Previous research has documented the role of readers’ existing topic knowledge in supporting students’ comprehension of text; yet, we know less about how to build students’ knowledge in order to support comprehension and vocabulary learning. In the current study, we test the hypothesis that knowledge can be built and leveraged simultaneously in the interest of students’ literacy development through the use of conceptually coherent text sets. Fourth grade students (N = 59) were randomly assigned to read either a set of six informational texts that cohered around a set of concepts related to the topic birds (CC texts) or a set of texts that addressed a range of topics (NCC group texts). After reading, we assessed students’: (1) knowledge of the concepts in the conceptually coherent text set, (2) knowledge of target concept-related words that appeared in their respective text sets, (3) knowledge of general academic words that appeared in both texts sets, (4) comprehension of a novel text on a related topic, and (5) interest in the topic of the conceptually coherent texts. Results revealed that students who read the conceptually coherent texts demonstrated more knowledge of the concepts in their texts, more knowledge of the target words in their texts, and had better recall of the novel text compared to students who read unrelated texts. Findings suggest that there is potential for knowledge and vocabulary to be built during English language arts through a focus on conceptual coherence in the design of reading experiences for students.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Adams, B. C., Bell, L. S., & Perfetti, C. A. (1995). A trading relationship between reading skill and domain knowledge in children’s text comprehension. Discourse Processes, 20, 307–323.
Alexander, P. A., Kulikowich, J. M., & Schulze, S. K. (1994). How subject-matter knowledge affects recall and interest. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 313–337.
Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. (1981). Vocabulary knowledge. In J. Guthrie (Ed.), Comprehension and teaching: Research reviews (pp. 77–117). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Best, R. M., Floyd, R. G., & McNamara, D. S. (2008). Differential competencies contributing to children’s comprehension of narrative and expository texts. Reading Psychology, 29, 137–164.
Callahan, D., & Drum, P. A. (1984). Reading ability and prior knowledge as predictors of eleven and twelve year olds’ text comprehension. Reading Psychology, 5(1–2), 145–154.
Camp, D. (2000). It takes two: Teaching with twin texts of fact and fiction. The Reading Teacher, 53, 400–408.
Cervetti, G. N., Jaynes, C. A., & Hiebert, E. H. (2009). Increasing opportunities to acquire knowledge through reading. In E. H. Hiebert (Ed.), Reading more, reading better (pp. 79–100). New York: Guilford.
Chiesi, H. I., Spilich, G. J., & Voss, J. F. (1979). Acquisition of domain-related information in relation to high and low domain knowledge. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 275–290.
De Bot, K., Paribakht, T., & Wesche, M. (1997). Toward a lexical processing model for the study of second language vocabulary acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 309–329.
Durham, R. E., Farkas, G., Hammer, C. S., Tomblin, J. B., & Catts, H. W. (2007). Kindergarten oral language skill: A key variable in the intergenerational transmission of socioeconomic status. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 25, 294–305.
Farkas, G., & Beron, K. (2004). The detailed age trajectory of oral vocabulary knowledge: Differences by class and race. Social Science Research, 33, 464–497.
Friedman, M. (1937). The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 32, 675–701.
Garner, R., & Gillingham, M. G. (1991). Topic knowledge, cognitive interest, and text recall: A microanalysis. Journal of Experimental Education, 59, 310–319.
Gilles, C., & Pierce, K. M. (2001). Pairing fact and fiction for deep understanding. Language Arts, 78, 579–588.
Giorgis, C., & Johnson, N. T. (2002). Children’s books: Text sets. The Reading Teacher, 56, 200–208.
Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371–395.
Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Barbosa, P., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., David, M. H., et al. (2004). Increasing reading comprehension and engagement through concept-oriented reading instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 403–423.
Hoff, E. (2013). Interpreting the early language trajectories of children from low SES and language minority homes: Implications for closing achievement gaps. Developmental Psychology, 49, 4–14.
Kaefer, T., Neuman, S. B., & Pinkham, A. M. (2015). Pre-existing background knowledge influences socioeconomic differences in preschoolers’ word learning and comprehension. Reading Psychology, 36, 203–231.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction–integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163–182.
Kobayashi, K. (2009). The influence of topic knowledge, external strategy use, and college experience on students’ comprehension of controversial texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 130–134.
Kuperman, V., Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H., & Brysbaert, M. (2012). Age-of-acquisition ratings for 30,000 English words. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 978–990.
Lipson, M. Y. (1983). The influence of religious affiliation on children’s memory for text information. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 448–457.
McMurrer, J. (2008). Instructional time in elementary schools: A closer look at changes for specific subjects. Washington, DC: Center for Education Policy. Retrieved December 26, 2015. http://www.cep-dc.org/displayDocument.cfm?documentid=309.
Nagy, W. E., Herman, P. A., & Anderson, R. C. (1985). Learning words from context. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 233–253.
Neuman, S. B., & Dwyer, J. (2011). Developing vocabulary and conceptual knowledge for low-income preschoolers: A design experiment. Journal of Literacy Research, 43, 103–129.
Neuman, S. B., & Wright, T. S. (2013). All about words: Increasing vocabulary in the Common Core classroom, PreK-2. New York: Teachers College Press.
Nordstokke, D. W., Zumbo, B. D., Cairns, S. L., & Saklofske, D. H. (2011). The operating characteristics of the nonparametric Levene test for equal variances with assessment and evaluation data. Practical Assessment, Research, & Evaluation, 16(5), 1–8.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pearson, P. D., Hansen, J., & Gordon, C. (1979). The effect of background knowledge on young children’s comprehension of explicit and implicit information. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11, 201–209.
Pulido, D. (2003). Modeling the role of second language proficiency and topic familiarity in second language incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading. Language Learning, 53, 233–284.
Pulido, D. (2007). The effects of topic familiarity and passage sight vocabulary on L2 lexical inferencing and retention through reading. Applied Linguistics, 28, 66–86.
Recht, D. R., & Leslie, L. (1988). Effect of prior knowledge on good and poor readers’ memory of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 16–20.
Rentner, D. S., Scott, C., Kober, N., Chudowsky, N., Chudowsky, V., Joftus, S., & Zabala, D. (2006). From the capital to the classroom: Year 4 of the No Child Left Behind Act. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.
Reutzel, R. D., & Morgan, B. C. (1990). Effects of prior knowledge, explicitness, and clause order on children’s comprehension of causal relationships. Reading Psychology, 11, 93–114.
Romance, N. R., & Vitale, M. R. (1992). A curriculum strategy that expands time for in-depth elementary science instruction by using science-based reading strategies: Effects of a year-long study in grade four. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 545–554.
Shefelbine, J. L. (1990). Student factors related to variability in learning word meanings from context. Journal of Reading Behavior, 22, 71–97.
Stahl, S. A., & Jacobson, M. G. (1986). Vocabulary difficulty, prior knowledge, and text comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 18(4), 309–323.
Stahl, S. A., Jacobson, M. G., Davis, C. E., & Davis, R. L. (1989). Prior knowledge and difficult vocabulary in the comprehension of unfamiliar text. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 27–43.
Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–406.
Taboada, A., Tonks, S. M., Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2009). Effects of motivational and cognitive variables on reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 22, 85–106.
Taft, M. L., & Leslie, L. (1985). The effects of prior knowledge and oral reading accuracy on miscues and comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 17, 163–179.
Walker, C. H. (1987). Relative importance of domain knowledge and overall aptitude on acquisition of domain-related information. Cognition and Instruction, 4, 25–42.
West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: problems and remedies. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications (pp. 56–75). Newbery Park, CA: Sage.
Zeno, S., Ivens, S., Millard, R., & Duvvuri, R. (1995). The educator’s word frequency guide. Brewster, NY: Touchstone Applied Science Associates.
Appendix: Sample instructional script
Appendix: Sample instructional script
[Hold up book and say] We’re about to read a book called, “Feathers Not Just for Flying.”
Say: “Have you ever wondered about how birds’ feathers help them survive? This book will help us answer that question. Let’s read to find out.”
[Pass out books and say] After you finish reading, we’ll talk about what we learned about how feathers are helpful for birds.
Allow the student as long as 10 min to read the book. If all students finish before that, you can begin the discussion. However, you will need to stop students at the 10-min mark.
After students have finished reading
[Collect the books]
[Pass out the feathers and say] These are different kinds of feathers from different birds. Notice how they are different.
[Start Discussion] Ask each of the following questions allowing at least a minute for each.
What did you learn about birds’ feathers from reading this book?
How are feathers helpful for birds? How do feathers help birds survive?
Do birds keep the same set of feathers throughout their lives? How do you know?
What would happen if birds lost all of their feathers? Why?
About this article
Cite this article
Cervetti, G.N., Wright, T.S. & Hwang, H. Conceptual coherence, comprehension, and vocabulary acquisition: A knowledge effect?. Read Writ 29, 761–779 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9628-x