Examination of Different Reading Strategies with Eye Tracking Measures in Paragraph Questions

Abstract

This study aims at investigating the effects of two different test-taking strategies on reading achievement, dwell time, fixation counts and number of regressions on area of interests (AOIs) of the multiple choice reading comprehension questions with different type and difficulty levels. In this true experimental study, 28 subjects are randomly assigned into two groups. While subjects in stem first strategy (S-FS) group read the question stem first, subjects in paragraph first strategy group (P-FS) read paragraph first. Results of this study show that dwell time, fixation counts, and number of regressions on question stem AOIs in the S-FS group are significantly higher than the P-FS group. As a result, contrary to the common recommendations in practice, reading the question stem first provides no advantage in terms of reading achievement and dwell time as expected. Moreover, the S-FS significantly increases dwell time, fixation counts, and number of regressions on question stem AOIs.

Keywords

• Reading comprehension,eye tracking,reading strategies,stem first strategy,paragraph first strategy

Paragraf Sorularında Farklı Okuma Stratejilerinin Göz İzleme Metrikleriyle İncelenmesi

Abstract

Bu çalışmada farklı tür ve zorluklardaki çoktan seçmeli okuduğunu anlama sorularının çözümünde kullanılan iki farklı soru çözme stratejisinin başarı, soru çözme süresi, odaklanma sayısı ve okunulan alana tekrar geri dönme sayısı üzerindeki etkisinin araştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Tam deneysel olarak yürütülen bu çalışmada 28 katılımcı rastgele olarak iki gruba ayrılmıştır. Önce soru kökü stratejisini (Ö-SkS) kullanan grup, soruları önce soru kökünü okuyarak, önce paragraf stratejisini (Ö-PS) kullanan grup ise, soruları önce paragrafı okuyarak çözmüşlerdir. Çalışmadan elde edilen sonuçlara göre Ö-SkS grubunun soru kökü alanında harcadığı süre, odaklanma sayısı ve okunulan alana geri dönme sayısı Ö-PS grubuna göre anlamlı olarak daha fazladır. Sonuç olarak, uygulamada yaygın olarak tavsiye edilenin aksine, paragraf sorusu çözerken önce soru kökünün okunmasının başarı ve soru çözme süresi açısından avantaj sağlamadığı gibi, Ö-SkS kullanımının soru kökü alanında harcanan süreyi, odaklanma sayısını ve okunulan alana geri dönme sayısını anlamlı derecede artırdığı ortaya çıkmıştır.

Keywords

• Okuduğunu anlama,göz izleme,okuma stratejileri,önce soru kökü stratejisi,önce paragraf stratejisi

References

1. Anderson, N., Bachman, L., Perkins, K., & Cohen, A. (1991). An exploratory study into the construct validity of a reading comprehension test: Triangulation of data sources. Language Testing, 8(1), 41–66.
2. Basaran, M. (2013). Okuduğunu anlamanın ölçülmesinde paragraftan anlam kurmaya dayalı çoktan seçmeli sorular. Journal of Educational Science Research, 3(2), 107-121.
3. Basturk, S., & Dogan, S. (2010). Lise öğretmenlerinin özel dershaneler hakkındaki görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(2), 135-157.
4. Bax, S., & Weir, C. J. (2012). Investigating learners' cognitive processes during a computer-based CAE Reading test. Research Notes.
5. Bayazit, A. (2013). Farklı soru biçimlerinin göz hareketleri, başarım ve cevaplama süresine olan etkilerinin incelenmesi. Doktora Tezi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
6. Canham, M., & Hegarty, M. (2010). Effects of knowledge and display design on comprehension of complex graphics. Learning and Instruction, 20, 155–166.
7. Cerdán, R., Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, T., Gilabert, R., & Gil, L. (2009). Impact of question-answering tasks on search processes and reading comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 19(1), 13-27.
8. Chou, M. H. (2013). Strategy use for reading English for general and specific academic purposes in testing and nontesting contexts. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(2), 175-197.

9. Cohen, A. D. (2010). Focus on the language learner: Styles, strategies and motivation. An introduction to applied linguistics, 2, 161-178.
10. Cohen, A.D. (1998). Strategies and processes in test taking and SLA. In L.F. Bachman & A.D. Cohen (Eds.), Interfaces between second language acquisition and language testing research (pp. 90–111). New York: Cambridge University Press.
11. Craven, J. & Jones, E. (n.d.). LSAT logical reasoning - read the stimulus or the stem first? Retrieved April 15, 2016, from https://lawschooli.com/lsat-lr-stimulus-or-question-stem-first/
12. Djamasbi, S. (2014). Eye tracking and web experience. AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction, 6(2), 37-54.
13. Dogru Tercihler, (2016). Yıllara göre YGS konu-soru dağılımları. Retrieved April 15, 2016, from http://dogrutercihler.com/yillara-gore-ygs-konu-soru-dagilimlari/
14. Erdem, D. T. (2015). Comparing L2 learners' strategy use in literal vs. inferential reading: A cognitive validity study through eye - tracking. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
15. George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 17.0 update (10a ed.) Boston: Pearson.
16. Goldberg, J. H., & Kotval, X. P. (1999). Computer interface evaluation using eye movements: methods and constructs. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 24(6), 631-645.
17. Guler, H. K. (2013). Türk öğrencilerin PISA'da karşılaştıkları güçlüklerin analizi. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 26(2), 501-522.
18. Hannon, B. (2012). Understanding the relative contributions of lower‐level word processes, higher‐level processes, and working memory to reading comprehension performance in proficient adult readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(2), 125-152.
19. Hegarty, M., Mayer, R. E., & Green, C. E. (1992). Comprehension of arithmetic word problems: Evidence from students' eye fixations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(1), 76.
20. Hegarty, M., Mayer, R. E., & Monk, C. A. (1995). Comprehension of arithmetic word problems: A comparison of successful and unsuccessful problem solvers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(1), 18.
21. Holsanova, J., Rahm, H., & Holmqvist, K. (2006). Entry points and reading paths on newspaper spreads: comparing a semiotic analysis with eye-tracking measurements. Visual communication, 5(1), 65-93.
22. Hopkins, K. D. (1998). Educational and psychological measurement and evaluation. Allyn & Bacon, A Viacom Company, 160 Gould Street, Needham Heights, MA 02194.
23. Hsu, W. T. (2008). EFL students' English language knowledge, strategy use and multiple-choice reading test performance: A structural equation modeling approach (Published doctoral dissertation). University of Southampton.
24. Hyönä, J., & Lorch, R. F. (2004). Effects of topic headings on text processing: Evidence from adult readers’ eye fixation patterns. Learning and instruction, 14(2), 131-152.
25. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1976). Eye fixations and cognitive processes. Cognitive psychology, 8(4), 441-480.
26. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: from eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological review, 87(4), 329.
27. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology,13(4), 351-371.
28. Killoran, D.M. (2016). The PowerScore LSAT logical reasoning bible™. PowerScore Publishing.
29. Kolay Turkce, (n.d.). Paragraf sorusu çözme teknikleri. Retrieved April 15, 2016, from http://www.kolayturkce.com/paragraf-sorusu-cozme-teknikleri/
30. Kung, F. W. (2017). Teaching second language reading comprehension: the effects of classroom materials and reading strategy use. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1-12.
31. Lai, M. L., Tsai, M. J., Yang, F. Y., Hsu, C. Y., Liu, T. C., Lee, S. W. Y., ... & Tsai, C. C. (2013). A review of using eye-tracking technology in exploring learning from 2000 to 2012. Educational Research Review, 10, 90-115.
32. Leeuw, L., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2016). Role of text and student characteristics in real‐time reading processes across the primary grades. Journal of Research in Reading, 39(4), 389-408.
33. Leone, J. (n.d.). Test-Taking Strategies for Reading. Retrieved July 15, 2017, from http://rpdp.net/literacyFiles/NHSPE-reading.pdf
34. Magoosh GRE Blog, (n.d.). GRE reading comprehension. Retrieved April 15, 2016, from http://magoosh.com/gre/gre-guide/gre-verbal-guide/gre-reading-comprehension/
35. McMillan, J.H. & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (6th ed.). London: Pearson.
36. MoNE (2015). PISA 2012 araştırması ulusal nihai rapor. Ankara: Ölçe, Değerlendirme ve Sınav Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü.
37. MoNE (n.d.). Özel eğitim ihtiyacı olan öğrencilere sınav uygulama kılavuzu. Ankara: Ölçme, Değerlendirme ve Sınav Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü.
38. Mousavi, S. A. (1999). A dictionary of language testing (2nd Ed.). Tehran: Rahnama Publications.
39. Netzel, R., Ohlhausen, B., Kurzhals, K., Woods, R., Burch, M., & Weiskopf, D. (2017). User performance and reading strategies for metro maps: An eye tracking study. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 17(1-2), 39-64.
40. Nevo, N. (1989). Test-taking strategies on a multiple-choice test of reading comprehension. Language Testing, 6(2), 199-215. OECD (2013). PISA 2012 results: What makes schools successful? Resources, policies and practices (Volume IV), PISA, OECD. Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264201156-en
41. Ozcelik, A.D. (1997). Test hazırlama kılavuzu. Ankara: ÖSYM yayınları.
42. Ozkan, O., & Kaya, S. S. (2015). Bilimsel makalede “sınırlılıklar” neden ve nasıl yazılır. TAF Preventive Medicine Bulletin, 14(6).
43. Pang, J. (2008). Research on good and poor reader characteristics: Implications for L2 reading research in China. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20(1), 1–18.
44. Parhoodeh, K., Rostamy, M., & Mehry, A. (2015). Multiple Choice Reading Comprehension Tests and English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Learners Answering Strategies. Sino-US English Teaching, 12(6), 410-423.
45. Powers, R. (n.d.). Trying the four types of paragraph comprehension questions on the ASVAB. Retrieved April 15, 2016, from http://www.dummies.com/test-prep/asvab-test/trying-the-four-types-of-paragraph-comprehension-questions-on-the-asvab/
46. Presley, M., & McCormick, B. (1995). Social interactional theories of learning and development: Vygotsky's sociocultural approaches to mind. Cognition, teaching and assessment. New York: Harper-Collins.
47. Radach, R. (1998). Eye guidance and visual information processing: Reading, visual search, picture perception and driving. Eye Guidance in Reading and Scene Perception, Oxford, England: Elsevier, 1-27.
48. Raney, G. E., Campbell, S. J., & Bovee, J. C. (2014). Using eye movements to evaluate the cognitive processes involved in text comprehension. Journal of visualized experiments: JoVE, (83).
49. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372–422.
50. Rayner, K., & Castelhano, M. (2007). Eye movements. Scholarpedia, 2(10), 3649.
51. Roberts, L., & Siyanova-Chanturia, A. (2013). Using eye-tracking to investigate topics in L2 acquisition and L2 processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(2), 213-235.
52. Rupley, W. H., & Blair, T. R. (1983). Reading diagnosis and remediation: Classroom and clinic (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
53. Senemoglu, N. (2015). Gelişim, öğrenme ve öğretim: Kuramdan uygulamaya (24th ed.). Ankara: Yargı Yayınevi.
54. Sinatra, G. M., & Broughton, S. H. (2011). Bridging reading comprehension and conceptual change in science education: The promise of refutation text. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(4), 374-393.
55. Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
56. Solaz-Portolés, J. J., & Sanjosé, V. (2007). Cognitive variables in science problem solving: A review of research. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 4(2), 25-33.
57. Sung, Y. T., Wu, M. D., Chen, C. K., & Chang, K. E. (2015). Examining the online reading behavior and performance of fifth-graders: evidence from eye-movement data. Frontiers in psychology, 6.
58. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285.
59. Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296.
60. Turk Dili ve Edebiyati, (2007). Paragraf sorularını çözerken nelere dikkat etmeliyim? Retrieved April 15, 2016, from http://www.turkedebiyati.org/paragraf_bilgisi.html
61. Wu, J. Y. (2014). Gender differences in online reading engagement, metacognitive strategies, navigation skills and reading literacy. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(3), 252-271. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12054
62. Yesilyurt, S. (2008). Üniversiteye giriş sınavına hazırlanan öğrencilerin dershaneleri tercih etme sebepleri ve dershanelerdeki biyoloji öğretiminin durumu üzerine bir çalışma. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 5(2), 95-109.