Publication Date
In 2024 | 0 |
Since 2023 | 0 |
Since 2020 (last 5 years) | 0 |
Since 2015 (last 10 years) | 0 |
Since 2005 (last 20 years) | 1 |
Descriptor
Reading Comprehension | 3 |
Cognitive Processes | 2 |
Models | 2 |
Reading Processes | 2 |
Reading Research | 2 |
Theories | 2 |
College Students | 1 |
Comparative Analysis | 1 |
Concept Formation | 1 |
Decoding (Reading) | 1 |
Educational Theories | 1 |
More ▼ |
Author
Kamil, Michael L. | 5 |
Pearson, P. David | 5 |
Hiebert, Elfrieda H. | 1 |
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 2 |
Information Analyses | 1 |
Reports - Evaluative | 1 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Pearson, P. David; Hiebert, Elfrieda H.; Kamil, Michael L. – Reading Research Quarterly, 2007
The authors assert that, in order to teach vocabulary more effectively and better understand its relation to comprehension, we need first to address how vocabulary knowledge and growth are assessed. They argue that "vocabularly assessment is grossly undernourished, both in its theoretical and practical aspects--that it has been driven by…
Descriptors: Vocabulary Development, Lexicology, Instructional Effectiveness, Theory Practice Relationship
Peer reviewed
Pearson, P. David; Kamil, Michael L. – Visible Language, 1974
Descriptors: College Students, Form Classes (Languages), Language Research, Morphemes
Peer reviewed
Kamil, Michael L.; Pearson, P. David – Reading Research Quarterly, 1977
Continues discussion of Ronald Carter's Rauding Theory. (AA)
Descriptors: Cognitive Processes, Models, Reading Comprehension, Reading Processes
What hath Carver Raud? A Reaction to Carver's "Toward a Theory of Reading Comprehension and Rauding"
Peer reviewed
Pearson, P. David; Kamil, Michael L. – Reading Research Quarterly, 1977
Critiques Carver's presentation of his theory of reading comprehension and rauding (see article in same issue), interpreting the theory as a limited, serial, mathematical "model." (JM)
Descriptors: Learning Theories, Reading, Reading Comprehension, Reading Research
Kamil, Michael L.; Pearson, P. David – New York University Education Quarterly, 1979
In the bottom-up model of the reading process, the reader's first task is to decode the symbols into sound representations. By contrast, the top-down model assumes that the reader begins by guessing about the meaning of some unit of print. Each model suggests different instructional practices. (Author/SJL)
Descriptors: Cognitive Processes, Comparative Analysis, Decoding (Reading), Educational Theories