A Meta‐Analysis on the Effects of Text Structure Instruction on Reading Comprehension in the Upper Elementary Grades

Abstract

In this meta‐analysis, the authors synthesize results from 44 (quasi‐)experimental studies on informational and narrative text structure interventions involving students in grades 4–6 in regular school settings. Findings show that text structure instruction had positive immediate effects on students’ reading comprehension but that effect sizes varied largely across outcome measures: questions (Hedges’ g = 0.25), summarization (g = 0.57), recall (g = 0.37), and knowledge about text structure (g = 0.38). However, students who received text structure instruction no longer outperformed control groups at delayed posttests. Content‐related features, such as a focus on paragraph‐level structure, active construction of graphic organizers, and teaching rule‐based summarization techniques, moderated the effectiveness of text structure instruction, but these effects also varied across outcome measures. Instructional features moderated delayed effects: Interventions with opportunities for individual student practice resulted in higher delayed effects for comprehension questions. The authors argue that text structure instruction deserves a place in the primary school curriculum so the positive effects on reading will be maintained.

Investigating a Text Structure Intervention for Reading and Writing in Grades 4 and 5

“…Students who received the text structure intervention in this study experienced statistically significantly larger gains in identifying text structure in paragraph-length passages, an important skill in the text structure model of comprehension (Meyer, 1987), representing a small effect (g = 0.31), but effects did not transfer to identification of text structure on the reading and writing assessments. This effect was similar to the average effect size on measures of text structure knowledge in upper elementary grades (g = 0.34; Bogaerds-Hazenberg et al, 2020). In this study, however, students in the comparison group were taught how to answer comprehension questions about informational texts, including questions about text structure.…”

“…Text structure instruction typically involves teaching students to identify how ideas in texts are organized and to use text structures as schemata to Investigating a Text Structure Intervention for Reading and Writing in Grades 4 and 5 organize and recall ideas in written summaries (Meyer & Ray, 2011). Meta-analyses have revealed the components of text structure interventions that are effective for improving reading comprehension, including explicit instruction, signal words, graphic organizers, and summary writing (Bogaerds-Hazenberg, Evers-Vermeul, & van den Bergh, 2020;Hebert, Bohaty, Nelson, & Brown, 2016;Pyle et al, 2017). The components of effective text structure interventions for teaching writing are less clear, as most studies have taught story structure or persuasive elements rather than informational text structures (Graham, McKeown, Kiuhara, & Harris, 2012).…”

“…Explicit instruction begins with the teacher explaining or modeling a skill or strategy and then gradually releasing responsibility to students until they are able to apply it on their own (Pearson & Dole, 1987). Instruction in text structure interventions includes variations of direct explanation and modeling, collaborative practice, guided practice with feedback, and independent practice with increasingly complex texts (Bogaerds‐Hazenberg et al, 2020; Hebert et al, 2016; Pyle et al, 2017).…”

“What’s the Main Idea?”: Using Text Structure to Build Comprehension

“…Research (Meyer, 1975) has demonstrated that most texts are organized by one or a combination of two or more specific text structures: sequence, description, comparison, problem–solution, and cause–effect. Teachers can use these text structures to build students’ comprehension, which is well supported in the research (Bogaerds‐Hazenberg et al, 2020; Hebert et al, 2016; Wijekumar, Meyer, & Lei, 2012, 2013; Wijekumar et al, 2014, 2020; Williams et al, 1994, 2016). Williams et al, (2016) examined the effectiveness of teaching second‐grade students to identify text structures while reading expository text and found that it increased students’ ability to get the "gist" and generate a summary of the text.…”

Summarization in English as a Foreign Language: A Study Comparing Summary Performances to Summarizers’ Vocabulary Size

“…In English speaking countries, such as United states and Canada, students learn to summarize texts in primary/ secondary school (e.g., Liebman, 1992;Pennycook, 1996;Rinnert & Kobayashi, 2005;Shi, 2006), therefore, they are familiar with writing summaries, so many research studies on English summarization focus not only on learners of English as a second/foreign language (ESL/EFL) but also first language (L1) speakers of English. These include studies on strategies for L1 summarization (e.g., Bogaerds-Hazenberg et al, 2020;Brown, 2018;Graham et al, 1992;Nelson et al, 1992;Winograd, 1984;) and studies on the influence of metacognition on L1 summary performances (e.g., Goctu, 2017;Jitendra et al, 2000) that are applied to second language (L2) summarization studies (e.g., Anderson, 1991;Block, 1986;Brown & Day, 1983;Carrell, 1989;Carrell & Liberto, 1989;Cohen, 1994;Graham & Hebert, 2010;Hosseinpur, 2015;Hidi & Anderson, 1986;Kellogg & Whiteford, 2009;Koda, 2005;Phakiti, 2003a;Saddler et al, 2017;Wischgoll, 2016). Many of scholars (e.g., Hirvela & Du, 2013;Kirkland & Saunders, 1991) mention that summarization is a very complex cognitive skill; to grasp this skill therefore requires intense training for both L1 and L2 speakers (Kellogg & Whiteford, 2009).…”