Reading comprehension improvement with individualized cognitive profiles and metacognition

Literacy Research and Instruction

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 124-139

  Allen, Kathleen D ^a   Hancock, Thomas E ^b,c  

^a SAINT MARTIN'S UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b GEORGE FOX UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c Saint Martin's University ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Cognition; Comprehension; Metacognition; Metacomprehension; Reading

Indexed keywords

EID: 65249116497     PISSN: 19388071     EISSN: 19388063     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19388070801938320     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Advantage Learning Systems. (1998). STAR readingTM. Wisconsin Rapids, WI: Author.
2. Anderson, R. C., & Pearson, P. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 255-291). New York: Longman.
3. Anderson, V., & Roit, M. (1993). Planning and implementing collaborative strategy instruction for delayed readers in grades 6-10. Elementary School Journal, 94, 121-137.
4. Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984a). Cognitive monitoring in reading. In J. Flood (Ed.), Understanding reading comprehension (pp. 21-44). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
5. Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984b). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosensthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 353-394). New York: Longman.
6. Britton, B. K., Stimson, M., Stennett, B., & Gülgöz, S. (1998). Learning from instructional text: Test of an individual difference model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 476-491.
7. Burns, P., & Roe, B. (1999). Burns and Roe Informal Reading Inventory: Preprimer to Twelfth Grade, Fifth Edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
8. Carr, M., Kurtz, B. E., Schneider, W., Turner, L. A., & Borkowski, J. G. (1989). Strategy acquisition and transfer among American and German children: Environmental influences on metacognitive development. Developmental Psychology, 25, 765-771.
9. Carroll, J. B. (1995). On methodology in the study of cognitive abilities. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 30, 429-454.
10. Collins, C. (1991). Reading instruction that increases thinking abilities. Journal of Reading, 34, 510-516.
11. Durkin, D. (1978/1979). What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 481-538.
12. Evans, J. J., Floyd, R. G., & McGrew, K. S. (2002). The relations between measures of Cattell- Horn-Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities and reading achievement during childhood and adolescence. The School Psychology Review, 31, 246-262.
13. Flanagan, D. P., & Ortiz, S. O. (2001). Essentials of cross-battery assessment. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
14. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognitive and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
15. Glenberg, A. M., & Epstein, W. (1987). Inexpert calibration of comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 11, 84-93.
16. Haladyna, T. M. (2002). Evaluation of the Oregon statewide assessment program. Phoenix: Arizona State University West, Educational Psychology.
17. Hancock, T. E. (2005). [Review of the Wechsler Objective Reading Dimensions]. In R. A. Spies & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 1111-1113). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.
18. Hancock, T. E., Thurman, R. A., & Hubbard, D. C. (1995). An expanded control model for the use of instructional feedback. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 410-425.
19. Horn, J. L., & Cattell, R. B. (1966). Refinement and test of the theory of fluid and crystallized general intelligences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 57, 253-270.
20. Karpov, Y., & Haywood, H. C. (1998). Two ways to elaborate Vygotsky's concept of mediation: Implications for instruction. American Psychologist, 53(1), 27-36.
21. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
22. Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394.
23. Kuhn, D. (2000). Metacognitive development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 178-181.
24. Kulik, J., & Kulik, C. (1988). Timing of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 58(1), 79-97.
25. Lubliner, S. (2004). Help for struggling upper-grade elementary readers. Reading Teacher, 57, 430-439.
26. Maki, R. H., & McGuire, M. J. (2002). Metacognition for text: Findings and implications for instruction. In T. Perfect & B. Schwarz (Eds.), Applied metacognition (pp. 39-67). New York: Cambridge University Press.
27. Marshall, J. (2000). Research on response to literature. In M. L. Kami, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (vol. 3, pp. 381-402). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
28. McGrew, K. S., & Flanagan, D. P. (1997). Beyond g: The impact of Gf-Gc specific cognitive abilities research on the future use and interpretation of intelligence tests in schools. School Psychology Review, 26, 189-211.
29. McGrew, K. S., & Woodcock, R. W. (2001). Woodcock Johnson III: Technical manual. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
30. Meloth, M. S. (1990). Changes in poor readers' knowledge of cognition and the association of knowledge of cognition with regulation of cognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 792-798.
31. Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students' metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 249-259.
32. Nelson, T. O., & Dunlosky, J. (1991). When people's judgments of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall. Psychological Science, 2, 267-270.
33. Oregon Department of Education. (2001). Technical aspects of the Oregon statewide assessment system: Background information (Oregon Technical Digest). Salem, OR: Author.
34. Oregon Department of Education. (2002). Reading Test Specifications. In Assessment. Retrieved June 7, 2003, from http://ODE.STATE.OR.US/ASMT/ DEVELOPMENT/TESTSPECS
35. Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (1990). How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. In B. F. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 15-51). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. Paris, S. G., Lipson, M., & Wixson, K. (1983). Becoming a strategic reader. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 293-316.
37. Powers, W. T. (1978). Quantitative analysis of purposive systems: Some spadework at the foundations of scientific psychology. Psychological Review, 85, 417-435.
38. Pressley, M., Borkowski, J., & Schneider, W. (1986). Good information processing: What it is and how education can promote it. In F. Weinert (Ed.), International Journal of Educational Research (pp. 857-867). New York: Pergamon Press.
39. Pressley, M., El-Dinary, & Beard, P. (1997). What we know about translating comprehensionstrategies instruction into practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 486-490.
40. Pressley, M., Wharton-McDonald, R., Mistretta-Hampston, J., & Echevarria, M. (1998). Literacy instruction in 10 fourth- and fifth-grade classrooms in upstate New York. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2(2), 159-194.
41. Rosenshine, B. (1980). Skill hierarchies in reading comprehension. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension. (pp. 535-554). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42. Schmitt, M. C., & Baumann, J. F. (1990). Metacomprehension during basal reader instruction: Do teachers promote it? Reading Research and Instruction, 29, 2-13.
43. Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460-475.
44. Schunk, D. H., & Rice, J. M. (1993). Strategy fading and progress feedback: Effects on self-efficacy and comprehension among students. Journal of Special Education, 27, 257-277.
45. Shanahan, T. (2000). [Review of the Burns and Roe Informal Reading Inventory: PrePrimer to Twelfth Grade, Fifth Edition]. In B. S. Plake & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The fourteenth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 196-198). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.
46. Shelley, A. C., & Thomas, P. L. (1996). Using metacognitive strategies to enhance learning in the English classroom. The New England Reading Association Journal, 32(3), 3-6.
47. Spear-Swerling, L. (2004). Fourth graders' performance on a state-mandated assessment involving two different measures of reading comprehension. Reading Psychology, 25(2), 121-148.
48. Sperling, R., Howard, B., Staley, R., & DuBois, N. (2004). Metacognition and self-regulated learning constructs. Educational Research and Evaluation, 10(2), 117-139.
49. The Princeton Review. (2002). Testing the testers 2002: An annual ranking of state accountability systems executive summary. Retrieved January 23, 2003, from http://www.princetonreview.com
50. Tierney, R., & Pearson, D. (1994). Learning to learn from text: A framework for improving classroom practice. In R. Ruddell, M. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading, 4th edition (pp. 496-513). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
51. Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001a). Woodcock-Johnson Psychoeducational Battery-Third Edition. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
52. Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001b). Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement-Third Edition. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.