2014
DOI: 10.1080/19388071.2014.968301
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Emergent Readers’ Social Interaction Styles and Their Comprehension Processes During Buddy Reading

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
6
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, we code children’s use of features and monitoring during buddy reading but not the kinds of dialogic talk or comprehension talk in which children engage. Given the benefits of dialogic talk (Mercer & Howe, 2012), future research might explore whether or how buddy reading behaviors, such as text-based, extra-textual, and higher order talk that have been identified in previous qualitative research (Brown, 2016; Christ, Wang, & Chiu, 2015), may be related to subsequent individual reading behaviors and outcomes. Unfortunately, doing this kind of analysis justice is not possible, in addition to our main research focus, given the space limitations of this article.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, we code children’s use of features and monitoring during buddy reading but not the kinds of dialogic talk or comprehension talk in which children engage. Given the benefits of dialogic talk (Mercer & Howe, 2012), future research might explore whether or how buddy reading behaviors, such as text-based, extra-textual, and higher order talk that have been identified in previous qualitative research (Brown, 2016; Christ, Wang, & Chiu, 2015), may be related to subsequent individual reading behaviors and outcomes. Unfortunately, doing this kind of analysis justice is not possible, in addition to our main research focus, given the space limitations of this article.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This explanation is supported by Pan and Wu's (2013) assertion that learning EFL reading requires more interaction. It is also supported by a number of studies that found that instruction that incorporates social interaction about text increases students' reading comprehension (e. g., Christ, Wang, & Chiu, 2015;Gambrell, Hughes, Calvert, Malloy, & Igo, 2011).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…Partner reading may support meaning making so well because when students share their thoughts out loud, they become an external object that both readers can discuss and reflect upon. This, in turn, may serve to provide access to alternative understandings and opportunities to engage in comprehension processes and think critically about text (e.g., “buddy reading,” Christ & Wang, 2012; Christ et al, 2015; Flint, 2010), including texts that are challenging (Topping, 2014). During partner reading, students typically focus on learning from texts and co‐constructing knowledge, which can lead to positive academic growth (e.g., Flint, 2010).…”
Section: Partner Readingmentioning
confidence: 99%