REFERENCES
- Afflerbach, P. 2000. “Verbal Reports and Protocol Analysis.” In Handbook of Reading Research: Volume III, edited by Michael L. Kamil, Peter B. Mosenthal, P. David Pearson, and Rebecca Barr, 163–79. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Afflerbach, P., and P. Johnston. 1984. “Research Methodology on the Use of Verbal Reports in Reading Research.” Journal of Reading Behavior 16 (4): 307–322.
- Baquedano-Lopez, P. 2000. “Narrating Community in Doctrina Classes.” Narrative Inquiry 10 (2): 429–52.
- Boyatzis, R. E. 1998. Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
- Eakle, J. A. 2007. “Literacy Spaces of a Christian Faith-Based School.” Reading Research Quarterly 42 (2): 472–510. doi: 10.1598/RRQ42.4.3.
- Ek, L. D. 2008. “Language and Literacy in the Pentecostal Church and the Public High School: A Case Study of a Mexican ESL Student.” The High School Journal 92 (2): 1–13.
- Ericsson, K. A., and H. A. Simon. 1984/1993. Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books/MIT Press.
- Gee, J. P. 2015. Literacy and Education. New York: Routledge.
- Hilden, K., and M. Pressley. 2011. “Verbal Reports of Reading.” In Literacy Research Methodologies, edited by Nell K. Duke and Marla H. Mallette, 427–40. New York: The Guilford Press.
- Manseau, P., and J. Sharlet. 2004. Killing the Buddha: A Heretic's Bible. New York: Free Press.
- Moje, E. B., D. R. Dillon, and D. O’Brien. 2000. “Reexamining the Roles of Learner, Text, and Context in Secondary Literacy.” Journal of Educational Research 93 (3): 165–80.
- Moore, R. L. 2003. Touchdown Jesus: The Mixing of Sacred and Secular in American History. Louisville, KY: John Knox Press.
- Rackley, E. D. 2010. “Motivations for Religious Literacy Practices of Religious Youth: Examining the Practices of Latter-day Saint and Methodist Youth in One Community.” PhD dissertation, University of Michigan.
- Rackley, E. D. 2014. “Scripture-Based Discourses of Latter-day Saint and Methodist Youths.” Reading Research Quarterly 49 (4): 417–435. doi:10.1002/rrq.76
- Rackley, E. D. 2015. “How Young Latter-day Saints Read the Scriptures: Five Profiles.” The Religious Educator 16 (2): 129–148.
- Rackley, E. D., and M. Kwok. 2016. “‘Long, Boring, and Tedious:’ Youths' Experiences with Complex, Religious, Texts.” Literacy 50 (2): 55–61.
- Reyes, C. C. 2009. “El Libro de Recuerdos [Book of Memories]: A Latina Students’ Exploration of Self and Religion in Public School.” Research in the Teaching of English; 43 (3): 263–85.
- Rosenblatt, L. M. 1938/1968. Literature as Exploration. London: Heinemann.
- ———. 1985. “Viewpoints: Transaction versus Interaction—A Terminological Rescue Operation.” Research in the Teaching of English 19 (1): 96–107
- ———. 2013. “The Transactional Theory of Reading and Writing.” In Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, edited by DonnaE. Alvermann, NormanJ. Unrau, and RobertB. Ruddell, 923–56. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
- Sarroub, L. K. 2002. “In-Betweeness: Religion and Conflicting Visions of Literacy.” Reading Research Quarterly 37 (2): 130–48.
- Skerrett, A.. 2013. “Religious Literacies in a Secular Literacy Classroom.” Reading Research Quarterly 49 (2): 233–50. doi: 10.1002/rrq.65.
- ——— 2014. “‘Closer to God’: Following Religion across the Lifeworlds of an Urban Youth.” Urban Education. doi: 10.1177/0042085914549365.
- Small, J. 2008. “College Student Religious Affiliation and Spiritual Identities: A Qualitative Study.” PhD diss., University of Michigan.
- Smith C., and M. L. Denton. 2005. Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Winton, D. 2009. Small Screen, Big Picture: Television and Lived Religion. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press.
- Wyatt, D., M. Pressley, P. B. El-Dinary, S. Stein, P. Evans, and R. Brown. 1993. “Comprehension Strategies, Worth and Credibility Monitoring, and Evaluations: Cold and Hot Cognition when Experts Read Professional Articles that are Important to Them.” Learning and Individual Differences 5 (1): 49–72.