A
Alan G. Kamhi
Researcher at University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Publications - 102
Citations - 4591
Alan G. Kamhi is an academic researcher from University of North Carolina at Greensboro. The author has contributed to research in topics: Reading (process) & Reading comprehension. The author has an hindex of 35, co-authored 102 publications receiving 4391 citations. Previous affiliations of Alan G. Kamhi include University of Memphis & Northern Illinois University.
Papers
More filters
Book
Language and Reading Disabilities
Hugh W. Catts,Alan G. Kamhi +1 more
TL;DR: This chapter discusses the development of Reading Comprehension Skills, the causes of Reading Disabilities, and the importance of knowing how to organize schema content and text grammars in the context of Literacy.
BookDOI
The Connections between Language and Reading Disabilities
Hugh W. Catts,Alan G. Kamhi +1 more
TL;DR: G.R. Lyon as discussed by the authors discusses the relationship between language and reading in children with dyslexia and their ability to read, and finds beauty in the Ugly Facts about reading comprehension.
Journal ArticleDOI
Toward an understanding of developmental language and reading disorders.
Alan G. Kamhi,Hugh W. Catts +1 more
TL;DR: The findings supported previous claims that children with reading impairments have difficulty processing phonological information and raised questions about the distinctiveness of school-age children with a history of language impairment and poor readers with no history oflanguage impairment.
Journal ArticleDOI
Alternative Assessment of Language and Literacy in Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Populations.
Sandra P. Laing,Alan G. Kamhi +1 more
TL;DR: Problems and recent solutions to the use of norm-referenced testing will be discussed, with a focus on processing-dependent and dynamic assessment procedures.
Journal ArticleDOI
Phonological and Spatial Processing Abilities in Language- and Reading-Impaired Children
TL;DR: The LI and RI children performed comparably on every task with the exception of the multisyllabic word repetition task, which was consistent with those from the previous study (Kamhi & Catts, 1986).