Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.

Lecture 3 Models Of Reading 2 (2)

56 051 vues

Publié le

TSL 591

Publié dans : Business, Formation

Lecture 3 Models Of Reading 2 (2)

  2. 2. SIGNPOST <ul><li>INTERACTION IN THE READING PROCESS </li></ul><ul><li>INTERACTIVE APPROACHES </li></ul><ul><li>RUMELHART MODEL </li></ul><ul><li>STANOVICH MODEL </li></ul><ul><li>ANDERSON & PEARSON SCHEMA-THEORETIC </li></ul><ul><li>VIEW </li></ul><ul><li>PEARSON & TIERNEY R/W MODEL </li></ul><ul><li>MATHEWSON’S MODEL </li></ul><ul><li>NEW LITERACY APPROACHES </li></ul>
  3. 3. INTERACTION IN THE READING PROCESS <ul><li>Bottom-up + top-down models of reading </li></ul><ul><li>Focus either on the reading process (cognitive processes) </li></ul><ul><li>Or the product of reader’s interaction with the info & prior knowledge </li></ul>
  4. 4. INTERACTION IN THE READING PROCESS – ctd. <ul><li>Important features: </li></ul><ul><li>A) Automaticity (application of lower level skills) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>In other words application of lower level reading skills is done automatically </li></ul></ul><ul><li>B) Interaction between text & background knowledge </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Interaction of the writer’s intentions and the reader’s interpretations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What are the two meanings of the following sentence? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Flying planes can be dangerous </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Shows that the writer’s intention and the reader’s background knowledge sometimes do not match </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>C) The role of social, contextual & political variables affecting meaning making </li></ul>
  5. 5. INTERACTION IN THE READING PROCESS – ctd. <ul><li>CONSIDER (lecture 2 notes): </li></ul><ul><li>Psycholinguistic’s point of view </li></ul><ul><li>Sociolinguistic’s point of view </li></ul><ul><li>Intertextuality’s point of view </li></ul>
  6. 6. Problems with BU and TD <ul><li>Drawbacks of Bottom-Up </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The idea of linear processing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Underestimated the contribution of the reader </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Failed to recognize that students utilize their expectations about the text based on their knowledge of language and how it works </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Failure to include previous experience and knowledge into processing </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. Problems with BU and TD <ul><li>Drawback of Top-Down </li></ul><ul><ul><li>When reading topics which are completely new and foreign, it is inefficient, impractical and perhaps impossible to make predictions about the reading </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>E.g. Imagine an ‘ orang asli ’ boy who has never left the village reading about MP3 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Or a boy from Hmong tribe in Vietnam reading about Halloween </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. INTERACTIVE READING MODEL <ul><li>An interactive reading model attempts to combine the valid insights of bottom-up and top-down models. </li></ul><ul><li>It attempts to take into account the strong points of the bottom-up and top-down models, and tries to avoid the criticisms levelled against each, making it one of the most promising approaches to the theory of reading today. ( McCormick, T. 1988 ) </li></ul>
  9. 9. INTERACTIVE READING MODEL <ul><li>To reiterate: </li></ul><ul><li>An interactive reading model is a reading model that recognizes the interaction of bottom-up and top-down processes simultaneously throughout the reading process. </li></ul>
  10. 10. INTERACTIVE APPROACHES <ul><li>Emphasize the role of prior knowledge or pre-existing knowledge in providing the reader with non-visual or implicit information in the text. </li></ul><ul><li>Also, add the fact that the role of certain kind of information-processing skills is also important. </li></ul><ul><li>Interactive approaches see the advent of the incorporation of bottom-up and top-down approaches to reading (Eskey, 1988; Samuels and Kamil, 1988). </li></ul>
  11. 11. INTERACTIVE APPROACHES – ctd. <ul><li>Both modes of information processing, top-down and bottom-up alike, are seen as strategies that are flexibly used in the accomplishment of the reading tasks (Carrell and Eisterhold, 1983; Carrell, 1988; Clarke, 1979; Eskey, 1988; Grabe, 1988) . </li></ul><ul><li>Hence,the interactive approaches rely on both the graphic and contextual information </li></ul>
  12. 12. Interactive Models <ul><li>Based on influential articles written throughout the late 1970’s and 1980s </li></ul><ul><li>The Rumelhart Model (1977) </li></ul><ul><li>The Kintsch and van Dijk models (1978,1988,1998) </li></ul><ul><li>The Just and Carpenter Model (1980) </li></ul><ul><li>The Stanovich Model (1980) </li></ul><ul><li>The Anderson & Pearson Schema-Theoretic view (1984) </li></ul><ul><li>The Pearson & Tierney Reading/Writing Model (1984) </li></ul><ul><li>Perfetti’s Model (1985, 1988, 1991) </li></ul><ul><li>The McClelland, Rumelhart, et. Al Model (1986) </li></ul><ul><li>The Rayner & Pollatsek Model (1989) </li></ul><ul><li>Mathewson’s Model of Attitude Influence (1976, 1985, 1994) </li></ul><ul><li>New Literacy Approaches </li></ul>
  13. 13. RUMELHART MODEL <ul><li>Successful reading is both a perceptual and a cognitive process </li></ul><ul><li>Stresses the influence of various sources namely feature extraction, orthographic knowledge, lexical knowledge, syntactic knowledge and semantic knowledge on the text processing and the reader’s interpretation. </li></ul><ul><li>Incorporates a mechanism labeled as the ‘ message centre ’, which holds the information and then redirects them as needed. </li></ul><ul><li>This mechanism allows the sources of knowledge to interact with each other and thereby enable higher-level processing to influence lower-level processing . </li></ul>David E. Rumelhart
  14. 14. RUMELHART MODEL <ul><li>In his model: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Graphic information enters the process through a Visual Information Store (VIS) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A cognitive Feature Extraction Device selects the important features of the graphic input </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A Pattern Synthesizer takes this information along with syntactic, semantic, orthographic, lexical and pragmatic knowledge (context) in order to produce the most probable interpretation for the graphic input. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The reading process is the result of the parallel application of sensory and non-sensory sources of information </li></ul></ul>
  15. 15. RUMELHART MODEL Grapheme Input VIS Feature extraction device Pattern Synthesizer Orthographic Knowledge Lexical Knowledge Syntactical Knowledge Semantic knowledge Model of probable interpretation Once a Feature Extraction Device has operated on the Visual Information Store , it passes the data to a Pattern Synthesizer which receives input from Syntactical, Semantic, Lexical and Orthographic Knowledge , all operating at the same point.
  16. 16. STANOVICH MODEL <ul><li>Stanovich introduced the interactive-compensatory reading model </li></ul><ul><li>Neither BU or TD address all areas of reading comprehension </li></ul><ul><li>But the interactive-compensatory taps into the strengths of both BU and TD </li></ul><ul><li>Says that readers rely on both BU and TD processes simultaneously and alternatively depending on the reading purpose, motivation, schema and knowledge of the subject </li></ul>Keith E. Stanovich
  17. 17. STANOVICH MODEL <ul><li>Incorporates the ‘compensatory mode’ to his model with the interaction between the top-down and bottom-up processing . </li></ul><ul><li>The compensatory mode enables the reader to, “ at any level compensate for his or her deficiencies at any other level ” (Samuels and Kamil, 1988: 32) . </li></ul><ul><li>This model has enabled researchers to theorize how good and poor readers approach a text. </li></ul>
  18. 18. STANOVICH MODEL <ul><li>If there is a deficiency at an early print-analysis stage (BU), higher order knowledge structures (TD) will attempt to compensate. </li></ul><ul><li>For the poor reader, who may be both inaccurate and slow at word recognition but who has knowledge of the text-topic, TD processing may allow for this compensation </li></ul><ul><li>E.g. A beginning reader who is weak at decoding reads this and do not know the word emerald. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The jeweler put the green emerald in the ring </li></ul></ul><ul><li>He will still understand the meaning of the sentence because he may use context and knowledge of gems to decide what the word is </li></ul>
  19. 19. STANOVICH MODEL <ul><li>States that if one of the processors (i.e, orthographic, lexical, syntactic and semantic) fails, other processors will facilitate comprehension </li></ul><ul><li>For example in a cloze vocabulary exercises: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Beagles, Retriever, Spaniels, as well as other ____ of dogs are favorite canines for hunting enthusiast. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The lexical information is absent, but students would guess the word breeds or types, since syntactic and semantic cues compensate for the absent processors </li></ul></ul>
  20. 20. ANDERSON & PEARSON SCHEMA-THEORETIC VIEW <ul><li>Focus on the role of schemata, knowledge stored in memory , in text comprehension </li></ul><ul><li>Comprehension = interaction between old & new information </li></ul><ul><li>Schema Theory: Already known general ideas subsume & anchor new information </li></ul><ul><li>Include: a) info about the relationships among the components, b) role of inference & c) reliance on knowledge of the content, + abstract & general schemata. </li></ul>P. David Pearson
  21. 21. ANDERSON & PEARSON SCHEMA-THEORETIC VIEW <ul><li>Schemata: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Knowledge already stored in memory, function in the process of interpreting new information and allowing it to enter and become part of the knowledge store </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Schema: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>An abstract knowledge structure </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A structure that represents the relationship among its component parts </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. ANDERSON & PEARSON SCHEMA-THEORETIC VIEW <ul><li>Read this: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Queen Elizabeth participated in a long-delayed ceremony in Clydebank. Scotland yesterday. While there is still bitterness here following the protracted strike, on this occasion a crowd of shipyard workers numbering in the hundreds joined dignitaries in cheering as the HMS Pinafore slipped into the water. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>What is the name of the ceremony? </li></ul>
  23. 23. ANDERSON & PEARSON SCHEMA-THEORETIC VIEW Ship-Christening Schema Done by celebrity Involves new ship Bottle broken on bow Done before launching In dry dock To bless ship Water Shipyard The Ship Christening Schema
  24. 24. PEARSON & TIERNEY R/W MODEL <ul><li>Negotiation of meaning between writer & reader who both create meaning through the text as the medium. </li></ul><ul><li>Readers as composers: </li></ul><ul><li>“ the thoughtful reader …is the reader who reads as if she were a writer composing a text yet for another reader who lives within her ”. </li></ul><ul><li>Reader reads with the expectation that the writer has provided sufficient clues about the meaning </li></ul><ul><li>Writer writes with the intention the reader will create meaning </li></ul><ul><li>Consider: pragmatic theories of language that every speech acts, utterance, or attempt at comprehending an utterance is an action </li></ul>
  25. 25. PEARSON & TIERNEY R/W MODEL <ul><li>Reading is an act of composing rather than recitation or regurgitation </li></ul><ul><li>Context is important </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Knowing why something was said is as crucial to interpreting the message as knowing what was said </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Failing to recognize author’s goal can interfere with comprehension of the main idea or point of view </li></ul>
  26. 26. PEARSON & TIERNEY R/W MODEL <ul><li>Focus on the thoughtful reader with 4 interactive roles: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Planner – creates goal, use existing knowledge, decides how to align with the text </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Composer – searches for coherence in gaps with inferences about the relationship within the text </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Editor – examines his interpretations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Monitor – directs the other 3 roles </li></ul></ul>
  27. 27. MATHEWSON’S MODEL OF ATTITUDE INFLUENCE <ul><li>A model that addresses the role that attitude and motivation play in reading </li></ul><ul><li>Attitude intention to read reading </li></ul><ul><li>Attitude = tri-componential construct : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cognitive component (evaluation), affective component (feeling) , & conative component (action readiness) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>* Conative = personality, volition, temperament </li></ul><ul><li>All these influence the intention to read, & the intention to read affects reading behaviour. </li></ul><ul><li>This model provides feedback on how motivation may change & how important it is to address affective issues in teaching reading. </li></ul>
  28. 28. MATHEWSON’S MODEL OF ATTITUDE INFLUENCE Cognitive Component Affective Component Conative Component Attitude Towards Reading Intention to Read Reading Behavior
  29. 29. MATHEWSON’S MODEL OF ATTITUDE INFLUENCE <ul><li>Attitude toward reading may be modified by a change in reader’s goal </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Examples: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Topic of no interest </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Examination on comprehension </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Feedback during reading may affect attitude and motivation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Satisfaction with affect developed through reading </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Satisfaction with ideas developed through reading </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Feelings generated by ideas from the reading process </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ideas constructed from in the information read </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How the reading affects values, goals and self-concept </li></ul></ul>
  30. 30. NEW LITERACY APPROACHES <ul><li>Emphasize on multiple literacies embedded in social & societal contexts </li></ul><ul><li>Reading should not be treated as an isolated activity </li></ul><ul><li>Reading must account for socially & culturally events & the associated literacy acts (e.g e-mailing, memo writing, note taking, blogging) </li></ul><ul><li>The influence of ‘culture’ on the reader-writer expectations </li></ul><ul><li>Not on the reader-writer relationship BUT on the social & cultural event around written language . </li></ul><ul><li>Hence, readers construct meaning as individuals within a culture AND </li></ul><ul><li>Their interpretation not necessarily incorrect due to their background (culture) </li></ul>
  31. 31. GROUP DISCUSSION (20 minutes) <ul><li>In groups of not more than 4, choose one of the models for discussion. </li></ul><ul><li>KINTSCH & VAN DIJK MODELS </li></ul><ul><li>JUST & CARPENTER MODEL </li></ul><ul><li>PERFETTI’S MODEL </li></ul><ul><li>McCLELLAND, ET AL MODEL </li></ul><ul><li>RAYNER & POLLATSEK MODEL </li></ul>
  32. 32. GROUP PRESENTATION ( 10 minutes) <ul><li>Describe to the class the model you have chosen. </li></ul><ul><li>Notice the similarities and differences of the focus in each model. </li></ul>