Advertisement

Reading and Writing

, Volume 30, Issue 9, pp 2039–2067 | Cite as

Development of comprehension monitoring in beginner readers

  • Language and Reading Research Consortium (LARRC)
  • Gloria Yeomans-Maldonado
Article
First Online:

Abstract

The current study was designed to understand the development of comprehension monitoring among beginner readers from first to third grade, and to determine the extent to which first graders’ comprehension monitoring predicts reading comprehension in grade three. Participants were 113 children (57% female) from four US states who were followed from Grade 1 (M = 7 years, SD = 4 months) to Grade 3 (M = 9 years, SD = 4 months). Measures included decoding, vocabulary, working memory, comprehension monitoring, and reading comprehension. Children’s ability to monitor comprehension grew significantly from first to third grade, with a deceleration in growth over time. In addition, comprehension monitoring in Grade 1 made a significant contribution to reading comprehension in Grade 3, even after controlling for decoding, vocabulary, and working memory. Together, these findings supplement our understanding of young readers’ development of comprehension monitoring as well as its association with reading comprehension at a later time. Practical implications of the results in the context of providing support for higher-level language skills in beginning reading instruction are discussed.

Keywords

Comprehension Decoding Oral language Vocabulary 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Grant # R305F100002 of the Institute of Education Sciences’ Reading for Understanding Initiative. We are deeply grateful to the numerous staff, research associates, school administrators, teachers, children, and families who participated. Key personnel at study sites include: Lisa Baldwin-Skinner, Lauren Barnes, Garey Berry, Beau Bevens, Jennifer Bostic, Shara Brinkley, Janet Capps, Beth Chandler, Lori Chleborad, Willa Cree, Dawn Davis, Jaclyn Dynia, Michel Eltschinger, Kelly Farquharson, Tamarine Foreman, Rashaun Geter, Sara Gilliam, Cindy Honnens, Miki Herman, Jaime Kubik, Trudy Kuo, Gustavo Lujan, Junko Maekawa, Carol Mesa, Denise Meyer, Maria Moratto, Kimberly Murphy, Marcie Mutters, Amy Pratt, Trevor Rey, Amber Sherman, Shannon Tierney, Stephanie Williams, and Gloria Yeomans-Maldonado.

References

  1. Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working memory. The psychology of learning and motivation, 8, 47–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker, L. (1984). Children’s effective use of multiple standards for evaluating their comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bialystok, E., & Luk, G. (2007). The universality of symbolic representation for reading in Asian and alphabetic languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(02), 121–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bollen, K. A., & Curran, P. J. (2006). Latent curve models: A structural equation perspective (Vol. 467). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, T. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  6. Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (2006). Profiles of children with specific reading comprehension difficulties. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 683–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (2014). Reading comprehension and vocabulary: Is vocabulary more important for some aspects of comprehension. L’Année psychologique, 114, 647–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cain, K., Oakhill, J., Barnes, M. A., & Bryant, P. E. (2001). Comprehension skill, inference-making ability, and their relation to knowledge. Memory & Cognition, 29(6), 850–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 31. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Codding, R. S., Mercer, S., Connell, J., Fiorello, C., & Kleinert, W. (2016). Mapping the relationships among basic facts, concepts and application, and common core curriculum-based mathematics measures. School Psychology Review School Psychology Review, 45(1), 19–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Connor, C. M., Phillips, B. M., Kaschak, M., Apel, K., Kim, Y. S., Al Otaiba, S., et al. (2014). Comprehension tools for teachers: Reading for understanding from prekindergarten through fourth grade. Educational Psychology Review, 26, 379–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Connor, C. M., Radach, R., Vorstius, C., Day, S. L., McLean, L., & Morrison, F. J. (2015). Individual differences in fifth graders’ literacy and academic language predict comprehension monitoring development: An eye-movement study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19, 1140134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Currie, N. K., & Cain, K. (2015). Children’s inference generation: The role of vocabulary and working memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 137, 57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Daneman, M., & Merikle, P. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3(4), 422–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dunn, D. M., & Dunn, L. M. (2007). PPVT-IV: Peabody picture vocabulary test. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
  16. Fecica, A. M., & O’Neill, D. K. (2010). A step at a time: Preliterate children’s simulation of narrative movement during story comprehension. Cognition, 116, 368–381. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.05.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Florit, E., & Cain, K. (2011). The simple view of reading: Is it valid for different types of alphabetic orthographies? Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 553–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. García, J. R., & Cain, K. (2013). Decoding and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis to identify which reader and assessment characteristics influence the strength of the relationship in English. Review of Educational Research. doi: 10.3102/0034654313499616.Google Scholar
  19. Hancock, G. R., & Mueller, R. O. (2006). Structural equation modeling: A second course. Greenwich, Conn: IAP.Google Scholar
  20. Helder, A., Van Leijenhorst, L., & van den Broek, P. (2016). Coherence monitoring by good and poor comprehenders in elementary school: Comparing offline and online measures. Learning and Individual Differences, 48, 17–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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 Co.Google Scholar
  22. Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2(2), 127–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hulme, C., & Snowling, M. J. (2011). Children’s reading comprehension difficulties: nature, causes, and treatments. Curent Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 139–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kamata, A., Nese, J. F. T., Patarapichayatham, C., & Lai, C.-F. (2013). Modeling nonlinear growth with three data points: Illustration with benchmarking data. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 38(2), 105–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. B. (2015). The performance of RMSEA in models with small degrees of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44(3), 486–507. doi: 10.1177/0049124114543236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kershaw, S., & Schatschneider, C. (2012). A latent variable approach to the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 25(2), 433–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kim, Y. S. (2015). Language and cognitive predictors of text comprehension: Evidence from multivariate analysis. Child Development, 86(1), 128–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kim, Y. S. (2016). Direct and mediated effects of language and cognitive skills on comprehension of oral narrative texts (listening comprehension) for children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 141, 101–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  31. Klingner, J. K., & Vaughn, S. (1999). Promoting reading comprehension, content learning, and English acquisition though Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR). The Reading Teacher, 52(7), 738–747.Google Scholar
  32. Language and Reading Research Consortium. (2015). The dimensionality of language ability in young children. Child Development, 86(6), 1948–1965. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Language and Reading Research Consortium, Farquharson, K., & Murphy, K. A. (2016). Ten steps to conducting a large, multi-site, longitudinal investigation of language and reading in young children. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 419. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00419.Google Scholar
  34. Language and Reading Research Consortium, Johanson, M., & Arthur, A. (2015). Improving the language skills of pre-kindergarten students: Preliminary impacts of the Let’s Know! experimental curriculum. Child and Youth Care Forum. doi: 10.1007/s10566-015-9332-z.Google Scholar
  35. Lepola, J., Lynch, J. S., Laakkonen, E., Silven, 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, 259–282. doi: 10.1002/RRQ.020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J. (2011). Qualitative reading inventory-5. Bloomington, MN: Pearson Assessment.Google Scholar
  37. MacGinitie, W. H., MacGinitie, R. K., Maria, K., & Dreyer, L. G. (2000). Gates-MacGinitie reading tests (4th ed.). Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.Google Scholar
  38. Markman, E. M. (1977). Realizing that you don’t understand: A preliminary investigation. Child development, 48(3), 986–992.Google Scholar
  39. Markman, E. (1981). Comprehension monitoring. In W. P. Dickson (Ed.), Children's oral communication skills (pp. 61–85). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  40. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus statistical modeling software: Release 7.0. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  41. Nation, K., Adams, J. W., Bowyer-Crane, C. A., & Snowling, M. J. (1999). Working memory deficits in poor comprehenders reflect underlying language impairments. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 73(2), 139–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Oakhill, J. V., & Cain, K. (2011). The precursors of reading ability in young readers: Evidence from a four-year longitudinal study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16(2), 91–121. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2010.529219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Oakhill, J., Hartt, J., & Samols, D. (2005). Levels of comprehension monitoring and working memory in good and poor comprehenders. Reading and Writing, 18(7–9), 657–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Paris, S. G., & Myers, M. (1981). Comprehension monitoring, memory, and study strategies of good and poor readers. Journal of Literacy Research, 13(1), 5–22.Google Scholar
  45. Perfetti, C. A., Stafura, J. Z., & Adlof, S. M. (2013). Reading comprehension and reading comprehension problems: A word-to-text integration perspective. In B. Miller, L. E. Cutting, & P. McCardle (Eds.), Unravelling reading comprehension: behavioral, neurobiological, and genetic components (pp. 22–32). Baltimore: Paul Brookes Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  46. Protopapas, A., Simos, P. G., Sideridis, G. D., & Mouzaki, A. (2012). The components of the simple view of reading: A confirmatory factor analysis. Reading Psychology, 33(3), 217–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rapp, D. N., & Kendeou, P. (2007). Revising what readers know: Updating text representations during narrative comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 35(8), 2019–2032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Semel, E., Wiig, E., & Secord, W. (2003). Clinical evaluation of language fundamentals-IV. Marickville: Harcourt Assessment.Google Scholar
  49. Silva, M. T., & Cain, K. (2015). The relations between lower- and higher-level oral language skills and their role in prediction of early reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 321–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Singer, M. (2013). Validation in reading comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(5), 361–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Skarakis-Doyle, E. (2002). Young children’s detection of violations in familiar stories and emerging comprehension monitoring. Discourse Processes, 33(2), 175–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Skibbe, L. E., Grimm, K. J., Bowles, R. P., & Morrison, F. J. (2012). Literacy growth in the academic year versus summer from preschool through second grade: Differential effects of schooling across four skills. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16(2), 141–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Strasser, K., & Río, F. D. (2014). The role of comprehension monitoring, theory of mind, and vocabulary depth in predicting story comprehension and recall of kindergarten children. Reading Research Quarterly, 49, 169–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R., & Rashotte, C. (1999). TOWRE–2 test of word reading efficiency. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
  55. Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2012). The simple view of reading redux vocabulary knowledge and the independent components hypothesis. Journal of learning disabilities, 45(5), 453–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. van der Schoot, M., Reijntjes, A., & van Lieshout, E. C. (2012). How do children deal with inconsistencies in text? An eye fixation and self-paced reading study in good and poor reading comprehenders. Reading and Writing, 25(7), 1665–1690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Van Dyke, J. A., Johns, C. L., & Kukona, A. (2014). Low working memory capacity is only spuriously related to poor reading comprehension. Cognition, 131, 373–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wagoner, S. A. (1983). Comprehension monitoring: What it is and what we know about it. Reading Research Quarterly, XVIII, 328–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Williams, K. T. (1997). Expressive vocabulary test second edition (EVT™ 2). Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 42, 864–872.Google Scholar
  60. Woodcock, R. W. (1998). Woodcock reading mastery tests—revised/normative update. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service/Pearson Assessments.Google Scholar
  61. Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III Test of Cognitive Abilities. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Language and Reading Research Consortium (LARRC)
  • Gloria Yeomans-Maldonado
    • 1
  1. 1.The Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options