Underprepared College Students' Perceptions of Reading: Are Their Perceptions Different than other Students?

Saumell, Linda; Hughes, Marie Tejero; Lopate, Kay

doi:10.1080/10790195.1999.10850074

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The other goal was to identify descriptive labels at appropriate levels of abstraction for the participants' verbalizations, as indicated by the rows in Table 1. Selection of these labels was guided by prior research on comprehension strategies [31,32,33], but many of the labels were composed in a bottom-up manner [30] in direct response to the data. The twenty-three protocols were then coded independently by two experimenters, with the understanding that codes could be added to the table as needed.…”

Section: B Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

First Steps in Understanding Engineering Students' Growth of Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in an Interactive Learning Context

Taraban

Anderson

DeFinis

et al. 2007

J of Engineering Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of procedural knowledge in students, i.e., the ability to effectively solve domain problems, is the goal of many instructional initiatives in engineering education. The present study examined learning in a rich learning environment in which students read text, listened to narrations, interacted with simulations, and solved problems using instructional software for thermodynamics. Twenty‐three engineering and science majors who had not taken a thermodynamics course provided verbal protocol data as they used this software. The data were analyzed for cognitive processes. There were three major findings: (1) students expressed significantly more cognitive activity on computer screens requiring interaction compared to text‐based screens; (2) there were striking individual differences in the extent to which students employed the materials; and (3) verbalizations revealed that students applied predominantly lower‐level cognitive processes when engaging these materials, and they failed to connect the conceptual and procedural knowledge in ways that would lead to deeper understanding. The results provide a baseline for additional studies of more advanced students in order to gain insight into how students develop skill in engineering.

show abstract

Section: B Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

First Steps in Understanding Engineering Students' Growth of Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in an Interactive Learning Context

Taraban

Anderson

DeFinis

et al. 2007

J of Engineering Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, being aware of comprehension strategies helps readers comprehend texts (Rodríguez and Rodríguez 2009). When obliged to read, students often select inefficient and ineffective strategies for reading (Saumell, Hughes, and Lopate 1999). Consequently, it can be inferred that instruction on reading comprehension strategies can improve reading comprehension ability.…”

Section: Reading Comprehensionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Differences between monolinguals and bilinguals/males and females in English reading comprehension and reading strategy use

Afsharrad

Benis

2015

International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study aims at finding the differences between bilingual and monolingual learners across gender in the use of cognitive, metacognitive, and total reading strategies, as well as reading comprehension ability. To this end, 50 Persian-Turkish bilinguals and 36 Persian monolinguals participated in the study. A standard test of reading comprehension and two questionnaires were employed for data collection: a background questionnaire to determine if the subjects were bilingual or monolingual and a standardized Likert scale questionnaire to identify the reading strategies used by bilinguals and monolinguals. To analyze the data, four factorial ANOVAs were conducted with an alpha set at .05 for each effect. The results showed that bilinguals and females outperformed monolinguals and males, respectively, in reading comprehension. Moreover, bilinguals and monolinguals differed in their use of metacognitive strategies but not cognitive ones. Interestingly, there was no difference between males and females in using cognitive and metacognitive strategies, but they differed in total strategy use. The results which are discussed in the light of previous research can provide some useful insights into syllabus design and English language teaching.

show abstract

“…The other screen types evoked 15-20 percent of the verbalizations. In order to examine these data more carefully, specifically with respect to cognitive processing, they were separated into comments associated with lower-level cognitions (Codes 1, 2, and 3, in Table 2) and higher-level cognitions (Codes 4 and 5 in Table 2), based on a search of cognitive research on comprehension and problem solving [8,9,[33][34][35][36][37]. The mean number of verbalizations made on each screen type was calculated and is summarized in Table 3.…”

Section: B Differences In Cognitive Processing As a Function Of Scrementioning

confidence: 99%

A Paradigm for Assessing Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in Engineering Students

Taraban

DeFinis

Brown

et al. 2007

J of Engineering Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conceptual and procedural knowledge are two mutually-supportive factors associated with the development of engineering skill. The present study extends previous work on undergraduate learning in engineering to provide further validation for an assessment paradigm capable of quantifying engineering students' conceptual and problem-solving knowledge. Eight students who were enrolled in an introductory thermodynamics course and four who were enrolled in the course sequel provided verbal protocol data as they used instructional software. They were compared to existing data from a cohort of eleven science and engineering majors who had not taken thermodynamics. The results replicated earlier findings showing more cognitive activity on computer screens requiring overt user interaction compared to text-based screens. The data also indicated that higher-versus lower-performing students, based on course grades, engaged in more higher-order cognitive processing. There was no evidence that students gained deeper cognitive processing as they advanced through the engineering curriculum.

show abstract

Underprepared College Students' Perceptions of Reading: Are Their Perceptions Different than other Students?

Cited by 10 publications

References 6 publications

First Steps in Understanding Engineering Students' Growth of Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in an Interactive Learning Context

First Steps in Understanding Engineering Students' Growth of Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in an Interactive Learning Context

Differences between monolinguals and bilinguals/males and females in English reading comprehension and reading strategy use

A Paradigm for Assessing Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in Engineering Students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About