The Effects of Reading Purpose on the Representation and Comprehension of Multiple Texts Reading of College students

碩士 === 國立屏東教育大學 === 教育心理與輔導學系 === 99 === Previous research on single text reading revealed that reading purpose is one essential factor influencing readers’ construction of reading representation. Reading multiple texts is a common reading activity for college students. Examining how reading purpo...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Huei-ru Yang, 楊蕙如
Other Authors: I-chung Lu
Format: Others
Language:zh-TW
Published: 2011
Online Access:http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/71869214698880416702
Description
Summary:碩士 === 國立屏東教育大學 === 教育心理與輔導學系 === 99 === Previous research on single text reading revealed that reading purpose is one essential factor influencing readers’ construction of reading representation. Reading multiple texts is a common reading activity for college students. Examining how reading purposes influence college students’ multiple texts reading is an important but overlooked research topic. The purpose of the current study was to examine how reading purposes influence college students’ representation and comprehension of multiple text reading. The participants were 45 college students recruited from a university in Southern Taiwan. The students were given five texts about ADHD. They were instructed to read the texts with the order of their choices and to take notes during reading. After reading, the students were asked to write a short essay in order to recall, to summarize, or to comment on the topic of the texts and then to complete a comprehension test and a questionnaire on evaluation of text source. The results showed that, for the notes the students took, the three groups did not differ in the number of various single-text statements or cross-text statements. However, they differed in both the number of various single-text statements and cross-text statements in the short essay. The summarizing group showed more single-text reducing statements than the argumentation group and the argumentation group had more single-text evaluation statements than the summarizing group, while the argumentation group showed more cross-text evaluation statements than both the recall group and summarizing group. There was no difference in the evaluation of text source and reading comprehension among the three groups. These findings indicate that readers of different reading purposes construct representation of multiple texts in different ways.