Running head: SCHEMA AND READING COMPREHENSION

Schema Theory and Reading Comprehension Deanna Echols EDU 580 November 29, 2012

SCHEMA AND READING COMPREHENSION

Schema Theory and Reading Comprehension Historical Perspective Schemata and Schema Theory Schema is defined as the prior knowledge gained through experiences (Xiao-hui, Jun, & Wei-hua, 2007). A persons schema will reflect the knowledge gained from experiences, their attitudes, conceptual understandings, ideals, and abilities. Learners use schema to organize and construct meaning for new events and experiences they encounter (Vacca, Vacca, Gove, Burkey, Lenhart, & McKeon, 2012). As cognitive psychologist Jean Piaget described, individuals learn and construct meaning by either incorporating a new experience into pre-existing knowledge, or construct a schema to fit the new experience (McVee, Dunsmore, & Gavelek, 2005). The concept of schema, popular in the education and psychology fields for over two centuries, actually has roots that date to the times of Aristotle and Plato. The concept was popularized by researchers Kant in the 18th century, and Bartlett in the early twentieth century. Piaget is also credited with first using the term schema in the 1920s (Little & Box, 2011). Schema theory, expanding on the idea of schema and knowledge construction, is the idea that past experiences lead to the construction of mental structures that help us make sense of new experiences (Jing-Tao, 2012). As previously stated, cognitive psychologist Jean Piaget incorporated the concept of schema into his theory of the development of cognition, stating that individuals learn through either assimilating a new experience into a pre-existing schema or adapting schema to fit the new experience (McVee, et al., 2005). Schema theory recognizes the uniqueness of each learners personal schema, since their previous knowledge depends on the personal experiences of that specific learner. This theory also asserts that knowledge is not stored in a specific order, but is significance-driven, meaning that learners create meaningful

SCHEMA AND READING COMPREHENSION

representations of new information within their minds and networks of summaries that can be reconstructed to apply to a new situation (Jing-Tao, 2012). Schema theory asserts that knowledge is represented in the mind through five major processes: selection, abstraction, interpretation, integration, and reconstruction. Mental representations, or schema, are formed selectively, meaning that only the pieces of the information that are related to the activated schema are selected from the larger mass of text or information. Schema theory also emphasizes that these representations are abstract, since only the semantic or logical components are encoded into memory. Third, information cannot exist in individual pieces or fragments, but must be incorporated into a larger organized schema of knowledge. Schema theory also emphasizes that the interpretation of information depends on its consistency with the activated schema. Finally, schema theory mandates that learners will recall and reconstruct the meaning of the information stored with reference to the schema that was activated when they encountered the new information (Nassaji, 2002). This idea of knowledge representation is vitally important for understanding the connection between schema theory and reading comprehension. Schema Theory and Reading Comprehension Harvey and Goudvis (2007) assert that readers naturally make connections between books and their own lives. It is through making these connections that reading comprehension is affected by the readers schema. Schema theory suggests that comprehension is a process of mapping the information present in the text onto the pre-existing schema of the reader (Nassaji, 2002). Vacca, et al., (2012) asserts that when readers activate schema, they form expectations for the meaning of the text, impacting the interpretation and comprehension of the text. These authors also suggest that schema provides a framework for readers to organize and assimilate

SCHEMA AND READING COMPREHENSION

new information proficiently, increasing retention. Schema also allows the readers to make inferences about the text, filling in gaps in the material or predicting events. Finally, schema helps readers elaborate on the material, allowing the student to use cognitive processes to supplement comprehension, such as speculation, judgment, and evaluation. Schema theory also provides a window into how individuals transfer and generate knowledge, a useful tool for instructors (McVee, et al., 2005). There are three types of schema, all of them directly related to reading comprehension: linguistic, formal, and content schema. Linguistic schema refers to the readers existing language proficiency in vocabulary, grammar, aspects of common speech and writing. This type of schema serves as the foundation for other schema types, since knowledge of the language of the text plays an integral role in comprehension of the text (Xioa-hui, et al., 2007). Linguistic schema is found in the ability to decode the language of the text and activate schema to generate meaning of unknown words (Jing-Tao, 2012). The second type of schema is formal schema, or the understanding of the different vocabulary, grammar, sentence-structure, voice, and tone of different types of text. Genres have certain characteristics, and understanding these traits will guide the readers expectations about the content of the text and how to effectively gather meaning from the text. The third type of schema is content schema, or the background knowledge about the content area of the text, and is the key for comprehension of the text. Understanding and previous experience with the content of a text can compensate for deficiencies of formal schema, but studies suggest that readers retain the most information when the content and formal schemata were familiar to them (Xiao-hui, et al., 2007). Limitations of Schema Theory

SCHEMA AND READING COMPREHENSION

Although schema theory is accepted as a successful strategy for reading comprehension, there are limitations and criticisms of this theory. Nassaji (2002) asserts that while schema theory mandates that only the meaningful components of a text will be incorporated into schema, research suggests that these components are not necessary for integration of information into schemata. Integration can occur even when items from a text do not constitute a meaningrelationship, such as nonsense syllables or even letter-digits. Nassaji (2002) and McVee, et al. (2005) also criticize that the assumption of schema theorists that knowledge exists in pre-existing formats portrays knowledge as an inflexible process, which goes against the nature of cognition. Nassaji (2002) finally asserts that schema theory is unbalanced in its assumption that comprehension is a purely top-down reading strategy, or a reading model that emphasizes previous knowledge (Yu-hui, Li-rong, & Yue, 2010). Comprehension is instead an integrated reading mode of both bottom-up, reading instruction focusing on word and sound recognition (Yu-hui, et al., 2010), and top-down models. Another limitation to schema theory in comprehension is found in the ambiguity of passages used for schema-activation instruction. These texts are usually found to be vague and differ from naturally occurring, everyday texts that readers are exposed to. Because of this ambiguity, authors suggest that instructors cannot truly evaluate performance on texts that are poorly written or vary greatly from texts that the reader would normally be assigned, since these texts are not true representations of that persons ability to derive meaning from context-rich texts (McVee, et al., 2005; Nassaji, 2002). McVee, et al. (2005), presents another limitation of schema theory: the dependence on personal experiences of the reader. Since schema theory is reliant on the prior knowledge of the reader, the possible diversity of experiences or deficiency of experiences within readers will influence the interpretation of the text. These authors also

SCHEMA AND READING COMPREHENSION

affirm the importance of understanding schema theory as a way to help learners recognize patterns in the world from the lens of their own cultural and social experiences. Because of this socio-cultural influence, some students may struggle to understand culturally-biased texts, or teachers who are unaware of the differences between cultures may not be able to effectively activate diverse students prior knowledge. These limitations are important to consider when developing strategies for reading comprehension within the classroom, understanding the culture and social identities of students, and modifying schema-activation and building lessons to incorporate everyday texts and aspects of the bottom-up reading model. Schema Strategies for Teaching Reading Comprehension Building Schema Semantic mapping. In some cases, students may lack the prior knowledge needed to comprehend new knowledge. Little and Box (2011) affirm that at-risk students who struggle with reading may suffer from insufficient prior knowledge of the concepts within the text, especially in cross-cultural situations. One strategy offered by Little and Box is the use of graphic and advanced organizers, especially semantic mapping. These authors state that these organizers can present students with vocabulary, introduce them to concepts, and give them a general overview of the material. Semantic mapping allows students to organize their schema about a specific topic into a graphic organizer, with the instructor acting as a facilitator. The process begins as students are given a new topic, at which point they start brainstorming and writing down their reactions, thoughts, knowledge, and experiences with the topic. The teacher then asks students to share responses and writes appropriate responses on the board or poster. The class then works together to organize the schema into sub-categories. Finally, the responses are placed into a graphic organizer resembling a bubble map, in which a central box or bubble is surrounded by

SCHEMA AND READING COMPREHENSION

connected boxes containing the sub-categories and related responses. This strategy is helpful to use as a comparison for pre-reading and post-reading, as well as a formative assessment on the general knowledge of the class about the topic before reading or after reading the text. This strategy helps introduce new schema to students who may lack prior knowledge about the topic, and allows students to impact and build on each others prior knowledge to organize the responses into sub-categories. Pre-Reading schema building process. Anderson and Hite (2010) present a teachable strategy for building schema and creating a scaffold for new information through analysis of several aspects of a text or novel. There are three stages of this process. The first stage is called begin at the end, in which the reader starts reading after the last page of text and reads the pages before the back cover, such as glossaries, maps, and study questions. These pages help build new knowledge of the vocabulary, setting, and purpose of the author for this text. The second stage, cover the cover, involves the reader analyzing aspects of the back and front covers to read the synopsis, reviews from critics, or even a short biography of the author. These texts help the reader build ideas about the plot, setting, characters, and the opinion of the authors writing and the book. The final stage is called finish at the front, in which students then read the pages before the first page of text, including forwards, table of contents, dedications, and the copyright page. This helps the reader build more knowledge about the plot, storyline, or purpose of the author. This strategy is also helpful for preparing students to read the text and helping provide them with schemata to later be activated while reading the main body of the text. Anderson and Hite also present this as an independent strategy for students, and affirm that independent strategies are an important instructional tool to help readers develop into successful independent readers.

SCHEMA AND READING COMPREHENSION

Strategies such as the pre-reading schema building process and semantic mapping help build reading comprehension by introducing readers to formal and content schema of the text. As previously mentioned, formal schema introduces students to the characteristics of different genres and the language, vocabulary, and organizational aspects of the text (Xiao-hui, et al., 2007). By using strategies such as the pre-reading schema building process in which students study several of the aspects of that specific text such as vocabulary, prefaces, and synopses, (Anderson & Hite, 2010) they are being exposed to the formal schema of the text. Content schema, or background knowledge about the content area of the text (Xiao-hui, et al., 2007), can also be built during both of these strategies. While reading the maps, glossaries, and indexes of the text in the pre-reading schema building process (Anderson & Hite, 2010) or brainstorming to identify schema related to a specific topic with semantic mapping ( Little & Box, 2011), students are building experiences with the content area of the topic. Schema Activation Strategies There are many schema-activation strategies used in instruction. In a study by Susan Gooden (2012), activating prior knowledge ranked as the second most used reading comprehension strategies among surveyed teachers. Tuan and Loan (2010) also stress that activating schema is important not only for reading comprehension but for listening comprehension, emphasizing the need for educators to activate relevant schema before a listening activity. Tuan and Loan also present several strategies for activating schema, such as mind mapping-depicting schema in a web or mapped design, guided questioning, diagrams and illustrations, predicting, and skimming of a text. These strategies, according to Tuan and Loan, encourage students to activate stored schema and acquire relevant information as a group, facilitating top-down processing. Vacca, et al., (2012) also presents strategies for activating

SCHEMA AND READING COMPREHENSION

schema. Think-Alouds are a modeling process in which instructors read aloud and model how to think about a text while reading and connect the information in the text to the teacher and students pre-existing schemas. Vacca, et al. also presents a strategy called a KWL chart. This chart is a graphic organizer that involves writing what the reader already knows, K, what they want to know, W, and what they learned after reading the text, L. This strategy links the students prior knowledge, or schema, allows them to question the concept before reading, and organize the new information learned. High 5! comprehension strategies. Dymock and Nicholson (2010) present the most critically important comprehension strategies used in instruction called the High 5! This strategy involves five strategies, three of which are listed: activating prior knowledge, questioning, and analyzing text structure. All three of these strategies directly involve activating and using schema. The first strategy, activating prior knowledge, is essentially activating schemata about the topic. These authors suggest that research affirms the enhancement of comprehension when readers activate schema. The second strategy, questioning, is encouraging readers to ask questions before reading the text. These questions can be a right there, meaning the answer is evident within the text, think and search, questions in which encourage making inferences, and beyond the text questions, which encourage the reader to do research beyond the text to fill in gaps in information. As previously stated by Vacca, et al., (2012), activating schema allows readers to make inferences about the text, filling in gaps in the material or predicting events. This questioning strategy presented affirms the connection between activating schema and increased comprehension.

SCHEMA AND READING COMPREHENSION

10

The third strategy, analyzing text structure, is related to the understanding of formal schema. As previously mentioned, formal schema is the understanding of the structure, organization, and characteristics of the text (Xiao-hui, et al., 2007). This strategy of analyzing the components of the text builds knowledge about how authors present ideas within texts. This strategy is presented as a successful tool for students in primary grades exposed to descriptive and narrative writing (Dymock & Nicholson, 2010). Text connections. A final strategy presented for activating schema is called text connections. These connections encourage students to relate what they are reading to their prior experiences. Since prior experiences and knowledge are the basis of schema (Xiao-hui, et al., 2007), these connections are integral parts of activating schema while reading. There are three types of connections presented: text-to-self, text-to-text, and text-to-world (as cited in Vacca, et al., 2012; Harvey & Goudvis, 2007). Text-to-self connections are connections that students make between pieces of a text and their personal lives and experiences. These connections could be to elements of the plot, characters, or even the setting (Vacca, et al., 2012). This type of connection is directly related to content schema, or the prior knowledge and experiences related to the content of the text (Xiaohui, et al., 2007). Harvey and Goudvis (2007) presents lesson strategies for text-to-self connections such as students coding elements of a text R for items that remind them of something in their own lives. Another strategy is allowing students to relate characters in a story to their own personality traits. Text-to-text connections require students to recall another text that has similarities to the text they are currently reading. This strategy encourages students to compare and contrast texts, characters, settings, plots, and other elements of the story (Vacca, et al., 2012). These

SCHEMA AND READING COMPREHENSION

11

connections relate to formal schema, emphasizing the understanding of common themes in the structure of text (Xiao-hui, et al., 2007). Harvey and Goudvis (2007) present a strategy that encourages students to read several books by the same author and compare the common qualities of those books. Text-to-world connections are inferential connections made by the students about larger universal issues, such as crime, hunger, and responsibility (Vacca, et al., 2012). These connections can be used when discussing time periods, important events in history, or even universal or morality issues within texts (Harvey & Goudvis, 2007). Conclusion Research affirms that the concept of schema and schema theory are successful tools in enhancing reading comprehension (Vacca, et al., 2012; Nassaji, 2002; McVee, et al., 2005). Using techniques that activate and build schema during instruction could be important tools for comprehension across subject boundaries. The recent move to Common Core standards will also produce challenges for educators to adapt to new standards in reading comprehension and college and career readiness.

SCHEMA AND READING COMPREHENSION

12

References Anderson, N., & Hite, C. E. (2010). Building comprehension for reading novels: The prereadingschema building process. New England Reading Association, 45(2), 26-31. Dymock, S., & Nicholson, T. (2010). "High 5" Strategies to enhance comprehension of expository text. The Reading Teacher, 64(3), 166-178. Gooden, S. (2012). Comprehension strategies teachers use when they read. Journal of Reading Education, 37(2), 16-20. Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2007). Activating and connecting to background knowledge: A bridge from the new to the known. In S. Harvey, & A. Goudvis, Strategies that work: teaching comprehension for understanding and engagement (2nd ed., pp. 91-107). Portland, Maine: Stenhouse Publishers. Jing-Tao, L. (2012). Schema theory and its instructional applications on EFL. US-China Foreign Language, 10(2), 915-920. Little, D. C., & Box, J. A. (2011). The use of a specific schema theory strategy-semantic mapping-to facilitate vocabulary development and comprehension for at-risk readers. Reading Improvement, 48(1), 24-31. McVee, M. B., Dunsmore, K., & Gavelek, J. R. (2005). Schema Theory Revisited. Review of Educational Research, 75, 4, 531-566. Nassaji, H. (2002). Schema theory and knowledge-based processes in second-language reading comprehension: A need for alternative perspectives. Language Learning, 52(2), 439-481. Tuan, L., & Loan, B. (2010). Schema-building and listening. Studies in Literature and Language, 1(5), 53-64. Vacca, J. L., Vacca, R., Gove, M., Burkey, L., Lenhart, L., & McKeon, C. (2012). Reading and learning to read (8th ed.). (A. Martinez-Ramos, Ed.) Boston: Pearson Education Inc. Xiao-hui, L., Jun, W., & Wei-hua, W. (2007). Analusis of schema theory and its influence on reading. US-China Foreign Language, 5(11), 18-21. Yu-hui, L., Li-rong, Z., & Yue, N. (2010). Application of schema theory in teaching college English reading. Canadian Social Science, 6(1), 59-65.

SCHEMA AND READING COMPREHENSION

13