DOCUMENT RESUME CS 010 974 ED 347 501 Thacker, Peter R. AUTHOR Text Organization in Reading: What Ninth Grade Good TITLE and Poor Readers and Writers Know. Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), SPONS AGENCY Washington, DC. PUB DAV, 91 R11K80029 CONTRACT 150p.; Revision of a research report originally NOTE published as a dissertation for Harvard University. Reports - Research/Technical (143) PUB TYPE MF01/PC06 Plus Postage. EDRS PRICE *Cohesion (Written Composition); *Grade 9; High DESCRIPTORS Schools; High School Students; *Reading Ability; Reading Research; *Text Structure; *Writing Ability; Writing Research *Text Factors; *Text Organization IDENTIFIERS ABSTRACT Intended to gain information about students who have difficulty organizing text when they write, a study probed students' ability to recognize and understand varying degrees of text organiza,ion whtle reading. Ninety ninth-grade students, divided equally iato groups of good readers/good writers, good readers/poor writers, and poor readers/poor writers, were asked to read cause/effect paragraphs from natural text in three text conditions (ordered, scrambled, and reconnected) and two levels of passage difficulty (sixth and ninth grade). Data included recall of paragraphs, ability to judge paragraphs for organizational clarity, ability to unscramble poorly organized paragraphs, and interviews. Significant main effects were found for: passage difficulty, ability group, and text condition on the recall measure; text condition on the organizational judgment task; and ability group and passage difficulty on the unscrambling task. Results also indicated: (1) an interaction between ability group and text condition on the organizational judgment task; and (2) that all students judged ordered paragraphs to be better organized than the two scrambled conditions. Good readers/good writers, however, were more cognizant of the differences between scrambled and reconnected text than were the other two groups. Findings suggest that good readers who are poor writers have an ability to create better organized text, yet, similar tc poor readers/poor writers, they lack a clear understanding of the function of clear cohesive relationships. (A sample paragraph in the 3 text conditions, instructions for subjects, iilterview questions, 4 appendixes of data, and 43 references are attached.) (Author/RS) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** What Text Organization in Reading: Writers Know Ninth Grade Good and Poor Readers and f:Z) Cral Peter R. Thacker Grant # R 11K80029 Office of Educational Research and A Report Presented to the Implementation, U.S. Department of Education 1991 EDUCATION U S DEPARTMENT OF Improvement Ottce Of Educahonal Research and INFORMATION EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES CENTER (ERIC) leDrOCtuCPd as .4.."4"rne document has been or organqabon ece.ved Num thP maw, or.ginabog 1 made to Improve ACnor changes have been reproduct(On quality stated in (h.adoc u POrntS, 01 v,Pv. Or op"ons represent offca ment do no( nercessaray OEM pos.t(o. or (Newt, BEST COPY A1/411AKE 4 c 1991 PETER R. THACKER ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 3 FOREWORD This research report was first published as my dissertation for Harvard University in a slightly altered This report contains a discussion of strategy form. interviews which were not a part of my dissertation research and no discussion of a leading speed measure asked for by my In addition, dissertation committee, but not by the OERI. the background chapter is truncated in this nvort and a discussion of my efforts to disseminate my findings is added. I had great cooperation in the complation of this My first thanks go to my advisor at Harvard, Mary study. She provided auvice, counsel, and consummace Beth Curtis. editing in shaping, performing, analyzing, and reporting My other two committee members from Harvard, this research. vision Jeanne Chall and Catherine Snow, provided expertise, and a supportive atmosphere which made this a better piece of research. One of the requirements of the "Teacher as Researcher" grants was that teachers would be given strong support from I could not have performed this their school district. research without the broad-based, enthusiastic support of the Research and Evaluation Department, the Grants 4 ii Management staff, high school administrators, and teachers. The Research and Evaluation Department in my school district knew of my research interests in advance of the They encouraged my grant application for these grants. application and showed continued interest and support The District is deeply committed to throughout the study. improving student writing through thoughtful application of curriculum based on insights found both through research and teaching. My original liaison from the department, Evelyn Brzezinski, provided access, advising, and editing through the proposal, data collection, and drafting stages of this Her help went well beyond her obligation to my report. Gary Williams, who took Evelyn's place, also gave project. willingly of his time and expertise. Maurice Caba, the head of Grants Management, gave advise and technical support during the proposal and data I appreciate his accessibility, gathering for this report. especially in light of the fact that my project was minuscule in relation to other grants processed through the District. My principal, Bob O'Neill, and curriculum vice- principal, Darrell Tucker demonstrated great interest in my to study and provided a flexible schedule which allowed me iii Without their collect data during the school day. cooperation and support, I could not have completed this report. Administrators and English Department chairs in four other high schools also graciously ran interference for me as I asked students to participate and, then, gathered data. These helpful individuals included Tom Parr, Dave Williams, John Vingelen, Myra Rose, Joan Crosby, Gene Jenkins, Colin Karr-Morse, Velma Johnson, Lyle Meyer, George Guthrie, and I thank also the many teachers in these Audrey Haynes. schools who allowed me to recruit and test students during class time. The teachers in my department allowed me to collect writing samples, prodded students to participate in the study, and propelled me into completing this project. Sylvia Skarstad, Sarah McKenzie and Charlotte Pennington helped in Bill Miller, Joan reading and rating pilot writing samples. Brenner, Joan Swinney, Jeanette Swenson, Mary Ayala, Alex Gordin, Gordon Bolton, and Claude Bonfiglio placed themselves and their students at my disposal. To perform this research necessitated finding several individuals willing to help in the analysis of the data. found two able, hard-working colleagues in my own English Robin and Jim Department, Robin Davis and Jim Mayer. f' iv They helped assisted me in endless hours of analyzing data. produce rubrics and read scores of essays and protocols. They are true teacher/researchers. Jane Braunger and Andy Clark, both language arts specialists from the District's Curriculum Department listened to my ideas, read drafts of proposals and chapters and provided the feedback necessary to spur me on. I recedved assistance as well from a high school student, Edward Garrett, who created the software to run my He and Shelly Jackson also took on the arduous task study. of transcribing recalls. Tom Owen, an able statistician from a local university, provided tireless statistical assistance. I feel privileged to have worked with the above- mentioned individuals and many others in completing this report. I also deeply appreciate the grant accorded me by the Office of Educational Research and Implementation of the The grant provided funds to U.S. Department of Education. help pay for creation of the software and analysis of the But even more significantly, it data for this research. propelled me to think of my research in more practical terms, a great service as I was struggling to frame my questions for my research. 7 ABSTRACT This study was designed to probe students' ability to recognize and understand varying degrees of text The study was done with the organization while reading. intention of gaining information about students who have difficulty organizing text when they write. Ninety ninth grade students, divided equally into readers/poor groups of good readers/good writers, good writers, and poor readers/poor writers, were asked to read cause/effect paragraphs from natural text in three text -- a conditions (ordered, scrambled, and reconnected scrambled paragraph in which relationships between sentences have been made clearer) and two levels of passage difficulty Students' ability to assess (6th and 9th grade). organization was examined by analyzing their 1) recall of ability paragraphs in all text structures and conditions, 2) to judge paragraphs for organizational clarity, and 3) Students ability to unscramble poorly organized paragraphs. strategies used to accomplish were also interviewed about each task. Significant main effects were found for passage difficulty, ability group, and text condition on the recall I. a vi organizational judgment measure; for text condition on the task; and for ability group and passage difficulty on the An interaction between ability group and unscrambling task. text condition was found on the organizational judgment All students judged ordered paragraphs to be better task. organized than the two scrambled conditions; however, good readers/good writers were more cognizant of differences between scrambled and reconnected text than the other two Good readers/good writers and good readers/poor groups. writers outperformed poor readers/poor writers on the Performance on the recall task was good unscrambling task. reader/good writer > good '7eader/poor writer > poor reader/poor writer, though differences between the two significance. groups of good readers only approached Results of this study suggest that good readers who are better organized poor writers have an ability to create text, yet, similar to poor readers/poor writers, they lack a clear understanding of the function of clear cohesive Both groups of poor writers demonstrated an relationships. ability to judge poorly organized text as disorganized. This fact provides an entry for discussions with poor writers about the elements of organization which they need to address when they revise their own work. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD ABSTRACT Background to the Study 1 CHAPTER 1. Overview of the Present Study CHAPTER 2. Organization's Contribution to Meaning in Text 5 9 Creating the Study's Tasks 10 Comprehension Measures 11 Judging Organizational Clarity 12 Unscrambling Scrambled Paragraphs Describing Strategies Used in Performing 13 Organizational Tasks 13 Summary of Tasks Created Creating Paragraphs of Varied Levels of Organization 14 16 Choosing the Population to Study 16 My Research Questions 18 CHAPTER 3. Methodology of the Study 18 Subjects 19 Defining Reading Ability 20 Defining Writing Ability 22 Other Factors Affecting Inclusion in Sample 22 Paragraph Selection Materials: 25 Description of Procedures while Running Study 26 Comprehension Task 27 Rating Task 28 Unscrambling Task 29 Strategy Interviews 30 Procedures for Scoring Verbal Recalls 32 Procedures for Scoring Unscrambled Paragraphs Procedures for Evaluating Strategy Interview 33 Protocols 35 Results of the Study CHAPTER 4. Reading What Is the Effect of Text Organization on 35 Comprehension? Ability Effects Involving Differences between 36 Groups Conditions 39 Effects Involving Different Text 40 Effects Involving Passage Difficulty