Expository Text Comprehension in the Primary Grade Classroom.

By Joanna P. Williams, Kendra M. Hall, Kristen D. Lauer, K. Stafford, Laura DeSisto, J. Decani. 2005

183 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7308e6fdbd924cf018545d5a089d803755b3696b

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 Education

Citations in the corpus

Embedding reading comprehension training in content-area instruction (2009, background): “with the program that they were to teach (Williams et al., 2005).”
Using Graphic Organizers to Improve Reading Comprehension Skills for the Middle School ESL Students. (2013, background): “Williams et al. (2005) studied that incorporation of graphic organizer in the comprehension of expository reading texts.”
Instruction, Student Engagement, and Reading Skill Growth in Reading First Classrooms (2009, background): “Moreover, there is strong evidence that reading comprehension can be improved through consistent instruction and the use of reading comprehension strategies (Williams et al., 2005).”
Comprehension challenges in the fourth grade: The roles of text cohesion, text genre, and readers' prior knowledge (2011, background): “…other reading aptitudes deemed important in previous research, such as oral language-based abilities (Carver & David, 2001; Storch & Whitehurst, 2002), metacognitive strategy knowledge (Baker, 1985; Wong, 1985), and knowledge of text structure (Williams et al., 2005), were omitted from this study.”
Handbook of Metacognition in Education (2009, methodology): “An evaluation of this module (Williams et al., 2005) randomly assigned teachers to one of three experimental conditions: (1) the text structure program; (2) a content program that used the same materials, including the well-structured target paragraphs, but did not focus on compare/contrast structur”
Evidence–Based Strategies for Improving the Reading Comprehension of Secondary Students: Implications for Students with Learning Disabilities (2012, methodology): “Knowledge of ways in which text is organized helps students to better comprehend and remember information from the material they have read (Gersten, Fuchs, Williams, & Baker, 2001; Idol, 1987; Trabasso & Bouchard, 2002; Williams, 2005).”
A Cognitive View of Reading Comprehension: Implications for Reading Difficulties (2014, background): “…textual markers such as headers (Lemari´e, Lorch, Eyrolle, & Virbel, 2008) and subheaders (Lorch, Lorch, & Mogan, 1987) and by organizing the content in a logical yet interesting way (Williams et al., 2005), we can help readers create a coherent mental representation of the text with less effort.”
An intervention to improve comprehension of cause/effect through expository text structure instruction. (2014, background): “…coupled with the results of evaluations of Williams’ intervention to teach the comparison structure within the context of science instruction (Williams et al., 2005, 2009), which also showed robust effects, suggest that a focus on text structure is valuable for young children across a…”
Reading comprehension: Developmental processes, individual differences, and interventions. (2008, unknown): “The primary goal of the theme-identification programme is to combine teaching through explicit instruction, modeling, and practise with the use of guiding questions (Wilder & Williams, 2001; Williams, 2003; Williams et al., 2005).”
Structure Strategy Interventions: Increasing Reading Comprehension of Expository Text. (2011, methodology): “Williams et al. (2005, 2007) examined direct instruction with the comparison structure (compare-contrast) with second grade students.”