Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T19:03:00.234Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - First impressions: What four readers can teach us

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

By
Benita A. Blachman
Edited by
Kurt W. Fischer ,
Jane Holmes Bernstein  and
Mary Helen Immordino-Yang
Benita A. Blachman
Affiliation:
Trustee Professor of Education and Psychology Syracuse University
Kurt W. Fischer
Affiliation:
Harvard University, Massachusetts
Jane Holmes Bernstein
Affiliation:
The Children's Hospital, Boston
Mary Helen Immordino-Yang
Affiliation:
University of Southern California
Get access

Summary

Overview: Watching real children read reminds us what we do and do not yet understand about the reading process, especially how little is known about the underlying processing deficits that cause dyslexic behavioral patterns. To ground this point, Blachman compares the three dyslexic readers to Jonathan, an effective reader, and stresses the relation between accuracy and fluency in the production of functional reading. While much neuropsychological research focuses on the processes underlying reading accuracy, methods to remediate poor fluency need attention in research and practice (see Wolf and Ashby, this volume). From an educational perspective, children must combine accuracy and fluency in order to improve their comprehension and their comfort with reading.

The Editors

What do you see when you watch four young boys read? To prepare for the conference on which this volume is based, speakers were asked, essentially, to reflect on this question. We were asked to view a videotape of four 9-year-old boys, one typical reader and three poor readers, and use the profiles of these children as the centerpiece for our remarks. The videotape was divided into two sections, each showing the children engaged in a series of diagnostic tests, and speakers were asked to respond to one section or the other. I was asked to respond to the section that included measures of rapid naming (Denckla & Rudel, 1976) and measures of isolated word reading (reading words and non-words from lists) (Test of Word Reading Efficiency, Torgesen, Wagner, & Rashotte, 1999; The Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery–Revised, Woodcock & Johnson, 1989).

Type
Chapter
Information
Mind, Brain, and Education in Reading Disorders , pp. 217 - 226
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blachman, B. A. (ed.). (1997). Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia: Implications for early intervention. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Blachman, B. A. (2000). Phonological awareness. In Kamil, M. L., Mosenthal, P. B., Pearson, P. D. & Barr, R. (eds), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III), 483–502. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Blachman, B. A., Schatschneider, C., Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Clonan, S. M., Shaywitz, B. A. & Shaywitz, S. E. (2004). Effects of intensive reading remediation for second and third graders and a 1-year follow-up. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 444–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, S. (1997). Ability to encode phonological representations: An underlying difficulty of poor readers. In Blachman, B. A. (ed.), Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia: Implications for early intervention, 21–47. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Brady, S. & Shankweiler, D. (eds). (1991). Phonological processes in literacy: A tribute to Isabelle Y. Liberman. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Denckla, M. B. & Rudel, R. G. (1976). Rapid “automatized” naming (R. A. N.): Dyslexia differentiated from other learning disabilities. Neuropsychologia, 14, 471–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R. & Pearson, P. D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research, 61, 239–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehri, L. C. (1989). Development of spelling knowledge and its role in reading acquisition and reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 356–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehri, L. C. (1997). Sight word learning in normal readers and dyslexics. In Blachman, B. (ed.), Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia: Implications for early intervention, 163–89. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Elbro, C. (1996). Early linguistic abilities and reading development: A review and a hypothesis about distinctness of phonological representations. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 8, 453–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elbro, C., Borstr⊘m, I. & Petersen, D. K. (1998). Predicting dyslexia from kindergarten: The importance of distinctness of phonological representations of lexical items. Reading Research Quarterly, 33(1), 36–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, A. E. (1991). How early phonological development might set the stage for phoneme awareness. In Brady, S. A. & Shankweiler, D. P. (eds), Phonological processes in literacy: A tribute to Isabelle Y. Liberman, 97–117. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Goodman, K. S. (1976). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. In Singer, H. & Rudell, R. B. (eds), Theoretical models and processes of reading, 497–508. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
Goswami, U. (2002). Phonology, reading development and dyslexia: A cross-linguistic perspective. Annals of Dyslexia, 52, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, R. B. & Shankweiler, D. (1985). Repetitive naming and the detection of word retrieval deficits in the beginning reader. Cortex, 21, 617–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liberman, I. Y. & Shankweiler, D. (1985). Phonology and the problems of learning to read and write. Remedial and Special Education, 6, 8–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liberman, I. Y. & Shankweiler, D. (1991). Phonology and beginning reading: A tutorial. In Rieben, L. & Perfetti, C. A. (eds), Learning to read: Basic research and its implications, 3–17. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Metsala, J. L. & Walley, A. C. (1998). Spoken vocabulary growth and the segmental restructuring of lexical representations: Precursors to phonemic awareness and early reading ability. In Metsala, J. L. & Ehri, L. C. (eds), Word recognition in beginning literacy, 89–120. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Nicholson, T. (1991). Do children read words better in context or in lists? A classic study revisited. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 444–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rack, J. P., Snowling, M. J. & Olson, R. K. (1992). The nonword reading deficit in developmental dyslexia: A review. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 29–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayner, K. (1997). Understanding eye movements in reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 317–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shankweiler, D. (1999). Words to meanings. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 113–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Share, D. L. & Stanovich, K. E. (1995). Cognitive processes in early reading development: Accommodating individual differences into a model of acquisition. Issues in Education, 1, 1–57.Google Scholar
Stage, S. & Wagner, R. (1992). Development of young children's phonological and orthographic knowledge as revealed by their spellings. Developmental Psychology, 28, 287–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (1988). Explaining the differences between the dyslexic and the garden-variety poor reader: The phonological-core variable-difference model. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 590–612.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stanovich, K. E. (1994). Romance and reality. The Reading Teacher, 47, 280–91.Google Scholar
Tangel, D. & Blachman, B. A. (1992). Effect of phoneme awareness instruction on kindergarten children's invented spelling. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24, 233–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tangel, D. & Blachman, B. A. (1995). Effect of phoneme awareness instruction on the invented spelling of first grade children: A one year follow-up. Journal of Reading Behavior, 27, 153–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K. & Rashotte, C. (1999). Test of Word Reading Efficiency. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
Treiman, R. (1993). Beginning to spell. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Treiman, R. (1997). Spelling in normal children and dyslexics. In Blachman, B. A. (ed.), Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia: Implications for early intervention, 191–218. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Wagner, R. K. & Torgesen, J. K. (1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 192–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., Hecht, S. A., Barker, T. A., Burgess, S. R., Donahue, J. & Garon, T. (1997). Changing relations between phonological processing abilities and word-level reading as children develop from beginning to skilled readers: A 5-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 33, 468–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiederholt, J. L. & Bryant, B. R. (1992). Gray Oral Reading Tests, Third Edition. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.Google Scholar
Wolf, M. (1991). Naming speed and reading: The contribution of the cognitive neurosciences. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 123–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, M. & Bowers, P. (1999). The “double-deficit hypothesis” for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 415–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, M. & Katzir-Cohen, T. (2001). Reading fluency and its intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 211–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodcock, R. W. & Johnson, M. B. (l989). Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery–Revised. Chicago, IL: The Riverside Publishing Co.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×