Understanding Reading Comprehension: Processes and Practices by Wayne Tennent

Author:Wayne Tennent [Tennent, Wayne]
Language: eng
Format: azw3
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Published: 2014-09-29T04:00:00+00:00

Interrogative Inferences

Interrogative inferences were not noted in the list of inference types presented in Chapter 5, and it is not a categorisation highlighted in any previous research. The categorisation has been devised in response to the disconnect between how research has approached inference making and how various reading curricula have viewed it. As noted in Chapter 5, the reading curriculum tends to view inference making as a way to deepen understanding through the exploration of text after the text has been read, whereas the focus of research has been to emphasise the contribution that inference making has to creating a coherent understanding of text while it is being read.

Of course, research does recognise that inferences are made after reading. This is clear in the Kintsch and Rawson (2005) conceptualisation of inference making, where they describe post-reading inference making as taking place in a controlled manner. These types of inference have been categorised generally as elaborative inferences (Cain, 2010; Garnham and Oakhill, 1996; Long et al., 1990). This term does have some descriptive merit, in that inferences made after reading inevitably must elaborate on the general understanding that has been developed (and to re-iterate, we are working from the premise that those inferences that deepen understanding can only be made after coherence has been established). They cannot repeat what has already been established, and it is possible to argue therefore that these inferences will ‘enrich’ (Cain, 2010: 56) our understanding of the text. However, this term will not be used here, and the reasons for this are twofold. The first is theoretical. In the literature, elaborative inferences are presented, it seems, as being of little purpose and of limited value. This is because they are not made while reading and thus do not, on the whole, contribute to the creation of coherence (which, as we know, has been the focus of research). This is discussed more fully below, where I am going to suggest that elaboration is actually a key factor in deepening understanding. As such, while accepting elaborative inferences as a specific type, I am going to focus on elaboration as a pedagogical process.

The second reason for not using elaborative inferences as a category is more explicitly pedagogical, and this is when the term ‘interrogative’ becomes relevant. Interrogation necessarily involves the asking of questions. This is important if we want children to engage with text more deeply. For this to happen we have to ask them questions, and if the children’s reflections on, and perceptions of, the text are to be explored these questions need to provide a springboard for dialogic interaction (we will consider this in more detail in the Practices section of this book); otherwise we will not know what they are thinking, or why they are thinking it.

Now it might be argued, with some justification I think, that readers are asking themselves questions all the time as they attempt simply to achieve coherence. In the previous chapter as we read ‘The boy and his dog’ text presented

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.