Recently, in a 4th grade classroom, a student was struggling to read a text about a girl who wanted to join the soccer team. I noticed he looked puzzled and reread the sentences a couple of times.
“Maria practiced every afternoon. However, she did not make the team. Therefore, she decided to work harder and try again next year.”
When asked what happened, he says, "Maria practiced every afternoon. She made the team next year." He misses the contrast signaled by however and the cause/effect signaled by therefore. To him, the sentences feel like a simple list of events. Not understanding the inter-clausal connectors will make the overall message about perseverance unclear to him.
I realized that the student's struggle isn't with decoding, but with following the logic and flow created by cohesive devices. Many teachers overlook the smaller words (pronouns, synonyms, and transitions) that actually hold those structures together. These "small words" provide clues to the structures used to organize writing. This organizational framework helps readers understand where they are in the text and anticipate what is coming next, which is particularly helpful in informational and instructional texts.
The "small words" or cohesive devices (also called cohesive ties) are the "glue" of comprehension. When students miss them, they may decode the words correctly but fail to follow the meaning of the text or struggle with inference. For struggling readers, especially, ignoring cohesive devices can mean missing the author's message entirely.
Why Do Cohesive Devices Matter for Comprehension?
Research highlights the critical role cohesive devices play in reading comprehension. Snow (2002) emphasized that cohesion is foundational for building mental models of text and stressed the importance of scaffolding how students process these "glue words." Without attention to these small but powerful words, students may read sentence by sentence without fully grasping how ideas connect.
Cain (1999, 2011) demonstrated that explicit instruction in cohesive devices, such as inter-clausal connectors like because, so, and therefore, significantly improves comprehension, particularly for struggling readers, and found that weak comprehenders often fail to track pronouns and synonyms, hindering their ability to make essential inferences.
Skilled readers, on the other hand, naturally weave pronouns, synonyms, and connectors into a coherent mental model of meaning. Teaching students to notice and use cohesive devices strengthens their understanding of text structure, enhances inferencing skills (such as determining what he, this, or that refers to), and even supports writing, as students learn to use cohesive devices to connect their own ideas.
What Are Cohesive Devices?
Cohesive devices are the words and phrases that connect ideas within and between sentences. They contribute to a text's smooth progression, reducing the cognitive load on readers as they move from one sentence to the next. By signaling transitions and logical connections, cohesive devices allow readers to focus on content without needing to work out how each sentence fits within the overall meaning. They act like signposts, guiding readers so they don't get lost in the text.
Types of Cohesive Devices
Cohesive devices are classified by the function they serve in helping readers and writers connect ideas across sentences and larger texts. It is not about difficulty or parts of speech, but how they build meaning and help link ideas. For example, a pronoun (he) and a transition (as a result) are very different word types, but both help link ideas.
Cohesive devices are classified into several types:
-
Reference: Pronouns (he, she, it, they), demonstratives (this, that, these, those), and other reference words tie sentences together by pointing back to previously mentioned items, creating continuity.
-
For instance, in "John went to the store. He bought some milk," the pronoun he helps readers understand that John is the subject in both sentences, thus clarifying the narrative.
-
Conjunctions: Cohesive devices such as conjunctions (and, but, because, therefore) explicitly show relationships between ideas, helping readers understand how concepts connect.
-
For example, "He was tired, but he kept working" indicates contrast, while "She missed the bus, so she was late" shows cause and effect. These ties prevent confusion and help readers grasp the intended meaning quickly.
-
Inter-clausal Connectors/Transitions: Inter-clausal connectors (also called transitions or conjunctive ties) are words or short phrases that connect clauses, sentences, or ideas. They signal the relationship (addition, contrast/opposition, cause/effect, sequence-time, comparison) between one idea and the next, guiding the reader through the text. Think of them as bridges—without them, ideas may feel disconnected or confusing. Missing them often leads to a misunderstanding of text structure (van den Broek, Risden, & Husebye-Hartmann, 1995).
-
For example, "It rained heavily. As a result, the game was canceled."
The connector shows cause-effect, contrast, sequence, or comparison. -
Lexical Cohesion: Repetition, synonyms, and collocations unify ideas across a text, reinforcing main themes or concepts.
-
For instance, in a paragraph about climate change, terms like global warming, carbon emissions, and environmental impact all relate to the central theme, reinforcing understanding. Lexical cohesion reduces ambiguity and helps readers infer relationships without constantly seeking clarifications.
-
Substitution and Ellipsis: Substitution and ellipsis reduce redundancy in text without losing meaning.
-
For example, "I need a pen, and she needs one too" uses "one" to avoid repeating "pen," allowing readers to follow along without distraction. By minimizing unnecessary repetition, cohesive devices make the text more concise and easier to process, promoting better comprehension.
Instructional Strategies for Teachers (Grades 3–12)
Instructional strategies focused on cohesive devices help students recognize and use these "glue words" and structures. Research demonstrates that explicit instruction in cohesive devices enhances comprehension. As mentioned, Cain & Nash (2011) showed that teaching causal connectors such as because or therefore improves young readers' ability to infer meaning and follow text structure. Students need explicit instruction to understand that cohesion occurs when the interpretation of one element in a text depends on another. Without this instruction, readers, especially struggling readers, have to work harder to make sense of the relationships between ideas.
Adapting for Different Proficiency Levels
Cohesive tie instruction can be tailored for varying language proficiency levels. Primary grades may start with simple conjunctions (and, but, because), pronouns, and repeated words, while intermediate students can expand transitions, work on synonyms for lexical cohesion, and substitutions. Advanced students can focus on subtle cohesion techniques, such as ellipsis and nuanced conjunctions, to create sophisticated and complex writing. Across grades 2-12, focus on connecting cohesive instruction to both reading comprehension (noticing ties in text) and writing (using ties for clarity).
Takeaway for Teachers and Coaches
Cohesive devices may seem like "small words," but they have a significant role in comprehension. Explicit instruction helps students see how texts hang together. Cohesive devices are essential elements that connect ideas within a text, guiding readers smoothly from one thought to the next. These ties include various linguistic elements, such as conjunctions, pronouns, synonyms, and transitional phrases, which help maintain the flow and unity of a text. By teaching students to notice pronouns, synonyms, and connectors, we strengthen their ability to navigate complex texts in grades 3–12—and to use those same strategies in their own writing.
References
-
Cain, K., & Nash, H. (2011). The influence of connectives on young readers' processing and comprehension of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(2), 429–441.
-
Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (1999). Inference making ability and its relation to comprehension failure in young children. Reading and Writing, 11(5–6), 489–503.
-
Halliday, M.A.K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
-
McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N. B., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14(1), 1–43.
-
Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for Understanding: Toward an R&D Program in Reading Comprehension. RAND Corporation.
-
van den Broek, P., Risden, K., & Husebye-Hartmann, E. (1995). The role of causal inference in reading for meaning. Discourse Processes, 20(3), 291–307.
