Reading comprehension on the last grades of cicles I and II of elementary school

• Autor(a) principal: Chang,Eliane Mi
• Data de Publicação: 2014
• Outros Autores: Avila,Clara Regina Brandão de
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: CoDAS
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2317-17822014000400276
• topic: Reading; Comprehension; Language; Education, Primary and Secondary; Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences

PURPOSE: To characterize students' performance in Cycle I and II of the Elementary School (EF), in decoding, reading comprehension and underlying skills of reading, and investigate correlations between these variables, in the absence and presence of reading comprehension deficits, identified by their teachers.METHODS: 125 students from ES were grouped according to Cycle and presence or absence of reading comprehension impairments. Two Control (good readers from both Cycles) and two Research groups (poor readers from both Cycles) were established. Assessment involved: fluency and reading comprehension; oral comprehension; working and short-term phonological memory; grammar closure. It was compared (Mann-Whitney test): in intragroup study, both Control and Research groups; in intergroup study, Control and Research from different cycles, and Control I and Research II. Spearman coefficient investigated correlations.RESULTS: Analyzing reading comprehension, we observed better performance of Control Groups in all tasks in comparison to the respective Research Groups, and better performance of Control II in comparison to Control I. Research Groups had similar results in most tests. Positive correlations have been observed between most of the variables.CONCLUSION: Students without reading comprehension impairments showed better performance in reading in both Cycles. Working memory and oral comprehension did not differentiate students with and without complaints in Cycle I, differently from what was observed in Cycle II. Research II presented similar or better performance than Research I and similar or worse performance than Control I. Underlying skills showed different profiles of correlation with reading comprehension capacity, according to the group.