<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>reading comprehension | Daniel Schmidtke</title><link>https://www.danschmidtke.com/tag/reading-comprehension/</link><atom:link href="https://www.danschmidtke.com/tag/reading-comprehension/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><description>reading comprehension</description><generator>Source Themes Academic (https://sourcethemes.com/academic/)</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 15 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Do bridging programs close the reading gap? Eye-tracking evidence from passage reading</title><link>https://www.danschmidtke.com/currentprojects/trajectory/</link><pubDate>Sun, 15 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://www.danschmidtke.com/currentprojects/trajectory/</guid><description>&lt;h3 id="the-big-idea">The big idea&lt;/h3>
&lt;p>Bridging programs aim to help students become ready for university-level reading. But an open question is &lt;strong>how reading growth unfolds across students who start at different levels&lt;/strong>. We tested three plausible patterns: the gap could &lt;strong>widen&lt;/strong> (divergent), &lt;strong>shrink&lt;/strong> (convergent), or &lt;strong>stay the same&lt;/strong> (stable change).&lt;/p>
&lt;h3 id="what-we-did">What we did&lt;/h3>
&lt;ul>
&lt;li>Collected longitudinal passage-reading data from &lt;strong>405&lt;/strong> bridging-program students (Mandarin/Cantonese L1) at &lt;strong>two timepoints&lt;/strong>: program start (t1) and end (t2), across a &lt;strong>28-week&lt;/strong> program.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>Used &lt;strong>eye-tracking&lt;/strong> while students read full passages for comprehension, plus comprehension questions after each passage.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>Used incoming &lt;strong>IELTS Reading&lt;/strong> scores as an independent measure of &lt;strong>baseline reading ability&lt;/strong> (so we’re not just grouping people by the outcome itself).&lt;/li>
&lt;/ul>
&lt;h3 id="what-we-found">What we found&lt;/h3>
&lt;ul>
&lt;li>Students showed &lt;strong>overall improvement&lt;/strong> by the end of the program in reading comprehension and multiple eye-movement indicators of reading efficiency.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>The key result: we found &lt;strong>stable change&lt;/strong>. Students who started stronger stayed stronger, and students who started weaker improved too—but at roughly the &lt;strong>same rate&lt;/strong> (parallel growth trajectories), so the gap &lt;strong>didn’t close or widen&lt;/strong> over the program.&lt;/li>
&lt;/ul>
&lt;h3 id="why-it-matters">Why it matters&lt;/h3>
&lt;p>This tells us two things at once: (1) bridging programs can produce meaningful reading gains, and (2) &lt;strong>equal slopes don’t automatically mean equal outcomes&lt;/strong>—students who start behind may need &lt;strong>extra, targeted support early&lt;/strong> if the goal is to narrow the gap by the end of the bridging program.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>&lt;br>&lt;br>&lt;/p></description></item></channel></rss>