by Lori-Anne Busch | Aug 3, 2022 | Evidence-Based Practices Series, Grade 1, MSV / Three Cueing
Are you an early-years teacher who teaches young children to read through guided reading and leveled books?
When a student struggles to read a word, is your first response to ask, “What would make sense?” or, “What would sound right?”
Do you use running records to help identify goals for your students? Have you taught students strategies like, “Skip the word and go on” or “Look at the pictures for clues” when they come to unknown words?
If so, you likely follow the whole language or balanced literacy approach, and at some point in your career you likely were told never to say these three little words: “Sound it out”.
I was alarmed and embarrassed the first time someone said this to me. Teaching reading by focusing on letters and their sounds had been my custom, ever since my first year of teaching, when I was hired to teach a Grade 1 class. I remember being unsure of where to start, and going to the veteran teacher next door, to ask for help. She introduced me to phonics, and when the first child in my class read a full sentence aloud to me, I experienced a thrill that made me a teacher of reading for life! It had occurred to me, back then, that I had not been taught how to teach reading in my bachelor degree, and I wondered what I would have done without the teacher next door.
It turns out that many teachers use the strategies they do because of the teachers who work close by, who they have turned to for help. Just recently I learned that I am not the only person to have graduated with a bachelor degree in Elementary Education, having not been taught how to teach reading. For many others, the approach shared with them, through professional development, or the teacher next door, was the three cueing system, or MSV.
After my first few years as a classroom teacher, my career quickly turned to supporting students with disabilities. Having spent most of my career working in the field of inclusive education, I somehow had sidestepped being taught MSV, or the three-cueing system, so when I was told not to use the words, “Sound it out,” I was baffled and worried that something else very important had been missed in my education.
MSV stands for Meaning, Structure and Visual, and is often presented in a three circle Venn diagram. If a student uses meaning to help them solve an unknown word, they are drawing on their background knowledge, the pictures in the book, and their understanding of the context of the story. Structure refers to sentence structure, and a student is using this cueing system when they draw on what they know about grammar and syntax to solve a word. Visual cues are when students use their understanding of letters or letter patterns, and sounds, to solve the word. Prompts to use visual information include having the student look at the first letter in the word and telling them to, “Get your mouth ready” (Burkins & Yates, 2021).
In the three-cueing system, phonics and phonological awareness are underemphasized. Teaching students to use context or sentence structure to solve words, is believed to be more reliable (Beverine-Curry, 2019). Reading specialists like Marie Clay and Kenneth Goodman, who were proponents of the whole language approach that was common in the 70s and 80s, minimized the importance of teaching the alphabetic code. In fact, the belief was that focusing too much on print could trip a student up, and instead they should be guided to use meaning and syntax, as these behaviors were common to skilled readers (Smith, 1971, as cited in National Institute for Direct Instruction, 2022). This has since been disproven. It turns out that using pictures and context to solve words are behaviors common to poor readers, whereas strong readers apply sound-symbol relationships (Kilpatrick, 2016).
It is true that one of the strategies in MSV is related to letters and sounds. The visual cue in the three-cueing system represents grapho-phonemic connections, or print to sound connections. However, even though the three circles in the MSV Venn diagram are the same size, and the prompts were initially used in balance, over time, prompting students to use visual information to solve words was minimized (Burkins & Yates, 2021). Having students look at the letters is relegated to the last resort, as a reading strategy. Additionally, in guided reading, when students come upon an unknown word, they may be asked to make the sound of the first letter in the word, but then are prompted to use other cues, like the pictures on the page, to predict the word.
According to reading researcher David Kilpatrick (2016), “The whole language/balanced literacy instruction approach stresses meaning, context and good literature, but puts too little emphasis on phonological awareness and word study, virtually guaranteeing poor reading among about one third of our students” (p. 42).
Unfortunately, it turns out that “minimizing the use of visual information actually makes learning to read harder” (Burkins & Yates, 2021, p. 115), according to recent neurological research. When we use a “meaning – first approach”, students do not gain practice mapping sounds to letters, and this cuts down on the development of orthographic knowledge (Burkins & Yates, 2021, p. 116). Orthographic knowledge is a person’s memory of how language is represented in written form. In fact, using the three-cueing system “can actually prevent the critical learning that is necessary for the child to become a skilled reader” (Beverine-Curry, 2019).
Would you be surprised to learn that decoding, or sounding out words, is accurate 95% of the time, while using context to guess is only accurate 25 to 35% of the time (Kilpatrick, 2016)? Additionally, as texts become more complex, it is less possible to use context to solve words. Therefore, this strategy eventually will not serve readers well, since “with each passing year, the reading vocabulary load increases, so compensation becomes more challenging” (Kilpatrick, 2016, p. 3).
New research into how the brain learns to read has come out in support of teaching phonics and phonemic awareness as the most effective strategies for all readers (Dehaene, 2013). Teaching students to learn letter sound correspondences, and to associate sounds with letters turns out to be the way that our brains store words permanently, in a process called orthographic mapping (Kilpatrick, 2016). When students acquire the habit of looking closely at words, connecting sounds to letters, they are engaging in a powerful behavior that leads to “permanent word storage” and fluent word reading (Kilpatrick, 2016, p. 41). The end result is the development of a large bank of words that a student knows on sight. When students can decode words with ease, they are able to understand what they read. We all agree that reading is about making meaning from text, and it turns out that teaching students to “sound it out” is the route to get there!
It is unfortunate that for many teachers, just like me, the strategies we employ have come to us through the teacher next door, or the book at the bookstore, as opposed to through scientific research. It is important to remember, however, that many of the methods in use in schools today were developed before scientific discovery of how reading happens in the brain, and so the teacher next door “cannot be faulted for not anticipating that discovery” (Kilpatrick, 2016, p. 42). Teachers have done what they found worked best, not knowing the science behind it. In some cases, traditional teaching strategies have been disproven, while others have been confirmed by recent scientific studies.
It is now known that training students in “phonemic awareness, letter-sound skills, and word study skills…will result in substantial reductions in the percentage of struggling readers” (Kilpatrick, 2016, p. 42). And so, in the wize words of Maya Angelou, “Do the best you can until you know better. Then when you know better, do better”.
One of my goals is to learn more about what the research has to say about teaching reading, and to share that with teachers like you, through this blog. Please let me know if this has been helpful to you! Looking into various teaching strategies more closely to see what the research tells us, is beneficial to teachers and students alike. Thanks, and Happy Teaching!
References
Beverine-Curry, H. [The Reading League]. (2019, October 24). The Reading League Live Event September 2019: Three-Cueing Systems & Related Myths. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG7sEYIsbVo
Burkins J., & Yates, K. (2021). Shifting the balance: 6 ways to bring the science of reading into the balanced literacy classroom. Stenhouse Publishers.
Dehaene, S. (October 25, 2013). How the brain learns to read.
. You Tube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25GI3-kiLdo
Kilpatrick, D. (2016). Equipped for reading success: A comprehensive, step-by-step program for developing phonemic awareness and fluent word recognition. Casey & Kirsch Publishers.
National Institute for Direct Instruction. (n.d.). Part 2: What whole language writers have to say about literacy. Retrieved August 3 2022, from https://www.nifdi.org/news/hempenstall-blog/442-part-2-what-whole-language-writers-have-had-to-say-about-literacy
Smith, F. (1971). Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
by Lori-Anne Busch | Oct 31, 2020 | Dyslexia / Specific Disability in Reading, Evidence-Based Practices Series, Grade 1, Teaching Reading to Struggling Readers
You may be hearing more and more about the Science of Reading lately.
Do you wonder what it is that everyone is talking about?
My goal is to give you a quick synopsis of the Science of Reading, so that you can see what all of the excitement is about!
With this information you may decide to adopt some new techniques or strategies that will benefit the students you work with. In my experience, teachers who find out about the Science of Reading are grateful to finally have the knowledge to support students who they had not been able to help learn to read, up until this point.
No matter what grade you teach, you are likely to have students who struggle to read in your classes. The Science of Reading can be applied to support readers at any age. All of us can improve our practices by learning more about the scientific research behind reading. If you are a life-long learner, as I am, this information brings a breath of fresh air to literacy instruction, and to teaching in general.
What is the Science of Reading?
It is research that is based on a formula called the Simple View of Reading, first proposed in 1986 by researchers Gough & Tumner, which shows that reading comprehension depends on two basic components: decoding, and language comprehension (Farrell et al., 2019).
Decoding (D) x Language Comprehension (LC) = Reading Comprehension (RC)
Essentially, it is research that shows that a person will not be able to understand what they are reading if they do not have strong skills in both decoding, and language comprehension (Farrell et al., 2019, para 1). The significance of this research is that it shows the importance of directly and explicitly teaching students to associate letters and sounds, and then to sound out words letter by letter.
“Gough and Tunmer (1986) proposed the Simple View of Reading to clarify the role of decoding in reading. Many educators did and still do believe that strong decoding skills are not necessary to achieve reading comprehension if language abilities are strong” (Farrell et al.,2019, para 3).
Breaking Down the Formula
The formula can be further explained and broken down.
The multiplication symbol in the formula is significant, because it shows how a student with poor skills in either area would struggle to understand what they were reading.
An explanation by Dr. Jan Hasbrouk from The Reading League, helps to clarify this: “If the decoding skill is weak…especially if it is so weak we would have to say it is basically a zero, in terms of competency in decoding, no matter how smart you are, how language proficient you are, …what a good thinker you are, you are not going to have reading comprehension” (Hasbrouk, 2019, 7:25).
This kind of profile is characteristic of students with dyslexia, who have average or above average intelligence, yet experience a “block” when it comes to interpreting written language (Hasbrouk, 2019).
Students who are learning English often experience the opposite challenge, compared with students who have dyslexia. They may be able decode or pronounce the words that they are reading, yet not be able to understand the meaning of the words. Imagine, for example, that the student does not know any of the English words in a paragraph they have been given to read in science class. Even if their decoding is 100%, (that is, they can pronounce all of the words aloud), if their understanding of the meaning of the English words is low, they will not have any understanding of what they’ve read (Hasbrouk, 2019).
This research is important because it provides an opposite view of learning to read, from the very common whole-language approach. In the whole-language philosophy, successful readers are thought to bring what they already know about language to the page, and to predict upcoming words. They apply their understanding of oral language, sentence structure and meaning to reading the words (Zakaluk, 1982, para. 9-10). In contrast, in phonics-based approach, reading is seen as beginning with letters and sounds, and the emphasis is on cracking the code (para. 5). The whole-language approach remains very popular in schools today, and was the main approach used throughout the 80s and 90s.
Why is there so much attention on the Science of Reading now?
If the Simple View of Reading was first proposed in the 1980s, then why is it being brought up so much lately, you might wonder.
Over the past ten years or so, there has been extensive research into what happens inside the human brain, as a person develops the ability to read (Kearns, 2019, p. 185). Neuroscientists have been observing brain waves in readers, and have been using neuroimaging data to observe the difference between the brains of students with typical reading skills and those with dyslexia (p. 182). Their discoveries have implications for teaching reading, which confirm what Gough & Tumner presented in 1986:
“In the early elementary grades, students require extensive instruction and practice to help them learn grapheme-phoneme connections and recognize many words by sight. Some kinds of instruction – especially explicit, systematic phonics instruction – are especially effective in helping students acquire word reading skills. In its absence, some students will not develop good reading skills” (Kearns et al., 2019, p. 183).
For more information on connecting graphemes (letters) with phonemes (sounds), please see my previous post, on orthographic mapping.
Phonics and Whole-Language Combined
In contrast to the whole-language approach, the Simple View of Reading indicates the importance in teaching students how to decode, or to sound out words by matching letters to sounds. In the Simple View of Reading, language skills remain an important factor, but it is only half of the equation. Students need both decoding and language skills to comprehend what they read.
Even though research on the importance of teaching decoding has existed for over forty years, and even though this research has been replicated many times, and has not been dis-proven, many teachers do not know about it (Farrell et al., 2019, para 1,3) or are not convinced of its merit.
Many early years teacher do teach phonics and decoding, however some continue to believe that this is not necessary, or that it should only be touched on, in passing. There is the belief that students will grasp what they need to know about letters and letter patterns through exposure to words and reading, and that it is not important to spend time deliberately, directly teaching phonics. For example, Marie Clay, creator of the Reading Recovery program, states: “The beginning reader must discover for himself how to scan and visually analyze print to locate cues and features…” (p. 8).
As a previous resource teacher, and reading intervention teacher, I have worked with many, many students who were not able to deduce letter and sound correspondence through general reading practice. Instead, they required very intensive, explicit instruction, in order to learn to read. Developing the ability to decode was what finally helped them find success. In fact, I recently learned that up to 50% of students will struggle to read, if they are not directly taught sound symbol relationships (Hasbrouk, 2019). Bringing phonics into your instruction benefits all readers!
For all teachers, the Simple View of Reading is a helpful tool in determining how to help students who are struggling with reading comprehension (Farrell et al., 2019). Keeping the formula in mind when deciding what type of support to provide to students, the teacher can quickly see whether the problem is breaking down for the student over decoding or understanding language. This provides a very helpful starting point.
Middle Years and High School Students Who Struggle to Read
No matter what age the student is, consulting the Simple View of Reading can support the teacher in deciding how best to teach reading to an individual who is struggling:
“All of us can think of an older student who struggles with reading words. This struggle usually occurs because poor decoding skills were not mastered during the foundational instruction phase. Often students in these grades have adopted inefficient coping strategies that negatively impact comprehension. Even in later grades, students can benefit from phonics instruction and teachers are encouraged to provide time to enable “catch-up” growth. There is no substitute for effective decoding, and it can be taught at any age” (The Barksdale Reading Institute, Phonics tab, “Advanced Phonics Continuum”).
Where to Look Next:
According to The Reading League, a website that was created with the goal of supporting teachers in improving the reading skills of students in the state of Mississippi, there “two key reports” that teachers should be aware of:
“Teachers should be knowledgeable about two national reports that articulate key recommendations for instruction that are based on the science of reading.
- The National Reading Panel (2000) emphasized that phonics instruction should be systematic and explicit.
- The Institute of Educational Sciences (2016) confirmed the findings of the National Reading Panel by emphasizing again that it is important to explicitly teach the alphabetic principle and that students need to decode, encode, and analyze word parts in order to internalize the sound-symbol associations.
- In addition, the IES report recommended the importance of reading decodable connected text everyday during the early reading instruction years to build accuracy and fluency. (The Barksdale Reading Institute, Phonics tab, “Research: Two Key Reports” section)
I hope that you will find this helpful, and that you will apply this research with the students you teach. I am convinced if you give it a try, you will see positive changes not only in the readers who are experiencing difficulty, but with all of your early readers!
Happy Teaching!
References
Clay, M. M. (1979). The early detection of reading difficulties. Heinemann.
Farrell, L., Hunter, M., Davidson, M., & Osenga, T. (2019). The simple view of reading. Reading Rockets. https://www.readingrockets.org/article/simple-view-reading
Hanford, E. (2020, October 3). Influential literacy expert Lucy Calkins is changing her views. APM Reports. https://www.apmreports.org/story/2020/10/16/influential-literacy-expert-lucy-calkins-is-changing-her-views?fbclid=IwAR26L9qEoFLsxBYbe7y74qZMHgXUzrfiO2-vpOTQVxEYiPmlWuZyr5dbU10
Harbrouk, (2019, July 9). The science of reading: An overview (by Dr. Jan Hasbrouck) [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTvHSgoTeZE
Kearns, D. M., Hancock, R., Hoeft, F., Pugh, K. R., & Frost, S. F. (2019). The neurobiology of dyslexia. Teaching Exceptional Children, 51 (3), 175-188.
Kilpatrick, D. A. (2016). Equipped for reading success: A comprehensive, step by step program for developing phonemic awareness and fluent word recognition. Casey & Kirsch Publishers.
The Barksdale Reading Institute. (n.d). The Reading Universe: Understanding the Big Picture of Literacy Instruction [interactive grid]. https://www.readinguniverse.org/copy-of-concepts-of-print
Zakaluk, B. (1982). A theoretical overview of the reading process: Factors which influence performance and implications for instruction. [Unpublished monograph]. University of Manitoba.
by Lori-Anne Busch | Sep 1, 2020 | Dyslexia / Specific Disability in Reading, Evidence-Based Practices Series, Grade 1, Teaching Reading to Struggling Readers
As an identical twin, I think I look for doubles, similarities, or matches in almost everything I do. If you are a twin like me, you likely find other twins to be fascinating, and swarm toward them like moths to a flame. I had the absolute luck of getting to work in a classroom a couple of years ago in which the kindergarten teacher, the educational assistant, and I, the resource teacher, all had identical twin sisters! I experienced an immediate feeling of companionship whenever I entered the classroom.
Today I am going to introduce you to the six syllable types in English, and perhaps because of my personal way of seeing the world, I like to think of these syllable types as sextuplets. They are similar but unique in their own special way, just like sextuplets would be!
In structured literacy approaches, the six syllable types are explicitly taught to students, as they develop an in depth understanding of English spelling. Direct phonics instruction, that is carefully structured and sequenced, is key to structured literacy.
The National Reading Panel has identified five fundamental reading skills (Melekoglu, 2019, p. 412). These five skills are the basis for developing reading skills in students and “problems in any one of these skills can impact improvements in other crucial skills” (p. 413). The five skills are “phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and text comprehension” (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, as cited in Melekoglu, 2019, p. 413).
Structured literacy has to do with two of the five fundamental reading skills: the phonics and phonemic awareness skills, mainly. However the other components are not forgotten or left out. As you will see below, when a new letter or letter pattern is taught to students, they are given the opportunity to use that new knowledge in sentences and books. These skills are not taught in isolation, but rather, applied to reading real text, as soon as possible, and within the same lesson.
The important elements of structured literacy, according to Valdine Bjornson of the Manitoba Reading and Learning Clinic, (Orton Gillingham Academy, Classroom Instructor Course, June – July 2020) are:
- The reading instruction is highly sequenced, beginning at the most basic and working toward the complex. For example, short vowels are taught before vowel teams.
- It is cumulative, in that each lesson involves reviewing what was previously taught. This occurs when the teacher asks questions about concepts learned in earlier lessons, weaving the concepts into the current lesson. The teacher constantly spirals back to previously taught information, since the later tasks are built on them.
- Every lesson progresses logically, and builds sequentially. Tasks that are easier, come first in the lesson.
- Concepts practiced earlier on in the lesson are returned to towards the end of the lesson. The student applies the letters / patterns that were introduced early on in the lesson, to reading and writing words and sentences in the final steps of the lesson.
- Each lesson involves reading “connected text”; sentences or books that include the letters or patterns just taught. The teacher does not give students words or sentences to read that are beyond what they have been explicitly taught. Doing so would be considered unfair, and would not be emotionally sound. The teacher is careful to structure the lesson so that the student feels successful, and so they only give tasks to the student that they are confident the student will be able to do.
The Orton Gillingham approach is the premier model for structured literacy. Once students have learned the letter names and sounds, the teacher introduces the six syllable types in English. There are six syllable-spelling conventions used in English. It is useful to teach them because when students know the syllable types, it makes it easier for them to spell words correctly. It also helps them to know how to pronounce the vowels, in words that they do not yet know (Moats & Tolman, 2009). When students learn how to chunk longer words into syllables, and have been taught the syllable types, they are able to tackle longer words. They will be also be less likely to skip or guess at longer words (Moats & Tolman, 2009).
Here is a list of the six syllable types.
Before teachers can introduce the syllable types, students must learn how to divide a word into syllables, and how to count the number of syllables in a word. This is an oral activity, in which the student is asked to repeat a word, and then clap or tap the number of syllables they hear. Hearing syllables in words is one of the earliest steps in developing phonological awareness. As mentioned above, phonological awareness is one of the five essential components of teaching reading, according to he National Reading Panel.
It is sometimes helpful to have students count how many times their jaw moves down, when they say a word aloud. Syllables can be counted this way, since every syllable has a vowel, and our jaws drop down each time we make a vowel sound (Moats & Tolman, 2009).
Try saying the following words aloud, and while you do, place your hand on your chin.
Count the syllables in each of these words:
Apple (2)
Potato (3)
Watermelon (4)
Box (1)
Open Syllable
Open syllables are syllables that end in vowels. When the syllable ends in a vowel, the vowel sound is long. An easy way to see this at work, is to look at short words that end in long vowels. Remember that the long sound is when the vowel says its name. The short sound is when the vowel makes its soft, short sound. Long “E” is like the sound at the end of “me”, and short “E” is the sound in the middle of the word “bed”.
Each of these words end in a vowel, and the vowel sound is long. These are examples of open syllable words.
Me
He
Hi
She
No
Go
So
Closed Syllable
Some smaller words that are examples of closed syllables, are words like “mat” and “set”. Note that after each vowel, there is a consonant. Words that follow this pattern can be shown as “CVC” or consonant, vowel, consonant. They can also look like this: “VC”, in multisyllabic words like the first syllable in “ap-ple” or like in the word “ask“. The consonant “closes the door” and makes the vowel quieter. One way to help students remember this, is to tell them that it is harder to hear someone who is talking behind a closed door, because the sound is softer. That remind us that the vowel is making its soft sound.
Another idea is to use a visual cue, in which you show students how the pronunciation of a word changes when a consonant is added to the end of the word. To do this, you could have an open syllable word written on a longer card, so that part of the card can be folder over. On the back of the flap, a consonant is written. When the consonant is added to the end of the word, the pronunciation of the vowel changes.
For example, the word “me” is written on a card, with a flap that has a letter “T” written on the back. The flap is the door. When the door is open, the word is read as “me”, pronounced /m/ /ee/, but when the door is closed (the flap with the letter “T” on it closes like a door), the word now reads “met”. Opening the door again hides the “T” behind it, so the word reads “me” again. This demonstrates the idea of open and closed syllables, and is helpful in illustrating the way that the vowel changes its sound in open and closed syllables.
In the training offered by the Orton Gillingham academy, picture cues are used to remind students about the different syllable types. A tiger is used to show open syllables, due to the long “I” in the first syllable of the word ti – ger. A camel is used to show closed syllables, due to the short “A” sound in the first syllable, and the fact that the letter “M” closes the door, and signals to us that the vowel uses its short, soft sound in this syllable.
The other four syllable types are very recognizable, especially when illustrated with a few examples. Usually these syllable types are taught in single syllable words first, and then are expanded to words with multiple syllables. Remember that the “C” stands for “consonant”, and “V” for “vowel”.
Vowel Consonant – e
(VCe)
Examples: rake, bike, hope, com-pete, des-pite
Vowel Team
(CVVC, CVV)
These are syllables with long or short vowel sounds, that use two or more letters to spell the vowel. This category includes diphthongs like ou / ow, and oi / oy. Examples of vowel teams are oo, ae, ai,
Words: rain, read, away, loud, boy
Vowel – r
(V-r)
Also called “R controlled vowels”, because the letter “R” changes the way that the vowel sounds.
Examples are: er, ir, or, ar, ur
Words: fur, hurt, cart, yurt, sir
Consonant – le
(C-le)
These words have a consonant before the letter “L”, followed by a silent “E”.
Examples: apple, candle, little
Once you know the syllable types, you can notice different combinations of these types in multi-syllabic words. The word candle, for example, contains a closed syllable: “can”. Then, the second syllable in the words is a consonant – le syllable: “dle”.
Teaching reading this way involves many components, including supporting students in developing phonological awareness, or the ability to hear the sounds within words, which is what they do when they break a word into syllables. It also involves teaching them some vocabulary unique to English language. In this structured literacy approach, children are taught the meaning of the words “vowel”, “consonant”, and “syllable”, for example. They are taught difference between a long and short vowel sound. Additional vocabulary is introduced as we teach about open and closed syllables, and it expands from there.
David Kilpatrick, a well known reading researcher, advocates for using phoneme awareness and phonics in teaching students to read (2016). He points out that one might wonder whether it is necessary to teach reading in such a structured and direct way, since it seems that most students learn to read and spell fine without this. In reality, many students do learn to read without the use of a structured literacy approach, he agrees. However, for about 30% of students, direct, systematic phonics and phonemic awareness instruction is vital in becoming a successful reader (Kilpatrick, 2016, p. 16). Without it, these students will remain struggling readers throughout school.
Teaching phonics and phonological awareness is necessary, in order to prevent many students from becoming struggling readers. This method supports stronger readers in becoming even better at reading: “Typical first and second graders can learn to read more quickly and efficiently when they are trained in phoneme awareness” (Kilpatrick, 2016, p. 17). Without a structured literacy approach, such as the Orton Gillingham method, early elementary school teachers will continue to struggle to meet the needs of the weakest readers in their classes. Being a poor reader will have an impact on a student’s self-esteem and academic success, limiting their potential to become an accomplished, literate adult.
I hope you enjoyed meeting the sextuplets! They might even feel close to your heart, it you are a twin or a triplet yourself. I am sure you can appreciate the similarities and the important unique qualities of each. As a twin, similarities and differences were very important, when I was growing up. At times the differences were of utmost importance, as I struggled to define myself as an individual. At other times, the sense of belonging that came from having someone with the same DNA as myself, the same voice, hair, eyes, nose, and body type was very soothing.
I hope you found this post helpful. If you are interested in learning more about structured literacy, I strongly recommend the Orton Gillingham Classroom Educator course, offered by the Manitoba Reading and Learning Clinic. This post just barely scratches the surface, but if you would like to learn more, you can really go into it deeply through the Orton Gillingham training. For more information, please contact me below or through a message on the home page.
You can also go to directly to Manitoba’s very own Orton Gillingham Academy training locale, at https://sites.google.com/view/thereadingandlearningclinicofm/home?authuser=0
References:
Bjornson, V. (2020) Orton Gillingham Academy, Classroom Instructor Course.
Kilpatrick, D. A. (2016). Equipped for reading success: A comprehensive, step by step program for developing phonemic awareness and fluent word recognition. Syracuse: Casey & Kirsch Publishers.
Melkoglu, M. A. (2019). Evidence based fluency interventions for elementary students with learning disabilities. European Journal of Education Studies, 6 (5), 411-423.
Moats, L, & Tolman, C (2009). Excerpted from Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling (LETRS): Spellography for Teachers: How English Spelling Works (Module 3). Boston: Sopris West. Retreived on August 31, 2020 from https://www.readingrockets.org/article/six-syllable-types.
by Lori-Anne Busch | Jun 15, 2020 | Evidence-Based Practices Series, Grade 1, Teaching Reading to Struggling Readers
In researching the topic of teaching reading, I was happy to come across the following statements, from two very respected and credible sources, adamantly vouching for phonics instruction:
“The topic is seemingly simple – phonics. Do children need instruction in phonics? Why is there an argument? The answer is “yes” (Fountas & Pinnelll, 2020, p. 1).
“The question of whether to include phonics instruction has been resolved. The answer is yes” (International Literacy Association, 2019, p. 2).
If you are like me, you may share your enthusiasm about phonics only with a few trusted colleagues. I picture us whispering in the back corner of the staff room, passing resources to each other under the table. Well friends, now that Fountas and Pinnell, and the ILA have shouted it from the rooftops, we can too! Phonics instruction works! Its the best! I believe in it, because I have seen it work, really work, and I L-O-O-V-E all of the programs out there that break teaching reading down into minute, sequential steps, that follow beautifully, from one to the next. It is like music to me.
In 1997, the U.S. Congress asked for a review of research on literacy, with the goal of improving reading and writing achievement (Lonigan & Shanahan, 2008, p. v). As you may know, in the 80’s and 90’s, whole language instruction was mainly used in schools, and the impact on reading scores was dismal. In fact, “a 1994 National Assessment of Educational Progress report found 56% of 4th graders in California read below a basic level after embracing Whole Language” (Betker, presentation, 2019, Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/)
The resulting report, which recommended systematic phonics instruction, was “influential in helping to guide reading-education policy and practice in the United States” (Lonigan & Shanahan, p. v). The report is called the “Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read” (NICHD, 2000). This report is very widely cited in articles about teaching reading, and has impacted how we teach reading in Canada, as well. After the report was released by the National Reading Panel in 2000, there was a dramatic increase in the use of systematic, explicit phonics instruction, in schools.
However, it is clear to me, and to many teachers who have heard the research conclusions, knowing that something is supported by science does not automatically lead to implementation in a regular classroom. The information needs to be interpreted in such a way that it is usable and practical. Also, there are important factors to consider, in ensuring that the method is applied in a way that is congruent with the research. As you can imagine, not all phonics instruction is equal – the sequence that a teacher uses is vitally important: “[T]his process is not left to accident but goes according to a superbly designed sequence” ( Fountas & Pinnell, 2020, p. 3).
In teaching reading, and incorporating phonics in one’s program, it is important to consider the following questions:
- Who is phonics instruction for? Isn’t it intended only for students who struggle to learn to read?
According to Fountas & Pinnell (2020), “[E]ven children who “crack the code” early and appear to have noticed letter-sound relationships and figured out how to use them will benefit from systematizing their knowledge and developing effective, efficient ways to use their knowledge, not only of letters and sounds, but also of patterns involving larger chunks of words” (p. 1). They go on to say that phonics instruction is “even more critical when we consider the large number of English learners in our schools. It is our responsibility as educators to ensure equity and access to language for all students” (p. 1). I would argue that the same need for equity exists among students who are first language English speakers, but whose early experiences have not enabled them to develop pre-literacy skills.
“Research has shown the power of this early instruction in phonics for young students’ reading and writing development. Government-funded documents have shown that phonics instruction is helpful for all students, harmful for none, and crucial for some” International Literacy Association, 2019, p. 2).
2. Is there a “best” way to teach phonics / decoding?
“[H]ow we translate …research into instructional practice varies widely, resulting in practices that are sometimes ineffective or unbalanced and instructional materials that too often have serious instructional design flaws. Some phonics instruction is random, incomplete, and implicit. Other instruction is overdone and isolated, devoid of the extensive application to authentic reading and writing needed for mastery. Neither is as effective as it needs to be” (International Literacy Association, 2019, p. 2).
“There is no one best way to teach phonics…That is, there is no single method that has been shown to be the most effective approach” (Cunningham, as cited in Allington, 2013, p. 522). However, some methods certainly are better than others, and some programs are more easily applied and adopted, I would argue. The main point here is that, students do need to learn to decode, and that this is an important part of becoming an effective reader (Allington, 2013, p. 522).
You may have heard the term “the science of reading”. In the last few decades, an incredible amount of research has been done, that actually looks at what happens in people’s brains, when they learn to read. In fact, we now know an astronomical amount more about teaching reading than we did only 40 years ago, according to Dr. Kilpatrick (2016, p. 46) a reading researcher and doctor of psychology. The science of reading essentially tells us how the brain changes as it learns to read. This information can help us to know which teaching methods would result in developing a reading brain.
A recent brain research study out of Stanford explained how beginning readers who focus on letter–sound relationships, or phonics, instead of trying to learn whole words, increase activity in the area of the brain best wired for reading. This has resulted in the conclusion that phonics instruction has a strong impact on students’ early reading growth” (International Literacy Association, 2019, p. 2, Retreived from https://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/ila-meeting-challenges-early-literacy-phonics-instruction.pdf).
The Orton-Gillingham approach is one example of how to teach students to read, using systematic, explicit phonics instruction. This approach is recommended for students with Dyslexia, however it has been applied to students of varied abilities, with success. If you are looking for a place to begin, I highly recommend learning as much as you can about this approach.
Some other specific phonics methods that you may be interested in looking into, especially if you are an early years teacher, are the use of word families, and teaching of onset and rimes. David Kilpatrick recommends the use of word families for Grade 1 students who can identify the first sounds and letters in words, but cannot yet decipher the middle and ending sounds (2016, p. 50). Additionally, colour-coded onset-rime phonics-based intervention has been shown to be effective with struggling readers, and is recommended as an intervention for students at Tier 2 and Tier 3 (Wall, Rafferty, Camizzi, Max & VanBlargan, 2016, p. 8).
What else is there to consider?
Teaching students to read through decoding is only part of phonics instruction. It is important to have students apply their developing phonics skills in writing. Using inventive spelling in kindergarten and first grade is an effective way to reinforce letter-sound correspondence, because children who get the chance to write suddenly become “interested in using those letter-sound relationships to read and write” (Adams, as cited in Allington, 2013, p. 522)
It is important to note that phonics instruction must not stand on its own. It must be taught “within a comprehensive literacy design that must also include reading high-quality books aloud to children, engaging them in shared reading, interactive read-aloud, small group guided reading instruction, small group book clubs, independent choice reading, and a wide range of writing contexts that support the expansive knowledge of words and how words work” (Fountas & Pinnell, 2020, p. 1).
“We must design lessons that provide the opportunities for struggling readers to actually read” (p. 526). Often lessons for struggling readers differ from lesson for good readers, in that there is less reading activity and more work on skills in isolation (p. 526). This limits the volume of reading that these students do. Additionally, they tend to read less overall, since a person who struggles at something tends to do less of it. Struggling readers may tend to choose to read less often, as a result of the difficulty they experience in reading.
It is a good idea to have explicit phonics instruction as part of a lesson, but this should be sandwiched between opportunities for the child to read connected text, at a level that they can read with success. It is best to provide an opportunity for the child to apply the phonics skills that they have been taught, in connected text immediately after. (Lourenzo, C., 2019, lecture in course “Diagnostic & Remedial Techniques in ELA, University of Manitoba).
Kilpatrick (2016) explains that we, as teachers, do not need to choose one approach to reading. Kilpatrick explains that each of the traditional approaches (from phonics, to whole words to whole language) is appropriate at specific stages in the process (p. 48). At the very beginning stages of reading instruction, he asserts that a more phonological approach is appropriate, and as students develop along the reading continuum, whole language or other approaches are suitable. Once students learn sound-symbol relationships, and are able to decode easily and automatically, using the strategy methods from whole language, would be appropriate and useful.
Most of all, what really matters, is having effective “expert” teachers working with struggling readers, according to Allington (2013, p. 523).
The expertise of the teacher is “the critical factor in the quality of reading lessons” according to research (Allington, 2013, p. 523)
The way to increase the reading abilities in students is to teach their teachers “about reading development and how to facilitate it” (Allington, 2013, p. 523). Allington recommends that each school employ a reading specialist with a graduate degree in literacy, to support teachers to this end. Additionally, he recommends that we move away from having educational assistants work with the students who struggle the most. Instead, those students should work with teachers who have the most expertise in teaching reading (p. 523).
In order to become good readers, all students need lots and lots of experience reading books that are matched to their reading level, not their grade. This is especially important for struggling readers (Allington, 2013, p. 525).
Self teaching occurs when students are engaged in reading books at their independent reading level (p. 525). For this reason, it is the “volume of reading activity” that is most important in developing strong readers (p. 526).
Allington provides teachers with the following list,that can be used to guide one’s practice. This list is for teachers to use, to check their lessons against the characteristics of research-based reading lessons (Allington, 2013, p. 528).
- “Do we expect our struggling readers to read and write more every day than our achieving readers?
- Have we ensured that every intervention for our struggling readers is taught only by our most effective and most expert teachers?
- Have we designed our reading lessons such that struggling readers spend at least two thirds of every lesson engaged in the actual reading of texts?
- Do we ensure that the texts we provide struggling readers across the full school day are texts they can read with at least 98% word recognition accuracy and 90% comprehension?
- Does every struggling reader leave the building each day with at least one book that they can read and that they also want to read?” (Allington, 2013, p. 528)
I see this as being so helpful to myself and to the teachers I work with, that I want to paint it on the sky!. I trust that you will find this as helpful as I have!
Onward we go, in developing our abilities as expert teachers! It is the teacher, not the method, that makes the difference for struggling readers! (p. 523). But don’t leave out the phonics!
I would also like to recommend the following two articles, for more information on phonics instruction:
Twelve Compelling Principles from the Research on Effective Phonics Instruction by Fountas & Pinnell, 2020
Literacy Leadership Brief: Meeting the Challenges of Early Literacy Phonics Instruction by The International Literacy Association, 2019
Thank you for being part of this contemplation on teaching reading.
What questions do you have, with regards to phonics instruction? What conclusions have you arrived at?
References
Allington, R. (2013). What Really Matters When Working with Struggling Readers. The Reading Teacher, 66 (7), 520-529.
Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (2020) Twelve Compelling Principles from the Research on Effective Phonics Instruction. Heinemann. Retrieved on June 16, 2020 from https://www.fountasandpinnell.com/resourcelibrary/resource?id=484
The International Literacy Association (2019). Literacy Leadership Brief: Meeting the Challenges of Early Literacy Phonics Instruction. Retrieved on June 16, 2020 from https://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/ila-meeting-challenges-early-literacy-phonics-instruction.pdf
Kilpatrick, D. (2016). Equipped for Reading Success: A comprehensive, step by step program for developing phoneme awareness and fluent word recognition. Casey & Kirsch Publishers.
National Institute for Literacy (2008). Developing Early Literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel. National Centre for Family Literacy.
Wall, C. A., Rafferty, L. A., Camizzi, M. A., Max, C. A., & Van Blargan, D. M. (2015). Action Research of a Color-Coded, Onset-Rime Decoding Intervention: Examining the effects with first grade students identified as at risk. Preventing School Failure: An Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 60 (1), 1-9.
by Lori-Anne Busch | Jun 3, 2020 | Evidence-Based Practices Series, Grade 1, Teaching Reading to Struggling Readers
I have been reading Dr. Kilpatrick’s book, Equipped for Reading Success (2016), which was very enthusiastically recommended to me by two colleagues. This book is about teaching reading through developing phonological awareness in students. Phonological awareness is the understanding that spoken language is composed of smaller units such as phrases, words, syllables, and phonemes (sounds).“Children need to be able to distinguish sounds so that they can attach them to letters” when learning to read and spell (Fountas & Pinnell, 2009, p. 174).
Kilpatrick explains that each of the traditional approaches (from phonics, to whole words to whole language) is appropriate at specific stages in the process of learning to read (p. 48). At the very beginning stages of reading instruction, he asserts that a more phonological approach is appropriate, and as students develop along the reading continuum, whole language or other approaches become suitable.
In fact, the National Early Literacy Panel (NELP) Report (2008) states that “children’s early Phonological Awareness –that is, their ability to distinguish among sounds within auditory language–[is] an important predictor of later literacy achievement” (Lonigan & Shanahan, p. viii).
Many of the songs that you remember from your childhood likely targeted various phonological awareness skills. My favorite one was The A – Z Name Game by Sharon Lois and Bram. I learned rhyming through singing, “Lori-Anne, Lori-Anne, banana, fanna, fo – Fori-Anne, Me, mi, mo, Mori-Anne, Lori-Anne!” Rhyming and word play in poems, books and songs, train students to distinguish the sounds in words. Some of these silly songs actually teach children complex phonemic awareness skills.
Developing phonological awareness comes before phonics instruction. Being able to hear the individual sounds in words is the first step in learning to read and spell. Next, students are taught to connect those sounds to letters. When letters become part of the instruction, it is no long phonological awareness that is being taught, but phonics. When kindergarten teachers and day care educators read books that have rhyming phrases in them, or sing songs in which different sounds are substituted in words, they are actually working on important skills that support literacy development.
Being a child in Canada in the 80s, I was raised on songs by Fred Penner and Raffi. You can’t imagine how star struck I was when one day, about five years ago, I actually saw Fred Penner in real life, having lunch in a restaurant in Winnipeg, at the table next to mine. I had seen him at a concert when I was really young, but this was different! He was ten feet away! I could barely keep myself from starting at him! He had to have been pretty amazing for me to still recognize his greatness over 30 years later!
In kindergarten and Grade 1, phonological awareness can be directly taught, as a stepping stone toward reading and spelling. It is important to teach these skills, because children “do not automatically identify sounds just because they can speak and understand language” (Fountas & Pinnell, 2009, p. 178). In fact, “[S]peakers focus their attention on the meaning of utterances, not sounds. Unless they are trying to learn an alphabetic code, there is no reason to notice and ponder the phonemic level of language” (National Reading Panel Report, as cited in Fountas & Pinnell, 2009, p. 175).
Some children transition from nursery rhymes and songs right into the next level, in which they associate sounds with specific letters. Not all children need phonological awareness training, and it may be beneficial only for those who struggle with reading problems (Bus & van IJzendoorn, 1999, p. 404). Some students, however, need to be specifically taught to hear the distinct sounds within words, and to “map” those sounds to letters, which is called “orthographic mapping” (Kilpatrick, 2016, p. 45). “Orthography” has to do with writing letters and words.
Students need to be able to connect “what is heard in the mind (phoneme awareness) with what is seen on the page (letter-sound skills)” (Kilpatrick, 2016, p. 45). Phonemic awareness and connecting letters with their most common sounds (phonics) are “prerequisites” to learning to read. In fact, early literacy teachers will not be able to move their students along in literacy, until the students are “proficient” with these two skills (Kilpatrick, 2016, p. 49). Letters and their sounds need to be connected easily and automatically for the child, before they can benefit from “formal reading instruction”, according to Dr. Kilpatrick (p. 49).
Formal reading instruction in Grade 1 usually includes “word study”, or phonics instruction. However, Dr. Kilpatrick recommends that prior to teaching students the beginning, middle, and ending sounds in words, which is part of the phonics instruction that usually happens at the start of Grade 1, it is a better idea to teach them word families. (Word families, I am sure you will recall, are sets of words that follow the same spelling pattern, like rat, cat, fat, mat, pat, sat). This would allow the children to apply their developing skills at letter-sound association with the first sound, in each of the word family words, and then use the rhyme to help them along, so that they can read full words.
Since most students are not able to map full words yet, in the first month of Grade 1, using word families is like providing “training wheels” for the students at this earlier stage in reading (Kilpatrick, 2016, p. 50). Many students at this stage can map the first sound in a word only, and so this approach could be used first, prior to phonics. The word family approach is called the “Linguistic Approach”, and Dr. Kilpatrick recommends that Grade 1 teachers use “a ‘linguistics first, phonics second approach, while systematically training phonological awareness” (p. 50).
Dr. Kilpatrick (2016) asserts that if Grade 1 teachers were to follow his advice on this, they would “reduce the number of struggling readers to a fraction of what any traditional method (including phonics alone) would produce” (p. 50). Currently there is a portion of students in every school who read far below grade level. If we apply the research that tells us about how reading progresses, we can dramatically lessen the number of students who struggle (p. 45).
It is at this point that I have some questions, and am curious to learn more about the best way Grade 1 teachers might spend their first months with their students. The idea that there is an absolute best way to spend this time, and that doing so will eliminate the likelihood that any students will struggle to read is very appealing! I have always been very interested in teaching reading, and I am constantly learning and growing as a teacher of reading. The reason why the first few months of Grade 1 is especially interesting to me now, however, is that I will be transitioning to a new position in my school division next September. My first task in this new role is to provide support to Grade 1 teachers, as our division moves away from Reading Recovery and toward a new approach.
I am questioning the use of word families, despite Dr. Kilpatrick’s very convincing argument, because I have recently been taking part in Orton-Gillingham training. My instructor explained the other day that she is opposed to using word families, because she believes it can lead students down the road to guessing, or to not attending to each letter and sound in words (V. Bjornson, presentation, May 30, 2020). Once students begin to guess, they are moving away from word mapping, and are not learning the core skills they will need to become strong readers. It is better, instead, to have the students attend to each letter in a word, one at a time. To me, this makes more sense, as I have spent lots of time working with students who think that reading is about guessing.
Dr. Kilpatrick seems to concur with some aspects of Bjornson’s argument when he says the following: “For beginning reading instruction we need to make use of reading materials that are appropriate to the level at which the student can phonologically and orthographically deal with words” (2016, p. 49). If students are asked to read texts that are above the level that they can decode, or if they are taught to memorize full words before they learn the letter-sound connections, they can sometimes develop unhealthy coping behaviors that can lead them down the wrong path (p. 49). Would word family words not be considered inappropriate for students who are not yet able to deal with three letter words, in the first month of Grade 1, I wonder?
However, I can also see benefits to word families, as they would help to build confidence in struggling readers. If time is spent on word families for a brief period while students solidify their letter-sound skills, and phonemic awareness, it can give them the satisfying feeling of reading words, even if they are actually reading just the first letter, and recalling the rhyme, when solving the rest of the word.
I am curious what your perspective is on this question. Have you used word families in the past? Have you noticed a tendency toward guessing words after having used it, or is it a helpful transition that segues into reading CVC words? What are your thoughts on phonological awareness training and phonics instruction?
References:
Bus, A. G., van Ijzendoorn, M. H. (1999). Phonological Awareness and Early Reading: A meta-analysis of experimental training studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91 (3), 403-414.
Lonigan, C. J., & Shanigan, T. (2008). Executive Summary of the Report of the National Early Literacy Panel. Developing Early Literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel. National Centre for Family Literacy.
Kilpatrick, D. (2016). Equipped for Reading Success: A comprehensive, step by step program for developing phoneme awareness and fluent word recognition. Casey & Kirsch Publishers.
National Institute for Literacy (2008). Developing Early Literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel. National Centre for Family Literacy.
Pinnell, G. S. & Fountas, I. C. (2009). When Readers Struggle: Teaching that works. Heinemann.
by Lori-Anne Busch | May 12, 2020 | Evidence-Based Practices Series, Grade 1
Have you ever wished you could talk to your younger self, to share important words of wisdom that you gained through experiences, years later? Oh, how I wish I could send a letter back to myself, when I was a first year, Grade 1 teacher. If I could only sneak a copy of Beverly Tyner’s (2009) Small Group Reading Instruction, into the hands of my 23 year-old-self. How much better that year would have gone! Never mind that Tyner’s book was not published until almost ten years after my first year of teaching; if we can travel back in time, the publication date is not important!
I have summarized Tyner’s model below, to give you a snapshot of what it might look like, if you were to adopt this method for your own class. Essentially, she believes that “boxed reading programs that do not provide teachers with the appropriate materials or the necessary knowledge about the development of readers will never be the answer for struggling readers” (2009, p. xi). Understanding the truth in this statement has led me to move away from my research on the effectiveness of these kinds of “boxed” programs, and to move on to researching general approaches or strategies for teaching reading.
This same advice, to bring together the best parts of various programs, to fit the needs of unique students, was given to me as a student in a class at the University of Manitoba called Diagnostic and Remedial Techniques in ELA. This is the idea of empowering teachers to make decisions and judgements as to how to build a literacy program that works for their own class, and for individual students. (Lourenzo, C., lectures, Sept. 2018). Providing teachers “with the knowledge to be good consumers of reading products will drive the reading process forward in unprecedented way” (Tyner, 2009, p. xi). Teachers with knowledge of the research on reading are then able to adjust the instruction that they do in their classes, based on this information and on their own good judgement and experiences.
Beverly Tyner provides a framework which teachers can use to structure this kind of selecting, applying and adjusting of various strategies, when working with small groups of students.
Differentiated Instruction
- Tyner is a former early elementary school teacher herself, and explains that she understands how daunting it is to try to differentiate lessons for a wide range of learners.
- She shows teachers how they can meet the needs of everyone in the classroom. This includes those who are struggling to read, as well as those who come to school already able to read some words.
The Developmental Reading Process
- She provides teachers with a basic understanding of the “developmental reading process” that allows them to put theory into practice (p. 159).
- Essentially, there are “stages through which beginning readers naturally progress” (Tyner, 2009, p. 5). After assessing the students, using the ERSI assessment tool, teachers group their students into small groups of three to four students. Students are grouped with “others who are most similar in their literacy needs” (p. 7).
- The five stages that readers pass through as they become independent at reading, are described, with the important characteristics of readers at that stage.
- A grade-level designation is included for each stage. This allows teachers to coordinate their small group lessons with reading materials appropriate for the learners at each stage.
- Tyner’s model meets the recommendations for effective assessment by Reutzel and Cooter (2016): “In general, assessment should proceed developmentally according to the sequence in which skills are learned: phonemic awareness, to alphabet knowledge, to phonics and other decoding skills” (p. 188).
The 5 Stages
- Stage 1 – Emergent Reader
- Stage 2 – Beginning Reader
- Stage 3 – Fledgling Reader
- Stage 4 – Transitional Reader
- Stage 5 – Independent Reader
- The groups are flexible; students are moved from group to group based on ongoing assessment by the teacher (p. 7).
- “The progression begins in Stage 1 with the emergent reader (basically non-reader) and continues to an independent reading level in Stage 5” (p. 7).
- The stages bridge from Kindergarten to Grade 2 level. “Students advance through these levels as they build on their knowledge and move forward at their own pace” (p. 8).
- Tyner describes the characteristics of a reader in the “emergent stage”, as a person who has very little phonemic awareness, knows very few or no sight words, knows less than half of the alphabet, and does not understand the concept of a word (p. 9).
- At the next stage, “beginning reader”, the student has developed the ability to hear sounds in words, can track print, knows more than half the alphabet, and knows 15 sight words (p. 9). It goes on from there, with characteristics of each stage explained, as well as information on how to check whether the student has moved into the next stage.
Inclusive
- Tyner provides an early-intervention model that allows teachers to meet the needs of students who are working at the lowest level, who she has termed “emergent readers”, the “beginning readers”, “transitional readers”, and so on, without the need for students to leave their classroom.
- Our goal, in inclusive schools today, is to provide instruction to students with intellectual disabilities alongside their same age peers, whenever possible. Tyner’s model makes this feasible through the structure of this approach, the time spent in small groups working on specific, intentional goals.
- It is not only the weakest students who receive this strategic teaching, but all students. Every student receives small-group instruction time with the teacher, including those at the later stages in reading development.
- As she explains, “the approach presented in this book might help lay the foundation on which teachers can begin to build effective reading programs for all students. We can no longer be content in only addressing the needs of struggling readers…teachers recognize the need for providing differentiated instruction to students performing above, on, and below grade level” (Tyner, 2009, p. 160).
Small-Group Lessons
- Tyner shows teachers how to take the word study that they use with the full class, and adjust it to meet the needs of specific students in small-group. This allows for students who are significantly behind, to receive direct instruction in the specific areas of weakness.
- This tailoring of instruction is what helps students advance as readers.
- Key to the small group work is the direct teaching of phonics, with the goal of helping students see the patterns in words.
- “…Phonics falls under the wider category called word study. Word study refers to the systematic, developmental study of words…and encompasses alphabet knowledge, beginning consonant sounds, word families, common and uncommon vowel patterns” and so on (p. 11, italics in original).
Word Study
- Most appealing to me, is the sequencing that Tyner provides, in showing teachers how to move students from one level to the next, in their growth toward becoming independent readers.
- Specific letters and word parts, or patterns, are taught at each stage, to move students along in developing the ability to decode words.
- An important goal for students at the emergent stage is to develop phonological awareness. Very clear, direct teaching of phonemic awareness is of utmost importance for students who fall below grade level in reading.
- “Students who exhibit phonemic awareness will have an easier time learning to read and spell (Goswami, as cited in Tyner, 2009, p. 10). This is the kind of instruction that students who are reading below level need, in order to close the gap.
- “The need for systematic phonics and word study instruction delivered in small-group is well documented” (Morris, NICHD, Santa & Hoien, as cited in Tyner, 2009, p. 11).
Comprehensive Literacy Program
The five components are:
(1) phonemic awareness
(2) phonics – this is included in a wider category called “word study”.
(3) fluency
(4) vocabulary
(5) comprehension
- These instructional components have been identified by the National Reading Panel (2000) as “components consistently [relating] to reading success” (NICHD as cited in Tyner, 2009, p. 10).
Whole-Class Application
- Additionally, Beverly Tyner (2009) recommends a way for teachers to structure their ELA class time, which includes all of the components of a comprehensive literacy program, and is based on research. (This overall structure, is what I especially wish I could share with younger-me!)
“The Literacy Block”(Tyner, 2009, p.22) is broken down into four chunks:
- Whole-Group Instruction – Read Alouds / Modelled Reading
- Whole Group Shared Reading – Including Choral Reading
- Small-Group Differentiated Reading Model – In which all 5 components of literacy are addressed for all students. “Small group instruction is for all students, although the struggling readers may be seen more frequently” (p. 22).
- Independent Reading – Where students practice reading or doing activities at their independent level, on their own or with partners, while the teacher provides lessons to small groups of students.
- Tyner provides advice for how to structure this time so that the teacher is not interrupted while working in small groups, by students who are given the task of working independently (See Chapter 9: Engaging and Managing the Rest of the Class During Small-Group Reading Instruction, pp. 144-158).
Varied Texts
- Tyner (2009) provides a clear description of how to run each part of the block as well as the purpose for each. She even explains which type of reading material to use for each part of the literacy block, and tells why.
- For example, during Shared Reading, “the primary focus… is to share grade-level text; therefore, the teacher is primarily responsible for reading the text” (p. 19). Through choral reading, all students are taught grade level content and vocabulary. Students with weaker reading skills are provided support, without attention being drawn to them, since the class reads in unison.
- In the Small-Group Reading Instruction slot, the kind of text used, differs. Students need to practice reading, with books they can read with success. To provide just the right level of difficulty, leveled books are recommended for use in small group, by Tyner. Since this model is flexible, the teacher may adjust the types of books used. Personally, I have used decodable texts for students in the emergent and beginning stages, because that way students can apply what they have learned in word study, immediately afterwards. The decodable books I have chosen, are ones that include only the word parts or letters that the child has been introduced to. This allows them to successfully decode the text, using their new skills. I find decodable texts very useful at these early stages, since I know that the right amount of challenge is necessary to nudge them forward, as readers (p. 13).
Research – Based
- Beverly Tyner (2009) provides an entire model that shows teachers how to make the day to day work that they do in their classroom reflect the research on literacy.
- Her advice for the word study portion of the lessons meets Stahl’s (1992) recommendations for successful phonics instruction (Reutzel and Cooter, 2016, p. 187):
- “First of all it builds on children’s knowledge of how print functions. In the early stages phonics and decoding instruction also build on students’ phonological awareness when the alphabet is introduced…Phonics is integrated into a comprehensive reading program, and focuses, ultimately, on reading words, not memorizing rules” (Stahl, as cited in Reutzel & Cooter, p. 187). Tyner provides a comprehensive program that meets these criteria.
- Research confirms that effective programs include onset and rime instruction, which can also be woven into writing instruction (for instance, using “temporary” or phonemic spellings)” (p. 187).
- “A prime objective of exemplary phonics instruction is to develop independent word-recognition strategies, focusing attention on the internal structure of words (structural analysis)” (p. 187).
- “All effective instruction is preceded by an assessment of student knowledge” (p. 187)
This valuable framework, the idea of the developmental stages, the precise description of how to go about teaching students at various stages in their development, is invaluable. Additionally, as noted above, the methods used are based in research.
If I had had this plan, when I first began teaching, along with the rationale for why to include each component, I can only imagine how much better the year would have gone. This is my new favorite book, and I want to share it with all of you!
I encourage you to give it a try, if you are an early-years teacher. Let me know how it turns out!
If you are already familiar with this method, what are your impressions? Please share your experiences with it, in the comment section below.
Happy teaching everyone!
References:
Reutzel, D. R & Cooter, R. B. Jr. (2016). Strategies for Reading Assessment and Instruction in an Era of Common Core Standards: Helping Every Child Succeed. Pearson.
Tyner, B. (2009). Small Group Reading Instruction: A differentiated teaching model for beginning and struggling readers. International Reading Association.
Recent Comments