Self-report of reading comprehension strategies: What are we measuring?

Jennifer G. Cromley, Roger Azevedo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Proficient readers engage in a wide range of cognitive and metacognitive strategies, and both developmental and classroom intervention researchers are in need of high-quality measures of strategy use. Several researchers have recently called into question the validity of the most common type of measures of strategy use in reading, self-report or introspective measures (i.e., the participant must report on his or her cognitive activity while not actually engaged in the activity). We administered three parallel strategy use measures to a sample of 30 ninth-grade students: a prospective self-report measure, a concurrent multiple-choice measure which required students to apply the strategies to specific passages, and a text on which we asked students to think aloud. We also collected two measures of reading comprehension-a standardized measure and free recall scores. Consistent with Veenman's (2005) conclusions based on a literature review, the concurrent multiple-choice and think-aloud data were both significantly correlated with both of the comprehension scores and with each other, whereas the prospective self-report data had non-significant correlations with all of the other measures. We conclude by recommending concurrent measures for researchers who wish to study strategy use in reading comprehension.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)229-247
Number of pages19
JournalMetacognition and Learning
Volume1
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2006
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Comprehension
  • Measurement
  • Reading
  • Self-report
  • Strategies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Self-report of reading comprehension strategies: What are we measuring?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this