EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 191 (2024) SHS Web Conf., 191 (2024) 07018 References
Open Access
Issue
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 191, 2024
9e Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française
Article Number 07018
Number of page(s) 17
Section Linguistique et didactique
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202419107018
Published online 28 June 2024
  1. Allington, R. L. (2005). The other five “pillars” of effective reading instruction. Reading today, 22(6), 3. [Google Scholar]
  2. Ankrum, J. W., & Bean, R. M. (2008). Differentiated reading instruction: What and how. Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy and Language Arts, 48(2), 133–146 [Google Scholar]
  3. Baker, L., Dreher, M. J., Shiplet, A. K., Beall, L. C., Voelker, A. N., Garrett, A. J., Schugar, H. R., & Finger-Elam, M. (2017). Children’s comprehension of informational text: Reading, engaging, and learning. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(1), 197–227. https://iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/221 [Google Scholar]
  4. Baron, GL (2019). Les technologies dans l’enseignement scolaire: regard rétrospectif et perspectives. Les Sciences de l’éducation-Pour l’Ère nouvelle, 52(1), 103–122. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bianco, M. (2015). Du langage oral à la compréhension de l’écrit. Grenoble: PUG. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bianco, M., & Lima, L. (2017). Comment enseigner la compréhension en lecture? Paris: Hatier. [Google Scholar]
  7. Block, C. C., Oakar, M., & Hurt, N. (2002). The expertise of literacy teachers: A continuum from preschool to grade 5. Reading research quarterly, 37(2), 178–206. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bishop, M. F., & Dappe, L. (2021). Des dispositifs didactiques comme outils de vulgarisation pour l’enseignement de la compréhension. Repères. Recherches en didactique du français langue maternelle, 63, 229–246. https://doi.org/10.4000/reperes.4265 [Google Scholar]
  9. Casalis, S. & Colé, P. (2018). Le morphème, une unité de traitement dans l’acquisition de la litéracie. Langue française, 199, 69–81. https://doi.org/10.3917/lf.199.0069 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018). Ending the reading wars: Reading acquisition from novice to expert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(1), 5–51. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. Chartrand, S., Emery-Bruneau, J. et Sénéchal, K. avec la coll. De P. Riverin (2015) Caractéristiques de 50 genres pour développer les compétences langagières en français. 2e édition. Québec: Didactica C. E. F. en ligne: http://www.enseignementdufrancais.fse.ulaval.ca [Google Scholar]
  12. Écalle, J. & Magnan, A. (2021). Chapitre 4. Les aides à l’apprentissage. Dans J. Écalle & A. Magnan (Dir.), L’apprentissage de la lecture et ses difficultés (pp. 185–245). Paris: Dunod. [Google Scholar]
  13. Elola, M. (2021). Les manuels scolaires d’histoire du cycle 3 primaire (élèves de 9 à 11 ans): aller et retour entre lisibilité et compréhension (Thèse de doctorat, Aix-Marseille). [Google Scholar]
  14. Fisher, C., & Nadeau, M. (2014). Usage du métalangage et des manipulations syntaxiques au cours de dictées innovantes dans des classes du primaire. Repères. Recherches en didactique du français langue maternelle, 49, 169–191. https://doi.org/10.4000/reperes.742 [Google Scholar]
  15. Gala, N., François, T., Javourey-Drevet, N. & Ziegler, J.-C. (2018). La simplification de textes, une aide à l’apprentissage de la lecture. Langue française, Lire – écrire: Des savoirs scientifiques aux savoirs pratiques, 199 (3), 123–131. https://doi.org/10.3917/lf.199.0123 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gala, N. & Javourey-Drevet, L. (2020). Mots ‘faciles’ et mots ‘difficiles’ dans ReSyf: un outil pour la didactique du lexique mobilisant polysémie, synonymie et complexité. LIDIL - Revue de linguistique et de didactique des langues, 2020, 62, https://doi.org/10.4000/lidil.8373 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gala, N., Tack, A., Javourey-Drevet, L., François, T. & Ziegler, J.-C. (2020a). Alector: A Parallel Corpus of Simplified French Texts with Alignments of Misreadings by Poor and Dyslexic Readers. Actes de la conférence Language Resources and Evaluation for Language Technologies (LREC), Marseille, France. [Google Scholar]
  18. Gala, N., Todirascu, A., Bernhard, D., Wilkens, R. & Meyer, J.-P. (2020b). Transformations syntaxiques pour une aide à l’apprentissage de la lecture: typologie, adéquation et corpus adaptés. SHS Web of Conferences, 7e Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française 78, pp.14006. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20207814006 [Google Scholar]
  19. Gala, N., Roubaud, M.-N. & Javourey-Drevet, L. (2024). La difficulté d’apprentissage du vocabulaire de spécialité à l’école; le cas des verbes opaques. Revue Lexique 34 (à paraitre) [Google Scholar]
  20. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and special education, 7(1), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258600700104 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. Guthrie, J. T., Hoa, A. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.05.004 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Hiebert, E. H., & Cervetti, G. N. (2012). What differences in narrative and informational texts mean for the learning and instruction of vocabulary. Vocabulary instruction: Research to practice, 2, 322–344. [Google Scholar]
  23. Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and writing, 2(2), 127–160. http://phonicstrainingonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/simple_view.pdf [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. Javourey-Drevet, L., Dufau, S., François, T., Gala, N., Ginestié, J. & Ziegler, J.-C. (2022a). Simplification of literary and scientific texts to improve reading fluency and comprehension in beginning readers of French. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271642100062X [Google Scholar]
  25. Javourey-Drevet, L., Dufau, S., Gala, N., & Ziegler, J.-C. (2022b). HIBOU: an eBook to improve Text Comprehension and Reading Fluency for Beginning Readers of French. Workshop READI (Tools and Resources for REAding Difficulties) dans 13th Edition Language Resources and Evaluation Conference. (LREC 2022), European Language Resource Association, Marseille, France. [Google Scholar]
  26. Jeong, J., Gaffney, J. S., & Choi, J.-O. (2010). Availability and Use of Informational Texts in Second-, Third-, and Fourth-Grade Classrooms. Research in the Teaching of English, 44(4), 435–456. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25704889 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  27. Kendeou, P., van den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1567–1577 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193491 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  28. Kendeou, P., Van den Broek, P., White, M. J., & Lynch, J. S. (2009). Predicting reading comprehension in early elementary school: The independent contributions of oral language and decoding skills. Journal of educational psychology, 101(4), 765. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  29. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological review, 95(2), 163. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033–295X.95.2.163 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  30. Kintsch, W. (2005). An overview of top-down and bottom-up effects in comprehension: The CI perspective. Discourse processes, 39(2–3), 125–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2005.9651676 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  31. Marin, B. & Legros, D. (2008). Chapitre 4. Psycholinguistique cognitive de la compréhension de textes. B. Marin & D. Legros (Dir), Psycholinguistique cognitive: Lecture, compréhension et production de texte (pp. 61–78). Louvain-La-Neuve: De Boeck Supérieur. [Google Scholar]
  32. Marin, B., Crinon, J., Legros, D., & Avel, P. (2007). Lire un texte documentaire scientifique: quels obstacles, quelles aides à la compréhension? Revue française de pédagogie. Recherches en éducation, 160, 119–131. [Google Scholar]
  33. Mauger G. &, Poliak C. (1998). Les usages sociaux de la lecture. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 123 3–24.. https://doi.org/10.3406/arss.1998.3252 [Google Scholar]
  34. Mullis, I.V.S., von Davier, M., Foy, P., Fishbein, B., Reynolds, K.A., & Wry, E. (2023). PIRLS 2021 International Results in Reading. Boston: Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. https://doi.org/10.6017/lse.tpisc.tr2103.kb5342 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  35. Nagy, W. E., & Anderson, R. C. (1984). How many words are there in printed school English?. Reading research quarterly, 304–330. https://doi.org/10.2307/747823 [Google Scholar]
  36. OCDE (2023), PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education, Paris: PISA, Éditions OCDE, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en. [Google Scholar]
  37. Pappas, C. C. (1993). Is narrative “primary”? Some insights from kindergarteners’ pretend readings of stories and information books. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25(1), 97–129. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  38. Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific studies of reading, 11(4), 357–383. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  39. Perfetti, C., & Stafura, J. (2014). Word knowledge in a theory of reading comprehension. Scientific studies of Reading, 18(1), 22–37. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  40. Perfetti, C., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2010). Decoding, vocsion="1.0sion="1.0ehension. Dans M. G. McKeown & L. Kucan (éds.). Bringing reading research to life (pp. 291–303). Londres: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  41. Potocki, A., Écalle, J. & Magnan, A. (2013). Narrative comprehension skills in 5-year-old children: Correlational analysis and comprehender profiles. Journal of Educational research, 106(1), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2012.667013 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  42. Roubaud, M-N (2005). Affronter la complexité d’un texte: la langue mise en scène, Caractères, ABLF (Association Belge pour la Lecture section francophone), 19(2), 5–11. [Google Scholar]
  43. Saidane, R., Fejzo, A. & Chapleau, N. (2018). L’enseignement du vocabulaire transdisciplinaire entre complexité et nécessité. La Lettre de l’AIRDF, 64(1), 48–53. [Google Scholar]
  44. Spencer, M., Quinn, J. M., & Wagner, R. K. (2014). Specific reading comprehension disability: Major problem, myth, or misnomer? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(1), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12024 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  45. Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading research quarterly, vol 16, pp 32–71 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  46. van Dijk, T. A. & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press [Google Scholar]
  47. Tilstra, J., McMaster, K., Van den Broek, P., Kendeou, P., & Rapp, D. (2009). Simple but complex: Components of the simple view of reading across grade levels. Journal of research in reading, 32(4), 383–401. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9817.2009.01401.x [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  48. Wolfe, M. B. (2005). Memory for narrative and expository text: independent influences of semantic associations and text organization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(2), 359. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.