Textbook preferences: The possibilities of individualized learning in social studies with an individualized textbook

Journal of Interactive Learning Research

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 493-510

  Gentry, James ^a   Fowler, Teri ^b   Nichols, Bobbie ^c  

^a TARLETON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY TEXARKANA   (United States)

^c Texarkana Independent School District   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 39749184651     PISSN: 1093023X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Alexander, P.A. (1996). The past, present, and future of knowledge research: A reexamination of the role of knowledge in learning and instruction. Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 89-92.
2. Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multimentional and developmental perspective. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthall, D.P. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III, pp. 285-310). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3. Armbruster, B.B. (1984). The problem of "Inconsiderate texts." In G. G. Duffy, L.R. Roehler, & J. Manson (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 202-217). New York: Longman.
4. Armbruster, B., &Anderson, T. (1981). Content area textbooks. (Reading Education Report No. 23). Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Center for the Study of Reading.
5. Armbruster, B., &Anderson, T. (1987). Does text structure /summarization instruction facilitate learning from expository text? Reading Research Quarterly, 22(3), 331-346.
6. Ayersman, D. J. (1996). Reviewing the research on hypermedia-based learning. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28(4), 500-525.
7. Bidarra, J., Chambel, T., & Guimaräes, N. (2000, June). Enhancing learner-centred design of hypermedia artefacts through cognitive and affective indicators. Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2000 (pp. 124-129). Retrieved February 4, 2006, from http:/ /www.editlib.org/index.cfm/files/
8. Bean, R. M., & Zigmond, N. (1994). Adapted use of social studies textbooks in elementary classrooms. Remedial & Special Education, 15(4), 216-310.
9. Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2002). Questioning the author: Making sense of social studies. Educational Leadership, 60(3), 44-47.
10. Bednarz, S.W., Miyares, I.M., Schug, M.C., & White, C.S. (2003). World cultures and geography. Evanston, IL: McDougal Littell.
11. Boehn, R.G., Armstrong, D.G., Hunkins, F.P., Reinhartz, D., & Lobrecht, M. (2003). Our word today: People, places, and issues. Columbus, OH: Glenco McGraw-Hill.
12. Creswell, J.W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
13. Dillion, A., & Gabbard, R. (1998) Hypermedia as an educational technology: A review of the quantitative research literature on learner comprehension, control and style. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 322-349.
14. Dunn, M. A. (2000). Closing the book on social studies: Four classroom teachers go beyond the text. Social Studies, 91(3), 132-136.
15. Foltz, P.W., Kintsch, W., & Landauer, T.K. (1998). The measure of textual coherence with latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25(2-3), 285-307.
16. Fuhler, C. J. (1992). A cross-curricular approach: The effects of integrating trade books into the curriculum to develop historical understanding in adolescents with learning disabilities. (Doctoral dissertation, Northern Illinois University, 1992). Dissertation Abstracts International, 53-06, 1792A.
17. Gee, J. P. (2001). Early literacy and developmentally appropriate practice: Rethinking the paradigm. In S.B. Neuman & D.K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 245-262). New York: Guilford Press.
18. Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw-Hill.
19. Goodman, K. S. (2000). Reading, writing, & written texts: A transactional sociopsycholinguistic view. In R.B. Ruddeli, M.R. Ruddell, & S. Harry (Eds.), Theoretical models and pocesses of reading (4th ed., pp. 1093-1130). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
20. Guzzetti, B. J., Kowalinski, B. J., & McGowan, T. (1992). Using a Ifterature-based approach to teach social studies. Journal of Reading, 36(2), 114-122.
21. Harmon, J. M., Katims, D. S., & Whittington, D. (1999). Helping middle school students learn with social studies texts. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(1), 70-75.
22. Hayes, D. (1989). Expository text structure and student learning. Reading Horizons, 30(1), 52-61.
23. King, D. C. (1977). Social studies texts. How to recognize good ones and survive bad ones. Learning, 5(5), 38-41.
24. Kracht, J.B. (2003). World explorer: People, places, and cultures. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
25. Korgin, D., Abbott. E., Ellinwood, J., & Horton, D. (1993). Learning history by doing history. Educational Leadership, 50(7), 39-41.
26. Labbo, L., & Field, S. (1996). The use of literature in elementary social studies textbooks. Soutern Social Studies Journal, 21(2), 17-28.
27. Landauer, T., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. (1998). An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25(2-3), 259-284.
28. Leu, D.J. (2000). Literacy and technology: Deictic consequences for literacy education in an information age. In M.L. Kamil, P.B, Mosenthall, D.P. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III, pp. 743-770). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
30. Many, J. E. (2000). The effect of reader stance on the students' personal understanding of literature. In R.B. Ruddell, M.R. Ruddell, & S. Harry (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (4th ed., pp. 653-667). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
31. Pintrich, P.R. (1994). Continuities and discontinuities: Future directions for research in educational psychology. Educational Psychologist, 29, 137-148.
32. Rosenblatt, L. M. (1964). The poem as event. College English, 26, 123-128.
33. Rosenblatt, L. M. (1978). The reader the poem: The transactional theory of literacy work. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
34. Rosenblatt, L. M. (2000). The transactional theory of reading and writing. In R.B. Ruddell, M.R. Ruddell, & S. Harry (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (4th ed., pp. 1057-1092). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
35. Sager, R.J., Helgren, D.M., & Brooks, A.S. (2003). People, places, and change. Austin, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
36. Sampson, M. B., Rasinski, T. V., & Sampson, M R. (2003). Total literacy, Reading, writing, and learning (3rd ed.). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Wadsworth/Nelson Thomas Learning.
37. Schunk, D. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207-231.
38. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
39. Sturtevant, E. G., & Linek, W. M. (2004). Content literacy: An inquiry-based case approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
40. Tyson, H., & Woodward, A. (1989). Why students aren't learning very much from textbooks. Educational Leadership, 47(3), 14-17.
41. Vacca, R. 1, & Vacca, J. L. (2005). Content area reading: Literacy and learning across the curriculum. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
42. Wentzel, K.R. (1991). Relations between social competence and academic achievement in early adolescence. Child Development, 62(5), 1066-1078.
43. Wentzel, K.R. (11993). Social and academic goals at school: Motivation and academic achievement in early adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 13(1), 4-20.
44. Wingfield, A. & Eccles, J. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis. Developmental Review, 12, 265-310.
45. Wolfe, M., Schreiner, M.E., Rehder, B., Laham, D., Foltz, P. W., Kintsch, W., et al. (1998). Learning from text: Matching readers and texts by latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25(2-3), 259-284.