A review was conducted of the research related to the ability of elementary school children to carry out search tasks with informational text. The review was organized within a framework of components of the search process: Goal Formation, Text Selection, Information Extraction and Integration, and Evaluation. The research reviewed suggests that older and more proficient readers are better able than younger and less proficient readers to execute search tasks successfully and spontaneously. Other factors, such as the considerateness of text and the reader's prior knowledge of text structure and topic, were also shown to affect children's ability to search informational text. Implications for instruction are discussed.Locating Information in Text -2 LOCATING INFORMATION IN TEXT: A FOCUS ON CHILDREN IN THE ELEMENTARY GRADESIn school, children search text for answers to questions, pursue evidence in support of a point, and seek information on topics of interest. Recognition of the importance of locating information is evident in the fact that it is assessed on standardized tests and taught in commercially published programs, such as basal programs in reading and social studies.In this report we review research related to the ability of elementary school children to search text to locate information. We conclude with some reflections on the educational implications of this research. What is Involved in Locating Information?Locating information is a type of strategic reading (Guthrie & Mosenthal, 1987). Strategic readers have the following characteristics: (a) They have a purpose or goal for reading, which defines the reading task; (b) They analyze the task and all the factors that affect it; (c) From an analysis of the task, the text, and their own cognitive and affective resources, strategic readers carefully select tactics appropriate for achieving their goal; (d) They monitor their comprehension, thinking, and learning; and (e) They are flexible, changing their strategy as necessary to achieve their goal (Wade & Armbruster, in press).Guthrie and his colleagues have addressed the more specific question of what is involved in the subset of strategic reading of interest here--locating information. Guthrie and Mosenthal (1987) propose a model of the subprocesses of information location. The components of their model are:1. formulate a goal, 2. inspect appropriate categories of information, 3. sequence the inspection, 4. extract details from one or more categories, and 5. recycle to obtain a solution.Dreher (1992) presents a variation of this model, with the following five components:1. goal formation--formulating a goal or plan of action, 2. category selection--selecting appropriate text sections or categories (e.g., table of contents) for inspection, 3. information extraction--extracting the relevant information from the selected categories, 4. integration--integrating the extracted information with prior knowledge of the topic, and 5. recycling--repeating the preceding processes until the search task is comp...

This paper reports the results of an analysis of 12 fourth-grade science and social studies lessons in which a textbook was used as a focus of instruction. The purpose was to determine how the textbook was used by teachers and students and, in particular, what kinds of questions the teachers asked during the textbook-based lessons. The results replicate and extend several findings from previous research. First, even when textbooks were used during instruction, students did not do very much reading, and the reading they did was round robin oral reading. Second, the teachers asked a large number of questions. Third, very few of these questions came from textbooks; rather, the teachers made up about 90% of their own questions. Finally, only about one-fourth of the questions asked were about the text segments currently being read and, of those questions, text explicit questions outnumbered text implicit questions two to one. Also of interest were the large number of question repetitions and rhetorical questions (questions that did not appear to elicit a response).

No abstract

No abstract