This document discusses three theories related to reading comprehension: schema theory, cognitive load theory, and self-questioning theory. Schema theory proposes that information that fits into a student's existing knowledge is more easily understood and retained. Cognitive load theory suggests that reducing extraneous cognitive load can optimize learning by preserving working memory resources. Self-questioning theory examines how student-generated questions may improve comprehension, though past research has not determined why.

1. 2.0 Literature Review
In the fieldof readingcomprehension,student-generated questions have been investigated within
instructional contexts for primary school, secondary school and college students (Taboada, 2003).
Althoughfindingsfrominstructional studiesreveal thatstudent-generatedquestionshave animpact
on reading comprehension, past research has not examined why student-generated questions
improve textcomprehension.Inrelationtothis,few theorieshave beenidentified to be involved in
the relationship of student-generated questions and prior knowledge to reading comprehension.
2.1 SchemaTheory
Schemataare dynamiccognitive structuresinmindthatcontainlearners’existing knowledge (Winn
& Snyder,2001). Whena personisreadinga text,hisor herrate of learningdependson two factors:
One factor isnew information which is received from the text, and another is his or her previously
learned knowledge (Anderson & Pearson, 1984). The most significant point related to the schema
theoryisinformationthatfitsintoa(student’s) existingschemaismore easily understood, learned,
and retainedthaninformationthat does not fit into an existing schema (Slavin, 1991). According to
Guastello, Beasley, & Sinatra (2000), a vital task of teachers is to ensure that L2 learners have
enough background knowledge related to the new information and also provide L2 learners with
special tools or techniques to link up the new information to their previously learned knowledge.
Theyjustifiedtheirclaimsbythisreasonthatif studentsdonothave enoughbackgroundknowledge
to connect it with the new information, they may not be able to comprehend the new materials.
Thus,our abilitytounderstandandremember new information is critically depends upon what we
already know and how our knowledge is organized (Slowiaczek & Clifton, 1980).
2.2 Cognitive LoadTheory
Cognitive load is a term used to describe the amount of information processing expected of the
learner. Intuitively, it makes sense that the less cognitive load a learner has to carry, the easier
learning should be (Chalmers, 2003). The cognitive load theory states that if we can reduce the
amountof variables(e.g., unnecessary or extraneous cognitive learning load) that put obstacles in
the way of converting working memory to long-term memory, we can consequently optimize
learners’ comprehension in a significant way (Sweller, 1988). Due to the fact that the working
memory’scapacityislow,baseduponwhatSwellermentioned,the usefulness of different learning
techniques depends on their capability to decrease the amount of excessive and unessential
cognitive load on this memory. Van Dijk & Kintsch (1978) noted that through eliminating
unimportant and extraneous details, interactive reading emphasizes more important points,
structures, and relationships of content and facilitate learning process.
2.3 Self-questioningTheory

2. Bibliography
Anderson,R.,&Pearson,D. (1984). A Schema-TheoreticView of Basic Processesin Reading
Comprehension. Cambridge:BeranekandNewman,Inc.
Chalmers,P.(2003). The Role of Cognitive TheoryinHuman–ComputerInterface. Computersin
Human Behaviour,593-607.
Guastello,F.,Beasley,M.,& Sinatra,R. (2000). ConceptMappingEffectson Science Content
Comprehensionof Low-AchievingInner-CitySeventhGraders. Remedialand Special
Education,356-365.
Slowiaczek,M.,&Clifton,C.(1980). SubvocalizationandReadingforMeaning. Journalof Verbal
Learning and VerbalBehavior,573-582.
Sweller,J.(1988).Cognitive LoadDuringProblemSolving:EffectsonLearning. CognitiveScience,
257-285.
Taboada,A. (2003). The Associationof StudentQuestioningwithReadingComprehension.
Departmentof Human Development.
VanDijk,T., & Kintsch,W.(1978). Toward a Model of Text ComprehensionandProduction.
PsychologicalReview,363-394.
Winn,W., & Snyder,D.(2001). Cognitive PerspectivesinPsychology.InL. Earlbaum, Handbookof
Research for EducationalCommunicationsand Technology. Indiana:AECT.