KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE PROPOSAL OR REVISION,
Cover Sheet (10/02/2002)
Course Number/Program Name EDRD 8410 Curriculum in Reading Theory and Research
Department Elementary and Early Childhood Education
Degree Title (if applicable) Ed.D. Program
Proposed Effective Date Fall 2006
Check one or more of the following and complete the appropriate sections:
x
New Course Proposal
Course Title Change
Course Number Change
Course Credit Change
Course Prerequisite Change
Course Description Change
Sections to be Completed
II, III, IV, V, VII
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
Notes:
If proposed changes to an existing course are substantial (credit hours, title, and description), a new course with a
new number should be proposed.
A new Course Proposal (Sections II, III, IV, V, VII) is required for each new course proposed as part of a new
program. Current catalog information (Section I) is required for each existing course incorporated into the
program.
Minor changes to a course can use the simplified E-Z Course Change Form.
Submitted by:
Faculty Member
Approved
_____
Date
Not Approved
Department Curriculum Committee Date
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Not Approved
Department Chair
Date
School Curriculum Committee
Date
School Dean
Date
GPCC Chair
Date
Dean, Graduate Studies
Date
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Vice President for Academic Affairs Date
Approved
Not Approved
President
Date
Page 1 of 16
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE/CONCENTRATION/PROGRAM CHANGE
I.
Current Information (Fill in for changes)
Page Number in Current Catalog
Course Prefix and Number
Course Title
Credit Hours
Prerequisites
Description (or Current Degree Requirements)
II.
Proposed Information (Fill in for changes and new courses)
Course Prefix and Number EDRD 8410 _____________________
Course Title __Curriculum in Reading Theory and Research
Credit Hours 3
Prerequisites Acceptance to the Ed.D. program
Description (or Proposed Degree Requirements)
This course examines the research underlying current models of the reading process and explores reading
acquisition and development from different theoretical and sociological perspectives. The emphasis will be
on studies examining early literacy including language acquisition, emergent literacy, phonemic awareness,
phonics, fluency and comprehension
III.
Justification
Reading continues to be one of the most researched areas in education and the primary focus of instruction
at the elementary levels. It is fundamental to success in all school subjects. Because reading is such a
complex process influenced by so many different factors, the number of disciplines contributing to the everincreasing knowledge base of the field has grown. Cognitive psychologists, developmental psychologists,
anthropologists, psycholinguists and sociolinguists have joined reading educators in producing theories and
research that enable us to better understand the complex phenomenon of reading and how best to teach it.
The pedagogical content knowledge of reading has been further informed by evidence from scientific-based
reading research (most notably, the findings of the National Reading Panel), second language reading
studies, and commissioned reports from the National Reading Conference organization, technical reports
from the Center of the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement (CIERA), and by the Professional
Standards of the International Reading Association.
The purpose of this course is to engage reading professionals in the examination, critical reflection and
further study of theory and scientific-based research related to reading and literacy development in order to
inform the best classroom practices. Further, this course is designed to prepare reading professionals to
assume roles as instructional leaders in literacy.
Page 2 of 16
IV.
Additional Information (for New Courses only)
Instructor:
Text:
Required Text:
Ruddell, R. B. & Unrau, N. (Eds.). (2004). Theoretical models and processes of reading.
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Supplementary Texts:
Perez, B. (Ed.). (1998). Sociocultural contexts of language and literacy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Additional readings may be assigned.
Prerequisites:
Admission to the Ed.D. program
Objectives:
Course objective
Doctoral
KSDs
1a, 1b
Distributed School Leadership
Roles
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader, Learning &
Development Leader, Change
Leader,
PSC/NCATE
Standards
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5,
1.6
Demonstrate knowledge of reading research and
histories of reading. (Assessment: Can
summarize the major reading studies and refer to
the sources. Candidates can recount historical
developments in the history of reading
Demonstrate knowledge of language development
and reading acquisition and the variations related to
culture and linguistic diversity. (Assessment: Can
identify, explain, compare, and contrast the theories
and research in the areas of language development
and learning to read. Candidates can characterize
the course of development in learning to read.)
1a, 1b
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader, Learning &
Development Leader, Change
Leader,
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5,
1.6
1a, 1b, 2e
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader, Learning &
Development Leader, Change
Leader, Process Improvement
Leader
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5,
1.6, 1.7, 1.8
Demonstrate knowledge of the major components
of reading (phonemic awareness, word identification
and phonics, vocabulary and background
knowledge, fluency, comprehension strategies, and
motivation) and how they are integrated during
fluent reading. (Assessment: Can explain the
findings of the National Reading Panel in these
areas as well as the findings of a major study in
each of these areas. Candidates can explain how
1a, 1b, 2e
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader, Learning &
Development Leader, Change
Leader, Process Improvement
Leader
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5,
1.6, 1.7, 1.8
Demonstrate knowledge of psychological,
sociological, linguistic, and anthropological
foundations of reading and writing processes and
instruction. (Assessment: Can explain, compare
and contrast major theories in the foundational
areas as they relate to reading.)
Page 3 of 16
the components are integrated during fluent
reading.)
Display positive dispositions related to reading and
the teaching of reading. (Assessment: Can identify
specific questions related to knowledge, skills, and/
or dispositions related to his/her teaching and can
plan specific strategies for finding answers to those
questions. Candidates can conduct professional
workshops for paraprofessionals and teachers.)
3.a, 3.b, 3.c
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader, Learning &
Development Leader, Change
Leader, Operations Leader
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.6,
1.7, 1.8
Instructional Method
This course will be divided into five modules: I. Theoretical Foundations and Models of Reading; II. Literacy and
Language Development; III. Emergent Literacy; IV. Major Components of Reading; and V.Factors Related to
Reading Development. Because all aspects of reading are interrelated, it is possible that there will be some overlap
across modules. Major research studies related to specific topics will be reviewed in each module. Dispositions and
issues related to diversity will be infused throughout the course. All assigned readings are to be completed prior to
the class date for discussion. The specific course assignments and expectations are as follows:
1. Candidates will maintain a reading log for the assigned readings in each module. Each log entry must
contain the citation for the article or book chapter (APA style), a brief summary of the contents, a reflection
and two or three questions or points to be used for group discussion. (Objs. 1-5) (worth 100 points)
2. Candidates will prepare a three to four-page (1 ½ spaced, 12 pt. font) summary for each module,
comparing and contrasting the different theories pertaining to the topics in the module, and explaining how
these theories, models or studies inform best practices and dispositions, and what additional considerations
are raised. (Objs. 1-4) (worth 100 points)
3. Candidates will do an in-depth inquiry on a topic of their choice related to the course objectives and prepare
a 12 to 15 page paper (double-spaced, 12 pt. font) of their findings. (Obj. 5) (worth 100 points)
EVALUATION AND GRADING (for each course) :
A:
B:
C:
F:
92% - 100%
84% - 91%
75% - 83%
75% or lower
Note: All written work should reflect careful organization of material and the high standards of investigation
associated with college-level studies. Papers should be typewritten, on 8 1/2 x 11 in. paper. All work submitted
should follow APA format. Manuscripts must be proof-read to ensure accuracy in spelling, punctuation, and
grammar. Written work should be attractive and neat.
V.
Resources and Funding Required (New Courses only)
*Course funding is addressed in a comprehensive manner in the comprehensive proposal for the umbrella
Ed.D degree for the Bagwell College of Education.
Page 4 of 16
Resource
Amount
Faculty
Other Personnel
Equipment
Supplies
Travel
New Books
New Journals
Other (Specify)
TOTAL
Funding Required Beyond
Normal Departmental Growth
Page 5 of 16
VI. COURSE MASTER FORM
This form will be completed by the requesting department and will be sent to the Office of the
Registrar once the course has been approved by the Office of the President.
The form is required for all new courses.
DISCIPLINE
COURSE NUMBER
COURSE TITLE FOR LABEL
(Note: Limit 16 spaces)
CLASS-LAB-CREDIT HOURS
Approval, Effective Term
Grades Allowed (Regular or S/U)
If course used to satisfy CPC, what areas?
Learning Support Programs courses which are
required as prerequisites
Ed.D.
EDRD 8410
Rdg Research I
3
Fall 2006
Regular
APPROVED:
________________________________________________
Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee __
VII Attach Syllabus
Page 6 of 16
Elementary and Early Childhood Education
Ed. S. Program
Reading (P-5 Emphasis)
I. EDRD 8410 Curriculum in Reading Theory and Research
Kennesaw State University
Bagwell College of Education
Department of Elementary and Early Childhood Education
II. INSTRUCTOR: To be assisgned
Kennesaw Hall Room 2333
Office Phone: 770-423-6481
E-mail: lakanbi@kennesaw.edu
Office Hours: By appointment
III. CLASS MEETINGS: TBD
IV. TEXT(S):
Required Text:
Ruddell, R. B. & Unrau, N. (Eds.). (2004). Theoretical models and processes of reading.
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Supplementary Texts:
Perez, B. (Ed.). (1998). Sociocultural contexts of language and literacy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Additional readings may be assigned.
V. CATALOG COURSE DESCRIPTION:
ECE 8410: Reading Theory and Research I
This course examines the research underlying current models of the reading process and explores reading
acquisition and development from different theoretical and sociological perspectives. The emphasis will be
on studies examining early literacy including language acquisition, emergent literacy, phonemic awareness,
phonics, fluency and comprehension.
VI. PURPOSE/RATIONALE:
Page 7 of 16
Reading continues to be one of the most researched areas in education and the primary focus of instruction
at the elementary levels. It is fundamental to success in all school subjects. Because reading is such a
complex process influenced by so many different factors, the number of disciplines contributing to the everincreasing knowledge base of the field has grown. Cognitive psychologists, developmental psychologists,
anthropologists, psycholinguists and sociolinguists have joined reading educators in producing theories and
research that enable us to better understand the complex phenomenon of reading and how best to teach it.
The pedagogical content knowledge of reading has been further informed by evidence from scientific-based
reading research (most notably, the findings of the National Reading Panel), second language reading
studies, and commissioned reports from the National Reading Conference organization, technical reports
from the Center of the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement (CIERA), and by the Professional
Standards of the International Reading Association.
The purpose of this course is to engage reading professionals in the examination, critical reflection and
further study of theory and scientific-based research related to reading and literacy development in order to
inform the best classroom practices. Further, this course is designed to prepare reading professionals to
assume roles as instructional leaders in literacy.
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY’S CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK:
Collaborative development of expertise in teaching and learning
The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) at Kennesaw State University is committed to developing expertise
among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers and leaders who possess the capability, intent and
expertise to facilitate high levels of learning in all of their students through effective, research-based practices in
classroom instruction, and who enhance the structures that support all learning. To that end, the PTEU fosters the
development of candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to proficient to expert and leader.
Within the PTEU conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of continued development, not an endstate. To be effective, teachers and educational leaders must embrace the notion that teaching and learning are
entwined and that only through the implementation of validated practices can all students construct meaning and
reach high levels of learning. In that way, candidates at the doctoral level develop into leaders for learning and
facilitators of the teaching and learning process. Finally, the PTEU recognizes, values and demonstrates
collaborative practices across the college and university and extends collaboration to the community-at-large.
Page 8 of 16
Through this collaboration with professionals in the university, the public and private schools, parents and other
professional partners, the PTEU meets the ultimate goal of assisting Georgia schools in bringing all students to high
levels of learning.
Knowledge Base
Teacher development is generally recognized as a continuum that includes four phases: preservice, induction, inservice, renewal (Odell, Huling, and Sweeny, 2000). Just as Sternberg (1996) believes that the concept of expertise
is central to analyzing the teaching-learning process, the teacher education faculty at KSU believe that the concept of
expertise is central to preparing effective classroom teachers and teacher leaders. Researchers describe how during
the continuum phases teachers progress from being Novices learning to survive in classrooms toward becoming
Experts who have achieved elegance in their teaching. We, like Sternberg (1998), believe that expertise is not an
end-state but a process of continued development.
Use of Technology : Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission.
Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the master teacher preparation
program, and all candidates must be able to use technology to improve student learning and meet Georgia
Technology Standards for Educators. During the courses, candidates will be provided with opportunities to explore
and use instructional media. They will master use of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and
Internet, and feel confident to design multimedia instructional materials, and create WWW resources.
VII.
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: The Professional Teacher Education Unit prepares learning facilitators who
understand their disciplines and principles of pedagogy, who reflect on their practice, and who apply these
understandings to making instructional decisions that foster the success of all learners. The objectives
below align with IRA Professional Reading Standard I: Foundational Knowledge and Dispositions for
Reading Specialists, and with the subject matter knowledge and disposition competencies of the PTEU
Conceptual Framework. The candidate is expected to be able to demonstrate the following competencies
upon the satisfactory completion of the course requirements:
Course objective
Demonstrate knowledge of psychological,
sociological, linguistic, and anthropological
foundations of reading and writing processes and
instruction. (Assessment: Can explain, compare
and contrast major theories in the foundational
areas as they relate to reading.)
Demonstrate knowledge of reading research and
histories of reading. (Assessment: Can
summarize the major reading studies and refer to
Doctoral
KSDs
1a, 1b
Distributed School Leadership
Roles
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader, Learning &
Development Leader, Change
Leader,
PSC/NCATE
Standards
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5,
1.6
1a, 1b
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader, Learning &
Development Leader, Change
Leader,
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5,
1.6
Page 9 of 16
the sources. Candidates can recount historical
developments in the history of reading
Demonstrate knowledge of language development
and reading acquisition and the variations related to
culture and linguistic diversity. (Assessment: Can
identify, explain, compare, and contrast the theories
and research in the areas of language development
and learning to read. Candidates can characterize
the course of development in learning to read.)
Demonstrate knowledge of the major components
of reading (phonemic awareness, word identification
and phonics, vocabulary and background
knowledge, fluency, comprehension strategies, and
motivation) and how they are integrated during
fluent reading. (Assessment: Can explain the
findings of the National Reading Panel in these
areas as well as the findings of a major study in
each of these areas. Candidates can explain how
the components are integrated during fluent
reading.)
Display positive dispositions related to reading and
the teaching of reading. (Assessment: Can identify
specific questions related to knowledge, skills, and/
or dispositions related to his/her teaching and can
plan specific strategies for finding answers to those
questions. Candidates can conduct professional
workshops for paraprofessionals and teachers.)
1a, 1b, 2e
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader, Learning &
Development Leader, Change
Leader, Process Improvement
Leader
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5,
1.6, 1.7, 1.8
1a, 1b, 2e
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader, Learning &
Development Leader, Change
Leader, Process Improvement
Leader
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5,
1.6, 1.7, 1.8
3.a, 3.b, 3.c
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader, Learning &
Development Leader, Change
Leader, Operations Leader
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.6,
1.7, 1.8
VIII. COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND ASSIGNMENTS:
This course will be divided into five modules: I. Theoretical Foundations and Models of Reading; II. Literacy
and Language Development; III. Emergent Literacy; IV. Major Components of Reading; and V.Factors Related to
Reading Development. Because all aspects of reading are interrelated, it is possible that there will be some overlap
across modules. Major research studies related to specific topics will be reviewed in each module. Dispositions and
issues related to diversity will be infused throughout the course. All assigned readings are to be completed prior to
the class date for discussion. The specific course assignments and expectations are as follows:
4. Candidates will maintain a reading log for the assigned readings in each module. Each log entry must
contain the citation for the article or book chapter (APA style), a brief summary of the contents, a reflection
and two or three questions or points to be used for group discussion. (Objs. 1-5) (worth 100 points)
5. Candidates will prepare a three to four-page (1 ½ spaced, 12 pt. font) summary for each module,
comparing and contrasting the different theories pertaining to the topics in the module, and explaining how
these theories, models or studies inform best practices and dispositions, and what additional considerations
are raised. (Objs. 1-4) (worth 100 points)
6. Candidates will do an in-depth inquiry on a topic of their choice related to the course objectives and prepare
a 12 to 15 page paper (double-spaced, 12 pt. font) of their findings. (Obj. 5) (worth 100 points)
Page 10 of 16
EVALUATION AND GRADING (for each course) :
A:
B:
C:
F:
92% - 100%
84% - 91%
75% - 83%
75% or lower
Note: All written work should reflect careful organization of material and the high standards of investigation
associated with college-level studies. Papers should be typewritten, on 8 1/2 x 11 in. paper. All work submitted
should follow APA format. Manuscripts must be proof-read to ensure accuracy in spelling, punctuation, and
grammar. Written work should be attractive and neat.
IX. Policies
Diversity: A variety of materials and instructional strategies will be employed to meet the needs of the different
learning styles of diverse learners in class. Candidates will gain knowledge as well as an understanding of
differentiated strategies and curricula for providing effective instruction and assessment within multicultural
classrooms. One element of course work is raising candidate awareness of critical multicultural issues. A second
element is to cause candidates to explore how multiple attributes of multicultural populations influence decisions in
employing specific methods and materials for every student. Among these attributes are age, disability, ethnicity,
family structure, gender, geographic region, giftedness, language, race, religion, sexual orientation, and
socioeconomic status. An emphasis on cognitive style differences provides a background for the consideration of
cultural context.
Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and accommodations for persons defined as disabled
under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. A number of
services are available to support students with disabilities within their academic program. In order to make
arrangements for special services, students must visit the Office of Disabled Student Support Services (ext. 6443)
and develop an individual assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is required.
Please be aware there are other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State University that address
each of the multicultural variables outlined above.
Professionalism- Academic Honesty: KSU expects that graduate students will pursue their academic programs in
an ethical, professional manner. Faculty of the EdS and EdD programs abide by the policies and guidelines
established by the university in their expectations for candidates’ work. Candidates are responsible for knowing and
adhering to the guidelines of academic honesty as stated in the graduate catalog. Any candidate who is found to
have violated these guidelines will be subject to disciplinary action consistent with university policy. For example,
plagiarism or other violations of the University’s Academic Honesty policies could result in a grade of “F” in the
course and a formal hearing before the Judiciary Committee.
Professionalism- Participation and Attendance: Part of your success in this class is related to your ability to
provide peer reviews and feedback to your editing groups regarding their research and their writing. Furthermore,
responding effectively and appropriately to feedback from your peers and the professor is another measure of one’s
professionalism. In addition, since each class meeting represents a week of instruction/learning, failure to attend
Page 11 of 16
class will likely impact your performance on assignments and final exams. Please be prepared with all readings
completed prior to class. We depend on one another to ask pertinent and insightful questions.
XII.
COURSE OUTLINE
The following topics and assignments are subject to change at the discretion of the instructor. Also, some topics
may extend beyond the week(s) indicated.
Week
Topics and Reading Assignments
Topic: Introduction to Course
Alexander, P., & Fox, E. (2004). A Historical Perspective on Reading Research. Theoretical
Models and Processes of Reading, Ch. 2.
1
Topic: Understanding the Reading Process: Theoretical Foundations and Models of
Reading (Module I)
Ruddell, R., & Unrau, N. (2004). Reading as a Meaning-Constructive Process: The Reader, the
Text, and the Teacher. Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Ch. 51.
2
Anderson, R. (2004). Role of the Reader’s Schema in Comprehension, Learning and Memory.
Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Ch. 20.
Gee, P. (2004). Reading as Situated Language: A Sociocognitive Perspective. Theoretical
Models and Processes of Reading, Ch. 4.
3
Perez., B. (1998). A Sociocultural Theory of Literacy. Sociocultural Contexts of Language and
Literacy, Ch. 2.
Rumelhart, D. (2004). Toward an Interactive Model of Reading. Theoretical Models and Processes
of Reading, Ch. 41.
4
Rosenblatt, L. (2004). The Transactional Theory of Reading and Writing. Theoretical Models and
Processes of Reading, Ch. 48.
Goodman, K. (1994). Reading, Writing, and Written Texts: A Transactional Sociolinguistic View.
Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading.
5
Stanovich, K. (2000). The Interactive-Compensatory Model of Reading: A Confluence of
Developmental, Experimental and Educational Psychology.
Progress in Understanding Reading, Ch. 4.
6
Topic: Literacy and Language Development (Module II)
Perez, B. (1998). Language, Literacy and Biliteracy. Sociocultural Contexts of Language and
Literacy, (selected chapters in unit).
Davis, J. (1994). The Sounds of Language. Mother Tongue, Ch. 3.
Page 12 of 16
7
8
9
10
11
Ruddell, R., & Ruddell, M. (1994). Language Acquisition and Literacy Processes. Theoretical
Processes and Processes of Reading.
Tabors, P., & Snow, C. (2004). Young Bilingual Children and Early Literacy Development.
Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Ch. 10.
Topic: Emergent Literacy (Module III)
Gunn, B., Simmons, D., & Kameenui, E. ( Ret. 9/23/2005). Emergent Literacy: Synthesis of the
Research . (Available at http://idea.uoregon.edu/~ncite/documentss/techrep/tech19.html)
Whitehurst, G., & Lonigan, C. (2002). Emergent Literacy: Development from Pre-readers to
Readers. Handbook of Early Literacy Research.
Sulzby, E. (1994). Children’s Emergent Reading of Favorite Storybooks: A Developmental Study.
Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading.
Vellutino, F., & Scanlon, D. (2002). Emergent Literacy Skills, Early Instruction, and Individual
Differences as Determinants in Learning to Read: The Case for Early Intervention. Handbook of
Early Literacy Research.
Topic: Major Components of Reading (Module IV)
View videotape on the National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read.
Kamil, M. (2004). Vocabulary and Comprehension Instruction: Summary and Implications of the
National Reading Panel Findings. The Voice of Evidence.
Stahl, S. (2004). What Do We Know about Fluency? Findings of the National Reading Panel. The
Voice of Evidence.
Ehri, L. (2004). Teaching Phonemic Awareness and Phonics: An Explanation of the National
Reading Panel Meta-Analysis. The Voice of Evidence.
12
Topic: Factors Related to Reading Development (Module V)
Goswamni, U. (2002). Early Phonological Development and the Acquisition of Literacy. Handbook
of Early Literacy Research.
Richgels, D. (2002). Invented Spelling, Phonemic Awareness and Reading and Writing
Instruction. Handbook of Early Literacy Research.
13
14
Paris, S., Wasik, B., & Turner, J. (1996). The Development of Strategic Readers. Handbook of
Reading Research: Volume II.
Ehri, L. (1996). Development of the Ability to Read Words. Handbook of Reading Research:
Volume II.
Monzo, L. & Rueda, R. (2001). Constructing Achievement Orientations Toward Literacy: An
Analysis of Sociocultural Activity in Latino Home and Community Contexts. (CIERA Report # 1011).
XIII. REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
Barr, R. & Dreeban, R. (1996). Grouping students for reading instruction. In R. Barr,
M.L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P.B. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research:
Page 13 of 16
Volume II (pp.885-910). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Davis, J. (1994). Mother tongue. New Your: Carol Publishing Co.
Ehri, L.C. (1996). Development of the ability to read words. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil,
P.B. Mosenthal, & P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume II
(pp. 383-417). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publisher.
Ehri, L. C. (2004). Teaching phonemic awareness and phonics: An explanation of the National Reading Panel
metaanalysis. In P. McCardle & V. Chharbra, (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research (pp. 153-186).
Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Goodman, K. S. (1994). Reading, writing and written texts: A transactional
Sociopsycholinguistic view. In R.B. Ruddell, (etc) (pp.1093-1130)
Gavelek, J.R., Raphael, T.E., Biondo, S.M. & Wang, D. (1999). Integrated literacy
instruction: A review of the literature. (CIERA Report #2001). Retrieved September
11, 2005 from http://www.ciera.org/library/reports/inquiry-2/2-001/2-001%20Front%
20 Matter.html.
Goswami, U. (2002). Early phonological development and the acquisition of literacy. In
S.B. Newman & D.K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 111125). New York. The Guilford Press.
Kamil, M.L. (2004). Vocabulary and comprehension instruction: Summary and
implications of the National Reading Panel findings. In P. McCardle and V. Chhabra
(Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research (pp.213-234). Baltimore. Paul H.
Brooks Publishing Co.
McNamera, T.P., Miller, D.L., & Bransford, J.D. (1996). Mental Models and reading
Comprehension. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P.B. Pearson (Eds.),
Handbook of reading research: Volume II (pp. 490-511). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Publisher.
Miller, P.C. & Endo, H. (2004). Understanding and meeting the reader of ESL students.
Phi Delta Kappan, 85, 786-791.
Monzo, L., & Rueda, R. (2001). Constructing achievement orientation toward literacy:
An analysis of sociocultural activity in Latino home and community contexts.
(CIERA Report #1-011). Retrieved September 11, 2005 from http://www.ciera.org/
library/reports/inquiry-/1-011/1-011%20front%20matter.html.
Paris, S.G., Wasik, B.A. & Turner, J.C. (1996). The development of strategic readers. In
R.Barr, M.L.Kamil, P.B. Mosenthd, & P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading
research: volumeII (pp. 609-640). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers.
Perez, B. (Ed.) (1998). Socio cultural contexts of Language and Literacy Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Richgels, D.J. (2002). Invented spelling, phonemic awareness, and reading and writing
Page 14 of 16
Instruction. In S.B. Newman & D.K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy
Research (pp.142-158). New York. The Guilford Press.
Rosenblatt, L.M. (1994). The transactional theory or reading and writing. In R.B.
Ruddell, (etc.) (pp.1057-1092).
Ruddell, R.B., & Ruddell, MR. (1994). Language acquisition and literacy processes. In
R.B. Ruddell, M.R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of
Reading (pp. 83-103). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Rurelhart, D.E. (1994). Toward an interactive model of reading. In R.B. Ruddell, M.R.
Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 864894). Newark, DE; IRA.
Senechal, M., LeFevre, J., Thomas, E.M., & Daley, K.E. (1998). Differential effects of
Home literacy experience on the development of oral and written language. Reading
Research Quarterly, 33, 96-116.
Stahl, S.A. (2004). What do we know about fluency? Findings of the national reading
Panel. In P. McCardle & V. Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research
(pp. 187-212). Baltimore: Paul II Brooke, Publishing Co.
Stanovich, K.E. (2000). Progress in Understanding Reading: Scientific Foundation and
Frontiers. New York: Guilford Press.
Strickland, D. (2002). Early intervention for African American children considered to be
at risk. In S.B. Neuman & D.K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research
(pp. 322-332). In S.B. Newman & K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy
research (pp.322-332). New York: The Guilford Press.
Sulzby, E. (1994). Children’s emergent reading of favorite storybooks: A developmental
study. In R.B. Ruddell, M.R. Ruddoll, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and
processes of reading (pp. 244-280). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Taylor, B.M. (1999). Beating the odds in teaching all children to read. (CIERA
Report 2-006). Retrieved September 11, 2005, from http://www.cierra.org/library/
reports/inquiry-2/2-006/2-006%20Front%20Matter.html.
Tierrey, R.J., & T. Sharahan. (1996). Research on the reading-writing relationship:
Interactions, transactions, and outcomes. In R.Barr (pp. 246-280).
Vellutino, F.R., & Scanlon, D.M. (2002). Emergent literacy skills, early instruction, and
individual difference as determinants of difficulties in learning to read: The case for
early intervention. In S.B. Newman & D.K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early
literacy research (pp. 295-321). New York: The Guilford Press.
Watson, R. (2003). Literacy and oral language. In S.B. Newman & D.K. Dickinson
(Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp.43-53). New York: The Guilford
Press.
Whitehurst, G.J., & Lenigan, C.J. (2002). Emergent literacy: Development from
Page 15 of 16
pre readers to readers. In S. B. Newman & D.K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of
early literacy research (pp. 11-29). New York: The Guilford Press.
Internet resources for further research and professional development:
Association for School and Curriculum Development. Available at http:// www.ascd.org/
Association for Childhood Education International. Available at http://www.udel.edu/bateman/acei/
Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement. Available at www.ciera.org
International Reading Association. Available at www.reading.org.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. Available at http://www.naeyc.org.
National Association for Multicultural Education. Available at http://www.nameorg.org
National Reading Conference. Available at http://www.nrconline.org/
Page 16 of 16