SCHEMA THEORY and Reading

A schema is a cognitive framework that is comprised of a number of organized ideas. Schemata are theorized to be abstract knowledge structures, or models, that may be used in the solving of problems by individuals. Schema theory assumes that such knowledge structures are stored in an individual's memory. Schema theory posits, thus, that an individual solves a problem through the application of knowledge models that are stored in that individual's memory.

The application of schema theory in reading research has emphasized both "(a) the constructive nature of comprehension, and (b) the crucial role of the reader's prior knowledge in that construction" (Sadoski, Paivio, and Goetz, 1991, p. 465). Schema theory, since the mid-1970s, has constituted an alternative explanation of the reading process to the data-driven models of reading (Sadoski, et al.). The application of schema theory in reading research, however, has sparked some controversy. Opposing ideas on the application of schema theory in reading research are examined in the remainder of this paper.

Symons and Pressley (1993, pp. 251-261) conducted an experiment to assess the effects of prior knowledge on reading success. The application of prio

. . .
complete explanation of the reading process. Egan (1994, pp. 636-640) supports Frager's (1993, pp. 616-622) conclusions, and extends the conceptual support for those conclusions to contend that the affective dimension of reading may be used to stimulate the cognitive dimension or schema. Egan (1994, p. 640) describes this process as a "schema awareness activity . . . that enables students to realize that reading . . . can and should be active, productive, and personal." Thus, Egan, as is true of Frager, does not reject the validity of schema theory as an explanation of the process of reading; however, Egan, as also is true of Frager, contends that reading has an affective as well as a cognitive dimension, and that neither dimension is independent of the other. Where Frager (1993, pp. 616-622) and Egan (1994, pp. 636-640) support the general validity of schema theory for application in reading research while simultaneously contending that the explanation of the reading process provided by schema theory is incomplete, however, Carver (1992, p. 165) stated that "the evidence supporting the general importance of . . . schema theory variables is highly questionable in normal, typical, or ordinary reading--called rauding." Carver (
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Symons Pressley, Paivio Goetz, SCHEMA THEORY, schema theory, Journal Reading, reading research, Research Quarterly, prior knowledge, reading process, theory reading, symons pressley, explanation reading, schema theory reading, REFERENCES Egan, application schema theory, 1993 pp, application schema, frager 1993, theory reading research, Overall Carver's, explanation reading process, symons pressley 1993, Sadoski Paivio, January Support, Reading Research,
Approximate Word count = 1827
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)

More Essays on SCHEMA THEORY and Reading