The Science of Reading: Four Forces That Modified, Distorted, or Ignored the Research Finding on Reading Comprehension
Michael F. Graves
Search for more papers by this authorMichael F. Graves
Search for more papers by this authorABSTRACT
The science of reading is the latest version of the reading wars brought to national attention by the popular press. Although most of the popular press has focused on phonics and early reading, in this article, we chose to study what happened to the research on reading comprehension. By the beginning of the 21st century, there had emerged a mainstream view of reading comprehension and comprehension instruction. However, four factors distorted, impeded, and swamped the research findings. (1) Commercial publishers fit comprehension instruction into a curricular format that distorted the intent of the research. (2) The No Child Left Behind Act, with its high-stakes testing and concomitant interim assessments, moved the focus in schools from developing comprehension to passing tests. (3) The publishers’ criteria for the Common Core State Standards promoted instruction that ran contrary to research findings. (4) Problems with the educational research, publication, development, and dissemination process itself further weakened the effect of research on practice. We conclude with suggestions for researchers to better communicate their results and procedures to other educators, suggestions for how the research community can have a greater impact on the development and review of commercial reading materials and policy initiatives, and suggestions for improving the education of future researchers, administrators, and teachers.
References
- Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P.D., & Paris, S.G. (2008). Clarifying differences between reading skills and reading strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61(5), 364–373. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.61.5.1
- Anderson, R.C., & Pearson, P.D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. In P.D. Pearson, R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 255–291). New York, NY: Longman.
- Au, W. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative metasynthesis. Educational Researcher, 36(5), 258–267. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07306523
10.3102/0013189X07306523 Google Scholar
- Balu, R., Zhu, P., Doolittle, F., Schiller, E., Jenkins, J., & Gersten, R. (2015). Evaluation of Response to Intervention practices for elementary school reading (NCEE 2016–4000). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
- Baumann, J.F., & Bergeron, B.S. (1993). Story map instruction using children’s literature: Effects on first graders’ comprehension of central narrative elements. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25(4), 407–437. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862969309547828
- Beck, I.L., McKeown, M.G., Sandora, C., Kucan, L., & Worthy, J. (1996). Questioning the Author: A yearlong classroom implementation to engage students with text. The Elementary School Journal, 96(4), 385–414. https://doi.org/10.1086/461835
- Blanc, S., Christman, J.B., Liu, R., Mitchell, C., Travers, E., & Bulkley, K.E. (2010). Learning to learn from data: Benchmarks and instructional communities. Peabody Journal of Education, 85(2), 205–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619561003685379
10.1080/01619561003685379 Google Scholar
- Boyles, N. (2012). Closing in on close reading. Educational Leadership, 70(4), 36–41.
- Brown, R., & Dewitz, P. (2014). Building comprehension in every classroom: Instruction with literature, informational texts, and basal programs. New York, NY: Guilford.
- Brown, R., Pressley, M., Van Meter, P., & Schuder, T. (1996). A quasi-experimental validation of transactional strategies instruction with low-achieving second-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 18–37. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.88.1.18
- Burch, P. (2010). The bigger picture: Institutional perspectives on interim assessment technologies. Peabody Journal of Education, 85(2), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619561003685288
10.1080/01619561003685288 Google Scholar
- Campbell, D.T. (1979). Assessing the impact of planned social change. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2(1), 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-7189(79)90048-X
10.1016/0149-7189(79)90048-X Google Scholar
- Carey, R.F., & Harste, J.C. (1987). Comprehension as context: Toward reconsideration of a transactional theory of reading. In R.J. Tierney, P.L. Anders, & J.N. Mitchell (Eds.), Understanding readers’ understanding: Theory and practice (pp. 189–204). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Carillo, E. (2016). Reimagining the role of the reader in the Common Core State Standards. English Journal, 105(3), 29–35.
- Chambliss, M.J., & Calfee, R.C. (1998). Textbooks for learning: Nurturing children’s minds. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
- Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (2006). Troubling images of teaching in No Child Left Behind. Harvard Educational Review, 76(4), 668–697. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.76.4.56v8881368215714
- Coleman, D., & Pimentel, S. (2012). Revised publishers’ criteria for the Common Core State Standards in English language arts and literacy, grades 3–12. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Publishers_Criteria_for_3-12.pdf
- Cuban, L. (1993). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms, 1890–1990 ( 2nd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
- Davis, D.S., Bippert, K., & Villarreal, L. (2015). Instructional tendencies in the teaching of reading comprehension: A portrait of practice in the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) database. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 64(1), 285–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/2381336915617399
10.1177/2381336915617399 Google Scholar
- Davison, M.L., Biancarosa, G., Carlson, S.E., Seipel, B., & Liu, B. (2018). Preliminary findings on the computer-administered Multiple-Choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment, a diagnostic reading comprehension test. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 43(3), 169–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508417728685
- Dennis, D.V. (2009). “I’m not stupid”: How assessment drives (in)appropriate reading instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(4), 283–290. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.53.4.2
- Dewitz, P., & Jones, J. (2013). Using basal readers: From dutiful fidelity to intelligent decision making. The Reading Teacher, 66(5), 391–400. https://doi.org/10.1002/TRTR.01134
- Dewitz, P., Jones, J., & Leahy, S. (2009). Comprehension strategy instruction in core reading programs. Reading Research Quarterly, 44(2), 102–126. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.44.2.1
- Dewitz, P., Leahy, S.B., Jones, J., & Sullivan, P.M. (2010). The essential guide to selecting and using core reading programs. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
- Dole, J.A., Duffy, G.G., Roehler, L.R., & Pearson, P.D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 239–264. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543061002239
- Duffy, G.G. (2009). Explaining reading: A resource for teaching concepts, skills, and strategies ( 2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.
- Duffy, G.G., Roehler, L.R., & Putnam, J. (1987). Putting the teacher in control: Basal reading textbooks and instructional decision making. The Elementary School Journal, 87(3), 357–366. https://doi.org/10.1086/461500
- Duke, N.K., & Pearson, P.D. (2002). Effective practices for developing reading. In S.J. Samuels & A.E. Fartrup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading ( 3rd ed., pp. 213–234). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
- Duke, N.K., Pearson, P.D., Strachan, S.L., & Billman, A.K. (2011). Essential elements of fostering and teaching reading comprehension. In S.J. Samuels & A.E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction ( 4th ed., pp. 51–93). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
10.1598/0829.03 Google Scholar
- Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2012). Close reading in elementary schools. The Reading Teacher, 66(3), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1002/TRTR.01117
- Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2015). Improve reading with complex texts. Phi Delta Kappan, 96(5), 56–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721715569472
- Fountas, I.C., & Pinnell, G.S. (1996). Guided reading: Good first teaching for all children. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
- Gamse, B.C., Jacob, R.T., Horst, M., Boulay, B., & Unlu, F. (2008). Reading First Impact Study: Final report (NCEE 2009–4038). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
- Gardner, H. (1985). The mind’s new science: A history of the cognitive revolution. New York, NY: Basic.
- Gersten, R., Fuchs, L.S., Williams, J.P., & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: A review of research. Review of Educational Research, 71(2), 279–320. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543071002279
- Gerwetz, C. (2020, February 20). States to schools: Teach reading the right way. Education Week. Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/states-to-schools-teach-reading-the-right-way/2020/02
- Goldstein, D. (2012, October). The schoolmaster. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/10/the-schoolmaster/309091/
- Goldstein, D. (2020, February 15). An old and contested solution to boost reading scores: Phonics. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/15/us/reading-phonics.html
- Goodman, K.S., Shannon, P., Freeman, Y.S., & Murphy, S. (1988). Report card on basal readers. Katonah, NY: Richard C. Owen.
- Goodman, Y.M., Watson, D.J., & Burke, C.L. (1996). Reading strategies: Focus on comprehension ( 2nd ed.). New York, NY: Richard C. Owen.
- Goren, P. (2010). Interim assessments as a strategy for improvement: Easier said than done. Peabody Journal of Education, 85(2), 125–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619561003673938
10.1080/01619561003673938 Google Scholar
- Graves, M.F. (2015). Building a vocabulary program that really could make a significant contribution to students becoming college and career ready. In P.D. Pearson & E.H. Hiebert (Eds.), Grounding Common Core teaching in proven practices (pp. 133–142). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
- Graves, M.F., Ringstaff, C., Li, L., & Flynn, K. (2018). Effects of teaching elementary students to use word learning strategies. Reading Psychology, 39(6), 602–622. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2018.1496503
- Graves, M.F., & Sales, G. (2016). Word learning strategies teacher’s guide. Minneapolis: Seward.
- Graves, M.F., Schneider, S., & Ringstaff, C. (2018). Empowering students with word-learning strategies: Teach a child to fish. The Reading Teacher, 71(5), 533–543. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1644
- Hacker, D.J., & Tenent, A. (2002). Implementing reciprocal teaching in the classroom: Overcoming obstacles and making modifications. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 699–718. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.4.699
- Hanford, E. (2018, September 10). Hard words: Why aren’t kids being taught to read? APM Reports. Retrieved from https://www.apmreports.org/episode/2018/09/10/hard-words-why-american-kids-arent-being-taught-to-read
- Hanford, E. (2019, December 5). There is a right way to teach reading, and Mississippi knows it. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/05/opinion/mississippi-schools-naep.html
- Hansen, J., & Pearson, P.D. (1983). An instructional study: Improving the inferential comprehension of good and poor fourth-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(6), 821–829. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.75.6.821
- Hodge, E.M., Gabriel, R., & Chenelle, S. (2020). Beyond fact-checking: An examination of research use in the Appendix to the Common Core State Standards. The Elementary School Journal, 121(1), 75–99. https://doi.org/10.1086/709982
- Hoover, W.A., & Gough, P.B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2(2), 127–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00401799
- Joyce, K.E., & Cartwright, N. (2020). Bridging the gap between research and practice: Predicting what will work locally. American Educational Research Journal, 57(3), 1045–1082. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831219866687
- Kaufman, J.H., Opfer, V.D., Thompson, L.E., & Pane, J.D. (2018). Connecting what teachers know about state English language arts standards for reading and what they do in their classrooms: Findings from the American Teacher Panel. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
- Keene, E.O., & Zimmermann, S. (1997). Mosaic of thought: Teaching comprehension in a reader’s workshop. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
- Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T.A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363–394. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363
- Kohli, S., & Lee, I. (2020, February 20). California students sued because they were such poor readers. They just won $53 million to help them. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-02-20/california-literacy-lawsuit-settlement-53-million
- Kucan, L., Hapgood, S., & Palincsar, A. (2011). Teachers’ specialized knowledge for supporting student comprehension in text-based discussions. The Elementary School Journal, 112(1), 61–82. https://doi.org/10.1086/660689
- LaVenia, M. (2019). The state of the instructional materials market: 2018 report. Durham, NC: EdReports. Retrieved from http://storage.googleapis.com/edreports-206618.appspot.com/annual-reports/undefined/download/the-state-of-instructional-materials-market-report_final_aug28.pdf
- Lawrence-Lightfoot, S., & Davis, J.H. (1997). The art and science of portraiture. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
- Markman, E.M., & Gorin, L. (1981). Children’s ability to adjust their standards for evaluating comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(3), 320–325. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.73.3.320
- Mathews, J. (2020, January 31). Read all about it: The ‘reading wars’ are back in America’s education salons. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/read-all-about-it-the-reading-wars-are-back-in-americas-education-salons/2020/01/30/271793e6-4124-11ea-b5fc-eefa848cde99_story.html
- McKeown, M.G., Beck, I.L., & Blake, R.G. (2009). Rethinking reading comprehension instruction: A comparison of instruction for strategies and content approaches. Reading Research Quarterly, 44(3), 218–253. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.44.3.1
- Mol, S.E., & Bus, A.G. (2011). To read or not to read: A meta-analysis of print exposure from infancy to early adulthood. Psychological Bulletin, 137(2), 267–296. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021890
- Morrow, L.M. (1984). Reading stories to young children: Effects of story structure and traditional questioning strategies on comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16(4), 273–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862968409547521
- Murphy, P.K., Wilkinson, I.A.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(3), 740–764. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015576
- Nabors Oláh, L., Lawrence, N.R., & Riggan, M. (2010). Learning to learn from benchmark assessment data: How teachers analyze results. Peabody Journal of Education, 85(2), 226–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619561003688688
10.1080/01619561003688688 Google Scholar
- National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). NAEP report card: Reading. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
- National Governors Association Center for Best Practice & Council of Chief Sate School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Authors.
- National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (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 Pub. No. 00–4754). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
10.1111/j.1467-9817.2004.00238.x Google Scholar
- Ness, M. (2011). Explicit reading comprehension instruction in elementary classrooms: Teacher use of reading comprehension strategies. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 25(1), 98–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2010.531076
10.1080/02568543.2010.531076 Google Scholar
- No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107–110, § 115, Stat. 1425 (2002).
- Nuthall, G. (2004). Relating classroom teaching to student learning: A critical analysis of why research has failed to bridge the theory-practice gap. Harvard Educational Review, 74(3), 273–306. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.74.3.e08k1276713824u5
- Palincsar, A.S., & Brown, A.L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1
10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1 Google Scholar
- Palincsar, A.S., David, Y.M., & Brown, A.L. (1989). Using reciprocal teaching in the classroom: A guide for teachers. Unpublished manuscript, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
- Palincsar, A.S., & Schutz, K.M. (2011). Reconnecting strategy instruction with its theoretical roots. Theory Into Practice, 50(2), 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2011.558432
- Paris, S.G., Cross, D.R., & Lipson, M.Y. (1984). Informed strategies for learning: A program to improve children’s reading awareness and comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(6), 1239–1252. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.76.6.1239
- Paris, S.G., & Stahl, S.A. (2005). Children’s reading comprehension and assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
10.4324/9781410612762 Google Scholar
- Pearson, P.D. (2007). An endangered species act for literacy education. Journal of Literacy Research, 39(2), 145–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862960701331878
- Pearson, P.D. (2013). Research foundations of the Common Core State Standards in English language arts. In S.B. Neuman & L.B. Gambrell (Eds.), Quality reading instruction in the age of Common Core Standards (pp. 237–262). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
10.1598/0496.17 Google Scholar
- Pearson, P.D., & Cervetti, G.N. (2015). Fifty years of reading comprehension theory and practice. In P.D. Pearson & E.H. Hiebert (Eds.), Research-based practices for teaching Common Core literacy (pp. 1–24). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
- Pearson, P.D., & Cervetti, G.N. (2017). The roots of reading comprehension. In S.E. Israel (Ed.), Handbook of reading comprehension ( 2nd ed., pp. 12–51). New York, NY: Guilford.
- Pearson, P.D., & Gallagher, M.C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8(3), 317–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(83)90019-X
- Pilonieta, P. (2010). Instruction of research-based comprehension strategies in basal reading programs. Reading Psychology, 31(2), 150–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710902754119
10.1080/02702710902754119 Google Scholar
- Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 545–561). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension strategy instruction: A turn-of-the-century status report. In C.C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 11–27). New York, NY: Guilford.
- Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. New York, NY: Routledge.
- Pressley, M., Duke, N., & Boling, E. (2004). The educational science and scientifically based instruction we need: Lessons from reading research and policymaking. Harvard Educational Review, 74(1), 30–61. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.74.1.5445104446530382
- Pressley, M., & El-Dinary, P.B. (1997). What we know about translating comprehension-strategies instruction research into practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(5), 486–488. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949703000504
- Pressley, M., Goodchild, F., Fleet, J., Zajchowski, R., & Evans, E.D. (1989). The challenges of classroom strategy instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 89(3), 301–342. https://doi.org/10.1086/461578
- Pressley, M., & McCormick, C. (1995). Advanced educational psychology for educators, researchers, and policymakers. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
- RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
- Ravitch, D. (2013, October 24). The biggest fallacy of the Common Core Standards (Rev. ed.). Huffington Post. Retrieved from https://www.huffpost.com/entry/common-core-fallacy_b_3809159
- Reutzel, D.R., Child, A., Jones, C.D., & Clark, S.K. (2014). Explicit instruction in core reading programs. The Elementary School Journal, 114(3), 406–430. https://doi.org/10.1086/674420
- Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 479–530. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543064004479
- Rumelhart, D.E. (1980). On evaluating story grammars. Cognitive Science, 4(3), 313–316. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0403_5
- Rupp, A.A., Ferne, T., & Choi, H. (2006). How assessing reading comprehension with multiple-choice questions shapes the construct: A cognitive processing perspective. Language Testing, 23(4), 441–474. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532206lt337oa
10.1191/0265532206lt337oa Google Scholar
- Seidenberg, M.S., Cooper Borkenhagen, M., & Kearns, D.M. (2020). Lost in translation? Challenges in connecting reading science and educational practice. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S119–S130. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.341
- Shanahan, T. (2020). What constitutes a science of reading instruction? Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S235–S247. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.349
- Shanahan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, C., Duke, N.K., Pearson, P.D., Schatschneider, C., & Torgesen, J. (2010). Improving reading comprehension in kindergarten through 3rd grade: A practice guide (NCEE 2010–4038). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
- Shepard, L.A. (2010). What the marketplace has brought us: Item-by-item teaching with little instructional insight. Peabody Journal of Education, 85(2), 246–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619561003708445
10.1080/01619561003708445 Google Scholar
- Simba Information. (2017). K-12 reading market survey report 2017. Retrieved from https://www.simbainformation.com/Sitemap/Product/10538016
- Simba Information. (2020). K-12 reading market survey report 2020. Retrieved from https://www.simbainformation.com/Reading-Survey-12938533/
- Snow, C., & O’Connor, C. (2016). Close reading and far-reaching classroom discussion: Fostering a vital connection. Journal of Education, 196(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741619600102
10.1177/002205741619600102 Google Scholar
- Solari, E.J., Terry, N.P., Gaab, N., Hogan, T.P., Nelson, N.J., Pentimonti, J.M., … Sayko, S. (2020). Translational science: A road map for the science of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S347–S360. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.357
- Stark, L. (2019, April 30). What parents of dyslexic children are teaching schools about literacy. PBS NewsHour. Retrieved from https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/what-parents-of-dyslexic-children-are-teaching-schools-about-literacy
- Stein, N.L., & Glenn, C.G. (1979). An analysis of story comprehension in elementary school children. In R.O. Freedle (Ed.), New directions in discourse processing (pp. 37–52). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Tierney, R.J., & Pearson, P.D. (1983). Toward a composing model of reading. Language Arts, 60(5), 568–580.
- Valli, L., & Buese, D. (2007). The changing roles of teachers in an era of high-stakes accountability. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 519–558. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207306859
- Valli, L., Croninger, R.G., & Buese, D. (2012). Studying high-quality teaching in a highly charged policy environment. Teachers College Record, 114(4), 1–33.
- Valli, L., Croninger, R.G., Chambliss, M.J., Graeber, A.O., & Buese, D. (2008). Test driven: High-stakes accountability in elementary schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
- Wexler, N. (2020a, July 22). What we talk about when we talk about reading comprehension. Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/nataliewexler/2020/07/22/what-we-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-reading-comprehension/#7e55f1ac24e9
- Wexler, N. (2020b, August 6). Missing pieces in the puzzle of reading comprehension. Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/nataliewexler/2020/08/06/missing-pieces-in-the-puzzle-of-reading-comprehension/#1264749c2f4e
- Willingham, D.T. (2006). The usefulness of brief instruction in reading comprehension strategies. American Educator, 30(4), 39–50.
- Woulfin, S., & Gabriel, R.E. (2020). Interconnected infrastructure for improving reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S109–S117. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.339