Old paint on canvas, as it ages, sometimes becomes transparent. When that happens it is possible, in some pictures, to see the original lines: a tree will show through a woman's dress, a child makes way for a dog, a large boat is no longer on an open sea. That is called pentimento because the painter “repented,” changed his mind. Perhaps it would be as well to say that the old conception, replaced by a later choice, is a way of seeing and then seeing again. (Hellman, 1973, p. 3)
References
1.
AlexanderP. A.JettonT. L. (2000). Learning from texts: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. In KamilM. L.MosenthalP. B.PearsonP. D.BarrR. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume 3 (pp. 285–310). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
AlvermannD. E. (1981). The compensatory effect of graphic organizers on descriptive text. Journal of Educational Research, 75, 44–48.
4.
AlvermannD. E. (1988). Effects of spontaneous and induced lookbacks on self-perceived high and low ability comprehenders. Journal of Educational Research, 81, 325–331.
5.
AlvermannD. E. (2000). Narrative approaches. In KamilM. L.MosenthalP. B.PearsonP. D.BarrR. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume 3 (pp. 123–139). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
6.
AlvermannD. E. (2001). Reading adolescents' reading identities: Looking back to see ahead. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44, 676–690.
AlvermannD. E. (2003). Seeing themselves as capable and engaged readers: Adolescents and re/mediated instruction.Naperville, IL: Learning Point Associates. Retrieved February 28, 2004, from http://www.ncrel.org/litweb/adolescent.htm.
9.
AlvermannD. E. (2004a). Adolescent aliteracy: Are schools causing it?Voices in Urban Education, 3 (Winter/Spring), 26–35. (VUE: A “roundtable-in-print” series published by the Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University with excerpts available online). Retrieved July 24, 2004, from http://www.annenberginstitute.org/VUE/index.html.
10.
AlvermannD. E. (Ed.). (2004b). Adolescents and literacies in a digital world.New York: Peter Lang.
11.
AlvermannD. E.MooreD. W. (1991). Secondary reading. In BarrR.KamilM. L.MosenthalP.PearsonP. D. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume 2 (pp. 951–983). White Plains, NY: Longman.
12.
AlvermannD. E.CommeyrasM.YoungJ. P.RandallS.HinsonD. (1997). Interrupting gendered discursive practices in classroom talk about texts: Easy to think about, difficult to do. Journal of Literacy Research, 29, 73–104.
13.
AlvermannD. E.HagoodM. C. (2000) Critical media literacy: Research, theory, and practice in “New Times.”Journal of Educational Research, 93, 193–205.
AlvermannD. E.HayesD. A. (1989). Classroom discussion of content area reading assignments: An intervention study. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 305–335.
16.
AlvermannD. E.HinchmanK. A.MooreD. W.PhelpsS. F.WaffD. (Eds.). (1998). Reconceptualizing the literacies in adolescents' lives.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17.
AlvermannD. E.HrubyG. G. (2000). Mentoring and reporting research: A concern for aesthetics. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 46–63.
18.
AlvermannD. E.HuddlestonA.HagoodM. C. (2004). What could professional wrestling and school literacy practices possibly have in common?Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 47, 532–540.
19.
AlvermannD. E.HyndC. R.QianG. (1995). Effects of interactive discussion and text type on learning counterintuitive science concepts. Journal of Educational Research, 88, 146–154.
20.
AlvermannD. E.MoonJ. S.HagoodM. C. (1999). Popular culture in the classroom: Teaching and researching critical media literacy.Newark, DE: International Reading Association and National Reading Conference.
21.
AlvermannD. E.O'BrienD. G.DillonD. R. (1990). What teachers do when they say they're having discussions of content reading assignments: A qualitative analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 296–322.
22.
AlvermannD. E.RushL. S. (2004). Literacy intervention programs at the middle and high school levels. In JettonT. L.DoleJ. A. (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice (pp. 210–227). New York: Guilford Press.
23.
AlvermannD. E.SmithL. C.ReadenceJ. E. (1985). Prior knowledge activation and the comprehension of compatible and incompatible texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 420–436.
24.
AlvermannD. E.YoungJ. P.GreenC.WisenbakerJ. M. (1999). Adolescents' perceptions and negotiations of literacy practices in after-school Read and Talk Clubs. American Educational Research Journal, 36, 221–264. [Reprinted in RuddellR. (Eds.). (2004). Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
25.
BeachR.BruceB. (2004). Using digital tools to foster critical inquiry. In AlvermannD. E. (Ed.), Adolescents and literacies in a digital world (pp. 147–163). New York: Peter Lang.
26.
BeachR.MyersJ. (2001). Inquiry-based English instruction: Engaging students in life and literature.New York: Teachers College Press.
27.
BeanT. W.ReadenceJ. E. (2002). Adolescent literacy: Charting a course for successful futures as lifelong learners. Reading Research & Instruction, 41, 203–210.
ColeM.GriffinP. (1986). A sociohistorical approach to remediation. In deCastellS.LukeA.EganK. (Eds.), Literacy, society, and schooling (pp. 110–131). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
30.
CurtisM. B.LongoA. M. (1999). When adolescents can't read: Methods and materials that work.Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
31.
FloodJ.HeathS. B.LappD. (1997). Handbook of research on teaching literacy through the communicative and visual arts.New York: Macmillan.
32.
GeeJ. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy.New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
33.
GreenleafC. L.JimenezR. T.RollerC. M. (2002). Reclaiming secondary reading interventions: From limited to rich conceptions, from narrow to broad conversations. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 484–496.
34.
GreenleafC. L.SchoenbachR.CzikoC.MuellerF. L. (2001). Apprenticing adolescent readers to academic literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 71, 79–129.
35.
GuthrieJ. T.WigfieldA. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In KamilM. L.MosenthalP. B.PearsonP. D.BarrR. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume 3 (pp. 403–422). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
36.
HellmanL. (1973). Pentimento: A book of portraits.Boston: Little, Brown.
37.
HerberH. L. (1970). Teaching reading in content areas.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
38.
HindinA.MoroccoC. C.AguilarC. M. (2001). “This book lives in our school”: Teaching middle school students to understand literature. Remedial and Special Education, 22, 204–213.
39.
HorneyM. A.Anderson-InmanL. (1994). The electrotext project: Hypertext reading patterns of middle school students. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 3, 71–91.
40.
HullG.SchultzK. (2001). Literacy and learning out of school: A review of theory and research. Review of Educational Research, 71, 575–611.
41.
KamilM. (2003). Adolescents and literacy: Reading for the 21st century.Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
42.
KamilM. L.IntratorS. M.KimH. S. (2000). The effects of other technologies on literacy and literacy learning. In KamilM. L.MosenthalP. B.PearsonP. D.BarrR. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume 3 (pp. 771–788). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
43.
LabboL. D.ReinkingD. (1999). Negotiating the multiple realities of technology in literacy research and instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 478–492.
44.
LankshearC.KnobelM. (2003). New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom learning.Buckingham, UK: Open University.
45.
LeanderK. M.McKimK. K. (2003). Tracing the everyday “sitings” of adolescents on the Internet: A strategic adaptation of ethnography across online and offine spaces. Education, Communication & Information, 3, 211–240.
46.
LeuD. J.Jr. (2000). Literacy and technology: Deictic consequences for literacy education in an information age. In KamilM. L.MosenthalP. B.PearsonP. D.BarrR. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume 3 (pp. 743–770). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
47.
LeuD. J.Jr.KinzerC. K.CoiroJ. L.CammackD. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies. In RuddellR. B.UnrauN. (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1570–1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Retrieved March 1, 2004, from http://www.readingonline.org/newliteracies/lit_index.asp?HREF=leu/.
48.
LewisC.FindersM. (2004). Implied adolescents and implied teachers: A generation gap for new times. In AlvermannD. E. (Ed.), Adolescents and literacies in a digital world (pp. 101–113). New York: Peter Lang.
LukeC. (2004). Re-crafting media and ICT literacies. In AlvermannD. E. (Ed.), Adolescents and literacies in a digital world (pp. 132–146). New York: Peter Lang.
51.
McPartlandJ.BalfanzR.ShawA. (2004). The Talent Development Literacy Program for poorly prepared high school students. In StricklandD. S.AlvermannD. E. (Eds.), Bridging the literacy achievement gap: Grades 4-12 (pp. 252–265). New York: Teachers College Press.
52.
MojeE. B. (2000). “To be part of the story”: The literacy practices of gangsta adolescents. Teachers College Record, 102, 651–690.
53.
MojeE. B. (2002). Re-framing adolescent literacy research for new times: Studying youth as a resource. Reading Research & Instruction, 41, 211–228.
54.
MooreD. W. (1996). Contexts for literacy in secondary schools. In LeuD. J.KinzerC. K.HinchmanK. A. (Eds.), Literacies for the 21st century: Research and practice. (Forty-fifth yearbook of the National Reading Conference, pp. 15–46). Chicago: National Reading Conference.
55.
MooreD. W.BeanT. W.BirdyshawD.RycikJ. A. (1999). Adolescent literacy: A position statement. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43, 97–112.
56.
MooreD. W.ReadenceJ. E.RickelmanR. J. (1983). An historical exploration of content area reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 410–438.
57.
National Reading Panel (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel.Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
PavonettiL.BrimmerK.CipielewskiJ. (2002). Accelerated Reader: What are the lasting effects on the reading habits of middle school students exposed to Accelerated Reader in elementary grades?Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46, 300–311.
60.
RavaC.2001. “Seven School Districts and Their Communities Awarded Grants in Schools for a New Society Initiative.”Corporation News, Carnegie Corporation of New York. Retrieved February 14, 2004, from http://www.carnegie.org/sub/news/sns.html
61.
Renaissance Learning. (2004). Better data means better teaching and learning. Retrieved October 8, 2004, from http://www.renlearn.com.
62.
SantaC.HavensL.MaycumberE. (1996). CReating Independence through Student-owned Strategies.Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
SturtevantE. G. (2003). The literacy coach: A key to improving teaching and learning in secondary schools.Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
