Promoting reading comprehension and critical-analytic thinking: A comparison of three approaches with fourth and fifth graders

Contemporary Educational Psychology

Volumn 46, Issue , 2016, Pages 101-115

  Li, Mengyi ^a   Murphy, P Karen ^a   Wang, Jianan ^a   Mason, Linda H ^b   Firetto, Carla M ^a   Wei, Liwei ^a   Chung, Kyung Sun ^a  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Classroom discussion; Critical analytic thinking; Reading comprehension; School based intervention

Indexed keywords

EID: 84977508355     PISSN: 0361476X     EISSN: 10902384     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.05.002     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Alexander P.A. Knowledge-seeking and self-schema: A case for the motivational dimensions of exposition. Educational Psychologist 1997, 32(2):83-94.
2. Alexander P.A. Thinking critically and analytically about critical-analytic thinking: An introduction. Educational Psychology Review 2014, 26:469-476.
3. Alexander P.A., Fox E. Adolescents as readers. Handbook of reading research 2011, Vol. IV:157-176. Routledge, New York.
4. Alexander P.A., Jetton T.L. Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. Handbook of reading research 2000, Vol. III:285-310. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
5. Alexander P.A., Sperl C.T., Buehl M.M. The persuasiveness of persuasive discourse. International Journal of Educational Research 2001, 35:651-674.
6. Almasi J.F. The nature of fourth graders' sociocognitive conflicts in peer-led and teacher-led discussions of literature. Reading Research Quarterly 1995, 30(3):314-351.
7. Altman D.G. Practical statistics for medical research 1991, Chapman & Hall, New York, NY.
8. Anderson R.C., Chinn C., Waggoner M., Nguyen K. Intellectually stimulating story discussions. Literacy for all: Issues in teaching and learning 1998, 170-186. Guilford, New York. J. Osborn, F. Lehr (Eds.).
9. Anderson R.C., Pearson P.D. A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. Handbook of reading research 1984, 255-291. Longman, New York. P.D. Pearson (Ed.).
10. Baker S., Gertsen R., Scanlon D. Procedural facilitators and cognitive strategies: Tools for unraveling the mysteries of comprehension and the writing process, and for providing meaningful access to the general curriculum. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice 2002, 17(1):65-77.
11. Beck I.L., McKeown M.G., Sandora C., Kucan L., Worthy J. Questioning the author: A yearlong classroom implementation to engage students with text. The Elementary School Journal 1996, 96(4):385-414.
12. Bråten I., Britt M.A., Strømsø H.I., Rouet J.F. The role of epistemic beliefs in the comprehension of multiple expository texts: Toward an integrated model. Educational Psychologist 2011, 46(1):48-70.
13. Brown A.L., Day J.D. Macrorules for summarizing texts: The development of expertise. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1983, 22(1):1-14.
14. Cameron A.C., Trivedi P.K. Regression analysis of count data 2013, Cambridge University Press, New York. 2nd ed.
15. Chinn C.A., Buckland L.A., Samarapungavan A. Expanding the dimensions of epistemic cognition: Arguments from philosophy and psychology. Educational Psychologist 2011, 46(3):141-167.
16. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences 1988, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
17. Cohen J., Cohen P., West S.G., Aiken L.S. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences 2003, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. 3rd ed.
18. Common Core English Language Arts Standards. (2011). Retrieved from <>. http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy.
19. Daniel, H. M. (2010). Reliability of AIMSweb reading curriculum-based measurement (R-CBM) (oral reading fluency). Retrieved from <>. https://ebssp.eboardsolutions.com.
20. Ellis E.S., Graves A.W. Teaching rural students with learning disabilities: A paraphrasing strategy to increase comprehension of main ideas. Rural Special Education Quarterly 1990, 10(2):2-10.
21. Fountas I.C., Pinnell G.S. Guiding readers and writers: Teaching comprehension, genre, and content literacy 2001, Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH.
22. Fuchs L.S., Fuchs D., Hosp M.K., Jenkins J.R. Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading 2001, 5(3):239-256.
23. Fuchs L.S., Fuchs D., Maxwell L. The validity of informal measures of reading comprehension. Remedial and Special Education 1988, 9(2):20-28.
24. Gardner E.F., Rudman H.C., Karlsen B., Merwin J.C. Stanford achievement test 1982, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Iowa City, IA.
25. Graves A.W., Levin J.R. Comparison of monitoring and mnemonic text-processing strategies in learning disabled students. Learning Disabilities Quarterly 1989, 12(3):232-236.
26. Greene J.A., Azevedo R., Torney-Purta J. Modeling epistemic and ontological cognition: Philosophical perspectives and methodological directions. Educational Psychologist 2008, 43(3):142-160.
27. Greene J.A., Sandoval W.A., Bråten I. Introduction to epistemic cognition. Handbook of epistemic cognition 2016, 495-510. Routledge, New York. J.A. Greene, W.A. Sandoval, I. Bråten (Eds.).
28. Hansen J., Pearson P.D. An instructional study: Improving the inferential comprehension of good and poor fourth-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology 1983, 75(6):821-829.
29. Harris K.R., Graham S., Brindle M., Sandmel K. Metacognition and children's writing. Handbook of metacognition in education 2009, 131-153. Routledge, New York. D.J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, A.C. Graesser (Eds.).
30. Harris K.R., Graham S., MacArthur C., Reid R., Mason L.H. Self-regulated learning processes and children's writing. Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance 2011, 187-201. Routledge, Danvers, MA. B. Zimmerman, D. Schunk (Eds.).
31. Harris K.R., Graham S., Mason L.H., Friedlander B. Powerful writing strategies for all students 2008, Brooks Publishing Co., Inc., Baltimore, MD.
32. Huot B. The literature of direct writing assessment: Major concerns and prevailing trends. Review of Educational Research 1990, 60:237-263.
33. Kintsch W. Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition 1998, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
34. Li M., Murphy P.K., Firetto C.M. Examining the effects of text genre and structure on 4th- and 5th-grade students' high-level comprehension as evidenced in small-group discussions. International Journal of Educational Psychology 2014, 3(3):205-234.
35. Manzo A.V. The request procedure. The Journal of Reading 1969, 13(2):123-126.
36. Mason L.H. Explicit self-regulated strategy development versus reciprocal questioning: Effects on expository reading comprehension among struggling readers. Journal of Educational Psychology 2004, 96(2):283-296.
37. Mason L.H. Teaching students who struggle with learning to think before, while, and after reading: Effects of SRSD instruction. Reading and Writing Quarterly 2013, 29(2):124-144.
38. McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M., Cai, Z., & Graesser, A. (2013). Coh-Metrix version 3.0. Retrieved from <>. http://cohmetrix.com.
39. Mercer N. Words and minds: How we use language to think together 2000, Routledge, London.
40. Mercer N. The art of interthinking. Teaching Thinking 2002, 7:8-11.
41. Murphy P.K. The eye of the beholder: The interplay of social and cognitive components in change. Educational Psychologist 2007, 42:41-53.
42. Murphy P.K. Marking the way: School-based interventions that "work". Contemporary Educational Psychology 2015, 40:1-4.
43. Murphy P.K., Alexander P.A. What counts? The predictive power of subject-matter knowledge, strategic processing, and interest in domain-specific performance. Journal of Experimental Education 2002, 70:197-214.
44. Murphy P.K., Alexander P.A., Muis K.R. Knowledge and knowing: The journey from philosophy and psychology to human learning. Theories, constructs, and critical issues 2012, Vol. 1:189-226. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. K.R. Harris, S. Graham, T. Urdan (Eds.).
45. Murphy P.K., Greene J.A., Firetto C.M. Quality talk: Developing students' discourse to promote critical-analytic thinking, epistemic cognition, and high-level comprehension 2014, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, (Technical Report No. 1).
46. Murphy P.K., Rowe M.L., Ramani G., Silverman R. Promoting critical-analytic thinking in children and adolescents at home and in school. Educational Psychology Review 2014, 26:561-578.
47. Murphy P.K., Wilkinson I.A.G., Soter A.O., Hennessey M.N., Alexander J.F. Examining the effects of classroom discussion on students' high-level comprehension of text: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology 2009, 101(3):740-764.
48. Myers J.L., O'Brien E.J. Accessing the discourse representation during reading. Discourse Processes 1998, 26:131-157.
49. National Assessment Governing Board. (2010). Writing framework for the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from <>. http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2011/2012470.pdf.
50. National Assessment Governing Board. (2013). Reading framework for the 2013 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from <>. https://www.edpubs.gov/document/ed005373p.pdf.
51. National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). The Nation's report card: A first look: 2013 mathematics and reading (NCES 2014-451). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C. Retrieved from <>. https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2014451.
52. National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. Washington, DC.
53. Nussbaum E.M. Using argumentation vee diagrams (AVDs) for promoting argument-counterargument integration in reflective writing. Journal of Educational Psychology 2008, 100(3):549-565.
54. Nystrand M., Wu L., Gamoran A., Zeiser S., Long D. Questions in time: Investigating the structure and dynamics of unfolding classroom discourse. Discourse Processes 2003, 35(2):135-196.
55. Ogle D.M. The know, want to know, learn strategy. Children's comprehension of text 1989, 205-223. International Reading Association, Newark, DE. K.D. Muth (Ed.).
56. Osborne J. Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science 2010, 328(5977):463-466.
57. Pearson AIMSweb technical manual (R-CBM and TEL) 2012, NCS Pearson Inc., Eden Prairie, NM.
58. Pressley M., Brown R., El-Dinary P.B., Afflerbach P. The comprehension instruction that students need: Instruction fostering constructively responsive reading. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice 1995, 10(4):215-224.
59. Reninger K.B., Wilkinson I.A.G. Using discussion to promote striving readers' higher level comprehension of literary texts. Building struggling students' higher level literacy: Practical ideas, powerful solutions 2010, 57-83. International Reading Association, Newark, DE. J.L. Collins, T.G. Gunning (Eds.).
60. Reznitskaya A., Anderson R.C., Dong T., Li Y., Kim I.H., Kim S.Y. Learning to think well: Application of argument schema theory. Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices 2008, 196-213. Guilford Press, New York, NY. C.C. Block, S. Parris (Eds.).
61. Shinn, M. R., & Shinn, M. M. (2002). AIMSweb training workbook: Administration and scoring of Reading Curriculum Based Measurement (R-CBM) for use in general outcomes measurement. Retrieved from <>. http://www.aimsweb.com/wp-content/uploads/Maze-Manual.pdf.
62. Shinn M.R., Good R.H., Knutson N., Tilly W.D., Collins V.L. Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency: A confirmatory analysis of its relation to reading. School Psychology Review 1992, 21(3):459-479.
63. Soter, A. O., Wilkinson, I. A. G., Murphy, P. K., Rudge, L., & Reninger, K. (2006). Analyzing the discourse of discussion: Coding manual. Columbus, OH. Unpublished manuscript.
64. Soter A.O., Wilkinson I.A.G., Murphy P.K., Rudge L., Reninger K., Edwards M. What the discourse tells us: Talk and indicators of high-level comprehension. International Journal Educational Research 2008, 47(6):372-391.
65. van den Broek P., Young M., Tzeng Y., Linderholm T. The landscape model of reading: Inferences and on-line construction of a memory representation. The construction of mental representations during reading 1999, 71-98. LEA, Mahwah, NJ. H. van Oostendorp, S.R. Goldman (Eds.).
66. Vygotsky L.S. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes 1978, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
67. Vygotsky L.S. Thought and language 1986, MIT Press, Cambridge.
68. Webb, N. M. (1991, April). Managing small-group processes in the classroom. Paper session presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
69. Wilkinson, I. A. G., Soter, A. O., Murphy, P. K., & Li, J. (2008, March). Promoting high-level comprehension of text through quality talk: A quasi-experimental study. Paper session presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.
70. Wilkinson I.A.G., Soter A.O., Murphy P.K. Developing a model of Quality Talk about literary text. Bringing reading research to life 2010, 142-169. Guilford Press, NY. M.G. McKeown, L. Kucan (Eds.).