Decoding and reading comprehension: A test of the decoding threshold hypothesis.

Wang, Zuowei; Sabatini, John; O’Reilly, Tenaha; Weeks, Jonathan

doi:10.1037/edu0000302

Cited by 67 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Instead of estimating one regression slope as in linear regression, broken-line regression estimates two regression slopes, divided by the identified change point. This method has recently been used in educational research (Wang et al, 2019) and could be useful for making future binary decisions (e.g., to teach background knowledge before reading or not).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Researchers have suggested that readers need a minimal level of decoding and word-recognition skills (Duncan et al, 2013; Juul, Poulsen, & Elbro, 2014; Wang, Sabatini, O’Reilly, & Weeks, 2019) or general vocabulary (Hsueh-Chao & Nation, 2000; Laufer, 1989; Schmitt, Jiang, & Grabe, 2011) to read and understand text at a sufficient level. It is estimated that people need to know the meaning of between 95% and 98% of the words in text in order to comprehend it well (Hsueh-Chao & Nation, 2000; Laufer, 1989; Schmitt et al, 2011).…”

Section: The Existence Of Thresholds In the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How Much Knowledge Is Too Little? When a Lack of Knowledge Becomes a Barrier to Comprehension

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Have you ever found it difficult to read something because you lack knowledge on the topic? We investigated this phenomenon with a sample of 3,534 high school students who took a background-knowledge test before working on a reading-comprehension test on the topic of ecology. Broken-line regression revealed a knowledge threshold: Below the threshold, the relationship between comprehension and knowledge was weak (β = 0.18), but above the threshold, a strong and positive relation emerged (β = 0.81). Further analyses indicated that certain topically relevant words (e.g., ecosystem, habitat) were more important to know than others when predicting the threshold, and these keywords could be identified using natural-language-processing techniques. Collectively, these results may help identify who is likely to have a problem comprehending information on a specific topic and, to some extent, what knowledge is likely required to comprehend information on that topic.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Existence Of Thresholds In the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

How Much Knowledge Is Too Little? When a Lack of Knowledge Becomes a Barrier to Comprehension

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar to the research with younger students, RfU studies have demonstrated that whereas the overall influence of decoding on comprehension attenuates over time, decoding remains an important factor for adolescents whose word‐level skills are underdeveloped. For example, Wang, Sabatini, O’Reilly, and Weeks (2019; Educational Testing Service) found that fifth‐ and eighth‐grade students who fell below a minimum threshold of decoding skill made little progress in reading comprehension over three years, whereas for students who performed above the decoding threshold, comprehension accelerated across the grades.…”

Section: Examining the Svrmentioning

confidence: 99%

How the Reading for Understanding Initiative’s Research Complicates the Simple View of Reading Invoked in the Science of Reading

Cervetti

Pearson

Palincsar

et al. 2020

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advocates of the science of reading have invoked the simple view of reading (SVR) to justify an approach that foregrounds decoding in early reading instruction. The SVR, which describes comprehension as the product of decoding and listening comprehension, also served as the primary theoretical model underlying the Reading for Understanding (RfU) initiative. Research funded under the RfU initiative included direct examinations of the validity of the SVR and the nature of its underlying components and extended the SVR in studies of middle school and high school readers. In this article, the authors use research conducted under the RfU initiative to examine the validity and utility of the SVR, in general, and the appropriateness of its application in the “science of reading” debate. RfU research has provided not only evidence in support of the overall SVR model but also important cautions relevant to the “science of reading” debate. In particular, RfU has provided evidence regarding the significance of the listening comprehension component of the SVR, often overlooked by advocates of the science of reading. This research has documented the importance of early oral language skills, which support both decoding and listening comprehension in young readers and plays a critical role in students’ success as readers as they move through school. In addition, RfU research has identified a complicated constellation of skills and knowledge that impact reading comprehension as students advance in school.

show abstract

“…The NAEP assesses reading comprehension. A student’s ability to comprehend passages on the NAEP and similar high-stakes tests of reading achievement is influenced by reading accuracy and efficiency (Sabatini et al, 2018; Wang et al, 2019), highlighting that the nexus of difficulties comprehending written language can be rooted in the failure to develop the requisite ability to integrate orthographic and phonological information to achieve accurate and efficient word reading (Harm & Seidenberg, 2004; Perfetti, 2007; Perfetti & Stafura, 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Characteristics of Students Identified With Dyslexia Within the Context of State Legislation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All but seven U.S. states have laws that govern some aspects of dyslexia screening, intervention, or teacher training in public schools. However, in the three states that mandate child-level reporting, data indicate lower than expected rates of dyslexia identification when compared with commonly accepted dyslexia prevalence rates. To better understand this apparent mismatch, this study explores factors that might predict the school-assigned identification of individuals with dyslexia. Deidentified data on 7,947 second-grade students in 126 schools from one U.S. state included a universal screening measure of literacy skills indicative of dyslexia (i.e., reading and spelling), school-assigned dyslexia classification, and demographic characteristics. As expected, behavioral characteristics of dyslexia from universal screening were associated with school-assigned dyslexia classification. However, dyslexia classification was less likely for minority students and individuals attending schools with a higher percentage of minority students. Students who showed behavioral characteristics of dyslexia and attended schools with a higher proportion of other students with similar poor literacy skills were more likely not to receive a school-assigned dyslexia classification. The findings suggest systematic demographic differences in whether a student is identified with dyslexia by schools even when using universal screening.

show abstract

Decoding and reading comprehension: A test of the decoding threshold hypothesis.

Cited by 67 publications

References 44 publications

How Much Knowledge Is Too Little? When a Lack of Knowledge Becomes a Barrier to Comprehension

How Much Knowledge Is Too Little? When a Lack of Knowledge Becomes a Barrier to Comprehension

How the Reading for Understanding Initiative’s Research Complicates the Simple View of Reading Invoked in the Science of Reading

Characteristics of Students Identified With Dyslexia Within the Context of State Legislation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About