Text analysis: Critical component of planning for text-based discussion focused on comprehension of informational texts

References

• Armbruster, B. B., & Anderson, T. H. (1984). Producing “considerate” expository text: Or easy reading is damned hard writing (Reading Education Report No. 46). Champaign, IL: Center for the Study of Reading.
   Google Scholar
• Barnitz, J. G. (1980). Syntactic effects on the reading comprehension of pronoun-referent structures by children in grades two, four, and six. Reading Research Quarterly, 15(2), 268–289. doi:10.2307/747328
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2006). Improving comprehension with Questioning the Author: A fresh and expanded view of a powerful approach. New York, NY: Scholastic.
   Google Scholar
• Colman, P. (2007). A new way to look at literature: A visual model for analyzing fiction and nonfiction texts. Language Arts, 84(3), 257–268.
   Google Scholar
• Crosson, A. C., & Lesaux, N. K. (2013a). Does knowledge of connectives play a unique role in the reading comprehension of English learners and English-only students? Journal of Research in Reading, 36(3), 241–260. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2011.01501.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crosson, A. C., & Lesaux, N. K. (2013b). Connectives. The Reading Teacher, 67(3), 193–200. doi:10.1002/TRTR.1197
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curtis, C. P. (1996). The Watsons go to Birmingham–1963. New York, NY: Dell Laurel-Leaf.
   Google Scholar
• Fang, Z. (2006). The language demands of science reading in middle school. International Journal of Science Education, 28(5), 491–520. doi:10.1080/09500690500339092
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, Z. (2012). The challenges of reading disciplinary texts. In T. Jetton & C. Shanahan (Eds.), Adolescent literacy in the academic disciplines: General principles and practical strategies (pp. 34–68). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fillmore, L. W., & Snow, C. E. (2000). What teachers need to know about language. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
   Google Scholar
• Frantz, S., Starr, L. E., & Bailey, A. L. (2015). Syntactic complexity as an aspect of text complexity. Educational Researcher, 44(7), 387–393. doi:10.3102/0013189X15603980
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garas-York, K., & Almasi, J. (2017). Constructing meaning through discussion. In S. E. Israel (Ed.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (2nd ed., pp. 500–542). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., Cai, Z., Conley, M., Li, H., & Pennebaker, J. (2014). Coh-Metrix measures text characteristics at multiple levels of language and discourse. The Elementary School Journal, 115, 210–229. doi:10.1086/678293
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., & Louwerse, M. M. (2003). What do readers need to learn in order to process coherence relations in narrative and expository text? In A. P. Sweet & C. E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 82–98). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Irwin, J. W. (1979). Fifth grade readers’ comprehension of explicit and implicit connective propositions. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11(3), 261–271. doi:10.1080/10862967909547329
   Google Scholar
• Jones, C. D., Clark, S. K., & Reutzel, D. R. (2016). Teaching text structure: Examining the affordances of children’s informational texts. The Elementary School Journal, 117(1), 143–169. doi:10.1086/687812
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kucan, L., Hapgood, S., & Palincsar, A. S. (2011). Teachers’ specialized knowledge for supporting student comprehension in text-based discussions. The Elementary School Journal, 112(1), 61–82. doi:10.1086/660689
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kucan, L., Palincsar, A. S., Busse, T., Heisey, N., Klingelhofer, R., Rimbey, M., & Schutz, K. (2011). Applying the Grossman et al. theoretical framework: The case of reading. Teachers College Record, 113(12), 2897–2921.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKeown, M. G., & Beck, I. L. (2015). Effective classroom talk is comprehension instruction. In L. B. Resnick, C. S. Asterhan, & S. N. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 51–62). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Michaels, S., & O’Connor, C. (2015). Conceptualizing talk moves as tools: Professional development approaches for academically productive discussions. In L. B. Resnick, C. S. Asterhan, & S. N. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 347–361). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Moe, A. J., & Irwin, J. W. (1986). Cohesion, coherence, and comprehension. In J. W. Irwin (Ed.), Understanding and teaching cohesion comprehension (pp. 3–8). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Pappas, C. C. (2006). The information book genre: Its role in integrated science literacy research and practice. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(2), 226–250. doi:10.1598/RRQ.41.2.4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pulver, C. J. (1986). Teaching students to understand explicit and implicit connectives. In J. W. Irwin (Ed.), Understanding and teaching cohesion comprehension (pp. 69–82). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• Schleppegrell, M. J. (2001). Linguistic features of the language of schooling. Linguistics and Education, 12(4), 431–459. doi:10.1016/S0898-5898(01)00073-0
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, I. A. G., & Son, E. H. (2011). A dialogic turn in research on learning and teaching to comprehend. In M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, & P. P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. IV, pp. 359–387). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., Braaten, M., & Stroupe, D. (2012). Proposing a core set of instructional practices and tools for teachers of science. Science Education, 96(5), 878–903. doi:10.1002/sce.v96.5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar