Running head: BUILDING BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE 1

Literature Review - Domain A: “Building Background Knowledge”

Maria Laique

National University
BUILDING BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE 2

Abstract

This article is a literature review about the importance of background knowledge in

children's comprehension. A three-part experiment was conducted with 4 year olds from low and

middle class families. The results suggest that differences in background knowledge may

account for differences in understanding text for low, and middle income children.
BUILDING BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE 3

Literature Review – Domain A

The first thing we as teachers have to do in the classroom before we teach a new lesson,

is to see how much background knowledge the students already have about the particular topic.

Once we establish this, students are able to connect that information to their new learning and

comprehension of topic. Not all students will have the same amount of background knowledge,

or even the same kind. Depending on their family’s financial backgrounds, their prior

knowledge seems to differ. In this study, the authors have proven that low income families have

less background knowledge than students who come from middle class families, therefore

effecting their comprehension of the subject matter.

Case Study

This was done in three parts using 4 year olds from low and middle income families. In

the first experiment, the kids were assessed on their knowledge about birds, by making them

fictional characters in a book and giving them names. They told the children information like

“This is a toma. A toma is a bird. Then asked questions like, “Can a toma live in a nest?”, and

other similar questions to see how much these kids knew about birds. “The experiment revealed

stark differences in knowledge about birds between the two groups. Low class children had

significantly more limited background knowledge than their middle‐class peers” (Neuman,

Kaefer, & Pinkham, 2014, p. 145). Simply put, the lower income children didn’t have much

knowledge about the topic of birds than the middle class children even though they were asked

the same questions and told the same story.

In the second experiment, an 18‐page illustrated storybook was created using 4 types of

birds that were extinct (the moa, faroe, cupido, and kona). This book had all the components of a

story (setting, plot, problem, and resolution). “Using a receptive comprehension measure that
BUILDING BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE 4

examined children's understanding of critical story events and their ability to make causal

inferences, we found once again that the low income children experienced greater difficulty

comprehending the story than their middle class peers” (Neuman, Kaefer, & Pinkham, 2014, p.

145). The low income children couldn’t really comprehend the story as much as the middle class

children could.

In the third experiment, they made up a story about “wugs”. We know that there’s no

such thing as “wugs” but the children were told this fictional story about them and what they

are. They wanted to make sure that both groups had no prior knowledge of a certain topic, and

that’s why they created a fictional word with a fictional story. “our results sustained our

hypothesis about background knowledge and comprehension. In this case, there were no

differences between the two groups” (Neuman, Kaefer, & Pinkham, 2014, p. 145). This shows

the importance of having background knowledge to the comprehension of topics. When neither

group had any prior knowledge to the certain topic, the results were the same between them.

Conclusion

This study not only proved that there’s a correlation between a family’s financial status

and their learning, but also how important it is to have background knowledge for academic

success. This is why, as teachers, it is vital to get to know how much your students already

know, clarify any misunderstandings, and make sure everyone starts off at the same level of that

background knowledge.

References

Neuman, S. B., Kaefer, T., & Pinkham, A. (2014). Building Background Knowledge. The

Reading Teacher, 68(2), 145-148. doi:10.1002/trtr.1314