Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multiple Strategy Frameworks

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Reading Comprehension

  • 5323 Accesses

Abstract

In recent times there has been more of an interest in multi-strategy intervention programs to improve the reading ability of students who struggle with reading comprehension. The development of a routine framework should enable students to develop skills and apply those skills using many different texts and genres. A concern is that these programs may be too complex for teachers to successfully implement in their classrooms. Another concern is how do teachers organise and decide on the most effective comprehension strategies to include in combination? Researchers have identified a small number of very effective reading comprehension strategies that can be used in combination. What is important is that a consistent and integrated framework will provide the opportunity for students to develop a set of strategies that can be applied routinely and systematically throughout the course of their reading intervention. A routine framework can be structured in such a way s to promote self-regulated learning by incorporating a metacognitive set of procedures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alfassi, M. 1998. Reading for meaning: The efficacy of reciprocal teaching in fostering reading comprehension in high school students in remedial reading classes. American Educational Research Journal 35: 309–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alfassi, M. 2004. Reading to learn: Effects of combined strategy instruction on high school students. The Journal of Educational Research 97: 171–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apthorp, H.S. 2006. Effects of a supplemental vocabulary program in third-grade reading/language arts. Journal of Educational Research 100(2): 67–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashman, A., and J. Elkins. 2001. Educating children with diverse abilities. Sydney: Prentice Hall-Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, L., M.J. Dreher, and J.T. Guthrie. 2000. Why teachers should promote reading engagement. In Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation, ed. L. Baker, M.J. Dreher, and J.T. Guthrie, 1–16. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, B.L. 1996. But teacher you went right on: A perspective on Reading Recovery. The Reading Teacher 50: 284–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Block, C.C. 2004. Teaching comprehension: The comprehension process approach. Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Block, C.C., S.R. Paris, K.L. Reed, C.S. Whiteley, and M.D. Cleveland. 2009. Instructional approaches that signify increase reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology 101(2): 262–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B.S. 1956. Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook 1: The cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bong, M., and E.M. Skaalvik. 2003. Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review 15: 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borkowski, J.G. and Muthukrishna, N. 1992. Moving metacognition into the classroom: Working models and effective strategy teaching. In Promoting Academic Competency in post secondary students with learning difficulties, eds. Pressley, M., Harris, K.R. and Guthrie, J.T. Journal of Learning Disabilities 28:170–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A.L. 1980. Metacognitive development in reading. In Theoretical issues in reading comprehension, ed. R. Spiro, B. Bruce, and W. Brewer, 453–481. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, A., M. Fitts, B. McLaughlin, J. McNamara, and J. Williams. 1996. Teaching and learning in Reading Recovery: Response to “But teacher you went right on”. The Reading Teacher 50: 294–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D.L. 2002. Individualizing instruction in self-regulated learning. Theory into Practice 41: 81–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrie, F., and E. Skinner. 2003. Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology 95: 148–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clay, M.M. 1978. Reading: The patterning of complex behaviour. Auckland: Heinemann Educational Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clay, M.M. 1992. Reading Recovery: The wider implications of an education innovation. In Prevention of reading failure, ed. A. Watson and A. Bedenhop, 22–47. Auckland: Ashton Scholastic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clay, M.M. 1993. Reading Recovery. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, J.E. 2002. What motivates students to read? Four literacy personalities. The Reading Teacher 56: 326–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Combs, B.L. 2001. Self-regulated learning viewed from models of information processing. In Self-regulated learning and academic achievement, ed. B.J. Zimmerman and D.H. Schunk, 289–307. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Lemos, M.M. 2004. Effective strategies for the teaching of reading: What works and why. In Learning difficulties: Multiple perspectives, ed. B.A. Knight and W. Scott, 187–202. Frenchs Forest: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E.L. 1992. The relation of interest to the motivation of behaviour: A self-determination theory perspective. In The role of interest in learning and development, ed. K.A. Renninger, S. Hihi, and A. Krapn, 43–70. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dole, J., C. Sloan, and W. Trathen. 1995. Teaching vocabulary within the context of literature. Journal of Reading 38: 452–460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty Stahl, K.A. 2009. Synthesised comprehension instruction in primary classrooms: A story of successes and challenges. Reading and Writing Quarterly 25: 334–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreher, M.J. 2000. Fostering reading for learning. In Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation, ed. L. Baker, M.J. Dreher, and J.T. Guthrie, 68–93. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N.K. 2004. The case for informational text. Educational Leadership 61: 40–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N.K., and P.D. Pearson. 2002. Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In What research has to say about reading instruction, 3rd ed, ed. A.E. Farstrup and S.J. Samuels, 205–242. Newark: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duran, D., and C. Monereo. 2005. Styles and sequences of cooperative interaction in fixed and reciprocal peer tutoring. Learning and Instruction 15: 179–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Education Department of Western Australia. 1994a. Reading developmental continuum. Melbourne: Longman Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Education Department of Western Australia. 1994b. Reading resource book. Melbourne: Longman Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elbaum, B., S. Vaughn, M. Hughes, and S. Moody. 2000. How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology 92: 605–619.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkins, J. 2000a. Learning difficulties/disabilities in literacy. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy 25: 11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogarty, J., and D. Greaves. 2004. The overlooked role of phonological processing abilities for successful Reading Recovery program outcomes. In Learning difficulties: Multiple perspectives, ed. B.A. Knight and W. Scott, 51–65. Frenchs Forrest: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freebody, P., and A. Luke. 1990. “Literacies” programs: debates and demands in cultural context. Prospect 5: 7–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frick, R.W. 1992. Interestingness. British Journal of Psychology 83: 113–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambrell, L.B., and P.B. Jawitz. 1993. Mental imagery, text illustrations, and the children’s story comprehension and recall. Reading Research Quarterly 28: 265–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaskins, I.W. 2003. Taking charge of reader, text, activity and context variables. In Rethinking reading comprehension, ed. A.P. Sweet and C.E. Snow, 141–165. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunning, T.G. 2006. Assessing and correcting reading and writing difficulties, 3rd ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J.T., and M.H. Davis. 2003. Motivating the struggling readers in middle school through an engagement model of classroom practice. Reading and Writing Quarterly 19: 59–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J.T., K.E. Cox, K.T. Knowles, M. Buehl, S.A. Mazzoni, and L. Fasulo. 2000. Building toward coherent instruction. In Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation, ed. L. Baker, M.J. Dreher, and J.T. Guthrie, 209–236. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hareli, S., and B. Weiner. 2002. Social emotions and personality inferences: A scaffold for a new direction in the study of achievement motivation. Educational Psychologist 37: 183–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J.A. 1992. Self-concept. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hay, I. 1995a. Understanding self-perception: Some school and home implications. School Talk, August/September.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hidi, S. 1990. Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational Research 60: 549–571.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horner, S.L., and C.S. Shwery. 2002. Becoming an engaged, self-regulated reader. Theory into Practice 41(2): 102–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houghton, S., and A. Bain. 1993. Peer tutoring with ESL and below average readers. Journal of Behavioural Education 3: 125–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvela, S., and M. Niemivirta. 2001. Motivation in context: Challenges and possibilities in studying the role of motivation in new pedagogical cultures. In Motivation in learning contexts: Theoretical advances and methodological implications, ed. S. Volet and S. Jarvela, 105–128. New York: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johns, J.L., P. van Leirsburg, and S.L. Davis. 1994. Improving reading: A handbook of strategies. Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keene, E.O. 2002. From good to memorable: Characteristics of highly effective comprehension teaching. In Improving comprehension instruction, ed. C. Collins Block, L.B. Gambrell, and M. Pressley, 385–389. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kehr, H.M., P. Bles, and L. von Rosenstiel. 1999. Self-regulation, self-control, and management training transfer. International Journal of Educational Research 31: 487–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinnunen, R., and M. Vauras. 1997. Comprehension monitoring and the level of comprehension in high- and low-achieving primary school children’s reading. Learning and Instruction 17: 143–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, R. 2002. A question of calibration: A review of the self-efficacy beliefs of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly 25: 88–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leach, J.M., H.S. Scarborough, and L. Rescorla. 2003. Late-emerging reading disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology 95: 211–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, J.W. 2003. Learning disabilities: Theories, diagnosis, and teaching strategies 9th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linden, M., and M.C. Wittrock. 1981. The teaching of reading comprehension according to the model of generative learning. Reading Research Quarterly 17: 44–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linnenbrink, E.A., and P.R. Pintrich. 2003. The Role of self-efficacy beliefs in student engagement in the classroom. Reading and Writing Quarterly 19: 119–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Long, S.A., P.N. Winograd, and C.A. Bridge. 1989. The effects of reader and text characteristics on imagery reported during and after reading. Reading Research Quarterly 24: 353–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louden, W., L.K.S. Chan, J. Elkins, D. Greaves, H. House, M. Milton, S. Nichols, J. Rivalland, M. Rohl, and C. van Kraayennoord. 2000. Mapping the territory, primary students with learning difficulties: Literacy and numeracy, Vols. 1, 2 & 3, Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubliner, S., and L. Smetana. 2005. The effects of comprehensive vocabulary instruction on Title 1 students’ metacognitive word-learning skills and reading comprehension. Journal of Literacy Research 37(2): 163–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luke, A., and P. Freebody. 1999. A map of possible practices: Further notes on the four resources model. Practically Primary, ALEA 4: 5–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nation, K., P. Clarke, and M.J. Snowling. 2002. General cognition ability in children with reading comprehension difficulties. British Journal of Psychology 72: 549–560.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Conner, E.A., and O. Simic. 2002. The effects of Reading Recovery on special education referrals and placements. Psychology in the Schools 39: 635–646.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogle, D.M. 1986. K-W-L: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text. The Reading Teacher 39: 564–570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogle, D., and L. Lang. 2007. Best practices in Adolescent literacy Instruction. In Best practices in literacy instruction, 3rd ed, ed. L.B. Gambrell, L.M. Morrow, and M. Pressley, 264–282. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Overett, J., and D. Donald. 1998. Paired reading: effects of a parent involvement program in a disadvantaged community in South Africa. British Journal of Educational Psychology 68: 347–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A.S., and A.L. Brown. 1984. Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction 1: 117–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A.S., and A.L. Brown. 1987. Enhancing instructional time through attention to metacognition. Journal of Learning Disabilities 20: 66–75 (February).

    Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A.S., and L. Klenk. 1992. Fostering literacy learning in supportive contexts. Journal of Learning Difficulties 25: 211–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paris, A.H., and S.G. Paris. 2003. Assessing narrative comprehension in young children. Reading Research Quarterly 38: 36–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, P.D., L.R. Roehler, J.A. Dole, and G.G. Duffy. 1992. Developing expertise in reading comprehension. In What research has to say about reading instruction, ed. S.J. Samuels and A.E. Farstrup, 101–144. Newark: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pekrum, R., T. Goetz, W. Titz, and R.P. Perry. 2002. Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist 37: 91–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P.R. 2000. An achievement goal theory perspective on issues in motivation terminology, theory and research. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25: 92–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M.G. 1998. Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching. New York: The Gilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M. 2002a. At-risk students: Learning to break through comprehension barriers. In Improving comprehension instruction, ed. C. Collins Block, L.B. Gambrell, and M. Pressley, 354–369. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M. 2002b. Improving comprehension instruction: A path for the Future. In Improving comprehension instruction, ed. C. Collins Block, L.B. Gambrell, and M. Pressley, 385–389. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M. 2002c. Comprehension instruction: What makes sense now, what might make sense soon. International Reading Association Online Document, http://www.readingonline.org/articles/handbook/pressley/index.html.

  • Quandt, I., and R. Selznick. 1984. Self concept and reading, 2nd ed. Newark: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed, J.H., D.L. Schaller, and L.F. Deithloff. 2002. Investigating the interface between self-regulation and involvement processes. Educational Psychologist 37: 53–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reutzel, D.R., J.A. Smith, and P.C. Fawson. 2005. An evaluation of two approaches for teaching reading comprehension strategies in the primary years using science information texts. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 20(3): 276–3056.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohl, M., and J. Rivalland. 2002. Literacy learning difficulties in Australian primary schools: Who are the students identified and how do their schools and teachers support them? The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy 25: 19–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohrbeck, C.A., M.D. Ginsburg-Block, and J.W. Fantuzzo. 2003. Peer assisted learning with elementary school students: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Psychology 95: 240–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R.M., and E.L. Deci. 2000. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25: 54–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadoski, M., and Z. Quast. 1990. Reader response and long-term recall for journalistic text: The roles of imagery, affect, and importance. Reading Research Quarterly 25: 256–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiefele, U. 1991. Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist 26: 299–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. 2003. Self-efficacy for reading and writing: Influence of modelling, goal setting, and self-evaluation. Reading and Writing Quarterly 19: 159–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D.H., and M.J. Rice. 1991. Learning goals and progress feedback during reading comprehension instruction. Journal of Reading Behaviour 23: 351–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D.H., and B.J. Zimmerman. 2007. Influencing children’s self-efficacy and self-regulation of reading and writing through modelling. Reading & Writing Quarterly 23: 7–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, R.M. 2005. Literacy learning of at-risk first-grade students in the Reading Recovery early intervention. Journal of Educational Psychology 97: 257–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R.E., and N.A. Madden. 2001. One million children: Success for all. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, F. 1978. Reading. London: Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spires, H.A., and J. Donley. 1998. Prior knowledge activation: Inducing engagement with formal texts. Journal of Educational Psychology 90: 249–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szabo, S. 2006. KWHHL: A student-driven evolution of the KWL. American Secondary Education 34(3): 57–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blachowicz, C.L.Z., P.J.L. Fisher, and D. Ogle. 2006a. Vocabulary: Questions from the classroom. Reading Research Quarterly 41(4): 524–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabassam, W., and J. Grainger. 2002. Self-concept, attributional style and beliefs of students with learning difficulties with and without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Learning Disability Quarterly 25: 141–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobias, S. 1994. Interest, prior knowledge, and learning. Review of Educational Research 64: 37–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Kraayenoord, C., and J. Elkins. 1991. Learning difficulties. In Educating children with special needs, ed. A. Ashman and J. Elkins, 131–176. Sydney: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., R. Gersten, and D. Chard. 2000. The underlying message in LD intervention research: findings from research syntheses. Exceptional Children 67: 99–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Block, C.C., and R.B. Johnson. 2002. The thinking process approach: Preparing students for the future comprehension challenges. In Improving comprehension instruction, ed. C. Collins Block, L.B. Gambrell, and M. Pressley, 385–389. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J.H., and J.T. Guthrie. 2004. Modelling the effects of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, amount of reading, and past reading achievement on text comprehension between U.S. and Chinese students. Reading Research Quarterly 39: 162–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westwood, P. 2007. Commonsense methods for children with special educational needs: Strategies for the regular classroom, 5th ed. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A. 2000. Facilitating children’s reading motivation. In Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation, ed. L. Baker, M.J. Dreher, and J.T. Guthrie, 140–158. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A., J.T. Guthrie, S. Tonks, and K.C. Perencevich. 2004. Children’s motivation for reading: Domain specificity and instructional influences. The Journal of Educational Research 97(6): 299–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. 1996. Reading recovery: Theoretical issues and review of thesis research. Master’s thesis dissertation, University of New England.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolley, G. 2010. A multiple strategy framework supporting vocabulary development for students with reading comprehension deficits. Australian Journal of Special Education 34(2): 119–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolley, G.E., and I. Hay. 2004. Using imagery as a strategy to enhance students’ comprehension of read text. In Learning difficulties: Multiple perspectives, ed. B.A. Knight and W. Scott, 85–101. Frenchs Forest: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolley, G.E., and I. Hay. 2007. Reading intervention: The benefits of using trained tutors. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy 30(1): 9–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeider, M., R.D. Roberts, and G. Matthews. 2002. Can emotional intelligence be schooled? A critical review. Educational Psychologist 37: 215–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B.J. 2002. Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice 41: 64–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, R.J., R.E. Slavin, and A.M. Farnish. 1991. The effects of cooperative learning and direct instruction in reading comprehension strategies on main idea identification. Journal of Educational Psychology 83:8–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinnell, G.S. 1989. A Systematic approach to reducing the risk of reading failure. In Risk makers, risk takers, risk breakers, ed. J.B. Allen and J.M. Mason. Portsmouth: Heinemann Educational Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, K. 1991. Reading Recovery: What does it have to offer U. K. schools? Reading 25:22–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R., and J. Kulik. 1982. Snapshots or benchmarks? In Memory observed, ed. U. Neisser, 23–40. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, K.W., R.M. Ryan, and J.D. Creswell. 2007. Mindfulness: Theoretical foundations and evidence for its salutary effects. Psychological Inquiry 18(4): 211–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B., and R. Fielding-Barnsley. 1995. Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children: A 2 and 3-year follow-up and a new preschool trial. Journal of Educational Psychology 87: 488–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadman, A. 1976. Learning difficulties in children and adults: Report of the House of Represen­tatives Select Committee on specific learning difficulties. Canberra: Australian Government Printing Services (Chair).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education and Professional Studies, Griffith University, Mt. Gravatt Campus, Brisbane, Queensland, 4111, Australia

    Dr. Gary Woolley

Authors
  1. Dr. Gary Woolley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gary Woolley .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Woolley, G. (2011). Multiple Strategy Frameworks. In: Reading Comprehension. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1174-7_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation