Higher-Order Comprehension Processes in Struggling Readers: A Perspective for Research and Intervention

By David N. Rapp, Paul van den Broek, Kristen L. McMaster, Panayiota Kendeou, C. Espin. 2007

373 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3b92ecebe5e1bdaec371964fa8f65a127cc50c8e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Evidence–Based Strategies for Improving the Reading Comprehension of Secondary Students: Implications for Students with Learning Disabilities (2012, background): “These students struggle to construct meaning from written text, connect meaning to words, make inferences, draw conclusions, recall and summarize information, and actively monitor their comprehension (Catts, Adlof, & Weismer, 2006; Jitendra, Hoppes, & Xin, 2000; Rapp et al., 2007; Williams, 2005).”
A Meta‐Analysis on the Effects of Text Structure Instruction on Reading Comprehension in the Upper Elementary Grades (2020, background): “Empirical research has shown that struggling readers typically fail to rely on text structure to guide their reading (Meyer, Brandt, & Bluth, 1980; Rapp et al., 2007).”
A Cognitive View of Reading Comprehension: Implications for Reading Difficulties (2014, background): “A general implication is that, for an instructional strategy or intervention to be effective, it needs to focus on improving the online processes that occur during reading (Rapp et al., 2007).”
Coh-Metrix (2011, background): “Such cohesion breaks result in an increase in reading time and generation of inferences (O’Brien et al., 1998; Rapp et al., 2007; Zwaan & Radvansky, 1998).”
Reading Comprehension (2016, background): “The processes used to construct meaning are often of more interest than the product (Rapp et al., 2007) because they can help discern why the intended meaning or mental representation was not evident at the conclusion of a reading activity.”
Making the right connections: Differential effects of reading intervention for subgroups of comprehenders (2012, neutral): “The two-cluster solution was consistent with our previous research (Rapp et al., 2007; van den Broek et al., 2006), and resulted in two subgroups of struggling readers: elaborators ( n =31) and paraphrasers ( n =25).”
Development of a new reading comprehension assessment: Identifying comprehension differences among readers (2014, methodology): “Included in this examination was also whether MOCCA can be used to identify subtypes of poor comprehenders similar to those identified in previous research using think-aloud approaches (McMaster et al., 2012; Rapp et al., 2007).”
Connecting Cognitive Theory and Assessment: Measuring Individual Differences in Reading Comprehension (2012, background): “Such measures have been found to capture individual and developmental differences (Rapp et al., 2007; McMaster et al., 2012; for review, see van den Broek et al., in press).”