European International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research
and Management Studies
124
https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijmrms
TYPE
Original Research
PAGE NO.
124-126
DOI
OPEN ACCESS
SUBMITED
30 March 2025
ACCEPTED
29 April 2025
PUBLISHED
31 May 2025
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue05 2025
COPYRIGHT
© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.
The Development of the
KBAT-RC (Knowledge,
Behavior and Attitudes
Test for Reading
Comprehension)
Akhmedova Nodira Muxtarjanovna
TSPU, PhD., Associate professor, Uzbekistan
Abstract:
This article is about developing reading
motivation by using meaningful tasks such as using
reading to identify solutions to problems and other
texts of interest to the students. Findings from the first
sample suggest that teachers prefer more tangible
practices when teaching reading comprehension
(teaching vocabulary, prediction and asking questions),
in contrast to developing the inference skills and self-
monitoring for meaning strategies of the children they
teach.
Keywords:
Reading,
comprehension,
teacher
knowledge, measurement, teacher training.
Introduction:
The KBAT-RC measurement tool was
developed by Dixon and Oakhill to address the lack of
tools available to explore teacher professional
knowledge of reading comprehension. It was designed
to probe teachers’ knowledge, behaviou
rs and
attitudes
in
relation
to
teaching
reading
comprehension.
The KBAT-RC was designed around the behaviour
change theories outlined in the Theoretical Domains
model and the Behaviour Change Wheel [2; 45-p.]. The
Behaviour Change Wheel suggests that knowledge (or
capacity), opportunity and motivation are necessary
components of any approach designed to change ways
of thinking and acting. In contrast to the other
measurement tools of teacher knowledge about
reading, which focus on mainly on subject knowledge,
the KBAT-RC was designed to measure subject
knowledge and the way the knowledge may, or may
not, be used by teachers. We were interested in
European International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research
and Management Studies
125
https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijmrms
European International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Management Studies
understanding what knowledge teachers have and how
they act on this knowledge.
The KBAT-RC development followed a four step,
outlined in Figure 1. The initial scoping phase involved
a secondary data analysis from a prior study [8; 90-p.]
and a review of published measurement tools available.
Figure 1. The four-step development process followed
to construct the KBAT-RC.
Phase 2 began with a systematic review of
experimental studies published between 1990 and
2022 that reported improved outcomes for reading
comprehension interventions delivered by teachers to
whole classes of primary aged students, on
standardised assessments of reading comprehension.
The features of effective whole class instruction of
reading comprehension were summarised from 4
studies identified. These features include:
•
Developing reading motivation by using
meaningful tasks such as using reading to identify
solutions to problems and other texts of interest to the
students.
•
Teaching reading strategies (activating prior
knowledge, clarifying words and phrases, summarising,
inferencing).
•
Using small group and peer tutoring
approaches, in addition to whole class teaching.
•
Differentiating teaching in response to
attainment (including using Response to Teaching (RTI)
interventions).
The motivations that prompted teachers to engage in
the teaching of reading comprehension
–
both extrinsic
(including policy, opportunities and motivation
provided by school leadership and colleagues) and
intrinsic motivation (such as personal and social
validity).
The KBAT-RC is a useful measurement tool, allowing
researchers to explore the knowledge, behaviours and
attitudes of teachers to the teaching reading
comprehension. Using this measure on a wider basis
presents an opportunity to make teacher professional
learning more targeted and effective in supporting
teachers to develop appropriate skills and pedagogies
in the classroom.
The KBAT-RC consists of 25 questions split into four
parts. Part 1 collects contextual and demographic
information from participants and asks about their
current teaching responsibilities and the range and
breadth of teaching experience. The current
opportunities available to teachers to teach reading
comprehension are explored in Part 2 (6 questions),
and their motivations to teach reading comprehension
are probed in Part 3 (8 questions). Part 4 comprises 10
questions which tap into the knowledge of teachers.
The knowledge of the teachers is defined as their
subject and pedagogical content knowledge, combined
with the choices they make when teaching. Therefore,
the questions aim to explore both teachers’ beliefs
about what is important when teaching reading
comprehension
(including
common
assessment
practices) and the direct strategies used when teaching.
Scenario questions, where participants are asked to
consider the reasons behind pedagogical decisions, are
used to explore what teachers think would be
appropriate in the classroom and to understand what
informs the pedagogical decisions they make when
working with students. The design of the questions
varies from section to section. Parts 1, 2 and 3 are 5-
part Likert scale questions which ask participants to
select the most appropriate answer. There are open
response questions at the end of Part 2 and 3 for
participants to add comments and reflections. Part 4
probes teacher knowledge of reading comprehension
and uses both 5 part-Likert scale response questions
and multiple-choice scenario questions which probe
the reason for using different pedagogies with
students. An additional open question asking teachers
to describe a typical reading lesson (adapted from
Neuman and Cunningham 2009) was discarded from
the question set, as it was shown to reduce the
questionnaire completion rate during the piloting
phase.
Reading comprehension, in contrast to the interactive
nature of spoken language comprehension, can be
thought of as a solitary task
–
at first reading, the reader
is dependent on their own skills, knowledge and
understanding to construct their initial interpretation
of the text. Further discussion and reflection of a text
with others can support an individual to refine their
understanding. The Component Model of Reading
Acquisition or CMR acknowledges reading as a social
practice. The CMR proposes that the acquisition of
reading skill requires cognitive components (word
recognition
and
language
comprehension),
psychological components (motivation and interest),
and ecological components (influences of peers,
classroom and community), acknowledging texts and
reading as social and cultural practices.
The findings of the KBAT-RC of the knowledge,
behaviours and attitudes of teachers in England reflect
findings from other studies [4; 110-p.]. Teachers in this
sample report being intrinsically motivated to teach
reading comprehension, but appear to focus on the
more tangible, discrete aspects such as the explicit
teaching of vocabulary and decoding. The less tangible,
metacognitive aspects of the reading comprehension
process, such as self-monitoring for understanding and
European International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research
and Management Studies
126
https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijmrms
European International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Management Studies
inference generation are less well understood. This
could reflect the position taken in the English National
Curriculum for English (DFE Citation2014), highlighting
the impact of recent policy interventions on the
teaching of word reading (such as the government
endorsed introduction of materials, training and
resources) has had on the reading classroom in
England. Data from this first sample has identified some
intriguing contradictions and further research should
be conducted to better understand gaps between the
espoused beliefs of teachers and the instructional
strategies they report using. Using the KBAT-RC with
other participant samples, both in England and in other
educational jurisdictions will enable a broader picture
to be established of teacher knowledge, behaviours
and attitudes to teaching reading comprehension.
REFERENCES
Aarnoutse, C., and G. Schellings. 2003. “Learning
Reading Strategies by Triggering Reading Motivation.”
Educational
Studies
29
(4):
387
–
409.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0305569032000159688
Binks-Cantrell, E., R. M. Joshi, and E. K. Washburn.
2012. “Validation of an Instrument for Assessing
Teacher Knowledge of Basic Language Constructs of
Literacy.” Annals of Dyslexi
a 62 (3): 153
–
171.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-012-0070-8
Duff, F. J., and P. J. Clarke. 2011. “Practitioner Review:
Reading Disorders: What are the Effective Interventions
and how Should They be Implemented and Evaluated?”
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 52 (1): 3
–
12.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02310.x
Hoover, W. A., and P. B. Gough. 1990. “The Simple View
of Reading.” Reading and Writing 2 (2): 127–
160.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00401799
Michie, S., M. Johnston, J. Francis, W. Hardeman, and
M. Eccles. 2008. “From Theory to Intervention :
Mapping
Theoretically
Derived
Behavioural
Determinants to Behaviour Change Techniques.”
Applied
Psychology
57
(4):
660
–
680.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00341.x
Michi
e, S., M. van Stralen, and R. West. 2011. “The
Behaviour Change Wheel: A New Method for
Characterising and Designing Behaviour Change
Interventions.” Implementation Science 6
Oakhill, J. 2020. “Four Decades of Research into
Children’s Reading Comprehen
sion: A Personal
Review.” Discourse Processes 57 (5–
6): 402
–
419.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2020.1740875
Oakhill, J. V., and K. Cain. 2012. “The Precursors of
Reading Ability in Young Readers: Evidence from a Four-
Year Longitudinal Study.” Scient
ific Studies of Reading
16
(2):
91
–
121.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2010.529219
Suggate, S. P. 2016. “A Meta
-Analysis of the Long-Term
Effects of Phonemic Awareness, Phonics, Fluency and
Reading Comprehension Interventions.” Journal of
Learning
Disabilities
49
(1):
77
–
96.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219414528540
