ESRCcomprehensionbooklet PDF
ESRCcomprehensionbooklet PDF
ESRCcomprehensionbooklet PDF
As Figure 1 shows, a persons reading competence depends upon both of these skills: typical
fluent readers are shown in the upper right quadrant with good word recognition and
comprehension skills, while children with dyslexia are shown in the upper left quadrant (poor
word recognition, and good comprehension).
Children with comprehension difficulties fall in the lower half of the figure. Poor reading
comprehension can occur either in combination with poor word recognition or when word
recognition skills are well developed. If a young child cannot decode a word accurately, s/he
cannot comprehend that word. Consider the difference in meaning between He thought the girl
was very pretty and He thought the girl was very petty, two sentences that differ by only a
single letter. Accurate decoding of words is necessary for access to meaning.
However, it is children who can decode well but still have comprehension difficulties (lower right
quadrant) that are the focus of this booklet. Such children often go unnoticed in the classroom
because their difficulties are hidden behind their seemingly fluent reading. We refer to these
children as poor comprehenders.
What is comprehension?
Comprehension is the goal of both reading and listening. Successful comprehension enables
readers (or listeners) to acquire information, to experience and be aware of other worlds
(including fictional ones), to communicate successfully, and to achieve academic success.
Poor comprehenders experience a range of difficulties both in the metacognitive skills and
control processes that aid the construction of a mental representation of text and in some of the
oral language processes that underpin these; many poor comprehenders also have limited
working memory capacity (see Box 2). In addition, it is thought that poor comprehenders adopt
a lower standard of coherence, that is, they are more likely to accept a lack of consistency
within a text than those who comprehend well. Indeed it is likely that a number of different
cognitive profiles are associated with the behavioural manifestations of poor reading
comprehension.
Box 2: Common areas of difficulty for poor comprehenders (for a fuller account see Cain &
Oakhill (2007) and Nation (2005)).
Administration
Group x x
Individual x x
Reading
Silent x x
Aloud (feedback) x x
Text
Simple sentence x x
Short passage x x x
Extended passage x x
Response Format
Cloze x x
Multiple-choice x
Short answer x x
Measures Accuracy Accuracy Reading Comprehension Reading Comprehension
Comprehension Comprehension
Reading Rate Reading Rate
Strengths Assesses sentence level Assesses word, sentence
and text-level - and text-level
comprehension. Taps comprehension. Taps a
memory for literal range of different types of
information and inference.
inferencing skills.
Limitations Pupil receives feedback Pupil receives feedback Substantial load on Substantial load on
to bootstrap decoding. to bootstrap decoding. decoding skill. decoding skill.
Some questions can be Reading rate confounded Does not assess text- Focus is on sentence-
answered verbatim with with accuracy. level comprehension level comprehension
reference to text. strategies. strategies (local
Reading rate confounded coherence)
with accuracy.
Box 3: Some commonly used measures of reading comprehension
4. Since tests of reading comprehension vary in task demands, it is important to be clear that
the nature of the assessment influences which children may be identified or fail to be identified
as having comprehension impairments. Some tests that are marketed as measures of
reading comprehension are in fact very highly dependent on decoding. Hence, children can fail
because they have decoding rather than specific comprehension difficulties or, on the other
hand, some children may pass leaving their comprehension impairments undetected. Indeed,
some children perform well on tests of reading comprehension that measure sentence-level
comprehension yet have quite substantial comprehension impairments when reading extended
discourse. Another common problem with many comprehension tests is that certain questions
can be answered correctly using background knowledge (without the text having to be read).
Thus, some childrens reading comprehension difficulties may be masked because they can rely
on general knowledge to answer the comprehension questions while conversely, children with
low levels of background knowledge may be penalized.
5. Given the complexity of comprehension, it seems likely that children may fail to understand
what they have read for a variety of different reasons. Thus, a comprehensive assessment
should include measures of decoding accuracy and fluency, oral language, general cognitive
resources and working memory as well as reading comprehension. In addition, every effort
should be made to assess comprehension of extended text or discourse, not just word- or
sentence-level comprehension.
In the early phases of reading instruction, the emphasis is typically on phonics and the
development of decoding skills. It is difficult at this stage to obtain reliable estimates of reading
comprehension. However, it is wise to monitor the development of childrens vocabulary and
their listening skills early on, because slow development of these skills can signal likely future
reading comprehension difficulties.
Developing Reading Comprehension Strategies
A meta-analysis conducted by the US National
Reading Panel (2000) highlighted teaching techniques
that have been shown to be effective in promoting Box 4
Reciprocal Teaching (RT)
reading comprehension: RT refers to an instructional activity that
takes place in the form of a dialogue be-
tween teachers and students regarding
!" Comprehension monitoring segments of text
!" Graphic/semantic organisers (diagrams) for The teacher and students take turns as-
suming the role of the teacher in this dia-
learning new vocabulary logue
!" Story structure training focusing on plots, The dialogue is structured by the use of
four strategies:
characters and main events
Clarifying
!" Question answering
!" Text Comprehension (TC) comprised work on inferencing, metacognition and RT to develop
strategies to support text comprehension and production.
!" Oral Language (OL) focused on training childrens strategies for understanding and produc-
ing spoken language. It used a listening version of RT as a core technique, linking to activities
that targeted key areas of oral language, namely vocabulary, figurative language and spoken nar-
rative (see Figure 3 for example).
!" Combined (COM) made explicit links between written and spoken language and highlighted
strategies that could be used across both domains. It integrated all components from the other
two approaches so that, for example, new vocabulary was introduced for use in both written and
spoken contexts.
Each of these programmes, delivered by trained teaching assistants as part of a 20-week inter-
vention was effective in bringing about significant gains in reading comprehension. Strikingly,
one year after the intervention finished, the children who received the OL programme were ahead
of the other groups not only maintaining their gains, but also increasing their comprehension skills
further.
Gains in reading comprehension have positive effects not only on childrens attainments but also
on their enjoyment of reading and on their self-esteem. It is vitally important to be aware of indi-
vidual differences in reading comprehension in children of all ages, to identify early children who
are falling behind their peers and to put interventions in place.
Figure 3: Example of an activity to support story structure (from the READMe project)
Further Reading
Cain, K. and Oakhill, J.V. (2006). Assessment matters: Issues in the measurement of reading
comprehension. British Journal of Educational Psychology,76 (4), 697-708.
Cain, K. and Oakhill, J.V. (2007). Reading comprehension difficulties: correlates, causes, and
consequences. In Cain, K. and Oakhill, J.V. (Eds). Childrens comprehension problems in oral and
written language. Guilford Press.
Independent Review of the Teaching of Early Reading, Department for Education and Skills, 2006.
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, 281-300.
Nation, K. (2005). Children's reading comprehension difficulties. In M. J. Snowing & C. Hulme (Eds.)
The Science of Reading: A Handbook (pp. 248-266). Oxford: Blackwell.
Nation, K. (2006). Assessing childrens reading comprehension. In M.J. Snowling and J. Stackhouse
(Eds.), Dyslexia, Speech and Language: A Practitioners Handbook. Whurr.
POSTnote Teaching Children to Read Parliamentary Copyright 2009. The Parliamentary Office of
Science and Technology, 7 Millbank, London, SW1P 3JA; Tel: 020 7219 2840 www.parliament.uk/
parliamentary_offices/post/pubs2009.cfm
Snowling, M.J., Stothard, SE., Clarke, P., Bowyer-Crane, C., Harrington, A., Truelove, E., Nation, K.,
& Hulme, C. (2009) YARC York Assessment of Reading for Comprehension. Passage Reading. GL
Publishers.
Yuill, N., & Oakhill, J. (1991). Children's problems in text comprehension: An experimental
investigation. Cambridge: CUP.
This booklet was compiled following the ESRC Seminar Series Reading Comprehension: From
Theory to Practice and is a collaboration between research groups at the Universities of York,
Oxford, Lancaster and Sussex