Advertisement

Educational Psychology Review

, Volume 26, Issue 3, pp 379–401 | Cite as

Comprehension Tools for Teachers: Reading for Understanding from Prekindergarten Through Fourth Grade

  • Carol McDonald Connor
  • Beth M. Phillips
  • Michael Kaschak
  • Kenn Apel
  • Young-Suk Kim
  • Stephanie Al Otaiba
  • Elizabeth C. Crowe
  • Shurita Thomas-Tate
  • Lakeisha Cooper Johnson
  • Christopher J. Lonigan
Review Article

Abstract

This paper describes the theoretical framework, as well as the development and testing of the intervention, Comprehension Tools for Teachers (CTT), which is composed of eight component interventions targeting malleable language and reading comprehension skills that emerging research indicates contribute to proficient reading for understanding for prekindergarteners through fourth graders. Component interventions target processes considered largely automatic as well as more reflective processes, with interacting and reciprocal effects. Specifically, we present component interventions targeting cognitive, linguistic, and text-specific processes, including morphological awareness, syntax, mental-state verbs, comprehension monitoring, narrative and expository text structure, enacted comprehension, academic knowledge, and reading to learn from informational text. Our aim was to develop a tool set composed of intensive meaningful individualized small group interventions. We improved feasibility in regular classrooms through the use of design-based iterative research methods including careful lesson planning, targeted scripting, pre- and postintervention proximal assessments, and technology. In addition to the overall framework, we discuss seven of the component interventions and general results of design and efficacy studies.

Keywords

Reading comprehension Elementary school Preschool Literacy Instruction Intervention Tier 2 Small group intervention Academic language Oral language Children Students Early childhood Middle childhood 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Dr. Lynda Apel, Dr. Jennifer Dombek, Karli Willis, and M. Jane Weekley for their contributions to the development of specific interventions. We thank the children, parents, teachers, and school administrators without whom this research would not have been possible. The Reading for Understanding Network grant no. R305F100027 from the US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences funded these studies. The opinions expressed are ours and do not represent the views of the funding agency.

References

  1. Adolph, K. E. (2000). Specificity of learning: why infants fall over a veritable cliff. Psychological Science, 11, 290–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, R. C., Reynolds, R. E., Schallert, D. L., & Goetz, E. T. (1977). Frameworks for comprehending discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 14, 367–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Apel, K., & Diehm, E. (2014). Morphological awareness intervention with kindergarteners and first and second grade students from low SES homes: a small efficacy study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47, 65–75. doi: 10.1177/0022219413509964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Apel, K., & Lawrence, J. (2011). Contributions of morphological awareness skills to word-level reading and spelling in first-grade children with and without speech sound disorder. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54, 1312–1327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Apel, K., Wilson-Fowler, E. B., Brimo, D., & Perrin, N. A. (2012). Metalinguistic contributions to reading and spelling in second and third grade students. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 25, 1283–1305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Apel, K., Brimo, D., Diehm, E., & Apel, L. (2013). Morphological awareness intervention with kindergarten, first, and second grade students from low SES homes: a feasibility study. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 44, 161–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baker, L. (1984). Children’s effective use of multiple standards for evaluating their comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 588–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baker, L., & Stein, N. (1981). The development of prose comprehension skills. In C. Santa & B. Hayes (Eds.), Children’s prose comprehension: research and practice (pp. 7–43). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
  9. Bishop, D. V. M., & Snowling, M. J. (2004). Developmental dyslexia and specific language impairment: same or different? Psychological Bulletin, 130, 858–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Block, C. C., & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (2002). Comprehension instruction: research-based best practices. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  11. Botting, N., Simkin, Z., & Conti-Ramsden, G. (2006). Associated reading skills in children with a history of language impairment. Reading and Writing, 19, 77–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bowers, P. N., Kirby, J. R., & Deacon, S. H. (2010). The effects of morphological instruction on literacy skills: a systematic review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 80, 144–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In R. M. Lerner & W. Damon (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: theoretical models of human development (6th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 793–828). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  15. Bybee, R. W., & Kennedy, D. (2005). Math and science achievement. Science, 307, 481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cain, K. (1996). Story knowledge and comprehension skill. In C. Cornoldi & J. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties: processes and intervention (pp. 167–192). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  17. Cain, K., & Nash, H. M. (2011). The influence of connectives on young readers’ processing and comprehension of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 429–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 31–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Carlisle, J. F. (2000). Awareness of the structure and meaning of morphologically complex words: impact on reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 12, 169–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Carlisle, J. F., & Stone, C. A. (2005). Exploring the role of morphemes in word reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 428–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Casasanto, D., & Boroditsky, L. (2008). Time in the mind: using space to think about time. Cognition, 106, 579–593. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.03.004.
  22. Charity, A. H., Scarborough, H. S., & Griffin, D. M. (2004). Familiarity with school English in African American children and its relation to early reading achievement. Child Development, 75, 1340–1356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Connor, C. M. (2013). Intervening to support reading comprehension development with diverse learners. In B. Miller & L. E. Cutting (Eds.), Unraveling the behavioral, neurobiological and genetic components of reading comprehension: the dyslexia foundation and NICHD (pp. 222–232). Baltimore: Brookes.Google Scholar
  24. Connor, C. M., & Craig, H. K. (2006). African American preschoolers’ language, emergent literacy skills, and use of African American English: a complex relation. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 771–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Connor, C. M., Kaya, S., Luck, M., Toste, J., Canto, A., Rice, D. C., & Underwood, P. (2010). Content-area literacy: individualizing student instruction in second grade science. Reading Teacher, 63(6), 474–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., Fishman, B., Giuliani, S., Luck, M., Underwood, P., & Schatschneider, C. (2011). Classroom instruction, child × instruction interactions and the impact of differentiating student instruction on third graders’ reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 46, 189–221.Google Scholar
  27. Connor, C. M., Rice, D. C., Canto, A. I., Southerland, S. A., Underwood, P., Kaya, S., & Morrison, F. J. (2012). Child characteristics by science instruction interactions in second and third grade and their relation to students' content-area knowledge, vocabulary, and reading skill gains. The Elementary School Journal, 113, 52–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., Fishman, B., Crowe, E. C., Al Otaiba, S., & Schatschneider, C. (2013). A longitudinal cluster-randomized control study on the accumulating effects of individualized literacy instruction on students’ reading from 1st through 3rd grade. Psychological Science, 24, 1408–1419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Coyne, M. D., McCoach, D. B., Loftus, S., Zipoli, R., & Kapp, S. (2010). Direct vocabulary instruction in kindergarten: teaching for breadth vs. depth. Elementary School Journal, 110, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Craig, H. K., & Washington, J. A. (2004a). Language variation and language learning. In A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. Ehren, & K. Apel (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: development and disorders (pp. 228–247). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  31. Craig, H. K., & Washington, J. A. (2004b). Grade-related changes in the production of African American English. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 450–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Craig, H. K., Zhang, L., Hensel, S. L., & Quinn, E. J. (2009). African American English-speaking students: an examination of the relationship between dialect shifting and reading outcomes. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 52, 839–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Cromley, J. G., & Azevedo, R. (2007). Testing and refining the direct and inferential mediation (DIME) model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 311–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Dickinson, D. K., Golinkoff, R. M., & Hirsh-Pasek, K. K. (2010). Speaking out for language: why language is central to reading development. Educational Researcher, 39, 305–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Duncan, G., J., Kalil, A., & Ziol-Guest, K. (2008). Economic costs of early childhood poverty (vol. 4): Partnership for America's Economic Success.Google Scholar
  36. Dymock, S. (2007). Comprehension strategy instruction: teaching narrative text structure awareness. The Reading Teacher, 61, 161–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Elleman, A. M., Lindo, E. J., Morphy, P., & Compton, D. L. (2009). The impact of vocabulary instruction on passage-level comprehension of school-age children: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2, 1-1-44.Google Scholar
  38. Englert, C. S., Hiebert, E. H., & Stewart, S. R. (1988). Detecting and correcting inconsistencies in the monitoring of expository prose. Journal of Educational Research, 81, 221–227.Google Scholar
  39. Fischer, M. H., & Zwaan, R. A. (2008). Embodied language: a review of the role of the motor system in language comprehension. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(6), 825–850. doi: 10.1080/17470210701623605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Fitzgerald, J. (1989). Research on stories: implications for teachers. In K. D. Muth (Ed.), Children’s comprehension of text: research into practice (pp. 2–36). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
  41. Garner, R., & Anderson, J. (1981). Monitoring-of-understanding research: inquiry directions, methodological dilemmas. Journal of Experimental Education, 50, 70–76.Google Scholar
  42. Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Williams, J. P., & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: a review of research. Review of Educational Research, 71, 279–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Gillam, R., & Pearson, N. (2004). Test of narrative language. Austin, Texas: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
  44. Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 9(3), 558–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Glenberg, A. M., Gutierrez, T., Levin, J. R., Japunitich, S., & Kaschak, M. P. (2004). Activity and imagined activity can enhance young children’s reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Research, 96(3), 424–436.Google Scholar
  46. Goodwin, A. P., & Ahn, S. (2013). A meta-analysis of morphological interventions in English: effects of literacy outcomes for school-age children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17, 257–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Graesser, A. C., Dowell, N., & Moldovan, C. (2014). A computer’s understanding of literature. Scientific Studies of Literature, (in press)Google Scholar
  49. Griffin, C. C., Malone, L. D., & Kameenui, E. J. (1995). Effects of graphic organizer instruction on fifth-grade students. The Journal of Educational Research, 89, 98–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Hall, K., Sabey, B., & McClellan, M. (2005). Expository text comprehension: helping primary-grade teachers use expository texts to full advantage. Reading Psychology: An International Quarterly, 26, 211–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Hauk, O., Johnsrude, I., & Pulvermuller, F. (2004). Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron, 41(2), 301–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Havas, D. A., Glenberg, A. M., & Rinck, M. (2007). Emotion simulation during language comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 436–441.Google Scholar
  53. Hoff, E. (2013). Interpreting the early language trajectories of children from low-SES and language minority homes: implications for closing achievement gaps. Developmental Psychology, 49, 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 127–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Hostetter, A. B., & Alibali, M. W. (2008). Visible embodiment: gestures as simulated action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(3), 495–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Huttenlocher, J., Vasilyeva, M., Waterfall, H. R., Vevea, J. L., & Hedges, L. V. (2007). The varieties of speech to children. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1062–1083.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Kaschak, M. P., Madden, C. J., Therriault, D. J., Yaxley, R. H., Aveyard, M., Blanchard, A. A., & Zwaan, R. A. (2005). Perception of motion affects language processing. Cognition, 94(3), B79–89. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.06.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Kendeou, P., van den Broek, P., White, M. J., & Lynch, J. S. (2009). Predicting reading comprehension in early elementary school: the independent contributions of oral language and decoding skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 765–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Kinnunen, R., Vauras, M., & Niemi, P. (1998). Comprehension monitoring in beginning readers. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2, 353–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: a paradigm for cognitions. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Kirby, J. R., Deacon, S. H., Bowers, P. N., Izenberg, L., Wade-Woolley, L., & Parrila, R. (2012). Children’s morphological awareness and reading ability. Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 25, 389–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Konstantopoulos, S., & Chung, N. (2011). The persistence of teacher effects in elementary grades. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 361–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  64. Law, J., Garrett, Z., & Nye, C. (2004). The efficacy of treatment for children with developmental speech and language delay/disorder: a meta-analysis. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 47, 924–943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Lee, E. C., & Rescorla, L. (2008). The use of psychological state words by late talkers at ages 3, 4, and 5 years. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29, 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Lonigan, C. J. & Schatschneider, C. (2013, July). Explaining reading comprehension of elementary school children: a latent-variable approach to the simple view of reading. Presented at the 20th Annual Meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading. Hong Kong, China.Google Scholar
  67. Markman, E. M. (1977). Realizing that you don’t understand: a preliminary investigation. Child Development, 48, 986–992.Google Scholar
  68. Markman, E. M. (1979). Realizing that you don’t understand: elementary school children’s awareness of inconsistencies. Child Development, 50, 643–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Melby-Lervåg, Monica, & Lervåg, Arne. (2013). Reading comprehension and its underlying components in second-language learners: a meta-analysis of studies comparing first- and second-language learners. Psychological Bulletin (no pagination specified).Google Scholar
  70. Mesmer, H. A., Cunningham, J. W., & Hiebert, E. H. (2012). Toward a theoretical model of primary-grade text complexity: learning from the past, anticipating the future. Reading Research Quarterly, 47, 235–258.Google Scholar
  71. Meteyard, L., Bahrami, B., & Vigliocco, G. (2007). Motion detection and motion words: language affects low-level visual perception. Psychological Science, 18, 1007–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Meyer, B. J. F., & Poon, L. W. (2004). Effects of structure strategy training and signaling on recall of text. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 810–851). Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
  73. National Center for Education Statistics [NAEP], Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education. (2013). Fast facts: english language learners. Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education. http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=96. Accessed December
  74. Park, L. S. (2001). A single shard. Clarion Books.Google Scholar
  75. Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 317–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Perfetti, C. A. (2008). Reading comprehension: A conceptual framework from word meaning to text meaning. Paper presented at the Assessing reading in the 21st century conference: Aligning and applying advances in the reading and measurement sciences, Philadelphia PA.Google Scholar
  77. Phillips, B. M. (2014). Promotion of syntactical development and oral comprehension: development and initial evaluation of a small -group intervention. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, (in press)Google Scholar
  78. Phillips, Tabulda, Jangra, Burris, Sedgwick, & Chen (2014). Developing preschoolers’ language and comprehension proficiency: an experimental trial. (in preparation)Google Scholar
  79. Pianta, R. C., Belsky, J., Houts, R., Morrison, F. J., & NICHD-ECCRN. (2007). TEACHING: opportunities to learn in America’s elementary classrooms. Science, 315, 1795–1796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Pressley, M., Johnson, C. J., Symons, S., McGoldrick, J. A., & Kurita, J. A. (1989). Strategies that improve children’s memory and comprehension of text. The Elementary School Journal, 90, 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Rapp, D. N., & van den Broek, P. (2005). Dynamic text comprehension: an integrative view of reading. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(5), 276–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Rapp, D. N., van den Broek, P., McMaster, K., Kendeou, P., & Espin, C. A. (2007). Higher-order comprehension processes in struggling readers: a perspective for research and intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 389–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Reis, S. M., Eckert, R. D., McCoach, D. B., Jacobs, J. K., & Coyne, M. (2008). Using enrichment reading practices to increase reading fluency, comprehension, and attitudes. The Journal of Educational Research, 101, 299–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Reis, S. M., McCoach, D. B., Little, C. A., Muller, L. M., & Kaniskan, R. B. (2011). The effects of differentiated instruction and enrichment pedagogy on reading achievement in five elementary schools. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 462–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Reutzel, D. R., Smith, J. A., & Fawson, P. C. (2005). An evaluation of two approaches for teaching reading comprehension strategies in the primary years using science information texts. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 20, 276–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Ruffman, T. (1999). Children’s understanding of logical inconsistency. Child Development, 70, 872–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Schubert, T. W. (2004). The power in your hand: gender differences in bodily feedback from making a fist. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 757–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Sell, A. J., & Kaschak, M. P. (2011). Processing time shifts affects the execution of motor responses. Brain and Language, 117, 39–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Sell, A. J., & Kaschak, M. P. (2012). The comprehension of sentences involving quantity information affects responses on the up-down axis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 19, 708–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Silverman, R. D., & Hines, S. (2009). The effects of multimedia-enhanced instruction on the vocabulary of English-language learners and non-English-language learners in pre-kindergarten through second grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 305–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Skibbe, L. E., Phillips, B. M., Day, S., Brophy-Herb, H. E., & Connor, C. M. D. (2012). Children’s early literacy growth in relation to classmates’ self-regulation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 451–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Snow, C. E. (2001). Reading for understanding. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Education and the Science and Technology Policy Institute.Google Scholar
  93. Snow, C. E. (2010). Academic language and the challenge of reading for learning about science. Science, 328, 450–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Stevens, R. J., Van Meter, P., & Warcholak, N. D. (2010). The effects of explicitly teaching story structure to primary grade children. Journal of Literacy Research, 42, 159–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Storch, S. A., & Whitehurst, G. J. (2002). Oral language and code-related precursors to reading: evidence from a longitudinal structural model. Developmental Psychology, 38, 934–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Taylor, J. E., Roehrig, A. D., Connor, C. M., & Schatschneider, C. (2010). Teacher quality moderates the genetic effects on early reading. Science, 328, 512–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Terry, N. P., Connor, C. M., Thomas-Tate, S., & Love, M. (2010). Examining relationships among dialect variation, literacy skills, and school context in first grade. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53, 126–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Terry, N. P., Connor, C. M., Petscher, Y., & Conlin, C. A. (2012). Dialect variation and reading: is change in nonmainstream American English use related to reading achievement in first and second grade? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 55(1), 55–69.Google Scholar
  99. Thomas-Tate, S., & Connor, C. M. (2013). Intervening to support reading comprehension with diverse learners. Paper presented at the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  100. Tompkins, G. E., & McGee, L. M. (1989). Teaching repetition as a story structure. In K. D. Muth (Ed.), Children’s comprehension of text: research into practice (pp. 59–78). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
  101. Torgesen, J. K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early intervention in reading: the lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15, 55–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Trabasso, T. (1981). Can we integrate research and instruction on reading comprehension? In C. Santa & B. Hayes (Eds.), Children’s prose comprehension: research and practice (pp. 103–116). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
  103. Trabasso, T., & Wiley, J. (2005). Goal plans of action and inferences during comprehension of narratives. Discourse Processes, 39, 129–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. van der Lely, H. K. J., & Marshall, C. R. (2010). Assessing component language deficits in the early detection of reading difficulty risk. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 357–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. van Kleeck, A. (2008). Providing preschool foundations for later reading comprehension: the importance of and ideas for targeting inferencing in storybook-sharing interventions. Psychology in the Schools, 45, 627–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Weiser, B., & Mathes, P. (2011). Using encoding instruction to improve the reading and spelling performances of elementary students at risk for literacy difficulties: a best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 81, 170–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Williams, J. P., Hall, K. M., Laurer, K. D., Stafford, K. B., DeSisto, L. A., & de Cani, J. S. (2005). Expository text comprehension in the primary grade classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 538–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Williams, J. P., Stafford, K. B., Lauer, K. D., Hall, K. M., & Pollini, S. (2009). Embedding reading comprehension training in content-area instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Willson, V. L., & Rupley, W. H. (1997). A structural equation model for reading comprehension based on background, phonemic, and strategy knowledge. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 45–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Wolfram, W. (1971). Black and white speech differences revisited. In W. Wolfram & N. H. Clarke (Eds.), Black-white speech relationships (pp. 139–161). Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
  111. Wolter, J. A., Wood, A., & D’zatko, K. W. (2009). The influence of morphological awareness on the literacy development of first-grade children. Language, Speech, & Hearing Services in Schools, 40, 286–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carol McDonald Connor
    • 1
  • Beth M. Phillips
    • 2
  • Michael Kaschak
    • 3
  • Kenn Apel
    • 4
  • Young-Suk Kim
    • 2
  • Stephanie Al Otaiba
    • 5
  • Elizabeth C. Crowe
    • 2
  • Shurita Thomas-Tate
    • 6
  • Lakeisha Cooper Johnson
    • 7
  • Christopher J. Lonigan
    • 2
  1. 1.Arizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  2. 2.Florida State University, Florida Center for Reading ResearchTallahasseeUSA
  3. 3.Florida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA
  4. 4.University of South CarolinaColumbiaUSA
  5. 5.Southern Methodist UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  6. 6.Missouri State UniversitySpringfieldUSA
  7. 7.Georgia State UniversityAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations