MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE ASSESSMENT AND DIAGNOSIS OF READING DISABILITY.
Saved in:
| Title: | MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE ASSESSMENT AND DIAGNOSIS OF READING DISABILITY. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Malatesha Joshi, R. |
| Source: | Reading Psychology. Oct-Dec2003, Vol. 24 Issue 3/4, p247. 20p. |
| Subjects: | Reading disability, Curriculum, Information technology, Intelligence levels, Componential analysis (Linguistics) |
| Abstract: | Even though reading instruction had been historically the most important academic responsibility of schools, recently, it has drawn much greater attention because language processing has become the backbone of the unprecedented advancement in information technology. In light of this background, specific reading disability (RD, hereafter) has become the focus of intense research efforts. As the most commonly encountered variety of Learning Disability, RD is almost always identified on the basis of a discrepancy seen between the IQ score of the at-risk reader and his or her reading achievement score. In general, poor readers who have a significant” discrepancy between IQ and achievement are classified as having learning disability (LD, hereafter); poor readers whose reading score and IQ are on par with each other are identified as not having a learning disability. This procedure, in essence, classifies children who experience difficulty in learning to read into two categories: poor readers with reading disability and poor readers without reading disability. This approach is based on the assumption that poor readers identified as having reading disability are qualitatively different from poor readers who are not so identified. This paper examines the validity of this form of classification and offers a new approach for dealing with children with reading problems. The proposed approach utilizes a method of diagnosis which is based on the Componential Model of reading which, instead of categorizing poor readers into the two categories, focuses on the cause of the reading difficulty and targets remedial instruction at the source of the reading problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Reading Psychology is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: pbh DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection An: 10911081 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE ASSESSMENT AND DIAGNOSIS OF READING DISABILITY. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Malatesha+Joshi%2C+R%2E%22">Malatesha Joshi, R.</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Reading+Psychology%22">Reading Psychology</searchLink>. Oct-Dec2003, Vol. 24 Issue 3/4, p247. 20p. – Name: Subject Label: Subjects Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading+disability%22">Reading disability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum%22">Curriculum</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Information+technology%22">Information technology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intelligence+levels%22">Intelligence levels</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Componential+analysis+%28Linguistics%29%22">Componential analysis (Linguistics)</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Even though reading instruction had been historically the most important academic responsibility of schools, recently, it has drawn much greater attention because language processing has become the backbone of the unprecedented advancement in information technology. In light of this background, specific reading disability (RD, hereafter) has become the focus of intense research efforts. As the most commonly encountered variety of Learning Disability, RD is almost always identified on the basis of a discrepancy seen between the IQ score of the at-risk reader and his or her reading achievement score. In general, poor readers who have a significant” discrepancy between IQ and achievement are classified as having learning disability (LD, hereafter); poor readers whose reading score and IQ are on par with each other are identified as not having a learning disability. This procedure, in essence, classifies children who experience difficulty in learning to read into two categories: poor readers with reading disability and poor readers without reading disability. This approach is based on the assumption that poor readers identified as having reading disability are qualitatively different from poor readers who are not so identified. This paper examines the validity of this form of classification and offers a new approach for dealing with children with reading problems. The proposed approach utilizes a method of diagnosis which is based on the Componential Model of reading which, instead of categorizing poor readers into the two categories, focuses on the cause of the reading difficulty and targets remedial instruction at the source of the reading problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Reading Psychology is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=10911081 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1080/02702710390227323 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 20 StartPage: 247 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Reading disability Type: general – SubjectFull: Curriculum Type: general – SubjectFull: Information technology Type: general – SubjectFull: Intelligence levels Type: general – SubjectFull: Componential analysis (Linguistics) Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE ASSESSMENT AND DIAGNOSIS OF READING DISABILITY. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Malatesha Joshi, R. IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 10 Text: Oct-Dec2003 Type: published Y: 2003 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 02702711 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 24 – Type: issue Value: 3/4 Titles: – TitleFull: Reading Psychology Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
