Abstract

This study aims to compare the reading comprehension levels of 7th-grade students in authentic and modified texts. For this purpose, two texts were identified, one being narrative and the other informative. The selected texts were processed according to determined modification criteria, and an effort was made to align them with the students’ grade levels. Following this, reading comprehension questions regarding the texts were prepared. Two study groups were utilized during these stages. The first group (n = 22) was included in the text modification process. While the second group (n = 34) was used during the development phase of the reading comprehension questions. After preparing the texts and reading comprehension questions, two groups equivalent in terms of reading comprehension were selected. One group was presented with the modified text, and the other group received the authentic text. Subsequently, reading comprehension questions related to the read texts were directed to these two groups. Thus, the third group in the research (n = 92) participated in the comparison of reading comprehension scores obtained from the authentic and modified texts. The obtained data were analyzed with ANCOVA in the Jamovi software. According to the findings, the contribution of texts modification to reading comprehension is statistically significant. Effect size analyses showed that this contribution was at a medium level (η²ₚ = .087) for the narrative text and at a large level (η²ₚ = .141) for the informative text.

Keywords: Narrative text, Informative text, Text modification, Reading comprehension, Middle school student

References

  1. Aksan, Y., Aksan, M., Mersinli, Ü., & Demirhan, U. U. (2016). A frequency dictionary of Turkish. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315733302
  2. Al-Thanyyan, S., & Azmi, A. (2021). Automated text simplification. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 54(2), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442695
  3. Amendum, S., Conradi, K., & Hiebert, E. (2018). Does text complexity matter in the elementary grades? A research synthesis of text difficulty and elementary students’ reading fluency and comprehension. Educational Psychology Review, (30), 121-151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9398-2
  4. American Educational Research Association. (2011). Code of ethics. https://www.aera.net/About-AERA/AERA-Rules-Policies/Professional-Ethics
  5. American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). https://apastyle.apa.org/products/publication-manual-7th-edition
  6. Arfé, B., Mason, L., & Fajardo, I. (2018). Simplifying informational text structure for struggling readers. Reading and Writing, (31), 2191-2210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9785-6
  7. Ariely, M., Livnat, Z., & Yarden, A. (2019). Analyzing the language of an adapted primary literature article. Science & Education, (28), 63-85. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11191-019-00033-5
  8. Arslan, A., & Engin, A. O. (2019). 5. sınıf Türkçe ders kitabının öğretmen görüşlerine göre değerlendirilmesi. Uluslararası Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 2019(13), 67-94. https://doi.org/10.46778/goputeb.570245
  9. Ateşman, E. (1997). Türkçede okunabilirliğin ölçülmesi. Ankara Üniversitesi TÖMER Dil Dergisi, (58), 171-174.
  10. Aydın, G., & Ayrancı, B. (2018). Reading preferences of middle school students. World Journal of Education, 8(2), 127-139. https://doi.org/10.5430/WJE.V8N2P127
  11. Aytan, T., Saydam M., Akkaş, N., & Güneş, G. (2021). Yabancılara Türkçe öğretiminde sadeleştirilmiş metinlerin okuduğunu anlamaya etkisi: Nasrettin Hoca Fıkraları örneği. International Journal of Languages Education and Teaching, 9(1), 230-242. https://doi.org/10.29228/ijlet.49240
  12. Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4(10), 829-839. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1201
  13. Bağcı-Dağdeviren, Ş. (2024). İlkokul öğrencileri için düzeyleştirilmiş metin ve okunabilirlik formülü geliştirilmesi üzerine bir araştırma (Thesis No. 850317) [Doctoral dissertation, İstanbul University]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  14. Bakan, H. (2012). Yabancılara Türkçe öğretiminde metindilbilimsel ölçütler çerçevesinde bir sadeleştirme denemesi: Sait Faik Abasıyanık, Meserret Oteli (Thesis No. 304267) [Master’s thesis, Ankara University]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  15. Bakan-Aktaş, H., & Ay, S. (2021). Yabancı dil öğretiminde geleneksel metin sadeleştirme yaklaşımına karşı metindilbilimsel sadeleştirme önerisi: Bağlaşıklık ve bağdaşıklık kavramları. Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 12(1), 94-102. https://izlik.org/JA68ZC96UX
  16. Başaran, M. (2021). Okuduğunu anlayamayan öğrencilerin okuma esnasındaki bilişsel davranışları ve duygu durumları. Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi, 9(1), 45-58. https://doi.org/10.16916/aded.802475
  17. Bayraktar, İ., & Durukan, E. (2016). Türkçe ders kitaplarında metin sadeleştirme üzerine bir değerlendirme. Uluslararası Türkçe Edebiyat Kültür Eğitim Dergisi, 5(3), 1356-1369. https://doi.org/10.7884/teke.709
  18. Bayraktar, İ., & Durukan, E. (2020). Yüzey yapı değişiklikleri ile öğrencilerin okuduğunu anlama becerileri arasındaki ilişki üzerine bir inceleme. Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi, 8(2), 292-314. https://doi.org/10.16916/aded.668524
  19. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., Omanson, R. C., & Pople, M. T. (1984). Improving the comprehensibility of stories: The effects of revisions that improve coherence. Reading Research Quarterly, 19(3), 263-277. https://doi.org/10.2307/747821
  20. Bérešová, J. (2015). Authentic materials - enhancing language acquisition and cultural awareness. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, (192), 195-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SBSPRO.2015.06.028
  21. Bölükbaş, F. (2015). Yabancı dil olarak Türkçe öğretiminde okuma metinlerinin dil düzeylerine göre sadeleştirilmesi. International Journal of Languages’ Education and Teaching, (UDES2015), 924-935.
  22. Brookhart, S. M. (2010). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. ASCD.
  23. Carlisle, J. (2000). Awareness of the structure and meaning of morphologically complex words: Impact on reading. Reading and Writing, (12), 169-190. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008131926604
  24. Carroli, P. (2008). Literature in second language education: Enhancing the role of texts in learning. Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474212267
  25. Cerga-Pashoja, A., Gaete, J., Shishkova, A., & Jordanova, V. (2019). Improving reading in adolescents and adults with high-functioning autism through an assistive technology tool: A cross-over multinational study. Frontiers in Psychiatry, (10), 546. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00546
  26. Ciecierski, L., & Bintz, W. (2015). Using authentic literature to develop challenging and integrated curriculum. Middle School Journal, 46(5), 17-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2015.11461921
  27. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  28. Creswell, J. W. (2020). Eğitim araştırmaları (H. Ekşi, Ed. & Trans.). Edam.
  29. Çetinkaya, G. (2010). Türkçe metinlerin okunabilirlik düzeylerinin tanımlanması ve sınıflandırılması (Thesis No. 265580) [Doctoral dissertation, Ankara University]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  30. Dahl, A., Carlson, S., Renken, M., McCarthy, K., & Reynolds, E. (2021). Materials matter: An exploration of text complexity and its effects on middle school readers’ comprehension processing. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 52(2), 702-716. https://doi.org/10.1044/2021_LSHSS-20-00117
  31. Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(4), 450-466. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6
  32. De Belder, J., & Moens, M. F. (2010). Text simplification for children. In F. Crestani, S. Marchand-Maillet, H. Chen, E. N. Efthimiadis, & J. Savoy (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 19-26). Association for Computing Machinery.
  33. Derse, G. E., & Coşkun, H. (2021). Türkçe ders kitabındaki metinlerin değerler eğitimi açısından incelenmesi ve öğretmen görüşlerine göre değerlendirilmesi. Değerler Eğitimi Dergisi, 19(41), 9-35. https://doi.org/10.34234/ded.738543
  34. Dickens, R., & Meisinger, E. (2017). Examining the effects of reading modality and passage genre on reading comprehension in middle school students. Reading Psychology, 38(3), 321-347. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2016.1263701
  35. Duman, A. (2010). Türkçe eğitiminde metne müdahale sorunu. Türklük Bilimi Araştırmaları, (27), 285-295. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/156994
  36. Durmuş, M. (2013a). İkinci/yabancı dil öğretiminde sadeleştirilmiş metin sorunları. Bilig, (65), 135-150. https://bilig.yesevi.edu.tr/yonetim/icerik/makaleler/2422-published.pdf
  37. Durmuş, M. (2013b). Metin değiştiriminin dilbilimsel süreçleri üzerine. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 6(4), 391-408. https://doi.org/10.9761/JASSS1077
  38. Durukan, E. (2014). Metinlerin okunabilirlik düzeyleri ile öğrencilerin okuma becerileri arasındaki ilişki. Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi, 2(3), 68-76. https://doi.org/10.16916/aded.26659
  39. Elleman, A., Lindo, E., Morphy, P., & Compton, D. (2009). The impact of vocabulary instruction on passage-level comprehension of school-age children: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(1), 1-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345740802539200
  40. Field, A. (2024). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics. SAGE Publications.
  41. Fleiss, J. L. (1971). Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin, 76(5), 378-382. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031619
  42. Foorman, B., Petscher, Y., & Bishop, M. (2012). The incremental variance of morphological knowledge to reading comprehension in grades 3-10 beyond prior reading comprehension, spelling, and text reading efficiency. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(6), 792-798. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LINDIF.2012.07.009
  43. Gala, N., François, T., Javourey-Drevet, L., & Ziegler, J. C. (2018). La simplification de textes, une aide à l’apprentissage de la lecture. Langue Française, 199(3), 123-131. https://doi.org/10.3917/lf.199.0123
  44. Gamer, M., Jim Lemon, J., & Singh, I. (2019). irr: Various coefficients of interrater reliability and agreement (Version 0.84.1) [R package]. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=irr
  45. Gilmore, A. (2007). Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 40(2), 97-118. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444807004144
  46. Glavas, G., & Štajner, S. (2015). Simplifying lexical simplification: Do we need simplified corpora?. In C. Zong & M. Strube (Eds.), Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 2: Short Papers) (pp. 63-68). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/P15-2011
  47. Göktürk, A. (2023). Okuma uğraşı. Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
  48. Güneş, F. (2013). Türkçe öğretiminde metin seçimi. Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi, 1(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.16916/aded.16014
  49. Hayes, D. P., Wolfer, L. T., & Wolfe, M. F. (1996). Schoolbook simplification and its relation to the decline in SAT-verbal scores. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 489-508. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312033002489
  50. Illés, É. (2008). What makes a coursebook series stand the test of time. Elt Journal, 63(2), 145-153. https://doi.org/10.1093/ELT/CCN019
  51. İsen, D., & Işınsu, T (2011). Klasik eserlere çocuklar nasıl yönlendirilmeli ve buna ilişkin batıdan örnekler. Tuskish Studies, 6(3), 929-937. http://doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.2552
  52. Javourey-Drevet, L., Dufau, S., François, T., Gala, N., Ginestié, J., & Ziegler, J. (2022). Simplification of literary and scientific texts to improve reading fluency and comprehension in beginning readers of French. Applied Psycholinguistics, 43(2), 485-512. https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271642100062X
  53. Kanık-Uysal, P. (2022). Türkçe dersi sınavlarında yer alan soruların üst düzey düşünme becerileri açısından incelenmesi. Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi, 10(1), 136-156. https://doi.org/10.16916/aded.1016659
  54. Karaağaç, H. G., & Alikılıç, D. (2023). Çocuk edebiyatı ve çocuğa görelik kavramı. Education and Technology in Information Science, 1(1), 58-66. https://izlik.org/JA22TP34TR
  55. Kim, Y. S., & Snow, C. E. (2009). Text modification: Enhancing English language learners’ reading comprehension. In E. H. Hiebert & M. Sailors (Eds.), Finding the right texts: What works for beginning and struggling readers (pp. 129-146). Guilford Press.
  56. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.
  57. Krippendorf, K. (2011). Computing Krippendorff Alpha-Reliability. https://www.asc.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/2021-03/Computing%20Krippendorff%27s%20Alpha-Reliability.pdf
  58. Kurudayıoğlu, M., & Soysal, T. (2019). 2018 Türkçe Dersi Öğretim Programı kazanımlarının 21. yüzyıl becerileri açısından incelenmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(2), 483-496. https://doi.org/10.31592/aeusbed.621132
  59. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
  60. Li, Y., Xu, S., & Wang, Q. (2005). The effects of simplified and elaborated texts on second language reading comprehension: An exploratory study. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, (2), 45-74.
  61. Long, M. H., & Ross, S. (1993). Modifications that preserve language and content. In Tickoo, M. L. (Ed.), Simplification: Theory and application (Anthology Series No. 31, pp. 29-52). SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.
  62. Maxwell, S. (2011). The effects of two types of text modification on English language learners reading comprehension: simplification versus elaboration (Publication No. 449) [Master’s thesis, Hamline University]. School of Education and Leadership Student Capstone Theses and Dissertations.
  63. Melanlıoğlu, D. (2008). Kültür aktarımı açısından Türkçe öğretim programları. Eğitim ve Bilim Dergisi, 33(150), 64-73. https://educationandscience.ted.org.tr/article/view/785
  64. Mesmer, H., & Hiebert, E. (2015). Third graders’ reading proficiency reading texts varying in complexity and length. Journal of Literacy Research, 47(4), 473-504. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X16631923
  65. Ministry of National Education. (2006). İlköğretim (6, 7, ve 8. sınıflar) Türkçe dersi öğretim programı. Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.
  66. Ministry of National Education. (2019). Türkçe dersi öğretim programı. Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.
  67. Norris, S., Stelnicki, N., & Vries, G. (2012). Teaching mathematical biology in high school using adapted primary literature. Research in Science Education, (42), 633-649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9215-8
  68. Özcan, H. (2008). Halk edebiyatı metinlerinin çocuk edebiyatına kaynak olması ve örneklem olarak Dede Korkut Hikayeleri. Turkish Studies, 3(2), 582-603. http://doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.311
  69. Özçelik, D. A. (2016). Okulda ölçme ve değerlendirme (5th ed.). Pegem Akademi.
  70. Reed, D., & Kershaw-Herrera, S. (2016). An examination of text complexity as characterized by readability and cohesion. The Journal of Experimental Education, 84(1), 75-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2014.963214
  71. Seol, H. (2024). Seolmatrix: Correlations suite for jamovi. (Version 3.8.8) [Computer software]. https://github.com/hyunsooseol/seolmatrix
  72. Sever, S. (2018). Sanatsal uyaranlarla dil öğretimi. Tudem.
  73. Siddharthan, A. (2014). A survey of research on text simplification. ITL-International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 165(2), 259-298. https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.165.2.06sid
  74. Spencer, M., Gilmour, A., Miller, A., Emerson, A., Saha, N., & Cutting, L. (2018). Understanding the influence of text complexity and question type on reading outcomes. Reading and Writing, (32), 603-637. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9883-0
  75. Surya, S., Mishra, A., Laha, A., Jain, P., & Sankaranarayanan, K. (2018). Unsupervised neural text simplification [Preprint]. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.07931
  76. Sweller, J., Van Merriënboer, J. J., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, (31), 261-292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5
  77. Şeref, İ., Karagöz, B., & Koç Ardıç, İ. (2020). Türkçe ders kitaplarındaki okuma metinlerinin metinsellik özellikleri: Lao Tzu’nun ‘Acele Karar Vermeyin’ öyküsü örneği. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 19(73), 92-104. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.516826
  78. Şimşek, T. (2007). Çocuk edebiyatı. Suna Yayınları.
  79. Tekşan, K., & Çinpolat, E. (2023). Türkçe ders kitaplarındaki değiştirilmiş anlatı metinlerine ilişkin bir inceleme. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(3), 416-427. https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.1245443
  80. Tekşan, K., Çinpolat, E., & Uyar, Y. E. (2023). 2000-2022 yılları arasında kullanılan Türkçe ders kitaplarında metin seçimleri. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 43(3), 2129-2178. https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.1246579
  81. Tezcan-Aksu, B., & Adalı, E. (2018). Çağdaş Türkçenin sıklık sözlüğü. Ötüken Neşriyat.
  82. The Jamovi Project. (2023). Jamovi (Version 2.4) [Computer software]. https://www.jamovi.org
  83. Uygur, M. E. (2024). Dilbilimsel bakış açısıyla uygulamalı metin değiştirimi. In H. H. Mutlu & E. Çinpolat (Eds.), Türkçenin yabancı dil olarak öğretiminde metin değiştirimi (pp. 19-59). Vizetek.
  84. Uygur, M. E., Mutlu, H. H., & Çinpolat, E. (2025). The effect of text modification on comprehension and the exploration of perceptions. Reading in a Foreign Language, 37(1), 1-34. https://doi.org/10.64152/10125/67519
  85. Ülper, H., Çetinkaya, G., & Bayat, N. (2017). Okuduğunu anlama testinin geliştirilmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(1), 175-190.
  86. Yano, Y., Long, M. H., & Ross, S. (1994). The effects of simplified and elaborated texts on foreign language reading comprehension. Language Learning, 44(2), 189-219. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1994.tb01100.x
  87. Yaşar, S. A. (2019). Yabancılara Türkçe öğretiminde metin uyarlama ve Memduh Şevket Esendal’ın Pazarlık hikâyesinin A2 seviyesine göre uyarlanması (Thesis No. 606467) [Master’s thesis, Dumlupınar University]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
  88. Young, D. J. (1999). Linguistic simplification of SL reading material: Effective instructional practice?. The Modern Language Journal, 83(3), 350-366. https://doi.org/10.1111/00267902.00027
  89. Yücelşen, N. (2014). Ortaokul Türkçe ders kitaplarında yer alan düzenlenmiş ve kısaltılmış yazınsal metinlerin değerlendirilmesi (Thesis No. 381937) [Master’s thesis, İstanbul University]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.

Copyright and license

Copyright © 2026 The Author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite

Çinpolat, E., Tekşan, K., & Uyar, Y. E. (2026). The reflection of text structure modifications on reading comprehension: a comparison of authentic and modified texts among 7th grade students. Education and Science, 51(226), 327-358. https://doi.org/10.15390/ES.2026.2508