No abstract

No abstract

The compensatory-encoding theory (C-ET) of reading specifies how the efficiency of performance subcomponents affects comprehension under diverse task conditions. It maintains that readers can overcome weak skills through compensatory processes. To test whether C-ET captures more general principles underlying scholastic performance, the authors applied the theory to algebra: 140 undergraduates were asked to resolve algebraic inequalities under time pressure or under no time pressure. Participants were also assessed on the efficiency of the subcomponents required to execute the criterion algebraic inequality task (e.g., number identification, computation latency). Strong linkages were observed between subcomponent efficiency and algebraic inequality accuracy under time pressure, whereas weaker linkages were observed under no time pressure. Under no time pressure, rate of performance was unrelated to accuracy, all consistent with C-ET. Educational implications for helping struggling math problem solvers and for understanding standardized test results are considered.

Some important approaches to reading instruction and assessment, as well as influential theories of reading, are based on the assumption that reading fluency is necessary for good comprehension. However, this may not always be the case. This article takes another look at the relationship between word reading fluency and comprehension. It also identifies diverse pathways that lower ability readers can take to comprehend well. Findings on compensatory‐encoding theory are presented. They reveal that struggling readers can overcome weak skills and improve comprehension if they know how to compensate, are motivated to understand, and are unrestricted. However, when such readers must perform under time pressure, must read text at a constant or fast rate, or must read silently, they are less likely to compensate and frequently comprehend less well as a result. At the other extreme of the skill spectrum, the article also discusses older and more fluent readers who often read lackadaisically and thus are not engaged by text. As a consequence, they comprehend below their potential. The article concludes with instructional implications for helping nonfluent readers to compensate freely and for challenging fluent readers to stay focused on a text's meaning.

No abstract