Part of
Learning to Read in a Digital World
Edited by Mirit Barzillai, Jenny Thomson, Sascha Schroeder and Paul van den Broek
[Studies in Written Language and Literacy 17] 2018
► pp. 185204
Ackerman, R., & Lauterman, T.
(2012) Taking reading comprehension exams on screen or on paper? A metacognitive analysis of learning texts under time pressure. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1816–1828. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Al-Seghayer, K.
(2001) The effect of multimedia annotation modes on L2 vocabulary acquisition: A comparative study. Language Learning & Technology, 5(1), 202–232.Google Scholar
Akbulut, Y.
(2007) Effects of multimedia annotations on incidental vocabulary learning and reading comprehension of advanced learners of English as a foreign language. Instructional Science, 35(6), 499–517. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) Predictors of foreign language reading comprehension in a hypermedia reading environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 39(1), 37–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anderson, R. C., & Biddle, W. B.
(1975) On asking people questions about what they are reading. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 9, 89–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Andre, T.
(1979) Does answering higher-level questions while reading facilitate productive learning? Review of Educational Research, 49(2), 280–318. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, E. D., Hope, L., & Karandjeff, K.
(2009) Contextualized teaching and learning: A faculty primer. San Francisco, CA: Research & Planning Group for California Community Colleges.Google Scholar
Beck, I. L.
(1997) Questioning the author: An approach for enhancing student engagement with text. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
Brown, S.
(2016) Young learners’ transactions with interactive digital texts using e-readers. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 30(1), 42–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burnett, A.
(2011) The effects of listening previewing on fourth grade students’ acquisition of knowledge of reading vocabulary words. Retrieved on July 6 2016 from [URL].
Caitlin, L.
(2015) 5 strategies for teaching close reading with tech. Retrieved on July 6 2016 from [URL].
Carrell, P. L.
(1985) Facilitating ESL reading by teaching text structure. TESOL Quarterly, 19(4), 727–752. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carenini, G., & Moore, J. D.
(2006) Generating and evaluating evaluative arguments. Artificial Intelligence, 170(11), 925–952. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Catlin, T.
(2016) StudySync is the perfect tool to develop 21st century literacy! Retrieved from [URL].
Chandler, P., & Sweller J.
(1991) Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chen, H. C., & Graves, M. F.
(1995) Effects of previewing and providing background knowledge on Taiwanese college students’ comprehension of American short stories. Tesol Quarterly, 29(4), 663–686. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ciullo, S., Falcomata, T., & Vaughn, S.
(2015) Teaching social studies to upper elementary students with learning disabilities graphic organizers and explicit instruction. Learning Disability Quarterly, 38(1), 15–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, V.
(2006) Strategies for comprehending electronic text in digitally mediated times. In A. Méndez-Vilas, A. Solano Martín, & J. A. Mesa González (Eds.), Current developments in technology-assisted education (pp. 170–174). Spain: FORMATEX.Google Scholar
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E.
(1987) Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing (No. 403). In L. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cook, L. K., & Mayer, R. E.
(1983) Reading strategies training for meaningful learning from prose. In M. Pressley & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Cognitive strategy research (pp. 87–131). New York: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davey, B., & McBride, S.
(1986) Effects of question-generation training on reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(4), 256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davis, D. S., & Neitzel, C.
(2012) Collaborative sense-making in print and digital text environments. Reading and Writing, 25(4), 831–856. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Jong, M. T., & Bus, A. G.
(2002) Quality of book-reading matters for emergent readers: An experiment with the same book in a regular or electronic format. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dewey, J.
(1966) Democracy and education. New York: Free Press, 578, 53–60.Google Scholar
Dexter, D. D., & Hughes, C. A.
(2011) Graphic organizers and students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34(1), 51–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., & Pearson, P. D.
(1991) Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 239–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dole, J., Valencia, S., Greer, E., & Wardrop, J.
(1991) Effects of two types of prereading instruction on the comprehension of narrative and expository text. Reading Research Quarterly, 26(2), 142–159. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowden, T.
(2007) Relevant, challenging, integrative and exploratory curriculum design: Perspectives from theory and practice for middle level schooling in Australia. Australian Educational Researcher, 34, 51–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dreyer, C., & Nel, C.
(2003) Teaching reading strategies and reading comprehension within a technology-enhanced learning environment. System, 31(3), 349–365. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elbro, C., Rasmussen, I., & Spelling, B.
(1996) Teaching reading to disabled readers with language disorders: A controlled evaluation of synthetic speech feedback. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 37(2), 140–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Edyburn, D. L.
(2007) Technology-enhanced reading performance: Defining a research agenda. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(1), 146–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fagella-Luby, M., Schumaker, J. S., & Deshler, D.
(2007) Embedded learning strategy instruction: Story-structure pedagogy in heterogeneous secondary literature classes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 131–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fischer, J. A.
(1973) Effects of cue synthesis procedure and postquestions on the retention of prose material. Dissertation Abstracts International, 34, 615.Google Scholar
Haring, N., Lovitt, T., Eaton, M., & Hansen, C.
(1978) Classroom organization and management. The fourth R: research in the classroom. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R. O., Musti-rao, S., Hale, A., McGuire, S., & Hailley, J.
(2010) Examining listening previewing as a classwide strategy to improve reading comprehension and vocabulary. Psychology in the Schools, 47(9), 903–916. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heller, R., & Greenleaf, C. L.
(2007) Literacy instruction in the content areas: Getting to the core of middle and high school improvement. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.Google Scholar
Herold, B.
(2014) Research drives teacher training for digital reading. Education Week. Retrieved on May 7 2014 from [URL].Google Scholar
Ijaz, K., Bogdanovych, A., & Trescak, T.
(2016) Virtual worlds vs books and videos in history education. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnson, T. E., Archibald, T. N., & Tenenbaum, G.
(2010) Individual and team annotation effects on students’ reading comprehension, critical thinking, and meta-cognitive skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1496–1507. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jones, B. F., Pierce, J., & Hunter, B.
(1988) Teaching students to construct graphic representations. Educational Leadership, 46(4), 20–25.Google Scholar
Kim, A. H., Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., & Wei, S.
(2004) Graphic organizers and their effects on the reading comprehension of students with LD A synthesis of research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(2), 105–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
King, A.
(1994) Autonomy and question asking: The role of personal control in guided student-generated questioning. Learning and Individual Differences, 6(2), 163–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Korat, O.
(2010) Reading electronic books as a support for vocabulary, story comprehension and word reading in kindergarten and first grade. Computers & Education, 55(1), 24–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Korat, O., & Shamir, A.
(2007) Electronic books versus adult readers: Effects on children’s emergent literacy as a function of social class. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(3), 248–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) The educational electronic book as a tool for supporting children’s emergent literacy in low versus middle SES groups. Computers & Education, 50(1), 110–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kozma, R. B.
(1991) Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61, 179–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1992) Constructing knowledge with learning tool. In P. Kommers, D. Jonassen, & T. Mayes (Eds.), Cognitive tools for learning (pp. 23–32). Berlin: Springer-Verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lauterman, T., & Ackerman, R.
(2014) Overcoming screen inferiority in learning and calibration. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 455–463. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A.
(2010) Reading in the disciplines: The challenges of adolescent literacy. New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York.Google Scholar
Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., Castek, J., & Henry, L. A.
(2013) New literacies: A dual level theory of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. In D. Alvermann, N. J. Unrau, & R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (6th ed., pp. 1150–1182). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, J. R., & Pressley, M.
(1981) Improving children’s prose comprehension: Selected strategies that seem to succeed. In C. M. Santa & B. L. Hayes (Eds.), Children’s prose comprehension: Research and practice (pp. 44–71). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
Loranger, A. L.
(1994) The study strategies of successful and unsuccessful high school students. Journal of Literacy Research, 26(4), 347–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorenz, B., Green, T., & Brown, A.
(2009) Using multimedia graphic organizer software in the prewriting activities of primary school students: What are the benefits?. Computers in the Schools, 26(2), 115–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maclellan, E.
(1997) Reading to learn. Studies in Higher Education, 22(3), 277–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E.
(1997) Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32, 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005a) Principles for managing essential processing in multimedia learning: Segmenting, pretraining, and modality principles. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp.169–182). New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005b) Principles for reducing extraneous processing in multimedia learning: Coherence, signaling, redundancy, spatial contiguity, and temporal contiguity principles. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp.183–200). New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005c) Principles of multimedia learning based on social cues: Personalization, voice, and image principles. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 201–212). New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009) Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E., & DaPra, C. S.
(2012) An embodiment effect in computer-based learning with animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 18(3), 239–252. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mazzeo, C., Rab, S. Y., & Alssid, J. L.
(2003) Building bridges to college and careers: Contextualized basic skills programs at community colleges. Brooklyn, NY, and San Francisco, CA: Work Strategy Center.Google Scholar
McCormick, S.
(1989) Effects of previews on more skilled and less skilled readers’ comprehension of expository text. Journal of Literacy Research, 21(3), 219–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Merga, M. K.
(2014) Are teenagers “really” keen digital readers? Adolescent engagement in ebook reading and the relevance of paper books today. English in Australia, 49(1), 27–37.Google Scholar
Merrill, M. D., Drake, L., Lacy, M. J., & Pratt, J.
(1996) Reclaiming instructional design. Educational Technology, 36, 5–7.Google Scholar
Meyer, B. J., Brandt, D. M., & Bluth, G. J.
(1980) Use of top-level structure in text: Key for reading comprehension of ninth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 72–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montali, J., & Lewandowski, L.
(1996) Bimodal reading: Benefits of a talking computer for average and less skilled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(3), 271–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nist, S. L., & Simpson, M. L.
(1988) The effectiveness and efficiency of training college students to annotate and underline text. In National Reading Conference Yearbook . National Reading Conference, 37, 251–257.
Novak, E., Razzouk, R., & Johnson, T. E.
(2012) The educational use of social annotation tools in higher education: A literature review. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 39–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paivio, A.
(1986) Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L.
(1984) Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pearson, P. D.
(2010) Literacy and science: Each in the service of the other. Science, 328, 459–463. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perin, D.
(2011) Facilitating student learning through contextualization: A review of evidence. Community College Review, 39(3), 268–295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Porter-O’Donnell, C.
(2004) Beyond the yellow highlighter: Teaching annotation skills to improve reading comprehension. English Journal, 93, 82–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P.
(1995) Verbal protocols of reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Puente, K.
(2012) Empowering students with digital reading. District Administration, 48(5), 38–42.Google Scholar
Razon, S., Turner, J., Johnson, T. E., Arsal, G., & Tenenbaum, G.
(2012) Effects of a collaborative annotation method on students’ learning and learning-related motivation and affect. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 350–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rich, S., & Pressley, M.
(1990) Teacher acceptance of reading comprehension strategy instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 43–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rose, T. L., & Sherry, L.
(1984) Relative effects of two previewing procedures on LD adolescents’ oral reading performance. Learning Disability Quarterly, 7(1), 39–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S.
(1996) Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 181–221. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sam D. P., & Rajan, P.
(2013) Using graphic organizers to improve reading comprehension skills for the middle school ESL students. English Language Teaching, 6(2), 155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Samaras, H., Giouvanakis, T., Bousiou, D., & Tarabanis, K.
(2006) Towards a new generation of multimedia learning research. AACE Journal, 14(1), 3–30.Google Scholar
Simpson, M. L., & Nist, S. L.
(1990) Textbook annotation: An effective and efficient study strategy for college students. Journal of Reading, 34(2), 122–129.Google Scholar
(2002) Encouraging active reading at the college level. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 365–379). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Singer, H., & Donlan, D.
(1982) Active comprehension: Problem-solving schema with question generation for comprehension of complex short stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 166–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Singer, H.
(1978) Active comprehension: From answering to asking questions. The Reading Teacher, 31(8), 901–908.Google Scholar
Singleton, S. M., & Filce, H. G.
(2015) Graphic organizers for secondary students with learning disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 48(2), 110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A., Groff, C., & Lake, C.
(2008) Effective reading programs for middle and high schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(3), 290–322. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spiro, R. J., DeSchryver, M., Hagerman, M. S., Morsink, P. M., & Thompson, P.
(Eds.) (2015) Reading at a crossroads?: Disjunctures and continuities in current conceptions and practices. New york, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Strangman, N., Hall, T., & Meyer, A.
(2004) Background knowledge instruction and the implications for UDL implementation. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum (Links updated 2009). Retrieved from [URL].Google Scholar
Suzuki, A., Sato, T., & Awazu, S.
(2008) Graphic display of linguistic information in English as a Foreign Language reading. TESOL Quarterly, 42(4), 591–616. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watts, G. H.
(1973) The “arousal” effect of adjunct questions on recall from prose materials. Australian Journal of Psychology, 25(1), 81–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wijekumar, K. K., Meyer, B. J., & Lei, P.
(2012) Large-scale randomized controlled trial with 4th graders using intelligent tutoring of the structure strategy to improve nonfiction reading comprehension. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(6), 987–1013. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, J.
(2008) Annotations and the collaborative digital library: Effects of an aligned annotation interface on student argumentation and reading strategies. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(2), 141–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yu, F. Y., Chang, Y. L., & Wu, H. L.
(2015) The effects of an online student question-generation strategy on elementary school student English learning. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 10(1), 1. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, L. J., Gu, P. Y., & Hu, G.
(2008) A cognitive perspective on Singaporean primary school pupils’ use of reading strategies in learning to read in English. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 245–271. DOI logoGoogle Scholar