RSEXXX10.1177/0741932518772904Remedial and Special EducationFrancis et al. 772904research-article2018 Article Remedial and Special Education 2018, Vol. 39(5) 274 –288 Extending the Simple View of Reading © Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2018 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav to Account for Variation Within DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932518772904 10.1177/0741932518772904 Readers and Across Texts: The rase.sagepub.com Complete View of Reading (CVRi) David J. Francis, PhD1 , Paulina A. Kulesz, PhD1, and Julia S. Benoit, PhD1 Abstract This study leverages advances in multivariate cross-classified random effects models to extend the Simple View of Reading to account for variation within readers and across texts, allowing for both the personalization of the reading function and the integration of the component skills and text and discourse frameworks for reading research. We illustrate the Complete View of Reading (CVRi) using data from an intensive longitudinal design study with a large sample of typical (N = 648) and struggling readers (N = 865) in middle school and using oral reading fluency as a proxy for comprehension. To illustrate the utility of the CVRi, we present a model with cross-classified random intercepts for students and passages and random slopes for growth, Lexile difficulty, and expository text type at the student level. We highlight differences between typical and struggling readers and differences across students in different grades. The model illustrates that readers develop differently and approach the reading task differently, showing differential impact of text features on their fluency. To be complete, a model of reading must be able to reflect this heterogeneity at the person and passage level, and the CVRi is a step in that direction. Implications for reading interventions and 21st century reading research in the era of “Big Data” and interest in phenotypic characterization are discussed. Keywords Simple View of Reading, reading comprehension, oral reading fluency, multilevel models, cross-classified random effects models Introduction we think of these lines of research as frameworks for study- ing reading and have found utility in labeling them the Reading Comprehension Frameworks Component Skills Framework (CSF), the Text and Reading comprehension has been viewed as the end prod- Discourse Framework (TDF), and the Developmental uct of complex interactions between a reader, text, and Framework (DevF), respectively. The lines of research pur- activity. The quality of this product depends on the skills sued by these frameworks may cross and interact some- that the reader brings to the task, the demands that the text what, but hardly ever are they fully integrated. places on the reader, and the challenge posed by the specific The Simple View of Reading (SVR; Gough & Tunmer, activity in which the reader is engaged (Snow, 2002). The 1986) has contributed greatly to our understanding of read- complex interactive relations that are involved in construct- ing, both as a heuristic model for conceptualizing the pro- ing a coherent mental representation of the text are rarely cess of comprehending written language and also as a fully integrated in reading research. During any period in framework for reading research. The CSF of reading the history of research on reading comprehension, one finds research is a direct descendant of the SVR. This framework several lines of active research that focus on different aspects of comprehension. Specifically, we find that read- 1 University of Houston, TX, USA ing research can be characterized by its focus on the compo- nent skills of readers, the features of text and linguistic Corresponding Author: discourse that affect comprehension, and the development David J. Francis, Department of Psychology, Texas Institute for Measurement, Evaluation, and Statistics, University of Houston, 4849 of reading as children move from the early stages of reading Calhoun Road, Room 372, Houston, TX 77204-6022, USA. acquisition to reading mastery. For ease of communication, Email: [email protected] Francis et al. 275 has sought to elaborate on the component linguistic and On their own, each of these frameworks is powerful and non-linguistic cognitive skills that underlie the two major useful and has led to significant advances in the science of components of the SVR—decoding and language compre- reading and reading comprehension. To achieve these gains, hension. Since the SVR was originally posited, investiga- research conducted under a given framework tends to either tors have elaborated on these component skills and have average over, or to control variation that is the primary shifted their attention toward deeper comprehension pro- focus of research in other frameworks. For example, it is cesses that are necessary for building a coherent text repre- not uncommon for research on the role of component skills sentation. The TDF departs significantly from the CSF and to treat texts as a sampling feature and to administer mea- the SVR by focusing on the role of text characteristics and sures of reading achievement that average over different the features of linguistic discourse and how these aspects of texts, or to control text features through the use of readabil- language affect comprehension. The TDF has underscored ity formulae. Research conducted in the TDF may focus on the importance of helping struggling students to recognize typically developing readers in a narrow grade span, and different features and styles of text, and to understand how then average over readers to assess the effects of text fea- text is organized to achieve an author’s goals. tures on students’ understanding. These approaches are While somewhat of an oversimplification, it is not valuable in that they serve to isolate the contributions of wholly unfair to characterize the CSF as a reading frame- different elements of the reader–text-purpose interaction, work that is focused on the reader and the TDF as a frame- either at a given time point or developmentally. However, work that is focused on the text. When one examines the individually they fail to address the potential interactions research on reading, CSF research has focused on the that exist across elements and they presume that the effects impact of different cognitive and linguistic skills of the observed between individuals also apply within individuals. reader on comprehension, as well as demographic features Inferring that a relation observed at one level of analysis of readers (e.g., good vs. poor, typically developing vs. dis- applies at a different level of analysis has been termed the abled, female vs. male, and English Language Learner ecological fallacy (Francis, Barr, Benoit, & McIntyre, 2017) [ELL] vs. native speaker), and to a lesser extent motiva- in multilevel modeling research. We propose that it is both tional and attitudinal characteristics of readers (see Ahmed possible and desirable to develop models of reading that are et al., 2016; Cain & Oakhill, 2009; Joshi & Aaron, 2000; not susceptible to the ecological fallacy. Specifically, we Nation & Snowling, 2004; Oliviera, da Silva, Dias, Seabra, propose a model of reading that is capable of capturing the & Macedo, 2014, as recent examples of CSF research). variation that exists within readers, as well as the variation Interventions in the CSF have focused on building stronger among readers, across texts and time, to best understand cognitive and linguistic skills in the reader, or improving how particular readers function when faced with compre- their motivation and interest in reading (Scammacca, hending specific texts for specific purposes. These models Roberts, Vaughn, & Stuebing, 2015). In contrast, and again also describe how readers generally function in these vary- oversimplifying, research conducted in the TDF has typi- ing contexts. We refer to such models as personalized mod- cally focused on the text and the features of the text and els of reading. how these influence comprehension, and to a much lesser extent on the cognitive, linguistic, and motivational charac- Prior Research on Integrating Reading teristics of the reader that have been the focus of the CSF Frameworks (Lynch & van den Broek, 2007; McNamara & Kintsch, 1996; McNamara, Kintsch, Songer, & Kintsch, 1996). To develop personalized models of reading requires over- Interventions in the TDF framework have sought to engage coming the challenge of integrating broad literatures on readers in identifying and navigating the discourse features component skills, text and discourse, and reading develop- of the text and on building argumentation skills in the reader ment. These literatures exist largely in parallel. The joint (Meyer & Ray, 2011; Pyle et al., 2017). In addition to these investigation of reader and text characteristics has been lim- two broad frameworks of reading research, a third organiz- ited in three ways: (a) by limiting the focus to only one or ing framework for reading research is the DevF, which has two of the three domains of factors (reader characteristics, primarily focused on the effects of developmental changes text characteristics, and/or comprehension activity) and in reading, both in the reader characteristics and the dis- averaging across the other domain(s), (b) by limiting the course level skills that affect comprehension (Barnes, focus within each domain to a few features whenever more Dennis, & Haefele-Kalvaitis, 1996; Cain, Oakhill, & than one domain is