METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES HELP STUDENTS

TO COMPREHEND ALL TEXT

LINDA H . EM.ERS

University of Arkansas
CHRISTINE PINKLEY

Rogers, Arkansas Public Schools

Reading comprehension instruction in many classrooms focuses
on teacher-generated questions which actually measure comprehension of specific text rather than developing metacognitive
strategies for comprehending all text. Explicit instruction in the
metacognitive strategies of making text connections, predicting,
and sequencing, was evaluated for its usefulness in improving
reading comprehension in a first-grade classroom. Results
showed a significant difference in students' awareness of comprehension strategies and comprehension of text as measured by
the Index of Reading Awareness and the Beaver Developmental
Reading Assessment before and after the intervention. These
findings suggest that students in primary grades may benefit
from explicit instruction in reading comprehension strategies at
the same time they are learning to decode words.

"What's this word?" the student asked?

"Tomb robber," the teacher replied.
"That's someone who would break into the
pyramid to steal what had been left with
the mummy."
"Ob! Those bad guys on the news
kicked in the...the thingies," she shared.
"Do you mean gravestones?"
"Yes! They kicked over the gravestones
on tbe news," she agreed.
This is an example of the metacognitive
thinking a first-grade student is capable of
following the explicit instruction of comprehension strategies. Despite research
suggesting that explicit instruction of reading comprehension strategies improves
students' ability to comprehend text, much
classroom instruction focuses on measuring comprehension of individual stories or

text that has been read (Cross and Paris,

1988; Paris and Oka. 1986; Yuiil and Josceiyne, 1988). Reading instruction in many
classrooms uses a basal text and relies on
teacher-generated questions believed to
teach students to comprehend. But, more
precisely, this measures comprehension
rather than teaching students strategies for
comprehension (Durkin, 1979). This article shares the results of an action research
project designed to determine the effects
of explicit instruction of reading comprehension strategies on the reading
comprehension of a group of first graders.
In the classrooms referred to above, the
instruction focuses on recalling details of
the story being read ratber than on a strategy tbat could be used for comprehending
this and all text. In order for students to

13

14 / Reading Improvement

become effective readers they need explicit instruction in specific reading

comprehension strategies that may be
applied to everything they read. Research
indicates that instruction in metacognitive
strategies improves students" reading cotnprehension (Cross and Paris, 1988; Paris
and Oka, 1986). Studies have shown that
students who use metacognitive strategies
while they read become better readers and
more clearly comprehend what they read
(Cross and Paris; Dewitz and Dewitz, 2003;
Paris and Oka). Furthermore, the Committee on the Prevention of Reading
Difficulties in Young Children (vSnow,
Bums, and Griffin, 1998) found tbe acquisition of reading comprehension skills and
strategies important enough to cite the lack
of these metacognitive strategies as one of
tbe major reasons children do not become
good readers.
Durkin's (1979) landmark study
described classrooms in which teachergenerated questions about specific text
were the norm for reading comprehension
instruction. She reported that reading comprehension instruction focused on the
literal recall of the current text being read
rather than on strategies tor understanding
all text. Nearly thirty years later, reading
instruction in many classrootns involves a
scenario where each week students read a
story as a whole group from a basal text,
then read the selection as homework. Those
students are tested over the story for which
they receive a grade in reading. Although
students read the story as a whole group,
are assigned the story to be read as homework, and occasionally re-read the story
in a small group setting, students are frequently unable to answer the multiple

choice questions required to pass the comprehension tests.

The Role of Metacognition in
Comprehension

Cross and Paris (1988) and Yuill and

Joscetyne (1988) identified comptehension strategies which they suggest good
readers bave in place and contribute to their
success as readers. Cross and Paris studied the relationship between metacognition
and reading ability using Informed Strategies for Learning (ISL). They found that
these strategies provided help for poor
readers and concluded tbat good readers
were already using these metacognitive
comprehension strategies. This suggests
that successful readers may intuitively and
independently integrate these reading comprehension strategies into their reading
abilities.
Yuill and Joscelyne (1988) focused their
research on less skilled students" and found
that those who were les.s-skiiled in reading comprehension benefited from
instruction, while those wbo were moreskilled in reading comprehension did not
benefit significantly. They concluded that
training less-skilled readers to use comprehension strategies brought tbem closer
in ability to those students who were more
skilled in reading cotnprehension.
Paris and Oka (1986) conducted another study to investigate students' use of
reading comprehension .strategies by teaching them to be metacognitive about their
reading process. Tbe results revealed that
the students' who used ISL improved their
reading coinprehension and that readers
of all skill levels benefited from ISL.
In a similar study Cross and Paris (1988)

Metacognitive Strategies .../15

used ISL to study the relationship between

metacognition and reading ability. However, unlike Paris and Oka (1986} they did
not fmd ISL to have a significant effect on
all readers. They found that the reading
comprehension strategy instruction had the
greatest impact on less-skilled readers. This
led them to ponder the idea of whether this
was because good readers were already
doing the things ISL taught them, or if
good readers were already integrating what
they knew about reading comprehension
strategies into their meaning-making
processes at an earlier stage in their reading development.
It appears that when reading comprehension is taught within a curriculum that
focuses on the comprehension of a particular text, the explicit instruction of the
strategies necessary for meaningful comprehension is missing. Research suggests
that when metacognitive strategies for comprehending all text are explicitly taught,
comprehension improves. The purpose of
this project was to investigate the effects
of explicit instruction of metacognitive
comprehension strategies on students' reading comprehension abilities.
Subjects and Design

This project was designed to assess the

effectiveness of explicit instruction of the
specific metacognitive strategies of using
prior knowledge, predicting, and sequencing on the comprehension development of
readers in a first-grade classroom. Prior
knowledge required students to make textto-self, text-to-text, and text-to-world
connections while reading, and predicting
involved using context clues, to make predictions about what was being read.

Sequencing involved the readers distinguishing between important and

not-so-important details as well as putting
important events in the correct order in
which they occurred in text. The project
was conducted in a first grade classroom
of twenty-four students. Five were Hispanic, one was Asian/Pacific Island, and 18
were White. Six of these students received
English Language Learner (ELL) services
in a pull-out program.
Data Collection Instruments

In order to establish baseline scores for

these first graders' comprehension, archival
data and specific comprehension assessment tools were used. Archival data
included comprehension scores derived
from the Beaver Developmental Reading
Assessment. (DRA) (Beaver. 1999) taken
two weeks prior to the beginning of
metacognitive instruction. The DRA is a
field-tested, research-based tool designed
to provide an accurate assessment of individual students' reading comprehension
(Pearson Learning Group. 2005). The
assessment was administered to individual students in an isolated setting away
from the classroom. These assessments
were administered before and after the
intervention of explicit instruction of comprehension strategies.
Additionally, each student completed
the Index of Reading Awareness (IRA) by
Jacobs & Paris (1987) to determine his or
her level of cognitive thinking about reading prior to the intervention. The IRA is a
test designed to measure students* cognitive awareness during reading. Each
student completed the IRA to determine
his or her level of awareness about the cog-

16 / Reading Improvement

nitive processes they used while reading.

Students were given the multiple-choice
test in small groups of four or five students
at the beginning and again at the conclusion of the project. There were 20 questions
on this test which had three possible
answers. The answers were rated 0 - 2; 2
being the answer that showed the greatest
level of reading awareness. Forty was the
maximum score that could be earned.
To measure reading comprehension during the project a Comprehension Strategy
Checklist was developed. Figure 1 illustrates the tool was used to record students"
use of comprehension strategies. The
checklist was completed while listening to
and observing each student during small
group reading instruction. A check mark
wasrecordedwhen a strategy was observed
and a minus was recorded when it was
taught and modeled, but not observed being
used by the student. A mark of N/A meant
that the strategy was neither taught nor
observed. Anecdotal notes were also
recorded during small group and whole
group instruction.
Students used graphic organizers to
record their personal applications of the
comprehension strategies taught during the
project. Students used a researcher-developed forniat for recording their use of prior
knowledge to make text-to- connections
while reading. They responded to "'When
I read these words..." and "It reminded
me of...." by recording their personal connections of the current text to previous
experiences. Figure 2 illustrates text-toself connections made while reading Nate
the Great and the Cnmcby Christmas by
Marjorie and Craig Sharmat,

A similar format required students to

offer insight into their predictions by
responding to "This is what just happened ..." and "My prediction..." Figure
3 shows predictions made about the story
Mummies in the Mornitig by Mary Pope
Osbome.
Two different formats were used for
sequencing. The first was a "Story Graph"
where students sequenced the events of tbe
story and used a scale from Important to
Not Important to indicate their perception
of the significance of the event to the story
(Barton & Sawyer, 2004). Figure 4 is a
story graph completed after reading Owl
Moon by Jane Yolen.
The other format required students to
identify the beginning, middle, and end of
a story by asking the question "What is the
story mostly about?" (McLaughlin, 2003).
Figure 5 was completed after reading
David Goes to School by David Shannon.
Intenention Strategies
Explicit instruction of reading comprehension strategies took place in botb
whole and small group settings. Whole
group instruction was designed to introduce each comprehension strategy to the
first graders. The whole group setting was
also the forum for addressing issues related to the use of the strategies that arose
during small group time. Small group
instruction was structured to support students' use of the comprehension strategies
while reading independently. The Comprehension Strategy Checklist previously
mentioned was used to record observed
strategies and pertinent anecdotes in both
settings.

Metacognitive Strategies . . . / 1 7
Figure L Comprehension Strategy Checklist/Interview used to determine comprehension
strategies used during the project.
"The goal is to capture a child's evolving thinking during reading"- Harvey &. (ioudvis

Comprehension Strategy Checklist/Interview

Student

1
c

1
Strategies Applied
Is there a part of this stor>' ihat reminds you of
something in your own life''
T to S
Is there a part of this story that reminds you of
something else you have read?
T to T
Is there a part of this story Ihat reminds you of
something else?
T lo W
What will happen next?
Predict
What is this story mostly ahout^
Sequencing
What are (he important parts of this story''
Sequencing
Atiecdotal records:

18 / Reading Improvement

2. Format for recording text connections made during reading

17
When I read these words...

F p
1\

! I t reminded me of

'

..

__

Metacognitive Strategies .../19

Whole group instruction. Strategy

instruction for the entire group occurred
daily for nine weeks during story time. The
students received teacher-mode led instruction on how to use prior knowledge to make
text connections, how to use context clues
to make meaningful predictions, and how
to sequence the events of a story, as
metacognitive strategies for comprehending the text. During this same time the
students were also taught to use various
types of graphic organizers to facilitate
their application of the comprehension
strategies. The graphic organizers the students constructed were collected and
carefully analyzed to determine the students' understanding and application of
comprehension strategies.
Small group instruction. To account for
the varied levels of reading development
among the students, groups were formed
based on the archival records which included DRA scores. SAT-9 scores, and
knowledge of sight words. The DRA and
Sight Word Recognition scores were taken
at the eighteen-week grading period just
prior to the start of this project. Students'
scores on the reading component of the
Stanford 9 tests (SAT-9), administered during the fall of the school year, were the
third piece of archival data used to establish reading levels. Students who scored
above grade level on two or more of these
assessments were placed in small reading
groups together. Students who scored
below grade level on two or more of these
assessments were also grouped together
for small group instruction. The remaining
students were put into a group. Fifty-four
percent of the students were at grade level,
21% were below grade level, and 25% were

above grade level in their reading readiness (see Figure 6). Initially there were a
total of five groups; however, after the first
meeting it was necessary to split the group
of above grade level readers into two
groups. Two students in this group were
able to read considerably faster than the
others, and were causing a disruption to
the group. The resulting set of small groups
included two above grade level groups.,
three at grade level groups, and one below
grade level group. Small groups consisted
of two to five students. Trade books were
chosen for each small group based on their
reading readiness levels.
Within the three levels of readiness students were assigned trade books from a
series appropriate for their level. The small
group of below grade level readers read
No, David! and David Goes to School by
David Shannon. There was one group of
students reading these trade books. Students who were reading at grade level were
reading books from the Henry and Mudge
series written by Cynthia Rylant. There
were three small groups reading at grade
level. The two remaining small groups read
Mummies in the Morning by Mary Pope
Osbome from the Magic Tree House series.
Figure 7 contains a list of books used for
the project. These trade books were chosen for the small groups based on
recommendations by Fountas' and Pinnell's Guided Reading (1996). These
authors offer specific recommendations on
how to match books to students" reading
abilities, interest, and needs. The researcher
met with each small group once a week
for thirty minutes. The groups met outside
the classroom in a quiet area. During this
time the students read their assigned books

20 / Reading Improvement

hi^tire 3. Format used for recording predictions made about stories

This is what just happened..

This is what just happened...

Metacognitive Strategies .../21

4. Format used for recording perceived importance of event to the storv.

Important

Important

with the researcher stopping and engaging the students in a directed discussion of
the text. The discussion focused around
the reading comprehension strategies being
taught; using prior knowledge, making predictions, and sequencing events.
In.struction of strategies. This project
took place over a nine-week period. The
strategies were introduced and taught in
progression in order to give students the
opportunity to become familiar with the
use of one strategy before being introduced
to a new one. The students were first introduced to the use of prior knowledge to
make text-to-self, text-to-text, and text-toworld connection.s. The next strategy

introduced was predicting using prior

knowledge. Finally, students were taught
to use sequencing important details as a
reading comprehension strategy. Explicit
instruction ofthe strategies followed a pattern: introduction of strategy, modeling of
the strategy by the researcher in whole
group settings, small group guided practice,
re searcher-mode led use of graphic organizer in whole group setting; small group
guided practice, and whole group independent use of graphic organizer. A
detailed description ofthe progression of
lessons and lesson plans may be obtained
by contacting the authors.

22 / Reading Improvement

I'igiire 5. Format used for Identifying beginning, middle, and end of stories read

Name:

Table 1

Results obtained from l-test for Reading Awareness Index scores using an alpha of 01

Posttest

Pretest
N

Mean

Mean

24

19.42

24

22 17

Nole. Maximum score on pretest anii posttest 40.

/ Sfal
807

2.Q72

007

Metacognitive Strategies . . . / 2 3
Table 2.
Results iihiuiiiL'il from t-lesi for Heaver Devflopmcnial Reading A.s.se.ssnieiit iisiii^. 01 alpha.

Pretest

Posttest

Mean

Mean

/ Stal

24

14.833

24

17 917

2 807

5 463

P
1 49

Ndtv. Maximum score on DRA =44.

Table 3.
Results obtained from analysis ofuneLdokil records colk'clfil during .slralc;t^' inslriictinn
Independent Use

Enhanced Comprehensioti

Comprehension Strateav

Connections
Prediction
Sequencing

Results and Discussion

Each student completed the IRA (Jacobs

& Paris, 1987) to measure his or her level
of cognitive thinking about reading prior
to the project and during the last week of
the project. The results of the IRA pretest
and posttest were analyzed and compared
using a /-test with an alpha level set at .01.
This analysis revealed a significant difference between the pretest and posttest
scores, t (24) = 2.807; r Stat 2.972; p <
.007. Reading Awareness scores were higher after the implementation of reading
comprehension instruction (M=22.17) than

before explicit instruction (M= 19.42). The

results are presented in Table I.
In order to assess the effects of explicit instruction on students* levels of reading
comprehension, the results of the DRA
(Beaver, i 999) that was administered prior
to the start of the project then after the
intervention of small and whole group
instruction, were analyzed.
Each student completed the DRA during the last week of the project and those
results were compared to the archival DRA
scores recorded prior to the intervention.
The results were analyzed using a paired-

24 / Reading Improvement

samples r-test with an alpha level set at .01.

This analysis revealed a significant difference between the pretest and posttest
scores, t(24}= 2.807; / Stat 5.463: p < 1.489.
DRA scores were significantly higher after
the implementation of explicit instruction
using whole and small group settings {M
= 17.917) than hefore the implementation
(M = 14.833). The results are presented in
Tahle 2.

Measures of strategy use during intervention. Reading comprehension was

assessed during the intervention using a
researcher developed Comprehension
Strategy Checklist (see Figure 1.) and
graphic organizers (see Figures 2 - 5 ) . The
checklist form was used during small group
instruction to record all observations related to metacognitive strategy use. Anecdotes
were recorded on this same form during

Figure 6. Percentage of students in small groups based on reading levels.

Below Grade Level

21%
1-

-II:;;;;;
Above Grade
Level
25%

At Grade Level
54%

Metacognitive Strategies . . . / 2 5

Books used during the comprehension strategies project.

Comprehensive List of Trade Books Used During Whole and Small Group Instruction
Allard. Henry G
Miss Nel.wn Is Missing
Brett, Jan.
The Hat
Osborne. Mary Pope.
Mummies in the Mornnig
Prelutsky, Jack.
AM[ful Ofirc Ri.se.s
Rylant, Cynthia.
Hetiry and Mudge and tin.' Stariy Nighl
Rylant, Cynthia.
Henty and Mudge lake ihe Big Test
San Souci, Daniel,
North Counliy Nighl
Shannon. David.
No. David!
Shannon, David.
David does lo School
Sharmat, Marjorie & Craig. Nale the Great and the Crunchy Christmas
Sharmat, Marjorie.
Nate Ihe Great and the Siunyy Trail
Wood, Audrey.
King Bidgood 's tn the Bathtub
Wood, Audrey.
The Napping House
Yolen, Jane.
Owl Moon

26 / Reading Improvement
l-igurc 'S'. Independent use of metacognitive comprehension strategies.
Comprehension
Stralei!\
Prior Knowledge;
Texl-lo-self

Observation of Independent \ Ise of Strategy

Graphic Organiser Used

During week four of the project a student was

observed sharing an unsolicited connection, jumping
out of his seat ihe student stated. "I have a te\t-to-seif
connection! When I read he opened his wide mouth"
it reminded me 1 went on a walk and saw a snake,"

W ords from the te.st were

recorded on sticky noles
during reading and later
recorded b\ the sludents'
onio graphic organizers
(See Figure 2).

iext-to-text

Students were observed using the correct terminologx

The researcher observed a student holding two books
and slating "I made a lext-to-iext These two books
are bolh about frogs and polliwogs""

Text-to-world

Prediction

Sequencing

Independent use of genuine connections were

recorded in small group and whole group instaiction
During small group a student asked \\ hat's this
word''"
"" lomb robber." the researcher replied lhat s
someone who would break inlo the pyramid to steal
what had been left with the mumm) .""
"Oh. those bad gu\s on the news kicked in the... the
thingees." she shared
"Do you mean gravestones?"
"Yes. they kicked over the gravestones on the news,"
she agreed.
The student makes the prediction "I'm thinkini! thai
the mumm\ is going to come in " I he student checked
her prediction and circled the plus sign to Indicate lhat
her prediction was correct

Ihc student indicates "they went owling". "I'a called

hoo. hoo, hooooooo". and "the) saw' a owl" as being
ihe most important events in the stor)'

Ihe student writes and iliusirales the beginning of the

slor>' as David is late Ihe middle of the storA is David
has gum and the student wriles David cleans desks as
the end of the slor\.

Students recorded what

was bappened in the lexi
they had just read and
followed with a prediction
aboul what would occur
next (See I'igure 3).
Studenis used a story graph
to sequence the events of a
stor\ ihe\ had read. Ihe
student then indicated
which events were
perceived as being mosl
importani (See I'igure 4)
Students used a graphic
organi/er to sequence the
beginning, middle, and end
of a book the\ had read
(See Figure 5).

Metacognitive Strategies ...121

both small and whole group instructional

settings. The Comprehension Strategy
Checklist sheets tor each student were carefully analyzed looking for patterns of
behavior or outcomes. Also, graphic organizers were collected and analyzed for
students' application of the reading comprehension strategies being taught. Two
patterns of use emerged during the project.
Anecdotes first revealed a genuine use of
prior knowledge in making text-to-self,
text, and world connections that enhanced
student understanding of what was being
read. Also, the independent use of all strategies began to emerge as students used these
strategies outside direct instruction during
reading class. Students made connections
and predictions during independent reading and while reading content-specific text
not related to explicit instruction of these
strategies. The intervention of explicit
instruction included three reading comprehension strategies, prior knowledge,
predicting, and sequencing. The analysis
of anecdotal records revealing these patterns is presented in Table 3. Observations
were recorded when students authentically used these strategies outside of explicit
reading instruction time. Figure 8 reports
examples of independent use of all three
strategies.
The reading comprehension of the firstgrade students in this project was measured
using two quantitative instruments, the
IRA. and the DRA. Both of these measures showed a significant increase in
students' reading comprehension levels
when baseline and posttest scores were
compared using a t-test. Qualitative data
which were collected through analysis of
graphic organizers and anecdotal records

on a checklist showed two patterns of

behavior. Genuine connections to aid in
understanding the text being read and independent use of the strategies taught were
noted.
The results of this project seem to suggest that explicit instruction of
metacognitive strategies is an effective
instructional method. The explicit instruction of metacognitive
reading
comprehension strategies significantly
improved these first-grade students' reading comprehension. Careful analysis of the
anecdotal records and students' work samples as well as the results of the
comprehension tests seem to suggest that
the independent use of the reading comprehension strategies was effective across
all groups for students of all reading abilities. These findings do not completely
support those of Cross and Paris {1988) or
Yuill and Joscelyne (1988) who concluded that reading comprehension instruction
was not as beneficial for the more skilled
readers they studied. However, the discrepancy in these findings may be due to
the difference in age groups at which the
explicit instruction was introduced. Cross
and Paris used third and fifth grade students in their study. Yuill and Joscelyne
conducted their project with eight-yearold students. The findings of this project,
conducted with first graders, seem to suggest that the explicit instruction of reading
comprehension strategies should begin at
an earlier stage in students' reading development. This supports the findings of
Smolkin and Donovan (2001) who found
that reading comprehension instruction
should begin much earlier than it traditionally does. The tindings of the present

28 / Reading Improvement

project also seem to suggest that students

in primary grades may benefit from explicit instruction in reading comprehension at
the same time they are learning to decode
words for reading. Overall, it appears that
the explicit instruction of reading comprehension strategies for first grade
students is a valuable teaching tool.
Implications for The Classroom

The results of this project seem to imply

that the explicit instruction of reading comprehension strategies should begin early
in reading development. It appears that the
reading comprehension of students may
be positively affected by explicit instruction in strategy use, and that reading
comprehension instruction should not be
based solely on the comprehension of a
particular text, as is common practice in
many classrooms.
The results of this project further suggest that whole group instruction, which
includes teacher modeling, paired with the
opportunity for students to use the strategies independently, is appropriate to
develop reading comprehension in young
children. It appears that small group interaction to support whole group instruction
may benetit students' use of reading comprehension strategies. These interactions
provide a forum for discussion, provide an
opportunity for scaffolding, and reveal
understandings and difficulties students
may be experiencing. During this project
the use of small groups was most productive when the conversation was natural,
rather than somewhat contrived from heavy
reliance on written scripts. Students were

more comfortable talking because they

were making the decisions about where it
was appropriate to stop for a discussion
within the text. Because of this it is crucial
that the teacher read the selected text prior
to meeting with the small group to keep the
conversation focused on what is happening in the story.
When teaching students to make connections it is important that they write and
refer to the words they read in the books
in an effort to keep their connections
grounded in the text. Connections should
be brief. Frequently students wanted to tell
protracted stories connected to their personal experiences. If allowed to do so the
comprehension may be of the student's
experiential story rather than the text being
read.
Reading comprehension instruction in
the primary grade classroom is often specific to a text rather than global and
applicable to all text. The purpose of this
project was to determine the effects of
explicit instruction of metacognitive strategies on the reading comprehension of one
group of first graders. Whole and small
group strategy instruction resulted in significant increases in students* use of
reading comprehension strategies as well
as their levels of reading comprehension.
This approach appears to be an effective
means of comprehension instruction for
primary level students.

Metacognitive Strategies . . . / 2 9

References
Beaver. J. (1999). The Developmeuhd Reading
Assessment. Lebanon. IN: Pearson Learning
Publisher.
Cross. D. R.. & Paris S. (1988). Developmental
and instructional analyses of children's
metacognition and reading comprehension.
Journal of Educational Psxchologw 80(2).
131.
Dewitz. P. & Dewitz. P. K. (2003). They can read
the words, but they can't understand: Refining
comprehension assessment. The Reading
Teacher. 56. 422-435.
Durkin. D. (1979). What classroom observations
reveal about reading comprehension. Reading
Research Quarterly. 74.481-533.
Fountas. I.C. & Pinnell. G.S. (1996). Guided reading: Good tlrst teaching for all children.
Portsmouth. NH: Heinemann.
Jacobs, J.E. Paris. S.G. (1987). Children's
metacognition about reading: Issues in definition,
measurement,
and
instruction.
Educational Psychologist. 22. l'i^-H%.
McLaughlin, M. (2003). Guided comprehension
in the primary grades. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
National reading panel. (2000) Teaching children
to read: An evidence-based assessment of the
scientific research literature on reading and its
implications for reading instruction: Reports
of the subgroups. Washington. DC: National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
Paris, S.G. & Oka. E. (1986). Children's reading
strategies, melacognition, and motivation.
Developmental Review. 6, 25-26.
Pearson Learning Group. (2005). Retrieved July
14. 2005 from http://www.pearsonlearning.
com/dra/
Smoikin. L,. Donovan, C. (2001). The contexts of
comprehension: The information book read
aloud, comprehension, and comprehension
instruction in a first grade classroom. The Elementiu-y School Journal. IO2{1), 97-124.

Snow. C . Burns, M.S. & Griffin. P (Eds.). (1998).

A cognitive and motivational agenda for reading instruction. Educational Leadership, 46(A).
30-36.
Yuill, N., & Joscelyne, T, (1988). Effect of organizational cues and strategies on good and poor
comprehenders' story understanding. Journal
of Educational Psychology, H0{2). 152-158.