Abstract
Cognitive organizers (COs) are text aids which represent objects, concepts, and their relations by the use of symbols and spatial arrangements without adding to semantic content. The present study examines language learners’ text comprehension through outlines, a popular CO, compared with text-only condition, and further investigates the effect of learner-constructed outlines (i.e., systematic note-taking) and expert-constructed outlines (i.e., readymade displays) on comprehension. Finally, the predictive power of multiple intelligences (MI) across different input modalities is scrutinized. Following stratified random sampling, a total of 111 EFL undergraduates were divided into text-only (receiving a text twice), expert-constructed (the text followed by an outline), and learner-constructed (the text followed by an outline to be drawn up by the learner) groups. A TOEFL examination, a 1218-word expository text on systematic sleep disorder, a follow-up reading comprehension test, and a multiple intelligences inventory constituted the data collection measures. The results of multiple regression and ANOVA were as follows: (a) COs lead to more content recall than text displays; (b) expert-constructed and learner-constructed outlines are equally effective; (c) MI significantly predicts the groups’ reading comprehension; (d) interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligences are significant correlates of text-only groups’ performance; and (e) visual, verbal, and intrapersonal intelligences are significantly associated with learner-constructed groups’ reading scores. The study offers several implications for theory and practice.
Highlights
As a predominant text genre in the present academic environments, expository texts are characterized by (a) the high density of unfamiliar and/or technical vocabularies, (b) the frequent use of causal and sequential text schemas, and (c) the need to integrate and draw numerous elaborative inferences with current segments of text (Diakidoy, Kendeou, & Ioannides, 2003)
Despite second language (L2) learners’ more complex reading challenges as a result of their limited L2 competence and their higher demand for input enhancement techniques as supplementary aids, little research to date has studied the effectiveness of outlines for L2 learners. To bridge these gaps in the literature, the present study investigates the contributions of two forms of Cognitive organizers (COs), namely learner-constructed outlines and expert-constructed outlines in comparison with the text-only condition, on L2 learners’ comprehension
In order to examine whether there is any significant difference between the effect of COs and the text-only condition on L2 learners’ text comprehension, an independent samples t test was run
Summary
As a predominant text genre in the present academic environments, expository (or scientific) texts are characterized by (a) the high density of unfamiliar and/or technical vocabularies, (b) the frequent use of causal and sequential text schemas, and (c) the need to integrate and draw numerous elaborative inferences with current segments of text (Diakidoy, Kendeou, & Ioannides, 2003). Cognitive organizers (COs) or adjunct displays are broadly defined as text aids which represent objects, concepts, and their relations by the use of symbols and their spatial arrangements without adding to the semantic content (McCrudden, Schraw, & Lehman, 2009). They hold great potential for helping readers see the unseen phenomenon by clearly and efficiently representing multiple intra- and inter-concept relations for the reader to view at a single glance (Amundsen, Weston, & McAlpine, 2008; Redford, Thiede, Wiley, & Griffin, 2012). A reader-friendly and easy-to-construct type of CO is an outline
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
