Cited by 2Reading and Literacy DevelopmentEducational Assessment and PedagogyEducational Methods and Analysis

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

THE INSTRUCTIONAL COHERENCE OF READING LESSONS IN SEVEN BASAL READER SERIES

Reutzel, D. Ray, Daines, Delva·1987·Reading Psychology

Abstract

This study was conducted to determine the instructional coherence of randomly selected reading lessons in seven basal reading series. Instructional coherence was described as “a structure which logically links instructional components of a reading lesson to one another in an organized manner.” For the analyses, 210 instructional units were randomly selected from seven basal reading series from grades 1‐6. A procedure and instrument were developed by the researchers to analyze the basals. Three raters were trained to analyze the basals. Initially, 10 units were analyzed by the three raters to check for agreement. Regression analyses and least square mean differences in the ratings for each item were checked. More training and conferencing was conducted until significant differences among raters’ ratings were eradicated. The basals were examined for explicit links in the teachers’ manuals among the traditionally accepted lesson parts: vocabulary introduction, story introduction, the story, story questions, skill lessons and enrichment. Findings indicated that each instructional unit was composed of several self‐contained mini lessons rather than representing an integrated and related unit for instruction organized around a central purpose. Lesson parts failed to make logical connections to previous or following lesson parts. It was concluded that the nature of reading lessons could be a contributing factor to the instructional “flitting” observed by Durkin (1984) in her classroom observational studies. Implications stemming from the findings were delinated for teachers, text adoption committees and publishers.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/0270271870080105

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 8 · Cited by 2

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Armbruster B., 1985, Reading Education: Foundations for a Literate America, 47
  2. 10.2307/747566 · DOI
  3. Daines D., 1982, Reading in the Content Areas: Strategies for Teachers
  4. Duffy G. G., 1981, Theory into practice: How does it work in real classrooms?
  5. 10.1598/RRQ.14.4.2 · DOI
  6. 10.2307/747314 · DOI
  7. Durkin D., 1984, The Reading Teacher, 37, 734
  8. Durkin D., 1985, Reading Education: Foundations for a Literate America, 3
  9. 10.1080/10862968009547385 · DOI
  10. Moe A. J., 9186, Understanding and Teaching Cohesion Comprehension, 3

Metadata

Authors
Reutzel, D. R., & Daines, D.
Affiliations
Brigham Young University (US)
Venue
Reading Psychology
Published
1987-01
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
33-44
ISSN
  • 0270-2711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1521-0685
OpenAlex
W2053084076
Cited by
2
References
8
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Reading Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Methods and Analysis
Keywords
basal readers, reading lessons, instructional coherence, lesson structure, mini-lessons, vocabulary teaching, teacher's guide, early reading instruction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: THE INSTRUCTIONAL COHERENCE OF READING LESSONS IN SEVEN BASAL READER SERIES. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/0270271870080105
The paper
Reutzel, D. R., & Daines, D. (1987). THE INSTRUCTIONAL COHERENCE OF READING LESSONS IN SEVEN BASAL READER SERIES. Reading Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/0270271870080105