The Literacy Brain

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.

What is Partner Reading?

The instructional strategy partner reading looks different depending on the classroom and students. Partner reading provides opportunity for social and academic support. Partner reading also encourages motivation and provides opportunity for practice. This strategy at times becomes the teacher’s extended arms and mouth of instruction. Partner reading usually includes two students reading a book and at times discussing the contents of the book. The benefits are vast. See my post of June 2022.

The biggest challenge to “partner reading” is student collaborative skills. Students bring their individual intrapersonal and interpersonal skills, and knowledge to a group. These skills are combined with their partner’s skills to solve or work through the given task. Some students fall into these skills naturally through observation and participation of social interactions—beginning at birth. Some students will need explicit modeling of what and how these skills are practiced in a group setting. Most students will need to know the “ground rules” of what is excepted and not excepted during partner work in your classroom. The amount of repetition of ground rules will depend on the grade and prior experience of the students participating. Most students like to share and work with a partner.

Educators use different names and definitions for the instructional strategy of “partner reading”. Some of those names and definitions are noted below.

Partner Reading. I define 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” (Ray, 2022).
Buddy reading is defined as two students reading a book of their choosing at their independent reading level. This instructional strategy is most often used to pair students of different grades levels, such as Grade 5 students and Kindergarteners reading their independent reading-level book to each other. This strategy may also be used in one classroom. Some buddy reading groups are encouraged to ask questions about the passage read. One student reads while the other student listens. Student are encouraged to sit side-by-side, so that the listener can see the reader’s page. Teachers usually sets a time for students to read—five or ten minutes, or the whole passage. This strategy usually promotes motivation for students to read. Students often scaffold the reading and comprehension process for each other.
Paired reading. Reading Rockets (2022) defines paired reading as a research-based fluency strategy for students who struggling with reading fluency. Students of the same reading level often reread the same passage to build fluency. Students are paired higher-level with lower-level reading ability. Students read books or passages of their choosing.
Cooperative learning is defined “as students working together, helping each other, sharing their ideas, and assisting their group in achieving mastery over the content material” (Ray, 2017, p. 45). Cooperative learning may exist of two or more students working together to accomplish a common goal or task. Cooperative learning usually increases student academic achievement and creative thinking skills. This strategy usually narrows or closes the reading performance gap.
Peer-Assisted Learning Strategy (PALS) is another name type of partner reading. This strategy is more scripted and is often used as an intervention strategy. Peer-assisted involves two students, one of higher-level and one of lower-level working together to accomplish a common task. This strategy calls for one passage or book that is accomplishable by both students (Fuchs, D. & Fuchs, L., 2005). The higher-leveled student reads the passage or book first to model how to read the passage. The lower-leveled student then reads the same passage and retells the passage just read. The PALS instructional strategy also includes paragraph shrinking and prediction relay.

Educators will usually see more growth in students who work in more scripted groups. Scripted group means that students in the group have been given direction as to what they need to accomplish, like reading a passage, discussing the character(s) of a story, orally answer or write questions or come up with a summary.

References

Fuchs, D. & Fuchs, L. (2005). Peer-assisted learning strategies: promoting word recognition, fluency, and reading comprehension in young children. The Journal of Special Education, 39, p 34-44.

Ray. J.S. (2022, June 9). The power of intentional partner reading. The Literacy Brain. https://theliteracybrain.com/2022/06/09/the-benefits-of-intentional-partner-reading/

Reading Rockets (2022). Paired (or partner) reading. https://www.readingrockets.org/strategies/paired_reading

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.

Developing An Elementary Classroom Book Club

Most of us understand that a book club is a group of individuals that meet to discuss the passages of a common book. There are different types of book clubs depending on who began the book club, when and the book club meets, and why the book club began. How you develop your book club will depend on your current students and instructional program. Students will bring to the table different social and academic abilities that will need to be brought into the process of designing the structure and flow of your book club. Each year your book club may have a different configuration. Elementary students usually begin learning about book clubs beginning in Grades 2-5.

An effective classroom book club will have the following components: a) reading, b) written response, c) observation, d) planning, e) coaching, f) digital tools, and g) assessment (Cherry-Paul, Johansen, 2019). Students will need some assistance and scaffolding to get started and maintain effective function. You may need more patience to implement book clubs this school year, as most students will need more teacher modeling and coaching to function effectively in book clubs. Most students have not had the opportunity to develop the social interaction skills necessary for smooth function in a book club, as they were glued to electronic devices without much “natural” social interaction over last two plus years. This will be especially true for students in the primary grades, as these students haven’t had the “normal” opportunities to socialize in or out of the classroom.

I use the following steps and considerations to development a book club.

Form groups. This is usually accomplished by using student data, as students are usually group by reading ability. Student groups should consist of 4-6 students. There may be some students that need to participate in book-clubs differently, like in a smaller or more differentiated group with only the teacher to accommodate their ability level. You may need to get creative so that they do not feel left out. Another consideration should be student personalities. You may group students of higher-reading ability with students of lower-reading ability, if the book their reading is accomplishable by the lower-readers. I caution putting higher-readers in the mix that will not be engaged at the lower-readers ability. This will also depend on how nourishing the higher-level students may be.
Set-up a tentative schedule of when book clubs will meet. In the beginning you might plan to meet with each group, while the other students are engaged in a different activity. In time all book clubs might be able to meet at the same time. Each classroom will have a different mix of students, so there may be years that the whole class can meet for book clubs at the same time and other years when it will be impossible. I typically will meet with a group of students twice a week—flexibility is key.
Choose a book. Books should be chosen based on student ability. Book topics and genre should be considered to encourage natural student engagement. If possible, allow the students to choose the book. Books chosen at student’s highest instructional level or zone of proximal development will usually yield the most literacy growth.
Decide what types of activities will be completed in relation to the chosen book. This may include writing a chapter or book summary. This might also include interactive discussions about the plot or characters. This might also include a review of vocabulary words before you read. This might also include reflective or recall questions. Engaging students in the passage that they have read usually promotes deeper comprehension.
Develop a way to keep written response activities. Many times, related activities are not completed in one group time. To accommodate unfinished assignments, students might have their own “book club” folder. Students might keep their responses in their classroom “to be completed or must do” folder. Teachers might keep all of their responses in a group folder. I like to use different colors for each group.
Meet with students. Let students know what will be expected of them during “book clubs” or small group time. Never assume that they know how to function during “your” small group time. Each educator usually has similar, but different expectations. Typically, students each take turns to read aloud, moving around the circle or group. Decide ahead of time if they should each read a sentence, a paragraph, or a page before allowing the next student to read. Students should be engaged or following along. Giving students a role during book club usually increases the engagement, like highlighter or pencil person or folder person.
Model how to read. Not all student groups will need this, but most will enjoy you taking a turn to read. They are hearing your voice model how to read a passage. This also gives you a natural pause to ask questions about the passage or model metacognitive thinking. If students are losing their place as they read, have them use their finger or small piece of paper to keep their place. I often use my finger on their book to help them focus, keep their place, and decode words. In time they will not need the scaffold.
Ask questions. Ask students questions about what they have just read or about unfamiliar words. This will assist them to bring clarity and dive deeper into the meaning of the passage. Often students need to clarify their current understanding of a word or passage. Encourage students to take a breath or raise their hand to discuss or clarify a word or passage.
Model how to complete assignments. Are students expected to write their responses in complete sentences? Do students need to use a separate piece of paper? When do they need to answer questions? What types of questions might students ask? How might students respond to other student questions? I often write students’ verbal answer(s) in a central location for those struggling to write the answer, after giving most students time to produce their own written answer. This allows students to begin the process of moving from a verbal to written response. This scaffold is removed as all students become more fluid in writing the answer.

Reference

Cherry-Paul, S. & Johansen, D. (2019). Breathing New Life Into Book Clubs. Heinemann.

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.

Differentiation vs Scaffolding

The attributes of differentiation and scaffolding have some similarities. There are also some distinctions between the two types of instruction. Each are valuable instructional strategies to assist educators in meeting the needs of all students present. Differentiated and scaffolding are described in the following paragraphs.

Differentiated instruction is defined as adjusting lessons to meet student learning needs by using regular assessment data to develop lessons and instructional groups (Tomlinson, 2022). Educators alter grade-level instruction to better meet student learning-style and learning-level. Students of the same classroom may receive different instructional lessons on the same subject. Tomlinson (2022) suggests four key areas of instruction that educators may adjust to better meet the instructional needs of students present. The first is the intended content to be absorbed by the students. The depth and width of the subject may be altered to match student learning level. The second is how the information is presented to students, such as lectures, exploration station or project format to better ensure absorption and future usage of the presented information. The third area is the intended outcome of the lesson. What will be the product of the lesson? How will the lesson conclude, such as a quiz, reflection or written document? In some cases, the students might be held accountable for writing a five-paragraph essay, while others receiving the same lesson may be only held accountable for writing 1 or 2 paragraphs. The fourth suggested area that might be adjusted is the learning environment, such as student or community-centered. What types of classroom management techniques are used? This might include student desks or group tables. Some environments might include a reading nook or allow students to roam freely.

Differentiated instruction is typically presented to students in a small group format. Small group instruction allows educators to use different types of instruction for a particular group of students. These students may be at a different academic level than their aged peers. These students may need instruction of a grade-level concept not yet user friendly for them. These students may have “holes” in their academic portfolio for various reasons. Scaffolding strategies may also be present in the small group instruction.

Scaffolding is “a supportive instructional structure that teachers use to provide the appropriate mechanisms for a student to complete a task that is beyond their unassisted abilities” (Ray, 2017, p. 14). van de Pol, Volman, and Beishuizen describe scaffolding as a process that includes contingency, fading, and transfer of responsibility. Contingency is the support that teachers initially give to students, such as modeling. Fading may be described as half-in, half-out or the “murky” zone. The teacher is pulling away given support or scaffolding to give full control of task completion back to the student. Transfer of responsibility is the intended outcome. At this stage of the scaffolding process, students “own” the knowledge/skill to complete the task independently and are often able to assist others in completing the task.

The teacher role in scaffolding might include collaboration or discussion with a student to “brainstorm” solutions of an issue or complete a task. A second teacher role might be constantly asking the student questions about the task to help them develop “files” of information about the task. This assists students in building knowledge to increase student ability to explain concepts. A third teacher role is to constantly model and explain tasks in the ideal format of student’s current maturation level. The ideal format is just beyond what the student can accomplish on their own, often referred to as student zone of proximal development (Vygotsky, 1929;1934/2002).

The scaffolding instructional strategy is usually used to focus more on an individual student’s learning needs during an instructional lesson or completion of a particular task than to a group of students. This strategy is often used unconsciously by the instructor to increase student engagement and completion of a task, such as a teacher might read a question for a student or have a conversation about what the question is asking. Teachers may give students a copy of the formula for area or the multiplication table that can be removed from the student when they can use the information provided fluidly.

Differentiation and scaffolding instructional strategies may be used simultaneously to better meet the individual instructional needs of student(s).

References

Ray, J. (2017). Tiered 2 interventions for students in grades 1-3 identified as at risk in reading. (Doctoral dissertation, Walden University). Retrieved from https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/3826/

Tomlinson, Carol A. (2022). What is differentiated instruction? Reading Rockets. https://www.readingrockets.org/article/what-differentiated-instruction

van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher-student interaction: A decade of research. Education Psychology Review, 22, 271-296. doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6.

Vygotsky, L. (1929). The problem of the cultural development of the child II. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 36, 415-434. Vygotsky Reader, Blackwell. Retrieved from https://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/1929/cultural_development.htm

Vygotsky, L. (1934/2002). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Teaching Word Syllabication

Dividing written words into syllables can be a complex, dauting journey. Teach the skill in baby steps or small pieces at a time. There are many different ways to teach students about dividing words into syllables. Teaching them in a manner that builds upon prior teaching or knowledge will increase student accusation of the skill.

Learning syllabication usually begins in pre-school through orally instruction. Educators teach students how to verbally separate words into syllables, using a clapping, tapping or stomping action to indicate each syllable. Typically, students learn how to divide written words into syllables as they begin to learn how to decode and encode written words. Students learn the more complex “rules” to divide written words into syllables as the words become more complex.

There are six major or more common word syllables in the English language. I have found the task of teaching students easier if the syllables types are taught in the following order: a) closed-CVC, b) final e, c) open, d) vowel diagraph, e) r-controlled, f) constant -le. Students tend to first learn about closed syllables through instruction of CVC words. These syllables have a short vowel sound and are always closed in by a consonant, like bat or sit. Instruction in the final e syllable usually follows instruction of closed syllables. The syllabication rules of closed and final e syllables are more stable, recognizable, and easier to retain. The third syllable type to be taught is the open syllable. Open syllables always have a long vowel sound and are not closed in by a constant, like the first syllable of mu/sic. Instruction of closed and open syllables will cover 70% of written words in the English language (Hennesy, 2022; White, 2022).

There are other stable syllable norms or rules that may help students in dividing written words into syllables. The first norm is compound words that may be divided between the two words, like camp/fire. The second norm is words with double constants of the same letter can be divided between the two double consonants, like bb (rab/bit). The third norm that may be followed is a syllable break may occur in a word that contains two different constants side-by-side, like nc (con/cept). This rule may be tricky to learn, as some double constants are letter blends or diagraphs that should not be separated, such as ch, th, fl, or str (constriction, authoritative, sunflower). The fourth norm is diphthongs or vowel teams that cannot be separated, like oa, ea in boatman or teacher. The fifth norm of syllabication is putting a syllable break just before or after an affix in a word, like pre/sort or read/ed. Affixes are morphemes that may be easier for students to spot. The sixth norm is that each syllable must include a vowel phoneme.

The following steps usually increase the retention of syllabication skills and decrease possible student anxiety in learning how to read.

Find and underline all vowel phonemes of a word. Explain that words may have a single vowel or vowel teams that are pronounced with only one phoneme.
Count the underlined vowel phonemes of the word. This is the number of syllables present in the word.
Look for double constants. Are the double constants a constant diagraph or letter blend (spr, fl, sh) that cannot be separated? If not place a separation line through the two constants to show a syllable break.
Look at the current syllables and what syllable breaks should still be made? Are there parts of the word that still have more than one vowel phoneme? Are there affixes that may help with where the next syllable break may need to be placed?
Pronounce/encode the word – sound out each syllable, then blend the syllables together, and then fluently pronounce the word.
Allow time for student(s) to practice and model the process.

Syllable breaks may be confirmed by reviewing the six syllable types and other general syllable break norms, such as compound words and affixes.

References

Hennesy, N. (2021). Making meaning of text: a structured framework for informed instruction. 2021 Annual IDA Reading, Literacy & Learning Conference.

White, N. (2021). Continuum of decoding strategies: explicit__systematic—cumulative. 2021 Annual IDA Reading, Literacy & Learning Conference.

What is the importance of learning word syllables?

Typically, students will skip words that are not familiar to them. Often those who skip the unknown word(s) do not have the tools in their toolbox to decode the word(s). Some may know the names of the letter(s), but do not know the phonemes connected to the letters. Some may not know how to “chunk” portions of the unknown word. Not having this skill often impedes student comprehension of the written passage. Many students will stop trying to read the passage after failing to comprehend the passage. The possible embarrassment often shuts students down or they learn how to get around not knowing the necessary information about the word(s). This often leads to acting out or becoming silent with the hope of avoiding embarrassment. When students learn how to separate words into smaller more user-friendly chunks or syllables, they usually build confidence in being able to pronounce unknown words. This puts a tool or strategy into their personal tool box. This allows them to avoid possible embarrassment. This gives students the opportunity to move forward without the assistance of others-independence. This may also give them the confidence to assist other students. The tool usually leads to an increase in their academic achievement across all academics.

Students who have the skill of syllabication in their tool box benefit in multiple ways. One benefit is the increase of reading fluency. A second benefit, students are better able to focus on processing the meaning of groups of words, instead of how to pronounce the word. A third benefit of knowing how to decode written words into workable chunks is the increase of student spelling accuracy. A fourth benefit is passage comprehension. Most students comprehend orally at a higher level than they can read. Students use their knowledge of oral language to help them comprehend written words. A fifth benefit is the increase of student intrinsic motivation and decrease student mischief.

Students begin learning about syllables orally through “naturally” breaks in the pronunciation of a word. Students are often taught to clap for each syllable. This allows the student(s) to count the number of syllables in each word. Students usually move from oral division of words to learning about CVC written words, as they learn to read. CVC written words are pronounced phonetical with a short vowel sound. This is also when the study of morphonology becomes more prevalent, as the CVC words usually have their own meaning in which students can use to begin understanding the meaning of multisyllabic words. CVC words are known as closed syllables.

Students need time to practice this skill. Practice of the skill may take place during different points of instruction, such as purposeful small or whole group instruction, or independent study. Some students will need more “regular” moments (5-15 minutes) of review: warm-up or homework.