Reading and the web: Broadening the need for complex comprehension

Reading at a Crossroads?: Disjunctures and Continuities in Current Conceptions and Practices

Volumn , Issue , 2015, Pages 89-103

  Goldman, Susan R ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84941559380     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (55)

1. Alvermann, D. E. (2001). Reading adolescents' reading identities: Looking back to see ahead. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44, 676-690.
2. Bazerman, C. (1985). Physicists reading physics: Schema-laden purposes and purposeladen schema. Written Communication, 2, 3-23.
3. Bean, T. W. (2000). Reading in the content areas: Social constructivist dimensions. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, Vol. III (pp. 629-644. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
4. Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (1985). Teaching vocabulary: Making the instruction fit the goal. Educational Perspectives, 23, 11-15.
5. Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next: A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
6. Braasch, J. L. G., Lawless, K. A., Goldman, S. R., Manning, F. H., Gomez, K. W., & MacLeod, S. (2009). Evaluating search results: An empirical analysis of middle school students' use of source attributes to select useful sources. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 41, 63-82.
7. Britt, M. A., & Aglinskas, C. (2002). Improving students' ability to identify and use source information. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 485-522.
8. Britt, M. A., Perfetti, C. A., Van Dyke, J., & Gabrys, G. (2000). The sourcer's apprentice: A tool for document-supported history instruction. In P. Stearns (Ed.), Knowing, teaching and learning history: National and international perspectives (pp. 437-470. New York, NY: NYU Press.
9. Caccamise, D., Franzke, M., Eckhoff, A., Kintsch, E., & Kintsch, W. (2007). Guided practice in technology-based summary writing. In D. S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies (pp. 375-396. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
10. Carnegie Council on Advancing Adolescent Literacy. (2009). Time to act: An agenda for advancing adolescent literacy for college and career success. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
11. Coté, N., & Goldman, S. R. (1999). Building representations of informational text: Evidence from children's think-aloud protocols. In H. van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 151-174. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
12. Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). (2010). The Common Core Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies and science and technical subjects. Retrieved on June 10, 2011, from http://www.corestandards.org
13. Gerrig, R. J., & McKoon, G. (1998). The readiness is all: The functionality of memorybased text processing. Discourse Processes, 26, 67-86.
14. Goldman, S. R. (2004). Cognitive aspects of constructing meaning through and across multiple texts. In N. Shuart-Ferris & D. M. Bloome (Eds.), Uses of intertextuality in classroom and educational research (pp. 317-352. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
15. Goldman, S. R., & Bisanz, G. (2002). Toward a functional analysis of scientific genes: Implications for understanding and learning processes. In J. Otero, J. A. León, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 19-50. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
16. Goldman, S. R., Braasch, J. L. G., Wiley, J., Graesser, A. C., & Brodowinska, K. (2012). Comprehending and learning from Internet sources: Processing patterns of better and poorer learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 47, 356-381. doi: 10.1002/RRQ.027
17. Goldman, S. R., Lawless, K. A., Gomez, K. W., Braasch, J., MacLeod, S., & Manning, F. (2010). Literacy in the digital world: Comprehending and learning from multiple sources. In M. G. McKeown & L. Kucan (Eds.), Bringing reading research to life (pp. 257-284. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
18. Goldman, S. R., Lawless, K. A., Pellegrino, J. W., Braasch, J. L. G., Manning, F. H., & Gomez, K. (in press). A technology for assessing multiple source comprehension: An essential skill of the 21st century. In M. Mayrath, J. Clarke-Midura, & D. H. Robinson (Eds.), Technology-based assessments for 21st century skills: Theoretical and practical implications from modern research. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
19. Goldman, S. R., Meyerson, P., Mayfield, C., Coté, N., & Bloome, D. (1999). If it says so in the textbook, it must be true: The problematic role of the textbook in social studies learning in middle school. Paper presented at the 1999 American Education Research Association Annual Meeting, Montreal, Canada.
20. Goldman, S. R., Ozuru, Y., Braasch, J. L. G., Manning, F. H., Lawless, K. A., Gomez, K. W., & Slanovits, M. J. (2011). Literacies for learning: A multiple source comprehension illustration. In N. L. Stein & S. W. Raudenbush (Eds.), Developmental cognitive science goes to school (pp. 30-44. New York, NY: Routledge.
21. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6-10.
22. Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., & VanLehn, K. (2005). Scaffolding deep comprehension strategies through Point&Query, AutoTutor, and iSTART. Educational Psychologist, 40, 225-234.
23. Guthrie, J. T., Anderson, E., Aloa, S., & Rinehart, J. (1999). Influences of conceptoriented reading instruction on strategy use and conceptual learning from text. The Elementary School Journal, 99, 343-366.
24. Guthrie, J. T., & Ozgungor, S. (2002). Instructional contexts for reading engagement. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 275-288. New York, NY: Guilford Publications, Inc.
25. Hirsh, S. G. (1999). Children's relevance criteria and information seeking on electronic resources. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50, 1265-1283.
26. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A constructionintegration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
27. Kintsch, W. (1994). The psychology of discourse processing. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 721-739. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
28. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
29. Lee, C. D. (2007). Culture, literacy and learning: Taking bloom in the midst of the whirlwind. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
30. Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A. (2009). Reading in the disciplines: The challenges of adolescent literacy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
31. Meltzer, J., Smith, N. C., & Clark, H. (2002). Adolescent literacy resources: Linking research and practice. Providence, RI: Northeast and Islands Regional Educational Laboratory at Brown University.
32. Meyer, B. J. F., & Wijekumar, K. (2007). A Web-based tutoring system for the structure strategy: Theoretical background, design, and findings. In D. S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies (pp. 347-374. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
33. Moje, E. B. (2008). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy teaching and learning: A call for change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52, 96-107.
34. Myers, J. L. & O'Brien, E. J. (1998). Accessing the discourse representation during reading. Discourse Processes, 26, 131-158.
35. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2004). Learning for tomorrow's world: First results from PISA 2003. Paris, France: Author.
36. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2006). Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy: A framework for PISA 2006. Paris, France: Author.
37. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.
38. Perfetti, C. A., & Britt, M. A. (1995). Where do propositions come from? In C. A. Weaver III, S. Mannes, & C. R. Fletcher (Eds.), Discourse comprehension: Essays in honor of Walter Kintsch (pp. 11-34. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
39. Perfetti, C. A., Rouet, J.-F., & Britt, M. A. (1999). Toward a theory of documents representation. In H. van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 99-122. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
40. Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension strategies instruction: A turn-of-the-century status report. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 11-27. New York, NY: Guilford.
41. Rampey, B. D., Dion, G. S., & Donahue, P. L. (2009). NAEP 2008 trends in academic progress (NCES 2009-479). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
42. RAND Reading Study Group (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Education.
43. Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66, 181-221.
44. Rouet, J.-F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to Web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
45. Rouet, J.-F., Britt, M. A., Caroux, L., Nivet, C., & Le Bigot, L. (2009). When do readers construct document models? The role of source information and story consistency. Paper presented at the biennial meeting for the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction.
46. Rouet, J.-F., Favart, M., Britt, M. A., & Perfetti, C. A. (1997). Studying and using multiple documents in history: Effects of discipline expertise. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 85-106.
47. Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78, 40-59.
48. Squire, K. (2006). From content to context: Videogames as designed experience. Educational Researcher, 35, 19-29.
49. van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York, NY: Academic Press.
50. VanSledright, B. (2002). Confronting history's interpretive paradox while teaching fifth graders to investigate the past. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 1089-1115.
51. Wallace, R. M., Kupperman, J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2000). Science on the Web: Students online in a sixth-grade classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 75-105.
52. Wiley, J., Goldman, S. R., Graesser, A. C., Sanchez, C. A., Ash, I. K., & Hemmerich, J. A. (2009). Source evaluation, comprehension, and learning in Internet science inquiry tasks. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 1060-1106.
53. Wineburg, S. (1991). On the reading of historical texts: Notes on the breach between school and academy. American Education Research Journal, 28, 495-519.
54. Wineburg, S. (2001). Historical thinking and other unnatural acts: Charting the future of teaching the past. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
55. Zwaan, R. A., Magliano, J. P., & Graesser, A. C. (1995). Dimensions of situation model construction in narrative comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 386-397.