The Causes of High and Low Reading Achievement

Carver, Ronald P.

doi:10.4324/9781410605375

Cited by 55 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, under the sum-based version of the Simple View, an individual lacking the ability to decode could still have a reading comprehension value greater than 0 if listening comprehension were greater than 0. Carver (1998Carver ( , 2000 introduced an alternative to the product-based model of Gough and Tunmer (1986) and the sum-based model of Dreyer and Katz (1992), conceptualizing the original Simple View components in the context of rauding theory. He argued that reading achievement (E L ) can be expressed purely as a combination of Pronunciation Level (P L ), Verbal Level (V L ), and Cognitive Speed Level (C s ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Contribution of Naming Speed to the Simple View of Reading

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether naming speed makes a contribution to the prediction of reading comprehension, after taking into account the product of word decoding and listening comprehension (i.e., the Simple View of Reading; [Gough, P.B. & Tunmer, W.E. (1986). Remedial and Special Education 7, 6-10]), and phonological awareness. In grade 3, word decoding was measured with the Woodcock [(1998). Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests -Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services]. Word Identification and Word Attack subtests, listening comprehension with the Woodcock (1991) [Woodcock Language Proficiency BatteryRevised. Chicago: Riverside Publishing Company] test of Listening Comprehension, naming speed with a picture naming task, and 4 measures assessed phonological awareness.Reading comprehension was assessed in grades 3, 4, and 5 with the Woodcock (1998) Passage Comprehension subtest and in grade 5 with the GatesMacGinitie reading test. The Simple View was evaluated twice: first, with a pseudoword measure for decoding (Grapheme-Phoneme-conversion product) and, second, with a word identification measure for decoding (word recognition product). Hierarchical regression and commonality analyses indicated that the decoding and listening comprehension products accounted for considerable variance in reading comprehension. Naming speed had a small but significant effect after accounting for the GraphemePhoneme-conversion product (2-3%), but little effect after accounting for the wordrecognition product (0-2%). Subgroup analyses indicated that naming speed had its primary effect for less able readers. Commonality analyses supported the interpretation that naming speed contributes after the Grapheme-Phoneme-conversion product but not after the word recognition product because naming speed has already had its effect upon word recognition. These results indicate that it is important how the Simple View decoding term is defined, and that the Simple View may be incomplete, especially for less able readers.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Contribution of Naming Speed to the Simple View of Reading

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If the child's decoding is less than fully automatic, his or her comprehension will suffer. As decoding moves toward full automaticity, reading comprehension skill should equal comprehension of oral language (Carver, 1993(Carver, , 2000Hoover & Gough, 1990). Others…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Becoming a Fluent Reader: Reading Skill and Prosodic Features in the Oral Reading of Young Readers.

Schwanenflugel

Hamilton

Kühn

et al. 2004

Journal of Educational Psychology

239

292

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prosodic reading, or reading with expression, is considered one of the hallmarks of fluent reading. The major purpose of the study was to learn how reading prosody is related to decoding and reading comprehension skills. Suprasegmental features of oral reading were measured in 2nd-and 3rd-grade children (N = 123) and 24 adults. Reading comprehension and word decoding skills were assessed. Children with faster decoding speed made shorter and less variable intersentential pauses, shorter intrasentential pauses, larger sentence-final fundamental frequency (F 0 ) declinations, and better matched the adult prosodic F 0 profile. Two structural equation models found evidence of a relationship between decoding speed and reading prosody as well as decoding speed and comprehension. There was only minimal evidence that prosodic reading was an important mediator of reading comprehension skill.Prosodic reading, or reading with expression, is widely considered to be one of the hallmarks of the achievement of reading fluency. When a child is reading prosodically, oral reading sounds much like speech with appropriate phrasing, pause structures, stress, rise and fall patterns, and general expressiveness. However, exactly where does the development of prosodic reading or "making it sound like language" (Stahl & Kuhn, 2002, p. 582) fit in our conceptions of developing reading skill? The purpose of the current study was to determine how individual differences in developing reading skill are related to prosodic reading in order to better place prosodic reading in the process of learning to read fluently. Gough and Tumner's (1986) "simple view of reading" proposed that reading comprehension could be described in terms of two factors-language comprehension and word decoding. In this model, both language comprehension and decoding are seen as limiting factors in reading comprehension. If the child's decoding is less than fully automatic, his or her comprehension will suffer. As decoding moves toward full automaticity, reading comprehension skill should equal comprehension of oral language (Carver, 1993(Carver, , 2000Hoover & Gough, 1990). OthersCorrespondence concerning this article should be addressed to Paula J. Schwanenflugel, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Georgia, 323E Aderhold Hall, Athens, GA 30602. E-mail: pschwane@coe.uga.edu. NIH Public Access NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript (e.g., Kuhn & Stahl, 2003; National Reading Panel, 2000) suggested that more than automaticity of individual word decoding is necessary for comprehension to be enhanced. Instead, they suggested that fluency, defined as not only accuracy and automaticity of individual word reading, but also prosodic rendering of the text, is needed for children to adequately comprehend. What Is Reading Prosody?Despite its presumed status as the hallmark of fluent reading, we currently know little about the nature of reading prosody per se. To read prosodically, children must be able to do more than de...

show abstract

“…This second model involves transposing one component in the initial print-processing model; that is, placing oral reading accuracy after, not before, the automaticity components (word recognition-timed and spelling). It seems reasonable that the ability to automatically identify isolated words at a given grade level (e.g., third grade) should lead to accurate contextual reading at that same grade level (see Carver, 2000). Thus, the alternative model, depicted in Fig.…”

Section: Determining Model Fitmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Hasbrouck and Tindal (2006) published oral reading rate norms, but their data were obtained under less than optimal conditions. It is unclear what materials (genre and difficulty level) the students were actually reading, or whether they were reading for meaning, an important requirement in establishing valid rate norms (Carver, 2000). Morris et al (in press) recently reported oral and silent reading rate data in a study where elementary students (grades 2-6) were reading for meaning.…”

Section: Future Studiesmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In addition, question difficulty can vary by item or passage, affecting comprehension performance and measurement reliability. That said, text-level, print-processing skills (e.g., oral reading accuracy, oral reading rate, silent reading rate) should be assessed in real reading situationsthat is, situations where the student is reading for meaning (Carver, 2000;Samuels, 2006). That was the case in the present study (see Method).…”

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modeling aspects of print-processing skill: implications for reading assessment

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined how well elementary students' performance on a set of commonly-used reading assessments conformed to a model of automatic print processing. The assessments included measures of word recognition-untimed, word recognition-timed, oral reading accuracy, oral reading rate, silent reading rate, and spelling. The proposed print-processing model, based on the work of Perfetti (1992) and Share (1995), held that contextual reading accuracy is directly related to automatized word knowledge which is directly related to reading rate. Structural equation modeling showed that the performance data had an acceptable fit to the proposed model and to a second, post hoc model in which automatic word recognition is directly related to contextual reading accuracy. However, additional regression analyses tended to favor the initial model. Because the six print-processing components in this study proved to be reliable and related, and because two of the components (word recognition-timed and spelling) are seldom used in conventional reading assessments, the results have important implications for practice.

show abstract

The Causes of High and Low Reading Achievement

Cited by 55 publications

References 0 publications

The Contribution of Naming Speed to the Simple View of Reading

The Contribution of Naming Speed to the Simple View of Reading

Becoming a Fluent Reader: Reading Skill and Prosodic Features in the Oral Reading of Young Readers.

Modeling aspects of print-processing skill: implications for reading assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About