FSD | Frontiers in Sustainable Development
← Back to Volume 5, Issue 3

Use of Schema Theory in the Teaching of Reading Comprehension

Wangjin Xie
Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 431-436, 2025 DOI: 10.54691/4ardft39 March 22, 2025
Download PDF
Abstract.This paper explores the use of Schema Theory in the teaching of reading comprehension. The study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of Schema Theory, its role in reading comprehension, and effective teaching strategies based on this theory. By exploring various aspects of Schema Theory, including its role in reading comprehension, teaching strategies, assessment methods, educators can enhance their instructional practices and improve student learning outcomes.
Keywords. Schema Theory; Reading Comprehension; Teaching Strategies; Assessment Methods.
APA Citation Wangjin Xie (2025). Use of Schema Theory in the Teaching of Reading Comprehension. Frontiers in Sustainable Development, 5(3), 431-436. https://doi.org/10.54691/4ardft39

References

  1. Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (2001). Maturation of individual differences in reading ability: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Psychological Science, 12(6), 503-509.
  2. Goodman, M. L., Pearson, P. D., & Whitehurst, G. J. (2001). Children's knowledge about the world: Development and relations to literacy. In H. B. Sheridan & S. W. Starin (Eds.), The development of literacy: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 373-401). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  3. Guthrie, R. W., & Wong, D. K. O. (1992). Literature comprehension and motivation. International Reading Association.
  4. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. MIT Press.
  5. Pearson, P. D. (2001). Integrating schema theory and vocabulary instruction: An agenda for future research. In P. D. Pearson & S. B. Horrace (Eds.), Handbook of vocabulary instruction (pp. 41-59). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  6. Pearson, P. D., & Horrace, S. B. (2001). Vocabulary instruction: Definitions and distinctions. In P. D. Pearson & S. B. Horrace (Eds.), Handbook of vocabulary instruction (pp. 3-18). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  7. Reese, E. L., & Wilson, P. K. (2002). Predicting children's success in learning to read: Factors related to language background. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 509-518.
  8. Riddell, J. E., & Peterson, C. (1993). A developmental analysis of preschoolers' understanding of causation. Child Development, 64(2), 411-425.
  9. Roser, M. J., & Kirsch, N. R. (1997). Effects of prior knowledge on reading comprehension. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11(3), 201-212.
  10. Roser, M. J., & Kirsch, N. R. (1999). Predictive power of prior knowledge: A meta-analysis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13(2), 117-130.
  11. Shanahan, T. (2004). What we know about early literacy: Implications for practice. Harvard Education Press.
  12. Stanovich, K. E. (1994). Matthew effects in reading: Some implications of individual differences in the acquisition of reading skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 29(4), 395-415.
  13. van der Maas, H. J., & van den Broek, M. (2003). Schema theory in education. International Encyclopedia of Educational Theory and Practice, 2(2), 333-340.
  14. Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitude change by exposure to a stimulus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2), 1-24.
  15. Zimmer, M. E., & Schneider, W. (2009). Scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: A call for collaboration. Teaching Forum, 29(1), 1-10.