Cross Modal Functioning and Reading Achievement

Derevensky, Jeffrey L.

doi:10.1080/10862967709547225

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 104 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings in the area of sensory integration (i.e. Bartholomeus & Doehring, 1972;Birch & Belmont, 1964Derevensky, 1977;Kahn, 1965;Kahn & Birch, 1968;Muehl & Kremenal, 1966;and Reilly, 1973) lend support for such a statement. In addition, the finding of an additive developmental sequence, that is, while one modality may be dominant over the other modes at a particular period in time, the various sensory modalities are often used when precipitated by a particular set of events, such that when both modes are used superior performance occurs (Derevensky, 1976;Flavell, 1971).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Discussion of the integration of auditory and visual skills has a steadily growing body of literature. While cross modal functioning and intersensory perception are discussed in another paper (see Derevensky, 1977) the research appears to be reasonably clear that having eliminated any severe auditory and visual malfunctioning, integration between sensory modalities is essential for information processing and learning (Bartholomeus & Doehring, 1972;Birch & Belmont, 1964Lawton & Seim, 1973;Muehl & Kremenack, 1966;Reilly, 1972;Steger, Vellutino & Meshoulam, 1972).…”

Section: Studies Comparing the Visual And Auditory Modalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modal Preferences and Strengths: Implications for Reading Research

Derevensky

1978

Journal of Reading Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In recent years, much research has been engendered concerning sensory modality functioning and its relationship to the reading process. The approaches to studying sensory modality preferences and its relationship to individual learning patterns have been numerous. The present review is designed to integrate the research findings on modal preferences, to attempt to arrive at some reasonably sound principles through a systematic synthesis of the literature, and to suggest some areas in need of further research.The question of how people differ in the rate, style, and quality of learning is one which has concerned psychologists and educators for almost a century. The fact that individuals differ along any continuum is rarely disputed, yet this fact is often ignored in psychological research designed to generate general laws of learning (Newsom, Eischens, and Looft, 1972). Discrepancies in group and individual learning curves have been formally presented by Sidman (1952) who demonstrated mathematically that the shape of the mathematical function based on the average learning curves of a group is not necessarily the same as the learning curve for an individual. The notion that individual differences merely arise from error deviations about some mythical average is no longer acceptable (

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Section: Studies Comparing the Visual And Auditory Modalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modal Preferences and Strengths: Implications for Reading Research

Derevensky

1978

Journal of Reading Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the age at which this parallelism "occurs" remains in question. Derevensky (1977) and some authors suggested that certain children remain in the kinesthetic stage (Cuban, 1970;Riessman, 1964).…”

Section: Introduction Phyllis L Messer University Of Wyomingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relationship of Sex, Age and Sensory Modality Learning Style of Ten to Fourteen-Year Old Students

Messer

1977

Middle School Research Selected Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The age when learning styles become &dquo;set,&dquo; has not yet been determined (Derevensky, 1977;Keefe, 1982;Sperry, 1973). Like so many things in young adolescence, learning styles seem to be in transition.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Building Usage and Learning Styles At the Middle Level

Messer

1983

NASSP Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phyllis L. Messer is instructor, University of Wyoming, Laramie. This article describes how one learning style measurement tool can be used to improve the instruction of middle level learners.T here are more than 20 forms of identified, measurable learning styles (Fischer and Fischer, 1979;Lepke, 1978;Messick, 1976). One person may have several distinct learning style strengths. The variety of publications and measurement instruments are an indication of the breadth of the field.Some of the instruments are more readily applicable to classroom use than others. This article will deal with one instrument, selected because of its accuracy, its feasible administration and scoring, and the logical use of its resulting profile as a tool for improved instruction for young adolescent students.A learning styles inservice should remind educators that the &dquo;ease of learning&dquo; process is indeed different from intellectual abilities. One primary difference is that learning styles involve the way an individual learns; how mental processing takes place. Intelligence involves the amount that an individual is capable of learning. Second, learning styles affect how all information is processed. A learning style strength influences how a person learns golf, social studies, mathematics, and fly-tying. Inat LAKEHEAD UNIV on March 15, 2015 bul.sagepub.com Downloaded from

show abstract

Cross Modal Functioning and Reading Achievement

Cited by 3 publications

References 104 publications

Modal Preferences and Strengths: Implications for Reading Research

Modal Preferences and Strengths: Implications for Reading Research

The Relationship of Sex, Age and Sensory Modality Learning Style of Ten to Fourteen-Year Old Students

Building Usage and Learning Styles At the Middle Level

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About