Interactive paraphrase training: The development and testing of an iSTART module

Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications

Volumn 200, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 181-188

  McNamara, Danielle S ^a   Boonthum, Chutima ^b   Kurby, Christopher A ^a   Magliano, Joe ^c   Pillarisetti, Srinivasa ^a   Bellissens, Cedrick ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS   (United States)

^b HAMPTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Feedback; Paraphrase evaluation; Reading strategy; Self explanation

Indexed keywords

COMPREHENSION OF SCIENCE TEXTS; DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING; HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS; LEARN+; PARAPHRASE EVALUATION; READING STRATEGIES; SELF EXPLANATIONS; STRATEGY USE; TEXT CONTENT;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

EID: 73149118949     PISSN: 09226389     EISSN: 18798314     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.3233/978-1-60750-028-5-181     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. M. Dynarski, R., Agodini, S. Heaviside, T. Novak, N. Carey,L. Campuzano, B. Means, R. Murphy, W. Penuel, H. Javitz, D. Emery, & W. Sussex, Effectiveness of Reading and Mathematics Software Products: Findings from the First Student Cohort, U.S. Department of Education, IES, 2007.
2. C.E. Snow, Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension, Santa Monica, Rand Education, CA 2002.
3. D. Donahue, M. Daane, & W. Grigg, The Nation's Report Card: Reading Highlights 2003 (NCES 2004-452), U.S. Department of Education, NCES, U.S. Government Printing Office, D.C. 2003.
4. J. Otero, J.A. Leon, & A.C. Graesser, The psychology of science text comprehension. Mahwah, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, NJ 2002.
5. T. O'Reilly & D.S. McNamara, The impact of science knowledge, reading strategy knowledge on more traditional "High-Stakes" measures of high school students' science achievement, American Educational Research Journal 44 (2007), 161-196.
6. D.S. McNamara, Reading both high and low coherence texts: Effects of text sequence and prior knowledge, Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 55 (2001), 51-62.
7. D.S. McNamara, SERT: Self-explanation reading training, Discourse Processes 38 (2004), 1-30.
8. M.T.H. Chi, N. De Leeuw, M. Chiu, & C. LaVancher, Eliciting self explanations improves understanding, Cognitive Science 18 (1994), 439-477.
9. C. Bereiter & M. Bird, Use of thinking aloud in identification and teaching of reading comprehension strategies, Cognition and Instruction 2 (1985), 131-156.
10. Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. Introduction to Latent Semantic Analysis. Discourse Processes, 25 (1998), 259-284.
11. D.S. McNamara, I.B. Levinstein, & C. Boonthum, iSTART: Interactive strategy trainer for active reading and thinking, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 36 (2004), 222-233.
12. D.S. McNamara, C. Boonthum, I.B. Levinstein, & K.K. Millis, Evaluating Self-Explanation in iSTART: Comparing Word-based and LSA Systems, In T. Landauer, D.S. McNamara, S. Dennis, & W. Kintsch eds, Handbook of Latent Semantic Analysis, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ (2007), 227-241.
13. D.E. Knuth, The art of computer programming, Vol.3: Sorting and searching, 3rd ed., Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1998.
14. D.S. McNamara, T. O'Reilly, R. Best, & Y. Ozuru, Improving adolescent students' reading comprehension with iSTART, Journal of Educational Computing Research 34 (2006), 147-171.
15. J.P. Magliano, S. Todaro, K.K. Millis, K. Wiemer-Hastings, H.J. Kim, & D.S. McNamara, Changes in reading strategies as a function of reading training: A comparison of live and computerized training. Journal of Educational Computing Research 32 (2005), 185-208.
16. W.H. MacGinitie & R.K. MacGinitie, Gates MacGinitie reading tests. Riverside, IL 1989.
17. T. O'Reilly & D.S. McNamara, Reversing the reverse cohesion effect: Good texts can be better for Strategic, high-knowledge readers, Discourse Processes 43 (2007), 121-152.
18. A.C. Graesser, D.S. McNamara, M.M. Louwerse, & Z. Cai, Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language, Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 36 (2004), 193-202.
19. S. Gilliam, J.P. Magliano, K.K. Millis, I.B. Levinstein, & C. Boonthum, Assessing the format of the presentation of text in developing a Reading Strategy Assessment Tool (R-SAT), Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 39 (2007), 199-204.
20. I.B. Levinstein, C. Boonthum, C., Pillarisetti, S.P., Bell, C., and McNamara, D.S., iSTART 2: Improvements for Efficiency and Effectiveness. Behavior Research Methods Instruments and Computers, 39, (2007), 224-232.