The Role of Hot and Cool Executive Functioning in Pre-Readers Story Comprehension
and Response to Comprehension Intervention
Andrea DeBruin-Parecki
Kelly B. Cartwright
LRA 2014
Reading comprehension is essential for academic success, yet a significant proportion of
children do not achieve basic comprehension proficiency by fourth grade. The NAEP Reading
Assessment measures reading and comprehension skills by having students read age-appropriate
passages and answer related questions. The cognitive targets being assessed are the
understanding of written text, the development and interpretation of meaning, and the
appropriate use of meaning in regard to the type of text, purpose and situation, all skills directly
related to reading comprehension. The 2013 NAEP Report results reported no improvement in
reading for 4th grade students (Anne E. Casey, January 2014).
Numerous cognitive skills predict successful reading comprehension, such as executive
skills (Cartwright, 2012; Sesma, Mahone, Levine, Eason, & Cutting, 2009), Theory of Mind
(ToM) (Cartwright & Guajardo, 2011; Lysaker, Tonge, Gauson, & Miller, 2011), oral language
comprehension (Nation, Cocksey, Taylor, & Bishop, 2010; Nation & Snowling, 2004), and
vocabulary (Coyne et al., 2010, Muter, Hulme, Snowling, & Stevenson, 2004; Ouellette, 2006).
Additionally, explicit instruction in inferential comprehension strategies, such as predicting,
inferencing, and making connections to prior knowledge, produces significant gains in reading
comprehension in elementary students (Bianco et al., 2012, Duffy et al., 1987; Shanahan, et al.,
2010) and narrative comprehension in preschool students (DeBruin-Parecki & Squibb, 2011;
1
Roberts, 2013; Van Kleeck 2008). Literal comprehension instruction often includes explicit
discussion of vocabulary during story reading (Zucker, Cabell, Justice, Pentimonti, & Kaderavek,
2013), which produces significant increases in vocabulary in elementary students (Brett,
Rothlein, & Hurley, 1996) and in preschool students (Blewitt, Rump, Shealy, & Cook, 2009;
Strasser, Larraín, & Lissi, 2013); these are important findings, given the strong predictive
relation between reading comprehension and vocabulary (Muter, et al., 2004; Ouellette, 2006).
However, comprehension instruction of any type, literal or inferential, occurs infrequently in
preschool and early elementary school, when curricula focus predominantly on letter- and wordlevel skills (Duke & Carlisle, 2011; Hawken, Johnston, & McDonnell, 2008; Pressley, 2002).
Furthermore, when it occurs, comprehension instruction in preschool classrooms focuses
predominantly on literal comprehension rather than on inferential strategies that can be
generalized to new situations (Zucker, et al., 2013).
In order to address problems with comprehension in later elementary school, researchers
must partner with practitioners to better understand how to foster inferential comprehension
skills earlier in development (DeBruin & Squibb, 2011; Duke & Carlisle, 2010; Shanahan, et al.,
2010). Unfortunately, limited work has been done on teaching comprehension strategies to
preschoolers, in examining the role of cognitive contributors to narrative comprehension in
preschoolers, or in the effects of cognitive skills on preschoolers’ response to explicit, inferential
comprehension interventions.
To be able to accomplish this work, many pieces have to be put into place including a
comprehension strategy curriculum. The current study used Enhancing Preschoolers in
Comprehension (EPIC), a supplementary comprehension strategy curriculum that occurred over
a ten-week period twice a week for a weekly total of three hours of whole group instruction and
2
linked small group activities (DeBruin-Parecki, 2013; DeBruin-Parecki & Pribesh, in press;
DeBruin-Parecki & Vaughn, 2014; DeBruin-Parecki & Squibb, 2011). The curriculum is
designed to have the teacher focus on instruction of four related comprehension skills for prereaders: Connection to Life (activating background knowledge), Predicting (inferencing),
Retelling (summarizing), and Increasing vocabulary. There are four units in EPIC: Friendship,
Imagination, Other People/Other Places, and Change Over Time. For further information about
EPIC including choice of focus strategies and how lesson plans were constructed, see DeBruinParecki & Pribesh, in press; DeBruin-Parecki & Squibb, 2011.
To be able to examine the idea that cognitive contributors have a link to narrative
comprehension in preschoolers or compare the effects of cognitive skills on preschoolers’
response to a supplementary inferential comprehension strategy curriculum, literal
comprehension instruction, and typical comprehension instruction, a study was launched.
Researchers were most interested in assessing both the impact of hot and cool executive skills on
the effectiveness of a supplementary inferential comprehension strategy curriculum in preschool
classrooms, and the differential effects of the types of comprehension instruction.
Method
Two university researchers partnered with three masters level university lab school
preschool teachers who delivered inferential (EPIC), literal, or typical comprehension instruction
to their classes for ten weeks. The theme for instruction across all classes was Friendship. The
study had a quasi-experimental, pre-test posttest control group design. Children (n = 49; mean
age = 4 years, 7 months; 35.8% minority students, 41.5% girls) included 17 3-year-olds, 17 4year-olds, and 15 5-year-olds. Children were pretested on executive skills (cognitive flexibility,
inhibition, and working memory), ToM, and receptive and expressive vocabulary, using the
3
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) (Dunn & Dunn, 2007) and Expressive Vocabulary
Test (EVT) (Williams, 2007), respectively. Additionally, children’s narrative comprehension
skills were assessed with the Early Literacy Skills Assessment (ELSA) (DeBruin-Parecki, 2004).
Posttest measures of expressive vocabulary and narrative comprehension were repeated,
dependent measures.
Pre-Intervention Results
One-way ANOVAs by age group (3-year-olds, 4-year-olds, and 5-year-olds) indicated 5year-olds scored significantly higher than 3-year-olds on cognitive flexibility, F (2, 45) = 4.57, p
< .05; similarly, 5-year-olds scored higher than 3- and 4-year-olds on working memory, F (2, 44)
= 5.44, p < .01. No other age differences emerged. All executive skills and ToM were
significantly, positively related to narrative comprehension, as expected. Cognitive flexibility
predicted significant variance in expressive vocabulary (7%, p < .05) beyond all other pretest
variables and age, consistent with comprehension findings in older children and adults
(Cartwright, 2002, 2007; Cartwright et al. 2010). ANCOVAs indicated children high on
cognitive flexibility or ToM had significantly higher expressive vocabulary than children low on
these variables at pretest, F (1, 39) = 5.26, p < .05 and F (1, 36) = 9.56, p < .01, but no similar
effects on comprehension emerged at pretest.
Post-Intervention Results
Repeated measures ANCOVAs revealed inferential comprehension instruction produced
significant gains in expressive vocabulary and narrative comprehension, even when all pretest
variables were controlled, F (2, 26) = 6.25, p < .01 and F (1, 25) = 5.31, p < .05, respectively
(see Figure 1); and literal comprehension instruction produced significant gains in expressive
vocabulary over the typical instruction control, F (2, 26) = 6.25, p < .01. Moreover, children in
4
the inferential comprehension condition who were high on cognitive flexibility at pretest made
significantly greater gains in comprehension than those low on cognitive flexibility (who made
no significant comprehension gains; see Figure 2). These results held, even when expressive
vocabulary was controlled, F (2, 24) = 4.99, p < .05. Similar effects on responsiveness to
inferential comprehension instruction emerged for ToM.
5
Discussion
These data indicate cognitive flexibility and theory of mind are important correlates of
expressive vocabulary and precursors to narrative comprehension development; further, these
skills appear to enable preschoolers’ successful response to effective inferential comprehension
instruction such as the comprehension strategy instruction that composes the content of EPIC.
Because cognitive flexibility and ToM can be assessed briefly, they may provide important
screening tools to indicate preschoolers’ readiness to respond to comprehension strategy
instruction in preschool classrooms. Furthermore, executive skills and ToM can be taught,
yielding improvements in reading comprehension in elementary students (Cartwright, 2002;
Lysaker, et al., 2011). Thus, future research should explore the possibility of both including
supplementary focused comprehension strategy curricula, and training preschoolers on these
skills to prepare them for effective comprehension strategy instruction.
6
References
Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2014, January). Early Reading Proficiency in the United States.
Retrieved November 21, 2014 from
http://www.aecf.org/~/media/Pubs/Initiatives/KIDS%20COUNT/E/EarlyReadingProficie
ncy/EarlyReadingProficiency2014.pdf
Bianco, M., Pellenq, C., Lambert, E., Bressoux, P., Lima, L. & Doyen, A. (2012). Impact of
early code-skill and oral comprehension training on reading achievement in the first
grade. Journal of Research in Reading, 34 (4), 427-455.
Blewitt, P., Rump, K. M., Shealy, S. E., & Cook, S. A. (2009). Shared book reading: When and
how questions affect young children’s word learning. Journal of Educational Psychology,
101(2), 294-304.
Brett, A., Rothlein, L., & Hurley, M. (1996). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories
and explanations of target words. The Elementary School Journal, 96, 415-422.
Cartwright, K. B. (2002). Cognitive development and reading: The relation of reading-specific
multiple classification skill to reading comprehension in elementary school
children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 56-63.
Cartwright, K. B. (2007). The contribution of graphophonological-semantic flexibility to
reading comprehension in college students: Implications for a less simple view of
reading. Journal of Literacy Research, 39, 173-193.
Cartwright, K. B. (2012). Insights from cognitive neuroscience: The importance of executive
function for early reading development and education. Special Issue on Neuroscience
Perspectives - Early Education and Development, 23, 1-13.
7
Cartwright, K. B., & Guajardo, N. R. (2011, March). A longitudinal study of the role of theory
of mind in elementary students’ metacognition and reading comprehension. Poster
presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development,
Montreal, Canada.
Cartwright, K. B, Marshall, T. R., Dandy, K., & Isaac, M. C. (2010). The development of
graphophonological-semantic cognitive flexibility and its contribution to reading
comprehension in beginning readers. Journal of Cognition and Development, 11, 61-85.
Coyne, M.D., McCoach, D. B., Loftus. S., Zipoli, R., Ruby, M., Creveccouer, Y. C., & Kapp, S.
(2010). Direct and extended vocabulary instruction in kindergarten: Investigating transfer
effects. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 3(2), 93-120.
DeBruin-Parecki, A. (2004). The Early Literacy Skills Assessment (ELSA): Violet’s
Adventure/La Aventura de Violetta (Carmen Magana, translator). Ypsilanti, Michigan:
High/Scope Press.
DeBruin-Parecki, A. (April 2013). The value of pre-reader comprehension strategy instruction:
Giving young children tools to build understanding. Paper presented at the International
Reading Association Conference: San Antonio, Texas.
DeBruin-Parecki, A. & Pribesh, S. (in press). Evening the playing field: The importance of teaching
all children comprehension strategies. In A. DeBruin, A. Van Kleeck, & Gear, S.
Pre-Reader Comprehension: An Essential Building Block to Becoming a Successful
Reader. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.
8
DeBruin-Parecki, A. & Squibb, K. (2011). Promoting at-risk preschool children’s
comprehension through research-based strategy instruction. Reading Horizons, 51 (1),
41-62.
DeBruin-Parecki, A., & Vaughn, E. S. (April 2014). The Value of Comprehension Strategy
Instruction for Head Start Children. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association: Philadelphia. PA.
Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., Sivan, E., Rackliffe, G., Book, C., Meloth, M. S….& Bassiri, D.
(1987). Effects of explaining the reasoning associated with using reading strategies.
Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 347-368.
Duke, N. K., & Carlisle, J. F. (2011). The development of comprehension. In M. L. Kamil, P. D.
Pearson, E. B. Moje, and P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research, Vol. IV
(pp. 199-228). London: Routledge.
Dunn, L. M., Dunn, D. M (2007). PPVT-4: Peabody picture vocabulary test. Minneapolis, MN:
Pearson Assessments.
Hawken, L. S., Johnston, S. S., & McDonnell, A. P. (2005). Emerging literacy views and
practices: Results from a national survey of Head Start teachers. Topics in Early
Childhood Special Education, 25, 232-242.
Lysaker, J T., Tonge, C., Gauson, D., & Miller, A. (2011). Reading and social imagination:
What relationally oriented reading instruction can do for children. Reading Psychology,
32, 520-566.
Muter, V., Hulme, C., Snowling, M., & Stevenson, J. (2004). Phonemes, rimes, vocabulary, and
grammatical skills as foundations of early reading development: Evidence from a
longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 40, 665-681.
9
Nation, K., Cocksey, J., Taylor, J. S. H., & Bishop, D. V. M. (2010). A longitudinal
investigation of early reading and language skills in children with poor reading
comprehension. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51, 1031-1039.
Nation, K. & Snowling, M. J. (2004). Beyond phonological skills: Broader language sklls
contribute to the development of reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 27, 342-356.
Ouellette, G. P. (2006). What’s meaning got to do with it: The role of vocabulary in word
reading and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 554-566.
Pressley, M. (2002). Metacognition and self-regulated comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup & S. J.
Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (Chapter 13, pp. 291309). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Roberts, K. L. (2013). Comprehension strategy instruction during parent-child shared reading:
An intervention study. Literacy Research and Instruction, 52, 106-129.
Sesma, H. W., Mahone, E. M., Levine, T., Eason, S. H., & Cutting, L. (2009). The contribution
of executive skills to reading comprehension. Child Neuropsychology, 15, 232-246.
Shanahan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, C., Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Schatschneider, C., &
Torgesen, J. (2010). Improving reading comprehension in kindergarten through 3rd
grade: A practice guide (NCEE 2010-4038). Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S.
Department of Education. Retrieved from whatworks.ed.gov/publications/practiceguides.
Strasser, K., Larraín, A., & Lissi, M. R. (2013). Effects of storybook reading style on
comprehension: The role of word elaboration and coherence questions. Early Education
and Development, 24, 616-639.
10
Van Kleeck, A. (2008). Providing preschool foundations for later reading comprehension: The
importance of and ideas for targeting inferencing in storybook-sharing interventions.
Psychology in the Schools, 45(7), 627-643.
Williams, K. T. (2007). EVT-2: Expressive vocabulary test. Minneapolis, Minn: Pearson
Assessments.
Zucker, T. A., Cabell, S. Q., Justice, L. M., Pentimonti, J. M., & Kaderavek, J. N. (2013). The
role of frequent, interactive prekindergarten shared reading in the longitudinal
development of language and literacy skills. Developmental Psychology, 49, 1425-1439.
11