SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi / 2024 / Cilt: 12 Sayı: 4

Comparison of Reading Comprehension Performance of Fourth Grade Primary School Students through Different Techniques

İlkokul Dördüncü Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Okuduğunu Anlama Performanslarının Farklı Tekniklerle Karşılaştırılması

Mustafa Kocaarslan(BARTIN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-3918-6589
Zehra Çelik(BARTIN ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ, TEMEL EĞİTİM BÖLÜMÜ)0009-0000-7842-4725
Kübra Nur Yıldırım(BARTIN ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ, TEMEL EĞİTİM BÖLÜMÜ)0009-0003-8031-2441
Pages
919–939
Publication Date
2024-10-31
🏛️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)

The findings indicated positive and significant relationships between all reading comprehension measurements from low to high levels.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examined the relationships among fourth-graders’ reading comprehension scores measured by a sentence verification test, cloze test, retelling, and open-ended questions.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The findings indicated positive and significant relationships between all reading comprehension measurements from low to high levels.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Students who read more books per month achieved high performance only in the sentence verification test.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Okuduğunu anlamayı değerlendirme · cümle doğrulama testi · boşluk tamamlama testi

Abstract

This study examined the relationships among fourth-graders’ reading comprehension scores measured by a sentence verification test, cloze test, retelling, and open-ended questions. The study also examined whether the students' reading comprehension scores measured in multiple ways differed according to gender, reading media preference, availability of a bookshelf at home, and the number of books read was also investigated. The findings indicated positive and significant relationships between all reading comprehension measurements from low to high levels. Females performed better than males in all reading comprehension measures. In addition, a significant difference was found in favor of those who preferred reading printed materials in all tests regarding the reading media. Students with a bookshelf at home had significantly higher retelling scores than those without. Students who read more books per month achieved high performance only in the sentence verification test.

Özet

Bu araştırmada dördüncü sınıf öğrencilerinin cümle doğrulama testi, boşluk tamamlama testi, yeniden anlatma ve açık-uçlu sorular ile ölçülen okuduğunu anlama puanları arasındaki ilişkiler incelenmiştir. Bununla birlikte öğrencilerin farklı tekniklerle ölçülen okuduğunu anlama puanlarının cinsiyet, okuma ortamı tercihi, evde kitaplığa sahip olma ve okunan kitap sayısına göre farklılaşıp farklılaşmadığı araştırılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda genel olarak bütün okuduğunu anlama ölçümleri arasında düşük düzeyden yüksek düzeye kadar pozitif ve anlamlı ilişkiler tespit edilmiştir. Kızlar erkeklere göre tüm okuduğunu anlama ölçümlerinde daha üstün performans göstermiştir. Ayrıca okuma ortamı açısından bütün testlerde basılı okumayı tercih edenler lehine anlamlı farklılık bulunmuştur. Evinde kitaplık bulunan öğrencilerin olmayanlara göre yalnızca yeniden anlatma puanları anlamlı derecede yüksek bulunmuştur. Aylık daha fazla kitap okuyan öğrenciler yalnızca cümle doğrulama testinde yüksek performans elde etmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kocaarslan, M., Çelik, Z., Yıldırım, K. N., *, M. K. (2024). Comparison of Reading Comprehension Performance of Fourth Grade Primary School Students through Different Techniques. Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 4, 919–939. https://doi.org/10.16916/aded.1511386

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (75)

  1. Akyol, H. (2011). Yeni programa uygun Türkçe öğretim yöntemleri (4. baskı). Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
  2. Akyol, H., Yıldırım, K., Ateş, S., Çetinkaya, Ç., & Rasinski, T. V. (2014). Okumayı değerlendirme. Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık
  3. Allen, M. M., Ukrainetz, T. A., & Carswell, A. L. (2012). The narrative language performance of three types of at-risk first-grade readers. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 43(2), 205–221. Doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2011/11-0024)
  4. Aloqaili, A. S. (2012). The relationship between reading comprehension and critical thinking: A theoretical study. Journal of King Saud University-Languages and Translation, 24(1), 35-41. Doi:10.1016/j.jksult.2011.01.001
  5. Altun, D., Tantekin Erden, F., & Snow, C. E. (2018). A multilevel analysis of home and classroom literacy environments in relation to preschoolers’ early literacy development. Psychology in the Schools, 55(9), 1098-1120. Doi:10.1002/pits.22153
  6. Applegate, M. D., Quinn, K. B., & Applegate, A. J. (2002). Levels of thinking required by comprehension questions in informal reading inventories. The Reading Teacher, 56(2), 174-180.
  7. Badger, E., & Thomas, B. (1992). Open-ended questions in reading. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 3(4), 03-12.
  8. Brüggemann, T., Ludewig, U., Lorenz, R., & McElvany, N. (2023). Effects of mode and medium in reading comprehension tests on cognitive load. Computers & Education, 192, 104649. Doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104649
  9. Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (2006). Assessment matters: Issues in the measurement of reading comprehension. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 697-708. Doi:10.1348/000709905X69807
  10. Calet, N., López‐Reyes, R., & Jiménez‐Fernández, G. (2020). Do reading comprehension assessment tests result in the same reading profile? A study of Spanish primary school children. Journal of Research in Reading, 43(1), 98-115. Doi:10.1111/1467-9817.12292
  11. Cao, Y., & Kim, Y. G. (2021). Is retell a valid measure of reading comprehension?. Educational Research Review, 32, 100375. Doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100375
  12. Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 284-290. Doi:10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284
  13. Clinton, V. (2019). Reading from paper compared to screens: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Journal of Research in Reading, 42(2), 288-325. Doi:10.1111/1467-9817.12269
  14. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.) New York, NY: Routledge Falmer.
  15. Coles, M., & Hall, C. (2002). Gendered readings: Learning from children's reading choices. Journal of Research in Reading, 25(1), 96-108. Doi:10.1111/1467-9817.00161.
  16. Collins, A. A., Compton, D. L., Lindstrom, ¨ E. R., & Gilbert, J. K. (2020). Performance variations across reading comprehension assessments: Examining the unique contributions of text, activity, and reader. Reading and Writing, 33(3), 605-634. Doi:10.1007/s11145-019-09972-5
  17. Cutting, L. E., & Scarborough, H. S. (2006). Prediction of reading comprehension: Relative contributions of word recognition, language proficiency, and other cognitive skills can depend on how comprehension is measured. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 277-299. Doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_5
  18. Day, R. R., & Park, J. S. (2005). Developing reading comprehension questions. Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(1), 60-73.
  19. De Jong, P. F., & Leseman, P. P. (2001). Lasting effects of home literacy on reading achievement in school. Journal of School Psychology, 39(5), 389-414. Doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(01)00080-2
  20. Delgado, P., Vargas, C., Ackerman, R., & Salmerón, L. (2018). Don’t throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension. Educational Research Review, 25, 23-38. Doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2018.09.003
  21. Diehl, J. J., Bennetto, L., & Young, E. C. (2006). Story recall and narrative coherence of high-functioning children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34(1), 87-102. Doi:10.1007/s10802-005-9003-x
  22. Durkin, D. (1993). Teaching them to reading. Boston: Allyn &Bacon.
  23. Ecalle, J., & Magnan, A. (2008). Relations between print exposure and literacy skills: New evidence from grade 1–5. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 26(4), 525-544. Doi:10.1348/026151007X267959.
  24. Fletcher, J. M. (2006). Measuring reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 323-330. Doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_7
  25. Francis, D. J., Fletcher, J. M., Catts, H. W., & Tomblin, J. B. (2005). Dimensions affecting the assessment of reading comprehension. In S. G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Children’s reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 369-394). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  26. Francis, D. J., Snow, C. E., August, D., Carlson, C. D., Miller, J., & Iglesias, A. (2006). Measures of reading comprehension: A latent variable analysis of the diagnostic assessment of reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 301-322. Doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_6
  27. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9(2), 20-28. Doi:10.1177/074193258800900206
  28. Fraenkel, J., Wallen, N., & Hyun, H.H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. Boston: McGraw Hill.
  29. Furenes, M. I., Kucirkova, N., & Bus, A. G. (2021). A comparison of children’s reading on paper versus screen: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 91(4), 483-517. Doi:10.3102/0034654321998074
  30. Gellert, A. S., & Elbro, C. (2013). Cloze tests may be quick, but are they dirty? Development and preliminary validation of a cloze test of reading comprehension. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 31(1), 16-28. Doi:10.1177/0734282912451971
  31. George D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  32. Green, S. B., & Salkind, N. J. (2005). Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
  33. Halamish, V., & Elbaz, E. (2020). Children's reading comprehension and metacomprehension on screen versus on paper. Computers & Education, 145, 103737. Doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103737
  34. Harlaar, N., Dale, P.S., & Plomin, R. (2007). Reading exposure: A (largely) environmental risk factor with environmentally−mediated effects on reading performance in the primary school years. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48(12), 1192-1199. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01798.x.
  35. Karasu, H. P., Girgin, Ü. ve Uzuner, Y. (2013). Formel olmayan okuma envanteri. Ankara: Nobel.
  36. Keenan, J. M. (2016). Assessing the assessments reading comprehension tests. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 42(2), 17-21.
  37. Keenan, J. M., Betjemann, R. S., & Olson, R. K. (2008). Reading comprehension tests vary in the skills they assess: Differential dependence on decoding and oral comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 12(3), 281-300. Doi:10.1080/10888430802132279.
  38. Kendeou, P., McMaster, K. L., & Christ, T. J. (2016). Reading comprehension: Core components and processes. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 62-69. Doi:10.1177/2372732215624707
  39. Kim, S., Im, H., & Kwon, K. A. (2015). The role of home literacy environment in toddlerhood in development of vocabulary anddecoding skills. Child & Youth Care Forum, 44(6), 835-852. Doi:10.1007/s10566-015-9309-y
  40. Klingner, J. K. (2004). Assessing reading comprehension. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 29(4), 59-70. Doi:10.1177/073724770402900408
  41. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163-182. Doi:10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163.
  42. Marcotte, A. M., & Hintze, J. M. (2009). Incremental and predictive utility of formative assessment methods of reading comprehension. Journal of School Psychology, 47(5), 315-335. Doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2009.04.003
  43. McKenna, M. C., Kear, D. J., & Ellsworth, R. A. (1995). Children’s attitudes toward reading: A national survey. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 934-956. Doi:10.2307/748205
  44. McMaster, K. L., & Kendeou, P. (2023). Refocusing reading comprehension: Aligning theory with assessment and intervention. Learning and Individual Differences, 102, 102256. Doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102256
  45. McMaster, K. L., van den Broek, P., Espin, C. A., White, M. J., Rapp, D. N., Kendeou, P., BohnGettler, C. M., & Carlson, S. (2012). Making the right connections: Differential effects of reading intervention for subgroups of comprehenders. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(1), 100-111. Doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2011.11.017.
  46. Merisuo-Storm, T. (2006). Girls and boys like to read and write different texts. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(2), 111-125. Doi:10.1080/00313830600576039.
  47. Mézière, D. C., Yu, L., Reichle, E. D., von der Malsburg, T., & McArthur, G. (2023). Using eye‐tracking measures to predict reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 58(3), 425-449. Doi:10.1002/rrq.498
  48. Mol, S.E., & Bus, A.G. (2011). To read or not to read: A meta-analysis of print exposure from infancy to early adulthood. Psychological Bulletin, 137(2), 267-296. Doi:10.1037/a0021890.
  49. Mullis, I.V.S., Martin, M.O., Kennedy, A.M. & Foy, P. (2007). PIRLS 2006 international report: IEA's progress in international reading literacy study in primary schools in 40 countries. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College. Retrieved from http://timss.bc.edu/pirls2006/index.html
  50. Nation, K. (2005). Children's reading comprehension difficulties. In M. J. Snowing and C. Hulme (Eds.). The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 248-266). Oxford: Blackwell.
  51. Nation, K., & Snowling, M. (1997). Assessing reading difficulties: The validity and utility of current measures of reading skill. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(3), 359-370. Doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1997.tb01250.x
  52. National Reading Panel. (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. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
  53. Nootens, P., Morin, M. F., Alamargot, D., Gonçalves, C., Venet, M., & Labrecque, A. M. (2019). Differences in attitudes toward reading: A survey of pupils in grades 5 to 8. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2773.
  54. Ozuru, Y., Briner, S., Kurby, C. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2013). Comparing comprehension measured by multiple-choice and open-ended questions. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 67(3), 215-227. Doi:10.1037/a0032918
  55. Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
  56. Pamphlett, R., & Farnill, D. (1995). Effect of anxiety on performance in multiple choice examination. Medical Education, 29(4), 297-302.
  57. Paris, S. G., Carpenter, R. D., Paris, A. H., & Hamilton, E. E. (2005). Spurious and genuine correlates of children's reading comprehension. In S. G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds.). Children's reading comprehension and assesment (pp. 131-160). Mahwah, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  58. Parker, R., Hasbrouck, J. E., & Tindal, G. (1992). The maze as a classroom-based reading measure: Construction methods, reliability, and validity. The Journal of Special Education, 26(2), 195-218. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246699202600205
  59. Peterson, C. (1990). The who, when and where of early narratives. Journal of Child Language, 17(2), 433–455. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000900013854
  60. Ralli, A. M., Kazali, E., Kanellou, M., Mouzaki, A., Antoniou, F., Diamanti, V., & Papaioannou, S. (2021). Oral language and story retelling during preschool and primary school years: developmental patterns and interrelationships. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 50(5), 949–965. Doi:10.1007/s10936-021-09758-3
  61. RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
  62. Rapp, D. N., van den Broek, P., McMaster, K. L., Kendeou, P., & Espin, C. A. (2007). Higherorder comprehension processes in struggling readers: A perspective for research and intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 289-312. Doi:10.1080/10888430701530417
  63. Reese, E., Suggate, S., Long, J., & Schaughency, E. (2010). Children’s oral narrative and reading skills in the first 3 years of reading instruction. Reading and Writing, 23, 627-644. Doi:10.1007/s11145-009-9175-9
  64. Royer, J.M. (2001). Developing reading and listening comprehension tests based on the sentence verification technique (SVT). Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45, 30-41.
  65. Rutter, M., Caspi, A., Fergusson, D., Horwood, L. J., Goodman, R., Maughan, B., Moffitt, T. E., Meltzer, H., & Carroll, J. (2004). Sex differences in developmental reading disability: New findings from 4 epidemiological studies. JAMA, 291(16), 2007-2012. Doi:10.1001/jama.291.16.2007
  66. Schiefele, U., Schaffner, E., Moller, ¨ J., & Wigfield, A. (2012). Dimensions of reading motivation and their relation to reading behavior and competence. Reading Research Quarterly, 47, 427-463. Doi:10.1002/RRQ.030
  67. Shapiro, E. S., Fritschmann, N. S., Thomas, L. B., Hughes, C. L., & McDougal, J. (2014). Concurrent and predictive validity of reading retell as a brief measure of reading comprehension for narrative text. Reading Psychology, 35(7), 644-665. Doi:10.1080/02702711.2013.790328
  68. Spear-Swerling, L. (2004). Fourth graders' performance on a state-manadated assessment involving two different measures of reading comprehension. Reading Psychology, 25(2), 121-148. Doi:10.1080/02702710490435727
  69. Støle, H., Mangen, A., & Schwippert, K. (2020). Assessing children’s reading comprehension on paper and screen: A mode-effect study. Computers & Education, 151, 103861. Doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103861
  70. Ulusoy, M. (2008). Evaluating sixth graders’ reading levels with different cloze test formats. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 31, 115-133.
  71. Ulusoy, M., & Çetinkaya, Ç. (2012). Cümle doǧrulama tekni̇ǧi̇ni̇n okuma ve di̇nlemeni̇n ölçülmesi̇nde kullanilmasi. Hacettepe Egitim Dergisi, 43, 460-471.
  72. Üstüner, A., & Şengül, M. (2004). Çoktan seçmeli test tekniğinin Türkçe öğretimine olumsuz etkileri. Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 14(2), 197-208.
  73. Vandergrift, L. (2004). Listening to learn or learning to listen? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 3-25. Doi:10.1017/S0267190504000017
  74. Wang, J. H. Y., & Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Modeling the effects of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, amount of reading, and past reading achievement on text comprehension between US and Chinese students. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(2), 162-186. Doi:10.1598/RRQ.39.2.2
  75. Yıldırım, K. (2012). Öğretmenlerin öğrencilerin okuduğunu anlama becerilerini değerlendirmede kullanabilecekleri bir sistem: Barrett taksonomisi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9(18), 45-58.