The role of text and text-reader interactions in young children's reading development and achievement

Elementary School Journal

Volumn 105, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 183-197

  Palincsar, Annemarie Sullivan ^a   Duke, Nell K ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 9744268171     PISSN: 00135984     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/428864     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print: A summary. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2. Chall, J. S., Jacobs, V. A., & Baldwin, L. E. (1990). The reading crisis: Why poor children fall behind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
3. Duke, N. K. (1999). The scarcity of informational texts in first grade (Report No. 1-007). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement.
4. Duke, N. K. (2000a). For the rich it's richer: Print experiences and environments offered to children in very low- and very high-SES first-grade classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 441-478.
5. Duke, N. K. (2000b). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 202-224.
6. Duke, N. K., Bennett-Armistead, V. S., & Roberts, E. M. (2002). Incorporating informational text in the primary grades. In C. Roller (Ed.), Comprehensive reading instruction across the grade levels (pp. 40-54). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
7. Duke, N. K., Bennett-Armistead, V. S., & Roberts, E. M. (2003). Bridging the gap between learning to read and reading to learn. In D. M. Barone & L. M. Morrow (Eds.), Literacy and young children: Research-based practices (pp. 226-242). New York: Guilford.
8. Duke, N. K., Martineau, J. P., Frank, K. A., & Bennett-Armistead, V. S. (2003). 3.6 minutes per day: What happens when we include more informational text in first-grade classrooms? Unpublished manuscript, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
9. Feeley, J. T., & Rhodes, C. S. (1995). A new look at the materials selection process. In S. B. Wepner, J. T. Feeley, & D. S. Strickland (Eds.), The administration and supervision of reading programs (2d ed., pp. 111-129). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
10. Guthrie, J. T., Van Meter, P., McCann, A. D., Wigfield, A., Bennet, L., Poudstoe, C., Rice, M. E., Faibisch, F., Hunt, B., & Mitchell, A. M. (1996). Growth of literacy engagement: Changes in motivations and strategies during concept-oriented reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(3), 306-332.
11. Hapgood, S., Magnusson, S. J., & Palincsar, A. S. (in press). A very science-like kind of thinking: How young children make meaning from first- and second-hand investigations. Journal of the Learning Sciences.
12. Hoffman, J., McCarthey, S., Abbott, J., Christian, C., Corman, L., & Dressman, M. (1994). So what's new in the new basals? A focus in first grade. Journal of Reading Behavior, 26, 47-73.
13. Hoffman, J. V., Roser, N., Patterson, E., Salas, R., & Pennington, J. (2001). Text leveling and "little books" in first-grade reading. Journal of Literacy Research, 33, 507-528.
14. Hoffman, J., Sailors, M., & Patterson, E. U. (2002). Decodable texts for beginning reading instruction: The year 2000 basals. Journal of Literacy Research, 34(3), 269-298.
15. Huck, C. S., Hepler, S., & Hickman, J. (1992). Children's literature in the elementary school (5th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
16. Juel, C., & Roper/Schneider, D. (1985). The influence of basal readers on first-grade reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(2), 134-152.
17. Kamil, M. L., & Lane, D. (1997a, March). A classroom study of the efficacy of using information text for first-grade reading instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. Available: http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~mkamil/Aera97
18. Kamil, M., & Lane, D. (1997b, December). Using information text for first-grade reading instruction: Theory and practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Reading Conference, Scottsdale, AZ. Available: http://www.stanford.edu/~mkamil/nrc97b.htm
19. Magnusson, S., & Palincsar, A. S. (in press). Learning from text designed to model scientific thinking in inquiry-based instruction. In W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders: Connecting science and literacy. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
20. McEneaney, J. E. (2000). Learning on the Web: A content literacy perspective [On-line]. Available: www.readingonline.org/articles/mceneaney/ forum.html.
21. Menon, S., & Hiebert, E. H. (1999). Literature anthologies: The task for first-grade readers. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement.
22. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
23. Neuman S. (2001). The role of knowledge in early literacy: A review of selected technical reports from the Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 468-475.
24. Palincsar A. S., & Magnusson, S. J. (2001). The interplay of first-hand and second-hand investigations to model and support the development of scientific knowledge and reasoning. In S. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 151-194). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. Palincsar, A. S., & Magnusson, S. J. (2002, October). Attending to the nature of subject matter in text comprehension assessment. Paper prepared for the CIERA Conference on Comprehension Assessment, Ann Arbor, MI.
26. Pappas, C. C., Varelas, M., Barry, A., & Rife, A. (2003). Dialogic inquiry around information books: The role of intertextuality in constructing scientific understandings in urban primary classrooms. Linguistics and Education, 13, 435-482.
27. Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 545-562). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
28. Purcell-Gates, V., Degener, S., Jacobson, E., & Somer, M. (2002). Impact of authentic adult literacy instruction on adult literacy practices. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 70-92.
29. Purcell-Gates, V., & Duke, N. K. (2001, August). Explicit explanation/teaching of informational text genres: A model for research. Paper presented at Crossing Borders: Connecting Science and Literacy, a conference sponsored by the National Science Foundation, Baltimore.
30. Purcell-Gates, V., & Duke, N. K. (2002, November). Measuring genre knowledge: Issues of construct validity and reliability. Poster presented at the annual meeting of Interagency Educational Research Initiative Principal Investigators, Washington, DC.
31. Purcell-Gates, V., Duke, N. K., Hall, L., & Tower, C. (2002, December). Text purposes and text use: A case from elementary science instruction. In W. H. Teale (chair), Relationships between text and instruction: Evidence from three studies. National Reading Conference, Miami.
32. Radencich, M. C. (1995). Administration and supervision of the reading/writing program. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
33. Short, K. (1995). Research and professional resources in children's literature. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
34. Smolkin, L., & Donovan, C. (2001). The context of comprehension: The information book read aloud. Elementary School Journal, 102(2), 97-122.
35. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
36. Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P., Clark, K. F., & Walpole, S. (2000). Effective schools and accomplished teachers; Lessons about primary-grade reading instruction in high-poverty schools. Elementary School Journal, 101, 121-166.