1

References

Baker, L., DeWyngaert, L. U., & Zeliger-Kandasamy, A. (2015). Metacognition in

comprehension instruction. In S. R. Parris & K. Headley (Eds.), Comprehension

Instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 72-87). New York, NY: Guilford.

Boekaerts, M. (1999). Self-regulated learning: Where we are today. International Journal of

Educational Research, 31, 445-457. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(96)00015-1

Cain, K., Oakhill, J. V., Barnes, M. A., & Bryant, P. E. (2001). Comprehension skill, inference-

making ability, and their relation to knowledge. Memory & Cognition, 29, 850-859.

https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196414

Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (1998). Comprehension skill and inference-making ability: Issues of

causality. In C. Hulme & R. M. Joshi (Eds.), Reading and spelling: Development and

disorders (pp. 329-342). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Coltheart, M., Curtis, B., Atkins, P., & Haller, M. (1993). Models of reading aloud: Dual-route

and parallel-distributed-processing approaches. Psychological Review, 100, 589-608.

https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.4.589

de Bruin, A. B., Thiede, K. W., Camp, G., & Redford, J. (2011). Generating keywords improves

metacomprehension and self-regulation in elementary and middle school

children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 109, 294-310.

Dignath, C., & Büttner, G. (2008). Components of fostering self-regulated learning among

students. A meta-analysis on intervention studies at primary and secondary school

level. Metacognition and Learning, 3, 231-264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-

9029-x
 2

Droop, M., & Verhoeven, L. (2003). Language proficiency and reading ability in first‐and

second‐language learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 78-103.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.38.1.4

Elbro, C., & Buch-Iversen, I. (2013). Activation of background knowledge for inference making:

Effects on reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17, 435-452.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2013.774005

Evans, J. S. B., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing

the debate. Perspectives on psychological science, 8(3), 223-241.

Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their

development. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 39-50.

Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College composition

and communication, 32(4), 365-387.

Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL

Quarterly, 25, 375-406. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586977

Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text

comprehension. Psychological review, 101, 371-395. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.101.3.371

Kim, J. S., Olson, C. B., Scarcella, R., Kramer, J., Pearson, M., van Dyk, D., ... & Land, R. E.

(2011). A randomized experiment of a cognitive strategies approach to text-based

analytical writing for mainstreamed Latino English language learners in grades 6 to

12. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4(3), 231-263.

Larson, A. A., Britt, M. A., & Kurby, C. A. (2009). Improving students' evaluation of informal
arguments. The Journal of Experimental Education, 77, 339-366.
https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.77.4.339-366
 3

Larson, M., Britt, M. A., & Larson, A. A. (2004). Disfluencies in comprehending argumentative

texts. Reading Psychology, 25, 205-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710490489908

Meece, J. L., Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (2006). Classroom goal structure, student

motivation, and academic achievement. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 57, 487-503. doi:

10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070258

Mokhtari, K., Dimitrov, D. M., & Reichard, C. A. (2018). Revising the Metacognitive
Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI) and testing for factorial invariance.
Studies in Language Learning & Teaching, 8, 219-246. doi: 10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.2.3
Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students' metacognitive awareness of reading

strategies. Journal of educational psychology, 94(2), 249.

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.

Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Olson, C. B., & Land, R. (2007). A cognitive strategies approach to reading and writing

instruction for English language learners in secondary school. Research in the Teaching

of English, 269-303.

Perfetti, C. A., & Adlof, S. M. (2012). Reading comprehension: A conceptual framework from

word meaning to text meaning. Measuring up: Advances in how we assess reading

ability, 3-20.

Schoonen, R., Gelderen, A. V., Glopper, K. D., Hulstijn, J., Simis, A., Snellings, P., &

Stevenson, M. (2003). First language and second language writing: The role of linguistic

knowledge, speed of processing, and metacognitive knowledge. Language

learning, 53(1), 165-202.

Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what

we need to know. Contemporary educational psychology, 21, 43-69.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1996.0004

Stanovich, K. E. (1990). Concepts in developmental theories of reading skill: Cognitive

resources, automaticity, and modularity. Developmental review, 10(1), 72-100.

Stoller, F. L., & Grabe, W. (2018b). How Reading Comprehension Works. In J. M. Newton, D.

R. Ferris, C. C. Goh, W. Grabe, F. L. Stoller, & L. Vandergrift (Eds.), Teaching English

to Second Language Learners in Academic Contexts (pp. 9-27). New York, NY:

Routledge.

Wilson, D., & Sperber, D. (2002). Relevance theory. In L. R. Horn & G. L. Ward (Eds.), The

handbook of pragmatics (p. 607-632). Oxford: Blackwell.

Wolf, M., Miller, L., & Donnelly, K. (2000). Retrieval, automaticity, vocabulary elaboration,

orthography (RAVE-O) a comprehensive, fluency-based reading intervention

program. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 375-386.