U. S. Fourth Graders’ Informational Text Comprehension: Indicators from NAEP


Heather R. SCHUGAR , Mariam Jean DREHER


Abstract

This study is a secondary analysis of reading data collected from over 165,000 fourth graders as part of the U.S. National Assessment of Educational Progress. Using hierarchical linear modelling, the authors investigated factors associated with students’ informational text comprehension, including out-of-school reading engagement, and in-school measures of cross-curricular reading, discussion about reading, and reading-related activities (e.g., book reports, projects). In addition, this study examined the interactions between these factors, informational text comprehension, and students’ eligibility for Free and Reduced Priced Meals (FARMS). There were positive associations between students’ informational text comprehension and their reading engagement, cross-curricular reading, and discussion about reading. However, reading-related experiences were associated with lower than expected scores. In addition, out-of-school reading engagement and in-school reading experiences may not be associated with informational reading comprehension to the same degree for the most at-risk U.S. students, as most results differed in strength of association for FARMS-eligible students. 


Keywords

Informational text, Content area literacy, Reading engagement, Discussion, Poverty

Paper Details

Paper Details
Topic Elementary Education
Pages 523 - 552
Issue IEJEE, Volume 9, Issue 3
Date of acceptance 13 February 2017
Read (times) 109
Downloaded (times) 57

Author(s) Details

Heather R. SCHUGAR

West Chester University, United States


Mariam Jean DREHER

University of Maryland, Turkey


References

Adams, M. J. (1990). Learning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Akyol, G., Sungur, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2010). The contribution of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to students’ science achievement. Educational Research and Evaluation, 16, 1-21.

Almasi, J. F. (1995). The nature of fourth graders’ sociocognitive conflicts in peer-led and teacher-led discussions of literature. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 314-351.

Anderson, R. C., & Pearson, P. D. (1984). A schematic-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. B. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. 1, pp. 255-292). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Applebee, A. N., Langer, J. A., & Mullis, I. V. S. (1988). Who reads best? Factors related to reading achievement in grades 3, 7, and 11. Princeton, NJ: National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Atwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understandings about writing, reading, and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Atwell, P., & Battle, J. (1999). Home computers and school performance. The Information Society, 15, 1–10.

Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2001). Inviting students into the pursuit of meaning. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 225-241.

Bell, M. (2009/2010). Major new literacy initiative proposed in US Congress. Reading Today, 27(3), 1, 4.

Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Bryk, A. S., Raudenbush, S. W., & Congdon, R. T. (1996). HLM. Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling with the HLM/2L and HLM/3L Programs. Chicago: Scientific Software International.

Bus, A. G. (2003). Socio-emotional requisites for learning to read. In A. van Kleeck, S. A. Stahl & E. B. Bauer (Eds.), On reading storybooks to children: Parents and teachers (pp. 3-15). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cadima, J., Leal, T., & Burchinal, M. (2010). The quality of teacher-student interactions: Associations with first graders’ academic and behavioral outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 48, 457-482.

Calkins, L., Montgomery, K., Santman, D., & Falk, B. (1998). A teacher's guide to standardized tests: Knowledge is power. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Center on Education Policy. (2007). Choices, changes, and challenges: Curriculum and instruction in the NCLB era. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.

Center on Education Policy (2010). Policy implications for trends for Asian American students. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.

Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Chall, J. S. (1996). Stages of reading development (2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

Chall, J. S., Jacobs, V. A., & Baldwin, L. E. (1990). The reading crisis: Why poor children fall behind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Chambliss, M., & Calfee, R. C. (1998). Textbooks for learning: Nurturing children's minds. Maiden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

Chapman, M., Filipenko, M., McTavish, M., & Shapiro, J. (2007). First graders’ preferences for narrative and/or information books and perceptions of other boys’ and girls’ book preferences. Canadian Journal of Education, 30, 531‐553.

Chudowsky, N., Chudowsky, V., & Kober, N. (2009). State test score trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are all achievement gaps closing and is achievement rising for all? Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.

Cohen, E. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64, 1-35.

Coiro, J. (2011). Talking about reading as thinking: Modeling the hidden complexities of online reading comprehension. Theory into Practice, 50, 107-115.

Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 214-257.

Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C., & Leu, D. (2008). Handbook of research on new literacies. Routledge: New York.

Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., et al. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, U.S. Government Printing Office.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1995). What happens to a dream deferred?: The continuing quest for equal educational opportunity. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 607-630). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Dearing, E., Wimer, C., Simpkins, S. D., Lund, T., Bouffard, S. M., Caronongan, P., Kreider, H., & Weiss, H. (2009). Do neighborhood and home contexts help explain why low-income children miss opportunities to participate in activities outside of school? Developmental Psychology, 45, 1545–1562.

Delpit, L. (1998). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people’s children. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 280-298.

Dreher, M. J. (2000). Fostering reading for learning. In L. Baker, M. J. Dreher, & J. T. Guthrie (Eds.),

      Engaging Young Readers: Promoting Achievement and Motivation (pp. 68-93). New York: Guilford Press.

Dreher, M. J. & Kletzien, S. B. (2015). Teaching informational text in K-3 classrooms: Best practices to help children read, write, and learn from nonfiction. New York: Guilford Press.

Dudley-Marling, C., & Lucas, K. (2009). Pathologizing the language and culture of poor children. Language Arts, 86, 362-370.

Duke, N. K. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 202-224.

Duke, N. K., & Roberts, K. M. (2010). The genre-specific nature of reading comprehension. In D. Wyse, R. Andrews, & J. Hoffman (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of English, language and literacy teaching (pp. 74–86). London: Routledge.

Durkin, D. (1978/1979). What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 481-533.

Fang, Z., & Wei, Y. (2010). Improving middle school students’ science literacy through reading infusion. Journal of Educational Research, 103, 262-273.

Feitelson, D., & Goldstein, Z. (1986). Patterns of book ownership and reading to young children in Israeli school-oriented and non-school-oriented families. The Reading Teacher, 39, 924-930.

Fleener, C. E., Morrison, S. L., Linek, W. M., & Rasinski, T. V. (1997). Recreational reading choices: How do children select books? In W. M. Linek & E. G. Sturtevant (Eds.), Exploring literacy (pp. 75-84). Commerce, TX: College Reading Association.

Flood, J., & Lapp, D. (1986). Types of texts: The match between what students read in basals and what they encounter in tests. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 284-297.

Goatley, V. J., Brock, C. H., & Raphael, T. E. (1995). Diverse learners participating in regular education "book clubs.” Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 352-380.

Gottfried, A. E., Fleming, J. S., & Gottfried, A. W. (1998). Role of cognitively stimulating home environment in children’s academic intrinsic motivation: A longitudinal study. Child Development, 69, 1448-1460.

Green-Powell, P. A., Hilton, A. A., & Joseph, C. L. (2011). Creating collaborative partnership with local churches to improve academic performance of K-12 public schools. US-China Education Review, 8, 64-69.

Guthrie, J. T., Anderson, E., Alao, S. & Rinehart, J. (1999). Influences of concept-oriented reading instruction on strategy use and conceptual learning from text. The Elementary School Journal, 99, 343-355.

Guthrie, J. T., & McCann, A. D. (1996) Idea circles: Peer collaborations for conceptual learning. In L. B. Gambrell & J. F. Almasi (Eds.). Lively discussions! Fostering engaged reading (pp. 87-105). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Guthrie, J. T., & McRae, A. (2011). Reading engagement among African American and European American students. In S. J. Samuels & A. E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (4th ed., pp. 115-142). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Guthrie, J. T., McRae, A., Coddington, C. S., Klauda, S. L., Wigfield, A., & Barbosa, P. (2009). Impacts of comprehensive reading instruction on diverse outcomes of low- and high-achieving readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 195-214.

Guthrie, J. T., McRae, A., & Klauda, S. L. (2007). Contributions of concept-oriented reading instruction to knowledge about interventions for motivations in reading. Educational Psychologist, 42, 237-250.

Guthrie, J. T., Schafer, W. D., & Huang, C. (2001). Benefits of opportunity to read and balanced instruction on the NAEP. Journal of Educational Research, 94, 145-162.

Guthrie, J. T., Van Meter, P., McCann, A. D., Wigfield, A., Bennett, L., Poundstone, C. C., Rice, M. E., Fabisch, F., Hunt, B., & Mitchell, A. (1996). Growth of literacy engagement: changes in motivations and strategies during concept-oriented reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly. 31, 306-332.

Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & VonSecker, C. (2000). Effects of integrated instruction on motivation and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 331-341.

Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Barbosa, P., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., Davis, M. H., Scafiddi, N. T., & Tonks, S. (2004). Increasing reading comprehension and engagement through Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 403-423.

Hall, C., & Coles, M. (1999). Children's reading choices. New York: Routledge.

Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experiences of young American children. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (2003). The early catastrophe. Education Review, 17, 110-118.

Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2000). Strategies that work. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.

Hoff, E. (2003). The specificity of environmental influence: Socioeconomic status affects early vocabulary development via maternal speech. Child Development 74, 1368–78.

Jeong, J., Gaffney, J. S., & Choi, J.-O. (2010). Availability and use of informational texts in second-, third-, and fourth-grade classrooms. Research in the Teaching of English, 44, 435-456.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989/1990). Social skills for successful group work. Educational Leadership, 47, 29-33.

Kamil, M., & Lane, D. (1998). Researching the relationship between technology and literacy: An agenda for the 21st century. In D. Reinking, L. McKenna, L. Labbo & R. Kieffer (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology: Transformations in a post-typographic world (pp. 323-341). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kellett, M. (2009). Children as researchers: What can we learn from them about the impact of poverty on literacy opportunities? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 13, 395-408.

Ketch, A. (2005). Conversation: The comprehension connection. The Reading Teacher, 59, 8-15.

Kletzien, S. B. (1999, December). Children’s reading preferences and information books. Paper presented at the National Reading Conference, Orlando, FL.

Langer, J. A. (1986). Children reading and writing: Structures and strategies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Lareau, A. (1989). Home advantage: Social class and parental intervention in elementary education. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Lee, V. E., Croninger, R. G., & Smith, J. B. (1997). Course-taking, equity, and mathematics learning: Testing the constrained curriculum hypothesis in U.S. secondary schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 99-121.

Ly, C. (2010). More than a library?: Urban poverty and an exploratory look at the role of a neighborhood institution. Perspectives on Urban Education, 7, 22-33.

Mahoney, J. L., Larson, R. W., Eccles, J., & Lord, H. (2005). Organized activities as developmental contexts for children and adolescents. In J. L. Mahoney, R. W. Larson & J. Eccles (Eds.), Organized activities as contexts of development (pp. 3-22). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Many, J., Fyfe, R., Lewis, G., & Mitchell, E. (1996). Traversing the topical landscape: Exploring students' self-directed reading-writing-research processes. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 122-135.

Martinez, M. G., Roser, N. L., Worthy, J., Strecker, S., & Gough, P. (1997). Classroom libraries and children's book selections: Redefining "access" in self-selected reading. National Reading Conference Yearbook, 46, 265-272.

McGill-Franzen, A., & Allington, R. L. (1999). Putting books in the classroom seems necessary but not sufficient. Journal of Educational Research, 93, 67.

Meyer, K. E. (2010). A collaborative approach to reading workshop in the middle years. Reading Teacher, 63, 501-507.

Moje, E. B., Stockdill, D., Kim, K., & Kim, H. (2011). The role of text in disciplinary learning. In M. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, & P. A. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. IV, pp. 453-486). New York: Taylor & Francis.

Moll, L.C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzales, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31, 132-141.

Morrow, L. M., Pressley, M., Smith, J. K., & Smith, M. (1997). The effect of a literature-based program integrated into literacy and science instruction with children from diverse background. Reading Research Quarterly, 32, 54-76.

Morrow, L. M., & Weinstein, C. S. (1986). Increasing children's use of literature through program and physical design changes. Elementary School Journal, 83, 131-137.

Moss, B. (2003). Exploring the literature of fact: Children's nonfiction trade books in the elementary classroom. New York: Guilford Press.

Moss, B. (2008). The information text gap: The mismatch between non-narrative text types in basal readers and 2009 NAEP recommended guidelines. Journal of Literacy Research, 40, 201-209.

Moss, G., & McDonald, J. W. (2004). The borrowers: Library records as unobtrusive measures of children's reading preferences. Journal of Research in Reading, 27, 401-412.

Mullens, J. E., & Gaylor, K. (1999). Measuring classroom instructional processes: Using survey and case study field test results to improve item construction (Working Paper No. 1999-08). Washington, DC: Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics.

Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Kennedy, A. M., & Foy, P. (2007). PIRLS 2006 international report: IEA’s Progress in International Reading Literacy Study in primary schools in 40 countries. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. [Available at http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/pirls2006/intl_rpt.html]

Murphy, P., Wilkinson, I. G., Soter, A. O., Hennessey, M. N., & Alexander, J. F. (2009). Examining the effects of classroom discussion on students’ comprehension of text: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 740-764.

National Assessment Governing Board. (2008). Reading framework for the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) (2007). The nation’s report card: Reading 2007 (NCES 2007-496). Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C.

National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) (2009). The nation’s report card: Reading 2009 (NCES 2010-458). Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C.

National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) (2010a). How the samples of schools and students are selected for the main assessments: State and national. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/nathow.asp on August 18, 2010.

National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) (2010b). Reading: What does the NAEP reading assessment measure? Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/reading/whatmeasure.asp on August 16, 2010.

National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) (2011). Interpreting NAEP reading results. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/reading/interpret-results.asp on December 31, 2011.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (NICHD). (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. 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. (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Ness, M. (2011). Teachers' use of and attitudes toward informational text in K-5 classrooms. Reading Psychology, 32, 28-53.

Neuman, S. B. (1999). Books make a difference: A study of access to literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 286-311.

Neuman, S. B. (2006). The knowledge gap: Implications for early education. In D. K. Dickinson & S. B. Neuman (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 29-40). New York: Guilford.

Neuman, S. B. (2010). Lessons from my mother: Reflections on the National Early Literacy Panel report. Educational Researcher, 39, 301-304.

Neuman, S. B., & Celano, D. (2001). Access to print in low-income and middle-income communities: An ecological study of four neighborhoods. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 8-27.

Neuman, S. B., & Celano, D. C. (2012). Giving our children a fighting chance: Poverty, literacy, and the development of information capital. New York: Teachers College Press.

Nippold, M. A., Duthie, J. K., & Larsen, J. (2005). Literacy as a leisure activity: Free-time preferences of older children and young adolescents. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36, 93-102.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. P.L. 107–110. Washington, DC: U.S. Congress. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf

Oakes, J., & Saunders, M. (2002). Access to textbooks, instructional materials, equipment, and technology: Inadequacy and inequality in California's public schools. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Los Angeles.

Orfield, G. (2001). Schools more separate: Consequences of a decade of resegregation [Electronic Version]. Rethinking Schools, 16. Retrieved from http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/16_01/Seg161.shtml

Palardy, G. J. (2008). Differential school effects among low, middle, and high social class composition schools: A multiple group, multilevel latent growth curve analysis. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19, 21-49.

Pappas, C. C. (2006). The information book genre: Its role in integrated science literacy research and practice. Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 226-250.

Pease-Alvarez, L., & Samway, K. D. (2008). Negotiating a top-down reading program mandate: The experiences of one school. Language Arts, 86, 32–41. 

Pett, M. A., Lackey, N. R., & Sullivan, J. J. (2003). Making sense of factor analysis: The use of factor analysis for instrument development in health care research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Pincus, A. R. H. (2005). What’s a teacher to do? Navigating the worksheet curriculum. Reading Teacher, 59, 75-79.

Portes, P., & Salas, S. (2009). Poverty and its relation to development and literacy. In L. M. Morrow, R. Rueda & D. Lapp (Eds.), Handbook of research on literacy and diversity (pp. 97-113). New York: Guilford.

Pressley, M. (2002). Effective beginning reading instruction. Journal of Literacy Research, 34, 165-188.

Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Pressley, M., Wharton-McDonald, R., Mistretta-Hampston, J., & Echevarria, M. (1998). Literacy instruction in 10 fourth- and fifth-grade classrooms in upstate New York. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2, 159-194.

Project for Excellence in Journalism (2004). The state of the news media 2004: An annual report on American journalism. Retrieved from http://stateofthemedia.org/2004/newspapers-intro/audience/

Purcell-Gates, V. (1995). Other people’s words: The cycle of low literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Purcell-Gates, V., Duke, N. K., & Martineau, J. A. (2007). Learning to read and write genre-specific text: Roles of authentic experience and explicit teaching. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 8-45.

RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

Reardon, S. F. (2011). The widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor: New evidence and possible explanations. In R. Murnane & G. Duncan (Eds.), Whither opportunity? Rising inequality and the uncertain life chances of low-income children (pp. 91-116). New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press.

Romance, N. R., & Vitale, M. R. (1992). A curriculum strategy that expands time for in-depth elementary science instruction by using science-based reading strategies: Effects of a year-long study in grade four. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 545-554.

Rosenblatt, L. M. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

Rowe, M. L. (2008). Child-directed speech: Relation to socioeconomic status, knowledge of child development and child vocabulary skill. Journal of Child Language, 35, 185-205.

Samuelstuen, M. S., & Bråten, I. (2005). Decoding, knowledge, and strategies in comprehension of expository text. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 46, 107 –117.

Sheldon, W. D., & Carrillo, R. (1952). Relation of parent, home and certain developmental characteristics to children's reading ability. Elementary School Journal, 52, 262-270.

Singer, H., McNeil, J. D., & Furse, L. L. (1984). Relationship between curriculum scope and reading achievement in elementary schools. The Reading Teacher, 37, 608-612.

Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75, 417-453.

Slavin, R. E. (1986). Using student team learning (3rd ed.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research on Elementary and Middle Schools.

Smith, M. C. (2011). Which in- and out-of-school factors explain variations in learning across different socio economic groups? Findings from South Africa. Comparative Education, 47, 79-102.

Smith, M. S., Chudowsky, N., Ginsburg, A., Hauser, R., Jennings, J., & Lewis, S. (2012). NAEP background questions: An underused national resource. Retrieved from http://www.nagb.org/publications/expert-panel-naep-bq-report.pdf

Smith, N. B. (1986). American reading instruction. Newark, Del.: International Reading Association.

Sonnenschein, S., & Schmidt, D. (2000). Fostering home and community connections to support children's reading development. In L. Baker, M. J. Dreher, & J. T. Guthrie (Eds.), Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation (pp. 264-284). NY: Guilford Press.

Southern Education Foundation. (2013). A new majority: Low income students in the south and west. Retrieved from http://www.southerneducation.org/cmspages/getfile.aspx?guid=0bc70ce1-d375-4ff6-8340-f9b3452ee088

Spear-Swerling, L., Brucker, P. O., & Alfano, M. P. (2010). Relationships between sixth-graders’ reading comprehension and two different measures of print exposure. Reading and Writing, 23, 73-96.

Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Clark, K., & Walpole, S. (2000). Effective schools and accomplished teachers: Lessons about primary-grade reading instruction in low-income schools. Elementary School Journal, 101, 121-165.

Timion, C. S. (1992). Children's book selection strategies. In J. W. Irwin & M. A. Doyle (Eds.), Reading and writing connections: Learning from research (pp. 204-222). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) (2011). National school lunch program. Retrieved from http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/lunch/

United States Department of Education (USDE) (2002). Public law 107-110: The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (pp. 670). Washington, DC: Department of Education.

United States Department of Education (USDE), Institute of Educational Sciences (IES), and National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) (2007). 2005 NAEP data companion. Washington DC: Department of Education.

Valli, L., Croninger, R., Chambliss, M., Graeber, A., & Buese, D. (2008). Test driven: High-stakes accountability in elementary schools. New York: Teachers College Press.

Venezky, R. L. (2000). The origins of the present-day chasm between adult literacy needs and school literacy instruction. Scientific Studies of Reading, 4, 19-39.

Vitale, M. R., & Romance, N. R. (2011). Adaptation of a knowledge-based instructional intervention to accelerate student learning in science and early literacy in grades 1 and 2. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 5, 79-93.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Weizman, Z. O., & Snow, C. E. (2001). Lexical input as related to children's vocabulary acquisition: Effects of sophisticated exposure and support for meaning. Developmental Psychology, 37, 265-279.

White, S., Chen, J., & Forsyth, B. (2010). Reading-related literacy activities of American adults: Time spent, task types, and cognitive skills used. Journal of Literacy Research, 42, 276-307.

Wilkinson, I. A. G. (1998). Dealing with diversity: Achievement gaps in reading literacy among New Zealand students. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 144-167.

Williams, J. P. (2005). Instruction in reading comprehension for primary-grade students: A focus on text structure. Journal of Special Education, 39, 6-18.

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.