From Integrating to Learning:  Insights from Spanish L2 Multiple Documents Selection in Reading Tasks

Maha Soliman

doi:10.5294/laclil.2021.14.1.6

Autores/as

Maha Soliman Autor/a Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5751-8810

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2021.14.1.6

Palabras clave:

Comprensión, enseñanza de una segunda lengua, selección de documentos, integración educativa, español

Resumen

La literatura previa se ha enfocado en investigar el uso de las fuentes en la sala de clases y cuánto contribuyen en construir una representación mental coherente de los textos leídos. Estos estudios explican cómo se integra a partir de múltiples fuentes de documentos, sin embargo, sus resultados se limitan a la primera lengua y no informan sobre los tipos de estas fuentes o el por qué de su uso. En este sentido, el objetivo de este estudio de caso es identificar los tipos de fuentes de documentos utilizados en cuatro cursos de un programa de intercambio estudiantil en Chile. Los datos se recopilaron a través de grupos focales con 60 estudiantes y entrevistas en profundidad con 4 docentes realizados durante el primer semestre del 2019 para determinar en qué sentido el tipo de documento seleccionado podría contribuir al proceso de aprendizaje. Se realizó un análisis de contenido mediante Nvivo 12 que permitió informar sobre las implicancias pedagógicas del uso de estas fuentes en el aula de español como L2.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Citas

Andreassen, R., & Bråten, I. (2013). Teachers’ source evaluation self‐efficacy predicts their use of relevant source features when evaluating the trustworthiness of web sources on special education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(5), 821–836. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01366.x

Anmarkrud, Ø., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2014). Multiple-documents literacy: Strategic processing, source awareness, and argumentation when reading multiple conflicting documents. Learning and Individual Differences, (30), 64–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.01.007

Anmarkrud, Ø., McCrudden, M. T., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2013). Task-oriented reading of multiple documents: Online comprehension processes and offline products. Instructional Science, 41(5), 873–894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-013-9263-8

Bloome, D., Kim, M., Hong, H., & Brady, J. (2018). Multiple source use when reading and writing in literature and language arts in classroom contexts. In J. L. G. Braasch, I. Bråten, & M. T. McCrudden (Eds.), Handbook of multiple source use (pp. 254–266). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315627496-15

Braasch, J. L., Lawless, K. A., Goldman, S. R., Manning, F. H., Gomez, K. W., & MacLeod, S. M (2009). Evaluating search results: An empirical analysis of middle school students’ use of source attributes to select useful sources. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 41(1), 63–82. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.41.1.c

Brand‐Gruwel, S., Kammerer, Y., Van Meeuwen, L., & Van Gog, T. (2017). Source evaluation of domain experts and novices during Web search. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(3), 234–251. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12162

Brante, E. W., & Strømsø, H. I. (2018). Sourcing in text comprehension: A review of interventions targeting sourcing skills. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 773–799. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9421-7

Bråten, I., Ferguson, L. E., Anmarkrud, Ø., & Strømsø, H. I. (2013). Prediction of learning and comprehension when adolescents read multiple texts: The roles of word-level processing, strategic approach, and reading motivation. Reading and Writing, 26(3), 321–348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9371-x

Bråten, I., McCrudden, M. T., Stang Lund, E., Brante, E. W., & Strømsø, H. I. (2018). Task‐oriented learning with multiple documents: Effects of topic familiarity, author expertise, and content relevance on document selection, processing, and use. Reading Research Quarterly, 53(3), 345–365. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.197

Bråten, I., Stadtler, M., & Salmerón, L. (2018). The role of sourcing in discourse comprehension. In M. Schober, D. Rapp, & M. Britt (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of discourse processes (pp. 141–166). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315687384-10

Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2010). When law students read multiple documents about global warming: Examining the role of topic-specific beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing. Instructional Science, 38(6), 635–657. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9091-4

Rouet, J. F., & Britt, M. A. (2011). Relevance processes in multiple document comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 19–52). Information Age.

Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J. F. (2012). Learning with multiple documents: Component skills and their acquisition. In M. J. Lawson & J. R. Kirby (Eds.), Enhancing the quality of learning: Dispositions, instruction, and learning processes (pp. 276–314). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139048224.017

Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J. F. (2020). Multiple document comprehension. In L. Zhang (Ed.), The oxford encyclopedia of educational psychology (pp.10–25). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.867

Britt, M. A., Rouet, J. F., & Braasch, J. L. (2013). Documents as entities: Extending the situation model theory of comprehension. In M. A. Britt, S. R. Goldman, & J.-F. Rouet (Eds.), Reading: From words to multiple texts (pp. 160–179). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203131268

Britt, M. A., Rouet, J. F., & Durik, A. (2018). Representations and processes in multiple source use. In J. L. G. Braasch, I. Bråten, & M.T. McCrudden (Eds.), Handbook of multiple source use (pp. 17–33). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315627496-2

Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/

Ferguson, L. E., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2012). Epistemic cognition when students read multiple documents containing conflicting scientific evidence: A think-aloud study. Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 103–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.08.002

Goldman, S. R. (2004). Cognitive aspects of constructing meaning through and across multiple texts. In N. Shuart‐Faris & D. Bloome (Eds.), Uses of intertextuality in classroom and educational research (pp. 317–352). Information Age.

Goldman, S. R., & Bisanz, G. L. (2002). Toward a functional analysis of scientific genres: Implications for understanding and learning processes. In J. Otero, J. A. León, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 19–50). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Goldman, S. R., Braasch, J. L., Wiley, J., Graesser, A. C., & Brodowinska, K. (2012). Comprehending and learning from Internet sources: Processing patterns of better and poorer learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(4), 356–381. http://wiley.lsri.uic.edu/personal/jwiley/rrq.pdf

Goldman, S. R., Britt, M. A., Brown, W., Cribb, G., George, M., Greenleaf, C., Lee, C. Shanahan, C., & Project READI. (2016). Disciplinary literacies and learning to read for understanding: A conceptual framework for disciplinary literacy. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 219–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1168741

Guerrini, M. (2009). CLIL materials as scaffolds to learning. CLIL Practice: Perspectives from the Field, 1, 74–84.

Guthrie, J. T., Braasch, J. L. G., Bråten, I., & McCrudden, M. T. (2018). Promoting multiple-text comprehension through motivation in the classroom. In J. L. G. Braasch, I. Bråten, & M. McCrudden (Eds.), Handbook of multiple source use (pp. 382–400). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315627496-22

Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 428–444). Sage Publications.

Karimi, M. N. (2018a). The mediated/unmediated contributions of language proficiency and prior knowledge to L2 multiple-texts comprehension: A structural equation modelling analysis. Applied Linguistics, 39(6), 912–932. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amw059

Karimi, M. N. (2018b). Prior topical knowledge and L2 proficiency as determinants of strategic processing in English for Academic Purposes multi-texts comprehension. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 12(3), 235–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2016.1177058

Karimi, M. N., & Alibakhshi, G. (2014). EFL learners’ text processing strategies across comprehension vs. integration reading task conditions. System, 46, 96–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.07.013

Kintsch, W. (1986). Learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 3(2), 87–108. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0302_1

List, A., Alexander, P. A., & Stephens, L. A. (2017). Trust but verify: Examining the association between students’ sourcing behaviors and ratings of text trustworthiness. Discourse Processes, 54(2), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1174654

List, A., Du, H., Wang, Y., & Lee, H. Y. (2019). Toward a typology of integration: Examining the documents model framework. Contemporary Educational Psychology, (58), 228–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.03.003

Narvaez, D., Van Den Broek, P., & Ruiz, A. B. (1999). The influence of reading purpose on inference generation and comprehension in reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 488.

Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Brønnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International journal of educational research, (58), 61–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.12.002

Maxwell, J. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Sage publications.

McCrudden, M. T. (2018). Text relevance and multiple‐source use. In J. L. G. Braasch, I. Bråten, & M.T. McCrudden (Eds.), Handbook of multiple source use (pp. 168–183). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/

-10

McCrudden, M. T., & Schraw, G. (2007). Relevance and goal-focusing in text processing. Educational psychology review, 19(2), 113–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9010-7

McCrudden, M. T., Stenseth, T., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2016). The effects of topic familiarity, author expertise, and content relevance on Norwegian students’ document selection: A mixed methods study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(2), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000057

McNamara, D. S., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Learning from texts: Effects of prior knowledge and text coherence. Discourse processes, 22(3), 247–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539609544975

McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N. B., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14(1), 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1401_1

Milne, E. D., Llinares, A., & Morton, T. (2010). CLIL across contexts: A scaffolding framework for CLIL teacher education. Current Research on CLIL, 19(3), 12–20. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269464750_CLIL_across_contexts_A_scaffolding_framework_for_CLIL_teacher_education

Nikula, T., Dafouz, E., Moore, P., & Smit, U. (2016). Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096145

Perfetti, C. A., Britt, M. A., & Georgi, M. C. (2012). Text-based learning and reasoning: Studies in history. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/

Perfetti, C. A., Rouet, J. F., & Britt, M. A. (1999). Toward a theory of documents representation. In H. Van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representation during reading (pp. 99–122). Erlbaum.

Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). The persuasiveness of source credibility: A critical review of five decades’ evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(2), 243–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02547.x

Rouet, J. F., & Britt, M. A. (2011). Relevance processes in multiple document comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 19–52). IAP Information Age Publishing.

Rouet, J. F., & Britt, M. A. (2014). Multimedia learning from multiple documents. In R. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. (pp. 813–841). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139547369.039

Rouet, J. F., Britt, M. A., & Durik, A. M. (2017). RESOLV: Readers’ representation of reading contexts and tasks. Educational Psychologist, 52(3), 200–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1329015

Rouet, J. F., Britt, M. A., Mason, R. A., & Perfetti, C. A. (1996). Using multiple sources of evidence to reason about history. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(3), 478. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.88.3.478

Rouet, J. F., Favart, M., Britt, M. A., & Perfetti, C. A. (1997). Studying and using multiple documents in history: Effects of discipline expertise. Cognition and Instruction, 15(1), 85–106. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1501_3

Salmerón, L., Gil, L., & Bråten, I. (2018a). Using eye-tracking to assess sourcing during multiple document reading: A critical analysis. Frontline Learning Research, 6(3), 105–122. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v6i3.368

Salmerón, L., Gil, L., & Bråten, I. (2018b). Effects of reading real versus print-out versions of multiple documents on students’ sourcing and integrated understanding. Contemporary Educational Psychology, (52), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.12.002

Salmerón, L., Strømsø, H. I., Kammerer, Y., Stadtler, M., & Van den Broek, P. (2018c). Comprehension processes in digital reading. In M. Barzillai, J. Thomson, S. Schroeder, & P. van den Broek (Eds.), Learning to read in a digital world (pp. 91–120). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/swll.17.04sal

Schraw, G., McCrudden, M. T., & Magliano, J. P. (2011). Text relevance and learning from text. Information Age Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_354

Sendur, K. A., van Boxtel, C., & van Drie, J. (2021). Undergraduate L2 students’ performance when evaluating historical sources for reliability. English for Specific Purposes, 61, 17–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2020.08.004

Shanahan, C., Shanahan, T., & Misischia, C. (2011). Analysis of expert readers in three disciplines: History, mathematics, and chemistry. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(4), 393–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X11424071

Stadtler, M., Scharrer, L., Skodzik, T., & Bromme, R. (2014). Comprehending multiple documents on scientific controversies: Effects of reading goals and signaling rhetorical relationships. Discourse Processes, 51(1–2), 93–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2013.855535

Stearns, P. N., Seixas, P., & Wineburg, S. (2000). Knowing, teaching, and learning history: National and international perspectives. New York University Press.

Stenseth, T., & Strømsø, H. I. (2019). To read or not to read: A qualitative study of students’ justifications for document selection in task-oriented reading. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 63(5), 771–788. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2018.1434828

Strømsø, H. (2017). Multiple models of multiple-text comprehension: A commentary. Educational Psychologist, 52(3), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1320557

Strømsø, H. I., Bråten, I., & Britt, M. A. (2010). Reading multiple texts about climate change: The relationship between memory for sources and text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 20(3), 192–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.001

Sylvén, L. K. (2019). Investigating content and language integrated learning: Insights from Swedish high schools. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788922425

Van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. Academic Press.

Van Meter, P., List, A., Lombardi, D., & Kendeou, P. (2020). Handbook of learning from multiple representations and perspectives. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429443961

Weber, K., & Mejia-Ramos, J. P. (2013). The influence of sources in the reading of mathematical text: A reply to Shanahan, Shanahan, and Misischia. Journal of Literacy Research, 45(1), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X12469968