Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Environment for Meaningful Development of Reading Literacy in Pre-School Cover

Environment for Meaningful Development of Reading Literacy in Pre-School

Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education
Volume 2 (2011): Issue 2011 (December 2011)
By:  and    
Open Access
|Jun 2012
References

References

  1. Alexander, P., & Fox, E. (2004). Historical perspective on reading research and practice. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.),(5th ed., pp. 33-59). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, P., & Jetton, T. (2003). Learning from traditional and alternative texts: New conceptualization for an information age. In A. Graesser, M. Gernsbacher & S. Goldman (Eds.),(pp. 199-241). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Search in Google Scholar
  3. Alijevs, R. (2005).[Education philosophy. 21st century]. Rīga: Retorika A.
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. Barr, R. N, & Tagg, J. (1995).Retrieved March 10, 2011, from
    Search in Google Scholar
  5. Belousa, I. (2010). Mācību pieeju, metožu un stratēgiju izvērtējums [Evaluation of educational approaches, methods and strategies]. In R. Grabovska & I. Belousa (Eds.),[Sustainable development: Practical experience in education] (pp. 29-64). Daugavpils: AIIA.
    Search in Google Scholar
  6. Belousa, I., & Stakle, A. (2010). Intercultural and media literacy: Global tendencies in metacontent of teacher education in Latvia.(1), 109-132.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  7. Bogner, A., & Menz, W. (2005). Das theoriegenerierende Experteninterview. Erkenntnisinteresse, Wissensformen, Interaktion [The theory of expert interviews. Cognitive interest, forms of knowledge and interaction]. In A. Bogner, B. Littig & W. Menz (Eds.),[The expert interview - theory, method, application] (Vol. 2, pp. 33-70). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
    Search in Google Scholar
  8. Brooks, J., & Brooks, M. (1993).Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. Cummins, J. (1986). Empowering minority students: A framework for intervention., 18-36.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  10. DiCicco-Bloom, B., & Crabtree, B. (2006). The qualitative research interview., 314-321.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  11. Driscoll, M. (1994).Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
    Search in Google Scholar
  12. Gelo, O., Braakmann, D., & Benetka, G. (2008). Quantitative and qualitative research: Beyond the debate.(3), 266-290.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  13. Geske, A., & Grīnfelds, A. (2006).[Education research]. Rīga: LU Akadēmiskais apgāds.
    Search in Google Scholar
  14. Goodman, K. (1996).Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
    Search in Google Scholar
  15. Guthrie, J., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.),(Vol. 3, pp. 403-422). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Search in Google Scholar
  16. Gutknecht, B. (1991). Transition in reading instruction: From a skills acquisition to a whole language model.(1), 3-7.
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. Helminga, H. (2006).[Montessori pedagogy]. Rīga: Jumava.
    Search in Google Scholar
  18. Honebein, P. (1996).New York: Educational Technology Publications.
    Search in Google Scholar
  19. Jarvis, P. (1985).London: Croom Helm.
    Search in Google Scholar
  20. Johansone, I. (2003).[International evaluation study of reading literacy]. Rīga: Mācību grāmata.
    Search in Google Scholar
  21. Jonassen, D. (1999b).Retrieved January 5, 2011, from
    Search in Google Scholar
  22. Kennedy, D., Hyland, A., & Ryan, N. (2009).Bologna Handbook.
    Search in Google Scholar
  23. Kerka, S. (2003). Critical literacy for challenging times: Introduction. In G. Hull, L. Mikulecky, R. Clair & S. Kerka (Eds.),(pp. 2-3). Columbus, OH: Center on Education and Training for Employment.
    Search in Google Scholar
  24. Koohang, A. (2009). A learner-centered model for blended learning design.(1), 76-91.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  25. Kristapsone, S. (2008).[Scientific research in the process of studies]. Rīga: SIA "Biznesa augstskola Turība".
    Search in Google Scholar
  26. Kroplijs, A., & Raščevska, M. (2004).[Qualitative research methods in social science]. Rīga: Raka.
    Search in Google Scholar
  27. Littig, B. (2008). Interviews mit Eliten - Interviews mit ExpertInnen: Gibt es Unterschiede [Interview with the elites - interviews with experts: Is there a difference].Retrieved February 4, 2011, from
    Search in Google Scholar
  28. Meuser, M., & Nagel, U. (2005). ExpertInneninterviews - vielfach erprobt, wenig bedacht [Expert interviews - often tested, little thought]. In A. Bogner, B. Littig & W. Menz (Eds.),[The expert interview - theory, method, application] (Vol. 2, pp. 71-93). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
    Search in Google Scholar
  29. Murphy, E. (1997).Retrieved January 5, 2011, from
    Search in Google Scholar
  30. Ntiri, D. (2009). Toward a functional and culturally salient definition of literacy.(2), 97-104.
    Search in Google Scholar
  31. EU. (2010).Retrieved December 16, 2010, from
    Search in Google Scholar
  32. Ptičkina, Ā. (1999).[Learning to read in primary school]. Rīga: Pētergailis.
    Search in Google Scholar
  33. Salīte, I., Pipere, A., & Grišāne, O. (1998).[Integrated learning in the perspective of contemporary humane pedagogy, its content and methodological base]. Daugavpils: Daugavpils University Publishing House "Saule".
    Search in Google Scholar
  34. Scheibelhofer, E. (2008). Combining narration-based interviews with topical interviews: Methodological reflections on research practices.(5), 403-416.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  35. Sterling, S. (1996).In J. Huckle & S. Sterling (Eds.),London: Earsthscan Publications Limited.
    Search in Google Scholar
  36. Tracey, D., & Young, J. (2007). Technology and early literacy: The impact of an integrated learning system on high-risk kindergartners achievement., 443-467.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  37. [Improving competences for the 21st century. Programme in European cooperation in school]. (2008). Retrieved November 12, 2010, from
    Search in Google Scholar
  38. Vale, D. (1995).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Search in Google Scholar
  39. Zariņa, S. (2010). Lasītmācīšanās procesa pirmsskolā izvērtēšana sociālā konstruktīvisma kontekstā [Evaluation of reading acquisition process in preschool in the context of constructivism].(pp. 109-117). Rīga: Latvijas Universitāte.
    Search in Google Scholar
  40. Wilson, B., & Cole, P. (1991). A review of cognitive teaching models.(4), 47-64.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  41. Амонашвили, Ш . (1995).[Reflection on the humane education]. Москва: Издательский дом Шалвы Амонашвили.
    Search in Google Scholar
  42. Ясвин, В. (2001).[Learning environment: From modelling to projecting]. Москва: Смысл.
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10230-011-0005-3 | Journal eISSN: 2255-7547 | Journal ISSN: 1691-6301 (formerly 2255-7547)
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 68 - 83
Published on: Jun 14, 2012
Published by: Daugavpils University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Keywords:
meaningful development of reading literacy in pre-school,
environment for meaningful development of reading literacy in pre-school,
expert interviews,
constructive learning environment
Related subjects:
Social sciences,
Education,
Education, other

© 2012 Sandra Zariņa, Inga Belousa, published by Daugavpils University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.

Volume 2 (2011): Issue 2011 (December 2011)
Previous article