本研究目的在探討概念導向閱讀教學(CORI)導入國中小學閱讀課程，對學生閱讀投入的影響。藉由營造CORI閱讀教學與現行閱讀教學，來對照兩種閱讀教學對學生閱讀投入的影響差異。
本研究以183名，來自四所學校八個班級的國小四年級、六年級、國中八年級與九年級生為研究對象，其中四個班級為控制組，施行現行閱讀教學，共87位學生，44位國小生(四年級、六年級)，43位國中生(八年級、九年級)；另外四個班級為實驗組，施行CORI閱讀教學，共96位學生，48位國小生(四年級、六年級)，48位國中生(八年級、九年級)。以準實驗研究法的不等組前後測設計進行研究，運用多變量共變數分析(MANCOVA)驗證在CORI閱讀教學介入後對學生的閱讀動機、閱讀行為與閱讀策略運用之影響。
根據研究分析結果，得到結論發現：國小實驗組與控制組(四年級、六年級)，CORI閱讀教學介入後，兩組國小生在閱讀投入的閱讀動機、閱讀行為、閱讀策略運用均無顯著差異；國中實驗組與控制組(八年級、九年級)，CORI閱讀教學介入後，國中實驗組在閱讀投入的閱讀動機整體構面、正向閱讀動機，以及自我效能均顯著優於國中控制組，然而在閱讀行為與閱讀策略運用，兩組國中生未具顯著差異。
根據研究結果，提出建議：(一) 獨立開設閱讀課程，並常態設立於各年級正規課程中，讓學生有足夠的時間閱讀，學習及運用不同的閱讀策略、進行不同學科的專題探索；(二) 結合資訊素養於學科教學中，希望藉此培育不同學科背景的閱讀教師、厚植學生多元學科的背景知識，並且促使學生運用資訊素養來擴展學科學習的廣度與深度。

The purpose of this study is to investigate the differences of students’ reading motivation, reading behavior, and reading strategy use between two contexts. Employing data from 183 fourth, sixth, eighth, and ninth graders in four schools. Following quasi-experimental method, four classes, 87 students participated in present instruction , 44 fourth and sixth graders, 43 eighth and ninth graders. And four classes, 96 students received Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction(CORI), 48 fourth and sixth graders, 48 eighth and ninth graders. Reading Engagement Measure was used as instrument to collect data. MANCOVA was used to analyze the data. According to the data analysis, the results indicated that:
Comparison of students, fourth and sixth graders, in elementary schools, experiencing CORI and present instruction, there were no significant differences in reading motivation, reading behavior, and reading strategy use.
Students, eighth and ninth graders, in middle schools, experiencing CORI were significantly higher than present instruction students in reading motivation, positive reading motivation and self-efficacy. As to reading behavior, and reading strategy use, there were no significant differences between them.
According to the results, the suggestions: 1.Establishing reading course alone and normally in all grades to provide students enough time to read and practice strategies in multi-subject reading. 2.Integrating information literacy into academic subjects teaching to cultivate reading teachers and enrich students with multi-subject background knowledge. Simultaneously making students to use information literacy to expand and go deep into academic subjects learning.

中文文獻

丁亞雯（2012）。以「課程與教學」為十二年國教推動核心─臺北市推動的策略與行動。 中等教育，63(1)，183-187。

于健、鄭青青（2015）。國小學童閱讀環境與閱讀態度之相關性研究―以雲林縣某國小為例。管理資訊計算，4(1)，1-15。

于富雲、陳玉欣（2008）。概念構圖對不同空間能力之國小學童自然科學習成效的響。教育心理學報，39，83-104。

佐藤學著; 黃郁倫、鐘啟泉譯（2012）。學習的革命：從教室出發的改革。臺北市：天下雜誌。

何琦瑜、賓靜蓀、張瀞文（2011）。國中生學習力大調查，搶救「無動力世代」。親子天下。取自 http://topic.parenting.com.tw/issue/2013/futurelearning/article2-1-7.aspx

何雍慶、蔡青姿（2009）。運用PLS方法探討價值創新導入新產品開發之調節角色。中華管理評論國際學報，12(2)，1-24。取自 http://cmr.ba.ouhk.edu.hk/cmr/webjournal/v12n2/CMR196C08.pdf

宋幸真（2014）。概念導向閱讀教學對國小四年級學生自然與生活科技領域學習成效之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學，臺南市。

宋曜廷、劉佩雲、簡馨瑩（2003）。閱讀動機量表的修訂及相關因素研究。測驗學刊，5，47-71。

吳清基（2010）。推動臺灣的閱讀教育--全民來閱讀。研考雙月刊，34(1)，62-66。

李咏吟（1998）。認知教學：理論與策略。臺北市：心理。

吳明隆（2009）。結構方程模式：AMOS的操作與應用。臺北市：五南。

吳明隆（2013）。SPSS統計應用學習實務：問卷分析與應用統計。新北市:易習圖書。

柯華葳、詹益綾（2013）。書與閱讀。國家圖書館館刊，102(1)，37-50。

柯華葳、詹益綾、張建妤、游婷雅（2009）。臺灣四年級學生閱讀素養（PIRLS 2006 報告）第二版。取自http://lrn.ncu.edu.tw/Teacher%20web/hwawei/PIRLS_Report.htm

林佳誼（2013）。CORI教學模式對國小學童自然領域自律學習成就及自我效能之探討(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學，臺南市。

林清山、程炳林（1995）。國中生自我調整學習因素與學習表現之關係暨自我調整的閱讀理解教學策略效果之研究。教育心理學報，28，15-58。

林菁、謝欣穎（2013）。資訊素養與閱讀策略融入國小四年級 「我們的水族箱」主題探究：以Big6模式為例。圖書資訊學刊，11(1)，95-130。

施淑慎（2009）。國中生使用逃避策略相關因素徑路模式之檢驗。國立政治大學-教育與心理研究，32(1)，111-145。

張文靜、辛濤（2012）。閱讀投入對閱讀素養影響的跨文化比較研究——以PISA2009為例。心理發展與教育，2，175-183。

孫劍秋、林孟君（2013）。從臺灣中學生PISA閱讀素養的表現談精進學生閱讀素養的教學策略。中等教育，64(3)，35-51。

財團法人誠品文化藝術基金會。基金會簡介。取自 http://www.eslitefoundation.org.tw/Content.aspx?mi=Description

張景媛（1991）。大學生認知風格、動機與自我調整因素、後設認知與學業成績關係之研究。教育心理學報，24，145-161。

張貴琳（2001）。閱讀習慣的另類檢視：PISA閱讀投入因素。教師天地，172，77-83。

張毓仁、柯華葳、邱皓政、歐宗霖、温福星（2011）。教師閱讀教學行為與學生閱讀態度和閱讀能力自我評價對於閱讀成就之跨層次影響：以PIRLS 2006為例。教育科學研究期刊，56(2)，69-105。

張德銳(2013)。 與時俱進因材施教十二年國教後中學教學發展趨勢。師友月刊，556，58-62。

張錦弘、沈育如(2013)。PISA調查 我15歲學生閱讀素養大進步。聯合新聞網，文教新資訊， UDN文教職考。取自 http://mag.udn.com/mag/edu/storypage.jsp?f_ART_ID=488391#ixzz30NpF78sE

莊惠慈、陳海泓（2013年5月）。概念導向閱讀教學對國小五年級學童閱讀動機與閱讀理解策略使用之研究。陳海泓(主持人)，教學設計與發展。2013教育高階論壇國際研討會「數位時代之教育議題與發」，國立臺南大學。

教育部（2010）。閱讀理解策略教學手冊。臺北市：教育部。取自 http://blog.ilc.edu.tw/blog/gallery/6222/6222-691368.pdf

教育部（2011a）。97年國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。取自 http://www.k12ea.gov.tw/ap/sid17_law.aspx

教育部（2011b）。十二年國民基本教育實施計畫(核定本)。取自 http://12basic.tyc.edu.tw/files/12-BE.pdf

教育部（2011c）。圖書教師手册。臺北市：教育部。取自 https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/37008184/tlresources/handbookforteacherlibrarian110522.pdf

許芳瑜（2013）。概念導向閱讀教學運用在國小五年級社會學習領域對學生閱讀動機及學習成效的影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學，臺南市。

許芳瑜、陳海泓（2013）。概念導向閱讀教學的探究。教育研究論壇，4(2)，361-378。

許雅婷（2009）。後設認知策略在閱讀障礙學生之應用。雲嘉特教，10，68-74。

陳李綢（1991）。思考模式、學術經驗與認知策略訓練對大學生後設認知與智力的影響。教育心理學報，24，67-90。

陳李綢（1995）。「學習策略訓練方案」對國中生閱讀理解學習之影響。教育心理學報，28，77-98。

陳昭珍、趙子萱（2010）。圖書教師的角色及任務。圖書教師電子報，1。取自 http://teacherlibrarian.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/index.php?id=13

陳海泓（2013）。概念導向閱讀教學對國小五年級學生閱讀理解策略運用能力的影響。區域與社會發展研究，4，61-93。

陳啟勳（2000）。記憶策略。雙語詞彙、學術名詞暨辭書資訊網。取自 http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1308778/

陳慧玲（2015）。概念導向閱讀教學融入自然與生活科技領域對國小五年級學生閱讀動機與閱讀理解之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中教育大學，臺中市。

陳麗夙（2014）。概念導向閱讀教學融入社會學習領域對國小四年級學生閱讀理解策略運用能力及閱讀理解能力之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學，臺南市。

曾元鴻（2013）。從PISA國際學生評量反思臺灣基礎教育。師友月刊，551，40-43。

黃馨緯（2012）。閱讀教學的作法與啟示-以美國lexile閱讀分級與教學為例。南臺灣教育論壇，431-452。

楊榮昌（2002）。相互教學法對國小五年級學童閱讀理解、後設認知及閱讀動機之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東師範學院，屏東。

臺灣PISA國家研究中心（2009）。PISA 2009中文版學生問卷。 取自 http://pisa.nutn.edu.tw/download/web_qa/student_qa.pdf
臺灣PISA國家研究中心（2010）。計畫概述。取自 http://pisa.nutn.edu.tw/pisa_tw.htm

圖書教師輔導團（2010）。圖書教師輔導團簡介。圖書教師電子報，1，取自http://teacherlibrarian.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/index.php?id=16

劉潔玲（2009）。香港中學生在國際學生評估計畫的閱讀表現對語文課程改革的啟示。 教育科學研究期刊，54(2)，85-105。

蔡明學（2012）。從學習核心素養探究國際的教育政策發展之趨勢。教育資料與研究， 107，111-134。
蔡逸芬、陳品華（2015）。國小高年級學童課外閱讀自我決定動機之研究。教育心理學報，46(3)，425-448。

駱淑萍（2014）。亞洲華僑青年閱讀投入度之比較研究─以國立臺灣師範大學僑生先修部學生為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。

賴苑玲（2009）。南投縣國小高年級學童閱讀習慣、閱讀理解與對參與「希望閱讀」與「焦點300」閱讀活動態度之研究。社會科教育研究，14，1-30。

賴苑玲、伍桐慰、沈佩怡、陳曉萍、蔡如惠（2013）。圖書教師與社會領域教師協作教學之行動研究。區域與社會發展研究，4，3-27。

盧雪梅編譯（1991）。教學理論：學習心理學的取向。臺北市：心理。

謝品宽（2011）。概念取向閱讀教學對國小學童在閱讀動機及閱讀理解之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學，臺南市。

蕭文龍（2015）。統計分析：SPSS中文版+PLS-SEM(SmartPLS)。臺北市：碁峰。

蘇宜芬、林清山（1992）。後設認知訓練課程對國小低閱讀能力學生的閱讀理解能力與後設認知能力之影響。教育心理學報，25，245-267。

西文文獻

Afflerbach, P., Cho, B., Kim, J., Crassas, M., & Doyle, B. (2013). Reading: What else matters besides strategies and skills? Reading Teacher, 66(6), 440-448. doi:10.1002/TRTR.1146

André, M. A., & Anderson, T. H. (1979). The development and evaluation of a self questioning study technique. Reading Research Quarterly, 14(4), 605-623.

Anderson, R. C., & Pearson, P. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. Technical Report, 306.

Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1980). Metacognitive skills and reading. Technical Report, 188. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED195932.pdf

Baumgartner, H. & Homburg, C. (1996). Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: A review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13(2), 139-161.

Belenky, M. (1997). Women's ways of knowing : the development of self, voice, and mind. New York : BasicBooks.

Benko, S. (2012). Scaffolding: An ongoing process to support adolescent writing development. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 56(4), 291-300.

Coddington, C. S., & Guthrie, J. T. (2009). Teacher and student perceptions of boys’ and girls’ reading motivation. Reading Psychology, 30, 225-249.

Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., & Pearson, P. (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research, 2, 239-264. doi:10.2307/1170536

Doll, W. J., Xia, W., & Torkzadeh, G. (1994). A confirmatory factor analysis of the end-user computing satisfaction instrument. MIS Quarterly, 18(4), 453-461.

IRA(2000). Excellent reading teachers: A position statement of the international reading association. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44(2), 193-199.

Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 2, 117-142. doi:10.2307/1170412

Flavell, J.R.(1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem. In L.B. Resmick(Ed.). The Nature of Intellignece (pp. 231-235). Hilldale, MJ: Erlbaum.

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911.
doi:10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P.C., & Paris, A.H.(2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109.
Graesser, A., Golding, J. M., & Long, D. L. (1991). Narrative representation and comprehension. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 171-205). New York: Longman. Retrieved from https://books.google.com.tw/books?hl=zh-TW&lr=&id=kPcGfPeWoboC&oi=fnd&pg=PA171&dq=Narrative+representation+and+comprehension&ots=CZ3MEtPYSH&sig=9PHj6c5qvw0-F0WNu6r-Day-oPk&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Narrative%20representation%20and%20comprehension&f=false

Guthrie, J. T. (2001). Contexts for engagement and motivation in reading. Reading Online, 4(8). Retrieved from http://www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.asp?HREF=/articles/handbook/guthrie/index.html

Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Classroom contexts for engaged reading: An overview. In J. T. Guthrie, A. Wigfield, & K. C. Perencevich (Eds.), Motivating reading comprehension: Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction(pp. 1-25). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Guthrie, J. T. (2005). What is CORI?. Retrieved from http://www.cori.umd.edu/what-is-cori/
Guthrie, J. T. (Ed.). (2008). Engaging adolescents in reading. Thousand Oaks, CA : Corwin Press.

Guthrie, J.T., & Alao S. (1997). Engagement in reading for young adolescents. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,40(6),438-446.

Guthrie, J. T., Anderson, E., Alao, S., & Rinehart, J. (1999). Influsences of concept-oriented reading instruction on strategy use and conceptual learning from text. The Elementary School Journal, 99(4), 34r3-366.

Guthrie, J. T., Cambria, J., & Wigfield, A.(2008). Motivations for reading information books school questionnaire(MRIB-S) and motivations for reading information books nonschool questionnaire(MRIB-N). Retrieved from http://www.cori.umd.edu/measures/MRIB-S.pdf

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., Hoa, L. W., Wigfield, A., Tonks, S. M., Humenick, N. M., & Littles, E. (2007). Reading motivation and reading comprehension growth in the later elementary years. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 282-313.

Guthrie, J. T., Hoa, L. W., Wigfield, A., Tonks, S. M., & Perencevich, K. C. (2006). From spark to fire: Can situational reading interest lead to long-term reading motivation? Reading Research and Instruction, 2, 1-35.

Guthrie, J. T., Klauda, S. L, & Ho, A. N. (2013). Modeling the relationships among reading instruction, motivation, engagement, and achievement for adolescents. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(1), 9-26.

Guthrie, J. T., & Klauda, S. L. (2014). Effects of classroom practices on reading comprehension, engagement, and motivations for adolescents reading. Research Quarterly, 49(4), 387-416.

Guthrie, J. T., McGough, K., Bennett, L., & Rice, M. E. (1996). Concept-oriented reading instruction: An integrated curriculum to develop motivations and strategies for reading. In L. Baker, P. Afflerbach, & D. Reinking (Eds.), Developing Engaged Readers in School and Home Communities (pp. 165-190). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Guthrie, J. T., McRae, A., & Klauda, S.L. (2007). Contributions of concept-oriented reading instruction to knowledge about interventions for motivations in reading. Educational Psychologist, 42(4), 237-250. doi:10.1080/00461520701621087

Guthrie, J.T., & Taboada, A.(2004). Fostering the cognitive strategies of reading comprehension. In J. T. Guthrie, A. Wigfield, & K. C. Perencevich (Eds.), Motivating reading comprehension: Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction(pp. 87-112). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Guthrie, J. T., Weber, S., & Kimmerly, N. (1993). Searching documents: Cognitive processes and deficits in understanding graphs, tables, and illustrations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18(2), 186-221. doi:10.1006/ceps.1993.1017

Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M.L. Kamil & P. B. Mosenthal(Eds), Handbook of Reading Research, 3 (pp. 403-422). Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.

Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Barbosa, P., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., Davis, M. H., & Tonks, S. (2004). Increasing reading comprehension and engagement through concept-oriented reading instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 403-423. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.403

Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Humenick, N. M., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., & Barbosa, P. (2006). Influences of stimulating tasks on reading motivation and comprehension. Journal of Educational Research, 99(4), 232-245.

Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & Klauda, S. L. (2012). Adolescents’ engagement in academic literacy. Retrieved from http://www.cori.umd.edu/research-publications/2012_adolescents_engagement_ebook.pdf

Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & VonSecker, C. (2000). Effects of integrated instruction on motivation and strategy use in reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 331-341.

Guthrie, J. T., Van Meter, P., Hancock, G. R., McCann, A., Anderson, E., & Alao, S. (1998). Does concept-oriented reading instruction increase strategy-use and conceptual learning from text? Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 261-278.

Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2007). Strategies that work : Teaching comprehension for understanding and engagement. Portland, Me. : Stenhouse Publishers ; Markham, Ont. : Pembroke Publishers.

Hayes, B. L. (Ed.). (1991). Effective strategies for teaching reading. Boston : Allyn and Bacon.
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development.
Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111-127. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
Ho, A. N., & Guthrie, J. T. (2013). Patterns of association among multiple motivations and aspects of achievement in reading. Reading Psychology, 34, 101-147.

Jackson, D. L., Gillaspy, J. J., & Purc-Stephenson, R. (2009). Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: An overview and some recommendations. Psychological Methods, 14(1), 6-23. doi:10.1037/a0014694

Kail, R. V., & Cavanaugh, J. C. (2013). Human development : A life-span view. Australia ; Belmont, CA : Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Kenny, D. A. (1979). Correlation and causality. New York : Wiley.

Kunz, J. & Linder, S.(2012). Buy one, get one free: Benefits of following the controllability principle for intrinsic motivation? In Davila, A., Epstein, M. J., & Manzoni, Jean-François (Eds.) Performance measurement and management control: Global issue(Studies in managerial and financial accounting,25)(pp. 339-362). Bingley, U.K. : Emerald.

Lipson, M. Y., Valencia, S. W., Wixson, K. K., & Peters, C. W. (1993). Integration and thematic teaching: Integration to improve teaching and learning. Language Arts, 4, 252-263.

Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 1, 153-184. doi:10.2307/1163475
Matsumura, L. C.,Garnier, H. E., & Spybrook, J.(2013). Literacy coaching to improve student reading achievement: A multi-level mediation model. Learning and Instruction, 25, 35-48.

Montgomery, K. (2000). Classroom rubrics: Systematizing what teachers do naturally. The Clearing House, 6, 324-328.

Motallebzadeh, K., & Ghaemi, H. (2011). The Role of engaged reading in conceptual
learning from text and reading comprehension of EFL learners: A modeling
approach. Journal of Language & Linguistics Studies, 7(2), 53-86.

OECD.(2010a). PISA 2009 assessment framework: Key competencies in reading,
mathematics and science. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/44455820.pdf

OECD.(2010b). PISA2009 assessment framework: Key competencies in
reading,mathematics and science. retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/44455820.pdf

Oldfather, P., & McLaughlin, H.J. (1993). Gaining and losing voice: A longitudinal study of students’ continuing impulse to learn across elementary and middle school contexts. Research in Middle Level Education, 3, 1-25.

Ozgungor, S., & Guthrie, J.T. (2004). Interactions among elaborative interrogation, knowledge, and interest in the process of constructing knowledge from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 3, 437-443.

Palinscar, A., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition & Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.

Perencevich, K. C. (2004). How the CORI framework looks in the classroom. In J. T. Guthrie, A. Wigfield, & K. C. Perencevich (Eds.), Motivating reading comprehension: Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction(pp. 25-53). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571-581. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.571

Sporer, N., Brunstein, J. C., & Kieschke, U. (2009). Improving students' reading comprehension skills: Effects of strategy instruction and reciprocal teaching. Learning and Instruction, 19(3), 272-286.

Stricklin, K. (2011). Hands-On reciprocal teaching: A comprehension technique. Reading Teacher, 64(8), 620-625. doi:10.1598/RT.64.8.8

Swan, E. A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2003). Concept-oriented reading instruction : Engaging classrooms, lifelong learners / Emily Anderson Swan ; foreword by John T. Guthrie. New York : Guilford Press.

Taboada, A., Tonks, S. M., Wigfield, A. & Guthrie, J. T. (2009). Effects of motivational and cognitive variables on reading comprehension. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22(1), 85-106.

What Works Clearinghouse(2010). Concept-Oriented reading instruction (CORI). What works clearinghouse intervention report. What Works Clearinghouse, 7.

Wigfield, A.(1997). Reading motivation: A domain-specific approach to motivation. Educational Psychologist, 32(2), 59-68.

Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1995). Dimensions of children's motivations for reading: An initial study. Reading Research Report, 34. Athens, GA: National Reading Research Center.

Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J.T.(1997). Relations of children’s motivation for reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 420-432.

Wigfield, A., Guthrie, J. T., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., Klauda, S. L., McRae, A., & Barbosa, P. (2008). The role of reading engagement in mediating effects of reading comprehension instruction on reading outcomes. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 432- 445.

Wigfield, A., Guthrie, J. T., Tonks, S., & Perencevich, K. C. (2004). Children's motivation for reading: Domain specificity and instructional influences. Journal of Educational Research, 97, 299-309.