Comprehension and technoxslogy

International Handbook of Literacy and Technology

Volumn 2, Issue , 2013, Pages 317-326

  Duke, Nell K ^a   Schmar Dobler, Elizabeth ^b   Zhang, Shenglan ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b EMPORIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846612011     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203929131-31     Document Type: Chapter

References (61)

1. Altun, A. (2000). Patterns in cognitive processes and strategies in hypertext reading: A case study of two experienced computer users. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9, 35-55.
2. Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Cognitive monitoring in reading. In J. Flood (Ed.). Understanding reading comprehension: Cognition, language, and the structure of prose (pp. 21-44). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
3. Boyle, T. (1997). Design for multimedia learning. London: Prentice Hall.
4. Calisir, F., & Gurel, Z. (2003). Influence of text structure and prior knowledge of the learner on reading comprehension, browsing and perceived control. Computer in Human Behavior, 79, 135-145
5. CAST eReader [Computer Software]. Wakefield, MA: CAST, Inc. Retrieved September, 2005 from http://www.cast.org/products/ereader/index.html
6. Childers, J., & Hentzi, G. (Eds.) (1995). Columbia dictionary of modern literary and cultural criticism. New York: Columbia University Press.
7. Coiro, J. (2003). Reading comprehension on the Internet: Expanding our understanding of reading comprehension to encompass new literacies. The Reading Teacher, 56, 458-464.
8. Coiro, J., Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Labbo, L., & Teale, W. (2003). A review of research on literacy and technology: Replicating and extending the NRP subcommittee report on computer technology and reading instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Reading Conference, Scottsdale, AZ.
9. Coiro, J., & Schmar-Dobler, E., (2003). Exploring how skilled readers use reading strategies while locating information on the Internet. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference, Scottsdale, AZ.
10. Dee-Lucas, D., & Larkin, J. H. (1995). Learning from electronic texts: Effects of interactive overviews for information access. Cognition & Instruction, 13, 431-468.
11. Duke, N. K. (2005). Comprehension of what for what: Comprehension as a non-unitary construct. In S. Paris & S. Stahl (Eds.), Current issues in reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 93-104). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Duke, N., & Pearson, P. D., (2002). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.). What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 205-242). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
13. Duke, N. K., Pressley, M., Hilden, K., Golos, D., Halladay, J., Zhang, S., Fingeret, L., Park, Y., & Reynolds, J. M. (2005). The simple view of reading is probably too simple. Paper presented at the National Reading Conference, Miami, FL.
14. Eagleton, M. B., Guinee, K., & Langlais, K. (2003). Teaching Internet literacy strategies: The hero inquiry project. Voices From the Middle, 70(3), 28-35.
15. Feldman, S. C., & Fish, M. C. (1991). Use of computer-mediated reading supports to enhance reading comprehension of high school students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 7(1), 25-36.
16. Foltz, P. W. (1996). Comprehension, coherence, and strategies in hypertext and linear text. In J.-F. Rouet, J. J. Levonen, A. Dillon, & R. J. Spiro (Eds.). Hypertext and Cognition (pp. 109-136). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Gillingham, M. G. (1996). Comprehending electronic text. In H. V. Oostendorp, & S. de Mul (Eds.). Cognitive aspects of electronic text processing (pp. 77-98). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
18. Gillingham, M. G., & Gamer, R. (1992). Readers’ comprehension of mazes embedded in expository texts. Journal of Educational Research, 85, 234-241.
19. Gillingham, M. G., Garner, R., Guthrie, J. T., & Sawyer, R. (1989). Children’s control of computer-based reading assistance in answering synthesis questions. Computers in Human Behavior, 5, 61-75.
20. Gordon, S., Gustavel, J., Moore, J., & Hankey, J. (1988). The effects of hypertext on reader knowledge representation. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Human Factors Society, 32,296-300. Santa Monica, CA: The Human Factors Society.
21. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6-10.
22. Hillinger, M. L. & Leu, D. J. (1994). Guiding instruction in hypermedia. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society’s 38th Annual Meeting, 266-270.
23. International Reading Association. (2001). Integrating literacy and technology in the curriculum: A position statement. Retrieved January 13, 2003, from http://www.reading.org/positions/technology.html
24. Kamil, M., & Lane, D. (1998). Researching the relationship between technology and literacy: An agenda for the 21st century. In D. R. Reinking, L. D. Labbor, M. McKenna, & R. Kieffer (Eds.). Literacy for the 21st century: Technological transformations in a post-typo graphic world (pp. 323-342). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
25. Kim, H., & Hirtle, S. C. (1995). Spatial metaphors and disorientation in hypertext browsing. Behaviour and Information Technology, 14, 239-250.
26. Kim, H. S., & Kamil, M. L. (1999, December). Exploring hypertext reading and strategy use for structured vs. unstructured texts. Paper presented at the National Reading Conference, Orlando, FL.
27. Kristeva, J. (1984). Revolution in poetic language. New York: Columbia University Press.
28. Lachman, R. (1989). Comprehension aids for on-line reading of expository text. Human Factors, 31, 1-15.
29. Lawless, K. A., & Kulikowich, J. M. (1994). Reading comprehension, navigation and hypertext. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southwestern Educational Research Association, San Antonio, TX.
30. Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., & Cammack, D. (2004). Towards a theory of literacies emerging from the Internet and other ICT. In R. B. Ruddell & N. Unrau (Eds.). Theoretical Models of Processing Reading, 5th Edition (pp. 1568-1611). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
31. Lawless, K. A., Brown, S. W., Mills, R., & Mayall, H. J. (2003). Knowledge, interest, recall and navigation: A look at hypertext processing. Journal of Literacy Research, 35, 911-934.
32. New London Group, The. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66, 60-92.
33. Pang, E. S., & Kamil, M. L. (2001). Reading hypertext: Comprehension and strategies of third grade students. In D. L. Schallert, C. M. Fairbanks, J. Worthy, B. Maloch, & J. V. Hoffman (Eds.). 51st Yearbook of the National Reading Conference Yearbook (pp. 333-343). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference.
34. Potelle, H., & Rouet, J. (2003). Effects of content representation and readers’ prior knowledge on the comprehension of hypertext. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58, 327-345.
35. McDonald, S., & Stevenson, R. (1996). Disorientation in hypertext: The effects of three text structures on navigation performance. Applied Ergonomics, 27(1), 61-68.
36. McDonald, S., & Stevenson, R. (1998). Effects of text structure and prior knowledge of the learner on navigation in hypertext. Human Factors, 40(1), 18-27.
37. McKenna, M. C., Reinking, D., Labbo, L. D., & Kieffer, R. D. (1999). The electronic transformation of literacy and its implications for the struggling reader. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 15, 111-126.
38. Mohageg, M. F. (1992). The influence of hypertext linking structures on the efficiency of information retrieval. Human Factors, 34, 351-367.
39. RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Towards an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Education.
40. Reinking, D. (1988). Computer-mediated text and comprehension differences: The role of reading time, reader preference, and estimation of learning. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 484-498.
41. Reinking, D., & ChanLin, L. (1994). Graphic aids in electronic texts. Reading Research and Instruction, 33, 207-232.
42. Reinking, D., & Rickman, S. S. (1990). The effects of computer-mediated texts on the vocabulary learning and comprehension of intermediate-grade readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 22, 395-411.
43. Reinking, D., & Schreiner, R. (1985). The effects of computer-mediated text on measures of reading comprehension and reading behavior. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 536-552.
44. Rosenblatt, L. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
45. Rouet, J., Levonen, J., Dillon, A., & Spiro, R. (Eds.). (1996). Hypertext and cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
46. Reinking, D., & Mason, G. E. (Eds.). (1987). Reading and computers: Issues for theory and practice. NY: Teachers College Press.
47. Schmar, E. S. (2002). A collective case study of reading strategies used by skilled fifth graders reading on the Internet. (Doctoral Dissertation, Kansas State University). Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 4227.
48. Schmar-Dobler, E. (2003). Reading on the Internet: The link between literacy and technology. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 47, 80-85.
49. Shapiro, A. (1998). Promoting active learning: The role of system structure in learning from hypertext. Human-Computer Interaction, 31, 1-36.
50. Smolin, L. I., & Lawless, K. A. (2003). Becoming literate in the technological age: New responsibilities and tools for teachers. The Reading Teacher, 56, 570-577.
51. Spires, H. A. & Estes, T. H. (2002). Reading in Web-based learning environments. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.). Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 115-125). New York: The Guilford Press.
52. Spruijt, S., & Jansen, C. (1999). The influence of task and format on reading results with an online text. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 42(2), 92-100.
53. Sutherland-Smith, W. (2002). Weaving the literacy Web: Changes in reading from page to screen. The Reading Teacher, 55, 662-668.
54. Symons, S., MacLatchy-Gaudet, H., Stone, T. D., & Reynolds, P. L. (2001). Strategy instruction for elementary students searching informational text. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(1), 1-33.
55. Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
56. van Oostendrop, H. (1996). Studying and annotating electronic text. In J. Rouet, J. Levonen, A. Dillon, & R. J. Spiro (Eds.). Hypertext and cognition (pp. 137-148). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
57. van Oostendorp, H., & de Mul S. (Eds.) (1996). Cognitive aspects of electronic text processing. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
58. Verheij, J., Stoutjesdijk, E., & Beishuizen, J. (1996). Search and study strategies in hypertext. Computers in Human Behavior, 12, 1-15.
59. Waniek, J., Brunstein, A., Naumann, A., & Krems, J. F. (2003). Interaction between text structure representation and situation model in hypertext reading. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 62(2), 103-111.
60. Wixson, K., & Peters, C. (1984). Reading redefined: A Michigan Reading Association position paper. The Michigan Reading Journal, 17, 4-7.
61. Yang, S. C. (1997). Information seeking as problem-solving using a qualitative approach to uncover the novice learners’ information-seeking processes in a Perseus hypertext. Library & Information Science Research, 79(1), 71-92.