Influence de la structure textuelle et de la redondance sur la lisibilité
Mots-clés :
Structure textuelle, Redondance textuelle, Lisibilité, Vitesse de lecture, Enseignement primaireRésumé
L’auteur analyse les résultats relatifs à la compréhension et à la vitesse de lecture de deux groupes d’élèves de 5e et 6e année totalisant 483 sujets. Le matériel utilisé était constitué de deux ensembles de textes représentant différents types de textes caractérisés à partir de la taxonomie de B.J.F. Meyer. Ces textes comportaient une version de base et une version modifiée de façon à ce qu’on puisse mesurer à la fois l’effet du type de texte et de la redondance sur la lisibilité. Les résultats ont révélé que le type de texte et la redondance influencent l’un et l’autre et la compréhension et la vitesse de lecture. De plus, ces deux facteurs interagissent entre eux et avec l’habileté générale à lire pour influencer la vitesse de lecture. En regard des indices de lisibilité obtenus en appliquant la formule de Henry, on a pu démontrer que la lisibilité peut varier en fonction des types de textes, alors que les variables prises en compte par la formule sont constantes. Les résultats conduisent à des suggestions pour la didactique de la lecture et pour la recherche dans le domaine des taxonomies textuelles et de leurs incidences sur la lisibilité.
Statistiques
Références
Anderson, R.C. (1977). The notion of schemata and the educational enterprise: General discussion of the conference. In R.C. Anderson, R.J. Spiro, & W.E. Montague (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. [page range unclear in scan]). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Anderson, R.C. (1984). Role of the reader's schema in comprehension, learning, and memory. In R.C. Anderson, J. Osborn, & R.J. Tierney (Eds.), Learning to read in American schools: Basal readers and content texts (pp. 243–257). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Anderson, T. (1980). Study strategies and adjunct aids. In R.J. Spiro, B.C. Bruce, & W.F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 483-502). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ausubel, D.P. (1967). Learning theory and classroom practice. Toronto: OISE.
Bartlett, F.C. (1932). Remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Beaugrande, R.-A. de, & Dressler, W.U. (1981). Introduction to text linguistics. New York: Longman.
Bereiter, C. (1978). Discourse type, schema, and strategy: A view from the standpoint of instructional design. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association (joint symposium with International Reading Association), Toronto.
Binkley, M.R. (1988). New ways of assessing text difficulty. In B.L. Zakaluk & S.J. Samuels (Eds.), Readability: Its past, present and future (pp. 98-120). Newark: International Reading Association.
Bransford, J.D. (1984). Schema activation and schema acquisition: Comments on Richard C. Anderson's remarks. In R.C. Anderson, J. Osborn, & R.J. Tierney (Eds.), Learning to read in American schools: Basal readers and content texts (pp. 259-272). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Calfee, R.C., & Curley, R. (1984). Structure of prose in the content areas. In J. Flood (Ed.), Understanding reading comprehension (pp. 161-180). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Chall,J.S. (1958). Readability: An appraisal of research and application. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
Chall, J.S. (1988). The beginning years. In B.L. Zakaluk & S.J. Samuels (Eds.), Readability: Its past, present and future (pp. 2–13). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Dale, E., & Chall, J.S. (1948). A formula for predicting readability. Columbus: Bureau of Educational Research, Ohio State University.
Davidson, A., & Green, G. (1988) Linguistic complexity and text comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Davison, A., & Kantor, R.N. (1982). On the failure of readability formulas to define readable texts: A case study from adaptations. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 187–209.
De Landsheere, G. (1963). Pour une application des tests de lisibilité de Flesch à la langue française. Le travail humain, 26, 141–154.
De Landsheere, G. (1973). Le test de closure. Paris: Nathan.
Fillmore, C.J. (1968). The case for case. In E. Bach & R.T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in linguistic theory (pp. 1–88). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Flesch, R. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32, 221–233.
Freedle, R., & Hale, G. (1979). Acquisition of new comprehension schemata for content area prose by transfer of a narrative schema. In R.O. Freedle (Ed.), New directions in discourse processing (Vol. 2, pp. 121-135). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Fry, E.B. (1968). A readability formula that saves time.Journal of Reading, 2, 513-516.
Fry, E. (1977). Fry's readability graph: Clarification, validity and extension to level 17. Journal of Reading, 20, 242-252.
Gray, W.S., & Leary, B.W. (1935). What makes a book readable. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Grimes,J.E. (1975). The thread of discourse. La Haye: Mouton.
Gunning, R. (1952). The technique of clear writing. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Henry, G. (1975). Comment mesurer la lisibilite. Paris: Nathan.
Horowitz, R. (1987). Rhetorical structure in discours processing. In R. Horowitz & S.J. Samuels (Eds.), Comprehending oral and written language (pp. 117-160). New York: Academic Press.
Kintsch, W. (1977). Memory and cognition. New York:John Wiley.
Kintsch, W. (1982). Text representations. In W. Otto & S. White (Eds.), Reading expository material (pp. 87-101). New York: Academic Press.
Kintsch, W., & Miller, J.R. (1984). Readability: A view from cognitive psychology. I J. Flood (Ed.), Understanding reading comprehension (pp. 220-232). Newark, DE International Reading Association.
Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394.
Kintsch, W., & Vipond, D. (1979). Reading comprehension and readability i educational practice and psychological theory. In L.G. Nillson (Ed.), Memory process (pp. 329-365). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kobasigawa, A., Lacasse, M.A., & MacDonald, V.A. (1988). Use of headings by children for text search. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 20, 1, 50-63.
Lively, B.A., & Pressey, S.L. (1923). A method for measuring the "vocabulary burden of textbooks. Educational Administration and Supervision, 9, 389-398.
Mandler, J.M. (1978). A code in the node: The use of a story schema in retrieval Discourse Processes, 1, 14-35.
Meyer, B.J.F. (1975). The organization of prose and its effects on memory. New York: American Elsevier.
Meyer, B.J.F. (1984). Organizational aspects of text: Effects on reading comprehen sion and applications for the classroom. In J. Flood (Ed.), Promoting readin comprehension (pp. 113-138). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Meyer, B.J.F. (1985). Prose analysis: Purposes, procedures and problems. In B.K Britton &J.B. Black (Eds.), Understanding expository text (pp. 269-304). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Meyer, B.J.F., Brandt, D.M., & Bluth, G.J. (1980). Use of top-level structure in text: Key for reading comprehension of ninth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 74-103.
Meyer, B.J.F., & Freedle, R.O. (1984). Effects of discourse type on recall. America Educational Research Journal, 21, 121-143.
Miller, G.A. (1951). Language and communication. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Miller, G.A. (1953). What is information measurement? American Psychologist, 8, 3–11.
Préfontaine, R.R. (1979). Échelle de langage et d’acquisition orthographique. Québec: Le Sablier.
Rabin, A.T. (1988). Determining difficulty levels of text in languages other than English. In B.L. Zakaluk & S.J. Samuels (Eds.), Readability: Its past, present and future (pp. 46-76). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Rothkopf, E.Z. (1982). Adjunct aids and the control of mathemagenic activities during purpositive reading. In O. Wayne & S. White (Eds.), Reading expository material (pp. 109-138). New York, Academic Press.
Rumelhart, D.E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance VI. Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on attention and performance (pp. 573-603). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rumelhart, D.E. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In R.J. Spiro, B.C. Bruce, & W.F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 33-58). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rumelhart, D.E., & Ortony, A. (1977). The representation of knowledge in memory. In R.C. Anderson, R.J. Spiro, & W.E. Montague (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 99-135). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Shannon, C.E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Smith, F. (1982). Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read (3rd ed.). New York: Holt Rinehart.
Spache, G.D. (1953). A new readability formula for primary grade reading materials. Elementary School Journal, 53, 410-413.
Spiro, R.J. (1980). Constructive processes in prose comprehension and recall. In R.J. Spiro, B.C. Bruce, & W.F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp.245-278). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Spiro, B.C. Bruce, & W.F. Brewer (Eds.) , Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 245-278). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Stein, N.L., & Glenn, C.G. (1979). An analysis of story comprehension in elementary school children. In R.O. Freedle (Ed.), New directions in discourse processing (Vol. 2, pp. 53-120). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Taylor, W.L. (1953). Cloze procedure: A new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Quarterly, 30, 415-433.
Voss, J.S., & Bisanz, G.L. (1985). Knowledge and the processing of narrative and expository texts. In B.K. Britton & J.B. Black (Eds.), Understanding expository text (pp. 173-198). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Washburne, C.W., & Vogel, M. (1926). Winnetka graded book list. Chicago: American Library Association.
Zakaluk, B.L. & Samuels, S.J. (1988). Toward a new approach to predicting text comprehensibility. In B.L. Zakaluk & S.J. Samuels (Eds.), Readability: Its past, present and future (pp. 121–144). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Téléchargements
Publié-e
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
Cette œuvre est sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International.
La Revue canadienne de l’éducation utilise la licence CC BY-NC-ND de Creative Commons.
