Prior knowledge has an important role to play in helping us to make sense of what we read.

As researchers Kathryn McCarthy and Danielle McNamara have set out, what readers know shapes their processing of written language (the text) and facilitates their memory for whatever new understandings they construct.

Domain knowledge that is specific and related to the text being read is helpful. If the student is reading a text about how rivers develop, domain knowledge would include what a river is, where you find rivers and the general features of a river. In addition, readers may draw on personal experiences, such as being on the banks of a river or swimming in a river. The knowledge of how different types of texts are structured and what to expect when reading them is helpful, too.

However, the research literature suggests that using prior knowledge is not something all students do automatically. As Jane Oakhill and colleagues have pointed out, even when students have relevant knowledge, they may not know how or when to use it during reading, and many will benefit from additional guidance or scaffolding.

Activating prior knowledge when reading

Understanding the most effective ways of helping students to use their prior knowledge is an important part of any teacher’s reading pedagogy toolkit. And, in a recently published systematic review, Courtney Hattan and colleagues helpfully identified 88 studies that explored different ways of activating prior knowledge. 

Of the six general approaches the researchers identified, the most investigated method was using open-ended prompts, such as questions and discussions with partners. Importantly, though, the review found different effects for this approach in students of different ages.

For younger primary pupils, open-ended prompts were not found to be effective at supporting reading comprehension. Older primary (key stage 2) pupils were effectively supported by open-ended prompts that were discussed as a whole class, or in pairs, prior to reading - but not when the pupils’ responses were written down. 

In secondary school and beyond, open-ended prompts were found to be effective when aimed at individual students and when used to structure a whole-class or paired discussion, but the levels of effectiveness depended on the student. Writing responses did not seem to be effective. For undergraduate students (the most experienced readers), most approaches were effective.  

More by Megan Dixon:

• Why suspensions affect everyone in class
• How the BOGOF approach can maximise learning
• Why has the number of struggling readers tripled?

On the surface, this study provides some helpful guidance for teachers about the best ways to activate pupils’ prior knowledge. 

But there’s a problem: around half of the studies identified for this systematic review used undergraduate psychology students as participants. Only two studies included in this review focused on younger primary children. It would therefore be more accurate to say that this review helps us to understand a lot about how to help university students draw on their prior knowledge when reading, a little about supporting secondary school students and next to nothing about helping younger children who are just learning to read. More research is clearly needed.

Ultimately, then, this study acts as an important reminder of the limitations of the research process. We cannot simply lift and shift pedagogies from one age or phase to another and assume they will have the same outcome. 

It also provides a timely reminder about the limitations of knowledge. It shows that, when it comes to reading, it isn’t always what you know that helps, but the way you use that knowledge.

Megan Dixon is a doctoral student and associate lecturer at Sheffield Hallam University