Measuring strategy use in context with multiple-choice items

Metacognition and Learning

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 155-177

  Cromley, Jennifer ^a   Azevedo, Roger ^b  

^a TEMPLE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Comprehension; Measurement; Reliability; Strategy use; Validity

Indexed keywords

EID: 79960742389     PISSN: 15561623     EISSN: 15561631     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11409-011-9070-z     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Alexander, P. A., & Judy, J. E. (1988). The interaction of domain-specific and strategic knowledge in academic performance. Review of Educational Research, 58(4), 375-404.
2. Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Greene, J. A., Winters, F. I., & Cromley, J. C. (2008a). Why is externally-regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learning with hypermedia? Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), 45-72.
3. Azevedo, R., Witherspoon, A. M., Graesser, A., McNamara, D., Rus, V., Cai, Z., Lintean, M., & Siler, E. (2008b). MetaTutor: An adaptive hypermedia system for training and fostering self-regulated learning about complex science topics. Paper presented at a Symposium on ITSs with agents at the annual meeting of the Society for Computers in Psychology, Chicago, IL.
4. Baker, L. (1989). Metacognition, comprehension monitoring, and the adult reader. Educational Psychology Review, 1(1), 3-38.
5. Baker, L., & Cerro, L. C. (2000). Assessing metacognition in children and adults. In G. Schraw & J. C. Impara (Eds.), Issues in the measurement of metacognition (pp. 99-146). Lincoln: Buros Institute.
6. Best, R. M., Rowe, M., Ozuru, Y., & McNamara, D. S. (2005). Deep-level comprehension of science texts: The role of the reader and the text. Topics in Language Disorders, 25, 62-80.
7. Brand-Gruwel, S., Aarnoutse, C., & van Den Bos, K. P. (1998). Improving text comprehension strategies in reading and listening settings. Learning and Instruction, 8, 63-81.
8. Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children's reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 31-42.
9. Calvo, M. (2005). Relative contribution of vocabulary knowledge and working memory span to elaborative inferences in reading. Learning and Individual Differences, 15(1), 53-65.
10. Campbell, N. A., & Reece, J. B. (2001). Biology (6th ed.). San Francisco: Benjamin Cummings.
11. Cromley, J. G., & Azevedo, R. (2006). Self-report of reading comprehension strategies: What are we measuring? Metacognition and Learning, 1(3), 229-247.
12. Cromley, J. G., & Azevedo, R. (2007). Testing and refining the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 311-325. doi: 10. 1037/0022-0663. 99. 2. 311.
13. Cromley, J. G., & Snyder, L. E. (2007). Testing the fit of the DIME model of reading comprehension with undergraduate students. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
14. Cromley, J. G., Snyder-Hogan, L. E., & Luciw-Dubas, U. A. (2010a). Reading comprehension of scientific text: A domain-specific test of the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 687-700. doi: 10. 1037/a001945.
15. Cromley, J. G., Snyder-Hogan, L. E., & Luciw-Dubas, U. A. (2010b). Cognitive activities in complex science text and diagrams. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35, 59-74. doi: 10. 1016/j. cedpsych. 2009. 10. 002.
16. Evans, J. E., Floyd, R. G., McGrew, K. S., & Leforgee, M. H. (2001). The relations between measures of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities and reading achievement during childhood and adolescence. School Psychology Review, 31(2), 246-262.
17. Glaser, C., & Brunstein, J. (2007). Improving fourth-grade students' composition skills: Effects of strategy instruction and self-regulation procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 297-310.
18. Gonzalez, J. E., & Uhing, B. M. (2008). Home literacy environments and young Hispanic children's English and Spanish oral language: A communality analysis. Journal of Early Intervention, 30(2), 116-139. doi: 10. 1177/1053815107313858.
19. Graesser, A. (2007). An introduction to strategic reading comprehension. In D. S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Hadwin, A., Winne, P., Stockley, D., Nesbit, J., & Woszczyna, C. (2001). Context moderates students' self-reports about how they study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 477-487.
21. Hadwin, A. F., Nesbit, J. C., Jamieson-Noel, D., Code, J., & Winne, P. H. (2007). Examining trace data to explore self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 2(2), 107-124. doi: 10. 1007/s11409-007-9016-7.
22. Hannon, B., & Daneman, M. (2001). A new tool for measuring and understanding individual differences in the component processes of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 103-128.
23. Hannus, M., & Hyona, J. (1999). Utilization of illustrations during learning of science textbook passages among low- and high-ability children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24(2), 95-123.
24. Hine, D. C. (1994). Hine sight: Black women and the re-construction of American history. NY: Carlson Publications.
25. Johnson-Glenberg, M. C. (2005). Web-based training of metacognitive strategies for text comprehension: Focus on poor comprehenders. Reading and Writing, 18, 755-786.
26. Katz, S., Blackburn, A. B., & Lautenschlager, G. J. (1991). Answering reading comprehension items without passages on the SAT when items are quasi-randomized. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51(3), 747-754.
27. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
28. Kozminsky, E., & Kozminsky, L. (2001). How do general knowledge and reading strategies ability relate to reading comprehension of high school students at different educational levels? Journal of Research in Reading, 24(2), 187-204.
29. Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J. (2000). Qualitative reading inventory III. New York: Longman.
30. MacGinitie, W. H., MacGinitie, R. K., Maria, K., & Dreyer, L. G. (2001). Gates-MacGinitie reading tests, Level 7/9, Form S (4th ed.). Itasca: Riverside.
31. MacGinitie, W. H., MacGinitie, R. K., Maria, K., & Dreyer, L. G. (2002). Technical report for the fourth edition, Gates-MacGinitie reading tests. Itasca: Riverside.
32. McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., & Blake, R. G. K. (2009). Rethinking Comprehension Instruction: Comparing strategies and content instructional approaches. Reading Research Quarterly, 44(3), 218-253.
33. McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. P. (2009). Towards a comprehensive model of comprehension. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (51st ed., pp. 297-384). NY: Elsevier Science.
34. McNamara, D. S., O'Reilly, T. P., Best, R. M., & Ozuru, Y. (2006). Improving adolescent students' reading comprehension with iSTART. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(2), 147-171.
35. McNamara, D. S., de Vega, M., & O'Reilly, T. (2007). Comprehension skill, inference making, and the role of knowledge. In F. Schmalhofer & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Higher level language processes in the brain: Inference and comprehension processes (pp. 233-251). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students' metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259.
37. Naceur, A., & Schiefele, U. (2005). Motivation and learning-The role of interest in construction of representation of text and long-term retention: Inter- and intraindividual analyses. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20(2), 155-170.
38. NICHD. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: NICHD.
39. Oakhill, J., & Yuill, N. (1996). Higher order factors in comprehension disability: Processes and remediation. In C. Cornoldi & J. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties: Processes and intervention (pp. 69-92). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
40. OECD. (2000). Manual for the PISA 2000 database. Paris: OECD.
41. Richardson, J. T. E. (2004). Methodological issues in questionnaire-based research on student learning in higher education. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 347-358.
42. Samuelstuen, M., & Bråten, I. (2007). Examining the validity of self-reports on scales measuring students' strategic processing. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(2), 351-378.
43. Schmalhofer, F., McDaniel, M. A., & Keefe, D. (2002). A unified model for predictive and bridging inferences. Discourse Processes, 33(2), 105-132.
44. Schmitt, M. (1990). A questionnaire to measure children's awareness of strategic reading process. The Reading Teacher, 49, 454-461.
45. Shorris, E. (1997). On the uses of a liberal education II. As a weapon in the hands of the restless poor. Harper's Magazine, 295, 50-59.
46. Starr, C., & McMillan, B. (2001). Human biology (4th ed.). Pacific Grove: Wadsworth Group.
47. Stromso, H. I., Braten, I., & Samuelstuen, M. S. (2003). Students' strategic use of multiple sources during expository text reading: A longitudinal think-aloud study. Cognition and Instruction, 21(2), 113-147.
48. VanSledright, B. A., & Frankes, L. (2000). Concept- and strategic-knowledge development in historical study: Reading American history: A comparative exploration in two fourth-grade classrooms. Cognition and Instruction, 18(2), 239-283.
49. Veenman, M. V. J. (2005). The assessment of metacognitive skills: What can be learned from multi-method designs? In B. Moschner & C. Artelt (Eds.), Lernstrategien und Metakognition: Implikationen für Forschung und Praxis (pp. 75-97). Berlin: Waxmann.
50. Willson, V. L., & Rupley, W. H. (1997). A structural equation model for reading comprehension based on background, phonemic, and strategy knowledge. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1(1), 45-63.
51. Winne, P. H., & Nesbit, J. C. (2009). Supporting self-regulated learning with cognitive tools. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 259-277). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
52. Woodcock, R. W. (1997). Woodcock diagnostic reading battery. Itasca: Riverside.
53. Zientek, L. R., & Thompson, B. (2009). Matrix summaries improve research reports: Secondary analyses using published literature. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 343-352. doi: 10. 3102/0013189X09339056.