BakerL. (2002). Metacognition in comprehension instruction. In BlockC. C.PressleyM. (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 77–95). New York: Guilford Press.
2.
BeanR.DraperJ.TurnerG.ZigmondN. (2010). Reading first in Pennsylvania: Achievement findings after five years. Journal of Literacy Research,42(1), 5–26.
3.
CarlisleJ. F.CortinaK. S.ZengJ. (2010). Reading achievement in reading first schools in Michigan. Journal of Literacy Research,42(1), 49–70.
4.
CarverR. P. (1987). Should reading comprehension skills be taught? In ReadanceJ. E.BaldwinR. S. (Eds.), Research in literacy: Merging perspectives (Thirty-sixth Yearbook of the National Reading Conference, pp. 115–126). Rochester, NY: National Reading Conference.
5.
DoleJ. A.HospJ. L.NelsonK. L.HospM. K. (2010). Second opinions on reading first: The view from Utah. Journal of Literacy Research,42(1), 27–48.
6.
FoormanB. R.PetscherY.LefskyE.TosteJ. R. (2010). Reading first in Florida: Five years of improvement. Journal of Literacy Research,42(1), 71–93.
7.
GamseB.C.JacobR. T.HorstM.BoulayB.UnluF. (2008). Reading First impact study final report. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. (NCEE 2009–4038).
8.
GerstonR. (2009, October). No success like failure? Examining the ‘no effects’ phenomenon in education research. Education Week, pp. 24–26.
9.
McKeownM. G.BeckI. L.BlakeR. G. K. (2009). Rethinking reading comprehension instruction: A comparison of instruction for strategies and content approaches. Reading Research Quarterly,44(3), 218–253.
10.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Pub. No. 004754). Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health.
11.
StanovichK. E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers. New York: Guilford Press.