The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.

Original Article

Linguistic knowledge, fluency and meta‐cognitive knowledge as components of reading comprehension in adolescent low achievers: differences between monolinguals and bilinguals

Mirjam Trapman

Corresponding Author

University of Amsterdam, , The Netherlands

Address for correspondence: Mirjam Trapman, University of Amsterdam, Spuistraat 210, 1012VT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. E‐mail:

m.j.w.trapman@uva.nl

Search for more papers by this author
Amos van Gelderen

University of Amsterdam, , The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author
Roel van Steensel

University of Amsterdam, , The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author
Erik van Schooten

University of Amsterdam, , The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author
Jan Hulstijn

University of Amsterdam, , The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 28 August 2012
Cited by: 9

Abstract

In this study we investigate the role of linguistic knowledge, fluency and meta‐cognitive knowledge in Dutch reading comprehension of monolingual and bilingual adolescent academic low achievers in the Netherlands. Results show that these components are substantially associated with reading comprehension. However, their role appears to be different for the monolingual and bilingual low achievers. There are interactions between knowledge and fluency components with membership of the monolingual or bilingual group of low achievers, indicating that knowledge is more important in explaining reading comprehension of bilinguals, whereas fluency is more important in explaining the monolinguals’ reading comprehension. Explanations of this difference between monolingual and bilingual low achievers are discussed.

Number of times cited: 9

  • , Investigating Linguistically Diverse Adolescents’ Literacy Trajectories Using Latent Transition Modeling, Reading Research Quarterly, 54, 1, (81-107), (2018).
  • , Indian students learning to read English: an analysis using the simple view of reading, Journal of Research in Reading, 41, 2, (312-328), (2017).
  • , Writing proficiency level and writing development of low-achieving adolescents: the roles of linguistic knowledge, fluency, and metacognitive knowledge, Reading and Writing, (2018).
  • , Writing with peer response using different types of genre knowledge: Effects on linguistic features and revisions of sixth-grade writers, The Journal of Educational Research, 111, 1, (66), (2018).
  • , The role text structure inference skill plays for eighth graders’ expository text comprehension, Reading and Writing, 10.1007/s11145-017-9801-x, 31, 9, (2065-2094), (2017).
  • , Supporting Language and Literacy Development for Additional Language Learners with Disabilities, The Wiley Handbook of Diversity in Special Education, (183-205), (2017).
  • , Expository text comprehension in secondary school: for which readers does knowledge of connectives contribute the most?, Journal of Research in Reading, 40, S1, (S42-S65), (2016).
  • , The role of word decoding, vocabulary knowledge and meta‐cognitive knowledge in monolingual and bilingual low‐achieving adolescents' reading comprehension, Journal of Research in Reading, 39, 3, (312-329), (2014).