In T. Shanahan & C. J. Lonigan (Eds.), Early childhood literacy: The National Early Literacy Panel and beyond (pp. 217–232). Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.
  24. Hudson, N., Scheff, J., Tarsha, M., & Cutting, L. E. (2016). Reading comprehension and executive function neurobiological findings. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 42(2), 23-29.
  25. Hulme, C., & Snowling, M. J. (2009). Developmental disorders of language learning and cognition. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
  26. Idol, L. (1987). Group story mapping: A comprehension strategy for both skilled and unskilled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 196–205.
  27. Jimenez, R. T., Garcia, G. E., & Pearson, P. D. (1996). The reading strategies of bilingual Latina/o students who are successful English readers: Opportunities and obstacles. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(1), 90-112.
  28. Kendeou, P., van den Broek, P., White, M. J., & Lynch, J. S. (2009). Predicting Reading Comprehension in Early Elementary School: The Independent Contributions of Oral Language and Decoding Skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 765–778. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015956
  29. Kim, Y.-S. (2015). Language and Cognitive Predictors of Text Comprehension: Evidence From Multivariate Analysis. Child Development, 86(1), 128–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12293
  30. Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., & Boardman, A. (2007). Teaching reading comprehension to students with learning difficulties. Teaching Reading Comprehension to Students with Learning Difficulties. Retrieved from http://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&PAGE=reference&D=psyc5&NEWS=N&AN=2007-11367-000
  31. Lepola, J., Lynch, J., Laakkonen, E., Silvén, M., & Niemi, P. (2012). The role of inference making and other language skills in the development of narrative listening comprehension in 4-6-year-old children. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(3), 259–282. https://doi.org/10.1002/RRQ.020
  32. Locascio, G., Mahone, E. M., Eason, S., & Cutting, L. (2010). Executive Dysfunction Among Children With Reading Comprehension Deficits. Journal of Learning Disabilities, (April). https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409355476
  33. Mandler, J. M., & Johnson, N. S. (1977). Remembrance of things parsed: Story structure and recall. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 111–151.Manguel, A. (2014). A history of reading. New York: Penguin Books.
  34. McGee, A., & Johnson, H. (2003). The Effect of Inference Training on Skilled and Less Skilled Comprehenders. Educational Psychology, 23(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410303220
  35. McLaughlin, M. J., Speirs, K. E., & Shenassa, E. D. (2014). Reading Disability and Adult Attained Education and Income: Evidence From a 30-Year Longitudinal Study of a Population-Based Sample. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(4), 374–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412458323
  36. Meyer, B. J., & Freedle, R. O. (1984). Effects of discourse type on recall. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 121–143.
  37. Muter, V., Hulme, C., Snowling, M. J., & Stevenson, J. (2004). Phonemes, rimes, vocabulary, and grammatical skills as foundations of early reading development: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 40(5), 665–681. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.40.5.665
  38. Nation, K., & Snowling, M. J. (1998). Individual Differences in Contextual Facilitation: Evidence from Dyslexia and Poor Reading Comprehension. Child Development, 69(4), 996–1011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06157.x
  39. Nation, K., & Snowling, M. J. (2000). Factors influencing syntactic awareness skills in normal readers and poor comprehenders. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21(2), 229–241. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716400002046
  40. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office
  41. Oakhill, J. V., & Cain, K. (2012). The precursors of reading ability in young readers: Evidence from a four-year longitudinal study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16(2), 91–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2010.529219
  42. Oakhill, J. V., Cain, K., & Bryant, P. E. (2003). The dissociation of word reading and text comprehension: Evidence from component skills. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18(4), 443–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960344000008
  43. Oakhill, J.& Cain, K. (2016). Supporting reading comprehension development from research to practice. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 42(2), 32-39
  44. Paris, A. H., & Paris, S. G. (2003). Assessing narrative comprehension in young children. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(1), 36–76. https://doi.org/10.1598/rrq.38.1.3
  45. Paris, A. H., & Paris, S. G. (2007). Teaching Narrative Comprehension Strategies to First Graders. Cognition and Instruction, 25(1), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000709336701
  46. Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  47. Perfetti, C. A., Landi, N., & Oakhill, J. V. (2005). The acquisition of reading comprehension skill. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
  48. Pimperton, H., & Nation, K. (2014). Poor Comprehenders in the Classroom: Teacher Ratings of Behavior in Children With Poor Reading Comprehension and Its Relationship With Individual Differences in Working Memory. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(3), 199–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412454172
  49. Pitts, M. (1983). Comprehension Monitoring: Definition and Practice. Journal of Reading, 26(6), 516-523. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40031758
  50. Quinn, J. M., Wagner, R. K., Petscher, Y., & Lopez, D. (2015). Developmental Relations Between Vocabulary Knowledge and Reading Comprehension: A Latent Change Score Modeling Study. Child Development, 86(1), 159–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12292
  51. Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory and practice. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (Vol. 1, pp. 97–110). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  52. Scott, C. M. (2009). A Case for the Sentence in Reading Comprehension. Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 40(2), 184. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2008/08-0042)
  53. Sesma, H. W., Mahone, E. M., Levine, T., Eason, S. H., & Cutting, L. E. (2009). The contribution of executive skills to reading comprehension. Child Neuropsychology, 15(3), 232–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/09297040802220029
  54. Shapiro, L. R., & Hudson, J. A. (1991). Tell me a make-believe story: Coherence and cohesion in young children’s picture-elicited narratives. Developmental Psychology, 27(6), 960–974. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.27.6.960
  55. Skarakis-Doyle, E. (2002). Young Children’s Detection of Violations in Familiar Stories and Emerging Comprehension Monitoring. Discourse Processes, 33(2), 175–197. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326950DP3302_04 Snowling, M. J., Adams, J. W., Bowyer-Crane, C., & Tobin, V. (2000). Levels of literacy among juvenile offenders: The incidence of specific reading difficulties. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health. 10, 229-241. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbm.362
  56. Snyder, L., Caccamise, D., & Wise, B. (2005). The assessment of reading comprehension considerations and cautions. Topics in Language Disorders, 25(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1097/00011363-200501000-00005
  57. Stahl, S. A., & Fairbanks, M. M. (1986). The Effects of Vocabulary Instruction: A Model-Based Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 72–110. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543056001072
  58. Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew Effects in Reading: Some Consequences of Individual Differences in the Acquisition of Literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 360–407. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.21.4.1
  59. Tomesen, M., & Aarnoutse, C. (1998). Effects of an Instructional Programme for Deriving Word Meanings. Educational Studies, 24(1), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305569980240108
  60. Vellutino, F. R., Tunmer, W. E., Jaccard, J. J., & Chen, R. (2007). Components of reading ability: Multivariate evidence for a convergent skills model of reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(1), 3-32 https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr1101_2
  61. Weaver, C. A., III, & Kintsch, W. (1991). Expository text. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 230–244. White Plains, NY: Longman.
  62. Welsh, J. A., Nix, R. L., Blair, C., Bierman, K. L., & Nelson, K. E. (2010). The Development of Cognitive Skills and Gains in Academic School Readiness for Children From Low-Income Families. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(1), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016738
  63. Williams, J. P., Hall, K. M., & Lauer, K. D. (2004). Teaching expository text structure to young at-risk learners: Building the basics of comprehension instruction. Exceptionality, 12(3), 129–144.
  64. Yuill, N., & Joscelyne, T. (1988). Effect of organizational cues and strategies on good and poor comprehenders’ story understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 152–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.2.152