Advertisement

Reading and Writing

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 117–136 | Cite as

The role of RAN and reading rate in predicting reading self-concept

  • Ronen Kasperski
  • Michal Shany
  • Tami Katzir
Article

Abstract

Social identity theory states that a person’s self-concept is created from comparison with others (Walsh & Gordon, 2008). In the case of reading, oral reading is a salient feature young children have to compare themselves on to their classroom peer group. The current study was set to explore the ability of oral reading tasks such as rapid naming and reading rate as well as measures of accuracy and reading comprehension to independently predict reading self-concept among young developing Hebrew readers. Data from 138 s to third grade students was analyzed using a structural equation modeling analyses (SEM). Findings indicated that the path between RAN-L and reading rate was the strongest and single predictor of reading self-concept. The findings suggest that speed-based performance is linked to both cognitive and psychosocial related difficulties and that slow readers are at risk for lower reading self-concept.

Keywords

RAN Reading self-concept Reading rate Reading accuracy Reading comprehension 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Prof. James Chapman and Prof. Sharon Vaughn for their valuable comments on the PhD thesis on which the current article is based and Tal Erez for her editorial assistance.

References

  1. Ackerman, R., & Koriat, A. (2011). Response latency as a predictor of the accuracy of children’s reports. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(4), 406.Google Scholar
  2. Ackerman, R., & Zalmanov, H. (2012). The persistence of the fluency–confidence association in problem solving. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 19(6), 1187–1192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  4. Armitage, P., & Berry, G. (1994). Statistical methods in medical research (3rd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Science.Google Scholar
  5. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  6. Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15(1), 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Breznitz, Z. (2005). Brain activity during performance of naming tasks: Comparison between dyslexic and regular readers. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(1), 17–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cahan, S. (1998). Intelligence scale for children. Revised Manual. Hebrew version of Wechsler’s 1974 version. Jerusalem: Psychoeducational Services and H. Szold Institute.Google Scholar
  10. Chapman, J. W., & Tunmer, W. E. (1995). Development of young children’s reading self concepts: An examination of emerging subcomponents and their relationship with reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(1), 154–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chapman, J. W., & Tunmer, W. E. (1997). A longitudinal study of beginning reading achievement and reading self-concept. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 279–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chapman, J. W., & Tunmer, W. E. (2003). Reading difficulties, reading-related self-perceptions, and strategies for overcoming negative self-beliefs. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19, 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chapman, J. W., Tunmer, W. E., & Prochnow, J. E. (2000). Early reading-related skills and performance, reading self-concept, and the development of academic self-concept: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 703–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Christopher, M. E., Miyake, A., Keenan, J. M., Pennington, B., DeFries, J. C., Wadsworth, S. J., et al. (2012). Predicting word reading and comprehension with executive function and speed measures across development: A latent variable analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(3), 470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Conlon, E. G., Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., Creed, P. A., & Tucker, M. (2006). Family history, self perceptions, attitudes and cognitive abilities are associated with early adolescent reading skills. Journal of Research in Reading, 29(1), 11–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Conradi, K., Jang, B. G., & McKenna, M. C. (2014). Motivation terminology in reading research: A conceptual review. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 127–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. de Jong, P. F., & van der Leij, A. (2003). Developmental changes in the manifestation of a phonological deficit in dyslexic children learning to read a regular orthography. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Denckla, M. B., & Rudel, R. G. (1976). Rapid ‘automatized’naming (RAN): Dyslexia differentiated from other learning disabilities. Neuropsychologia, 14(4), 471–479.Google Scholar
  19. Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  20. Gorsuch, G., & Taguchi, E. (2010). Developing reading fluency and comprehension using repeated reading: Evidence from longitudinal student reports. Language Teaching Research, 14, 27–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Grabe, W. (2009). Reading fluency, reading rate and comprehension. Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice (pp. 289–310). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Harter, S. (2012). The construction of the self: Developmental and sociocultural foundations. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  23. Jenkins, J. R., Fuchs, L. S., Van Den Broek, P., Espin, C., & Deno, S. L. (2003). Sources of individual differences in reading comprehension and reading fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Johnston, T. C., & Kirby, J. R. (2006). The contribution of naming speed to the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 19(4), 339–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kail, R., Hall, L. K., & Caskey, B. J. (1999). Processing speed, exposure to print, and naming speed. Applied Psycholinguistics, 20(02), 303–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kasperski, R. (2009). Beyond the cognitive factors in reading comprehension: The role of reading self-concept and reading self-confidence. Master’s thesis, University of Haifa.Google Scholar
  27. Kasperski, R., & Katzir, T. (2013). Are confidence ratings test- or trait-driven? Individual differences among high, average, and low comprehenders in fourth grade. Reading Psychology, 34(1), 59–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Katzir T., Hershko S., & Halamish V. (2013). The effect of font size on reading comprehension on second and fifth grade children: Bigger is not always better. http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0074061.
  29. Katzir, T., Kim, Y. S., Wolf, M., Morris, R., & Lovett, M. W. (2008). The varieties of pathways to dysfluent reading comparing subtypes of children with dyslexia at letter, word, and connected text levels of reading. Journal of learning disabilities, 41(1), 47–66.Google Scholar
  30. Katzir, T., Lesaux, N. K, & Kim, Y. S. (2009). The role of reading self-concept and home literacy environment in fourth grade reading comprehension. Journal of Reading and Writing, 22(3), 261–276.Google Scholar
  31. Katzir, T., Shaul, S., Breznitz, Z., & Wolf, M. (2004). The universal and the unique in dyslexia: A cross-linguistic investigation of reading and reading fluency in Hebrew-and English-speaking children with reading disorders. Reading and Writing, 17(7–8), 739–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kleitman, S., & Stankov, L. (2007). Self-confidence and metacognitive processes. Learning and Individual Differences, 17(2), 161–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Koriat, A. (2008). Subjective confidence in one’s answers: The consensuality principle. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(4), 945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Koriat, A., & Ackerman, R. (2010). Choice latency as a cue for children’s subjective confidence in the correctness of their answers. Developmental Science, 13(3), 441–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, J. (1974). Towards a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lepola, J., Poskiparta, E., Laakkonen, E., & Niemi, P. (2005). Development of and relationship between phonological and motivational processes and naming speed in predicting word recognition in grade 1. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(4), 367–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Marsh, H. W. (1986). Verbal and math self-concepts: An internal/external frame of reference model. American Educational Research Journal, 23(1), 129–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Marsh, H. W. (1987). The big-fish–little-pond effect on academic self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(3), 280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Marsh, H. W. (1990). The causal ordering of academic self-concept and academic achievement: A multiwave, longitudinal panel analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 646–656. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.82.4.646 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Marsh, H. W., & Craven, R. G. (2006). Reciprocal effects of self-concept and performance from a multidimensional perspective: Beyond seductive pleasure and unidimensional perspectives. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 133–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Marsh, H. W., & Hau, K. T. (2003). Big-fish–little-pond effect on academic self-concept: A cross-cultural (26-country) test of the negative effects of academically selective schools. American Psychologist, 58(5), 364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Marsh, H. W., & Parker, J. W. (1984). Determinants of student self-concept: Is it better to be a relatively large fish in a small pond even if you don’t learn to swim as well? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(1), 213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Möller, J., Pohlmann, B., Köller, O., & Marsh, H. W. (2009). A meta-analytic path analysis of the internal/external frame of reference model of academic achievement and academic self-concept. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1129–1167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Morgan, P. L., & Fuchs, D. (2007). Is there a bidirectional relationship between children’s reading skills and reading motivation? Exceptional children, 73(2), 165–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Drucker, K. T. (2012). PIRLS 2011 international results in reading. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College.Google Scholar
  46. Mullis, I. V., Martin, M. O., Kennedy, A. M., & Foy, P. (2007). PIRLS 2006 international report: IEA’s progress in international reading literacy study in primary schools in 40 countries. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.Google Scholar
  47. Nathan, R. G., & Stanovich, K. E. (1991). The causes and consequences of differences in reading fluency. Theory into practice, 30(3), 176–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Washington, DC: National Institute for child Health and Human Development.Google Scholar
  49. Nietfeld, J. L., & Schraw, G. (2002). The effect of knowledge and strategy training on monitoring accuracy. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(3), 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Norton, E. S., & Wolf, M. (2012). Rapid automatized naming (RAN) and reading fluency: Implications for understanding and treatment of reading disabilities. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 427–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pajares, F., & Schunk, D. (2001). The development of academic self-efficacy. United States: Development of achievement motivation.Google Scholar
  52. Perfetti, C. A., Landi, N., & Oakhill, J. (2005). The acquisition of reading comprehension skill. In S. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 227–247). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  53. Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998). Raven manual, Section 1, General overview, 1998 edition. Oxford, UK: Oxford Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  54. Retelsdorf, J., Köller, O., & Möller, J. (2014). Reading achievement and reading self-concept—Testing the reciprocal effects model. Learning and Instruction, 29, 21–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Robinson, M. D., Johnson, J. T., & Herndon, F. (1997). Reaction time and assessments of cognitive effort as predictors of eyewitness memory accuracy and confidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(3), 416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schunk, D. H. (1987). Peer models and children’s behavioral change. Review of Educational Research, 57, 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Shany, M., Lahman, D., Shalem, T., Bahat, A., & Zayger, T. (2006). “Alef ad taf”—A system for diagnosing disabilities in the processes of reading and writing according to national norms. Holon: Yesod publishing.Google Scholar
  58. Shany, M., & Share, D. L. (2011). Subtypes of reading disability in a shallow orthography: a double dissociation between accuracy-disabled and rate-disabled readers of Hebrew. Annals of Dyslexia, 61(1), 64–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Share, D. L. (2008). On the Anglocentricities of current reading research and practice: the perils of overreliance on an “outlier” orthography. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Share, D. L., & Levin, I. (1999). Learning to read and write in Hebrew (pp. 89–111). Learning to read and write: A cross-linguistic perspective.Google Scholar
  61. Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407–441.Google Scholar
  62. Stankov, L. & Crawford, J. D. (1997). Self-confidence and performance on tests of cognitive abilities. Intelligence, 25, 93–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Stankov, L., & Schweizer, K. (2007). Raven’s Progressive Matrices, manipulations of complexity and measures of accuracy, speed and confidence. Psychology Science, 49(4), 326.Google Scholar
  64. Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 360–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Voeller, K., Conway, T., & Rose, E. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tov-li, E. (2000). A reading and writing test battery for 1st—9th graders (in Hebrew). Kiriat Bialik: Ach.Google Scholar
  67. Walsh, K., & Gordon, J. R. (2008). Creating an individual work identity. Human Resource Management Review, 18(1), 46–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wolf, M., & Bowers, P. G. (1999). The double-deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wolf, M., & Denckla, M. B. (2005). Rapid automatized naming and rapid alternating stimulus tests (RAN/RAS). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
  70. Wolf, M., & Katzir-Cohen, T. (2001). Reading fluency and its intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 211–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Learning Disabilities and Special Education, Edmond J. Safra Brain Research Center for the Study of Learning DisabilitiesUniversity of HaifaMount Carmel, HaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations