Your search found 1987 results.

Descriptors:
Undergraduate Students; Online Searching; Internet; Information Seeking; Science and Society; Synthesis; Information Sources; Critical Reading; Conflict; Information Literacy; Reading Comprehension; Memory; Expertise; Health Materials; Information Technology; Foreign Countries

Abstract:
Past research has shown that readers often fail to notice conflicts in text. In our present study we investigated whether accessing information from multiple documents instead of a single document might alleviate this problem by motivating readers to integrate information. We further tested whether this effect would be moderated by source expertise. One hundred undergraduates read the same medical information purportedly written by either medical experts or laypeople, which was presented as one document or spread across four documents. Results revealed partial support for our hypotheses. Readers of multiple documents exhibited superior memory for conflicts and provided a more balanced description of conflicting information in essays they wrote. Variation of author expertise moderated the effect of presentation format in the essay task but not on the memory test. The results extend previous research by showing that multiple documents reading also stimulates the integration of "conflicting" information. (Contains 2 tables and 1 footnote.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Foreign Countries; Undergraduate Students; Information Sources; Critical Reading; Handheld Devices; Telecommunications; Radiation; Research Methodology; Protocol Analysis; Information Utilization; Information Literacy; Value Judgment; Attention; Conflict; Science and Society; Risk Assessment; Reader Text Relationship; Health Materials; Information Technology

Abstract:
This study used think-aloud methodology to explore undergraduates' spontaneous attention to and use of source information while reading six documents that presented conflicting views on a controversial social scientific issue in a Google-like environment. Results showed that students explicitly and implicitly paid attention to sources of documents as well as sources cited within documents and that their attention to source information was associated with its use in evaluating, predicting, and interpreting the content of the documents. Students' sourcing activity varied across documents. The two documents that took the strongest, opposing stances on the controversy elicited the most sourcing. We also observed that, in essays they wrote on the controversy, students' spontaneous sourcing activity was related to their citation of a particularly trustworthy source. The study's theoretical implications are discussed in terms of the Documents Model framework. (Contains 4 tables and 1 figure.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Elementary School Students; Grade 4; Grade 5; Reading Comprehension; Reading Skills; Critical Reading; Information Literacy; Information Sources; Knowledge Level; Reliability; Evaluation Methods; Intervention; Elementary Education; Control Groups; Training; Foreign Countries

Abstract:
In two experiments, we examined fourth and fifth graders' comprehension of the source of information in texts presenting controversial issues. In Experiment 1, participants read short texts in which two people presented different arguments regarding an issue. Participants identified who said what and evaluated each source's knowledge of the issue. Most students correctly identified the source of information but failed to take into account each source's characteristics when determining who was most knowledgeable. In Experiment 2, we implemented an intervention on students' evaluations of information sources. Less skilled students in the intervention group assessed source knowledge more accurately than those in a control group. We conclude that elementary school students' comprehension of who says what in a text can benefit from training sessions that involve practice, feedback, explanations, and discussions. We consider the implications for document-based learning in elementary and secondary education. (Contains 5 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Information Seeking; Science and Society; Information Sources; Critical Reading; Information Literacy; Reading Comprehension; Reader Text Relationship; Synthesis; Prior Learning; Schemata (Cognition); Reliability; Conflict; Bias; Models; Foreign Countries

Abstract:
When reading multiple texts about controversial scientific issues, learners must construct a coherent mental representation of the issue based on conflicting information that can be more or less belief-consistent. The present experiment investigated the effects of text-belief consistency on the situation model and memory for text. Students read four texts about a scientific controversy. Learners' situation model was biased towards their beliefs when belief-consistent and belief-inconsistent texts were presented block-by-block. When the texts were presented alternatingly, situation models for belief-consistent and belief-inconsistent texts were equally strong. Moreover, the text base was better for belief-inconsistent texts. These results support the idea that prior beliefs influence the processing of conflicting information in multiple texts differently on the level of the situation model and on the propositional text base. A more balanced situation model of scientific controversies can be promoted by presenting belief-consistent and belief-inconsistent texts in an alternating sequence. (Contains 5 tables, 2 figures and 1 footnote.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Cognitive Processes; Information Literacy; Synthesis; Epistemology; Influence of Technology; Technological Advancement; Information Technology; Research Needs; Intellectual Disciplines; Metadata; Decision Making Skills; Reputation; Authors; Value Judgment; Information Sources; Critical Reading; Information Utilization

Abstract:
New media, new knowledge practices, and concepts point to the need for greater understanding of cognitive processes underlying knowledge acquisition and generation in open informational worlds. The authors of the articles in this special issue address cognitive and instructional challenges surrounding multiple document comprehension--a prerequisite of digital literacy and knowledge work in the information age. In this article, we raise issues of conceptual clarity regarding constructs such as "source" and "document", and discuss work in disciplinary literacy and knowledge-building communities to clarify uses of information resources to support knowledge creation. The discussion aims to (a) provide insights into the cognitive and social practices needed for students to manage, understand, apply, and create knowledge and (b) suggest research directions to advance these goals. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
State Standards; Literacy; Reading Instruction; Critical Reading; Federal Legislation; Academic Standards; Educational Legislation; Writing Skills; Student Responsibility; Time on Task

Abstract:
Schools in the United States are making curricular changes from kindergarten through college to meet the Common Core State Standards' demands for higher expectations in reading and writing. As they make these important changes, however, they need not overturn all that they learned about effective reading pedagogy during No Child Left Behind (NCLB). It is better to think of the Common Core movement not as a reversal of NCLB, but as the next step on a journey toward close, critical reading and powerful writing. Part of No Child Left Behind's legacy is the understanding that certain skills (such as knowing letter names and sounds and decoding unknown words) are foundational to more advanced skills (such as reading critically and writing compellingly). Students need to learn the underlying, consistent patterns of written words. In plain talk, they need to crack the code. Schools must remember such basic skills as they move into the Common Core era, in which deeper learning and more advanced literacy assume a prominent role. Achieving these higher goals is where No Child Left Behind comes up short. Although NCLB has successfully focused educators' efforts on making sure that all students have basic literacy skills, it has not produced the thoughtful, critical readers and writers educators desire. By going beyond NCLB's fascination with the basics, schools can transform the literacy curriculum into what they wanted in the first place: a systematic effort to develop engaged and powerful readers, writers, and thinkers. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Student Evaluation; State Standards; Academic Standards; Elementary Secondary Education; Critical Reading; Reading Skills; Reading Instruction

Abstract:
"A significant body of research links the close reading of complex text--whether the student is a struggling reader or advanced--to significant gains in reading proficiency and finds close reading to be a key component of college and career readiness" (Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, 2011, p. 7). When the author read this statement in the content frameworks of one of the consortia now creating assessments for the Common Core State Standards, she was frankly a little insulted. "Of course" she teaches students to read closely--both her university students and younger students, through her literacy consultant work. But on closer examination, she realized she may not be encouraging students to read closely enough to meet the expectations set by these standards. Exactly what do the Common Core standards mean by close reading? And what principles and practices should guide educators as they implement close reading in the classroom--particularly in elementary classrooms? Much of the available information about close reading centers on secondary schools, where this skill seems to fit most comfortably. By the time students are in these later grades, they are more inclined to think abstractly. They read complicated texts by great authors that beg for careful analysis. But close reading can't wait until 7th grade or junior year in high school. It needs to find its niche in kindergarten and the years just beyond if educators mean to build the habits of mind that will lead all students to deep understanding of text. (Contains 1 figure.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
History Instruction; Intellectual Disciplines; Differences; Content Area Reading; Reading Comprehension; Teaching Methods; Inferences; Language Usage; Sociolinguistics; Elementary Education; Reading Skills; Grade 4; Historians; Primary Sources; Critical Reading

Abstract:
Teachers can engage students in historical thinking by intentionally structuring close reading tasks. This article provides a practical and theoretical examination of the learning and teaching during a 30-minute social studies class in which students studied colonization by reading a primary source text from the Jamestown Colony. Students used inference as a tool first to explain the literal meaning of the text (explanatory inference) and then to elaborate on that literal meaning to develop their historical ideas (elaborative inference). Also, an inquiry-based teaching method called "critical exploration" was used in this class and is described in practical terms. (Contains 35 notes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Literacy; Teaching Methods; Speech Communication; Writing Processes; Seminars; Coaching (Performance); Academic Standards; State Standards; Critical Reading; Learner Engagement; Difficulty Level; Middle School Students; Thinking Skills

Abstract:
The Common Core initiative calls for implementing fewer, tougher standards for literacy instruction. Seen from a student's perspective, the standards ask a lot in terms of effort and focus. Educators have to ask themselves, How can they motivate students to care enough about what they read and write to put in the hard work necessary to meet these higher standards? Spoken dialogue offers one key. According to the authors, this point was brought home to them in 2010 when they interviewed Melissa Hedt, the literacy coach at Asheville Middle School in Asheville, North Carolina. Melissa had been piloting 6th grade Common Core instructional units that they had developed in partnership with the Literacy Design Collaborative. The units featured a Paideia seminar--a formal, text-based dialogue--as well as extensive practice in close reading and the writing process. Their conversation with Melissa gave them new insight into the role of formal discussion in classrooms that help students meet the standards. Because the Common Core standards include explicit anchor standards for speaking and listening, they had already been arguing that faithful implementation of the standards must include formal classroom dialogue. Now, they began to realize that practice in speaking and listening might also be the key to engaging students in more rigorous reading and writing. This article illustrates how Paideia seminars support the Common Core anchor standards for speaking and listening. (Contains 2 endnotes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Ecology; Environmental Education; Critical Reading; Teaching Methods; Social Influences; World Problems; Social Values

Abstract:
The aim of the paper is to make a critical reading of ecocentrism and its meta-scientific use of ecology. First, basic assumptions of ecocentrism will be examined, which involve nature's intrinsic value, postmodern and modern positions in ecocentrism, and the subject-object dichotomy under the lenses of ecocentrism. Then, we will discuss implications for environmental education and ecology education including a contradistinction between the instrumental and the emancipatory approach and the study of socio-scientific issues. An outline of protected areas as a socio-scientific issue, which is informed by the emancipatory approach, will be presented in the final part of the paper. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website