Reading Perspective: Can It Improve Middle School Students’ Comprehension of Informational Text?

REFERENCES

• ACT. (2012). A first look at the Common Core and college and career readiness. Retrieved from http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/FirstLook.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ainley, M., Hidi, S. E., & Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 545–561.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, P. A. (2003). The development of expertise: The journey from acclimation to proficiency. Educational Researcher, 32(8), 10–14.
   Google Scholar
• 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 texts. Review of Educational Research, 64, 201–252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, P. A., Shallert, D. L., & Hare, V. C. (1991). Coming to terms: How researchers in learning and literacy talk about knowledge. Review of Educational Research, 61, 315–343.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alvermann, D. E., & Boothby, P. R. (1982). Text differences: Children's perceptions of text at the transition stage in reading. The Reading Teacher, 36, 298–302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, R. C., & Pichert, J. W. (1978). Recall of previously unrecallable information following a shift in perspective. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, R. C., Pichert, J. W., & Shirey, L. L. (1983). Effects of the reader's schema at different points in time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 271–279.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, T. H., & Armbruster, B. B. (1984). Content area textbooks. In R. C. Anderson, J. Osborn, & R. J. Tierney (Eds.), Learning to read in American schools: Basal readers and content texts (pp. 193–226). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Ausubel, D. P. (1969). A cognitive theory of school learning. Psychology in the Schools, 6, 331–335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bean, T. W., & Harper, H. (2009). The “adolescent” in adolescent literacy: A preliminary review. In K. D. Wood & W. E. Blanton (Eds.), Literacy instruction for adolescents: Research-based practice (pp. 37–53). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Benjamin, A. (2007). But I’m not a reading teacher: Strategies for literacy instruction in the content areas. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
   Google Scholar
• Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2006). Reading next—A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report to the Carnegie Corporation of New York (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
   Google Scholar
• Blanton, W. E., Wood, K. D., & Taylor, D. B. (2007). Rethinking middle school reading instruction: A basic literacy activity. Reading Psychology, 28, 75–95.
   Google Scholar
• Bransford, J. D., & Johnson, M. K. (1972). Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 717–726.
   Google Scholar
• Bråten, I., & Samuelstuen, M. S. (2004). Does the influence of reading purpose on reports of strategic text processing depend on students’ topic knowledge? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 324–336.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, C., Snodgrass, T., & Covington, M. (2007). Computerized Propositional Idea Density Rater [CPIDR 3]. University of Georgia Research Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.cs.uga.edu/∼wcb/cpidr/
   Google Scholar
• Bunting, M. F., Cowan, N., & Colfish, G. H. (2008). The deployment of attention in short-tem memory tasks: The trade-offs between immediate and delayed deployment. Memory & Cognition, 36, 799–812.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerdán, R., Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, T., Gilabert, R., & Gil, L. (2009). Impact of question-answering tasks on search processes and reading comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 19, 13–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chall, J. S., & Jacobs, V. A. (2003). Poor children's fourth-grade slump. American Educator. Retrieved from http://www.aft.org/pubs-reports/american_educator/spring2003/chall.html
   Google Scholar
• Coiro, J. (2011). Predicting reading comprehension on the internet: Contributions of offline reading skills, online reading skills, and prior knowledge. Journal of Literacy Research, 43, 352–392.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Combs, D. (2004). A framework for scaffolding content area reading strategies. Middle School Journal, 36(2), 13–20.
   Google Scholar
• Damico, J., Baildon, M., Exter, M., & Guo, S. J. (2009). Where we read from matters: Disciplinary literacy in a ninth-grade social studies classroom. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 53, 325–335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiVesta, F. J., & DiCintio, M. J. (1997). Interactive effects of working memory span and text context on reading comprehension and retrieval. Learning and Individual Differences, 9, 215–231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Buehl, M. M. (1999). The relation between assessment practices and outcomes of studies: The case of research on prior knowledge. Review of Educational Research, 69, 145–186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DuBay, W. H. (2004). The principles of readability. Costa Mesa, CA: Impact Information.
   Google Scholar
• Evers, A. (2001). The revised Dutch rating scale for test quality. The International Journal of Testing, 1, 155–182.
   Google Scholar
• Fleischman, H. L., Hopstock, P. J., Pelczar, M. P., & Shelley, B. E. (2010). Highlights from PISA 2009: Performance of U.S. 15-year old students in reading, mathematics, and science literacy in an international context (NCES 2011-004). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistic.
   Google Scholar
• Flesch, R. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32, 221–233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fry, E. (1977). Fry's readability graph: Clarifications, validity, and extension to level 17. Journal of Reading, 21, 242–252.
   Google Scholar
• Goetz, E. T., Schallert, D. L., Reynolds, R. E., & Radin, D. I. (1983). Reading in perspective: What real cops and pretend burglars look for in a story. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 500–510.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graves, M. F., & Liang, L. A. (2008). Four facets of reading comprehension instruction in the middle grades. Middle School Journal, 39(4), 36.
   Google Scholar
• Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a digital age: Web 2.0 and classroom research. What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38, 246–259.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gutman, L. M., & Midgley, C. (2000). The role of protective factors in supporting the academic achievement of poor African American students during the middle school transition. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29, 223–248.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hidi, S. (1990). Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational Research, 60, 549–571.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical issue for the 21st century. Review of Educational Research, 70, 151–179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology (Vol. 1). New York, NY: Henry Holt.
   Google Scholar
• Juvonen, J., Le, V., Augustine, C., & Constant, L. (2004). Focus on the wonder years: Challenges facing the American middle school. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Kaakinen, J. K., & Hyönä, J. (2005). Perspective effects on expository text comprehension: Evidence from think-aloud protocols, eyetracking, and recall. Discourse Processes, 40, 239–257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaakinen, J. K., Hyönä, J., & Keenan, J. M. (2002). Perspective effects of online text processing. Discourse Processes, 33, 159–173.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kardash, C. A. M., Royer, J. M., & Greene, B. A. (1988). Effects of schemata on both encoding and retrieval of information from prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 324–329.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kincaid, J. P., Fishburne, R. P., Jr., Rogers, R. L., & Chissom, B. S. (1975). Derivation of new readability formulas (Automated Readability Index, Fog Count and Flesch Reading Ease Formula) for Navy enlisted personnel (Research Branch Report 8-75). Millington, TN: Naval Technical Training, U. S. Naval Air Station.
   Google Scholar
• Krapp, A., Hidi, S., & Renninger, A. (1992). Interest, learning and development. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 3–26). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, J., Grigg, W., & Donahue, P. (2007). The Nation's Report Card: Reading 2007 (NCES 2007-496). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Linderholm, T., & van den Broek, P. (2002). The effects of reading purpose and working memory capacity on the processing of expository text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 778–784.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorch, R. F., Lorch, E. P., & Klusewitz, M. A. (1993). College students’ conditional knowledge about reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 239–252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCrudden, M. T., Magliano, J. P., & Schraw, G. (2011). Relevance in text comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 1–18). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• McCrudden, M. T., & Schraw, G. (2007). Relevance and goal-focusing in text processing. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 113–139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., & Hartley, K. (2006). The effect of general relevance instructions on shallow and deeper learning and reading time. Journal of Experimental Education, 74, 293–310.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., & Kambe, G. (2005). The effect of relevance instructions on reading time and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 88–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moje, E. B. (2008b). Responsive literacy teaching in secondary school content areas. In M. E. Conley, J. R. Friedhoff, M. B. Sherry, & S. F. Tuckey (Eds.), Meeting the challenges of adolescent literacy: Research we have, research we need (pp. 58–87). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mraz, M., Rickelman, R. J., & Vacca, R. T. (2009). Content area reading: Past, present, and future. In K. D. Wood & W. E. Blanton (Eds.), Literacy instruction for adolescents: Research-based practice (pp. 77–91). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, P. K., & Mason, L. (2006). Changing knowledge and beliefs. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 305–324.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Narvaez, D., van den Broek, P., & Ruiz, A. B. (1999). The influence of reading purpose on inference generation and comprehension in reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 488–496.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Assessment Governing Board. (2010). Reading framework for the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
   Google Scholar
• National Governors Association Center for Best Practices. (2010). Common core state standards. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
   Google Scholar
• National Institute for Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
   Google Scholar
• National Middle School Association. (2003). This we believe: Successful schools for young adolescents. A position paper of the National Middle School Association. Westerville, OH: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ozuru, Y., Dempsey, K., & McNamara, D. S. (2009). Prior knowledge, reading skill, and text cohesion in the comprehension of science texts. Learning and Instruction, 19, 228–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paxton, R. J. (1999). A deafening silence: History textbooks and the students who read them. Review of Educational Research, 69, 315–339.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennsylvania Training & Technical Assistance Network. (2010). Assessing to learn: PA benchmark initiative. Retrieved from http://www.pattan.net/teachlead/AssessingtoLearn.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Pichert, J. W., & Anderson, R. C. (1977). Taking different perspectives on a story. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 309–315.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramsay, C. M., & Sperling, R. A. (2010). Designating reader perspective to increase comprehension and interest. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35, 215–227.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramsay, C. M., & Sperling, R. A. (2011). The role of relevance instructions in purpose-driven comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 243–265). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• Recht, D. R., & Leslie, L. (1988). Effect of prior knowledge on good and poor learners’ memory of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 16–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds, R. (1992). Selective attention and prose learning: Theoretical and empirical research. Educational Psychology Review, 4, 345–391.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenblatt, L. M. (1982). The literary transaction: Evocation and response. Theory Into Practice, 21, 268–278.
   Google Scholar
• Schraw, G., Bruning, R., & Svoboda, C. (1995). Sources of situational interest. Journal of Reading Behavior, 27, 1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). The effect of reader purpose on interest and recall. Journal of Reading Behavior, 26, 1–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schraw, G., Wade, S. E., & Kardash, C. A. M. (1993). Interactive effects of text-based and task-based importance on learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 652–661
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78, 40–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh, K., Granville, M., & Dika, S. (2002). Mathematics and science achievement: Effects of motivation, interest, and academic engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 95, 323–332.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spiro, R. J., & Taylor, B. M. (1980). On investigating children's transition from narrative to expository discourse: The multidimensional nature of psychological text classification (Technical Report No. 195). Cambridge, MA: Bolt, Baranek, & Newman. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/38/d9/1b.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Wade, S. E., Buxton, W. M., & Kelly, M. (1999). Using think-alouds to examine reader-text interest. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 194–216.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walczyk, J. J., & Hall, V. C. (1991). A developmental study of children's ability to adopt perspectives and find errors in text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16, 2–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinstein, M. (2009). Air travel takes off. Cobblestone, 30(6), 2–3.
   Google Scholar
• Whitaker, C. P., Gambrell, L. B., & Morrow, L. M. (2004). Reading comprehension instruction for all students. In E. R. Silliman, & L. C. Wilkinson (Eds.), Language and literacy learning in schools (pp. 130–150). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wijekumar, K. K., Meyer, B. J. F., & Lei, P. (2012). Large-scale randomized controlled trial with 4th graders using intelligent tutoring of the structure strategy to improve nonfiction reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Technology Research and Development, 60, 987–1013. doi: 0.1007/s11423-012-9263-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wineburg, S. S. (1991). On the reading of historical texts: Notes on the breach between school and the academy. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 495–519.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe, M. B. W., & Mienko, J. A. (2007). Learning and memory of factual content from narrative and expository text. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 541–564.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar