Skip to content
1. Positive about Hills et al 2002?
- simple
- complex
- comprehensive
1 of 7
Other questions in this quiz
2. what is good about Rapcsak and Beeson 2002 model?
- comprehensive but also complex
- easy to follow
- simple in terms of approach
3. what was bad about Hills et al 2002 model?
- skips stage of graphemic buffer
- skips stage of semantic decision
- skips stage of phoneme-grapheme conversion
4. what is it limited in?
- explanation of written spelling
- output variations
- explanation of oral spelling
5. what does it mean when if it skips the stage of semantic decision?
- it's hard to explain spelling of semantically different words that sound the same
- hard to explain letter name retrieval
- hard to explain calligraphic conversion
Comments
No comments have yet been made