臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究旨在探討交互教學法對國中學習障礙學生閱讀理解能力的促進效果，比較學生在說明文與敘事文閱讀理解表現上的差異，並分析教學初期與後期學生閱讀理解策略運用的變化情形。
本研究採用交互教學中的ET-RT模式 (explicit teaching before reciprocal teaching)，在師生對話開始前，先進行策略的直接教學。研究方法採用單一受試實驗設計模式中的跨個人多基線設計，針對三名國中一年級學習障礙學生進行三個時期五個階段的實驗教學與評量。所得的資料分為兩部份，一是以目視分析與C統計法探討受試在研究者自編之閱讀理解測驗的表現；二是對教學過程中受試閱讀理解策略運用的次數與方式進行分析。本研究結果綜合如下：
一、學習障礙學生接受交互教學法後，其閱讀理解測驗的整體得分，及說明文與敘事文閱讀理解測驗的得分有顯著增加的趨向，撤除教學兩週後，教學處理的效果未能持續保留。
二、學習障礙學生接受交互教學法前、中、後，在說明文與敘事文兩種類型閱讀理解測驗的表現，無明顯差異。
三、學習障礙學生接受交互教學法後期，閱讀理解策略使用的次數比初期減少。
四、學習障礙學生接受交互教學法初期，運用策略時，最常使用重述的方式；學習障礙學生接受交互教學法後期，運用策略時，最常使用文章組織的方式，教學後期策略使用方式的種類較教學法初期多元，策略錯誤使用的次數較教學法初期減少。

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of reciprocal teaching on reading comprehension of junior high school students with learning disabilities. The student reading comprehension performance with expository and narrative texts was compared. The strategies used by the students at the beginning and end of the intervention were analyzed.
The researcher utilized “ET-RT model” (explicit teaching before reciprocal teaching). The students were introduced to the four strategies before the dialogues began. A multiple-baseline across subjects design was used, which included baseline, treatment, and maintenance phases. The subjects were three first-grade students with learning disabilities. The researcher developed a series of reading comprehension tests. Each test consisted of two types of texts (i.e., expository and narrative texts). All tests were scored to evaluate student performance in reading comprehension. The data-processing procedures adopted visual analysis and the simplified time-series analysis methods. The researcher explored the way each strategy was used by the students at the beginning and end of the intervention.
The results of this study were summarized as follows：
1. Reciprocal Teaching had a significantly immediate effect on improving the student test scores (expository, and narrative comprehension tests), but the results were not maintained at the 2-week follow-up.
2. There was no significant difference between the expository and narrative text scores before, during and after the intervention.
3. The observed strategies were used more frequently by the subjects at the beginning than at the end of the intervention.
4. At the beginning of the intervention, the subjects performed rereading more frequently while using strategies. At the end of the intervention, the subjects performed text-organizing more frequently while using the strategies. The strategy category used at the end of the intervention was greater than at the beginning of the intervention. There were fewer strategy errors at the end of the intervention than at the beginning of the intervention.

目 錄
第一章 緒論………………………………………………………………...…1
第一節 研究動機與目的………………………………………………..1
第二節 待答問題………………………………………………………..6
第三節 名詞釋義………………………………………………………..7
第二章 文獻探討……………………………………………………………10
第一節 閱讀的理論………………………………………………..…..10
第二節 學習障礙學生的學習特徵……………………………………24
第三節 交互教學法……………………………………………………35
第四節 閱讀理解策略教學……………………………………………52
第三章 研究方法…………………………………………………………62
第一節 研究設計………………………………………………………62
第二節 研究對象………………………………………………………65
第三節 研究工具………………………………………………………67
第四節 教學程序………………………………………………………70
第五節 研究步驟………………………………………………………75
第六節 資料處理………………………………………………………77
第四章 研究結果……………………………………………………………81
第一節 閱讀理解整體表現的資料分析………………………………..81
第二節 說明文閱讀理解表現的資料分析……………………………..93
第三節 敘事文閱讀理解表現的資料分析……………………………104
第四節 不同文體閱讀理解表現的比較分析………………...……….116
第五節 閱讀理解策略運用情形的資料分析…………………………124
第五章 討論、結論與建議…………………………………………………140
第一節 討論……………………………………………………...…….141
第二節 結論………………………………………………………...….147
第三節 研究限制………………………………………………………148
第四節 建議……………………………………………………………149
參考文獻……………………………………………………………………152
附錄…………………………………………………………………………167
附錄一 說明文與敘事文閱讀理解測驗範例……………………………..167
附錄二 策略使用次數紀錄表…………………………………..…………169
附錄三 「交互教學前明確教學」的學習單範例………………………...170
附錄四 「正式閱讀教學的教材」之篇名及字數…………………………176
附錄五 三名普通學生之基本資料…………………………………..…..177
表 次
表2-1 說明文體結構類型………………………………………………..….19
表2-2 閱讀前、中、後的理解策略………………………………………….54
表2-3 認知策略教學的介入模式………………………………..………….57
表3-1 實驗受試基本資料表……………………………………………….67
表3-2 策略使用說明提示卡的內容……………………………………….73
表3-3 教學對話的原則………………………………………………….....74
表4-1 S1閱讀理解測驗整體表現的階段內目視分析結果摘要表……...83
表4-2 S1閱讀理解測驗整體表現的階段間目視分析摘要表……….…..84
表4-3 S1閱讀理解測驗整體表現的C統計分析摘要表………………..85
表4-4 S2閱讀理解測驗整體表現的階段內目視分析結果摘要表………86
表4-5 S2閱讀理解測驗整體表現的階段間目視分析摘要表……………87
表4-6 S2閱讀理解測驗整體表現的C統計分析摘要表…………………88
表4-7 S3閱讀理解測驗整體表現的階段內目視分析結果摘要表………89
表4-8 S3閱讀理解測驗整體表現的階段間目視分析摘要表………..….90
表4-9 S3閱讀理解測驗整體表現的C統計分析摘要表…………………91
表4-10 S1在說明文閱讀理解測驗表現的階段內目視分析結果摘要表..95
表4-11 S1在說明文閱讀理解測驗表現的階段間目視分析摘要表…..…96
表4-12 S1在說明文閱讀理解測驗表現的C統計分析摘要表………….97
表4-13 S2在說明文閱讀理解測驗表現的階段內目視分析結果摘要表..98
表4-14 S2在說明文閱讀理解測驗表現的階段間目視分析摘要表……..99
表4-15 S2在說明文閱讀理解測驗表現的C統計分析摘要表…………100
表4-16 S3在說明文閱讀理解測驗表現的階段內目視分析結果摘要表...101
表4-17 S3在說明文閱讀理解測驗表現的階段間目視分析摘要表……102
表4-18 S3在說明文閱讀理解測驗表現的C統計分析摘要表…………103
表4-19 S1在敘事文閱讀理解測驗表現的階段內目視分析結果摘要表..106
表4-20 S1在敘事文閱讀理解測驗表現的階段間目視分析摘要表……107
表4-21 S1在敘事文閱讀理解測驗表現的C統計分析摘要表………....108
表4-22 S2在敘事文閱讀理解測驗表現的階段內目視分析結果摘要表..109
表4-23 S2在敘事文閱讀理解測驗表現的階段間目視分析摘要表……110
表4-24 S2在敘事文閱讀理解測驗表現的C統計分析摘要表…………111
表4-25 S3在敘事文閱讀理解測驗表現的階段內目視分析結果摘要表..112
表4-26 S3在敘事文閱讀理解測驗表現的階段間目視分析摘要表……113
表4-27 S3在敘事文閱讀理解測驗表現的C統計分析摘要表…………114
表4-28 受試在不同文體閱讀理解測驗的答題狀況分析……………….119
表4-29 S1閱讀理解策略使用次數統計表………………………………126
表4-30 S2閱讀理解策略使用次數統計表………………………………126
表4-31 S3閱讀理解策略使用次數統計表………………………………126
表4-32 閱讀理解策略使用的方式及其定義…………………………….130
表4-33 閱讀理解策略使用的錯誤類型及其定義……………………….130
表4-34 三位受試在教學初期閱讀理解策略使用的方式……………….134
表4-35 三位受試在教學後期閱讀理解策略使用的方式……………….138
表4-36 受試在教學初期、後期閱讀理解策略使用方式的次數……….138
表4-37 受試在教學初期、後期閱讀理解策略使用的錯誤次數………..138
圖 次
圖2-1 閱讀的成分………………………………………………………...12
圖2-2 閱讀的自動化理論…………………………………...……………14
圖2-3 學障學生的優勢及弱勢能力……………………………………...24
圖3-1 本研究架構圖………………………………………………….…...62
圖3-2 實驗設計模式圖……………………………………………….…...64
圖4-1 受試者在閱讀測驗整體得分的曲線圖……………………………82
圖4-2 受試者在說明文閱讀理解測驗的得分曲線圖…………………….94
圖4-3 受試者在敘事文閱讀理解測驗的得分曲線圖…………………...105
圖4-4 受試者在不同文體閱讀理解測驗的得分曲線圖……………...…118
圖4-5 S1在教學初期與教學後期閱讀理解策略使用次數的變化..…...127
圖4-6 S2在教學初期與教學後期閱讀理解策略使用次數的變化.…....127
圖4-7 S3在教學初期與教學後期閱讀理解策略使用次數的變化.….…127

一、中文部分
王英君（民89）。國小閱讀障礙學生閱讀理解策略之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所未出版之碩士論文。
王佳玲（民90）。國小不同閱讀理解能力學生在不同難度、文體文章閱讀理解表現及方式之比較研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所未出版之碩士論文。
王瓊珠（民81）。國小六年級閱讀障礙兒童與普通兒童閱讀認知能力之比較研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所未出版之碩士論文。
吳芳香（民87）。國小二年級優讀者與弱讀者閱讀策略使用與覺識之研究。國立高雄師範大學特殊教育研究所未出版之碩士論文。
何嘉雯、李芃娟（民92）。交互教學法對國小閱讀理解困難學生教學成效之研究。特殊教育與復健學報，11期，101-125頁。
李俊仁（民88），聲韻處理能力和閱讀能力的關係。國立中正大學心理學研究所未出版之博士論文。
吳訓生（民89）。國小低閱讀能力學生閱讀理解策略教學效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所未出版之博士論文。
周台傑（民89）。學習障礙兒童鑑定原則鑑定基準說明。載於柯華葳、邱上真主編，學習障礙學生鑑定與診斷指導手冊，41-62。台北：教育部特殊教育工作小組。
林玟慧（民84）。閱讀理解策略教學對國中閱讀障礙學生閱讀效果之研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所未出版之碩士論文。
林宜真（民87）。閱讀障礙學生與普通學生閱讀理解方式之比較研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所未出版之碩士論文。
林清山譯（民86）。教育心理學：認知取向（第三版）。台北：遠流。
林惠芬（民86）。自我教導問─答閱讀策略對國中輕度智能不足學生閱讀理解效果之研究。特殊教育學報，12期，103-123。
胡永崇（民84）。後設認知策略教學對國小閱讀障礙學童閱讀理解成效之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所未出版之博士論文。
柯華葳（民82）。語文科的閱讀教學。輯於李永吟主編學習輔導（pp. 307-349）。台北：心理。
教育部（民91）。身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定標準。台北：教育部。
曾尚民（民91）。學習障礙學生的問題行為與輔導。特殊教育季刊，第82期，34-40頁。
黃秀霜、詹欣蓉（民86）。閱讀障礙兒童之音韻覺識、字覺識及聲調覺識之分析。特殊教育與復健學報，5期，125-138。
葉瓊華、詹文宏（民89）。概念構圖、自問自答及畫重點策略對國小閱讀障礙兒童閱讀理解能力及後設認知能力教學成效之研究。特殊教育學報，14期，189-231。
鄭昭明（民83）。認知心理學。台北：桂冠圖書公司。
錡寶香（民90）。國小低閱讀成就學生的口語述說能力：語言層面的分析。特殊教育學報，15期，129-175頁。
藍慧君（民80）。學習障礙與普通兒童閱讀不同結構文章之閱讀理解與閱讀理解策略的比較研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所未出版之碩士論文。
二、英文部分
Alvermann, D., Dillon, D. R., & O''Brien, D. G. (1987). Using discussion to promote reading comprehension. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Alverman, D. E., Young, J. P., Weaver, D., Hinchman, K. A., Moore, D. W., Phelps, S. F., Thrash, E. C., & Zalewski, P. (1996). Middle and high school students’ perceptions of how they experience text-based discussion: A multicase study. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(3), 244-267.
Armbruster, B. B., & Anderson, T. H. (1988). On selecting “considerate” content area textbooks. Remedial and Special Education, 9(1), 47-52.
Baker, L. (1982). An evaluation of the role of metacognitive deficits in learning disabilities. Topics I Learning and Learning Disabilities, 2, 27-35.
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. Elementary School Journal, 96, 385-414.
Bender(2001). Learning disabilities: Characteristics, identification, and teaching strategies (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Bos, C. S., & Reyes, E. I. (1996). Conversations with a Latina teacher about education for language-minority students with special needs. Elementary School Journal, 96, 343-352.
Bos, C. S., & Vaughn, S. (2002). Strategies for Teaching Students with Learning and Behavior Problems (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Brown, A. L., Day, J. D., & Jones, R. S. (1983). The development of plans for summarizing texts. Child Development, 54, 968-979.
Brown, A. L., & Palincsar, A. S. (1986). Guided, cooperative learning and individual knowledge acquisition. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 270738)
Bruce, M. E. & Robinson, G. L. (2001). The clever kid''s reading program: Metacognition and reciprocal teaching. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED456429. )
Bruer, J. (1993). The mind’s journey from novice to expert. American Educator, 17(2), 6-45.
Bryan, R. (1997). Assessing the personal and social status of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: Research and Practice, 13(1), 63-76.
Bryant, D. P., Ugel, N., Thompson, S., & Hamff, A. (1999). Instructional strategies for content-area reading instruction. Intervention in School and Clinic，34 , 293-302.
Carnine, D., Silbert, J., & Kameenui, E. J. (1990). Direct instruction reading (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Carr, S. C., & Thompson, B. (1996). The effects of prior knowledge and schema activation strategies on the inferential reading comprehension of children with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 19, 48-61.
Chi, M. T. H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting selfexplanation. Cognitive Science, 18(3), 439-477.
Coley, J. D., DePinto, T., Craig, S., & Gardner, R. (1993). From college to classroom: Three teachers’ adaptation of reciprocal teaching. The Elementary School Journal, 94(2), 255-266.
Collins, A., & Smith, E. E. (1982). Teaching the process of reading comprehension. In D. K. Detterman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), How and how much can intelligence be increased (pp. 173-185). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1998). What reading does for the mind. American Educator, 22(1 & 2), 8-15.
Deshler, D. D., & Schumaker, J. R. (1988). An instructional model for teaching students how to learn. In J. L. Graden, J. E. Zins, & M. J. Curtis (Eds.), Alternative educational delivery systems: Enhancing instructional outcomes for all students (pp. 391-411). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
Deshler, D. D., Warner, M. M., Schumaker, J. B., & Alley, G. R. (1983). The learning strategies model: Key components and current status. In J. D. McKinney & L. Feagans (Eds. ), Current topics in learning disabilities (Vol. 1, pp. 245-283). Norwood, NJ:Ablex.
Englert, C. S., & Thomas, C. C. (1987). Sensitivity to text structure in reading and writing: A comparison between learning disabled and non- learning disabled students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10(2), 93-105.
Engelmann, S. (1980). Direction Instruction. NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Fox, A. (1998). Clumsiness in children: Developmental coordination disorders. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 57-63.
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Mathes, P. G., & Lipsey, M. W. (2000). Reading differences between underachievers with and without learning disabilities: A meta-analysis. In R. Gersten, E. Schiller, & S. Vaughn (Eds.), Research syntheses in special education (pp. 81-104). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gaffney, J. S., & Anderson, R. C. (2000). Trends in reading research in the United States: Changing intellectual currents over three decades. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research Volume III (pp.53-74), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gagné, E. D., Yekovich, C. W, & Yekovich, F. R. (1993). The cognitive psychology of school learning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins College Publishers.
Gambrell, L. B. (1996). What research reveals about discussion. In L. B. Gambrell & J. F. Almasi (Eds.), Lively discussion!: Fostering engaged reading (pp. 25-38). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Garner, R. (1992). Self-regulated learning, strategy shifts, and shared expertise: Reactions to Palincsar and Klenk. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25(4), 226-229.
Garnett, K. (1992). Developing fluency with basic number facts: Intervention for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 7, 210-216.
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.
Goldenberg, C. (1993). Instructional conversations: Promoting comprehension through discussion. The Reading Teacher, 46(4), p.316-326.
Graham, L., & Wong, B. Y. L. (1993). Comparing two models of teaching a question-answering strategy for enhancing reading comprehension: Didactic and self-instruction training. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 270-279.
Gunning, T. G. (1996). Creating reading instruction for all children. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research Volume III (pp.403-422), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
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.
Hart, E. R. & Speece, D. L. (1998). Reciprocal teaching goes to college: Effects for postsecondary students at risk for academic failure. Journal of Educational Psychology; 90(4), 670-681.
Kelly, M., Moore, D. W., & Tuck, B. F. (1994). Reciprocal teaching in a regular primary school classroom. Journal of Educational Research, 88(1), 53-61.
Klingner, J. K., & Vaughn, S. (1996). Reciprocal teaching of reading comprehension strategies for students with learning disabilities who use English as a second language. The Elementary School Journal, 96 (3), 275-293.
Kolligian, J., & Sternberg, R. J. (1987). Intelligence, information processing, and specific learning disabilities: A triarchic synthesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20(1), 8-17.
Kucan, L., & Beck, I. L., (1997). Thinking aloud and reading comprehension research: Inquiry, instruction, and social interaction. Review of Educational Research, 67, 271-299.
Lapp, D., Flood, J., & Ranck-Buhr, W. (1995). Using multiple text formats to explore scientific phenomena in middle school classrooms. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Disabilities, 11, 173-186.
Lederer, J. M. (2000). Reciprocal teaching of social studies in inclusive elementary classrooms. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(1), 91-107.
Lenz, B. K., Ellis, E. S., & Scanlon, D. (1996). Teaching learning strategies to adolescents and adults with learning disabilities. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Lerner, J. (2000). Learning disabilities: Theories, diagnosis, and teaching strategies (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Loxterman, J. A., Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (1994). The effects of thinking aloud during reading on students’ comprehension of more or less coherent text. Reading Research Quarterly, 29(4), 353-368.
Lyon, R. & Moats, L. C. (1997). Critical conceptual and methodological considerations in reading intervention research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(6), 578-588.
MacInnis, C., & Hemming, H. (1995). Linking the needs of students of students with learning disabilities to a whole language curriculum. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 534-544.
Mariage, T. V. (2000). Constructing educational possibilities: A sociolinguistic examination of meaning-making in “sharing-chair.” Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 23, 79-103.
Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1997). Best practices in promoting reading comprehension in students with learning disabilities. Remedial and Special Educatioon, 18, 197-213.
McCormick, C. B., & Pressley, M. (1997). Educational psychology: Learning, instruction, and assessment. New York: Longman.
McCormick, S. (1992). Disabled readers’ erroneous responses to inferential comprehension questions: Description and analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 55-77.
Meichenbaum, D. M. (1977). Cognitive behavior modification. New York: Plenum.
Mercer, C. D. (1997). Students with learning disabilities (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/ Prentice.
Miranda, A., & Villaescusa, M. I. (1997). Is arrtibution retraining necessary? Use of self-regulation procedures for enhancing reading comprehension strategies of children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(5), 503-512.
Moats, L. C., & Lyon, G. R. (1993). Learning Disabilities in the United States: Advocacy, science, and the future of the field. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 282-294.
Morgan, K. B. (1995). Creative phonics: A meaning-oriented reading program. Intervention in School and Clinic, 30, 287-291.
Neuman, S. B., & McCormick, S. (2000). A case for single-subject experiments in literacy research. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research Volume III (pp.181-194), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Padget, S. Y. (1998). Lessons from research on dyslexia: Implications for classification system for reading disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 21, 167-178.
Palincsar, A. S. (1982). Improving the reading comprehension of junior high students through the reciprocal teaching of comprehension-monitoring strategies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urban-Champaign.
Palincsar, A. S.(1987). Collaborating for collaborative learning of text comprehension . (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 285123. )
Palincsar, A. S. (1988). Reciprocal teaching instructional materials packet. East Lansing: Michigan State University.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117─175.
Palincsar, A. S., & Herrenkohl, L. R. (2002). Designing collaborative learning contexts. Theory into Practice, 41(1), 26-32.
Palincsar, A. S., & Klenk, L. (1991). Learning dialogues to promote text comprehension. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED338724. )
Palincsar, A. S., & Klenk, L. (1992). Fostering literacy learning in supportive contexts. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25(4), 211-225, 229.
Raphael, T. E. (1986). Teaching question answer relationships, revisited. The Reading Teacher, 39, 516-522.
Paris, S. G., & Oka, E. R. (1986). Children’s reading strategies, metacognition, and motivation. Developmental Review, 6, 25-56.
Resnick, L. B. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Richek, M., Caldwell, J., Jennings, J., & Lerner, J. (1996). Reading problems: Assessment and teaching strategies. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Rinehart, S. D., Stahl, S. A., & Erickson, L. G. (1986). Some effects of summarization training on reading and studying. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 422-438.
Polloway, E. A., Patton, J. R., & Serna, L. (2001). Strategies for teaching learners with special needs (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/ Prentice Hall.
Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal Teaching: A Review of the Research. Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 479-530.
Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P. B., Gaskins, I., Schuder, T., Bergman, J. L., Almasi, J., & Brown, R. (1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of reading comprehension strategies. The Elementary School Journal, 92(5), 513-555.
Pressley, M. Roehrig, A., Bogner, K., Raphael, L. M., & Dolezal, S. (2002). Balanced literacy instruction. Focus on Exceptional Children, 34(5), 1-14.
Pressley, M., Wharton-McDonald, R., Mistretta-Hampston, & Echevarria, M. (1998). Literacy instruction in 10 fourth- and fifth-grade classrooms in upstate New York. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2, 159-194.
Sáenz, L. M., & Fuchs, L. S. (2002). Examining the reading difficulty of secondary students with learning disabilities. Remedial & Special Education, 23(1), 31-41.
Savage, J. F. (1998). Teaching reading and writing: Combining skills, strategies, and literature (2nd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Slater, W. H., & Horstman, F. R. (2002). Teaching reading and writing to struggling middle school and high school students: The case for reciprocal teaching. Preventing School Failure, 46(4), 163-167.
Smith, C. R. (1998). Learning disabilities: The interaction of learner, task, and setting (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Smith, T. E. C., Polloway, E. A., Patton, J. R., & Dowdy, C. A. (2001). Teaching Students with Special Needs in Inclusive Settings (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Speece, D. L., MacDonald, V., Kilsheimer, L., & Krist, J.(1997). Research to practice: Preservice teachers reflect on reciprocal teaching. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 12(3) , 177-187.
Swanson, H. L. (1999). Reading research for students with LD: A meta-analysis of intervention outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32(6), 504-532.
Swanson, P. N., & de la Paz, S. (1998). Teaching effective comprehension strategies to students with learning and reading disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 33（4）, 209-218.
Swanson, H. L., & Hoskyn, M. (1998). Experimental intervention research on students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 68, 277-321.
Tawney, J. W., & Gast, D. L. (1984). Single subject research in special education. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company.
Tryon, W. W. (1982). A simplified time-series analysis for evaluation treatment interventions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15, 423-429.
Vaughn, S. Moody, S., & Schumm, J. S. (1998). Broken promises: Reading instruction in the resource room. Exceptional Children, 64, 211-226.
Vygotsky, K. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development higher psychological process. Edited and translated by M. Cole, V. John Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Williams, J. P. (1993). Comprehension of students with and without learning disabilities: Identification of narrative themes and idiosyncratic text representations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 631-641.
Wilson, 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.
Wong, B. Y. L., & Jones, W. (1982). Increasing metacomprehension in learning disabled and normally achieving students through self-questioning training. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 228-239.
Wong, B. Y. L., & Wilson, M. (1984). Investigating awareness of and teaching passage organization in learning disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 477-482.