Literacy Data Base

This research has supported and affirmed several of my personal beliefs and convictions about emergent readers and writers.

The clarification of precisely what is envisioned when an approach is described as “balanced” is imperative for this introduction. Some understand a balanced reading curriculum as merely one combining phonics instruction, phonemic awareness exercise, and spelling lessons. The definitional idea of balanced reading instruction when I refer to such is larger and more like that of Pikulski and Fountas and Pinnell. In the context of this database, balanced instruction is defined as the integrated teaching of reading, writing, and spelling that builds on oral language skills. Subsets of this domain must be the inclusion and provision of; Read Alouds, Shared Reading, Guided Reading, Independent Reading, Authentic Literature, Shared Writing, Interactive Writing, Writing Workshop, and Independent Writing. The social nature of learning is a philosophy that also is supported and embedded throughout each element of instruction

In the late 1980's arguments arose over the relative effectiveness for beginning reading of whole language approaches as compared to more traditional methods of basal instruction. This topic is now one of the most heated debates in educational circles. Although initially appealing, declining reading achievement test scores, have raised questions about the efficacy of the whole language approach. A New Zealand literacy educator recently stated “It's not enough just to create opportunities for children to do things they can already do, (as implied by some whole language approaches) instead, it's up to us to provide powerful teaching so that children can move, or better yet, leap forward.” This database attempts to sort the research, theory, and practice that surround “The Great Reading Debate”, and a synthesis of the three educational territories; research, theory, and description of practice for exemplary instruction for our emergent readers is sought. Revealing what good teachers should be doing in classrooms to produce children who read well, and read willingly, forms the framework of this investigation.

For personal purposes, some annotations have been replaced with a more detailed summary of information.

Annotation: The authors of this selection explain support for the following belief: “As children grow and develop, the refining of the basic skills that make up the language arts, listening, speaking, reading, and writing, are accomplished more easily in an environment that offers the varied language experiences that come with literature.” In this they advocate a whole language approach to reading instruction. The emphasis' stated are sensible considerations as to include literature if not holistically, at least partially in a good early literacy paradigm. I propose to highlight a few points that lend credibility to the issue of using literature to teach reading. Literature in the early grades, beyond the basil, promotes and instills a love and joy of stories, gained through children's positive contact with books. Familiar regional literature allows home funds of knowledge, and cultures to enter the classroom environment, and thus closes the gaps sometimes existing between homes and school. No follow-up activity required after reading (aloud or silently) is the model of what we teachers are striving; students read for the love of the act of reading. As teachers model pleasure reading, we establish an important connection for the students: what reading class is really all about is reading books! Students also tend to value what they see an adult value, in this case, books and reading. Assessment in a literature based curriculum can be summarized as parents and teacher observe the student making progress, even without the reinforcement of test results- Reading promotes reading, a child who is an enthusiastic reader in grade three will continue to develop competence in the upper elementary grades. The curriculum structure of whole language incorporates for children a variety of literature with varied length and complexity, use of background knowledge, and availability for teaching basic skills. My reservations lie in accounting and providing for the atypically developing students, who may, or may not acquire the necessary skills through whole language approaches. Again it appears that a literature-based approach should be an integral part of balanced instruction, but not the entire curriculum. I believe for children to benefit from formal reading instruction, youngsters must have a certain level of phonemic awareness - the awareness of sounds within our language.

Allor, J., Fuch, D., & Mathes, P. (2001, May/June). Do Students With and Without Lexical Retrieval Weakness Respond Differently to Instruction? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 264.

Allington, R.L. (1997, August/September). Overselling phonics. Reading Today, 15 (1), 15.

Annotation: A rancorous public debate reign over beginning reading instruction. The author offers the possibility that some are overstating, exaggerating, and maybe even creating evidence to support the effectiveness of code-rented (phonics) materials and methods. Yes, there is a convergence of research evidence pointing to the critical role of good decoding skills as they influence good reading. However, a strong point is make that there is no agreement of research focusing on how school programs might best foster strong phonics ability. What type of phonics and of what intensity and over what duration is optimal for producing the greatest amount of children who will read well and willingly?

I have noticed that intensity and duration of phonics instruction is not explicitly connected to the notion of students willingly choosing to read in the article. Yet, prior knowledge of this author reminds me of this significant connection. For the focus of this database, I seek to find the supporting research that answers this query. What is the best ‘balanced' instruction as one implores the best of whole language and phonics-based approaches?

Five unscientific assertions are discussed that foster reflection, consideration, and contemplation for myself, as I seek to formulate a collection of exemplary practice for emergent literacy. Some thoughts to consider are; contrary to the assertion that phonics is not being taught, exemplary teachers rarely report using commercial phonics curriculum material, they instead do teach phonics knowledge and strategies in an ‘embedded' fashion. The assertion of a ‘phonemic awareness' crisis is again unscientific. Research indicates that those few classmates who don't get it initially, can develop phonemic awareness with in a few weeks if offered some targeted small-group intervention.

In consideration of “direct, systematic, and sequential” and/or “direct, opportunistic, and sequential” phonics instruction, research has yet to converge and scientifically validate which is the optimal sequence. My personal influence from this article is to give teachers professional freedom to appropriately respond to children's needs. The importance of decodable texts is challenged and combated with support for “manageable” texts – texts kids can read without too much difficulty. In closing, the author cautions that there is a sucker born every minute and Americans can include the market for best phonics instruction in their list of encounters where they were easily mislead into parting with their money. Improving instruction is not so simple as purchasing new material. Ultimately, effective decoding instruction is developed and delivered by well-versed and well prepared teachers who know their children and know how literacy development is facilitated.

Bracey, G.W. (1995, February). Reading Recovery: Is it effective? Is it cost-effective? Phi Delta Kappan, 76, (6), 493.

Annotation: Fabulous ideas fill this short work on Reading Recovery. Gleaned from the reading, is it effective? Yes! Is it cost effective for Americans? No! It seems that we have imported a program that was designed to meet one set of needs (struggling New Zealand students from small community schools in a nation with a high literacy level), and are now trying to use it with students who have different problems (students struggling in larger inner city American schools and in poor rural areas). Suggested is that we take what works from Reading Recovery, and utilize and apply it in nontutoring situations, perhaps a better fit for America economically and practically. To do so may simultaneously move American reading instruction away from the elusive search for a single best method! The instructional attainment of high levels of literacy (forming the successful framework of Reading Recovery) should be the sensible fundamentals and rudiments for exemplary beginning reading curricula. They include:

2. They have and use background knowledge and strategies to obtain meaning from print.

In good instruction, these three goals are not only addressed but also well integrated, enabling readers to gain proficiency in all of them.

Research consistently demonstrates that the more children know about language and literacy before they arrive at school, the better equipped they are to succeed in reading. The main accomplishments include:

Carbo, M. (1989, October). An evaluation of Jeanne Chall's response to ‘Debunking the Great Phonics Myth'. Phi Delta Kappan, 71, (2), 152.

Annotation: Jeanne Chall has written a report titled “The Great Debate”. In this work the author reviews and analyzes research in an attempt to determine if teaching emphasis in early grades should be on code (phonics) or on meaning (whole language). The response by Marie Carbo highlights what she sees as inaccurate conclusions drown from poor quality experimental research. These studies were done quite some time ago, in the years 1930-1960. According to Carbo, the research evidence in “The Great Debate” did not favor phonics! The question raised throughout the report is did Jeanne Chall bend research to agree with her own theories? This pro-phonics belief is described by Carbo as a belief system that is “deep and narrow”. A point must be seriously considered that “if you select judiciously (having or showing sound judgment), and avoid interpretations, you can make research ‘prove' almost anything you want it to. Does this imply that Chall choose research in which result supported her own theory? No researcher can reach valid conclusions by bending theory and practice with flawed research.

Important to note, as it pertains to this database, is the references to phonics instruction and comprehension. It is obvious that Jeanne Chall is a proponent of a phonics approach for early instruction. Interestingly, studies in 1930 reported no significant differences between phonics and non-phonics experimental groups in reading comprehension. Another study in 1960 (both discussed in this work), revealed a mean comprehension score of the less-phonics group higher than the phonics group.

Chall, J. S. (1989, October). The Uses of Educational Research : Comments on Carbo. Phi Delta Kappan, 71, (2), 158.

Annotation: The debates continues over intrinsic, natural, look and say approach to emergent reading, as opposed to “an emphasis on the basics” – direct phonics instruction, making it possible for children to “unlock” new words. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), put out an official report titled “The reading Report Card”. When summarized by this article, found was research linking school factors to reading achievement and conclusions were that many factors, among them, early phonics instruction, are significantly related to reading achievement.

I understand that the cause of this two sided view-point, phonics vs. whole language, is grounded in the philosophy of uses of educational research. The purpose is to search for knowledge and understanding that help to improve educational practice. The ultimate goal is usefulness. Therefore, how can nearly a century of study on the subject be put to good use? For the purpose of this focus, it seems evident that intensity of phonics instruction should proportionately shift from much phonics instruction to much whole language (meaning) instruction. I base this claim on Chall's concluding remarks as she defends her push for phonics instruction, (see article).

Coles, G. (2001,November). Reading Taught to the Tune of the ‘Scientific' Hickory Stuck. Phi Delta Kappan, 204-212.

Annotation: The National Reading Panel (NRP) promise to eliminate the nation's reading deficit by ensuring that every child can read by the third grade. The panel presents reading acquisition as a simple step-by-step process, not as a complex interactive one. The report pits instruction of phonics against no instruction of phonics and then claims the phonics instruction a superior method! Mandated by the panel is a skills emphasis in phonics that must be done in steps, and goes on to prohibit alternate instructional approaches. The author suggests reasonable propositions in response to the panel's report, that conclude in stating that no single approach to teaching skills should be mandated, and that instructional decision making can draw on research, but sweeping instructional decisions must also include information from other instructional domains.

Annotation: Major research findings for the past 30 years are reviewed. The understanding of this research provides the foundation for and dictates approaches for phonics instruction. Conclusions may seem startling, however, as findings reveal “there is no best way to teach phonics!” This understanding and acceptance calls for educators to provide children with multiple and varied opportunities to obtain the information they need to successfully decode and spell words. Phonics activities should universally stress transfer of knowledge, for the only phonics knowledge that matters is what children actually do with that knowledge when they are reading and writing. How we teach children to decode a word is unimportant, as long as our chosen approach teaches decoding, i.e. allows the reader to recognize words and associate them with meaning easily and efficiently. Students who recognize most words instantly and automatically read a lot more. Although no research has been able to prove the best way to teach phonics, research indeed does indicate that children who engage in a variety of phonics activities and in lots of reading and writing become better readers and writers.

1. The synthetic approach: teaches a child to go letter-by-letter and then blend.

3. The analogical approach: children learn to recognize patterns in words and use rhyming to figure out new words

5. The embedded phonics approach: phonics occurs in the context of authentic reading and writing (often associated with whole language instruction)

A most important premise to this body of knowledge is the revelation of how the brain operates to process text. Brain research suggests that the brain is a pattern detector, not a rule applier, and that, while readers look at every word, and almost every letter in each word, they look at them considering all the patterns they know. Decoding is successful when the brain recognizes a familiar spelling pattern or, if the pattern is not familiar, it tries to search to associate patterns. Parallel distributed processing is the theory that explains the incredibly fast ability of the brain to recognize words and associate them with meaning.

Annotation: The work reminds educators of the conditions that promote readers. The authors include: 1. Reading aloud to children and modeling

3. Saturate the area with print and writing materials, and encouraging students to take on the roles of readers and writers.

Intervention becomes necessary when a child or children do not make the necessary connection between letters and sound on their own. Direct phonics instruction can rightfully take place within the context of children's total literacy experiences. Phonics is NOT a separate knowledge base to be acquired apart form daily reading and writing routines. An example of and explicit instructional procedure is explained. It is designed to teach children to become aware of sounds in spoken words (phonemic awareness), discover the match between these sounds and the letters in written words (sound-letter associations), and then apply this knowledge to recognize or spell words while reading and writing. Initial sound substitution, segmenting, and rhyming cues are used in this model.

In review, the essential components of effective phonics instruction include: 1. Phonemic Awareness

Annotation: The subtitle: “A combination of whole language and basic phonics instruction” may be the best way to teach beginning readers. This statement concurs with much, if not all of recent research on the topic. The goal of phonics based method and whole-language method is the same, to teach students to read. The methods, however, are markedly different. Phonics teaches students to ‘decode' within a systematic structured curriculum. Whole language stresses the use of whole, uncontrived texts and encourages children to use language in ways that relate to their own lives and cultures. In an effort to undermine one method for another, we have created, what is known in educational circles as, “the great reading war”. A third approach may just be the key to end the battle. A “balanced” approach to reading instruction combines the best elements of phonics instruction and whole language. Children are explicitly taught the relationship between letters and sounds, but they are also reading interesting stories and writing their own. Some strong and solid findings tend to favor a more balanced approach. Studies indicate that children who acquire phonemic awareness, the understanding that sounds make up language, become more skilled readers than those who don't. It must be repeated that phonemic awareness is different form phonics; and that teaching phonics without providing an understanding of phonemic awareness in inadequate. To explain through example, “you can tell a child that the letter “f” makes the sound you hear at the beginning of the word “fish”, but to a child without phonemic awareness, there is no “beginning sound” in “fish”. This child has not the understanding that a sentence is make up of these individual words, much unlike a long string of sound.

Another research-based plug for phonemic awareness is demonstrated by study results that reveal that clearly, instruction in phonemic awareness, especially in Kindergarten and Grade 1, is key to future acquisition of reading skill. The shocking statistics of one in five, or 10 million children, have reading impairment. We must seek the best remedy. It may be found in new technology that allows us to view the brain while children read.

Annotation: University of Houston educational psychologist Barbara Foorman studied 375 low-achieving first graders, seeking an answer to most effective reading instruction. The subjects were from poor homes, who were divided into three groups. The first was taught using the whole language approach, the second using phonics, and the third using a combination of the two. The study was conducted for one full year. Results showed 1/3 of the whole language group unable to master more than 2.5 words on a 50-word list. Only 6% of the phonics group had equally low scores. Those taught with both methods scored in the middle ground.

Ehri, L.C., Nunes, S.R., Willows, D.M., Schuster, B.V., Yaghoub-Zaden, Z.

& Shanahan, T. (2001, July/August/September). Phonemic

Awareness instruction helps children learn to read: Evidence from the

National Reading Panel's meta-analysis. Reading Research

Quarterly, 36, (3), 250.

Annotation: The introduction of this text reminds educators of the continual debate that surrounds the fields of methodology in teaching emergent readers. Unsettled is the support of phonics verses no phonics, basal readers verses literature-based instruction, homogeneous grouping verses heterogeneous grouping, early intervention verses wait-and-see, accepting approximations verses expecting correctness, and direct (explicit) instruction verses discovery.

The work accepts that this controversy may continue indefinitely, and does not attempt to end the battle. A strong claim, however, is that the most important variables is a classroom teacher who understands how children acquire literacy and the role played by the instructor in helping each individual student to reach highest potential.

The selection is amiable to teacher-researcher experience, as many book-features help educators to continue their learning through professional development and collegial support. Work is based on the theory that learning is a constructive activity. The most essential element in the learning-building process is the teacher who provides the raw material: demonstrations, explanations, appropriate leveled materials, feedback, and encouraging and revealing interactions.

Methods described focus on helping emergent readers to become strategic users of literacy. This journey to literacy shall be joyous, timely, and in good company. The philosophy behind the techniques is “good first teaching is the foundation of education and the right of every child”.

4. Self-extending: developed a system that itself fuels further learning. Every time they read, they learn more about reading.

3. Guided reading: teacher introduces, student reads whole text to themselves – some support

Annotation: As my research continues, so does the evolving focus of my study. This work is so contradictory to probably all print on reading instruction, yet, it gives important insight to the focus of exemplary instruction of reading. How can we think of reading instruction as wrong? Some excellent points highlighted here should give us, as teachers seeking optimal success for students, serious pause.

Does school reading work? Are we teaching children to want to read, or to read for their own ends? Does school reading ignore individual differences? Are we delivering diverse reading, and not assuming that all children begin to read at age 6, and progress at the some rate? Are all children suppose to be interested in the identical reading material delivered by basil texts? Children who are not conforming to ritualized reading lessons, demonstrated by groups of Bluebirds, Robins, or Crow, are identified as unmotivated or not ready to read. In planning for exemplary practice, this statement calls strongly for diverse grouping of students, using high/low ability grouping, interest groups, and others. These level or tracking groups exert a deleterious effect on those children who are classified as low (regardless of group's name). Lop achievers in reading remain low achievers, a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Students are assigned to grade levels by reading ability. We consider, is this fair to the child? Measurements of learning “aptitude” are essentially assessments in reading. Is, and should it be, that reading ability is the “Superior Court”. Where does it place the poor reader who has terrific creativity, abstract thinking and can do or fix anything with his hands? A final intriguing and important thought to consider, do schools take credit for reading skills students have learned and continue to learn on their own? Further, would some students read more and read better if they did not have to spend so much of their time and energy enduring the ritual of school reading programs? As teachers striving for exemplary practice for early literacy, remember that there are two sides to every coin. Should we teach children to read the words or to read the world?

Annotation: This annotation is taken from the essay on phonemic awareness written by Joanna Williams. Phonemic awareness is the awareness of the sounds (phonemes) that make up spoken words. This ability is not necessary for speaking and understanding spoken language, but is, however, of critical importance for learning to read! Phonemes are difficult to discern as they are folded into one another and are pronounced as a blend. Segmenting words into phonemes can be difficult. Studies have established a strong relationship between phonemic awareness and reading performance in first and second grades. Furthermore, phonemic awareness was found to predict beginning reading success better than such measures as age, socioeconomic status, and IQ. It is justifiable to consider Phonemic Awareness both a cause of reading acquisition as well as a consequence of reading acquisition. Literature that focuses on playing with sounds through rhyme, alliteration, and so on, as well as providing practice in segmenting spoken words via games work for teachers to promote phonemic awareness.

Annotation: There was nationwide movement in 1996 to revive the phonics approach to reading. At this time, California was using a “whole language” method and tied for last place in a national reading test. Many say that California's whole language ‘fad' produced “disastrous results”. Proponents of whole language believe that reading is learned best when the child is immersed in real books and real writing. Most research backs the need for lots of phonics, the sooner the better, for the brain has no inherent knowledge of the alphabet.

In sorting much research reports and articles on the topic, I believe I've again found the best answer through quoting “The most successful schools are those that compromise, blending the best of phonics and whole language”. Those classrooms that “balance instruction” insist that students tackle literature with more confidence now that they are armed with better skills. Advantages/Disadvantages as we separate the methods respectively follows:

Whole Language: Advantage: The early emphasis on literature makes reading fun from the start.

Phonics: Advantage: Children learn strategies for decoding words they've never seen.

Disadvantage: The emphasis on decoding practices may turn children off to literature.

Hurst, C.O. (2000, October). Guided Reading Can Strengthen

Annotation: The embedded message in this work seems to be that reading strategies are encouraged and developed more easily through good books. “Good Books” are defined as those that foster a reaction from the reader. Pointing good and poor readers to such books will encourage better reading comprehension through the building and utilization of comprehension strategies. The author suggests that good readers interact with text without even realizing that they're doing it. Poor readers often are unaware that this is what they are suppose to do. Virtually almost ‘word calling', they read literally without bringing in prior knowledge. Selections that conjure a reaction to anyone with a “beating heart” can benefit the poorer reader, as they experience give-and –take with text, as well as calling on their prior knowledge.

Jeynes, W.H., &Littell, S.W. (2000, September). A Meta-Analysis of

Lane, K.L., O'Shaughnessy, T.E., Lambros, K.M., Gresham, F.M., &

Beebe-Frankenberger, M.E. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral

Annotation: (annotation replaced with detailed summary) This article cleverly describes methods of practice for exemplary instruction for emergent readers. Although not explicitly connected to research findings, the described methods are supported through literacy studies. A “Morning Letter”, a message written in letter form is the framework employed to imbue good reading strategy in emergent reading students. The letter uses vocabulary and syntax in accordance with students' progressive reading ability. The experience encourages the application of various reading strategies in a natural context. The author ‘blankets' the techniques described under the title of “guided reading”. Unlike a predetermined curriculum that includes a sequence of skills, the skills taught in guided reading are determined by students' strengths and weaknesses as well as need. Reading strategies are listed, hung in the classroom, and perhaps most importantly, modeled by the teacher and peers. New strategies are added to the list as the year progresses.

In building competent readers, the author places much significance on maintaining a focus on the message, or meaning of the text. Students need time to be aware of, and practice with the strategies that can be applied to help them understand text. Children need modeled experiences, as well as direct instruction, in the development of self-checking processes, summarizing, and retelling skills. They see demonstrations of the way a competent reader uses and integrates reading strategies. Retelling helps students understand that they are accountable for reading, not “word calling”. Meaning is not the individual word, but rather the deeper relationship that exists among the words.

Informally assessing students' abilities is the critical teacher role during the guided reading process. The teacher observes how students use or misuse reading strategies. Progress is documented in terms of strengths and weaknesses, and thus lesson objectives for direct instruction can be planned appropriately.

Creating a natural purpose for reading (empowered by the morning letter) has long been supported in theory and research. Early year letters are written using material known to students as to be comforting and less threatening. Vocabulary and complexity of syntax increase in difficulty with student time and experience. Other subjects across the disciplines are drawn upon as topics of the letter.

A risk-free environment has long been documented as a positive for learning. Here, clearly stated, “risk-taking” is an important part of the reading process”. Children's guesses are encouraged for developing self-checking skills that require students to discover whether or not their guesses make sense, such a valuable reading strategy. Context clues are another strategy promoted through “morning letter”. It surprises may readers to learn that some of the most helpful information for recognizing a word comes not from the word itself, but from all the printed information around that word! Students understand that the context of unknown words and phrases reveal meaning.

The author sees a balance of teacher observation and standardized tests as appropriate assessment of student's ability to become better readers and understand written language.

Student's capability to read can be limited by a lack of confidence. The letter provided students to feel confident as readers, and enabled a willingness to impose meaning into the printed word (purpose setting) and to retell what they read (retelling and summarizing). The letter created a controlled reading situation in which students could understand why people read. I personally agree. Learning why to read is a prerequisite to learning how to read.

The morning letter provided students with time to practice skills necessary for good readers and ultimately to become competent, independent readers.

Annotation: The focus of my database is continually evolving as I proceed to digest research reports and journal articles. This article reveals “both sides of the coin” as the Federal Trade Commission probes into the Gateway Company's product Hooked On Phonics. The article opens with stating ‘this product threatens to undermine the public school's monopoly on reading instruction. Also stated “many educators who feel threatened by the burgeoning “home school” movement find opposition to phonics-type services a convenient way of restraining further growth of home schooling. I strongly disagree, and don't believe either statement. What I do believe is teachers must not be insecure in their role as educators. No product can replace the realm of instruction and guidance given by the teacher. A teacher's philosophy should include the belief that “people are different”. In this regard, two statements are true. Hooked on Phonics, if it appeals to a parent/child team, can be a supplement to the student. It may enhance the method used in class, or be an alternative method that is more/less effective for this individual. Teachers should support and be grateful that the parent is involved in the learning process. The method is not intended to replace the teacher. Secondly, I see it as absurd for teachers to worry that the home school movement will take over our country, and leave educators unemployed. It's just not going to happen. Hooked on Phonics is not the ingredient for exemplary instruction but when used as a supplement, it does not create a situation in which teachers need to become alarmed.

Moustafa, M. & Maldonado-Colon, E. (1999, February). Whole-to-Parts

Phonics Instruction: Building on what children know to help them

know more. The Reading Teacher, 52, (5), 448.

Annotation: The work describes an explicit, systematic, and extensive method of phonics instruction that differs from a traditional part to whole method. The whole-to-parts phonics is embedded in context and meaningful text. The methodology is grounded in the following areas of agreement among researchers:

The objective of whole to part is to teach the alphabetic principle, that letters represent speech sounds, and to do so using words in which the children have ownership.

In English, children hear, recognize, analyze, and make correspondences. Onset-rime is easier to hear than individual letter phoneme correspondences. Whole to parts phonics capitalizes on the knowledge that the brain makes analogies between familiar and unfamiliar print. These analogies are made at the onset-rime level, not the phonemic level. The more words students have available, the more analogies can be made. Whole to part phonics uses predictable text (redundant with natural language) contrive situations where student can capitalize on their knowledge of language and ability to recognize words holistically. Thus, children are taught to recognize a large body of print words quickly and easily.

Annotation: Explicit segmentation is clearly explained and it's great importance is stressed. Explicit segmentation is when children isolate the phonemes of a word, one by one, in temporal order, to spell it. Explicit segmentation is a stronger test of phonemic-level processing than is sound categorization, and it is the better predictor of success in learning to read, thus, very important for Kindergarten and First grade teachers to provide adequate instruction.

Children must see reading and writing used in meaningful ways and experience literacy in their learning environments in order to build their conceptual and factual knowledge about the process. Many children acquire literacy knowledge easily and naturally, however, some children do not. There are at least two groups whose needs must be addressed directly in beginning reading instruction.

2. Those who have knowledge of and experience with written language, but have not acquired phonemic awareness.

Poskiparta, E., Niemi, P. & Vauras, M. (1999, September). Who benefits from Training

Reiner, K. (1998, September). Developing a kindergarten phonemic

Annotation: The text briefly defines many areas relevant to the topic of reading, and included are those more specific to “balanced reading”. The introduction defines reading well.

Defining reading: Reading is a dynamic, complex act that involves the bringing of meaning to and getting meaning from the written page. This implies that readers bring their backgrounds, their experiences, as well as their emotions into play. Reading is seen as a total integrative process that included the following domains:

1. Affective: Feelings and emotions that influence what we decide to read and influence how we interpret what we read.

2. Perceptual: Ability to organize stimuli on a field, how we organize stimuli depends largely on our background of experiences on sensory receptors.

3. Cognitive: Areas involving thinking, under this umbrella would we place all comprehension skills.

Emergent Literacy: Kindergarten is usually considered the bridge between emergent literacy and beginning reading. The term emergent literacy connotes an ongoing process, as opposed to “reading readiness” which seems to connote a “waiting period”.

Balanced Reading Program: A balanced program includes the best of whole language and sequential skill development in relation to what children are learning and reading. Individual differences in students are taken into account when presenting material. Children are grouped according to developmental levels. The program helps student to gain word recognition and comprehension reading skills and strategies. Guided reading approaches are used. These incorporate both oral and silent reading. Reading aloud to students to model good adult reading fluency and also to help students to gain story sense, and to expand their vocabulary is implemented. A good program is also very concerned with helping children develop a love of reading so that they become life-long readers.

However, children still need to learn to read on their own. Today many teachers do not allow time for silent reading. Oral reading is being abused in many present reading programs. Oral reading is important but should not become an end unto itself. It is also distressing that silent reading is being ignored. Teachers should not allow oral reading to become a substitute for teaching reading skills. There is a need for both oral and silent reading in a reading lesson. The best of whole language includes:

Using whole pieces of good literature, integrating the language arts, peer group projects, and teachers' preparation of materials based on student's needs.

Incorporating the best of these two approaches provides an effective “eclectic reading program”.

Direct Instruction: Instruction guided by a teacher who uses different kinds of strategies to help students gain understanding of what they are reading describes direct instruction. Direct instruction requires teachers to have goals and activities to accomplish these goals. Techniques range from directly explaining some concepts to using inductive techniques. Teachers can help students become more active consumers of information by providing instruction before, during, and after the reading activity.

Before reading: preview selection, vocabulary, teaching any needed strategies, activate prior knowledge, purpose setting

Short, K.G. (1999, Summer). The Search for ‘Balance” in a Literature-Rich

Annotation: The political debate returns! Should reading be used as a tool to make sense of life verses should reading be used to develop strategies to improve reading? The pendulum has swung for when literature's role in children's lives was highly regarded and valued (‘book-floods' pervaded the classrooms, lots of trade books), back towards phonic skills based program focused on development of fluency. This article leans toward a ‘balance' that needs to be settled between these two ends of the pendulum. Shall we integrate whole class strategy lessons and individual conferences so that students could then balance reflection on reading strategy and literary elements, allowing time to read for enjoyment and to dialogue about books? Some philosophy supports reading as a process of construction meaning for purposes significant to the reader. A long line of research on the ‘best' approach clearly states that it is “the teacher who makes the difference, and so approaches must also be based on teachers as professionals who make instructional decisions using their knowledge of specific students, and of research, theory, and practice”. Again, teachers need to be allowed “creative space” to search and find the balance in their own classrooms! To create a strong framework for balance in a literature rich classroom, three levels organize this meaningful language event. Children: 1. Learn language. 2. Learn about language. 3. Learn through language.

In going about their daily lives, children learn to talk through three processes, 1. By talking and listening to others 2. By exploring how language functions 3. By using language to get something done.

These facts of living provide the framework to understand what is necessary in literacy curriculum. Upon their reflection, it is obvious that they provide ‘balance' in the literacy curriculum.

2. Students need to learn about language by reflection on strategies and literary knowledge (phonics awareness and instruction).

3. Students need to learn through language by using literature to inquire about the world and their own lives (literature-based instruction).

The goal is not to search for the ‘right' engagement when offered these three, but to understand the complex ways in which multiple engagements interact to support children's development as readers and thinkers. While each of these three aspects are different, it is the complex interplay among them that is most powerful for readers. When teachers over-emphasize one over another, students have no reason to care about reading strategies and skills, because they are not reading for purposes that are meaningful in their lives. Teachers must avoid getting fixated too long on one area, instead, learn to ‘braid' them together, based on students needs. When engagements are excluded based on the assumption that certain young children are not “ready”, they develop misconceptions. For example, they should not have to wait until third grade to find out that reading involves critique and inquiry and that literature goes far beyond reading instruction. In contrast, upper grade students still need time to develop fluency and flexibility as readers, accomplished by “time simply to enjoy a good book”. Interestingly, the balanced literacy programs I've held highly do not list Literature Circles. Literature circles are important to curriculum for the “learn through reading” is essential to every child's learning. Both directed reading and literacy circles are important to balance curriculum because of the different roles they play, reading to develop strategies and reading to make sense of life. A key mistake of educators is to act as if one engagement can meet all purposes and needs. Again, exemplary instruction must be balanced. Inquiry shall be the heart of the curriculum. This inquiry is a philosophical stance that highlights learners having time to search for the questions that are significant in their lives, and to systematically investigate those questions. In this light, literacy has become a tool to satisfy inquiry. To respond to the political push to wipe out reading as a way of discovering and thinking about the world, ongoing teacher professional development is essential. Teachers need to read, dialogue, and research, to be informed professionals who are in control of their classrooms. Teachers are needed who can articulate their beliefs and practices in response to public debates about education.

Strickland, D.S. (1998, March). What's Basic in Beginning Reading?

Annotation: (replaced with a more detailed summary) Effective teachers recognize phonics and phonemic awareness as useful tools for successful reading and writing. These instructors are also aware of the dangers of over reliance on one method of word recognition and the potential deterrent to successful reading. Educators on both sides of the phonics debate agree that, ultimately, reading and writing for meaning is paramount. With this introduction information, the author proposes a Whole to Part to Whole Conceptual Framework, Blending Skills with meaning; a Balanced Reading Approach.

This model known as whole part whole is grounded with the following accepted three understandings:

1. Teaching must support learning the whole thing- stories, informational books, and poems.

3. Teaching includes planned practice within the context of meaningful reading and writing.

The framework of whole part whole instruction is constructed as its name indicates.

1. Start with whole text: Provides the basis for meaningful literacy activities examples include shared reading of poems or stories using big books or charts. Teachers use active demonstration and think- alouds.

2. Focus on useful parts of language: Responding to all texts only at the holistic level is not enough. Highlighting specific textual features helps children form generalizations about language that they can apply independently.

3. Return to whole texts for application and practice: Allow students to move from simply knowing about a generalization to using that knowledge in a purposeful way. This acknowledges that isolated language elements behave differently depending on context (“lead”, “wind”, can mean and be pronounced differently).

Much research cited to support phonics is based on results of standardized tests. Such scores do not account for partial understandings and or attitude toward reading – philosophic practices more associated with whole language approaches.

The experience of the author suggests the gaps between the phonics and whole language debates are much less in actual classroom practice. It is unlikely that one would find classrooms that reflect polar ends of an instructional continuum.

The whole part whole model may be the needed “common ground”. Today's educators are seeking to provide a ‘balanced' and comprehensive instructional program that is engaging and rich with meaning, yet grounded in curricular expectations that are visible to teachers, parents, and students.

1. Skills and meaning should never be separated. Alphabetic code should be applied hand in hand with comprehension and thoughtful response.

2. Instruction is systematic when it is planned, deliberate in application, and proceeds in an orderly manner. Not a rigid progression, however, instead accounts for learner variability.

3. Intensive instruction on any particular skill or strategy should be based on need.

4. Ongoing documentation and monitoring of learning determines order of skills to be addressed and required level of intensity. Running records and analysis of invented spelling serve this purpose well.

5. Instructional goals and objectives for several grade levels should be familiar to all teachers, in order for all to have a clear sense of direction.

Annotation: (replaced with a detailed summary) Balanced literacy programs combine good past teaching practices with current teaching methods. Learning can be done through themes extended across the curriculum. Phonics teaching can be done through trade books if applied thinking taken from good practice i.e. teach consonants that have more reliable sound/letter patterns first. Share literature for it's content and overall language and then go back to focus on certain aspects of particular sentences or works. Use this same whole-part-whole approach with grammar lessons as well. Flexible grouping in classrooms allows all students activities that are multilevel. Engage students in the same literacy processes while acknowledging that children come to the classroom with different backgrounds and abilities. Maintain a high but realistic standard for all children. Literacy and content learning can be done in unison. In assessment, consider standardized tests are a snapshot of a student's performance on a particular day. Work samples, anecdotal notes and checklists are better demonstrators of a child's progress. Such a collection (or portfolio) gives a more comprehensive picture of progress over time. Thoughts from this work are supportive of the current theory and research on balanced literacy curriculum.

Annotation: Effective methods for instruction of emergent readers may be summarized by the final thought conveyed in this article. “Curriculum alignment needs to link instructional content to clearly defined, researched based standards, and to leave creative space for teachers to search and find the balance in their own classrooms.” Balanced reading instruction “is a useful term for what good teaching is: thoughtful planned instruction based on children's backgrounds, interests, strengths and needs”. This quote bases itself on cultural and psycholinguistic theory. The challenge still, as it relates to my focus is, where to situate phonics in a balanced reading program? Should it be taught explicitly or within the context of an integrated language based program? To revert back to the initial quote in this annotation, perhaps it is clear that this answer must be judged upon the teacher's assessment of students' backgrounds, interests, strengths and needs A balanced literacy program may divide instruction equally between the four major historical approaches to reading instruction. Time is allotted equally between the four, which are: Guided Reading, Self Selected Reading, Writer's Workshop, Working With Words (direct instruction of vocabulary).

Annotation: (replaced with a detailed summary) The focus of this database is to acquire a collection of the research, theory, and practice in order for teachers to provide exemplary classroom reading instruction. This work has suitably done just so. Based on solid research, as well as practical experience. Presented are ten ideas to teach better reading and heighten literacy learning. The domain of literacy has expanded greatly beyond the skill of book reading. Schools need teachers that are true experts in teaching reading skills if we are to produce life-long readers.

This work synthesizes much study of a well-balanced reading program. The synthesis is listed below for consideration and for my own purposes/reference.

1. Children construct their own meaning when reading. Specific prior knowledge allows the reader comprehension that is individually unique.

a. Specific prior knowledge = particular information needed to understand text on a certain topic. Two types 1. text-specific knowledge calls for understanding about the type of text (a story has a beginning, middle, and end). 2. topic-specific knowledge = entails understanding about the topic (knowing about dinosaurs before reading a book about prehistoric animals). Both of these types of knowledge are important for the reader to construct meaning. Crucial to expanding students' overall prior knowledge is independent reading and writing activities.

2. Teachers encourage and support the “engaged reader”. An engaged reader uses prior knowledge to gain information from new material, uses varied skills strategically to gain information independently, is internally motivated to read for information and pleasure, interacts socially to make gains in literacy development. Learning is and should be a social process. Allowing students choice in reading material is a strong motivator that fosters independent reading habits. Multiple sources of reading and resources for learning help teach the value of reading to students as well as their own potential as readers and learners.

3. Phonemic awareness relates strongly to success in beginning reading. Some can develop this prerequisite without formal instruction. Where phonics teaching is necessary, it should be ‘embedded/ in connected, informative, engaging text. There should be provided a balance of activities to improve word recognition (including phonics instruction) and the reading of meaningful text.

4. Teacher must use implicit and explicit modeling to support literacy learning. Modeling demonstrates for students how to approach a task, explicitly, how to use a table of contents. Implicitly, engaging students in the meaning of story and creating a purpose for reading demonstrated with a read aloud. Strategies used during implicit and explicit modeling should be seated within whole literacy events so that they remain part of the literary experience and not isolated skills.

5. Discussion among readers and listeners in response to shared text helps children construct meaning and understand stories. Children support one another in efforts to understand and reflect on stories. Children are engaging in their most intellectually demanding work when they share ideas and opinions about stories, and share experiences related to stories read aloud to them.

6. Responding to literature helps students construct their own meaning, which may not always be the some for all readers. Students develop self-monitoring skills by being encouraged continuously to think about and respond to what they read and write. We must get children to the point where they do this automatically. Students must be allowed to read without asking them to find facts. In this students can find pleasurable experiences with literature. If not ever given time for this experience, how would children know to choosy reading in their leisure time?

7. Classroom discussion is important to learning. Verbal exchanges increase the level of thinking. Learning rests on critical thinking, considering option, making choices. Hearing different points of view reinforces that reading is the way to learn the world! Small group and peer-to-peer discussion groups have shown most beneficial. Children who rely on each other for help learn more than those children who work alone.

8. At least 5 strategies are critical to construction meaning before, during and after reading. They should be taught. They are: Inferencing, reaching conclusions based on information in the text. Includes making predictions, using prior knowledge combined with information available from text. Identifying: finding critical facts and details. Monitoring, self checking meaning , re-reading as necessary. Summarizing, pulling together important information. Question Generating, purpose setting by asking questions to be answered by the text.

9. Reading and Written abilities develop together. Combined instruction leads to improvements in both areas. To become better thinkers, meaning should be actively constructed through reading and writing.

10. We must provide for authentic reading! It is now known that the whole act of reading is greater than the sum of it's isolated skills, which are interrelated in a literacy context and do not always develop in a hierarchical way. Literacy attainment is not a sequence of events as the National Reading Panel has tried to indicate. Student reading assessment options include samples (portfolios) of student's work. These multiple measures provide an evolving “video” of progress as opposed to a “snapshot in time” rendered by a standardized test score.

Annotation: This article claims to simplify $200 million in research conducted over 30 years conducted by respected associations and agencies. Versed on the subject myself, through limited review of research, I must agree that in fact, it does just that.

The claim is that every child can learn to read by the end of first grade if properly taught. Further stating, “properly taught” equals the systematic instruction of phonics. “A simple solution” is the caption for the best approach. Systematic phonics is described as the simple concept of teaching 26 letters of the alphabet, the 44 sounds they make, and the 70 most common ways to spell those sounds. Children can unlock 85% of words in the English language simply by learning the correspondence between sounds and letters. As compared to the thousands of characters that the Chinese and Japanese must memorize, the alphabet has been regarded as the most important invention in the social history of the world, a simple and accessible tool for reading.

In opposition to the phonics approach is the “look and say” or “whole word” method, preferred by Horace Mann, an influential philosopher of education. The premise of this method is that children could learn to read by associating words with pictures. A father of progressive education, John Dewey also supported this philosophy. Dewey believed that teaching children to read with phonics was drudgery that would turn them off from genuine learning.

The “whole language” approach stemmed fro the “look and say” philosophy. Whole language theorists believe that children learn to read the same way they learn to speak.

Research does not agree. Research in reading instruction shows conclusively that whole language does not work, and that phonics-based instruction does. Instruction currently being provided to many children does not reflect what we know for research. Direct, systematic instruction about the alphabetic code provided in kindergarten and first grade proves to be our best weapon in the fight against illiteracy. Like it or not, phonics wins!

Taberski, S. (1998, March). Make guided reading groups flexible and

Annotation: (replace with a detailed summary) The definition of guided reading has changed dramatically over the years for both the author of this article, and myself. Similarly, we both admit that we assessed each child's reading level during the first few weeks and grouped them accordingly. Groups met every day, read from a basal reader, and reading strategies barely or never came up in discussion!

Today we understand that children's reading shall be assessed throughout the year, and flexible groups be formed based on various needs of students. Strategy for reading, decoding, and comprehension should be modeled explicitly using think-about, and talk-aloud techniques. A framework of strategy and method are briefly highlighted here:

Guided reading group size is limited to five. While two guided reading groups meet 2-3 times weekly, other students take part in shared reading and writing, independent reading, read-alouds, and conferences.

Book Selection: Book choice is in response to reader's needs. Examples of such needs are print tracking, phrasing, and activation of prior knowledge. Therefore, books must be structured as to meet these needs. Short chapter-length books, predictable text, decodable text, predictable characters, text with adequate spacing between words, are all examples of a partial listing of necessary book types.

Group Procedures: When reading, pay attention to meaning, and visual clues; a strategy described as the “2 punch!” One, does it make sense? And two, do the letter sounds match the letter printed? Chunk words for proper fluency and phrasing as well as a 1-to-1 correspondence to spoken word and printed word. Use schema (connecting the known to the unknown) to enhance comprehension. Utilize comprehension builders such as DRTA, character maps, story grammar and writing about what students are reading.

Lastly, explain to children why they are called together. What is the common need or deficit? How will we approach it? When will it be appropriate to apply it again?

Torgesen, J.K. (2001,January/February). Intensive Remedial Instruction for

Turner, R.L. (1989, December). The Great Debate: Can both Carbo and

Annotation: The author reviews studies of three methods of early reading instruction. Approaches reviewed and analyzed for effectiveness both short and long term are whole language, intrinsic phonics, and systematic phonics. Whole Language is briefly described as a strategy to teach whole words and not introduce phonetic analysis at all, letting students develop their own methods for figuring out the sounds, over time. Intrinsic Phonics uses a basal reader. Students learn a basic sight vocabulary of 50-150 words. Gradually they learn the relationships between letters and letter combinations. The objective of Systematic phonics is to teach letter sounds and blends directly, prior to teaching whole words. The objective of all methods described is to develop independent word-attack skills in beginning readers.

After intensive analysis of studies in the 1930-1960's the author reports that systematic phonics instruction produces better decoding skills by the middle of grade one. The abilities level out equally, however, after this point, and continue to show no significant difference, by the end of grade two, in spite of 80 additional hours of phonics instruction.

It shocks me to read the finding “learning letter sounds and blends by basal (intrinsic phonics) and systematic phonics methods proved equal. All studies conclude systematic phonics appears to have a slight and early advantage over a basal-reader/whole-word approach as a method of beginning reading instruction (approximately half way into grade 1). However, this difference does not last long and has no clear meaning for the acquisition of literacy in the sense of enhancing vocabulary and improving comprehension. Let's be careful not to judge “word-calling” experts better readers! Again, it appears a balanced approach to instruction is our best choice.

Annotation: (replaced with a detailed summary) “Will Dot settle the phonics vs. whole language war?” is the commencement of this selection. Upon completion of reading, the message is again; balanced instruction is the exemplary route for success of emergent and at-risk students. The focus of the selection is a first grade teacher who is also part of a 16 person group that constitutes the nation's leading experts on reading. The panel's charge is to write a definitive report on how to prevent reading difficulties. After attending conferences, this instructor, Dot Fowler, works to transfer new reading research into practical strategy. This research reveals that students need not one, but many approaches to become proficient in reading. Included in Ms. Fowler's reading curriculum are the following:

Phonemic awareness: beginning with rhyme awareness, achieved through selections from the New Mother Goose. The research premise is that, rhyming teaches children to understand that words are made up of individual sounds. Research goes on to assert that without this basic building block in place many students will flounder.

Phonics instruction is extended to more difficult tasks. They are manipulation of letters (if this is “my”, how would you spell “try”?) and segmentation and blending (/f/, /l/, /i/) can you write “fly”?)

Good stories as part of a literature based program are held in high regard. Again, research tells that students will not learn to love reading without books that tell a good story. Therefore, phonics and literature (whole language) should be complementary components of exemplary practice.

Individual instruction addresses the issue that students enter school with various previous abilities and experiences. You cannot exclude the real world from academic instruction. Some kids have little help from home. Small class size for early grades is a boost to classroom management. Also included here are clear understandings of what is expected from and of students.

Writing words the students have learned and used previously is a transfer of skills, to accommodate the necessity of repetition; required of all good instruction.

Yopp, H.K. & Yopp, R.H. (2000, October). Supporting phonemic

Annotation: (detailed summary) This review seeks to highlight the authors' key ideas as they compare to the thoughts of another work on phonics by M. Moustafa. Both scholars agree that phonemic awareness (PA) is one of the most important foundations for reading success. The awareness that spoken language consists of a sequence of phonemes is a definition of phonemic awareness that both writers share in common. Yopp's position toward phonemic awareness instruction states that it should be playful and engaging, interactive and social, and should stimulate curiosity and experimentation with language. It is this playful and appealing method of delivery of the knowledge that distinguishes Yopp and Moustafa.

A sequence for PA instruction is proposed that advances from simpler to more complex cognitive functions. Activities grow in difficulty beginning with rhyme, and then extending into activities that focus on syllable units, then onset-rime, and then phoneme. A caution is to say that teachers should not engage exclusively in rhyme activities before moving on, children do not have to “pass” in one area before experiencing another. Phonemic Awareness development is not a lockstep process. Both authors hope to see PA instruction become a thoughtful, conscious, and important component of early literacy programs, yet again caution is given to say PA supports reading development only if it is part of a broader program that includes development of vocabulary, syntax, comprehension, strategy in reading and decoding, and writing across all content areas. In sum PA should be an integral part of a linguistically rich environment. Both authorities believe PA is to teach the alphabetic principal, and agree in doing so to provide specific focus and instruction with onset-rime and word analogies. Yopp's activities are apart from the storybook, and contrived as games, chants, songs, and manipulatives to be used toward developing sensitivity to the sound structure of language. This approach is not embedded in meaningful context, and words are segmented and put back together (like Humpty Dumpty and block towers) as opposed to being first learned holistically. The selected words are obviously out of context and may or may not be familiar to the learners.

Sound definition of auditory discrimination, phonetics, phonics, phoneme, and phonemic awareness are included. Also is a well contrive chart depiction types of sound manipulation (matching, isolation, substitution, blending, segmentation, deletion) with examples using different linguistic units (syllable, onset-rime, phoneme).

Abstracts

Problem: Researchers set to compare the effectiveness of phonemic awareness and decoding training for students with and without severe lexical retrieval weaknesses.

Purpose: To examine whether students who are unable to retrieve phonological codes quickly from long-term memory, referred to as lexical retrieval weakness, blunts the effectiveness of combined phonemic awareness and decoding training. The effectiveness of a phonemic awareness and decoding program for first grade students demonstrating low phonemic awareness was examined.

Hypothesis: Lexical retrieval weakness may influence reading development independently of the effects of phonemic awareness.

Subjects: (Student) Students in both groups chosen demonstrated poor phonemic awareness. 58 students were in the sample. All were initially screened using the following measures:

6. Word Identification, Word Attack, and Passage Comprehension (subtests of the WRMT-R)

The students were divided into high and low lexical retrieval groups based on their alternating stimulus RAN scores. 9 students scored between the two cut-off scores (for high and low), and were eliminated from the study. The final sample was make up of 49 first graders. 24 with relatively low lexical retrieval and 25 with relatively high lexical retrieval. The low group was evenly divided between treatment and contrast groups. Of the high group, 12 were placed in treatment and 13 were placed in contrast group.

Subjects: (Teachers) 20 teachers in 6 schools in a southeastern U.S. urban school district were recruited to participate. 10 teachers conducted peer-mediated instruction, and 10 served as a no treatment contrast group.

Procedure: The reading development of students with relatively high lexical retrieval skill was compared to that of students with relatively low lexical retrieval skill.

Testing: All students in the treatment classrooms participated in Peer Assisted Learning Strategies for First-Grade PALS. An observation instrument was developed that included a checklist of appropriate teacher and student behaviors. A research assistant was available during all training sessions. Technical assistance was not given to teachers in contrast classrooms. Students' progress was monitored by administering CBM measures (phonemic segmentation and oral reading fluency) each week.

Results: Interaction involving treatment group were statistically significant for Word Identification and Word Attack, with treatment group out performing the contrast group. High lexical retrieval group students demonstrated more progress on Word Identification and Passage Comprehension than did low lexical retrieval students. To repeat, the treatment group outperformed the contrast group on measures of word identification, word attack, and reading fluency, but not on phonemic awareness or comprehension tasks.

Discussion: Research suggests that students with deficits in lexical retrieval and phonemic awareness are at considerable risk for experiencing difficulty in learning to read.

Although phonemic awareness appears to be an important predictor of reading ability, this study is consistent with others that state that lexical retrieval ability provides additional and unique prognostic information. Implications can be made from the findings of reliable differences favoring the high lexical retrieval group on measures of phonemic awareness, reading fluency, word identification, and comprehension. Consistent with the double-deficit hypothesis, students who are weak in both phonemic awareness and lexical retrieval are at greatest risk for reading difficulty. Students stronger in lexical retrieval skill may respond more favorably to phonemic awareness a

Problem: Evidence indicates that for young children, learning to use different reading strategies in inseparable from making meaning and sharing meanings while developing literacy. This study aimed to extend this knowledge in the area of emergent readers, 5 to 7 tears of age.

Purpose: To investigate young children's reading strategies, identify common strategies, to look for patterns which may suggest that the use of reading strategies are developmental in nature. Researchers seek to learn the reading strategies that young children use when they read picture storybooks.

Subjects: 12 children from 5 to 7 years of age. 7 girls and 5 boys. Consent to participate was sought and granted form caregivers. The research took place in a private, quiet atmosphere.

Data Collection: The children were invited individually to select a storybook to read on two separate occasions, with one self-selected book read at each visit. Their non-verbal reading behavior was recorded by a combination of note taking and symbolic coding in order to formulate a list of strategies that the children used. Written notes were used to clarify a strategy or to record a new strategy which had not previously been given a code. Data was collected on audiotape. A coding system was used with written explanations to give it meaning. The transcriptions of the reading episode were compared to the text and similarities and differences noted. The notes of the child's non-verbal reading behavior were also summarized, and interpreted. Verbal results and non-verbal strategies were interpreted as a whole unit, not as separate unrelated entities.

Data Analysis: The strategies that each child used were listed. Similarities were noted and rated as to how common was the strategy. The most common strategies were identified and summarized.

Discussion: Some children use a few main strategies while others use a combination of many. Some children cover a much wider spectrum in their selection of reading strategies, using strategies that seem to be less mature in nature as well as some complex operations. At times, text difficulty level or the child's ability level determines which strategy is used. The hypothesis is 1. The individual's prior experiences and interests

This study supports research stating that reading strategy can be ordered from least complex (used by younger children) to more complex (used by older children), and that chosen strategies move from more oral to more written. This research has also conjured the following interesting findings. Some readers select and deploy a controlled repertoire of strategies, and they choose from an ever-expanding repertoire rather than adopting and discarding reading strategies as the progress develops. However, others indeed form strategy in a developmental sequence, and pictures before print dominate these. This study leaves one with an interesting debate; are reading strategies developmentally sequenced or simply a non-hierarchical list?

Conclusions: Knowledge of this work shall make educators more aware of the different types of reading strategies that emergent readers use. Such education aids in programming and designing language encounters, as well as for supporting young readers. This study allows teachers to introduce students to specific skills and strategies. We know that children have their own individual sets of reading strategies that they use to make and share meaning. As instructors of reading, we will encourage and support use of strategy utilizing teacher think-alouds and explicit teaching of available strategic choices.

Purpose: A meta-analysis to discover if phonemic awareness instruction is effective in helping children learn to read. To understand under what circumstances and for what specific children it is most effective. To prove that findings are scientifically valid. To reveal findings applicable to classroom practice.

Hypothesis: Phonemic awareness is one of the best predictors of how well children will learn to read. Instruction in phonemic awareness (PA), improves reading performance over alternative forms of instruction or no instruction.

Subjects: To qualify for the analysis of research studies, the reports had to be written in English and meet the following criteria: Use an experimental design with a control group. Had to test the hypothesis that instruction in phonemic awareness improves reading performance over alternative forms of instruction or no instruction. Studies had to report statistics permitting the calculation or estimation of effect sizes. 52 studies met the criteria.

Design: To evaluate the relationship between the methodological quality of studies and effect sizes found, adopted was the 5 methodological criteria applied by Troia in a critique of the internal and external validity of PA studies.

Procedure: The primary statistic used in the analysis of outcomes was effect size, an indication whether, and by how much, performance of the treatment group exceeded performance of the control group, with the difference expressed in standard deviation units. The formula used to calculate raw effect sizes for each treatment-control comparison was the mean of the treatment group minus the mean of the control group divided by a pooled standard deviation.

Tools: The DSTAT statistical package was used to determine effect sizes and to test the influence of moderator variables on effect sizes.

The data was analyzed by the study of the effect size statistic which measured how much the mean of the PA-instructed group exceeded the mean of the control group in standard deviation units. An effect size of 1 indicated a strong effect of instruction. An effect size of 0 indicated that the treatment and control group means were identical, showing that instruction had no effect.

Findings: The inspection of standard deviation values revealed that all of the effect sizes involving PA and reading outcomes were statistically greater than zero. This indicated that instruction was uniformly effective in teaching PA and in facilitating transfer to reading across all levels of the moderator variables that were considered. The overall effect size of PA instruction on the acquisition of PA was large, (based on 72 comparisons). The inspection of spelling outcomes revealed that all but 3 effect sizes were statistically greater than zero, indicating PA instruction transferred and improved spelling skills more than had alternative forms of instruction or no instruction. The effects on performance in math affected by PA instruction were also evaluated. The effect size was statistically non significant and close to zero. This indicated that the effects of PA instruction was limited to literacy outcomes.

Discussion/Interpretations: These findings lead to the conclusion that phonemic awareness instruction is more effective than alternative forms of instruction or to no instruction, in helping children acquire phonemic awareness, and in facilitating transfer of PA skills to reading and spelling. Scientific findings supporting causal inferences about the impact of PA instruction on learning to read are uniformly positive. The effects of PA instruction are found to be greater under some circumstances than others. The research findings show that one of the best predictors of future reading success is phonemic awareness, so selecting at-risk readers by measuring their PA makes logical sense. Results of this meta-analysis also show that PA instruction benefits low social economic status students as much as it had benefited those children from middle to high SES. These findings hold in spite the fact that these low SES children are phonologically or culturally different from the instructors.

Jeynes, W.H., &Littell, S.W. (2000, September). A Meta-Analysis of

Problem/Purpose: A meta-analysis was conducted to examine whether whole language instruction increases the reading skills of low-SES students in grades K-3. The effects of 3 modes of instruction (whole language, basal, and eclectic), were examined.

Data Collection: Data was collected from all out comes measures (both standard and non-standard) that provided data on change in literary level.

Design: Whole language instruction was more specifically delineated into the following groups:

1. Whole Language (pure): teaching methods that advocates would agree represented best features of whole language.

2. Whole Language H (specific): a group that did not contradicts the pure group, but provided insufficient evidence to be rated as ‘pure”.

3. Whole Language III (broad): a richly integrated, student-centered class, but included features (spelling workbooks, afternoon block) to which ‘purists' would object.

4. Whole Language IV (eclectic): deliberate combinations of whole language with more direct, teacher-sponsored instruction in reading strategies such as phonics, (uses a basil reader).

Procedure: Statistical methods were implemented to analyze data. Both standardized and non-standardized test results were accounted for.

Analysis: A mean sample size (630), mean study duration (12 mo.), and mean year of study (1980), were used in calculation of data. For all the whole language studies combined, low-SES children receiving basal instruction did consistently better on the various literacy measures than their counterparts who received whole language instruction.

The basal proved even more substantial when considering only standardized tests. Total effect sizes gave at least some edge to the basal approach, however, when the four categories of whole language were examined more specifically, the data trend became less clear. A statistical measure given indicated that the results of the pure whole language group were significantly different form specific and broad whole language groups. Standardized testing has proven the basal a better choice.

Generalizations and Implications: An indication may be when educators implement a clearly defined program of whole language, student performance improves. What is still an uncertainty from this study, are results and their implications taken from non-standardized tests, as these are less consistent and more difficult to ascertain in measuring academic achievement. The standardized tests obviously fail to measure creativity and partial understanding, both key elements in whole language, and it's proponent's philosophy of the development of language. Attitude measures are also chosen by whole language instructors, rather than direct assessment of performance. Whole language advocates assert that the key to learning language well rests in enjoying the learning process. Because whole language constitutes a more natural way of learning language, students will enjoy learning more, and hence, learn more.

Conclusions: The study authors state a strong conclusion. The evidence suggests that low-SES students in grades K-3 benefit from basal instruction more than they do from whole language instruction. Therefore, using a whole language approach could widen the gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students. They conclude that legitimate concerns about the whole language approach are raised. They claim it might be wise to objectively study the effects of any such programs before they are implemented widely in schools, especially as such a critical level as the primary years. This accountability is considered and driven from both a student and economic accountability standpoint.

Lane, K.L., O'Shaughnessy, T.E., Lambros, K.M., Gresham, F.M., &

Beebe-Frankenberger, M.E. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral

Disorders, 9, 219.

Problem: Low reading achievement places children at risk for negative outcomes, including school failure, behavior problems, and peer and teacher rejection.

Purpose: The efficacy of phonological awareness training with first grade children at risk for antisocial conduct problems (CP) and hyperactivity, impulsivity, inattention (HIA) who are also at risk for learning to read is investigated.

Hypothesis: Disruptive behavior is decreased as a collateral effect of improved phonemic awareness.

Subjects: Participants were 7 teacher-nominated students (5 boys, 2 girls) with low phonological awareness skills who exhibited higher than average problem behaviors according to the Social Skills Rating System –Teacher Version. Four of the children were White, 2 were Black, and 1 was Hispanic. None of the students were receiving special education services nor did they have a Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders diagnosis according to the cumulative file records. At the onset of the study, participants ranged in age from 74 to 92 months (M=84.14 months, SD=7.01). Four students lived in Arizona and 3 lived in Georgia.

Instrumentation/Testing: For students to be included in this study, three criteria had to be satisfied: A test of Phonological Awareness (TOPA) score at or below the 25^th percentile, A Critical Events Index (CEI) of 1 or more or a SSRS-T Problem Behavior score at or above the 75^th percentile, and SSRS-T Externalizing and Hyperactivity subscale scores that exceeded gender norms by one standard deviation.

Procedure: The participants were assigned to intervention conditions that formed into two groups. Each group met for 30 minutes, three days a week for 10 weeks, during the 2^nd semester of 1^st grade. A total of 30 intervention lessons were provided, resulting in 15 hours of training.

Students were motivated with earned points for participation and correct responses on a daily basis during the pullout intervention. The children could trade their points for a reinforcer (e.g. stickers, pencils). Points were not allocated during the general education literacy block.

The independent variable introduced was the Phonological Awareness Training for Reading (PATR). The test was designed to foster children's awareness for the sound structure of words. In particular, it helps children understand how spoken language is represented by the letters of the alphabet. PATR included four types of activities: rhyming, sound blending, sound segmenting, and reading and spelling.

The dependent variable is described as follows: Direct measures of reading and behavior were collected on each child at four time points. Preintervention data were collected at the onset of the second semester of their firs grade year. Weekly probes were collected throughout the 10 weeks of reading intervention. Postintervention data were collected when the intervention concluded. Two weeks later, follow-up data were collected to examine maintenance of treatment effects.

Reading Measures: Two measures of early reading skills were assessed. DIBELS is an instrument designed to provide a measure of fluency on key indicators of early literacy skills (e.g., Phoneme Segmentation Fluency, Letter Naming Fluency, Nonsense Word Fluency, and Onset Recognition Fluency) and includes 20, 1-minute probes for each subtest. In this study, only the Nonsense Word Fluency subtest was administered. CWPM, a curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency was assessed using beginning first-grade level decodable minibooks. Forty excerpts of approximately 100 words in length were selected from passages in these books and randomly assigned as 1-minute probes. Errors of substitution, omission and mispronunciations, and hesitations of 3 seconds or more were recorded. The number of words read correctly per minute was calculated for 1-minute probes.

Direct Observation Measures: Two direct observation measures were assessed: Total Disruptive Behaviors (TDB) in the classroom, and Negative Social Interactions (NSI) on the playground. These measures were collected in 10-minute observation sessions using duration recording at four time points previously mentioned. Starting a stopwatch whenever the target student was engaged in any of the behaviors described in the tests, and stopping the watch when the student ceased the behavior measured TDB and NSI

Total Disruptive Behavior is a class of behavior that disturbs or disrupts the classroom ecology and interferes with classroom instruction. Negative Social Interaction is defined as classes of behavior that disturbs or disrupts ongoing play activities and involves any occurrence of physical or verbal aggression.

The experimental design for this study was a multiple baseline across intervention groups. Three children, Derk, Lilah, and Willard, were in the first intervention group and four children, Darina, Nicholas, Steven, and Timmy, were in the second intervention group. Each child was assessed on CBM oral reading fluency (CWPM), word attack fluency (DIBELS), TDB, and NSI at the four specified time points. After stable baseline levels were established for the reading measures, the above measures were assessed weekly during the intervention phase to monitor individual growth. The following methods were used for assessment purposes: mean score comparisons across phases, CWPM goals-to-achievement calculations, and calculation of effect sizes. A change in mean scores between phases indicated a change in behavior, while a change in slope, or trend line, indicated both within and between phase changes in behavior. In this investigation an effect size was computed by subtracting the baseline mean from the treatment mean and dividing by the pooled standard deviation. Because of the single case design effect sizes were calculated for each child.

Results: Examination of mean changes by phases revealed that all participants, boys and girls alike, make substantial gains in word attack skills. Students appeared to maintain their respective gains during both post intervention and follow-up data collection points. Several students continued to make gains even after the intervention concluded as evidenced by post intervention mean scores. However, only Timmy continued to make gains during the follow-up phase. Similarly, inspection of mean values between baseline and intervention data phases indicated that all students showed improvements in CWPM. Derk, Karina, Lilah, Timmy, and Willard continued to show improvement in oral reading fluency into the post intervention phase. Unfortunately, Karina and Nicholas's CWPM means decreased in the follow-up condition to a level below the baseline phase. Visual inspection of TDB means indicated that all students showed decreases in TDB from baseline to intervention phases. A Reciprocal relationship existed between word attack and disruptive behavior in the classroom. Namely, improvements in reading skills (DIBELS) were accompanied by decreases in disruptive behavior (TDB). All students except Lilah showed decreases in negative social behavior (NSI) in the playground sitting between baseline and intervention phases. Comparisons between the children's mean CWPM during baseline with the CWPM in Week 10 of the reading intervention indicate that all children made progression oral reading fluency.

All children demonstrated strong improvement in word attack skills as evidenced by effect sizes ranging form 1.22 to 3.81. All students experienced an increase in the correct number of words read per minute with CWPM effect sizes ranging from 0.98 to 3.14. Although all students showed decreases in disruptive classroom behavior, the results were more varied relative to the reading measures with TDB effect sizes ranging from –1.19 to –0.01. In general all children, with one exception (Lilah), showed positive behavioral changes as evidenced by negative effect sizes. Specifically, all children who participated tin the phonemic awareness training intervention experienced substantial growth in word attack skills and oral reading fluency as evidenced by effect sizes, mean score comparisons, and CWPM growth calculations. Nonetheless, the findings also suggest that while improvements were noted, the intervention may not have been of sufficient intensity and duration to produce lasting changes, and produce reading fluency growth at a rate commensurate with normally achieving students. Beginning reading skills (DIBELS and CWPM) increased, maladaptive behaviors in the classroom (TDB) and on the playground (NSI) decreased. The three oldest children despite making the greatest progress in work attack skills, proved to be the most resistant to behavioral changes as evidenced by their small effect sizes for TDB measures. However, it was encouraging to see that even a 10-week intervention did impact social behavior in an unstructured setting (on the playground).

Discussion: Results of analyses support the efficacy of an early reading skills intervention for children who are at risk for CP + HIA. Results suggest that for some first-grade children, secondary intervention targeting academic skills result in positive collateral effects on behavior. Examination of effect sizes and mean changes by phase provides preliminary evidence of a reciprocal relationship between improvements in phonemic awareness skills and a decrease in maladaptive behaviors. The increased efficacy in early reading skills appears to enable children to participate in the reading activities during literacy, which directly competes with time for disruptive behavior. Results also suggest that older children's maladaptive behaviors appear to be more resistant to intervention than younger children's. This study indicates that it may be possible for schools to design and implement socially valid, academic interventions that will create changes in both academic and behavioral domains. Results of this brief intervention suggest that improved phonemic awareness is associated with decreases in disruptive behavior. Findings provide preliminary evidence to warrant implementation of this type of practical, cost-effective, academic-oriented intervention on a larger scale, particularly given that the outcomes might ultimately result in long-term benefits to the children and to society as a whole.

Purpose: The explored detailed concurrent relationships among different measures of naming speed, phonological skill, and orthographic skill in a sample of second graders.

Hypothesis: The central reading problem among children identified with reading disabilities involves a deficit in aspects of word recognition and decoding. These word reading difficulties are largely due to core deficits in phonological skills.

Subjects: Children from two public elementary schools in a suburb of Los Angeles. There were 85 participants in the study. The children were representative of the full range of reading abilities at the two schools. Children with limited English proficiency were excluded. 44 boys, 41 girls, ranging in ages 7.0 to 8.11, with a mean age of 7.10.

Instrumentation/Testing: Standardized Reading Tests were used to detect word identification. Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised and ability to detect nonsense words (WRMT-R). Reading Comprehension was tested using the Silveroli Classroom Reading Inventory, Graded Oral Paragraphs. Vocabulary knowledge was tested using the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-III (WISC-III). Two measures of naming speed were created, adapted from work of other researchers. Phonological Skills assessed were from an adaptation of the Auditory Analysis Test, and similar measures used by researcher Wagner. Orthographic Skills were tested by a researcher designed test.

Results: Some subjects demonstrated a “double-deficit” of reading disability. These children had both slow symbol naming speed (could not identify letters quickly – thus led to spelling deficits), as well as low phonological coding skills (low ability to decode unfamiliar works). These children showed more severe reading difficulties than children with either deficit alone.

Discussion: This report implies that phonological processing problems in young readers reduces the child's opportunities to learn from exposure to printed words and hence, has a direct and powerful effect on the acquisition about knowledge about printed words, including word specific spellings and orthographic regularities, (i.e. irregularly spelled works and words that conform to common spelling patterns). Poor readers have less exposure, read less, and thus gain proficiency much less quickly. In reference to the focus of this database, this study strongly implies the necessity of phonics instruction, along with spelling instruction to be included in every primary curriculum. Students can be plagued with both letter naming and letter sound deficits.

Purpose: Intervention was designed to address deficits in phonemic awareness, decoding, and fluency as part of a special literacy project in the school district.

Subject: D.W., a 15 year old boy in a public high school, with a family history of reading problems.

Data Collection: Tests were administered to evaluate phonological skills (phonemic awareness tested using the Rosner Test of Auditory Analysis Skills, and the Lindamood Auditory Conceptualization Test. Language skills (receptive vocabulary) assessed via Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test Revised Form L. Scores indicated weaknesses in both phonemic awareness and expressive language skills. Further testing was administered to record abilities in Word-Retrieval and Rapid-Naming Skills. Test of Adult/Adolescent Word Finding and Reading Skills using the Woodcock-Johnson Psych-Educational Battery-Revised, and decoding, assessed via the Decoding Skills Test. The final criterion-reference measure was given to assess ability to read and write sight words, with a software program called The Sentence Master.

Procedure: Intervention began in D.W.'s seventh grade year, and continued for four years. D.W. met with the literacy teacher two times weekly, for 45-60 minute sessions. He received a total of 170 lessons oven the four-year period. He received no instruction during the summer, and no reinforcement at home.

Observations during testing: At the beginning D.W. was a cooperative but reluctant student. Often in place of attempting to decode words, he would state “I don't know”. During his first year he stated his goal was to turn 16 and drop out of school. The next year he began to volunteer to read in class and his goal turned to completing high school and joining the military.

Post testing: Post intervention measures were recorded using testing measures as described in the initial assessment section. Clear improvement was demonstrated using appropriate testing. Phonemic awareness skills improved from a first grade level to an adult level. D.W. grew for a 2.1 grade level to 3.5 in tests measuring standardized reading skills. Identification of high frequency words improved from a beginning first grade level to a fifth grade level. Reading rate improved from 49 words per minute, to 72 words per minute. Spelling showed dramatic improvement with an increase form 50% to 85% of words spelled correctly. An end of grade assessment, as determined by a state designed test, resulted in D.W. earning a raw score that was only 5 points below a passing grade. This result moved D.W. from the first percentile in reading up to the 20^th percentile.

D.W. met the criteria for the double-deficit hypothesis as proposed by Wolf and Bowers. This in evidenced by very poor abilities in phoneme awareness and severe deficits in rapid naming. In easier terms, D.W. had both low decoding and poor sight word recognition. However, he had weakness in other types of language skills, plus suffered an attention disorder. Considering all this information D.W. was an example of the complexity found in many students with severe reading disabilities.

Discussion and Interpretations: Evaluation of reading disabilities must take into account students' skills and weaknesses in all aspects of language processing, not just phonemic awareness and speed of naming. Implication taken from this research suggest that teachers in the early grades must by cognizant of the early warnings of present and future reading troubles. It is not surprising that persistent difficulty in all areas of reading discourage students severely enough that they look forward to leaving school as soon as possible. Students who do not develop adequate word identification skills by third grade have a very poor chance of becoming competent readers and often fall further and further behind. Students such as D.W. require tremendous amounts of practice and over learning in order to develop acceptable levels of in word-finding and letter-sound association. Intervention automaticity must be provided frequently (including summers) and be supported both at school and at home. This type of prevention would hinder discouragement and eventual drop out. Students with more severe deficits must be identified early, and appropriate intervention must begin immediately. Identification should include measures that will pinpoint problems in phonemic awareness, rapid naming, and word finding. Moving one step further indicates that, all schools need teachers that are true experts in teaching phonemic awareness, decoding, sight word identification, and fluency to the most difficult-to-teach students. They need me!

Question/Hypothesis: Measures of specific foundation skills in the preschool period and family demographics and home environment can be used to identify children who subsequently evidence poor reading abilities.

Focus: The identification of foundation skills during the preschool period that are needed for the acquisition of reading abilities.

Purpose: To examine how the development of foundation skills influence later reading abilities.

Subjects: The subjects were healthy, typical, full-term infants. A total of 96 children (48 boys and 48 girls) were included in this sample. Children with Event-Related Potentials, (ERP) data at birth, Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children 3^rd edition, (WISC-III) IQ cores at 8 years over 85, and WRAT-R scores at 8 years were included in the study.

Instrumentation/Testing: Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) were used. These ERPs were obtained from infants within 36 hours of birth. All four components are baseline-to-peak negative amplitude and negative peak latency measures of ERPs elicited by the three-formant synthesized speech syllable /gi/. These four components were, NP 224:N2 peak amplitude measured over the right hemisphere frontal region, NL 252:N1 peak latency measured over the left hemisphere parietal area, NL242:N1 peak latency measured over the right hemisphere temporal region, and NL 212:N1 peak latency measured over the left hemisphere frontal area.

Using a software routine and a 90% interrater reliability standard, baseline-to-peak amplitudes were calculated as the difference between the average prestimulus period and a particular large negative peak within the brain wave. The peak latency measure was calculated as the difference in time between the point of stimulus onset and the maximum point of a negative peak within the brain wave. The authors of this study also were responsible for the ERP testing documentation, as recorded in the journal titled Developmental Neuropsychology (see references in report).

Two measures of environment were used. Socioeconomic status (SES) measures were calculated for each participant using information obtained at 3 years of age on parental education, parental occupation, and family income.

The second measure used was the preschool version (ages 3 to 6 years) of the HOME for Measurement of the Environment (HOME) inventory. This test was administered when the children were 3 years of age.

The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale-For the Edition was administered to the children yearly at ages 3 through 6 years.

Reading abilities at 8 years of age were assessed using the Wide Range Achievement Test-Revised (WRAT-R).

Procedure: The children were tested at yearly intervals. The data reported were obtained from the tests done at birth and at 3 and 8 years of age. Tests were administered at birth and then each year within 4 weeks of the child's birth date.

Data Analyzed: Reading abilities at 8 years of age were correlated with the development of foundation skills in speech perception, language, and short-term memory, and by family demographics and activities in the home environment. Correlations reflected the relationship between the foundation skills of speech perception, language, and short-term memory, thought to influence the development of reading skills, along with family demographics and home environment activities and reading scores.

Findings: The findings indicated that home environment scores are correlated with preschool language abilities and verbal short-term memory scores as well as reading scores.

As expected, most of the foundation skills were found relate to and predict reading scores. Verbal short-term memory scores contributed little to the prediction of reading scores. The results across studies indicated that auditory ERPs recorded within 36 hours of birth could be used to successfully discriminate, at well above chance levels, the reading performance of children 8 years later. From these findings, it is apparent that speech perception abilities that are present at birth do influence the subsequent development of language and reading abilities. Activities in the home environment during the preschool period are also found to play an important role in the development of reading abilities. Homes characterized by activities related to books and reading, language learning, and the development of communication skills are characteristic of children with better language and reading abilities. These findings show that measures of the home environment are more strongly related than SES to reading scores. Measures of language as they relate to reading scores are surprisingly not as strong as anticipated. Short-term memory scores are not significantly related to reading scores and contribute little to predictive models, according to this study.

Interpretations: The findings also provide information on two approaches to the study of reading disabilities. One approach is to separate children into groups based on their reading scores and to determine if variables thought to be related to the development of reading skills are predictive of group membership. The second approach is to consider reading as a continuum of abilities and to determine if the variables thought to influence the development of reading abilities are predictive of the full range of reading scores obtained.

Purpose: To investigate the continuing role of specific phonological skills (in this study, rhyme and phoneme awareness) in influencing concurrent and later reading development. To investigate the relationship between short term memory and reading skills.

Hypothesis: The best concurrent predictor set for reading accuracy at age 9 is grammatical knowledge, phoneme awareness, and speech rate.

Subjects: 34 behaviorally well adjusted children, 16 boys, and 18 girls – mean age 9.9. Ages range was 9.3 – 10.3.

Data Collection: At ages 4, 5, and 6, the children were given tests of rhyme and phoneme awareness, a test of letter name knowledge and a test of phonological working memory. When the children were age 9, that is at follow-up, they were given the following 3 standardized attainment tests: The Neal Analysis of Reading Ability, the British Abilities Scales Arithmetic Test, and the Graded Nonword Reading Test. To assess cognitive and linguistic skills the children were given the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children III UK Vocabulary Subtest (a measure of spoken expressive vocabulary) and the Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities-Revised Grammatical Closure Subtest (a measure of awareness of syntactic form and grammatical inflection). The children were also given two phonological awareness tests, the phoneme deletion test, and the rhyme discrimination test; all tests are described in detail in the report. Finally, two memory tests were given, memory span for words and speech rate.

Procedure: The children were tested yearly at ages 4, 5, and 6. The testing was conducted over 3 to 4 sessions, each lasting 20-30 minutes. The tests were not administered in a fixed order.

Results: All analysis was carried out with raw scores. As expected, high correlations were obtained for reading accuracy with grammatical closure, phoneme deletion, and nonword reading. Low correlations were obtained for arithmetic with phoneme deletion. Word span had low correlation with arithmetic, vocabulary, and rhyme discrimination. Rhyming ability did not statistically predict reading accuracy in the analysis. Phoneme awareness significantly predicted individual variation in reading accuracy. Grammatical awareness significantly predicted reading accuracy. In review, the main predictors of reading accuracy at age 9 were grammatical and phonemic awareness. It appears that both of these skills had specific associations with reading and not more generally with educational attainment. More specifically, results indicated that phonemic awareness was a better predictor of reading at age 9 than rhyme discrimination. The two best long-term predictors of reading accuracy at age 9 were the phoneme deletion and nonword repetition measures obtained at ages 5 and 6. Short-term memory processes played a significant role in predicting reading accuracy skill at age 9. Speech rate proved a better predictor of reading than a more conventional verbal short-term memory (word span- # of words you can recall in sequence) test.

Implications: Reading accuracy, when assessed by a test of prose reading (ordinary language, not poetry) is the product of decoding, word recognition, and the use of context. This study showed that rhyme and phoneme awareness are independent skills, and that phonemes but not rhyme awareness, predicts independent variance in reading accuracy. Tests of rhyming ability given at ages 4, 5, and 6 prove to be poor long-term predictors of reading accuracy skill. Phoneme awareness, however, is found to be a very powerful predictor of reading accuracy, both in short and long term (at age 9). The influence of phoneme awareness is specific to reading (as opposed to arithmetic skill).

In the early stages of learning to read, access to critical phonemic segments in spoken words (initial and final phonemes) combined with letter knowledge, suffices to establish primitive mappings between printed and spoken words. Later, access to more precise phonological representations is required to create complex mappings between spelling and sounds. An important predictor of reading accuracy in middle childhood is found to be grammatical awareness. Syntactic factors interact with decoding ability to increase word identification skills. In this respect it is sensible that grammatical awareness is a predictor of reading accuracy in context (measured by prose reading test) but not a pure measure of decoding skill (nonword reading tests). It is likely then that children with poor decoding skills, provided they are verbally able, take advantage of context clues to promote reading accuracy. In the same light, children with poor decoding ability score more highly on standardized tests of prose reading (context clues provided) than they do on single word recognition tests because of the availability of contextual information in the prose.

Findings demonstrate clear and consistent relationships between phonological skills and learning to read in both short and long term.

Purpose: The study purported to reveal results of equal effects from children with varying cognitive levels, who had been given training in linguistic awareness; and also set to determine components of phonological awareness which are most amenable to training. Components considered were syllable deletion, single phoneme isolation, phoneme blending, and phonemic deletion.

Subjects: Two schools were designated as intervention schools and two as control schools. 97 pupils were involved in the intervention schools, and 105 pupils in the control schools. The schools were in Finland. 26 children (12 boys and 14 girls) comprised the lowest quartile in phonological awareness in the intervention schools. These subjects were assigned to training. Mean age was 7 years, 2 months. Each subject was pair-wise matched with a subject from the control schools, mean age 7 years, 1 month. Matching was based on phonological awareness, listening comprehension, and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised Verbal and Total scales.

Design: The 26 pupils from control schools were divided into those who were given normal special instruction (n=11), and those who received only general education classroom instruction (n=15); their matched pairs in the intervention schools were accordingly assigned to two subgroups.

Procedure: The 26 children participating in intervention worked in groups of 3 to 6 members. The intervention took the form of 47 sessions of linguistic awareness training. Sessions took place during school time. The sessions were 20 minutes in length.

1. The child is to become aware of the different units of the language, that is, sentences, words, syllables, and phonemes.

2. The program advanced gradually toward those sub skills of linguistic awareness that are difficult to perform, for example, phoneme deletion.

5. The study material was personally relevant for each child (own name, hobbies, etc.).

Assessment: Phonological Awareness was assessed in preschool, at the beginning, middle, and end of intervention. Tests were based on the following tasks:

After the study was finished tests of word recognition, spelling, listening comprehension and reading comprehension were administered as a posttest.

Results: Separate ANOVAs were performed on the four components (listed above) of phonological awareness. Comparisons were made between the experimental and control groups. The two groups were compared according to the four listed components. The sum score of phonological awareness and cognitive levels (knowing, low vs. nearly average) was clearly increased by the training program given to the experimental group students. In other words, children receiving normal special education instruction and their matched pairs receiving training in linguistic awareness, displayed, as a group lower phonological awareness than the rest. The performance of the group receiving normal special education instruction was the poorest. Separate ANOVAs showed that training effects on phonological awareness were due to a drastic improvement in phoneme blending skill. The entire training group, and the control group, with a nearly average cognitive level, clearly outperformed the controls with cognitive delay in phoneme blending.

It did appear, interestingly enough, that the cognitive delayed children did catch up, as they performed at the level of other preschool nonreaders in the spring term of Grade 1. At the end of grade 1 the lowest in reading and spelling were the control children with cognitive delays who received normal special educational instruction. 7 out of 26 control children, but none of the intervention children still had extensive difficulties. Their difficulties in learning to read and write were also reflected as poor phonological awareness. All, except one, scored zero in both phoneme blending and phoneme deletion at posttest.

Because of training, phoneme blending was higher. A similar effect was not observed with syllable deletion, phoneme isolation, and phoneme deletion.

The control group with a somewhat higher cognitive profile became close to average decoders and spellers without any addition help. For listening comprehension, it was the experimental children with a nearly average cognitive level whose listening comprehension benefited from training in linguistic awareness. Linguistic awareness training appeared superfluous for this group, however, with regard to decoding and spelling.

Implications: Group comparisons lead to the conclusion that the lack of phoneme awareness alone does not cause inferior reading, at least not in a school system that emphasizes phonics training, such as Finland's. It appears that several negative factors are relevant to inferiority in reading. This study indicates most seriously impaired groups seem to consist of children who suffer from both poor phonological awareness as well as low IQ scores.

The positive training effect on phoneme blending could be interpreted in terms of the relative difficulty of various components of phonological awareness and their role in reading development. Phoneme blending seems to be a sensitive measure of the development of phonological awareness when training is given at the same time children start to receive formal instruction in reading and spelling. I ask is better phoneme blending a result of reading and spelling? Do they hold reciprocal relationships?

Reading and spelling development can be predicted on the basis of performance on phonological awareness tests of varying difficulty.

This study suggests that the lack of linguistic awareness in not a sufficient cause for poor reading. Poor reading involves a combination of factors, such as lack of phonological awareness and letter knowledge, poor working memory and counting skills, and low verbal intelligence. In the case of these learners, the relationship between phonological awareness and reading acquisition is not causal but reciprocal, one feeding into the other.

Reiner, K. (1998, September). Developing a kindergarten phonemic

Problem: Children enter kindergarten with varying backgrounds and experiences. Many have lots of pre-reading experiences, while others arrive with limited or none.

Purpose: To provide literacy methods so that each child will grow in knowledge, dispositions, and skills to become capable and confident emergent readers and writers. Accepting that phonemic awareness (the awareness of sounds within our language), is a prerequisite to formal reading instruction, the author seeks to explain how to implement phonemic awareness activities into daily kindergarten routine.

Subjects: 25 kindergarten students in a self contained classroom in the United States.

Data Collection: The instructor used specific activities to help children to become more aware of words and sounds within words. Monthly charts were used to document each child's writing. Each was reviewed monthly and instructor dated the growth she observed developing. Weekly charts were developed with individual student's names and space to write a daily comment was provided.

Data Analysis: A chart was completed for each month across the entire year. Every child's name was listed and documented writing abilities were recorded. The year's progress as a class could easily be viewed.

Results: The “letter-of –the –week” program was not meeting the needs of all children, especially those who have not had much previous experience with print. After using methods created, kindergarten children grew confident and enthusiastic as they began writing. By April, the class had progressed to 0 scribblers, 1 who drew pictures, 4 who wrote isolated letters, 1 who copied only, 3 who wrote words from memory, 8 who used invented spelling, 2 who wrote phrases, 6 children who wrote simple sentences. Many students were enthusiastically choosing books as a self-selected activity by April as opposed to little interest in doing so in September.

Implications: Implementing the literacy experiences described in this study increases children's enthusiasm. Documentation shows that every child grows both in disposition toward reading and writing as well as in skill from such experiences. Conclusions support activities to promote phonemic awareness for building confident and eager emergent readers and writers.

Purpose: To explore the relative predictive power of different types of phonemic awareness tasks. To learn if the statistical correlation between phonemic awareness and reading achievement is of practical significance.

Subjects: 73 kindergarten students from a small rural community. Mean age of students at initial testing was 6.6 with range of 5.8 to 7.4. 36 boys and 37 girls were included. Only 50 of the original 73 students participated in the testing in grade 2. In grade 2, 14 students were now in Catholic school, and 36 were in public school.

Procedure: The test of phonemic awareness was administered individually, completed in two consecutive days. The achievement test administered to 2^nd graders was given by their classroom teacher.

Tools: Achievement test for public school children was the Iowa Test of Basic Skills. Those in Catholic school were administered the California Achievement Test. Word Analysis subtest and Reading Comprehension subtest was used to assess reading achievement in grade 2.

Results: The descriptive statistics for each of the subtests supported previous research suggesting a hierarchy of phonemic awareness skills – rhyming and sound oddity tasks are easier than phonemic deletion and manipulation tasks. On the easier tasks, Initial Consonant Same and Rhyme Supply subtests, the students scored much higher than they did on other subtests. More specifically, students scored 7.7 and 5.3 out of 10 on these less difficult (lower on hierarchy) tasks, and they earned mean scores of 2.9 to 3.3 on the other, more difficult subjects.

High performers were those who scored above the 75^th% (raw score of 32 and up).

Average performers were those who scored between 25^th and 75^th % (raw score between 14 and 31).

Low performers were those who scored below the 25^th % (raw score of 13 or less).

Low performers were consistently unable to complete phoneme manipulation tasks (Strip Initial Consonant and Substitute Initial Consonant Subtests). They obtained almost all their correct responses on the sound oddity task (Initial Consonant Same Subtest).

Analysis: Performance on the Strip Initial Consonant subtests was as good a predictor of reading achievement as the total score! Rhyme supply and sound oddity tasks were not highly predictive of 2^nd grade test performance. Three subtests, Phonemic Segmentation, Strip Initial Consonant, and Substitute Initial Consonant, and Total score were highly predictive of later reading achievement. The Rhyme Supply and initial Consonant Same subtests were not good predictors. Phonemic awareness was assessed with a simple 50-item informal test that took only 15 minutes to administer.

Discussion: The results of this investigation replicate previous research confirming the predictive value of phonemic awareness to later reading achievement The ease of administration, coupled with the predictive power, suggests that screening tools of this sort can be useful for identifying children who are at risk for poor achievement in reading. Students' ability to supply rhyming words or identify words that start the same is not highly predictive of reading ability or disability. Also, poor performance on phonemic segmentation or manipulation is not concrete evidence that students will have difficulty learning to read. However, the inability to do these tasks at the end of kindergarten may indicate a high likelihood of reading failure in first grade. Some have suggested that phonemic synthesis (e.g. /c/, /a/, /t/, what word?) is a prerequisite to success in reading, unlike phonemic analysis, which develops along with reading. If so, blending tasks would be good early predictors and should be included as part of any kindergarten assessment in phonemic awareness.

Limitations: It appears absolutely necessary to mention that so many students in the “low performance” group were not included in the 2^nd grade tests. Of the 18 students in the lower quartile, those who got 13 or fewer correct out of 50, only 8 (44%) participated in the 2^nd grade testing. Clearly these low scoring students, who could do neither phonemic segmentation nor manipulation tasks, were in serious reading trouble.

Introduction: The research investigation from the previous study (consult abstract of the same author), revealed that some of the most interesting information lay in the missing data of the lowest scoring students. To satisfy her inquiry, a follow-up study was conducted on students in the lower quartile three years after the kindergarten testing.

Subjects: 12 students who scored in the lower quartile (13 or below out of 50), three years after original testing (presently in grade 3). Boys outnumbered girls by a ratio of 6:1. Of the 8 students in public school, 5 were in classes for students with learning disabilities, 1 was in remediation by a Chapter 1 teacher, 1 was receiving no special assistance, and 1 was retained in grade 2.

Procedure: All 12 students were retested with the test of phonemic awareness. They also read a third-grade passage from the Gray Oral Reading Inventory. Individual structured interviews were conducted with the students. An experimenter asked the following questions:

Results: The students completed the tasks more easily than they had in kindergarten. Inconsistency showed in results on the easier rhyming task. Using 114 words per minute as a reading rate for grade 3, 6 students read at grade level. None of the students who had been identified as learning disabled read at grade level. The 4 students in Catholic school appeared to be doing better than those in public school. The students' attitudes toward school in general and reading in particular were generally positive.

Discussion: Inconsistency in rhyming task results suggest that little credence should be put into performance on these tasks as predictors of future reading success. Girls appear to be more successful than boys at

Torgesen, J.K. (2001,January/February). Intensive Remedial Instruction for

Purpose: To investigate the conditions that need to be in place for all children to acquire adequate reading skills in school, particularly focusing on children with serious learning disabilities.

Hypotheses: The most explicit condition for phonemic awareness will produce better reading outcomes than less explicit instructional conditions, regardless of variability in general intelligence within the normal range.

Subjects: 60 children with severe reading disabilities assigned to two instructional programs that incorporated principals of effective instruction. The programs differed in depth and extent of instruction in phonemic awareness and phonemic decoding skills. All children fell into the following criteria:

1. Identified by the teacher as having serious difficulty acquiring word-level reading skills.

2. Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised was a least 1.5 SD. Below average for their age.

3. Lindamood Auditory Conceptualization Test scores below minimum required levels for their grade.

Instrumentation/Testing: All children received instruction in two 50 minute sessions per day for 8 weeks.

Procedure: Children were randomly assigned to one of two groups. The Auditory Discrimination in Depth Program (ADD), and the Embedded Phonics Program (EP). No control group was used in this study for the researchers felt it unethical to consume such a large part of a child's day with intervention not focused on their primary reading difficulty. Treatment was provided on a 1:1 basis until 67.5 hours of instruction was completed. The ADD curriculum stimulated phonemic awareness via articulacy clues and spent instructional time building individual word reading skills. They used the Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing Program for Reading, Spelling, and Speech. The EP program stimulated phonemic awareness through writing and spelling activities, taught decoding strategies directly and spent greater amounts of time in reading and writing connected text. The ADD group spent 5% of time reading and writing connected text. The EP group spent 50% of time on the same. The ADD taught phonics awareness directly, with a primary emphasis on building skills on phonemic awareness and phonemic decoding. The EP taught phonics awareness indirectly, with a primary emphasis on decoding and awareness while reading meaningful text.

Results: Follow-up tests were the Woodcock Reading Mastery (WRMT-R) and the GORT-III. It was obvious from posttest results that both treatments had powerful effects on the rate of reading growth of children in the sample. Expressive and receptive language skills improved significantly in both groups. Posttest revealed that the groups were not reliably different from one another two years following intervention. Both instructional programs produced very large improvements in generalized reading skills that were stable over a two-year follow-up period. Their growth during the intervention produced effect sizes of 4.4 for one of the interventions and 3.9 for the other.

Discussion: The two methods of instruction are not differentially effective for children with different levels of phonological ability, when they are compared to growth in broad reading ability that participants demonstrate in resource rooms. Implications taken from the report suggest that both ADD and EP have significant and almost equivalent positive effects on learning disabled reading students.

Introduction: Hypothesis: Early readers do not spontaneously use orthographic analogies during reading.

Problem: Investigators set up the experiment to discover the skills that are best able to account for orthographic analogy use during early reading, the evidence of association between reading ability and orthographic analogy use, the contribution of rhyme awareness to reading in a way that is independent of phonemic awareness.

Purpose: The purpose of investigation was to reveal which measures contribute most to children's ability to read by analogy.

Methodology: Subjects: 68 children (38 boys, 30 girls) mean age of 5 years, 8 months, recruited from 5 schools in the same area in the UK. All students had an approximate equivalent of a reading age of 5 years, 4 months.

Instrumentation/Testing: commercially available tests administered for Rhyme Detection, Alliteration Detection, Measure of Vocabulary (British Picture Vocabulary Scales II), Measure of Short-Term Memory (British Ability Scales II Digit Span), Measure of children's spontaneous ability to read by analogy (Orthographic Analogy Task), measure of children's ability to read individual words without context of a sentence (British Ability Scales II Word Reading Assessment).

Procedure: Some tests allowed for practice first, others did not. All children tested in a quiet area of the school. Tasks were completed over 2 – 3 visits to reduce fatigue.

Results: Orthographic analogy use directly contributed to early reading ability. Tests revealed strong correlations between reading by orthographic analogy, phoneme detection, and reading.

Discussion: Children are able to exploit analogies during early reading. Such analogies should be made available and explicit to early readers as a strategic means for decoding new words.

Home Page	Taking It Forward
Introduction	Additional Resources
Philosophy	Reference page
Abstract	Constance Weaver on Schemata
Thesis Preparation	Synthesis of Guided Reading
Thesis Investigation	Definition of Terms

Introduction To Data Base

Hurst, C.O. (2000, October). Guided Reading Can Strengthen

Jeynes, W.H., &Littell, S.W. (2000, September). A Meta-Analysis of

Lane, K.L., O'Shaughnessy, T.E., Lambros, K.M., Gresham, F.M., &

Beebe-Frankenberger, M.E. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral

Moustafa, M. & Maldonado-Colon, E. (1999, February). Whole-to-Parts

Reiner, K. (1998, September). Developing a kindergarten phonemic

Short, K.G. (1999, Summer). The Search for ‘Balance” in a Literature-Rich

Strickland, D.S. (1998, March). What's Basic in Beginning Reading?

Taberski, S. (1998, March). Make guided reading groups flexible and

Torgesen, J.K. (2001,January/February). Intensive Remedial Instruction for

Turner, R.L. (1989, December). The Great Debate: Can both Carbo and

Yopp, H.K. & Yopp, R.H. (2000, October). Supporting phonemic

Abstracts

Jeynes, W.H., &Littell, S.W. (2000, September). A Meta-Analysis of

Lane, K.L., O'Shaughnessy, T.E., Lambros, K.M., Gresham, F.M., &

Beebe-Frankenberger, M.E. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral

Disorders, 9, 219.

Reiner, K. (1998, September). Developing a kindergarten phonemic

Torgesen, J.K. (2001,January/February). Intensive Remedial Instruction for