Epilogue: Reading Comprehension Is Not a Single Ability—Implications for Assessment and Instruction Purpose In this epilogue, we review the 4 response articles and highlight the implications of a multidimensional view of reading for the assessment and instruction of reading comprehension. Method We reiterate the problems with standardized tests of reading comprehension and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of recently developed ... Clinical Focus
Clinical Focus  |   April 20, 2017
Epilogue: Reading Comprehension Is Not a Single Ability—Implications for Assessment and Instruction
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Alan G. Kamhi
    University of North Carolina–Greensboro
  • Hugh W. Catts
    Florida State University, Tallahassee
  • Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time of publication.
    Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time of publication. ×
  • Correspondence to Alan G. Kamhi: agkamhi@uncg.edu
  • Editor and Associate Editor: Shelley Gray
    Editor and Associate Editor: Shelley Gray×
Article Information
School-Based Settings / Language Disorders / Reading & Writing Disorders / Attention, Memory & Executive Functions / Clinical Forum: Reading Comprehension Is Not a Single Ability
Clinical Focus   |   April 20, 2017
Epilogue: Reading Comprehension Is Not a Single Ability—Implications for Assessment and Instruction
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, April 2017, Vol. 48, 104-107. doi:10.1044/2017_LSHSS-16-0049
History: Received June 9, 2016 , Revised September 28, 2016 , Accepted October 13, 2016
 
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, April 2017, Vol. 48, 104-107. doi:10.1044/2017_LSHSS-16-0049
History: Received June 9, 2016; Revised September 28, 2016; Accepted October 13, 2016

Purpose In this epilogue, we review the 4 response articles and highlight the implications of a multidimensional view of reading for the assessment and instruction of reading comprehension.

Method We reiterate the problems with standardized tests of reading comprehension and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of recently developed authentic tests of reading comprehension. In the “Instruction” section, we review the benefits and limitations of strategy instruction and highlight suggestions from the response articles to improve content and language knowledge.

Conclusions We argue that the only compelling reason to administer a standardized test of reading comprehension is when these tests are necessary to qualify students for special education services. Instruction should be focused on content knowledge, language knowledge, and specific task and learning requirements. This instruction may entail the use of comprehension strategies, particularly those that are specific to the task and focus on integrating new knowledge with prior knowledge.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access