Successful reading comprehension demands complex cognitive skills, and, consequently, motivation to make meaning from text. Research on reading motivation and engagement can inform policy aimed at improving reading achievement. Multiple dimensions of reading motivation and engagement—and instructional practices for bolstering each one—draw on interventions for students of diverse language and ethnic backgrounds in elementary and middle grade classrooms. The article concludes with policy recommendations centering on (a) the need for school administrators and teachers to learn principles of reading motivation and engagement and (b) the importance of devoting time to planning, in collaboration with researchers, how to apply these principles with particular students in particular classrooms.

No abstract

No abstract

The simple view of reading describes reading as the product of decoding (D) and listening comprehension (LC). However, the simple view of reading has been challenged, and evidence has proved it to be too simple to explain the complexities of reading comprehension in the elementary school years. Hypotheses have been advanced that there are cognitive-linguistic factors that underlie the common variance between D and LC, which are malleable, although there is no clarity at this point regarding what these are. We propose that one such group of malleable cognitive factors is executive function (EF) skills. Further, we posit that EF skills play equally strong roles in explaining reading comprehension variance in emergent bilinguals and English monolinguals. We used multigroup structural equation modeling to determine the contribution of these constructs (D, LC, and EF) to reading comprehension in 425 emergent bilinguals and 302 English monolinguals in grades 2-4. The shared variance between D and LC was explained by direct and indirect effects in the models tested, with strong indirect effects for the EFs of cognitive flexibility and working memory through D and LC, respectively, for both language groups. The indirect effect of cognitive flexibility through LC on reading comprehension was considerably larger for emergent bilinguals than for English monolinguals. Considerations for a more nuanced view of the simple view of reading and its implications for practice are discussed. P ublic discourse surrounding the science of reading has emphasized the simple view of reading (SVR; Gough & Tunmer, 1986) as a guiding framework for research under the Reading for Understanding initiative in the last decade (e.g.,

No abstract

No abstract

Reading comprehension is an incredibly complex, purposeful activity that involves simultaneous orchestration and integration of multiple processes. However, dominant perspectives suggest that two clusters of skills, word reading and language comprehension, account for successful reading. Such two‐factor models are problematic because they do not easily account for complexities in reading comprehension processes or for contributions to reading comprehension of other individual difference variables related to the purposeful nature of reading, such as executive functions (EFs) and intrinsic motivation. Further, simple models may lead to oversimplification of research questions, curricula, and instructional practices, causing researchers and educators to miss important contributors to reading comprehension necessary for students to develop into skilled readers. In this study, the authors assessed the unique contributions of EFs, both domain‐general and reading‐specific, and cognitive intrinsic motivation (i.e., the desire to engage in effortful cognitive activities) to reading comprehension in 122 university students beyond language comprehension and word‐reading skills. Findings confirm unique contributions of cognitive intrinsic motivation and reading‐specific EF to students’ reading comprehension beyond established predictors and domain‐general EFs. Findings also suggest complexities, such as impacts of language comprehension on word reading, as well as impacts of cognitive intrinsic motivation on both language and reading comprehension, that should be considered in theory and practice. Finally, because reading‐specific EF contributed to reading comprehension directly and indirectly beyond controls, these findings underscore the importance of applying knowledge of EF to specific reading processes to better support students who struggle to understand text.

Previous studies offer mixed evidence regarding whether a unified model of reading comprehension predictors applies to Dual Language Learners (DLLs) and English Speakers (ESs), or whether distinctive models across language groups are empirically supported. The present study adds another dimension to this body of work by examining multiple reading engagement and motivation predictors alongside cognitive predictors of reading comprehension. The participants-188 DLLs and 166 ESs in the fourth and fifth grades-completed measures of word identification, linguistic comprehension, cognitive strategy use, internal motivation, and extrinsic motivation, and their teachers rated their reading engagement. Language status did not moderate the relations of any predictors with either concurrent reading comprehension performance or growth of reading comprehension across the school year, supporting a unified model of reading comprehension for DLLs and ESs. Word identification and linguistic comprehension showed the strongest relations with concurrent reading comprehension and growth. While the role of reading engagement was less prominent, it was demonstrated to be a plausible partial mediator of the relation of word identification with concurrent reading comprehension.