The impact of reading self-efficacy and task value on reading comprehension scores in different item formats

Reading Psychology

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 1-27

  Solheim, Oddny Judith ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STAVANGER   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 78751607214     PISSN: 02702711     EISSN: 15210685     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02702710903256601     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
2. Alexander, P. A. (2005). The path to competence: A lifespan developmental perspective on reading. Journal of Literacy Research, 37, 413-436.
3. Allan, A. I. C. G. (1992). EFL reading comprehension test validation: Investigating aspects of process approaches. Unpublished PhD thesis, Lancaster University, Lancaster, England.
4. Anmarkrud, Ø., & Br°aten, I. (2009). Motivation for reading comprehension. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 252-256.
5. Baker, L., & Wigfield, L. (1999). Dimensions of children's motivation for reading and their relations to reading activity and reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 452-477.
6. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
7. Campbell J. (2005). Single instruments, multiple measures: Considering the use of multiple item formats to assess reading comprehension. In S. G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Children's reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 347-368). Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
8. Carr, M., Mizelle, N. B., & Charak, D. (1998). Motivation to read and learn from text. In C. R. Hynd & S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Learning from text across conceptual domains (pp. 45-70). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9. Dermitzaki, I., Andreou, G., & Paraskeva, V. (2008). High and low reading comprehension achievers strategic behaviours and their relation to performance in a reading comprehension situation. Reading Psychology, 29, 471-492.
10. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.
11. Farr, R., Pritchard, R., & Smitten, B. (1990). A description of what happens when an examinee takes a multiple-choice reading comprehension test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 209-226.
12. Fletcher, J. M. (2006). Measuring reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 323-330.
13. Francis, D. J., Feltcher, J. M., Catts, H.W., & Tomblin, J. B. (2005). Dimensions affecting the assessment of reading comprehension. In S. G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Children's reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 369-394). Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
14. Guthrie, J. T., Hoa, A. L. W., Wigfield, A., Tonks, S. M., Humenick, N. M., & Littles, E. (2007). Reading motivation and reading comprehension growth in the later elementary years. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 282-313.
15. Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 403-424). Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
16. Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2005). Roles of motivation and engagement in reading comprehension assessment. In S. G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Children's reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 187-214). Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
17. Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Metsala, J. L., & Cox, K. E. (1999). Motivational and cognitive predictors of text comprehension and reading amount. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 231-256.
18. Haladyna, T. M., & Downing, S. M. (2004). Construct-irrelevant variance in highstakes testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 23, 17-27.
19. Høien, T., & Tønnesen, G. (1998). H°andbok til ordkjedetesten [Handbook for the word-chain test]. Stavanger, Norway: Stiftelsen Dysleksiforskning.
20. Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 127-160.
21. Johnson, E. S., Jenkins, J. R., & Jewell, M. (2005). Analyzing components of performance assessment: An expanded simple view. Reading Psychology, 26, 267-283.
22. Langer, J. (1987). The construction of meaning and the assessment of comprehension: An analysis of reader performance on standardized test items. In R. O. Freedle & R. P. Duran (Eds.), Cognitive and linguistic analyses of text performance (pp. 225-244). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
23. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment. Validation of Inferences from persons' responses and performance as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741-749.
24. Mucherah, W., & Yoder, A. (2008). Motivation for reading and middle school students' performance on standardized testing in reading. Reading Psychology, 29, 214-235.
25. Mullis, I. V. S., Kennedy, A. M., Martin, M. O., & Sainsbury, M. (2006). PIRLS 2006 assessment framework and specifications (2nd ed.). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
26. Nasjonalt Læremiddelsenter. (1995). Kartlegging av leseferdighet, 6. trinn [Assessment of reading ability, Grade 6]. Oslo, Norway: Nasjonalt Laeremiddelsenter.
27. Pearson, P. D., & Hamm, D. N. (2005). The assessment of reading comprehension: A review of practices-Past, present and future. In S. G. Paris &S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Children's reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 13-69). Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
28. Pintrich, P. (2000). An achievement goal perspective on issues in motivation terminology, theory and research. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 92-104.
29. Pressley, M. (2002). Metacognition and self-regulated comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed., pp. 291-309). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
30. Raven, J. C. (1958). Standard progressive matrices: Sets A, B, C, D & E. Oxford, UK: Oxford Psychologists Press.
31. Raven, J. C., Court, J. H., & Raven, J. (1988). Standard progressive matrices. London, UK: Oxford Psychologists Press.
32. Rupp, A. A., Ferne, T., & Choi, H. (2006). How assessing reading comprehension with multiple-choice questions shapes the construct: A cognitive processing perspective. Language Testing, 23, 441-474.
33. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Developing self-efficacious readers and writers: The role of social and self-regulatory processes. In J. T. Guthrie & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction (pp. 34-50). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
34. Solheim, O. J., & Uppstad, P. H. (2007, August/September). Reading during answering. Paper presented at the 12th Biennial Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction, Budapest, Hungary.
35. Solheim, O. J., & Uppstad, P. H. (2010). Eye tracking as a tool in process-oriented reading test validation. In O. J. Solheim (Ed.), Vurdering av leseprestasjoner. Grunnleggende forutsetninger for m°aling av leseferdighet [Assessment of reading performance. Fundamental conditions for measuring reading ability]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway.
36. Valencia, S. W., & Pearson, P. D. (1987). Reading assessment. Time for a change. The Reading Teacher, 40, 726-732.
37. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-Value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81.
38. Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Relations of children's motivation of reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 420-432.
39. Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-efficacy and educational development. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing societies (pp. 202-231). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 82-91.