Category: Cognitive Development

Gillingham and Stillman’s (1956) Theory of Teaching Reading-Phonics

During the 1950s, there was much debate over which reading instructional methods were the most effective for teaching students how to read. The debate remains the same today, phonics or whole word. Gillingham and Stillman’s theory (1956) of teaching students how to read suggests that all students should be taught literacy using her phonics instructional method. They state that students should receive this type of instruction as preventive measure in Grades 1 and 2. Teaching students how to read was not emphasized until Grade 1 in the 1950s. Today educators begin teaching students how to read in pre-kindergarten/kindergarten. They also stated that this method should be used for remedial instruction beginning in Grade 3. In the 1950s most students were not identified as behind until Grade 3. Today we can begin to identify students as young as pre-kindergarten. If all students were taught to read beginning in pre-kindergarten/kindergarten using a phonological instructional method less students would need to be remediated.

Gillingham began her work in the field of dyslexia or with students struggling to learn how to read under the direction of Dr. Orton a pathologist who studied individuals with brain issues. Students who struggled at learning how to read were referred to Dr. Orton for evaluation. These students were often of higher IQ, with normal sight, and functioned “normally” other than not being able to learn how to read. Most of Gillingham’s work centered on how to effectively teach this type of student how to read. Stillman was a classroom teacher that worked with Gillingham to formulate how to teach students struggling to learn how to read. She also discovered that all students benefited from being taught using her phonics instructional method.

Gillingham and Stillman (1956) believed that remedial students did not learn reading skills through the normal route of instruction. Gillingham and Stillman found that students who were placed in remedial classes often had normal or higher levels of intelligence but were struggling with the acquisition of reading skills. Gillingham and Stillman noted that remedial students often have “normal sensory acuity, both visual and auditory” (p. 20).  They argued that remedial students need to be taught by a trained remediation teacher who can present alternative methods in learning how to read.  When the same students are taught using the phonics method, for example, the results are vastly different. Gillingham and Stillman noted that students who are provided with remediation for four or five years have a greater chance in improving their reading skills.  Students who are remediated early in their school career will often not have memories of failing to learn to read. Students who are remediated early will usually be more confident in their reading abilities and in learning other subjects.

Gillingham and Stillman’s Phonic Instructional Theory

Gillingham and Stillman (1956) stated that students should first be taught the grapheme-phoneme or letter-sound correspondences, followed by the encoding of phonemes to form words. She stated that whole word instruction cannot take the place of “word-building” or phonics instruction. One student stated that “Until I had these Phonic Drill Cards, I never knew that the letters in a word had anything to do with pronouncing it” (Gillingham & Stillman, 1956, p. 39).  Gillingham and Stillman’s method involves the close association of components that form a language triangle. These components are visual, auditory, and kinesthetic. These components work together to record information in the brain.

The first step or linkage is letter-sound correspondence instruction (Gillingham & Stillman, 1956). Students are taught the name of the written symbol (visual), then the sound (auditory) of the written symbol while looking (visual) at the written letter. Students are also taught to feel (kinesthetic) their vocal cords to understand how their body is producing the associated sound. Gillingham and Stillman stated that there is not a set order that letters must be taught. It is suggested that letters should be introduced beginning “with unequivocal sounds and non-reversible forms” (Gillingham & Stillman, 1956, p. 44). She also suggested that teachers should have a plan to follow for the introduction of new symbols.

The teacher first models each process, then completes the tasks with the student, before the student is ask to complete the task independently. Emphasis is placed on learning the correct pronunciation of each letter phoneme, which is modeled by the teacher. Gillingham and Stillman (1956) discussed that teachers should study the correct pronunciation of each letter sound, using pictures that show the correct pronunciation-mouth, tongue, and teeth position. They suggested that each grapheme should be introduced with a “key word” that models the correct pronunciation of the symbol in the initial letter position, like /b/ bear. Students practice correspondences until they become fluid in each letter-sound correspondence. Today we know that phonological awareness plays a major role in students learning the correct pronunciation of each letter sound.

The second step or linkage is learning how to write (kinesthetic) the symbols (visual) of the learned sounds (auditory). The teacher models how to write the symbol; how to hold a writing utensil, where to begin, where to end, etc. Students then trace over the teacher’s model of how to write the symbol. When students become fluid in how to correctly form the symbol through tracing, then they begin copying the symbol on their own.

There are six more steps in Gillingham and Stillman’s (1956) phonic instructional theory, which will be addressed in future blogs.

References

Gillingham, A, & Stillman, B. (1956). Remedial training for children with specific disability in reading, spelling, and penmanship. Cambridge: Education Publication Service, Inc.

Gillingham, A. (1955). The prevention of scholastic failure due to specific language disability, part I. Bronxville: N.Y. Academy of Medicine.

 

 

Developing the Reading Brain Connections is Hard Work!

The brain has elasticity or the ability to grow new connections and prune unused connections. This is an easier task for younger individuals, when their brain has a greater degree of elasticity. No matter the age growing new or different connections or routes of communication between the different parts of the brain for effective reading is usually very tiring. When a person has dyslexia, this impedes the process.

In his book The Teacher Who Couldn’t Read, John Corcoran (2008) describes living a life similar to a prisoner with no way to escape or get out for good behavior. In his 40s John stumbled upon or was talked into trying a program called, Lindamood Bell. He hesitated because no one else had been able to break through and help him learn the skills necessary to read.

Even though he read at about Grade 2, he had wholes or gaps in the necessary tools he needed to effectively read at Grade 2. He first began meeting with his instructional team at Lindamood Bell for four hours a day, after a week he moved his instruction time to six hours a day. He describes his plunge into intense therapy-training like a soldier readying himself for war. John states, “at times my shirt would be soaking wet as I strained to learn the new techniques. I never worked so hard at anything in my life, and I never felt so good” (Corcoran, 2008, p. 201).

John describes that his journey of learning how to read began with phonemic awareness (oral language), learning how to better manipulate sounds of words. He was lacking the phonemic awareness skills that many educators take for granted as this is usually acquired before students enter formal education. Once those skills were learned, he began learning the names of letters and their corresponding sounds. Instructors assisted John in learning how the movements of his face and mouth helped him to create the sounds of the individual letters, letter diagrams, and words.

He noted that part of his issue was a lack of correct sound linkage. Meaning his brain did not accurately connect the right oral sounds with their corresponding letter(s). He lacked sound discrimination skills that are necessary to distinguish between different sounds associated with each letter. He stated that nearly a third of individuals who possess normal hearing “do not have fully developed auditory conceptual ability” (Corcoran, 2008, p. 204). This skill is necessary for decoding words into the individual sounds and their corresponding letters. He noted that he had to use his senses of hearing, seeing, touching, and moving to accurately absorb the skills necessary to read.

After about three weeks, he began to feel the prison walls tumble as “the task went from being hard, physical labor to a fun learning activity” (Corcoran, 2008, p. 203). “I felt my own transition from being physically and mentally exhausted to being relaxed and confident” (p. 203). He began to unmask his deception of not knowing how to read, no longer feeling the need to manipulate his environment to protect himself.

After one month of instruction or 100 hours of treatment in the Lindamood-Bell Learning Process, John “gained 10 years in word-attack skill” (Corcoran, 2008, p. 206) moving from Grade 2 to Grade 12; “three years in word recognition” (p. 206) moving from Grade 5 to Grade 8; and “a year and a half in spelling” (p. 206). His therapy also increased his ability to follow oral directions and his reading comprehension skills.

The Lindamood Bell Program was developed in the late 1960’s to teach students with unreliable auditory perceptions known as Auditory Discrimination in Depth (ADD). The program teaches “students to perceive sounds in isolation and in context and how to produce them” (American Federation of Teachers, 1999). They have other programs such as Lindamood Phonemic Sequencing Program (LiPS), which focuses on reading and spelling. “Combining phonics with auditory discrimination in depth (LIPS) program is what I will call the Complete Intensive Systematic Phonics Learning System” (Corcoran, 2008, p. 209).

Each student is unique having different genetic and environmental factors that may affect students’ ability to learn how to read, making accurate diagnose of individual student learning needs a challenge.

Identifying dyslexic or literacy deficit students during grades Pre-Kinder – 2, when an individual’s brain in more flexible, decreases the dollars to educate and rehabilitate individuals during their teens and adulthood. Identifying them can be tricky! Many states have passed laws making dyslexia a learning disability and many districts have now adopted the necessary assessments to diagnose these students. The International Dyslexia Association (IDA) defines dyslexia as:

“a specific learning disability that is neurobiological in origin. It is characterized by difficulties with accurate and/or fluent word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding abilities. These difficulties typically result from a deficit in the phonological component of language that is often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities and the provision of effective classroom instruction. Secondary consequences may include problems in reading comprehension and reduced reading experience that can impede growth of vocabulary and background knowledge” (Adopted by the IDA Board of Directors, Nov. 12, 2002).

Classic dyslexia or developmental dyslexia is acquired through one’s genetics. These students are usually identified though their lack of phonological process skills. They rely on different parts of the brain to process written words. These students work twice as hard to process written words. This type of dyslexia was first discussed in research during the 1800s. Another type is dyscalculia, which affects an individual’s ability to effectively process math equations. Another type of dyslexia is dysgraphia—a student’s ability to learn how to process information into written language. There are programs outside of public education that can effectively diagnose and treat individuals of dyslexia. I encourage individuals to choose programs that are Orton-Gillingham based and endorsed by IDA.

“A good builder, like a good teacher, uses the best tools and material available, which includes a plan and blueprint” (Corcoran, 2008, p. 210).

References

Corcoran, J. (2008). The teacher who couldn’t read. Kaplan, Inc.American Federation of Teachers (1999). Lindamood-bell reading intervention      program. Reading Rockets. https://www.readingrockets.org/article/ lindamood-bell-reading-intervention-program

Dyslexia and The Teacher Who Couldn’t Read

Individuals are not naturally designed to read. Individuals must develop and refine the “right” brain connections to efficiently process written language. Efficiently is defined as fluently reading written words and gleaning the writer’s intended message. A person’s brain adds, subtracts, and reorganizes read information to develop and refine the highways of connection to process written language. The reading brain connections for most individuals will develop without much fanfare or grit. These individuals are genetically programmed to develop brain connections that communicate with many regions of the brain to process written language.

Individuals who have developmental dyslexia do not develop the same communication routes to effectively process written language. Their brain works twice as hard to process and develop more efficient processing routes for written language. Many dyslexic students seem to be at grade-level or above, because of their good oral language skills. But oral language uses different brain routes than written language to comprehend what is said. Students that are diagnosed or show strong signs of dyslexia usually need direct, explicit, systematic instruction to learn how to read.

This means that for approximately 10-20% of individuals the task of learning how to read is very laborious, making the task at times uninteresting. These students often look for an escape-daydreaming, bathroom, drink, irritate their neighbor, etc. These students are also often labeled as an attention problem, lazy, undisciplined. Making the process of learning how to read engaging, a want to participate in the process usually eases the process of gaining reading skills for dyslexic students.

Many states now have educational laws in place to better assist students with dyslexia and other students struggling to acquire literacy skills. These laws are dependent on those seeing that the laws are put into motion and sustained. The motion and sustainment are dependent on the educators present at each educational site. Many educational sites now have systems to better identify and accommodate students who might have dyslexia. The hope is that no student will have to face the “private prison” that Mr. Corcoran, author and literacy advocate, had to face.

John Corcoran describes, in his 2008 book The Teacher Who Couldn’t Read, his journey of how he learned to read in his late 40s. He invented his own survival methods to navigate a literate world. He managed to muddle, navigate his way through layers and years of education to become a social studies and English grammar teacher. Most individuals didn’t know he couldn’t read or write above Grade 2 or possible they ignored his lack of literacy skills. John states “I began a 40-year battle inside my own private prison” in Grade 2 (p. 20). He describes middle school as a battlefield (p. 47). John wrote, “I felt like I was in a maze at a carnival, only this wasn’t fun. I had six 45-minute classes, six teachers, and a list of classrooms I couldn’t find. I didn’t have any friends and I couldn’t read the schedule or figure out what door to open” (p. 48). By high school I felt “dumb, ignored or dismissed by teachers, evasive, polarized by literate and illiterate camps, angry, and confused” (p. 66). John became an expert at deception, as his parents didn’t seem to know that he couldn’t read either. His father was a teacher who “had degrees or college credits from six different institutions of higher learning and read books like kids eat popcorn” (p.79).

John began the agonizing work of developing more efficient brain connections to process written language at age 48. He is severely dyslexic. Dyslexia is known to jump around in the family trees, depending on the mix of genetics. Dyslexia can jump generations and show up in families of distant dyslexic relatives. Dyslexia doesn’t skip socioeconomic levels or race. More about how he developed the brain connection to become literate in my next blog.

References

Corcoran, J. (2008). The teacher who couldn’t read. Kaplan, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Building a Habit of Deep Reading

Instilling the love of reading or the want to read at leisure may be different for each student. Learning how to read is hard, exhausting for most students. Finding a motivating reason to learn how to read usually eases the fatigue and stress. Some students might develop the intrinsic push to read for pleasure. Some students might develop the intrinsic push to read to research about a particular topic. Some students might develop the intrinsic push to read to be like their friends. Others push themselves to not be embarrassed. In addition, modeling the love for reading usually increases student intrinsic motivation to learn how to read effectively.

Reading is a complex endeavor that includes many components working simultaneously, together. Written words are breathed in, swirled around, and processed using current brain connections to examine, analyze and make conclusions. The process of making meaning out of the written words usually takes fluid, efficient seconds. In these seconds your brain is moving the written words through different parts of the brain to bring coherent meaning. The meaning of the words may have a different twist or meaning for each person—this is dependent on their background knowledge and efficiency of their brain’s written language processing networks. Not all brains are developed equally. Part of the analysis process is student’s lexicon or dictionary. This is their personal reference book or computer catalog for them to use while understanding oral or written language. Student lexicon is constantly changing. Teachers assist in developing brain connections for processing written words through instruction.

Networks for reading efficiently are developed through instruction and practice. One of the ways that teachers assist in the development of brain connections for processing written words with coherency is modeling how to read. Each step of the reading process should be modeled to students, beginning in the pre/primary grades. In some cases, the modeling may need to take place several times. While modeling for students in small groups, invite students to follow along with their book. These are steps that you might use.

  • Choose a book that may be of interest to most students in the group. You will need to model all different types of written words, such as non-fiction, fiction, poetry, etc.
  • Take the time to review the contents of the book. This may not look the same each time. This is often referred to as a prereading or a book-walk-through. Look at the structure of the book. Look at the pictures. Look at the front and back covers. Look at the how the words are written in the book. Look for a table of contents. Look for gems in the back of the book, like index or definitions. Ask questions (wonder) about things you have found. Make predictions about the story based on the title or pictures. Make connections between this book and other books. Make connections between the book and student life experiences.
  • Read the book taking time to breathe in the words. You might read a sentence and take a moment before reading the next to analyze what you have read. You might ask a question. You might think about what might happen next or how this is connected to the previous sentence or paragraph. You might go back and reread a previous sentence to better understand the one you just read. This may take several smaller lessons to emphasize and develop the natural connections for comprehension. Breathing words develops and strengthens brain connections to process for written words for meaning. Many students need modeling, remodeling, and many opportunities to practice.
  • After reading the book or passage, model how to analyze or make the connections to form further conclusion(s). The following are some ideas of how you might analyze the words read: a) think aloud about what you read- ask questions like, what color is a bumble bee? What kinds clothes should you wear outside on a cold day? Should the dog be driving a car? Why does the character stay on the path? Why is there a title on this page? Does this make sense? What do you think the car looks like? Or what does it look when it’s raining? b) discuss your conclusion with friends, c) analyze individual words of the passage, d) analyze sentences read, e) analyze sentences with other sentences of the same passage, f) make connections between self and the passage, or g) write a written summary.

More students have the ability to take in and process oral language to understand what is read aloud to them than when they read the words silently. Encouraging students (especially struggling comprehension readers) to whisper-read the passage aloud usually increases their comprehension of the passage and assists in the development of the necessary brain connections to fluidly comprehend the written passage.

 

 

The Benefits of Intentional Partner Reading

I discovered the power of intentional student partner reading by accident, while completing my student teaching in the early 2000s. During my student teaching in a Grade 1/2 combination classroom, part of my role was to observe and assist students. My mentor’s classroom featured student reading centers. There were four reading centers/tasks and five student reading groups. Students were grouped by ability and rotated to a new center each day. One group received explicit instruction from the teacher, while the other groups completed literacy related tasks at their center for the day. Reading groups usually lasted 30 minutes. Students seemed to be finished with the task of their reading center earlier than the time allowed for small groups. The students became squirmy and tended to need more attention during the last 10 minutes of small group time. I began to contemplate possible changes to the intended instructional schedule during that time of the school day to possibly avoid the necessary teacher attention.

When it came time for me to “take the wheel” or teach solo for two weeks, I (with the blessing of my mentor teacher) altered her classroom schedule by subtracting 10 minutes from reading group time and adding 10 minutes of intentional peer/partner reading. I paired students and gave each student a curriculum-based book to read at their current independent reading level. Students took turns to orally read their teacher provided book. Each student read for approximately five minutes. Towards the end of my solo teaching, my mentor teacher mentioned that many students grew faster than they had so far this school year—this was early Spring. At the time I didn’t think much about the extra growth. I have since used this strategy for various reasons, like building social emotional skills or reading fluency, during full-time teaching positions. Each time I have used this strategy, the reading achievement growth has been similar or greater to the first results.

I define “intentional” partner reading as two students orally reading a teacher chosen passage or book at their independent reading level, taking turns with their teacher chosen partner to read and listen to a book or passage. Students are intentionally paired higher-level readers with lower-level readers. Each student receives a teacher chosen book to read at their current independent instructional reading-level. While one student is reading the other student is listening or assisting their partner to read. I choose the student partners, putting higher-level readers with lower-level readers. The higher-level students are usually able to assist their partner should they stumble. This also allows the lower students to hear grade-level or higher vocabulary words and writing structures. At times I have paired students who are at same independent reading-level, giving them each a different book to read. These students are usually at or above grade-level. Student personalities may have a factor in how you group students and the intended effectiveness of the process. I do not tell students why they are being partnered with that student, as the point is not to create a dominate and inferior partnership. I will usually change student partners. This is dependent on the group of students and how long I use the strategy.

Some of the benefits of using the intentional partner reading strategy are noted below. This strategy typically builds:

  • Vocabulary or Lexicon – students hear new words and possible meaning(s) of the new word. Familiar words are revisited, reinforcing the meaning and usage of word.
  • Comprehension – Students typically know the meaning of more spoken words and sentences than written words and sentences. This is especially true if they haven’t connected the written graphemes of a word with its oral spoken phoneme(s). Oral language ability often dictates student latter comprehension ability. In addition, students often voluntarily ask their partner questions about the text.
  • Brain Connections – develops brain connections of what they see (graphemes) with what they have heard (phonemes).
  • Writing Ability usually increases – students hear different structures of sentences and genres of writing. Students also see the spelling of words and correct structures of sentences.
  • Oral Reading Fluency – students practice decoding and encoding words. Students are more likely to hear their mistakes and try to correct their reading accuracy.
  • Collaboration Skills – usually gain a sense of support, partnership, togetherness, motivation, accomplishment and purpose for reading the passage or story.
  • Listening Skills – students practice/build their listening skills, as tend to listen more attentively to their peers.

Many primary and elementary school campuses have curriculum or books closets that house non-fiction and fiction books at various reading-levels. Some libraries or classrooms may also feature leveled non-fiction and fiction reading books. Students usually love the tasks of reading together. This strategy is usually more effective for reading-fluency in the lower reading-levels, K-5.

I have observed, over the years, many educators use the term “partner reading” to mean different formats of two students reading to each other. I will discuss this further in a later blog.

 

Student Developmental Processing Lag

Student language development was stunted during the pandemic. Students were put in “rooms” with computers. This led to a “student lag” in developing cognitive processing skills. Students are struggling to upload and process language, and analyze and synthesize the information with stored knowledge for future use. You can hear student brain strain as they scrabble to process the information, often struggling to locate old information and hold new information long enough to make the necessary connections to process spoken and written information. Students are now working overtime to build and perhaps struggling maintain brain connections. This lends to many tired and overwhelmed students who often become frustrated. Students will often checkout of the learning process with or without proper interaction and instructional scaffolding. Students who lack intrinsic motivation will likely fall further behind. Intrinsic motivation pushes them to power through the struggle to develop the necessary connections to process information.

Many students didn’t have “normal” interactions with extended relatives, neighbors, classmates, or community members during the pandemic. These nonplanned community interactions usually stimulate the development of oral language capabilities that assist in developing written literacy skills. These skills are interwoven. Students also didn’t receive the “normal” opportunity to build and strengthen brain connections that students usually need to function within a regular school day. Many of these connections are developed through natural social interactions. Students may also develop part of these brain connections through purposeful instructional lessons that allow for practice of taught skill.

The severity of the processing lag will differ depending on different possible factors. Some of those factors are noted below:

  • Student Age. Students are typically pruning unneeded brain connections during their preprimary years of education. Children typically have major cognitive changes around age 7 and 10-12 that correspond with physical developmental changes. Children between the ages of 2 and 6 spend a large amount of time mimicking their surroundings.
  • Reading on a digital device. This usually develops skimmers of the words/passages, which decreases their ability to read deeply for accurate comprehension. This also affects their short-term memory development and use.
  • Lack of interaction with individuals of higher cognitive processing skills
  • Lack of investigative activities that require interaction outside of their home, like travel or trips to the local museums
  • Lack of reading instruction and materials that may require the interaction of other individuals
  • Lack of exercise
  • Learning how to use technology
  • Adjusting to longer usage of technology…staring at a computer screen, television or video game
  • Less time writing manually. Manual writing assist in learning how to process and use information. This also assists in memory formation.

Students may need a few years to “catch-up” to their grade-level expectations. This may be shortened through explicit instruction. Students will be lacking necessary background information (foundational or prior knowledge) that may further impede the learning of new concepts. This may increase the need for differentiating and scaffolding of instruction and learning opportunities to ensure participation and ownership of new information taught. Patience may be one of the bigger pieces of the “catch-up” phase.

References

Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. (2000/1966). The psychology of the child. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Wolf, M. (2018). Reader, Come Home: The Reading Brain in a Digital World. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

Increasing Student Wealth, Lexicon of Knowledge

Developing student lexicon* to increase comprehension of spoken and written language happens naturally and purposively. The environment that an individual lives in naturally develops their lexicon. For example if you live on a farm, you obsorb the knowledge/language of farm culture. The degree of farm language that you learn depends on the components of the farm that you are exposed to, and your degree of participation in the those components. The learned and stored information about farm life may be relevant in other cultures or life-styles. For example you may learn about record keeping that is applicable in every business. Or you may learn about the components of healthy food consumption that applicable to human development in any culture.

Where I was raised it was natural for most individuals to learn about fresh water fish, it was part of the community culture. It was natural to learn about the salmon run, where in a community near the ocean it may be more natural to learn about sea turtles or tide pools. The habitats, life-cycle, and behaviors of different types of fish have many similarities. Within a purposeful learning environment the study of fish usually gives the opportunity to introduce different cultures, geographical areas, bodies of water, etc. of where the fish reside. The similarities and differences help students to increase their lexicon to comprehend both seen and unseen language related to fish and their habitat. The new learned information about fish is then available to make new conclusions.

In the book How Lincoln Learned to Read,Wolff describes how 12 individuals were educated through their the culture or life-style. This is a non-fiction book that discusses individuals that made notable contributions to America. Some of individuals had great disabilities, some had wealth, and some were very poor. The book includes people and events that influenced their learning. Reading How Lincoln Learned to Read helps the reader to paint a picture of how individuals are educated inside and outside of the classroom and how a person gathers information to understand written and spoken language. The book also helps the reader to understand how early childhood education can influence adult choices.

One chapter of the book describes the education of Belle born to slaves. She was educated by her parents to function effectively within the institution of slavery. This was not the slavery of the plantation South, but of the Northern Dutch who had smaller farms. She had to learn that she was commodity and that staying with her parents could end at a very young age. The chapter also describes how her life evolved into a free woman and how she used prior knowledge to move her forward. Another chapter of the book describes how a girl named, Rachel was raised in hills without the conveniences of modern day technology. The chapter goes on to describe how she lost her father at age 11, forcing the family to move closer to her mother’s family. Where she was able gain a formal education through a private school. The chapter goes on to describe how she used the knowledge that she gained as a child her writing. Some of her writings about nature, the hills, set the stage for present science education. The book also describes individuals such as Abraham Lincoln, Henry Ford, and Benjamin Franklin.

*Students store spoken and written words in their lexicon or mental dictionary. Students increase their mental dictionary through their environment. Student lexicon is always adding new words, pictures, gestures, etc that may help them to better comprehend language. This development begins at birth. Their brain begins attaching meaning(s) to individual tones of sound. Students adjust their stored information as they are introduced to new sounds and their meaning(s). Students also adjust their stored information as new meaning(s) or connections are introduced to the stored information. For example, if you know that dogs shakes when it gets wet, but do not know that dogs may smell when they get wet. Then you experience the a bad odor of a wet dog. Your mental dictionary will adjust your stored information to be dogs shake and may smell when they get wet. The stored information may look similar to a spider web as the information is added and adjusted. Students transfer the stored meaning(s) of tones (voice) to symbols (print) as they learn how to read and write. Student lexicon also helps students to infer or conclude the unwritten or unspoken meaning of a conversation or writing.

Reference
Wolff, Daniel (2009). How Linclon Learned to Read. New York: Bloomsbury USA.

Development of Reading Connections in the Brain

Translating written language into meaning or the process of reading is like completing a dot to dot picture. The brain has to connect the right dots or take the right highways and sideroads to deeply or fully comprehend written language. The complex process of connecting the right dots begins at conception, as brain connections are organized or cataloged through predetermined genetic design. The original or genetic organization can be altered or changed through a child’s environment.

Individuals are not naturally wired with the connections to process letters into usable information. The brain has to develop those connections to process written letters into useable information, which begins at birth through oral language. A child’s verbal communication connections serve as a reference for the process of developing written processing connections. Some children can more easily develop the right connections to use written language. Meaning they pick up letter names and their corresponding sounds and are able to build words and their meanings into usage information without purposeful instruction. Most children need planned instruction to learn each letter and the letter’s corresponding sound(s) and how to develop letters into meaningful words. Most children also need planned instruction to break down words into sounds and meaning. And some children will need explicit, systematic instruction to fully digest letters, words, and sentences into useable information. Understanding what type of literacy instruction children need will follow in a future post.

References

International Dyslexia Association Conference; Dr. Louisa Moats, Dr. F. Hoeft, & Dr. K. Pugh
Binet, A. & Simon, T. (1916) The development of intelligence in children. Williams & Wilkins Co.
Fowler, W. (1983). Potentials of childhood (Vol 1.) D.C. Health & Co.
Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. (1966). The psychology of the child. Basic Books.
Vygotsky, L. (1934). Thought and language. MIT Press.

 

 

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)

Facebook
Twitter