education. The shift in emphasis may have created the mistaken belief that developmental efforts targeting reading ability are completed in grade 6 and no further development is necessary.
The development of reading motivation in the framework curriculum is confi ned to subject-based contents. The framework curricula explicate only the motivation for reading literature, however, among learner ac-tivities they still list a few which strengthen certain content-independent motives. The education of readers aims to direct the natural curiosity of children towards reading and to give them self-confi dence in reading.
This overview of curricular documents reveals that Hungarian national curricula have been advancing towards the contemporary paradigms of reading development, and they consider reading as instrumental know-ledge necessary in learning, thinking, and everyday life.
inspired by the methods and fi ndings of the PISA and the PIRLS interna-tional reading assessments. Based on these internainterna-tional surveys, Hun-garian national Competence Assessments have been organized, assessing the reading comprehension of students annually since 2003. These assess-ments as output regulators have a tangible effect on the school-based practice of reading instruction. At the same time, no comprehensive assess-ment standards for reading are available as yet.
Reading frameworks must follow the developmental process of read-ing ability. They must include the most basic elements, such as phonemic awareness. They also must include the reading of words and sentences, as well as the comprehension and interpretation of texts. Nevertheless, the evaluation of reading cannot end with the assessment of the compo-nents of reading ability, because in addition to reading ability, good read-ing comprehension has further essential requirements, i.e. readread-ing moti-vation and the use of reading strategies, and highly developed levels of both. Assessment frameworks may greatly facilitate that these factors receive the appropriate emphasis in instructional practice.
In the development of curricula and assessment frameworks, the use and processing of a much greater variety of text types should be consid-ered than is done at present. With a broader spectrum, much more read-ing goals and methods have to, and could be, taught in instructional pract ice. Before reading, it is advisory for children to set their reading goal, to select the method and strategy appropriate for this goal, to mon-itor the process and the success of reading and to name the problems of the individual in reading skills and reading comprehension.
The interpretation of the paradigm of complex mother tongue educa-tion today suggests that theoretical knowledge of grammatical structures and levels on the one hand, and the learning of reading and writing on the other hand should rely upon each other to a greater degree than in current practice. Reading as the representation of written (visual) lan-guage, and grammar as a projection of language awareness can mutually complement each other. These should also be joined with the observation of the characteristics of language use in the spirit of the whole language approach, i.e. psycho- and sociolinguistic contents should receive more attention in education.
Reading skills and reading comprehension are the essential prerequi-sites of learning and social success. Their acquisition and development
are key elements in education. Their effective development can be con-siderably promoted by assessment frameworks as detailed descriptions of the content of teaching. Accordingly, there is an obvious need for de-veloping comprehensive reading standards for the whole Hungarian school system.
References
Adamikné, J. A. (2006). Az olvasás múltja és jelene. [The past and present of reading]
Budapest: Trezor Kiadó.
Almasi, J. F. (2003). Teaching strategic processes in reading. New York: Guilford Press.
Applebee, A. N., & Purves, A. C. (1992). Literature and the English language arts. In Jackson, P. W. (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Curriculum (pp. 726–748). New York: MacMillan Publishing Company.
Arató, L. (2006). A tananyagkiválasztás és -elrendezés néhány lehetséges modellje.
[A few possible models of selecting and organizing instructional material] In Sipos, L. (Ed.), Irodalomtanítás a harmadik évezredben. [Teaching literature in the third millennium] (pp. 113–123). Budapest: Krónika Nova Kiadó.
Assor, A., Kaplan, H., & Roth, G. (2002). Choice is good, but relevance is excellent:
Autonomy-enhancing and suppressing teacher behaviours predicting students’ en-gagement in schoolwork. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 261–278.
Bean, T. W., Bean, S. K., & Bean, K. F. (1999). Intergenerational conversation and two adolescents’ multiple literacies: Implicational for redefi ning content area literacy.
Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 42(6), 438–449.
Block, C. C., Gambrell, L. B., & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (2002). Improving comprehension instruction. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Braby, R., Kincaid, J. P., Scott, P., & McDaniel, W. (1982). Illustrated formats to teach procedures. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communications, 25, 61–66.
Chapman, J. W., & Tunmer, W. E. (2002). Relations between self-perceptions and litera-cy achievement: Developmental factors and Matthew effects. Second International SELF Conference. http://self.uws.edu.au/Conferences/2002_CD_Chapman_&_
Tunmer.pdf.
Cs. Czachesz, E. (1998). Olvasás és pedagógia. [Reading and education] Szeged: Mozaik Kiadó.
Csépe, V. (2002). Beszédészlelés, szenzoros emlékezet és diszlexia. [Speech perception, sensory memory and dyslexia] (DSc dissertation). Budapest: MTA.
Csépe, V. (2005). Kognitív fejlődés – neuropszichológia. [Cognitive developmental neuro-psychology] Budapest: Gondolat Kiadó.
Csépe, V. (2006a). Az olvasó agy. [The reading brain] Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
Csépe, V. (2006b). A diszlexia természete. [The nature of dyslexia] In Józsa, K. (Ed.), Az olvasásképesség fejlődése és fejlesztése [The development of reading ability] (pp.
61–74). Budapest: Dinasztia Tankönyvkiadó.
Csíkos, Cs. (2007). Metakogníció – A tudásra vonatkozó tudás pedagógiája. [Metacogni-tion: The pedagogy of knowledge on knowledge] Budapest: Műszaki Kiadó.
Csíkos, Cs., & Steklács, J. (2006). Metakogníció és olvasás. [Metacognition and reading]
In Józsa, K. (Ed.), Az olvasási képesség fejlődése és fejlesztése [The development of reading ability] (pp. 75–88). Budapest: Dinasztia Tankönyvkiadó.
Dickinson, D. K., McCabe, A., Clark-Chiarelli, N., & Wolf, A. (2004). Cross-language trans fer of phonological awareness in low-income Spanish and English bilingual preschool children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 323−347.
Donmall, B. (1985). Language Awareness. London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Resources.
Ediger, M. (1996). Technology in the school curriculum. Journal of Research in Educa-tional Media, 3(4), 33–42.
Ediger, M. (2001). Reading and the curriculum. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 455–496).
Ediger, M. (2002). Oral communication in the reading curriculum. Eric Digest, Opinion Papers, 2–10.
Ediger, M., & Rao, D. B. (2001). Reading in the science curriculum. New Delhi, India:
Discovery Publishing House.
Fazekasné, F. M. (2000). A beszédhanghallás kritériumorientált fejlesztése. [The criterion referenced development of phonemic awareness] Új Pedagógiai Szemle, 50(7–8), 279–284.
Fazekasné, F. M. (2006). A beszédhanghallás fejlesztés 4–8 éves életkorban. [The devel-opment of phonemic awareness between the ages 4–8] Szeged: Mozaik Kiadó.
Fazekasné, F. M., & Józsa, K. (2008). Tanulásban akadályozott, alsó tagozatos gyerme-kek beszédhanghallása. [The phonemic awareness of learning disabled students in primary education] In Marton, K. (Ed.), Neurokognitív fejlődési zavarok vizsgálata és terápiája. Példák a bizonyítékon alapuló gyakorlatra [Research and therapy of neurocognitive developmental defi ciencies: Examples of evidence based practice]
(pp. 151–176). Budapest: Eötvös Kiadó.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psycologist, 34, 906–911.
Gambrell, L. B., Mazzoni, S. S., & Almasi, J. F. (2000). Promoting collaboration, social interaction, and engagement with text. In Baker, L., Dreher, M. J., & Guthrie, J. T.
(Ed.), Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation (pp. 119–
139). New York: Guilford Press.
Garbe, C., Holle, K., Weinhold, S., Meyer-Hamme, A., & Barton, A. (2010). Towards a better understanding of the phenomenon of adolescent struggling readers. In Garbe, C., Holle, K., & Weinhold, S. (Ed.), Teaching adolescent struggling readers. A com-parative study of good practices in European countries (pp. 25–44). Hamburg: Peter Lang.
Gordon, Gy. J. (2006). Nemzetközi tendenciák az irodalomtanításban. [International trends in teaching literature] In Sipos, L. (Ed.), Irodalomtanítás a harmadik évezred-ben [Teaching literature in the third millennium] (pp. 100–112). Budapest: Krónika Nova Kiadó.
Gósy, M. (2000). A hallástól a tanulásig. [From hearing to learning] Budapest: Nikol Kkt.
Guay, F., Marsh, H. W., & Boivin, M. (2003). Academic self-concept and academic achievement: Developmental perspectives on their causal ordering. Journal of Edu-cational Psychology, 95, 124–136.
Guthrie, J. T., & Cox, K. E. (2001). Classroom conditions for motivation and engagement in reading. Educational Psychology Review, 13(3), 283–302.
Guthrie, J. T., & Davis, M. H. (2003). Motivating struggling readers in middle school through an engagement model of classroom practice. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19, 59–85.
Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfi eld, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In Kamil, M. L., Mosenthal, P. B., Pearson, P. D., & Barr, R. (Ed.), Reading research hand-book III (pp. 403–424). New Jersey: Erlbaum, Mahwah.
Guthrie, J. T., Hoa, A. L. W., Wigfi eld, A., Tonks, M., Humenick N. M., & Littles, E.
(2006). Reading motivation and reading comprehension growth in the later elemen-tary years. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 282–313.
Guthrie, J. T., Mcrae, A., & Klauda, S. L. (2007). Contributions of concept-oriented read-ing instruction to knowledge about interventions for motivations in readread-ing. Educa-tional Psychologist, 42(4), 237–250.
Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfi eld, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In Kamil, M. L., & Mosenthal, P. B. (Ed.), Handbook of reading research, Vol. III (pp. 403–
422). NJ: Erlbaum, Mahwah.
Heath, S. B. (1980). The function and uses of literacy. Journal of Communication, 30(1), 122–133.
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development.
Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127.
IRA (2002). Integrating literacy and technology in the curriculum. A position statement of the International Reading Association, Newark. www.reading.org.
James C., & Garrett P. (Ed.). (1991). Language awareness in the classroom. London:
Long man.
Janurik, M. (2008). A zenei képességek szerepe az olvasás elsajátításában. [The contribu-tion of musical abilities to learning to read] Magyar Pedagógia, 108(4), 289–317.
Józsa, K. (2004). Az első osztályos tanulók elemi alapkészségeinek fejlettsége − Egy longitudinális kutatás első mérési pontja. [The developmental level of fi rst grade pupils’ elementary basic skills: The fi rst assessment in a longitudinal study] Iskola-kultúra, 14(11), 3–16.
Józsa, K. (2005). Szövegfeldolgozó képességfejlesztés. [Text processing ability develop-ment] Symposium. In Falus, I., & Rapos, N. (Ed.), Közoktatás – pedagógusképzés – neveléstudomány V. Országos Neveléstudományi Konferencia, Tartalmi Összefogla-lók [Public education – teacher training – educational sciences. 5th National Educa-tional Conference. Abstracts] (pp. 296–301). Budapest: MTA Pedagógiai Bizottság.
Józsa, K. (Ed.). (2006). Az olvasási képesség fejlődése és fejlesztése. [The development of reading ability] Budapest: Dinasztia Tankönyvkiadó.
Józsa, K. (2007a). Az elsajátítási motiváció. [Mastery motivation] Budapest: Műszaki Kiadó.
Józsa, K. (2007b). Az elemi alapkészségek szerepe az olvasási képesség fejlődésében:
egy longitudinális vizsgálat tapasztalatai. [The role of elementary basic skills in the development of reading ability: Findins from a longitudinal study] Syimposium
(abstract). In Korom, E. (Ed.), PÉK 2007 – V. Pedagógiai Értékelési Konferencia:
Program – Tartalmi összefoglalók [PÉK 2007 – 5th Conference on Educational As-sessment: Programme and abstracts] (pp. 55). Szeged: SZTE Neveléstudományi Doktori Iskola.
Józsa, K., & Steklács, J. (2009). Az olvasástanítás kutatásának aktuális kérdései. [Current trends in research on reading instruction] Magyar Pedagógia, 109(4), 365–397.
Józsa, K., & Zentai, G. (2007). Hátrányos helyzetű óvodások játékos fejlesztése a DIFER Programcsomag alapján. [Developing disadvantaged kindergarteners by the playful methods of the DIFER Program package] Új Pedagógiai Szemle, 57(5), 3–17.
Kame’enui, E. J., & Simmons, D. C. (2001). The DNA of reading fl uency. Scientifi c Studies of Reading, 5(3), 203−210.
Kassai, I. (1998). A beszédhanghallás szerepe a kommunikációban. [The role of phone-mic awareness in communication] Beszédgyógyítás, 9(2), 6–15.
Keene, E. O., & Zimmermann, S. (1997). Mosaic of thought: Teaching comprehension in a reader’s workshop. Porthsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Kelly, D. L. (2003). Developing the PIRLS background questionnaires. In Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., & Kennedy, A. M. (Ed.), PIRLS 2001 technical report (pp. 29–37).
Boston: International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College.
Kincaid, J. P., Aagard, J. A., O’Hara, J. W., & Cottrell L. K. (1981). Computer readability editing system. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communications, 24(1), 38–42.
Kincaid, J. P., Fishburne, R. P., Rogers, R. L., & Chissom, B. S. (1975). Derivation of new readability formulas (Automated Readability Index, Fog Count, and Flesch Reading Ease formula) for Navy Enlisted Personnel. In Kincaid, J. P., Fishburne, R.
P., Rogers, R. L., & Chissom, B. S. (Ed.), Research Branch Report (pp. 8–75). Naval Air Station Memphis, Chief of Naval Technical Training.
Kingstone, A. (1967). Some thoughts on reading comprehension. In Hafner, L. (Ed.), Improving reading comprehension in secondary schools (pp. 72–75). New York:
Macmillan.
Kirsch, I., de Jong, J., Lafontaine, D., McQueen, J., Mendelovits, J., & Monseur, C. (2002).
Reading for change: Performance and engagement across countries: Results from PISA 2000. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenfl ugel, P. J., Morris, R. D., Morrow, L. M., Woo, D. G., Meisin ger, E. B., Sevcik, R. A., Bradley, B. A., & Stahl, S. (2006). Teaching children to be come fl uent and automatic readers. Journal of Literacy Research, 38(4), 357–388.
Kupari, P. (2007). The signifi cance of reading, communication and dialogue in learning mathematics. In Linnakylä, P., & Arffman, I. (Ed.), Finnish reading literacy: when quality and equity meet (pp. 175–198). University of Jyväskylä, Institute for Educa-tional Research.
Lee, C. (2006). Language for learning mathematics. Assessment for learning in practice.
Berkshire: Open University Press.
Lengyel, Zs. (1999). Az írás. Kezdet-folyamat-végpont. [Writing: Beginnings, process and fi nal stage] Budapest: Corvina Kiadó.
Manguel, A. (1998). Az olvasás története. [A history of reading] Budapest: Park Kiadó.
McMahon, R., Richmond, M. G., & Reeves-Kazelskis, C. (1998). Relationships between kindergarten teachers’ perceptions of literacy acquisition and children’s literacy invol-vement and classroom materials. Journal of Educational Research, 91(3), 173–182.
McQuillan, J., & Au, J. (2001). The effect of print access on reading frequency. Reading Psychology, 22(3), 225–248.
Meece, J. L., & Miller, S. D. (2001). A longitudinal analysis of elementary school stu-dents’ achievement goals in literacy activities. Contemporary Educational Psychol-ogy, 26, 454–480.
Meece, J., Anderman, E., & Anderman, L. (2006). Classroom goal structure, student motivation and academic achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 487–503.
Mihály, I. (2003). Nemzetközi olvasásvizsgálat – PIRLS 2001. [An international reading study: PIRLS 2001] Új Pedagógiai Szemle, 53(7–8), 201–211.
Molnár, É., & Józsa, K. (2006). IKT-val segített oktatás hatása az olvasási képesség fejlődésére hátrányos helyzetű tanulók körében. [The effects of ICT supported in-struction on the development of reading ability among disadvantaged students] In Józsa, K. (Ed.), Az olvasási képesség fejlődése és fejlesztése [The development of reading ability] (pp. 281–295). Budapest: Dinasztia Tankönyvkiadó.
Molnár, Gy., & Józsa, K. (2006). Az olvasási képesség értékelésnek tesztelméleti meg-közelítései. [Approaches to the assessment of reading ability in test theory] In Józsa, K. (Ed.), Az olvasási képesség fejlődése és fejlesztése [The development of reading ability] (pp. 155–174). Budapest: Dinasztia Tankönyvkiadó.
Mullis, I. V. S., Kennedy, A. M., Martin, M. O., & Sainsbury, M. (2006). PIRLS 2006 assessment framework and specifi cations. MA: Boston College, Chestnut Hill.
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Kennedy, A. M., Trong, K. L., & Sainsbury, M. (2009).
PIRLS 2011 assessment framework progress in reading literacy study. MA: Boston College, Chestnut Hill.
Művelődési és Közoktatási Minisztérium (1995). Nemzeti Alaptanterv. [National Core Curriculum] Budapest: Művelődési és Közoktatási Minisztérium.
Művelődési Minisztérium (1978). Az általános iskolai nevelés és oktatás terve. [Curricu-lum for the general elementary school] Budapest: Művelődési Minisztérium.
Nagy, J. (1990). A rendszerezési képesség kialakulása. [The evolution of systematizing ability] Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
Nagy, J. (2003). A rendszerező képesség fejlődésének kritériumorientált feltárása. [The criterion referenced mapping of the development of systematizing ability] Magyar Pedagógia, 103(3), 269–314.
Nagy, J. (2006a). Olvasástanítás: a megoldás stratégiai kérdései. [The strategic issues of reading instruction] In Józsa, K. (Ed.). Az olvasási képesség fejlődése és fejlesztése [The development of reading ability] (pp. 17–42). Budapest: Dinasztia Tankönyvkiadó.
Nagy, J. (2006b). A szóolvasó készség fejlődésének kritériumorientált diagnosztikus feltérképezése. [The diagnostic and criterion referenced assessment of the skill of word reading] In Józsa, K. (Ed.). Az olvasási képesség fejlődése és fejlesztése [The development of reading ability] (pp. 91–106). Budapest: Dinasztia Tankönyvkiadó.
Nagy, J. (Ed.). (2009). Fejlesztés mesékkel: Az anyanyelv, a gondolkodás fejlődésének segítése mesékkel 4–8 éves életkorban. [Development through tales and stories:
Helping the development of language and reasoning skills between the ages 4–8]
Szeged: Mozaik Kiadó.
Nagy, J. (2010). Új pedagógiai kultúra. [The new culture of education] Szeged: Mozaik Kiadó.
Nagy, J., Józsa, K., Vidákovich, T., & Fazekasné, F. M. (2004a). DIFER Programcso-mag: Diagnosztikus fejlődésvizsgáló és kritériumorientált fejlesztő rendszer 4–8 évesek számára. [DIFER Program Package: A diagnostic and criterion referenced developmental system for 4-8-year-olds] Szeged: Mozaik Kiadó.
Nagy, J., Józsa, K., Vidákovich, T., & Fazekasné, F. M. (2004b). Az elemi alapkészségek fejlődése 4–8 éves életkorban. [The development of elementary basic skills between the ages 4–8] Szeged: Mozaik Kiadó.
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) (1998). Reading framework for the national assessment of educational progress: 1992–1998. Washington DC: U.S.
Department of Education, Offi ce of Educational Research and Improvement.
National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assess-ment of the scientifi c research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Develop-ment.
Nyitrai, Á. (2009a). A mese, a mesélés fejlesztő hatása. [The developmental effects of tales and storytelling] In Nagy, J. (Ed.), Fejlesztés mesékkel: Az anyanyelv, a gon-dolkodás fejlődésének segítése mesékkel 4–8 éves életkorban [Development through tales and stories: Helping the development of language and reasoning skills between the ages 4–8] (pp. 9–31). Szeged: Mozaik Kiadó.
Nyitrai, Á. (2009b). Az összefüggés-kezelő képesség fejlődésének segítése. [Helping the development of the ability of comprehending relations] In. Nagy, J. (Ed.), Fejlesztés mesékkel: Az anyanyelv, a gondolkodás fejlődésének segítése mesékkel 4–8 éves élet-korban [Development through tales and stories: Helping the development of language and reasoning skills between the ages 4–8] (pp. 53–80). Szeged: Mozaik Kiadó.
Oktatási és Kulturális Minisztérium (2007). Nemzeti Alaptanterv. [National Core Cur-riculum] Oktatási és Kulturális Minisztérium, Budapest, http://www.okm.gov.hu/
letolt/kozokt/nat_070926.pdf
Oktatási Minisztérium (2000). Kerettanterv 2000. [Frame Curriculum] http://www.nefmi.
gov.hu/kozoktatas/tantervek/kerettanterv-2000
Oktatási Minisztérium (2006). Korszerű, használható tankönyveket az iskolákba. [Schools should teach from up-to-date and usable textbooks] www.nefmi.gov.hu/letolt/kozokt/
tkvrendelet.ppt
Pap-Szigeti, R., Zentai, G., & Józsa, K. (2006). A szövegfeldolgozó képességfejlesztés módszerei. [The methods of text processing ability development] In Józsa, K. (Ed.), Az olvasási képesség fejlődése és fejlesztése [The development of reading ability]
(pp. 235–258). Budapest: Dinasztia Tankönyvkiadó.
Paris, S. G., Wasik, B. A., & Turner, J. C. (1991). The development of strategic readers.
In Kamil, P., Mosenthal, P., Pearson P. D., & Barr, R. (Ed.), Handbook of reading research. Vol. 2 (pp. 609–640). New York: Erlbaum, Longman, Hillsdale.
Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In Kamil, P., Mosenthal, P. Pearson, P. D., & Barr, R. (Ed.), Handbook of reading re-search. Vol. 3 (pp. 545–562). New York: Erlbaum, Longman, Hillsdale.
Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P. B., Gaskins, I., Schuder, T., Gergman, J., Almasi, J., & Brown, R. (1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of reading compre-hension strategies. Elementary School Journal, 92, 511–554.
Pressley, M., Symons, S., Snyder, B. I., & Cariglia-Bull, T. (1989). Strategy instruction comes of age. Learning Disability Quaterly, 12, 16–30.
Proctor, C. P., Carlo, M., August, D., & Snow, C. (2006). The intriguing role of Spanish language vocabulary knowledge in predicting English reading comprehension. Jour-nal of EducatioJour-nal Psychology, 98(1), 159–169.
Purves, A. C. (1973). Literature education in ten countries: An empirical study. Stock-holm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Ramus, F. (2003). Developmental dyslexia: Specifi c phonological defi cit or general sen-sorimotor dysfunction? Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 13, 212–218.
Roller, C. M. (2002). Comprehensive reading instruction across the grade levels: a col-lection of papers from the Reading Research 2001 Conference. Newark: Interna-tional Reading Association.
Saussure, F. (1916/1998). Bevezetés az általános nyelvészetbe. [Course in general lin-guistics] Budapest: Corvina Kiadó.
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Developing self-effi cacious readers and writers: The role of social and self-regulatory processes. In Guthrie, J. T., & Wig-fi eld, A. (Ed.), Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruc-tion (pp. 34–50). Newark, DE: Internainstruc-tional Reading Associainstruc-tion.
Shaywitz, S. E., Shaywitz, B. A., Pugh, K. R., & CAST Research Team (1998). Func-tional disruption in the organization of the brain for reading in dislexia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 95, 2636–2641.
Sipos, L. (1994). Iskolaszerkezet és irodalomtanítás. [School structure and the teaching of literature] In Sipos, L. (Ed.), Irodalomtanítás I [The teaching of literature. Vol. 1.]
(pp. 15–29). Budapest: Pauz Kiadó-Universitas Kulturális Alapítvány.
Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for understanding. Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica: Rand.
Steklács, J. (2002). Irodalmi nevelés. [Literary education] In Bárdos, J., Galuska, L., Steklács, J., & Szilágyi, J. (Ed.), Irodalmi alapfogalmak [Fundamental concepts in literature] (pp. 136–144). Kecskemét: Kecskeméti Főiskola.
Steklács, J. (2006). Olvasási stratégiák, szövegértő olvasás. Az szövegértés tanítása és fejlesztése a stratégiai olvasásra épülő kísérleti fejlesztőprogramban. [Reading strat-egies and reading comprehension: Teaching and developing reading comprehension in an experimental program to foster strategic reading] Magiszter, 4(15), 175–186.
Steklács, J., & Csíkos, Cs. (2009). Developing Reading Strategies Among 4th Grade Students in Hungary. New Mexico Journal of Reading, 3, 15–21.
Steklács, J. (2011, in press). Olvasási stratégiák tanítása, tanulása és az olvasásra vonatkozó tudatosság. [Teaching and learning reading strategies and reading aware-ness]
Sulkunen, S. (2007). Authentic texts and Finnish youngsters: a focus on gender. In Linna-kylä, P., & Arffman, I. (Ed.), Finnish reading literacy: when quality and equity meet (pp. 175–198). Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, Institute for Educational Re-search.
Swanson, H. L., Rosston, K., Gerber, M., & Solari, E. (2008). Infl uence of oral language and phonological awareness on children’s bilingual reading. Journal of School Psy-chology, 46, 413–429.
Swanson, H. L., Trainin, G., Necoechea, D. M., & Hammill, D. D. (2003). Rapid naming, phonological awareness, and reading: A meta-analysis of the correlation evidence.
Review of Educational Research, 73, 407–440.
Sweet, A. P., Guthrie, J. T., & Ng, M. M. (1998). Teacher perceptions and student reading motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 210–223.
Szenczi, B. (2008). Énkép és tanulás: Nemzetközi kutatási irányzatok és tendenciák.
[Self-concept and learning: Trends in international research] Iskolakultúra Online, 1(2), 104–118.
Szenczi, B. (2010). Az olvasási motiváció: defi níciók és kutatási irányok. [Reading mo-tivation: Defi nitions and trends in research] Magyar Pedagógia, 110(2), 119–147.
Szinger, V. (2002). Az írás és olvasás előkészítése az óvodapedagógus szemszögéből.
[Preparation for writing and reading: The kindergarten teacher’s perspective] Alka-lmazott Nyelvtudomány, 2(2), 69–78.
Szinger, V. (2007). Kivárás és bontakozó írásbeliség – Hagyomány és újszerűség az óvo-dai írás és olvasás előkészítésben. [Waiting and emergent literacy: Tradition and innovation in preparation for writing and reading in the kindergarten] Könyv és Nevelés, 9(1), 71–76.
Turner, J. C. (1995). The infl uence of classroom contexts on young children’s motivation for literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 410–441.
Turner, J. C. (1997). Starting right: Strategies for engaging young literacy learners. In Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfi eld, A. (Ed.), Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction (pp. 183–204). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Tynjälä, P. (1999). Towards expert knowledge? A comparison between a constructivist and a traditional learning environment. International Journal of Educational Re-search, 31, 357–442.
Van Damme, J., Opdenakker, M.-C., De Fraine, B., & Mertens, W. (2004). Academic self-concept and academic achievement: Cause and effect. Third Biennial SELF Conference. Berlin: Max Plank Institute, July 4–7, 2004. http://self.uws.edu.au/Con-ferences/2004_Van_Damme_Opdenakker_De_Fraine_Mertens.pdf.
van den Broek, P., & Kremer, K. E. (2000). The mind in action: What it means to com-prehend during reading. In Taylor, B. M., Graves, M. F., & van den Broek, P. (Ed.), Reading for meaning: Fostering comprehension in the middle grades (pp. 1–31).
New York: Teacher’s College Press.
Verboord, M. (2005). Long-term effects of literary education on book-reading frequency:
An analysis of Dutch student cohorts 1975–1998. Poetics, 33, 320–342.
Vigotszkij, L. Sz. (1967). Gondolkodás és beszéd. [Thought and language] Budapest:
Akadémiai Kiadó.
Wagner, R., & Torgesen, J. K. (1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 192−212.
Wigfi eld, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Motivation for reading: individual, home, textual, and classroom perspective. Educational Psychologist, 32, 57–135.
Wigfi eld, A., Eccles, J. S., & Rodriguez, D. (1997). The development of children’s moti-vation in school contexts. In Iran-Nejad, A., & Pearson, P. D. (Ed.), Review of
re-search in education (pp. 73–118). Washington DC: American Educational Rere-search Association.
Wigfi eld, A., Guthrie, J. T., & McGough, K. (1996). A questionnaire measure of chil-dren’s motivations for reading. Athens, GA: National Reading Research Center.
Wigfi eld, A., Guthrie, J. T., Tonks, S., & Perencevich, K. C. (2004). Children’s motiva-tion for reading: Domain specifi city and instructional infl uences. The Journal of Educational Research, 97(6), 299−309.
Wood, K. D., & Algozzine B. (1994). Using collaborative learning to meet needs of high risk learners. In Wood, K. D., & Algozzine B. (Ed.), Teaching reading to high risk learners: A unifi ed perspective (pp. 155–180). MA, Needham Heights: Allyn and Bacon.
Zentai, G. (2010). A rendszerezési képesség fejlődése 4–8 éves életkorban, [The develop-ment of systematizing ability among 4- to 8-year-olds] Magyar Pedagógia, 110(1), 5–34.