Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Reading Comprehension pp 15–34Cite as

Reading Comprehension

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

This chapter lays the foundation for an understanding of what reading comprehension is and how it is conceptualised in the literature. It develops the notion that reading comprehension is a flexible and ongoing cognitive and constructive process. It is asserted that there are both conceptually driven (top-down) and data-driven processes (bottom-up) that contribute to the construction of a situation (mental) model of text ideas. It is a two-way process that integrates information from the text-based model with information from prior knowledge using inferential processing. The chapter will examine how readers construct mental or situation models of text to enable reading comprehension.The second part of the chapter examines a number of factors that impede children’s reading comprehension. By nature reading comprehension difficulties are complex and reader difficulties may be related to a combination of factors such as: biological, cognitive, or behavioural issues. What is important is the realisation that reading comprehension outcomes are influenced by a combination of factors that may be situated within or outside of the learner.

This is a preview of subscription content, 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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Achibald, L.M.D., and S.E. Gathercole. 2007. The complexities of complex memory span: Storage and processing deficits in specific language impairment. Journal of Memory and Language 57: 177–194.

    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 

  • Anderson, J.R., and G.H. Bower. 1971. On an associative trace for sentence memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour 10: 673–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J.R., and P. Freebody. 1981. Vocabulary knowledge. In Comprehension and Teaching: Research Reviews, ed. J.T. Guthrie, New York: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, S. 1996. A skills approach: Optimizing initial reading instruction. In Prevention of reading failure, ed. A. Watson and A. Badenhop, 84–97. Sydney: Scholastic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ariel, A. 1992. Educating children and adolescents with learning disabilities. Toronto: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armbruster, B., and T. Anderson. 1985. Producing considerate expository text: Or easy reading is damned hard writing. Journal of Curriculum Studies 17: 247–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashton-Warner, S. 1963. Teacher. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel, D.P. 1968. The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. New York: Grune and Stratton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. 1990. Human memory: Theory and practice. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A.D., and G. Hitch. 1993. The recency effect: Implicit learning with explicit retrieval? Memory and Cognition 21: 146–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A.D., and G. Hitch. 1994. Developments in the concept of working memory. Neuropsychology 8: 485–493.

    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 

  • Bayliss, D.M., C. Jarrold, A.D. Baddeley, and E. Leigh. 2005. Differential constraints on the working memory and reading abilities of individuals with learning difficulties and typically developing children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 92: 76–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beal, C.R. 1996. The role of comprehension monitoring in student’s revision. Educational Psychology Review 8: 219–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, I.L., and C. Juel. 1992. The role of decoding in learning to read. 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 

  • Bender, W.N. 2008. Learning disabilities: Characteristics, identification, and teaching strategies. Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, D.V.M. 1997. Uncommon understanding: Development and disorder of language comprehension in children. Hove: Psychological Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, D.V.M., and M.J. Snowling. 2004. Developmental dyslexia and specific language impairment: Same or different? Psychological Bulletin 130: 858–886.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Block, C.C., and M. Pressley. 2002. Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices. New York: Guilford Press.

    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 

  • Bos, C.S. 1999. Informed flexible teaching: Promoting student advocacy and action. In Learning disabilities: Advocacy and action, ed. P. Westwood and W. Scott, 9–20. Melbourne: Australian Resource Educators’ Association Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bos, C.S., and S. Vaughn. 2002. Strategies for teaching students with learning and behaviour problems, 5th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowyer-Crane, C., and M.J. Snowling. 2005. Assessing children’s inference generation: What do tests of reading comprehension measure? British Journal of Educational Psychology 75: 189–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brand-Gruwel, S., C.A.J. Aarnoutse, and K.P. van den Bos. 1998. Improving text comprehension strategies in reading and listening settings. Learning and Instruction 8: 63–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A.L. 1982. Learning and development: the problems of compatibility, access and induction. Human Development 25: 89–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, H., and B. Cambourne. 1987. Read and retell. Melbourne: Nelson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burg, L. 1977. Reading and loving. London: M.T.H. Routledge & Kegan; Chi, and E.T. Rees, 1983. In Trends in memory development research, ed. M.T.H. Chi. New York: Karger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caccamise, D., and L. Snyder. 2005. Theory and pedagogical practices of text comprehension. Topics in Language Disorders 25: 5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cain, K., and J. Oakhill. 1999. Inference making ability and its relation to comprehension failure in young children. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal 11: 489–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cain, K., and J. Oakhill. 2007. Reading comprehension difficulties: Correlates, causes, and consequences. In Students’s comprehension problems in oral and written language: A cognitive perspective, ed. K. Cain and J. Oakhill, 41–75. London: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cambourne, B. 1999. Explicit and systematic teaching of reading – A new slogan? The Reading Teacher 53: 126–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cambourne, B. 2002. Conditions for literacy learning: From conditions of learning to conditions of teaching. The Reading Teacher 55: 358–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnie, D., E.J. Kameenui, and G. Coyle. 1984. Utilization of contextual, information in determining the meaning of unfamiliar words. Reading Research Quarterly 19: 188–204.

    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 

  • Catts, H.W., T.P. Hogan, and M.E. Fey. 2003. Subgrouping poor readers on the basis of individual differences in reading-related abilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities 36: 151–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, J.W., and W. Tunmer. 1997. A longitudinal study of beginning reading achievement and self-concept. British Journal of Educational Psychology 67: 279–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, J.W., and W. Tunmer. 2003. Reading difficulties, reading-related self-perceptions, and strategies for overcoming negative self-beliefs. Reading and Writing Quarterly 19: 5–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, H., and E. Clark. 1977. Psychology and language: An introduction to psycholinguistics, 43–57. New York: Harcourt and Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, C., and L. Bornholt. 2003. Reading self-concepts and task choices for student with reading difficulties. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties 3: 24–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, L., and S. Matthey. 2001. Helping parents read with their children: evaluation of an individual and group reading motivation programme. Journal of Research in Reading 1: 65–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A., J.S. Brown, and K.M. Larkin. 1980. Inference in text understanding. In Theoretical issues in reading comprehension, ed. R.J. Spiro, B.C. Bruce, and W.F. Brewer, 385–410. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Covington, M.V. 1984. Research on motivation in education: Student motivation, Vol. 1, New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daneman, M., and I. Green. 1986. Individual differences in comprehending and producing words in context. Journal of Memory and Language 25: 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Corte, E., L. Verschaffel, and A. Van der Ven. 2001. Improving text comprehension strategies in upper primary school children: A design experiment. British Journal of Educational Research 71: 531–559.

    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 

  • Dipardo, A., and P. Schnack. 2004. Expanding the web of meaning: Thought and emotion in an intergenerational reading and writing program. Reading Research Quarterly 39: 14–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dole, J.A., S.W. Valencia, A.E. Greer, and J.L. Wardrop. 1991. Effects of two types of prereading instruction on the comprehension of narrative and expository text. Reading Research Quarterly 26: 142–158.

    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 

  • Droop, M., and L. Verhoeven. 2003. Language proficiency and reading ability in first- and second-language learners. Reading Research Quarterly 38(1): 78–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, G.G., and L. Roehler. 1989. Improving classroom reading instruction: A decision-making approach, 2nd ed. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, G.G., L.R. Roehler, E. Sivan, G. Rackliffe, C. Book, M.S. Meloth, L.G. Vavrus, R. Wesselman, J. Putnam, and D. Bassiri. 1987. The effects of explaining the reasoning associated with reading strategies. Reading Research Quarterly 22: 347–367.

    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 

  • Durrant, C., and B. Green. 2000. Literacy and the new technologies in school education: Meeting the l(IT)eracy challenge? The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy 23: 89–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L.C., and S. McCormick. 1998. Phases of word learning: Implications for instruction with delayed and disabled readers. Reading & Writing Quarterly 4(2): 135–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emery, D.W. 1992. Children’s understanding of story character. Reading Improvement 29: 2–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ernsbarger, S.C. 2002. Simple, affordable, and effective strategies for prompting reading behaviour. Reading & Writing Quarterly 18: 279–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewers, C.A., and S.M. Brownson. 1999. Kindergartener’s vocabulary acquisition as a function of active vs. passive story book reading, prior vocabulary and working memory. Journal of Reading Psychology 20: 11–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farris, P.J., C.J. Fuhler, and M.P. Walther. 2004. Teaching reading: A balanced approach for today’s classrooms. Boston: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, C.R., J.E. Hummel, and C.J. Marsolek. 1990. Causality and the allocation of attention during comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology 16: 233–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fountas, I.C., and G.S. Pinnell. 1996. Guided reading: Good first teaching for all children. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freebody, P., and J. Frieberg. 2001. Re-discovering practical reading activities in homes and schools. Journal of Research in Reading 24: 222–234.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Frith, U. 1995. Dyslexia: Can we have a shared theoretical framework? Education and Child Psychology 12(1): 6–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fromkin, G., R. Rodman, P. Collins, and D. Blair. 1996. An introduction to language, 3rd ed. Sydney: Harcourt and Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fry, E. 2002. Readability versus levelling. The Reading Teacher 56: 286–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • L.B. 2004. Exploring the connection between oral language and early reading. The Reading Teacher 57: 490–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gersten, R., L.S. Fuchs, J.P. Williams, and S. Baker. 2001. Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: A review of research. Review of Educational Research 71: 279–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glazer, S.M. 1994. Can children assess their own work? Teaching K-8, January, 114–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glenberg, A.M., and W.E. Langston. 1992. Comprehension of illustrated text: pictures help to build mental models. Journal of Memory and Language 31: 129–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goerss, B.L., I.L. Beck, and M.C. McKeown. 1999. Increasing remedial students ability to derive meaning from context. Journal of Reading Psychology 20: 151–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, L.B., and G. Underwood. 1981. The influence of pictures on the derivation of meaning from children’s reading material. Journal of Research in Reading 4: 6–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, Y.M. 1996. Revaluing readers while readers revalue themselves: Retrospective miscue analysis. The Reading Teacher 49: 600–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, C.C., L.D. Malone, and E.J. Kameenui. 1995. Effects of graphic organizer instruction on fifth-grade students. Journal of Educational Research 89: 98–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunning, T.G. 2003. The role of readability in today’s classrooms. Topics in Language Disorders 23: 175–200.

    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., W. Schafer, Y.Y. Wang, and P. Afflerbach. 1995. Relationships of instruction to amount of reading: An exploration of social, cognitive, and instructional connections. Reading Research Quarterly 30(1): 8–25.

    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 

  • Harris, K.R., and M. Pressley. 1991. The nature of cognitive strategy instruction: Interactive strategy instruction. Exceptional Children 57: 392–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassett, D.D. 2006. Signs of the times: The governance of alphabetic print over ‘appropriate’ and ‘natural’ reading development. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy 6(1): 77–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hay, I., A. Ashman, and C.E. van Kraayenoord. 1997. Investigating the influence of achievement on self-concept using intra-class design and a comparison of the PASS and SDQ-1 self-concept tests. British Journal of Educational Psychology 67: 311–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holdaway, D. 1980. Independence in reading: A handbook on individualized procedures, 2nd ed. Gosford: Ashton Scholastic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Idol, L. 1988. Johnny can’t read: Does the fault lie with the book, the teacher, or Johnny? Remedial and Special Education, l9, 8–25.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L., S. Graham, and K.R. Harris. 1997. The effects of goal setting and self-instruction on learning a reading comprehension strategy: A study of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities 30: 80–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juel, C. 1998. Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology 80: 417–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamhi, A., and H. Catts. 2002. The language basis of reading: Implications for classification and treatment of children with reading disabilities. In Speaking, reading, and writing in children with language learning disabilities: New paradigms in research and practice, ed. K.G. Butler and E. Silliman, 45–72. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kavussanu, M., and D. Harnisch. 2000. Self-esteem in children: Do goal orientations matter? British Journal of Educational Psychology 70: 229–242.

    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 

  • Kintsch, W. 1982. Memory for text. In Discourse processing, ed. A. Flammer and W. Kintsch, 186–204. New York: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. 1993. Information accretion and reduction in text processing: inferences. Discourse Processes 16: 193–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. 1998. Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirby, J.R. 1991. Reading to learn: Toward an applied psychology of reading comprehension. In Teaching for learning: The view from cognitive psychology, ed. J.B. Biggs, 103–135. Hawthorn: Globe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krapp, A. 2005. Basic needs and the development of interest and intrinsic motivational orientations. Learning and Instruction 15: 381–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, M.R., and S.A. Stahl. 1998. Teaching children to learn word meanings from context: A synthesis and some questions. Journal of Literacy Research 30: 119–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • LaBerg, D., and S.J. Samuels. 1974. Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology 6: 293–323.

    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 

  • Leppanen, U., P. Niemi, and K.A.J. Nurmi. 2004. Development of reading skills among preschool and primary school pupils. Reading Research Quarterly 39: 72–93.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, J.R. 1981. On functions of pictures in prose. In Neuropsychological and cognitive processes in reading, ed. F. Pirozzolo and M. Wittrock, 203–288. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, R.B., and D.H. Doorlag. 1999. Teaching special students in the mainstream, 4th ed. New York: MacMillan Publishing Company.

    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 

  • Lipson, M.Y. 1983. The influence of religious affiliation on children’s memory for text information. Reading Research Quarterly 18: 448–457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ludwig, C. 2004. Literacy in the learning Areas: A proposition. Literacy learning in the Middle Years 8: 37–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manset-Williamson, G., and J.M. Nelson. 2005. Balanced, strategic reading instruction for upper- elementary and middle school students with reading disabilities: A comparative study of two approaches. Learning Disability Quarterly 28: 59–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marr, M.B., and K. Gormley. 1982. Children’s recall of familiar and unfamiliar text. Reading Research Quarterly 18: 89–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKoon, G., and R. Ratcliff. 1992. Pronoun resolution and discourse models. Journal of Educational Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 18: 440–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNaughton, S., M. Lai, S. MacDonald, and S. Farry. 2004. Designing more effective teaching of comprehension in culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms in New Zealand. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy 27: 184–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, B.J.F. 1975. The organization of prose and its effects on memory. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrow, L.M. 1985. Retelling stories: A strategy for improving young children’s comprehension, concept of story structure, and oral language complexity. Elementary School Journal 85: 647–661.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nation, K., J.W. Adams, C.A. Bower-Crane, and M.J. Snowling. 1999. Working memory deficits in poor comprehenders reflect underlying language impairments. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 73(2): 139–159.

    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 

  • Neal, J.C., and P.R. Kelly. 2002. Delivering the promise of academic success through late intervention. Reading and Writing Quarterly 18: 101–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, S.B. 1995. Reading together: A community – supported parent tutoring program. The Reading Teacher 49(2): 120–129.

    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 

  • Paris, S.G. 2005. Reinterpreting the development of reading skills. Reading Research Quarterly 40: 184–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paris, S.G., and E.R. Oka. 1989. Strategies for comprehending text and coping with reading difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly 12: 32–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paris, S.G., and P.N. Winograd. 1990. How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. In Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction, ed. B.F. Jones and L. Idol, 15–51. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, P.D., and D.D. Johnson. 1978. Teaching reading comprehension. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, P.D., and T.E. Raphael. 1990. Reading comprehension as a dimension of thinking. In Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction, ed. B.F. Jones and L. Idol. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    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 

  • Perfetti, C. 2007. Reading ability: Lexical Quality to Comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading 11(4): 357–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P.R., R.W. Marx, and R.A. Boyle. 1993. Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research 63: 167–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M.G. 1997. The cognitive science of reading. Contemporary Educational Psychology 22: 247–259.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, K.D. 1988. Learning and learning to learn. In Teaching the learning disabled: A cognitive developmental approach, ed. K.D. Reid, 5–28. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rivalland, J. 2000. Definitions and identification: Who are the children with learning difficulties? Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties 5: 12–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, G.L. 2001. Problems in literacy and numeracy. In Integration and Inclusion, ed. P. Foreman, 167–229. Victoria: Nelson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, G.L. 2002. Assessment of learning disabilities: The complexity of causes and consequences. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties 7: 29–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohl, M. 2000. Programs and strategies used by teachers to support primary students with difficulties in learning literacy. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties 5: 17–22.

    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 

  • Romeo, L. 2002. At-risk students: Learning to break through comprehension barriers. In Improving comprehension instruction, ed. C. Collins Block, L.B. Gambrell, and M. Pressley, 385–389. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rozendaal, J.S., A. Minnaert, and M. Boekaerts. 2005. The influence of teacher perceived adminis­tration of self-regulated learning on students’ motivation and information-processing. Learning and Instruction 15: 141–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuels, S.J. 1978. Why children fail to learn and what to do about it. Exceptional Children 53: 7–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schallert, D.L. 1980. The role of illustrations in reading comprehension. In Theoretical issues in reading comprehension, ed. R.J. Spiro, B.C. Bruce, and W.F. Brewer, 503–524. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schank, R.C., and R. Ableson. 1977. Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    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. 2004. Learning theories: An educational perspective, 4th ed. Saddle River: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D.H. 2005. Commentary on self-regulation in school contexts. Learning and Instruction 15: 173–177.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C.E. 2002. Reading for understanding: Toward a research and development program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica: Rand Corp. Retrieved 12 Dec, 2002, from http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1465/.

  • Snow, C.E., and A.P. Sweet. 2003. Reading for comprehension. In Rethinking reading comprehension, ed. A.P. Sweet and C.E. Snow, 1–11. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snowling, M.J., J.W. Adams, D.V.M. Bishop, and S.E. Stothard. 2001. Educational attainments of school leavers with a preschool history of speech-language impairments. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders 36: 173–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich, K.E. 1986. Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly 21: 360–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stull, A., and R.E. Mayer. 2007. Learning by doing versus learning by viewing: Three experimental comparisons of learner-generated versus author-provided graphic organisers. Journal of Educational Psychology 99(4): 808–820.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H.L., and O. Jerman. 2007. The influence of working memory on reading growth in subgroups of children with reading difficulties. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 96: 249–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H.L., M.H. Ashbaker, and C. Lee. 1996. Learning- disabled readers’ working memory as a function of processing demands. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 61: 242–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H.L., C.B. Howard, and L. Saez. 2006. Do different components of working memory underlie different subgroups of reading disabilities? Journal of Learning Disabilities 39(3): 252–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trabasso, T., and L.L. Sperry. 1985. Causal relatedness and importance of story events. Journal of Memory and Language 24: 595–611.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tunmer, W.E., J.W. Chapman, K.T. Greaney, and J.E. Prochnow. 2002. The contribution of educational psychology to intervention research and practice. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education 49: 11–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dijk, T.A., and W. Kintsch. 1983. Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Gelderen, A., R. Schoonen, K. de Glopper, J. Hulstijin, A. Simis, P. Snellings, and M. Stevenson. 2004. Linguistic knowledge, processing speed, and metacognitive knowledge in first- and second-language reading comprehension: A componential analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology 96(1): 19–30.

    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 

  • Vellutino, F.R., J.M. Fletcher, M.J. Snowling, and D.M. Scanlon. 2004. Specific reading disability (dyslexia): what have we learned in the past four decades? Journal of Child Psychiatry 45(1): 2–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vipond, D. 1980. Micro- and macroprocessess in text comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour 19: 276–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vollmeyer, R., and F. Rheinberg. 2005. A surprising effect of feedback on learning. Learning and Instruction 15: 589–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J.V. 1979. From social interaction to higher psychological processes: A clarification of Vygotsky’s theory. Human Development 22: 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westwood, P. 2004. The affective components of difficulty in learning: Why prevention is better than attempted cure. In Learning difficulties: Multiple perspectives, ed. B.A. Knight and W. Scott, 187–202. Frenchs Forest: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Wharton-McDonald, R. 2002. The need for increased comprehension instruction. In Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching, ed. M. Pressley, 236–288. New York: The Gilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J., and C. Moon. 1991. Parental Support of Independent Readers in the Junior School. Reading 25: 2–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, M. 2008. Proust and the squid. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, F.B., and E.L. Grigorenko. 2001. Emerging issues in the genetics of dyslexia: A metho­dological preview. Journal of Learning Disabilities 34: 503–511.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthy, J., E. Patterson, R. Salas, S. Prater, and M. Turner. 2002. More than just reading: The human factor in reaching resistant readers. Reading Research and Instruction 41: 177–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuill, N., J. Oakhill, and A. Parkin. 1989. Working memory, comprehensionability and the resolution of text anomaly. British Journal of Psychology 80: 351–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, H., and R. Hoosain. 2001. The influence of narrative text characteristics on thematic inference during reading. Journal of Research in Reading 24: 173–186.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B.J., and D.H. Schunk. 2001. Reflections on theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement. In Self-regulated learning and academic achievement, ed. B.J. Zimmerman and D.H. Schunk, 289–307. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zinar, S. 2000. The relative contributions of word identification skill and comprehension monitoring behaviour to reading comprehension ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25: 363–377.

    Google Scholar 

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

    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.

  • Pressley, M. 2002e. Reading Instruction that Works: The case for balanced teaching, 2nd ed. New York: Gilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whaley, J.F. 1981a. Readers’ expectation for story structures. Reading Research Quarterly 17: 90–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doidge, N. 2007. The brain that changes itself. Melbourne: Scribe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paris, S.G., and E.R. Oka. 1986a. Children’s reading strategies, metacognition and motivation. Developmental Review, 6: 25–56.

    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). Reading Comprehension. In: Reading Comprehension. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1174-7_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation