طراحی الگوی تدریس مبتنی بر روانی بازیابی با تکیه بر نظریه هوش کتل–هورن–کارول و تأثیر آن بر سواد خواندن

مهدیه  شکوهی نسب; میترا کامیابی; امان الله  سلطانی; ویدا  اندیشمند

Authors

Mahdieh Shokoohi Nasab Department of Educational Sciences and psychology,ke.c., Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran. Author https://orcid.org/0009-0003-8338-8070
Mitra Kamyabi Department of Educational Sciences and psychology,ke.c., Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran. Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2572-7527
Amanallah Soltani Department of Educational Sciences and psychology,ke.c., Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran. Author
Vida Andishmand Department of Educational Sciences and psychology,ke.c., Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran. Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8028-9833

Keywords:

Reading Literacy, Cattell–Horn–Carroll Theory, Retrieval Fluency, Instructional Design, Elementary School Students

Abstract

This study aimed to design and examine the effectiveness of an instructional model based on the retrieval fluency component of the Cattell–Horn–Carroll (CHC) theory of intelligence in improving reading literacy among sixth-grade elementary school students. This applied study employed a quasi-experimental pretest–posttest design with a control group. The statistical population consisted of female sixth-grade elementary school students in Kerman, Iran, in 2025. Ten students were selected and assigned to an experimental group and a control group, with five participants in each group. The experimental group received 10 45-minute sessions of instruction based on the retrieval fluency component of the CHC framework, whereas the control group continued to receive conventional instruction. The instructional model incorporated lexical access speed, ideational fluency, expressional fluency, figural fluency, and figural flexibility. Reading literacy was assessed using the standardized Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) test. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) in SPSS version 26. Examination of the statistical assumptions supported the application of ANCOVA. The interaction between group membership and pretest scores was not statistically significant (F=0.044, p=0.84), confirming the homogeneity of regression slopes. After controlling for pretest scores, ANCOVA revealed a statistically significant difference between the experimental and control groups in reading literacy (F=206.46, p=0.001, ηp²=0.97). Accordingly, the retrieval fluency–based instructional intervention significantly improved reading literacy, with group membership accounting for 97% of the variance in posttest reading literacy scores. An instructional model based on retrieval fluency within the CHC theoretical framework can substantially enhance students’ reading literacy by facilitating rapid access to stored information, activating prior knowledge, and strengthening cognitive processing during reading. Accordingly, integrating retrieval fluency strategies into reading comprehension instruction and other learning contexts requiring efficient information retrieval may provide an effective approach to improving elementary students’ literacy performance.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Smith R, Snow P, Serry T, Hammond L. The role of background knowledge in reading comprehension: A critical review. Reading Psychology. 2021;42(3):214-40. doi: 10.1080/02702711.2021.1888348.

2. Pashaei MR. Paratext and its effect on reading literacy in the fourth-grade Persian textbook. Research in Educational Systems. 2025;19(71):31-44. doi: 10.22034/jiera.2026.564234.3417.

3. Sadeghnia A, Ebrahimi Ghavam S, Pourhossein M. The use of cognitive metaphors in teaching and their effect on students' comprehension: A systematic review. Research in Educational Systems. 2025;19(68):37-53. doi: 10.22034/jiera.2025.529205.3335.

4. Schneider WJ, McGrew KS. CHC theory revised: A visual-graphic summary of Schneider and McGrew’s 2018 CHC update. MindHub, 2018.

5. Caemmerer JM, Keith TZ, Reynolds MR. Beyond individual intelligence tests: Application of Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory. Intelligence. 2020;79:101433. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2020.101433.

6. Zaboski BA, Kranzler JH, Gage NA. Meta-analysis of the relationship between academic achievement and broad abilities of the Cattell-horn-Carroll theory. Journal of School Psychology. 2018;71:42-56. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2018.10.001.

7. Nida I, Sulastri A, Utami CT. Mapping cognitive profiles in dyslexia and mathematical disabilities: A narrative review of the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model (2015–2025). IJIP : Indonesian Journal of Islamic Psychology. 2026;8(1):174-201. doi: 10.18326/ijip.v8i1.6475.

8. Radtke BM, Łada-Maśko AB, Jurek P, Olech M, Sajewicz-Radtke U. Beyond Reading and Spelling: Exploring Intelligence Profiles in Individuals with Dyslexia through a Cattell-Horn-Carroll Theory Lens. Health Psychology Report. 2025. doi: 10.5114/hpr/205989.

9. Sigmund JL, Mehlhase H, Schulte-Körne G, Moll K. Early cognitive predictors of spelling and reading in German-speaking children. Frontiers in Education. 2024. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1378313.

10. Forthmann B, Jendryczko D, Scharfen J, Kleinkorres R, Benedek M, Holling H. Creative ideation, broad retrieval ability, and processing speed: A confirmatory study of nested cognitive abilities. Intelligence. 2019;75:59-72. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2019.04.006.

11. Weiss S, Goecke B, Wilhelm O. How much retrieval ability is in Originality? 2024.

12. Danker JF, Anderson JR. The ghosts of brain states past: Remembering reactivates the brain regions engaged during encoding. Psychological Bulletin. 2010;136(1):87-102. doi: 10.1037/a0017937.

13. Frankland PW, Josselyn SA, Köhler S. The neurobiological foundation of memory retrieval. Nature Neuroscience. 2019;22(10):1576-85. doi: 10.1038/s41593-019-0493-1.

14. Karpicke JD. Metacognitive control and strategy selection: Deciding to practice retrieval during learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2009;138(4):469-86. doi: 10.1037/a0017341.

15. Stone SM, Storm BC. Search fluency as a misleading measure of memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2019. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000806.

16. Koponen T, Eklund K, Heikkilä R, Salminen J, Fuchs L, Fuchs D, et al. Cognitive correlates of the covariance in reading and arithmetic fluency: Importance of serial retrieval fluency. Child Development. 2020;91(4):1063-80. doi: 10.1111/cdev.13287.

17. McWeeny S, Choi S, Choe J, LaTourrette A, Roberts MY, Norton ES. Rapid automatized naming (RAN) as a kindergarten predictor of future reading in English: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly. 2022;57(4):1187-211. doi: 10.1002/rrq.467.

18. Cadime I, Freitas T, Martín-Aragoneses MT, Ribeiro I. Does reading fluency mediate the relationship between cognitive-linguistic skills and reading comprehension? A study in european portuguese. Cognitive Development. 2024;71:101490. doi: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2024.101490.

19. Bessie YR, Rahayu G. The impact of Reading fluency on college performance. International Research-Based Education Journal. 2023;5(2):287. doi: 10.17977/um043v5i2p287-292.

20. Masrai A. Can L2 Phonological Vocabulary Knowledge and Listening Comprehension be Developed Through Extensive Movie Viewing? the Case of Arab EFL Learners. International Journal of Listening. 2019;34(1):54-69. doi: 10.1080/10904018.2019.1582346.

21. Lyu C, Deng S. Effectiveness of embodied learning on learning performance: A meta-analysis based on the cognitive load theory perspective. Learning and Individual Differences. 2024;116:102564. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2024.102564.

22. Yonkaitis CF. Lesson plan basics: Teaching in the classroom with confidence. NASN School Nurse. 2020;35(3):1942602X89303. doi: 10.1177/1942602x19893038.

23. Zhang S. Use of postmethod pedagogy in a lesson plan of college English writing course. The Frontiers of Society, Science and Technology. 2020;2(13):103-10. doi: 10.25236/FSST.2020.021314.

24. Mestre JM. How to transversely develop emotional intelligence ability through school subjects? A theoretical proposal. Psihologijske Teme. 2020;29(1):17-41. doi: 10.31820/pt.29.1.2.

25. Hulley SB, Cummings SR, Browner WS, Grady DG, Newman TB. Designing Clinical Research. 4th ed: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2013.