Skip to main content

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

Educational Psychology Review volume 26, pages 379–401 (2014)Cite this 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.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (Canada)

Fig. 1

References

  • Adolph, K. E. (2000). Specificity of learning: why infants fall over a veritable cliff. Psychological Science, 11, 290–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. C., Reynolds, R. E., Schallert, D. L., & Goetz, E. T. (1977). Frameworks for comprehending discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 14, 367–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, L. (1984). Children’s effective use of multiple standards for evaluating their comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 588–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Block, C. C., & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (2002). Comprehension instruction: research-based best practices. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Bybee, R. W., & Kennedy, D. (2005). Math and science achievement. Science, 307, 481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlisle, J. F., & Stone, C. A. (2005). Exploring the role of morphemes in word reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 428–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, G., J., Kalil, A., & Ziol-Guest, K. (2008). Economic costs of early childhood poverty (vol. 4): Partnership for America's Economic Success.

  • Dymock, S. (2007). Comprehension strategy instruction: teaching narrative text structure awareness. The Reading Teacher, 61, 161–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Garner, R., & Anderson, J. (1981). Monitoring-of-understanding research: inquiry directions, methodological dilemmas. Journal of Experimental Education, 50, 70–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillam, R., & Pearson, N. (2004). Test of narrative language. Austin, Texas: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 9(3), 558–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., Dowell, N., & Moldovan, C. (2014). A computer’s understanding of literature. Scientific Studies of Literature, (in press)

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauk, O., Johnsrude, I., & Pulvermuller, F. (2004). Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron, 41(2), 301–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Havas, D. A., Glenberg, A. M., & Rinck, M. (2007). Emotion simulation during language comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 436–441.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 127–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hostetter, A. B., & Alibali, M. W. (2008). Visible embodiment: gestures as simulated action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(3), 495–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinnunen, R., Vauras, M., & Niemi, P. (1998). Comprehension monitoring in beginning readers. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2, 353–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: a paradigm for cognitions. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konstantopoulos, S., & Chung, N. (2011). The persistence of teacher effects in elementary grades. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 361–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • Markman, E. M. (1977). Realizing that you don’t understand: a preliminary investigation. Child Development, 48, 986–992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markman, E. M. (1979). Realizing that you don’t understand: elementary school children’s awareness of inconsistencies. Child Development, 50, 643–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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).

  • 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 

  • Meteyard, L., Bahrami, B., & Vigliocco, G. (2007). Motion detection and motion words: language affects low-level visual perception. Psychological Science, 18, 1007–1013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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

  • Park, L. S. (2001). A single shard. Clarion Books.

  • Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 317–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • 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)

  • Phillips, Tabulda, Jangra, Burris, Sedgwick, & Chen (2014). Developing preschoolers’ language and comprehension proficiency: an experimental trial. (in preparation)

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruffman, T. (1999). Children’s understanding of logical inconsistency. Child Development, 70, 872–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sell, A. J., & Kaschak, M. P. (2011). Processing time shifts affects the execution of motor responses. Brain and Language, 117, 39–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C. E. (2001). Reading for understanding. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Education and the Science and Technology Policy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C. E. (2010). Academic language and the challenge of reading for learning about science. Science, 328, 450–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Trabasso, T., & Wiley, J. (2005). Goal plans of action and inferences during comprehension of narratives. Discourse Processes, 39, 129–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

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.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

    Carol McDonald Connor

  2. Florida State University, Florida Center for Reading Research, Tallahassee, FL, USA

    Beth M. Phillips, Young-Suk Kim, Elizabeth C. Crowe & Christopher J. Lonigan

  3. Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA

    Michael Kaschak

  4. University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA

    Kenn Apel

  5. Southern Methodist University, University Park, TX, USA

    Stephanie Al Otaiba

  6. Missouri State University, Springfield, MO, USA

    Shurita Thomas-Tate

  7. Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Lakeisha Cooper Johnson

Authors
  1. Carol McDonald Connor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Beth M. Phillips
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael Kaschak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kenn Apel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Young-Suk Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Stephanie Al Otaiba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Elizabeth C. Crowe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Shurita Thomas-Tate
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Lakeisha Cooper Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Christopher J. Lonigan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carol McDonald Connor.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Connor, C.M., Phillips, B.M., Kaschak, M. et al. Comprehension Tools for Teachers: Reading for Understanding from Prekindergarten Through Fourth Grade. Educ Psychol Rev 26, 379–401 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9267-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9267-1

Keywords

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