Deviations in the Process of Main Idea Identification: An Analysis Across Text Processing Levels

Öz

One of the primary indicators of text comprehension is the ability to identify the main idea. However, research indicates that students often fail to construct the main idea in a coherent and well-integrated manner. This study examines the difficulties experienced by children aged 10–11 in the process of identifying the main idea, as well as the deviations that emerge during this process. Data were collected from 100 participants using a main-idea identification task, and the data were analyzed within the framework of three fundamental levels inferred from Kintsch’s (1998) construction–integration model. The findings show that only a limited proportion of students were able to construct the main idea at a valid and sufficient level, with deviations concentrating primarily at the textbase and surface text levels. Processing at the mental representation (situation model) level remained limited. These deviations clustered around recurring patterns, including incomplete construction of the main idea, a focus on surface-level details, and the indication of topic information in place of the main idea. In addition, the negative correlational relationships observed between processing levels suggest that text processing tended to remain confined to a single level and that integrative transitions across levels were not successfully achieved. Differences related to gender and text type were also identified. Overall, the results suggest that instruction in main-idea identification can be addressed in relation to students’ cognitive characteristics, textual features, and stages of text processing.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• reading comprehension
• main idea
• text-base
• situation model

Ana Düşünceyi Belirleme Sürecinde Ortaya Çıkan Sapmalar: Metin İşlemleme Düzeylerine Göre Bir İnceleme

Öz

Bir metnin kavrandığının temel göstergelerinden biri ana düşüncenin belirlenebilmesidir. Ancak araştırmalar, öğrencilerin ana düşünceyi çoğu durumda bütüncül ve tutarlı biçimde yapılandıramadıklarını göstermektedir. Bu çalışmada, 10-11 yaş grubundaki çocukların ana düşünceyi belirleme sürecinde yaşadıkları sorunlar ve bu süreçte ortaya çıkan sapmalar incelenmiştir. 100 katılımcıdan ana düşünceyi belirleme formu kullanılarak veri toplanmış; veriler, Kintsch’in (1998) yapı-bütünleştirme modelinden çıkarımlanan üç temel düzey çerçevesinde çözümlenmiştir. Bulgular, öğrencilerin yalnızca sınırlı bir bölümünün ana düşünceyi geçerli ve yeterli düzeyde oluşturabildiğini; sapmaların ağırlıklı olarak metin tabanı ve yüzey metin düzeylerinde yoğunlaştığını göstermektedir. Zihinsel temsil düzeyinde işlemleme ise sınırlı kalmıştır. Bu sapmalar, ana düşüncenin eksik yapılandırılması, yüzey ayrıntılara odaklanma ve ana düşünce yerine konunun belirtilmesi gibi örüntüler çevresinde toplanmaktadır. Ek olarak düzeyler arasındaki negatif yönlü korelasyonel ilişki, metin işleme süreçlerinin çoğunlukla tek bir düzeyde kaldığını ve bütünleştirici geçişlerin gerçekleştirilemediğini ortaya koymaktadır. Ayrıca cinsiyet ve metin türüne bağlı ayrışmalar bulunmaktadır. Sonuçlar, ana düşünce öğretiminin öğrencilerin bilişsel özellikleri, metinsel özellikler ve metin işlemleme aşamalarıyla ilişkilendirilerek ele alınabileceğini göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Okuduğunu anlama
• ana fikir
• metin tabanı
• durum modeli

Kaynakça

1. Acar-Erdol, T., & Akin-Arikan, Ç. (2022). Gender gap in reading achievement: the mediating role of metacognitive strategies and reading-related attitudes. Social Psychology of Education, 25(2), 537-566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-022-09692-9
2. Afflerbach, P. P. (1990). The influence of prior knowledge on expert readers’ main idea construction strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 25(1), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.2307/747986
3. Algül, Ö. & Bozkurt, B. Ü. (2021). Okuduğunu anlama sürecinde çıkarım becerisine ilişkin belirlemeler. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (53), 175-204. https://doi.org/10.9779/pauefd.787770
4. Baumann, J. F. (1984). The effectiveness of a direct instruction paradigm for teaching main idea comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(1), 93–115. https://doi.org/10.2307/747654
5. Baydık, B. (2011). Okuma güçlüğü olan öğrencilerin üstbilişsel okuma stratejilerini kullanımı ve öğretmenlerinin okuduğunu anlama öğretim uygulamalarının incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 36(162), 301-319.
6. Bortolussi, M., Dixon, P., & Sopčák, P. (2010). Gender and reading. Poetics, 38(3), 299-318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2010.03.004
7. Bridge, C. A., Belmore, S. M., Moskow, S. P., Cohen, S. S., & Matthews, P. D. (1984). Topicalization and memory for main ideas in prose. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16(1), 61-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/1086296840954
8. Brown, A. L. & Day, J. D. (1983). Macrorules for summarizing texts: The development of expertise. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(83)80002-4

9. van den Broek, P., Lynch, J. S., Näslund, J., Ievers-Landis, C. E., & Verduin, K. (2003). The development of comprehension of main ideas in narratives: Evidence from the selection of titles. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 707–718. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.707
10. Butterfuss, R., McCarthy, K. S., Orcutt, E., Kendeou, P., & McNamara, D. S. (2024). Identification of main ideas in expository texts: selection versus deletion. Reading and Writing, 37(3), 757-785. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10431-5
11. Carriedo, N. & Alonso-Tapia, J. (1996). Main idea comprehension: Training teachers and effects on students. Journal of Research in Reading, 19(2), 128–153. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.1996.tb00099.x
12. Catts, H. W., Hogan, T. P., & Fey, M. E. (2003). Subgrouping poor readers on the basis of individual differences in reading-related abilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36(2), 151–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940303600208
13. Çetinkaya, Ç., Yıldırım, K. & Ateş, S., (2013). Anlam kurmanın zor ve önemli bir becerisi: Ana fikir. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, 9(3), 188-210.
14. Ekorini, P. Z. (2020). Analysis on students’ difficulties of finding main idea of a passage. Dharma Pendidikan, 15(2), 72–82. https://doi.org/10.69866/dp.v15i2.95
15. Flores, M. M., & Ganz, J. B. (2007). Effectiveness of direct instruction for teaching statement inference, use of facts, and analogies to students with developmental disabilities and reading delays. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 22(4), 244–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576070220040601
16. Gültekin-Pala, S. & Kanık-Uysal, P. (2024). Ana fikir sorularına verilen cevapların okur-tepki teorisi bağlamında değerlendirilmesi. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 22(3), 2097-2122. https://doi.org/10.37217/tebd.1528981
17. Hare, V. C., Rabinowitz, M., & Schieble, K. M. (1989). Text effects on main idea comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 24(1), 72–88. https://doi.org/10.2307/748011
18. İlter, I. (2018). Zayıf okuyucuların okuduğunu anlama becerilerinin geliştirilmesinde ana fikir belirleme becerisinin öğretimi. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Özel Eğitim Dergisi, 19(2), 303-334. https://doi.org/10.21565/ozelegitimdergisi.315887
19. Jitendra, A. K., Kay Hoppes, M., & Xin, Y. P. (2000). Enhancing main idea comprehension for students with learning problems: The role of a summarization strategy and self-monitoring instruction. The Journal of Special Education, 34(3), 127-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246690003400302
20. Johnston, P., & Afflerbach, P. (1985). The process of constructing main ideas from text. Cognition and Instruction, 2(3–4), 207–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.1985.9648917
21. Kanık-Uysal, P. & Bayrak-Özmutlu, E. (2022). Türkçe eğitiminde ana fikir öğretimine ilişkin bir inceleme. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(36), 1336-1367. https://doi.org/10.35675/befdergi.1052948
22. Kanık-Uysal, P. & Gültekin-Pala, S. (2022). Ana fikri bulma: Öğretmen ve öğrenciler neler yapıyor? Neden zorlanıyor? Okuma Yazma Eğitimi Araştırmaları, 10(1), 44-66. https://doi.org/10.35233/oyea.1112647
23. Kedek, S. (2024). Metin yapısı farkındalığının ana düşünceyi belirlemeye etkisi [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi.
24. Kendeou, P., & van den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 35(7), 1567–1577. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193491
25. Kırnık, D. & Erdem, İ. (2023). Temel eğitimde ana fikir öğretimi uygulamaları. Ana Dili Egitimi Dergisi, 11(2), 363-376. https://doi.org/10.16916/aded.1182927
26. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological review, 95(2), 163-182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163
27. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.
28. Kintsch, W. & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363–394. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363
29. Kuşdemir, Y. & Katrancı, M., (2016). Okumada kaygı ve anlama: ana fikri bulamıyorum öğretmenim! Eğitim ve Bilim, 41(183), 251-266. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2016.4951
30. Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2012). Science text comprehension: Drawing, main idea selection, and summarizing as learning strategies. Learning and Instruction, 22(1), 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.05.005
31. Lietz, P. (2006). A meta-analysis of gender differences in reading achievement at the secondary school level. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 32(4), 317-344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2006.10.002
32. Logan, S. & Johnston, R. (2010) Investigating Gender Differences in Reading. Educational Review, 62, 175-187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131911003637006
33. Lord, K. M. (2015). Determining the main idea: Instructional strategies that work. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 51(3), 138-142.
34. Miller, C. A., Darch, C. B., Flores, M. M., Shippen, M. E., & Hinton, V. (2011). Main idea identification with students with mild intellectual disabilities and specific learning disabilities: A comparison of explicit and basal instructional approaches. Journal of Direct Instruction, 11(1), 15–29. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ943049
35. Mínguez, R., Gómez-Marí, I., & Sanz-Cervera, P. (2020). Interventions for improving reading comprehension in children with ASD: A systematic review. Behavioral Sciences, 11(1), 2-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs11010003
36. Özdemir, Y. & Kıroğlu, K. (2019). Okuduğunu anlama becerilerinin gelişimine uzamsal bir bakış. Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(1), 85-124. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/amauefd/article/472195
37. Parlak, B. & Doğan, N. (2014). Dereceli puanlama anahtarı ve puanlama anahtarından elde edilen puanların uyum düzeyleri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 29(29-2), 189-197. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/hunefd/article/101815
38. Pilten, G. (2007). Ana fikir bulma stratejisi öğretiminin ana fikir bulma ve okuduğunu anlamaya etkisi [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. Gazi Üniversitesi.
39. Rosén, M. (2001). Gender differences in reading performance on documents across countries. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 14(1-2), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007995107442
40. Stevens, R. J. (1988). Effects of strategy training on the identification of the main idea of expository passages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 21. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.1.21
41. Stevens, R. J., Slavin, R. E., & Farnish, A. M. (1991). The effects of cooperative learning and direct instruction in reading comprehension strategies on main idea identification. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 8-16. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.83.1.8
42. Stevens, E. A. (2018). The effects of a text structure and paraphrasing intervention on the main idea generation and reading comprehension of struggling readers in grades 4 and 5 [Doctoral dissertation]. The University of Texas at Austin.
43. Stevens, E. A. & Vaughn, S. (2021). Using paraphrasing and text structure instruction to support main idea generation. Teaching Exceptional Children, 53(4), 300-308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059920958738
44. Stevens, E. A., Park, S., & Vaughn, S. (2019). A review of summarizing and main idea interventions for struggling readers in Grades 3 through 12: 1978–2016. Remedial and Special Education, 40(3), 131–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517749940
45. Syed, M., & Nelson, S. C. (2015). Guidelines for establishing reliability when coding narrative data. Emerging Adulthood, 3(6), 375‐387. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696815587648
46. Shelton, A., Lemons, C. J., & Wexler, J. (2020). Supporting main idea identification and text summarization in middle school co-taught classes. Intervention in School and Clinic, 56(4), 217–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220944380
47. Tomitch, L. M. B., Lodhia, V., Neumann, D., Foroushani, N., & Waldie, K. E. (2025). Individual differences in main idea identification: An EEG study of monolinguals and bilinguals with dyslexia. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728925100321
48. Toonder, S., & Sawyer, B. E. (2021). The impact of adaptive computer-assisted instruction on reading comprehension: Identifying the main idea. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(5), 1336–1347. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12573
49. Uğur, F. (2017). Ortaokul 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin bilgilendirici metin yapısı unsurlarını belirleme düzeyleri. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 14(39), 200-222. https://doi.org/10.14520/adyusbd.852
50. Uzun, G. L., Bozkurt, Ü., & Erdoğan, T. (2011). Okuma süreci, okuma çıktıları ve yaratıcı okuma: İlköğretim öğrencileri üzerine gözlemler. G. L. Uzun ve Ü. Bozkurt (Ed.), Theoretical and applied researches on Turkish language teaching (pp. 75-99)-. Die BlueEule.
51. Vaughn, S., Klingner, J. K., Swanson, E., Boardman, A., Roberts, G., Mohammed, S. S., & Stillman-Spisak, S. J. (2011). Efficacy of collaborative strategic reading with middle school students. American Educational Research Journal, 48(4), 938–964. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831211410305
52. Wang, D. (2009). Factors affecting the comprehension of global and local main idea. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 39(2), 34–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2009.10850371
53. Wilawan, P. (2012). Fostering main idea comprehension among EFL learners through cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Journal of Education and Practice, 3(12), 82–91. https://ijhss.thebrpi.org/journals/Vol_2_No_14_Special_Issue_July_2012/6.pdf
54. Williams, J. P. (1986). Teaching children to identify the main idea of expository texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.2307/747838
55. Williams, J. P. (1988). Identifying main ideas: A basic aspect of reading comprehension Topics in Language Disorders, 8(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/00011363-198806000-00003