A Knowledge-Based Framework for Unifying Content-Area Reading Comprehension and Reading Comprehension Strategies

Reading Comprehension Strategies: Theories, Interventions, and Technologies

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 73-104

  Vitale, Michael R ^a   Romance, Nancy R ^b  

^a EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79958276922     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203810033-6     Document Type: Chapter

References (90)

1. Adams, G. A., and Engelmann, S. (1996).Research on Direct Instruction: 25 years beyond DISTAR Seattle, WA: Educational Achievement Systems.
2. Anderson, J. R. (1982).Acquisition of cognitive skill. Psychological Review 89 369-403.
3. Anderson, J. R. (1987).Skill acquisition: Compilation of weak-method problem solutions. Psychological Review 94 194-210.
4. Anderson, J. R. (1992).Automaticity and the ACT theory. American Journal of Psychology 105 165-180.
5. Anderson, J. R. (1993).Problem solving and learning. American Psychologist 48 35-44.
6. Anderson, J. R. (1996).ACT: A simple theory of complex cognition. American Psychologist 51 335-365.
7. Anderson, J. R., and Fincham, J. M. (1994).Acquisition of procedural skills from examples. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, Cognition 20 1322-1340.
8. Armbruster, B. B., and Osborn, J. H. (2001).Reading instruction and assessment:Understanding IRA standards New York: Wiley.
9. Artzen, E., and Holth, P. (1997).Probability of stimulus equivalence as a function of training design. Psychological Record 47 309-320.
10. Beane, J. A. (1995).Curriculum integration and the disciplines of knowledge. Phi Delta Kappan 76 646-622.
11. Billmeyer, R., and Barton, M. L. (1998).Teaching reading in content areas Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
12. Block, C. C., and Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices New York: Guilford.
13. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., and Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
14. Carnine, D. (1991).Curricular interventions for teaching higher order thinking to all students:Introduction to a special series. Journal of Learning Disabilities 24 261-269.
15. Dalton, B., Palincsar, A. S., Defrance, N. L., and Hapgood, S. E. (2006April)The role of strategy instruction in supporting students’ understanding of graphic intensive science hypertext Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
16. Dick, W., Cary, L., and Cary, J. L. (2004).The systematic design of instruction (6th ed.). New York: Allyn and Bacon.
17. Dillon, T., and Tan, P. L. (1993).Object-oriented conceptual modeling New York: Prentice Hall.
18. Dougher, M. J., and Markham, M. R. (1994).Stimulus equivalence, functional equivalence and the transfer of function. In S. C. Hays, L. J. Hays, M. Santo, and O. Koichi (Eds.), Behavior analysis of language and cognition 71-90 Reno, NV: Context
19. Dreher, M.. J. (2002).Children searching and using information text. In C. C. Block and M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices 289-304 New York: Guilford
20. Duke, N. K., Bennett-Armistead, V. S., and Roberts, E. M. (2003).Filling the nonfiction void. American Educator 27(1), 30-35.
21. Duke, N. K., Martineau, J. A., Frank, K. A., and Bennett-Armistead, V. S. (2003).3.6 minutes per day: The impact of including more information text in first grade Unpublished manuscript, Michigan State University.
22. Duke, N., and Pearson, P. D. (2002).Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup and S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction 205-242 Newark, DE: International Reading Association
23. Ellis, A. K. (2001).Research on educational innovations Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
24. Engelmann, S., and Carnine, D. (1991).Theory of instruction Eugene, OR: Association for Direct Intervention.
25. Farstrup, A. E., and Samuels, S. J. (2002). What research has to say about reading instruction Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
26. Florida Department of Education. (2005). Florida’s comprehensive assessment test: 2005 FCAT scores. Retrieved August 2005 from http://www.firn, edu/doe/sas/fcat/fcpress.html
27. Gagne, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K., and Keller, J. M. (2004).Principles of instructional design New York: Wadsworth.
28. Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Williams, J. P., and Baker, S. (2001).Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: A review of research. Review of Educational Research 71 279-320.
29. Glaser, R. (1984).Education and thinking: The role of knowledge. American Psychologist 39 93-104.
30. Graesser, A. C., Leon, J. A., and Otero, J. C. (2002).Introduction to the psychology of science text comprehension. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon, and A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension 1-15 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
31. Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M. (2003).What do readers need to learn in order to process coherence relations in narrative and expository text? In A. P. Sewwt and C. E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension 82-98 New York: Guilford
32. Graesser, A. C., Olde, B., and Klettke, B. (2002).How does the mind construct and represent stories? In M. C. Green, J. J. Strange, and T. C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative impact:Social and cognitive foundations 231-263 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
33. Graesser, A. C., and Wiemer-Hastings, K. (1999).Situation models and concepts in story comprehension. In S. R. Goldman, A. C. Graesser, and P. van den Broek (Eds.), Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence: Essays in honor of Tom Trabasso 77-92 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
34. Guthrie, J. T., Cox, K. E., Anderson, E., Harris, K., Mazzoni, S., and Rach, L. (1998).Principles of integrated instruction for engagement in reading. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 177-199.
35. Guthrie, J. T., and Ozgungor, S. (2002).Instructional contexts for reading engagement. In C. C. Block and M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices 275-288 New York: Guilford
36. Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Barbosa, P., and Perencevich, K. C., Davis, M. H., Scafiddi, N. T., and Tonks, S. (2004).Increasing reading comprehension and engagement through concept-oriented reading instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology 96 403-423.
37. Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., and Perencevich, K. C. (2004).Motivating reading comprehension:Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
38. Hirsch, E. D. (1996).The schools we need. And why we don’t have them New York:Doubleday.
39. Hirsch, E. D. (2001).Seeking breadth and depth in the curriculum. Educational Leadership 59(2), 21-25.
40. Kearsley, G. P. (1987). Artificial intelligence and instruction: Applications and methods New York: Addison-Wesley.
41. Kintsch, W. (1988).The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A constructionintegration model. Psychological Review 95 163-182.
42. Kintsch, W. (1994).Text comprehension, memory, and learning. American Psychologist 49 294-303.
43. Kintsch, W. (1998).Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition Cambridge, England:Cambridge University Press.
44. Kintsch, W. (2002). On the notions of theme and topic in psychological process models of text comprehension. In M. M. Louwerse and W. van Peer (Eds.), Thematics:Interdisciplinary studies (pp. 157-170). Philadelphia: Benjamins.
45. Kintsch, W. (2004) The construction-integration model of text comprehension and its implications for instruction. In R. B. Ruddell and N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1270-1328). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
46. Kintsch, W. (2005).An overview of top-down and bottom-up effects in comprehension:The CI perspective. Discourse Processes 39 125-128.
47. Kolodner, J. L. (1993).Case-based reasoning San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
48. Kolodner, J. L. (1997).Educational implications of analogy: A view from case-based reasoning. American Psychologist 52 57-66.
49. Landauer, T. K. (2002).On the computational basis of learning and cognition: Arguments from LSA. Psychology of Learning and Motivation 41 43-84.
50. Landauer, T. K., and Dumais, S. T. (1996). How come you know so much? From practical problem to new memory theory. In D. Herrmann, C. McEnvoy, C. Hertzog, and M. Johnson (Eds.), Basic and applied memory research (Vol. 1, pp. 105-126). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
51. Landauer, T. K., and Dumais, S. T. (1997).A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review 104 211-240.
52. Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P. W., and Laham, D. (1998).An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes 25 259-284.
53. Landauer, T., McNamara, D. S., Dennis, S., and Kintsch, W. (in press). LSA: A road to meaning Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
54. Luger, G. F. (2002).Artificial intelligence: Structures and strategies for complex problemsolving Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.
55. McNamara, D. S. (2006April)iSTART: An automated reading tutor for higher-level strategies Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
56. McNamara, D. S., de Vega, M., and O’Reilly, T. (in press).Comprehension skill, inference making, and the role of knowledge. In F. Schmalhofer and C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Higher level language processes in the brain: Inference and comprehension processes Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
57. Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., and Novak, J. D. (1998).Teaching science for understanding:A human constructivist view New York: Academic.
58. National Center for Educational Statistics. (2000). NAEP 1999 trends in academic progress: Three decades of student performance (NCES 2000-469). Washington, DC:Author.
59. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Jessup, MD: National Institute for Literacy.
60. Niedelman, M. (1992). Problem solving and transfer. In D. Carnine and E. J. Kameenui (Eds.), Higher order thinking: Designing curriculum for mainstream students (pp. 137-156). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
61. North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (2005). Reports and statistics: Student testing results. Retrieved August 2005 from http://www.ncpublicschools.org/reportstats/ html
62. O’Donnell, A. M., Dansereau, D. F., and Hall, R. H. (2002).Knowledge maps as scaffolds for cognitive processing. Educational Psychology Review 14 71-96.
63. Ogle, D., and Blachowicz, C. L. Z. (2002).Beyond literature circles: Helping students comprehend informational texts. In C. C. Block and M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices 259-274 New York: Guilford
64. Pearson, P. D., and Fielding, L. (1995). Comprehension instruction. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, and P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Volume 2, pp. 815-860). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
65. Perkins, D. N., and Grotzer, T. A. (1997).Teaching intelligence. American Psychologist 52 1125-1133.
66. Romance, N. R., and Vitale, M. R. (1992).A curriculum strategy that expands time for indepth elementary science instruction by using science-based reading strategies:Effects of a year-long study in grade 4. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 29 545-554.
67. Romance, N. R., and Vitale, M. R. (2001).Implementing an in-depth expanded science model in elementary schools: Multi-year findings, research issues, and policy implications. International Journal of Science Education 23 373-404.
68. Romance, N. R., and Vitale, M. R. (2005May)A knowledge-focused multi-part strategy for enhancing student reading comprehension proficiency in grade 5 Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Reading Association, San Antonio, Texas.
69. Romance, N. R., Vitale, M. R., and Greene, E. O. (2003).A curriculum content analysis of the Scott Foresman Reading/Language Arts: Grades 3, 4, 5 NSF/IERI Project Technical Report, Florida Atlantic University, College of Education.
70. Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Houang, R. T., Wang, H. C., Wiley, D. E., and Cogan, L. S. (2002).Why schools matter: A cross-national comparison of curriculum and learning San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
71. Scott-Foresman. (2002).Scott-Foresman reading for Florida Indianapolis, IN: Author.
72. Schug, M. C., and Cross, B. (1998).The dark side of curriculum integration. Social Studies 89(2), 54-57.
73. Sidman, M. (1960).Tactics of scientific research New York: Basic Books.
74. Sidman, M. (1994).Stimulus equivalence Boston: Author’s Cooperative.
75. Sidman, M. (2000).Equivalence relations and the reinforcement contingency. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior 74 127-146.
76. Slavin, R. E. (1990).On making a difference. Educational Researcher 19(3), 30-34.
77. Slavin, R. E. (2002).Evidence-based education policies: Transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher 31(7), 15-21.
78. Snow, C. E. (2002).Reading for understanding: Toward a research and development program in reading comprehension Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
79. Sowa, J. F. (2000).Knowledge representation: Logical, philosophical, and computational foundations New York: Brooks/Cole.
80. Trabasso, T., and Bouchard, E. (2002).Teaching readers how to comprehend text strategically. In C. C. Block and M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices 176-202 New York: Guilford
81. Vitale, M. R., and Medland, M. B. (2004).Knowledge structure development: A developmental framework for children’s understanding of knowledge Boca Raton, FL: Center for School Development.
82. Vitale, M. R., and Romance, N. R. (2000).Portfolios in science assessment: A knowledgebased model for classroom practice. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, and J. D. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view 168-197 San Diego, CA: Academic
83. Vitale, M. R., and Romance, N. R. (2006a, September). Concept mapping as a means for binding knowledge to effective content-area instruction: An interdisciplinary perspective. Paper presented at the Second International Conference on Concept Mapping, San Jose, Costa Rica.
84. Vitale, M. R., and Romance, N. R. (2006b).Research in science education: An interdisciplinary perspective. In J. Rhoton and P. Shane (Eds.), Teaching science in the 21st century 329-351 Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press
85. Vitale, M. R., Romance, N. R., and Klentschy, M. (2005April)Enhancing the time allocated to elementary science instruction by linking reading comprehension to science:Implications of a knowledge-based model Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Dallas, Texas.
86. Vitale, M. R., Romance, N. R., and Klentschy, M. (2006April)Improving school reform by changing curriculum policy toward content-area instruction in elementary schools:A research-based model Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
87. Walsh, K. (2003).Lost opportunity. American Educator 27 24-27.
88. Weaver, C. A., and Kintsch, W. (1995).Expository text. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, and P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, 230-245) Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
89. Williams, J. P. (2002).Using the theme scheme to improve story comprehension. In C. C. Block and M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices 126-139 New York: Guilford Press
90. Yore, L. (2000).Enhancing science literacy for all students with embedded reading instruction and writing-to-learn activities. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 5 105-122.