Intermediate-level college students of French were randomly assigned to a condition in which they received information on the organization of a journal article or to a control condition where they did not receive this training. Half the students from each of these groups were assigned to read a scientific article in French which used canonical organization while the other half read the same article in a coherent form which did not. Afterwards, the students completed a free recall task in English, and the written recalls were scored for number of idea units recalled. Results indicated a significant main effect for instruction in text structure. This effect obtained only, however, when the text was in canonical experimental report order (problem, description of the investigation, results and conclusion). The discussion addresses how knowledge of structure gained through instruction may be used in comprehension and recall in the case of foreign-language readers.
References
1.
BarnettJ. E. (1984). Facilitating retention through instruction about text structure. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16, 1–13.
2.
BazemanC. (1983, March). Early developments in argumentation in physics. Paper presented at the CCC Convention, Baruch College, New York.
3.
CarrellP. L. (1983). Evidence of a formal schema in second language comprehension. Language Learning, 34, 87–112.
4.
CarrellP. L. (1984). The effects of rhetorical organization of ESL readers. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 441–469.
5.
de GrootA. D. (1965). Thought and choice in chess. The Hague: Mouton.
6.
HaberlandtK. (1980). Story grammar and reading time of story constituents. Poetics, 9, 99–118.
7.
HindsJ. L. (1983a). Contrastive rhetoric: Japanese and English. Text, 3, 183–195.
8.
HindsJ. L. (1983b, March). Retention of information using a Japanese style of presentation. Paper presented at the 17th Annual TESOL Convention, Toronto.
9.
KaplanR. B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural relations. Language Learning, 1 & 2, 1–20.
10.
KocourekR. (1982). La langue française de la technique et de la science. Wiesbaden: Brandstetter Verlag.
11.
LeeJ. F. (1986a). Background knowledge & L2 reading. Modem Language Journal, 70, 350–354.
12.
LeeJ. F. (1986b). On the use of the recall task to measure L2 reading comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 8, 83–93.
13.
MageT. L. (1977). Contrastive discourse analysis: EST and SST. In Proceedings of the IV International Congress of Applied Linguistics (Vol. 1, pp. 237–248). Wiesbaden: Hochschulverlag.
14.
MageT. L. (1981). Scientific and technical discourse: A comparative analysis of English and Romanian. In SelinkerL.TaroneE.HanzeliV. (Eds.), English for academic and technical purposes: Studies in honor of Louis Trimble (pp. 91–104). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
15.
MandlerJ. M. (1982). Some uses and abuses of a story grammar. Discourse Processes, 5, 305–318.
16.
MandlerJ. M.DeForestM. (1979). Is there more than one way to recall a story. Child Development, 50, 886–889.
17.
MandlerJ. M.JohnsonN. S. (1977). Remembrance of things parsed: Story structure and recall. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 111–151.
18.
MandlerJ. M.ScribnerS.ColeM.DeForestM. (1980). Cross-cultural invariance in story recall. Child Development, 51, 19–26.
19.
MayerR. E. (1985). Structural analysis of science prose: Can we increase problem-solving performance? In BrittonB. K.BlackJ. B. (Eds.), Understanding expository text: A theoretical and practical handbook for analyzing explanative text (pp. 65–87). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
PerlmutterJ.RoyerJ. M. (1973). Organization of prose materials: Stimulus, storage and retrieval. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 27, 200–209.
21.
Pollard-GottL.McCloskeyM.TodresA. K. (1979). Subjective story structure. Discourse Processes, 2, 251–281.
22.
PoulsenD.KintschE.KintschW.PremackD. (1979). Children's comprehension and memory for stories. Journal of Experimental Children's Psychology, 28, 379–403.
23.
RumelhartD. E. (1975). Notes on a schema for stories. In BobrowD. G.CollinsA. (Eds.), Representation and understanding: Studies in cognitive science (pp. 211–236). New York: Academic Press.
24.
RumelhartD. E. (1977). Introduction to human information processing. New York: Wiley.
25.
SagerJ. C.DungworthD.McDonaldP. F. (1980). English special languages: Principles and practice in science and technology. Wiesbaden: Brandstetter Verlag.
26.
SamuelsS. J. (1986). Training materials for expository text structure. Unpublished manuscript.
27.
SamuelsS. J.TennysonR.SaxL.MulcahyP.SchermerN.HajovyH. (1987). Adults' use of text structure in the recall of a scientific journal article. Unpublished manuscript.
28.
SchultzC. B.DiVestaF. J. (1972). Effects of passage organization and note taking on the selection of clustering strategies and on recall of textual materials. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 244–252.
29.
SingerH.DonlanD. (1982). Active comprehension: Problem-solving schema with question generation for comprehension of complex short stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 166–186.
30.
TaylorB. M.SamuelsS. J. (1983). Children's use of text structure in the recall of expository material. American Educational Research Journal, 20, 517–528.
31.
VesonderG. T. (1979). The role of knowledge in the processing of experimental reports. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
32.
WiddowsonH. G. (1979). Explorations in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
