An examination of summary writing as a measure of reading comprehension

Martha H. Head, John E. Readence, Ray Buss

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of topic interest, writing ability, and summarization training on seventh‐grade subjects’ ability to summarize a social studies text. In addition, subjects’ performance on a multiple‐choice text was examined in relation to their summaries. These effects were then considered for their concomitant effect on the issue of using summaries to measure reading comprehension. Results indicated that multiple‐choice and summarization measures shared very little overlap in the kinds of text comprehension that they assessed. Additionally, it appeared that each of the three factors investigated had some degree of influence on summarization scores. Recommendations for future research are presented.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-11
Number of pages11
JournalReading Research and Instruction
Volume28
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 1989
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Aptitude
Reading
comprehension
examination
ability
social studies
performance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • Psychology (miscellaneous)

Cite this

An examination of summary writing as a measure of reading comprehension. / Head, Martha H.; Readence, John E.; Buss, Ray.

In: Reading Research and Instruction, Vol. 28, No. 4, 1989, p. 1-11.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Head, Martha H. ; Readence, John E. ; Buss, Ray. / An examination of summary writing as a measure of reading comprehension. In: Reading Research and Instruction. 1989 ; Vol. 28, No. 4. pp. 1-11.
@article{6e371a75dffc4affb889cd5fd4c113b9,
title = "An examination of summary writing as a measure of reading comprehension",
abstract = "This study investigated the effects of topic interest, writing ability, and summarization training on seventh‐grade subjects’ ability to summarize a social studies text. In addition, subjects’ performance on a multiple‐choice text was examined in relation to their summaries. These effects were then considered for their concomitant effect on the issue of using summaries to measure reading comprehension. Results indicated that multiple‐choice and summarization measures shared very little overlap in the kinds of text comprehension that they assessed. Additionally, it appeared that each of the three factors investigated had some degree of influence on summarization scores. Recommendations for future research are presented.",
author = "Head, {Martha H.} and Readence, {John E.} and Ray Buss",
year = "1989",
doi = "10.1080/19388078709557982",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "1--11",
journal = "Literacy Research and Instruction",
issn = "1938-8071",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An examination of summary writing as a measure of reading comprehension

AU - Head, Martha H.

AU - Readence, John E.

AU - Buss, Ray

PY - 1989

Y1 - 1989

N2 - This study investigated the effects of topic interest, writing ability, and summarization training on seventh‐grade subjects’ ability to summarize a social studies text. In addition, subjects’ performance on a multiple‐choice text was examined in relation to their summaries. These effects were then considered for their concomitant effect on the issue of using summaries to measure reading comprehension. Results indicated that multiple‐choice and summarization measures shared very little overlap in the kinds of text comprehension that they assessed. Additionally, it appeared that each of the three factors investigated had some degree of influence on summarization scores. Recommendations for future research are presented.

AB - This study investigated the effects of topic interest, writing ability, and summarization training on seventh‐grade subjects’ ability to summarize a social studies text. In addition, subjects’ performance on a multiple‐choice text was examined in relation to their summaries. These effects were then considered for their concomitant effect on the issue of using summaries to measure reading comprehension. Results indicated that multiple‐choice and summarization measures shared very little overlap in the kinds of text comprehension that they assessed. Additionally, it appeared that each of the three factors investigated had some degree of influence on summarization scores. Recommendations for future research are presented.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33747679948&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33747679948&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/19388078709557982

DO - 10.1080/19388078709557982

M3 - Article

VL - 28

SP - 1

EP - 11

JO - Literacy Research and Instruction

JF - Literacy Research and Instruction

SN - 1938-8071

IS - 4

ER -