Reading fluency performance of elementary-school fifth-grade students
Desempenho em fluência de leitura de escolares do 5º ano do ensino fundamental
Cláudia da Silva; Beatriz Vieira da Fonseca
Abstract
Purpose: to characterize and compare the reading fluency performance of public- and private-school fifth-grade students.
Methods: a total of 44 elementary-school fifth-grade students of both sexes, aged 10 to 11 years, participated in the study and were divided into Group I (GI, with 25 public-school students) and Group II (GII, with 19 private school students). They were submitted to the Assessment of Reading Fluency Performance (ADFLU). The performance analysis was based on the number of correct words per minute, incorrect words per minute, total reading time, and reading speed. The data analysis was made with statistical tests, with significance set at p-value ≤0.05, for the inter- and intra-group comparisons.
Results: in the analysis per group, there was a significant difference in the total reading time between the texts in GI, and in the reading speed between the texts, in GII. In the comparison between the groups, all variables had a significant difference, with a better performance in GII.
Conclusion: the reading fluency performance of public- and private-school fifth-graders was characterized. The performance of the private-school students was superior to that of the public-school students.
Keywords
Resumo
Objetivo: caracterizar e comparar o desempenho em fluência de leitura de escolares do 5º ano do ensino público e privado.
Métodos: participaram deste estudo 44 escolares do 5° ano do ensino fundamental, de ambos os gêneros, com idade entre 10 e 11 anos, divididos em Grupo I (GI) 25 do ensino público e Grupo II (GII) 19 do ensino privado. Os escolares foram submetidos à Avaliação do Desempenho em Fluência de Leitura - ADFLU. A análise do desempenho foi realizada pelo número de palavras corretas por minuto, palavras incorretas por minuto, tempo total de leitura e velocidade de leitura. Para a análise dos dados foi utilizado testes estatísticos com valor de p ≤0,05, para a comparação inter e intragrupo.
Resultados: na análise por grupo, houve diferença significativa para o tempo total de leitura entre os textos em GI e para a velocidade de leitura entre os textos no GII. Na comparação entre os grupos, todas as variáveis apresentaram diferença significativa, com melhor desempenho em GII.
Conclusão: foi possível caracterizar o desempenho em fluência de leitura dos escolares do 5º ano do ensino público e privado, sendo o desempenho dos escolares da rede privada superior aos escolares da rede pública quando comparados.
Palavras-chave
References
. Rasinski TV. Readers who struggle: why many struggles and a modest proposal for improving their reading. Read Teach. 2017;70(5):519-24.
2. Santos AAA, Ferraz AS, Rueda FJM. Relações entre a compreensão de leitura e as habilidades metalinguísticas. Psicol Esc Educ. 2018;22(2):301-9.
3. Gombert JE. Metalinguistic development. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
4. Seabra AG, Dias NM, Montiel JM. Estudo fatorial dos componentes da leitura: velocidade, compreensão e reconhecimento de palavras. Psicol. USF. 2012;17(2):273-83.
5. Aldhanhani ZR, Abu-Ayyash EAS. Theories and research on oral reading fluency: what is needed? Theory Pract Lang Stud. 2020;10(4):379-88.
6. Tighe LE, Schatschneider C. A quantile regression approach to understanding the relations among morphological awareness, vocabulary, and reading comprehension in adult basic education students. J Learn Disabil. 2016;49(4):424-36.
7. Silva C, Rodriguez LM. Reading performance markers of students from public and private elementary school. Braz J Dev. 2021;7(2):17299-314.
8. Yilmaz M, Kadan Ö. An action research aiming to reveal the effects of paired reading on eliminating reading difficulties. Bartin University J Facul Educ. 2019;8(1):231-44.
9. Coltheart M, Rastle K, Perry C, Ziegler J. DRC: a dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychol Rev. 2001;108(1):204-56.
10. Cunha VLO, Martins MA, Capellini SA. Relação entre fluência e compreensão leitora em escolares com dificuldades de aprendizagem. Psic: Teor. Pesq. 2017;33(e33314):1-8.
11. Martins MA, Capellini SA. Relation between oral reading fluency and reading comprehension. CoDAS. 2019;31(1):1-8.
12. Carretti B, Motta E, Re AM. Oral and written expression in children with reading comprehension difficulties. J Learn Disabil. 2016;49(1):65-76.
13. Barbosa ALA, Soares HB, Azoni CAS. Development of a vocabulary-screening tool for children 3 to 7-years of age. Audiol. Commun. Res. 2019;24:e2131.
14. Cunha VLO, Capellini SA. Characterization of reading comprehension performance of students from 3rd to 5th grades of elementary school. Rev. CEFAC. 2016;18(4):941-51.
15. Martins MA, Capellini SA. Fluência e compreensão da leitura em escolares do 3º ao 5º ano do ensino fundamental. Estud. psicol. 2014;31(4):499-506.
16. Lee J, Yoon SY. The effects of repeated reading on reading fluency for students with reading disabilities: a meta-analysis. J Learn Disabil. 2017;50(2):213-24.
17. Stevens EA, Walker MA, Vaughn S. The effects of reading fluency interventions on the reading fluency and reading comprehension performance of elementary students with learning disabilities: a synthesis of the research from 2001 to 2014. J Learn Disabil. 2017;50(5):576-90.
18. OECD: Organização para Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Econômico. PISA 2018: Insights and Interpretations. [homepage on the internet] 2019. [accessed 2020 dec 15]. Available at: <https://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA%202018%20Insights%20and%20Interpretations%20FINAL%20PDF.pdf>.
19. Oakhill JV, Cain K. The precursors of reading ability in young readers: evidence from a four-year longitudinal study. Sci Stud Read. 2012;16(2):91-121.
20. Zuanetti PA, Novaes CBN, Fukuda MTH. Intervention based on shared story reading: effect on low and high challenge reading and writing tasks. CoDAS. 2021;33(3):e20200129.
21. Martins MA, Capellini SA. Avaliação do desempenho em fluência de leitura (ADFLU). Ribeirão Preto: Book Toy, 2018.
22. Condemarin M, Blomquist M. Dislexia: manual de leitura corretiva. Porto Alegre: Editora Artes Médicas, 1989.
23. Ramos CS. Avaliação de leitura em escolares com indicação de dificuldade de leitura e escrita [thesis]. São Paulo (SP): Universidade Federal de São Paulo; 2005.
24. Souza CA, Escarce AG, Lemos SMA. Reading competence of words and pseudo words, school performance and listening skills in primary schools. Audiol. Commun. Res. 2019;24:e2018.
25. Alves LM, Souza HTV, Souza VO, Lodi BF, Ferreira MCM, Siqueira CM et al. Phonological processing in individuals with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Rev. CEFAC. 2014;16(3):874-82.
26. Barbosa VM, Silva C. Correlation between receptive vocabulary skill, syntactic awareness, and word writing. Rev. CEFAC. 2020;22(3):e2420.
27. Colombo RC, Cárnio MS. Reading comprehension and receptive vocabulary in Elementary School students with typical development. CoDAS. 2018;30(4):e201700145.
28. Santos VAP. Teacher mediator of reading: the importance and necessity of teacher training for the teaching of reading. Braz J Dev. 2021;7(1):7279-91.
29. Monteiro SM, Soares M. Processos cognitivos na leitura inicial: relação entre estratégias de reconhecimento de palavras e alfabetização. Educação e Pesquisa. 2014;40(2):449-66.
30. Mendes ECCS, Brunoni D. Competência em leitura: interface entre contextos psicossocial, familiar e escolar. São Paulo (SP): Editora Mackenzie; 2015.
31. Durkin K, Conti-Ramsden G. Young people with specific language impairment: A review of social and emotional functioning in adolescence. Child Lang Teach Ther. 2010;26(2):105-21.
32. Celeste LC, Pereira ES, Pereira NRRP, Alves LM. Prosodic parameters of reading in 2nd to 5th grade students. CoDAS. 2018;30(1):e20170034.
Submitted date:
10/08/2021
Accepted date:
11/15/2021
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
Email