Enhancing Search and Comprehension Processes in Text-Based Learning

1. Search and Comprehension Processes in Learning from Text Cerdán, R., Vidal-Abarca, E., Gil, L., Gilabert, R., & Martínez, T. University of Valencia

2. Comprehension & Learning from Text • Adjunct Questions: Aids for Comprehension & Learning • Search tasks in complex documents ( Rouet & Tricot, 1998) • Evaluation (E):search goal & strategy • Selection (S):selection of information units • Processing (P):extraction of relevant information • Iterations of E-S-P cycles • Pattern of search (Rouet, Vidal-Abarca, Bert-Erlboul & Millogo, 2001) • High level questions: Review & Integrate • Low level questions: Locate & Memorize

3. Previous experiment to study Search & Comprehension processes(Vidal-Abarca, et al., 2002) • 22 University students • 2 groups: high vs. low level questions • Task: (on a computer screen) • Reading long science text (1800 words) + • Searching info to Answer (HL vs. LL) questions • Reading the question • Re-reading the text (if neened) • Writing the answer Cycles

4. Answering questions at a good level implied: • Reading questions fewer times. • Selecting lower number of text segments (relevant + non-relevant for the questions) • Reading more relevant segments. • Fewer answering cycles. Main results High level questions: • Reading questions more times and selecting more text segments (relevant + non-relevant) Low level questions: • Reading questions fewer times and selecting fewer text segments (relevant + non-relevant)

5. Current experiment New Situation: searching info to answer (HL vs LL) Qs, but NO prior reading text GOAL: replicate prior results? • Search & comprehension processes in answering questions at good vs.poor level? • Search patterns to answer high vs. low level questions?

6. Procedure • 16 University students. • 2 groups: high level vs. low level questions • Task: on a computer screen (Read & Answer) • Searching info to Answer (HL vs. LL) questions • Reading the question • Reading the text • Writing the answer Cycles

7. Read&Answer 1. Reading the question 2. Searching info to answer Q

8. Design ANOVAs 2x2: Type of question x Comprehension (Answering level) • High L Q: Integrating distant information + many inferences • Low L Q:Locating especific information + few or no inferences. • Good comprehension (highest third score) • Poor comprension (lowest third score)

9. On line measures Evaluation Phase: • Number of times reading the questions. • Time spent reading the questions. • Word reading time per visit. Selection Phase: • Number of total paragraphs visited. • Number of relevant paragraphs. • % of relevant paragraphs. Processing Phase: • % of time reading relevant segments within each question. Control Processes: • Number of QTW cycles: Q (reading the question), T (reading the text), W (writing an answer),

10. Evaluation phase: Times reading questions Processing phase: % of time reading relevant segments Selection phase: % of relevant segments Executive control processes: number of QTW cycles

11. Summary • Reading questions fewer times. • Selecting a higher percentage of relevant segments ( especially in low level questions) • Fewer answering cycles. Answering at a Good vs. Poor level: High vs.low level questions: • High level: Reading questions more times, selecting more segments (relevant + non-relevant) and using more QTW cycles. • Low level: Reading questions fewer times, selecting fewer text segments and using fewer QTW cycles.

12. Conclusions • Good comprehenders: effective search pattern • Poor comprehenders: loss in search task • Pattern for High level questions: Review&Integrate • Pattern for Low level questions: Locate&Memorize