听障学生阅读理解中的策略运用及其眼动特点研究
|
摘要
阅读策略是学习策略的重要组成部分,也是当前阅读研究领域的主要热点之一。能否有效地使用阅读策略,是实现流畅阅读的必要条件,也是判断一名读者阅读能力强弱的重要标志。在阅读策略研究中,多以健听学生为对象,针对听障学生的较少；而且对阅读策略的认识仍然比较零乱,未能形成整体观点。本研究从阅读理解过程的实质入手,从阅读策略与学习策略的关系出发,对听障学生阅读策略的构成体系、运用状况以及在运用过程中的眼动特点等问题进行了探讨和考察,目的在于了解不同类型听障学生在阅读策略运用方面的差异,以期能为教育实践提供指导。
本研究主要包含三个部分：研究一以发展有效的听障学生阅读策略评价工具为出发点,系统构建了针对听障学生阅读策略的架构体系；研究二结合自编的测评工具,通过对不同年级、不同性别听障学生的比较分析,了解听障学生阅读策略的发展水平和趋势,揭示不同类型听障学生在阅读策略运用中的特点；研究三借助眼动追踪技术,在不影响听障学生自然阅读状态的情况下,通过对相关眼动指标的提取,了解不同阅读策略运用倾向和眼球运动模式之间的关系,藉由眼球运动指标揭示听障学生在不同阅读条件下的信息处理历程。
本研究的结果可以概括为以下几个方面：
(1)听障学生的阅读策略是一个多元化的、多层次的复合结构,其基本构成体系中包含认知策略、元认知策略、资源管理策略三个维度。其中,认知策略又包含复述、精制、组织策略等类型,元认知策略包含计划、监控、调节三种类型,资源管理策略包含时间资源管理、环境资源管理和情意资源管理等。
(2)本研究自编了听障学生阅读策略问卷。通过多种方法的检验表明,该问卷具有较好的内部一致性信度、重测信度、稳定性信度,具有良好的内容效度和结构效度。因此,听障学生阅读策略问卷是可靠的,并且是有效的,可以用来评估听障学生在阅读理解过程中的策略运用水平。
(3)听力障碍学生在阅读过程中策略运用的整体水平偏低,大多数学生在平时的阅读过程中并不善于使用阅读策略；在各类阅读策略中,听障学生用的最多的三种策略为复述策略、调节策略、情意资源管理策略；而用的最少的三种策略依次为监控策略、计划策略和组织策略；在不同年级层次上,大学阶段听障学生的策略运用水平明显优于高中阶段和初中阶段学生,特别是在元认知策略方面,高中阶段是听障学生策略发展的关键时间；听障女生策略运用的总体水平优于听障男生。
(4)不同阅读策略运用倾向的听障学生在阅读过程中表现出不同的眼动模式。总体说来,高阅读策略组学生在阅读过程中对阅读材料的注视次数少、眼跳距离大、回视少。在快速阅读条件下,高策略组学生能灵活地调整眼动模式,通过减少注视次数、增大眼跳距离来适应阅读要求,保证阅读效率,但低策略组听障学生在这方面的能力较差。
(5)较之低策略组听障学生,高策略组学生被试表现出更强的对阅读材料的预期能力(自上而下加工的能力)。他们能够相对主动地根据阅读材料提供的信息去预测和理解文章内容,建立对阅读材料的预期。在阅读理解中,高阅读策略组听障学生还表现出比低策略组被试更好的理解监控能力,特别在对逻辑型错误的觉察方面明显优于低策略组听障学生,显示出他们更强的构建文章心理表征的能力。
Reading strategy is an important part of learning strategies; it has also been one of the hot topics in the domain of reading research. Ability to effectively use reading strategies is a necessary condition for achieving fluency read, as well as the important symbol for judgement of one's reading ability. There are many researches about general students' reading strategies, but few on those who are deaf And the explanations about reading strategies are scattered too, which haven't formed an integrated one. Starting from the process of reading comprehension, as well as the relationship of reading strategy and learning strategy, this research make a series of studies on hearing impaired students' reading strategy, in which the using status, developmental traits and eye movement characters are investigated thoroughly. We aim at knowing the differences of the reading strategies among different types of hearing impaired student, then guiding educational practice.
This research consists of three parts:in study one, Starting from the relationship of reading strategy and learning strategy as well as the interview to some hearing impaired students, we constructed a system of deaf students' reading strategies. On the base of this, we developed a questionare for the estimation of them. In study two, we investigated the development level of reading strategy in deaf students by using the tool we designed in study one. At the same time, we compared the different traits in different grades and different gender. In study three, we explored the eye movement feature of the hearing impaired students, with the aim of revealing their information process in the using of reading strategies.
The results of this study can be summarized as follows:
(1) Hearing impaired students' reading strategy is a diversified, multi-layered composite structure, which contains cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies and resource management strategies. the cognitive strategies include reciting, elaboration and organization, the metacognitive strategies include planning, monitoring and adjusting, the third type strategies—resource management strategies, include time resource management, environmental resource management and affective resource management.
(2) We designed a reading strategy questionnaire of deaf students. Through many experiments, the reliability and validity of the tool were tested. It can be confirmed that this questionnaire has good internal consistency reliability, test-retest reliability and stability reliability, as well as the structure and content validity. Due to these characteristics, it could be employed to estimate the using level of reading strategies of deaf students.
(3) The results indicated that Dead students' overall usage level of strategies is low, most students are not good at using reading strategies; in all types of reading strategies above, the hearing impaired students make the most use of reciting, adjusting and affective resource management. Least of planning, monitoring and organization. From the result, we can also see that the college deaf students show much more profitable strategies than high school and junior school students, especially in the use of metacognitive strategies. And the girls show more profitable strategies than boys.
(4) Different hearing impaired students show different eye movement patterns in their using of strategies. In briefly, students who show much more profitable strategies have less times of fixation and long distance of saccadic, their regressive times during the reading is fewer too. At the fast reading condition, these students can adjust their eye movement pattern flexibility, by reducing the fixation frequency, increasing saccade distance to accommodate the reading requirements, but students with low strategies show less ability of this.
(5) Compared with the students who showed less reading strategies, the higher strategy group was found shown stronger expectations on the experimental materials. This means they have better abilities in top to down processing. During the reading, they can promote their understanding by establishing an expectation on the text. The result of experiment 3 also indicated that the deaf students with good reading strategies were better in comprehension monitoring, especially in the awareness of the logical error, it showed their better mental representation ability.
本研究主要包含三个部分：研究一以发展有效的听障学生阅读策略评价工具为出发点,系统构建了针对听障学生阅读策略的架构体系；研究二结合自编的测评工具,通过对不同年级、不同性别听障学生的比较分析,了解听障学生阅读策略的发展水平和趋势,揭示不同类型听障学生在阅读策略运用中的特点；研究三借助眼动追踪技术,在不影响听障学生自然阅读状态的情况下,通过对相关眼动指标的提取,了解不同阅读策略运用倾向和眼球运动模式之间的关系,藉由眼球运动指标揭示听障学生在不同阅读条件下的信息处理历程。
本研究的结果可以概括为以下几个方面：
(1)听障学生的阅读策略是一个多元化的、多层次的复合结构,其基本构成体系中包含认知策略、元认知策略、资源管理策略三个维度。其中,认知策略又包含复述、精制、组织策略等类型,元认知策略包含计划、监控、调节三种类型,资源管理策略包含时间资源管理、环境资源管理和情意资源管理等。
(2)本研究自编了听障学生阅读策略问卷。通过多种方法的检验表明,该问卷具有较好的内部一致性信度、重测信度、稳定性信度,具有良好的内容效度和结构效度。因此,听障学生阅读策略问卷是可靠的,并且是有效的,可以用来评估听障学生在阅读理解过程中的策略运用水平。
(3)听力障碍学生在阅读过程中策略运用的整体水平偏低,大多数学生在平时的阅读过程中并不善于使用阅读策略；在各类阅读策略中,听障学生用的最多的三种策略为复述策略、调节策略、情意资源管理策略；而用的最少的三种策略依次为监控策略、计划策略和组织策略；在不同年级层次上,大学阶段听障学生的策略运用水平明显优于高中阶段和初中阶段学生,特别是在元认知策略方面,高中阶段是听障学生策略发展的关键时间；听障女生策略运用的总体水平优于听障男生。
(4)不同阅读策略运用倾向的听障学生在阅读过程中表现出不同的眼动模式。总体说来,高阅读策略组学生在阅读过程中对阅读材料的注视次数少、眼跳距离大、回视少。在快速阅读条件下,高策略组学生能灵活地调整眼动模式,通过减少注视次数、增大眼跳距离来适应阅读要求,保证阅读效率,但低策略组听障学生在这方面的能力较差。
(5)较之低策略组听障学生,高策略组学生被试表现出更强的对阅读材料的预期能力(自上而下加工的能力)。他们能够相对主动地根据阅读材料提供的信息去预测和理解文章内容,建立对阅读材料的预期。在阅读理解中,高阅读策略组听障学生还表现出比低策略组被试更好的理解监控能力,特别在对逻辑型错误的觉察方面明显优于低策略组听障学生,显示出他们更强的构建文章心理表征的能力。
Reading strategy is an important part of learning strategies; it has also been one of the hot topics in the domain of reading research. Ability to effectively use reading strategies is a necessary condition for achieving fluency read, as well as the important symbol for judgement of one's reading ability. There are many researches about general students' reading strategies, but few on those who are deaf And the explanations about reading strategies are scattered too, which haven't formed an integrated one. Starting from the process of reading comprehension, as well as the relationship of reading strategy and learning strategy, this research make a series of studies on hearing impaired students' reading strategy, in which the using status, developmental traits and eye movement characters are investigated thoroughly. We aim at knowing the differences of the reading strategies among different types of hearing impaired student, then guiding educational practice.
This research consists of three parts:in study one, Starting from the relationship of reading strategy and learning strategy as well as the interview to some hearing impaired students, we constructed a system of deaf students' reading strategies. On the base of this, we developed a questionare for the estimation of them. In study two, we investigated the development level of reading strategy in deaf students by using the tool we designed in study one. At the same time, we compared the different traits in different grades and different gender. In study three, we explored the eye movement feature of the hearing impaired students, with the aim of revealing their information process in the using of reading strategies.
The results of this study can be summarized as follows:
(1) Hearing impaired students' reading strategy is a diversified, multi-layered composite structure, which contains cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies and resource management strategies. the cognitive strategies include reciting, elaboration and organization, the metacognitive strategies include planning, monitoring and adjusting, the third type strategies—resource management strategies, include time resource management, environmental resource management and affective resource management.
(2) We designed a reading strategy questionnaire of deaf students. Through many experiments, the reliability and validity of the tool were tested. It can be confirmed that this questionnaire has good internal consistency reliability, test-retest reliability and stability reliability, as well as the structure and content validity. Due to these characteristics, it could be employed to estimate the using level of reading strategies of deaf students.
(3) The results indicated that Dead students' overall usage level of strategies is low, most students are not good at using reading strategies; in all types of reading strategies above, the hearing impaired students make the most use of reciting, adjusting and affective resource management. Least of planning, monitoring and organization. From the result, we can also see that the college deaf students show much more profitable strategies than high school and junior school students, especially in the use of metacognitive strategies. And the girls show more profitable strategies than boys.
(4) Different hearing impaired students show different eye movement patterns in their using of strategies. In briefly, students who show much more profitable strategies have less times of fixation and long distance of saccadic, their regressive times during the reading is fewer too. At the fast reading condition, these students can adjust their eye movement pattern flexibility, by reducing the fixation frequency, increasing saccade distance to accommodate the reading requirements, but students with low strategies show less ability of this.
(5) Compared with the students who showed less reading strategies, the higher strategy group was found shown stronger expectations on the experimental materials. This means they have better abilities in top to down processing. During the reading, they can promote their understanding by establishing an expectation on the text. The result of experiment 3 also indicated that the deaf students with good reading strategies were better in comprehension monitoring, especially in the awareness of the logical error, it showed their better mental representation ability.
引文
[1]白学军,沈德立.不同年级学生读课文时眼睛注视方式的研究.心理科学,1996,19(1)：6-9.
[2]白学军,沈德立.初学阅读者和熟练阅读者阅读课文时眼动特征的比较研究,心理发展与教育,1995(2)：1-7.
[3]曹锋.朱曼殊.儿童阅读理解监察能力的初步研究,1989(6)：20-26.
[4]陈明蕾、柯华葳,文体难易度对中文儿童在线阅读表征层次之影响：来自眼球移动的证据.2006.http://lrn.ncu.edu.tw/Teacher%20Web/hwawei/Chinese%20Research.html
[5]陈向阳,戴吉.初中生元认知阅读策略训练效应的实验研究.心理科学,2007,30(5)：1099-1103.
[6]戴海崎,张峰,陈雪枫.心理与教育测量.广州：暨南大学出版社,1999年.
[7]杜晓新.阅读中认知策略及元认知策略相关及实验研究.心理科学,1997(20)：166-167.
[8]杜晓新,冯震.元认知与学习策略北京.人民教育出版社,1999.
[9]杜晓新,宋永宁,黄昭鸣.组织结构图标记对文本整体信息理解与保持的影响.心理科学,2006(5)：1101-1103.
[10]杜晓新,宋永宁,黄昭鸣.聋校中、高年级语文阅读教学中组织策略训练的实验研究.中国听力语言康复科学杂志,2008(4)：42-44.
[11]龚少英,刘华山.中学生阅读理解元认知的发展研究.心理科学,2003(6)：11-19.
[12]韩雪屏.语文教育的心理学原理.上海：上海教育出版社,2001年.
[13]贺荟中。聋生与听力正常学生语篇理解过程的认知比较.华东师范大学博士研究生学位论文,2003年.
[14]何文明.聋生语文学习情况调查研究.中国特殊教育,2001(1)：45-47.
[15]何先友,莫雷.文本标记效应研究综述.心理学动态,2000,8(3)：37-41.
[16]柯华葳.中文阅读历程成分分析：儿童在阅读理解上的困难。第五届世界华语语文教学研讨会论文集,1998：399-405.
[17]李伟健.学习困难学生阅读理解监视的实验研究.心理与行为研究,2004(1)：346-350.
[18]李姿德、林芃娟.交互教学法对增进听觉障碍学生阅读理解能力之研究.特殊教育与复健学报,2003(11)：127-152.
[19]林宝贵、黄玉枝.听障学生国语文能力及错误类型之分析.特殊教育研究学刊,1997(15)：109-129.
[20]林宝贵、李真贤.听觉障碍学生国语文能力之研究.教育学院学报,1987(1)：1-49.
[21]刘电芝.学习策略研究.北京：人民教育出版社,1999年.
[22]刘电芝,黄希庭.学习策略研究概述.教育研究,2002(2)：78-82.
[23]刘儒德.论学习策略的实质.心理科学,1997(2)：179-181.
[24]莫雷.阅读预期对快速阅读理解影响的实验研究.心理科学,1999(3)：197-201.
[25]莫雷.初中三年级学生语文阅读能力结构的因素分析研究.心理学报.1990(1)：41-50.
[26]绮宝香.听觉障碍学生阅读理解能力之分析.特殊教育学报,2000(14)：155-187.
[27]秦宁箴.组织策略训练对7年级聋生阅读效果影响的实验研究.华东师范大学硕士学位论文,2008年.
[28]宋曜廷,黄嵘生,苏宜芬,张国恩.具多重策略的阅读理解辅助系统之设计与应用。发表于第四届华人心理学家学术研讨会,台北,2002.
[29]宋永宁,杜晓新,黄昭鸣.聋生段落、篇章阅读中标记效应的实验研究.中国特殊教育,2006,69(10)：17-19.
[30]沈德立主编.学生汉语阅读过程的眼动研究.北京：教育科学出版社,2001.
[31]陶云,申继亮,沈德立.中小学生阅读图文课文的眼动实验研究.心理科学,2003(2)：199-203.
[32]阎国利,眼动分析法在心理学研究中的应用,天津：天津教育出版社,1998.
[33]阎国利,阅读发展心理学.合肥：安徽教育出版社,2004年.
[34]杨飞燕.听障高中生阅读能力现状调查及其思考.南京师范大学教育硕士专业学位论文,2006年.
[35]杨七平.聋职校阅读课文的“七步法”教学模式.中国特殊教育,2003(3)：46-48.
[36]杨双、刘翔平等.阅读理解困难儿童的理解监控特点.中国特殊教育.2006(4)：53-57.
[37]袁茵.听觉障碍小学生汉语阅读能力研究.辽宁师范大学博士学位论文,2004年.
[38]袁茵、杨旭.听觉障碍学生阅读训练模式评介.中国特殊教育,2004(1)：40-43.
[39]王晓平、吴庆麟、胡艳萍.小学四年级叙述文阅读理解策略教学的实验研究.心理科学,2008,31(5)：1245-1247.
[40张必隐.阅读心理学(修订版).北京：北京师范大学出版社,2004年.
[41]张蓓莉.听觉障碍学生之语言能力研究.特殊教育研究学刊,1989(5)：165-204.
[42]张蓓莉.回归主流听觉障碍学生之语言能力研究.特殊教育研究学刊,1987(3)：119-134.
[43]张大均、余林.文章结构分析训练对阅读理解水平影响的实验研究.心理科学,1998(2)：136-139.
[44张向葵.图式理论在小学语文阅读理解中的应用及其对语文学习成绩的影响.心理科学,1999(2).
[45]曾世杰.听觉障碍学生中文字或词辨识之转录研究.国立台湾师范大学特殊教育研究所硕士论文,1988年.
[46]曾祥敏.国外近十年阅读策略训练研究述评.西南交通大学学报(社会科学版),2008(4)：87-93.
[47]曾祥芹主编.阅读学新论.北京：语文出版社,2005年.
[48]周国韬、郭忠根.初中生语文阅读精加工策略的训练研究.心理科学,1998(21)：172-173.
[49]周龙兴.小学生阅读的策略发展及教学研究报告。教学理论与实践,1999(3)：47-53.
[50]朱绍禹编著.中学语文教育概说.呼和浩特：内蒙古人民出版社,1983年.
[1]Akamatsu, C.T. (1988). Instruction in text structure:Metacognitive strategy instruction for literacy development in deaf students. ACEHI/ACEAD,14,13-32.
[2]Anderson, N. J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. The Modern Language Journal,75,460-472.
[3]Andrews, J. E.,& Mason, J. M. (1991). Strategy usage among deaf and hearing readers. Exceptional Children,57,536-545.
[4]Andrews, J.E., Winograd, P.,& DeVille, G.(1994). Deaf children reading fables:Using ASLsummaries to improve reading comprehension. American Annals of the Deaf,139,3, 378-386.
[5]Baker, L.,& Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P.D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp.353-394). New York:Longman.
[6]Barnett, M. A. (1988). Reading through context:How real and perceived strategy use affects L2 comprehension. The Modern Language Journal,72,2,150-162.
[7]Block, E. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL Quarterly,20,3,463-494.
[8]Brown,P.M.& Brewer, L. C. (1996). Cognitive processes of deaf and hearing skilled and less skilled readers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education,1,263-270.
[9]Carlisle, J. F.,& Rice, M. S. (2002). Improving reading comprehension:Research-based principles and practices. Timonium, MD:York Press.
[10]Carrell, P. L.& Eisterhold, J. C. (1983). Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly,17,4,553-569.
[11]Carrell, P.L., Pharis, B.G.& Liberto, J.C. (1989). Metacognitive strategy training for ESL reading. TESOL Quarterly:647-678.
[12]Cook, L.K.& Mayer, R.E. (1983). Reading Strategies Training for Meaningful Learning from Prose. In Pressley, M.& Levin, J.R.(Ed.), Cognitive Strategy Research. New York: Springer-Verlag Inc.
[13]Cook, A. E.,& Myers, J. L. (2004). Processing discourse roles in scripted narratives:The influences of context and world knowledge. Journal of Memory and Language,50,268-288.
[14]Davey, B., (1987). Postpassage questions; Task and reader effects on comprehension and metacomprehension processes. Journal of Reading Behavior.79,3,261-283.
[15]Dembo, M. H. Applying educational psychology. (1994). NY:Longman. Kinnunen R, et al. Comprehension monitoring in beginning readers. Scientific Study of Reading,1998,4,353-37.
[16]Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R.,& Pearson, P. D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new:Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research,61, 2,239-264.
[17]Dowaliby, F.J. (1992).The effects of adjunct questions in prose for deaf and hearing students at different reading levels. American Annals of the Deaf,137,338-344.
[18]Ewoldt,C. (1986). What does 'reading'mean? Perspectives for Teachers of Hearing Impaired,4,10-13.
[19]Ewoldt, C., Israelite, N.,& Dodds, R. (1992). The ability of deaf students to understand text: A comparison of the perceptions of teachers and students. American Annals of the Deaf,137, 351-361.
[20]Fielding, L.,& Pearson, P. D. (1994). Reading comprehension:What works. Educational Leadership,51,5,62-68.
[21]Flavell,J.H.(1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring:A new area of cognitive Developmental inquiry. American Psychology,34,10,906-911.
[22]Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculation about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert & R.H. Kluwe (Ed.), Metacognition, motivation and understanding. Hillsdale,New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum.
[23]Fox,S. (1994). Metacognitive strategies in a college world literature course. American Annals of the Deaf,139,506-511.
[24]Gagne, E. D. (1985). The cognitive psychology of school learning, Boston:Little, Brown and Company.
[25]Gibson, E.J., and Levin. H. (1975). The Psychology of Reading. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
[26]Goodman, K. S. (1967). Reading:a psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist,6:123-135.
[27]Goodman, K. (1973).Psycholinguistic nature of the reading process, Detroit:Wayne State University Press.
[28]Hanson, V. L.,& Carol Fowler, C. (1987). Phonological coding in word reading:Evidence from hearing and deaf readers. Memory & Cognition,15,199-207.
[29]Heilman, A. W., Blair, T. R.,& Rupley, W. H. (1990). Principles and practices of teaching reading (7th ed.). Columbus, Ohio:Nerrill Publishing Company.
[30]Herrmann, B. A. (1988). Two approaches for helping poor readers become more strategic. The Reading Teacher,46,24-28.
[31]Huey, E.B., (1908). The psychology and pedagogy of reading. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press, 12
[32]Jimenez, R., Garcia, G. & Pearson, P. (1996).The reading strategies of students who are successful English readers:Opportunities and Obstacles. Reading Research Quarterly,31(1), 90-112.
[33]Just, M. A.,& Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading:From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review,87,329-354.
[34]Just, M. A.,& Carpeter, P. A. (1992). Individual differences in.working memory. Psychological Review,99,1,122-149.
[35]Kavale, K.,& Schreiner, R. (1979). The reading processes of above average and average readers:A comparison of the use of reasoning strategies in responding to standard comprehension measures. Reading Research Quarterly,15,1,102-128.
[36]Kdelly. (1996). The interaction of syntactic competence and vocabulary during reading by deaf students. Journal of deaf studies and deaf education,1:75-90.
[37]Keer, H.V., Verhacghe, J.P. (2005). Comparing two teacher development programs for innovating reading comprehension instruction with regard to teachers' experiences and student outcomes. Teaching and Teacher Education,21,543-562.
[38]Kintsch,W.(1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension:A construction-integration model. Psychological Review,95,163-182.
[39]Kintsch,W.(1998). Comprehension:A paradigm for cognition. New York:Cambridge University Press.
[40]Langer, J. (1982). The reading process. In A.Berget & H. A. Robinson (Eds.). Second school reading:What research reveals f or classroom practice. Urbana, IL:ERIC Clearinghouse on Readingand Communication Skills.
[41]Livingston,S. (1991). Comprehension strategies of two deaf readers. Sign language studies, 71,115-130.
[42]Mayer, R. E. (1996). Learning strategies for making sense out of expository text:The SOI model for guiding three cognitive processes in knowledge construction. Educational Psychology Review,8,357-371.
[43]McAnally, P. L., Rose, S.& Quigley, S. (1999). Reading practices with deaf learners. Austin, TX:PRO-ED.
[44]Mokhtari, K.& Reichard, C.A. (2002). Assessing students'metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology,942,249-259.
[45]Moores,J.,&Moores,D. (1980)nguage training with the young deaf child. In D.Bricker(ed), Language intervention with children.(vol.2),San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
[46]Morrison, R. E. (1984). Manipulation of Stimulus Onset Delay in Reading:Evidence for Parallel Programming of Saccades. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,10,667-682.
[47]O'Malley, M.,& Chamot, A. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. New York:Cambridge University Press.
[48]Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies:What every teacher should know. New York:Newbury House Publishers.
[49]Palincsar, A. S., Brown,A. L. (1984). Reciprocal Teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition & Instruction,2,117-175.
[50]Paris, S. G., & Myers, M. (1981).Comprehension monitoring, memory, and study strategies of good and poor readers. Journal of Reading Behavior,13,5-22.
[51]Phakiti, A. (2003). A closer look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to EFL reading achievement test performance. Language Testing,20,1,26-56.
[52]Pressley, M. (2000).Comprehension instruction in elementary school:A quarter-century of research progress. In B. M. Taylor, M. F. Graves,& P.van den Broek (Eds.), Reading for meaning:Fostering comprehension in the middle grades (pp.32-51). New York:Teachers College press.
[53]Pressley, M.,& Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading:The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
[54]Pressley-Forrest. D. L.,& Gillies, L. A. (1985). Children's flexible use of strategies during reading, In Pressley, M.,& Levin, J. R. (Eds.), Cognitive Strategy Research Educational Applicotions, N.Y.:Springer-Verlag.
[55]Rayner, K. (1978). Eye movements in reading and information processing. Psychological Bulletin,85,618-660.
[56]Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing:20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin,24,372-422
[57]Rayner, K.,& Juhasz, B. J. (2004). Eye movement in reading:Old questions and new directions. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,16,340-352.
[58]Rayner, K., Chace, K. H., Slattery, T. J.,&Asyby, J. (2006). Eye movements as reflections of comprehension processes in reading. Scientific Studies of Reading,10,3,241-255.
[59]Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D. L.,& Rayner, K.(1998).Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review,105,125-157.
[60]Rumelhart, D. E. (1975).Notes on a schema for stories. In D. G. Borrow & Collins (Eds. Representation and understanding:studies in cognitive. Science. New York:Academic Press.
[61]Rumelhart, D.E. (1977).Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance:Ⅵ. Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
[62]Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemata:the building blocks of cognition. In Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp.33-58), ed by R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce,&W.F. Brewer. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[63]Sarig. (1987). High-level reading in the first and in the foreign language:Some comparative process data. In Joanne Devine, P. L. Carrell,& D. E. Eskey (Eds.) Research in reading in English as a second language (pp.105-120). Washington:TESOL.
[64]Satchwell, S.E. (1993). Does teaching reading strategies to deaf children help increase their reading levels? ACEHI,19,38-48.
[65]Schirmer, B. R. (1995). Mental imagery and the reading comprehension of deaf children. Reading Research and Instruction,34,3,177-188.
[66]Schirmer, B. R.& McGough,S. M. (2005). Teaching Reading to Children Who Are Deaf: Do the Conclusions of the National Reading Panel Apply? Review of Educational Research, 75,1,83-117.
[67]Schirmer, B. R.,& Winter, C. R. (1993). Use of cognitive schema by children who are deaf for comprehending narrative text. Reading Improvement.30,1,26-34.
[68]Sheorey, R.,& Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System,29,431-449.
[69]Sinatra, G.M., Brown, K.J.,& Reynolds, R. (2002). Implications of cognitive resource allocation for comprehension strategies instruction. In C.C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction:Research-based best practices (pp.2-76). New York:Guilford Press.
[70]Stanovich,K.E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly,16,32-71.
[71]Strassman,B.K. (1992). Deaf adolescents' metacognitive knowledge about school-related reading. American Annals of the Deaf,137,326-330.
[72]Strassman, B. K. (1997)Metacognition and reading in children who are deaf:A review of the literature. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education,2,140-149.
[73]Taylor, (1980). Recall of the matically relevant material by good and poor readers, Journal of educational psychology,72,15-38.
[74]Trybus, R.,& Karchmer, M. (1977).School achievement scores of hearing impaired children: National data on achievement status and growth patters. American Annals of the Deaf,122, 62-69.
[75]Wallace, J. (1995). Improving the reading of poor achieving students. Reading Improvement, 32,2,102-104.
[76]Walker, I., Munro,J.,& Rickards, K.W. (1998b). Literal and inferential reading comprehension of students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Volta Review,100,2,87-103.
[77]Winograd, P.& Hare, V.C. (1988). Direct instruction of reading comprehension strategies:The nature of teacher explanation. In C.E. Weinstein, E.T. Goetz & P.A. Alexander, eds., Learning and Study Strategies:Issues in Assessment Instruction and Evaluation (pp.121-139). San Diego:Academic Press.
[78]Wrightstone, J., Aronow, M.,& Moskowitz, S. (1963). Developing reading test norms for deaf children. American Annals of the Deaf,108,311-316.
[2]白学军,沈德立.初学阅读者和熟练阅读者阅读课文时眼动特征的比较研究,心理发展与教育,1995(2)：1-7.
[3]曹锋.朱曼殊.儿童阅读理解监察能力的初步研究,1989(6)：20-26.
[4]陈明蕾、柯华葳,文体难易度对中文儿童在线阅读表征层次之影响：来自眼球移动的证据.2006.http://lrn.ncu.edu.tw/Teacher%20Web/hwawei/Chinese%20Research.html
[5]陈向阳,戴吉.初中生元认知阅读策略训练效应的实验研究.心理科学,2007,30(5)：1099-1103.
[6]戴海崎,张峰,陈雪枫.心理与教育测量.广州：暨南大学出版社,1999年.
[7]杜晓新.阅读中认知策略及元认知策略相关及实验研究.心理科学,1997(20)：166-167.
[8]杜晓新,冯震.元认知与学习策略北京.人民教育出版社,1999.
[9]杜晓新,宋永宁,黄昭鸣.组织结构图标记对文本整体信息理解与保持的影响.心理科学,2006(5)：1101-1103.
[10]杜晓新,宋永宁,黄昭鸣.聋校中、高年级语文阅读教学中组织策略训练的实验研究.中国听力语言康复科学杂志,2008(4)：42-44.
[11]龚少英,刘华山.中学生阅读理解元认知的发展研究.心理科学,2003(6)：11-19.
[12]韩雪屏.语文教育的心理学原理.上海：上海教育出版社,2001年.
[13]贺荟中。聋生与听力正常学生语篇理解过程的认知比较.华东师范大学博士研究生学位论文,2003年.
[14]何文明.聋生语文学习情况调查研究.中国特殊教育,2001(1)：45-47.
[15]何先友,莫雷.文本标记效应研究综述.心理学动态,2000,8(3)：37-41.
[16]柯华葳.中文阅读历程成分分析：儿童在阅读理解上的困难。第五届世界华语语文教学研讨会论文集,1998：399-405.
[17]李伟健.学习困难学生阅读理解监视的实验研究.心理与行为研究,2004(1)：346-350.
[18]李姿德、林芃娟.交互教学法对增进听觉障碍学生阅读理解能力之研究.特殊教育与复健学报,2003(11)：127-152.
[19]林宝贵、黄玉枝.听障学生国语文能力及错误类型之分析.特殊教育研究学刊,1997(15)：109-129.
[20]林宝贵、李真贤.听觉障碍学生国语文能力之研究.教育学院学报,1987(1)：1-49.
[21]刘电芝.学习策略研究.北京：人民教育出版社,1999年.
[22]刘电芝,黄希庭.学习策略研究概述.教育研究,2002(2)：78-82.
[23]刘儒德.论学习策略的实质.心理科学,1997(2)：179-181.
[24]莫雷.阅读预期对快速阅读理解影响的实验研究.心理科学,1999(3)：197-201.
[25]莫雷.初中三年级学生语文阅读能力结构的因素分析研究.心理学报.1990(1)：41-50.
[26]绮宝香.听觉障碍学生阅读理解能力之分析.特殊教育学报,2000(14)：155-187.
[27]秦宁箴.组织策略训练对7年级聋生阅读效果影响的实验研究.华东师范大学硕士学位论文,2008年.
[28]宋曜廷,黄嵘生,苏宜芬,张国恩.具多重策略的阅读理解辅助系统之设计与应用。发表于第四届华人心理学家学术研讨会,台北,2002.
[29]宋永宁,杜晓新,黄昭鸣.聋生段落、篇章阅读中标记效应的实验研究.中国特殊教育,2006,69(10)：17-19.
[30]沈德立主编.学生汉语阅读过程的眼动研究.北京：教育科学出版社,2001.
[31]陶云,申继亮,沈德立.中小学生阅读图文课文的眼动实验研究.心理科学,2003(2)：199-203.
[32]阎国利,眼动分析法在心理学研究中的应用,天津：天津教育出版社,1998.
[33]阎国利,阅读发展心理学.合肥：安徽教育出版社,2004年.
[34]杨飞燕.听障高中生阅读能力现状调查及其思考.南京师范大学教育硕士专业学位论文,2006年.
[35]杨七平.聋职校阅读课文的“七步法”教学模式.中国特殊教育,2003(3)：46-48.
[36]杨双、刘翔平等.阅读理解困难儿童的理解监控特点.中国特殊教育.2006(4)：53-57.
[37]袁茵.听觉障碍小学生汉语阅读能力研究.辽宁师范大学博士学位论文,2004年.
[38]袁茵、杨旭.听觉障碍学生阅读训练模式评介.中国特殊教育,2004(1)：40-43.
[39]王晓平、吴庆麟、胡艳萍.小学四年级叙述文阅读理解策略教学的实验研究.心理科学,2008,31(5)：1245-1247.
[40张必隐.阅读心理学(修订版).北京：北京师范大学出版社,2004年.
[41]张蓓莉.听觉障碍学生之语言能力研究.特殊教育研究学刊,1989(5)：165-204.
[42]张蓓莉.回归主流听觉障碍学生之语言能力研究.特殊教育研究学刊,1987(3)：119-134.
[43]张大均、余林.文章结构分析训练对阅读理解水平影响的实验研究.心理科学,1998(2)：136-139.
[44张向葵.图式理论在小学语文阅读理解中的应用及其对语文学习成绩的影响.心理科学,1999(2).
[45]曾世杰.听觉障碍学生中文字或词辨识之转录研究.国立台湾师范大学特殊教育研究所硕士论文,1988年.
[46]曾祥敏.国外近十年阅读策略训练研究述评.西南交通大学学报(社会科学版),2008(4)：87-93.
[47]曾祥芹主编.阅读学新论.北京：语文出版社,2005年.
[48]周国韬、郭忠根.初中生语文阅读精加工策略的训练研究.心理科学,1998(21)：172-173.
[49]周龙兴.小学生阅读的策略发展及教学研究报告。教学理论与实践,1999(3)：47-53.
[50]朱绍禹编著.中学语文教育概说.呼和浩特：内蒙古人民出版社,1983年.
[1]Akamatsu, C.T. (1988). Instruction in text structure:Metacognitive strategy instruction for literacy development in deaf students. ACEHI/ACEAD,14,13-32.
[2]Anderson, N. J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. The Modern Language Journal,75,460-472.
[3]Andrews, J. E.,& Mason, J. M. (1991). Strategy usage among deaf and hearing readers. Exceptional Children,57,536-545.
[4]Andrews, J.E., Winograd, P.,& DeVille, G.(1994). Deaf children reading fables:Using ASLsummaries to improve reading comprehension. American Annals of the Deaf,139,3, 378-386.
[5]Baker, L.,& Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P.D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp.353-394). New York:Longman.
[6]Barnett, M. A. (1988). Reading through context:How real and perceived strategy use affects L2 comprehension. The Modern Language Journal,72,2,150-162.
[7]Block, E. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL Quarterly,20,3,463-494.
[8]Brown,P.M.& Brewer, L. C. (1996). Cognitive processes of deaf and hearing skilled and less skilled readers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education,1,263-270.
[9]Carlisle, J. F.,& Rice, M. S. (2002). Improving reading comprehension:Research-based principles and practices. Timonium, MD:York Press.
[10]Carrell, P. L.& Eisterhold, J. C. (1983). Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly,17,4,553-569.
[11]Carrell, P.L., Pharis, B.G.& Liberto, J.C. (1989). Metacognitive strategy training for ESL reading. TESOL Quarterly:647-678.
[12]Cook, L.K.& Mayer, R.E. (1983). Reading Strategies Training for Meaningful Learning from Prose. In Pressley, M.& Levin, J.R.(Ed.), Cognitive Strategy Research. New York: Springer-Verlag Inc.
[13]Cook, A. E.,& Myers, J. L. (2004). Processing discourse roles in scripted narratives:The influences of context and world knowledge. Journal of Memory and Language,50,268-288.
[14]Davey, B., (1987). Postpassage questions; Task and reader effects on comprehension and metacomprehension processes. Journal of Reading Behavior.79,3,261-283.
[15]Dembo, M. H. Applying educational psychology. (1994). NY:Longman. Kinnunen R, et al. Comprehension monitoring in beginning readers. Scientific Study of Reading,1998,4,353-37.
[16]Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R.,& Pearson, P. D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new:Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research,61, 2,239-264.
[17]Dowaliby, F.J. (1992).The effects of adjunct questions in prose for deaf and hearing students at different reading levels. American Annals of the Deaf,137,338-344.
[18]Ewoldt,C. (1986). What does 'reading'mean? Perspectives for Teachers of Hearing Impaired,4,10-13.
[19]Ewoldt, C., Israelite, N.,& Dodds, R. (1992). The ability of deaf students to understand text: A comparison of the perceptions of teachers and students. American Annals of the Deaf,137, 351-361.
[20]Fielding, L.,& Pearson, P. D. (1994). Reading comprehension:What works. Educational Leadership,51,5,62-68.
[21]Flavell,J.H.(1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring:A new area of cognitive Developmental inquiry. American Psychology,34,10,906-911.
[22]Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculation about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert & R.H. Kluwe (Ed.), Metacognition, motivation and understanding. Hillsdale,New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum.
[23]Fox,S. (1994). Metacognitive strategies in a college world literature course. American Annals of the Deaf,139,506-511.
[24]Gagne, E. D. (1985). The cognitive psychology of school learning, Boston:Little, Brown and Company.
[25]Gibson, E.J., and Levin. H. (1975). The Psychology of Reading. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
[26]Goodman, K. S. (1967). Reading:a psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist,6:123-135.
[27]Goodman, K. (1973).Psycholinguistic nature of the reading process, Detroit:Wayne State University Press.
[28]Hanson, V. L.,& Carol Fowler, C. (1987). Phonological coding in word reading:Evidence from hearing and deaf readers. Memory & Cognition,15,199-207.
[29]Heilman, A. W., Blair, T. R.,& Rupley, W. H. (1990). Principles and practices of teaching reading (7th ed.). Columbus, Ohio:Nerrill Publishing Company.
[30]Herrmann, B. A. (1988). Two approaches for helping poor readers become more strategic. The Reading Teacher,46,24-28.
[31]Huey, E.B., (1908). The psychology and pedagogy of reading. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press, 12
[32]Jimenez, R., Garcia, G. & Pearson, P. (1996).The reading strategies of students who are successful English readers:Opportunities and Obstacles. Reading Research Quarterly,31(1), 90-112.
[33]Just, M. A.,& Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading:From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review,87,329-354.
[34]Just, M. A.,& Carpeter, P. A. (1992). Individual differences in.working memory. Psychological Review,99,1,122-149.
[35]Kavale, K.,& Schreiner, R. (1979). The reading processes of above average and average readers:A comparison of the use of reasoning strategies in responding to standard comprehension measures. Reading Research Quarterly,15,1,102-128.
[36]Kdelly. (1996). The interaction of syntactic competence and vocabulary during reading by deaf students. Journal of deaf studies and deaf education,1:75-90.
[37]Keer, H.V., Verhacghe, J.P. (2005). Comparing two teacher development programs for innovating reading comprehension instruction with regard to teachers' experiences and student outcomes. Teaching and Teacher Education,21,543-562.
[38]Kintsch,W.(1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension:A construction-integration model. Psychological Review,95,163-182.
[39]Kintsch,W.(1998). Comprehension:A paradigm for cognition. New York:Cambridge University Press.
[40]Langer, J. (1982). The reading process. In A.Berget & H. A. Robinson (Eds.). Second school reading:What research reveals f or classroom practice. Urbana, IL:ERIC Clearinghouse on Readingand Communication Skills.
[41]Livingston,S. (1991). Comprehension strategies of two deaf readers. Sign language studies, 71,115-130.
[42]Mayer, R. E. (1996). Learning strategies for making sense out of expository text:The SOI model for guiding three cognitive processes in knowledge construction. Educational Psychology Review,8,357-371.
[43]McAnally, P. L., Rose, S.& Quigley, S. (1999). Reading practices with deaf learners. Austin, TX:PRO-ED.
[44]Mokhtari, K.& Reichard, C.A. (2002). Assessing students'metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology,942,249-259.
[45]Moores,J.,&Moores,D. (1980)nguage training with the young deaf child. In D.Bricker(ed), Language intervention with children.(vol.2),San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
[46]Morrison, R. E. (1984). Manipulation of Stimulus Onset Delay in Reading:Evidence for Parallel Programming of Saccades. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,10,667-682.
[47]O'Malley, M.,& Chamot, A. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. New York:Cambridge University Press.
[48]Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies:What every teacher should know. New York:Newbury House Publishers.
[49]Palincsar, A. S., Brown,A. L. (1984). Reciprocal Teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition & Instruction,2,117-175.
[50]Paris, S. G., & Myers, M. (1981).Comprehension monitoring, memory, and study strategies of good and poor readers. Journal of Reading Behavior,13,5-22.
[51]Phakiti, A. (2003). A closer look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to EFL reading achievement test performance. Language Testing,20,1,26-56.
[52]Pressley, M. (2000).Comprehension instruction in elementary school:A quarter-century of research progress. In B. M. Taylor, M. F. Graves,& P.van den Broek (Eds.), Reading for meaning:Fostering comprehension in the middle grades (pp.32-51). New York:Teachers College press.
[53]Pressley, M.,& Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading:The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
[54]Pressley-Forrest. D. L.,& Gillies, L. A. (1985). Children's flexible use of strategies during reading, In Pressley, M.,& Levin, J. R. (Eds.), Cognitive Strategy Research Educational Applicotions, N.Y.:Springer-Verlag.
[55]Rayner, K. (1978). Eye movements in reading and information processing. Psychological Bulletin,85,618-660.
[56]Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing:20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin,24,372-422
[57]Rayner, K.,& Juhasz, B. J. (2004). Eye movement in reading:Old questions and new directions. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,16,340-352.
[58]Rayner, K., Chace, K. H., Slattery, T. J.,&Asyby, J. (2006). Eye movements as reflections of comprehension processes in reading. Scientific Studies of Reading,10,3,241-255.
[59]Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D. L.,& Rayner, K.(1998).Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review,105,125-157.
[60]Rumelhart, D. E. (1975).Notes on a schema for stories. In D. G. Borrow & Collins (Eds. Representation and understanding:studies in cognitive. Science. New York:Academic Press.
[61]Rumelhart, D.E. (1977).Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance:Ⅵ. Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
[62]Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemata:the building blocks of cognition. In Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp.33-58), ed by R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce,&W.F. Brewer. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[63]Sarig. (1987). High-level reading in the first and in the foreign language:Some comparative process data. In Joanne Devine, P. L. Carrell,& D. E. Eskey (Eds.) Research in reading in English as a second language (pp.105-120). Washington:TESOL.
[64]Satchwell, S.E. (1993). Does teaching reading strategies to deaf children help increase their reading levels? ACEHI,19,38-48.
[65]Schirmer, B. R. (1995). Mental imagery and the reading comprehension of deaf children. Reading Research and Instruction,34,3,177-188.
[66]Schirmer, B. R.& McGough,S. M. (2005). Teaching Reading to Children Who Are Deaf: Do the Conclusions of the National Reading Panel Apply? Review of Educational Research, 75,1,83-117.
[67]Schirmer, B. R.,& Winter, C. R. (1993). Use of cognitive schema by children who are deaf for comprehending narrative text. Reading Improvement.30,1,26-34.
[68]Sheorey, R.,& Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System,29,431-449.
[69]Sinatra, G.M., Brown, K.J.,& Reynolds, R. (2002). Implications of cognitive resource allocation for comprehension strategies instruction. In C.C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction:Research-based best practices (pp.2-76). New York:Guilford Press.
[70]Stanovich,K.E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly,16,32-71.
[71]Strassman,B.K. (1992). Deaf adolescents' metacognitive knowledge about school-related reading. American Annals of the Deaf,137,326-330.
[72]Strassman, B. K. (1997)Metacognition and reading in children who are deaf:A review of the literature. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education,2,140-149.
[73]Taylor, (1980). Recall of the matically relevant material by good and poor readers, Journal of educational psychology,72,15-38.
[74]Trybus, R.,& Karchmer, M. (1977).School achievement scores of hearing impaired children: National data on achievement status and growth patters. American Annals of the Deaf,122, 62-69.
[75]Wallace, J. (1995). Improving the reading of poor achieving students. Reading Improvement, 32,2,102-104.
[76]Walker, I., Munro,J.,& Rickards, K.W. (1998b). Literal and inferential reading comprehension of students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Volta Review,100,2,87-103.
[77]Winograd, P.& Hare, V.C. (1988). Direct instruction of reading comprehension strategies:The nature of teacher explanation. In C.E. Weinstein, E.T. Goetz & P.A. Alexander, eds., Learning and Study Strategies:Issues in Assessment Instruction and Evaluation (pp.121-139). San Diego:Academic Press.
[78]Wrightstone, J., Aronow, M.,& Moskowitz, S. (1963). Developing reading test norms for deaf children. American Annals of the Deaf,108,311-316.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |