Adaptivity in reading literary texts;

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Flexibility in reading literary texts -8- another way of saying that for each individual the difference with the mean regression weight is estimated. The occurrences of this reading activity might vary between stories as well; the regression weight for story j of individual k (at fragment i) is considered as a deviance from the mean regression weight for this individual. Hence, equation (1) has to be elaborated with residuals for individuals as well as with residuals for the story read. p= P ∑ p= 0 p= P p ∑(γ p β = + + ) (2) p= 0 u pjk v p0k In equation (2) residuals for stories (upjk) as well as for individuals (vp0k) are allowed. These residuals are assumed to be normally distributed with an expected value of zero and a variance of S 2 upjk and S 2 vp0k respectively. It is however an empirical matter which variance components are needed to describe the differences between stories (S 2 u1jk, S 2 u2jk, … ) and which are needed to describe the differences between individuals (S 2 v10k, S 2 v20k, …). Substitution of equation (2) in (1) shows the model to be estimated: Y ∑ = p P p= 0 p p Logit( ) = [( γ + + ) * ] (3) ijk u pjk v p0 k fr ijk As the dependent variable is dichotomous, a logit transformation is used (remember, Logit (Yijk) = Ln (Yijk / [1 – Yijk)). Results Figure 1 summarizes the general course of students’ reading activities over the reading process, constructed from the fixed part estimates of the model (see the Appendix for the estimates). Each reading activity is presented in a separate panel. The horizontal axis represents the factor ‘time’ in the form of story fragments. On the vertical axis the estimated mean probability of occurrence of each reading activity is diagrammed for the two ability groups; W (weak readers) and S (strong readers). Each line represents the mean course of the reading activity displayed by weak or strong readers over four to five stories. It is important to note that the scale of the vertical axis differs for the various reading activities, due to different levels of probability of occurrence. For instance, retelling is a rather common activity, whereas metacognitive responding is relatively rare. In our discussion of Figure 1, we will first focus on the general patterns in students’ activities. In the next section we will consider differences in patterns between weak and strong readers. Do readers change their configuration of activities over the course of the reading process? As appears from Figure 1, there are four distinct patterns in the general course of students’ reading activities; - no change over the course of the reading process; - an increase of the reading activity over the course of the reading process; - a decline of the reading activity over the course of the reading process;
Flexibility in reading literary texts -9- - an increase at the beginning, followed by a decline towards the end of the reading process. Some reading activities (e.g., ‘analyzing’) are represented by straight horizontal lines. In these cases, the mean probability of occurrence of the activity remains constant over the reading process as a whole. No change over the reading process was observed. Other reading activities show a pattern of gradual increase (e.g., ‘problem detecting’). At the beginning of the reading process, the probability of occurrence of problem detecting is less than 10%. Student-readers tend to detect relatively few problems when reading the first few story fragments. As the story reading progresses, the probability of occurrence increases. At the end of the reading process, problem detecting reaches a peak (about 20 %). Apparently, students experience relatively many interpretation problems towards the end of the story. The third pattern can be illustrated by ‘associating’. This activity significantly declines over the course of the reading process. At the start of the reading process, when students are reading the story’s title and the first few fragments, they provide relatively many personal associations in response to the story. As the reading progresses, fewer associations are given. The probability of occurrence drops from 10 – 20% at the start to less than 5% at the end of the reading process. The final pattern is illustrated by strong readers’ emotional responses. At the beginning of the reading process, there is a probability of about 5% that strong readers provide emotional responses to the story. This probability increases significantly during reading. For story fragment 9 the probability of occurrence has been doubled (13%). From this point on, the chance of emotional responses to occur diminishes again, dropping to about 8%. Apparently, strong readers tend to provide the most emotional responses when they are reading the middle part of stories, the part where ‘the true action’ takes place. In sum, readers tend to change the configuration of their reading activities over time. The mean probability of occurrence fluctuates over moments in the reading process for six out of eight reading activities; retelling, inferencing, problem detecting, associating, evaluating and emotional responding. For two activities (analyzing and metacognitive responding) no changes over the course of the reading process were observed. Do strong readers more often change their activities during reading than their weaker peers? Our second research question (2a) involves a comparison between weak (W) and strong (S) readers, regarding changes in their reading activities during reading. The comparison can be made from two different perspectives; in terms of differences in occurrence, and in terms of the pattern of development of the activity over time. Figure 1 shows that for analyzing, the lines for weak and strong readers coincide, forming one straight horizontal line. This indicates that weak readers engage in analyzing as often as strong readers, and that in both groups the occurrence of analyzing remains constant over the reading process. For problem detecting, associating and metacognitive responding, the lines of weak and strong readers are (almost) parallel. This indicates a similar pattern of development for both groups; an increase of problem detecting, a decline of associating, and a stable pattern of metacognitive responses throughout their reading of a story. However, the extent to which weak and strong readers engage in these activities differs. In general, strong readers engage in these activities more often than weak readers, throughout the reading process. The panels of the remaining reading activities (retelling, inferencing, evaluating, and emotional responding) show differences in occurrence and different patterns of development for weak and strong readers. For example, compared to strong readers, weak readers provide many retellings of the story content during reading. Their mean pattern of response does not
Page 1 and 2: Flexibility in reading literary tex
Page 7: Flexibility in reading literary tex
Page 15 and 16: Appendix Flexibility in reading lit
Page 17 and 18: Table 2. Example of a coded transcr
Page 19 and 20: W (Estimated) Probability (Estimate

Adaptivity in reading literary texts;

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?