The Simple View of Reading: Three Assessments of Its Adequacy
By Wesley A. Hoover, W. Tunmer. Remedial and special education, 2018
136 citations recorded by the source corpus.
In this article, we provide some comments on the simple view of reading (SVR), now some 30 years after its initial proposal and empirical work (Gough & Tunmer, 1986; Hoover & Gough, 1990). We begin with an overview of what the SVR is as a conceptual model, as well as what it is not. We follow this with comments, in turn, on three papers presented in this special issue that assessed the adequacy of the SVR. We close with thoughts on the main points across the three papers reviewed. Throughout, we not only comment on the research about the simple view but also on its educational implications.
Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Statistics and Probability
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3e735ec038e56f7c3df11fc5fd8383230847a345
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Developmental and Educational Psychology
In Statistics and Probability
Citations in the corpus
- The cognitive foundations of learning to read: a framework for preventing and remediating reading difficulties (2019, background): “These basic ideas are represented in the Simple View of Reading (SVR), which constitutes the top section of the Cognitive Foundations Framework (Gough & Tunmer, 1986; Hoover & Gough, 1990; Hoover & Tunmer, 2018; Tunmer & Chapman, 2012b).”
- Building Content Knowledge to Boost Comprehension in the Primary Grades (2020, unknown): “…community is quick to point out that the science of reading is much broader to include skills related to both decoding and linguistic comprehension, per the Simple View of Reading (Castles, Rastle, & Nation, 2018; Hoover & Tunmer, 2018; Language and Reading Research Consortium [LARRC], 2015).”
- The Science of Reading Progresses: Communicating Advances Beyond the Simple View of Reading (2021, background): “However, as Hoover and Tunmer (2018) noted, “there is much more to understand about reading than what is represented in the SVR” (p. 311).”