A Review of Factors Affecting Reading Comprehension

Öz

This study, which examines the factors affecting reading comprehension from various perspectives, is a literature review. Accordingly, research and review articles on reading comprehension skill, factors affecting reading comprehension, reading comprehension barriers in Google Academic, ULAKBİM, YÖK Academic, Web of Science, ERIC, Proquest database were scanned and the variables affecting reading comprehension skills were scanned. Determined and the effects of these variables on the reading comprehension process are explained. According to the results of the literature review; Six factors affecting reading comprehension, namely reading comprehension strategies, vocabulary knowledge, fluent reading, text type and text type awareness, affective qualities of reading, metacognitive reading strategies, were determined and these factors were explained with various dimensions. One of the results obtained from the research is that the main difference that distinguishes competent readers from weak readers is their ability to use these six factors consciously, to organize the reading process accordingly, and to use these factors in a timely and effective manner in the reading process. In addition, it has been concluded that the six factors determined have a direct effect on the reading comprehension skill, are related to each other, and have features that can be taught and gained to students.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Reading comprehension skill
• Reading strategies
• Affective qualities of reading
• Text knowledge
• Vocabulary knowledge

Okuduğunu Anlamayı Etkileyen Etmenlere Yönelik Bir İnceleme

Öz

Okuduğunu anlamayı etkileyen etmenlerin çeşitli açılardan incelendiği bu çalışma, bir alanyazın derlemesi niteliği taşımaktadır. Buna göre Google Akademik, ULAKBİM, YÖK Akademik, Web of Science, ERIC, Proquest veri tabanı üzerinde bulunan okuduğunu anlama becerisi, okuduğunu anlamayı etkileyen etmenler, okuduğunu anlama engelleri konulu araştırma ve derleme makaleleri taranarak okuduğunu anlama becerisini etkileyen değişkenler belirlenmiş ve bu değişkenlerin okuduğunu anlama sürecindeki etkileri açıklanmaya çalışılmıştır. Alanyazın derlemesinin sonucuna göre; okuduğunu anlama stratejileri, sözcük bilgisi, akıcı okuma, metin türü ve metin türü farkındalığı, okumanın duyuşsal nitelikleri, üstbilişsel okuma stratejileri olmak üzere okuduğunu anlamayı etkileyen altı etmen belirlenmiş ve bu etmenler çeşitli boyutlarıyla açıklanmıştır. Çalışmadan elde edilen sonuçlardan biri, yetkin okurları zayıf okurlardan ayıran temel farkın bu altı etmeni bilinçli bir biçimde kullanabilme, okuma sürecini buna göre düzenleyebilme ve okuma sürecinde bu etmenleri zamanında ve etkili bir biçimde kullanabilme becerileri olduğu yönündedir. Öte yandan belirlenen altı etmenin okuduğunu anlama becerisi üzerinde doğrudan etkili olduğu, birbirleriyle ilişkili nitelikte olduğu ve her bir etmenin öğretilebilir, öğrencilere kazandırılabilir özellikler taşıdığı sonucuna varılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Okuduğunu anlama becerisi
• Okuma stratejileri
• Okumanın duyuşsal nitelikleri
• Metin bilgisi
• Sözcük bilgisi

Kaynakça

1. Akyol, H. (2006). Türkçe öğretim yöntemleri. Ankara: Kök Yayıncılık.
2. Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 285-310). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Allington, R. L. (1983). Fluency: the neglected reading goal in reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, 36(6), 556-561. EJ274256.
5. Anderson, A. W. (1960). Directing reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 13(3), 206-211. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/20197259?seq=1
6. Anderson, T. H. (1980). Study strategies and adjunct aids. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 483-502). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7. Armbruster, B. B., Echols, C. H., & Brown, A. L. (1982). The role of metacognition in reading to learn: a developmental perspective. The Volta Review, 84(5), 45-56. Retrieved from https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/17499/ctrstreadeducrepv01983i00040_opt.pdf?sequence=1
8. Artley, A. S. (1955). Some ‘musts’ ahead in teaching reading. National Elementary Principal, 35, 3-6. doi: 10.1177/002205745513800102

9. Aukerman, R. C. (1981). How do I teach reading? New York, NY: John Willy and Sons.
10. Baker, L, & Brown, A.L. (1980). Metacognitive skill and reading. (Technical report No:188). Urbana Campain: Center for the Study of Reading, University of Illinois.
11. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
12. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman.
13. Barbe, W. B. (1958). Measuring reading comprehension. The Clearing House, 32(6), 343-345. doi: 10.1080/00098655.1958.11476143
14. Barbe-Clevett, T., Hanley, N., & Sullivan, P. (2002). Improving reading comprehension through metacognitive reflection. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED471067)
15. Başaran, M. (2013). 4. sınıf öğrencilerinin üstbilişsel okuma stratejilerini kullanma durumları ve bu stratejilerle okuduğunu anlama arasındaki ilişki. Turkish Studies, 8(8), 225-240.
16. Baştuğ, M., Hiğde, A., Çam, E., Örs, E. ve Efe, P. (2019). Okuduğunu anlama becerilerini geliştirme stratejiler, teknikler ve uygulamalar. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
17. Bazerman, C. (1985). Physicist reading physics: Schema-laden purposes and purpose-laden schema. Written Communication, 2(1), 3-23. doi: 10.1177/0741088385002001001
18. Bender, W. N., & Larkin, M. J. (2003). Reading strategies for elemantary students with learning difficulties. Georgia: Published By Corwin Press.
19. Bimmel, B. E., Berg, H., & Oostdam, R. J. (2001). Effects of strategy training on reading comprehension in first and foreign language. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 16(4), 509-529. doi: 10.1007/BF03173195
20. Binder, C. (1996). Behavorial fluency: Evolution of a new paradigm. The Behavior Analyst, 19(2), 163-197. doi: 10.1007/bf03393163
21. Binder, C., Haughton, E., & Van Eyk, D. (1990). Increasing endurance by building fluency: precision teaching attention span. Teaching Exceptional Children, 22(3), 24-27. doi: 10.1177/004005999002200305
22. Bohn-Gettler, C. M., & Kendeou, P. (2014). The interplay of reader goals, working memory, and text structure during reading. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39, 206-219. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.05.003
23. Brown, A. L. (1980). Metcognitive development and reading. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 453-481). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24. Brown, H. (2003). Teaching by principles: an interactive approach to language pedagogy. New York: Pearson Education.
25. Carrell, P. L., Gajdusek, L., & Wise, T. (1998). Metacognition and EFL/ESL Reading. Instructional Science, 26(1-2), 97-112.
26. Chall, J. S. (1958). Readability: An appraisal of research and application. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Bureau of Educational Research.
27. Chumpavan, S. (2000). A qualitative investigation of metacognitive strategies used by Thai students in second language academic reading. SLLT, 9, 416-447. Retrieved from http: //mulinet10.li.mahidol.ac.th/e-thesis/2551/ cd 416/ 4836447
28. Costa, A. (1992). Rationale for change. In A. Costa, J. Bellanca, & J. Fogarty, J. (Eds.), If minds matter: A foreword to the future (vol. 1) (pp. 239-255). Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight.
29. Çöğmen, S. (2008). Eğitim fakültesi öğrencilerinin okuduğunu anlama stratejilerinin belirlenmesi. (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Aydın.
30. Davis, F. B. (1944). Fundamental factors of comprehension in reading. Psvchometrika, 9, 185-197. doi: 10.1007/BF02288722
31. Dechant, E. (1991). Understanding and teaching reading: an interactive model. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
32. Deeney, T. A. (2010). One-minute fluency measures: Mixed messages in assessment and instruction. The Reading Teacher, 63(6), 440-450. doi: 10.1598/RT.63.6.1
33. Demirel, Ö. ve Epçaçan, C. (2012). Okuduğunu anlama stratejilerinin bilişsel ve duyuşsal öğrenme ürünlerine etkisi. Kalem Eğitim ve İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 2(1), 71-106.
34. Dilidüzgün, Ş., Edizer Çetinkaya, Z., Ak Başoğlu, D., Oryaşın, M. ve Yücelşen, N. (2019). Metin türü bağlamında okuma yöntem-teknikleriyle üstbilişsel okuma stratejilerini ilişkilendirme çalışması. Uluslararası Türkçe Edebiyat Kültür Eğitim Dergisi, 8(3), 1796-1816.
35. Doğan, B. (2002). Strateji öğretiminin işbirlikli ve geleneksel sınıflarda okuduğunu anlama becerileri, güdü ve hatırda tutma üzerindeki etkileri. (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, İzmir.
36. Duffy, G. G. (1993). Rethinking strategy instruction: four teachers' development and their low achievers' understandings. The Elemantary School Journal, 93(3), 229-236. doi: 10.1086/461724
37. Duke, N. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2008). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. The Journal of Education, 189(1), 107-122. doi: 10.1177/0022057409189001-208
38. Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L.R. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erbaum.
39. Garner, R., & Reis, R. (1981), Monitoring and resolving comprehension obstacles: an ınvestigation of spontaneous lookbacks among uppergrade good and poor comprehenders. Reading Research Quarterly, (16), 569-582. doi: 10.2307/747316
40. Ghonsooly, B., & Elahi, M. (2010). Learners’ self-efficacy in reading and its relation to foreign language reading anxiety and reading achievement. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 53(217), 45-67. Retrieved from https://www.sid.ir/FileServer/JE/1323201021703.pdf
41. Göğüş, B. (1978). Türkçe ve yazın eğitimi. Ankara: Gül Yayınevi.
42. Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 375-406. doi: 10.2307/3586977
43. Grabe, W., & L. F. Stoller (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Harlow: Pearson Education.
44. Graesser, A., Golding, J. M., & Long, D. L. (1991). Narrative representation and comprehension. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. MosenthaL, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 171-205). New York, NY: Longman.
45. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6-10. doi: 10.1177/074193258600700104
46. Gunning, T. (2010). Assessing and correcting reading and writing difficulties (4th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
47. Günay, D. (2003). Metin bilgisi. İstanbul: Multilingual.
48. Güneyli, A. (2008). Metin türlerine göre okuduğunu anlama becerisinin sınanması. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 179, 82-92.
49. Güney, N. ve Aytan, T. (2014). Aktif sözcük hazinesini geliştirmeye yönelik bir etkinlik önerisi: Tabu. Akademik Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2(5), 617-628.
50. Güngör, A. (2005). Altıncı, yedinci ve sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin okuduğunu anlama stratejilerini kullanma düzeyleri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (28), 101-108.
51. Gürses, T. (2002). Reading strategies employed by elt learners at advanced level. (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Atatürk Üniversitesi, Erzurum.
52. Hall, K., & Browman, H. (1999). Metacognition and reading awareness among samples of nine-year-olds in two cities. Educational Research, 14(1), 167-174.
53. Hamzadayı, E. (2019a). Konuşmaya ilişkin duyuşsal nitelikler. Gökhan Çetinkaya (Ed.). Konuşma ve eğitimi içinde (ss. 140-152). Ankara: PegemA.
54. Hamzadayı, E. (2019b). Üstbilişsel okuma stratejileri kullanım düzeyi ile okuduğunu anlama arasındaki ilişki. S. Karagül (Ed.), Prof. Dr. Sedat Sever’e Armağan-Türkçe Eğitimi ve Çocuk Edebiyatı Kurultayı içinde (ss. 187-192). Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Yayını.
55. Hamzadayı, E. ve Bayat, N. (2015). Yabancılara Türkçe öğretiminde bağlamlaştırma stratejisinin sözcük öğrenimine etkisi. International Journal of Human Sciences, 12(1), 1440-1458. doi: 10.14687/ijhs.v12i1.3213
56. Hiebert, E. H., & Kamil, M. L. (2005). Teaching and learning vocabulary: bringing research to practice. New Jersey, NJ: Erlbaum.
57. Hirsh, D., & Nation, I. S. P. (1992). What vocabulary size is needed to read unsimplified texts for pleasure? Reading in a Foreign Language, 8(2), 689-696.
58. İnce, M. ve Gözütok, F. D. (2017). Türkçe 6, 7 ve 8. sınıf ders kitaplarının PISA okuma becerilerine göre incelenmesi. Turkish Studies, 12(33), 213-225.
59. İnce, Y. (2012). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin türkçe derslerinde kullandıkları okuduğunu anlama stratejileri. (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Uşak Üniversitesi, Uşak.
60. İşeri, K. (1998). Okuma ediminin eğitsel işlevi. TÖMER Dil Dergisi, (70), 5-18.
61. Jalongo, M. R., & Hirsh, R. A. (2010). Understanding reading anxiety: New insights from neuroscience. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37(6), 431-435. doi: 10.1007/s10643-010-0381-5
62. Johnson, D. D., & Pearson, P. D. (1978). Teaching reading vocabulary. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
63. Jordan, L. J. (1969). Education and training of the mentally retarded. Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 21(4), 132-137. doi: 10.1007/s10642-011-0254-5
64. Kanık Uysal, P. ve Bilge, H. (2018). Relationship between reading fluency and level of reading comprehension. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 11 (2), 161-172. doi: 10.26822/iejee.2019248590
65. Karatay, H. (2007). Sözcük öğretimi. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27(1), 141-153.
66. Karatay, H. (2011). Okuma eğitimi kuram ve uygulama (2. baskı). Ankara: Berikan Yayınevi.
67. Kent, S. C., Wanzek, J., & Al Otaiba, S. (2017). Reading instruction for fourth-grade struggling readers and the relation to student outcomes. Reading- Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 33(5), 395-411. doi: 10.1080/10573569.2016.1216342
68. Klare, G. R. (1974). Assessing readability. Reading Research Quarterly, 10(1), 62-102. doi: 10.2307/747086
69. Landers, K. A. (2010). An examination of genre differences. (Unpublished dissertation). The University of Minnesota. Minneapolis.
70. Laufer, B. (1992). How much lexis is necessary for reading comprehension? In P. J. L. Arnaud & H. Béjoint (Eds.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics (pp. 126-132). London: Macmillan.
71. Lehto, E. J., & Anttila, M. (2003). Listening comprehension in primary level grades two, four and six. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47, 133-143. doi: 10.1080/00313830308615
72. Leonard, D. C. (2002). Learning theories: A to z. London: Greenwood Press.
73. Mathson, D. V., Allington, R. L., & Solic, K. L. (2006). Hijacking fluency and instructionally informative assessments. In T. V. Rasinski, C. Blachowicz, & K. Lems (Eds.), Fluency instruction: researchbased best practices (pp. 106-119). New York: The Guilford Press.
74. Milosevic, I., & McCabe, R. (2015). Phobias: the psychology of irrational fear. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood.
75. Moffet, J., & Wagler, B. J. (1976). Student centered language arts and reading K-13: A handbook for teachers. Boston: Cook Publishers.
76. Moorman, K., & Ram, A. (1994). A functional theory of creative reading. Georgia: College and Computing Georgia Institute of Technology.
77. Moreillon, J. (2007). Collaborative strategies for teaching reading comprehension: Maximizing your impact. Chicago: American Library Association.
78. Mulder, H. B. G. W. J. (1996). Training in leesstrategieën: Vorm en rendement. Een onderzoek naar het effect van vier trainingsvarianten op leesvaardigheid Frans als vreemde taal [Instruction in reading strategies. A study into the effects of four instruction methods on reading comprehension in French as a foreign language]. Amsterdam: Meulenhoff Educatief.
79. Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524759
80. Nation, K., & Snowling, M. (1998). Individual differences in contextual facilitation: Evidence from dyslexia and poor reading comprehension. Child Development, 69(4), 996-1011. doi: 10.2307/1132359
81. National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: an evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
82. Özdemir, E. (1983). Okuma sanatı. İstanbul: Varlık Yayınları.
83. Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (1990). How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. In B. F. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 15-51). New Jersey, NJ: Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
84. Paris, S. G., Wasik, B. A., & Turner, J. C. (1996). The development of strategic readers. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.). Handbook of reading research (Vol. II), pp. 609-640). Mahwah, N.J.: Erlhaum.
85. Perrson, U. B. (1994). Readinng for understanding: An emprical contribution to the metacognition of reading comprehension. Sweden: Sweden Linkopin University Press, Department of Education and Psychology.
86. Phakiti, A. (2003). A closer look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to EFL reading achievement test performance. Language Testing, 20(1), 25-56. doi: 10.1191/0265532203lt243oa
87. Phares, E. J. (1976). Locus of control in personality. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
88. Pressley, M. (2002). Metacognition and self regulated comprehension. In A. F. Farstrup, S. J. Samuels (Ed.), What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 291-309). Newrk, DE: International Reading Ass., Inc.
89. Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
90. Pressley, M., & Wharton-McDonald, R. (1997). Skilled comprehension and its development through instruction. School Psychology Review, 26(3), 448-466.
91. Pressley, M., & Harris, K. R. (2012). Cognitive strategies instruction: from basic research to classroom instruction. In Alexander, P. A & Winne, P. H. (Eds). Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 77-94). New Jersey, NY: Taylor and Francis.
92. Proust, M. (2017). Okuma üzerine. (I. Ergüden, çev.). İstanbul: Notos Kitap.
93. Rasinski, T. (2003) Introduction and overview of oral reading. In the fluent reader. New York: Scholastic Professional Books.
94. Rasinski, T. (2009) Fluency: the essential link from phonics to comprehension in essential readings on fluency. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
95. Rasinski, T., & Samuels, S. J. (2011). Reading fluency: What it is and what it is not. In S. Samuels & E. Farstrup (Eds.) What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 94-114). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
96. Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
97. Rotter, J. B. (1954). Social learning and clinical psychology. New York, NY: Johnson Reprint Co.
98. Routman, R. (2003). Reading essentials: The specifics you need to teach reading well. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
99. Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). On evaluating story grammars. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 4, 313-316. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog0403_5
100. Saenz, L. K., & Fuchs, L. S. (2002). Examining the reading difficulty of secondary students with learning disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 31-41. doi: 10.1177/074193250202300105
101. Sainsbury, M., & Schagen, I. (2004). Attitudes to reading at ages nine and eleven. Journal of Research in Reading, 27(4), 373-386. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2004.00240.x
102. Sallı, A. (2002). Teacher’s perceptions of strategy training in reading instruction. (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Bilkent Üniversitesi, Ankara.
103. Samuel, S. J. (2006). Reading fluency. In T. Rasinski, C. Blachowicz, & Lems, K. (Eds.), Fluency instruction (pp. 231-252). The Guilford Press, London.
104. Schiefele, U. (2009). Situational and individual interest. In K.R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 197-222). New York, NY: Routledge.
105. Schmitt, N. (1998). Tracking the incremental acquisition of second language vocabulary: A longitudinal study. Language Learning, 48, 281-31. doi: 10.1111/1467-9922.00042
106. Schmitt, N., & Meara, P. (1997). Researching vocabulary through a word knowledge frame- work: Word associations and verbal suffixes. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 17-37. doi: 10.1017/S0272263197001022
107. Shmais, W. A. (2002). Identifying the metacognitive strategies of arab university students: A case study. An-Najah University Journal for Research, 16(2), 633-661.
108. Sidekli, S. ve Buluç, B. (2006). İlköğretim beşinci sınıf öğrencilerinin okuduğunu anlama becerilerinin karşılaştırılması. Ulusal Sınıf Öğretmenliği Kongresinde sunulan bildiri, Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.
109. Snow, C., Griffin, P., & Burns, S. (2005). Knowledge to support the teaching of reading: preparing teachers for a changing world (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
110. Spearitt, D. (1972). Identification of subskills of reading comprehension by maximum likelihood factor analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 8, 92-111. doi: 10.2307/746983
111. Speece, D. L., Milss, C., Ritchey, K. D., & Hilman, E. (2003). Initial evidence that letter fluency tasks are valid indicators of early rading skill. The Journal of Special Education, 36(4), 223-233. doi: 10.1177/002246690303600403
112. Stahl, S. A. (1998). Four questions about vocabulary knowledge and reading and some answers. In C. Hynd et al. (Ed.), Learning from text across conceptual domains. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
113. Stroud, C. K. (2006). Development of the school motivation and learning strategies inventory. (Unpublished Dissertation). Texas A & M University, Texas.
114. Susar Kırmızı, F. (2006). İlköğretim 4. sınıf Türkçe öğretiminde çoklu zeka kuramına dayalı işbirlikli öğrenme yönteminin erişi, tutumlar, öğrenme stratejileri ve çoklu zeka alanları üzerindeki etkileri. (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, İzmir.
115. Swales, J. M. (1999). Genre analysis: English in academic research settings. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
116. Taylor, E. A. (1958). The fundamental reading skill. Journal of Developmental Reading, 1(4), 21-30. Doi: 10.7586/6584813154
117. Temizkan, M. (2007). İlköğretim ikinci kademe Türkçe derslerinde okuma stratejilerinin okuduğunu anlama üzerindeki etkisi. (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.
118. Temizyürek, F. (2008). The impact of different types of texts on Turkish language reading comprehension at primary school grade eight. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 8(30), 141-152.
119. Topuzkanamış, E. (2009). Öğretmen adaylarının okuduğunu anlama ve okuma stratejilerini kullanma düzeyleri. (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Balıkesir Üniversitesi, Balıkesir.
120. Ülper, H. (2019). Okuma ve anlamlandırma becerilerinin kazandırılması. Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
121. Van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York; NY: Academic.
122. Verhoeven, L., & Perfetti, C. A. (2011). Introduction to this special issue: Vocabulary growth and reading skill. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15(1), 1-7. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2011.536124
123. Wagner, R. K., & Sternberg, R. J. (1987). Executive control in reading comprehension. In B. K. Britton & S. M. Glyn (Eds.), Executive control processes in reading (pp. 1-21). New Jersey, NJ: Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
124. Wallbrown, F. H., Singleton, B. A., & Levine, M. A. (1982). Further evidence concerning the dimensionality of reading attitudes. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 54(3), 1267-1280. doi: 10.2466/pms.1982.54.3c.1267
125. Westhoff, G. J. (1991). Increasing the effectiveness of foreign language reading instruction. ADFL Bulletin, 22(2), 29-36.
126. Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Motivation for reading: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 32(2), 57-58. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.420
127. Wolf, M., & Bowers, P. (1999). The "double-deficit hypothesis" for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of Educational Psychology, 9(1), 1-24. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.415
128. Wolf, M., & Katzir- Cohen, T. (2001). Reading fluency and its intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 211-239. doi: 10.1207/S1532799XSSR0503_2
129. Yıldız, M. (2008). İlköğretim beşinci sınıf öğrencilerinin dinlediğini anlama düzeylerinin metin türleri bakımından karşılaştırılması. Ö. Demirel ve E. Altun (Ed.), VII. Ulusal Sınıf Öğretmenliği Eğitimi Sempozyumu içinde (ss. 135-146). Çanakkale: On Sekiz Mart Üniversitesi.
130. Yussen, S. R., Mathews, S. R., & Hiebert, E. (1982). Metacognitive aspects of reading. In W. Otto & S. White (Eds.), Reading expository material (pp. 189-218). New York, NY: Academic Press.