Title: the impact of prior knowledge on EFL students’ reading comprehension.

In this title, we have two variables: Reading comprehension which is a dependent variable and prior
knowledge which is the independent variable.
Literature review : Extended annotation outline
Introduction
Section one: Reading comprehension
This section aims to discuss reading comprehension.
1.1. Definition:
1.1.1 Reading
1.1.2 Comprehension:
1.1.3 Reading comprehension:
Quote 2: “Reading comprehension means the ability to use context and knowledge to derive meaning from
what is read like grammatical competence, knowledge of morphology, syntax, gaining meaning out of
context, using schemata and metacognitive knowledge, recognizing text structure, and predicting what will
come next into a text” (Hudson,2007, p …..).

Type: long quotation.

Paraphrase: Reading comprehension refers to the capacity of using context and knowledge to extract meaning
from written content such as understanding grammar, knowing word structure, sentence structure and interpreting
context using mental framework and self-awareness to enhance understanding to identify the text building, and
prophesy what going to happen then into a text (Hudson.T ,2007) .
Summary: Reading comprehension involves using various skills and strategies to understand and derive
meaning from a text. This includes using context, grammar, morphology, syntax, and schema, as well as
recognizing text structure and making predictions about what will come next in the text (Hudson.T ,2007).
Critical comment
Definition of reading comprehension: I agree that reading comprehension is more than just understanding
individual words. It involves using different skills like grammar, knowledge of word structure, and being able to
understand the meaning of a text based on the context. However, the factors that are mentioned are just few of the
components that contribute the readings comprehension it is important to mention also vocabulary, inference
making and having critical thinking that play a huge roles in understanding and deriving meaning from a text.
1.2. Strategies:
1.2.1 Repetition
1.2.2 Prior knowledge:
1.3. Skills:
1.3.1 Decoding
1.3.2 Language comprehension:
 Section Two: Prior knowledge
This section aims to deal with the prior knowledge and its different strategies.
2.1 Definition:
As stated by Ausubel, (1968) 5: “ If I had to reduce all of educational psychology to just one principle, I
would say this: The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows .

Type: long quotation

Paraphrase: According to Ausubel . ( 1986 ) , If he condenses of all of educational psychology into one core
principle it would be the greatest aspect shaping learning is what the learner previously knows. Determine it and
educate him effectively.
Summary: Ausubel highlighted that the learner's existing knowledge is the most crucial factor influencing
learning, and teaching should be tailored accordingly (Ausubel . 1986 ) .

2.2 Types:
Quote 6: “Prior knowledge can be distinguished into two different knowledge types” (Yuksel , 2012 , p
1198) .

Type: Short quotation.

Paraphrase: according to Yuksel (2012) There are two distinct sorts of prior knowledge (Yuksel, 2012
)
Summary: two types of prior knowledge (Yuksel, 2012 ).
2.2.1 declarative knowledge
2.2.2 procedural knowledge

2.3 Different strategies to Activate prior knowledge:

2.3.1 Reflection and Recording Strategy
2.3.2 Brain Storming
2.3.3 Small Group Discussion:
Quote 7: ’’In this strategy, teachers give a problem, a situation or topic to their students to discuss in small
groups. After discussion, groups share their ideas and findings with whole class. By doing that, teachers can
observe students’ prior knowledge related to the topic" (Yuksel , 2012, p1199).

Type : Long quotation.

Paraphrase: In this approach, educators present a problem, scenario, or subject for students to explore within
small groups. Following group discussions, findings and ideas are shared with the entire class. This allows teachers
to notice students' prior understanding of the topic (Yuksel , 2012).
Summary: In small groups, Teachers use this strategy by discussing a problem, then students sharing their
findings with the whole class, teachers can determine their prior knowledge (Yuksel , 2012).
 Critical comment
Ausubel highlights the importance of prior knowledge in the learning process, it might not cover all the complexities
of educational psychology. While prior knowledge is indeed significant, but there are other factors such as
motivation, learning styles and socio-cultural context, also play vital roles in effective teaching and learning process .
Moreover, focusing only on what learners already know could miss the benefits of introducing new and challenging
ideas to help their minds grow. So, I agree that the concept of Ausubel is helpful, but without neglecting the fact that
it is important to consider other things that affect how we learn.
 2.3.4 K -W-L Strategy
2.3.5 Concept Map
2.3.6 CONTACT-2 [Computer -*Assisted Activation]
2.3.7 PKTandD [Prior Knowledge Test andDiagnosis]

Section three: The Role of Background Knowledge in Reading Comprehension.

This section aims to study The Role of Background Knowledge in Reading Comprehension:
3.1 the different roles that affect prior knowledge on students' reading performance
3.1.1 the role of domain knowledge: “Knowledge can be classified according to its specificity;
background knowledge comprises all of the world knowledge that the reader brings to the task of reading.
This can include episodic (events), declarative (facts) and procedural (how-to) knowledge as well as related
vocabulary “(Kintsch,1998)8.

Type : long quotation.

Paraphrase: A reader's background knowledge includes all of the information they bring to a reading
assignment, including declarative (facts), procedural (how-to), episodic (events), and associated vocabulary.
Knowledge may be categorized based on how detailed it is (Kintsch,1998).
Summary: Background knowledge refers to the world knowledge a reader brings to a reading task, including
episodic, declarative, and procedural knowledge, along with related vocabulary(Kintsch,1998) .

3.1.2 the role of working memory and cognitive load

3.1.3 the role of the text
Quote 9: “These texts make particular demands on the knowledge of the reader as such texts, by definition,
are written to inform by building on a reader’s existing knowledge of a particular topic “(Beck &
McKeown, 1991).

Type: short quotation

Paraphrase: These books place special demands on the reader's expertise since, by definition, they are created
to enlighten by building on a reader's previous knowledge of a certain topic (Beck & McKeown, 1991).
Summary: These books require a high level of expertise as they aim to enhance a reader's understanding of a
specific topic by building upon their prior knowledge. Source

3.2 Method
3.2.1 inclusion criteria:” General study characteristics include that Assessments of preexisting
knowledge were either a measure of 220 R. SMITH ET AL. general knowledge unrelated to the target text
or a specific assessment of knowledge and skills related to the passages used for comprehension. Outcome
measures has curriculum-based outcome measures (e.g., Key Stage assessments), standardized tests (e.g.,
Iowa Test of Basic Skills “(Hoover, Dunbar, & Frisbie, 2001)10 and Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test
(MacGinitie & MacGinitie, 1992) or researcher-designed assessments of reading comprehension.
Participant groups This review included studies involving participants from age six to 12 enrolled in formal,
mainstream education classes taught in English. As well for research design.
 Type: long quotation
Paraphrase: broad knowledge unrelated to the target text; or a particular evaluation of information and
abilities relevant to the comprehension passages. Outcome measurements include curriculum-based measures
(e.g., Key Stage assessments), standardized tests (e.g., Iowa Test of Basic Skills and Gates-MacGinitie Reading
Test), and researcher-designed evaluations of reading comprehension (Hoover, Dunbar, & Frisbie, 2001)
Summary: Reading comprehension assessment involves general knowledge or specific skills related to the
target text, using curriculum-based, standardized tests, or researcher-designed assessments (Hoover, Dunbar, &
Frisbie, 2001).

3.2.2 Procedure: We used a critical review methodology. A critical review synthesizes material from
diverse sources, analyzing it in order to produce a hypothesis or model based on the data and study
outcomes (Grant & Booth,2009)11.

Type: short quotation

Paraphrase: We used a critical review process. A critical review synthesizes material from many sources and
analyzes it to develop a hypothesis or model based on the facts and research findings (Grant & Booth,2009).
Summarize: The critical review process was employed to synthesize and analyze data from various sources,
forming a hypothesis or model based on the facts and research findings (Grant & Booth,2009)..

3.2.3 Study characteristics: “Descriptive characteristics This is consistent with the wider field of
research focusing on expository text due to its difficulty; narrative texts are less demanding on background
knowledge than expository texts” (Nelson, 1998; Olson, 1985; Spiro & Taylor, 1987; Wolfe & Woodwyk,
2010)12.

Type: short quotation

Paraphrase: Descriptive qualities This is congruent with the larger area of study that focuses on expository
writings because to their complexity; narrative texts are less demanding on preexisting knowledge than expository
texts (Nelson, 1998; Olson, 1985; Spiro & Taylor, 1987; Wolfe & Woodwyk, 2010).
Summary: The research focuses on expository texts due to their complexity, while narrative texts are less
demanding on background knowledge (Nelson, 1998; Olson, 1985; Spiro & Taylor, 1987; Wolfe & Woodwyk,
2010).
 Critical comment:
While the quote highlights the importance of background knowledge in reading, its oversimplified classification
neglects the complexity and diversity of individuals' experiences. It fails to acknowledge the dynamic nature of
reading comprehension and overlooks socio-cultural influences on background knowledge.
3.3 Resultats and discussion
3.3.1 Method used to assess comprehension and knowledge vary between studies
Variation in outcome measures across studies is problematic for two reasons.
Quote 13 : ” Firstly, it is difficult to make direct comparisons of background knowledge effects, and
secondly, different levels of comprehension are assessed by each of the measures. For example, tasks which
assess a READING PSYCHOLOGY 225 reader’s memory of the literal aspects of text, such as summaries,
sentence recognition and cloze items, probe a surface level representation of the text: the textbase
constructed by the reader”. (McNamara et al., 1996; Tapiero, 2007)13.

Type: long quotation.

Paraphrase: First, it is hard to establish direct comparisons of prior knowledge effects, and second, each test
assesses various degrees of comprehension. For example, measures that assess a reader's recollection of the literal
parts of text, such as summaries, phrase recognition, and cloze items, examine a surface-level representation of the
text. The textbase created by the reader (McNamara et al., 1996; Tapiero, 2007).
Summary: Direct comparisons of background knowledge effects and different comprehension levels are
challenging, as tasks like summaries, sentence recognition, and cloze items probe a surface-level representation of
the text (McNamara et al., 1996; Tapiero, 2007). .
 3.3.2 Knowledge Interacts with the Coherence and Cohesion of the Text:” Understanding a
text is moderated by an interaction between background knowledge and the text’s coherence and cohesion.
“An alternative explanation is that the demands on prior knowledge imposed by expository texts are
significantly greater than those imposed by narrative text – consequently, the impact of poor prior
knowledge may be far more pronounced with expository texts” (Cervetti & Wright, 2020; Wolfe &
Woodwyk, 2010)14.

Type: long quotation

Paraphrase: An additional interpretation is that the demands on previous information imposed by
explanatory writings are substantially larger than those enforced by narrative texts; hence, the impact of poor prior
knowledge may be far more evident with expository texts (Cervetti & Wright, 2020; Wolfe & Woodwyk, 2010).
Summary: Expository texts impose greater demands on prior knowledge than narrative texts, making the
impact of poor prior knowledge more pronounced (Cervetti & Wright, 2020; Wolfe & Woodwyk, 2010)..

3.3.3 misconceptions can be inhabiting factor in reading comprehension:

3.4 Contribution of the findings to a wider context
“The finding that different tools for assessing reading comprehension are used across various studies is not
surprising; it has been a debated topic for some time ” (e.g., Dochy, Segers, & Buehl, 1999; Johnston &
Pearson, 1982)15.

Type: short quotation

Paraphrase: It is not unexpected that different instruments are employed in different research to measure
reading comprehension because this is a topic that has been discussed for a while (e.g., Dochy, Segers, & Buehl,
1999; Johnston & Pearson, 1982).
Summary: Provided that reading comprehension has long been a divisive subject, it is not surprising that
different instruments are used in different studies to measure it (e.g., Dochy, Segers, & Buehl, 1999; Johnston &
Pearson, 1982).
.
3.4.1 limitations of the reviewed research studies
Quote 16: “Most interventions in this study were short-term, ranging from two to 12 hours of instructional
time. In a middle primary classroom, time is typically spent building students’ knowledge in less well-
defined domains such as ‘The American Revolution’ and ‘Classification’”(Kim et al., 2021)16.

Type; long quotation.

Paraphrase: The majority of the interventions in this study had a short duration, lasting between two and
twelve hours of teaching. Students' knowledge is usually developed in less well-defined areas, such "The American
Revolution" and "Classification," in a middle primary school (Kim et al., 2021).
Summary: The study found that most interventions in middle primary classrooms are short-term, ranging from
two to 12 hours, focusing on less well-defined domains like 'The American Revolution' and 'Classification'(Kim et
al., 2021)..
.
3.4.2 limitation of the review
3.4.3 recommendations for practice and the future research: “Findings from this review
suggest that children would benefit from exposure to background knowledge in a specific, explicit and
sequenced way” (Connor et al., 2017; Kim et al., 2021)17.
 Type: short quotation .
Paraphrase: the review's conclusions imply that children might gain from exposure to background information
in a methodical, explicit, and sequential manner (Connor et al., 2017; Kim et al., 2021).
Summary: The review indicates that children would benefit from specific, explicit, and sequenced exposure to
background knowledge (Connor et al., 2017; Kim et al., 2021). .

 Critical comment
The quote raises concerns about the effectiveness of short-term interventions, given the limited instructional time
available in middle primary classrooms. It questions whether such brief interventions allow for meaningful learning
experiences, particularly in complex subject areas like 'The American Revolution' and 'Classification'. This prompts
reflection on the need for balance between breadth of content coverage and depth of understanding within
constrained timeframes.
.
Conclusion