Learning to read

Reading skills acquisition is the process of acquiring the basic skills necessary for learning to read; that is, the ability to acquire meaning from print.

According to the report by the US National Reading Panel (NRP) in 2000, the skills required for proficient reading are phonological awareness, phonics (sound-symbol correspondence), fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension.

Skills required for proficient reading

According to the National Reading Panel, the ability to read requires proficiency in a number of language domains: phonemic awareness, phonics (sound-symbol correspondence), fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension.

• Phonemic awareness: The ability to distinguish and manipulate the individual sounds of language. The broader term, phonological awareness, also includes rhymes, syllables, and onsets and rimes.

• Phonics: Method that stresses the acquisition of letter-sound correspondences and their use in reading and spelling. This helps beginning readers understand how letters are linked to sounds (phonemes), patterns of letter-sound correspondences and spelling in English, and how to apply this knowledge when they read.

• Fluency: The ability to read orally with speed, accuracy, and vocal expression. The ability to read fluently is one of several critical factors necessary for reading comprehension. If a reader is not fluent, it may be difficult to remember what has been read and to relate the ideas expressed in the text to his or her background knowledge. This accuracy and automaticity of reading serves as a bridge between decoding and comprehension.

• Vocabulary: A critical aspect of reading comprehension is vocabulary development. When a reader encounters an unfamiliar word in print and decodes it to derive its spoken pronunciation, the reader understands the word if it is in the reader's spoken vocabulary. Otherwise, the reader must derive the meaning of the word using another strategy, such as context.

• Reading Comprehension :The NRP describes comprehension as a complex cognitive process in which a reader intentionally and interactively engages with the text. Reading comprehension is heavily dependent on skilled word recognition and decoding, oral reading fluency, a well-developed vocabulary and active engagement with the text.

• Motor Imaging: A Direct, ‘Best Practices’ Method for Teaching Semantic Vocabulary

There are several sound ways to teach and promote vocabulary acquisition. Research tells us that most any method that emphasizes word study will result in some progress in the acquisition of words and meanings or semantic vocabulary. There is one method however that seems to draw upon a somewhat elemental though mystifying but increasingly supported innovation that is worthy of particular consideration since it reveals a dimension of learning and hence teaching that is otherwise rarely employed, but that might better be more routinely considered, especially where teaching-learning is challenged. It involves the physical-sensory, as well as affective and cognitive domains. There has been little recognition even of the existence of a physical-sensory domain; it was not acknowledged by Krathwohl, Bloom and Masia (1964) the chief architects of the widely referenced handbooks of the cognitive, affective, and attitudinal domains that are the under-girth of most theory and practices in curriculum and instruction. The method that opens this little explored area of pedagogy has been proven to be more robust than two other classes of teaching methods representing more popular domains (Casale & Manzo, 1983). Importantly, the method is applicable from kindergarten through adult levels, and particularly so for struggling and second language learners. It is called Motor Imaging (Casale, 1985). The theoretical parameters, the founding research and the method are detailed to aid further explorations and applications. A Practice that Supports Theories Motor Imaging (MI) interweaves a new word, its meaning, and a relevant gesture, as in making the shape of a steeple when learning the word cathedral, or connecting the word amorphous with the gesture of wiggling the fingers of one hand while moving the hand back and forth, right and left. When this connection is made, the gesture becomes an aide to recalling the meaning of the word when it is encountered again, and an aide to recalling the word when it is needed in speech or writing. The implicit construct underlying MI anticipated more pointed findings from a study by Krauss (1998) whereby monitoring electrodes attached to people’s arms revealed that people “gesture” even when they don’t think they are. When subjects were given a definition and asked to think of the word defined, the electrodes detected small muscle movements related to the word meanings; words that connoted movement, such as castanets, elicited more muscle movement than abstract words like mercy. These findings further support a central tenet of Piaget’s theory of cognitive development. Piaget observed that pre-verbal infants appear to use gestures to represent meanings, and, as speech is acquired, these gestures are not replaced by words, but simply diminish in size and eventually are “interiorized” and retained in connection with word meanings. In a similar vein, Paivio’s “dual coding” theory (1986; and Sadoski, Paivio, & Goetz, 1991) proposed that human functioning is based on equal weightings for verbal and non-verbal learning. Using Paivio’s principles and techniques, Frick-Horbury and Guttentag (1998) found that when subjects were asked to grasp a bar while being told a word meaning and then asked to think of the word defined, they were less accurate, and took longer to think of the words than subjects who had free use of their hands. Recent research on mirror neurons further suggests that MI also draws upon certain other characteristics of brain anatomy and functioning that also are part and parcel of this awakening to the complex and synergistic connections between higher-order cognitive functioning and primitive operations found in many lower life forms. The effectiveness of Motor Imaging was first established in a rotational study that compared three approaches to vocabulary learning: a conventional dictionary/worksheet technique, the Subjective Approach to Vocabulary, and Motor Imaging. Fifth and sixth grade students were rotated through each of these three treatments in different orders. Motor Imaging and the Subjective Approach to Vocabulary resulted in statistically significantly greater word learning than the dictionary/worksheet technique both in immediate testing and after two weeks, and this effect was maintained across ability levels (Casale & Manzo, 1983). When & How to Use Motor Imaging Motor Imaging can be used either to introduce a weekly word list, or to pre-teach a few difficult vocabulary words from a reading assignment to facilitate classroom teaching routines.

                        Step 1.	The teacher takes a difficult word from the text, writes it on the chalkboard, pronounces it, and tells what it means.

Step 2. The teacher asks students to imagine a simple pantomime for the word meaning (“How could you ‘show’ someone what this word means with just your hands or a gesture?”). Step 3. When the teacher gives a signal, students do their gesture pantomimes simultaneously. Step 4. The teacher selects the most common pantomime observed. The teacher then demonstrates it to all the students, who then say the word and while doing the pantomime. Step 5. The teacher repeats each new word, this time directing the class to do the pantomime while saying a brief meaning or simple synonym. Step 6. The students’ next encounter with the word is in the assigned reading material. Step 7. The teacher should try to casually use the pantomime whenever the new word is used for a short time thereafter. The figure below presents some poignant examples from a Motor Imaging lesson. ________________________________________________________________________ Motor Imaging Examples New Word Language Meaning Motor Meaning appropriate right or fit for a certain both palms together

                                               purpose 	matching perfectly

convey take or carry from one both hands together, place to another moving from one side to the other

woe great sadness or trouble one or both hands over the eyes, head slanted forward

dazzle shine or reflect brightly palms close together, facing outward, fingers spread

utmost the very highest or most one or both hands reaching up as far as possible

abode place where you live hands meeting above the head in a triangular “roof” shape ________________________________________________________________________ One Broader Application has been made to Phonics & Phonetics Several teachers and specialists are reported to have successfully used this same basic approach in teaching students phonetics - aural word sounds and phonics - letter-sound, or grapheme representations (Manzo, Manzo & Albee, 2004). In this embodiment a hand gesture or expression is selected for a troublesome sound; the same gesture then is used each time the sound occurs, no matter which grapheme is present (e.g., a finger pointing to the eye, for the long sound of “i,” whether in sigh, lie, or by; a hand compressing any vowel forming a schwa - the neutral vowel sound of most unstressed syllables in English, as of “a” in ago or in cobra. The embodiments of language and gesturing detailed here probably are but a few of what more is possible when digested and applied by others schooled in the science and art of pedagogy.

References

Casale (Manzo), U. C., & Manzo, A. V. (1983).Differential effects of cognitive affective, and proprioceptive approaches on vocabulary acquisition. In G. H. McNinch (Ed.), Reading research to reading practice. The Third Yearbook of the American Reading Forum (pp.71-73). Athens, GA: American Reading Forum. Casale (Manzo), U. C. (1985). Motor imaging: A reading-vocabulary strategy. Journal of Reading, 28, 619-621. Frick-Horbury, D., & Guttentag, R. E. (1998). The effects of restricting hand gesture production on lexical retrieval and recall. American Journal of Psychology, 111, 43-62. Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964).Taxonomy of educational objectives; the classification of educational goals; handbook 2: Affective domain. New York: David McKay. Krauss, R.M. (1998). Why do we gesture when we speak? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7, 54-59. Manzo, A.V., Manzo, U., Albee, J.J., (2004) Reading assessment for diagnostic-prescriptive teaching. Belmont, CA : Thomson/Wadsworth Paivio, A. (1986). Mental Representations. New York: Oxford University Press Sadoski, M., Paivio, A., & Goetz, E.T. (1991). A critique of schema theory in reading and a dual coding alternative. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 463-484.

Chall's Stages of Reading Development

Jeanne Chall's model of the stages of reading acquisition is well known. In Chall's model, each stage builds on skills mastered in earlier stages; lack of mastery at any level can halt the progress beyond that level.

• Stage 0. Prereading: The learner gains familiarity with the language and its sounds. A person in this stage becomes aware of sound similarities between words, learns to predict the next part in a familiar story, and may start to recognize a few familiar written words. Chall's Stage 0 is considered comparable to what is often called "reading readiness." Typically developing readers achieve this stage about the age of 6.

• Stage 1. Initial reading stage, or decoding stage: The learner becomes aware of the relationship between sounds and letters and begins applying the knowledge to text. This demonstrates the reader has achieved understanding of the critical concept of the alphabetic principle and is learning sound-symbol correspondences, the alphabetic code. Typically developing readers usually reach this stage by the age of 6 or 7.

• Stage 2. Confirmation: This stage involves confirming the knowledge acquired in the previous two stages and gaining fluency in those skills. Decoding skills continue to improve, and they begin to develop speed in addition to accuracy in word recognition. At this point, the reader should be able to give attention both to meaning and to the print, using them interactively to build their skills and fluency. This stage is critical for the beginning reader. If the developing reader stops making progress during this stage, the individual remains, in Chall's words, "glued to the print." Typically developing readers usually reach this stage around the age of 8.

• Stage 3. Reading to learn: At this stage, the motivation for reading changes. The reader has enough reading skill to begin to read text in order to gain information. Readers' vocabulary development accelerates at this point resulting from increased exposure to the written word. Typically developing children usually achieve this stage in 4th grade, around the age of 9.

• Stage 4. Multiple viewpoints: The reader at this stage begins to be able to analyze what they read, understand different points of view, and react critically to what they read. Typical readers are developing this skill set during the high school years, around ages 14 to 19.

• Stage 5. Construction and judgement: At this stage, readers have learned to read selectively and form their own opinions about what they read; they construct their knowledge from that of others. This highest level of reading development is not usually reached until college age, or later, and may in fact be achieved only by those who have an intellectual inclination.

Other views

• Phase 1: Uta Frith's view of phase 1 as the logographic phase. Linnea Ehri calls it the visual-cue phase.

• Phase 2: Ehri's phonetic cue, or rudimentary alphabetic, stage.

• Phase 3: Gough and Hillinger's cipher or alphabetic phase

• Phase 4: Orthographic phase

Reading difficulties

Reading difficulties have a common source. Problems processing spoken words hinder a student’s ability to translate written words into speech. Regardless of age, subtle auditory or phonological (speech-sound) processing issues hinder reading.

Notes

• "Dr. Jeanne Chall's Stages of Reading Development". Retrieved 2006-10-28. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)
• "Scholastic - Stages of Reading". Retrieved 2006-10-28. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

References

• Catts H. W., Gillispie, M., Leonard, L. B., Kail, R. V., Miller, C. A. (2002). The role of speed of processing, rapid naming, and phonological awareness in reading achievement. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 510–525.
• Clark, Diana Brewseter and Joanna Kellogg Uhry. Dyslexia: Theory and Practice of Remedial Instruction, York Press, 1995.
• Fletcher-Flinn, C. M., Shankweiler, D., & Frostg, S. J. (2004). Coordination of reading and spelling in early literacy: An examination of the discrepancy hypothesis. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 17, 617–644.
• Galaburda, A. M., Menard, M. T., & Rosen, G. D., (1994). Evidence for aberrant auditory anatomy in developmental dyslexia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 91, 8010–8013
• Howlett, B. (2000) Sound reading emerging readers activity program. Ithaca, NY: Sound Reading Solutions, Inc.
• Howlett, B. (2002). Sound reading responsiveness assessment. Ithaca, NY: Sound Reading Solutions, Inc.
• McCandliss, B., Beck, I. L., Sandak, R., & Perfetti, C. (2003). Focusing attention on decoding for children with poor reading skills: Design and preliminary tests of the word building intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 7, 75–104.
• National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
• Shankweiler, D., Lundquist, E., Katz, L., & Stuebing, J. M. (1999). Comprehension and decoding: Patterns of association in children with reading difficulties. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 95–112
• Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151–218.
• Share, D. L. (1999). Phonological recoding and orthographic learning: A direct test of the self-teaching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72 (2), 95–129.
• Wagner, R., and Torgesen, J. K. (1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 192–212.
• Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). Comprehensive test of phonological processes, Austin, TX: PRO-ED Publishing, Inc.
• Wolf, M. (1991). Naming speed and reading: The contribution of the cognitive neurosciences. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 123–247.
• Wolf, M., & Bowers, P. G. (1999). The double-deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 415–38
• Wolf, M (2007). Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain. Harper

External links

• Children of the Code: The Code and the Challenge of Learning to Read It
• Earobics reading program
• Florida Center for Reading Research
• Read Naturally fluency program
• Sonday System reading program
• Sound Reading program
• The abc - de Haan reading method