Comprensión de textos

Abstract

Las inferencias elaborativas se basan en el conocimiento previo. En las microestructurales se debe comprender qué relación semántica existe entre dos oraciones que aparecen una a continuación de la otra. Pueden existir relaciones de significado y referenciales. En la Asignatura Fisiología de la FOUNLP realizamos dos experiencias para determinar el desarrollo de inferencias elaborativas (A) y microestructurales (B). Para (A) presentamos 4 oraciones a 54 estudiantes, con un contenido implícito a explicitar y para (B) les suministramos 3 oraciones a 97 estudiantes. En (A), 1ra oración: 18 inferencias elaborativas, 22 presentaron confusiones y 14 no escribieron nada; 2da oración: 10 inferencias elaborativas, 37 se confundieron y 5 no escribieron nada, 3ra oración: 14 inferencias elaborativas, 25 se confundieron y 15 no escribieron nada; 4ta oración: 7 inferencias elaborativas, 41 se confundieron y 6 no escribieron nada. En (B) 1ra oración, 45 no produjeron inferencia (0), 17 no cumplieron la consigna,17 realizaron inferencias significativas (S), 9 copias, 3 referenciales (R), 6 (S/R). 2da oración: 62 (0), 29 no cumplieron la consigna, 6 (S); 3ra oración: 54 (0), 22 (S),6 no cumplen la consigna, 9 copias, 5 ( R ) y 1 (S/R ). La comprensión lectora necesita de un trabajo permanente.

The elaborative inferences are based on prior knowledge. In the microstructural ones it is necessary to understand that semantic relation between two sentences that appear one after the other. There may be relations of meaning and referential. In the Physiology subject of FOUNLP, we conducted two experiments to determine the development of elaborative (A) and microstructural (B) inferences. For (A) we presented 4 sentences to 54 students, with an implicit content to be explained and for (B) we supplied 3 sentences to 97 students. In (A), 1st sentence: 18 elaborative inferences, 22 presented confusions and 14 did not write anything; 2nd sentence: 10 elaborative inferences, 37 were confused and 5 did not write anything, 3rd sentence: 7 elaborative inferences, 41 were confused and 6 did not write anything. ; 4th sentence: 7 elaborative inferences, 41 were confused and 6 did not write anything. In (B) 1st sentence, 45 did not produce inference (0), 17 did not meet the slogan, 17 made significant inferences (S), 9 copies, 3 references (R), 6 (S / R). 2nd sentence: 62 (0); 29 did not comply with the slogan, 6 (S).; 3rd sentence: 54 (0), 22 (S), 6 do not meet the slogan, 9 copies, 5 (R) and 1 (S / R). Reading comprehension needs permanent work.