Modality Preference and the Teaching of Reading: A Review

Teaching to a child's strengths versus improving areas of weakness has long been a key concept in remedial planning for many practitioners. Strengths and weaknesses have often been related to sensory modality capabilities resulting in the notion of auditory learners, visual learners, and learne...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of Learning Disabilities 1978, Vol.11 (1), p.17-29
Hauptverfasser: Tarver, Sara G., Dawson, Margaret M.
Format: Review
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 29
container_issue 1
container_start_page 17
container_title Journal of Learning Disabilities
container_volume 11
creator Tarver, Sara G.
Dawson, Margaret M.
description Teaching to a child's strengths versus improving areas of weakness has long been a key concept in remedial planning for many practitioners. Strengths and weaknesses have often been related to sensory modality capabilities resulting in the notion of auditory learners, visual learners, and learners needing haptic and kinesthetic feedback. This excellent review of research which assesses the validity of the modality strength concept finds strikingly little support; thus, practical wisdom is not supported by research data. Because the modality preference/strength concept has intuitive appeal and is apparently useful to many practitioners, the possibility certainly exists that the research is inadequately designed or insufficiently sensitive to validate this central principle. Comments regarding the methods of the studies and the conclusions of this review are invited from practitioners and researchers. — G.M.S.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/002221947801100103
format Review
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>sage_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_002221947801100103</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_002221947801100103</sage_id><sourcerecordid>10.1177_002221947801100103</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1323-6116d5716373e72222ed4687d406a9122907bfdae2f93cad5c5414ed8a59125e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9j91Kw0AQhRdRMFZfwKt9gdiZ_U28K8U_qChSr8O6O2lTaiK7Venbu6HeCV7NYeac4TuMXSJcIVo7BRBCYK1sBYgACPKIFahlVY6rY1aMhnJ0nLKzlDYAoIQ1Basfh-C23W7PnyO1FKn3xF0f-G5NfEnOr7t-xYeWv5ALWV7zWZZfHX2fs5PWbRNd_M4Je729Wc7vy8XT3cN8tig9SiFLg2iCtmiklWQzpaCgTGWDAuNqFKIG-9YGR6KtpXdBe61QUaiczldNcsLE4a-PQ0oZsvmI3buL-wahGcs3f8vn0PQQSm5FzWb4jH1m_C_xA6afVtI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>review</recordtype></control><display><type>review</type><title>Modality Preference and the Teaching of Reading: A Review</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><creator>Tarver, Sara G. ; Dawson, Margaret M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Tarver, Sara G. ; Dawson, Margaret M.</creatorcontrib><description>Teaching to a child's strengths versus improving areas of weakness has long been a key concept in remedial planning for many practitioners. Strengths and weaknesses have often been related to sensory modality capabilities resulting in the notion of auditory learners, visual learners, and learners needing haptic and kinesthetic feedback. This excellent review of research which assesses the validity of the modality strength concept finds strikingly little support; thus, practical wisdom is not supported by research data. Because the modality preference/strength concept has intuitive appeal and is apparently useful to many practitioners, the possibility certainly exists that the research is inadequately designed or insufficiently sensitive to validate this central principle. Comments regarding the methods of the studies and the conclusions of this review are invited from practitioners and researchers. — G.M.S.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-2194</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1538-4780</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/002221947801100103</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><ispartof>Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1978, Vol.11 (1), p.17-29</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1323-6116d5716373e72222ed4687d406a9122907bfdae2f93cad5c5414ed8a59125e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1323-6116d5716373e72222ed4687d406a9122907bfdae2f93cad5c5414ed8a59125e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/002221947801100103$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/002221947801100103$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>313,314,780,784,792,21819,27922,27924,27925,43621,43622</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tarver, Sara G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dawson, Margaret M.</creatorcontrib><title>Modality Preference and the Teaching of Reading: A Review</title><title>Journal of Learning Disabilities</title><description>Teaching to a child's strengths versus improving areas of weakness has long been a key concept in remedial planning for many practitioners. Strengths and weaknesses have often been related to sensory modality capabilities resulting in the notion of auditory learners, visual learners, and learners needing haptic and kinesthetic feedback. This excellent review of research which assesses the validity of the modality strength concept finds strikingly little support; thus, practical wisdom is not supported by research data. Because the modality preference/strength concept has intuitive appeal and is apparently useful to many practitioners, the possibility certainly exists that the research is inadequately designed or insufficiently sensitive to validate this central principle. Comments regarding the methods of the studies and the conclusions of this review are invited from practitioners and researchers. — G.M.S.</description><issn>0022-2194</issn><issn>1538-4780</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>review</rsrctype><creationdate>1978</creationdate><recordtype>review</recordtype><recordid>eNp9j91Kw0AQhRdRMFZfwKt9gdiZ_U28K8U_qChSr8O6O2lTaiK7Venbu6HeCV7NYeac4TuMXSJcIVo7BRBCYK1sBYgACPKIFahlVY6rY1aMhnJ0nLKzlDYAoIQ1Basfh-C23W7PnyO1FKn3xF0f-G5NfEnOr7t-xYeWv5ALWV7zWZZfHX2fs5PWbRNd_M4Je729Wc7vy8XT3cN8tig9SiFLg2iCtmiklWQzpaCgTGWDAuNqFKIG-9YGR6KtpXdBe61QUaiczldNcsLE4a-PQ0oZsvmI3buL-wahGcs3f8vn0PQQSm5FzWb4jH1m_C_xA6afVtI</recordid><startdate>197801</startdate><enddate>197801</enddate><creator>Tarver, Sara G.</creator><creator>Dawson, Margaret M.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>197801</creationdate><title>Modality Preference and the Teaching of Reading: A Review</title><author>Tarver, Sara G. ; Dawson, Margaret M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1323-6116d5716373e72222ed4687d406a9122907bfdae2f93cad5c5414ed8a59125e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>reviews</rsrctype><prefilter>reviews</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1978</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tarver, Sara G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dawson, Margaret M.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tarver, Sara G.</au><au>Dawson, Margaret M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>GEN</ristype><atitle>Modality Preference and the Teaching of Reading: A Review</atitle><jtitle>Journal of Learning Disabilities</jtitle><date>1978-01</date><risdate>1978</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>17</spage><epage>29</epage><pages>17-29</pages><issn>0022-2194</issn><eissn>1538-4780</eissn><abstract>Teaching to a child's strengths versus improving areas of weakness has long been a key concept in remedial planning for many practitioners. Strengths and weaknesses have often been related to sensory modality capabilities resulting in the notion of auditory learners, visual learners, and learners needing haptic and kinesthetic feedback. This excellent review of research which assesses the validity of the modality strength concept finds strikingly little support; thus, practical wisdom is not supported by research data. Because the modality preference/strength concept has intuitive appeal and is apparently useful to many practitioners, the possibility certainly exists that the research is inadequately designed or insufficiently sensitive to validate this central principle. Comments regarding the methods of the studies and the conclusions of this review are invited from practitioners and researchers. — G.M.S.</abstract><cop>Thousand Oaks, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/002221947801100103</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-2194
ispartof Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1978, Vol.11 (1), p.17-29
issn 0022-2194
1538-4780
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_002221947801100103
source Access via SAGE
title Modality Preference and the Teaching of Reading: A Review
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T18%3A39%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-sage_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Modality%20Preference%20and%20the%20Teaching%20of%20Reading:%20A%20Review&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20Learning%20Disabilities&rft.au=Tarver,%20Sara%20G.&rft.date=1978-01&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=17&rft.epage=29&rft.pages=17-29&rft.issn=0022-2194&rft.eissn=1538-4780&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/002221947801100103&rft_dat=%3Csage_cross%3E10.1177_002221947801100103%3C/sage_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_002221947801100103&rfr_iscdi=true