The article considers understanding as a social and cognitive phenomenon, analyses the conditions for the formation of understanding in oral and written communications. Text comprehension is a fundamental element of human literacy, since without comprehension it is impossible to use information, reflect and draw conclusions, on the basis of which it is possible to achieve goals and participate in social life. Thus, in the modern world it is one of the key elements of socialisation. Understanding the text is based not only on the technical skills of reading and writing, but also on the general outlook of a person, his ideas about different areas of life. Studies conducted during mass distance learning have shown that a break in personal teacher-student communication during training had a negative impact on the reading skills of schoolchildren. In addition to regularity, both social attitudes and value views of parents, as well as the cognitive experience of the student, the level of his speech development are important for effective reading and understanding.

Reading is considered by the authors not just as a set of cognitive skills, but also as a social action. Studies show that the reading skills and comprehension of new knowledge by schoolchildren are influenced by: the socio-economic status of the family, the attitudes and principles adopted in it. The article also shows that a long time spent by schoolchildren on the Internet negatively affects both their comprehension of texts and empathy. In addition, the problems of integrating the individual into the digital environment and the impact of digitalisation on consciousness and thinking are analysed. On the background of the growth of leisure preferences on the Internet, there is a decrease in the importance of reading for schoolchildren. An increase in school load also negatively affects interest in reading. The authors hypothesise that social stratification between schoolchildren with different levels of literacy can be reduced by using earlier teaching of semantic reading. The authors show that the study of these issues is important not only for pedagogical and psychological sciences, but also for sociology.

reading literacy, understanding of the text, functional literacy, semantic reading, learning to read, generation Z, sociology of education, educational psychology

1. Spichtig A. N., Hiebert E. H., Vorstius C. et al. Decline of Comprehension-Based Silent Reading Efficiency in the United States: A Comparison of Current Data with Performance in 1960. Reading Research Quarterly, 2016: 51(2): 239–259. DOI: 10.1002/rrq.137
2. Tsukerman G. A., Kovaleva G. S., Kuznetsova M. I. Formation of reading literacy, or new adventures of pushing and pulling. Voprosy obrazovaniya, 2015: 1: 284–300 (in Russ.).
3. Tsukerman G. A., Kovaleva G. S., Kuznetsova M. I. Victory in PIRLS and defeat in PISA: the fate of reading literacy of 10-15-year-old schoolchildren. Voprosy obrazovaniya, 2011: 2: 123–151 (in Russ.).
4. OECD PISA 2018 Reading Framework. PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework. 2019. DOI: 10.1787/5c07e4f1-en
5. Frumin I. D., Dobryakova M. S., Barannikov K. A., Remorenko I. M. Universal competencies and new literacy: what to teach today for success tomorrow. Moscow, NIU VSHE, 2018: 28 (in Russ.).
6. Cunningham A. E., Stanovich K. E. Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later. Developmental Psychology, 1997: 33(6): 934–945.
7. Willingham D. T. The Reading Mind: A Cognitive Approach to Understanding How the Mind Reads (ebook). Jossey-Bass ebook, 2017: 256.
8. Chudinova V. P. Functional illiteracy as the problem of developed countries. Sotsiologicheskiye issledovaniya, 1994: 3: 98–102 (in Russ.).
9. Kuz'mina Y., Popov D. Functional literacy of adults and their inclusion in social life in Russia. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 2015: 7: 48−57 (in Russ.).
10. Cargan L., Ballantine J. M. A nation at risk: National commission on excellence in education. Reading in sociology. 4th ed. Wadsworth Publishing Company. Belmont, California, 1987: 179–191.
11. Adamovich K. A., Kapuza A. V., Zakharov A. B., Frumin I. D. The main results of Russian students in the international research of reading, mathematical and natural science literacy PISA ‒ 2018 and their interpretation. Moscow, NIU VSHE, 2019: 28 (in Russ.).
12. Domingue B. W., Hough H. J., Lang D., Yeatman J. Changing patterns of growth in oral reading fluency during the COVID-19 pandemic [Policy brief]. Policy Analysis for California Education. 2021. Accessed 15.08.2022. URL: https://edpolicyinca.org/publications/changing-patterns-growth-oral-reading-fluency-during-covid-19-pandemic
13. Dobryakova M., Yurchenko O., Sivak Ye. Learning Experience and Deficiencies of a Modern School: Positions of Schoolchildren and Parents. Monitoring ekonomiki obrazovaniya, 2021: 1. Accessed 15.08.2022. URL: https://www.hse.ru/data/2021/03/15/1399118825/release_11_2021.pdf (in Russ.).
14. Wagner D. A. Literacy retention: Comparisons across age, time, and culture. In Paris S. G., Wellman H. M. (eds) Global prospects for education: Development, culture, and schooling. American Psychological Association, 1998: 229–251. DOI: 10.1037/10294-008
15. Yakovleva A. M. Clip reading: text as a simulacrum image. Khudozhestvennaya kul'tura, 2015: 2: 197–228 (in Russ.).
16. Znakov V. V. The Psychology of Understanding of the Man’s World. Moscow, IP RAN, 2016: 488 (in Russ.).
17. Snow C. Reading for Understanding: Toward a Research and Development Program in Reading Comprehension. Official site RAND. 2002. Accessed 15.08.2022. URL: https://www.videnomlaesning.dk/media/2526/reading-for-understanding.pdf
18. Willingham D. T., Lovette G. Can reading comprehension be taught? Teachers College Record, 2014: 17701.
19. Kuz'mina Yu., Tyumeneva Yu. Reading literacy of 15-year olds: the importance of family, individual and school characteristics. Voprosy obrazovaniya, 2011: 3: 164−191 (in Russ.).
20. Morozova N. G. On understanding the text. Izvestiya APN RSFSR. Trudy Instituta psikhologii, 1947: 7: 191–195 (in Russ.).
21. Gorshkov M. K., Krumm R., Petukhov V. V. Twenty years of reforms through the eyes of Russians: the experience of many years of sociological measurements. Moscow, Ves' Mir, 2011: 328 (in Russ.).
22. Stillman D. Generation Z at work. How to understand them and find a common language with them. Moscow, Mann, Ivanov i Ferber, 2018: 272 (in Russ.).
23. Temnova L., Mednikova M. The influence of virtual space on the communication of representatives of generations Z and Y. Teoriya i praktika obshchestvennogo razvitiya, 2017: 11: 19–23. DOI: 10.24158/tipor.2017.11.3 (in Russ.).
24. Hancox R. J., Milne B. J., Poulton R. Association of television viewing during childhood with poor educational achievement. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med., 2005: 159(7): 614–618. DOI: 10.1001/archpedi.159.7.614
25. Zimmerman F. J., Christakis D. A. Associations between content types of early media exposure and subsequent attentional problems. Pediatrics, 2007: 120(5): 986–992. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2006-3322
26. Tsymbalenko S. B., Sharikov A. V., Mayorova-Shcheglova S. A., Makeyev P. L. The influence of the Internet on Russian adolescents and youth in the context of the development of the Russian information space. Sociological research results. Moscow, Liga yunykh zhurnalistov, 2012: 99 (in Russ.).
27. ABCD study completes enrollment, announces opportunities for scientific engagement. Accessed 15.08.2022. URL: https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/abcd-study-completes-enrollment-announces-opportunities-scientific-engagement
28. Madigan S., Browne D., Racine N. et al. Association Between Screen Time and Children’s Performance on a Developmental Screening Test. JAMA Pediatr, 2019: 173(3): 244–250. DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.5056
29. Bezrukikh M. M. Preschooler. Myths and realities. Vestnik prakticheskoy psikhologii obrazovaniya, 2011: 8(4): 16–21 (in Russ.).
30. Zagidullina M. V. Adolescents: Reading and the Internet in Everyday Life. Sotsiologicheskiye issledovaniya, 2016: 5: 115–123 (in Russ.).
31. Mckenna M. C., Kear D. J., Ellsworth R. A. Children's attitudes toward reading: A national survey. Reading Research Quarterly, 1995: 30(4): 934–956 (in Russ.).
32. Lombina T. N., Mansurov V. A., Yurchenko O. V. Reading problems in the new digital reality (on the example of schoolchildren). Part 2. Sotsiologicheskaya nauka i sotsial’naya praktika, 2020: 1(29): 93–105 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/snsp.2020.8.1.7097
33. Kravtsov A. O. Dialectics of the "network personality" in the modern educational space. Obrazovatel'naya dinamika setevoy lichnosti, 2019: 15−21 (in Russ.).
34. Orchard L. J., Fullwood C. Current perspectives on personality and internet use. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev, 2010: 28: 155–169. DOI: 10.1177/0894439309335115
35. Belozerova L. A., Polyakov S. D. Transformation of the cognitive sphere of children of the "digital generation": the experience of analysis. Izv. Sarat. un-ta. Nov. ser. Ser. Akmeologiya obrazovaniya. Psikhologiya razvitiya, 2021: 1 (37): 23–32 (in Russ.).
36. Sparrow B., Liu J., Wenger D. M. Google effects on memory: Cognitive consequences of having information at our fi ngertips. Science, 2011: 333 (6043): 776–778. DOI: 10.1126/science.1207745
37. Valkenburg P. M., Peter J. Internet communication and its relation to well-being: Identifying some underlying mechanisms. Media Psychology, 2007: 9(1): 43–58. DOI: 10.1080/15213260709336802
38. Yang C., Lee Y. Interactants and activities on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter: Associations between social media use and social adjustment to college. Applied Developmental Science, 2020: 24(1): 62–78. DOI: 10.1080/10888691.2018.1440233
39. Wolf M. Proust and the squid: the story and science of the reading brain. HarperCollins Publishers, 2007: 314.
40. Nizhegorodtseva N. V., Volkova T. V. Psychological analysis of semantic reading as a specific type of activity. Yaroslavskiy pedagogicheskiy vestnik, 2012: 2: 257–262 (in Russ.).
41. Golan D., Barzillai M., Katzir T. The Effect of Presentation Mode on Children’s Reading Preferences, Performance, and Self-evaluations. Computers & Education, 2018: 126: 346–358. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.08.001
42. Veenendaal N. J., Groen M. A., Verhoeven L. What oral text reading fluency can reveal about reading comprehension. Journal of Research in Reading, 2015: 38(3): 213–225. DOI: 10.1111/1467–9817.1
43. Gambrell L., Marinak B. Reading Motivation: What the Research Says. Reading Rockets. 2009. Accessed 15.08.2022. URL: http://www.readingrockets.org/article/readingmotivation-what-research-says
44. Pagan S., Sénéchal M. Involving Parents in a Summer Book Reading Program to Promote Reading Comprehension, Fluency, and Vocabulary in Grade 3 and Grade 5 Children. Canadian Journal of Education, 2014: 37(2): 1–31.
45. Eason S. H., Goldberg L. F., Young K. M., Geist M. C., Cutting L. E. Reader-text interactions: How differential text and question types influence cognitive skills needed for reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 2012: 104(3): 515–528. DOI: 10.1037/ a0027182
46. Adler M. How to Read Books: A Guide to Reading Great Writings. Moscow, Mann, Ivanov i Ferber, 2011: 335 (in Russ.).
47. Duke N. K., Caughlan S., Juzwik M., Martin N. Reading and writing genre with purpose in K-8 classrooms. Portsmouth, NH, Heinemann, 2012: 228.
48. Leont'yev A. A. Fundamentals of Psycholinguistics. Moscow, Smysl, St. Petersburg, Lan', 2003: 287 (in Russ.).