Whole Language and Constructivism: A Bibliography
Jill Kerper Mora, Ed.D.
San Diego State University
Adams, M. J. (1998). The three-cueing system. In J. Osborn & F. Lehr (Eds.), Literacy for all: Issues in teaching and learning (pp. 73-99). The Guilford Press.
Altwerger, B., Edelsky, C., & Flores, B. M. (1987). Whole language: What’s new? The Reading Teacher, 41(2), 144-154.
Beatty, L., & Care, E. (2009). Learning from their miscues: Differences across reading ability and text difficulty. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 32(3), 226-244.
Behrens, H. (2021). Constructivist approaches to first language acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 48, 959-983.
Bodmer, F. (1944). The loom of language. W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Buettner, E. G. (2002). Sentence by sentence self-monitoring. The Reading Teacher, 56(1), 34-44.
Brown, J., Goodman, K. S., & Marek, A. M. (1996). Studies in miscue analysis: An annotated bibliography. International Reading Association.
Briceño, A., & Klein, A. F. (2019). A second lens on formative reading assessment with multilingual students. The Reading Teacher, 72(5), 611-621. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1774
Cole, A. D. (2004). When reading begins: The teacher’s role in decoding, comprehension, and fluency. Heinemann.
Cole, A. D. (2006). Scaffolding beginning readers: Micro and macro cues teachers use during student oral reading. The Reading Teacher, 15(5), 450-459.
Dascal, M. (1983). Pragmatics and the philosophy of mind: Thought in language (Vol. 1). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Davenport, R. M. (2002). Miscues, not mistakes: Reading assessment in the classroom. Heinemann.
Ebe, A. (2008). What eye movement and miscue analysis reveals about the reading process of young bilinguals. In A. D. Flurkey, E. J. Paulson, & K. S. Goodman (Eds.), Scientific realism in studies of reading (pp. 131-149). Routledge.
Ebe, A. (2010). Culturally relevant texts and reading assessment for English Language Learners. Reading Horizons: A Journal of Literacy and Language Arts, 50(3), 193-310.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339-369.
Flores, B. M. (2009). The sociopsychogenesis of literacy and biliteracy: How Goodman’s transactional theory of reading proficiency impacts biliteracy development and pedagogy: Essays in tribute to Ken and Yetta Goodman. In P. L. Anders (Ed.), Defying convention, inventing the future in literacy research and practice (pp. 160-172). Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Flores, B. (2025). Biliteracy con cariño: Using interactive dialogue journals as a bridge to proficient reading while writing in L1 and L2. California Association for Bilingual Education.
Flurkey, A. D., & Paulson, E. J., Goodman, K. S. (Eds.). (2008). Scientific realism in studies of reading. Routledge.
Flurkey, A. D., & Xu, J. (Eds.). (2003). On the revolution of reading. The selected writings of Kenneth S. Goodman. Heinemann.
Coll Salvador, C. (2003). Aprendizaje escolar y construcción del conocimiento. Paidós Educador.
Goodman, K. (2003/1994). Reading, writing and written texts: A transactional sociopsycholinguistic view. In A. D. Flurkey & J. Xu (Eds.), On the revolution of reading: Selected writings of Kenneth S. Goodman (pp. 3-45). Heinemann.
Goodman, K. (1992). I didn’t found whole language. The Reading Teacher, 46(3), 188-199.
Goodman, K. S. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Literacy Research and Instruction, 6(4), 126-135.
Goodman, K., Goodman, Y. M., & Flores, B. (1979). Reading in the bilingual classroom: Literacy and biliteracy. National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=pur1.32754076272578&seq=14
Goodman, K., Goodman, Y. M., & Paulson, E. J. (2009). Beyond word recognition: How retrospective and future perspectives on miscue analysis can inform our teaching. In J. V. Hoffman & Y. M. Goodman (Eds.), Changing literacies for changing times: An historical perspective on the future of reading research, public policy, and classroom practices (pp. 146-161). Taylor & Francis Group.
Goodman, K., Fries, P. H., & Strauss, S. L. (2016). Reading‒The grand illusion: How and why people make sense of print. Routledge.
Goodman, Y. M. (2015). Miscue analysis: A transformative tool for researchers, teachers, and readers. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 64, 92-111.
Grisham, D. (2000). Connecting theoretical conceptions of reading to practice: A longitudinal study of elementary school teachers. Reading Psychology, 21, 145-170.
Gutiérrez Curipoma, C. N., & Tapia Peralta, S. R. (2023). La integración de la neurolingüística y el constructivismo: Hacia una comprensión holística del lenguaje y la cognición [Integration of neurolinguistics and constructivism: toward a holistic understanding of language and cognition]. Ciencia Latina Revista Científca Multidiciplinar, 7(3), 3251-3265.
Howard, E. R., Lindholm-Leary, K., Rogers, D., Olague, N., Medina, J., Kennedy, B., Sugarman, J., & Christian, D. (2018). Guiding Principles for Dual Language Education (3rd ed.). Center for Applied Linguistics.
Indiana Department of Education (2023). Education, Indiana’s Priorities for Early Literacy. Retrieved from https://media.doe.in.gov/news/indianas-priorities-for-early-literacy-final.pdf
Jaichenco, V., & Wilson, M. (2013). El rol de la morfología en el proceso de aprendizaje de la lectura en español [The role of morphology in the process of learning to read in Spanish]. Interdisciplinaria, 30(1), 85-99.
Kabuto, B. (2016). A socio-psycholinguistic perspective on biliteracy: The use of miscue analysis as a culturally relevant assessment tool. Reading Horizons, 56(1).
Ke, S. E., Zhang, D., & Koda, K. (2023). Metalinguistic awareness in second language reading development. Cambridge University Press.
Lenski, S. D., Wham, M. A., & Griffey, D. C. (1998). Literacy orientation survey: A survey to clarify teachers’ beliefs and practices. Reading Research and Instruction, 37(3), 217-236.
MacPhee, D., Handsfield, L. J., & Paugh, P. (2021). Conflict or conversation? Media portrayals of the science of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(S1), S145-S155.
McGee, L. M., Kim, H., Nelson, K. S., & Fried, M. D. (2015). Change over time in first graders’ strategic use of information at point of difficulty in reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 50(3), 263-291.
McGinty, A. S., Justice, L. M., Piasta, S. B., Kaderavek, J., & Fan, X. (2012). Does context matter? Explicit print instruction during reading varies in its influence by child and classroom factors. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27, 77-89.
McKenna, M. C., & Picard, M. C. (2006). Revisiting the role of miscue analysis in effective teaching. The Reading Teacher, 60(4), 378-380.
Miramontes, O. B. (1990). A comparative study of English oral reading skills in differently schooled groups of Hispanic students. Journal of Reading Behavior, 22(4), 373-394.
Noguerón-Liu, S. (2020). Expanding the knowledge base in literacy instruction and assessment: Biliteracy and translanguaging perspectives from families, communities, and classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S307-S318.
Sawyer, D. (1991). Whole Language in context: Insights into the current Great Debate. Topics in Language Disorders, 11(3), 1-13.
Smith, F. (1999). Unspeakable acts, unnatural practices: Flaws and fallacies in “scientific” reading instruction. Heinemann.
Stouffer, J. (2021). Seeking middle ground: Analyzing running records from the top and bottom. The Reading Teacher, 74(6), 769/784.
Strauss, S. L. (2005). The linguistics, neurology, and politics of phonics: Silent “E” speaks out. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Strauss, S. L. (2010). Neuroscience and dyslexia. In A. A. McGill-Franzen, Richard L. (Ed.), Handbook of reading disability research (pp. 79-90). Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Strauss, S. L. (2011). Reading theory, constructivist psychology, and emerging concepts in neuroscience: Implications for a model of human consciousness. Functional Neurology, Rehabilitation, and Ergonomics, 1(1), 147-161.
Strauss, S. L., & Altweger, B. (2007). The logographic nature of English alphabetics and the fallacy of direct intensive phonics instruction. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 7(3), 299-319.
Strauss, S. L., Goodman, K. S., & Paulson, E. J. (2009). Brain research and reading: How emerging concepts in neuroscience support a meaning construction view of the reading process. Educational Research and Review, 4(2), 021-033.
Suárez, N., Rodríguez, C., O’Shanahan, I., & Jiménez, J. E. (2014). ¿Qué teorías sobre el aprendizaje de la lectura se atribuyen los profesores que enseñan a leer con diferente metodología [What theories of learning to read do teachers attribute their different methodologies for reading instruction?]. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 4(1), 55-65.
Taboada, D. S., Mora, J. K., & Vernon, S. (2005). Early literacy instruction in Mexico: Finding congruence between theory and practice. 55th National Reading Conference, Miami, Florida. https://zenodo.org/records/6792238
Tigse Parreño, C. M. (2019). El constructivismo, según bases teóricas de César Coll [Constructivism according to the theoretical base of César Coll]. Revista Andina de Educación, 2(1), 25-28.
Tobias, S., & Duffy, T. M. (Eds.). (2009). Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? Routledge.
Tracey, D. H., & Morrow, L. M. (2006). Lenses on reading: An introduction to theories and models. The Guilford Press.
Wise, A. F., & O’Neil, K. (2009). Beyond more versus less. A reframing of the debate on instructional guidance. In S. Tobias & T. M. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 82-105). Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Woulfin, S. l., & Gabriel, R. (2022). Big waves on the rocky shore: A discussion of reading policy, infrastructure, and implementation in the Era of Science of Reading. The Reading Teacher, 76(3), 326-332.