Strategically Teach Reading Comprehension and Build Independent Reading . .... Principles of instruction of reading comprehension (including independent reading) ...... Automatic Fantastic: Automatic skills are effective memories, which don't get ..... Build a database of features of each text, including (e.g., using Mem Fox' ...
BRIDGING THE GAP RESEARCH PROJECT PRINCIPLES OF READING INSTRUCTION TOWARDS OPTIMISING READING INSTRUCTION FOR AT-RISK READERS IN PREP-YEAR 3 Bruce Allen Knight, Central Queensland University, Susan A Galletly, Pamela S Gargett, and Queensland Department of Education & Training Teacher Researchers, Mackay, Queensland September 2017 (Version 1.6 Revised July 2018)
Central Queensland University, Townsville Campus. ISBN: 978-1-921047-27-5
Citation: Knight, Bruce Allen. Galletly, Susan A., & Gargett, Pamela S. (2017) ‘Principles of reading instruction towards optimising reading instruction for at-risk readers in Prep to Year 3: Principles developed through teacher reflection on research and practice in the ARC project Bridging the Gap for At-Risk Readers: Reading Theory into Classroom Practice’. Central Queensland University.
1
With profound gratitude to the educators and researchers of past decades, for the valuable knowledge you have built, which can be used now and in the future towards optimising reading instruction for all children, and particularly at-risk readers.
In memory of Michael Pressley, researcher extraordinaire, who prioritised and focused so strongly on the power and importance of balanced literacy instruction, and research knowledge being built in and from school circumstances, and the knowledge and expertise of teachers. This seems a strong direction for Australian knowledge building towards optimising reading instruction in the early years of schooling, for all children, and particularly at-risk readers.
2
Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 5 Section 1. The Phase 1 to 3 Journey to this Final Principles Document .................................................. 6 Teacher Reflection on Reading Research Principles of Instruction for At-Risk Readers ............................... 6 Arriving at the Framework for the Principles ................................................................................................ 7 Section 2. Key Factors Impacting Reading Instruction for At-Risk Readers ............................................ 9 Useful Models for Guiding Instruction .......................................................................................................... 9 Definitions used in the Project .................................................................................................................... 10 A Definition of Reading ................................................................................................................................. 10 A Definition of At-Risk Readers ..................................................................................................................... 11 A Definition of Reading Instruction ............................................................................................................... 11
Key Factors for Consideration When Teaching At-Risk Readers ................................................................. 12 How Instruction for At-Risk Readers Differs from Instruction for Healthy Progress Readers ...................... 12 Common Areas of Learning Breakdown ....................................................................................................... 14 The Value of Using Cognitive Load Theory and Dimensions of Learning ...................................................... 14 Using the Literacy Component Model and Seven ‘Case-Study Children’ for Reflecting on Instruction ....... 16
Section 3. The Principles of Instruction ................................................................................................. 19 Cluster 1. Teaching Smart: Teach Strategically and Carefully, to Achieve Effective Learning ............. 21 Principle 1. Ensure Successful Engaged Learning ........................................................................................ 22 Principle 2. Know the Child as a Learner ..................................................................................................... 23 Principle 3. Apply Knowledge Fundamentals .............................................................................................. 24 Principle 4. Enact Timely Strategic Action ................................................................................................... 25 Principle 5. Consider Learning Time ............................................................................................................ 26 Principle 6. Deliver Effective Pedagogy ....................................................................................................... 28 Cluster 2. Teaching for the Reading Heart: Teach to Maximise Ownership, Engagement and Motivation
29
Principle 7. Ensure Motivation and Engagement ........................................................................................ 29 Principle 8. Build Child Ownership of Learning ........................................................................................... 30 Principle 9. Foster Enjoyment...................................................................................................................... 31 Cluster 3. Teaching for the Reading Brain: Teach Strategically and Carefully, to Achieve Effective Reading Development ......................................................................................................................................... 32 Principle 10. Use The Literacy Component Model ...................................................................................... 32 Principle 11. Strategically Teach Reading Comprehension and Build Independent Reading ..................... 41 Principle 12. Strategically Teach Word Reading and Build Fluency ............................................................ 54 Principle 13. Foster Language Skills for Reading ......................................................................................... 83 Section 4. Using the Principles 2017-2067: Where to from here? ...................................................... 102 The relationship of educational research to classroom reading instruction ............................................ 102 Needs to fill gaps in research knowledge .................................................................................................. 105 Needed! School-level research towards optimising literacy instruction .................................................. 109 3
The potential of Consensus Research for collaborative knowledge building ............................................. 110 Choosing principles to explore as professional development and school improvement ........................... 111
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................................. 114 GLOSSARY ......................................................................................................................................... 117 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................... 126
4
INTRODUCTION Optimal instruction for at-risk readers in Australian schools will not be achieved until it is the norm, not just in experimental circumstances, exceptional schools, or a small number of schools, but is achieved in the usual school circumstances of classroom instruction in the vast majority of Australian schools. At the current time, it is likely that classroom reading instruction for at risk readers in many schools is not strongly research-based. This occurs for two reasons: firstly, low awareness of some to many of the considerable number of principles of instruction that have a considerable research basis; and secondly, that many principles of instruction suggested as appropriate by research evidence still lack a sufficient research base establishing them as effective in a range of Australian usual school circumstances. This document is written towards teachers, schools and education systems achieving both these ends. The principles of reading instruction detailed in the following pages have been built through consideration of reading research literature and teachers’ opinions of what constitutes effective reading instruction for at-risk readers in Prep to Year 3, over a three year period, 2013 to 2016. This document has four sections. The first section details the journey taken in arriving at this set of principles. The second section details factors for consideration when teaching at-risk readers. The third section lists the final principles for guidance of and use by teachers. The fourth section discusses recommendations for use of the principles towards optimising reading instruction for at-risk readers. Following these sections, the document concludes with a bibliography and glossary of terms used.
Excellent first-grade classrooms are very complex. The teacher coordinates the curriculum in response to 20 to 30 students, all of whom have unique developmental trajectories. The excellent teacher uses a variety of materials, tasks and grouping structures to do so. Monthly, weekly and daily planning provide a general outline of what will happen in these classrooms. What happens moment by moment, however, typically depends on student needs, with teachers monitoring student progress on tasks and providing scaffolding when they flounder. When students are successful, the excellent first-grade teacher encourages them to take on more challenging reading and more ambitious writing. If what a child is reading today proves to be just too difficult, the excellent first-grade teacher directs the child to books that are less frustrating. The excellent first-grade teacher is teaching mini-lessons all day and making a dozen or more instructional and curriculum decisions every hour.
Michael Pressley and team (2001), p. 68-69 Learning to Read: Lessons from Exemplary First Grade Classrooms
5
SECTION 1. THE PHASE 1 TO 3 JOURNEY TO THIS FINAL PRINCIPLES DOCUMENT Bridging the Gap for At-Risk Readers: Reading Theory into Classroom Practice is a three year ARC collaborative research project of Queensland Department of Education and Training (DET) and Central Queensland University (CQU) focussed on contributing to improving reading achievement by establishing principles of optimal Australian P-3 reading instruction for all readers and particularly at-risk readers. The project, conducted with state school teachers in the Mackay area of central Queensland, from June 2013 to June 2016, focussed on building knowledge as to what constitutes effective reading instruction for at-risk readers. It emphasised both teacher knowledge, built from their teaching experience and training, and what the research-base says about reading instruction for at-risk readers. It also emphasised bridging the gap between these two knowledge bases, with researchers working with teachers (teacher researchers) to develop sound principles of effective reading instruction for at-risk readers in Prep to Year 3, the first four years of formal schooling in Queensland (Qld). In Phase 1 of the project, a survey of teacher opinions was conducted, with responses from over 300 teachers in a wide variety of contexts in the central Queensland area; and a Phase 2 Discussion Paper was developed focussed on reading instruction principles built from consideration of reading research evidence including major reviews of research on reading instruction and more than 1000 individual research studies. It is recommended for reading in addition to this document, having more detailed discussion of many areas. Phase 2 of the project, in 2014, focussed on 63 teachers working collaboratively with researchers to consider what reading research says is best practice in reading instruction for young at-risk readers, in four 1-day professional development days; then gather teacher opinions and feedback as to how well the reading research principles fit with teacher understandings and recommendations as to best practice. An end product of Phase 2 was the Phase 2 Draft Set of Principles of Optimal Instruction for At-Risk Readers in Years Prep to Year 3. In Phase 3, these draft principles were trialled in 2015, formally by 18 selected teachers, and informally by other teachers who had participated in Phase 2. No dissention was experienced regarding any principles, with Phase 2 and 3 instead involving strong collaborative honing of some principles and subprinciples, and adding of subprinciples. The final principles document was then developed and offered for scrutiny by teachers and researchers within and beyond the project. This document is the final form of the Principles of Optimal Instruction for At-risk Readers in Prep to Year 3, produced at the end of the project (June 2016).
Teacher Reflection on Reading Research Principles of Instruction for At-Risk Readers Reading research principles were presented through professional development and through a Discussion Paper prepared by the CQU researchers with ongoing consultation with teachers as to the contents of the Discussion Paper. The Discussion Paper listed four sets of instructional principles: 1. General principles of instruction (including principles from models used in the project). 2. Principles of instruction of reading comprehension (including independent reading) 3. Principles of instruction of word reading (including fluency). 4. Principles of instruction of language skills (including language reasoning for reading). Teacher feedback was provided from 68 teachers involved in four groups with overlapping membership: a Reference Group of six senior Education Queensland staff who advised on the project, a Consultation Group of eight teachers acting in an advisory role in the project, a Professional Development Group of 60 teachers, and a Focus Group of eleven teachers who worked to merge the principles of the research with teacher feedback, submissions and contributions: • The Consultation Group advised on multiple factors across Phases 1 and 2, including the definitions used in the project, the contents of the Discussion Paper as it was being developed, and the draft principles as they were being honed.
6
• •
The Professional Development Group of 60 teachers focussed on principles of effective reading instruction from reading research literature as part of their Phase 2 involvement in a year-long professional development (PD) project on optimising reading outcomes of Prep-Yr3 at-risk readers. The Focus Group of eleven highly experienced teachers was invited to work together towards the end of Phase 2, to help develop the draft set of principles of optimal reading instruction for at-risk readers built from the discussion paper and teacher contributions.
To support teachers’ providing of opinions and feedback, a range of formats were used: • In discussion meetings, a small number of open-ended questions were used to guide discussion, with teacher comments and discussion points recorded and later summarised. • For providing feedback on the Discussion Paper, teachers were provided with six guiding questions used for each of the four sets of principles of instruction: o Q1 How well do the Principles of Instruction fit with your understanding? o Q2 What gaps are there (points that should have been there and weren’t)? o Q3 What new ideas are there that you’ve gained from either the Discussion Paper or being part of the project, e.g., PD days? o Q4 What are your thoughts on the principles? o Q5 Leverage for improving school reading outcomes: Which ≤5 principles do you think would make a strong difference in improving the literacy skills of at-risk readers if schools chose to focus strongly on implementing them as part of improving reading outcomes for at-risk readers? (Feel free to add principles not listed but which you feel are important.) o Q6 What other comments or suggestions would you like to add? • Teachers working as project literacy co-ordinators and members of the Consultation Group and Focus Group were invited to contribute further opinions when involved in honing the principles and integrating teacher opinion data with the Discussion Paper principles. • Teachers across the project and teachers and researchers beyond the project were invited to scrutinise and provide feedback on the final draft of this report.
Arriving at the Framework for the Principles In forming the draft principles, which became this principles document, the team aimed to include all important points while also aiming for relative succinctness, searching for a practical framework of best compromise, with much weighing of options as to strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. The briefest version of the instructional principles is the maxim tentatively used by teachers and researchers towards the end of Phase 2. This maxim seemed to encapsulate effective differentiated reading instruction for all readers, both at-risk and healthy progress readers. In short form, the maxim is 'Give children what they need.' In more formal terminology, it is stated as Support each child to build the reading skills needed for effective progress towards becoming a proficient reader: Maximise teaching and learning time spent on subskills the child needs for effective progress. Reduce learning time focussed on reading subskills making healthy progress. Find the learning time for the child’s teaching and learning to be effective. Ensure the road to reading is one of successful engaged learning. This maxim has the advantage of brevity, but lacks detail to support teachers’ and schools’ thinking on important strategies for improving reading outcomes for at-risk readers. What was needed was a logical practical form providing sufficient detail, whilst being practical and not overly wordy. Brainstorming individually then collaboratively by researchers resulted in use of three categories of principles, with each principle having a rationale, multiple teaching strategies, and examples of activities using those strategies. It was felt that this form was sufficiently comprehensive, whilst also meeting the need to be flexible and allow modification of the principles over time during Phase 3 of the project. The three categories equate to the How, Who and What of teaching at-risk readers: 7
1. Teaching Smart (How): Teach Strategically and Carefully, to Achieve Effective Learning 2. Teaching for the Reading Heart (Who): Teach to Maximise Children’s Ownership, Engagement and Motivation for Reading. 3. Teaching for the Reading Brain (What): Teach Strategically and Carefully, to Achieve Effective Reading Development. The principles are detailed in Section 3 of this document using these three sections. Suggested use of the principles by educators and researchers is then discussed in Section 4. Rather than including lots of references, cited across the document, then detailed in a very long, complete reference list, this document cites few references and instead uses a bibliography: a list of recommended readings, many of which have been used in developing the principles listed in this document. This choice was made deliberately, for three reasons. Firstly, given the very extensive amount of documents considered for the principles, to cite the many individual studies which underlie specific instructional principles would have made the document excessively lengthy. Secondly, a commented bibliography, detailing and briefly explaining useful readings for schools and teachers (including major reviews of the research on reading instruction for at-risk readers) is more in keeping with the purpose of the Bridging the Gap project, with its aims of providing instructional principles and research knowledge for ongoing use by teachers and schools. Thirdly, as discussed in Section 4, there are many and major research gaps when it comes to research-based principles of instruction established as being effective at school level; citing all studies would have included studies which offer only tenuous knowledge, rather than knowledge fully useful for school circumstances; and the writers felt explanation was needed, if citing these many studies; this too, would have added extensively to the length of the document.
For me, the ‘principles’ have already taken on a life of their own, and this resource is going to guide my teaching for years to come. I’m excited about all the different things I want to try and explore. Our school is keen to explore some of the principles systematically, too, which should be really helpful. Participating Teacher
8
SECTION 2. KEY FACTORS IMPACTING READING INSTRUCTION FOR AT-RISK READERS Effective reading instruction for children in Prep to Year 3, including at-risk readers, is Balanced Instruction supporting children’s reading development, such that at the start of Year 4, they have confident skilled use of • Reading comprehension: Readers are able to confidently and skilfully apply language skills, using reading comprehension strategies, when reading Year 4 texts. • Word reading and fluency: Readers are able to confidently and skilfully read the words in Year 4 texts, through reading familiar words automatically and being able to decode unfamiliar words efficiently, using relatively sophisticated graphophonics skills in the context of the semantic and syntactic cues provided by the text. Effective reading instruction in Prep to Year 3 focusses on the skills and subskills pivotal to early reading development as well as authentic reading experiences. These skills include • Reading comprehension skills for independent and academic reading: specific language strategies shown to boost reading comprehension. • Language skills for reading: language and reasoning skills which support reading comprehension, including spoken language, listening comprehension and inferential reasoning skills and subskills. • Word reading (reading accuracy): skills reading words as single words and in authentic texts. This section explores key factors for teaching at-risk readers. It briefly discusses the four research-based models used in the project, definitions of reading, at-risk readers, and reading instruction used in the project; and key issues impacting success, and lack thereof, in reading instruction for at-risk readers.
Useful Models for Guiding Instruction The models used for the project with regard to effective reading instruction for at-risk readers are: • Models for considering reading development, difficulties and instruction o The Literacy Component Model of Reading (Knight, Galletly, & Gargett, submitted-a), which incorporates Gough & Tunmer’s (1986) Simple View of Reading (Gough & Tunmer, 1986, Hoover & Gough, 1990). o Orthographic Advantage Theory (Galletly & Knight, 2004, 2011, 2013; Knight, Galletly & Gargett, submitted-a-e). • Models for optimising instruction for diverse learners and curriculum areas: o Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller 1994; Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation, 2017). o Marzano and Pickering’s (1997) Dimensions of Learning (DoL). These models were used as tools for teachers to consider reading, at-risk readers and diverse aspects of reading instruction, towards the developing of principles of best-practice reading instruction for early years at-risk readers, built from the research base on reading development, difficulties and instruction. The two models for considering reading development, difficulties and instruction are the Literacy Component Model and Orthographic Advantage Theory. The Literacy Component Model emphasises the three key components of effective reading development, Reading Comprehension, Language Skills, Word-reading skills: Reading Comprehension = Word Reading x Language Skills for Reading A powerful tool for teachers for guiding reading instruction, it is used as a separate instructional principle, (Principle 10: Use the Literacy Component Model) and explained in more detail in that section.. Orthographic Advantage Theory looks at the impacts of English’s very high level of orthographic complexity compared to other nations and the impacts it has in making it much harder for children to learn to read. It emphasises the very high cognitive load of learning to read and write words and do literacy tasks involving word reading and writing, which is experienced by Australian children learning to read English, in comparison to children in nations using regular orthographies (In those nations, learning to read and write words has very low cognitive load, such that very few children have word-reading or spelling difficulties). 9
Orthographic Advantage Theory establishes managing high cognitive load successfully as being the key challenge of effective reading instruction for at-risk readers. The Literacy Component Model and Orthographic Advantage Theory are powerful tools for thinking and reflecting on multiple aspects of reading development, difficulties and instruction. The two models for optimising instruction are Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller 1994; Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation, 2017) and Marzano and Pickering’s (1997) Dimensions of Learning framework. Cognitive Load Theory is used for its emphasising the importance of teaching ensuring children’s processing capacity is not overwhelmed during learning - a key factor in effective instruction of at-risk readers. Dimensions of Learning is utilised for its power in supporting teachers to consider the five key aspects of successful versus unsuccessful skill development in at-risk readers. While Dimensions of Learning is used elsewhere as a pedagogical framework for many areas of learning, in this project it is used purely as a five point framework valued for its clever emphasis on the five essential aspects of learning for at-risk readers. Readers are encouraged to further explore each of these models.
Definitions used in the Project Definitions of what constitutes ‘reading’, ‘at-risk readers’ and ‘reading instruction’ were developed for the project through discussion with the project’s Consultation Group of expert teachers in the Mackay area as to what teachers considered important aspects which needed to be included in the definitions. This generated a list of concepts which fully fitted with points relevant from research evidence perspectives. Following this, decisions were made as to what logistically could be managed within the project, as increasingly broad definitions create increasingly larger skill areas which need to be considered. The definitions decided upon are as follows. A Definition of Reading The term Reading, for the Bridging the Gap project, is defined as print reading, including • Reading comprehension at literal and inferential levels. • Word reading (reading accuracy) of regular and less regular words, familiar and unfamiliar words, and decontextualised and contextualised words. • Literature experience. • A love of books and reading. • Motivation for and engagement in reading. • Independent reading of diverse texts. • Reading fluency in reading aloud and silent reading. • Cognitive processing for reading, including phonological awareness, working memory and automaticity. • Language skills for reading, including vocabulary, language comprehension and reasoning, and conversations and discussions about texts and reading. • Writing as it relates to word reading, including spelling and writing of phonemic approximations. • Reading to children, with children and by children of diverse texts, including renowned literature. This project views reading as a broad concept with multiple complex facets: Reading is a complex activity that can be defined in a number of ways, depending upon the particular aspect of the skill or activity one is focusing on. For example, reading can be defined as the construction of meaning from text or as learning from print, if one is focusing on comprehension processes in reading. Reading can also be defined as deciphering print, if one is focusing on the aspect of reading that involves identifying the particular words the author has selected to convey meaning. At the word level, [reading may involve] knowing the meaning of the word that is identified or simply pronouncing it. ... The word ‘reading’ may be used to stand for quite different constructs…depending upon the particular aspect of reading that is being discussed. (Torgesen, Wagner, & Rashotte, 1999, pp.1-2)
10
This broad view of reading encompasses many aspects of literacy, including the reading components of Knight and Galletly’s (2010) definition and model of literacy used in the CAMLIT program (CQUniversity Accelerated Metacognitive Literacy Intensive Tuition) shown below. Literacy is • The ability to read and write confidently and fluently, • The ability to reflect on and discuss the content of what is read and written, and • Extensive use of those skills in diverse situations, including home, workplace and community life.
Put simply: • Being an effective reader lets you understand what others say in print. • Being an effective writer lets others understand what you have to say. • Being a reflective knowledgeable reader and writer, who enjoys reading, and is confident and fluent at reading and writing makes you a highly literate Australian citizen. To be literate uses reading, writing, talking, listening & thinking skills.
A Definition of At-Risk Readers The term At-Risk Readers, for the Bridging the Gap project, is defined as children in year-levels Prep to Year 3 who are at-risk of or are experiencing delayed development of reading skills, including reading comprehension, reading fluency and word-reading, and/or language-reasoning skills, possibly including difficulties or experiential gaps in development of • Early word-reading skills including letter-sound knowledge, word reading of highly frequent words, and phonics skills for reading familiar and unfamiliar regular words. • Verbal communication skills including language comprehension and reasoning, vocabulary, phonological awareness, and language expression. • Reading comprehension at literal and inferential levels. • Motivation, engagement and self-identity as a reader, writer and competent learner. • Information processing skills for reading, including working memory, cognitive processing, phonological awareness and attention and distractibility. • A sufficient bank of early experiences in literacy and literature. • Engagement in and benefiting from literature experience and experiences, and independent reading. This judgement of At-Risk Reader status is made by the child’s teachers and schools, using diverse perspectives, likely including observing and working with the child during reading, and monitoring the child’s development of skills, fluency and confidence in reading skills and subskills, particularly in the three reading component areas: reading comprehension, language skills underlying effective reading, and word reading (reading accuracy).
A Definition of Reading Instruction The term Reading Instruction, for the Bridging the Gap project, is Balanced Instruction, defined as: • Strategic intentional instruction, • Moving children effectively through development of reading skills and subskills, • Across multiple dimensions of learning, from early skill development through mastery to fluent skill use in diverse contexts, • With instruction initially fully teacher-managed (explicit teaching), • Moving to increasing student ownership and self-management.
11
As Ellis (2005, p44-46) explains, There is no one single instructional method that deserves sole claim to being ‘best practice’. Of course this will come as no surprise to teaching practitioners operating in the real worlds of their classrooms. Rather than single strategy solutions, the common wisdom of research in the field currently points to the need for balanced approaches to be employed to accommodate for the diverse needs of students….Balanced approaches are intended to take what has been learnt through research and practice and combine them into the means of providing students with the best possible education.
Reading Instruction for the Bridging the Gap project is classroom instruction, in that the class teacher is the central professional involved in and controlling reading instruction for the children in that class. Classroom reading instruction, organised by the class teacher, may well include small group and withdrawal instruction, and reading instruction conducted by support teachers and teacher aides. Literacy and numeracy are the arch ‘skills that beget skills’, sets of capabilities and dispositions that shape and enrich the development of cognitive skills and understandings. Without a powerful base, established early in students’ encounters with a largely literacyand numeracy saturated school system, they are more likely to lack the capabilities that generate other knowledges and understandings. FREEBODY, 2005, P.VII
Key Factors for Consideration When Teaching At-Risk Readers This section first discusses how instruction for at-risk readers differs from instruction for healthy progress readers. It then briefly explores common learning breakdowns of at-risk readers and how instruction needs to be tailored to avoid these breakdowns. It then details seven ‘case-study children’ which were used with teachers in the project in Phase 2, each a profile of a common specific pattern of reading weakness and instructional needs. How Instruction for At-Risk Readers Differs from Instruction for Healthy Progress Readers Effective teaching of at-risk readers entails strong consideration of factors impacting at-risk readers through: • Teaching for the Reading Heart (having deep understanding of the child), • Teaching Smart (Effective pedagogy so maximum learning is achieved in available learning time), and • Teaching for the Reading Brain (Effective progress in the subskills of effective reading, for children to move from being at-risk readers to becoming healthy progress readers) Many if not most of the principles of instruction for at-risk readers are the same principles used for all readers. It is thus useful to reflect on what distinguishes optimal instruction for at-risk readers from optimal instruction for healthy progress readers. Key differences between optimal reading instruction for at-risk versus healthy progress readers lie in: 1. Successfully differentiated instruction being less a goal, than an instructional imperative. 2. Four serious learning breakdowns which at-risk readers experience when instruction is not successful, of difficulty initially mastering skills (Mastery), difficulty becoming automatic (Automaticity), failing to generalise skills to effective use in diverse contexts (Generalisation), and forgetting skills which have been learned (Maintenance). 3. The significantly low processing capacity (working memory) of many at-risk readers, considerably lower than most children their age (Gathercole & Alloway, 2007). 4. The further shrinking of processing capacity when children are disengaged, anxious or stressed. 5. The crucial role of self-confidence as a learner, and healthy reading self-identity: As Henry Ford said, ‘Whether you think you can, or whether you think you can’t, you’re right!’ 6. The importance of meeting the ‘Find the Learning Time’ challenge: 12
o
7.
8. 9.
10.
11.
12.
13. 14.
15. 16. 17. 18. 19.
20.
Differentiating instruction effectively, so it is focussed precisely on meeting the child’s current instructional needs. o Achieving sufficient teaching and learning time to build the child’s needed skills. o Ensuring the child doesn’t miss out on important class learning and enjoyable class literacy activities. The value of using the Literacy Component Model (Reading Comprehension = Word Reading x Language Skills for Reading) and its categories of weak learners, and establishing children’s instructional needs by considering their levels of skill in word-reading and language skills. Strong need for awareness of English orthographic complexity and the extremely high cognitive load of learning to read and write words, and do tasks involving reading and writing words. The crux of effective teaching being to successfully manage Content and Task Load (cognitive load) so at-risk readers with low processing capacity are not overwhelmed, resulting in low success or failure too frequently experienced. The crucial role of Successful Engaged Learning and the damage which can occur from lots of unsuccessful learning, through diminishing self-confidence and developing Learned Helplessness (inner belief of not being capable of learning to read). The vital importance of high teacher expertise for teaching at-risk readers: o Being expert in teaching word-reading, reading comprehension and language skills. o Being able to quickly and effortlessly adjust tasks, in planning and while teaching, so that instruction is always skilfully differentiated, and children have learning success. The crucial role of achieving all five Dimensions of Learning (DoL) successfully for at-risk readers learning to be successful and enduring, and particularly the DoL2-4 progression: o DoL1 Motivation and Engagement (Attitudes and Perceptions) - The starting point of effective learning is active persistent engaged learners. o DoL5 Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (Habits of Mind) - The end goal of effective learning is sophisticated skill mastery: strategies used effectively in diverse contexts. o The DoL2-4 progression of learning from early skill development (DoL2) to sophisticated skill usage (DoL4), prevents learning breakdowns through keeping cognitive load manageable across the learning progression, while building skills, mastery, automaticity, generalisation and maintenance: ▪ DoL2. Focussed Skill Development (Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge). ▪ DoL3. Scaffolded Generalising of Skills (Extending and Refining Knowledge). ▪ DoL4. Extensive Authentic Skill Usage (Using Knowledge Meaningfully). The importance of monitoring skill development over time using efficiency data (e.g., skills correct per minute), which measures increasing skill, and can detect when skills levels slip. The importance of analysing instruction carefully when children’s learning has not been successful, through considering each of the five DoL dimensions, to decide on and plan the revised instruction which is needed. The importance of quickly moving into Timely Efficient Intervention, and effective use of repair strategies as soon as possible, in order to reinstate Successful Engaged Learning. The very large amounts of practice of skills at different levels of development which many atrisk readers need if they are to make effective progress in reading skills and subskills. The high resourcing required in achieving this instructional intensity, and resultant needs to use resources strategically and effectively. The importance of learning being motivating, engaging and fun, given the large amount of learning and practice many at-risk readers have to do to achieve effective reading progress. Taking a long-term perspective towards efficient literacy development over time, e.g., o Being aware of the Prep-Year 6 curriculum and future, as well as present needs. o Building subskills and using activities which support learning across multiple areas, and ‘save’ learning time, e.g., Synonym Sentences, Brave Spelling, speech-to-text software, Repeated Reading texts which build background knowledge for future KLA topics. The vital role of strong emotional supports and mentoring as part of reading instruction, so children understand their learning challenges and feel strongly supported, knowing teachers are aware of just how hard it is for them to learn, and how hard they are working.
13
Common Areas of Learning Breakdown There are four areas of learning failure which are very common in weak readers. They are weakness in skill mastery, long-term retention of skills and skill generalisation: 1. Skill Learning: Weakness in learning skills to a correct level: major difficulty progressing when first learning reading skills. 2. Skill mastery and automaticity: Failure to master skills proficiently and reach automaticity (skills being Correct + Fast + Supereasy): this creates the likelihood that skills will slip once instruction moves on, and they are no longer practised. 3. Skill Maintenance: Weakness making effective long-term memories is seen in failure to make effective long term memories which do not slip. Skills which seem learned, with instruction moved on to other areas, are often later found to have slipped. 4. Skill Generalisation: Weakness in skill generalisation is seen in failure to generalise skills to different contexts, e.g., a. Failure to move recently learned skills from skill development contexts to use in more complex contexts. b. Failure to move skills through to effective use in authentic reading. It is important that principles of reading instruction include focus on these key aspects of effective learning. This is because failure to master skills proficiently strongly impacts reading instruction of at-risk readers: • It means considerable teaching and learning time can end up ‘wasted,’ in that children have not benefited sufficiently from the teaching and learning time they have experienced, and further teaching and learning time is needed for skills to be retaught. • It bespeaks the importance of monitoring skill levels from first instruction to long term retention of skills. It is important to monitor skill development in at-risk readers on an ongoing basis, ensuring learned skills do not slip, and are developed through to effective use during reading of diverse texts. • It creates needs for a strong instructional focus on skills development in addition to a strong focus on authentic reading, and likelihood that this skills development will involve high levels of instructional resourcing and learning time. This makes the balanced instruction of at-risk readers very different to the balanced instruction of healthy progress readers. • It creates high resource needs in early years reading instruction, towards the achieving of effective teaching and learning. • It creates strong likelihood of low levels of Successful Engaged Learning if effective teaching and learning is not achieved, with likelihood of students becoming disengaged and moving into Learned Helplessness. (At-risk readers are even more resource intensive when early intervention is not successful, as they need continuing support across all school years.) • It creates a major ‘Find the Learning Time’ challenge, for time spent on skills development, without children missing out on the many other important aspects of reading development and school life and learning. The Value of Using Cognitive Load Theory and Dimensions of Learning Cognitive Load Theory and Marzano and Pickering’s five Dimensions of Learning (DoL) were chosen for the project because of their effectiveness towards achieving effective learning by at-risk readers. They do this through managing cognitive load effectively, and thus avoiding failure to master, generalise and make effective long-term memories of reading skills. The Dimensions of Learning model (DoL) is particularly useful for planning effective instruction for at-risk readers, and analysing effectiveness of instruction. The five dimensions are: • • • • •
DoL 1 Attitudes and Perceptions = Motivation and Engagement. DoL 2 Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge = Focussed Skill Development. DoL 3 Extending and Refining Knowledge = Scaffolded Generalising of Skills. DoL 4 Using Knowledge Meaningfully = Extensive Authentic Skill Usage. DoL 5 Habits of Mind = Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (at all levels of instruction). 14
•
DoL 2-4 progression: Teach for Mastery and Increasingly Sophisticated Skill Use, Monitoring progress at each level.
It can be seen, above, that DoL 2, 3 and 4 are matched to the three areas of learning breakdown, discussed above. Use of these three levels of learning (DoL2-4), with careful instruction and monitoring of students skill levels over time at each level means: • At DoL2 (Focussed Skill Development), failure to reach skill mastery, skill automaticity and longterm retention of skills will be avoided, through immediate action happening if skills show signs of not progressing well. • At DoL3 (Scaffolded Skill Generalisation), skills will be effectively and carefully scaffolded so skills stay learned and are moved into increasingly authentic contexts, with immediate action happening if skills show signs of slipping. • At DoL4 (Extensive Authentic Skill Usage), skill mastery will be monitored to ensure key skills have been carried through effectively to authentic reading, with immediate action happening if skills show signs of slipping. Because of the practical usefulness on thinking on the Dimensions of Learning (DoL) model, and children’s needs for success on all five DoL dimensions, in Section 3 of this document, separate subsections on use of DoL in instruction are included as examples after the listing of principles of instruction of the three reading components (reading comprehension, word-reading, language skills). Relative to the ‘balanced’ instruction used with healthy progress readers, the instructional needs of at-risk readers are ‘unbalanced,’ i.e., out of balance with regards to intensity of instruction in the five DoL dimensions. In their areas of instructional need (word reading or language skills), balanced instruction for at-risk readers requires much more time and effort spent building basic key skills to an effective level (DoL2), and then considerable time spent scaffolded through to effective use in authentic reading (the DoL2-4 teaching learning progression), far more time than in spent on these areas for healthy progress readers. The figure below uses the DoL framework to show the different instructional needs of healthy progress and at-risk readers, using different proportions of learning time in each of DoL 2, 3, and 4.
Healthy Progress Readers: Little time needed in DoL2 Motivation useful not vital
At-Risk readers: More time needed in DoL2 & DoL3 Motivation & active learning vital.
The importance of instruction focussed on children’s areas of instructional need is increasingly being established in studies of the impacts of different instructional emphases in classroom reading instruction on children with different instructional needs (e.g., Juel & Minden-Cupp, 2000, Connor, Piasta et al., 2009; Connor, Morrison et al., 2011; Connor, Morrison et al., 2013). These studies show: • In classrooms with strong phonics emphasis but relatively little instruction focussed on authentic reading, children with weak word reading made their strongest progress, but children with healthy progress reading made relatively poor gains.
15
• • • •
In classrooms with strong focus on authentic reading, but relatively little instruction focussed on phonics, children with weak word reading made poor progress, while children with healthy progress reading made their strongest progress. Children with weak word reading need and benefit from strong Focussed Skill Development (DoL2) of word-reading skills and also lots of authentic reading (DoL4). Teachers find it difficult to differentiate instruction based on children’s needs, but become increasingly skilful at doing so, with focussed learning on this area. Data showing children’s progress over time on reading comprehension, word-reading, and language skills can strongly support teacher decision-making on this area. (e.g., the research of Connor and colleagues uses an online database which generates instructional recommendations, based on children’s scores and progress on word reading and vocabulary, as a support to school and teacher decision-making).
Using the Literacy Component Model and Seven ‘Case-Study Children’ for Reflecting on Instruction The Literacy Component Model, shown below, used for reading, emphasises the integrative relationship of reading comprehension, word reading and language skills for literacy:
0% ➨ LANGUAGE SKILLS ➨ 100%
Reading Comprehension = Language Skills for Reading x Word Reading (Reading Accuracy) Using children’s achievement on word reading and language skills, it creates four quadrant categories of readers, with differing strengths, weaknesses and instructional needs. Q4 WORD READING WEAKNESS (Dyslexic readers)
Q1 THE GOAL: HEALTHY PROGRESS
Strong language skills Weak word reading
Strong language skills Strong word reading
Q3 COMBINED WEAKNESS
Q2 LANGUAGE SKILLS WEAKNESS
Weak language skills Weak word reading
Weak language skills Strong word reading
0% ➨ WORD-READING SKILLS ➨ 100%
With reading comprehension building from the integration of word reading of meaningful texts and language comprehension of the content which has been read, reading comprehension weakness will be experienced by children weak in word reading, language skills, or both. Assessing children’s word-reading and language skills and using the Literacy Component Model establishes four quadrants, as shown above. Each one represents a different combination of word-reading and language skills. The quadrants position children according to their skill profiles, and show their instructional needs. Children with healthy skills in both areas sit in the top-right quadrant, Quadrant 1, which is the goal of effective reading instruction for at-risk readers. Children with weak language skills sit in the bottom two quadrants, Quadrants 2 and 3. Children with weak word-reading skills sit in the two left-side quadrants, Quadrants 3 and 4. Children with combined weakness sit in the bottom-left quadrant, Quadrant 3. Teachers working in Phase 2 of the project found seven ‘case-study children,’ used in conjunction with the Literacy Component Model, very helpful for considering the strengths, weaknesses and instruction needs of at-risk readers in their classes. The ‘case-study children’ are introduced below and then discussed further in examples used in Section 3 of this document. Each ‘child’ is a profile of a common pattern of reading weakness. Three of the ‘children’ have weakness just in word reading, two have weakness just in language skills for reading, and two have weakness in both 16
areas. The figure below uses the Literacy Component Model and the ‘children’s’ skills on Word Reading and Language Skills to place the seven ‘children’ in the model’s three quadrants of weak readers. These ‘children,’ and the groups of at-risk reader which they represent, clearly do not need identical reading instruction. They need reading instruction which, as part of building sophisticated reading comprehension and skilled authentic reading, works to build strong skills in each child’s areas of weakness.
High
Q4 WORD READING WEAKNESS Strong language skills Weak word reading
Q1 HEALTHY PROGRESS Strong language skills Strong word reading
Q3 COMBINED WEAKNESS Weak language skills Weak word reading
Q2 LANGUAGE SKILLS WEAKNESS Weak language skills Strong word reading
Low
➨
➨
LANGUAGE SKILLS
➨
➨
EFFECTIVE INSTRUCTION FOCUSSES ON MOVING ALL AT-RISK READERS TO THIS QUADRANT
Low
➨
➨
WORD READING
➨
➨
High
In planning for reading instruction for at-risk readers, it is particularly important to reflect on and plan for the extent of Focussed Skill Development (DoL2, Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge) which these children will need on their areas of weakness, and the proportion of time and instruction which needs to be allocated to this area. At-risk readers with weak word-reading skills will need far more instructional time allocated to building word-reading skills in Focussed Skill Development, while at-risk readers with weak language skills will need far more instructional time allocated to building language skills for reading. At-risk readers weak in both areas will need Focussed Skill Development in both areas, thus needing considerably more instructional support than other children. • Quadrant 4 ‘children’, Sophia, Henry and Benny, have weakness only with word-reading skills; their language skills are strong. Quadrant 3 ‘children’, Nell and Braith also have weak word reading. For these children, balanced reading instruction needs to build word-reading skills, while also building reading comprehension skills. 17
•
•
Quadrant 2 ‘children’, Ethan and Joel have weakness only with language skills; their word-reading skills are strong. Quadrant 3 ‘children’, Nell and Braith also have weak language skills. For these children, balanced reading instruction needs to build language skills for reading, while also building reading comprehension skills. Quadrant 3 ‘children’, Nell and Braith are weak in both word-reading and language skills. Reading intervention for them must build all three components of reading: word reading, language skills and reading comprehension.
For all seven children, there is a ‘Find the Learning Time’ challenge, created by their needing instructional time to build their weak skills, in addition to time spent doing authentic reading, and the many other aspects of school learning. It is useful to think on the needs of the seven children above, in the three areas of reading instruction: • For word-reading instruction, o The five children with word-reading difficulties (Benny, Henry, and Sophia; Nell and Braith) are likely to need lots of instruction at the level of Focussed Skill Development (DoL2), as well as more time on Scaffolding Generalising of Skills (DoL3). They will also need ongoing strong emotional supports (DoL1) to ensure continued motivation and engagement for word-reading activities. o At-risk readers with healthy or excellent word-reading skills (Joel and Ethan) may need little to no extra emphasis on these areas (DoL1-3). o It’s likely all seven have similar needs for time spent in Authentic Reading (DoL4). • Because reading comprehension and language skills for reading are both areas of language skill development, o The children with language weakness (Ethan and Joel; Nell and Braith) are likely to need lots of instruction at the level of Focussed Skill Development (DoL2), as well as more time on Scaffolding Generalising of Skills (DoL3), and ongoing strong emotional supports (DoL1) to ensure continued motivation and engagement for language skills and reading comprehension activities. o The children with word-reading weakness and healthy or excellent language skills for reading (Benny, Henry and Sophia) will need accommodations so that their weak wordreading skills don’t prevent them effectively accessing the meaning of any text reading used in the lessons. • The children with word-reading weakness and combined weakness have support needs both for word-reading lessons and language skill lessons, while the children whose weakness is only in language skills, need support only for lessons involving language skills. Teachers are likely to find it useful to reflect on the seven case-study ‘children’, each a common at-risk reader profile, and the three categories of weak readers created using the Literacy Component Model, when considering the instructional needs of at-risk readers in their current class cohort. It is, of course, recognised that there are other categories of weak readers which it may be useful for teachers to reflect on, e.g., children with combined late-emerging word-reading and language weakness, young children with autism who are panicked about early reading, and children speaking English as a second language, who have various profiles of skills.
18
SECTION 3. THE PRINCIPLES OF INSTRUCTION This section details individual instructional principles in a form teachers and schools can use in focussing on improving reading instruction for at-risk readers. Each principle has its own rationale, then a list of strategies (principles of instruction), followed by examples of use of the principle and strategies. The principles of instruction using the Teaching Smart, Heart and Brain framework are in three categories, which equate to the How, Who and What of teaching at-risk readers: 1. Teaching Smart (How): Teach Strategically and Carefully, to Achieve Effective Learning. 2. Teaching for the Reading Heart (Who): Teach to Maximise Children’s Ownership, Engagement and Motivation for Reading. 3. Teaching for the Reading Brain (What): Teach Strategically and Carefully, to Achieve Effective Reading Development.
Cluster 1. Teaching Smart: Teach Strategically and Carefully, to Achieve Effective Learning: Principle 1. Ensure Successful Engaged Learning: (i.e., that the child is both Successful + Engaged). Principle 2. Know the Child as a Learner: Build deep knowledge of the child’s strengths, weaknesses, interests and passions. Principle 3. Apply Knowledge Fundamentals: Use strong knowledge of factors for effective progressing of at-risk readers: 1. Learning Needs: The Literacy Component Model, the three components of reading (reading comprehension, word reading, language skills for reading), three categories of weak readers and their learning needs. 2. Cognitive Load: Impacts of the very high cognitive load of learning to read English. 3. Common Learning Breakdowns: Difficulties mastering, maintaining and generalising skills; Learned Helplessness. Principle 4. Enact Timely Strategic Action: 1. Timely Efficient Intervention: Identify delays quickly and respond effectively, monitoring progress carefully. 2. Monitoring and Assessment: Assess and monitor development of reading-related skills including Literate Cultural Capital, language skills, word reading and reading comprehension. 3. Differentiation: Differentiate instruction to provide the instruction the child needs. Principle 5. Consider Learning Time: 1. Achieve High Instructional Intensity: Achieve high rates of learning and practice per minute of learning time. 2. Maximise Reading Opportunities: Ensure large amounts of time spent reading. 3. Find the Learning Time for skills development, without missing other important learning. 4. Integrate Multiple Aspects of Literacy to maximise literacy learning. 19
5. Be Strategic with Resourcing: Use resourcing strategically to ensure effective reading instruction. 6. Involve Community: Build strong community involvement in the reading development of at-risk readers. Principle 6. Deliver Effective Pedagogy: 1. Strategically Use Explicit Instruction: Teach new skills and content using explicit instruction. 2. Strategically Generalise Skills: Strategically use three stages to generalise learned skills: Focussed Skill Development (DoL2), Scaffolded Generalising of Skills (DoL3), and Extensive Authentic Skill Usage (DoL4). 3. Maximise Metacognition: Build metacognition of reading strategies as part of teaching those reading strategies. 4. Avoid Learning Breakdowns: monitor learning over time to ensure skills are used effectively long-term and have generalised through to authentic reading. Cluster 2. Teaching for the Reading Heart: Teach to Maximise Children’s Ownership, Engagement and Motivation for Reading Principle 7. Ensure Motivation and Engagement: Ensure strong positive motivation and engagement for reading. Principle 8. Build Child Ownership of Learning: Encourage children’s active owning of their learning. Principle 9. Foster Enjoyment: Keep learning enjoyable and stress-free to maximise learning and avoid Learned Helplessness.
Cluster 3. Teaching for the Reading Brain: Teach Strategically and Carefully, to Achieve Effective Reading Development Principle 10. Use The Literacy Component Model (Reading Comprehension = Word Reading x Language Skills for Reading): Use the Literacy Component Model in assessing, considering children’s needs and planning optimal reading instruction. Principle 11. Strategically Teach Reading Comprehension and Build Independent Reading: Teach reading comprehension strategically and carefully, to achieve effective independent reading. Principle 12. Strategically Teach Word Reading and Build Fluency: Teach word reading strategically and carefully, to achieve fluent effective text reading. Principle 13. Foster Language Skills for Reading: Teach language skills strategically and carefully to achieve effective sophisticated reasoning. These principles are detailed in the following pages.
The three-part framework is a keeper. The best of reading instruction programs and activities in Teaching for the Reading Brain cannot be functionally useful, unless we are also doing effective Teaching Smart and Teaching for the Reading Heart. This greatly increases the odds of achieving effective learning because firstly, the kids are engaged partners in the learning process and, secondly, we’re modifying and sequencing learning so that it works, giving children what they need! Participating Teacher
20
CLUSTER 1. TEACHING SMART: TEACH STRATEGICALLY AND CAREFULLY, TO ACHIEVE EFFECTIVE LEARNING The Teaching Smart cluster of reading instruction principles involves attention to teaching strategically and carefully to achieve effective learning. Through deep knowledge of the child as a learner and ensuring successful engaged learning and application of knowledge fundamentals, teachers are empowered to take early strategic action, apply effective pedagogy and maximise learning time through integration of instruction. Teaching using this cluster of principles is strategically supported by use of two models used in the project: Marzano and Pickering’s (1997) Dimensions of Learning (DoL) and Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1994). Dimensions of Learning (DoL) is powerful for guiding reading instruction through its five Dimensions which emphasise key aspects of effective teaching and learning, all of which must be achieved for healthy reading development, and are particularly important for at-risk readers: • DoL 1 – Motivation and Engagement (Attitudes and Perceptions). • DoL 2 – Focussed Skill Development (Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge). • DoL 3 – Scaffolded Generalising of Skills ( Extending and Refining Knowledge). • DoL 4 – Extensive Authentic Skill Usage (Using Knowledge Meaningfully). • DoL 5 - Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (Habits of Mind). • DoL 2-4 progression - Teach for Mastery and Increasingly Sophisticated Skill Use, Monitoring progress at each level. Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1994, Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation, 2017) is a model of effective teaching and learning, powerful for its emphasis on effective instruction focusing on and balancing three aspects of cognitive load: • Curriculum content load. • Reading lesson task load. • Children’s processing capacity (Working memory impacted by confidence level). For effective learning by at-risk readers, the combined cognitive load of curriculum content plus lesson task must never exceed children’s processing capacity. For the teacher of at-risk readers, the above inform their practice so that planning for teaching and the teaching itself are heavily reliant on knowledge of how learners learn to read, and teaching and learning are efficient, engaging and pedagogically appropriate. The Phase 2 Discussion Paper contains elaboration of principles of instruction in this section.
This section is realistic. Cognitive load is real and is something that all teachers need to be aware of. I was unaware of it until participating in this project. Explicit Instruction is a necessity to teach all skills in the classroom. Students must be engaged and motivated by their teacher. Without this, student development will be minimal. Participating Teacher
21
Principle 1. Ensure Successful Engaged Learning Principle 1. Successful Engaged Learning: Ensure Successful Engaged Learning, i.e., that the child is both Successful + Engaged.
Rationale Ensure Successful Engaged Learning for the at-risk reader, i.e. that the child is both Successful + Engaged. At-risk readers need both to be successful at the task, and to be actively engaged with unsuccessful reading kept to a minimum. This is because frequent experiences of low success result in children losing confidence, often moving into Learned Helplessness.
Strategies for this Principle 1. 2. 3. 4.
Provide multiple opportunities for engaging with tasks. Focus on establishing a classroom climate of motivation and engagement. Monitor children’s confidence levels as well as their skill levels. Ensure teaching is at an appropriate level for the child’s confidence and skill in each teaching moment. 5. Teach using authentic texts and child-selected texts.
Examples of Activities for Use of this Principle 1. Teaching ahead: teach lesson content first to at-risk readers to ready them for content being taught to the whole class. 2. For very beginning readers, build thorough word-reading skills with five to seven words relevant to the child’s family, classroom and school that the child will recognise and use, e.g., names of the child and his family members. 3. Engage in, use and create reading promotion initiatives likely to build children’s extent of independent reading, e.g., the Premier’s Reading Challenge, Reading Hour Initiative. Alternatively, devise your own class reward system for number of books read. 4. Set goals together and reward goal achievement. 5. Explore programs which build children’s understanding of self-management of motivation, engagement and learning behaviours (e.g., Martin, 2010; www.lifelongachievement.com).
22
Principle 2. Know the Child as a Learner Principle 2. Know the Child as a Learner: Build Deep Knowledge of the Child’s Strengths, Weaknesses, Interests and Passions
Rationale It is valuable for teachers of at-risk readers to have deep knowledge of the children’s strengths, weakness, interests and passions, and to relate these to reading. Interests and passions of the at-risk reader, will guide motivation and engagement. To effectively differentiate instruction, it is vital for teachers of at-risk readers know the precise areas which need targeting, e.g., language skills weakness, word-reading weakness or a combination of both of these.
Strategies for this Principle 1. Use diagnostic assessment to gather information about children’s skills and knowledge. 2. Use informal tools to gather information about children’s Literate Cultural Capital (children’s accumulated knowledge of verbal and print skills built from their home language experiences, often referred to as their ‘backpack’ that they bring to school.
Examples of Activities for Use of this Principle 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Early Start assessment. One School data. Compile individual books ‘ About Me’ that informally gathers personal data. Interviews with learner. Interviews with the learner’s family and previous teachers.
23
Principle 3. Apply Knowledge Fundamentals Principle 3. Apply Knowledge Fundamentals: Use Strong Knowledge of Factors for Effective Progressing of At-Risk Readers’ 1. Learning Needs. 2. Cognitive Load. 3. Common Learning Breakdowns.
Rationale It is important for teachers to have and use strong knowledge of factors which significantly impact the learning of at-risk readers: 1. Learning Needs: Teach using strong knowledge of the Literacy Component Model, the three components of reading (reading comprehension, word reading, language skills for reading), and the three categories of weak readers and their learning needs. 2. Cognitive Load: Teach using strong knowledge of the impacts of the very high cognitive load of learning to read English. 3. Common Learning Breakdowns in at-risk readers: Teach using strong knowledge of at-risk readers’ difficulties mastering, maintaining and generalising skills, and the likelihood of Learned Helplessness developing when children struggle. Strategies for this Principle 1. Learning needs: a) Use knowledge of the Literacy Component Model of Reading. Reading Comprehension=Language Skills x Word-reading skills. b) Build knowledge of the three categories of weak readers and their learning needs, e.g., readers with language skill weakness need attention focussed on building literal comprehension, inferential reasoning and vocabulary including background knowledge. 2. Cognitive Load: a. Apply Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1994; Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation, 2017) when planning for lesson delivery. Be aware of the very high cognitive load of different aspects of learning to read English. Use knowledge of Content Load (complexity of the skill area being taught), Task Load (complexity of the instructional task), and Processing Capacity (working memory, cognitive processing skills, confidence and focused attention; Gathercole & Alloway, 2007). b. Consider all five Dimensions of Learning (DoL; Marzano & Pickering, 1997) when planning effective instruction, teaching, and evaluating instruction. c. Use the DoL2-4 progression for ensuring effective skill mastery and usage. d. Use analogies for explaining information processing (Galletly, 1999), e.g., ‘Fat Happy Cups’ of processing capacity. 3. Common Learning Breakdowns in at-risk-readers: a. Use knowledge of learners’ difficulties in mastering, maintaining and generalising skills. b. Identify Learned Helplessness (Learners not feeling in control of and capable of learning, lacking belief in being able to make effective progress.) Examples of Activities for use of this Principle 1. Rereading familiar texts. 2. Echo Reading (Galletly, 2014) – The adult helper echo reads with the child, saying the words which aren’t easy and spending no time correcting words or helping children to work out words. 3. Choral reading – all read together to lessen the fear of failure and to experience success when reading poems or plays. 4. Use drama and movement activities to help with comprehension and retell skills for learners who struggle to do this on their own.
24
Principle 4. Enact Timely Strategic Action Principle 4. Enact Timely Strategic Action: Use Strategic and Effective 1. Timely Efficient Intervention. 2. Monitoring and Assessment. 3. Differentiation.
Rationale Early strategic action involves using knowledge of factors affecting at-risk readers’ learning to enact appropriate teaching and learning strategies, tools and pedagogies: 1. Timely Efficient intervention: Identify delays quickly and respond effectively, monitoring progress. 2. Monitoring and Assessment: Assess and monitor development of reading-related skills including Literate Cultural Capital, language skills, word reading and reading comprehension. 3. Differentiation: Differentiate instruction to provide the instruction the child needs.
Strategies for this principle 1. Differentiation: a. Differentiate instruction to provide the instruction the child needs. 2. Monitoring and Assessment: a. Regular monitoring of the individual learners progress to ensure the program is responsive to the at-risk learners needs. 3. Early Intervention: a. Use appropriate school supported instruments to identify areas of weakness. b. Create a program that addresses the individual needs of the at-risk learner and offers a variety of engaging and relevant activities.
Examples of Activities for Use of this Principle 1. Regularly use adjusted school benchmarks, based on regional benchmarks, for different reading skills. e.g., comprehension, reading levels. 2. ‘ Focus on Five’ – Listen and keep reading anecdotal records on five students each week to ensure that each learner’s achievement is monitored in formal manner. 3. Create individual reading goals that can be easily referred to on a regular basis. Perhaps record reading goals on a book mark to keep in children’s reading wallets.
It’s important to conduct interviews and assessment to gather information in order to get to know the child both as a person and as a learner. This enables the maximisation of learning time by attending to specific areas of interest and need. It is also necessary to pass on such collated information when transitioning these vulnerable students to the next year level. Consistency of practice, pedagogy, processes and terminology across the school is also paramount for effective transitioning and building confidence for these students. Participating Teacher
25
Principle 5. Consider Learning Time Principle 5. Consider Learning Time: Maximise Learning ‘Time’ through Integrating Instruction of Multiple Literacy Components: 1. Instructional Intensity. 2. Maximise Reading Opportunities. 3. Resourcing. 4. Community.
Rationale Maximise learning time through the following 1. Achieve High Instructional Intensity: Achieve high rates of skill learning and practice per minute of learning time. 2. Maximise Reading Opportunities: Ensure large amounts of time spent reading. 3. Find the Learning Time for skills development, without missing other important learning. 4. Integrate Multiple Aspects of Literacy to maximise literacy learning. 5. Be Strategic with Resourcing: Use resourcing strategically to ensure effective reading instruction. 6. Involve Community: Build strong community involvement in the reading development of at-risk readers.
Strategies for this Principle 1. Achieve High Instructional Intensity: a. Provide appropriate number of opportunities to practise a skill during instructional learning time. b. Strategically choose learning activities based on the level of instructional intensity they provide. For example, activities which achieve five to twenty practises per minute of instructional time enable much faster progress than activities with five practises per minute of instructional time. (Memory played turning over four cards each time). 2. Maximise reading opportunities: a. Use reading opportunities in all curriculum areas. Recognise opportunities to reinforce reading instruction in other curriculum areas by drawing attention to reading skills and strategies. b. Whole school planning enables children to move from year-level to year-level building on their skills: using the same language frees up cognitive load. 3. Find the Learning Time: a. Rise to the challenge of finding the learning time the child needs to build needed skills. Look for opportunities where additional learning can be included. b. Carefully differentiate so instruction is focussed precisely on the child’s current instructional need. c. Use individualised classwork and homework. d. Use games and activities with high instructional intensity (practises per minute of time) so more practice is achieved in a small amount of time. e. Trade time, e.g., trade off a narrative writing task (40minutes) for skills development activities with high instructional activities. To achieve the learning of the writing task, e.g., have the child verbally tell his narrative (10minutes). f. Ensure the child does not miss out on important class learning and enjoyable class literacy activities, yet nonetheless has sufficient teaching and learning time building needed reading skills. 4. Integrate Multiple Aspects of Literacy: a. Strategically incorporate needed literacy tasks in other learning areas. 5. Be Strategic with Resourcing: a. Advocate for provisions of appropriate resources to ensure effective reading instruction. b. Strategically select resources to maximise support of the learning process e.g., targeted teacher aide time during literacy blocks.
26
6. Involve Community: a. Take positive action to develop the capabilities of the community in teaching of reading through professional development workshops, newsletters and community promotions. b. Raise the involvement of community in reading development of at-risk readers through use of experienced members of our communities in our classrooms.
Examples of Activities for Use of this Principle • Develop card games and hands on activities that allow for enjoyable multiple practices. For example bingo, snap, lotto, go fish, snakes and ladders, bee bot games, barrier games. • Use transition opportunities to practise rhyme, letter and sound recognition, syllables, sight words, etc. For example – I spy, letter recognition on cards, sight word flash cards, ‘Pick a friend whose name begins with or rhymes with…’ • Build skills to automaticity through recall and recognition games and timed PowerPoints
27
Principle 6. Deliver Effective Pedagogy Principle 6. Deliver Effective Pedagogy:
Rationale Teach effectively using appropriate pedagogy and with due attention to metacognitive skills. 1. Strategically Use Explicit Instruction: Teach new skills and content using explicit instruction. 2. Strategically Generalise Skills: Strategically use three stages to generalise learned skills: a. Focussed Skill Development (DoL2), b. Scaffolded Generalising of Skills(DoL3), and c. Extensive Authentic Skill Usage (DoL4). 3. Maximise Metacognition: Build metacognition of reading strategies as part of teaching those reading strategies 4. Avoid Learning Breakdowns: Monitor learning over time to ensure skills are used effectively long term and have generalised through to authentic reading.
Strategies for this principle 1. Strategically Use Explicit instruction: a. Use explicit instruction pedagogy when teaching new reading skills. Apply research based principles of explicit instruction (Hattie, 2008; Pressley, 2006; Archer, 2011; Swanson, 1999) e.g., demonstrations and scaffolded learning, brisk pace, teach skills to automaticity and building student understandings of each lesson goal, purpose and intended learning outcomes. 2. Strategically Generalise Skills: a. Apply knowledge of the three DoL stages of Teaching and Learning by planning to use focused skill development (DoL2), scaffolded generalising of skills (DoL3) and extensive, authentic skill usage (DoL4) as an integral part of reading instruction. 3. Maximise Metacognition: a. Explicitly teach learners to become experts in knowing how, when, where and why reading strategies are used. 4. Avoid Learning Breakdowns: a. Support learners in transferring skills usage to contexts. b. Structure teaching and learning to include skills used in progressively wider contexts, e.g., classroom to the wider world.
Examples of Activities for Use of this Principle 1. Use puppets to model examples and non-examples of reading strategies, e.g., re-read, sounding out, read on. 2. Thinking out loud by the teacher e.g., ‘I think I need to use inference to understand what the author is telling me’ 3. Use mnemonics as a tool to support learners’ memory systems e.g., colours of the rainbow, planets.
28
CLUSTER 2. TEACHING FOR THE READING HEART: TEACH TO MAXIMISE OWNERSHIP, ENGAGEMENT AND MOTIVATION
The Teaching for the Reading Heart cluster of reading instruction principles for at-risk readers involves attention to maximising children’s ownership, engagement, motivation and enjoyment for reading. Confidence, engagement and focused attention are particularly important factors for successful learning for at-risk readers. Enjoyment is important for all readers but is paramount in keeping at-risk readers moving forward. The Phase 2 Discussion Paper contains elaboration of principles of instruction in this section.
Principle 7. Ensure Motivation and Engagement Principle 7. Ensure Motivation and Engagement: Build Strong Positive Motivation for and Engagement in Reading. Rationale Ensure strong positive motivation and engagement. When learning is active (the reader is engaged and focussed) then stronger cognitive processing and memory making occurs. Readers with weak cognitive processing can be distracted and not focus attention on the learning task and are therefore unlikely to make effective memories. Strategies for this principle 1. Design lessons appropriately with a focus on motivation and engagement to maximise the likelihood of Successful, Engaged Learning. (e.g., use Dimension of Learning framework with attention to DoL1). 2. Develop the at-risk reader’s self-confidence using principles of Formative Evaluation (Hattie, 2008) e.g., talk with the child about difficulties being experienced. 3. Use praise often and strategically: move students from passivity, discouragement and possible learned helplessness to active learning with an increasing sense of competence, skill and ability to learn. 4. Build at-risk readers readiness for lessons to ensure they will experience successful engaged learning, so confidence is not lost and learned helplessness reinforced.
Examples of Activities for Use of this Principle 1. Include references to purposeful contexts for at-risk readers. e.g., sports played, friends’ names, local landmarks. 2. Find and use role models e.g., buddy readers, teachers reading to school on parade 3. Circle or turn taking games where positive comments about peers are shared 4. Use individual goal cards to guide discussions on the pathway to improvement 5. Provide information on lesson goals and outcomes prior to the lesson
This is my favourite section. It gave me lots to think about and work on with the students and now I want to encourage students to just enjoy the experience of learning so that they learn for life. Participating Teacher
29
Principle 8. Build Child Ownership of Learning Principle 8. Build Child Ownership of Learning: Encourage Children’s Active Owning of their Learning.
Rationale Build children’s active owning of their learning so that at-risk readers have the knowledge, understanding and language for managing the reading process and their progress in gaining the skills.
Strategies for this principle 1. Emphasise teachers’ roles as supports and mentors such that children are confident to accept help in their learning progress. 2. Make the child’s learning progress visible so that they can readily understand what they have achieved and can further achieve. 3. Build students’ sense of what effective reading is by using a metalanguage to discuss what good readers do, use, think, value and plan around the reading process. 4. Build at-risk readers’ meta-cognition and control of motivation, engagement and reading skills so that they feel they are in control of the reading process. 5. Build self-teaching (as part of the transfer of responsibility from teacher to learner) by encouraging active participation in the learning.
Examples of Activities for Use of this Principle 1. Use charts that clearly show learning and progress and are seen only by the learner, teacher and parent. 2. Build healthy respectful teacher-child relationships so the child is emotionally supported and feels comfortable discussing challenges and difficulties. 3. Develop a Y chart of what a ‘good reading’ classroom looks like/ sounds like/feels like. 4. Discuss reading using a metalanguage about motivation and engagement. 5. Ensure at-risk readers don’t stay too long on highly predictable texts.
This section affirmed what I am doing in my classroom. I strongly believe in creating and maintaining positive, engaging and motivating classroom environments that welcome students. I found this to be one of my strengths personally and believe that most teachers would relate to this. Most teachers would relate to these principles and have no trouble incorporating them into their pedagogy. Participating Teacher
30
Principle 9. Foster Enjoyment Principle 9. Foster Enjoyment: Keep Learning Enjoyable and Stress-Free to Maximise Learning and Avoid Learned Helplessness
Rationale It is vitally important to ensure enjoyment and love of reading is established for all readers and most importantly for at-risk readers in order to foster a forward progression of reading development. Teachers of at-risk readers must encourage and motivate readers who have started reading, but are struggling to improve or enjoy it. A positive attitude towards reading and choosing to read in free time, affect not only reading performance but also success across the curriculum.
Strategies for this principle 1. Create a classroom environment with engaging displays and comfortable and inviting spaces that support and encourage positive engagement of texts on a regular basis. 2. Connect with individual reader’s interests by providing a broad range of fiction and non-fiction texts within the classroom setting and allowing learners to choose their own books. 3. Keep task load manageable with no cognitive overload so children have ‘Fat Happy Cups.’ 4. Ensure reading is interesting and fun by encouraging creativity and imagination.
Examples of Activities for Use of this Principle 1. Read aloud on a regular basis and include novels, poems and picture books discussing the illustrations, themes and characters. 2. Provide time to read for enjoyment and model reading for enjoyment during this time. 3. Share ideas about books and participate in discussions (perhaps reading circles) to understand different points of view and experiences. 4. Encourage learners to promote books they have enjoyed to classmates. 5. Share and model your own reading.
These are things that good teachers should be doing anyway. It’s not time consuming, it’s not complicated, it’s nothing extra to add to our curriculum. It’s our job. These principles are easy to implement. If teachers knew how easily these principles integrate and complement their pedagogy, they wouldn’t hesitate to use them in their classrooms. Participating Teacher
31
CLUSTER 3. TEACHING FOR THE READING BRAIN: TEACH STRATEGICALLY AND CAREFULLY, TO ACHIEVE EFFECTIVE READING DEVELOPMENT The principles in the Teaching for the Reading Brain cluster are principles of instruction for effective development of the skills and subskills of reading. The four Reading Brain principles focus teachers’ attention on the specific areas that need to be considered, planned and explicitly and strategically taught to optimise reading development: • Principle 10. Use the Literacy Component Model (Reading Comprehension = Word Reading x Language Skills): Apply in Assessing, Considering Children’s Needs And Planning Optimal Reading Instruction. • Principle 11. Strategically Teach Reading Comprehension and Build Independent Reading: Achieve Effective Independent Reading by Explicitly Teaching Reading Comprehension Skills. • Principle 12. Strategically Teach Word Reading and Build Fluency: Teach Word Reading Strategically and Carefully, to Achieve Fluent Effective Text Reading. • Principle 13. Foster Language Skills for Reading: Teach Language Skills Strategically and Carefully to Achieve Effective Sophisticated Reasoning. Each principle is, in effect, an overarching principle: a subsection of this document, each detailing its own list of specific principles of instruction.
Principle 10. Use The Literacy Component Model Principle 10. Use the Literacy Component Model: Apply the Literacy Component Model in Assessing and Considering Children’s Needs, And Planning Optimal Reading Instruction For At-Risk Readers Reading Comprehension = Word Reading x Language Skills for Reading Rationale The Literacy Component Model The Literacy Component Model of Reading (Knight, Galletly, & Gargett, submitted-e), incorporates Gough & Tunmer’s (1986) Simple View of Reading (Gough & Tunmer, 1986, Hoover & Gough, 1990), which is a very useful, practical model of reading, used widely by educators and reading researchers. It supports teacher and school consideration of important aspects of reading development, assessment, and instruction, through supporting focus on children’s strengths and weaknesses in word-reading and language skills.
% ➨ LANGUAGE SKILLS ➨ 100%
The Literacy Component Model showing four quadrants of achievement and student instructional needs Q4 WORD READING WEAKNESS (Dyslexic readers)
Q1 THE GOAL: HEALTHY PROGRESS
Strong language skills Weak word reading
Strong language skills Strong word reading
Q3 COMBINED WEAKNESS
Q2 LANGUAGE SKILLS WEAKNESS
Weak language skills Weak word reading
Weak language skills Strong word reading
0% ➨ WORD-READING SKILLS ➨ 100%
32
The Literacy Component Model encourages awareness of three key components of reading (Reading Comprehension, Word Reading and Language Skills for Reading) by thinking on them as separate and integrated components of reading development and instruction, monitoring skill development over time: • Reading Development: children develop skills in three areas which contribute to effective reading o Use of reading comprehension skills and strategies. o Effective word-reading skills. o Effective language skills for reading. • Reading Assessment: o Assessing and monitoring children’s reading comprehension, word-reading and language skills empowers reading instruction towards optimising reading instruction and accelerating children’s reading progress. o The Literacy Component Model establishes three categories of weak readers: using scatterplots, plotting children’s scores on tests of Word Reading and Language Skills, places children in one of four quadrants of skills achievement. Each quadrant has a distinct profile of skill strengths and weaknesses, which correspondingly suggests quite specific aims for reading instruction. o Reading comprehension scores can also be used in the scatterplot within each child’s score points, e.g., use the child’s initial and their score or percentile on a Reading Comprehension test, or colour code the initials to represent different levels of reading comprehension achievement. • Reading Instruction: Differentiate instruction to meet children’s specific needs for building wordreading, language and reading comprehension skills and strategies. The model is potentially equally useful for considering the three separate components of written expression (Written Expression = Word Writing x Language Skills & Reasoning), as well as parallel skills of word reading and word writing, and the orthographic and phonological skills which build and are built by word-reading and word-writing development. Reading Comprehension
Written Expression =
= Language Skills & Reasoning
Language Skills & Reasoning
x
x
Writing Accuracy (Word Writing)
Reading Accuracy (Word Reading)
Strategies used in Using the Literacy Component Model to Guide Instruction Principles of effective reading instruction for young at-risk readers, built from consideration of the Literacy Component Model, include the following: 1. Teach the three component areas: a. Teach reading comprehension strategies to an efficient fluent level. b. Teach word-reading skills and relevant subskills to an efficient fluent level. c. Teach language and reasoning skills to all children, and particularly those children with low verbal language skills. 2. Differentiate instruction according to children’s needs, to build skills showing low progress. 3. Use assessment of the three component areas to guide instruction: a. Assess children’s reading comprehension, word-reading and language skills at multiple timepoints each year to establish i. Current levels of achievement. 33
ii. Progress made. iii. Current instructional needs. b. Use scatterplots built from testing of language skills and word-reading skills to identify children’s current Component Model category: i. Healthy progress reading (healthy word-reading and language skills). ii. Language skills weakness with word-reading strength (hyperlexia). iii. Word-reading weakness with language-skills strength (dyslexia). iv. Combined weakness (word-reading and language skills weakness). 4. Maximise learning through using overlapping of components: a. Develop reading comprehension strategies using verbal activities, not just print reading activities: Reading comprehension strategies are language strategies, so it is not necessary for them to be developed solely in the context of print reading. b. Build language skills for both reading and writing, towards improving reading comprehension. Language skills being the basis of both written expression and reading comprehension, makes it likely that language skills built for written expression will also build reading comprehension skills. c. Integrate spelling instruction with word-reading instruction, as they are parallel skills with parallel skill development, which support each other’s development, through both building, and being built from phonological and orthographic skills. 5. Provide accommodations so children are not disadvantaged by weakness in any components, or by insufficient instructional time on a component due to more time spent on areas of weakness: a. For children weak in word reading, provide accommodations as needed in reading comprehension lessons and independent reading, so text meanings are accessed effectively, e.g., speech-to-text technology. b. Be efficient with remediation of weak aspects of reading, ensuring that weak readers do not miss out on other important aspects of reading development and favourite activities, due to time spent remediating their areas of weakness. Examples of Activities for Use of this Principle 1. Examples of learning activities for the three component areas of reading. 2. Examples of tests for use on scatterplots to guide planning of instruction. 3. Seven ‘types’ of weak readers established using the Literacy Component Model’s three categories of weak readers (www.literacyplus.com.au ; Newsletter 1, free download). 1. Examples of learning activities for the three literacy component areas of reading: Reading Comprehension Language comprehension strategies which optimise reading comprehension, e.g., • Identifying purpose, activating prior knowledge, responding, questioning, identifying main ideas, monitoring, reflecting, summarising, and visualisation • SCORE, Reciprocal Teaching, Three Level Guide, Top Level Structure.
=
Language Comprehension Strategies remediating language skills: • Vocabulary (words, phrases, idioms) and WORDY metacognitive strategy. • Literal comprehension: understanding sentences using more difficult words, e.g., negative verbs, less common conjunctions such as while, if, except, despite. • Inferential comprehension: logical reasoning and problem solving skills, e.g., Language made Visible, inferring, understanding humour and subtlety. 34
X
Word Reading Strategies for automisation: • Systematic mastery of different aspects of word reading, e.g., 200 most frequent words, sets of vowel GPCs, multisyllabic words. • Rapid Reads, Sets of 10. • Decodable, controlled and authentic texts. • Metacognition about words, e.g., the 20 vowel sounds of English, Regular, Pattern and Tricky words. • Reading fluency & expression.
Example 2. Examples of tests for use on scatterplots to guide planning of instruction. Tests of Language Skills 1. Bureau Test of Auditory Comprehension: a free test, often used by Speech Language Pathologists, but also available for teacher use. It uses four pages of pictures and 30 instructions, with children listening to each instruction, then responding by selecting the appropriate picture. The test has norms for to age 7yrs 4mths, and takes approximately five minutes to administer to each child. 2. Formal Vocabulary Tests, e.g., Renfrew Word Finding Test (Renfrew, 1997). 3. Reading comprehension tests used as listening comprehension tests, e.g., Neale Analysis of Reading Ability (Neale, 1999). Using one version of tests with parallel versions as a reading comprehension test and the other as a listening comprehension test can provide additional useful information. 4. Informal vocabulary and language comprehension tasks generating numerical scores which show a spread of achievement from low to high skill when the class’ scores are considered, e.g., a. A single vocabulary task or series of tasks. b. A reading comprehension exercise or series of exercises done as listening comprehension.
Tests of Word Reading 1. The Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE-2; Torgesen, Wagner & Rashotte, 2012). This well-normed test is extremely quick to administer, with children reading lists of words for just 45 seconds. It has 4 parallel forms, and can be used across all school years, with norms from ages 6yrs to adulthood. It is good to use both of its two subtests, which test two key word-reading skills: a. The Sight Word Efficiency (SWE) subtest tests reading of familiar real words. b. The Phonemic Decoding Efficiency (PDE), tests reading of unfamiliar words (pseudowords). 2. Other formal word reading tests, preferably efficiency tests, which involve each child reading for a very short amount of time, e.g., The Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS; Good & Kaminski, 2002; www.dibels.uoregon.edu) Oral Reading Fluency tests. 3. Informal word-reading tests, which schools might develop school-norms for, e.g., a. The Galletly Diagnostic Vowel Word Reading Tests (Galletly, 2015; Newsletter 2, free download, www.literacyplus.com.au). b. The 200 most frequent words of English, perhaps four parallel forms, each using every 4th word of the 200 most frequent words.
35
Example 3. Three categories (& 7 ‘types’) of Weak Readers: Common patterns of strength and weaknesses in children with reading difficulties Dr Susan Galletly, June 2014 All weak readers are individuals with highly specific instructional needs. That said, many weak readers have features in common making it useful to think of categories and patterns of weakness, and corresponding features of effective instruction to meet their needs. Reflect on your own students’ characteristics and how they fit these profiles. [RC: Reading Comprehension LS: Language Skills (Language & Thinking) WR: Word Reading (Reading Accuracy) M&E: Motivation & Engagement Y: Year-level]
WORD-READING WEAKNESS
COMBINED SKILLS WEAKNESS
LANGUAGE SKILLS WEAKNESS
Dyslexic reader
Panicked young dyslexic reader
Lower ability Mixed weakness reader
Severe Language Disorder (Mixed WR & LC reader)
Hyperlexic reader
Late-emerging comprehension difficulties
Sophia
Henry
Benny
Nell
Braith
Ethan
Joel
WR good Y1, low Y4 RC good Y1, low Y4 LS varies M & E varies Maths varies Y3Test Band 1-3 Poor phonics skills. Did well in Prep-Yr1 due to good skill learning sightwords and texts having high picture & language supports. Failed to build effective skills for reading unfamiliar words. Struggled from Yr3, due to texts having so many unfamiliar words, including many long multisyllabic words. Often family history of dyslexia. Often weakness goes undetected in Prep-Y1
WR & Spelling low Maths high LS good RC low due to WR low. M & E varies Y3Test Band 1-2 Family history of literacy weakness. Struggles to learn word reading and spelling. Easily forgets words which have been learned. Good ability shown in other areas. At risk of major written expression difficulties by mid primary school. May have similar difficulties with maths facts, especially times tables. May have areas of giftedness.
WR & Spelling very low LS low RC low M & E varies Maths low Y3Test Band 1-2 Good ability ‘masked’ by severely low school achievement. Significant difficulties with language skills, reading & written expression. Often extremely severe word reading difficulties (Dyslexia – may have giftedness too). Usually severe difficulties with comprehension & logical reasoning. May or may not have had lots of Speech Language Pathology intervention as a young child.
WR very high LS low RC low M & E varies Maths varies Y3Test Band 2-3 Great word-reading and spelling skills. Poor inferential language skills so has very poor reading comprehension, particularly from Yr3, due to texts being far more diverse and requiring good vocabulary and inferential language skills. May have an ASD diagnosis or show traits of ASD or weakness on social skills, and understanding how other people think.
WR good LS good Y1, low Y4 RC good Y1, low Y4 M & E varies Maths varies Y3Test Band 2-3 Good literal comprehension. Poor vocabulary or/and inferential comprehension. Did well in Prep-Y1 reading due to reading comprehension being literal comprehension with high picture language supports. Struggled from Yr3, due to texts being far more diverse and requiring good vocabulary and inferential language skills. Weak written expression.
Late-emerging word-reading difficulties
WR very low M & E very low LS varies RC varies Maths varies Reads own name but very few other words. Usual early intervention which is effective for other children didn’t work with this child. Often has family history of severe dyslexia. Avoids reading, and is very easily distracted during reading. Strong learned helplessness (inner belief that I’m not capable of learning to read) combined with strong avoidance.
WR low LS low RC low Maths low M & E varies Y3Test Band 1-2 Low general ability. Mild intellectual weakness. Low achievement in all areas.
36
WORD-READING WEAKNESS Late-emerging word reading difficulties
Dyslexic reader
Sophia
Henry
Instructional needs: Instructional needs: Teach Word Reading Use Echo Reading to Use pseudowords lots build book reading skill (proxy for unfamiliar & confidence. words, need healthy Work on maths skills if phonics to read/write) as needed: teens/tys, & many real words are read maths facts, using as sight-words.. Literacy Plus mottos. Teach Word Reading (Reading Accuracy) using Sounds & Vowels, then Two Vowels Talking sequences. Build skills to an automatic level (Correct + Fast + Supereasy). Monitor progress to avoid forgetting of skills which were correct. Integrate word-reading, vocabulary & spelling instruction, e.g., use spelling words from future terms/years as word-reading & vocab words, a long time before they’re to be learned as spelling words. Do phonological awareness as part of reading and spelling work: phonemes, rhyme, syllables. Teach Guestimating (Brave Spelling). Teach the 20 vowel sounds & 3 types of words/syllables (Regular, Pattern, Tricky). Teach ‘Dr G’s 2 Rulz ov Speling’, and enjoy finding spelling patterns. Be a schwa hunter. Use technology supports to ensure child has access to texts used in class, for building of Reading Comprehension skills. Optimise Reading Comprehension skills, e.g., SCORE, as strong comprehension skills can scaffold word reading of unfamiliar words.
COMBINED SKILLS WEAKNESS
Panicked young dyslexic reader
Benny Instructional needs: Strong focus on DoL1 (Attitudes & Perceptions), with aim of reversing Learned Helplessness, while child makes progress, so child learns he’s capable of learning to read. Focus on fun with reading activities & books. Use games to get instructional intensity, e.g., Memory/Snap. Do ‘new’ activities, not old activities now tainted as ‘Can’t do’. Build sight words, e.g., SG sequence: 7 family name words, then 5: car bus boat plane train: then 5: boy girl dog cat ball. Then use reading texts using those known sight words. Add sight words, building pride & skill. Build letter-sound knowledge. Do phonics with VC words first.
LANGUAGE SKILLS WEAKNESS
Lower ability Mixed weakness reader
Severe Language Disorder (Mixed WR & LC reader)
Hyperlexic reader
Late-emerging comprehension difficulties
Nell
Braith
Ethan
Joel
Instructional needs: Instructional needs: Instructional needs: Instructional needs: Build word-reading Don’t ever consider this child Build literal and Build inferential skills using work at unintelligent, despite very inferential language skills. language skills. the child’s level of low achievement. Teach child that the aim Build reading skill. Use ideas from Organise regular SLP of reading is not to get to comprehension skills. dyslexic reader, and support. Provide high levels the end of the words, but panicked young of support to build wordto get the message that dyslexic reader. reading and language skills. the writer wrote. Teach SCORE as an overarching Reading Comprehension strategy, then teach individual reading comprehension skills (e.g., summarising, predicting), using DoL2-4, and adding them into SCORE. Teach vocabulary both as direct instruction, and student as vocab sleuth, using WORDY words. Teach inferential language and reasoning skills, e.g., • Tighten Your Thinking: A schoolwide tool for building tighter thinking. • Questions, conversations & discussions. • On, Between, Beyond the Lines (Three Level Guide). • Idioms (Sayings, Figures of Speech). • Inferential Language Made Visible: Draw On vs Between Lines perspectives. • Thinking Bubbles, Talking Bubbles: What is the character thinking vs. saying. • Finding ‘Beyond the Lines’ thinking in picture books: Revisit previously read texts, this time focussing on inferential thinking and reasoning: it happens best in second & later reads. • Jokes and humour: have children draw pictures for a) the set-up (the listener’s prediction of what the answer to the joke is), and b) the punchline (the unexpected surprise meaning). Teach expressive language skills for writing, using DoL2-4 and a ‘Talk Curriculum’ before moving them into writing: • Compound & complex sentences. • Creating sentences from given words. • Complex description: noun wrapping (describers before and after nouns, verb wrapping.
37
WORD-READING WEAKNESS Late-emerging word-reading difficulties
Sophia
Dyslexic reader
Henry
COMBINED SKILLS WEAKNESS
Panicked young dyslexic reader
Benny
Lower ability Mixed weakness reader
Nell
Severe Language Disorder (Mixed WR & LC reader)
Braith
LANGUAGE SKILLS WEAKNESS Hyperlexic reader
Ethan
Late-emerging comprehension difficulties
Joel
My Students:
My Students:
My Students:
My Students:
My Students:
My Students:
My Students:
Strategies I’ll try:
Strategies I’ll try:
Strategies I’ll try:
Strategies I’ll try:
Strategies I’ll try:
Strategies I’ll try:
Strategies I’ll try:
38
Extended ‘case studies’ of Henry (Dyslexic Reader) and Braith (Specific Language Impairment) are included as examples following Principle 12: Word Reading (Henry) & Principle 13: Language Skills (Braith)
The blank form on the next page can be used for plotting the scores of groups of children
39
HEALTHY PROGRESS
Low ➨ ➨ LANGUAGE SKILLS ➨ High
➨
WORD-READING WEAKNESS (DYSLEXIA)
COMBINED WEAKNESS LANGUAGE SKILLS WEAKNESS Low ➨ ➨ WORD READING ➨ ➨ High 40
Principle 11. Strategically Teach Reading Comprehension and Build Independent Reading Principle 11. Strategically Teach Reading Comprehension and Build Independent Reading: Achieve Effective Independent Reading by Explicitly Teaching Reading Comprehension Skills Rationale Reading Comprehension is understanding what has been read and reflecting on it at different levels including literal, inferential and evaluative levels. Efficient reading comprehension is seen in a range of student behaviours, including 1. Engaging in and learning effectively from class reading lessons focussed on reading comprehension of a class-level text, building skills for increasingly sophisticated reading comprehension, and reading comprehension of more complex texts. 2. Reading diverse texts effectively for diverse purposes across the full range of curriculum areas and school activities. 3. Being keen independent readers of a diverse range of texts (students with poor comprehension usually don’t find independent reading motivating). The aim of reading comprehension for school purposes is effective language comprehension and thinking on texts, building language skills and knowledge, while also building motivation for future reading of texts. There are many reading comprehension strategies with a reasonable research-base (e.g., see discussion in Hempenstall, 2016; Pressley, 2006; Shanahan et al., 2010; Woolley, 2011). There are a very large number of single-skill reading comprehension strategies and also a range of organising reading comprehension strategies (e.g., SCORE; Hamilton-Smith et al., 2010), which support readers to use sets of single-skill strategies in sequential order. The important instructional principle for reading comprehension is that, over time, a considerable number of reading comprehension strategies are developed to a level of fluent confident usage in reading of diverse texts. At-risk readers also benefit by using an overarching sequential reading comprehension framework strategy such as SCORE (Skim & Scan, Connect & Question, Organise your Thinking, Read & Reflect, Be the Expert), with the SCORE mnemonic guiding the reader sequentially through the reading comprehension process, utilising useful single-skill strategies in doing so. To master use of a strategy like SCORE, at-risk readers are likely to need to have the strategy carefully modelled and taught, with extensive practice using SCORE in reading of many texts. Important factors for effective reading comprehension include 1. Motivation, engagement, and successful engaged learning. 2. Motivating texts children are keen to read. 3. Sufficient processing capacity for the cognitive load requirements of the reading lesson. 4. Efficient text access, either through efficient word-reading skills, or efficient text access using accommodation supports, e.g., text read aloud during or before class reading of the text, or/and use of technology supports such as reading pens and text-to-speech technology supports. 5. Explicit teaching of reading comprehension and inferential thinking about text content. 6. Efficient use of reading comprehension strategies; metacognitive awareness of when, how and why those strategies are used; and effective self-monitoring of both reading comprehension and use of reading comprehension strategies. 7. Efficient student semantic skills: vocabulary, background knowledge, and literal and inferential language skills. 8. Efficient student syntactic skills: understanding of and skilled use of genre structures and mature sentence structures. 9. Explicit teaching of semantic and syntactic skills, for students low in those areas. 10. Sufficient scaffolded practice on specific reading comprehension skills, for them to be mastered and used confidently. 11. Cycles of learning using revisiting of familiar texts for deeper exploration of the language content of texts using reading comprehension strategies and skills. 41
I like these principles: they help explain and reinforce things I do with children, as well as giving me things to work harder on. They help me make learning easier for children, and provide accommodations so that children aren’t disadvantaged by their weaknesses. Participating Teacher Strategies for this principle Strategies for teaching reading comprehension built from consideration of research evidence both on reading comprehension and the four models used in the project, include the following: 1. Incorporate teaching strategies of Teaching Smart and Teaching for the Reading Heart in reading instruction for at-risk readers. 2. Build strong school and teacher expertise for teaching reading comprehension to at-risk readers. 3. Have strong staff awareness of the cognitive load impacts of reading instruction for at-risk readers. a. The similarities and differences of reading instruction for at-risk and healthy progress readers: i. The similarities lie in principles of reading instruction for at-risk readers being mostly the same principles used for all readers. ii. The differences lie in instructional intensity, in successfully differentiated instruction being less a sensible goal, and more an instructional imperative, and in the damage done by poor instruction being intense, and often having long lasting impacts, through its impact on children’s self-confidence for reading. b. The crucial challenge of balance cognitive load if reading comprehension instruction for atrisk readers is to be effective: i. Curriculum Content Load plus learning Task Load must not exceed the child’s available processing capacity (working memory), and ii. At-risk readers processing capacity is often quite low. c. The role of stress in reducing children’s processing capacity, and the importance that reading tasks are enjoyed and relaxing, never stressful. d. The crucial importance of intervention starting as soon as difficulties are noticed, and at a sufficient level of expertise and intensity, such that children experience very little failure and, instead, lots of successful engaged learning, and learning progress. e. The crucial role of motivation and engagement (Whether you think you can, or whether you think you can’t, you’re right!) for at-risk readers, and corresponding need to avoid failure: i. Children need lots of successful engaged learning to maintain motivation for learning reading skills. ii. Frequent experiences of low success produce loss of motivation and engagement: this often leads to learned helplessness (not feeling capable of effective learning) and more entrenched, reading difficulties. f. The very high cognitive load of text reading for children with weak word-reading skills, and the value of reducing cognitive load of text reading by e.g., rereading familiar books and texts, Echo Reading. g. The vital importance of using principles of instruction incorporating cognitive load concepts, as at-risk readers are vulnerable for making poor progress until focussed, strategic instruction using Cognitive Load Theory principles are used, e.g., Cognitive Load Theory, Marzano & Pickering’s five Dimensions of Learning (DoL), Literacy Plus Mottos. 4. Have strong staff awareness of the strong interrelatedness of reading comprehension and language skills for reading: 42
a. That most reading comprehension skills are language skills. b. That this interrelatedness offers many instructional advantages: i. Many reading comprehension skills can be taught and practiced using verbal activities instead of print texts. ii. Reluctant readers often enjoy and are highly motivated in verbal activities. iii. Higher rates of instructional intensity can be achieved in verbal activities, e.g, when children can give spoken responses instead of written responses. 5. Build reading comprehension skills in at-risk readers carefully and strategically, ensuring effective mastery and generalisation through to authentic reading, through appropriate use of instructional intensity, careful scaffolding, lots of practice at the level of the child’s instructional needs, and strategic monitoring of skill development and use. 6. Include the five key strands of Marzano & Pickering’s Dimensions of Learning (DoL) within your school’s pedagogical frameworks to (i) Ensure skills are mastered and generalised effectively (ii) (In the event of children having made poor progress, with instructional change needed), use the five dimensions to analyse instruction and reflect on how effectively the different DoLs have been implemented and where change is needed: a. DoL1 Motivation and Engagement (Attitudes and Perceptions) - The starting point: Work towards achieving active engaged persistent learners who don’t give up and disengage. b. DoL5 Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (Habits of Mind) - The end goal: in using the strategy, having a vocabulary about the strategy, able to discuss the strategy and its purpose, and justify use of the strategy in relation to particular texts which have been read. Metacognitive awareness of key aspects of skills and strategies supports their continued use across lifelong learning, and builds children’s skills in being reflective, sophisticated learners. c. The DoL2-4 learning progression from explicit instruction and scaffolded practice using the strategy in isolation (DoL2) through scaffolded use in increasingly broad contexts, to sophisticated skill usage with diverse texts in diverse contexts (DoL4), keeping cognitive load manageable through three stages of teaching and learning, which keep the cognitive load of teaching tasks to a comfortable level not overloading student processing capacity: i. DoL2 Focussed Skill Development (Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge): narrow context explicit instruction lessons focussed on specific single skills, e.g., a single reading comprehension strategy, and on building skill with that strategy to an increasingly fluent level, ready then for use in the wider contexts of DoL3. ii. DoL3 Scaffolded Generalising of Skills (Extending and Refining Knowledge): scaffolded generalising of those skills into strategic contexts, which are more general but still contrived, in order to ensure successful engaged learning of those skills. iii. DoL4. Extensive Authentic Skill Usage (Using Knowledge Meaningfully): 1. Set a goal of achieving confident skilled strategy use in independent reading, i.e., reading without scaffolding and supports. 2. Monitor strategy use to observe whether fluent automatic skills with the strategy are being used in increasingly sophisticated ways, e.g., inferential reading comprehension, independent reading of increasingly complex literature. DoL4 uses the sophisticated skills built through DoL2 and DoL3 in increasingly complex and authentic contexts. 7. Meet the ‘Find the Learning Time’ Challenge, so at-risk readers receive the reading instruction and time spent reading which they need if they are to make healthy reading progress.
43
8. Ensure children with word-reading weakness have access to many books conceptually at age-level but with word-reading difficulty at an appropriate level. 9. Ensure extensive involvement with literature and reading, including a. Reading To (Modelled Reading: Show me): Children enjoying diverse texts read to them, building the strategies and positive habits of an effective reader. b. Reading With (Guided Reading: Help me): Children reading with support, in reading lessons, and supported reading of words and texts, building word reading and active comprehension strategies. c. Reading By (Independent Reading: Let me): Children reading more and more widely, both fiction and nonfiction ‘World Reading’ books, borrowing library books, with increasing home time spent reading. 10. Develop a schoolwide program of reading comprehension, which includes a. A specific list of reading comprehension strategies, large enough to be considered effective and complete. b. A growing bank of familiar texts which are revisited many times for different instructional purposes, using perhaps 10 to 20 texts allocated to each year-level. The familiarity of enjoyed texts reduces anxiety thus increasing children’s processing capacity. Use of a schoolwide system allows all teachers to have a list of the texts which children are familiar with, preferably accompanied by a list of the many language skills which can be developed using that text. The texts allocated to a year-level form only a small proportion of the literature used in that year-level, and are not meant to prescribe the total literature exposure used in the year-level. c. Core reading comprehension strategies taught at every year-level with age appropriate emphases, e.g., activating and using prior knowledge; using literal information, making inferences, activating prior knowledge and making connections from the text to one’s personal knowledge and experience (intertextuality), answering and asking questions, and predicting text events. d. Other useful reading comprehension strategies allocated to different year-levels or developmental levels for intensive focus. Allocating strategies to year-levels enables those strategies to be taught deeply and intensively in the allocated year-level. It does not mean that the strategies aren’t used or taught in other year-levels. While many key reading comprehension strategies are taught from the start of school, and used in all year-levels, many at-risk readers do not effectively master strategies unless they receive explicit instruction with lots of scaffolded practice at DoL2 and DoL3 levels. e. Reading comprehension as part of instruction of all curriculum areas. 11. Teach reading comprehension skills in verbal activities and diverse multiliteracies contexts, taking advantage of the lower cognitive load of these texts for children with word-reading weakness. 12. Use an integrated strategy such as SCORE to support student use of multiple reading comprehension strategies, during text reading: a. Teach the SCORE strategy initially as a chant, raising one strategy per finger. b. Once SCORE is known, teach the listed strategies specific to each letter. c. Use SCORE, when relevant, when new strategies are taught. 13. Have a strong school focus on building inferential thinking, starting from Prep. 14. Differentiate instruction for children with weak language skills and/or weak word-reading skills, taking into account learning needs in these areas.
44
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46.
15. Teach many useful single reading comprehension strategies: Activating prior knowledge 47. Reflecting Analysing text information 48. Researching Applying knowledge to different circumstances 49. Retelling Author’s Purpose 50. Scanning for information Bias & Prejudice 51. Sequencing Background (world) knowledge 52. Skimming Cause & Effect 53. SQRRR: Survey Question Read Recite Review Compare & Contrast 54. Study Skills Connecting ideas 55. Summarising Character description 56. Synthesising Character description using contextual cues 57. Three Level Guide: On, Between, Beyond the Character intentions & motivations lines Creating new texts from ideas in a text 58. Top Level Structure (TLS): identifying the text’s Critical literacy TLS Drawing conclusions 59. Top Level Structure (TLS): understanding TLS Describing vocabulary. Evaluating 60. Title and author awareness Evidence finding & justifying 61. Visible Thinking: Talking & Thinking bubbles. Fact versus Opinion 62. Visible Thinking: On the Lines vs Between the Figurative Language: Idioms, similes, Lines perspectives. metaphors. 63. Visible Thinking: Venn Diagrams, Mind Maps. Genre skills: identifying texts’ genres 64. Visualising while listening. Genre skills: retelling narratives 65. Visualising to remember context. Genre skills: narrative features 66. Vocabulary: Use of context clues Gist awareness during independent reading 67. Vocabulary: Identifying WORDY words Independent reading using specific reading (interesting new words worthy of learning) comprehension strategies 68. Vocabulary: Monitoring learning, e.g., reflecting Inferring: answering questions. on how well a word is known & progress made. Inferring: Talking bubbles and Thinking bubbles. Inferring: Idioms Inferring: Jokes and humour, puns Interpreting texts & diagrams Imagining Intertextuality: personal identification with texts. ‘Interviewing’ characters & authors. Justifying Listing facts & details Literal comprehension Main Idea versus Facts & Details Identification Metacognitive thinking Monitoring comprehension Monitoring comprehension: Clicks & Clunks Note taking Prioritising importance of information & ideas Predicting: hypothesising Predicting: confirming predictions Question answering Question generating 45
16. Have a strong schoolwide focus on building enthusiastic independent reading of fiction and nonfiction texts: a. Focus children on enjoying books and the reasons why they enjoyed them, e.g., have book recommendation forms which are easy to complete, and are then perused by children selecting books in the library. b. Scaffold at-risk readers into independent reading of texts of manageable difficulty. i. Support readers to select high interest texts with manageable levels of difficulty. ii. Emphasise the value and pleasure of rereading favourite books, with deeper knowledge and levels of reflection built with each rereading. iii. Encourage joint reading at home with parent and child using Echo Reading (Galletly, 2014, Word Reading Principle: Section 2, 3.d.iii). iv. Use reading buddies, with older children scaffolding younger children using Echo Reading. v. Pre-reading class texts with at-risk readers or teaching ahead so they can be the ‘experts’ during class lessons. c. Use talking books and text-to-speech software (e.g., scanning pens) strategically to i. Provide access to texts. ii. Build language skills. iii. Ready children for independently reading books they are already familiar with. d. Build self-monitoring of independent reading. e. Monitor children’s independent reading focusing on i. Reading comprehension of books read. ii. The amount of reading done. iii. How much the child enjoyed the book, and why. f. Use local & community reading challenges and competitions to promote extensive independent reading. 17. Use a community-focus to ensure children have strong print experience and verbal discussions from an early age. 18. Assess reading comprehension skills carefully and strategically to inform planning and teaching.
Examples of Activities for Use of this Principle 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
An example of Marzano & Pickering’s (1997) Dimensions of Learning used in reading instruction. Reading Comprehension Instruction for the Seven ‘Case Study Children’. Teacher-Suggested Ideas for Reading for Meaning. Teacher-Suggested Examples of Commercial Programs. Teacher-Suggested Ideas for Small Group and One: One Delivery of Instruction. Teacher-Suggested Ideas for Building a Reading Culture.
46
Example 1. An example of Marzano & Pickering ‘s (1997) Dimensions of Learning used in reading instruction. Marzano & Pickering’s Dimensions of Learning (DoL) model is extremely useful for reflecting on and planning reading instruction for at-risk readers. This is because 1. At-risk readers often experience phonological-verbal learning breakdowns which drastically reduce children’s long term gains from reading instruction. 2. The five Dimensions of Learning show how instruction needs to be structured and sequenced so learning breakdowns are prevented, and skills are mastered and retained long-term, plus also effectively generalised, with skills used effectively in authentic reading of diverse texts. Cognitive Load Theory and Marzano and Pickering’s (1997) model of five Dimensions of Learning (DoL), detailed in Section 2 of the project’s Discussion Paper, were chosen for use in the project because of their effectiveness towards achieving effective learning by at-risk readers. They do this through managing cognitive load, and thus avoiding failure to master, generalise and make effective long-term memories of reading skills. The Dimensions of Learning model (DoL) is particularly useful for planning effective instruction for at-risk readers. The five DoL dimensions are • DoL 1 Attitudes and Perceptions = Motivation & Engagement. • DoL 2 Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge = Focussed Skill Development. • DoL 3 Extending and Refining Knowledge = Scaffolded Generalising of Skills. • DoL 4 Using Knowledge Meaningfully = Extensive Authentic Skill Usage. • DoL 5 Habits of Mind = Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (at all levels of instruction). • DoL 2-4 progression: Teach for Mastery & Increasingly Sophisticated Skill Use, Monitoring progress at each level. Teaching the reading comprehension strategy Fact versus Opinion is used in the example below. It applies principles of effective instruction using the five Dimensions of Learning: • DoL1 Motivation and Engagement (Attitudes and Perceptions) - The starting point: An argument between two puppets over facts and opinions and which is best. The aim: achieving active engaged persistent learners who don’t give up and disengage. • DoL5 Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (Habits of Mind) - The end goal: Children confident and skilled about facts and opinions, able to discuss the strategy and its purpose, and justify a stance they take on text being fact or opinion. • The DoL2-4 progression of learning from early skill development (DoL2) to sophisticated skill usage (DoL4), keeping cognitive load manageable through three stages of teaching and learning, which keep the cognitive load of teaching tasks to a comfortable level not overloading student processing capacity: • DoL2 Focussed Skill Development (Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge): explicit instruction on Fact and Opinion, providing sufficient practice (instructional intensity) so that children build skill & confidence. o Use of verbal, not print activities, initially, to keep cognitive load low. o Effective Focussed Skill Development (DoL2): Narrow context explicit instruction lessons focussed on the skill of distinguishing fact from opinion, and building skill and confidence to an increasingly fluent level for use in broader contexts. o Lesson 1: Teaching Fact versus Opinion ▪ Teacher demonstration lesson introducing Fact, Opinion and the difference between them. Prior knowledge: The children are already proficient about ‘True’ and ‘False’ and the difference between them, from the previous set of lessons building skill with True, False, and deciding whether statements are true and false. ▪ The teacher shows two blue cards, one with the key word Fact written on it in bold capitals with the words ‘Always true. Never false. Can be proved as true.’ in brackets, and the other with the key word Opinion and ‘Not always true. Might sometimes be false. What some people might think. Some people would agree but others would disagree.’ in brackets. She gives a friendly definition of the two terms using flap pictures of people and animals: • Fact: Something that is always true and never false, e.g., People breathe air. Adult elephants are bigger than cats. 47
•
•
Opinion: something that is not a fact, but that some people might agree with. An opinion is relative: it’s not always true: perhaps it’s true just some of the time, or what some people might think, but other people wouldn’t agree with, e.g., o ‘That dog is big.’ is an opinion, because it’s not always true: he would look big if he’s beside a puppy or very little dog, but he’d seem small, not big, if he was standing beside a really big dog. grownup or bigger kid. o ‘This baby has beautiful eyes.’ is an opinion: the family might think that their baby’s eyes are beautiful, but other people might think they are just ordinary.’ • So Facts are always true, and Opinions are relative: true only some of the time, or what some people might think while others wouldn’t. o Lesson 2. Playing with Fact vs. Opinion. ▪ The teacher introduces two characters, Factual Factie and Opinion Oppie, one who only says Facts, and the other only Opinions, with ‘I love Facts’ and ‘I love Opinions’ written on their shirts and ‘mailbags’. The characters explain the two terms ‘Fact’ and ‘Opinion,’ and give facts and opinions on two topics: Colours and Animals. The characters then leave, leaving their two mailbags behind. ▪ After group discussion of what the characters said, the children discuss the facts and opinions then sort statements using the Fact vs Opinion mailbags, e.g., I do, We do, You do (transfer of responsibility & skill use from teacher to child): I do: Teacher demonstrates Posting postcards with the statements into the letter boxes, one for the house of Factual Factie, the other the house of Opinion Oppie. We do: As a class, children reflect on individual fact and opinion statements, before posting the statements in the correct posting box. You do: Children select fact and opinion statements and place or glue them into their pictured individual posting boxes. (With older children, children might work individually writing Fact or Opinion beside 10 statements on their reading response sheet. Once checked by the teacher, the facts are then cut into strips and posted into the Fact vs Opinion posting boxes). DoL3 Scaffolded Generalising of Skills (Scaffolded generalising of those skills into strategic contexts, which are more general but still contrived, in order to ensure successful engaged learning of those skills): Using the Fact & Opinion skill built in the narrow DoL2 context fully focussed on Fact vs Opinion, moving it into increasingly wider, more complex contexts: o Fact vs Opinion used strategically in reading tasks, with decreasing teacher prompts as students become increasingly self-managing: o First Fact vs Opinion used as a focus strategy in a series of class reading lessons (achieving instructional intensity using that strategy in print activities), with students recording how well they used Fact & Opinion in the lesson (building self-monitoring and metacognitive awareness) o Then Fact and Opinion definitions and sorting activities used occasionally as one of many quick reading warm-up activities. o Next Fact vs Opinion used as just one of multiple strategies used in a series of lessons, but with Fact vs. Opinion discussed or mentioned early in the lesson, and students initially recording how well they used each of the strategies in the lesson then moving to no recording (removing the print prompt). o Next Fact vs Opinion used as one of multiple strategies in a series of lessons, but with no deliberate mention of that strategy or recording of how well the strategy was used, except for an occasional review of strategies and an occasional self-monitoring exercise. o Teacher monitoring at all of these stages to see how effectively each child uses the Fact vs. Opinion strategy and needs for Early Intervention: a further cycle of DoL2, using new interesting tasks and contexts, later merged with the first DoL2 activities (Factual Factie and Opinion Oppie), with lots of verbal practice). o Teacher monitoring student engagement at all these stages to see whether task adjustments are needed, e.g., using verbal response tasks rather than written response tasks, etc. 48
•
•
DoL4 Extensive Authentic Skill Usage (Use of fluent automatic skills in increasingly sophisticated ways, e.g., inferential reading comprehension, independent reading of increasingly complex literature. DoL4 uses the sophisticated skills built through DoL2 and DoL3 in increasingly complex and authentic contexts): Authentic reading lessons with no specific focus on Fact vs Opinion, and teacher monitoring of how effectively each student is using the Fact vs. Opinion strategy to see if Early Intervention is needed (with Early Intervention being Further Cycles of DoL2 and DoL3) DoL5 Empowering Metacognitive Thinking - The end goal: Children confident and skilled about facts and opinions, able to discuss the strategy and its purpose, and justify a stance they take on text being fact or opinion.
Children need gentle nurturing instruction, carefully moving them along the long haul of reading development. We really liked the idea of using consistency of instruction and terminology across the school years, with reading comprehension strategies revisited multiple times. We use SCORE as our school organising strategy, and– individual reading comprehension strategies can be focussed on quite easily within SCORE and Reading On The Same Page. Participating Teacher
49
Example 2. Reading Comprehension Instruction for the Seven ‘Case-Study Children’ An Introduction to the seven children Using the Literacy Component Model, the project is using the examples of seven ‘children’, each one a profile of a common pattern of reading weakness (Galletly, 2014). Three of the children have weakness just in word reading, two have weakness just in language skills for reading, and two have weakness in both areas. Reading comprehension builds from the integration of word reading of meaningful texts and language comprehension of the content which has been read: Reading Comprehension = Language Skills x Word Reading This means children weak in either word-reading or language skills will have reading comprehension difficulties. Thus, while their strengths, weaknesses and instructional needs differ, all seven children have weak reading comprehension.
➨ High
WORD-READING WEAKNESS Strong language skills Weak word reading
HEALTHY PROGRESS Strong language skills Strong word reading
LANGUAGE SKILLS
➨
EFFECTIVE INSTRUCTION FOCUSSES ON MOVING ALL AT-RISK READERS TO THIS QUADRANT
LANGUAGE SKILLS WEAKNESS Weak language skills Strong word reading
Low ➨
➨
COMBINED WEAKNESS Weak language skills Weak word reading
Low
➨
➨
WORD READING
➨
➨ High
As discussed in Section 1 of the project Discussion Paper, assessing children’s word-reading and language skills and using the Literacy Component Model establishes four quadrants, as shown above. Each one represents a different combination of word-reading and language skills. The quadrants position the children according to their skill profiles, while also showing the children’s instructional needs. Children with weak word-reading skills sit in the two left quadrants. Children with weak language skills sit in the bottom two quadrants. Children with healthy skills in both areas sit in the top right quadrant: this top right quadrant is also the goal of effective reading instruction for at-risk readers.
50
Reading Comprehension instruction for the Seven ‘Case-Study Children’ With reading comprehension being an optimisation skill boosting the skills of all readers, all seven case study children need and will benefit from systematic reading comprehension instruction (Galletly, 2014). The children with weak word reading (Benny, Henry and Sophia) need accommodations so their poor word reading doesn’t prevent effective learning. The children with weak language skills need both accommodations so their weak language skills don’t prevent learning, plus additional instruction building the specific reading comprehension skills which are being taught. This additional instruction is likely to include lots of instruction at the level of Focussed Skill Development (DoL2), as well as more time on Scaffolding Generalising of Skills (DoL3), as well as ongoing strong emotional supports (DoL1) to ensure continued motivation and engagement for language skills and reading comprehension activities. The three readers who have just word-reading weakness, Benny, Henry and Sophia, have good language skills. They will learn well from Reading Comprehension lessons as long as their weak reading is taken into account. They will benefit from accommodations ensuring their word-reading difficulties do not complicate lessons on reading comprehension. These accommodations might include lessons using visual texts or movie clips rather than written texts; the text having being read to the child prior to the lesson, then read aloud several times during the lesson by the teacher and/or class, and use of text-to-speech software such as reading pens. Reading comprehension is very much language skills for reading, so children with language skills weakness are much more at-risk of difficulties learning to use reading comprehension strategies than children with word-reading weakness and good language skills. The four readers with language skills weakness (Nell, Braith, Ethan and Joel) are likely to learn relatively little from Reading Comprehension lessons unless lessons are structured to keep cognitive load manageable. Usual class reading comprehension lessons are likely to have higher cognitive load than they can manage, with Focussed Skill Development (DoL2) too brief, and Scaffolded Generalising of Skills (DoL3) too rapid. They are at-risk of the common learning failures of weakness in skill mastery, skill generalisation, and effective long-term mastery of skills. Nell, Braith, Ethan and Joel will benefit greatly from instruction focussed on ensuring successful engaged learning during all reading comprehension lessons, i.e., high levels of success, with continued strong motivation and engagement (DoL1). They will also benefit by the lessons described above teaching Fact versus Opinion, carefully teaching to ensure all five Dimensions of Learning are achieved. This teaching is resource intensive, and creates a Find the Teaching Time challenge. The children will benefit by Response to Intervention Levels 2 and 3: small group Skill Building Intervention or one: one Intensive Remediation. They will be advantaged by building skill with an overarching reading comprehension strategy such as SCORE. Once SCORE is mastered, single useful strategies can then be added, including Activating Prior Knowledge, Monitoring Comprehension, Inferential Reasoning (perhaps using the Three Level Guide’s On, Between and Beyond the Lines terms), Predicting, Summarising, and making and answering Questions. Use of the motto, ‘Small is Beautiful’ is useful when planning reading comprehension instruction for children like Nell, Braith, Ethan and Joel. Teaching and learning focussed on achieving effective mastery of a small number of key reading comprehension strategies, with those skills used effortlessly in authentic 51
reading, may be far more effective than teaching many strategies with few brought through to use in authentic reading. It is likely that the most important reading strategy children with weak language skills need to master is monitoring meaning, and using this skill effectively to build enjoyed reading of texts. Children like Nell, Braith, Ethan and Joel often think the aim of reading texts is simply to get to the end of the text. They need help to realise that the aim is to get the meaning which the writer has written for them, and scaffolding to practice reading for meaning to it being their usual practice while reading. Using Galletly’s (1999) cup of thinking analogy for working memory, discussed in Section 2, these children may benefit by a ‘one cup for reading, then one cup for thinking’ concept, practising pausing at the end of a small amount of text (page, paragraph or sentence, depending on the text and reader), and reflecting on its meaning before moving on. Nell, Braith, Ethan and Joel will also benefit by scaffolding to ensure high levels of independent reading for meaning, as comprehension skills are then built through independent reading, not just through reading lessons. Their language skills will also benefit greatly by extensive listening to texts. The criteria for Successful Engaged Learning for Nell, Braith, Ethan and Joel is that they effectively understand the texts they engage with and enjoy the texts used in independent reading. Time spent being bored through poor text choice is unsuccessful, disengaged learning, likely to lead to Learned Helplessness and becoming reluctant readers. Towards achieving effective independent reading and extensive listening to appropriate texts, a key part of reading instruction for these children is • Building excitement about reading and listening to texts. • Scaffolding and monitoring the texts they choose and their comprehension of these texts, to ensure reading for meaning is continuing, and becoming more sophisticated. The children might enjoy filling in fun book review cards on books they’ve read for use by other children. A focus on achieving continued enjoyed reading by these children is likely to yield continued reading growth.
What works for me: Enjoyment: comfy places to read, reading cubbies, free choice reading. Enticing texts: even hunting & fishing magazines. Motivation: reward systems, prizes, fun book reviews, laughter. Ownership: personal goals, buddy reading, pride in achievement. Participating Teacher
52
Example 3. Teacher-Suggested Ideas for Reading for Meaning: 1. ‘Daily 5’ and ‘Café’ Book sequences, activities and strategies. 2. Cloze Activities 3. Picture Interpretation, e.g, Picture Walk as part of SCORE S: Skim & Scan 4. Sentence Transformations 5. Sequencing Activities 6. Read & Draw Activities 7. Drama/Freeze Frames, etc. 8. Use of a question matrix for children to use in asking and answering questions. 9. Use of a target for evaluating the four options of multiple choice questions. 10. Marking Up Linger Longer Texts a. Focus on a text for a week. b. Activities such as SCORE, Strive, Reading on the Same Page, QAR/3LG
Example 4. Teacher-Suggested Examples of Commercial Programs
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
Key Into Inference Key Into Evaluation Key Into Reorganisation Sunshine Online Reading Eggs/Reading Express. Galaxy Online Cars & Stars Extension in Reading RIC Reading Boxes
Example 5. Teacher-Suggested Ideas for Small Group and One: One Delivery of Instruction 1. Pre-teaching at-risk readers so they are ahead of the class when that content is taught to the class. (‘Teach the last first’) 2. Strategic use of teacher aide and Learning Support Teacher time 3. Daily 5 routines. 4. Reading conference 5. MINILIT/MULTILIT 6. POLLEY (OLEY/PMAP) 7. Guided Reading 8. Organised/Structured Peer/Buddy Reading. 9. Streamed Reading Groups. Example 6. Teacher-Suggested Ideas for Building a Reading Culture 1. Regular Professional Development sessions with parents. 2. Providing parents with resources for supporting their children’s reading, e.g, To With & By, Question Matrix, SCORE bookmark, Reading Star with the school’s reading strategies. 3. Building parent involvement in school reading activities and events.
53
Principle 12. Strategically Teach Word Reading and Build Fluency Principle 12. Strategically Teach Word Reading and Build Fluency: Teach Word Reading Strategically and Carefully, to Achieve Fluent Effective Text Reading. Rationale Fluency gives the gift of time to the reading brain so insights and inferences can be made and emotions engaged. Maryanne Wolf, 2008, p.131
Fluent confident reading of diverse texts, using effective word reading, intonation and use of text meaning is a key aim of reading development. In early readers, a key component of reading fluency is word-reading efficiency (words read correctly and quickly). Word reading is skill at reading words and word parts, as isolated words and in meaningful text. It includes reading of real and pseudowords, familiar and unfamiliar words, words using common and less common grapheme-phoneme correspondences (GPCs), rapid reading of highly familiar one syllable ‘sightwords’ and careful reading of complex unfamiliar multisyllabic words. There are many principles of word reading instruction for at-risk readers which have been researched to varying extents, and many research reviews which discuss the research on this area (e.g., Adams, 1990; Hempenstall, 2016; National Reading Panel, 2000; Simmons & Kameenui, 1998; Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998).
English’s Complex Spelling System (Orthography) Makes It Hard to Learn to Read and Write Words English has 1120 different ways of spelling its 40 phonemes, the sounds required to pronounce all its words. By contrast, Italian needs only 33 combinations of letters to spell out its 25 phonemes.....the reported rate of dyslexia in Italy is barely half that in the US where 15% are affected to varying degrees. Unmesh Kher, 2001, p.56
Spelling patterns are described as Grapheme: Phoneme Correspondences (GPCs), i.e., the number of ways a sound is written (graphemes) compared to the number of sounds (phonemes) that the graphemes say. Graphemes can be one-to-one, one-to-many (e.g., the GPC for grapheme [y] is 1:4, [p]:/pin phone psyche pneumatic/) and many-to-one (e.g., the GPC for phoneme /er/ is 5-to-1: [her first nurse works early]). English orthography (spelling system) is characterised by lots of one-to-many, and many-to-one GPCs, making it one of the world’s most complex orthographies: 26 letters representing 44 common sounds in over 500 spelling patterns. Most nations use quite regular orthographies, with mostly one-to-one GPCs: this creates very low cognitive load so children learn to read and write words very easily, so reading and literacy development is easy and very few children have word-reading or spelling weakness (e.g., Knight, Galletly & Gargett, submitted a-e; Landerl, Wimmer, & Frith, 1997; Seymour, Aro, & Erskine, 2003). Our complex spelling system creates very high cognitive load for children beginning to learn to read and write. This high cognitive load directly impacts word-reading and spelling development. It also has secondary flow-on effects to all aspects of literacy which involve children reading and writing words, especially in children with weak word reading. Word-reading difficulty is the most common area of reading difficulties in young children (e.g., Leach, Scarborough & Rescorla (2003) found word-reading difficulties in over 90% of children who had reading difficulties from Grade 1, compared to language skills weakness in 50% of those children). Struggling to learn word reading can cause children to give up, and move into Learned Helplessness (Seligman, 2007): 54
from this point, they often require very skilful one: one instruction to make progress and again become active engaged learners. Avoiding Learned Helplessness for word reading is a key reason why Successful Engaged Learning is paramount for at-risk readers. Teachers of all year-levels need to be skilled in word-reading instruction for at-risk readers, because many older children have severe word-reading weakness, and these children require particularly skilful instruction. The Teaching Challenge is Successfully Managing Cognitive Load The high cognitive load of learning to read English words creates a major teaching challenge for P-1 wordreading instruction and reading instruction generally. The teaching challenge is to ensure the total cognitive load of teaching (curriculum content load plus the content load of the reading activities being used) remains well below the limit of children’s processing capacity, so children are feel confident and learn well. Children’s processing capacity is reduced by many factors, including • Young Age: The low processing capacity of all young readers. At age five years, working memory is low; it increases significantly from age five to age eight years. This makes all Prep children ‘at-risk’ of developing difficulties unless word-reading instruction is handled skilfully. • Inherited Weakness: The especially low processing capacity of children with inherited reading weakness. • Anxiety: The considerably reduced processing capacity of children who are anxious about reading (Anxiety reduces available processing capacity). • Learned Helplessness: The reduced amount of processing capacity which children apply to learning to read, when they don’t feel capable of effective reading progress. • Disengagement: The reduced available processing capacity when children are not actively engaged. High rates of successful engaged learning are vital for at-risk readers during early reading development to ensure children make steady word-reading progress and text reading progress, and to avoid children becoming disengaged or moving into Learned Helplessness. In addition, emotionally supportive classroom climates are extremely important if at-risk readers are to become successful learners (e.g., Hamre & Pianta, 2005, found that at-risk readers make significantly less progress when not in emotionally supportive classrooms, despite having been provided with excellent and appropriate academic teaching for learning): at-risk readers need a combination of emotional support and appropriate academic instruction. The Two Key Skills of Word Reading are Proliferating Sight Words and Effective Decoding Skills The two pivotal elements of effective word-reading development are 1. Proliferating sight words (steadily increasing numbers of words recognised instantly without the need for processing capacity to be allocated to working them out). 2. Efficient confident skills for reading unfamiliar regular words. The two subtests of the Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE-2; Torgesen, Wagner & Rashotte, 2012) are useful for monitoring children’s progress in developing these two skill areas. As these skills become increasingly effective, the cognitive load of reading texts is correspondingly reduced, freeing children’s processing capacity (working memory) for reading comprehension so they focus on meaning and enjoyment as they interact with text content. The most frequent words of English are one syllable words. English syllables have three Orthographic Grainsizes which can be used to categorise words and syllables: phonemes, multiletter spelling patterns, and highly irregular whole-words (Ziegler & Goswami, 2005). These three grainsizes create a logical threetype framework of words and word-reading strategies which makes word reading simpler for teachers, parents and children. When considering the many one-syllable words early readers encounter: • Regular ăĕĭŏŭ words (phoneme grainsize) are ‘sound-out’ words, e.g., vet bus sit. • Pattern words (multiletter spelling pattern grainsize) are ‘use the pattern’ words, e.g., reading or writing stall from knowledge of ball, chook from look, say from play. • Tricky words (whole-word grainsize) are ‘remember what it looks like’ words, e.g., a the you. This regular-pattern-tricky framework also applies to syllables within multisyllabic words, e.g., the syllables of hap-py are regular-pattern, those of yes-ter-day are regular-tricky-pattern. 55
Sight words are all the words a child recognises immediately on sight. While some sight words are highly irregular ‘exception’ words learned as whole words (e.g., was, one, done), regular words that have become very familiar to a reader and are now read ‘on sight’ are also sight words. Reading of sight words in at-risk readers is built through • Initially encountering a word through decoding it, or having been told what it says. • Encountering the word multiple times, thus building increasing familiarity with it. • Developing an orthographic representation of the whole word, so that in effect it is now stored in long-term memory as a single entity. Effective Word-reading Instruction Is Systematic and Sequential, and Avoids Learning Breakdowns Effective word-reading instruction is both systematic and sequential, e.g., reading of CVC words (Consonant-Vowel-Consonant words, e.g., hut bus pit) needs to be mastered before children will be able to master reading of CCVCC words (e.g., flint smash trust) and reading of multisyllabic CVCCVC and CVCVC words (e.g., kidnap picnic pilot tulip). Systematic sequential instruction takes into account word reading having Consecutive Skill Development (as discussed in the Phase 2 Discussion Paper): • A somewhat step-wise progression of skill development. • Earlier skills needing to be built before later skills. • Those later skills needing and building on the base of the earlier skills now being at a confident, fluent level. Efficient word reading of unfamiliar words is built through carefully sequenced instruction building skills with the many different groups of regular words (e.g., CVC, CVCe words, R-vowel words, regular multisyllabic words) and pattern words (e.g., words with orthographic units such as -all, -ight, -ar). At-risk readers showing signs of word-reading weakness benefit from highly structured word-reading instruction focussed on individual groups of words, • Firstly building skill reading just that set of words (e.g., R-vowel words: farm, fern, shirt, born, burn). • Then integrating that word-reading skill into reading of words with a mixture of vowels, including other vowels which have been previously learned. • Then moving to reading those words first in scaffolded texts using many focus words, then in authentic texts. Most principles of word-reading instruction for at-risk readers are the same as principles used for healthy progress readers. The difference lies in how effectively those principles are used. Children with weak word reading need lots of practice if they are to develop automatic phonics skills. They also often forget wordreading skills which seemed known, because the skills hadn’t been developed to a sufficiently automatic level. Systematic sequential instruction with sufficient practice helps avoid the three common areas of learning failure in weak readers: breakdowns in skill mastery, long-term retention of skills and skill generalisation. These weaknesses are particularly common in children with word-reading difficulties: 1. Weakness in skill mastery is seen both in a. Failure to master early word-reading skills to a correct level (e.g., seen in children struggling to learn first letters, sight words and decoding of regular CVC words). b. Failure to reach automaticity (Correct + Fast + Supereasy), which creates likelihood that skills will slip once instruction moves on from this area (e.g., seen in children struggling to be fluent at reading mixed CVC and CVCe words, e.g., bit rode hop bite rod hope) 2. Weakness making effective long-term memories is seen in it being common for newly learned word-reading and spelling skills to be forgotten. 3. Weakness in skill generalisation is seen in both a. Difficulty generalising skills to different contexts, e.g., to move word reading of reading just ‘ar’ words (e.g., part, car, farm), to reading mixed R-vowel words (e.g., sir, fern, farm) to reading R-vowel words mixed with words with many other known vowels (e.g., sir, wait, fern, grow, party). b. Many children failing to take word-reading skills from reading of single words through to fluent word reading during authentic reading. Because of the frequency with which word-reading skills are forgotten or move back to below mastery level, it is particularly important to monitor at-risk readers on long-term retention and effectiveness of different word-reading subskills, to ensure learned skills do not slip and instead move on to effective use in reading of diverse texts. 56
The high cognitive load of learning to read English makes it vital to use principles of instruction based on Cognitive Load Theory: a strong focus on keeping task cognitive load low and Successful Engaged Learning high, so that • Children’s low processing capacity is not overloaded. • Children experience Successful Engaged Learning (high success rates, while being focussed engaged learners). • Children experience little to no reading experiences where low levels of success are experienced. • Loss of motivation (and the tendency to move to being reluctant disengaged readers, often experiencing Learned Helplessness) is avoided through this focus on Successful Engaged Learning. Models such as Marzano and Pickering’s (1997) Dimensions of Learning model and Galletly’s (1999) Literacy Plus Mottos of Learning use principles of Cognitive Load Theory.
The Strong Relationship of Word Reading, Spelling, and Phonological and Orthographic Awareness Word reading, phonological awareness, orthographic awareness and spelling are four strongly interrelated skills, which actively support each other’s development, with vocabulary also closely related. Word-reading development builds orthographic, phonological, spelling and vocabulary skills and, in turn, is built by these skills’ development. The interrelatedness of these skills makes it practical and useful to integrate instruction of word reading with instruction on spelling, phonological awareness, orthographic awareness and vocabulary. There seems value in questioning the short time frame system many schools use, of children learning spellings within a five-day period, e.g., learned Monday to Friday and tested on Friday. The high cognitive load of this rushed learning means at-risk readers are not likely to benefit by this system. Integrating teaching of spelling, word reading, vocabulary, and orthographic and phonological awareness extends the learning period over weeks, months or even years, makes it likely at-risk readers will master words effectively, using them efficiently in spoken and written communication. Phonological awareness is skills for thinking about and manipulating the sounds, rhymes and syllables of spoken English words and word parts. Children at risk of word-reading difficulties are often found to have weak phonological awareness skills, while children likely to make healthy progress in word reading often have strong phonological awareness skills. Weakness in syllable and rhyme skills in children at age four years (well before start of school) predicts likelihood of word-reading difficulties once reading instruction commences. This enables early intervention in game form to be commenced with young children prior to school entry. Phonological awareness instruction for at-risk readers should include syllable, rhyme and phonemic awareness instruction, with the aim of developing confident, fluent phonological awareness skills for words and word parts. Orthographic awareness skills for early readers include • Letter-sound knowledge of most-common GPCs (24 one-sound letters, c g with two sounds, digraphs sh ch th). • Metacognitive knowledge about English’s orthography, e.g., o Awareness of English’s 20 vowel sounds, and that they are written using multiple spelling patterns. o Use of the three grainsizes of English syllables (Regular, Pattern and Tricky Words) when thinking of one-syllable words and the syllables of multisyllabic words, and use of the wordreading strategies most useful for each syllable/word type. o Awareness that some of English’s commonest vowel graphemes are quite regular, saying just one sound, but that many vowel graphemes say a range of vowel sounds (e.g., Galletly, 1999, 2001, 2015). Statistical Learning Creates Value in Practising Reading Words With Specific Spelling Patterns Learning to read words is, to a large extent, statistical learning (Pollo, Treiman, & Kessler, 2007): how hard it is to learn a particular GPC depends on how often that GPC is encountered during reading, and the extent to which that GPC has confusing GPCs. Most Anglophone children quickly learn common sounds with few confusing GPCs, e.g., d n m f, but are slower to learn less common regular ones, e.g., x z, and common ones which have confusing GPCs, e.g., c g a e i o u. 57
The high statistical frequency of many irregular words (e.g., a the could) makes it harder for children to learn GPCs of more regular words, e.g., irregular CVCe words give have come done some make it harder to master reading of the many regular CVCe words, e.g., hate hope cute. It is thus valuable for children to be metacognitive about English spelling patterns, e.g., that Bossy-e makes the vowel say its name in most words, but some final-e words are tricky words with the vowel not saying its name. English consonant GPCs are mastered more easily than vowel GPCs, as while there are over 250 consonant GPCs, most single consonant letters don’t have confusing GPCs, many digraphs are highly regular with no confusing GPCs (e.g., kn ph sh th), and many confusable GPCs occur very infrequently (e.g., answer, psyche, cupboard, listen). Common errors are c g, due to their having two common sounds, and least common consonants q v x y z. This makes it important to build metacognition of c g having two sounds and to provide lots of practice of c g q v x y (stronger statistical learning). Unfortunately, English vowel GPCs are particularly complex, in small part due to only having five vowel letters to represent twenty common vowel phonemes, and in large part due to there being over 250 vowel GPCs, many of which are frequently occuring, common and confusing, i.e., having lots of many-to-one, and one-to-many GPCs. This makes it important to use careful, sequenced instruction with high statistical learning for building skill at reading words with different vowel GPCs. The impact of English vowel orthographic complexity is seen in a study comparing German and English weak readers (Landerl, Wimmer, & Frith, 1997), which found English weak readers made 16 times more vowel errors than German weak readers, and that the German weak readers read the hardest words (3 syllable pseudowords) with greater accuracy than the English weak readers read the easiest words (1 syllable real words).
Dyslexia, Cognitive Processing and Family History Dyslexia is a term often used for word-reading difficulty characterised by a gap between functional ability level and reading level, due to word-reading difficulties and associated cognitive processing weakness (Fraser, Goswami, & Conti-Ramsden, 2010). Dyslexia is strongly heritable, and children with family histories of reading difficulties or dyslexia are far more likely to have reading difficulties. Children whose parents had severe difficulties often also have severe difficulties. Cognitive processing weakness is a key aspect of inherited weakness of word-reading difficulties, such that it is valuable to consider children with family histories of weak reading as at-risk readers from the start of schooling, and to be aware that it is highly likely that intensive instructional supports will be needed if children have weakness in both phonological awareness and Rapid Automised Naming (RAN, rapid naming of common objects or letters).
Children need to be able to read the words and be fluent to be effective readers. I have used many of these strategies and am still building my knowledge in this area. Each time I read this, I find something new that I want to try in my classroom. Participating Teacher
58
Strategies for this principle Terms & Abbreviations: C: Consonant, V: Vowel, GPC: Grapheme-Phoneme Correspondence CVC words: regular ăĕĭŏŭ words (e.g., cat bus, not put). CVCe words: regular āēīōū words (e.g., gave home, not have come). Regular words: ăĕĭŏŭ phoneme grainsize words, ‘sound-out’ words, e.g., vet bus sit. Pattern words: orthographic unit grainsize,‘use the pattern’ words, e.g., reading or writing stall small wall from knowledge of ball, chook shook took from look, say way tray from play. Tricky words: whole-word grainsize words, ‘remember what it looks like’ words, e.g., you one was. Scaffolded texts: Texts containing large numbers of words of the structure being generalised, e.g., CVC words. The strategies for teaching word reading strategically and carefully to at-risk readers are listed below in three sections: • Strategies ensuring effective enduring applied learning of word reading by at-risk readers. • Strategies for teaching word-reading skills. • Strategies assessing and monitoring at-risk readers’ learning and use of word-reading skills. 1. Strategies Ensuring Effective Enduring Applied Learning of Word Reading by At-Risk Readers Strategies focussed on ensuring effective learning in at-risk readers showing signs of word-reading weakness include the following: 1. Incorporate principles of Teaching Smart and Teaching for the Reading Heart in reading instruction for at-risk readers. 2. Have strong staff awareness of a. The similarities and differences of word-reading instruction for at-risk readers and healthy progress readers: i. The similarities lie in principles of word-reading instruction for at-risk readers being mostly the same principles used for all readers. ii. The differences lie in instructional intensity, in successfully differentiated instruction being less a sensible goal, and more an instructional imperative, and in the damage done by poor instruction being intense, often with long lasting impacts, through its impact on children’s self-confidence for reading. b. The vital importance of successful word-reading development from Prep to Year 2, so children are successful, with healthy confidence in their reading ability, and do not lose confidence in their ability to learn to read. c. The very high cognitive load of early word reading, making young children at risk of wordreading difficulties. d. The crucial challenge of effective word-reading instruction being to balance cognitive load: curriculum content load plus learning task load must never exceed student processing capacity. e. The role of stress in reducing children’s processing capacity, and the importance that wordreading tasks are enjoyed and relaxing, never stressful. f. The need to identify children struggling with word reading as early as possible, so children do not move from healthy word reading into having word-reading difficulties, and Learned Helplessness. g. The crucial importance of intervention starting as soon as difficulties are noticed, and at a sufficient level of expertise and intensity, such that children experience very little failure and, instead, lots of successful engaged learning, and learning progress. h. Children at particular risk, being those with i. Low processing capacity (working memory). ii. Low phonological awareness. iii. Low Rapid Automised Naming (RAN) of common objects (an indicator of automisation weakness). iv. Weak language skills. v. Low literate cultural capital. 59
vi. Family histories of word-reading difficulties (this makes difficulties about five times more likely). i. Likely early word-reading difficulties being evidenced in learning of i. Letters and sounds. ii. Wholeword sight words. iii. Reading and writing of regular words using phonics skills (sounding-out). j. The crucial role of motivation and engagement (Whether you think you can, or whether you think you can’t, you’re right!) in word-reading development of at-risk readers, and corresponding need to avoid failure: i. Children need lots of successful engaged learning to maintain motivation for learning challenging skills. ii. Frequent experiences of low success produce loss of motivation and engagement: this often leads to learned helplessness (not feeling capable of effective learning) and more entrenched, word-reading difficulties. k. The very high cognitive load of text reading for children with weak word-reading skills, and the value of reducing cognitive load of text reading by e.g., rereading familiar books and texts, Echo Reading. l. The vital importance of using principles of instruction incorporating cognitive load concepts, as at-risk readers are vulnerable for making poor progress until focussed, strategic instruction using Cognitive Load Theory principles are used, e.g., Cognitive Load Theory, Marzano & Pickering’s five Dimensions of Learning (DoL), Literacy Plus Mottos. 3. Provide excellent, strategic, intensive word-reading instruction that includes word reading of decontextualised words and word parts, as well as reading of scaffolded and authentic texts. 4. Teach using cognitive load principles to ensure enduring skill mastery, using monitoring of wordreading skill levels over time, to avoid the common areas of learning failure, in skill mastery, long-term retention, and skill generalisation to authentic reading, and development of Learned Helplessness. Do this by ensuring that a. Children experience high rates of Successful Engaged Learning. b. Children master development of consecutive word-reading skills. c. Children are strongly engaged, and do not lose motivation. d. Children experiencing slow progress are identified as soon as possible, and quickly moved to differentiated word-reading instruction, at the child’s precise levels of instructional need. 5. Teach to ensure effective cognitive processing, strongly using all five of Marzano and Pickering’s Dimensions of Learning (DoL), as vital aspects of word-reading development for at-risk readers. (While DoL is a pedagogical framework which can be used expansively, the 5 DoLs are used here as pivotal teaching steps for achieving effective reading outcomes in at-risk readers. As such, the 5 DoLs are easily incorporated into schools’ current pedagogical frameworks): a. High levels of Motivation & Engagement (DoL1, Attitudes and Perceptions). b. Focussed Skill Development to Mastery Level (DoL2, (Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge). c. Scaffolded Generalising of Skills DoL3 (Extending and Refining Knowledge) from reading single words to reading those words effectively in meaningful texts. d. Extensive Authentic Skill Usage (DoL4, Using Knowledge Meaningfully), in diverse reading and writing tasks. e. Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (DoL5, Habits of Mind) built about the word-reading skill as part of all word-reading instruction. f. Ensure skill mastery moves from single-word reading to effective word reading of meaningful texts: The DoL 2-4 progression: Teach for Mastery and Increasingly Sophisticated Skill Use, g. Monitoring progress at each level of DoL2-4, moving back to earlier stages if skills slip rather than continue developing. h. Using DoL as an analysis tool for rethinking instruction for children making poor progress. i. Use the DoL2-4 progression for teaching word-reading skills i. Building automatic skills reading subsets of words, then generalising their use to connected texts. ii. Scaffolded learning with gradual transfer of responsibility from teacher to child.
60
iii. Strongly focussing on building word-reading skill at each of the three stages of the DoL2-4 teaching learning progression, and of Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (DoL5): 1. DoL2. Focussed Skill Development (Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge): Build skill reading the words just within their subset, initially building accuracy, then working towards automaticity (Correct + Fast +Supereasy). 2. DoL3. Scaffolded Generalising of Skills (Extending and Refining Knowledge): Build skill reading the subset words in broader contexts, e.g., a. The subset words now mixed with words from previously learned subsets. b. The subset words in scaffolded meaningful text, e.g, text containing many words from that subset. c. Continue DoL3 work until DoL4 is achieved. 3. DoL4. Extensive Authentic Skill Usage (Using Knowledge Meaningfully): Skill reading the words correctly in authentic reading with attention focussed on multiple aspects of reading, including reading comprehension. 4. DoL5. Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (Habits of Mind): Build metacognitive competence with the subset: ability to explain the GPCs and characteristics of the words, how they are read and written. 6. Monitor skill with word subsets over time to ensure a. Mastery and automaticity of target words when mixed only with other target words. b. Maintenance (effective long-term memories) of reading of those target words. c. Generalisation: i. To other words mixed with target words. ii. To scaffolded texts which contain lots of the target words. iii. To authentic reading with occasional target words. 7. Teach strategically when children show learning breakdowns (failure to master, maintain or generalise skills, Learned Helplessness): act quickly and effectively, using effective repair strategies: a. Skill Mastery: i. Failure to master skills to a correct level: 1. For children experiencing this area of difficulty, differentiate instruction, ensuring very low Content Load, and Task Load, e.g., move back from trying to read regular three letter CVC words, to focussing on building skill reading two letter VC skills using just three less confusable vowels e.g., using the letters SATINPO. ii. Failure to reach automaticity (Correct + Fast + Supereasy): This creates likelihood that skills will slip once instruction moves on from this area. 1. Monitor skill levels over time. If skills slip, move back to building the skill, this time focussing on building automaticity. b. Skill generalisation: Failure to generalise skills to different contexts, e.g., to move word reading of R-vowel words to reading those words mixed with other words, and then in meaningful text. i. If this happens, ensure decontextualised reading is automatic, then carefully generalise the skills, using metacognition so the child is aware of the reading skill being generalised, and is self-monitoring skill generalisation. c. Long-term retention of skills: Failure to make effective long term memories which do not slip. i. If this happens, build the skill to an automatic level, then use a Memory Stretching system to monitor effectiveness of making of long term memories. e.g., briefly test the skill after longer and longer time periods: 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months. d. Not reaching sophisticated skill usage: i. If this happens, revisit earlier skill development, ensuring metacognition, and active self-monitoring of skill development occurs. e. Learned Helplessness (Seligman, 2007): i. If this happens, revisit earlier skills to find the level where the child feels confident about being able to read the words. Then steadily build skills, emphasising the child’s developing skill, and metacognition so the child self-monitors learning and progress. 8. Ensure children progress in both two key skills of word-reading development, with neither skill lagging: 61
a. A proliferating number of sight words, recognised instantly when reading. b. Effective phonics skills for decoding unfamiliar words (Initially just regular VC and CVC words, e.g., up, hat, then multisyllabic words, and words with common and less common GPCs). 9. Teach the three syllable types matched to the three grainsizes of English orthography: Regular words: phoneme grain size; Tricky words: whole-word grain size; Pattern words: letter-group grainsize. (As most words encountered in very early reading are single syllable words, it’s useful to talk of Regular/Pattern/Tricky ‘words rather than ‘syllables’. Later in primary school, when children are trying to learn the spelling of multisyllabic words, it’s more useful to think of Regular/Pattern/Tricky syllables.). a. Build skill sorting words into Regular, Pattern, Tricky Categories. b. Teach use of Regular-Pattern-Tricky words as a strategy for deciding whether to sound out a word, use a pattern to read the word, or think about it being a sight word, and trying to remember if it’s one you know: ‘For words you don’t read easily, first look at the word and think about it. If it looks regular, sound it out. If it doesn’t look regular, look for patterns or think if it’s a Tricky Word that you know. (Some weak readers think all words are regular.) c. Teach regular CVC words using words with varying vowels and final consonants, e.g., vet mud pig bad. Avoid using word families (-at words, -et words) for teaching regular CVC words: use of word families sidetracks children into focussing on categorising the word family rather than reading the CVC word, and at-risk readers have difficulties generalising to reading CVC words effectively (Apfelbaum, Hazeltine, & McMurray, 2013). d. Teach Pattern Words using key words, and word families words, e.g., ‘ball uses the pattern all. Words like ball that use the all pattern include wall small tall fall’. The rime pattern is the important orthographic part of most pattern words, so it is valuable to emphasise rhyme and word families. Use rhyme and word families when teaching pattern words, e.g., -all, -oy, -ar words. Word families focus attention on word rimes, and away from individual letters and their sounds. While of questionable use as a dominant method for teaching reading of CVC words, use of word families is very powerful for teaching pattern words: this is because the rime (word family) is the key aspect which needs to be learned and generalised, and many patterns are the last letters of the word, so rhyming is very helpful in moving from word to word in the word family, e.g., from ball to tall to small. 10. Teach word-reading skills in a sequence, using a word-reading curriculum that keeps content load as low as possible through use of sequenced subsets of words to be mastered (e.g., Galletly, 1999, 2001, 2015). English word-reading development is sequential in many ways, such that later word-reading skills cannot be built effectively unless key earlier skills are proficient. An example of such a sequence could be as follows: a. Reading of first words: i. Initial concrete words: Own name, 7 family names, 5 transport nouns (car, bus, plane, train, boat), 5 useful nouns (ball, boy, girl, cat, dog), 5 action verbs (run, jump, play, look, say). ii. Then frequent words often used in text sentences: I, me, my, a, he, the, this, am, is. iii. Words to be used as pattern words (look, car, me, see, ball, boy, now, play). b. Use of word-reading strategies for different grainsizes: i. Reading pattern words using pattern strategies, e.g., reading stall from knowledge of ball, chook from look, say from play. ii. Reading regular ăĕĭŏŭ CVC words, then mixed CVCe CVC words using sounding out. iii. Reading and writing tricky (exception words) by thinking on what the words looks like. iv. (Later) Reading and writing multisyllabic words, using regular-pattern-tricky word strategies. c. Reading of first 100 most frequent words, using regular-pattern-tricky word categories and strategies (Later continued into the first 200, then 300, then 500 most frequent words, then words with rare GPCs, e.g., pretty, people, answer). d. Reading of unfamiliar regular words then less regular words (e.g., Galletly, 1999, 2001, 2014): i. First ăĕĭŏŭ ‘vowel sounds’ in VC then CVC words using short vowels, e.g, at, us, vet, bus. ii. Then CV pattern words using āēīōū ‘vowel names’: e.g., me she we he the hi go no. iii. Then CVCe, and consonant cluster words, e.g., CCVCe, CVCC: bike, spoke, desk. iv. Then Y (2 sounds, e.g., my, baby). 62
v. Then groups of vowel digraphs with commonest GPCs a. CVCe words, e.g., mate Pete hide hope cute. b. The ‘Two Vowels Go Walking’ vowels: ai ea ee ie oa. c. R-vowels: ar or er ir ur. d. W-vowels aw ew ow (2 sounds as in now know) e. ‘i in the middle of words, Y at end of words’: oi oy ai ay. vi. Then more confusable vowels, e.g, ea oo (2 common sounds), ou (5 common sounds). e. Reading of multisyllabic words, i. Initially compound words then regular two syllable words: CVCCVC words which can be recoded using short vowels in both syllables (e.g., kitten, admit), CVCVC words which can be recoded using the first vowel being a long vowel (e.g., Simon, virus). (Often one of the vowels will use the schwa sound, however the word can still be decoded using long and short vowels). ii. Then less regular multisyllabic words, e.g., divide, program, and words with affixes. iii. Then long multisyllabic words, using multisyllabic word-reading strategies, e.g., 1. Count the vowels to scan your eyes across the word, then read syllable by syllable. 2. Vowels in multisyllabic words often say one of three sounds: their sound, their name or the schwa. Experiment with these vowel sounds when the you’re saying doesn’t seem correct. 11. Focus strongly on building orthographic skills at both cognitive and metacognitive levels (Cognitive levels refer to children’s use of orthographic skills; metacognitive levels refer to their understanding and being able to discuss how, when, where and why those skills are used): a. Teach orthographic skills from Prep including i. Awareness of English orthographic complexity (e.g., that many graphemes say multiple sounds, and many sounds are written using lots of graphemes). ii. The 20 common vowel sounds of Australian English, then the graphemes that commonly represent each vowel sound. iii. The three syllable types matched to the three grainsizes of English orthography, and the strategies for reading those three syllable types: 1. Regular words use phoneme grain size, and are read using sounding-out, e.g., us, hut, split. 2. Pattern words use multi-letter orthographic-unit grainsize (spelling patterns), and are read using those patterns, e.g., -ar, -all, -igh. In single syllable words, many ‘patterns’ are word rimes (the unit from the vowel to the end of the syllable), so children can use rhyme to read from known words to unfamiliar words using their patterns, e.g., from knowing look to reading and writing shook hook took. 3. Tricky words use whole-word grain size, and are read by remembering what the word looks like, e.g., one, was, eight. iv. Writing phonemic approximations of multisyllabic words whose spelling is not known, ensuring every syllable has a vowel. Use e.g., Guestimating strategy (Galletly, 2001): 1. Say the syllables on your fingers. 2. Write syllable by syllable: a. Flick a finger as you say the syllable. b. Write the syllable using the rule, ‘Every syllable MUST have a vowel’. 3. Check the word by counting the vowels then reading each syllable. v. Collecting spelling patterns, through exposure, discovery activities, and motivation to find new patterns, and new words using previously found patterns. vi. Awareness that many words can be written in multiple ways (the correct spelling and a range of phonemic approximations), and that phonemic approximations use spelling patterns which say the same sound as the correct word’s spelling pattern. vii. Awareness of the schwa sound: 1. Knowing it as the most common vowel sound, almost always occurring in multisyllabic words, and having the most spelling patterns (approximately thirty). 63
2. Having phonemic awareness of the schwa sound: hearing it and identifying it in specific syllables of words. 3. Building orthographic awareness: Noticing that vowel errors, when writing phonemic approximations, are most often on schwa sounds; and collecting schwa spelling patterns and word groups using those GPCs. b. Use spelling and reading activities maximising likelihood of orthographic learning, e.g., i. Word sorts: sorting written words by their spelling patterns. ii. Selecting the correctly spelled word from two to five spelling options (This activity keeps children’s focus on the word’s spelling, in contrast to activities such as writing words several times, where attention may be more focussed on handwriting of a letter, or on copying letters from a model word). 12. Focus strategically on building metalinguistic and phonological awareness skills: a. Build syllable skills from ages 3-4, including i. Clapping syllables while saying them, e.g., el-e-phant. ii. Counting them on fingers while saying them. iii. Representing them in concrete form, e.g., using blocks or written dashes. iv. Using written and spoken words when talking about syllables. v. Thinking about individual syllables, e.g., saying ‘What does this one say?’ when pointing to the block representing a syllable. vi. Saying words without a syllable e.g., el-phant. vii. Changing a given syllable, e.g, ‘Give this one the bear’: el-bear-phant. viii. Use an automaticity aim of being able to do the above skill relatively effortlessly (Most five year olds can master these skills easily. ix. Use syllable awareness activities while building skills writing phonemic approximations. b. Build rhyme skills from ages 3-4, including i. Identifying words which rhyme. ii. Babbling rhyming words: 1. Have an automaticity aim of eventually being able to say about 5 rhyming words in two seconds. 2. Always include nonsense words and real words as rhyming words. iii. Use written words and spoken words when doing rhyme. Point out how sometimes the rimes of words are written identically,e.g., bat-sat-vat, and sometimes differently, e.g., bone-groan-mown. iv. Use rhyme when playing with pattern words, e.g., writing lists of words rhyming with boy. c. Build phoneme skills from the start of playing with letters and words, e.g., ages 4-5: i. Identifying initial sounds of words (later final sounds, then vowel sounds. ii. Blending a given list of sounds to say the word those sounds make. iii. Listing sounds of one syllable words (two sound words, then three, four, five) iv. Saying words without a sound, e.g., ‘Say came. Now say it without mmm.’ v. Use written letters and words or plastic or wooden letters while sounds or letters. 13. Consider using fully-regular orthographies, to expedite early reading and literacy development of beginning readers, as there is considerable research suggesting fully-regular orthographies to have excellent potential for expediting word reading, word writing, vocabulary and literacy development (See discussion in Section 4). 14. Consider using reading schemes which reduce orthographic complexity (e.g., by using colours for different vowel sounds), as they may reduce confusion and cognitive load of early word reading.
64
2. Strategies for Teaching Word-reading skills 15. Ensure extensive involvement with literature and reading, so children value reading and view word reading as a powerful skill supporting effective independent reading: a. Reading To (Modelled Reading: Show me): Children enjoying diverse texts read to them, building the strategies and positive habits of an effective reader. b. Reading With (Guided Reading: Help me): Children reading with support, in reading lessons, and supported reading of words and texts, building word-reading and active comprehension strategies. c. Reading By (Independent Reading: Let me): Children reading more and more widely, both fiction and nonfiction ‘World Reading’ books, borrowing library books, with increasing home time spent reading. 16. Have a schoolwide word-reading program in keeping with research knowledge on effective wordreading instruction for at-risk readers: a. Use a standard schoolwide sequence of skill development, e.g., the sequence above. b. Teach word reading in all primary year-levels, using increasingly complex words as children progress. (Word-reading instruction mustn’t be restricted to just the first few years of primary school, particularly given that complex multisyllabic words occur more from Year 3 onward). c. Build orthographic awareness as part of word-reading and spelling instruction, as listed above. d. Teach word-reading skills to an automatic level (Correct + Fast + Supereasy). e. Provide sufficient practice reading isolated words with aims of firstly reading accurately, and secondly, reading quickly (Many at-risk readers need very large amounts of practice). f. Have teachers of all year-levels skilled at all stages of word-reading development, and able to effectively work with children at different word-reading ages, including children with learned helplessness (The word-reading progression of skills, above, is as applicable for older children with weak reading skills, as it is for healthy-progress young children). g. Use a shared vocabulary (preferably region-wide or state-wide) for word-reading development: i. Use terms such as 1. Word, letter, sound, grapheme, phoneme, spelling pattern, vowel, consonant, 2. Rhyme, rhyming, syllable, blending sounds, listing sounds. 3. Regular words, sounding out; pattern words, use the pattern; tricky (exception) words: remember how it looks. 4. Orthography, spelling patterns, schwa, vowels, vowel sounds (short vowels), vowel names (long vowels), 5. One-syllable word, multisyllabic word, compound word. ii. Consider using terms such as ‘vowel sound’ instead of ‘short vowel’ and ‘vowel name’ instead of ‘long vowel’, as young children find the long/short vowel distinction confusing, e.g., ‘long’ vowels’ are often said quickly, and ‘short’ vowels can be said for a long amount of time. h. Use word-reading activities which provide high instructional intensity, e.g., i. Repeated Reading of texts, including parallel texts with shifting errors (same text content and a small number of different words misspelled in each version: children are likely to read words’ orthography more deeply when scrutinising words for spelling as well as reading for meaning). ii. Rapid Reads: sets of words e.g., 30 words in 6 rows of 5 words, with parallel forms, words in different positions in the parallel forms (at-risk readers often remember words difficulty words by their position in the text). iii. Games using instructional intensity, e.g., Memory card game turning over four cards each turn, Snap card games, and board games reading read multiple words each turn. i. Have resources available for teachers of all year-levels to enable effectively differentiated word-reading instruction, without the need to do lots of preparation, including word-reading games, Rapid Reads, and high-interest texts of different word-reading ages. j. Emphasise the role and power of self-teaching in learning to read, and reading words and meaningful text. Build children’s pride in being increasingly able to decode words and read texts independently.
65
k. For class text reading where the focus is reading comprehension, have an attitude of ‘Word Reading is optional not essential’, and ensure appropriate scaffolds are provided (e.g., adult or peer supports, texts read aloud, reading pens). l. Teach letter sounds systematically: i. Build skill with the five letter characteristics: every letter having a name, a sound, a capital, a lowercase, and saying its sound in words. ii. Build skill initially with seven to ten letters and their sounds and using activities built around these letters. Learning a small number of letters has low content load, yet many phonological awareness and phonics reading skills can be built using a small set of letters. The letters should include two vowels, frequent consonants which are easily heard, and no letter pairs likely to be confused, e.g., a/u, e/I, h/h/m b/d p/q, m/w. iii. Build understanding that letters don’t always start with their sound. (Weak readers often think W says ‘duh’, Y says ‘wuh’, U says ‘yuh’, G says ‘juh’, letters f m n s x say ĕ): 1. Some letters have their sound at the start of their name, e.g., b d j. 2. Some letters have their sound at the end of their name, e.g., f m n s x . 3. Some letters don’t have their sound in their name, e.g, g u w y. iv. Build metacognition about consonant digraphs sh ch th not saying the sound of either of their two letters, letters c g having two common sounds, and consonant blends being two sounds said quickly. m. Use cycles of teaching and learning: i. Enabling healthy-progress children to move ahead rapidly with word reading. ii. Using that learning as exposure for at-risk readers. iii. Enabling at-risk readers to be doing successful engaged learning at their current level of word-reading development. n. Use proactive not reactive intervention, anticipating likelihood of word-reading weakness, and acting quickly to differentiate curriculum. i. Provide intensive early intervention, as soon as word-reading difficulties seem to be emerging (Small group and one: one instruction with the same adult doing the instruction, careful monitoring of progress, and careful introduction of next steps of instruction means classrooms need to have additional teacher and teacher-aide support at a relatively high level). ii. Use well-resourced Response to Intervention frameworks with three tiers of instruction, (e.g., see Mellard, Frey, & Woods, 2012; Mesmer & Mesmer, 2008): 1. Level 1. Core Instruction: strategic differentiated reading instruction used for all children, most often in the form of usual classroom instruction, including differentiated instruction focussed on children’s areas of instructional need. 2. Level 2. Skills Building Intervention: focussed more-intensive instruction being early intervention for children not progressing well with Core Instruction alone. 3. Level 3. Intensive Remediation: Highly-intensive intervention for students not progressing well with Intervention, and showing indicators of developing severely delayed reading skills. iii. Use Intensive Remediation (Level 3 of the Response to Intervention framework) as soon as indicators automisation weakness (low Rapid Automised Naming, RAN) is present, due to high risk of severe word-reading difficulties. o. Meet the ‘Find the Learning Time’ Challenge, through using creative thinking, increasing instructional intensity and reducing time spent on unnecessary time-consuming tasks: i. Focus on achieving instructional intensity as much as possible. When more practices per minute are achieved, time has been spent very effectively. Quality time (high instructional intensity) can often reduce the need for quantity time. 1. Use activities offering potential for high Instructional Intensity, e.g., Rapid Reads, Sets of 10, Memory/Snap card games, and board games where increased numbers of words can be read per turn. ii. Achieving multiple learning aims within single activities, e.g., 1. Rapid Reads can build vocabulary and word-reading skills, while also building pre-skills for easier learning of spelling. 66
2. Echo reading of texts on useful content areas can build background knowledge for knowledge for other learning areas while building reading skills. iii. Differentiate homework ensuring high instructional intensity for needed skills, and reduced time on other areas, e.g., use individualised Rapid Reads, Sets of 10, Memory/Snap games and board games. iv. Differentiated literacy tasks ensuring high instructional intensity for needed skills. v. Use verbal tasks in place of print tasks, to reduce learning time while achieving similar outcomes, and much higher Instructional Intensity. vi. Reduce writing time within literacy tasks, where time spent writing could be better used on needed skills (While all children need extensive focussed writing time, many writing tasks are nonessential from a Finding the Learning Time perspective, particularly when the child is a slow or reluctant writer). vii. Use parent tutor models for parents keen to build their children’s skills, e.g., a fortnightly one: one session with Learning Support teacher, parent and child, with games and activities then practiced at home for 30 minutes, five times per week. This can include Teaching Ahead, e.g., reading texts which will be used later in class lessons. viii. Integrate word study, combining spelling, word-reading and vocabulary emphases: use words from ‘next year’s’ spelling list as focus words used in developing word-reading and vocabulary skills. ix. Connect the curriculum: achieve reading and literacy goals in other learning areas, e.g., history and science. x. Encourage extensive listening to texts to accommodate weak readers for the low amount of text they may access through reading the texts. p. Use a community focus to ensure early intervention starts as soon as needs arise: i. Provide families with advice and resources on building skills in recognising the child’s name and first letter or the child’s name, phonological awareness skills, and intensive exposure to books and being read to, either by parents or using electronic supports, e.g., recorded stories for listening, interactive books. ii. Use-play based early intervention using two to five sight words, two to five letters and sounds, and phonological awareness games from age four, particularly for children with a family history of word-reading weakness and indicators of automisation deficit (low Rapid Automised Naming (RAN), and difficulties learning to read their own name and know the first letter of their own name). iii. Ensure smooth transitions from Kindergarten (pre-school) to Prep. q. Provide extensive reading of interesting texts with strong picture and contextual supports, and texts using varying sentences, using many words which children are already able to read. r. Integrate instruction of word reading, spelling and vocabulary, emphasising them being different but related areas of Word Study: i. Integrate vocabulary with spelling in 1. Writing of phonemic approximations (Guesstimating, also called Brave Spelling), from start of Prep, to boost children’s writing vocabulary. 2. Spelling instruction, once spelling has moved on from learning to write highly familiar words to learning to write less common words. ii. Use spelling grids (pick the correctly spelled word from multiple options) and word sorts to build reading and spelling skills. iii. For regular word subsets, teach word reading and spelling simultaneously, while accepting that there will often be errors in spelling, due to there being more spelling options than reading options e.g., while the ai grapheme is easily read correctly, as the sound ā in the word rain, when writing the word, the child has to decide between two equally common GPCS: ai a-e: rain rane. iv. Value spelling errors which are phonemic approximations, as being useful exploration of alternative spelling patterns. v. Use mnemonics to build skills with tricky (exception) words, e.g., the -ould words are the ‘Oh u lucky duck!’ words, for the word ‘great,’ think ‘great to eat’. (Many children with weak reading have weak phonological-verbal memory systems but healthy visualspatial memory systems. Mnemonics seem to be stored in children’s visual-spatial 67
memories, and can thus be a powerful support for children struggling to make sense of the many phonological-verbal concepts involved in early reading development.) 17. Focus strongly on successful engaged reading of meaningful texts: a. Use strategies which maximise children’s independent reading in and out of school. b. Emphasise reading fluency as an important reading skill when reading books and texts. i. Teach strategies to build fluency. ii. Use both Repeated Readings and extensive reading of diverse texts. iii. Explore a range of strategies for building fluency, e.g., those in Hempenstall (2016). iv. Use repeated reading of texts in appropriate engaging reading tasks, including 1. Reader’s Theatre. 2. Engaging poems, song lyrics, story extracts, yarns. 3. Texts with valuable content children are likely to learn or understand more deeply through repeated reading. 4. Parallel texts with shifting errors (three or four texts identical to each other except for two or three words spelled incorrectly, with different words incorrect in different texts). This has potential for texts with spelling words, and short engaging texts such as jokes. 5. Reading of favourite children’s books as a performance skill, reading to toys and younger children. c. Provide a wide range of texts at the child’s word-reading age, using interactive texts on iPads and computers, as well as print texts. i. Provide texts which children are likely to be successful at reading. ii. Develop a range of strategic texts at different word-reading ages, e.g., 6yrs 0mths, 6yrs 3mths, 6yrs 6mths, 6yrs 9mths, 7yrs 0mths, 7yrs 6mths, as texts at these different reading ages differ markedly from each other. Strategic texts might include 1. Texts explaining individual reading comprehension strategies and how to use them, as well as texts for practising the strategy. 2. Story grammar texts, explaining the six stages of a narrative (Orientation, Precipitating Event, Complication, Climax, Resolution, Conclusion), along with texts scaffolding children to identify one or more of these stages. 3. Specific genres, e.g., 3 persuasive texts at each level. 4. School values, e.g., positive learning behaviours. 5. History texts, e.g., Anzac Day texts, Australia Day texts, early white settlement texts, texts on aboriginal life prior to white settlement. iii. Ensure the child knows the value and importance of reading the words: 1. Use fully predictable texts only until some sight words and letters are known. Then move to less predictable texts and support effective word reading. iv. Use accommodations to support student success, e.g., reading pens, adult helpers, parent-as-helper. d. Ensure reading of books and texts is Successful Engaged Learning. i. Focus on keeping children’s motivation and engagement high for reading books independently and with adult supports. Strong motivation and engagement for independent reading are pivotal for effective reading development, through 1. Maximising processing capacity, thus increasing likelihood of successful engaged learning. 2. Ensuring lots of texts are read, thus increasing many reading and literacy skills. 3. Preventing discouragement and the start of being reluctant readers, wherein processing capacity is low during reading, far fewer texts are read and far less reading progress is made, thus starting a cycle of ongoing reading difficulties. ii. Provide supports so children aren’t blocked by difficult words, e.g., someone saying the word, reading pens. iii. Use ‘Echo Reading’ (Galletly, 2014), to ensure successful reading (see Example, below). 1. Use a motto of ‘The aim of reading books is to enjoy it and want to read another one’: a. When a child encounters a difficult word, say the word and move on. 68
b. Keep the flow of meaningful words happening to optimise contextual supports during reading. 2. Avoid time spent focussed on difficult words, e.g., using questions: a. This focusses attention on difficulties not success, and focus should be on successful engaged reading, not errors. b. If too frequent, it builds disengagement and reluctance to read books. c. At-risk readers are most unlikely to make effective memories of discussions during reading, because their processing capacity is loaded quite heavily during reading for meaning of books and longer texts, so there is little processing capacity available for other learning. 3. A supportive adult or peer reads alongside the child, to maximise contextual supports and successful engaged reading: a. The supporter and child read together, with the supporter a fraction of a second behind the child, ‘echoing’ but ready to keep the text sentences continuing should the child pause overly. When a hard word is encountered, the supporter says the word, and child echoes or moves to next word. b. The child reads all words which can be read without too much effort, the supporter reads all the hard words. c. No word is repeated, as this interrupts the flow of text sentences, and reduces the contextual supports provided by the language of the text. d. For words the adult feels the child can read quite easily, the adult might say the first sound of the word and pause on that sound, encouraging the child to lead the reading. e. Contextual supports are maximised through keeping the flow of meaningful sentences flowing without interruption, and the supporter making brief ‘aside’ comments about text content. f. Word reading, supported by the ongoing high level of contextual supports, is the child’s dominant strategy for reading unfamiliar words. High rates of success in word reading are ensured through the child only reading words which are easy or very manageable. g. Cognitive overload is effectively reduced through the text now being of manageable difficulty, and the child now has working memory available for focussing on meaning and reading the text. iv. Expect at-risk readers to still make errors when reading books on words they are currently learning to read during word-reading games. Text reading has much higher task load, so only word-reading skills which are relatively automised will usually be read successfully, and new word skills may or may not be read correctly. e. Move as quickly as possible into books and texts which don’t use highly predictable text. Do not overuse highly predictable class reading books using repeated sentence stems and strong picture cues as, while useful in many ways, they also focus attention away from word reading: i. Use these books to build initial book reading skills, of reading left to right, pointing to words, moving front to back of book. ii. Once some sight words and letter sounds are known, move away quite quickly from fully predictable texts. These books can be ‘read’ without looking deeply at the words, and children who spend too long with them are likely to be side-tracked into incorrectly thinking ‘Reading is remembering the sentence then reading the pictures.’ iii. Move to similarly entertaining texts with strong picture and contextual cues but which have variable text order instead of repeated sentence stems. Choose books with lots of highly frequent words and recodable words: to build a sense that it’s important and valuable to read the words to get the message that the writer wrote for you. 18. Consider using flexible differentiated word-reading instruction from Prep to Yr3 which does not require all children to master word reading at age 5 years. (Processing capacity rises significantly from age five to age eight years. Many at-risk readers have lower-than-usual working memory. Others start school with low Literate Cultural Capital, vocabulary and language skills. Delaying formal word-reading instruction with expectations of mastery until age 6-7 years might be more 69
effective for at-risk readers, enabling more successful engaged learning and smooth progress through word reading development): f. Building strong literacy skills without requirements that word-reading skills must be mastered. g. Focussing strongly on building Literate Cultural Capital and Tier 2 vocabulary. h. Focussing reading instruction from age five strongly on literature and language skills, including reading comprehension strategies used in listening to and discussing texts. i. Using reading pens, iPads and speech-to-text technology for ‘reading’ many early books, with the focus on reading for meaning, and thinking on meaning. This would remove the high cognitive load of word reading, and allow children to enjoy reading many texts, while building word-reading awareness. j. Strategically building earliest word-reading skills ensuring successful engaged learning: i. Building thorough skill with seven to ten letters and their sounds and using activities built around these letters. Learning a small number of letters has low content load, yet the many phonological awareness and phonics reading skills can be built using a small set of letters. The letters should include two vowels, and consonants which are frequent and easily heard, and no pair of letters likely to be confused, e.g., a/u, e/I, h/n, m/w, b/d p/q. As examples, Jolly Phonics (Lloyd, 1992) uses s t n p a I o as its first set of letters, while Phonological Fun (Galletly, 2000) uses b m f s t a o, with characters for each letter having names emphasising the letters’ name and sound, e.g., Beebubee. ii. Building thorough skill with five to seven words relevant to the child’s classroom and school (e.g., the name of the school teddy bear, the class pet bird, and several puppets), using many Language Experience texts available using these key words. (This has low content load, plus monitoring how well children make effective memories of just a few sight words, provides large amounts of information on how well they will cope with word-reading development. iii. Teaching personal words using individualised activities and Language Experience books: 1. Family names John, Smith, Mum, Dad, Sissie, Bro, Rover as single words on cards for the child to read or play with (e.g., scatter round the room then drive his reading car to, jump over after each one has been said), and 2. Personalised Language Experience books using children’s art, with short sentences using family names. iv. Building key phonological skills for reading: syllable and rhyme skills and phoneme skills built with the class letters and sounds, including identifying the beginning sound or words (and, later, the final sound, the vowel sound, then all sounds), blending sounds to say the two or three sound word the list of sounds make, and listing the sounds of two then three sounds words. v. Using a Response to Intervention framework to support children’s learning of these first letter-sounds, sight words, and family words. k. Differentiating word-reading instruction so healthy progress readers move on into learning sight words and reading of regular words, while at-risk readers can move at a slower pace: i. An aim of continued successful engaged learning in mastering letters and sounds. ii. Engaging computer games used to build skill with letters and sounds. iii. Repeated cycles to learning about letters and their sounds, e.g., 1. All letters and their sounds introduced in Prep, with the focus being introduction and exposure, but no requirement that children must master all letter-sounds by a certain time. As an example, Jolly Phonics songs and actions might be used, with early fun worksheets. 2. Later cycles focussed on learning letters to mastery. iv. Exposure to English having 20 vowel sounds, e.g., a school vowel chant, word sorts. v. Exposure to English orthography’s three grain-sizes (regular, pattern, tricky words and syllables) and the word-reading strategies for reading the different word types. vi. Lots of reading of texts, using reading pens if possible, and emphasising the difference between reading words we know or can work out and unfamiliar words. 1. We read all words we know, and if pointing, point to each word as we say it. 2. For words we don’t know, we use educational guessing, using clues such as words’ first letter sounds, the pictures, and what the text was saying. 70
3. Strategies Assessing and Monitoring At-Risk Readers’ Learning and Use of Word-reading skills 19. Assess word-reading skills, including subsets of words, e.g., a. b. c. d.
Reading of most frequent words (First 20, 50, 100, up to 500). Reading of pattern words, e.g., reading stall from knowing ball, chook from look. Reading of tricky (exception) words, e.g., any, pretty, could. Reading of unfamiliar regular words then less regular words: i. First VC, then CVC words using short vowels. ii. Then CVCe, and consonant cluster words using short and final-e vowels , e.g., CCVCe, CVCC. iii. Then Y (2 sounds, e.g., my, baby) and vowels saying their name at word end, (e.g., go, he, hi). iv. Then groups of more regular vowel digraphs (using only one main GPC), e.g., 1. Two Vowels Go Walking: ai ea ee ie oa. 2. R-vowels: ar or er ir ur. 3. W-vowels aw ew (2) ow (2) 4. ‘I in the middle of words, Y at end of words’: oi oy ai ay. v. Then more confusable vowels, e.g, ea (2), oo (2), ou (5). e. Reading of multisyllabic words, i. Initially regular two syllable words: CVCCVC words which can be recoded using short vowels in both syllables, CVCVC words which can be recoded using the first vowel being a long vowel, and the second a short vowel, e.g, Simon, virus. (Often one of the vowels will use the schwa sound, however the word can still be decoded using long and short vowels). ii. Then less regular multisyllabic words of two syllables. iii. Then long multisyllabic words, using school-wide word reading strategies (e.g., Count the vowels to scan your eyes across the word, optionally read the last syllable with and without a schwa sound, then read syllable by syllable). 20. Test the two core skills of word reading: a. Proliferating sight words recognised instantly. b. Confident skill reading unfamiliar words. 21. Use tests which test both real words (efficiency reading sight words), and pseudowords (efficiency reading unfamiliar words), to identify phonics weakness which can remain hidden if only real word tests of familiar words are used. e.g., a. The Test of Word Reading Efficiency-2 (TOWRE-2) has two subtests, Sight Word Efficiency (SWE), which tests reading of familiar real words, and Phonemic Decoding Efficiency (PDE), which tests reading of unfamiliar words (pseudowords), with four parallel forms. i. TOWRE tests don’t test subsets of words, instead using words of many orthographic forms; this enables the TOWRE tests to be assess readers from age 6yrs 0mths to age 21yrs. ii. There is value in developing new local norms for this test. The US norms for the TOWRE-2 show reading of young US children has improved considerably from the norming of the original 1999 TOWRE tests, to norming of TOWRE-2, with young readers now reading considerably more words at each age level. b. The Galletly Tests of Word Reading Efficiency (Galletly, 2015) test real word and pseudoword reading of eight sets of words: 1.ăĕĭŏŭ VC words 2.ăĕĭŏŭ CVC words 3.ăĕĭŏŭ CCVC &CVCC words 4.ăĕĭŏŭ CVC & āēīōū CVCe words 5. y ai ea ee ie oa words 6.R-vowel words (ar or er ir ur) 7. aw ew ow oi oy oo ou words 8. CVCCVC & CVCVC Multisyllabic words. c. DIBELS tests include Nonword Reading Fluency, which assesses the CVC subset of words (It does not test reading of real words except in prose reading). 22. Use efficiency tests (Words per unit time) so that accuracy and speed (efficiency) are being monitored, and testing takes minimal time. As examples a. The Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE) tests use 45 second samples of reading. 71
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
b. The Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS; Good & Kaminski, 2002) tests (www.dibels.uoregon.edu) use 1 minute samples of skills. They are free tests (with 20 parallel forms of each test), which for the most part map the sequential skills of reading development, while also being skills to teach (For minimal cost, now $1 per student per year, data is processed and reports generated for schools, classes and individual students): i. Initial Sound Fluency: saying the first sound of words. ii. Phoneme Segmentation Fluency: listing the sounds of short words. iii. Letter Naming Fluency (which can be used as Letter Sounding Fluency). iv. Nonword Reading Fluency: reading two & three letter ăĕĭŏŭ words. v. Oral Reading Fluency Tests: Grades 1-6. c. The Galletly Diagnostic Vowel Word Reading Tests (Galletly, 2015), which complement DIBELS tests in mapping reading development use 30 second samples of children’s reading. Use quick-to-use tests that provide useful numeric and diagnostic information allowing monitoring of progress over time, e.g., the Rosner Test of Auditory Association (TAAS, Rosner, 1993), which may be available free online, is a brief 13-item test of syllable awareness then phonemic awareness at progressively more complex levels. The level the child achieves at is a useful level at which to provide phonemic awareness games whilst working simultaneously on word reading at the same level. It would be easy to make multiple forms of this test, by using different words of the same orthographic structure. Assess (monitor) skills reading word subsets at the three stages of the DoL2-4 teaching learning progression, and also metacognition (DoL5): a. DoL2. Focussed Skill Development (Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge): Skill reading the words just within their subset, using efficiency tests, to measure both accuracy and level of automaticity. b. DoL3. Scaffolded Generalising of Skills (Extending and Refining Knowledge): Skill reading the subset words in broader contexts, e.g., i. When the subset words are mixed with other words. ii. When the subset words are in scaffolded meaningful text, e.g, text containing many words from that subset. c. DoL4. Extensive Authentic Skill Usage (Using Knowledge Meaningfully): Skill reading the subset words in authentic reading of meaningful text d. DoL5. Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (Habits of Mind): Assess metacognitive competence with the strategy: ability to explain the GPCs and characteristics of the words, how they are read and written. Assess text reading skills: a. Assess text reading efficiency (words per minute), using tests with parallel forms, e.g., the free DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency tests have multiple parallel forms, and grade-level norms. b. Assess (monitor) text reading fluency including expression, intonation, and pausing at punctuation points. c. Assess (monitor) text reading efficiency of silent reading. (Ensure children can read quite quickly with good comprehension.) Use effective tests which provide practical information guiding instruction: a. Prefer tests which are quick to use, and provide both a score and useful diagnostic data to guide instructional decision-making. If providing only a score or diagnostic data, aim for tests which are quick to use and score. b. Avoid tests which are overly time-consuming or expensive, or duplicate data and information already obtained from other assessments. c. Use dynamic assessment as a frequent classroom practice, working alongside the child, and observing strengths and weaknesses, and use this information to guide instruction, re minor changes to change curriculum content or tasks. Assess automaticity and effectiveness of long-term memories of word-reading skills. It is common for at-risk readers to forget reading skills for word subsets and spellings which have been learned. a. Chart children’s efficiency scores for reading subsets of words to ensure they achieve both: i. Automaticity (rapid efficient reading). ii. Permanent effective automaticity with no loss of skill over time. 72
iii. When skills are newly learned, check them fortnightly. Once they seem to have been mastered permanently, check them occasionally, depending on likelihood that skills will be forgotten. (Children with automisation weakness are likely to have skills slip.).
Examples of Activities for Use of this Principle 1. Marzano & Pickering‘s (1997) Dimensions of Learning used to evaluate Word-Reading Instruction. 2. Word-Reading instruction for the Seven ‘Case-Study Children’. 3. Literacy Plus Mottos Applied to Word Reading. 4. Teacher-Recommended Activities for Word Reading.
Word-reading instruction has been restricted to the lower school, and often just highly frequent ‘sightwords’. But word-reading takes years to develop! It’s time for word reading to become whole school, not just for struggling readers, but for all readers. If schools are organised with texts, activities, developmental lists and Rapid Reads, class teachers will have the resources they need to help children at different levels of word-reading skill, each child receiving the precise learning that’s needed. Participating Teacher
73
Example 1. Marzano & Pickering‘s (1997) Dimensions of Learning Used to Evaluate the Instructional Effectiveness of Word-Reading Instruction, towards Optimising Instructional Effectiveness. This section uses an example of Dimensions of Learning (DoL) used in instruction and monitoring instructional effectiveness. It uses a ‘case study’ of Henry, a Year 2 child with severe word-reading difficulties, one of the seven ‘case study’ children discussed across this document (Galletly, 2014). Background Henry, aged 7yrs 6mths, meets the DSM-5 criteria for Specific Learning Disorder (APA, 2013). He moved to his current school at the start of the school year. He is achieving at an above average level at maths and science, but showing significant weakness in reading and writing. He excels at sport. He has a family history of reading difficulties (Dyslexia) with his father and uncle both having had significant weakness at school learning to read and spell, and mild continuing spelling and written expression difficulties. Henry’s parents are very keen to support his learning and are actively involved in his schooling. In addition to completing set homework, the family are keen to support and be involved in Henry’s word-reading intervention. On the Neale Test of Reading Ability (Neale, 1999), Henry achieved at 6yrs 0mths level for both word reading and reading comprehension. When the test was used as a listening comprehension test, he achieved at an 8yrs 6mths level, showing healthy language skills. Henry’s sight word skills are developing more effectively than his phonics skills. On the Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE, Torgesen, Wagner & Rashotte, 1999), he achieved at a 6yrs 6mths level for Sight Word Efficiency (real word reading) but at below the 6yrs 0mth starting level of the Phoneme Decoding Efficiency subtest, being unable to read any pseudowords (a proxy for skill reading unfamiliar words). He correctly read 15 sight words from a 50 word sample of the 200 most frequent words, which included every 4th word, suggesting he may know 60 (4 x15) highly frequent words. On the South Australian Spelling Test he was able to write seven words correctly, achieving at a below 6yrs 0mths level: the seven words included five less regular sightwords (of are do the) and two regular words (sit hot) which may also have been sightwords. The vowels of other regular CVC words were spelled incorrectly. Henry knew all letter names, but made common vowel errors, mixing a/u and e/i, and made errors on less frequent and more confusable consonants (j/g, x, y). Henry was also assessed on the Galletly Diagnostic Word Reading Test (Galletly, 2014), which assesses word reading of words with different vowel groups (short vowels, final-e vowels, common long vowel graphemes, R-vowels, other vowels, and regular two syllable words using long, short and schwa vowels). Henry read VC words reasonably well, with occasional a/u and e/i errors, but made lots of errors on CVC and CCVC words with short vowels, final-e words and words with other common vowel graphemes. On the Rosner Test of Auditory Association (TAAS, Rosner, 1993), a test of phonological awareness skills, Henry scored at a below Year 1 level. This was not surprising, given that phonemic awareness and word reading develop together. On the school’s informal tests of Working Memory and Rapid Automised Naming (RAN), Henry showed weak skills. Working memory weakness means likelihood of cognitive overload during learning, and difficulty making permanent effective memories of learned word-reading skills. Weakness on RAN indicates possible automisation weakness, difficulty building phonological-verbal skills to an automatic level, and difficulty rapidly retrieving memories from long term memories. Weakness on RAN and working memory suggests Henry will need careful teaching. The school is trialling a three level Response to Intervention program for Year 2 at-risk readers. Aware that children with Double Deficit (weakness in both phonological awareness and Rapid Automised Naming, RAN) are less responsive to intervention which is not highly intensive, the school trialled Henry only briefly in Level 2 (small group, Skills Building Intervention), and then moved to a combination of Level 2 and one: one Level 3 Intensive Remediation. The one: one remediation is a 45-minute weekly session using a parent tutor model focussed on Successful Engaged Learning, with practice sessions using games with high Instructional Intensity between these weekly sessions, done at the before-school Reading Club, and as homework. Henry’s class teacher, Clare, is conducting both the Level 2 Skills Building Intervention and the one: one Intensive Remediation, as part of a school focus on increasing Year 2 teacher expertise in word-reading instruction for at-risk readers, using a three level Response to Intervention system. While Clare teaches these intervention sessions, her class is taught by the school’s Literacy Support Teacher, Letitia, whose role is to support the teachers’ expertise building, and co-ordinate the Year 2 Response to Intervention system. Letitia and Clare co-teach quite frequently. 74
Henry’s mother, Joan, attends one of Henry’s 45 minute Intensive Remediation sessions each fortnight, discussing the games and activities she and Henry have worked on, watching Clare work with Henry on recent and new reading activities, then using those activities with Henry at home over the next fortnight. Clare uses the other 45 minute session each fortnight to work alongside Henry, building knowledge on his learning strengths and weaknesses, and using dynamic assessment to monitor learning progress. The school is using the two Literacy Plus modules, Sounds & Vowels and Two Vowels Talking (Galletly, 1999, 2001), as a key aspect of the Year 2 Response to Intervention system. The modules use Cognitive Load Theory principles, and strong emphasis on multiple Dimensions of Learning (DoL1-3, 5). They use strategic sequencing of instruction, games providing instructional intensity, and systems for monitoring skill mastery over time. As such, they support teachers to watch for children having difficulties in the common areas of learning failure of at-risk readers, namely skill mastery, skill generalising and long-term retention of skills over time. The Literacy Plus modules don’t include reading of meaningful text, instead building wordreading skills to a DoL3 (generalising) level, ready for moving into reading of meaningful texts (DoL4). Discussion of Dimensions of Learning used for monitoring instructional effectiveness Last term, Clare, Henry and family built Henry’s skills reading CVC, CVCe, and CCVCC words using Sounds & Vowels games. They have now moved on to Two Vowels Talking activities, focussing on words using groups of common vowel digraphs. Henry did well initially with the ‘Two Vowels Go Walking’ vowels (ai ea ee ie oa) and work is now focussed on learning the R-vowels (ar er ir or ur) and reading R-vowel words, and reading regular two-syllable words. Clare has noticed that while Henry is progressing with his new work, his skills on CVC, CVCe, and CCVCC words have regressed, with Henry now making lots more a/u and e/i vowel errors again. Clare and Letitia meet to discuss Henry’s progress and directions instruction should take. They work through the five DoL Dimensions of Learning, considering each in turn. DoL1 Motivation & Engagement (Attitudes and Perceptions). Henry seems motivated, and enjoys playing the reading games. He loves the token economy that Clare uses, with ‘coins’ earned, using intermittent reinforcement of good work practices. However Clare has noticed Henry has become more passive, rather than being actively engaged in his learning, and now seems to guess in multisyllabic word games and Bossy-e games (CVC words mixed with CVCe words, practising 10 GPCs, with the child needing to choose between long and short vowel sounds when reading words). Clare and Letitia decide Henry seems not to be experiencing the Successful Engaged Learning which was happening last term, and may be feeling a bit out of control for reading of CVC, CVCe, and CCVCC words. Henry had strong Learned Helplessness when he first arrived at the school, tending to guess when reading words. That had largely stopped, with Henry feeling more in control of his progress. But now, there seems likelihood that Henry might be again losing confidence in his learning to read. The school uses the Literacy Plus concept of working memory being a cup of thinking space with elastic sides. The teachers wonder if Henry now has more of a sad skinny cup of thinking space, due to lowering confidence. They decide their approach needs to focus on moving Henry back into Successful Engaged Learning in his word-reading skills development. Clare and Letitia move onto to considering the other Dimensions of Learning. DoL2 Focussed Skill Development (Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge) Clare and Letitia are well aware that the progress indicators to watch for are increasing accuracy in word reading for each word group, then increasing speed. The school uses the Literacy Plus mottos of ‘Practice Makes Perfect’ and ‘Automatic! Fantastic! (Automatic = Correct + Fast + Automatic!). They are equally aware that the learning failure indicators to watch for are weakness in skill mastery, skill generalisation, and long-term mastery of skills. Clare has been using the Memory Stretching charts in Sounds & Vowels and Two Vowels Talking to monitor Henry’s long-term progress with skills. They see quite clearly that while Henry has been progressing on the new work [words with the ‘Two vowels go walking’ vowels (ai ea ee ie oa) and R-vowels (ar er ir or ur)], he has also been forgetting the earlier learned skills (CVC, CVCe and CVCe words).
75
They realise that those earlier skills had probably only been developed to a Correct level rather than an Automatic level, a likely problem given Henry’s family history and likely automisation weakness. They think on the games they were using. While the board games were played, the Memory/Snap games weren’t. Memory, later moved to Snap is very useful technique for moving children first to reading correctly then to reading at a Correct + Fast level. The teachers now move to thinking on DoL3. DoL3 Scaffolded Generalising of Skills Reflecting on the CVC CVCe CCVCC skills which have slipped, the teachers decide that they haven’t focussed sufficiently on DoL3. They decide that, in addition to building those ‘slipped’ skills back to an automising level, they will also focus strongly on Literacy Plus activities focussed on scaffolded generalising of skills, including • Building a growing bank of flashcards of all learned vowels with words on the reverse side. • Spelling activities using vowels learned to date. • Combined Vowel Word games which include all vowels learned thus far, e.g., the Combined Vowel Game for R-vowels includes words with short vowels, final-e vowels, ai ea ee ie oa, and R-vowels. Literacy Plus modules don’t provide reading of authentic texts, and Clare’s teaching has focussed fully on word reading of single words, but not on taking that reading through to reading of meaningful texts. The teachers decide to take the word-reading skills strongly through to reading of meaningful texts. Clare has been using Echo Reading very successfully with Henry, but realises that this may be largely because he has much stronger skills for sight words. They decide to move to Henry also reading texts containing lots of the regular words which have been worked on. DoL5 Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (Built at all levels of instruction). The teachers haven’t included focus on building metacognition about learning difficulties and how best to learn when one learns differently. They decide to build Henry’s metacognition about the vowels they are working on, using the schools 20-vowels-sounds chart, and the Literacy Plus games, so Henry is able to talk about what the vowels say and why. They also decide that there is value in helping Henry understand his learning difficulty. If Clare and Letitia are feeling a bit confused about Henry’s forgetting recently learned skills, Henry is probably extremely confused, perhaps even worrying that his difficulties might be because he’s just not smart enough (a common issue with bright children with learning difficulties). They decide to use the Understanding Why sections of Sounds & Vowels with Henry, building his understanding of working memory (cups of thinking space), long term memory (Filer and filing systems), and how forgetting skills is common in children with reading difficulties. The school is also about to start using Australian professor, Andrew Martin’s, well researched Motivation and Engagement tests and workbooks to build children’s understanding and metacognitive management of motivation skills, and Boosters, Mufflers, and Guzzlers of effective learning (Martin, 2010; www.lifelongachievement.com). They decide Henry may benefit greatly from this focus. The teachers reflect on where they are at and where they are going. They can see the way forward: • Henry has automisation weakness. While it might be impossible, from time perspectives, to achieve skills at a fully automatic level, there is great value in rebuilding them to a Correct + Fast level. • Clare will focus on rebuilding the skills which have slipped. She will include Snap games, and focus on moving playing of board games to a Correct + Fast level. • She will include a strong focus on successful DoL3, Scaffolded Generalising of Skills, using the Literacy Plus tools for generalising word reading to a level useful for scaffolded reading of authentic texts. She will also use the schools’ teacher-made set of texts practising reading different vowel word groups. • She will also focus on building Henry’s metacognition on three areas: English’s 20 vowel sounds and the vowels they’ve been focussing on; how children with word-reading difficulties learn differently; and motivation and engagement skills children can self-manage. Clare decides to discuss these directions with Henry and Joan at their next session together.
76
Example 2. Word-reading Instruction for the Seven Case-Study Children. Of the seven children, five need word-reading instruction. For Sophia, Henry and Benny, word-reading weakness is their specific area of weakness and instructional need. Nell and Braith have additional weakness with language skills. The profiles and instructional needs of these five children are as follows.
The profiles and instructional needs of the 5 children with word-reading weakness [RC: Reading Comprehension LS: Language Skills WR: Word Reading M&E: Motivation & Engagement Y: Year-level]
WORD-READING WEAKNESS
COMBINED WEAKNESS
Late-emerging word-reading difficulties
Dyslexic Reader
Panicked young dyslexic reader
Lower ability reader
Severe Specific Language Impairment
Sophia
Henry
Benny
Nell
Braith
WR good Y1, low Y4 RC good Y1, low Y4 LS varies M & E varies Maths varies Family history of literacy weakness. Poor phonics skills. Did well in PrepYr1 due to good skill learning sightwords and high picture & language supports of texts. Failed to build skills reading unfamiliar words. Struggled from Yr2, due to texts having so many unfamiliar words, with many being long multisyllabic words.
WR & Spelling low Maths high LS good RC low due to WR low M & E varies Family history of literacy weakness. Struggles to learn word reading and spelling. Easily forgets words which have been learned. Is developing written expression difficulties. May have similar difficulties with maths facts, especially times tables. Good ability shown in other areas. May have areas of giftedness.
WR very low M & E very low LS varies RC varies Maths varies Family history of literacy weakness. Reads own name but very few other words. Usual intervention didn’t work for Benny. Avoids reading, and is highly distractible during reading. Strong learned helplessness (inner belief that I’m not capable of learning to read) combined with strong avoidance.
WR low LS low RC low Maths low M & E varies Low general ability. Mild intellectual weakness. Low skills in all learning areas. Progressing steadily at a slow but steady rate.
WR & Spelling very low LS low RC low M & E varies Maths low Healthy ability ‘masked’ by very low achievement. Significant difficulties with language skills, reading & written expression. Often extremely severe word-reading difficulties (Dyslexia – may have giftedness too). Severe difficulties with comprehension & logical reasoning.
The children’s instructional needs are similar in some ways, and different in others. Sophia’s healthy sight words can hide her quite significant instructional weakness. She will benefit from instruction using lots of pseudowords as well as real words. Henry and Braith have reasonable ability but because word reading has always been difficult, they may be feeling as though they must be severely unintelligent. Sophia may feel this way as well. They will benefit from building understanding of their reading difficulties, using the ‘Understanding Why’ sections and contracts in Sounds & Vowels (Galletly, 1999). Nell is achieving at her ability level. She receives additional support, based on her having intellectual disability, and this has enabled her reading to have involved continued successful engaged learning. She is progressing at a steady rate commensurate with her ability level. Although the children are at different ages and stages of word-reading development, they are all on the same continuum of word-reading development. They all need and will benefit from systematic wordreading instruction. They may use the same word-reading games, e.g., Sounds & Vowels games focussed on CVC, CVCe and CCVCC words. For reading of authentic texts, they will need texts chosen by both interest age level and word-reading age level. Echo reading is useful for removing the challenge of finding interest level text, as with their adult reading the hard words, they are able to benefit from and enjoy reading interesting texts at higher wordreading age levels. Text to speech devices such as reading pens can be of major benefit to all five children, ensuring children have much stronger control of their reading. 77
Benny has a serious problem with Learned Helplessness. His high anxiety is severely blocking his learning progress, and he will need considerable one: one Intensive Remediation. The Bennys of this world show us how important it is for children to experience Successful Engaged Learning during reading instruction, and to avoid long periods of unsuccessful learning. While Benny probably would have needed Level 2 or 3 intervention to prevent his entrenched difficulties, Learned Helplessness has exploded the extent of his difficulties. He is now a treatment resister (Vellutino, 2000), at risk of not learning despite strong focussed intervention. Benny can definitely make excellent progress, but very high levels of teaching and learning time are likely to be needed to get him back on track. The table below provides further explanation of the children’s instructional needs for word reading.
Timely Efficient Word-reading Instruction Matched to Each Child’s Needs WORD-READING WEAKNESS COMBINED WEAKNESS Late-emerging word-reading difficulties
Dyslexic Reader
Sophia
Henry
Build Sophia’s word reading using lots of pseudowords (a proxy for unfamiliar words, needing healthy phonics to read and write them) as she reads many real words as sight-words.
Use Echo Reading to build book reading skill & confidence. Build understanding of his difficulties, and ways forward. Build early sight words skills as needed. Teach Word Reading (Reading Accuracy) using Sounds & Vowels, then Two Vowels Talking sequences. Build skills to automatic level (Correct + Fast + Supereasy). Monitor progress to avoid forgetting of skills which were correct. Integrate word reading, vocabulary & spelling instruction, using spelling words from future terms as word reading & vocab words. Build phonological awareness as part of reading and spelling work: phonemes, rhyme, syllables. Teach Guestimating (Brave Spelling). Teach the 20 vowel sounds & 3 types of words/syllables (Regular, Pattern, Tricky). Teach ‘Dr G’s 2 Rulz ov Inglish Speling’, and enjoy finding spelling patterns. Be schwa hunters. Use technology supports to ensure the child has access to texts used in class, for building of reading comprehension skills. Use Echo Reading to build book reading skill & confidence. Work on maths skills if needed: teens/tys, number sense & maths facts, using Literacy Plus mottos.
Panicked young dyslexic reader
Lower ability reader
Severe Specific Language Impairment
Benny
Nell
Braith
Focus strongly on DoL1, reducing anxiety. Move to as low a level as is needed, to achieve Successful Engaged Learning. Focus on fun with reading activities & books. Use games to get instructional intensity, e.g., Memory and Snap. Avoid old activities now tainted as ‘Can’t do’. Use new approaches. Build sight words using interesting nouns, e.g., 7 family name words, then transport nouns (car bus boat plane train) then (boy girl dog cat ball). Make language experience books using those words once they are known quite well. Add sight words, building pride & skill. Build letter-sound knowledge carefully. Do phonics with VC words first, then CVC.
Build wordreading skills using work at the child’s level of skill. Use ideas from dyslexic reader, and panicked young dyslexic reader. Use texts with simple easily understood content. Ensure literacy development continues steadily, and is characterised by continued successful engaged learning, so Nell has both strong confidence and steady skill development.
Don’t ever consider this child unintelligent, despite his very low achievement. Build Braith’s understanding of his difficulties and ways forward. Organise regular SLP support. Provide high levels of support to ensure successful engaged learning of wordreading skills, while also ensuring growth in his language skills. Braith will benefit from the instruction ideas listed for Sophia and Henry. Once Braith can do Guestimating, move into expanding his written expression. Children with Specific Language Weakness have very high support needs for building written expression, and freeing up word writing greatly empowers written expression.
78
Example 3. Literacy Plus Mottos Applied to Word Reading The Literacy Plus Mottos (Galletly, 1999, www.literacyplus.com.au) are strategies using principles of Cognitive Load Theory. While used originally for word-reading instruction, they are applicable in all contexts where children are learning skills with high cognitive load and are at risk of having their processing capacity and confidence overwhelmed.
A Motto for Phonological Awareness: Fine Tune that Sound System: Build phonological awareness skills to a confident fluent level. Mottos for Building Automatic Skills: Find the Right Level: Balance content load to the child’s levels of skill, processing capacity and confidence. Small is Beautiful: Chunk word reading curriculum into a sequence of word subsets using specific GPCs, then use a strong DoL2-4 focus to develop reading of subset words to a fluent, confident level. Praise a Job Well Done: Praise progress and, as part of reversing Learned Helplessness, help the child link progress to increased word-reading skill and increased competence as a learner. Hurrah for Fat Happy Cups: Anxiety shrinks and expands processing capacity; monitor processing capacity, keep task load manageable so cups stay fat and happy, with no cognitive overload. Practice makes Perfect: Use instructional intensity with lots of practice on activities at the right level of difficulty, to build effective automatic skills. Automatic Fantastic: Automatic skills are effective memories, which don’t get forgotten Automatic = Correct + Fast + Supereasy. Read Easy Books (Echo reading): See Word Reading Principle: Section 2, 3.d.iii. Build that wall strong (Reading as a brick wall): a logical rationale for explaining the value of building subskills of word reading. Learning to read is a brick wall, one layer for each year-level. When learning to read has been difficult, the wall has gaps and is wobbly. Filling in the gaps (building word-reading subskills, and reading lots of easy texts) makes the child’s wall strong, making the wall strong from the ground up. Mottos for Making Effective Long-Term Memories: Give Filer his Instructions: Plan to remember, and actively prioritise making effective memories (passive learning is more easily forgotten). Stretch those Memories: Memory stretching programs help learned skills stay learned.
79
Example 4. Teacher-Suggested Ideas for Word Reading Question 1: Which long term strategies have you implemented in teaching reading to at-risk readers that seem successful? Why do you think this? (means similar responses from more than 1 group) Resources used Strategies Actions taken Other Repetitive Modelled reading – Notice and celebrate Make it text show chn. what to do – every success no matter fun! using Explicit framework how small; communicate this to home Sight word lists – Reading accuracy Cater to different Foster love of weekly testing, strategies – memory learning styles reading word walls, charts, triggers – physical, oral flash cards etc. Find-a-words / Small group work Good oral language base Link to real life crosswords is essential – structured ‘talk time’ Games – Bingo, Explicit use of Daily reading and home See the use of Fish, Snap, Memory metalanguage reading reading in other Match contexts Powerpoints / Looking for patterns Mixed ability Drama and art warm-ups groupings Reading eggs Consistent phonics Don’t change approach Positive program – written and activities too often feedback and into stories positive Dotted words / cards to rewards trace Powerful Words Readers’ Theatre Setting achievable goals TO / WITH/ and Book (P-2) – BY – balanced personal dictionary reading program BIG Books Familiar and repeated Buddy up with younger / texts older readers Reading Beanies (P- 3 level guide for texts Reading on the Same 2) bookmark / class Page charts Class sets of books Actions / pictures for S-A-R with teacher aide sight words Jolly Phonics SCORE – skim and scan Stick with a book – – all can find something revisit it often they know ‘linger longer’ Books that cover Chunking words children’s interests Bookwalk – skim and scan – learn vocab before reading Sightwords on keyrings Look Look the owl / Lips the fish / Stretchy snake / Skippy frog / Chunky monkey / Trying Lion
80
Question 2: Which long term strategies have you implemented in teaching reading to at-risk readers that don’t seem to be working? Why do you think this? Resources used Jolly Phonics – not working for all kids – can’t use on its own
Strategies Changing a text too regularly (Reading on the Same Page works!)
Other Students not having enough time to complete tasks – not experiencing success
Covering big skills and not micro skills – no long term retention
Actions taken Conflicted about ability grouping (labelling vs level/skills target teaching) Rushing through levels
Giving kids texts that are too difficult – NAPLAN, PAT-R
Home reading – because there isn’t the support
Streaming all the time
Round robin reading / taking turns – they tend to dream off waiting for their turn Sending sight words to parents (non-particpating)
Unsupervised work
Teaching a second language when they don’t have English Blaming the family / child
Spelling tests (pre/post) – C2C random spelling words (not catering for ‘at-risk’ – too much pressure on T to move children through) (e.g., try ‘brain day’ – emphasis on improvement)
Focussing too much on 1 strategy e.g., sounding out Working independently – they don’t see themselves as learners Making connections – need maturity and readiness to learn in a formal situation
81
Aides working with ‘at-risk’ students, not the teacher Sometimes for ‘atrisk’ students, it doesn’t seem to matter how much we do, the movement / progress is still barely evident
Cluttered curriculum
Assuming prior knowledge and world knowledge Assuming they have same knowledge from Dec→Jan
‘at-risk’ kids together all the time Half-cohort (age difference) Lack of support (e.g., 1 aide for 2 classes, too many random aides) Increase standard of T aide (lack of expertise with ‘atrisk) Too many initiatives involving complete changes Authentic assessment non-existent
Question 3: Which recent strategies have you implemented in teaching reading to ‘at-risk’ readers that seem successful?
Resources used Phonetic games
Strategies BRAVE spelling
Nonsense word game
Syllables – each has a vowel
‘Reading Eggs’ – Rapid recall of vowel and it is individual consonant phonemes poster and selfassessed; fun and engaging Sight word games ‘Reading Beanies’ seems to be working well in P-2: children seem to be able to visualise the strategy for decoding unknown words ‘ Reading our Way’ – Downs Syndrome Assoc.
Revisiting the ‘metalinguistics’ and ‘concepts about print’ tasks (lots of practice) Using texts that are familiar and at the correct level Daily Five – helps build selfconfidence, choosing text STRIVE – interest in words Onset and rime – confidence with decoding 3 columns for words – tricky, regular, pattern – with lots of discussion Using decidable texts Singing Flash cards / screens Sound drills Syllabification Transformations Silly syllables Soupy words / rapid recalls Sightwords on rocks
82
Actions taken Get parents involved in phonetic games – include instructions Wave strategy – Yr1 to Yr3 teacher aide in the classroom at the same time for reading group Teacher aide in prep for the 1st term to help with gathering data
½ hour – fast paced – 5 sight words / reading nonsense and true CVC words/ writing sentences – read to T / dictionary work Goal setting
Small intensive blocks of time
other Success encourages success Explicit criteria for success
Build a rapport with the children – ‘have a go’
Principle 13. Foster Language Skills for Reading Principle 13. Foster Language Skills for Reading: Teach Language Skills Strategically and Carefully to Achieve Effective Sophisticated Reasoning
Rationale Reading and writing float on a sea of talk James Britton, 1970, p.164
Language Skills are central to reading and writing, as seen in the Literacy Component Model’s positioning of Language & Thinking Skills & Strategies as one of the three components of reading development, and central to both reading comprehension and written expression:
0% ➨ LANGUAGE SKILLS ➨ 100%
Reading Comprehension = Language Skills & Reasoning x Word Reading (Reading Accuracy) WORD READING WEAKNESS (Dyslexic readers)
THE GOAL: HEALTHY PROGRESS
Strong language skills Weak word reading
Strong language skills Strong word reading
COMBINED WEAKNESS
LANGUAGE SKILLS WEAKNESS (Hyperlexic readers)
Weak language skills Weak word reading
Weak language skills Strong word reading
0% ➨ WORD-READING SKILLS ➨ 100%
Language skills can be thought of as including language knowledge, e.g., vocabulary and background knowledge, and language reasoning, e.g., understanding questions and thinking inferentially. Language and communication skills are generally stated as including • Receptive Language: the understanding of language. • Expressive Language: expressing oneself using language. • Language Reasoning: the thinking underlying understanding and expressing oneself. • Vocabulary: word and concept knowledge, used in Receptive and Expressive Language (Background knowledge and literature experience can be considered part of vocabulary) • Pragmatics: social language skills, including social awareness, logical reasoning and problem solving, appropriateness of the communication actions. • Cognitive processing skills for communication, including short term memory, long term memory, executive processing, metacognition, and attention: children with communication difficulties and children with reading difficulties are usually found to have low working memory skills (Working Memory is used as a proxy for cognitive processing skills in general, weakness in this area means the child is likely to have difficulties with making effective long term memories, and becoming automatic at skills. • Phonological Awareness: awareness of and skill at use of syllables, rhyme, and phonemes (sounds). 83
• •
Hearing, listening and auditory processing. Articulation (Speech): correct use of speech sounds when speaking.
In at-risk readers there is a strong relationship of early language weakness prior to school entry and reading difficulties at school. Language factors are a major part of children’s Literate Cultural Capital at school entry: their backpack of language and literacy experiences prior to school entry. For effective reading development, it is particularly valuable to focus on three areas of language • Vocabulary, including o Background knowledge and o Literature experience. • Literal Comprehension, including o Understanding questions and instructions at different levels of complexity (e.g., Blank’s four levels of complexity for early comprehension). o Understanding explicitly stated information. o Participating in conversations and discussions. • Inferential Reasoning, including o Inferential aspects of language comprehension. o Language Reasoning: the thinking underlying understanding and expressing oneself. o Pragmatics: social language skills, including social awareness, logical reasoning and problem solving, appropriateness of the communication actions social reasoning. Language skills and literacy skills are intricately related (e.g., Catts, Adloff, & Ellis-Weismer, 2006). The relationship between language and literacy skills is seen in print communication paralleling verbal communication and building from verbal communication skills. The table below shows the paralleling of verbal and print skills, using the two basic purposes of communication: meaning input (receptive language) and meaning output (expressive language), both for general types of communication and at word level, i.e., vocabulary.
Meaning Input Meaning Output
Verbal Communication Language Reasoning & Comprehension Listening Vocabulary Language Reasoning & Expression Speaking Vocabulary
Print Communication Reading Comprehension Reading Vocabulary Written Expression Writing Vocabulary
The central role of language in reading means many ‘reading comprehension’ skills can be taught using verbal language activities. Many ‘reading comprehension’ skills can be built using verbal language activities. The advantages of using verbal tasks are lower cognitive load, higher rates of successful engaged learning, and higher motivation and engagement. The cognitive load of verbal language tasks (listening and speaking) is vastly lower than that of print language tasks (reading and writing) for at-risk readers with weak wordreading and word writing skills. Verbal language also takes much less time for these students such that lots more practice of a skill can be done in a similar time period, e.g., using verbal responses, some children might do ten responses in the time it takes them to do one written response. Additionally, while many atrisk readers are reluctant readers and writers, they usually find verbal discussions highly motivating. The close relationship of verbal and print communication skills make it valuable for schools to have not just a reading curriculum, but also a verbal language ‘Talk Curriculum’ which supports reading and writing development, as part of helping children to build powerful verbal communication skills.
84
There is considerable research for school instruction on Vocabulary development and instruction, and less but developing research on many other areas of language skill instruction. These are discussed in research reviews and in many articles on specific studies. Strategies for this principle This section focusses on strategies which relate most to reading. Principles were selected, with aims including: • To reduce additional instructional time beyond reading instruction to a minimum. • To integrate instruction on different areas, and thus achieve multiple instructional aims simultaneously. • To focus on general principles for delayed language, and not to include emphasis on programs for children with disordered language, not following normal development. Most children with language weakness have delayed language development, and relatively few have disordered language development. It is considered that for children with disordered development, teachers would work closely with the school’s Speech Language Pathologist. Choice of these strategies also took into account issues including • The large amount of practice and scaffolding often needed in supporting language development. • The early years’ curriculum already being very crowded. • Schools not being well resourced with teacher aide, Learning Support Teacher, and Speech Language Pathologist time. • The very large number of children likely to have significant language weakness, due to starting school with low Literate Cultural Capital (a relatively empty ‘backpack’ of home language and literacy experiences). • There being a very large number of language skills which at-risk readers will benefit from, such that too much emphasis might be focussed on language skills rather than the other aspects of reading instruction. • The great value of schoolwide and systemwide strategies in that the work done in a single yearlevel is expanded in useful ways, through teachers in successive year-levels knowing the content and strategies emphasised in previous year-levels, and deepening it, by referring back to that learning, and building on it. Some of the strategies are whole-school strategies, some are whole-class strategies, and others are for working with at-risk readers with weak language skills on a small-group or one-to-one basis. All strategies are valuable for building the language skills for reading in children weak in this area. The instructional strategies for building language skills for reading include the following: 1. Build strong school and teacher expertise for teaching language skills for reading. 2. Liaise closely with your school’s Speech Language Pathologists (SLPs) for advice re individual children’s needs and refining of school programs building speaking and language skills. a. Develop strong understanding of each child’s specific areas of language delay and instructional needs. b. Use programs developed by Education Qld SLPs, e.g., STRIVE, Support-a-Talker, Read-ItAgain Foundation Q, Oral Language Early Years (OLEY), Prep Metalinguistic Awareness Program (PMAP), ELF (Early Literacy Foundation: metalinguistic support program), Text Talk, Talking Time. 3. Incorporate principles of Teaching Smart and Teaching for the Reading Heart in language skill instruction. 4. Build strong school and teacher expertise for teaching language skills to at-risk readers. 5. Have strong staff awareness of the cognitive load impacts of instruction for at-risk readers. 85
a. The similarities and differences of reading instruction for at-risk and healthy-progress readers: i. The similarities lie in principles of language instruction for at-risk readers being mostly the same principles used for all readers. ii. The differences lie in instructional intensity, in successfully differentiated instruction being less a sensible goal, and more an instructional imperative, and in the damage done by poor instruction being intense, and often having long lasting impacts, through its impact on children’s self-confidence for reading. b. Language weakness is strongly associated with reading weakness; improving language skills increases children’s opportunities for becoming successful readers. c. Many children with weak language skills have low processing capacity (working memory). d. The crucial importance of intervention starting as soon as difficulties are noticed, and at a sufficient level of expertise and intensity, for children to make healthy progress. e. The crucial role of motivation and engagement (Whether you think you can, or whether you think you can’t, you’re right!), and corresponding need to avoid failure: i. Children need lots of successful engaged learning to maintain motivation for learning reading skills. ii. Frequent experiences of low success produce loss of motivation and engagement: this often leads to learned helplessness (not feeling capable of effective learning) and more entrenched, reading difficulties. f. The vital importance of using principles of instruction incorporating cognitive load concepts, as at-risk readers are vulnerable for making poor progress until focussed, strategic instruction using Cognitive Load Theory principles are used, e.g., Cognitive Load Theory, Marzano & Pickering’s five Dimensions of Learning (DoL), Literacy Plus Mottos. 6. Have strong staff awareness of the strong interrelatedness of reading comprehension and language skills for reading: a. That most reading comprehension skills are language skills in the context of print texts. b. That this interrelatedness offers many instructional advantages: i. Many reading comprehension skills can be taught and practiced using verbal activities instead of print texts. ii. Reluctant readers often enjoy and are highly motivated in verbal activities. iii. Higher rates of instructional intensity can be achieved in verbal activities, e.g, when children can give spoken responses instead of written responses. 7. Build language skills in at-risk readers carefully and strategically, ensuring effective mastery and generalisation through into reading comprehension and use during literacy tasks and authentic reading, through appropriate use of instructional intensity, careful scaffolding, lots of practice at the level of the child’s instructional needs, and strategic monitoring of skill development and use. 8. Include the five key strands of Marzano & Pickering’s Dimensions of Learning (DoL) within your school’s pedagogical frameworks to i. Ensure skills are mastered and generalised effectively ii. (When children have made poor progress and change is needed), using the five dimensions to analyse instruction and reflect on how effectively the different DoLs have been implemented and where change is needed. b. DoL1 Motivation and Engagement (Attitudes and Perceptions) - The starting point: Work to achieving active engaged persistent learners who don’t give up and disengage. c. DoL5 Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (Habits of Mind) - The end goal: in using the strategy, having a vocabulary about the strategy, able to discuss the strategy and its purpose, and justify use of the strategy in relation to particular texts which have been read. Metacognitive awareness of key aspects of skills and strategies supports their continued 86
9.
10.
11.
12.
use across lifelong learning, and builds children’s skills in being reflective, sophisticated learners. d. The DoL2-4 learning progression from explicit instruction and scaffolded practice using the strategy in isolation (DoL2) through scaffolded use in increasingly broad contexts, to sophisticated skill usage with diverse texts in diverse contexts (DoL4), keeping cognitive load manageable through three stages of teaching and learning, which keep the cognitive load of teaching tasks to a comfortable level not overloading student processing capacity: i. DoL2 Focussed Skill Development (Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge): narrow context explicit instruction lessons focussed on specific single skills, e.g., brainstorming words to describe characters and events, building skill with that strategy to an increasingly fluent level, ready then for use in the wider contexts of DoL3. ii. DoL3 Scaffolded Generalising of Skills (Extending and Refining Knowledge): scaffolded generalising of those skills into strategic contexts, including use in reading tasks. iii. DoL4. Extensive Authentic Skill Usage (Using Knowledge Meaningfully): lots of practice using the skill in diverse contexts including authentic reading. Ensure extensive involvement with literature and reading, including a. Reading To (Modelled Reading: Show me): Children enjoying diverse texts read to them, building the strategies and positive habits of an effective reader. b. Reading With (Guided Reading: Help me): Children reading with support, in reading lessons, and supported reading of words and texts, building word-reading and active comprehension strategies. c. Reading By (Independent Reading: Let me): Children reading more and more widely, both fiction and nonfiction ‘World Reading’ books, borrowing library books, with increasing home time spent reading. Have a schoolwide ‘Talk Curriculum’ that builds verbal skills for reading and writing. a. Include general aims for healthy progress readers. Build verbal skills a few years ahead of when children are expected to use them successfully in reading and writing. b. For at-risk readers, prioritise specific strategies with high gains for reading. c. Use schoolwide developmental sequences to bring students with low verbal communication skills or low Literate Cultural Capital up to an average level of readiness for reading development. (Students with low verbal skills and/or low Literate Cultural Capital are at major disadvantage compared to other at-risk readers with healthy verbal skills and high Literate Cultural Capital. Provide intensive language intervention building Literate Cultural Capital in kids low in this area: a. Be aware that children are likely to need frequent intensive reading sessions with a teacher working one: one or with a small group. b. Use a strong focus on vocabulary: i. Focus on Tier 1 vocabulary (common words, e.g., colours, objects, actions, categories) for children weak in this area. ii. Incorporate Tier 2 vocabulary (less common useful words) from start of Prep. c. Use literature experience as a major part of language skills work. i. Build skills for listening to book reading and audio recordings of books. d. Build skills for engaging in discussions about books and issues raised by books. e. Build skills for retelling narratives, and describing characters in books. Build skill using a range of complex sentences, initially using earliest conjunctions (because, when), and later adjectival clauses (postmodifying clauses starting with relative pronouns who, which, that, whose), and adverbial clauses using advanced conjunctions (e.g., while, if, so, till, until, although, however, thus, owing to). Children in Prep-Year 1 with healthy language skills use a lot of complex 87
13.
14.
15.
16. 17.
18.
19.
sentences: those who are not using a range of complex sentences and quite complex descriptive language are at risk of both reading comprehension and written expression skills. They can be built progressively using a Talk Curriculum. Use a strategy like WORDY, with 5 levels of knowledge, to build children’s metacognition about how well they know a word, and how easy it can be to move to being expert on that word: a. W = 0 = What’s That? b. O = 1 star = Once or twice I’ve heard it. c. R = 2 stars = In the Region of (e.g., It’s something to do with …). d. D = 3 stars = Doable (e.g., I can make a sentence, talk about related words. e. Y = 4 stars = YES!!! I’m expert on this word. I can tell you lots about it. Build word study skills from Prep, increasing awareness of the semantic, syntactic, orthographic and phonological features of the word, e.g., every word has meaning/s. Encourage children to collect interesting words, perhaps calling them WORDY words, and using WORDY words as topics Integrate word-reading, vocabulary and spelling instruction from Year 2 to maximise these three skills. This creates more effective learning (At-risk readers having one week to learn to spell a list of words that they can’t yet read well, don’t know the meanings of, and have never used in speaking and writing, is often ineffective use of teaching and learning time). Build metacognition (‘child as expert’ knowing of how, when, where and why strategies are used; e.g., Galletly & Knight, 2005) at the same time as building cognition (language skills). Build a love of books and being read to. (Many children with weak language skills will need considerable scaffolding for this to happen, including one: one and small group stories, and initial use of very short, highly structured stories, e.g., Dear Zoo, The Very Busy Caterpillar. Start inferential language instruction early, using Language made Visible (The use of pictures to explore the meaning of spoken or written language. a. Teach the Three-Level Guide from Prep and use the contrast of On the Lines versus between the lines perspectives using print texts and diverse multiliteracies texts. b. Draw picture sequences of describable scenes from books, using talking bubbles and thinking bubbles to show how characters’ thinking is often inconsistent with their words, e.g., a child saying ‘It’s delicious, thank you’, while thinking ‘This tastes YUK but I’ll use good manners.’ c. Draw literal (On the lines) and inferential (Between the lines) meanings of idioms, e.g., Hang on, Reading between the lines, raining cats and dogs, full of beans. d. Draw the two meanings of jokes: the set-up meaning, and the punchline meaning. e. Model inferential thinking, and reward children’s use of inferential thinking, e.g., I’m reading between the lines here, but I think…. Do you think I’m on the right track? Have a schoolwide vocabulary program based on Tier 2 words (slightly advanced vocabulary useful in multiple contexts, e.g., chaotic, producing, splatter): a. Synonym brainstorming and use of clines from Prep-1, linked to (or extending from) literature where possible b. Year-level sets of 200 Tier 2 words which are explicitly taught in that year-level. c. Integration of literature with vocabulary, such that many of the Tier 2 words are introduced using Literature. d. Subsets of those 200 words which are explicitly taught as writing vocabulary words using Guestimating (Brave Spelling), i.e., no emphasis on correct spelling and strong emphasis on a vowel in every syllable and words being increasingly readable. e. Use of a Level of Knowledge System such as WORDY so that children can observe how their knowledge of a word increases over time. f. Children as Word Wizards, who find wonderful WORDY words and post them on the class’ chart for this. 88
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
g. Children doing oral presentations to the class on WORDY words they’ve chosen, saying where they found it, why they like it, and being scaffolded (perhaps by teacher and class) to give the word’s meaning and say a sentence with it, and to discuss its features, e.g., its number of syllables and what they are, sounds they like in the word, spelling patterns they’ve found. Multifaceted word study of a word builds more powerful neurological representations. Make and use Language Experience books, using photos of children in the class cohort doing various activities, or children’s art, e.g., their paintings of ‘My friendly monster’: these build strong identification and are powerful for building DoL1, Motivation and Engagement (Attitudes and Perceptions) about reading and being read to. a. Use Language Experience books and children’s art books for multiple purposes, e.g., i. Noun wrapping, e.g., a friendly monster book: Sam’s monster is a massive purple creature that has three funny heads. ii. Parts of Speech: an actions book, a What have I got? (noun) book, a feelings book, an adverbs book. iii. Complex Sentences: a ‘because’ book, a ‘so’ book, an ‘although’ book. Build language skills in relation to literature where practical: Illustrated picture books are a bridge taking children to worlds and words beyond their own experience, but with strong emotional links, enabling children to belong to the experience. And while the first reading of a story is for the experience, when used strategically, subsequent readings are powerful, language-building environments, allowing practice and extension of skill levels. And books are beloved, such that returning to the book promotes strong positive engagement. Build listening skills. a. Build metacognition about the value of good listening skills. b. Use recorded texts, and encourage children to enjoy them as listening texts rather than wanting to look at illustrations. c. Build children’s skills for listening to recorded texts, encourage listening to diverse texts: i. At-risk readers usually have greatly reduced exposure to texts: weak word readers find reading tiring and unrewarding through difficulty accessing texts’ meanings. ii. Weak comprehenders find reading similarly unrewarding because of their difficulties accessing texts’ meanings. Texts are accessed much more quickly when listened to, rather than read, and through the training of listening skills which occurs when children persist in listening to appropriately selected texts, children build listening, comprehension and vocabulary skills, while rapidly increasing their number of familiar texts. iii. Texts can be recorded texts using electronic devices or texts read aloud by adults or peers. iv. Reluctant readers often quite quickly become comfortable and confident at listening to recorded books when going to bed. Encourage parents to continue reading children’s books to their at-risk readers. Parent reading of texts is extremely valuable, such that it’s important to encourage this activity; many parents stop reading to their children at about seven years of age, but at-risk readers need the extensive exposure to texts which parent reading provides. Teach, emphasise and reward clear, strategic explanations. a. Model rehearsing, emphasise the value of saying something several times, and support children to rehearse. Teach Top Level Structures (Cause-Effect, Problem-Solution, List-Description-Sequence, CompareContrast) and their signalling words gradually but strategically, ensuring that most or all Tier 2 vocabulary words relevant to Top Level Structure, are vocabulary words in Prep to Year 2. 89
26. Brainstorm vocabulary relevant to books which have been read, using words provided by the text, and words in keeping with the text, e.g., a. Words to describe different characters, events which occurred, actions. b. Words used in imagining possibilities from the book, e.g., What might Mr McGee like to do next weekend? 27. Teach Synonym Sentences: a. Build skills at writing a provided sentence in new and creative ways, using synonyms, idioms, and subtlety. b. Use Synonym Sentences as a ‘bridge’ to effective editing, supporting children to reword their writing to say its message more effectively. 28. Teach Synonym Duos: a. Play Memory and Snap card games with sets of synonyms (e.g., 6 synonyms of 6 concepts: cold, big, laughing, said, house, work). b. Build ownership of vocabulary through class harvesting of synonyms from Synonym Sentences to make sets of Synonym Duos. c. Include ‘Synonym Challenge’ after playing Synonym Duos: children being able to think up a great sentence with a synonym whose card they turn over. 29. Integrate language instruction with homework, e.g., a. Use a Question Matrix to support children to ask and answer questions about books parents read to them. b. For children with great spelling and poor language, encourage writing of long complex sentences. c. Include Synonym Sentences, and Synonym Duo card games as homework. 30. Provide parent supports for building their children’s reading, e.g., technology using voice-to-text software so parents lacking confidence in reading, can enjoy books with their children. Use an assumption that many parents don’t have effective reading skills and lack confidence re supporting their children’s progress. 31. Send recorded stories with accompanying books, home for children to listen to with family, with the task being to retell the story, and talk about the characters and events. 32. Build narrative skills: a. Build awareness of the sequence of narratives (story grammar) including six stages: Orientation, Precipitating Event, Complication, Climax, Resolution, and Conclusion: i. Use the six stages as a Reading Comprehension response to literature which has been read, e.g., debating which events which be the Precipitating Event. b. Build skill retelling stories, of books which have been read, e.g., using Somebody/Wanted/But/So and the 6 stages of a narrative (See example at end of section). c. Build awareness of characters: consider provided information (On the lines: the author said it), implied information (Between the lines: the author meant it), and imagination, creating actions and preferences used in different situations in keeping with the hints of character provided by the text (Beyond the lines: the author would agree with it). 33. Develop a schoolwide literature for language program, perhaps initially using 10 key texts per yearlevel in Years Prep to Year 3, and over time building to 20 key texts per year-level, which builds cumulatively across the school years, such that i. Children have deep experience with a small number of literature texts. ii. All year-levels know the texts and language foci which were worked on in previous year-levels. iii. Texts are used on an ongoing basis, often referred back to and used again and again, such that children’s experience with these texts deepens over time. b. Strategically select for each text, Tier 2 vocabulary words in the text or relevant to the text, relevant complex sentences, relevant genre skills, relevant Top Level Structure features, 90
34.
35. 36.
37.
c. Use Top Level Structure features (Cause-Effect, Problem-Solution, List-DescriptionSequence, Compare-Contrast) and specific language skills suited to the text. d. Build a database of features of each text, including (e.g., using Mem Fox’ Tough Boris) i. Complex sentences and language of literature emphasised in that text, e.g., All pirates ____ and so do I; When (something happened), Fierce Boris (verb). Boris felt ___ so he (verb). ii. Words of different parts of speech, which occur frequently, e.g., adjectives. iii. Genre Awareness, e.g., realistic fiction recount. iv. Parts of Speech: conjunctions, e.g., and so, because, when, after; past tense verbs. v. Top Level Structure: cause and effect, list. vi. Tier 2 words, both words in the text, e.g., tough, massive, scruffy, greedy, fearless, scary, and words applicable to the text, e.g., distressed, grieved, huge, brave. Anticipate many children starting school with low Literate Cultural Capital (limited language and literacy experiences), and work intensively from start of school to build Literate Cultural Capital , with strong use of repeated visiting of familiar ‘favourite’ books. Provide accommodations for children with weak hearing, auditory processing, or speech and language skills. Meet the ‘Find the Learning Time’ Challenge, through both creative means, e.g., community visitors working one: one with children, through strategically increasing instructional intensity, and reducing time spent on activities which aren’t targeting the child’s specific needs, e.g., for a child with great spelling but poor language, instead of writing answers, use spoken answers, for far more questions to be answered. Use a community-focus to ensure language skill building starts early: a. Provide families with advice and resources on building skills in recognising the child’s name and first letter or the child’s name, phonological awareness skills, and intensive exposure to books and being read to, either by parents or using electronic supports, e.g., recorded stories for listening, interactive books. b. Use play based early intervention using two to five sight words, two to five letters and sounds, and building of phonological awareness, from age four, particularly for children with a family history of word-reading weakness and indicators of automisation deficit (low Rapid Automised Naming, and indicators of difficulties learning to read the child’s name and first letter of the child’s name. c. Provide families with advice and resources i. Supporting children to 1. Build conversation skills, and to have conversations with parent and child both having lots of turns. 2. Have lengthy discussions on topics. 3. Be able to brainstorm words to describe something. 4. Enjoy books and stories. 5. Discuss stories, and characters in stories. 6. Retell events and stories. ii. Ensuring children have intensive exposure to books and being read to, by parents or using electronic supports, e.g., recorded stories for listening, interactive books. iii. How to enjoy books with children. iv. The importance of talking with children. v. The power of vocabulary and the danger of low vocabulary. vi. How to build vocabulary skills. d. Ensure intensive language enrichment at childcare centres and Kindergarten. e. Ensure smooth transitions from Kindergarten (pre-school) to Prep. 91
38. Assess vocabulary, literal comprehension, and inferential reasoning, retelling narratives and monitoring use of complex sentences and descriptive language, and monitor children’s progress in these areas. Examples of Activities for Use of this Principle 1. An example of Marzano & Pickering‘s (1997) Dimensions of Learning used in Language Skills instruction. 2. Language Skills instruction for the seven ‘case study’ children. 3. Short YouTube videos explaining Language Disorder. 4. Narrative Activities: a. 4 Step Narrative Summary: Somebody/Wanted/But/So. b. 6-Stage Narratives and Story Mountain. c. 5 W + H Using Who? When? Where? What? Why? How? to ask and answer questions about a text which is being read. d. Q Chart: Extending questioning using auxiliary verbs. e. Dramatic & Cartoon Strip Freeze Frames (for summarising beginning, middle and end of stories using static images) 5. Teacher ideas for building Language Skills for Reading. Example 1. A Dimensions of Learning (DoL) Example of Language Skills Instruction This section uses an example of Dimensions of Learning (DoL) focussed on ‘Talk Curriculum’ activities used to build language communication and reasoning skills which support reading development. It uses the ‘case study’ of Braith, who has Language Disorder (Galletly, 2014). Braith is one of the seven ‘case study’ children discussed across this document. Background Braith, a gifted athlete, is an example of a child with severest learning difficulties. He has severely delayed language skills affecting both comprehension and expression, i.e., major weakness in language communication and reasoning skills. As is common in children with impaired language, he also has severe word-reading weakness. Using DSM-5 criteria (APA, 2013), he meets the criteria for both severe Language Disorder and severe Specific Learning Disorder. This severe weakness in both areas creates a particularly strong ‘Find the Learning Time’ challenge for both his teachers and his extremely supportive family. Braith has automisation weakness, and a Double Deficit cognitive-processing weakness, with weakness in both working memory (processing capacity) and phonological awareness. This makes Braith a child in need of one: one high Intensive Remediation (Level 3, Response to Intervention) from as early as age 4yrs, as soon as those two skills could have been measured. Like many children with severe Language Disorder, Braith doesn’t present as a child with major communication weakness. His primary presentation is that of a quiet child with very severe learning difficulties. This too is common, and probably a key reason why language weakness so often goes unidentified when children’s language skills are not routinely screened. Braith’s skill answering questions was at a well below 6yrs 0mths level, as was his skill with complex sentences. While his functional verbal communication was adequate in many ways, Braith had the language weakness profile of many weak readers: • Using only a few Complex Sentences, and only developmentally-earlier conjunctions because when. Braith used mostly Simple and Compound Sentences. • Frequent errors on irregular plurals (mouses/mice) and irregular past tense verbs (catched/caught). • Very little complex description, e.g., few ‘wrapped nouns’ (noun phrases using adjective, adjective noun postmodifying phrase/clause structure, Galletly, 2003). • Major confusion of number sense, including o Confusion of ‘teen’ and ‘ty’ numbers (e.g., 17/70) with Braith unable to count down from 100 by 10s or from 20 by 1s, without mixing numbers, e.g., 20 19 18 70 60 40 30 20 10 0. o Not being able to add numbers effectively, e.g., 4+4, 2+2.
92
Braith also had major weakness explaining events which have happened, particularly when feeling stressed. As part of this weakness, he had weakness with sequencing events. He had difficulty with concepts such as before after while and day concepts such as yesterday tomorrow, the other day, on the weekend. Braith is a gifted athlete and sportsman, winning athletics events at district level, and able to quite effortlessly learn and perform quite intricate Karate sequences. His art skills are also quite impressive. It is interesting to reflect on our two information processing systems, one for verbal-phonological information and one for visual spatial information. It is very common for children with literacy weakness to have major weakness in cognitive processing for their verbal-phonological system, with no weakness (and often giftedness) for cognitive processing of their visual-spatial system. It is likely Braith’s strongest skill for progressing his skills is his continuing hard work, never giving up, and taking pride in the goals he has met. It is wonderful that Braith excels at sport, and it is likely that this strength rescues his self-esteem often. Braith’s needs for extensive teaching and learning time have been met as well as has been possible through a range of methods, including scaffolding and differentiated instruction by his class teacher, small group and one: one support from learning support staff, and use of one: one Intensive Remediation using a parent-tutor model, using weekly 45 minute sessions with Braith, his mother and a learning support teacher, with large amounts of home practice completed, using lots of games. Discussion using Dimensions of Learning for Mastering Language Skills for Reading Dimensions of Learning (DoL) has been used as the framework guiding all teaching and learning in Braith’s Intensive Remediation program. This is because Braith’s weak cognitive processing makes him likely to experience all the common areas of learning failure, i.e., major difficulty with early learning of new skills, building those skills to mastery level and automising them, generalising skills to new contexts, making effective long-term memories of learned skills, and taking skills through to effective use in authentic reading. All instruction has been strongly focussed on achieving effective learning while avoiding these common learning failures for which Braith is so very much at risk. Motivation and Engagement (DoL1, Attitudes and Perceptions) DoL1 continues to be a significant focus for improving Braith’s learning. Braith is an anxious boy, and anxiety reduces his already small processing capacity, thus limiting his learning effectiveness. He panics easily, particularly when presented with ‘sudden’ new learning tasks. When he panics, even simple tasks become very difficult, and Braith makes errors on skills which at other times he does easily. At the current time, Braith is working to meet new tasks head-on without anxiety, focussing on choosing the best strategy for the situation. Braith’s anxiety is likely to be impacting his school learning on an ongoing basis. He worries about what other children might say, and lives in fear of those days when his teacher is away and a supply teacher takes his class, someone who does not understand his needs and might get upset with Braith, viewing the weakness of his work as due to not trying, rather than to Braith’s severe learning difficulties. (Fortunately, for resilient children with language skills weakness, who persist as hard working students, despite low achievement, life after school is often much easier than school. Whereas school is characterised by innumerable new tasks, life after school is vastly more predictable and controllable with far fewer sudden surprises. Once in the workforce, in a career chosen because of areas of strength, perhaps a mechanic or builder, most daily events are not unexpected, and instead are events managed routinely and confidently.) Children with Braith’s profile of weakness are often considered intellectually slow, when this is not the case. With automisation weakness and severe language comprehension weakness, such children may score at very low levels on tests of intellectual skills, however normal ability shows in their functional life skills being at an age appropriate level. In some cases, it may be that the low scores they achieve are due less to low ability and more to low working memory and automisation weakness, combined with anxiety and associated weakness in coping with sudden new tasks. Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (DoL5, Habits of Mind) Metacognitive Thinking empowers cognitive learning, and Braith has been encouraged to know the what, why and how of his difficulties, and the skills which is he learning. This has included use of visual supports 93
and mnemonics. Braith’s visual-spatial processing system is very effective, and mnemonics use this system. In areas where Braith really struggled to do early skill development, they have proved very effective: • Braith uses quite complicated mnemonics for remembering the spellings of words like Wednesday. • When struggling with teens/tys, a mnemonic was developed of ‘teen’ being teenage numbers and T (‘ty’) being the shape of the T walking stick an old man uses as he gets older (70 =7Ty, 80 = 8Ty, etc). The chart Braith drew to establish this mnemonic for himself has now been used as a powerful help by many teachers supporting the many other children who struggle with a muddled number system due to mixing up teens/ty numbers. • A child’s calendar and foldable paper clock were very helpful for Braith building a sense of days (yesterday, the other day, tomorrow, next Tuesday) and telling time using quarters and to/past. • A glue bottle and feltpens were useful items providing structure for ‘wrapping nouns’ with two adjectives (feltpens) before the noun (glue), and one long clause or phrase (feltpen) after the noun (glue): noun → adjective adjective noun postmodifying phrase or clause, e.g., the dog → the incredibly big dog slobbering all over my foot. • Sorting the names of days and months on paper was much easier than talking about them, when Braith was learning to ‘count’ forward and backward by days and months. Focussed Skill Development (DoL2, Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge) More instructional time has been spent on DoL2 than any other Dimension, because of the major difficulty which Braith has in initial mastering of skills. The skills which have been taught and their subskills are discussed below in conjunction with DoL3. Skills have been monitored for mastery, long-term retention and generalisation. Scaffolded Generalising of Skills (DoL3, Extending and Refining Knowledge) While DoL2 has taken most learning time, DoL3 has been used strategically to maximise learning of multiple skills, and achieve lots of semi-authentic reading. When so much time has to be spent on DoL2, there really isn’t enough time to achieve the same amount of time on DoL4 (Extensive Authentic Skill Usage) that healthy progress readers achieve. Fortunately, strategic use of DoL3 mitigates impact of lack of DoL4 time. The language skills which Braith has built using a strong DoL focus include • Echo Reading (see Word-Reading Principle 3.d.iii): o Initially with Braith’s mum doing a lot of word saying, but with Braith enjoying reading texts he wanted to read and enjoyed. o Then with Braith steadily increasing the proportion of words he reads. • Repeated reading of texts: o With Rapid Reads made using the words which Braith made errors on. o With Braith excited about increasing his score (Words per minute, or time for whole text). o Initially focussed on speed, but later focussed on fluency, building phrasing and expression. • Use of complex sentences: o Earliest conjunctions (when, because), then less frequent conjunctions (although, despite). o First using simple two clause sentences, then extending those sentences by adding extra clauses giving reasons using written conjunctions (so because if) as prompts for adding those extra clauses. • Brainstorming sentences from given words: o First focussing just on brainstorming three quick ideas, the being ‘Every sentence has to start with a different word.’ o Writing down the different words Braith used to start sentences (with/without scaffolding) and using that list for ideas for other sentence starts. o Later, encouraging sentences starting with conjunctions. • Building skill writing phonemic approximations of brave spelling (Guestimating, Galletly, 2001): o The rule being ‘Every syllable MUST have a vowel’, no pressure on vowel being correct. o Later (as cognitive load reduced), moving to wanting all consonants appropriate, again with no pressure re correct spelling. o Later, teaching marking spelling by percentages not Tick/Cross (Take 5% off for each grapheme that needs changing. Tick/Cross focusses on unsuccessful learning as lots of crosses happen. Marking by percentages focusses on success, and children often move to 94
•
• • •
•
active interest on ‘Which bit?’ needs to be changed, thus applying a whole cup of thinking space to the one part of the word that needs to be focussed on.) Moving to use of a sentence writing book, with rules of one sentence per week, spelling doesn’t count, use extravagant vocabulary (big words), and write on every second line (so you can add great words in). o Then rewarding every three clap word (3-syllable word) which Braith wrote with a vowel (any vowel) in each syllable. (Rewarding three clap words seems to expand writing vocabulary generally: children use more rare words in their writing). o Then choosing a few useful big words whose spelling Braith mastered (gigantic, fantastic, amazing), with double rewards if those words had a vowel per syllable plus were spelt correctly (It seems likely that having a small bank of long words children write effortlessly in written expression, will encourage writing of more big words, particularly when there is no penalty for incorrect spelling). o Moving to extra rewards being earned for any wonderful conjunctions or wrapped nouns. o Moving to extra rewards for any sentence with ‘powerful punctuation’. Playing with Synonym Sentences: Saying or writing a given sentence using different words. Playing with WORDY (Language Skills, Principle 13) and WORDY words using Memory games of quite sophisticated synonyms (freezing, brisk, icy, chilly, crisp), with the knowledge level (W, WO), written on each and changed as knowledge quickly increased. Using 6-stage Narrative Structure (Orientation, Precipitating Event, Complication, Climax, Resolution, Conclusion) to talk about stories which have been read (Writing using narrative terms and structure is a very high cognitive load task, but using the terms when talking about a story has very low cognitive load, while building skill and confidence with narrative structure). Using inferential reasoning: o Discussing On the Lines, Between the Lines, and Beyond the Lines aspects of texts. o Playing with idioms, drawing their On the Lines and Between the Lines meanings. o Enjoying jokes and their two meanings: set up (I know!) and punchline (That tricked me!)
Braith has made good steady progress, though he continues to have significant weakness in both wordreading and language skills, and is likely to have high needs for support across all school years. At age 11 years, his word-reading skills are now at a 6yrs 10mth to 7yrs 3mths level. His reading comprehension is now at a 7yrs 2mth level, with listening comprehension level considerably higher. His progress rate has improved too, with 15 months progress made in spelling in the last 15 months, and 10mths gain in reading comprehension. While these gains may seem small, in reality they are huge. Braith now reads lots of texts relatively independently, and enjoys independent reading. His reading comprehension is increasing, seen in his enjoying his independent reading. His maths is improving impressively, with him now working through the times tables, and mastering them one set at a time. He can now read many maths word problems with relatively little help. His skill on expressing himself to explain things that have happened continues to improve. He is making gains, and copes increasingly well with class lessons. It’s also likely that, as his skills build, Braith will build confidence in his learning and become less anxious, with less panic when encountering new tasks. This will have a big effect in allowing greater learning progress. Braith’s severe difficulties are probably evidence that expecting ‘all’ children to read at grade level is possibly too high an expectation, given a small percentage of children have very severe reading weakness. But Braith will continue to improve, and technology likely to empower him as a reader is becoming more accessible, e.g., he is loving using Dragon 13 speech-to-text software for first draft ‘writing’ (www.nuance.com), and now enjoys editing his texts, and may try using a reading pen in the near future. For children with severest reading weakness, it’s important to realise that the goal may not be that far away, e.g., even an 8 year reading age can be sufficient to do an apprenticeship, if provided with learning support on the basis of having Dyslexia, and school-based apprenticeships now allow students to be focussing on their areas of strength and strong potential, at a much younger age than was previously possible. While learning has been and still is a massive struggle, Braith is likely to be a real success story.
95
Example 2. Language Skills Instruction for the Seven ‘Case Study’ Children. Of the seven children, four have language skills weakness and need instruction building language skills for reading if they are to achieve effective reading comprehension. Sophia, Henry and Benny have healthy language skills, however Nell, Braith, Ethan and Joel have significantly weak language skills. The profiles and instructional needs of these four children with language weakness are shown in the table below.
The profiles and needs of the 4 children with language skills weakness [RC: Reading Comprehension LS: Language Skills WR: Word Reading M&E: Motivation & Engagement]
COMBINED SKILLS WEAKNESS
LANGUAGE SKILLS WEAKNESS
Lower ability Mixed weakness reader
Severe Language Disorder (Mixed WR & LC reader)
Hyperlexic reader
Late-emerging comprehension difficulties
Nell
Braith
Ethan
Joel
WR low LS low RC low Maths low M & E varies Low general ability. Mild intellectual weakness. Low achievement in all areas.
WR & Spelling very low WR very high WR good LS low LS low LS good Y1, low Y4 RC low RC low RC good Y1, low Y4 M & E varies M & E varies M & E varies Maths low Maths varies Maths varies Good ability ‘masked’ by Great word-reading and Good literal comprehension. severely low school spelling skills. Poor Poor vocabulary or/and achievement. inferential language skills inferential comprehension. so has very poor reading Significant difficulties Did well in Prep-Y1 reading comprehension, with language skills, due to reading particularly from Yr3, due comprehension being literal reading & written to texts being far more expression. comprehension with high diverse and requiring picture language supports. Often extremely severe good vocabulary and word-reading difficulties Struggled from Yr3, due to inferential language skills. texts being far more diverse (Dyslexia – may have May have an ASD giftedness too). and requiring good Usually severe difficulties diagnosis or show traits of vocabulary and inferential ASD or weak social skills, language skills. Weak with comprehension & and understanding how written expression. logical reasoning. other people think. May or may not have had lots of Speech Language Pathology intervention as a young child. All four children need attention focussed on building Literal Comprehension, Inferential Reasoning and Vocabulary, including the building of background knowledge on many areas, including social awareness. Using the example of vocabulary: • Vocabulary instruction conducted using children’s literature, e.g., Beck & McKeown’s Text Talk series, with children building familiarity with a large number of children’s illustrated picture books, while learning six Tier 2 Vocabulary words per book, while also thinking on text structure, characters, predicting, and answering questions about the books used. • Synonym Sentences: writing a provided sentence in new and creative ways, using synonyms, idioms, and subtlety. 96
o
• •
Being able to say the same concept in multiple ways is a powerful language skill, supporting children to be able to edit their writing, rework the wording of text to greater effect. Direct vocabulary instruction, perhaps using a year-level list of useful Tier 2 vocabulary words. Building children’s metacognitive awareness that words are known at different levels (perhaps using the concept of WORDY, with five knowledge levels, from W: What’s That? To Y:Yes! I’m an expert on this word.)
Further useful strategies for use in building the children’s language skills are as follows:
Language Skills Instruction Useful for Supporting Reading Development COMBINED SKILLS WEAKNESS LANGUAGE SKILLS WEAKNESS Lower ability Mixed weakness reader
Severe Language Disorder (Mixed WR & LC reader)
Hyperlexic reader
Late-emerging comprehension difficulties
Nell
Braith
Ethan
Joel
Build literal and inferential language skills. Teach child that the aim of reading is not to get to the end of the words, but to get the message that the writer wrote. Teach SCORE as an overarching Reading Comprehension strategy, then teach individual reading comprehension skills (e.g., summarising, predicting), using DoL2-4, and adding them into SCORE. Teach vocabulary both as direct instruction, and student as vocab sleuth, using WORDY words. Teach inferential language and reasoning skills, e.g., • Tighten Your Thinking: A schoolwide tool for building tighter thinking. • Questions, conversations & discussions. • On, Between, Beyond the Lines (Three Level Guide). • Idioms (Sayings, Figures of Speech). • Inferential Language Made Visible: Draw On vs Between Lines perspectives. • Thinking Bubbles, Talking Bubbles: What the character is thinking versus saying. • Finding ‘Beyond the Lines’ thinking in picture books: Revisit previously read texts, this time focussing on inferential thinking and reasoning: it happens best in second & later reads. • Jokes and humour: have children draw pictures for a) the set-up (the listener’s prediction of what the answer to the joke is), and b) the punchline (the unexpected surprise meaning). Teach expressive language skills for writing, using a ‘Talk Curriculum’ then move them into writing: • Compound & complex sentences. • Creating sentences from given words. • Complex description: noun wrapping (describers before and after nouns, verb wrapping.
As a relatively new teacher, I didn’t know much about teaching language skills for reading. I didn’t study it at university, and it wasn’t a major focus in the early-years classrooms I worked in. This project has opened my eyes to realise the significance of language skills for reading. Participating Teacher
97
Example 3. Short Videos explaining Language Disorder (LD) What is SLI? 4 minute Youtube Video Published on May 17, 2012 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pqu7w6t3Rmo Becky Clark, RALLI editor and a speech and language therapist, explains what a Language Disorder is. The types of difficulties a child can have, and how diagnosing such difficulties can present a challenge.
Signs of SLI 8 minute Youtube Video Published on Jul 17, 2012 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAsf_Wqjz4g This film is for teachers and other professionals working in education or advising on educational issues. The film describes possible signs of SLI in the classroom. Feel free to use the film and accompanying slide show within your school to help develop staff awareness of SLI.
Example 4. Narrative Retell Activities a. 4 Step Narrative Summary: Somebody/Wanted/But/So. b. Story Mountain. c. 5 W + H Using Who? When? Where? What? Why? How? to ask and answer questions about a text which is being read. d. Q Chart: Extending questioning using auxiliary verbs. e. Dramatic & Cartoon Strip Freeze Frames (for summarising beginning, middle and end of stories using static images)
CLIMAX
COMPLICATION
RESOLUTION
PRECIPITATING EVENT
ORIENTATION
CONCLUSION
98
Somebody/Wanted/But/So Downloaded from http://reading.ecb.org 27.11.14 *Source: Ellery, V. (2005). Creating strategic readers. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association. Purpose: To summarize story elements. 1. Have students fold a sheet of paper in fourths (or use our graphic organizer) and write the following headings on the four sections: Somebody, Wanted, But, So. 2. Using a story that the students have read, have students complete their individual charts by writing a statement under each section: • Somebody (identify the character) • Wanted (describe the character’s goal) • But (describe a conflict that hinders the character) • So (describe the resolution of the conflict) Remind students to focus on information that is most significant. Lesson variations: Place A4 laminated versions of Somebody, Wanted, But, So onto the floor and students ‘step out’ the story, retelling orally. Place four Hula-Hoops on the floor, and label each hoop with one of the headings (Somebody, Wanted, But, So). After reading a story, have the students stand inside the hoops and summarise each corresponding aspect as they hop through the hoops.
Example 5. Teacher Ideas for Developing Language Skills for Reading Question 1 Which long term resources & strategies have you used and implemented in teaching Vocabulary and Language Skills to ‘at-risk’ readers that seem successful? Why do you think this? (✓ means similar responses from more than 1 group) Strategies Class / Teacher level Structured morning talk (set topic) Use Question Matrix – extend every topic e.g., How did I get to school today? - graphs/ background knowledge building/ anecdotes Wide open topics Monitor students' verbal skills e.g., practised, verbal Time to talk (air space) lots of oral (talk) Metalinguistics program linked to concepts /to rhymes. Nursery rhymes, fingerplays ✓ Music connection really works ✓ Pause before writing: 'everyone think of...pause...think...tell a friend...tell another friend, then run off to write (orally say it multiple times before writing) Haileybury study tour – Explicit Instruction teaching – practice makes perfection words repeated every day using ppt – super-fast, super-focussed with levels of successful, engaged learning- seeing it again, again, again – building automaticity through teaching micro skills ✓✓ STRIVE – saying word, action ✓✓ Teacher-given activities, student-made activities, friendly definitions, highlighting and studying a Tier2 word for a week, revisiting it later many times, creating great complex sentences, finding words in books 3 level guides. Blooms’ taxonomy works well Use interactive books and create activities /Qs to use building Bloom's 1-5 and 3 level guide levels 1-3 Humour, jokes, subtlety, idioms have tended to be ad hoc – do if covered or if you have ESL students – 'on the hop' ✓ Students make own dictionary – can be meaning, vocab, word reading, ‘ Powerful Words’ book Transformations – cut up sentences String sentences The 'curtain ring' resource Pat Donnelly's 'Inking Your Thinking'
99
SCORE Reading on the Same Page Linger Longer ✓✓✓ Act It Out – visualise Sight words – goals Explicit processes (e.g., SCORE, Reading on the Same Page) enable student driven sessions OLLY – early language program Broad reading – 'bubble-along' – Book whispering Guided reading (teacher directed) Mem Fox's Ten Reading Commandments ‘ reading to..’ picture books – favourites 'over and over' DART – synonym sentences and antonym sentences ✓✓ Functional grammar Verbal games – 'finish the sentence' start with 'if' 'when' 'while' Drama – role play / characters / Mantle of EXPERT Engagement through games ✓ ‘Brave’ spelling Syllabification – every syllable has a vowel ✓ Book Walk – t guides discussion to brainstorm to connect with the book before reading it – picture walk, vocab, personal experiences, alternate words, genre Vocabulary activities from class book – include an ‘interesting word activity’ on homework sheet and discuss in class – word is used that week in speaking and writing Fast rhyming drill ‘Soupy’ sight words alliteration Modelling – T uses a wide variety of new and developing vocab Whole school level Well-trained support staff Teacher training Whole school approach – core programs Small reading groups Mem Fox's book to all new parents Question 2 Which long term resources and strategies have you used and implemented in teaching Vocabulary and Language Skills to ‘at-risk’ readers that don’t seem to be working? Why do you think this? Comments from teachers We wouldn’t do it (vocab and language skills strategies) long term if it didn’t work We need more small group time with the teacher – whole class activities / discussion often don’t help these learners as they ‘drop-out’ / chew their shoelaces / don’t participate Increased resourcing is needed to provide the instructional intensity needed. The students who need the instruction aren’t engaged because we can’t reach them because we’re ‘managing’ the class – our cups are full with behaviour management etc. so we can’t get to do the intensive work with a teacher working with the weak kids, not the T-aide – the ‘expert’ isn’t doing the instruction – for expert instruction, the t needs to work with smaller groups Depriving kids of correct vocab – we underestimate what kids are capable of – try to simplify things but necessitated – use ‘right’ words Need for synonyms – not just divide up all the synonyms that mean ‘x’ Copying words and definitions out of dictionaries Incidental vocab lessons (one-off learning experience and not practised) Home reading – inconsistent parent support ✓ Independent work Cloze activities – isolated Find-a-words Using phonic readers and readers without quality literature celebration ‘ Need more time to find out what is working well’
100
Question 3 What other options may be valuable to explore for the teaching of Vocabulary & Language Skills for 'at-risk' readers? Comments from Teachers
Whole school vocabulary program OLLY program ✓ PMAP program – building oral vocab Support-a-Talker ✓ Parent program/ involvement A full-time teacher aide per 2 classes (at least) Homework help for ‘at-risk’ readers (those who don’t often do homework) i.e. sight words / reading Collegial development of reading resources (time) ‘ Teach the last first’ (preteach slower learners before the class meets the new learning) Word walls – word with a picture from learnings in class STRIVE program with C2C books Recognise when a sentence doesn’t make sense – what does it need? E.g., words cut up, put them in order Lexile reading program PROBE Inferential language Language made Visible Teacher talking modelling inferential thinking e.g., texts with lots of slang – build excitement - kids bring sample – share Develop a shared vocabulary for inferential language so T and children can use it Hailebury School – big on shared vocab No pet names – use real terms and lots of instruction Sacrificing creativity – focus on spelling (even later correcting of spelling rather than commenting on ideas expressed) Focus should be ‘Get your Fine Mind down on Paper!’
It has been powerful to reflect on the many language skills involved in reading and literacy tasks. Kids love doing Talk Curriculum activities, verbalising and drama. They get much higher Instructional Intensity, and they’re so much more engaged than when doing tasks involving reading and writing. We’re thinking far more on how we can build literacy skills using Talk Curriculum activities. Participating Teacher
101
SECTION 4. USING THE PRINCIPLES 2017-2067: WHERE TO FROM HERE? This project’s focus was on gathering and collating instructional principles which are or seem researchbased, and which teachers affirmed and modified, through considering these principles plus their personal experience working with at-risk readers. Importantly and interestingly, there was no dissention regarding any principles, and instead strong collaborative honing of some principles, or adding of subprinciples. The project did not focus on proving the effectiveness of the instructional principles listed in this document, and only a very small proportion of the teachers involved in the project were monitored in their trialling of the principles. As such, the principles detailed in Section 3 are principles towards optimising instruction, more than principles of optimal instruction. As stated in the introduction to this document, optimal instruction for at-risk readers in Australian schools will not be achieved until, firstly, optimal instruction and its many dimensions are more fully understood, and, secondly, this optimal instruction has become the Australian norm, i.e., achieved routinely in the vast majority of Australian schools, in their usual school circumstances of classroom instruction, not just in experimental circumstances, exceptional schools, or a small number of schools, but routinely in perhaps at least 80% of state schools. Australian classroom reading instruction for at-risk readers in many schools at the current time may not be strongly research-based. There are two key reasons for this. The first rests on school and education-system knowledge: many teachers and schools may have little awareness of some important principles of instruction that do have a considerable research basis. The second rests on research knowledge: many if not most principles of instruction suggested as appropriate by research-evidence still lack an ‘applied’ research-base, as most have not yet been sufficiently established as effective in usual school circumstances in a range of Australian schools. This document is written towards achieving both these ends, supporting educators and researchers to acquire and build the knowledge needed, towards optimising reading instruction. There are a very large number of principles of reading instruction included in Section 3. This creates the question for schools and teachers of ‘Where do we start?’ Towards this end, it’s valuable for educators to do three things: explore the principles towards establishing priority principles for use in your school or classroom; consider the thoroughness of the research establishing these principles; and consider how use of these principles can best be explored for your school. This section briefly explores the issues impacting these areas: firstly, the still-felt impacts of the curious relationship of educational research to classroom research-based instruction over the past six decades; secondly, needs for awareness of the many gaps in current knowledge on research-based classroom reading instruction for at-risk readers; and thirdly, the importance of teachers and researchers better understanding each other’s fields, and working collaboratively in useful research, which has strong practical importance, for guiding school reading and literacy instruction.
The relationship of educational research to classroom reading instruction The relationship of educational research to research-based classroom instruction has been highly variable over the past half-century, and this has strongly impacted potential optimising of classroom reading instruction for at-risk readers. In the 1950s and 1960s, educational research was overwhelmingly quantitative, experimental research, using tight controlling of variables as, at that time, qualitative and mixed-methods research were not much thought on. This research focussed on establishing factors likely to optimise classroom reading development, providing considerable useful information. It continued unchallenged until the 1970s, when the Whole Language movement began its dominant role in education (e.g., see Pressley, 2006; Pressley et al., 2001). While Whole Language was predominantly a philosophy of educational practice for classroom instruction, it also strongly impacted educational research, as it actively rejected experimental research and use of statistics to evaluate educational practice. With its strong emphasis on reading having to be meaningful, Whole Language completely changed the path of the Reading Wars, dissension on word-reading instruction in Anglophone nations, ongoing over the past century. Prior to Whole Language, Reading Wars dissension focussed on how best to teach word reading, usually debates over systematic phonics versus the Look-Say 102
(whole-word sight-word) method, both using explicit instruction. Whole Language completely routed this debate, instead moving dissention over to whether or not explicit word-reading instruction in any form was appropriate. Whole Language changed school reading instruction markedly in many ways, with its emphasis away from explicit instruction, and onto children being active participants leading learning, becoming proficient readers through engaging in meaningful reading. In early-years reading instruction, its strong emphasis was on children reading meaningful texts, not decontextualised words, and it was considered inappropriate to teach word-reading using single decontextualised words and word parts. Over time, this gave rise to introduction of fully-predictable followed by semi-predictable books being used as school and homereaders, and use of questioning using the Three Cueing System for children struggling to read individual words (e.g., Clay, 1993). Over the past six decades, word-reading instruction has thus been highly controversial, with two conflicting instructional perspectives: • One view, building from extensive research evidence, emphasises the importance of including strong explicit teaching of word reading using single words and word parts, within literacy instruction, especially for children with at-risk of or experiencing word-reading difficulties. • The other view, currently not reflecting a sufficient research base for reading instruction of at-risk and struggling readers, considers such instruction to be highly inappropriate, and likely to lead to ‘barking at print’ (highly efficient word reading accompanied by extremely poor comprehension). The Whole Language movement changed literacy instruction in Australia irrevocably. Whilst many of its changes were positive, its unfortunate approach to word-reading instruction, treating both teaching of decontextualised words and findings of experimental research as irrelevant and inappropriate, had ongoing inappropriate effects lasting to the current day. In Australia, over time, the Whole Language approach was replaced by the Socio-Cultural approach to literacy instruction: this built valuing of explicit instruction and building children’s metacognition in most areas of literacy instruction, and enabled increasing re-acceptance of experimental research being a valid means of reading research. It also built the valuing of explicit instruction in most areas of literacy instruction. Unfortunately, however, its advocating of explicit instruction and building of metacognition did not extend to word-reading instruction including systematic word-reading instruction. Because of this, Whole Language attitudes of systematic word reading instruction being irrelevant and unnecessary have continued within the Socio-Cultural approach. The ongoing Reading Wars controversy generated by Whole Language philosophy and practices has negatively impacted current word-reading instruction in many ways: • There has been ongoing contention about word-reading instruction, continuing to the current time. • In focussing on narrow issues (e.g., explicit word reading instruction versus Whole Language reading instruction), this dissension to a certain extent trivialised early-years reading instruction, preventing deeper exploration of early-years reading development and difficulties and optimising of instruction. As Pressley et al (2001, p.27) comment, ‘First grade seems reduced to a trivial experience when it is conceived of as the debate between skills-first and more holistic instruction. In contrast, whenever we have been in first grade classrooms, they seem to us to be very complex places, such complexity suggesting to us that excellent first grade instruction may not be due to just skills-first or a more holistic orientation, [and] the possibility that there might be a number of ways in which excellent first grade instruction is different from more typical first grade instruction. The hypothesis was supported by the development evidence [we found in our studies,] summarised later in this book.’
•
This trivialising is seen in Australian governments having justified providing unreasonably low resourcing for early-years reading instruction, perhaps due to assuming word-reading is of little consequence, in keeping with Whole Language and Sociocultural educational philosophies. Insufficiency of funding is discussion in reports commissioned by the Australian Primary Principal’s Association (e.g., Angus, Olney & Ainley, 2007), and the 2016 report of Australia’s Senate Standing 103
•
• •
• •
•
•
Committee on Education and Employment, Access to real learning: The impact of policy, funding and culture on students with disability (Senate Committee, 2016), which discusses reading disability being state and federal governments’ ‘hidden disability’, and major insufficiencies in educational supports for children with disabilities, including learning disabilities (Knight & Galletly, 2017). Trivialising of early-years instruction, perhaps due to Whole Language emphases, is also seen in governments’ seeming failure to recognise that, as with New Zealand, it is likely Australia’s excessively high proportions of weak readers, relative to highest achieving nations, is a key factor preventing improving of reading outcomes in international reading comparison studies. Governments seem to pressure schools and teachers to improve reading outcomes, as though this were a simple matter, when in fact it is an extremely complex situation to resolve. Trivialising is also seen in the lack of Australian research exploring the extent to which word-reading development and difficulties contribute to the reading comprehension difficulties of Australian children in NAPLAN, PIRLS and PISA (e.g., Galletly, Knight, Dekkers, & Galletly, 2009). The research-base on word-reading development, difficulties and instruction continued to develop, and further established word-reading skills-development instruction as much needed for at-risk readers, however it was largely ignored for many decades by educators and education systems, and in preservice teacher training. Preservice training has included very variable training on word reading development, difficulties and instruction. This means teachers vary greatly in levels of understanding, skills and confidence for teaching word reading, particularly to at-risk readers and children experiencing difficulties. Many practices which are commonplace today currently lack a sufficient research-base, e.g., o Use of fully-predictable books for an extended time with young at-risk readers not making healthy progress in text reading. o Use of the Three Cueing System and related questioning to support at-risk readers struggling to read unfamiliar words in texts. Many curriculum resources still use Whole Language theoretical bases that lack a sufficient research-base and do not align appropriately with the extensive research supporting researchbased word reading instruction. This can be seen in comparing the First Edition (1995) and Second Edition (2003) of Western Australia’s First Steps reading resources (Western Australian Department of Education, 1997, 2004). The First Edition, which Qld used as its Year 2 Diagnostic Net and Reading Developmental Continua, reflects strong Whole Language philosophy and does not align effectively with the word-reading research-base. Its emphases are similar to those of Reading Recovery (Clay, 1993) and Queensland’s (1991) Support a Reader. Whilst all three of these resources contain excellent activities that are useful and appropriate, they also include inappropriate emphases and relatively inefficient activities, and omit many research-based emphases and activities likely to make reading instruction more effective for at-risk readers. In contrast to its First Edition, the Second Edition of First Steps incorporates and builds from the wordreading research-base, making its emphases and activities likely to be much more effective. For many decades, schools and educators were reluctant to engage with reading researchers wanting to focus on knowledge building towards optimising reading instruction for at-risk readers: this blocked knowledge-building and building of shared vocabularies and mutual understandings between reading researchers and educators. Today this is seen in schools and educators having relatively low confidence for conducting their own research. It is also seen in reading researchers lacking familiarity with the many complexities of school circumstances that mitigate the effects of potentially excellent reading instruction (e.g., Kennedy, 2005). Additionally, it is seen in reading researchers underestimating how difficult it can be to achieve effective reading progress in struggling readers (e.g., Compton et al, 2014; Dion et al., 2010; O’Connor, 2000). As O’Connor (2000, p.53) comments of a school-level research project using research-based instruction, ‘The most important implication of this work may be the effort necessary to maintain nearly normal progress for the children with an initial difficulty in reading…. Within just a few months, most of the children with disabilities and several others lost ground in comparison with the children not at-risk when reading instruction retreated to the status quo. These findings are sobering because we may be seriously overestimating the effects of our short-term interventions on the long-term trajectory of reading growth.’
104
•
•
Some reading research became defensive as researchers, aware of the word-reading research-base and frustrated by how it was being ignored in educational practice in schools and preservice training, focused perhaps more on trying to bring research-based reading instruction into an appropriate role in school reading instruction, and less on ensuring that their research was sufficient. This is seen in aspects of America’s National Reading Panel’s (2000) analysis of readingresearch that, whilst sufficient for at-risk readers, may have been insufficient for drawing conclusions on what constitutes appropriate instruction for healthy-progress and advanced readers. It is also seen in Australia’s 2005 National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy which might have better been termed a national inquiry into the teaching of word reading. Word-reading instruction in Anglophone nations became and has continued to be highly political. This is seen in the UK and US governments mandating word-reading instruction built from the research-base. In Australia it is seen in the 2004 open letter from a large group of Australian reading researchers protesting continuance of inappropriate word-reading emphases and practices (Anderson et al., 2004l), and in the recommendations of the 2005 National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy (DEST, 2005), which seems largely instigated following that open letter. It is also seen in the recommendations of that national inquiry having been largely ignored, as discussed more recently in a 2012 open letter from Australian reading researchers (Bowen et al., 2012).
These issues create value in teachers and schools reflecting on previous versus current thinking on what constitutes effective word-reading instruction, and how this is likely to differ for at-risk, healthy-progress and advanced readers; their background training for word-reading instruction and its impacts on their assumptions and teaching; and the emphases of reading resources which do not promote the value of including explicit instruction and extensive practice of word-reading skills for children in need of wordreading instruction. Whilst inappropriate emphases in instructional resources may have negligible impact on skilled teachers with deep expertise in meeting at-risk readers’ instructional needs, inappropriate emphases have potential to confuse and derail the teaching of inexperienced teachers and teachers who have little background in the value of effective word-reading instruction. While the above might seem a case of unresolvable dilemmas, this is not the case, and it is likely that the practical pragmatism of schools and teachers offers many positive ways forward. Schools are increasingly autonomous in deciding their curriculum directions, and, as commented on by Pressley et al (2001, see quote on page 4 of this document), less swayed by issues of philosophical dissentions. Schools’ focus is children, their development and well-being; there is considerable knowledge available towards achieving the optimising of reading instruction; and this knowledge can potentially be built relatively easily, through a strong mutual focus on school-level research establishing effective reading instruction (e.g., Juel & MindenCupp, 2000, Connor, Piasta et al., 2009; Connor, Morrison et al., 2011; Connor, Morrison et al., 2013).
Needs to fill gaps in research knowledge It is valuable for educators to have good understanding of educational research methods, and there are many useful summaries and discussions of educational research which are worthy reading for both educators and researchers (e.g., Kincheloe & Berry, 2004; Lankshear & Knoebel, 2004; Stanovich, 2013). When educators and schools are unfamiliar with educational research, this can create errors in using educational research. The commonest error is likely to be considering educational practices as wellgrounded in research knowledge, when their research base is flimsy. Reviewing the research base during this project enabled reflecting on the many gaps and weaknesses of current educational research. It also revealed one area of considerable, potentially useful research that had been virtually completely ignored: The strange case of Initial Teaching Alphabet (ITA): Minimal action despite extensive research Perhaps the answer to preventing reading difficulties is to use fully regular spelling when children first start to learn to read, transitioning later to Standard English after they’ve developed proficiency reading and writing using the simplified orthography. We found extensive amounts of research conducted in the 1960s and early 1970s with many thousands of children in hundreds of schools, showing that use of a simplified orthography (in this case, the International Teaching Alphabet, ITA) enabled effective, relatively effortless mastery of reading and writing by children aged four and five years (e.g., see Bushnell, 1971; Downing, 1969; Initial Teaching Alphabet Foundation, 1971; Mazurkiewicz, 1973; Warburton & Southgate, 1969). 105
American studies discussed by Mazurkiewicz (1973) and Bushnell (1971) comment on there being no need for prescriptive teaching or explicit phonics instruction; three times less ITA readers needing to repeat grades; and half as many needing remedial support, with ITA readers needing support only of comprehension, in contrast to ‘traditional orthography’ readers needing remediation for both word reading and comprehension; and smooth transitioning to reading and writing Standard English. As one interviewed teacher commented in Britain’s extensive independent evaluation of the ITA research, where, in 1966, 9% of schools had elected to use ITA, through observing its effects (Warburton & Southgate 1969 p.56): The long uphill grind has been cut out. Reading is more an ordinary part of childhood instead of a chore and so the children take it in their stride. They pick up a book in their free time as they would a paintbrush or jigsaw.
Mazurkiewicz (1973) discusses results from a study of ITA used for eleven years with Year 1 children (14,000 children; three cohorts, each studied for six years), with advantages of ITA being more rapid development of word reading and writing, with significantly advanced word reading skills at much younger ages; children reading prolifically and confidently; children writing more prolifically, confidently and creatively, with advanced vocabulary development. He also comments on no requirement for specific teaching methods, few letter confusion difficulties, and significantly reduced needs for reading remediation. Bushnell additionally comments on positive social-emotional development with children showing advanced confidence, ‘ego-strength’, and learning behaviour. Half a century later, this relatively effortless, expedited, confident reading and literacy development would certainly seem the aim of optimal reading instruction for young Australian at-risk readers. The ITA findings are very much in keeping with crosslinguistic research since 1990 showing how easy it is for children to master word reading and writing and move into effective literacy in the many nations that use regular orthographies (e.g., Knight, Galletly & Gargett, 2017, Submitted a-e). As Aro concludes (2004, p.35), A transparent orthography treats even a phonologically immature reader in a lenient manner. It helps in explicating the alphabetic principles, the correspondence between spoken and written language...it does not burden the beginning reader with a plethora of correspondence rules; and together with systematic phonics teaching it provides the beginning reader with a simple tool for successful word recognition.
The ITA findings also align with the perspectives of the Literacy Component Model and the emphases of Orthographic Advantage Theory and Cognitive Load Theory, on the pivotal role of keeping cognitive load low for young, vulnerable learners. Indeed, consideration of ITA research findings using perspectives of cognitive load and crosslinguistic research findings suggests value in new research establishing the extent to which regular English orthographies expedite literacy development (Knight, Galletly & Gargett, 2017). It is interesting too to see the perspective of the 1960s, just prior to the Whole Language education revolution, that the Reading Wars seem primarily due to it being so very difficult to resolve reading instruction in Anglophone nations, when orthographic complexity makes it so difficult to optimise reading development (Sir Cyril Burt, Foreword, Warburton & Southgate, 1969, p.ix): Reading is by far the most important subject that the young child learns at school. It is also the most difficult to teach. ‘One in six of our boys and girls’, so a recent report assures us, ‘leaves school unable to read as that phrase is ordinarily understood – a higher proportion than any other civilised country.’ Nor are the reasons far to seek. English, owing to its composite origin, partly Anglo-Saxon, partly Norman-French, with later borrowings from a dozen different tongues, has a more erratic orthography than any other contemporary language. As a result, ‘the problem of the best reading method’ has formed a scholastic battleground for generations – ‘a field strewn with lost causes and littered with exploded ideas’.
There are issues present regarding the ITA research which urge caution by schools, rather than a rush to using fully regular English orthographies. In addition to children needing ample reading resources using the orthography, importantly, the research on ITA seems to have stopped very abruptly in the early 1970s, and 106
it is difficult to discern the cause of this abrupt halt. It may have been the ascendancy of Whole Language, as comments are made in some documents about most criticism being made from those most removed from ITA classrooms, with strongest enthusiasm from those most closely involved (e.g., Warburton & Southgate, 1969). It may have been education department and school decisions made due to some studies showing that children’s early advantages from ITA levelled out after a few years. However no documents of the time were found stating this, or discussing the abrupt end of ITA usage; and this seems unlikely as it was early reading development, not later literacy advantage, that was the focus and priority of the ITA research, originally commissioned by the British government to explore whether early literacy development could be made easier for young children and less traumatic for at risk readers. Most curiously, the very extensive research on ITA has been ignored by reading researchers to the present time, with no mention in reading research reviews of the very large extent of ITA research, and its promising findings on expediting early literacy development. While, for now, the answer is ‘More research needed!’, the ITA research certainly confirms instructional principles of managing cognitive load and reducing confusion during early learning, and making learning easy for young and at-risk children. It also suggests likelihood that a pivotal factor in current high proportions of struggling readers may be very young age when starting word reading instruction, thus low working-memory and low resilience for complex learning; when meeting the high cognitive load of learning to read English’s highly complex orthography (Knight, Galletly & Gargett, 2017). The ITA research also suggests value in re-exploring whether there really is good potential for expediting literacy development for at-risk readers, in use of regular English orthographies, e.g., ITA, colour-coding orthographies, and modern regular orthographies. As an example, Fleksispel (Galletly, 2005) is a free-to-use 40 GPC, modern, fully-regular orthography available for exploration, use and modification by educators and researchers. It seems likely modern fonts integrating ITA features (no capitals, b & d not confusable) and Flexispel features (uses modern keyboard fonts, offers multi-stage transitioning, to keep cognitive load lower) may work well both for beginning readers and older readers still struggling with word reading and writing. Korea, Japan, Taiwan and China, Asian nations which use fully regular orthographies prior to, then parallel with their complex logographic orthographies (e.g., Kanji, which is much more complex than English) provide a useful modern parallel for Anglophone nations considering exploring use of regular orthographies. These nations do impressively well in international reading comparisons at Year 4 (Progress in International Literacy Studies, PIRLS; Thomson et al., 2012), and age 15 (Program for International Student Assessment, PISA; Thomson, de Bortoli, & Buckley, 2013), showing far fewer weak readers than Australia, New Zealand, and other Anglophone nations. The usual situation: Action taken based on insufficient research The modus operandi for Initial Teaching Alphabet (ITA) research, discussed in the inset above, was extensive rigourous research studies in school circumstances, with findings established in lots of different school circumstances and school systems. Unfortunately, the opposite situation seems currently the norm, with too little research having been conducted on many areas of reading instruction. This creates difficulties for schools trying to decide whether principles of instruction, and programs using them, have a sufficient research base for schools to accept them as valid and well established by research. It is well established in research that findings established in experimental and quasi-experimental studies often don’t translate well into the complexity of usual school circumstances, where many factors impact on whether children will achieve effective learning from specific instructional emphases (Kennedy, 2005). It is also often found in research that healthy findings found immediately after experimental interventions often become much less significant over time (e.g., see Stanovich, 2013). Further, as discussed above, it is likely that reading researchers may have overestimated ease of transferability of experimental research findings into effective school reading instruction (Compton et al., 2014; Dion et al., 2010; O’Connor, 2000). Because of factors like these, to be accepted as established for Australian school-level instruction, findings of research studies done in controlled conditions, or in schools in other nations, need to be replicated and found valid and enduring in a range of Australian school circumstances. Experimental and quasiexperimental studies suggest the principles of instruction, then Applied Research in a range of Australian school contexts needs to explore whether those findings also are obtained in school circumstances. 107
Research funding in Australia is incredibly low, and has been so for many decades. Combined with the Whole Language era of school reluctance to work with researchers, this has meant that too little applied research has been done at school-level in Australia. Thus, while many research studies give indications of instructional principles likely to be effective at school level, those research studies were usually conducted in other nations, or in experimental conditions, far more optimal and controlled than is commonly experienced in Australian classrooms (Knight, Galletly, & Gargett, submitted-f): Many research findings provide only an indication of what might work in schools, not conclusive findings established as effective for schools. This is because instruction conducted in research studies often differs from usual school instruction in major ways. When considering research findings, it is therefore useful to consider key factors that increase and decrease the relevance of research findings to school-level literacy instruction… constraints on subject selection, research instruction usually using more optimal teaching circumstances, studies exploring too few variables, researchers overestimating applicability of research findings, insufficient control groups, and needs to study long-term effects. These factors strongly influence whether effectiveness found in research studies is likely to be similarly achieved in school settings.
Examples of programs, and principles not yet sufficiently explored for school usefulness are as follows: • The Response to Intervention (RTI) three-tiered model of successfully more intensive instruction: RTI is well established in research (e.g., Mellard, Frey, & Woods, 2012; Mesmer & Mesmer, 2008), with Level 1, Core Instruction, being highly-effective, classroom reading instruction; Level 2, Skills Building Intervention, being focussed more-intensive, usually small group intervention for children not responding sufficiently well at Level 1; and Level 3, Intensive Remediation, being highly intensive, often one: one, expert intervention for children not progressing sufficiently using Level 2 instruction. Whilst, internationally, studies have suggested the needed resourcing parameters for these three levels of instruction to be effective, no Australian research was found exploring what might constitute the resource and training levels which schools need, if they are to achieve effective instruction at each of the model’s three levels of intervention. • Word-reading instruction: Whilst it is well-established that at-risk children need highly effective word-reading instruction, very little published research was found on the word-reading levels of Australian children; Australian school-level classroom word-reading instruction; the achievement levels of children using different methods of word-reading instruction; and the relationship between children’s word-reading achievement and their reading comprehension achievement (Galletly, 2008). These might be relatively easily established, using available school data. • Low-progress children: Schools and teachers often feel guilty when, despite their best efforts and what seems to be evidence-based instruction, a sizable group of weakest readers make little to no progress. However, even in research circumstances, studies of Anglophone readers usually find a group of nonresponders, and these studies usually use a restricted clientele, often excluding children with behaviour, inattention or intellectual difficulties (e.g., Compton et al, 2014; Dion et al., 2010; O’Connor, 2000; Torgesen, 2000). When experimental instruction restricted to lesscomplex children (rather than the full gamut of children attending schools) still finds some children making minimal progress with best-practice instruction, there are clearly needs for research towards establishing the levels of resourcing and types of instruction needed for effective reading instruction for children with complex needs making limited progress in school circumstances. • Time spent reading, automisation weakness, and Learned Helplessness: Little to no research findings were found on some factors which teachers in the Bridging the Gap project felt were important, e.g., the impact on children’s reading development and instructional needs, of three factors: time spent reading texts of manageable ease (a major instructional factor in Australian schools); automisation weakness (difficulty mastering reading subskills to a sufficiently proficient level, such that skills become forgotten over time); and Learned Helplessness (inner belief that one is not actually capable of effective learning and mastery of a particular skill or area). There seems need for research on these areas, which might be done relatively easily using school-level research. • Some widely-used principles of instruction lack a sufficient research-base, e.g., questioning using the three cueing system when weak readers struggle to read words; slow-progress readers 108
•
spending extended time using fully-predicable books; and children encouraged to read words just from thinking on their first letter, rather than looking fully at the word (e.g., Clay, 1993). When considered using thinking on Cognitive Load Theory, Successful Engaged Learning, and Instructional Intensity, these practices don’t seem positive for struggling readers, such that it would be valuable for school-level research to explore their usefulness for at-risk and struggling readers, versus advanced and healthy-progress readers, and other alternative reading principles, e.g., o Thinking on Task Load for children reading only fully predictable books, it can be seen that children’s attention is focussed away from reading words, and instead onto ‘reading’ the illustrations and remembering and repeating the sentence stem. o Thinking on using three-cueing system questions for difficult words, as opposed to e.g., Echo Reading (Word Reading Principle: Section 2, 3.d.iii; Galletly, 2014), where a proficient reader says all difficult words, thus maximising time on successful reading), it can be seen that when meeting a difficult word during text reading, children’s processing capacity is low, due to thinking on multiple text aspects; children often don’t respond well to questioning when processing capacity is low; and time and Instructional Intensity are being allocated to when the child is being unsuccessful, thus reducing time reading successfully. Schools often move to using commercial programs which they think have a strong research-base, when in fact the research is not overly positive, or is merely preliminary research. As an example, whilst Reading Recovery (Clay, 1993), does have extensive research with positive findings, there is also a large research base of studies showing the program to be insufficiently effective (e.g., Baker et al., 2002). Other commercial programs use valid research-based instructional practices but often their research-base can really only be considered as preliminary research, as the studies have usually only compared the program’s effectiveness against the status quo, rather than with similarlyresourced reading-instruction and teaching expertise using alternative resources and activities. As discussed in the Phase 2 Discussion Paper, and elsewhere (Knight, Galletly, & Gargett, submitted-f), it is often the case that school funds might be better invested in building teacher and school expertise and capacity for providing improved education (Knight, Galletly & Gargett, Submitted-f): It seems important for schools and education systems to recognise that what is (perhaps unconsciously) being accepted when funds are allocated for add-on commercial programs, is the truism that effective intervention is resource intensive and expensive, whether it be classroom instruction or commercial interventions. The key decision to be reflected on, when considering commercial programs, thus becomes whether the funds spent are best spent in building school expertise for teaching at-risk readers, likely to impact very large numbers of at-risk readers over the years for no additional cost, or on outside intervention for a small number of children.
Needed! School-level research towards optimising literacy instruction Whilst research findings supporting specific principles of instruction time may be relatively limited, the findings are nonetheless valuable, with further value added when they are considered in the context of established models of reading development and instruction. As an example, while individual principles in Section 3 of this document vary greatly in the extent of research specifically focussed on them, all the principles align well with the four models used in the project, i.e., the Literacy Component Model and Simple View of Reading (Knight et al., Submitted-e; Gough & Tunmer, 1986); Orthographic Advantage Theory (Knight et al., In press; Submitted a-e); Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1994; Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation, 2017); and Marzano and Pickering’s (1997) Dimensions of Learning model. Additionally, even when offering incomplete knowledge, most research studies on instructional principles are valuable for reflecting on, towards their implications for school use (Pressley et al., 2006, p.10): Our perspective on what to do when they’re only a few quantitative studies, which often is the case… is as follows: make as much of whatever data you have, especially data collected in well-controlled, carefully conducted studies. That is, data in excellent studies
109
are definitely much better than no data. After all, by definition 'the cutting edge’ has only been studied a little.
Currently, much educational research supporting principles towards effective classroom reading instruction can be criticised for not being sufficiently persuasive, authoritative, relevant and of practical usefulness to schools (Anwaruddin, 2015; Knight, Galletly & Gargett, submitted-f; Pressley, Graham & Harris, 2006). Whilst to a certain extent, insufficiencies of Australian educational research are due to the very low funding Australia spends on educational research, it is certain that Australian reading and literacy research needs to be increasingly focussed on reading instruction at school level (Knight, Galletly & Gargett, submitted-f). The potential of Consensus Research for collaborative knowledge building There seems strong value in teachers and educators being far more directly involved in educational research, working collaboratively with researchers, and moving into leading research directions. In addition, low funding, the prohibitive expense of quasi-experimental research, and the high extent of school-level research needed, provoke opportunity and potential for opening a new era of educational research, focussed on what might be termed Consensus Research. Whereas prior to the 1970s, research was predominantly experimental research, over time, research embraced qualitative research, then mixed methods research and bricolage research. This has meant educational research today has wide options for data useful in research, e.g., including statistical data, surveys, checklists, work-samples, descriptive case studies, interviews, and self-reflective journaling. Bricolage Research builds from the French word, bricoleur, a handyperson, who works towards and achieves set goals, using available resources and tools, and an overriding spirit of ingenuity (e.g., Kincheloe & Berry, 2004). It is pragmatic, mixed-methods research, open to using diverse data forms and research methods, thus lending itself well to the Australian situation where schools are strongly focussed on optimising reading instruction, in the context of low research funding. Whereas experimental and quasiexperimental research can be prohibitively expensive when there are many variables to control for, Bricolage Research need not be expensive, as it seeks and finds opportunity within what is available. In educational settings, Bricolage Research focussed on establishing principles of effective reading instruction might perhaps be better termed Consensus Research. Consensus Research focussed on establishing the efficacy of principles of reading instruction for at-risk readers could be done effectively at national, regional, or schools-cluster levels. A region might co-ordinate research focusing on establishing the efficacy of a set of factors underlying instructional principles, e.g., 1. The extent to which time spent reading texts of manageable difficulty impacts development of word reading and reading comprehension. 2. Use of Echo Reading (Word Reading Principle, Section 2, 3.d.iii) as an alternative to questioning using the Three Cueing System, as a school and parent strategy. 3. The relationship of children’s word reading levels at different time points to their reading comprehension levels, e.g., as shown in Year 3 NAPLAN results. Using Consensus Research, a team might be established to co-ordinate the research, with researchers asked for their opinions on the efficacy of the principles, and to provide a summary review of available research related to the factors. Schools and teachers would be provided with this summary, when invited to engage in the research, and offered diverse data options to consider, e.g., the examples of data types, listed below, for exploring the first factor above: the extent to which time spent reading texts of manageable difficulty impacts development of word reading and reading comprehension.
Examples of possible optional data-forms towards exploring the extent to which time spent reading texts of manageable difficulty impacts development of word reading and reading comprehension: • Children’s word-reading levels for sight-words & unfamiliar words measured termly, using the Test of Word Reading Efficiency’s (TOWRE, Torgesen et al., 2012) 45 second samples of reading. • A one-week record of time spent reading, in class and at home, perhaps with separate categories for independent reading of books of own choice, reading of class texts, and home readers, - Perhaps doing this longitudinally, one week per term, from Prep to Year 3. • - Perhaps recording names & difficulties levels of texts children read during that week. 110
• • • • • • • •
Observation of children’s levels of engagement during independent reading, - Perhaps using a checklist of behaviours marked at set minute intervals. Goal setting and self-recording of time spent reading, done by children, - Perhaps using standard forms, including space for reflections, or checklists re enjoyment. Anecdotal records of observations of a small number of children. Calculating difficulty level of texts read by readers of different word-reading levels, by scanning sample pages, and using, e.g., the Show Readability Statistics option, of Microsoft Office. Calculating the number of words children read per minute, using texts of established wordreading difficulty level, - Perhaps doing this once per term, from Prep to Year 3, Data on factors possibly impacting time spent reading, e.g., parent confidence for supporting home reading; use of Echo Reading; listening to audio-versions of books prior to reading them. Surveys and interviews of children, parents, teachers re factors expediting reading, - Perhaps individual children, perhaps many, perhaps using set questions or survey forms. Teacher reflective journaling on increasing children’s reading, and observations made.
‘Many hands make light work!’ seems a useful adage for Consensus Research exploring factors impacting optimising of school reading instruction. Whilst for one school, gathering diverse forms of data might be onerous, this is far less so if done across schools, with invited data able to be at the level of complexity that individual teachers and school choose to provide. As preliminary (Stage 1) data is gathered, the research team would explore the information and options provided by the data, possibly making suggestions for useful data not yet gathered, which might be gathered easily. Researchers might suggest and conduct statistical analyses of relevant data sets, exploring relationships, e.g., the relationships between children’s Prep-Yr3 word-reading levels, extent of time spent reading, and Year 3 NAPLAN scores for Reading and Writing. Stage 1 data and its findings would then be summarised and shared with all involved parties, perhaps on a website. Stage 2 data could then be gathered, perhaps including opinions on the Stage 1 data and findings, from involved teacher-researchers, and panels of researchers and advanced educators. This might include a ‘vote survey’ on opinions on the importance of this principle and the factors which amplify or mitigate its effects, e.g., types of books, difficulty level of texts read, and extent of Successful Engaged Learning. Finally, Stage 3 consensus meetings might discuss the data and principles, making conclusions on the efficacy of the explored principles, to the level supported by the available data. Consensus Research has potential to provoke and support strong learning and knowledge-building. It might involve communities of learners, including researchers and educators working together and learning with and from each other; with researchers becoming increasingly knowledgeable on the complexities of school circumstances, and educators becoming increasingly knowledgeable on educational research and specific factors likely to expedite children’s learning. These beyond-school professional communities might be complimented and strengthened by within-school discussions by the professional learning communities of individual schools, e.g., at staff meetings, where research findings and implications might be considered as to how they are relevant to the specific teaching context of each individual school. While there is certainly much work to be done for Australia, to achieve optimal early-years reading instruction, for all children, and particularly for at-risk readers, the time seems ripe for concerted active learning and knowledge building, perhaps using Consensus Research conducted collaboratively. The principles listed in Section 3, are provided for this purpose. Choosing principles to explore as professional development and school improvement Schools and teachers might wonder where to start when using this Principles document. The document is offered for flexible use, and there are many ways it might be useful. In Phase 3 of the project, many teachers chose individual strategies to explore, and teachers in the Phase 3 focus group each took on five strategies to study across a four term period in their work with the children in their class. Many schools chose to use the principles as part of their school improvement foci. It was also interesting how many schools decided to revise their school curriculum plan, using the Literacy Component Model’s three strands (Reading Comprehension and Independent Reading and their teaching; Language skills for literacy 111
and their teaching; and Word Reading and Fluency and their teaching). Additionally, many teachers outside the project liked the idea of choosing 5 principles to trial. It is emphasised that in trialling principles, one might choose a complete overarching principle (from the 13 overarching principles), or a subprinciple of one of those overarching principles, or a single strategy listed for an overarching principle or subprinciple. Each of these items (overarching principle, subprinciple, strategies listed for either) is considered ‘a principle’ in the sense of trialling items, exploring the improving of instruction. For school use, the instructions used to introduce Phase 3’s trialling of the principles might be found useful. Teachers were invited to trial at least five principles: • One from Cluster 1, Teaching Smart (How): o Teach Strategically and Carefully, to Achieve Effective Learning. o Principles 1 to 6, and their subprinciples. • One from Cluster 2, Teaching for the Reading Heart (Who): o Teach to Maximise Children’s Ownership, Engagement and Motivation for Reading. o Principles 7 to 9, and their subprinciples. • Three from Cluster 3, Teaching for the Reading Brain (What): Principles 10 to 13: Teach Strategically and Carefully, to Achieve Effective Reading Development o One from Reading Comprehension & Independent Reading: 18 sub-principles, many with multiple strategies (e.g., Subprinciple 15 lists 68 individual Reading Comprehension strategies). o One from Word Reading & Fluency: 27 subprinciples, in three sections, many with multiple strategies. o One from Language Skills for Reading, 38 subprinciples, many with multiple strategies. o Alternatively, omit one of the three above, and instead explore Principle 10. Use the Literacy Component Model. Example 1 of 5 principles chosen Cluster 1, Teaching Smart: • Pr1 Successful Engaged Learning, Strategies 1-5 • Pr5.1 Instructional Intensity, Strategies a & b Cluster 2, Teaching for the Reading Heart: • Pr8 Child Ownership of Learning, Strategies 1-5 Cluster 3, Teaching for the Reading Brain: • Pr8.3 Build child ownership, Strategies 1-5 • Principle 11 Reading Comprehension & Independent Reading: o Strategy 6.c DoL2-4 Progression used with Reading Comprehension Strategies. • Principle 12 Word Reading & Fluency: o Strategy 6 Monitor Skill with Word Subsets to ensure Mastery, Maintenance, Generalisation • Principle 13. Language Skills for Reading: o Strategy 11.d Build Literate Cultural Capital: Build skills for engaging in discussions about books and issues raised by books. Example 2 of 5 principles chosen Cluster 1, Teaching Smart: • Pr3.2 Study Cognitive Load, Strategies a-d Cluster 2, Teaching for the Reading Heart: • Pr9 Foster Enjoyment, Strategies 1-4 Cluster 3, Teaching for the Reading Brain: • Principle 11 Reading Comprehension & Independent Reading: o Strategy 8. Ensure access to many books of appropriate word reading level and interest level. • Principle 12 Word Reading & Fluency: o Strategy 11.iv Writing phonemic approximations of multisyllabic words whose spelling is not yet known • Principle 13. Language Skills for Reading: o Strategies 27-29: Synonym Sentences, Synonym Duos, & Integrating Language Activities with Homework. Example 3 of 5 principles chosen Cluster 1, Teaching Smart: • Pr5 Consider Learning Time, Strategies 1-4 Cluster 2, Teaching for the Reading Heart:
112
• Pr7 Ensure Motivation and Engagement, Strategies 1-4 Cluster 3, Teaching for the Reading Brain: • Principle 11 Reading Comprehension & Independent Reading: o Strategy 11 Teach Reading Comprehension strategies in verbal activities & multiliteracies contexts to take advantage of lower cognitive load. • Principle 12 Word Reading & Fluency: o Strategy 4a-d Teach using Cognitive Load principles to ensure enduring skill mastery • Principle 13. Language Skills for Reading: o Strategy 32.b Build skill retelling narratives using Somebody/Wanted/But/So & The 6 Parts of a Narrative.
In addition, options were offered on factors such as changing over time to exploring different principles and choosing whether to work as individuals or groups: • You might be flexible in how long you focus on a principle: o Perhaps focus on the same five principles for the year. o Perhaps trial a larger number of principles over the year, for shorter time periods, e.g., one principle might only be trialled for one term, then another commenced. o Perhaps continue some principles across the whole year, but change one or more each term. • You might work as an individual teacher researchers, as use a combined focus: o Work by yourself, focussed on your teaching, your learning and the usefulness of the principles you explore in that learning. o Work as a group of teacher researchers at your school. Perhaps share strategies amongst your team, each choosing one that you’ll be the ‘write-up’ person for. o Use the principles as a focus of a school Professional Learning Community. • You might Trial a model instead of a principle, e.g., Component Model, Cognitive Load Theory, Marzano & Pickering’s Dimensions of Learning model. • Principles, strategies & subprinciples are ALL principles. o There are lots of sub-principles, strategies and examples in the Cluster 3 principles. o Treat them all as principles you might trial. You may well build stronger knowledge by being thorough in investigating a ‘small area’ (e.g., a single strategy), than by taking on a larger area. • Choose principles which appeal to you as an area of interest. We all do a stronger job, when investigating an area, trialling principles with ‘strong motivation, engagement and ownership’, Teachers and schools were invited to spend time reflecting on the principles before deciding: • Spend time reading, reflecting and discussing principles you might trial. • Consider which ones fit best with your learning interests, and your school’s learning emphases. • Discuss them with your colleagues, especially those who you’ll be working with. • Perhaps have a school discussion meeting discussing different possibilities. • Read the Principles document: o Read Section 2 to reflect on how instruction for at-risk readers differs in subtle ways from teaching more rapid-progress students. o Read Section 3: the principles, subprinciples and strategies, and also the examples included at the end of each principle. o Read Section 4, to reflect on why there is particular value in your research exploring the principles. • Read other documents from the project: o The Phase 1 Discussion Paper. o Publications by Professor Knight and colleagues written for research journals and books. (If you do not have access to these through a university library, final draft copies are available through ResearchGate, by searching for the authors). They were also asked to discuss and share their learning, discussing it with colleagues, for more in-depth knowledge building and reflection on possible factors impacting the effectiveness of each strategy explored. 113
BIBLIOGRAPHY This commented bibliography is a list of documents, many available online, which are useful reading for educators and researchers wanting more in-depth knowledge on reading development, instruction and difficulties, for all children, and particularly at-risk readers in the first years of schooling. 1) Broader reviews of reading, including diverse aspects of reading development and instruction: 1. Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge: MIT Press. This excellent review details the processes impacting children’s reading development. 2. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Committee on the Prevention of Reading Difficulties in Young Children, National Research Council, Washington DC: National Academy Press. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Starting out right: A guide to promoting children's reading success Committee on the Prevention of Reading Difficulties in Young Children, National Research Council. (http://www.nap.edu/download.php?record_id=6014 ). Washington DC: National Academy Press. This excellent review was conducted by the Committee on the Prevention of Reading Difficulties in Young Children, commissioned by the American National Research Council. The first book is a lengthy but very readable review; the second is a parent-friendly book, developed from the findings of that research review. Available online, it details expected accomplishments children need towards making healthy literacy progress, at stages of Birth to 3 Years, 3 to 4 Years, Kindergarten, First-Grade, Second-Grade and Third-Grade. 2) Narrower reviews of reading, focussed on specific aspects of reading development and instruction: 1. Hempenstall, K. (2016). Read about it: Scientific evidence for effective teaching of reading. Edited by Jennifer Buckingham. https://www.cis.org.au/publications/research-reports/read-about-itscientific-evidence-for-effective-teaching-of-reading This excellent and highly readable recent review discusses recent research guiding instruction of reading comprehension, vocabulary, fluency, word reading and phonemic awareness, and outlines activities and instructional emphases supported by research knowledge.
2. Pressley, M., et al. (2001). Learning to read: Lessons from exemplary first grade classrooms. New York, The Guildford Press. This excellent and highly readable book discusses the findings of school-based research on what constitutes excellent instruction in early-years classroom. It briefly reviews the history of Whole Language and Skills-Emphasis debates, finding that excellent instruction is not polarised to one viewpoint but is balanced, built from children’s specific needs and uses the strengths of all educational approaches, with a primary focus on optimising children’s literacy, confidence and wellbeing. Pressley’s (2006) book, Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching, whilst not focussed specifically on early-years reading, is also valuable reading.
3. Shanahan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, C., Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Schatschneider, C., & Torgesen, J. (2010). Improving reading comprehension in kindergarten through 3rd grade: A practice guide (NCEE 2010-4038). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from www.whatworks.ed.gov/publications/practiceguides. This highly practical review discusses Kindergarten to Year 3 teaching and learning of reading 114
comprehension, including the research underlying effective teaching and strategies, and practical use of the research findings. 4. Simmons, D. C. and E. J. Kameenui, Eds. (1998). What reading research tells us about children with diverse learning needs: Bases and basics. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum. This excellent review, written specifically for educators, details findings of a research synthesis investigating reading subskills to establish the basis of reading failure, then curriculum and instructional principles for designing effective instruction to prevent reading difficulties. It has separate sections on Reading Comprehension (Text Organisation), Word Reading (Word Recognition), Metacognitive Strategies, Emergent Literacy, Phonological Awareness, and Vocabulary (No major reviews thoroughly reviewed language skills for reading or literacy; most major reviews review the research on Vocabulary, which is extensive).
5. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. https://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf. This highly influential review commissioned by America’s National Institutes of Health focused strongly on five key areas of reading development: Reading comprehension, Fluency, Phonemic Awareness, Word Reading, and Vocabulary, and to a lesser extent on Teacher Education and Computer Technology. It built from limited research, as it used only meta-analysis (the statistical criteria of which inevitably mean exclusion of many studies also offering useful information on an area). The review was highly controversial, as its findings were published as needed instruction for all readers, whereas the majority of research in some areas (e.g., phonemic awareness and word reading) was studies of at-risk readers, rather than healthy-progress and advanced readers. Towards optimising instruction of at-risk readers, it is a highly readable report, containing much valuable information.
6. Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST) and Australian Council of Educational Research (ACER). (2005). Reports from Australia’s 2005 National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy. http://www.dest.gov.au/schools/publications/index.htm: a. Teaching reading: Report and recommendations: National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy. b. Teaching Reading: Literature Review (Report of the National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy. c. Appendix: Assessment and reporting of learning progress: The importance of monitoring growth. d. Your child's future: Literacy and Numeracy in Australia's schools. This review was initiated in response to a 2004 open letter to the Australian government from 26 Australian reading researchers protesting the widespread continuance in Australian teacher training and reading curricula of reading practices developed in the Whole Language era and lacking a research base (Anderson et al., 2004). The review was narrow, focussed on word reading rather than literacy, and is a useful review of that area. The review and its recommendations had very little impact on Australian reading instruction, prompting a 2012 open letter from 35 reading researchers, again emphasising needs for Australian word-reading instruction to be aligned with the research-base on word-reading development, difficulties and instruction (Bowen et al., 2012).
115
3) Documents written as part of the Bridging the Gap project: 1. The Phase 2 Discussion Paper, used in Phase 2, alongside four Professional Development days, to enable teachers to consider and reflect on research on reading development and instruction: Knight, B. A., & Galletly, S. A. (2014a). Discussion Paper for the project, ‘Bridging the gap for at-risk readers: reading theory into classroom practice.’: Central Queensland University. 2. The set of Draft Principles developed by the end of Phase 2, which were considered, trialed, and honed in Phase 3 of the project: Knight, B. A., & Galletly, S. A. (2014b). Phase 2 Draft principles of optimal reading instruction for atrisk readers in Prep to Year 3 for the project, ‘Bridging the gap for at-risk readers: reading theory into classroom practice: Central Queensland University.
3) Articles written & being written for reading research journals as part of the Bridging the Gap project: These articles will be useful reading for teachers and schools, and it is hoped these will be available online for interested readers: whilst not all articles will be available online in free-access journals, many research journals now permit authors to post a final draft on their websites and sites such as Researchgate. 1. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (In Press). Orthographic Advantage Theory: National advantage and disadvantage due to orthographic differences. Asia Pacific Journal of Developmental Differences. 2. Knight, B. A., & Galletly, S. A. (2017). Effective literacy instruction for all students: A time for change. International Journal for Research in Learning Disabilities, 3(1), 65-86. 3. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (2017). Managing cognitive load as the key to literacy development: Research directions suggested by crosslinguistic research and research on Initial Teaching Alphabet (i.t.a.). In R. Nata (Ed.), Progress in Education (Vol. 45, pp. 61-150). New York: Nova Science Publishers. 4. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-a). A call for research on impacts of English orthographic complexity and high cognitive load on literacy development. 5. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-b). Generational disadvantage, ineffective early intervention, and high schools too full of children with low literacy skills: Needs for new directions towards optimising anglophone reading outcomes. 6. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-c). It’s different learning to read and write English: A complex orthography creating high cognitive load. 7. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-d). It’s different teaching children to read and write English: Teaching to maximise learning and manage cognitive load. 8. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-e). The Literacy Component Model: A pragmatic universal model for researchers and educators. 9. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-f). Needed! Reading and literacy research at school level in Australia. 10. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-g). Teacher-researcher exploration of effective reading instruction for at-risk readers in the first four school years. 11. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., Morris, J., & Gargett, P. S. (2018). Reading instruction strategies to reduce cognitive load. Practical Literacy: The Early and Primary Years, 23(2), 8-10.
116
GLOSSARY This glossary explains terms used in the Discussion Paper for the collaborative research project Bridging the Gap for At-Risk Readers: Reading Theory into Classroom Practice. Most of the terms used in the discussion paper are familiar terms for most educators, however some terms have been used as technical nouns with specific meanings assigned to them in their use in the project. These terms are explained in this glossary. Some terms are grouped into logical categories with headings, for ease of considering the different terms collectively. The categories of terms are listed first, followed by single-item terms. The sections of this glossary are as follows: 1. Reading and Skills for Reading 2. Orthography, Aspects of 3. Models of Reading Instruction 4. Reading Instruction 5. Reading Instruction Activities 6. Single terms, not included in glossary categories (above) Glossary Section 1. Reading and Skills for Reading Cognitive Processing Skills for Reading and Literacy Cognitive processing skills for communication, literacy and learning, include phonological awareness; short term memory, working memory, and long term memory; Rapid Automised Naming (RAN); and executive processing, which includes attentional control, self-monitoring, and inhibiting of distractors. Short-term, Working and Long-term memory Ability to remember information intact (short-term memory), process that information while retaining it (working memory), and make efficient memories which are efficiently stored long-term and efficiently retrieved (long-term memory). We have two information processing systems which are separate though interacting: one used for phonological-verbal information and one for visual-spatial information. It is common for children with word reading weakness to have weak phonological-verbal information processing. Rapid Automised Naming (RAN) Rapid Automised Naming (RAN is the ability to rapidly name familiar items, which is a proxy for ability to efficiently retrieve long-term memories. Children with RAN weakness are at-risk of significant reading difficulties, with strongest risk being in children with a Double Deficit of combined weakness in RAN and phonological weakness. RAN weakness can be identified early, e.g., age 4 years, enabling Timely Efficient early intervention before difficulties are experienced. While there is less research on this area, it seems likely that children with RAN weakness have automisation weakness: difficulty becoming fast and fluent with skills they’ve had difficulty mastering. Phonological Awareness and Phonemic Awareness Phonological Awareness for reading development is awareness and skill with the phonological aspects of words and reading including words, syllables, onsets and rimes (rhyming), and individual sounds and sound clusters (phonemes). Phonological awareness weakness in young children is a strong predictor of possible reading difficulties. Whereas phonemic awareness does not build significantly until children engage with letters and words, phonological awareness of syllables and rhymes builds from early childhood. This enables identification of children with weak phonological awareness at, e.g., age four years, enabling Timely Efficient Intervention before difficulties are experienced. 117
Reading The term Reading, for the Bridging the Gap project, is defined as print reading, including literature experience; a love of books and reading; motivation for and engagement in reading; independent reading of diverse texts; reading comprehension at literal and inferential levels; reading fluency in oral and silent reading; word reading of regular and less regular words, including automatic effortless reading of regular and highly frequent ‘sight words’, as decontextualised words and in meaningful texts; cognitive processing for reading, including phonological awareness, working memory and automaticity; language skills for reading, including vocabulary, language comprehension and reasoning, and conversations and discussions about texts and reading; writing as it relates to reading; and reading to, with and by children of diverse texts, including renowned literature.
Word Reading Word reading is skills reading words. This includes single decontextualised words and contextualized words in meaningful prose, familiar and unfamiliar words, whole words and word parts (including syllables and graphemes), real words and pseudowords (made-up words using the orthographic structure of real words, which act as a proxy for unfamiliar words and the syllables of multisyllabic words). Word reading includes reading fluency and reading for expression.
Language Skills for Reading Language skills for reading are language and thinking skills which may be weak in at-risk readers. They include skills of listening, speaking, vocabulary and semantics, receptive language including literal and inferential comprehension and reasoning, expressive language including ideation and syntax, and logical reasoning skills.
Reading Comprehension Reading Comprehension is language and thinking skills and strategies established as optimising language comprehension of texts which are read, including diverse texts read in diverse contexts for diverse purposes. In the current project Reading Comprehension includes enjoyment of and participation in Independent Reading, reading books as a relaxation pastime: this is deemed appropriate as part of using a small number of categories, and strong likelihood that effective reading comprehension produces enjoyment of reading is a key basis of children choosing to do Independent Reading.
The ‘Talk Curriculum’ The ‘Talk Curriculum’ is an informal term, used to suggest the value of schools having a useful, practical, verbal language skills curriculum used to build the language skills which underlie effective reading and writing development. Schools’ Talk Curriculum would detail the language, reasoning and verbal communication skills which underlie and support literacy development, and list time-efficient strategies and activities for building those verbal communication skills. It is suggested that, rather than being a separate entity, likely to add more pressure to schools’ currently very crowded curriculum, greater value lies in the Talk Curriculum being carefully aligned and integrated with schools’ literacy and English curricula, for gently supporting and adding value to reading, literacy and English instruction.
Glossary Section 2. Orthography, Aspects of Orthography Orthography is the system of spelling patterns each nation chooses to use for writing.
118
English Orthographic Complexity English orthography is one of the world’s most complex orthographies, so complex that researchers consider it an outlier to the continuum of orthographic complexity. English uses 26 letters to represent its 44 common sounds using well over 500 different spelling patterns. Unlike regular orthographies, English orthography is characterised by lots of one: many, and many: one GPCs.
Orthographic Grainsizes (Regular, Pattern and Tricky Words and Syllables) From orthographic perspectives, English orthography has three grainsizes (Ziegler & Goswami, 2002), which equate to three types of syllables and one-syllable words, and reading strategies (Knight & Galletly, 2011): • • •
Regular words use phoneme grain size, e.g., cut still splits: They are read using Sounding Out (Phonemic Recoding). Tricky words (exception words) use whole-word grain size, e.g., one was who: They are read by remembering what words look like. Pattern words use letter-group grainsize, e.g., night boy ball. They are read by ‘using the pattern’, often using rhyme, as many letter patterns are word rimes, at the end of words, making rhyming a powerful reading support.
Orthographic Advantage Theory Orthographic Advantage Theory (Galletly & Knight, 2004, 2009, 2010, 2013; Knight, Galletly & Gargett, submitted) emphasises how, in comparison to the many regular-orthography nations, which experience strong Orthographic Advantage, Australia and other Anglophone nations have Orthographic Disadvantage, which impacts reading development, difficulties, and instruction in major ways.
Regular Orthographies (Transparent Orthographies) Regular orthographies are spelling systems with most sounds represented by just one grapheme, making the total number of grapheme-phoneme correspondences (GPCs) close to the number of phonemes in the nation’s language. The majority of nations use highly regular orthographies. Regular orthographies expedite word-reading and spelling development, through all words being very easy to read and write once lettersounds are known. Learning to read regular orthographies has very low cognitive load, which means all children master word reading and writing to a fluent confident level, within the first years of school, even many children with severe intellectual disability.
Early Literacy, Sophisticated Literacy, and Transition from Early Sophisticated Literacy Early Literacy, Sophisticated Literacy, and Transition from Early Sophisticated Literacy are useful concepts when considering the differences between reading development and instruction in Anglophone and regular-orthography nations. Literacy development can be considered as having two broad stages: Early and Sophisticated Literacy (Galletly & Knight, 2009, 2010, 2013). Early Literacy, ‘learning to read and write,’ requires teaching and learning focussed both on building word-reading and spelling skills, and building language and reasoning aspects of reading. Sophisticated Literacy is reading and writing to learn, the building of increasingly advanced language and reasoning skills, after Early Literacy development is completed. Transition from Early to Sophisticated Literacy occurs when children can read and write words easily and confidently, with working memory then available for focussing on language and reasoning on other aspects of reading. While Sophisticated Literacy focusses on the language and thinking aspects of reading, Early Literacy development and instruction must focus strongly on building word-reading and spelling skills, in addition to language and reasoning aspects of reading development.
Statistical Learning of Orthography Learning to read words is to quite a large extent statistical learning: how hard it is to learn a particular GPC depends on how often that GPC is encountered during reading, and the extent to which that GPC has 119
confusing GPCs. This is the reason why most Anglophone children quickly learn common consonant sounds which are highly regular (few common GPCs), e.g., d n m f, but are slower to learn less common regular ones, e.g., x z, and common ones which have confusing GPCs, e.g., c (which has three common sounds, k s ch), and g (whose name says the sound of j, and has two sounds: g j. Highly regular GPCs, e.g., those of consonants b d f h l m n p r t v w z are those whose GPCs are closest to one: one, and whose confusing GPCs occur infrequently and rarely in texts read by young children, e.g., silent p b n (pneumatic, lamb, hymn). English consonant GPCs are mastered more easily than vowel GPCs, as while there are over 250 consonant GPCs, most single consonant letters don’t have confusing GPCs, many digraphs are highly regular with no confusing GPCs, e.g., kn ph sh th, and the many confusable GPCs fortunately occur very infrequently, e.g., answer, psyche, cupboard.
Glossary Section 3. Models of Reading and Reading Instruction The Literacy Component Model of Reading The Literacy Component Model of Reading (Knight, Galletly & Gargett, submitted) builds from Gough and Tunmer’s (1986) Simple View of Reading, used widely by reading researchers and educators, which emphasises that, taking a simple view of reading, reading can be seen as the integration of three key components: Reading Comprehension = Language Skills x Word-reading skills. The project uses the Literacy Component Model for its prioritising the three key aspects of reading and reading development, reading comprehension, word-reading, and language skills, and its practical usefulness for assessing and monitoring reading skills, and guiding instruction. The Literacy Component Model is compatible with many other models of reading development, e.g., Connectionist models.
Cognitive Load Theory Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1994; Centre for Education Statistics & Evaluation, 2017), a model of teaching and learning, emphasises effective instruction focusing on three aspects of cognitive load and how they are integrated in effective teaching and learning: children’s Processing Capacity, curriculum content load (Content Load), and reading lesson task load (Task Load). For the theory’s originators’ terms Germane, Intrinsic and Extrinsic Load, this project used the terms Processing Capacity, Content Load and Task Load: • Content Load is the complexity of the skill area being taught. It is made manageable through strategically sequencing reading accuracy instruction into specific subskills which, when focussed on individually, have much lower Content Load than the area as a whole. • Task Load is the cognitive load (complexity) of the instructional tasks used in learning to read. It is useful to think on task load of lessons, and of learning activities used in lessons. It is also helpful to think on how well task load has been kept manageable not just in a single lesson, but across a series of lessons. • Processing Capacity is the individual child’s processing capacity. It is a composite, built from working memory, effectiveness of cognitive processing skills, confidence and focussed attention. Dimensions of Learning Dimensions of Learning (Marzano & Pickering, 1997) emphasises five key aspects of effective teaching and learning, all of which must be achieved for healthy reading development, and are particularly important for at-risk readers: • DoL1 Motivation and Engagement (Attitudes and Perceptions) - The starting point of effective learning: active persistent engaged learners. • DoL5 Empowering Metacognitive Thinking (Habits of Mind) - The end goal of effective learning: sophisticated skill mastery, with strategies used effectively as needed in diverse contexts. • The DoL2-4 progression of learning from early skill development (DoL2) to sophisticated skill usage (DoL4), keeping cognitive load manageable across the learning progression: o DoL2. Focussed Skill Development (Acquiring and Integrating Knowledge). o DoL3. Scaffolded Generalising of Skills (Extending and Refining Knowledge). o DoL4. Extensive Authentic Skill Usage (Using Knowledge Meaningfully). 120
Glossary Section 4. Reading Instruction Accommodations Accommodations are one of three forms of instruction used in reading instruction for at-risk readers: differentiation, remediation, and accommodations. Accommodations are supports that ensure weak readers are able to access texts’ meanings and are not denied access because of their poor reading skills.
Balanced Instruction Balanced instruction is instruction matched to children’s instructional needs, drawing from and using the strengths of diverse educational approaches, with a primary focus on optimising children’s literacy, confidence and wellbeing. The term Reading Instruction, for the Bridging the Gap project, is Balanced Instruction, defined as strategic intentional instruction, moving children effectively through development of reading skills and subskills, across multiple dimensions of learning, from early skill development through mastery to fluent skill use in diverse contexts, with instruction initially fully teacher-managed (explicit teaching), moving to increasing student ownership and self-management.
Consecutive Skill Development and Broad Skill Development The characteristics of reading instruction of different aspects of reading are shaped by the developmental path of those skills. Some skills use Broad Skill Development: they developed on a broad front, with no tight developmental order. Others use Consecutive Skill Development: they have a strong step-wise progression of development, with earlier skills needing to be built before later skills, and those later skills needing and building on the base of the earlier skills working at a confident, fluent level. Language skills and reading comprehension skills use mostly Broad Skill Development, while word-reading skills use Consecutive Skill Development.
Differentiation Differentiation is one of three forms of instruction used in reading instruction for at-risk readers: differentiation, remediation, and accommodations. Differentiation refers to instruction specifically tailored to match individual children’s interests, strengths and weaknesses. It focusses on meeting the child’s needs, and optimally developing effective motivation, engagement and skills for reading.
The Finding the Learning Time Challenge The Finding the Learning Time Challenge is the ongoing challenge that schools, teachers, and families face in trying sufficient teaching learning hours in which to do all the teaching and learning which at-risk readers need. While this is a challenge for meeting the needs for all children, it is a much bigger challenge for at-risk readers. This is because, in addition to needs for extensive authentic reading, at-risk readers also need considerable additional teaching and learning time supporting their development of skills they show weakness in, including key reading comprehension skills, language skills for reading and word-reading skills. Given limited school hours, and the extent of curriculum to be learned in primary school, schools, teachers and families need to be creative in finding this learning time.
Instructional Intensity Instructional Intensity is the intensity of learning and practice which children experience. It can be considered as the number of practices of a skill which a child experiences per minute of instructional learning time. 121
Reading Instruction The term Reading Instruction, for the Bridging the Gap project is Balanced Instruction, defined as strategic intentional instruction moving children effectively through development of reading skills and subskills, across multiple dimensions of learning, from early skill development through mastery to fluent skill use in diverse contexts, with instruction initially fully teacher-managed (explicit teaching) moving to increasing student ownership and self-management.
Response to Intervention frameworks Response to Intervention levels of instruction (e.g., Mellard, Frey, & Woods, 2012; Mesmer & Mesmer, 2008), used increasingly widely in Anglophone nations, use three levels of differentiated instruction for atrisk readers: 1. Level 1. Core Instruction: strategic differentiated reading instruction used for all children, most often in the form of usual classroom instruction, including differentiated instruction focussed on children’s areas of instructional need. 2. Level 2. Skills Building Intervention: focussed more-intensive timely efficient instruction for children not progressing well with Core Instruction alone. 3. Level 3. Intensive Remediation: Highly-intensive intervention for students not progressing well with Intervention, and showing indicators of developing severely delayed reading skills.
Teaching Ahead Teaching Ahead is an Accommodation strategy wherein class lesson content is taught first to at-risk readers to ready them for content being taught to the whole class. This accommodation has good potential for building stronger engagement during class learning, as the child is, in effect, an ‘expert’ on the topic.
Glossary Section 5. Reading Instruction Strategies and Activities This section includes strategies and activities which have specific names and are likely to need clarification Echo Reading Echo Reading (Galletly, 2014), sometimes termed the Neurological Impress method, is a method adults and peers can use to support children’s reading of meaningful text. It produces high levels of successful engaged reading and contextual supports for reading, and enables children to read much more complex texts than they could read unaided. The principles of Echo Reading are as follows: Proficient reader and child reading together, with adult a fraction of a second behind the child, ‘echoing,’ ready to keep the text sentences continuing should the child pause overly. When a hard word is encountered, the adult says the word with the child probably echoing, or instead moving to the next word. The child reads all words read without too much effort, the adult reads all the hard words, and no words are repeated, as this interrupts the flow of text sentences, and reduces the contextual supports provided by the language of the text. Semantic and syntactic cues are boosted through no pauses to work out words, no repeating of words, and the proficient reader boosting speed and adding expression and intonation, as needed. For words the adult feels the child can read quite easily, the adult might say the first sound of the word and pause a second, then say the word, if it’s not soon read by the child.
Language Made Visible The use of pictures to show the meaning of spoken or written language. Many at-risk readers have difficulty understanding language concepts of books and texts. Using drawings makes concepts more concrete for children and allow them to reflect and explore those concepts. Examples of Language Made Visible include drawing On the Lines (literal interpretation) and Between the Lines (inferential interpretation of figures of speech and common sayings (e.g., It’s raining cats and dogs), picture scenes from books, using talking 122
bubbles and speech bubbles to contrast what characters are saying versus thinking, and drawing contrasting set-up and punchline scenes to build understanding of jokes and humour.
Phonemic Approximations, Writing of (‘Brave Spelling’; Guestimating; Knight & Galletly, 2010) Phoneme Approximations are children’s writing attempts for words whose spelling is not known. They are powerful tools for building spelling, word reading and vocabulary, when orthographic and phonological layers are used. Galletly (2001) teaches phoneme approximations as Guestimating, the writing of phonemic approximations of words whose spelling is not yet known, ensuring every syllable has a vowel. After building fluent syllable phonological awareness skills, children use the following rules: 1. Say the syllables on your fingers. 2. Write syllable by syllable: a. Flick a finger as you say the syllable. b. Write the syllable using the rule, ‘Every syllable MUST have a vowel’. 3. Check the word, by counting the vowels then reading each syllable. To keep task load low, there is no requirement that the vowel must be correct, or even a good phonemic approximation. The first goal is simply to have a vowel in every syllable. Once that skill automises, children have processing capacity for thinking on other aspects of words. Phoneme approximations are a strong support of written expression, building writing vocabulary, and confidence in using new words in written expression, while also building phonological, orthographic and word-reading skills.
Rapid Reads Rapid Reads are sets of words used for practising word reading of single words. The sets of words (e.g., 30 words in 6 rows of 5 words, commonly use parallel forms, with words in different positions in the word set (at-risk readers often remember words difficulty words by their position in the text), and words often changed slightly, with affixes added or adjusted, to encourage deeper focus on word orthography during reading.
Repeated Readings Repeated Readings is the reading of a text multiple times with an aim of increasing word-reading accuracy, reading speed, and intonation and expression. Research shows repeated reading to be a useful tool for building word-reading and text-reading skills. (Opinion is divided on whether it is repeated reading of single texts, or simply the extensive reading of any and all texts, which improves fluency. There seems value in focussing on both areas.). Texts may be chosen strategically, e.g., useful content area texts. Some repeated readings use shifting errors to deepen children’s reading and awareness of orthography while reading. These use multiple parallel forms of the one text, with two to three words misspelled in each text, and different words misspelled in the different parallel versions of the text. (Researchers studying shifting errors found children read more deeply, and learned to read more words, using this shifting error concept.) Motivating texts focussing on improving fluency and expression, e.g., jokes, and humorous poems, or texts using spelling words for the term might be useful forms of texts with shifting errors.
SCORE SCORE (Hamilton-Smith et al., 2010) is an integrated framework and sequential strategy developed by teachers in the Mackay region, and now used increasingly across Australia. It was developed as a sequence useful for all readers, from advanced to at-risk, and from Prep to Year 12, as a tool for increasing student comprehension of diverse texts, including class reading lessons, independent reading, and reading comprehension tests and tasks. An acronym, the letters of SCORE stand for five sequential steps readers are encouraged to use during reading: Skim & Scan, Connect & Question, Organise your Thinking, Read & Reflect, Be the Expert.
123
Glossary Section 6. Single Terms Not included in Glossary Categories (Above) Anglophone Nations and Readers The term Anglophone refers to English-speaking nations and people where the first or only national language is English. In this document it refers to nations and children who are learning to read and write English as a first language. Australia is an Anglophone nation.
At-Risk Readers The term At-risk readers, for the Bridging the Gap project, is defined as children in year-levels Prep to Year 3 who are at-risk of or are experiencing delayed development of reading skills, including reading comprehension, reading fluency and word-reading, and/or language reasoning skills, possibly including difficulties or experiential gaps in development of • Early reading skills including letter-sound knowledge, word reading of highly frequent words, and phonics skills for reading familiar and unfamiliar regular words. • Verbal communication skills including language comprehension and reasoning, vocabulary, phonological awareness, and language expression. • Motivation, engagement and self-identity as a reader, writer and competent learner. • Information processing skills for reading, including working memory, cognitive processing, phonological awareness and attention and distractibility. • A sufficient bank of early experiences in literacy and literature. • Engagement in and benefiting from literature experience and experiences, and independent reading. This judgement of ‘at-risk reader’ status is made by the child’s teachers and schools, using diverse perspectives, likely including observing and working with the child during reading, and monitoring the child’s development of skills, fluency and confidence in reading skills and subskills, particularly in the three reading component areas: reading comprehension, language skills underlying effective reading, and word reading (reading accuracy).
Late-Emerging and Early-Emerging Reading Difficulties Reading-difficulties include both early-emerging and late-emerging reading difficulties. Early emerging reading difficulties are obvious in the first school years while late-emerging reading difficulties don’t emerge until mid-primary school. Often late-emerging reading difficulties are referred to as The Fourth Grade Slump. Until recent years, it was considered that it was poor language skills causing late-emerging difficulties, however recent studies are consistently showing that word-reading weakness and language-skill weakness are both significant contributors to late-emerging reading difficulties, such that there are three categories of weakness: weak word reading, weak language skills, and weak skills in both areas (e.g., Catts, Compton et al., 2012; Leach, Scarborough & Rescorla, 2003).
Learned Helplessness Learned Helplessness is a term used for the negative spiral which develops when children do not have a sense of control over their learning and believe they are not capable of effective progress (Hole & Crozier, 2007; Seligman, 2007). Correct responses they achieve are seen as due to luck, not skill, while incorrect responses are seen as a logical consequence of being unable to learn in this area. While learned helplessness is relatively obvious in reluctant readers who actively avoid reading activities, it is also present in compliant children who engage in reading when told to, but are passive, not active in their learning. Atrisk readers need to be active, engaged, successful learners for lasting learning to be achieved.
Literate Cultural Capital Literate Cultural Capital is children’s accumulated knowledge of verbal and print skills, built from their home language experiences. It is often referred to as children’s ‘backpack’ of skills they bring from home 124
(e.g., Prochnow, Tunmer et al. 2013). It is very common for children starting school to have delayed language skills and limited experience of books and being read to. Low Literate Cultural Capital is likely to be more prevalent in families with parents with poor reading skills, so is a major factor generating Australian at-risk readers, given Australia’s high proportions of school-leavers with literacy difficulties.
Representations (Neurological Representations) Using connectionist models, the term Representations (or Neurological Representations) is used to represent the different memory/knowledge connections we have to a word or concept, e.g., a child’s knowledge of the word elephant is built from we have semantic representations (the word’s meaning), experiential representations (our experience with elephants and the word elephant), phonological representations (its syllables and sounds), orthographic representations (its spelling patterns), and syntactic representations (the word is singular, and can be used in sentences in specific ways, e.g., One elephant came in.).
Self-Teaching Self-teaching is children building their reading skills through reading with increasingly less outside support, learning to read through reading, learning to read new words by working out unfamiliar words without help from adults or peers, practising use of the skills they have used. Similarly, as practising of skills builds increased skill and confidence, children use the skills and strategies of both reading comprehension and language skills increasingly independently, with self-teaching (independent use of learned skills) supporting their progress. Given the high level of reading supports needed until self-teaching is effective, children’s achieving of effective self-teaching of word reading during independent reading of meaningful texts is likely to be a particularly important milestone as regards classroom resourcing needed to support reading development. All children reading alphabetic orthographies learn to read words and build skill using reading strategies mostly by self-teaching: this applies whether children are regular-orthography or Anglophone readers, and Australian healthy-progress readers or at risk readers. While all children self-teach, however, they differ markedly in • The point where they have the combination of skill plus confidence enabling them to comfortably engage in self-teaching, while reading texts of appropriate structure and difficulty level. • The amount of instruction and reading supports needed for children to move into self-teaching. Successful Engaged Learning Successful Engaged Learning is learning when the child is both actively engaged in the learning task and achieving success at that task. Instructional Intensity can be considered as the number of practices of a skill which a child experiences per minute of instructional learning time. Successful engaged learning and high instructional intensity on tasks producing successful engaged learning are pivotal for effective learning by Anglophone at-risk readers. Children must be both engaged and motivated, whilst achieving success from their attempts, and have lots of practice. Research on lack of success shows even a few instances of failure by adults have enduring effects in learning tasks, yet vulnerable Australian at-risk readers experience failure many times each day, week after month after year. To achieve high rates of successful learning, Australian children need reading supports to provide feedback and guide reading so high levels of successful engaged learning is experienced, and unsuccessful reading is kept to a minimum. Timely Efficient Intervention Timely Efficient Intervention is reading and literacy intervention is timely, through being quickly initiated, as soon as possible after a child is identified as having potential or actual low literacy skills or subskills. It is efficient, through being provided with appropriate, sufficient resources (e.g., teacher and teacher-aide time, intervention resources and activities); through using those resources strategically and effectively, minimising wastage; and through achieving effective progress that takes the child to a level where skills are at a healthy progress level, and the child maintains a healthy-progress trajectory. 125
REFERENCES The list of references below is those readings which are cited in the discussion of this document. A separate bibliography is included above, of recommended readings. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), Fifth Edition. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatic Association. Angus, M., Olney, H., & Ainley, J. (2007). In the balance: The future of Australia's primary schools. Canberra: Australian Primary Principals Association (APPA). Retrieved from http://www.appa.asn.au/publications/in-the-balance/. Anderson, V., Bowey, J., Bretherton, L., Brunsdon, R., Castles, A., Coltheart, M., . . . Prior, M. (2004). Reading instruction in Australian schools: An open letter to the Minister for Education. Anwaruddin, S. M. (2015). Teachers’ engagement with educational research: Toward a conceptual framework for locally-based interpretive communities. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(40), 1-25. Apfelbaum, K. S., Hazeltine, E., & McMurray, B. (2013). Statistical learning in reading: Variability in irrelevant letters helps children learn phonics skills. Developmental psychology, 49(7), 1348-1365. Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit Instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Aro, M. (2004). Learning to read: The effect of orthography. Jyvaskyla, Finland: University of Jyvaskyla. Baker, S., Berninger, V. W., Bruck, M., Chapman, J. W., Eden, G., Elbaum, B., . . . Tunmer, W. E. (2002). Evidence-based research on Reading Recovery: Reading Recovery is not successful with its targeted student population, the lowest performing students. Education News (EducationNews.org). Retrieved from http://www.wrightslaw.com/info/read.rr.ltr.experts.htm. Bowen, C., Bretherton, L., Carter, M., Castles, A., Clarke, A., Coltheart, M., . . . Wright, C. (2012). An open letter to all federal and state ministers of education. Britton, J. (1970). Language and learning. Coral Gables: Florida: University of Miami Press. Bushnell, M. (1971). I/T/A/ News. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/?id=ED063083. Catts, H. W., Adlof, S. M., & Ellis Weismer, S. (2006). Language deficits in poor comprehenders: A case for the Simple View of Reading. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49(2), 278-293. Catts, H. W., Compton, D., Tomblin, J. B., & Bridges, M. S. (2012). Prevalence and nature of late-emerging poor readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(1), 166-181. Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation. (2017). Cognitive load theory: Research that teachers really need to understand. Retrieved from NSW: http://www.cese.nsw.gov.au/publicationsfilter/cognitive-load-theory-research-that-teachers-really-need-to-understand. Clay, M. M. (1993). Reading Recovery: A guidebook for teachers in training. Auckland: Heinemann. Compton, D. L., Miller, A. C., Elleman, A. M., & Steacy, L. M. (2014). Have we forsaken reading theory in the name of "Quick Fix" interventions for children with reading disability? Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 55-73. Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., Fishman, B., Crowe, E. C., Otaiba, S. A., & Schatschneider, C. (2013). A longitudinal cluster-randomized controlled study on the accumulating effects of individualized literacy instruction on students' reading from First through Third Grade. Psychological Science, 24(8), 1408-1419. Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., Schatschneider, C., Toste, J. R., Lundblom, E., Crowe, E. C., & Fishman, B. (2011). Effective classroom instruction: implications of child characteristics by reading instruction interactions on first graders’ word reading achievement. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4, 173-207. Connor, C. M., Piasta, S. B., Fishman, B., Glasney, S., Schatschneider, C., Crowe, E., . . . Morrison, F. J. (2009). Individualizing student instruction precisely: Effects of child × instruction interactions on first graders' literacy development. Child Development, 80(1), 77-100. Department of Education, Science and Training(DEST). (2005). Reports of the National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/tll_misc/5/ : 1. Teaching reading: Report and recommendations: National inquiry into the teaching of literacy. 2. Teaching Reading: Literature Review (Report of the National Inquiry into the Teaching of 126
Literacy). 3. Your child's future: Literacy and Numeracy in Australia's schools. Dion, E., Brodeur, M., Gosselin, C., Campeau, M.-È., & Fuchs, D. (2010). Implementing research-based instruction to prevent reading problems among low-income students: is earlier better? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 25(2), 87-96. Downing, J. (1969). The effectiveness of i.t.a. (Initial Teaching Alphabet) in the prevention and treatment of dyslexia and dysgraphia. Paper presented at the World Mental Health Assembly (Washington, D.C., November 17-21, 1969). Ellis, L. A. (2005). Balancing approaches: revisiting the educational psychology research on teaching students with learning difficulties. Camberwell: Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/aer/6/. Fraser, J., Goswami, U., & Conti-Ramsden, G. (2010). Dyslexia and specific language impairment: The role of phonology and auditory processing. Scientific Studies of Reading, 14(1), 8-29. Freebody, P. (2005). Foreword: Balancing approaches: revisiting the educational psychology research on teaching students with learning difficulties. Camberwell: Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/aer/6/. Galletly, S. A. (1999). Sounds & Vowels: Keys to literacy progress. Mackay, Qld, Australia: Literacy Plus. Galletly, S. A. (2000). Phonological fun. Mackay, Qld, Australia: Literacy Plus. Galletly, S. A. (2001). Two vowels talking: Keys to literacy progress. Mackay, Australia: Literacy Plus. Galletly, S. A. (2005). The Galletly Report: Reading-accuracy development, difficulties and instruction in Australia. Submission to the National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy. Retrieved from www.literacyplus.com.au. Galletly, S. A. (2008). An exploration of rapid-use reading-accuracy tests in an Australian context (Doctoral thesis) (PhD), Central Queensland University, Mackay campus. Galletly, S. A. (2014). 'Echo Reading' empowers text reading. Literacy Plus Newsletter 1 (October, 2014), p.7, with additional handout to download. Retrieved from www.literacyplus.com.au. Galletly, S. A. (2014). Three categories (& 7 ‘types’) of Weak Readers: Common patterns of strength and weaknesses in children with reading difficulties Literacy Plus Newsletter 1,p.7, with additional handout to download. Retrieved from www.literacyplus.com.au. Galletly, S. A. (2015). Galletly Diagnostic Vowel Word Reading Tests. Literacy Plus Newsletter 2 (April, 2015), p. 6, with additional handout to download. Retrieved from www.literacyplus.com.au. Galletly, S. A. (2015). Reading fun with common vowel graphemes. Literacy Plus Newsletter 2 (April, 2015), pp.2-3, with additional handout to download. Retrieved from www.literacyplus.com.au. Galletly, S. A., & Knight, B. A. (2004). The high cost of orthographic disadvantage. Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities, 9(4), 4-11. Galletly, S. A., & Knight, B. A. (2010). CQUniversity Accelerated Metacognitive Literacy Intensive Tuition (CAMLIT): Program for Middle School students experiencing literacy difficulties. CQUniversity. Mackay: Qld. Galletly, S. A., & Knight, B. A. (2011a). A theory of differential disadvantage of Anglophone weak readers with language and cognitive processing weakness. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 35(1), 72-96. Galletly, S. A., & Knight, B. A. (2011b). Transition from Early to Sophisticated Literacy as a factor in crossnational achievement differences. Australian Educational Researcher, 38, 329-354. Galletly, S. A., & Knight, B. A. (2013). Because trucks aren't bicycles: Orthographic complexity as a disregarded variable in reading research. Australian Educational Researcher, 40(2), 173-194. Galletly, S. A., Knight, B. A., & Dekkers, J. (2010). When tests frame children: The challenges of providing appropriate education for children with special needs. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 34(2), 133-154. Galletly, S. A., Knight, B. A., Dekkers, J., & Galletly, T. A. (2009). Indicators of late emerging reading-accuracy difficulties in Australian schools. The Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 34(5), 54-64. Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A. (Eds.). (2002). Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement. 127
Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6-10. Gathercole, S. E., & Alloway, T. P. (2007). Understanding working memory: A classroom guide. Harcourt Assessment. London: UK. Retrieved from https://www.york.ac.uk/res/wml/Classroom%20guide.pdf. Hamilton-Smith, S., Gargett, P., Shaw, J., Brodie, K., Faix, C., Harrison, C., & Galletly, S. A. (2010). SCORE: A reader-friendly strategy for assisting text access by students. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years, 18(3). Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2005). Can instructional and emotional support in the first-grade classroom make a difference for children at risk of school failure? Child Development, 76(5), 949-967. Hattie, J. (2008). Visible teaching, visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement: Routledge. Hempenstall, K. (2016). Read about it: Scientific evidence for effective teaching of reading. CIS Research Report 11. Sydney: The Centre for Independent Studies. Retrieved from https://www.cis.org.au/publications/research-reports/read-about-it-scientific-evidence-foreffective-teaching-of-reading Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 23(2), 127-160. Initial Teaching Alphabet Foundation, H. N. Y. (1971). i.t.a. Research Abstracts: Forty-two Studies of the Effectiveness of i.t.a. Abstracted in Systematic Form. Juel, C., & Minden-Cupp, C. (2000). Learning to read words: Linguistic units and instructional strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(4), 458-492. Kennedy, M. M. (2005). Inside teaching: How classroom life undermines reform. Cambridge: Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Kher, U. (2001, March 26). Deconstructing dyslexia: Blame it on the written word. Time, 56. Kincheloe, J. L., & Berry, K. S. (2004). Rigour and complexity in educational research: Conceptualising the bricolage. Maidenhead: UK: Open University Press. Knight, B. A., & Galletly, S. A. (2005). The role of metacognition in reading-accuracy learning and instruction. Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities, 10(2), 63-70. Knight, B. A., & Galletly, S. A. (2006). The Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE) used in an Australian context. Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities, 11(3), 139-146. Knight, B. A., & Galletly, S. A. (2011). Developing an informed and integrated teaching approach for students with reading-accuracy difficulties in the primary school. In D. Lynch & B. A. Knight (Eds.), Issues in Contemporary Teaching (Vol. 2, pp. 65-89). Brisbane: Australia: AACLM Press. Knight, B. A., & Galletly, S. A. (2014). Discussion Paper for the project, ‘Bridging the gap for at-risk readers: reading theory into classroom practice.’: Central Qld University. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A. & Gargett, P. S. (2014). Phase 2 Draft principles of optimal reading instruction for at-risk readers in Prep to Year 3 for the project, ‘Bridging the gap for at-risk readers: reading theory into classroom practice’: Central Queensland University. Knight, B. A., & Galletly, S. A. (2017). Effective literacy instruction for all students: A time for change. International Journal for Research in Learning Disabilities, 3(1), 65-86. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (In press). Orthographic Advantage Theory: National advantage and disadvantage due to orthographic differences. Asia Pacific J. of Developmental Differences. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., Morris, J., & Gargett, P. S. (2018). Reading instruction strategies to reduce cognitive load. Practical Literacy: The Early and Primary Years, 23(2), 8-10. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (2017). Managing cognitive load as the key to literacy development: Research directions suggested by crosslinguistic research and research on Initial Teaching Alphabet (i.t.a.). In R. Nata (Ed.), Progress in Education (Vol. 45, pp. 61-150). New York: Nova Science Publishers. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-a). A call for research on impacts of English orthographic complexity and high cognitive load on literacy development. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-b). Generational disadvantage, ineffective early intervention, and high schools too full of children with low literacy skills: Needs for new directions towards optimising anglophone reading outcomes. 128
Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-c). It’s different learning to read and write English: A complex orthography creating high cognitive load. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-d). It’s different teaching children to read and write English: Teaching to maximise learning and manage cognitive load. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-e). The Literacy Component Model: A pragmatic universal model for researchers and educators. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-f). Needed! Reading and literacy research at school level in Australia. Knight, B. A., Galletly, S. A., & Gargett, P. S. (Submitted-g). Teacher-researcher exploration of effective reading instruction for at-risk readers in the first four school years. Landerl, K., Wimmer, H. C. A., & Frith, U. (1997). The impact of orthographic consistency on dyslexia: A German-English comparison. Cognition, 63, 315-334. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2004). A handbook for teacher research. New York: Open University Press. Leach, J. M., Scarborough, H. S., & Rescorla, L. (2003). Late-emerging reading disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 211-224. Lloyd, S. (1992). The phonics handbook. United Kingdom: Jolly Learning Ltd. Martin, A. J. (2010). Building classroom success: Eliminating academic fear and failure. London: Continuum International Publishing Group. Marzano, R. J., & Pickering, D. J. (1997). Dimensions of learning: Teacher's manual. Alexandria:VA: ASCDMcREL. Mazurkiewicz, A. J. (1973). I.T.A. Revisited. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the College Reading Assn. (17th, Silver Springs, Md.,November 1-3, 1973) . Mellard, D. F., Frey, B. B., & Woods, K. L. (2012). School-wide student outcomes of Response to Intervention frameworks. Learning Disabilities -- A Contemporary Journal, 10(2), 17-32. Mesmer, E. M., & Mesmer, H. A. E. (2008). Response to Intervention (RTI): What teachers of reading need to know. The Reading Teacher, 62(4), 280-290. Neale, M. D. (1999). Neale analysis of reading ability (Third Edition ed.). Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research. O'Connor, R. E. (2000). Increasing the Intensity of Intervention in Kindergarten and First Grade. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(1), 43-54. Pollo, T. C., Treiman, R., & Kessler, B. (2007). Three perspectives on spelling development. In E. Grigorenko & A. Naples (Eds.), Single-word reading: Behavioural and biological perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Poskiparta, E., Neimi, P., & Vauras, M. (1999). Who benefits from training in linguistic awareness in the first grade, and what components show training effects? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32(5), 437-447. Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching (Third ed.). New York: The Guilford Press. Pressley, M., Allington, R. L., Wharton-McDonald, R., Collins Block, C., & Mandel Morrow, L. (2001). Learning to read: Lessons from exemplary first grade classrooms. New York: The Guildford Press. Pressley, M., Graham, S., & Harris, K. (2006). The state of educational intervention research as viewed through the lens of literacy intervention. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(1), 1-19. Prochnow, J. E., Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2013). A longitudinal investigation of the influence of literacy-related skills, reading self-perceptions, and inattentive behaviours on the development of literacy learning difficulties. International J. of Disability, Development & Education, 60(3), 185-207. Queensland Department of Education. (1991). Support-a-reader program. Brisbane: Queensland Department of Education. Queensland Department of Education. (1997). The Year 2 diagnostic net. Brisbane: Queensland Department of Education. Renfrew, C. E. (1997). Renfrew Word Finding Picture Test (4th ed.). Nottingham, England: Renfrew C. E. Rogers, M. (2012). Contextualizing theories and practices of bricolage research. The Qualitative Report, 17(7), 1-17. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR17/rogers.pdf. 129
Rosner, J. (1993). Test of Auditory Analysis. Retrieved from http://courses.washington.edu/sop/Test%20of%20Auditory%20Analysis%20Skills.pdf Seligman, M. E. P. (2007). The optimistic child (13 ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Senate Standing Committee on Education and Employment. (2016). Access to real learning: The impact of policy, funding and culture on students with disability. Retrieved from http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Education_and_Employment /students_with_disability/Report. Seymour, P. H. K., Aro, M., & Erskine, J. M. (2003). Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 143-174. Shanahan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, C., Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Schatschneider, C., & Torgesen, J. (2010). Improving reading comprehension in kindergarten through 3rd grade: A practice guide (NCEE 20104038). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from www.whatworks.ed.gov/publications/practiceguides. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Starting out right: A guide to promoting children's reading success. Washington DC: National Academy Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/download.php?record_id=6014. Stanovich, K. E. (2013). How to think straight about psychology (Tenth ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon, Pearson Education, Inc. Swanson, H. L. (1999). Reading research for students with LD: A meta-analysis of intervention outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32(6), 504. Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design Learning and Instruction, 4, 293-312. Thomson, S., Bortoli, L. D., & Buckley, S. (2013). PISA 2012: How Australia measures up. Retrieved from Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). Retrieved from https://www.acer.edu.au/documents/PISA-2012-Report.pdf. Thomson, S., Hillman, K., Wernert, N., Schmid, M., Buckley, S., & Munene, A. (2012). Highlights from TIMSS & PIRLS 2011 from Australia’s perspective. Retrieved from https://www.acer.edu.au/files/TIMSSPIRLS_Australian-Highlights.pdf. Torgesen, J. K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resistors. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(1), 55. Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE). Austin, Texas: Pro-Ed, Inc. Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (2012). Test of Word Reading Efficiency 2 (TOWRE 2). Austin, Texas: Pro-Ed, Inc. Warburton, F., & Southgate, V. (1969). i.t.a.: An independent evaluation. London: Newgate. Western Australia Department of Education. (1997). First Steps developmental continua. Australia: Rigby Heinemann. Western Australia Department of Education. (2004). First steps: Reading map of development. Second Edition. Port Melbourne: Vic: Rigby. Woolley, G. (2011). Reading comprehension: Assisting children with learning difficulties. Springer: Netherlands. Wolf, M. (2007). Proust and the squid: the story and science of the reading brain. New York: NY: Harper Collins. Ziegler, J. C., & Goswami, U. C. (2005). Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia and skilled reading across languages: A psycholinguistic grain size theory. Psychological Bulletin, 131(1), 3-29. Citation: Knight, Bruce Allen. Galletly, Susan A., & Gargett, Pamela S. (2017) ‘Principles of reading instruction towards optimising reading instruction for at-risk readers in Prep to Year 3: Principles developed through teacher reflection on research and practice in the ARC project Bridging the Gap for At-Risk Readers: Reading Theory into Classroom Practice’. Central Queensland University.
130
