Eight Readers Reading: The Intertextual Links of Proficient Readers Reading Multiple Passages

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Wiley and International Reading Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Reading Research Quarterly. Eight readers reading: The intertextual links of proficient readers reading multiple passages T his study is about 8 readers reading. It focuses on the intertextual links these readers made reading across five passages. I begin by presenting background information about the study: the forces that motivated it, the approaches to intertextuality that inform it, and which of these approaches it builds upon and extends. I then present an analysis of the intertextual links made by the 8 readers, which illustrates how a cognitive construction of intertextuality helps us understand the types of links readers make across multiple texts. Finally, implications of these 8 readers' link making are discussed. Motivating forcesThis study was motivated by four forces, all of which reflect a concern with the single-passage paradigm that is deeply embedded in the way we view and practice reading. Acknowledging these forces shows how the study relates to problems articulated by others, and how the study builds on related work in addressing these problems. The first force comes from the practice of reading in schools, where reading lessons, instructional strategies, and postreading discussions have largely evolved around a single passage. Even though literatureand project-based unit approaches have long advanced the need for teaching students how to read across multiple texts, the evidence to date indicates that (a) very little of this instruction occurs in classrooms (e.g., Schmidt et al., 1985), (b) very few instructional strategies explicitly orient students to make cross-textual links (Crismore, 1985), (c) almost none of the questions in commercially prepared materials prompt students to make connections among texts (Akyol, 1994), (d) even when prompted to make links among texts, students make very few links (Rogers, 1988), (e) almost no coverage in professional materials is given to how to explicitly help students read across multiple texts (Lipson, Valencia, Wixson, & Peters, 1993), and (f) the curricular environment of most schools provides little support for sustained thinking about how texts relate (Wolf, 1988).The second force comes from reading assessment, where there is a small but growing interest in assessing readers' understandings of multiple passages (e.g., Hartman & Pearson, 1990). This notion of "intertextual" assessment stands in sharp contrast to conventional reading tests, which measure comprehension of individual passages.The third force comes from reading research, where there is concern that the instruments used in studies to measur...

Does concept-oriented reading instruction increase strategy use and conceptual learning from text?

“…A conceptual theme is a set of principles that defines a knowledge domain (Alexander, 1992) and can be understood through multiple texts and genre (Hartman, 1995). Conceptual learning includes several types of acquisition consisting of particular features, propositions, and principles in a domain (Chi et al, 1994).…”

Thinking like a Historian: College Students' Reading of Multiple Historical Documents

“…Her reliance on surface-level strategies (such as memorization of events) that match her heuristics and beliefs about history would deter her from grasping the big picture. She would gain only disjointed knowledge, and would find it difficult to draw inferences across texts, typical of the majority of high school students who pay less attention to cross-textual ties than to within-text or outside-of-text ties, as shown in Hartmann's (1995) intertextuality study. Thus, as depicted by this case, these theories can work in concert to explain an individual's approach towards making sense from text.…”

“…Intertextuality seems to be a consequence and cause of engaged reading, and so is a complication only in the sense that it is not always a part of instruction or text-based research. Engaged readers negotiate textual understandings by linking information both within and outside of the text(s), broadly defined, that they are reading (Hartmann, 1995). These sorts of discrepancies may motivate or trigger epistemological shifts.…”

“…Hartmann (1995) studied eight advanced-level high school students as they read five historical passages that provided a rich intertextual environment. He found that students, when asked to do so, were capable of making exogenous links (to personal experiences or knowledge), primary endogenous links (within text), and secondary endogenous links (across text) to create textual meaning.…”

Seeking refuge in literacy from a scorpion bite

“…Teachers know that students have to be taught to read beyond a single text. Hartman (1995) defi nes intertextuality as, 'a cognitive construction, where readers absorb, transpose, and build a mosaic of intersecting texts' (p. 521). There can be two types of intertextual links: linking ideas, people and events, and making social, cultural, political, and historical connections.…”