The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Reading Growth in High-Poverty Classrooms: The Influence of Teacher Practices That Encourage Cognitive Engagement in Literacy Learning
Abstract
In this study we investigated the effects of teaching on students' reading achievement. More specifically, based on a framework of reading instruction maximizing students' cognitive engagement in literacy learning, curricular and teaching variables, including aspects of word-recognition and comprehension instruction, approaches to teaching such as telling versus coaching, and the enabling of students' active versus passive responding to literacy activities, were investigated to explain growth on reading comprehension, fluency, and writing measures over a school year in grade 1-5 classrooms. Participants included 88 teachers and 9 randomly selected students per classroom in 9 high-poverty schools across the United States that were engaged in a literacy instruction reform project. Teachers were observed 3 times across the school year during a reading lesson. Hierarchical linear modeling showed that a number of teaching variables explained substantial variation in student growth on several measures of reading achievement. Looking across all of the data, the most consistent finding was that teachers who emphasized higher-order thinking, either through the questions they asked or the tasks they assigned, promoted greater reading growth among the 9 target students in their classrooms. We examine the results of our work in relation to a framework of teacher effectiveness maximizing students' cognitive engagement in literacy learning.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cited by
Pianta, R. C., & Hamre, B. K. (2009) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x09332374 · Cited by 1,331
Seidel, T., & Shavelson, R. J. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654307310317 · Cited by 1,259
Back to the Future: Directions for Research in Teaching and Teacher Education
Grossman, P., & McDonald, M. (2008) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/0002831207312906 · Cited by 1,164
Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K., & Allen, J. P. (2012) · Handbook of Research on Student Engagement · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_17 · Cited by 1,055
Professional development in early childhood programs: Process issues and research needs
Sheridan, S. M., Edwards, C. P., Marvin, C. A., & Knoche, L. L. (2009) · Early Education and Development · doi:10.1080/10409280802582795 · Cited by 537
Metadata
- Authors
- Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Peterson, D. S., & Rodriguez, M. C.
- Venue
- The Elementary School Journal
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2003-09
- Volume
- 104
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-28
- ISSN
- 0013-5984 (ISSN-L)
- 1554-8279
- OpenAlex
- W2028098350
- Cited by
- 352
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Reading Growth in High-Poverty Classrooms: The Influence of Teacher Practices That Encourage Cognitive Engagement in Literacy Learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/499740
- The paper
- Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Peterson, D. S., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2003). Reading Growth in High-Poverty Classrooms: The Influence of Teacher Practices That Encourage Cognitive Engagement in Literacy Learning. The Elementary School Journal. https://doi.org/10.1086/499740
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.