The Role of Text in Disciplinary Learning

Handbook of Reading Research: Volume IV

Volumn 4, Issue , 2011, Pages 453-486

  Moje, Elizabeth Birr ^a   Stockdill, Darin ^a   Kim, Katherine ^a   Kim, Hyun Ju ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85145857192     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203840412-24     Document Type: Chapter

References (136)

1. ACT, I. (2006). Reading between the lines: What the ACT reveals about college readiness in reading. Iowa City, IA: ACT.
2. Afflerbach, P., & B. VanSledright (2001). Hath! Doth! Middle graders reading innovative history text. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44(8), 696-707.
3. Alexander, P. A. (1998). The nature of disciplinary and domain learning: The knowledge, interest, and strategic dimensions of learning frm subject-matter text. In C. Hynd (Ed.), Learning from text across conceptual domains (pp. 263-287). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. In M. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 285-310). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Alexander, P. A., & Judy, J., E. (1988). The interaction of domain-specific and strategic knowledge in academic performance. Review of Educational Research, 58, 375-404.
6. Alexander, P. A., Kulikowich, J. M., & Jetton, T. L. (1994). The role of subject-matter knowledge and interest in the processing of linear and nonlinear and nonlinear texts. Review of Educational Research, 64, 201-252.
7. Alexander, P. A., Kulikowich, J. M., & Schulze, S. K. (1994a). How subject-matter knowledge affects recall and interest on the comprehension of scientific exposition. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 313-337.
8. Alexander, P. A., Kulikowich, J. M., & Schulze, S. K. (1994b). The influence of topic knowledge, domain knowledge, and interest on the comprehension of scientific exposition. Learning and Individual Differences, 6, 379-397.
9. Alvermann, D. E. (2008). Why bother theorizing adolescents’ online literacies for classroom practice and research? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52, 8-19.
10. Alvermann, D. E., & Hagood, M. C. (2000a). Critical media literacy: Research, theory, and practice in” new times.” Journal of Educational Research, 93, 193-205.
11. Alvermann, D. E., & Hagood, M. C. (2000b). Fandom and critical media literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43, 436-446.
12. Alvermann, D. E., Young, J. P., Green, C., & Wisenbaker, J. M. (1999). Adolescents’ perceptions and negotiations of literacy practices in aft er-school read and talk clubs. American Educational Research Journal, 36, 221-264.
13. Anderson, R. C., & Pearson, P. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 225-253). New York: Longman.
14. Anderson, T. H., & Armbruster, B. B. (1984). Content area textbooks. In R. C. Anderson, J. Osborne, & R. J. Tierney (Eds.), Learning to read in American schools: Basal readers and content texts (pp. 193-226). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Armbruster, B. B., & Anderson, T. H. (1985). Producing “considerate” expository text: Or easy reading is damned hard writing. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 17, 247-263.
16. Bain, R. B. (2005). ‘They thought the world was flat?' HPL principles in teaching high school history. In J. Bransford & S. Donovan (Eds.), How students learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom (pp. 179-214). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
17. Bain, R. B. (2006). Rounding up unusual suspects: Facing the authority hidden in the history classroom. Teachers College Record, 108, 2080-2114.
18. Ball, S., & Lacey, C. (1984). Subject disciplines as the opportunity for a group action: A measured critique of subject sub-cultures. In A. Hargreaves & P. Woods (Eds.), Classrooms and staffrooms: The sociology of teachers and teaching (pp. 234-244). Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.
19. Barton, A. C. (1998). Teaching science with homeless children: Pedagogy, representation, and identity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 379-394.
20. Barton, K. C., & Levstik, L. S. (2004). Teaching history for the common good. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. Bass, H. (2006, April). What is the role of oral and written language in knowledge generation in mathematics? Paper presented at the Toward the Improvement of Secondary School Teaching and Learning:Integrating Language, Literacy, and Subject Matter.
22. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Gromoll, E. W. (1989). Learning from social studies texts. Cognition and Intruction, 6, 99-158.
23. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Worthy, J. (1995). Giving a text voice and improve students? understanding. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(2), 220-238.
24. Black, R. W. (2006). Language, literacy, and culture in online fanfiction. E-Learning, 3, 170-184.
25. Black, R. W. (2008). Just don’t call them cartoons: The new literacy spaces of animé, manga, and fanfiction. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, & D. J. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of research in new literacies (pp. 583-610). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
26. Bloome, D., & Egan-Robertson, A. (1993). The social construction of intertextuality in classroom reading and writing lessons. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 304-333.
27. Boaler, J., & Staples, M. (2008). Creating mathematical future through an equitable teaching approach:The case of railside school. Teachers College Record, 110, 608-645.
28. Bowden, D. (1993). The limits of containment: Text-as-container in composition studies. College Composition and Communication, 44(3), 364-379.
29. Britt, M. A., Rouet, J., Georgi, M., & Perfetti, C. (1994). Learning from history texts: From causal analysis to argument models. In G. Leinhardt, I. L. Beck, & C. Stainton (Eds.), Teaching and learning in history (pp. 47-84). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
30. Burton, L. (1999). Exploring and reporting upon the content and diversity of mathematicians’ views and practices. For the Learning of Mathematics, 19(2), 36-37.
31. Burton, L., & Morgan, C. (2000). Mathematicians writing. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 429-453.
32. Camitta, M. (1993). Vernacular writing: varieties of literacy among Philadelphia high school students. In B. V. Street (Ed.), Cross-cultural approaches to literacy (pp. 228-246). Cambridge, UK: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
33. Chambliss, M. J. (1995). Text cues and strateges successful readers use to construct the gist of lengthy written arguments. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 778-807.
34. Chambliss, M. J., & Calfee, R. (1998). Textbooks for learning: Nurturing children’s minds. Boston, MA:Blackwell.
35. Chambliss, M. J., & Murphy, P. K. (2002). Fourth and fift h graders representing the argument structure in written texts. Discourse Processes, 34, 91-115.
36. Chandler-Olcott, K. (2008). Anime and manga fandom: Young people’s multiliteracies made visible. In J. Flood, S. B. Heath, & D. Lapp (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching literacy through the communicative and visual arts (Vol. 2, pp. 247-257). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
37. Chandler-Olcott, K., & Mahar, D. (2003). “Tech-savviness” meets multiliteracies: Exploring adolescent girls’ technology-mediated literacy practices. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 356-385.
38. Cowan, P. M. (2005). Putting it out there: Revealing Latino visual discourse in the Hispanic academic summer program for middle school students. In B. V. Street (Ed.), Literacies across educational contexts:Mediating learning and teaching (pp. 145-169). Philadelphia: Caslon.
39. Coiro, J. (2003). Reading comprehension on the Internet: Expanding our understanding of reading comprehension to encompass new literacies. The Reading Teacher, 56, 458-464.
40. Crawford, D. B., & Carnine, D. (2000). Comparing the effects of textbooks in eighth-grade U.S. history:Does conceptual organization help? Education and Treatment of Children, 23, 387-422.
41. Davis, E., & Krajcik, J. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3-14.
42. Dawson, M. S. (2000). Histories and texts: Refiguring the diary of Samuel Pepys. The Historical Journal, 43, 407-431.
43. Dillon, D. R., Brien, D. G. O., & Volkman, M. (2001). Reading and writing to get work done in one secondary biology classroom. In E. B. Moje & D. G. O. Brien (Eds.), Constructions of literacy: Studies of teaching and learning in secondary classrooms (pp. 51-75). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
44. Eisner, E. W. (1994). Cognition and curriculum reconsidered. New York: Teachers College Press.
45. Ellington, A. J. (2006). The effects of non-CAS graphing calculators on student achievement and attitude levels in mathematics: A meta-analysis. School Science and Mathematics, 106(1), 16-26.
46. Finders, M. J. (1996a). “Just girls”: Literacy and allegiance in junior high school. Written Communication, 13, 93-129.
47. Finders, M. J. (1996b). Queens and teen zines: Early adolescent females reading their way toward adulthood. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 27, 71-89.
48. Ford, L. (2008). Reconfiguring the old south: Solving the problem of slavery, 1787-1838. Journal of American History, 95(1), 99-122.
49. Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
50. Gee, J. P. (2004). New times and new literacies: Themes for a changing world. In A. Ball & S. Warshauer Freedman (Eds.), Bakhtinian perspectives on language, literacy and learning (pp. 279-303). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
51. Gerofsky, S. (1996). A linguistic and narrative view of word problems in mathematics education. For the Learning of Mathematics, 16(2), 36-45.
52. Gilman, M. R., Saydak, V., & Vlk, S. (2005). The ACT for dummies. New York: Wiley.
53. Goldman, S. R. (1997). Learning from text: Reflections on the past and suggestions for the future. Discourse Processes, 23, 357-398.
54. Goldman, S. R., & Varma, S. (1995). CAPing the construction-integration model of discourse comprehension. In C. Weaver, S. Mannes & C. Fletcher (Eds.), Discourse comprehension: Essays in honor of Walter Kintsch (pp. 337-358). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
55. Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M., & Cai, Z. (2004). Coh-metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 36(2), 193-202.
56. Graesser, A. M., McNamara, D. S., & Rus, V. (in press). Computational modeling of discourse and comprehension. In M. Spivey, M. Joanisse & K. McRae (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
57. Graham, A., & Thomas, M. O. J. (2000). Building a versatile understanding of algebraic variables with a graphic calculator. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 41(3), 265-282.
58. Gustavson, L. (2007). Youth learning on their own terms. New York: Routledge.
59. Haggarty, L., & Pepin, B. (2002). An investigation of mathematics textbooks and their use in English, French and German classrooms: Who gets an opportunity to learn what? British Educational Research Journal, 28, 567-590.
60. Hall, L. A. (2007). Bringing television back to the bedroom: Transactions between a seventh grade struggling reader and her mathematics teacher. Reading Research and Instruction, 46, 287-314.
61. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London: Arnold.
62. Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
63. Heath, S. B., & McLaughlin, M. W. (Eds.). (1993). Identity and inner-city youth: Beyond ethnicity and gender. New York: Teachers College Press.
64. Herbel-Eisenmann, B. A., Lubienski, S.T., & Id-Deen, L. (2006). Reconsidering the study of mathematics instructional practices: The importance of curricular context in understanding local and global teacher change. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, 313-345.
65. Ingalls, R. L. (2005). Taking a page from their books: Negotiating containment and resuscitating rhetoric in writing across academic and spoken-word genres. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
66. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
67. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
68. Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394.
69. Knuth, D.E., Larrabee, T., & Roberts, P.M. (1989). Mathematical writing. Washington, DC: The Mathematical Association of America.
70. Kress, G. R. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. New York: Routledge.
71. Leander, K. M., & Lovvorn, J. (2006). Literacy networks: Following the circulation of texts, bodies, and objects in the schooling and online gaming of one youth. Cognition & Instruction, 24, 291-240.
72. Leander, K. M., & McKim, K. K. (2003). Tracing the everyday `sittings’ of adolescents on the Internet: A strategic adaptation of ethnography across online and offline spaces. Education, communication, & information, 3, 211-240.
73. Lee, C. D. (1993). Signifying as a scaffold for literary interpretation: The pedagogical implications of an African American discourse genre (Vol. NCTE Research Report, No 26). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
74. Lee, C. D. (2001). Is October Brown Chinese? A cultural modeling activity system for underachieving students. American Educational Research Journal, 38(1), 97-141.
75. Lee, C. D. (2007). Culture, literacy, and learning: Taking bloom in the midst of the whirlwind. New York:Teachers College Press.
76. Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A. (2010). Reading in the disciplines and the challenges of adolescent literacy. New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
77. Lee, J. K. (2002). Digital history in the history/social studies classroom. The History Teacher, 35, 503-517.
78. Lee, J., Grigg, W., & Donahue, P. (2007). The nation’s report card: Reading 2007. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
79. Lee, M. (2007). Promoting historical inquiry using secondary sources. Unpublished Dissertation, Dissertation Abstracts International, Ann Arbor.
80. Lee, J., & Weiss, A. (2007). The nation’s report card: U.S. history 2006 (NCES 2007-474). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
81. Lewis, C. (2008). Internet communication among youth: New practices and epistemologies. In J. Flood, S. B. Heath, & D. Lapp (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching literacy through the communicative and visual arts (Vol. 2, pp. 237-246). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
82. Lewis, C., & Fabos, B. (2005). Instant messaging, literacies, and social identities. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 470-501.
83. Love, E., & Pimm, D. (1996). ‘This is so’: A text on texts. In A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 371-409). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
84. Lubienski, S. T. (2000). Problem solving as a means toward mathematics for all: An exploratory look through a class lens. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(4), 454-482.
85. Luke, C. (2003). Pedagogy, connectivity, multimodality, and interdisciplinarity. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 397-404.
86. Mahiri, J. (1998). Shooting for excellence: African American and youth culture in new century schools. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
87. Mandl, H., Stein, N. L., & Trabasso, T. (1984). Learning and comprehension of text. Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
88. Mason, J., Burton, L., & Stacey, K. (1985). Thinking mathematically. New York: Addison Wesley.
89. McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., & Blake, R. G. K. (2009). Rethinking reading comprehension instruction:A comparison of instruction for strategies and content approaches. Reading Research Quarterly, 44, 218-253.
90. McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Butler Songer, N., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14(1), 1-43.
91. McNamara, D. S., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Learning from text: Effects of prior knowledge and text coherence. Discourse Processes, 22, 247-288.
92. Moje, E. B. (2000). To be part of the story: The literacy practices of gangsta adolescents. Teachers College Record, 102, 652-690.
93. Moje, E. B. (2007a). Developing socially just subject-matter instruction: A review of the literature on disciplinary literacy teaching. Review of Research in Education, 31(1), 1-44.
94. Moje, E. B. (2007b, May). Reading the adolescent reader: Profiles of reader identities, knowledge, strategy, and skill. Paper presented at the International Reading Association, Atlanta, GA.
95. Moje, E. B. (2008a). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy teaching and learning: A call for change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52, 96-107.
96. Moje, E. B. (2008b). Youth cultures, literacies, and identities in and out of school. In S. B. Heath, J. Flood, & D. Lapp (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching literacy through the communicative and visual arts (Vol. 2, pp. 207-220). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
97. Moje, E. B., Ciechanowski, K. M. I., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 38-70.
98. Moje, E. B., Overby, M., Tysvaer, N., & Morris, K. (2008). The complex world of adolescent literacy: Myths, motivations, and mysteries. Harvard Educational Review, 78, 107-154.
99. Moje, E. B., & Speyer, J. (2008). The reality of challenging texts in high school science and social studies:How teachers can mediate comprehension. In K. Hinchman & H. Thomas (Eds.), Best practices in adolescent literacy instruction (pp. 185-211). New York: Guilford.
100. Moll, L. C., & Gonzalez, N. (1994). Lessons from research with language-minority children. Journal of Reading Behavior, 26, 439-456.
101. Morgan, C. (2005). Words, definitions and concepts in discourses of mathematics, teaching and learning. Language and Education, 19, 103-117.
102. Morrell, E. (2002). Toward a critical pedagogy of popular culture: Literacy development among urban youth. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46, 72-77.
103. Morrell, E., & Duncan-Andrade, J. (2006). Popular culture and critical media pedagogy in secondary literacy classrooms. In M. Kalantzis & B. Cope (Eds.), International Journal of Learning, 12. Retrieved July 30, 2008, from http://www.ernestmorrell.com/images/International.Journal.Learning.2006.pdf
104. Nathan, M., & Koedinger, K. R. (2000). Teachers’ and researchers’ beliefs of early algebra development. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 168-190.
105. Nathan, M. J., Long, S. D., & Alibali, M. W. (2002). The symbol precedence view of mathematical development:A corpus analysis of the rhetorical structure of textbooks. Discourse Processes, 33, 1-22.
106. National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS). (2007). NCSS calls for change as the nation’s report card predicts trouble ahead for the next generation and of citizens and a healthy democracy. Retrieved May 21, 2007, from http:/./www.ncss.org/newsItems/viewFullItem$1168
107. New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: designing social future. Harvard Educational Review, 66, 60-92.
108. Paxton, R. J. (1999). A deafening silence: History textbooks and the students who read them. Review of Educational Research, 69(3), 315-339.
109. Paxton, R. J. (2002). The influence of author visibility on high school students solving a historical problem. Cognition and Instruction, 20(2), 197-248.
110. Perie, M., Grigg, W. S., & Donahue, P. L. (2005). The nation’s report card: Reading 2005 (No. NCES 2006-451). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
111. Porat, D. (2004). It’s not written here, but this is what happened: Students’ cultural comprehension of textbook narratives on the Israeli-Arab conflict. American Educational Research Journal, 41(4), 963-996.
112. Radford, L. (2000). Signs and meanings in students’ emergent algebraic thinking: A semiotic Analysis. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 42, 237-268.
113. Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75, 211-246.
114. Roberts, D. F., & Foehr, U. G. (2008). Trends in media use. The Future of Children: Children and Electronic Media, 18(1), 11-37.
115. Saye, J., & Brush, T. (2000). Implementation and evaluation of a student-centered learning unit: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 79-100.
116. Schleppegrell, M. J., Achugar, M., & Oteíza, T. (2004). The grammar of history: Enhancing content-based instruction through a functional focus on language. TESOL Quarterly, 38(1), 67-93.
117. Shreiner, T. (2009). Framing a model of democratic thinking to inform teaching and learning in civic education. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
118. Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking contentarea literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40-61.
119. Shuman, A. (1993). Collaborative writing: appropriating power or reproducing authority? In B. Street (Ed.), Cross-cultural approaches to literacy (pp. 247-271). Cambridge, UK: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
120. Siskin, L. S. (1994). Realms of knowledge: Academic departments In secondary schools: academic departments In secondary schools. London: Falmer Press.
121. Squire, K., De Vane, B., & Durga, S. (2008). Designing centers of expertise for academic learning through video games. Theory into Practice, 47, 240-251.
122. Steele, B. (2008). Thomas Jefferson’s gender frontier. The Journal of American History, 95(1), 17-42.
123. Steinkuehler, C. (2007). Massively multiplayer online gaming as a constellation of literacy practices. E-Learning, 4, 297-318.
124. Stockdill, D., & Moje, E. B. (2007, April). Adolescents as readers of culture, history, economics, and civics:The disconnect between student interest in their world and social studies schooling. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.
125. Stodolsky, S. S. (1988). The subject matters: Classroom activity in math and social studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
126. Stodolsky, S. S., & Grossman, P. (1995). The impact of subject matter on curricular activity: An analysis of five academic subjects. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 227-249.
127. Tarr, J. E., Chavez, O., Reys, R. E., & Reys, B. J. (2006). From the written to the enacted curriculum: The intermediary role of middle school mathematics teachers in shaping students’ opportunity to learn. School Science and Mathematics, 106, 191-201.
128. Tarr, J. E., Reys, R. E., Reys, B. J., Chavez, O., Shih, J., & Osterlind, S. J. (2008). The impact of middle-grades mathematics curricula and the classroom learning environment on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 247-280.
129. Twyman, T., & Tindal, G. (2006). Using a computer-adapted, conceptually based history text to increase comprehension and problem-solving skills of students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 5-16.
130. Wade, S. E., & Moje, E. B. (2000). The role of text in classroom learning. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 609-627). Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
131. Wallace, F. H., & Clark, K. K. (2005). Reading stances in mathematics: Positioning students and texts. Action in Teacher Education, 27(2), 68-79.
132. Wineburg, S. S. (1991). On the reading of historical texts: Notes on the breach between school and the academy. American Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 495-519.
133. Wineburg, S. S. (1998). Reading Abraham Lincoln: An expert/expert study in the interpretation of historical texts. Cognitive Science, 22(3), 319-346.
134. Wineburg, S. (2001). Historical thinking and other unnatural acts. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
135. Wineburg, S. S., & Martin, D. (2004). Reading and rewriting history. Educational Leadership, 62(1), 42-45.
136. Zolkower, B., & Shreyar, S. (2007). A teacher’s mediation of a thinking-aloud discussion in a 6th grade mathematics classroom Educational Studies in Mathematics, 65, 177-202.