Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
READING RECOVERY AND THE FAILURE OF THE NEW ZEALAND NATIONAL
LITERACY STRATEGYLITERACY STRATEGY
Evidence from the Progress in InternationalEvidence from the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2011 and
Reading Recovery Monitoring Reportsg y g p
Willi E T & J W ChWilliam E. Tunmer & James W. Chapman
Institute of EducationInstitute of EducationMassey University
IntroductionIntroduction• In response to growing concerns about NZ’s relatively
l i iti i lit hi t t thlarge inequities in literacy achievement outcomes, the government established the Literacy Task force in 1999.
• Taskforce responsible for providing recommendations i d t i i lit hi t f ll t d t b taimed at raising literacy achievement of all students but with particular attention given to “closing the gap between the lowest and highest students ”between the lowest and highest students.
d f h kf d l• Recommendations of the Taskforce constituted national literacy strategy but no fundamental changes in NZ’s approach to literac ed cation recommendedapproach to literacy education recommended.
• Over a decade later, concerns were still being expressed about the literacy achievement gap. In December 2011, h B i fi I i Mi i dthe Briefing to Incoming Minister stated:
“ the gap between our high performing and low performing… the gap between our high performing and low performing students remains one of the widest in the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). These low performing students are likely to be Māori or Pasifika and/or from low socio‐economic communities. Disparities in education appear early and persist throughout learning ” (p 8)early and persist throughout learning. (p. 8)
• Based on these findings the Briefing concluded that:Based on these findings, the Briefing concluded that:“The greatest challenge facing the schooling sector is producing equitable outcomes for students.” (p. 23)
NZ’s high degree of variability in literacyNZ s high degree of variability in literacy achievement outcomes is surprising for two reasons:reasons:
• NZ has a unified national education system ywith a relatively uniform approach to literacy instruction and intervention.
• Reading Recovery (RR), an early intervention program implemented throughout NZ in the 1980s, has as its stated purpose bringing t li d t l l fstruggling readers to average levels of performance within 20 weeks.
Evidence that NZ’s National Literacy Strategy has Failed
Evidence comes from latest Progress in InternationalEvidence comes from latest Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2011 report.
• PIRLS focuses on achievement and literacy learning experiences of children from 45 countries in grades
i l Y 5 i NZ (9 ld )equivalent to Year 5 in NZ (9‐year‐olds).• Reason 9‐year‐olds tested – period during which
d i ll f “l i d”students typically move from “learning to read” to “reading to learn.”
l f d d• 5‐year cycle of assessments administered in 2001, 2006, and 2011.
• PIRLS includes a test of reading comprehension and a• PIRLS includes a test of reading comprehension and a series of questionnaires, given to principals, teachers, parents and students to obtain information onparents, and students, to obtain information on reading behaviours, reading attitudes, and home and school contexts for reading.school contexts for reading.
PIRLS reading comprehension test is designed to assessPIRLS reading comprehension test is designed to assess two aspects of reading literacy:
• Purposes for reading
• Processes of reading comprehension
Two purposes account for most of theTwo purposes account for most of the reading done by young students:
• Reading for literary experience
• Reading to acquire and use information
Four types of comprehension processes are assessed across the two purposes of reading (literary experience,across the two purposes of reading (literary experience, acquiring information):
• Focus on and retrieve explicitly stated information –• Focus on and retrieve explicitly stated information –usually contained within a sentence or phrase.
• Make straightfor ard inferences s all connecting• Make straightforward inferences – usually connecting two or more pieces of information contained with text.
d d d f l• Interpret and integrate ideas and information – involves processing text beyond the phrase or sentence level, often drawing on background knowledge andoften drawing on background knowledge and experiences.
• Evaluate content language and textual elements• Evaluate content, language and textual elements –usually involves going beyond constructing meaning from text to critically reflecting on the text itself.from text to critically reflecting on the text itself.
liFor PIRLS 2001 assessment, scaling procedures based on Item Response Theory were used to establish an international scale with a mean of 500 and a standard deviationwith a mean of 500 and a standard deviation of 100.
To monitor within‐country changes in mean y greading achievement across assessment cycles data from subsequent assessmentscycles, data from subsequent assessments (2006, 2011) were linked to the 2001 scale.
PIRLS 2011 results – large disparity between good and poor readers has continued despite policies and resources aimed at p pclosing gap.
• Average reading achievement score for NZ in PIRLS 2011 not significantlNZ in PIRLS 2011 not significantly different either PIRLS 2001 or 2006.
Table 1Means, standard deviations, and percentiles of the reading , , p f gachievement scores for New Zealand as a function of PIRLS test cycle
Percentile Scores
Test Cycle Mean Scale Score
Standard Deviation
5th
Percentile95th
Percentile
PIRLS 2001 529 93 360 668
PIRLS 2006 532 87 374 664
PIRLS 2011 531 88 373 666
• Number of countries that significantly f d NZ (20) d d b foutperformed NZ (20) exceeded number of
countries that NZ significantly outperformed (17), similar to PIRLS 2006.
• Of six English‐speaking comparison countries, all but one significantly outperformed NZ.
Table 2PIRLS 2011 mean reading scores for English‐speaking comparison
Country Mean Scale Score Standard Deviation
g f g p g pcountries
Country Mean Scale Score Standard Deviation
5. Northern Ireland 558 76
6. United States 556 73
10 I l d 552 7510. Ireland 552 75
11. England 552 82
12. Canada 548 69
23. New Zealand 531 88
27. Australia 527 80
• Trend data revealed that although there were moreTrend data revealed that, although there were more increases than decreases in mean reading scores across countries from 2001 to 2011, NZ showed noacross countries from 2001 to 2011, NZ showed no significant increases in reading performance.
• Standard deviation and range (between 5th and 95thpercentiles) for NZ’s reading scores almost unchanged from PIRLS 2001 and 2006 and exceeded values of most other countries, including those of six English‐speaking comparison countries.
L diff i di b• Large differences in reading scores between Pākehā/European and Māori/Pasifika students
h d t d dunchanged over past decade.
Table 3M di hi t f N Z l dMean reading achievement scores for New Zealand as a function of ethnicity and PIRLS test cycle
Ethnic GroupEthnic Group
Test Cycle Pākehā/European
Asian Māori PasifikaEuropean
PIRLS 2001 552 540 481 481
PIRLS 2006 552 550 483 479
PIRLS 2011 558 542 488 473PIRLS 2011 558 542 488 473
PIRLS bli h d i i l b h k (lPIRLS established international benchmarks (low, intermediate, high, advanced) based on type of
i d blquestions students were able to answer.
• No significant changes from PIRLS 2001 or 2006• No significant changes from PIRLS 2001 or 2006 results in relatively high percentage of NZ students who failed to reach low international benchmarkwho failed to reach low international benchmark, despite general improvement across countries in percentages of students reaching benchmarks frompercentages of students reaching benchmarks from 2001 to 2011.
• NZ’s 8% failure rate exceeded by only 13 countries (Australia = 7%).(Australia 7%).
Child diff tl i th t f lit t lt lChildren differ greatly in the amount of literate cultural capital they posses at school entry.
• Literate cultural capital – a generic term referring to important reading related knowledge and competenciesimportant reading‐related knowledge and competencies that are an outgrowth of activities in the home environment that support early literacy development.environment that support early literacy development.
• Research indicates that the higher the level of literateResearch indicates that the higher the level of literate cultural capital possessed by children at the beginning of school, the more they profit from instruction, they y p ylearn to read sooner, and they read better than children who have less literate cultural capital.
Li l l i l h l i l dLiterate cultural capital at school entry includes:
• Oral language skills (especially vocabulary g g ( p y yknowledge)
• Familiarity with “book” languageFamiliarity with book language• Basic understanding of concepts and conventions of
printed languageprinted language• Knowledge of letter names and sounds• Preconventional spelling ability (e.g., KLR for colour)• Sensitivity to subcomponents of spoken wordsy p p• Sensitivity to semantic and syntactic constraints of
sentencessentences
According to data from the PIRLS 2001, 2006, and 2011 studies, differences in literate cultural2011 studies, differences in literate cultural capital at the beginning of school are associated with much larger differences in future readingwith much larger differences in future reading achievement in NZ than in most other countries.
• Early Literacy Activities (ELA) scale and Parents Like Reading (PLR) scale were used in the PIRLS 2011 study – expanded versions of y pearlier PIRLS measures.
• ELA based on frequency with which parents based o eque cy t c pa e tsengaged their children in nine literacy‐related activities prior to school entry:p y
Reading books, telling stories, singing songs, playing with alphabet toys, talking about things done, talking about things read, playing word games, writing letters or
d di l d i d l b lwords, reading aloud signs and labels.
• Difference of 38 scale points in mean reading scores between NZ students in often and sometimescategories of ELA was larger than all but four countries (much larger than international mean difference of 23 points).
PLR b d ’ d f• PLR based on parents’ degree of agreement/disagreement with seven statements
di h i i d d diregarding their attitude toward reading.
F l I d l if I h t R di i• For example, I read only if I have to; Reading is an important activity in my home; I like to spend my
ti di I d l if I d i f tispare time reading; I read only if I need information.
Diff f 40 l i t i di• Difference of 40 scale points in mean reading scores between NZ students in like and somewhat like t i f PLR l th ll b t tcategories of PLR was larger than all but two
countries (much larger than international mean diff f 28 i t )difference of 28 points).
C l iConclusionsLittle or no progress in reducing literacy achievementLittle or no progress in reducing literacy achievement gap despite PIRLS findings indicating that NZ was generally well above international means in:generally well above international means in:
• School resources for teaching reading – books, computers, school libraries (no reading resource shortages indicated).
• Classroom learning environment – high emphasis on academic success, including teachers’ expectations for student achievement; collaboration among teachers was strong; amount of instructional time spend on teaching reading was fourth highest.
• School climate – schools safe and orderly, h ki di i d hteacher working conditions good, teacher career
satisfaction above average.
• Level of formal education – above average, a d d f idegreed profession.
Reading Recovery and the National Literacy Strategy
R di R (RR) i ll i l d• Reading Recovery (RR) – a nationally implemented intervention program for children struggling to learn to read after a year of schoolingread after a year of schooling.
• Program involves one‐to‐one withdrawal instruction forProgram involves one to one withdrawal instruction for 30 – 40 minutes per day for 12 – 20 weeks by a specially trained RR teacher.trained RR teacher.
• Goal of program is to accelerate students’ reading achievement to the average level of their peers within a 20 – week period.
RR introduced throughout NZ in late 1980s and hasRR introduced throughout NZ in late 1980s and has been a major part of the literacy strategy. However, available data indicate that over the past decade RRavailable data indicate that over the past decade RR has had little or no impact on reducing NZ’s relatively large literacy achievement gaplarge literacy achievement gap.
• Of the total 6‐year‐old population, 14% entered RR in 2011 (18% in schools offering RR).
• Of the total 6‐year‐old population of Māori and Pasifika (Polynesian descendants from Pacific Islands), 24% were involved in RR, compared with 17% of NZ E /P k h dEuropean/Pakeha students.
• Māori and Pasifika made up 44% of the students involved in RR The higher participation rate forinvolved in RR. The higher participation rate for Māori/Pasifika indicates that they were already more likely to fall behind in reading after only onemore likely to fall behind in reading after only one year in school.
• Home language not considered a major issue as only ll b f h h ld l ka small number of these children learn to speak
Māori or a Polynesian language as a first language.
• RR is more likely to be implemented in high‐decileRR is more likely to be implemented in high‐decile (8‐10) schools (71%) than in low‐decile (1‐3) schools (56%) due largely to RR’s perceived ineffectiveness(56%), due largely to RR s perceived ineffectiveness for students attending low‐decile schools (decile rankings are based on the income/SES level of therankings are based on the income/SES level of the neighborhood the school serves).
• Māori/Pasifika children and children from low• Māori/Pasifika children and children from low‐income backgrounds are less likely to be successfully discontinued despite having receivedsuccessfully discontinued despite having received more lessons and extra time in RR (stable pattern over past decade)over past decade).
• Of the total number of children “referred on” (not successfully discontinued), 49% were Māori or Pasifika.
Research also strongly indicates RR is differentially effective; RR is not effective for those struggling readers who need help the most. Claim supported by data from three assessments taken before and after RR for successfully discontinued and referred on students:
• Entry and exit scores for successfully discontinuedEntry and exit scores for successfully discontinued children were much higher than those for referred on childrenreferred on children.
Discontinued entry M 13M = 13
Referred On entryReferred On entry M = 6
Di ti d itDiscontinued exitM = 29
Referred On exitM = 17
Discontinued entry M = 23
Referred On entryReferred On entry M = 10
Discontinued exitM = 57
Referred On exitM = 32
Discontinued entryDiscontinued entryMdn = 5
Referred On entryMdn = 2
Discontinued exitDiscontinued exitMdn = 18
Referred on exitMdn = 13
• RR children in high decile schools were more likely toRR children in high decile schools were more likely to enter and exit from RR with higher scores than children from low decile schools.
• Research further indicates that many of the lowest‐• Research further indicates that many of the lowest‐performing 6‐year‐olds are excluded from RR because they are considered not ready or less likely to benefitthey are considered not ready or less likely to benefit from the program or are withdrawn early from RR because they failed to make expected rates of progress.y p p g
• Children who are more likely to benefit from RR areChildren who are more likely to benefit from RR are further along the developmental progression from prereader to skilled reader.p e eade to s ed eade .
Phases of word learning proposed by Ehriand McCormick (1998)
Pre‐Alphabetic PhasePre Alphabetic Phase
Partial‐Alphabetic Phase
Full‐Alphabetic Phase
Consolidated‐Alphabetic Phase
A tomatic PhaseAutomatic Phase
• Children at low end of developmental progression need more intensive and explicit instruction inneed more intensive and explicit instruction in phonological skills than what is provided in RR.
• Chapman et al. (2001) found in a longitudinal study of h d h f il d hi i ifiRR that students who failed to achieve significant
progress or maintain modest gains had limited h l i l kill b i i f d iphonological skills at beginning of program, during
year preceding entry into RR, and during year f ll i i i i i RRfollowing participation in RR.
S l (2014) i i d RR h h• Serry et al. (2014) interviewed RR teachers who indicated that RR was best suited for students with l ti l i d l i di trelatively minor delays in reading progress, not
children with more severe problems.
• Center et al. (2001) found that the effectiveness of RR ( )interacts with type of classroom instruction. RR students in code‐oriented classrooms outperformed pRR students in whole language classrooms on four reading measures (although on average, RR students in both types of classrooms failed to reach the average level of their peers on any reading measure).
Major aim of RR is to help struggling readers to develop a “self extending system” of readingdevelop a self‐extending system of reading strategies so that they can learn effectively in the regular classroom without additional supportregular classroom without additional support.
• NZ research indicates that positive maintenance effects for the majority of successfullydiscontinued children are modest or non‐existent.
• Recent studies (Jesson & Limbrick, 2014; Nicholas & P khill 2013) h d hParkhill, 2013) showed that mean scores on standardized tests 2, 3, and 4 years following di ti ti f RR 1 d b ldiscontinuation from RR were on average 1 sd below that of same‐age cohorts. Only 1/3 of students in b th t di hi d l l hi hboth studies achieved average level or higher.
PIRLS 2011 Data in Relation to Reading RecoveryNZ reading mean 531 (SD=79
Non‐remedial mean 568 (SD=80)
RR mean 493 (SD=80)
Maori RR mean 469
Pasifika RR mean 463
Deciles 1‐2 RR mean 452
Deciles 9‐10 RR mean 515
The aim of Reading Recovery is to prevent literacy difficulties at an early stage before they begin to affect a child’s educational progress. Providing extra assistance to the lowest achievers after one year in school, it operates as an effective prevention strategy against later literacy difficulties. Nationally, it may be characterised as an insurance against low literacy levels” (emphases added). y ( p )https://www.readingrecovery.ac.nz/reading_recovery/
RR has had little or no impact on reducing NZ’s relatively large literacy achievement gap.e acy ac e e e gap
Why has New Zealand’s National Literacy y yStrategy Failed?
Continuation of NZ’s relatively large literacy achievement gap explained in terms of literate cultural capital, a rigidly constructivist orientation towards literacy education, and Matthew effects in reading.
• NZ has followed a predominantly constructivist approach to literacy education for the past 25 years.
• Literacy learning is largely seen as a by‐product of active mental engagement.
• There is little or no explicit teaching of phonemic awareness and alphabetic codingphonemic awareness and alphabetic coding skills.
• Word analysis activities, if any, arise primarily f th hild’ d i t tfrom the child’s responses during text reading and focus mainly on initial letter sounds.
• Underpinning the constructivist approach to literacy teaching is the “multiple cues” theoryliteracy teaching is the multiple cues theory of reading (or “searchlights” model).
“ i ffi i t id d ti th“…in efficient rapid word perception the reader relies mostly on the sentence and yits meaning and some selected features of the forms of words Awareness of thethe forms of words. Awareness of the sentence context (and often the general context of the text as a whole) and a glance at the word enables the reader toglance at the word enables the reader to respond instantly” (Clay, 1991, p.8).
Beginning readers “need to use their g gknowledge of how the world works; the possible meaning of the text; the sentencepossible meaning of the text; the sentence structure; the importance of order of ideas,
d f l tt th i f dor words, or of letters; the size of words or letters; special features of sound, shape and layout; and special knowledge from past literary experiences before they resort to y p f yleft to right sounding out of chunks or letter clusters or in the last resort single letters”clusters or, in the last resort, single letters (Clay, 1998, p.9, emphasis added).
Multiple cues theory of reading
Problems with constructivist/multiple cuesProblems with constructivist/multiple cues approach:
• Making use of letter‐sound relationships is the basic mechanism for acquiring wordthe basic mechanism for acquiring word‐specific knowledge, which is required for the d l t f t ti it i ddevelopment of automaticity in word recognition.
• To discover mappings between spelling pp g p gpatterns and sound patterns, children must also develop phonemic awarenessalso develop phonemic awareness.
The development of word-specific sublexical connectionsThe development of word specific, sublexical connections between the orthographic and phonological representations of
words in lexical memory.
The transition from analytic to automatic processing ofThe transition from analytic to automatic processing of words in text.
Phonemic awareness is required to segment the letter q gsound (“buh”) or letter name (“bee”) to make the connection
between the letter b and the phoneme /b/.
• Constructivist, multiple cues approach fails to respond adequately to differences in reading‐p q y grelated skills and competencies (literate cultural capital) at school entry which in turncultural capital) at school entry, which in turn triggers Matthew effects in reading.
• Children who do not possess sufficient literate cultural capital at school entry will (without supplemental instruction) be forced ( pp )to rely increasingly on ineffective word identification strategiesidentification strategies.
Th hild l i l i i• These children not only receive less practice in reading but soon begin to confront materials that
diffi l f h hi h i ll l iare too difficult for them, which typically results in avoidance of reading, inattentive behaviour, low
t ti f d ithd l fexpectations of success, and withdrawal from literacy learning tasks (i.e., negative Matthew ff t )effects).
• As a consequence they are prevented from taking• As a consequence, they are prevented from taking advantage of reciprocally facilitating relationships between reading comprehension performance andbetween reading comprehension performance and the two constituent components of reading (i.e., positive Matthew effects)positive Matthew effects).
These developmental spinoffs include:These developmental spinoffs include:
• Vocabulary growthVocabulary growth
• Ability to comprehend more syntactically complex sentences
l f h d l b• Development of richer and more elaborative knowledge basesknowledge bases
• Greater practice opportunities for building fluency and facilitating implicit learning of letter sound patternsletter‐sound patterns
R i ll f ilit ti l ti hi (i iti M tth ff t )Reciprocally facilitating relationships (i.e., positive Matthew effects) between reading achievement (R) and both word recognition (D) and
oral language comprehension (C).
Word Recognition
Language
Reading Comprehension
Language Comprehension
Contributing further to failure of NZ’s national literacy strategy are restrictive policies regarding first year of literacy teaching stemming largely from RR’s “wait‐to‐fail” approach to reading intervention.
• First formal assessment of literacy skills in NZ occurs at end of child’s first year of schooling with use of Clay’s Observation Survey.
• Clay (2005) argued against earlier assessment because “the child should be given sufficient time to adjust to the school situation and a variety of opportunities to pay attention to literacy activities” (p. 12).
Another factor contributing to large inequities in literacyAnother factor contributing to large inequities in literacy achievement is the view that early skills‐based teaching is based on “deficit theory” that “pathologizes” children from y p glow‐income, culturally diverse backgrounds.
• Claim that skills‐based teaching is antithetical to culturally responsive instruction is false, as teachers need to address the specific learning needs of struggling readers regardless ofthe specific learning needs of struggling readers regardless of cultural group or social class.
• No evidence that explicit instruction in essential reading‐No evidence that explicit instruction in essential readingrelated skills cannot be done in a culturally sensitive manner.
• If terms like “reading difficulties,” “underachievement,” “skill g , ,deficiencies,” etc. are offensive, simply replace with “specific learning needs.”
What can be done to overcome the failure of New Zealand’s National Literacy
Strategy?Strategy?
• Use differentiated instruction from outset of formal schooling that takes into account interactions between school entry reading‐related skills (high vs. low pre‐literate skills) and method of teaching reading (constructivist vs. explicit approaches).
• Acts of learning are the joint product of the learner• Acts of learning are the joint product of the learner and the environment (Byrne, 2005).
Division of Labour Continuum for Acts of Learning
Proportion of Input from Environment
Proportion of Input from Learner
High High
utio
n of
nm
ent
utio
n of
rn
er
Con
trib
uEn
viro
n
Con
trib
uLe
ar
Low Low
EnvironmentD d t
LearnerD d tDependent Dependent
Division of Labour Continuum for Acts of Learning
• Venezky (1999) argued that “phonics is a means to an end, not an end itself” (p. 231). Explicit , (p ) pphonics instruction helps to initiate the process by which untaught spelling‐sound relationshipsby which untaught spelling sound relationships are acquired through implicit learning.
• Letter‐sound correspondences acquired by direct phonics instruction are largely context free, whereas letter‐sound correspondences pacquired by implicit learning are mostly context‐sensitive.
• As children develop in reading they will beginAs children develop in reading, they will begin making greater independent use of letter‐sound information to identify unfamiliar words in textinformation to identify unfamiliar words in text.
• Additional spelling‐sound relationships can then be induced from the stored orthographicinduced from the stored orthographic representations of words that have been correctly identifiedidentified.
• For children encountering difficulty in developing h bili i i i i l h d dthe ability to perceive intuitively the redundant patterns and connections between speech and i li i i i i l h b i di killprint, explicit instruction in alphabetic coding skills
is crucial.
Division of Labour Continuum for Acts of Learning
Early Word Learning
Later Word Learning
High High
tion
of
men
t
utio
n of
rn
er
Con
trib
utEn
viro
n
Con
trib
uLe
ar
Low Low
EnvironmentD d t
LearnerD d tDependent Dependent
Division of Labour Continuum for Acts of Learning
• For some beginning readers, processes of acquiring literacy skills are highly learneracquiring literacy skills are highly learner dependent (high literate cultural capital children); less explicit instruction neededchildren); less explicit instruction needed.
• For other children, literacy learning processes are more environment dependent (loware more environment dependent (low literate cultural capital children); more t t d li it i t ti d dstructured, explicit instruction needed.
Division of Labour Continuum for Acts of Learning
Environment-Dependent /Low Literate Cultural Capital
Learner-Dependent/High Literate Cultural Capital
High High
tion
of
men
t
utio
n of
rn
er
Con
trib
utEn
viro
n
Con
trib
uLe
ar
Low Low
EnvironmentD d t
LearnerD d tDependent Dependent
Division of Labour Continuum for Acts of Learning
• Connor, Morrison, and Katch (2004) found that for high literate cultural capital children (superior print knowledge, oral vocabulary),(superior print knowledge, oral vocabulary), better fitting instructional patterns (i.e., child managed meaning focused instruction)child‐managed, meaning‐focused instruction) resulted in about half a grade equivalent gain i d f di l llin end‐of‐year reading scores over less well matched instructional patterns (i.e., teacher‐managed, code‐focused instruction).
• For low literate cultural capital children better fitting instructional patterns (i.e., teacher‐managed, code‐focused instruction) resulted in a difference of more than two full grade equivalents in end of year reading scores compared with poorly fitting instructional patterns (i.e., child‐managed, meaning‐focused instruction).
• We are not advocating a return to isolated skill‐and‐drill phonics instruction that is rigid, fixed, and lock‐drill phonics instruction that is rigid, fixed, and lockstep, with same lesson given to every child.
Continuum of Approaches to Beginning Reading Instruction
Isolated Skill‐and‐Drill Approach
Metacognitive Strategy Teaching Approach
Whole Language Approach
• Atomistic view of • Dynamic view of • Reading acquisition• Atomistic view of reading acquisition;reading broken down
l b k ll
• Dynamic view of reading acquisition; child seen as active l
• Reading acquisition seen as natural process that is meaning driven; “ ”into several subskills
• Heavy emphasis on
learner
• Emphasis on
“no meaning, no gain”
• Minimal emphasis on teaching subskills in isolation; much seatwork and use of
developing self‐improving strategies for recognizing words
word analysis activities; should only arise incidentally in
workbooksg g
and on how and when to use such strategies
ycontext of reading connected text.
• We are not advocating a focus on word level• We are not advocating a focus on word‐level skills that comes at the expense of language d k l d b d i fand knowledge‐based competencies; from a
Simple View of Reading (SVR) perspective, balance is needed as both sets of skills are equally important in learning to read.equally important in learning to read.
The Cognitive Foundations of Learning to ReadThe Cognitive Foundations of Learning to Read
Knowledge of the Alphabetic
Letter Knowledge
Principle
Alphabetic Coding Skill
Word Recognition
g
Phonemic Awareness
g
Background Knowledge and Inferencing Skills
Reading Comprehension
Vocabulary and
Phonological Knowledge
Language Comprehension
yMorphological Knowledge
S t ti
Linguistic Knowledge
Syntactic Knowledge
Components of the Simple View of Reading (SVR)Components of the Simple View of Reading (SVR) model.
Word Recognition
R di
L
Reading Comprehension
Language Comprehension
Relationship among the cognitive elements underpinningRelationship among the cognitive elements underpinning the development of the word recognition component of the
Cognitive Foundations framework.Cog e ou da o s a e o
Knowledge of the Alphabetic Principle
Letter Knowledge
Alphabetic Coding Skill
Word Recognition
Knowledge
Phonemic
g g
Awareness
Relationship among the cognitive elements underpinningRelationship among the cognitive elements underpinning the development of the language comprehension
component of the Cognitive Foundations framework.
Background Knowledge and
Phonological Knowledge
Inferencing Skills
Language
Vocabulary and
Knowledge
Linguistic
g gComprehension
Morphological Knowledge
Linguistic Knowledge
Syntactic Knowledge
R fReferenceTunmer W E Chapman J W Greaney K TTunmer, W. E., Chapman, J. W., Greaney, K. T., Prochnow, J. E., & Arrow, A. W. (2013). Why h l d i l i Sthe New Zealand National Literacy Strategy has failed and what can be done about it: Evidence from the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2011 andReading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2011 and Reading Recovery monitoring reports. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties 18Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 18,1‐41.
