MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Making Sense of Science Texts: A Mixed-Methods Examination of Predictors and Processes of Multiple-Text Comprehension
Making Sense of Science Texts: A Mixed-Methods Examination of Predictors and Processes of Multiple-Text Comprehension
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Making Sense of Science Texts: A Mixed-Methods Examination of Predictors and Processes of Multiple-Text Comprehension
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Making Sense of Science Texts: A Mixed-Methods Examination of Predictors and Processes of Multiple-Text Comprehension
Making Sense of Science Texts: A Mixed-Methods Examination of Predictors and Processes of Multiple-Text Comprehension

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Making Sense of Science Texts: A Mixed-Methods Examination of Predictors and Processes of Multiple-Text Comprehension
Making Sense of Science Texts: A Mixed-Methods Examination of Predictors and Processes of Multiple-Text Comprehension
Journal Article

Making Sense of Science Texts: A Mixed-Methods Examination of Predictors and Processes of Multiple-Text Comprehension

2017
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Previous research has identified various factors that contribute to readers' comprehension of expository texts, including strategy expertise, language proficiency, prior knowledge, and more recently, readers' beliefs about knowledge. This study addresses the need to understand the relative contributions of these predictors to readers' comprehension of multiple texts and the processes used by readers to make sense of texts. Eighty-three students (grades 5-7) participated in this mixed-methods study. The sample consisted of monolingual students and emergent and proficient bilingual students who completed measures of expository comprehension, strategic knowledge and awareness, English-language proficiency, prior content knowledge, and epistemic beliefs. Ten bilingual students from this sample also completed a think-aloud protocol to allow for close examination of their meaning-making processes. In a multiple regression analysis, English-language proficiency was the strongest predictor of comprehension, followed by content knowledge. Strategy knowledge and awareness and epistemic beliefs were not related to multiple-text comprehension in the model. The relationship between English-language proficiency and comprehension was stronger for bilingual students than for monolingual students. Students in the think-aloud sample demonstrated emergent knowledge of processes of disciplinary reading of multiple texts, including metacognitive monitoring, theorizing authorial identity, and intertextual integration, while also displaying a tendency to defer to institutionalized authority when evaluating credibility of the texts. The findings provide directions for future research on the way young adolescents comprehend and learn from expository texts in the discipline of science.