Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byMichael Cobb Modified over 9 years ago
1
Search and Comprehension Processes in Learning from Text Cerdán, R., Vidal-Abarca, E., Gil, L., Gilabert, R., & Martínez, T. University of Valencia
2
Comprehension & Learning from Text Search tasks in complex documents ( Rouet & Tricot, 1998) Evaluation (E): search goal & strategy Selection (S): selection of information units Processing (P): extraction of relevant information Iterations of E-S-P cycles Pattern of search (Rouet, Vidal-Abarca, Bert-Erlboul & Millogo, 2001) High level questions: Review & Integrate Low level questions: Locate & Memorize Adjunct Questions: Aids for Comprehension & Learning
3
Previous experiment to study Search & Comprehension processes (Vidal-Abarca, et al., 2002) 22 University students 2 groups: high vs. low level questions Task: ( on a computer screen) Reading long science text (1800 words) + Searching info to Answer (HL vs. LL) questions Reading the question Re-reading the text (if neened) Writing the answer Cycles
4
Main results Answering questions at a good level implied: Reading questions fewer times. Selecting lower number of text segments (relevant + non-relevant for the questions) Reading more relevant segments. Fewer answering cycles. High level questions: Low level questions: Reading questions more times and selecting more text segments (relevant + non-relevant) Reading questions fewer times and selecting fewer text segments (relevant + non-relevant)
5
Current experiment New Situation: searching info to answer (HL vs LL) Qs, but NO prior reading text GOAL: replicate prior results? Search & comprehension processes in answering questions at good vs. poor level? Search patterns to answer high vs. low level questions?
6
Procedure 16 University students. 2 groups: high level vs. low level questions Task: on a computer screen (Read & Answer) Searching info to Answer (HL vs. LL) questions Reading the question Reading the text Writing the answer Cycles
7
Read&Answer 1. Reading the question 2. Searching info to answer Q
8
Design ANOVAs 2x2: Type of question x Comprehension (Answering level) High L Q: Integrating distant information + many inferences Low L Q: Locating especific information + few or no inferences. Good comprehension (highest third score) Poor comprension (lowest third score)
9
On line measures Evaluation Phase: Number of times reading the questions. Time spent reading the questions. Word reading time per visit. Processing Phase: % of time reading relevant segments within each question. Control Processes: Number of QTW cycles: Q (reading the question), T (reading the text), W (writing an answer), Selection Phase: Number of total paragraphs visited. Number of relevant paragraphs. % of relevant paragraphs.
10
Evaluation phase: Times reading questions Selection phase: % of relevant segments Processing phase: % of time reading relevant segments Executive control processes: number of QTW cycles
11
Summary Answering at a Good vs. Poor level: Reading questions fewer times. Selecting a higher percentage of relevant segments ( especially in low level questions) Fewer answering cycles. High vs.low level questions: High level: Reading questions more times, selecting more segments (relevant + non-relevant) and using more QTW cycles. Low level: Reading questions fewer times, selecting fewer text segments and using fewer QTW cycles.
12
Conclusions Good comprehenders: effective search pattern Poor comprehenders: loss in search task Pattern for High level questions: Review&Integrate Pattern for Low level questions: Locate&Memorize
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.