Merging the Simple View of Reading with Rauding Theory

The Simple View of reading was merged with rauding theory by advancing a revision, called Simple View II. The original Simple View, described by Hoover and Gough (1990), has several inconsistencies between theoretical concepts and how concepts are measured. These inconsistencies were illuminated and clarified by using constructs from rauding theory. The resulting Simple View II focuses on how individual differences in reading level (called rauding accuracy level, AL) are almost entirely a function of word recognition level (called pronunciation level, PL) and listening comprehension level (called auditory accuracy level, AudAL). An analysis of data collected from 61 students in Grades 3–5, indicated that all of the reliable variance in AL was probably accounted for by PL and AudAL, thus providing strong support for Simple View II. Furthermore, the reading level of students in GE units (e.g., Grade 5) could be predicted highly accurately by simply averaging (a) their level of word recognition in GE units (e.g., Grade 3) and (b) their level of language comprehension in GE units (e.g., Grade 7). When Simple View II is merged with rauding theory, the result is a theoretical framework which includes interrelationships among all of the important constructs involved in reading ability, for students in Grade 1 through college.

[1]  C. Juel.  Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades. , 1988 .

[2]  P. David Pearson.  Handbook of reading research. , 1990 .

[3]  Ronald P. Carver.  Predicting accuracy of comprehension from the relative difficulty of the material , 1990 .

[4]  Ronald P. Carver,et al.  What Do Standardized Tests of Reading Comprehension Measure in Terms of Efficiency, Accuracy, and Rate?. , 1992 .

[5]  Keith E. Stanovich,et al.  Discrepancy definitions of reading disability: Has intelligence led us astray? Reading Research Quar , 1991 .

[6]  Ronald P. Carver,et al.  Reading Rate: A Review of Research and Theory , 1990 .

[7]  Ronald P. Carver,et al.  Reading Rate: Theory, Research, and Practical Implications. , 1992 .

[8]  R. Linn.  Educational measurement, 3rd ed. , 1989 .

[9]  Ronald P. Carver.  Effect of Prediction Activities, Prior Knowledge, and Text Type upon Amount Comprehended: Using Rauding Theory to Critique Schema Theory Research (Commentary). , 1992 .

[10]  Philip B. Gough,et al.  Decoding, Reading, and Reading Disability , 1986 .

[11]  Frank R. Vellutino,et al.  Introduction to three studies on reading acquisition : convergent findings on theoretical foundations of code-oriented versus whole-language approaches to reading instruction , 1991 .

[12]  Charles K. Kinzer,et al.  Literacy Research Theory, and Practice: Views from Many Perspectives : Forty-First Yearbook of the National Reading Conference , 1992 .

[13]  Priscilla L. Griffith,et al.  Acquisition of literacy: A longitudinal study of children in first and second grade. , 1986 .

[14]  Ronald P. Carver,et al.  Using Letter-Naming Speed to Diagnose Reading Disability , 1991 .

[15]  R. P. Carver.  Intelligence and Reading Ability in Grades 2-12. , 1990 .

[16]  Keith E. Stanovich,et al.  Intelligence, Cognitive Skills, and Early Reading Progress. , 1984 .

[17]  Ronald P. Carver,et al.  The Three Factors in Reading Ability: Reanalysis of a Study by Cunningham, Stanovich, and Wilson , 1992 .

[18]  Ronald P. Carver,et al.  The effect of reading library books at different levels of difficulty upon gain in reading ability , 1995 .