Rethinking middle school reading instruction: A basic literacy activity

Reading Psychology

Volumn 28, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 75-95

  Blanton, William E ^a   Wood, Karen D ^b   Taylor, D Bruce ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHARLOTTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33847105864     PISSN: 02702711     EISSN: 15210685     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02702710601115489     Document Type: Review

References (100)

1. Allington, R. L. (2002, June). What I've learned about effective reading instruction from a decade of studying exemplary elementary classroom teachers. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(10), 740-747.
2. Alvermann, D. E. (1984). Second graders' strategic reading preferences while reading basal stories. Journal of Educational Research, 77, 184-189.
3. Alvermann, D. E. (Ed.) (2002). Adolescents and literacies in a digital world. New York: Lang.
4. Alvermann, D. E. (2003, November). Seeing themselves as capable and engaged readers: Adolescents and re/medial instruction. Learning Point, 1-19. Retrieved February 16, 2005, from http://www.ncrel.org/litweb/readers/ readers.pdf
5. Ananda, S., & Rabinowitz, S. (2000). The high stakes of HIGH-STAKES testing. San Francisco, CA: WestEd. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED455254).
6. Armbruster, B. B., Lehrer, F., & Osborn, J. (2001). Put reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.
7. Barksdale-Ladd, M. A., & Thomas, K. F. (2000). What's at stake in high-stakes testing: Teachers and parents speak out. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(5), 384-397.
8. Bauman, J. F., Seifert-Kessell, N., & Jones, L. A. (1992). Effect of think-aloud instruction on elementary students' comprehension monitoring abilities. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24, 143-172.
9. Bauman, J. F., Seifert-Kessell, N., & Jones, L. A. (1993). Monitoring reading comprehension by thinking aloud (Instructional Resource No.1). Athens, GA: University of Georgia, National Reading Research Center.
10. Bellack, A. (1966). The language of the classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
11. Blanton, W. E., Greene, M. W., & Cole, M. (1999). Computer mediation for learning and play. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43, 272-278.
12. Blanton, W., Menendez, R., Moorman, G., & Pacifici. L. C. (2003). Effects of participation in technology rich environments on understanding written directions. Early Education & Development, 14(3), 313-333.
13. Blanton,W., & Moorman, G. (1990) The presentation of reading lessons. Reading Research and Instruction, 29, 35-55.
14. Blanton, W., Moorman, G., & Hayes, B. (1998). Effects of participation in the fifth dimension on far transfer. Journal of Computing Research, 16, 371-396.
15. Block, C., & Israel, S. (2004) The ABCs of performing highly effective thinkalouds. The Reading Teacher, 58, 154-167.
16. Borko, H., & Elliott, R. (1999). Hands-on pedagogy versus hands-off accountability: Tensions between competing commitments for exemplary math teachers in Kentucky.Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 394-400.
17. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
18. Bridge, C. A., Compton-Hall, M., & Cantrell, S. C. (1997). Classroom writing practices revisited: The effects of statewide reform on writing instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 98(2), 151-170.
19. Brown, A. L., Palincsar, A. S., & Purcell, L. (l986). Poor readers: Teach, don't label. In U. Neisser (Ed.) The school achievement of minority children: New perspectives (pp. 105-143). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20. Brown, R., Pressley, M., Van Meter, P., & Schuder, T. (1996). A quasi-experimental validation of transactional strategies instruction with low-achieving second grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 18-37.
21. Calkins, L., Montgomery, K., & Santman, D. (1998). A teacher's guide to standardized reading tests: Knowledge is power. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
22. Campbell, J. R., Hombo, C. M., & Masseo, M. (2000, August). NAEP 1999 trends in academic progress: Three decades of student performance. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/naep/pdf/main1999/200049pdf
23. Chall, J. S., Jacobs, V. A., & Baldwin, L. E. (1990). The reading crisis: Why poor children fall behind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
24. Daniels, H. (2002). Expository text in literature circles. Voices from the Middle, 9(4), 7-14.
25. Davey, B. (1983). Think aloud-Modeling the cognitive processes of reading comprehension. Journal of Reading, 27, 44-47.
26. Dodge, B. (1995). WebQuests: A technique for Internet-based earning. Distance Educator, 1(2), 10-13.
27. Donahue, P. L., Voelkl, K. E., Campbell, J. R., & Mazzeo, J. (1999). NAEP 1998 Reading report card for the nation and the states (NCES 1999-500). Retrieved May, 2005, from http://nces.ed.gov/naep
28. Duke, N. K. (2000) 3.6 Minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(2), 202-225.
29. Duke, N. K., & 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 (3rd ed., pp. 205-242). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
30. Dupuis, M. M., Askov, E. N., & Lee, J. W. (1979). Changing attitudes toward content area reading: The content area reading project. Journal of Educational Research, 73(2), 65-74.
31. Durkin, D. (1978-79). What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 481-533.
32. Fischer, K., & Farrar, M. J. (1987). Generalizations about generalization: How a theory of skill development explains both generality and specificity. International Journal of Psychology, 22, 643-677.
33. Fischer, K. W., & Granott, N. (1995). Beyond one-dimensional change: Parallel, concurrent, socially distributed processes in learning and development. Human Development, 38, 302-314.
34. Gall, M. (1970). The use of questions in teaching. Review of Educational Research, 40, 707-720.
35. Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about literacy and learning. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
36. Gordon, S. P., & Reese, M. (1997). High stakes testing: Worth the price? Journal of School Leadership, 7, 345-368.
37. Griffin, P., & Cole, M. (1987). New technologies, basic skills, and the underside of education: What's to be done? In J. Langer (Ed.),Language literacy and culture: Issues of society and schooling (pp. 199-231). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
38. Guastello, E. F., Beasley,T. M., & Sinatra, R. C. (2000). Concept mapping effects on science content comprehension of low-achieving inner-city seventh graders. Remedial & Special Education, 21(6), 356-364.
39. Haney, W. (2000). The myth of the Texas miracle in education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(41). Retrieved March 14, 2003, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n41/
40. Hill, B. C., Noe, K. L. S., & King, J. A. (2003). Literature circles in the middle school: One teacher's journey. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.
41. Hoetker, J., & Ahlbrand, W. P., Jr. (1969). The persistence of the recitation. American Education Research Journal, 6, 145-167.
42. Hoffman, J. V., Assaf, L., Pennington, J., & Paris, S. G. (2001). High stakes testing in reading: Today in Texas, tomorrow? The Reading Teacher, 54(5), 482-492.
43. International Reading Association. (1999). High-stakes assessment in reading: A position statement of the International Reading Association. Newark, DE: Author.
44. Irvin, J. (1990). Reading in the middle grades. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
45. Johnston, P. (1998). The consequences of the use of standardized tests. In Murphy, S. Shannon, P., Johnston, P., & Hansen, J. (Ed.) Fragile evidence: A critique of reading assessment (pp. 89-101). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
46. Jones, B. D., & Johnston, A. F. (2002, April). The effects of high-stakes testing on instructional practices. Paper presented at the 2002 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
47. Kamil, M. L. (2003). Adolescents and literacy: Reading for the 21st century. New York: Alliance for Excellent Education.
48. Kohn, A. (2000). The case against standardized testing: Raising the scores, ruining the schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
49. Langer, J. A. (1999). Beating the odds: Teaching middle and high school students to read and write well. (Research Rep. No. 12014). Albany, NY: National Research Center on English Learning & Achievement.
50. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003). New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom teaching. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
51. Leontiev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
52. Leu, D. J., Jr. (2002). The new literacies: Research on reading instruction with the Internet and other digital technologies. In J. Samuels & A. E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 310-336). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
53. Luke, A., & Elkins, J. (1998). Reinventing literacy in "new times." Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42(1), 4-7.
54. Luria, A. R. (1979). The making of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
55. Luria, A. R. (1985). Cognitive development: Its cultural and historical foundations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
56. McColskey, W., & McMunn, N. (2000). Strategies for dealing with high-stakes state tests. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(2), 115-120.
57. Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
58. Montali, J., & Lewandowski, L. (1996). Bimodal reading: Benefits of a talking computer for average and less skilled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(3), 271-279.
59. Moorman, G., & Blanton, W. (1990). The Information Text Reading Activity (ITRA): Engaging students in meaningful learning. Journal of Reading, 34, 174-193.
60. Mullis, I. V., Campbell, J. R., & Farstrup, A. E. (1993). Reading report card for the nation and the states (NCES 93269). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
61. Murphy, P. K., & Edwards, M. E. (2005, April). What the studies tell us: A meta-analysis of discussion approaches. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
62. Myers, M. (1996). Changing our minds: Negotiating English and literacy. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
63. National Assessment of Educational Progress in Reading Report Card. (2003). http://nces.ed.gov/nationalreportcard/naepdata/search.asp
64. Newkirk, T. (1989). Critical thinking and writing: Reclaiming the essay (Monograph No. 3). Bloomington, ID: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 309 457).
65. New London Group. (2000). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 9-38). New York: Routledge.
66. Nist, S. L., & Kirby, K. (1986). Teaching comprehension and study strategies through modeling and thinking aloud. Reading Research and Instruction, 25, 256-264.
67. Noll, E. (1994). Social issues and literature circles with adolescents. Journal of Reading, 38(2), 88-93.
68. Nystrand, M. (with Gamoran, A., Kachur, R., & Prendergast, C.) (1997). Opening dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
69. O'Brien, D. G., & Bauer, E. (2005). New literacies and the institution of old learning. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 120-131.
70. Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehensionfostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 117-175.
71. Palinscar, A. S., & Klenk, L. (1992). Fostering literacy learning in supportive contexts. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25(4), 211-225, 229.
72. Pappas, C. C. (1993). Is narrative primary? Some insights from kindergarteners' pretend readings of stories and information books. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25(1), 97-129.
73. Passman, R. (2001). Experiences with student-centered teaching and learning in high-stakes assessment environments. Education, 122(1), 189- 211.
74. Pearson, P., & Gallagher, M. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 317-344.
75. Perkins, D. (1992). Smart schools. New York: The Free Press.
76. Pressley, M. (2002). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching (2nd ed.) New York: Guilford.
77. Rand Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R & D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
78. Raphael, T. (1986). Teaching question-answer relationships. Reading Teacher, 39, 516-520.
79. Raphael, T. E., & McMahon, S. I. (1994). Book club: An alternative framework for reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, 48, 102-117.
80. Readence, J. E., Bean, T. W., & Baldwin, R. S. (1998). Content area literacy: An integrated approach (6th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
81. Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 479-530.
82. Rush, L. S. (2002) Taking a broad view of literacy: Lessons from the Appalachian Trail thru-hiking community. Retrieved April 22, 2004, from http://www.readingonline.org/newliteracies/lit
83. Schoenbach, R., Greenleaf, C., Cziko, C., & Hurwitz, L. (1999). Reading for understanding. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
84. Short, K., & Kauffman, G. (1995). So what do I do? The role of the teacher in literature circles. In N. Roser & M. Martinez (Eds.), Book talk and beyond: Children and teachers respond to literature (pp. 140-149). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
85. Snow, C. E., & Biancarosa, G. (2003).Adolescent literacy and the achievement gap: What do we know and where do we go from here? New York: Carnegie Corporation.
86. Soter, A. O., & Rudge, L. (2005, April). What the discussions tell us: Talk and indicators of high-level comprehension. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
87. Stauffer, R. G. (1969a). Teaching reading as a thinking process. New York: Harper & Row.
88. Stauffer, R. G. (1969b). Directing reading maturity as a cognitive process. New York: Harper & Row.
89. Stevens, R. (1912). The question as a measure of efficiency in instruction: A critical study of classroom practice. New York: Columbia University.
90. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
91. Wade, S. E., & Moje, E. B. (2000). The role of text in classroom learning. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, Vol. 3 (pp. 609-627). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
92. Walker, B. (2005). Think aloud: Struggling readers often require more than a model. The Reading Teacher, 58, 688-692.
93. Wedman, J. M., & Robinson, R. (1988). Effects of an extended in-service program on secondary teachers' use of content reading instructional strategies. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 21(3), 65-70.
94. Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into discussions of teacher quality. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
95. Wenglinsky, H. (2004). Facts or thinking skills? What NAEP results say. Educational Leadership, 62(1), 32-35.
96. Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind in action. New York: Oxford University Press.
97. Wideen, M. F., O'Shea, T., Pye, I., & Ivany, G. (1997). High-stakes testing and the teaching of science. Canadian Journal of Education, 22(4), 428-444.
98. Wilkinson, I. A. G., & Reninger, K. B. (2005, April). What the approaches look like: A conceptual framework for discussions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
99. Wood, K., & Muth, D. (1991). The case for improved instruction in the middle grades. Journal of Reading, 35(2), 84-90.
100. Yarbrough, T. L. (1999). Teacher perceptions of the North Carolina ABC Program and the relationship to classroom practice. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.