PERSPECTIVES on Language and Literacy

Fall Edition 2011 PERSPECTIVES on Language and Literacy

A Quarterly Publication of The International Dyslexia Association Volume 37, No. 4

Beyond Reading Recovery®— What Works Best?

s0REVENTIVE-EASURES s#HOOSING3TRATEGIES s(OW-UCH)S%NOUGH s2ESEARCHAND0ROGRAM )MPROVEMENTS Build a solid foundation in reading and spelling for beginning readers Wilson Fundations® for K–3 ensures that general education and Prevention Early Intervention at-risk students obtain the critical skills for reading and spelling.

for life? Close the reading gap for struggling readers Wilson Just Words® provides a systematic study of word structure to students in grades 4–12 and adults who require word-level

Intervention intervention.

Reach the most challenged readers Wilson Reading System® is a highly structured remedial program for grades 2–12 and adults who require the intensive Intensive intervention of a research-based multisensory program.

Support teachers so they can develop fl uent, independent readers Wilson Professional Development provides teachers with the skills and confi dence to teach even the most challenged readers.

Sustain program implementation and teacher support Wilson Literacy Teams partner with school districts so they can successfully implement and sustain programs.

Put Wilson to work in your Prevention, Intervention and Intensive settings and get the results you’re looking for. To receive a catalog or learn more call 800-899-8454 or visit www.wilsonlanguage.com achieve literacy achieve How do you Fall Edition 2011 PERSPECTIVES on Language and Literacy

A Quarterly Publication of The International Dyslexia Association Volume 37, No. 4

IDA PURPOSE STATEMENT Beyond Reading Recovery®— The purpose of IDA is to pursue and What Works Best? provide the most comprehensive range of information and services that address the full scope of dyslexia and related difficulties in Theme Editor’s Summary 7 learning to read and write… Tom Nicholson

The Multiple Cues or “Searchlights” Word Reading Theory: 15 In a way that creates hope, ® possibility, and partnership… Implications for Reading Recovery Keith T. Greaney So that every individual has the opportunity to lead a productive and Reading Recovery®: Does It Work? 21 fulfilling life, and society benefits James W. Chapman and William E. Tunmer from the resource that is liberated. Matthew Effects and Reading Interventions 28 Tom Nicholson and Sue Dymock

The Emergent Literacy Approach to Effective Teaching and Intervention 35 Alison W. Arrow and Claire McLachlan

Global Perspectives 40 The International Dyslexia Association Welcome Global Partners (IDA) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit, scientific and educational organization dedicated Susan C. Lowell, Anna Reuter, and Christy Blevins exclusively to the study and treatment of the specific language disability known Book Review 43 as dyslexia. We have been serving individuals with dyslexia, their families, Mary Farrell, Francie Matthews, Judy Shapiro, and Marilyn Zion and professionals in the field for over 55 years. IDA was first established to Classifieds 50 continue the pioneering work of Samuel T. Orton, M.D., in the study and treatment of dyslexia.

IDA’s membership is comprised of people with dyslexia and their families, educators, diagnosticians, physicians, and other professionals in the field. The IDA supports efforts to provide individuals with dyslexia with appropriate instruction and headquarters office in Baltimore, to identify these individuals at an early age. IDA believes that multisensory teaching and Maryland is a clearinghouse of valuable learning is the best approach currently available for those affected by dyslexia. information and provides information and referral services to thousands of people every year. IDA’s Annual Conference While IDA is pleased to present a forum for presentations, advertising, and exhibiting attracts thousands of outstanding to benefit those with dyslexia and related learning disabilities, it is not IDA’s policy to researchers, clinicians, parents, teachers, recommend or endorse any specific program, product, speaker, exhibitor, institution, psychologists, educational therapists, and company, or instructional material, noting that there are a number of such which present the people with dyslexia. critical components of instruction as defined by IDA. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Stephen M. Peregoy EDITOR Denise Douce THEME EDITOR Tom Nicholson, Ph.D.

BOARD EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Guinevere F. Eden, Ph.D., President Eric Q. Tridas, M.D., President-Elect Suzanne Carreker, Ph.D., CALT-QI, Vice President Cinthia Coletti Haan, Vice President Susan Lowell, M.A., B.C.E.T., Vice President Karen E. Dakin, M.Ed., Secretary Ben Shifrin, M.Ed., Treasurer Rebecca Aldred, M.Ed., Branch Council Chair

BOARD MEMBERS-AT-LARGE Elsa Cardenas-Hagan, Ed.D., CALT s Hugh W. Catts, Ph.D. s Gad Elbeheri, Ph.D. s Lynne Fitzhugh, Ph.D., CALT-QI Jonathan Green, M.Ed. s Erik E. Heyer s Gregory E. Matthews, CPA s Janis Mitchell s Louisa Moats, Ed.D. Gordon F. Sherman, Ph.D. s Mary Wennersten, M.Ed.

COUNCIL OF ADVISORS Marilyn Jager Adams, Ph.D. sDirk J. Bakker, Ph.D. s Susan Brady, Ph.D. s Hugh Catts, Ph.D. s Regina Cicci, Ph.D. Martha Denckla, M.D. s Drake D. Duane, M.D. sLeon Eisenberg, M.D. s Jack M. Fletcher, Ph.D. s Uta Frith, Ph.D. Albert M. Galaburda, M.D. s Alice H. Garside, Ed.M. sRosa A. Hagin, Ph.D. s Jeannette Jansky, Ph.D. s Lucia Karnes, Ph.D. Diana Hanbury King s Edith Klasen, Ph.D. s Carolyn Kline sC. K. Leong, Ph.D. s G. Reid Lyon, Ph.D. s John McLeod, Ph.D. Bruce Pennington, Ph.D. s Ralph D. Rabinovitch, M.D. sSylvia O. Richardson, M.D. s Hollis S. Scarborough, Ph.D. Gordon F. Sherman, Ph.D. s Archie A. Silver, M.D. sMargaret Snowling, Ph.D. s Joseph K. Torgesen, Ph.D. Lucius Waites, M.D. s Dorothy Whitehead s Beverly Wolf

SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD Marilyn Jager Adams, Ph.D. s Hugh W. Catts, Ph.D. s Martha Bridge Denckla, M.D. s Carsten Elbro, Ph.D. Usha Goswami, Ph.D. s George W. Hynd, Ed.D. s Doris J. Johnson, Ph.D. s Heikki Lyytinen, Ph.D. Richard K. Olson, Ph.D. s Kenneth R. Pugh, Ph.D. s Hollis Scarborough, Ph.D. s Sally E. Shaywitz, M.D. Gordon F. Sherman, Ph.D. s Margaret J. Snowling, Ph.D. s Joseph K. Torgesen, Ph.D.

40 York Road, 4th Floor Baltimore, MD 21204-5202 (410) 296-0232 www.interdys.org

Perspectives on Language and Literacy is a benefit of membership in the International Dyslexia Association. Annual membership with subscription is $45.00 USD for parents; $80.00 USD for advocates; $95.00 USD for professionals. Contact Jill Eagan at (410) 296-0232 ext. 405 or [email protected] for membership information. Subscription prices: Individual $60.00 USD; Institutional $110.00 USD (international customers may be subject to additional charges). Single copies of Perspectives on Language and Literacy may be ordered for $15.00 USD; $12.00 USD for members. Subscriptions and single copies may be ordered from Linda A. Marston at (410) 296-0232 ext. 409 or [email protected] Advertising information is available from Darnella Parks at (410) 296-0232 ext. 406 or [email protected] Written comments regarding material contained in Perspectives on Language and Literacy are invited. Please direct them to Stephen M. Peregoy or Denise Douce. The opinions of the authors are not necessarily the opinions of the International Dyslexia Association. ©2011 by The International Dyslexia Association® All rights reserved. ISSN 1935-1291

4 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association Letter from the President

Controversies in Research and Practice

Dear Colleagues and Friends, a natural and loving bonding experience was facilitated by formula. Meanwhile my husband, who is also a professor at Many medical and educational practices have taken a few the medical center where I work (and where our babies were twists and turns with the passage of time. What was considered delivered), was giving his scheduled lecture on lactation to best practices 50 or even 10 years ago might be considered the medical students in the building next door. His lecture unacceptable today. New information is uncovered through spoke to the numerous benefits to both mother and child and, research that allows us to evaluate specific practices in a new based on these research findings, it is no surprise that the light. Policies are put in place that set the course for future American Academy of Pediatrics “argues to promote, protect, treatments of a medical condition, or pave the way for educa- and support breastfeeding not only in their individual practices tional strategies for school systems. Individuals, families, and but also in the hospital, medical school, community, and organizations, along with scientists, practitioners, advocates, nation.” No doubt the present left by the formula company is politicians, and industry representatives play an important part confusing to many mothers who see it as an endorsement by in these complex evolutions. The course of the change is also the medical community and in conflict with the research find- influenced by media and modulated by socio-cultural factors. ings that are simultaneously advertised by the hospital. In theory, this complex, dynamic process leads toward better Another example struck me last week when it was time for practices, a reduction of the problem in that specific area of Pippa’s MMR vaccine, which is given to one-year-olds. As we health or education, and increased information on that topic to waited for the nurse to arrive, I thought about the events of the be shared by all stakeholders. last decade surrounding the MMR vaccine and the wave of Conflicting viewpoints, contradictory data, and incompati- belief that swept through the community that it was connected ble positions are often an integral part of this process. As a to autism. Here is a case where the scientific process failed scientist I have always considered controversy a part of the (both at the level of the scientists and the journal that published package; in fact, it is quite central to all that we do. Controversy the research). The problem with the science was brought to makes our work challenging and intriguing. For a provider, light by the media, and, at the same time, some of the contin- however, where there is incongruity, this means careful evalu- ued media attention on the controversy fuelled and perpetuated ation, decision making, and the need to provide options. As a the link between the MMR vaccine and autism. Parents were consumer, perhaps somewhat paradoxically, the more informa- confused and scared, some withholding vaccines from their tion that is available on treatments or procedures, the more children. In the end, new research efforts were mounted that questions can be raised. Frustrations often arise as one engages demonstrated with no uncertainty that the hypothesis for this in making decisions, especially the really important ones, such connection was wrong. The field has moved forward, yet, as choosing among health care or educational options for our parents still ask about the link between MMR and autism. Even children. as a scientist who has accessed the primary literature on this My daughter, Philippa, was born a year ago and during that work, I feel a lump in my throat as the shot goes in, and I can short time I have encountered several situations where I have empathize with parents who might not be able to counter that wondered about the actual state of research and practice. emotion with factual information. For example, Pippa was in no hurry to arrive punctually, We still have a few years before we worry about school and so around the time of my due date the physician advised us reading instruction, in particular. Most of you who are reading to schedule for a cesarean. On my next visit a few days later, this journal know the debate about whether to use code-based my regular physician had returned from being away and did not or meaning-based instruction for teaching kids to learn how to see the need to do anything other than wait a bit more. In the read. This controversy about phonics versus whole language meantime I had read everything I could get my hands on trying has gone on for decades, and it has popped up all over to evaluate the pros and cons of each option. In the end—with the world. I was born and raised in Germany until I was 12. confusion and fear being the major contributing factors to the My mother, who is German, obtained for me books based on a decision-making process, research data the minor—I decided Ganzheitsmethode (whole method) before I entered school. to wait. She recalls this influence as coming from the United States, and A few days later Pippa was born, and when I and my new like all mothers, she wanted to give me a head start. We did not bundle of joy were admitted into our room in the maternity end up learning to read in this way once in school, rather via ward, we found a nifty little bag with a jar of formula, a picture the Synthetische Methode. of a gorgeous mother with baby, and a caption that inferred that Continued on page 6

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 5 President’s Letter continued from page 5

In many countries, one meaning-based instruction program, and how to use this instructional method to give kids the best Reading Recovery®, has featured prominently in this debate help they can get, knowing that kids vary in the their profile of over whole language versus phonics and is a major focus in this skills as they arrive in school, ready (or not so ready) to learn to edition of Perspectives. Developed in New Zealand, it is widely read. A continued dialogue through scientific discoveries known, in large part, because of its implementation in that between all parties involved is necessary, even if it is controver- country through formal government programs. The collection sial. This special issue of Perspectives is just one voice in that of articles in this issue of Perspectives, spearheaded by Dr. Tom dialog that will undoubtedly continue for as long as we need to Nicholson, provides a historical account of how this program find the most effective ways to help all children learn to read. has penetrated a country’s educational system and, importantly, what researchers have learned about its efficacy. This issue is about this particular form of reading instruction, its theoretical Sincerely yours, motivation, and the research findings associated with it. It is also about the difficulties that arise when scientists disagree and what can be done to gain compromise. It is about when Guinevere F. Eden, Ph.D., President

IDA would like to thank the following organizations for their generous support of the 62nd Annual Conference:

Edwin W. and Catherine M. Davis Foundation

Sponsors as of October 1, 2011

6 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association Theme Editor’s Summary Beyond Reading Recovery®—What Works Best? by Tom Nicholson

his theme issue is for every reading teacher who wants to We asked her to write answers to the following questions: Tdeliver the best and most effective instruction. Its focus is using research to a) put in place preventive measures that How good a reader do you feel yourself to be? Alright. reduce the risk of failing to read, b) determine how widely used I read books like the Hobbit, Kingdom by the sea, etc. programs such as Reading Recovery® (RR) can be improved, Most people my age don’t. and c) learn what works, that is, what instruction delivers the How do you feel when it is your turn to read out loud best possible results in the shortest possible time. to the teacher? Nervous. I sometimes speak to fast, it’s Inevitably, this theme issue will have to address the major slightly embarrassing. Slightly. reading debate of our time, that is, whether code-based instruc- tion is better than meaning-based instruction; but we want to How do you feel when you come to a new word while go beyond the debate (Pearson, 2004) to consider what each reading? Curious. I enjoy finding the meaning of words kind of instruction has to offer the teacher and the clinician— by putting them into context. and the pupil—to get the best possible value for the work we How do you feel when you have to spell a new word do as teachers. that you don’t know how to spell yet? Mixed emotions. Our goal then is to take a critical look at research on strug- Want to get the word right yet not really caring. gling readers and the big picture of how to stop failure from How do you feel about getting a book for a present? happening in the first place. After decades of debate between Happy. I enjoy reading. code-based and meaning-based approaches, now in the 21st How do you feel about going to school? Bored. I prefer century we are looking for the best of both worlds. It may be holidays. that theoretical differences between code and meaning approaches are not as great as they seem, and that both teach- How do you think you’ll feel about reading when you ing strategies may work for struggling readers if we choose the go to high school? Mixed emotions. I love reading yet I right strategy at the right time to suit each learner’s needs. hear that in high school you sometimes have to read. Would you rather clean your room or read? Read. The Real World Reading is fun, cleaning is monotonous. Before diving straight into the research, we will consider How often do you read at home by yourself? Every day. two case studies, one a good reader, and one a poor reader, I love reading. both from the same school, in a low-income neighborhood. The reason for doing this is to remind us how important the How long do you read for at home after school is out stakes are in the area of reading intervention. It is not until you and before you get to bed? More than an hour. I can look at the literacy lives of poor readers, and compare them never get around to doing work when there’s a good with those of good readers, that we realize how important it is book calling. to use teaching approaches that get all children off to the best How many books do you have at home (just your own possible start and that give the best possible result in the short- books, not your family’s books)? [more than 20] passed est possible time. The following two case studies (Dymock & down from my sisters. Nicholson, 2011) give insight into the incredible benefits of When do you do most of your reading at home? Early learning to read well and the awful cost of not doing so. afternoon, early evening. Those are my free times. Can you remember the name of a book you read A Good Reader recently? Kingdom by the sea. This 11-year-old pupil attends a lower middle class school and is a very good reader. The overall impression is that she Do you like to read? Yes. I like plots turned to words. enjoys everything about books. She is confident, with excellent skills. She accurately reads words like bibliography, irascible, Reading her comments about herself as a reader, there and terpsichorean. A norm-referenced test of word reading put seems to be a quiet confidence. She knows she is a good this good reader at post-high school in grade level, in the 99th reader. She has read The Hobbit. She feels nervous about read- percentile, and at stanine 9. [The term stanine is an abbrevia- ing aloud to the teacher but only because she thinks she reads tion for “standard nine.” It is a scale that breaks the normal too quickly. When she comes across an unfamiliar word she is curve into nine categories, where stanine 5 is average achieve- not annoyed or upset, she is “curious.” She enjoys new words. ment, stanine 1 is low achievement, and stanine 9 is excellent She says she is bored at school but this may be positive in that achievement.] Continued on page 8

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 7 Theme Editor’s Summary continued from page 7 she needs challenge. She has mixed emotions about high Looking at this student’s responses as a whole, it seems like school and what she will have to read there but it is more that a cry for help. It is someone who finds reading and writing hard she will not have the same freedom to read what she likes. and frustrating, who reads very little, and who is frightened When reading her comments about out-of-school reading, about the future. The student is very anxious, and why should what comes through is a love of reading. The overall impression that be? These are the downstream outcomes of not learning to of this reader is that she is a bibliophile, she loves books, and read well. It does not have to be like this. she does so because she is a good reader with excellent skills. These case studies raise the inevitable question of why it is that some pupils learn to read well and others struggle. This A Struggling Reader theme issue suggests that we can prevent reading difficulties This 11-year-old boy attends the same low middle class by teaching phonological awareness and early literacy skills school and is a struggling reader. A norm-referenced test of his at kindergarten level and earlier. It also addresses the question ability to read words in a list, with no context clues, put him at of which approach will help the reading teacher to deliver the 8-year-old level, in the 12th percentile and at stanine 3, the best quality teaching to children who have slipped through which is in the below-average range. In the test, he read cor- the net. rectly words like book, animal, and stretch, but misread felt as “flick,” abuse as “abis,” collapse as “kolisp,” triumph as The Research “astrimp” and bibliography as “bilf.” At 11 years of age, he Which approach is better for teaching struggling readers, should be able to read these words, along with words like con- code-based instruction or meaning-based instruction? For a temporary and contagious. We asked him to write answers to long time the field has been divided between those who do, the following questions (and gave help when requested): and those who do not, think code-based instruction is a way of killing any chance of success poor readers might have. How good a reader do you feel yourself to be? Not good Goodman, (1973, p. 491) argued that “remedial reading class- as aver pelple. es are filled with youngsters in late elementary and secondary How do you feel when your teacher reads a story to the schools who can sound out words but get little meaning from class? I like listening to story so that I can visualize the their reading,” and many teachers worry that this is all that picture. (Teacher writes this for him.) code-based instruction would achieve. An alternative to How do you feel when it is your turn to read out loud to code-based instruction for the poor reader is meaning-based the teacher? I feel sede and nevis. instruction. It has long been thought that a focus on using How do you feel when you come to a new word while contextual cues for reading is the mark of the good reader. reading? I feill fustratd. Smith (1982, p. 230) argued that, “Less often the possibility is considered that use of context makes better readers.” Proponents How do you feel when you have to spell a new word that you don’t know how to spell yet? Wored and serd. of each approach argue that their approach is more effective than all others. Meaning-based instruction proponents argue How do you feel about getting a book for a present? Herd that code-based instruction is detrimental to the poor reader. but fun. The research literature, however, is not conclusive on this issue, How do you feel about going to school? Fun and cool. and in fact suggests the opposite (see the article in this issue by How do you think you’ll feel about reading when you go Keith Greaney). to high school? Fritin and serd. When we talk about reading programs, the problem is that Would you rather clean your room or read? I would they are often overlapping rather than distinctly different. read. For example, there are multiple versions of meaning-based How often do you read at home by yourself? Never instruction and they all include code-based instruction to some because I ned help. extent. Likewise, there are many versions of code-based instruction, for example analytic (or implicit) versus explicit, How long do you read for at home after school is out and before you get to bed? [a few minutes] before I go to and they each include some aspects of meaning-based bed. instruction, such as practice in reading of text. For example, the Orton-Gillingham approach is an explicit code-based in- How many books do you have at home (just your own struction approach but it also has aspects of meaning-based books, not your family’s books)? 20 or so. instruction philosophy in that children are encouraged to read When do you do most of your reading at home? Before (Nicholson, 2011). When we talk about programs, the issue is bed. not so much about the approach but the mix of approaches, Can you remember the name of a book you read recently? that is, about which mix is more effective. Show and Tell, Asralyun hidils (translation: Australian Idols). Code or Meaning? Even the Experts Disagree Do you like to read? Yes but not that much. At first glance, the reader is struck by discrepancies among research studies about the relative effects of code-based

8 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association instruction and meaning-based instruction as a way of tutoring that have looked at differentiated instruction have found that below-average readers. Some studies find differences in favor code-based instruction suits children who start with few litera- of phonological strategies (Center, Freeman, & Robertson, cy skills and meaning-based instruction suits children who start 2001; Foorman, Francis, Fletcher, Schatschneider, & Mehta, school with many literacy skills (Juel and Minden-Cupp, 2000; 1998; Greaney, Tunmer, & Chapman, 1997; Ryder, Tunmer, & Connor, Morrison, and Katch, 2004). If we think about older, Greaney, 2008); others in favor of meaning-based instruction struggling readers, those with low levels of literacy skills, these (Dahl & Freppon, 1995); and others no clear difference (Mathes results indicate that code-based instruction activities should et al., 2005). benefit them more than meaning-based instruction activities. Some meta-analyses have found that the weight of evidence A code emphasis is often the direction taken in intervention is firmly on the side of code-based instruction and against studies that target very poor readers. The emphasis is on pho- meaning-based instruction. This was the finding of a major lit- nological recoding strategies. Meaning-based instruction strate- erature review by the National Reading Panel (NRP) (National gies are not emphasized, though they may be included as part Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2000). of a decoding intervention to provide pupils with opportunities They found an average effect size of .41 in favor of code-based to practice their decoding strategies (Torgesen et al., 2001). instruction, which is a small-to-medium effect, and that the Other studies compare different ways of teaching phonological effects were stronger for younger children and children from strategies, given that there are many ways of teaching decoding poverty backgrounds. On the other hand, reinterpretations of skills, for example, teaching phonemic awareness and explicit the NRP conclusions about code-based instruction have argued code-based instruction skills versus use of a small set of code- that the effect sizes for code-based instruction were smaller based instruction strategies such as searching for common than those reported by the NRP, that the effect sizes for code- phonograms and affixes when decoding (Lovett et al., 2000). based instruction (.24) compared with “language-based read- These studies have showed positive results for phonological ing activities” (.29) were similar, and that a combination of the recoding instruction (which is what the term “decoding” refers two might be more effective than either one alone (Camilli, to in this introduction) but it still leaves open the question of Vargas, & Yurecko, 2003; Hammill & Swanson, 2006). In turn, whether or not the use of meaning-based instruction would be responses to the reanalyses argue in favor of the NRP conclu- just as effective as phonological recoding instruction for older, sions (Stuebing, Barth, Cirino, Francis, & Fletcher, 2008). struggling readers. It is an empirical question, though many In another recent meta-analysis, Hattie (2009) found a practitioners think that a meaning-based tutoring program is moderate difference in effect size between code-based instruc- unlikely to be effective with very poor readers because of the tion and meaning-based instruction. Hattie summarized 14 average poor reader’s reliance on contextual strategies to guess meta-analyses involving 6,000 students and found that code- unknown words, a strategy that holds them back, compared based instruction had a medium effect (average effect size with good readers, who have much better word recognition 0.60). He summarized four meta-analyses of meaning-based skills, good enough for them to use context clues productively instruction teaching involving over 600 students and found, for decoding, something poor readers are unable to do any- by way of contrast, that meaning-based instruction had an where near as well (Stanovich, 1986; Juel, 1988, 1994; Tunmer almost nil effect size (average effect size 0.06). To give an idea & Chapman, 1999; Nicholson, 1985, 1986, 1988, 1991; of the difference you could argue that meaning-based instruc- Nicholson & Tunmer, 2011; Tunmer & Nicholson, 2011). tion teachers would have to work ten times as hard as code-based instruction teachers to get the same results. Other The Case of RR meta-analyses support Hattie’s conclusion (Ehri, Nunes, Stahl, Nevertheless, meaning-based reading interventions for & Willows, 2001; Torgerson, Brooks, & Hall, 2006). struggling readers have been very popular in terms of Hattie concluded about code-based instruction that, large-scale implementation. RR is the best known example. “Overall, phonological instruction is powerful in the process In the history of reading research it is the most globally imple- of learning to read, both for reading skills and for reading mented intervention program of all time, and it uses mostly comprehension” (p. 134), and for meaning-based instruction meaning-based instruction strategies. However, popular is not that, “In summary, meaning-based instruction programs have necessarily the same thing as best, and while some researchers negligible effects on learning to read, be it on word recognition have found that RR is effective, other researchers (see “Reading or on comprehension. Such methods might be of value to Recovery®: Does It Work?” in this theme issue) have found this later reading but certainly not for the processes of learning not to be the case and argue that if RR included a stronger to read; it appears that strategies of reading need to be emphasis on phonological recoding, such as use of rime deliberately taught, especially to students older, struggling to spelling units for decoding (large-unit, sub-syllable decoding) read” (p. 138). or use of code-based instruction (small-unit, phonemic decod- Although meta-analyses indicate that code-based instruc- ing), it would do a better job (Chapman, Tunmer, & Prochnow, tion is the better teaching approach, especially for below- 2001; Chapman, Greaney, & Tunmer, 2007; Reynolds & average readers, the decision whether or not to use code-based Wheldall, 2007). instruction or meaning-based instruction may not be either-or. A number of studies support the concept of modifying RR, Research on differentiated instruction suggests that code-based by including more phonological recoding (Iversen & Tunmer, instruction and meaning-based instruction can both be used in 1993; Iversen, Tunmer, & Chapman, 2005; Hatcher, Hulme, & the classroom, depending on the needs of the child. Studies Continued on page 10

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 9 Theme Editor’s Summary continued from page 9

Ellis, 1994) but there seems to have been not enough studies of Another question often overlooked in research on one-to-one this kind to convince policy makers to make major changes to tutoring is who benefits? Some tuition has very little effect, as this intervention program. Reynolds, Wheldall, & Madelaine in children who enter RR with low levels of phonemic aware- (2009) suggest that it is difficult to make policy changes, such ness and phonological recoding skill. as modification or replacement of a predominantly meaning- based instruction intervention such as RR unless it is very clear The Theoretical Difference between Code-Based and that an alternative program, such as code-based instruction, Meaning-Based Instruction performs much better than meaning-based instruction when A theoretical argument in favor of a code-based approach they are directly compared as interventions for low-performing to tutoring poor readers comes from the simple view (Gough readers. & Tunmer, 1986), that reading comprehension is the product of decoding skill and language comprehension. Both are The Positive Effect of One-to-One Tutoring necessary; neither is sufficient. Improvements in reading A part of the success of many reading interventions, includ- comprehension (RC) will come from one or both these two ing RR, is their focus on one-to-one or small group tutoring. sources: decoding skill (D) and language comprehension (LC). Meta-analyses indicate that the average effect size for one-to- The first source is decoding. Some poor readers are weak in one tutoring of any kind is .40, which is a small-to-moderate one of these two areas, and some are weak in both. If they are effect (Juel, 1996; Cohen, Kulik, & Kulik, 1982; Elbaum, weak in both, as is the case for “garden variety” poor readers, Vaughn, Hughes, & Moody, 2000). Elbaum and colleagues then intervention will need to focus on both decoding and conducted a meta-analysis of reading interventions in 29 stud- language comprehension. ies and found that the average effect size was .41, again a Instruction in decoding skills will transfer to reading com- small-to-moderate effect. The average effect size for RR, which prehension by decreasing the amount of mental energy needed to decode print, enabling the reader to transfer this energy into uses one-to-one tutoring, is .66 (Elbaum et al., 2000) which is comprehension. Instruction in language comprehension, that a moderate effect, and is similar to that calculated by Hattie is, focusing on meaning and grammatical structure when (2009), though the size of the effect depends on which children reading text, and building vocabulary and general knowledge, you count as successful (Reynolds, Wheldall, & Madelaine, will transfer to reading comprehension by expanding the 2009). knowledge base available to the reader when comprehending Even without specialist training as in RR, volunteer tutors of text. Code-based instruction is a strong provider of decoding reading have an average effect size of .30 on overall reading skills, and meaning-based instruction of language comprehen- achievement, including decoding, fluency, and comprehen- sion skills. sion. These results indicate that tutoring in general has a small Meaning-based instruction, however, does not just focus on but significant effect, though it appears the effect is smaller for reading for meaning. It also attends to letter cues when reading reading comprehension, only .18 (Ritter, Barnett, Denny, & unknown words, though it does not stress them. A theoretical Albin, 2009). argument in favor of meaning-based instruction is the view Hattie (2009) argues that the size of the effect is probably that when pupils engage in extended reading of text, there is the wrong question because as long as pupils have a pulse, an opportunity for them to store implicitly the visual and just about everything done in education works: “Ninety-five phonological forms of words in memory, without explicit teach- percent-plus of all effect sizes in education are positive.” (p. 7). ing of these forms. This theoretical approach, called Know- It seems that an effect size of .40 is normal, no matter what ledge Sources Theory, argues that many children acquire lexical- you do. In terms of educational policy, the important question ized phonological recoding skills (McKay, Fletcher-Flinn, & should be what gets a better effect size than .40. Hattie sug- Thompson, 2004) with an implicit approach, by reading and gests that we need to look not just at what works, but what rereading texts, as in meaning-based instruction, with a mini- works best. mum of explicit code-based instruction (Thompson, Fletcher- This is why a direct comparison of contemporary code- Flinn, & Cottrell, 1999; Thompson & Fletcher-Flinn, 2006). based instruction (Calfee & Patrick, 1995) and meaning-based There is support for this argument from those who do not take instruction (Ministry of Education, 2009) would be of great sides in the reading wars. Gough’s (1994, 1996) code-cipher value. First, there are not many studies that directly compare theory argues that learning to decipher English writing is too the two strategies. Second, we need to look for a stronger complex a task for code-based instruction because the corre- effect than the average .40 if we are to accelerate the reading spondences vary greatly depending on what letters come progress of children who have fallen far behind their peers. The before or after a particular phonics pattern, and that much learn- last serious attempt to compare different kinds of code-based ing is only possible through extensive reading, which is what instruction with different kinds of meaning-based instruction meaning-based instruction recommends. was the First Grade Studies project, and this was at the class- While meaning-based instruction does not just focus on room level rather than with at-risk readers (Bond & Dykstra, reading for meaning, code-based instruction also does not 1966; Dykstra, 1968). focus just on the code. It also involves the application of

10 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association code-based instruction rules by reading text, except that it To conclude, many researchers agree that phonological stresses the importance of accurate decoding as a key to com- skills are critical for a) the struggling reader and b) the beginner prehension. Gough (1996) argues that this stress on accurate reader with low levels of pre-reading ability (Byrne, 2005; decoding is important because many pupils, especially older, Hattie, 2009; Nicholson & Tunmer, 2011; Tunmer & Nicholson, struggling readers, are unable to learn the code implicitly, and 2011). Reading for meaning is also critical, to practice those need the benefit of some code-based instruction. skills and to use other sources of information when reading, including context clues, visual information, and to build Preview of this Special Theme Issue general knowledge, grammatical insights, and vocabulary. The contributors to this special issue are all researchers with The authors in this theme issue suggest a clear direction. First, established national and international reputations in the field of teach phonemic awareness and pre-reading skills, preferably in reading. They work at Universities in New Zealand though the kindergarten. Second, use the best of both meaning-based reader will notice that they draw extensively on research from instruction and code-based instruction, that is, to teach phono- the United States, United Kingdom, and Europe. As theme edi- logical recoding skills and then to let our students read. tor, I wanted the issue to reflect a range of perspectives, so I invited writers whom I knew had different perspective on what References works best. Bond, G., & Dykstra, R. (1967). The cooperative research program in first grade read- The articles have been read and edited for quality of writing ing instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 2, 5–142. but the authors (including myself) have not had to incorporate Byrne, B. (2005). Theories of learning to read. In M. J. Snowling, & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 104–119). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. external reviewer requirements or restrictions. The writers have Calfee, R. C., & Patrick, C. L. (1995). Teach our children well: Bringing K–12 education been given the freedom to present their own ideas and their into the 21st century. Stanford, CA: Stanford Alumni. own data with the aim of creating a provocative forum on a Camilli, G., Vargas, S., & Yurecko, M. (2003). Teaching children to read: The fragile topic of major interest to the IDA community and beyond. link between science and federal education policy. Education Policy Analysis Keith Greaney writes that the meaning-based instruction Archives, 11 (15). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n15/ approach will not help the poor reader, and that RR is meaning- Center, Y., Freeman, L., & Robertson, G. (2001). The relative effect of a code-oriented based instruction, so it will not help the poor reader either. and a meaning-oriented early literacy program on regular and low progress Australian students in year 1 classrooms which implement Reading Recovery. Keith makes a compelling case that we could make more prog- International Journal of Disability, Development, and Education, 48, 207–232. ress if we could settle on a theory of reading based on science Chapman, J. W., Greaney, K. T., & Tunmer, W. E. (2007). How well is Reading rather than intuition and belief. Recovery really working in New Zealand? New Zealand Journal of Educational James Chapman and Bill Tunmer write that the RR program Studies, 42, 17–29. does not work for children who lack phonological recoding Chapman, J. W., Tunmer, W. E., & Prochnow, J. E. (2001). Does success in the Reading skills on entry, and that the program needs major surgery, in the Recovery program depend on developing proficiency in phonological skills? A longitudinal study in a meaning-based instructional context. Scientific Studies of form of more focus on phonological recoding, so it can be Reading, 5, 141–176. effective for those children who need help the most. Their arti- Cohen, P., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. (1982). Educational outcomes of tutoring: A meta- cle makes us wonder if we have asked too much of RR and analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 237–248. expected more than it has been able to deliver. Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., & Katch, L. E. (2004). Beyond the reading wars: Sue Dymock and I write about a code-based after-school Exploring the effect of child-instruction interactions on growth in early reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 8, 305–336. reading program where the poor readers who made the most Dahl, K. L., & Freppon, P. A. (1995). A comparison of inner-city children’s interpreta- gains were the ones who were behind but not too far behind. tions of reading and writing instruction in the early grades in skills-based and The very poor readers made small gains by comparison. What meaning-based instruction classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 50–74. we found were Matthew effects where those children who were Dymock, S. J., & Nicholson, T. (2011). Teaching reading comprehension. Wellington: “rich” and started our program with more reading skills, made New Zealand Council for Educational Research. the most progress, while the ones who were “poor” and started Dykstra, R. (1968). The effectiveness of code- and meaning-emphasis beginning read- several years behind their age in reading, struggled to make ing programs. The Reading Teacher, 22, 17–23. accelerated progress. This finding made us think that the Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Stahl, S. A., & Willows, D. M. (2001). Systematic code-based instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading approach that reading tutors use may not be as important as dif- Panel’s meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71, 393–447. ferentiating among poor readers in terms of dosage, that is, some Elbaum, B., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M., & Moody, S. (2000). How effective are one-to- poor readers will need larger dosage levels of instruction than one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? other poor readers, so that all our pupils can progress similarly. A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, Alison Arrow and Claire McLachlan review an extensive 605–619. amount of research to show that if we teach emergent literacy Foorman, B. R., Francis, D. J., Fletcher, J. M., Schatschneider, C., & Mehta, P. (1998). The role of instruction in learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at-risk skills before children start formal schooling, then we can give children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 37–55. children a protective factor that will reduce the need for RR Goodman, K. S. (1973). The 13th easy way to make learning to read difficult: A reac- because many more children will get off to a better start in tion to Gleitman and Rozin. Reading Research Quarterly, 8, 484–493. learning to read. We all know how hard it is for children to Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. catch up once they fall behind. The Chinese say that the Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6–10. fledgling who wants to fly needs to start practicing and flapping Gough, P. B. (1994). How children learn to read and why they fail. Annals of Dyslexia, its wings as early as possible. This is why Alison and Claire’s 46, 3–20. message is so important. Continued on page 12

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 11 Theme Editor’s Summary continued from page 11

Gough, P. B. (1996, February). A pox on both your houses. Paper presented to Nicholson, T., & Tunmer, W. E. (2011). Reading: The great debate. In C. Rubie-Davies Symposium on Integrated Direct Instruction, sponsored by Language Arts (Ed.), Educational psychology: Concepts, research, and challenges (pp. 36–50). Foundation of America and Oklahoma City Schools, Oklahoma City. London: Routledge. Greaney, K. T., Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (1997). Effects of rime-based ortho- Pearson, P. D. (2004). The reading wars. Educational Policy, 18, 216–252. graphic analogy training on the word recognition skills of children with reading Reynolds, M., & Wheldall, K. (2007). Reading Recovery 20 years down the track: disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 645–651. Looking forward, looking back. International Journal of Disability, Development, Hammill, D. D., & Swanson, H. L. (2006). The National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis and Education, 54, 199–223. of code-based instruction: Another point of view. The Elementary School Journal, Reynolds, M., Wheldall, K., & Madelaine, A. (2009). The devil is in the detail regard- 107, 17–26. ing the efficacy of Reading Recovery: A rejoinder to Schwartz, Hobsbaum, Briggs, Hattie, J. A. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to and Scull. International Journal of Disability, Development, and Education, 56, achievement. London: Routledge. 17–35. Iversen, S., & Tunmer, W. E. (1993). Phonological processing skills and the Reading Ritter, G. W., Barnett, J. H., Denny, G. S., & Albin, G. R. (2009). The effectiveness of Recovery program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 112–126. volunteer tutoring programs for elementary and middle school students: A meta- Iversen, S., Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2005). The effects of varying group size analysis. Review of Educational Research, 79, 3–38. on the Reading Recovery approach to preventive early intervention. Journal of Ryder, J. F., Tunmer, W. E., & Greaney, K. T. (2008). Explicit instruction in phonemic Learning Disabilities, 38, 456–472. awareness and phonemically based decoding skills as an intervention strategy for Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from struggling readers in meaning-based instruction classrooms. Reading and Writing, first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437–447. 21, 349–369. rd Juel, C. (1994). Learning to read in one elementary school. New York, NY: Springer- Smith, F. (1982). Understanding reading (3 ed.). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Verlag. Winston. Juel, C. (1996). What makes literacy tutoring effective? Reading Research Quarterly, Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual 31, 268–289. differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 210– 214. Juel, C., Griffith, P. L., & Gough, P. B. (1986). Acquisition of literacy: A longitudinal study of children in first and second grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, Stuebing, K. K., Barth, A. E., Cirino, P. T., Francis, D. J., & Fletcher, J. M. (2008). A 243–255. response to recent meta-analyses of the National Reading Panel Report: Effects of systematic code-based instruction are practically significant. Journal of Educational Juel, C., & Minden-Cupp, C. (2000). Learning to read words: Linguistic units and Psychology, 100, 123–134. instructional strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 458–492. Thompson, G. B., & Fletcher-Flinn, C. M. (2006). Lexicalised implicit learning in read- Lovett, M. W., Lacerenza, L., Borden, S. L., Frijters, J. C., Steinbach, K. A., & De Palma, ing acquisition: The knowledge sources theory. In C. M. Fletcher-Flinn & G. M. M. (2000). Components of effective remediation for developmental reading Haberman (Eds.), Cognition and language: Perspectives from New Zealand (pp. disabilities: Combining phonological and strategy-based instruction to improve 141–156). Queensland: Australian Academic Press. outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 263–283. Thompson, G. B., Fletcher-Flinn, C. M., & Cottrell, D. J. (1999). Learning correspon- Mathes, P. G., Denton, C. A., Fletcher, J. M., Anthony, J. L., Francis, D., Schatschneider, dences between letters and phonemes without explicit instruction. Applied C. (2005). The effects of theoretically different instruction and student characteris- Psycholinguistics, 20, 21–50. tics on the skills of struggling readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 148–182. Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Voeller, K. K., & Mckay, M., Fletcher-Flinn, C. M., & Thompson, G. B. (2004). New theory for under- Conway, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading standing reading and reading disability, Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities, disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approach- 9, 3–7. es. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 92, 263–283. Ministry of Education (2009). Literacy learning progressions. Wellington, New Torgerson, C. J., Brooks, G., & Hall, J. (2006). A systematic review of the research lit- Zealand: Learning Media. erature on the use of code-based instruction in the teaching of reading and spelling. Morris, D., Tyner, B., & Perney, J. (2000). Early steps: Replicating the effects of a first- Nottingham, England: Department for Education and Skills. grade reading intervention program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 681– Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (1999). Teaching strategies for word identification. 693. In G.B. Thompson, & T. Nicholson (Eds.), Learning to read: Beyond phonics and National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the whole language (pp. 74–102). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment Tunmer, W. E., & Greaney, K. E. (2008). Reading intervention research. An integrative of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading framework. In A. Fawcett, F. Manis, G. Reid, & L. Siegel (Eds.), Handbook of dys- instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government lexia (pp. 241–267). London: Sage. Printing Office. Tunmer, W. E., & Nicholson, T. (2011). The development and teaching of word recog- Nicholson, T. (1991). Do children read words better in context or in lists? A classic nition skill. In P. D. Pearson et al. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 4, study revisited. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 444–450. 405–431). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Nicholson, T. (1993). The case against context. In G. B. Thompson, W. E. Tunmer, & T. Wheldall, K. (2009). Effective instruction for socially disadvantaged low-progress Nicholson (Eds.), Reading acquisition processes (pp. 91–104). Clevedon, England: readers: The schoolwise program. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 14, Multilingual Matters. 151–170. Nicholson, T. (2011). The Orton-Gillingham approach. Bulletin of the Australian Learning Difficulties Association, 43(1), 9–12. Nicholson, T., Bailey, J., & McArthur, J. (1991). Context cues in reading: The gap Tom Nicholson, Ph.D., is a professor in the School of Educa- between research and popular opinion. Journal of Reading, Writing, and Learning tion at Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand, with Disabilities, 7, 33–41. interests in research methods, reading development, reading Nicholson, T., & Dymock, S. J. (2010). Teaching reading vocabulary. Wellington: New difficulties, and child development. His Ph.D. is from the Zealand Council for Educational Research. University of Minnesota. He has been an adviser to the gov- Nicholson, T., & Hill, D. (1985). Good readers don’t guess: Taking another look at the issue of whether children read words better in context or in isolation. Reading ernment on National Standards in Reading, Writing and Psychology, 6, 181–198. Mathematics and is a member of the International Reading Nicholson, T., Lillas, C., & Rzoska, A. (1988). Have we been misled by miscues? The Association Hall of Fame. Tom is author of Phonics Hand- Reading Teacher, 42, 6–10. book (2005, reprinted 2006), published by Wiley-Blackwell.

12 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association The Samuel T. Orton Award

Congratulations to

Maryanne Wolf, Ed.D., John DiBiaggio Professor of Citizenship and Public Service, Director of the Center for Reading and Language Research, and Professor in the Eliot-Pearson Department of Child Development, Tufts University Recipient of the 2011 Samuel T. Orton Award

The Samuel T. Orton Award, IDA’s highest honor, was established in 1966. This award recognizes a person or persons, who have made a vital contribution to our scientific understanding of dyslexia, significantly enhanced and advanced our capacity to successfully intervene and assist people with dyslexia, expanded national and international awareness of dyslexia, or demonstrated unusual competence and dedication in service to people with dyslexia.

The Margaret Byrd Rawson Lifetime Achievement Award

Congratulations to

Nancy Hennessy, M.Ed., Educational Consultant, The Consulting Network Recipient of the 2011 Margaret Byrd Rawson Award

The Margaret Byrd Rawson Lifetime Achievement Award recognizes the work of an individual in advancing the mission of the International Dyslexia Association. The award is given to an individual whose work on behalf of IDA embodies Margaret Rawson’s compassion, leadership, commitment to excellence, and fervent advocacy for people with dyslexia.

The Pinnacle Award

Congratulations to

Steven J. Walker, President & Chief Executive Officer, New England Wood Pellet LLC Recipient of the 2011 Pinnacle Award

The Pinnacle Award was created to recognize an individual with dyslexia who has publicly acknowledged such, has made significant achievements in his or her field of interest, is leading a successful life, and is a role model for others with dyslexia. The award is given annually, more than one person may receive this recognition in any given year; and the honoree does not have to be a member of IDA.

The Remy Johnston Award

Congratulations to

Alex Malchow, Arlington, VA Recipient of the 2011 IDA Remy Johnston Award

The Remy Johnston Certificate of Merit was established to honor the memory of a fine student with dyslexia whose promising life was tragically cut short a few months prior to graduating from college. The Certificate of Merit recognizes a young student with dyslexia who is a worthy role model for others, refuses to be limited by the challenges of learning differences, strives for excellence, chooses to live as an achiever, and continues to enrich the lives of families, friends, employers, and the communities in which he or she lives through service.

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 13 $FROOHJHSUHSDUDWRU\VFKRROIRUEULJKW FKLOGUHQZKROHDUQGLIIHUHQWO\

AIM~Academy In 0DQD\XQN·V New Location: 1200 River Road Ɣ Conshohocken, PA

&RPLQJLQ-DQXDU\«

AIM is a Wilson® Partner School & LETRS® Affiliate

For more information visit us at: www.aimpa.org or call 215-483-2461 169 Conarroe Street Ɣ Philadelphia, PA 19127

´Students need more schools like AIM!µ -- Nancy Hennessy, M.Ed, Former President of IDA & Educational Consultant

14 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association The Multiple Cues or “Searchlights” Word Reading Theory: Implications for Reading Recovery® by Keith T. Greaney

Introduction examples of how the running records assessment practices are While there appears to be strong support for Reading influenced by this theory are presented and critically exam- Recovery® (RR) in several countries (see What Works ined. Finally, a critical discussion of some examples of how the Clearinghouse, 2008) there is also research evidence suggest- word identification teaching practices, particularly regarding ing that such support is not universal (Chapman, Greaney, & the selection and use of teaching prompts, are also influenced Tunmer 2007; Iversen & Tunmer, 1993; Tunmer & Chapman, by the multiple cues word reading theory are also presented. 2003; Tunmer & Chapman 2004b; Chapman, Tunmer, & Prochnow, 2001). In fact, there is an interesting irony about RR in New . . . the multiple cues model of word Zealand, the “birthplace” of the program. While RR was designed to help the lowest achieving students in literacy, there reading has emerged and developed is evidence to suggest that it has had little impact on this group a particularly strong populatrity within of students. RR was first introduced in New Zealand schools on a national scale in the early 1980s at a time when the country whole language classroom evironments. ranked first in the 1970 International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) international sur- vey of literacy achievement. Yet in the last 25 years following The Multiple Cues or ”Searchlights” Theory of Word Reading its introduction New Zealand’s performance on the subsequent The relative importance that should be given to the explicit international literacy surveys such as PIRLS (see Mullis et al., teaching of word identification strategies during instructional 2003) has continued to drop from 1st in 1970, to 6th in 1990, reading and tutor lessons is an area of debate among both to 13th in 2003, and to 26th in 2006 (Greaney, 2004; Tunmer & teacher practitioners and researchers. Those who subscribe to Chapman, 2004a:, Tunmer et al., 2008). Given that RR has the whole language (or meaning-emphasis) theory of reading been in operation for approximately 25 years and given that claim that fluent readers use multiple cue sources of informa- such a program was designed to assist the very children who tion including, activating prior knowledge, using sentence comprise the lowest achievers in early literacy, it seems ironic context and syntax cues, cues from any accompanying illustra- that New Zealand’s performances in international literacy sur- tions, and visual/grapho-phonic cues from the words (Clay, veys have continued to decline during this period. 2005a, 2005b; Smith & Elley, 1997; Smith, 1979; Hood, 2000; While there have been several concerns about RR discussed Ministry of Education, 2003). However, those who subscribe to in the research literature (Reynolds & Wheldall 2007; Shanahan the code-emphasis view of reading claim that, while these mul- & Barr 1995; Glynn, Crooks, Bethune, Ballard, & Smith, 1989; tiple cue sources may have some relevance, it is the visual/ Chapman et al., 2007; Tunmer & Chapman 2004b; Iversen & grapho-phonic cues that are of prime importance and should Tunmer 1993; Tunmer & Chapman 2003), it is implied in this therefore be explicitly taught as priority cues (Greaney & article that a major reason why RR has failed to have an impact Arrow, 2010; Greaney, 2001, 2002; Pressley, 2006; Tunmer & on New Zealand’s widening literacy achievement gap may be Chapman, 2004a, 2004b; Tunmer & Greaney, 2010). For the due to the program’s heavy reliance on the multiple cues theo- past 40 years the multiple cues model of word reading has ry of word reading. A critical discussion of the multiple cues emerged and has developed a particularly strong popularity theory is important because this theory also underpins both the within whole language (i.e., meaning-oriented) classroom envi- assessment and teaching practices of all RR teachers in what- ronments. One view of the multiple cues approach to word ever country the program operates. Furthermore, in New identification suggests that the multiple information sources Zealand at least, (and possibly many other countries where RR available to readers enable them to predict or guess most unfa- operates), as a ”flow-on” effect from RR, regular junior class miliar words. Tunmer and Greaney (2010) state, for example, teachers’ reading assessment and teaching practices are also that “multiple cues theorists incorrectly assume that skilled heavily influenced by this theory. (Children in New Zealand reading is a process in which minimal word-level information begin school on or soon after their fifth birthday and the first is used to confirm predictions about upcoming text based on two-year groups are often referred to as junior classes.) The multiple sources of information” (p.230). Even though the reason for the “flow-on” effect is that most RR teachers are also model has been rejected by the scientific reading research regular class teachers so it would be expected that their class community, the theory, as demonstrated later in this article, literacy practices are influenced by many of the philosophical underpins how teachers both assess oral reading progress (i.e., underpinnings of RR. running records) and how they instruct for word identification This article begins with an outline of the characteristics of (i.e., teaching prompts). the multiple cues theory of word reading. Second, some Continued on page 16

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 15 Multiple Cues continued from page 15

The multiple cues theory of word reading model is often over the puzzling word. The second alternative is to guess what represented in diagrams similar to that presented in Figure 1 the unknown word might be. And the final and least preferred (see Hood, 2000; Smith & Elley, 1997; Clay, 2005b; Ministry of alternative is to sound the word out. Phonics in other words, Education, 2003). comes last” (p.26).

The Multiple Cues or ”Searchlights” Theory and Its Impact Figure 1. The Multiple Cues Word Reading Theory on Running Record Assessment Practices Running records are the most common form of oral reading Prior knowledge/experience assessment used in elementary schools and in many tutor pro- grams. (A running record is a recorded account of a student’s oral reading behavior that is taken by the teacher as the student reads the text protocols.) Furthermore, running records are Meaning Structure taken on a daily basis as an integral part of every RR lesson to monitor reading progress. A standard format for analyzing the error responses is used to calculate error and self correction rates and to analyze the extent to which the students are thought to be using the various (multiple) cues when attempting to identify unfamiliar words. Furthermore, the results from run- Visual/Grapho-phonics ning records enable teachers to identify areas of weakness and to design instructional tasks to address these needs. Symbols are used to highlight the particular cues that students are According to the Ministry of Education (2003) “Fluent read- deemed to have used when encountering unfamiliar words and ers and writers draw on their prior knowledge and use all avail- these symbols represent the three main cues (M for meaning, S able sources of information simultaneously and unconsciously” for sentence structure, and V for visual/grapho-phonics). (p.30). While some researchers and commentators suggest that An example of a student’s reading errors presented in an the multiple cues are viewed as being of equal importance, it instructional resource text about running records for teachers is worth noting that the visual/grapho-phonic cues are always (Ministry of Education, 2000, p.24) has the following story text placed at the bottom of the diagram suggesting that perhaps and reading error responses and is presented to illustrate the these particular cues may be of less importance. In support of level at which the multiple cues theory influences the analysis this concern Beard (2003) has noted that “Adams (1998) of the responses. The complete story is not inserted here, as describes the way in which this diagram has been adopted in only the sentences with the reading errors are the focus of the teacher education and is concerned that it may sometimes be analysis. The reader’s errors are printed above the words. used to underplay the role of phonics, as ‘grapho-phonic cues’ ______are tucked away at the bottom of the model, perhaps suggesting that such cues are a last resort in teaching” (p. 204). Uncle Timi’s Sleep * Cues used Smith & Elley (1997) also maintain that “context cues are d V emphasized in junior classrooms [and that] reading is easier A coconut dropped on the sand. when cues that come from the meaning or the sentence struc- childrens M V ture help the child fill any gaps” (p. 26). Furthermore, Clay A horse with some children on it galloped along the beach, (1998) also suggests that there is a definite hierarchical order of the cues that young readers use when they read. She claims walk S V that beginning readers But Uncle Timi didn’t wake up. wake M V need to use their knowledge of how the world works; the And Uncle Timi woke up. possible meanings of the text; the sentence structure; the ______importance of order of ideas, or words, or of letters; special *(Cowley, 1991) features of sound, shape and layout; and special knowledge from past literacy experiences before (emphasis added) they For the errors during the reading the student had identified resort to left to right sounding out of chunks or letter cluster, only the d (for dropped), childrens (for children), walk (for or, in the last resort, single letters (p. 9). wake) and wake for woke). The first error analysis showed that the student has used the visual (visual/grapho-phonic) cue for According to Clay’s view, the word-level cues should be identifying the d (dropped). For the error childrens, (for chil- viewed as the least important. Frank Smith (1979) also views dren) the student has used both the meaning and visual/grapho- the word-level cues to be of least importance when he claims, phonics cues, because the error indicates that the reader has for example, that “the first alternative and preference is to skip retained the intended meaning and the error has retained

16 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association grapho-phonemic similarity to the focus word. Similarly the are best acquired naturally in the same way as we learn to error walk (for wake) is deemed to represent both sentence speak and listen” (p. 77). Furthermore, teachers who subscribe structure and close visual/grapho-phonic similarity. The final to this naturalistic development viewpoint are less inclined to error wake (for woke) suggests that the reader has retained the include explicit teaching in phonological-based word identifi- meaning intention of the sentence and the two words are cation strategies in their classes. visually/grapho-phonemically similar. The emphasis on record- In her most recent text for RR teachers Clay (2005b) states ing peripheral word-level information may be enough in and of that when instructing for word identification “in your first itself to discourage teachers from further focusing on teaching attempts [italics in original] to call features of print to the for accurate word identification. child’s attention, prompt for sentence structure, and then In a critique of running records procedures, Blaiklock prompt for the message” (p. 111). In her companion text Clay, (2004) also notes this concern when he states that “following (2005a) further warns that “undue attention to the details of these guidelines provides a misleading picture of a child’s read- letters can block the child’s ability to use his language knowl- ing. A child who has difficulty decoding some words may still edge and meaning of the text, as part of his information base be assessed as making effective use of visual information if for decision making” (p.25). there is any visual connection between the child’s errors and Discouraging the use of grapho-phonic cues is particularly the correct words” (p. 248). Regardless of the quality of any problematic given that most of the students who are admitted reading errors, teachers should still recognize (when analyzing on to RR programs have the greatest phonological-based learn- running records) that word reading errors are by definition, still ing needs. Chapman et al. (2001) found in a longitudinal study incorrect responses and therefore, the problem should be of RR that the students who failed to make satisfactory progress viewed first and foremost, as one of inadequate decoding. In showed the most severe deficits on all phonological processing support of this concern (even when errors retain full meaning), measures at the outset. Furthermore, Center, Freeman, and McKenna and Picard (2006) also note that “teachers should Robertson (2001) investigated whether the efficacy of RR out- view meaningful miscues (like substituting pony for horse) as comes varied as a function of classroom literacy program type. evidence of inadequate decoding skills and not as an end result Whole language and code-emphasis classes were compared to be fostered” (p. 399). and the results showed that those RR students who had come from code-emphasis classes outperformed the RR students who The Multiple Cues or “Searchlights” Theory and Its Impact had come from the whole language classes. It appeared that the on Word Identification Teaching Practices code-emphasis instruction offered in the classes had compen- The extent to which explicit instruction in phonemically sated for the lack of attention given to this aspect within the RR based decoding strategies should occur in the teaching of read- lessons. However, for those students from the meaning-oriented ing in the early years of instruction should be of interest to all classes where no code-emphasis instruction was present, the teachers. This is because all general class teachers teach read- RR program had failed to address the phonological-based prob- ing and they all use teaching prompts when instructing for lems at all. word identification. When students encounter unfamiliar words Despite the large amount of international research over the during regular class instruction, the teacher can do several last 25 years that demonstrates the importance of (and the things including telling the word or offering prompts to assist necessity to explicitly teach to some students), specific word- the reader to either arrive at or decode the word themselves. level identification skills, it is surprising that there is still so However, some teaching prompts resemble nothing more than much attention given to the less efficient multiple cues simple global clues similar to those used in a game of treasure approach. Of even more concern, is the continued and deliber- hunt, while other prompts encourage the reader to activate ate relegation of the visual/grapho-phonic cues to that of least specific word-learning strategies. The amount of metacognitive importance. Several researchers share this concern. Pressley strategy involvement that the reader is encouraged to use is (2006) states for example that “the scientific evidence is simply therefore dependent upon the quality of the prompts that the overwhelming that letter sound cues are more important in teacher selects. In other words, an effective word identification recognizing words than either semantic or syntactic cues, [and teaching prompt is more likely to strategically empower the that] a heavy reliance on the latter is a disastrous strategy for student to be able to successfully identify the same word on beginning readers” (pp. 16 and 36). subsequent encounters and in different texts. On the other Furthermore, Moats (2007) notes that “Contextual guessing hand, an ineffective prompt is unlikely to have any strategy- strategies are supported by the cueing systems model of word enhancing value for the student when the unfamiliar word is recognition which has no basis in reading science. According encountered on subsequent occasions. to this theory, students are said to use grapho-phonic cues, Smith and Elley (1997) acknowledge that the predominant semantic or meaning cues, and syntax or contextual cues to philosophy underpinning reading instruction in New Zealand recognize words. In practice, the emphasis is on anything but has often been described as whole language. These authors the links between speech sounds and spelling. Unfortunately, define the whole language reading philosophy as being based balanced literacy students are learning strategies that poor on the theory that learning to read is as natural as learning to readers rely on, not what good readers know” (p. 20). speak. They claim that, “educators who support this model of When investigating teacher preferences for word identifica- the reading process usually advocate a natural or whole lan- tion prompts Greaney (2001) demonstrated that teachers did guage approach to teaching, arguing that reading and writing Continued on page 18

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 17 Multiple Cues continued from page 17 prefer to use the context-based cues ahead of the phonological- mote the RR program as being an effective and acceptable based cue sources when instructing for word identification intervention for students with early reading difficulties when strategies. However, Morris et al. (2000) argue that “we should the program has such a heavy multiple cues bias within the not dismiss the possibility (as Clay seems to do) that some chil- teaching and assessment components. Of more concern is that dren might benefit from studying a single information source while the international scientific community has rejected the (e.g., spelling patterns) in isolation while simultaneously being multiple cues theory of word reading, the evidence for this offered the chance to integrate this knowledge in contextual rejection continues to be overlooked by RR proponents and reading and writing” (p. 251). many school systems. It is unrealistic to expect teachers to have to teach students to read every unfamiliar word they encounter. This is because References of what Juel and Minden-Cupp (2000) refer to as the ”ortho- Beard, R. (2003). Uncovering the key skills of reading, In N. Hall, J. Marsh & J. Larson (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood literacy. London, England: Sage Publications. graphic avalanche of print” they face. This refers to the amount Blaiklock, K. (2004). A critique of running records of children’s oral reading. New and complexity of words that early readers encounter as they Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 39(2), 241–253. progress through school. However, this is the very reason why Center, Y., Freeman, L., & Robertson, G. (2001). The relative effect of a code-oriented it is important that students should be taught to use effective and a meaning-oriented early literacy program on regular and low progress word identification strategies that allow them to transfer such Australian students in Year 1 classrooms which implement Reading Recovery. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 48, 207–232. skills from the taught instructional situation to help them iden- Chapman, J. W., Greaney, K. T., & Tunmer, W. E. (2007). How well is Reading tify other unfamiliar words on subsequent encounters without Recovery really working in New Zealand? New Zealand Journal of Educational needing to rely on assistance from teacher prompts. Because Studies, 42(1&2), 17–29. different texts present (even previously taught) words in differ- Chapman, J. W., Tunmer, W. E., & Prochnow, J. E. (2001). Does success in the Reading ent contexts, the reliance on the context-based cues that may Recovery program depend on developing proficiency in phonological processing skills? A longitudinal study in a whole language instructional context. Scientific have been successful in one situation (e.g., in conjunction with Studies of Reading, 5, 141–176. context-based prompting) will almost always not be helpful Clay, M. M. (1985). The early detection of reading difficulties. Auckland, New when the student encounters the same or similar words in sub- Zealand: Heinemann. sequent texts. This is because regardless of the context in which Clay, M. M. (1998). An observation survey of early literacy achievement. Auckland, hitherto unfamiliar words may reappear within subsequent New Zealand: Heinemann. texts, the visual/grapho-phonic representations of those words Clay, M. M. (2005a). Literacy lessons designed for individuals: Part one. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann. (i.e., spelling), remain constant, and it is the constancy of those Clay, M. M. (2005b). Literacy lessons designed for individuals: Part two. Auckland, visual/grapho-phonic representations that teachers should be New Zealand: Heinemann. encouraging students to focus on. This is what makes some Cowley, J. (1991). Uncle Timi’s sleep. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media. prompts more strategically valuable for students. Glynn, T., Crooks, T., Bethune, N., Ballard, K., & Smith, J. (1989). Reading Recovery in context. Wellington, New Zealand: Department of Education. Conclusions Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading and reading disability. While decoding is not sufficient for reading comprehension, Remedial & Special Education, 7(1), 6–10. it is nevertheless, necessary, (Gough & Tunmer, 1986). Because Greaney, K. (2001). An investigation of teacher preferences for word identification efficient readers are first and foremost, efficient decoders of strategies. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 24(1), 21–30. print, it makes sense to focus on instructional strategies that are Greaney, K. (2002). Commentary: That reading debate again. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 37(1), 101–108. most likely to enhance the student’s ability to independently Greaney, K. (2004). First, to fourth to thirteenth and (in all probability), still dropping? decode the unfamiliar words while reading connected text. To New Zealand’s international literacy results: Some personal thoughts about the do this it is important for teachers to understand that the great- reasons for the gap. DELTA, 56(2), 53–64. est clue to a word’s identity is the word itself. Unfortunately, Greaney, K., & Arrow, A. (2010). Why the new national literacy standards won’t close this realization is unlikely to be fully accepted by many teach- our literacy achievement gap. New Zealand Journal of Teachers’ Work, 7(1), 29–37. ers while the predominant theory of reading both within regu- Hood, H. (2000). Right to read: An open letter to teachers. Palmerston North, New lar class programs and in tutor programs like RR, continues to Zealand: Dunmore Press. be dominated and influenced by the ineffective multiple cues Iversen, S., & Tunmer, W. E. (1993). Phonological processing skill and the Reading theory of word reading. Recovery programme. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 112–125. As mentioned earlier, RR has been in operation in New Juel, C., & Minden-Cupp, C. (2000). Learning to read words: Linguistic units and Zealand since the early 1980s and since its inception over 25 instructional strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 458–492. years ago, our literacy achievement gap has actually continued McKenna, M. C., & Picard, M. (2006/2007). Does miscue analysis have a role in to widen. Furthermore, in other countries where RR operates effective practice? The Reading Teacher, 60, 378–380. (with the same heavy reliance on the multiple cues theory), it Ministry of Education, (2000). Using running records: A resource for New Zealand classroom teachers. Wellington, New Zealand: Author. would be logical to expect the same problems identified in this Ministry of Education, (2003). Effective literacy practices in years 1 to 4. Wellington, article, to also be present in relation to the teaching of word New Zealand: Learning Media. identification strategies to students with reading difficulties. Ministry of Education, (2010, October). The New Zealand Curriculum Update, Issue Finally, it is incomprehensible to accept the claims that pro- 2. Wellington, New Zealand: Author.

18 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association Moats, L. (2007). Whole language highjinks: How to tell when “scientifically-based Tunmer, W. E., Nicholson, T., Greaney, K. T., Prochnow, J. E., Chapman, J. W., & reading instruction” isn’t. Retrieved from Thomas B. Fordham Institute website: http:// Arrow, A. W. (2008). PIRLS before swine: A critique of New Zealand’s national www.edexcellencemedia.net/publications/2007/200701_wholelanguagehijinks/ literacy strategy. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 43(2), 105–119. Moats2007.pdf What Works Clearinghouse. (2008, December). Reading Recovery (WWC interven- Morris, D., Tyner, B., & Perney, J. (2000). Early steps: Replicating the effects of a first tion report). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. grade reading intervention programme. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 681–693. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Gonzalez, E. J., & Kennedy, A. M. (2003). PIRLS 2006 international report. Boston: International Study Centre, Lynch School of Education, Keith Greaney, Ph.D., is a senior lecturer at Massey Boston College. University College of Education. Keith was a primary school Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching. teacher for 28 years and since coming to Massey in 1998 New York, NY: Guilford Press. has been teaching and researching in the areas of early Reynolds, M., & Wheldall, K. (2007). Reading Recovery 20 years down the track: literacy development and the assessment and teaching in Looking forward, looking back. International Journal of Disability, 54(2), 199– literacy to children who have literacy-related learning 223. difficulties. Shanahan, T., & Barr, R. (1995). Reading Recovery: An independent evaluation of the effects of an early instructional intervention for at-risk learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 958–996. Smith, F. (1979). Reading without nonsense. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Education Consulting and Struggling Readers? Smith, J. W. A., & Elley, W. B. (1997). How children learn to read: Insights from the We can help! New Zealand experience. Auckland, New Zealand: Longman. Professional Development Check out our selecƟon of the latest Stuart, M., Stainthorp, R., & Snowling, M. (2008). Literacy as a complex activity: 95 percent of students reading at instrucƟonal materials and soluƟons for Deconstructing the simple view of reading. Literacy, 42(2), 59–66. grade level . . . an achievable goal students struggling with: Tunmer, W. E., & Greaney, K. T. (2010). Defining dyslexia. Journal of Learning 
Comprehension Disabilities, 43(3), 229–243. 
Decoding Susan L. Hall, Ed.D. 
Phonological Awareness Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2003). The Reading Recovery approach to preven- 
Fluency tive early intervention: As good as it gets? Reading Psychology, 24, 337–360. President and Founder 
MulƟsyllable Words

Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2004a). Why the reading achievement gap in Ask about professional development and comprehensive online training for your school. New Zealand won’t go away: Evidence from the PIRLS 2001 international study of Visit our website at www.95percentgroup.com for a reading achievement. DELTA, 56(2), 69–82. complete lisƟng of our upcoming public workshops Start geƫng results today!

Contact InformaƟon: Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2004b). Reading Recovery: Distinguishing myth and speaking engagements. 95 Percent Group Inc. 475 Half Day Road, Suite 350, Lincolnshire, IL 60069 from reality. In R. M. Joshi (Ed.), Dyslexia, myths, misconceptions and some practi- Phone: 847-499-8200 cal application (pp. 99–114). Baltimore, MD: International Dyslexia Association.

Discover your strengths as an athlete, artist or leader as you prepare for college and a bright future.

N Remediation through structured, multi-sensory, phonetics-based language curriculum N Every graduate is accepted to college N Small class size (3-6 students) N A boarding school for 143 boys from around the world N Co-ed Summer Program N School-wide laptop program For more information, email: [email protected] or visit: www.gow.org

A college preparatory boarding school for young men, grades 7 to 12, with dyslexia and similar language-based learning differences.

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 19 St. Stanislaus

Forming Men of Character Since 1854

DYSLEXIA PROGRAMS IN A COLLEGE-PREPARATORY BOARDING SCHOOL and SUMMER CAMP At St. Stanislaus, we understand the promise in every student. In the past three years, seven of our students have been named National Merit Finalists. The eighty graduates in the Class of 2011 earned $5.6 million in scholarships to colleges and universities. We believe that students with dyslexia deserve to be in these numbers, and that’s why we offer dyslexia courses based on the Orton-Gillingham approach.

Call or visit us at www.ststan.com to learn more today!

Academic Excellence Structured Discipline Spiritual Enrichment Character Formation

St. Stanislaus College-Preparatory - An all-boys, Catholic boarding and day school for grades 7-12 304 South Beach Blvd., Bay St. Louis, Mississippi 39520 (228) 467-9057 x226 - www.ststan.com - [email protected]

20 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association Reading Recovery®: Does It Work? by James W. Chapman and William E. Tunmer

wo recent reports on Reading Recovery® (RR), released by interpreted in other countries (e.g., United Kingdom) as evi- TWhat Works Clearinghouse (WWC, 2007, 2008), claim that dence that the program must be effective (Soler & Openshaw, RR is an effective intervention even though only 5 out of 106 2006). research papers met the organization’s evidence standards (WWC, 2008). As Reynolds, Wheldall, and Madelaine (2009) Independent Studies of RR noted, this number is small given the extent of the program’s Only three independent studies of RR have been conducted implementation and the amount of funding allocated to RR in New Zealand. The New Zealand Department (later renamed over 25 years. Ministry) of Education funded all three studies. Glynn, Crooks, Bethune, Ballard, and Smith (1989) found that the modest gains Development of RR observed for most children successfully discontinued from RR Reading Recovery was developed in New Zealand by Marie largely disappeared within two years following completion of Clay during the 1970s (Clay, 1979, 1980) and funded by the the program. Chapman, Tunmer, and Prochnow (2001) found New Zealand Department of Education for adoption by schools that children selected for placement in RR and successfully throughout the country during the 1980s. The main aim of RR discontinued from the program were on average 6 months is to reduce substantially the incidence of reading failure by behind their same-age peers at discontinuation, and 12 months accelerating to average levels of performance the progress of below their same-age peers on standardized measures of read- 6-year-old children who show early signs of reading difficulty ing performance 1 year following discontinuation. The discon- (normally children whose reading progress falls in the lowest tinued RR children performed no better following their exit 20% of the enrollment cohort in any given school). Students from the program than a group of poor readers who did not selected for RR receive 30 to 40 minutes of daily individual receive RR. Moreover, the RR children’s rate of performance on instruction over 12 to 20 weeks by a specially trained RR a number of measures showed no acceleration effects during or teacher. Emphasis is placed on developing within these chil- after the RR program. dren a self-extending system of reading strategies that involves The third New Zealand study was undertaken by the New the flexible use of multiple cues (syntactic, semantic, visual, Zealand Council for Educational Research (NZCER) to investi- graphophonic) to detect and correct errors while reading text. gate the effectiveness of RR in New Zealand (McDowall, Boyd Decisions regarding exit, or “discontinuation,” from RR are & Hodgen, 2005). The design, however, precluded any scien- based on children reading at a level near their class average and tifically based conclusions from being made because the data attaining a reasonable degree of independence in reading. included national RR data returns for one year (2003) for RR Although developed for use in New Zealand there is little or children only, with no control group. Other data were based on no systematic New Zealand research showing that RR is effec- perceptions of the effectiveness of RR obtained from responses tive, especially in relation to long-term benefits. This dearth of to surveys and interviews with principals, RR teachers, the New Zealand research may seem surprising given that the RR three New Zealand RR national trainers and seven RR tutors, program is used in other countries because of the belief that it information obtained from 30 focus groups that comprised RR has been successful in New Zealand. This view was formed teachers and that were led by their RR tutors, and information largely because of Clay’s research on RR (Clay, 1979, 1980), from eight “successful” RR schools selected by RR tutors. In and the impression that the program must be successful short, there was no evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of because of its implementation throughout the country. RR with regard to either (1) achieving its goal of accelerating Clay’s RR studies have been criticized because of significant the reading progress of students experiencing early literacy design flaws, including a) no matched group of poor readers or learning difficulties, or (2) determining whether RR is the most a proper control group, b) inappropriate use of multiple t-tests effective approach for meeting the needs of struggling readers for analyzing gain scores, c) inclusion of only those RR students (Chapman, Greaney, & Tunmer, 2007). who were considered successful rather than all RR students, d) New Zealand evidence regarding the effectiveness of RR is failure to account for spurious regression-towards-the-mean either seriously flawed (Clay, 1979, 1980; McDowall et al., effects, e) using only performance measures devised by Clay 2005) or shows minimal to no gains as a result of placement in rather than independent standardized tests, and f) intervention the program (Chapman et al., 2001; Glynn et al., 1989). and comparison groups not equivalent at baseline (Center, Despite the lack of robust evidence in support of RR, it remains Wheldall, Freeman, Outhred, & McNaught, 1995; Nicholson, as a national Ministry of Education funded program. 1989). Beyond New Zealand, several investigations and extensive Implementation of RR throughout New Zealand was reviews of the RR program have appeared in the literature (e.g., achieved largely on the basis of Clay’s own claims about Center et al., 1995; Center, Freeman, & Robertson, 2001; the efficacy of the program, and because of support from Elbaum, Vaughn, Hughes, & Moody, 2000; Hiebert, 1994; the Department of Education. This official recognition was Continued on page 22

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 21 Reading Recovery®: Does It Work? continued from page 21

Morris, Tyner, & Perney, 2000; Pinnell, Lyons, DeFord, Bryk, & skills could be developed for pairs of struggling readers that Seltzer, 1994; Shanahan & Barr, 1995; Wasik & Slavin, 1993). would allow them to make accelerated progress. Their study There is some convergent evidence that RR can be effective for showed that although RR instruction in pairs required some- some children, but RR has not been shown to be more effective what longer lessons (43 minutes versus 33 minutes), there were than other, often less expensive, programs. Indeed, on the basis no major differences between children taught in pairs com- of a comprehensive and stringent meta-analysis of one-to-one pared to those taught in one-to-one lessons on any measures at tutoring programs in reading, Elbaum et al. (2000) concluded discontinuation. Children taught in pairs performed within the as follows: normal range on all measures and these positive effects were maintained on end-of-year measures. Thus, by increasing Overall, the findings of this meta-analysis do not instructional time by about a quarter, RR teachers could double provide support for the superiority of Reading Recovery the number of students served without making any sacrifices in over other one-to-one reading interventions. Typically, outcomes. Additional benefits were derived by supplementing about 30 percent of students who begin Reading the standard RR instructional approach with the teaching of Recovery do not complete the program and do not explicit, out-of-context word analysis skills. perform significantly better than control students. As Explicit attention to the development of word analysis skills indicated in this meta-analysis, results reported for runs counter to the instructional philosophy of RR. Clay (1993) students who do complete the program may be inflated stressed the importance of encouraging children to use many due to the selective attrition of students from some cues while reading, constantly cross-checking one source of treatment groups and the use of measures that may bias cues against another. She wrote that meaning is “the most the results in favor of Reading Recovery students. Thus it important source of information,” and that “the most important is particularly disturbing that sweeping endorsements of test for the child is “Does it make sense?” (1991, p. 292). Thus, Reading Recovery still appear in the literature. (p. 617) the child uses word-level information primarily for confirma- tion of language predictions: “The child checks language pre- Given that RR involves intensive, one-to-one instruction, it dictions by looking at some letters” and “can hear the sounds should come as no surprise that some studies show the pro- in a word he speaks [i.e., predicts] and checks whether the gram to be an effective intervention for some children with expected letters are there” (Clay, 1993, p. 41). As Clay (1991) reading difficulties (Reynolds & Wheldall, 2007). One-to-one stated: “In efficient rapid word perception, the reader relies instruction is much more effective than classroom instruction mostly on the sentence and its meaning and some selected (Bloom, 1984). The important question, however, which has features of the forms of words. Awareness of the sentence con- not been satisfactorily answered in favor of RR, is this: Holding text (and often the general context of the text as a whole) and a the basic parameters of the RR program constant, namely, that glance at the word enables the reader to respond instantly” (p. it involves one-to-one instruction for 30 to 40 minutes per day 8). Clay (1993) specifically stated that children should be dis- for 12 to 20 weeks by a specially trained teacher and that it couraged from relying too heavily on word-level cues: “If the supplements regular classroom reading instruction, are the child has a bias towards letter detail the teacher’s prompts will specific procedures and instructional strategies of RR more be directed towards the message and the language structure” effective than any other one-to-one (or small group) tutoring (p. 42). That is, when children show a preference for using program for struggling readers? The answer at present, must be word-level information to identify unknown words in text, Clay “no.” But an equally important question could well be in regard recommends that the teacher should divert their attention away to whether RR can only be delivered by means of one-to-one from such information. instruction. This text-based instructional emphasis reflects Clay’s strong theoretical orientation and the instructional underpinning of Theoretical Underpinnings of RR RR, which was designed to complement the predominantly Elbaum and colleagues (2000) noted that while there is a whole language approach to regular classroom instruction in widespread belief that one-to-one instruction is more effective New Zealand. In most New Zealand classrooms, students are than instruction delivered to more than one student at a time, taught what they need to know to learn to read incidentally there is “little systematic evidence to support this belief” (p. (i.e., “as the need arises”) through frequent encounters with 606). These authors presented a compelling argument in sup- interesting reading materials. According to Smith and Elley port of small group instruction: “Each additional student that (1994), two leading proponents of the whole language approach can be accommodated in an instructional group represents a in New Zealand, “Children learn to read themselves; direct substantial reduction in the per-student cost of the intervention, teaching plays only a minor role” (p. 87). or alternatively, a substantial increase in the number of students Clay’s instructional philosophy, reflected in the RR program, that can be served” (p. 606). Support for this contention comes stresses the importance of using information from many sources from Iversen, Tunmer, and Chapman (2005) who reported that in identifying unfamiliar words without recognizing that skills an early intervention program based on the RR format and and strategies involving phonological information are of pri- including explicit, out of context teaching of word analysis mary importance in beginning literacy development. The RR

22 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association view of literacy teaching, and the theoretical assumptions on text so that the child can pay full attention to the patterns being which it is based, were rejected by the scientific community studied” (p. 682). In discussing this important distinction over the past two to three decades (e.g., Gough & Juel, 1991; between Early Steps and RR, Morris and colleagues argued that Perfetti, 1992; Pressley, 2006; Spear-Swerling & Sternberg, some children benefit from studying a single information source 1996; Stanovich, 1991; Tunmer & Chapman, 2003). As Pressley (e.g., spelling patterns) in isolation while simultaneously being (2006) pointed out, “the scientific evidence is simply over- offered the chance to integrate this knowledge in contextual whelming that letter-sound cues are more important in recog- reading and writing. With this important difference, they found nizing words…than either semantic or syntactic cues” (p. 21), that Early Steps was highly effective, especially for those chil- and that “teaching children to decode by giving primacy to dren who were most at risk. semantic-contextual and syntactic-contextual cues over gra- In general, there are three major advantages in providing phemic-phonemic cues is equivalent to teaching them the way beginning and struggling readers with explicit and systematic weak readers read!” (p. 164). The use of letter-sound relation- instruction in orthographic patterns and word identification ships is the basic mechanism for acquiring word-specific (or strategies outside the context of reading connected text rather sight word) knowledge, including knowledge of irregularly than relying solely on “mini-lessons” given in response to stu- spelled words. dents’ oral reading errors during text reading. First, instruction In support of these claims, Chapman and colleagues (2001) in word analysis skills that is deliberately separated from mean- found in a longitudinal study of beginning literacy development ingful context allows students to give full attention to the letter- in New Zealand that students selected by their schools for RR sound patterns that are being taught, as well as avoid having were, without exception, experiencing severe difficulties in their text reading overly disrupted. Second, this instructional detecting sound sequences in words (i.e., phonological aware- approach helps students to learn word-decoding skills that may ness) and in relating letters to sounds (i.e., alphabetic coding) be useful in reading all texts, not just a specific text. Third, during the year preceding entry into the RR program. including isolated word study in beginning and remedial read- Participation in RR did not appreciably reduce these deficien- ing programs helps to ensure that struggling readers see the cies, and the failure to remedy these problems severely limited importance of focusing on word-level cues to identify unfamil- the immediate and long-term effectiveness of the program. iar words in text rather than using context to supplement word- Progress in learning to read following participation in RR was level information. As Pressley (2006) noted, one of the major strongly related to phonological processing skills at discontinu- distinguishing characteristics of struggling readers is their ten- ation from the program. Similar findings have been reported by dency to rely heavily on sentence context cues to compensate Center and colleagues (1995) in Australia, and by Iversen and for their deficient alphabetic coding skills. Tunmer (1993) in the United States. These considerations relate to the most serious shortcoming Changing the goal of word-level instruction in RR from of RR, which is the differential effectiveness of the program. The reading a specific text (with word analysis activities arising program appears to be beneficial for some struggling readers primarily from the student’s responses during text reading) to but not others, as indicated by the high percentage (around learning skills and strategies that may generalize to all texts, 15% in New Zealand but up to 30% elsewhere) of RR students does not mean adopting a rigid skill-and-drill approach in who do not complete the program but, instead, are “referred which word-level skills are largely taught in isolation with on” by their RR tutor for further assessment and possible addi- little or no connection to actual reading. Although struggling tional remedial assistance (Chapman et al., 2007; Elbaum et readers should receive explicit and systematic instruction in al., 2000). There is also New Zealand evidence that a signifi- letter-sound patterns and word identification strategies outside cant number of the lowest performing 6-year-olds are excluded the context of reading connected text, they should also be from RR because they are considered “not ready” or “less taught how and when to use this information during text likely” to benefit from the program than others, or are with- reading through demonstration, modeling, direct explanation, drawn early from the program because they failed to make and guided practice. It cannot be assumed that struggling “expected rates of progress” during the first few lessons readers who are successful in acquiring word analysis skills (Chapman et al., 2007). Such a practice inflates the results. will automatically transfer them when attempting to read con- And, as noted previously, many successful (i.e., discontinued) nected text. RR students do not maintain the gains made in the program. In support of these claims, Iversen and Tunmer (1993) found Reynolds and Wheldall (2007) found from their review of that the effectiveness of RR could be improved considerably by research on RR that the program “has not demonstrated that it incorporating more intensive and explicit instruction in phono- works for the students who are most at-risk for failing to learn logical awareness and the use of letter-sound relationships to read” (p. 213), leading them to conclude that “the success of (especially orthographic analogies), in combination with strate- the program appears to be inversely related to the severity of gy training on how and when to use this knowledge to identify the reading problem” (p. 209). words while reading text and to spell words while writing mes- sages. Morris and colleagues (2000) examined the effectiveness Conclusions of Early Steps, a first grade reading intervention program that is Changes in the instructional approach of RR have simply very similar to RR, especially in the emphasis it places on con- not kept pace with contemporary scientific research. As Church textual reading and writing. A fundamental difference, however, (2005) noted in a comprehensive review of research on accel- is that Early Steps also includes direct, systematic study of ortho- erating reading development in low achieving children, RR graphic patterns that is “purposefully isolated from meaningful Continued on page 24

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 23 Reading Recovery®: Does It Work? continued from page 23

…was designed in the 1970s prior to most of the modern McDowall, S., Boyd, S., & Hodgen, E., with van Vliet, T. (2005). Reading Recovery in research into how children learn to read. Not surpris- New Zealand: Uptake, implementation, and outcomes, especially in relation to Maori and Pasifika students. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational ingly, therefore, it lacks a number of elements which Research. have been found by research to be essential in teaching Morris, D., Tyner, B., & Perney, J. (2000). Early steps: Replicating the effects of a first- low achieving children how to read. The most notable grade reading international program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 681– omissions are the failure to assess phonemic awareness, 693. decoding fluency, or reading fluency, and the failure to Nicholson, T. (1989). A comment on Reading Recovery. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 24, 95–97. provide systematic instruction and practice on phone- Perfetti, C. A. (1992). The representation problem in reading acquisition. In P. Gough, mic awareness, decoding fluency and reading fluency to L. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 145–174). Hillsdale, NJ: those students who are lacking in these kinds of skills. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. These are major shortcomings. (p.13) Pinnell, G. S., Lyons, C. A., DeFord, D. E., Bryk, A., & Seltzer, M. (1994). Comparing instructional models for the literacy education of high at-risk first graders. Reading The WWC reports fall short in conveying important informa- Research Quarterly, 29, 8–39. tion relating to the effectiveness of the RR program. Therefore, Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: the case for balanced teaching. New York, NY: Guilford Press. we have argued (Tunmer & Chapman, 2003) that fundamental Reynolds, M., & Wheldall, K. (2007). Reading Recovery 20 years down the track: changes to the program, based on contemporary research, Looking forward, looking back. International Journal of Disability, Development, should occur and are very likely to improve the effectiveness of and Education, 54, 199–223. the program, both in terms of outcomes and cost. Reynolds, M., Wheldall, K., & Madelaine, A. (2009). The devil is in the detail regard- ing the efficacy of Reading Recovery: A rejoinder to Schwartz, Hobsbaum, Briggs, and Scull. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 56, References 17–35. Bloom, B. (1984). The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher, 13, 4–16. Shanahan, T., & Barr, R. (1995). Reading Recovery: An independent evaluation of the effects of an early instructional intervention for at-risk readers. Reading Research Center, Y., Freeman, L., & Robertson, G. (2001). The relative effect of a code-oriented Quarterly, 30, 958–996. and a meaning-oriented early literacy program on regular and low progress Australian students in year 1 classrooms which implement Reading Recovery. Smith, J. W. A., & Elley, W. B. (1994). Learning to read in New Zealand. Auckland, International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 48, 207–232. New Zealand: Longman Paul. Center, Y., Wheldall, K., Freeman, L., Outhred, L., & McNaught, M. (1995). An evalu- Soler, J., & Openshaw, R. (2006) Literacy crises and reading policy: Children still can’t ation of Reading Recovery. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 240–263. read. London, England and New York, NY: Routledge. Chapman, J. W., Greaney, K. T., & Tunmer, W. E. (2007). How well is Reading Spear-Swerling, L., & Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Off track: When poor readers become Recovery really working in New Zealand? New Zealand Journal of Educational “learning disabled.” Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Studies, 42, 17–29. Stanovich, K. E. (1991). Discrepancy definitions of reading disability: Has intelligence Chapman, J. W., Tunmer, W. E., & Prochnow, J. E. (2001). Does success in the led us astray? Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 7–29. Reading Recovery program depend on developing proficiency in phonological- Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2003). The Reading Recovery approach to preven- processing skills? A longitudinal study in a whole language instructional context. tive early intervention: As good as it gets? Reading Psychology, 24, 337–360. Scientific Studies in Reading, 5, 141–175. Wasik, B., & Slavin, R. (1993). Preventing early reading failure with one-to-one tutor- Church, J. (2005, December). Accelerating reading development in low achieving ing: A review of five programs. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 179–200. children: A review of research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the New What Works Clearinghouse. (2007). Reading Recovery. Retrieved from the Zealand Association for Research in Education, Christchurch, New Zealand. Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education website: Clay, M. M. (1979). The early detection of reading difficulties. Auckland, New http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/WWC_Reading_Recovery_031907.pdf Zealand: Heinemann. What Works Clearinghouse. (2008). Reading Recovery intervention report. Retrieved Clay, M. M. (1980). Reading Recovery: A follow-up study. New Zealand Journal of from the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education website: Educational Studies, 15, 137–55. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/wwc_reading_recovery_120208.pdf Clay, M. M. (1991). Becoming literate: The construction of inner control. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann. James Chapman, Ph.D., is professor of educational psychol- Clay, M. M. (1993). Reading Recovery. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann. ogy and Pro Vice-Chancellor of the College of Education Elbaum, B., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M., & Moody, S. (2000). How effective are one-to- one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? at Massey University. He has a Ph.D. in educational A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, psychology from the University of Alberta, Canada. His 92, 605–619. research activities have focused on motivational aspects of Glynn, T., Crooks, T., Bethune, N., Ballard, K., & Smith, J. (1989). Reading Recovery learning difficulties and more recently, on factors associated in context. Wellington: New Zealand Department of Education. with the acquisition of reading and the emergence of read- Gough, P. B., & Juel, C. (1991). The first stages of word recognition. In L. Rieben & ing difficulties/dyslexia. C. Perfetti (Eds.), Learning to read: Basic research and its implications (pp. 47–56). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hiebert, E. H. (1994). Reading Recovery in the United States: What difference does it Bill Tunmer, Ph.D., is a Distinguished Professor of Educa- make to an age cohort? Educational Researcher, 23, 15–25. tional Psychology in the College of Education at Massey Iversen, S., & Tunmer, W. E. (1993). Phonological processing skills and the Reading University, New Zealand, and co-author of the seminal Sim- Recovery program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 112–126. ple View of Reading. His Ph.D. is from the University of Texas Iversen, S., Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2005). The effects of varying group size at Austin. His research activities are in the acquisition of read- on the Reading Recovery approach to preventive early intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 456–172. ing and the emergence of reading difficulties/dyslexia.

24 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 25 Everything You Will Ever Need! The PAF Program includes all components of the RTI model



Three-year
sequence
for
reading,
spelling
and
handwriting



Research-based
instruction



Tools
for
continuous
monitoring
of

progress



Easily
used
in
all
RTI
instructional
tiers

Visit PAFprogram.com for more information about using PAF in the RTI model.

26 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association will I want to give every child the power to learn.

Intel® Reader

The Intel® Reader is changing lives. Created for people with reading-based learning disabilities such as dyslexia, this extraordinary mobile device takes a picture of printed text and converts it to the spoken word. It combines a high-resolution camera with the power of an Intel® Atom™ processor. Based on extensive assistive technology research, the Intel Reader is designed for real world participation—whether at school, home, or on the go.

Win an Intel Reader from Care Innovations for someone in your life.

Find out more at: Facebook.com/intelreader

The Intel Reader should not be relied on as the sole means of reading when a reading inconsistency or misreading of written text might put a person DWULVNIRUSHUVRQDOLQMXU\RUHFRQRPLFKDUP7KH,QWHO5HDGHULVQRWLQWHQGHGIRUUHDGLQJGDWDWKDWLVSULPDULO\PDWKHPDWLFDOVFLHQWL¿FRU¿QDQFLDO © 2011, Intel-GE Care Innovations, LLC. All rights reserved. Intel and the Intel corporate logo are trademarks of Intel Corporation in the United States and other countries, used under license. GE and the GE Monogram are trademarks of General Electric Company in the United States and other countries, used under license. All other third-party trademarks are the properties of their respective owners. Any use of the trademarks of Intel-GE Care Innovations, LLC (and its related companies) is prohibited without express written permission.

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 27 Matthew Effects and Reading Interventions

by Tom Nicholson and Sue Dymock

magine you are unable to read in a grade 1 classroom and all that “children who are reading well and who have good vocab- Iyour classmates can read. A specialist teacher takes you out of ularies will read more, learn more new word meanings, and the classroom for Reading Recovery® (RR) for half an hour each hence read even better. Children with inadequate vocabular- day, for three months. If you do not respond, then you will ies—who read slowly and without enjoyment—read less and, proceed to a third wave of instruction. By this time, you are in as a result, have slower development of vocabulary knowledge a different program. Someone takes you out of the classroom which in turn inhibits further growth in reading ability” for up to an hour for two or three days a week. By this time, you (p. 381). Stanovich, borrowing the term “Matthew effects” from are way behind your classmates, and you spend most of your previous articles on academic performance (Merton, 1968; classroom time doing unproductive work because you are Walberg & Tsai, 1983), suggested that similar “Matthew effects” unable to do the same work as everyone else. occurred in reading. Matthew effects in education implies that individuals who start their educational development with advantages are able to The ones who are not too far behind exploit instruction more effectively than those who lack these advantages, and this leads to a faster rate of development. The will progress well but the ones who concept is illustrated in the Bible’s Gospel according to are significantly behind in reading Matthew, “For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he will stay that way. shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath” (XXV: 29). The Matthew effects principle suggests that good readers get better at reading Tier 2 and 3 programs like RR rightly claim some success and poor readers get relatively worse. When Stanovich pub- because most children do improve from the extra instruction. lished his paper, there was only correlational evidence to sup- The problem is that Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions are replicat- port this possibility. As Stanovich pointed out, “correlational ing the same problem that occurs in the first year of instruction. evidence is much more plentiful than experimental evidence” Classroom teachers and specialists providing programs like RR (p. 379). Support was soon to come, however, when Juel (1988) have a wide range of pupils with widely different skill levels. reported Matthew effects in a longitudinal study of 54 children st th The ones who are not too far behind will progress well but the from 1 through 4 grade. By fourth grade, she found “a ones who are significantly behind in reading will stay that way. steadily widening gulf between the good and poor readers, What happens in the first year of school, recapitulates itself in both in and out of school” (p 445). Tier 2 and Tier 3 programs, where those who start with high The Matthew effects principle is relevant to the present levels of skills make good progress and those with low levels of study because it may explain the lack of progress of students skills do not. This is the Matthew effects phenomenon, where who start an intervention with low levels of reading skill. A the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Matthew effects explanation is that they are less able to benefit To explore this research question, “Are there Matthew from instruction than are pupils who start with higher levels of effects in remedial reading interventions?” we re-examined reading skill. Those pupils who start with higher levels of skill data from struggling readers that we had collected in an after can bootstrap themselves into reading more easily. Researchers school reading clinic over several years, to see if our tuition have noted for many years that students who start an interven- was equally effective for all our pupils or whether there were tion or a school class with higher reading skills will continue to rich get richer and poor get poorer effects. We looked at the have higher reading skills than those who start with lower skills pupils who benefited the most at the clinic, that is, those who (Clay, 1979; Torgesen, Rashotte, & Alexander, 2001). It may be reached the average range in reading, and compared them with that, whatever instructional approach we use, whether code- the ones who did not. We wondered whether the ones who based or meaning-based, there will still be students who do not reached the average range experienced rich get richer effects respond as well because they do not have a sufficient skill base compared with the ones who did not, and whether the ones to benefit from instruction to the same extent. who entered the clinic with better reading skills were the ones A research study relevant to the present study was an analy- who benefited most. sis of the lack of effectiveness of RR for students who started the program with low levels of reading skill. Chapman, Tunmer, & Rationale Prochnow (2001) wondered whether there was a relationship The rationale for the present study is that many interventions between the development of phonological processing skills do not work completely because of “Matthew effects.” and the effectiveness of RR. To answer this question, they exam- The concept of Matthew effects in reading made its first impact ined differences in phonological processing skills and other in the reading literature in the mid-1980s, in an article, aspects of reading performance between pupils who “partially “Matthew Effects in Reading.” Stanovich (1986) hypothesized benefited” from the program and those who had “minimal

28 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association benefit” (p. 164). To do the analysis, they formed two groups of predicted that we would find the same results as Chapman and pupils based on their word reading scores after they had com- colleagues (2001) found for RR but the results would be due, pleted RR. One group was the “partial benefits” group and the not to the inappropriateness of the intervention for pupils with other the “minimal benefits” group. low levels of reading skills, but because of Matthew effects, Data presented in their study showed that pupils who par- where the pupils with better skill levels gain more from the tially benefited started with significantly higher reading and instruction because their higher levels of skill enable them to reading-related scores than pupils who had minimal benefit benefit more from the instruction. We predicted that the stu- and finished RR with significantly higher reading scores than dents at the end of our program who were in the average range did those who gained minimal benefit. The researchers associ- of reading achievement will have started the program with ated the lack of effectiveness of RR with a failure to develop the higher skill levels than those who did not come up to average phonological processing skills of pupils who started the pro- at the end of the program. The reason is that the pupils with gram with low skill levels. The researchers wrote, “The failure higher skill levels did not have to go as far to get to the average of the RR program to eliminate the phonological processing range and they were in a better position, skills-wise, to profit difficulties of the discontinued children is not surprising from instruction because they had a more solid skill base than because systematic instruction in word level strategies is not a did those in the program with a lower skill base. central component of RR programs” (p. 171). The conclusion was that RR failed to help the “minimal benefits” group because Method it did not teach word-reading skills. Participants This suggestion may be correct but we think negative There were 190 participants in the study. The pupils had Matthew effects might be another possible explanation. completed a one-year program of reading tuition in an after- Matthew effects would make it impossible for RR to help pupils school reading center operated by the University in a large city gain as much from the same amount of instruction (RR only in New Zealand. The reading center had been operating for 5 gives a certain number of lessons) if those pupils have low skill years and some of the children in the sample had attended levels because they cannot respond as well as those pupils who reading lessons for more than just the 1 year. The ages of the start with higher levels of skills. pupils ranged from 5 to 15 years but nearly 80% were between This was our hypothesis and to see if it was correct we 7 and 12 years of age. The median age was 9 years. There were decided to look at data from our own reading tuition program. 127 boys and 63 girls. The students were mostly European The point of difference of our program from RR is that it does (85%) and Maori (10%). Parent occupations ranged widely but have a strong word-reading focus. The data for this study con- the median occupation was someone with skills, such as a sisted of case study records of students who had received salesperson, supervisor, farmer, or skilled tradesperson, such as weekly reading tuition at the Waikato University Children’s a carpenter. Reading Center over a five-year period. We hypothesized that if pupils in RR needed word-level Tutors instruction, then we should not find the same pattern of The tutors were University education students who were results in our data as for RR. On the other hand, if results from completing teacher qualifications. Tutors completed four 2-hour our program showed the same pattern of results as for RR then training sessions during the year and received ongoing supervi- it would suggest that a failure to bring up to average students sion and coaching during the year. The Reading Center had a who start an intervention with low levels of phonological manager who supervised the work of the tutors. One of the processing ability might be due to other factors than the meth- authors also attended tutoring sessions to observe progress and od of instruction. In particular, it might be due to the Matthew give assistance. effects principle. The intervention that we carried out had more focus on Measures phonological processing than RR but it was not purely code- The Neale Analysis of Reading Ability 3rd edition (Neale, based since it included reading of text. This is a positive thing. McKay, & Barnard, 1999) assessed passage reading accuracy Research indicates that the teaching of phonological recoding and reading comprehension. The test has parallel forms. Test- skills combined with reading practice helps less-skilled readers retest reliabilities for each form of the test were all above 0.90. (Denton & Vaughn, 2010; Iversen & Tunmer, 1993; Ryder, Students completed Form 1 of the test at the beginning of the Tunmer, & Greaney, 2008; Greaney, Tunmer, & Chapman, year and Form 2 of the test at the end of the year. 1997; Torgesen et al., 2001; Mathes et al., 2005). Researchers achieve better outcomes when there is a mix of skills and read- Design ing of text. A code-emphasis works better when students have The design of the study was to form two groups, “skilled” opportunities to practice and get feedback about their skills and “less skilled” and compare their reading and reading- through reading. A meaning emphasis that has opportunities to related scores at the beginning and end of the tuition program discuss the cipher in the context of reading is better than when and to compare the relative gains they made during the year. To the student has to induce the cipher with no discussion at all do this, we divided the two groups in terms of their stanine (Brady, in press; Tunmer & Arrow, submitted). scores at the end of the year. [The term stanine is an abbrevia- The research question for the present study asked, “Are tion for “standard nine.” It is a scale that breaks the normal there Matthew effects in remedial reading interventions?” We Continued on page 30

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 29 Matthew Effects and Reading Interventions continued from page 29 curve into nine categories, where stanine 5 is average achieve- into prefixes, root words, and suffixes (Calfee & Patrick, 1995; ment, stanine 1 is low achievement, and stanine 9 is excellent Henry, 2003). The teaching of syllable breaking skills helps less- achievement.] A score between stanines 1 and 3 is below aver- skilled readers to improve word reading skills, comprehension, age. Students in the average range achieve stanines between 4 and fluency (Diliberto, Beattie, Flowers, & Algozzine, 2009). and 6. Students in the above average achievement range For a small part of the lesson, 5 minutes, students practiced achieve stanines between 7 and 9. reading high frequency words (e.g., Fry, 2000; Dolch, 1936; The end-of-year stanines for Reading Comprehension Elley, Croft, & Cowie, 1977). Research indicates that less-skilled became the criterion for deciding if pupils had benefited from readers are better able to read high frequency words in sentence the reading tuition. The students who had stanine scores in the context than in isolation; whereas, skilled readers are equally average range or better, that is, stanines of 4 or above, became able to read high frequency words in either condition (Allington the “skilled” group. The students who had stanine scores below & Fleming, 1978). Tutors timed their speed and recorded the the average range, that is, between stanines 1 and 3, became the time on their lesson plan each week. Iversen, Tunmer, and “less skilled” group. This was not an arbitrary division. It is tak- Chapman (2005) included teaching high frequency words as ing the pupils at the end of the program who had come up to part of a modified RR program that achieved successful results. average and comparing them with the pupils who had not come They argued that practice with high frequency words was up to average to see why one group had reached the average “cementing them into lexical memory (Share, 1995)” (p. 459). range or better and the other had not. It was the same principle Spelling was a small part of the lesson, about 5 minutes. as used by Chapman et al. (2001) in their analysis of RR. Tutors selected high frequency words, pupil spelled them, and then the pupil self-corrected the spelling miscues if there Procedure were any. The participants applied for entry to the tuition program In the comprehension discussion part of the lesson, about 5 minutes, tutors focused on the structure of the text, such as nar- through their parents or through referrals from schools. Parents rative structure (characters, plot, setting, theme) and expository completed an application form and signed a consent form for text structure (descriptive and sequential) (Dymock & Nicholson, their child to participate in the research. The research had 2011; Calfee & Patrick, 1995). At the end of each lesson, tutors University ethics approvals. Pupils attended the center for a assigned pupils some text reading for home. 1-hour lesson once a week during the school year. Each lesson had the same components with fixed times Results allocated (see Table 1): The research question asked, “Are there Matthew effects in remedial reading interventions?” We predicted that there would TABLE 1. Time Allocated Per Component be a significant difference between the skilled and less skilled groups at the beginning and at the end of the year. We also pre- Teaching Focus Minutes dicted that the skilled group would show rich get richer effects Phonological 25 and the less skilled group would show poor get poorer effects. Table 3 shows the means and standard deviations of the Reading high frequency words 5 start of year and end of year stanine scores for reading accuracy Reading connected text 15 and reading comprehension for both the less skilled and more skilled groups. The results in Table 2 show that the more skilled Comprehension strategy instruction 5 group had higher stanine levels at the start of the year than did the less skilled group. The skilled group, as can be seen in Spelling strategies 5 Figures 1 and 2 (see page 32), also made greater stanine gains during the year in reading accuracy and reading comprehen- The lessons combined a mix of code-based teaching of skills, sion than did the less skilled group. The greater gains occurred some spelling practice, reading of extended text, and a focus on for reading accuracy and comprehension. At the start of the comprehension (see Table 2). The phonological part of the les- year, the chronological age of less skilled pupils was 9.61 son took 25 minutes, about 40% of the lesson, followed by 15 years. The chronological age of more skilled pupils was 10.33 minutes of reading practice on text that was of suitable reading years. To take account of this age difference, we carried out difficulty, and finishing with 5 minutes of comprehension dis- analyses of covariance but the pattern of results was almost cussion. Each tutor had a reading plan of skills to teach. The Test identical, that is, the more skilled group still made greater gains of Basic Decoding Skills (Bryant, 1975, reproduced in Nicholson, during the year than did the less skilled group. 2006) was the diagnostic instrument used to decide which skills We carried out separate analyses for each of the five years to teach. For example, the student might start with consonant that the program had been operating to take account of the fact digraphs or long vowel sounds, and move to other vowel com- that some children had attended multiple years, and the results binations. A more advanced plan started with syllable breaking were the same each year. The more skilled poor readers made skills and moved to more advanced skills of breaking words more progress than the less skilled.

30 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association TABLE 2. Basic Lesson Structure

Lesson Plan #______Date:______

Word reading practice Spelling practice Or – Turtletalk Use a list of high frequency words (e.g., Nicholson, 2006) Select a spelling rule and use 5 Select 6 words from the regular words to illustrate. story for today and ask a Write below the words you are pupil to tell you out loud Time in seconds: ______assessing. 1) how many phonemes 1. in the word, Miscues _____ 2. 2) to say each phoneme 3. slowly, and 4. 3) spell the words 5.

Phonological recoding Reading practice OR (Based on Calfee & Patrick, 1995; Moats, 2010) Title: Questions to answer What rule are you teaching? (circle one) Reading Level: OR Single consonants, e.g., fun, fat 1. Story Comprehension 1. Select 12 hard words Consonant digraphs, e.g., ship, chip a. Characters from the story Silent e rule (or “split digraph”), e.g., mat, mate b. Setting 2. Write 12 sentence flashcards, one for r and l affected vowels, e.g., bird, her, car, for, fur, all c. Plot each word Vowel digraphs, e.g., rain, ray; toy, toil d. Message 3. Pupil reads each Simple prefixes (e.g., re-, un-) and suffixes ( e.g., -er, -ing, ed, s) OR sentence quickly c and g followed by e, e.g., race, stage 2. Non-Fiction Comprehension 4. Pupils reads the text 6 types of syllable, e.g., rab-bit, ro-bot, gar-den, pi-rate, fif-teen, a. Structure (web, weave, aloud to tutor sequence) can-dle 5. Write 12 questions Greek (e.g., atmo-sphere, agora-phobia) and Latin (e.g., magic-ian, about the story – offic-ial) pupil has to answer the questions

TABLE 3. Stanine Means and Standard deviations (in brackets) for Less Skilled and More Skilled Poor Readers for Reading Accuracy and Reading Comprehension

Less skilled poor readers More skilled poor readers Measures N = 108 N = 82

Start of Year

Reading Accuracy 1.30 (.55) 2.46 (1.03)

Reading Comprehension 1.29 (.61) 2.41 (1.20)

End of Year

Reading Accuracy 2.12 (1.05) 4.28 (1.11)

Reading Comprehension 2.06 (.85) 4.83 (.94)

Continued on page 32

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 31 Matthew Effects and Reading Interventions continued from page 31

As shown in Figures 1 and 2 the more skilled group made Figure 1. Reading accuracy rate of progress as measured in stanines for more responsive (more skilled) poor readers compared with less respon- greater gains in reading accuracy and reading comprehension sive (less skilled) poor readers during the year than did the less skilled group. This pattern of 4.5 results indicates the operation of rich get richer Matthew effects for those who started the year with higher initial reading status, 4 and poor get poorer Matthew effects for those who started with 3.5 lower initial reading status. 3

2.5 Discussion The research question asked, “Are there Matthew effects in 2 More responsive Less responsive remedial reading interventions?” The results of the present 1.5 study suggest that differences in initial reading status of 1 unskilled readers when starting an intervention will benefit those pupils who start with higher levels of reading skill. They 0.5 are able to gain more from the instruction because they have a 0 stronger base of reading skills. The initial differences will cause Start of Year End of Year rich get richer and poor get poorer Matthew effects. The criticism of RR that it does not help these relatively low- Figure 2. Reading comprehension rate of progress as measured in stanines for more responsive (more skilled) poor readers compared with less skilled pupils because it does not teach word-level reading responsive (less skilled) poor readers skills may not be correct. The present study taught word-level reading skills and the same problem occurred that students 6 with low levels of reading skill did not respond as well to the 5 intervention as pupils with higher levels of reading skill. It may be that other studies that have found a lack of 4 response to instruction from some pupils need to consider the possibility of negative Matthew effects for those pupils who 3 started the intervention with scores lower than the majority of More responsive the poor readers who received the intervention. They may not Less responsive 2 need a different approach so much as a higher dosage of instruction (Blachman, 1997; Torgesen, 2000; Vellutino, Scanlon 1 & Lyon, 2000; Al Otaiba & Fuchs, 2006). We may be on the wrong path if we argue too much about the relative merits of 0 code-based and meaning-based instruction because research Start of Year End of Year indicates that whatever approach we use, some students will not benefit as much as will others (Nicholson & Tunmer, 2011; Conclusion Tunmer & Nicholson, 2011). The only way to stop negative Matthew effects is to differen- Matthew effects do not have to happen but we tend to let tiate in terms of dosage. Children who start school with few them happen because we assume that all students will respond prereading skills are at risk. They have to acquire essential pre- to our interventions. Seltzer, Choi, and Thum (2003) found reading skills as quickly as possible. The best way to do this is evidence of Matthew effects in an analysis of longitudinal data to give them much more instruction than is provided to regular from several schools. In one school, rates of progress of stu- pupils, and to do it as soon as possible. dents with low initial levels of achievement were “minimal” The impact of Matthew effects on treatment is very impor- (p. 273) whereas average students progressed at much faster tant and we think our study adds a new perspective. The results rates. These researchers argued it does not have to be this way raise the issue of whether “response to intervention” has any- and they gave as an example a school where rates of growth thing at all to do with the kind of instruction, as is suggested in were similar for students with high, average, and low initial other research. We are questioning whether the lack of response status levels of achievement. They argued that schools need to of some poor readers is really due to initial differences in read- look at their programs and figure out what they are doing (e.g., ing skills among pupils, as suggested in the Matthew effects tracking, which is a kind of high-dosage instructional experi- literature. We are also questioning the view that lack of ence for the top students who are given more challenging response to intervention is due to poor instruction. We are say- teaching, compared with negative Matthew effects for the ing instead that it is due to the fact that those who begin lower ability students who get less challenging teaching) that is instruction with higher levels of skill will gain more from the enabling some students to experience positive Matthew effects instruction—whatever it is—as explained in the Matthew effects while others experience negative Matthew effects. literature. Those who do not gain so much are experiencing

32 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association poor get poorer effects but they can be turned around if they Mathes, P. G., Denton, C. A., Fletcher, J. M., Anthony, J. L., Francis, D. J., & get a higher dosage of treatment. It is true that some programs Schatschneider, C. (2005). The effects of theoretically different instruction and students characteristics on the skills of struggling readers. Reading Research may work faster than others, but most interventions work for Quarterly, 40, 148–182. most pupils. The ones who do not respond can benefit, too, but Merton, R. (1968). The Matthew effect in science. Science, 56–63. only if the dosage is more than for those who are skilled. Moats, L. C. (2000). Speech to print. Language essentials for teachers. Baltimore, MD: Rather than changing instruction, our results make a strong Paul H. Brookes. case for a higher dosage of instruction at the beginning of Neale, M. D., McKay, M. F., & Barnard, J. (1999). Neale analysis of reading ability (3rd instruction for those who start with lower levels of skills than ed.). Hawthorn, Melbourne, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research. the average group of struggling readers. We may be headed Nicholson, T. (2006). Phonics handbook. Chichester, England: Wiley-Blackwell. down the wrong path when we ask which is better for less skilled, poor readers—focusing on meaning or skills. A more Nicholson, T., & Tunmer, W. E. (2011). Reading: The great debate. In C. Rubie-Davies (Ed.), Educational psychology: Concepts, research, and challenges (pp. 36–50). productive question is how can we provide a higher dosage of London: Routledge. instruction (whatever it is) than that given to those pupils who Ryder, J. F., Tunmer, W. E., & Greaney, K. T. (2008). Explicit instruction in phonemic enter intervention programs with the advantage, from the awareness and phonemically based decoding skills as an intervention strategy for beginning, of higher level skills. struggling readers in whole language classrooms. Reading and Writing, 21, 349– 369. Seltzer, M., Choi, K., & Thum, Y. M. (2003). Examining relationships between where References students start and how rapidly they progress: Using new developments in growth Allington, R. L., & Fleming, J. T. (1978). The misreading of high-frequency words. The modeling to gain insight into the distribution of achievement within schools. Journal of Special Education, 12, 417–421. Educational evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 263–286. Al Otaiba, S. A., & Fuchs, D. (2006). Who are the young children for whom best Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading practices in reading are ineffective? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 414–431. acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151–218. Blachman, B. A. (1997). Early intervention and phonological awareness: A cautionary Stanovich, K. S. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual tale. In B. A. Blachman (Ed.), Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia (pp. differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360– 409–430). Mahwah, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum. 407. Brady, S. (in press). Efficacy of phonics teaching for reading outcomes: Indications from Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., & Alexander, A. W. (2001). Principles of fluency post NRP research. In S. Brady, D. Braze, and C. Fowler (Eds.), Explaining individu- instruction in reading: Relationships with established empirical outcomes. al differences in reading: Theory and evidence. New York, NY: Psychology Press. In M. Wolf (Ed.), Dyslexia, fluency, and the brain (pp. 335–355). Timonium, MD: Bryant, N. D. (1975). Bryant test of basic decoding skills. New York, NY: Teachers York Press. College Press. Torgesen, J. K. (2000). Individual differences in response to interventions in reading: Calfee, R. C., & Patrick, C. L. (1995). Teach our children well: Bringing K–12 education The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research and into the 21st century. Stanford, CA: Stanford Alumni. Practice, 15, 55–64. Chapman, J. W., Tunmer, W. E., & Prochnow, J. E. (2001). Does success in the Reading Tunmer, W. E., & Arrow, A. (submitted). Reading: Phonics instruction. Unpublished Recovery program depend on developing proficiency in phonological processing manuscript, Massey University. skills? A longitudinal study in a whole language instructional context. Scientific Tunmer, W. E., & Nicholson, T. (2011). The development and teaching of word recog- Studies of Reading, 5, 141–176. nition skill. In M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, & P. B. Afflerbach (Eds.), Clay, M. M. (1979). The early detection of reading difficulties: A diagnostic survey with Handbook of reading research (Vol. 4, pp. 405–431). New York: Routledge. recovery procedures. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann. Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., & Lyon, G. R. (2000). Differentiating between Denton, C. A., & Vaughn, S. (2010). Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: More evidence against Perspectives from research. In T. A. Glover & S. Vaughn (Eds.), The promise of the IQ-achievement discrepancy definition of reading disability. Journal of Learning response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice (pp. 78–112). Disabilities, 33, 223–238. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Walberg, H. J., & Tsai, S. (1983). Matthew effects in education. American Educational Diliberto, J. A., Beattie, J. R., Flowers, C. P., & Algozzine, R. F. (2009). Effects of teach- Research Journal, 20, 359–373. ing syllable skills instruction on reading achievement in struggling middle school readers. Literacy Research and Instruction, 48, 14–27. Dolch, E. W. (1936). A basic sight vocabulary. Elementary School Journal, 36, 456– Tom Nicholson, Ph.D., is a professor in the School of Educa- 460. tion at Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand, with Dymock, S. J., & Nicholson, T. (2011). Teaching reading comprehension. Wellington, interests in research methods, reading development, read- New Zealand: New Zealand Council for Educational Research Press. ing difficulties, and child development. His Ph.D. is from the Elley, W., Croft, C., & Cowie, C. (1977). A New Zealand basic word list. Wellington, University of Minnesota. He has been an adviser to the New Zealand: New Zealand Council for Educational Research. government on National Standards in Reading, Writing and Fry, E. F. (2000). 1000 instant words: The most common words for teaching reading, Mathematics and is a member of the International Reading writing, and spelling. Westminster, CA: Teacher Created Materials. Association Hall of Fame. Tom is author of Phonics Hand- Greaney, K. T., Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (1997). Effects of rime-based orthographic analogy training on the word recognition skills of pupils with book (2006), published by Wiley-Blackwell. reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 645–651. Henry, M. (2003). Unlocking literacy: Effective decoding and spelling instruction. Sue Dymock, Ph.D., is a senior lecturer at the University of Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes. Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. Dr. Dymock has pub- Iversen, S., & Tunmer, W. E. (1993). Phonological processing skills and the Reading lished articles, chapters, and books on teaching reading Recovery program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 112–126. comprehension and vocabulary. She is also a regular pre- Iversen, S., Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2005). The effects of varying group size senter at international and national conferences including on the Reading Recovery approach to preventive early intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 456–472. the International Reading Association Annual Convention. Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 pupils from Sue directs the Hamilton Reading Centre, a clinic for chil- first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437–447. dren experiencing reading difficulties.

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 33 TEACHING BASIC WRITING SKILLS offers evidence-based techniques to add structure, coherence, and clarity to students’ writing. The activities can be adapted for a wide range of abilities and have been successfully implemented in primary through secondary grades in all subjects. The book:

includes 9 posters and interactive templates (CD-Rom). provides a developmental sequence of activities and goals for  constructing sentences, paragraphs and compositions.

provides strategies for summarizing, outlining, revising and editing.

1 (800) 547-6747 WWWSOPRISWESTCOMTBWSsWWWTEACHWRITINGSKILLSCOM

34 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association The Emergent Literacy Approach to Effective Teaching and Intervention

by Alison W. Arrow and Claire McLachlan

earning to read is one of the most fundamental achievements necessary, but not individually sufficient, for the acquisition of Lin Western society, with literacy being required for success literacy (e.g., Muter, 1994). Each has a different role to play in at higher and higher levels, even as technology develops. the development of literacy, but together they form the basis for However, not everyone leaves education systems with the abil- the acquisition of the alphabetic principle, which is the under- ity to read or write to any functional level (Chapman & Tunmer, standing that speech sounds in spoken words are represented 2011). As poor achievers move on through the schooling sys- by graphemes in print (Moats, 2000). The combined knowledge tem the blame tends to move back to beginning classrooms, to means that children can use letters and their sounds to make parents, and early childhood education teachers. The reasons phonemically correct representations of words when both for failure to learn to read are varied and complex for many reading and spelling (Nicholson, 2005). With regards to oral learners, but we can also pinpoint literacy education that con- language, the depth and breadth of receptive vocabulary con- tinues to teach poor readers the strategies of poor readers tributes to comprehension (Tannenbaum, Torgesen, & Wagner, (Pressley, 2006). An approach to reading instruction that 2006) and aids in decoding and word recognition (Tunmer & builds on the experiences of children prior to school entry Chapman, in press). offers alternative possibilities for success. This article outlines Phonological awareness is linked to the acquisition and the emergent literacy approach to literacy which recognizes the development of literacy at school (see Anthony & Francis, cognitive skills that children have when they begin school. 2005; Stuart, 2005). Children with greater phonological aware- These skills should then be identified and addressed in effective ness at kindergarten or at school entry tend to be better readers classroom instruction to minimize the need for intervention. (e.g., Sprenger-Charolles & Casalis, 1995). Phonological aware- When intervention is required, it should be explicitly focused ness is most commonly understood to be a single ability that on any of the emergent literacy components, phonological manifests itself in different ways at different points throughout awareness, alphabet knowledge, and vocabulary, for the best development (Anthony & Francis, 2005). Word and syllable chance of success. awareness develops early on, usually during the years of early childhood, while more advanced awareness of rimes and pho- The Emergent Literacy Approach nemes develop later (Anthony & Francis, 2005). Rime aware- The emergent literacy approach to literacy acquisition rec- ness includes the ability to distinguish between words that ognizes that literacy acquisition is on a continuum of develop- rhyme and words that do not rhyme, and the more complex ment. Emergent literacy is usually defined as the period of time manipulation task of producing rhyming words. Based on the between birth and the start of formal, conventional literacy assumption that phonological awareness is a single unified (Sulzby & Teale, 1991). The emergent literacy approach to lit- ability, it is expected that rime awareness would contribute to eracy acquisition includes the period of emergent literacy and the future development of phoneme awareness (Lonigan, the period of learning to read and write in conventional ways Burgess, & Anthony, 2000), thus by teaching children rime (Snow, Griffen, & Burns, 2005). This approach recognizes that awareness it may contribute to the development of literacy, there is literate knowledge that is necessary for the act of learn- mediated by phoneme awareness. At the furthermost end of the ing to read, that usually develops during the early years of life, continuum is phoneme manipulation, which includes the abil- and that this knowledge leads to conventional literacy acquisi- ity to delete and substitute phonemes. Closer to the center of tion. The act of learning to read is, therefore, on a continuum, the continuum is a sensitivity to phonemes, which is the ability with early literacy abilities necessary for the acquisition of later to identify if two phonemes are the same or different. developing conventional reading abilities. The conventional An increasing number of studies demonstrate that alphabet reading abilities are a progressive accumulation of skill, knowl- knowledge provides beginning readers with the knowledge edge, and strategy that allows the reader to accurately read and necessary to make connections between the spoken word and make sense of increasingly complex texts, and the writer to its print representation. Letter-name knowledge has been found construct and write texts of increasing complexity. There is, as to influence children’s early spelling attempts and can make Whitehurst and Lonigan (1998, p. 848) argue, “no clear demar- learning to read easier, if the words contain letter-name cues, cation between reading and pre-reading.” such as JRF for giraffe (Ehri & Wilce, 1985). The second way Cognitive skills and knowledge such as letter-knowledge, children may make use of alphabet knowledge is to use their oral language, and awareness of sounds in words (phonological knowledge of letter-sounds. This may be one of the more awareness) are the key components of emergent literacy important skills that children develop for attempting new and (Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998). Phonological awareness and unfamiliar words. Arrow (2007) found that if children had alphabet knowledge form part of the inside-out processes that good letter-sound knowledge they were able to make phone- comprise emergent literacy (Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998). mically correct attempts at spelling unfamiliar words. This is These two sets of knowledge are generally believed to be Continued on page 36

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 35 Emergent Literacy Approach continued from page 35 commensurate with the understanding that the best way for nizes that children will learn by being immersed in literate children to learn to break the alphabetic code is to learn letter- environments, much as it is best facilitated within environ- sounds in conjunction with phonological awareness (e.g., ments in which children are immersed in the uses of literacy Foorman et al., 2003). and see it being valued within their community (McNaughton, Vocabulary is increasingly being recognized as a key con- 1995; Tolchinsky, 2004). This literacy immersion allows chil- tributor to literacy development (Senechal, Ouellette, & Rodney, dren to appropriate literacy knowledge (Sonnenschein, 2002), 2006). Vocabulary is defined as both oral language and the with more frequent literacy engagement and interaction lead- storage of word meanings. The effects of vocabulary on other ing to the development of cognitive literacy skills (Sonnenschein forms of emergent literacy are three-fold. First, the depth of & Munsterman, 2002). All forms of culturally and socially con- vocabulary has influences on phonological awareness. As structed literacy practices can lead to relevant emergent litera- vocabulary increases, words are represented in the lexicon in cy, regardless of language (McBride-Chang & Kail, 2002). an increasingly segmented manner from words to phonemes Teachers can make use of the diversity of practices in interac- (Walley, Metsala, & Garlock, 2003). Second, vocabulary has tion with the literacy practices used in school settings (Makin, effects on comprehension, whereby children will not be able to Jones Diaz, & McLachlan, 2007). What the whole-language make meaning from text if they do not have the vocabulary to approach does not do is explicitly identify and recognize the support the text reading. Third, there may a direct connection cognitive, inside-out components that are necessary for the between being able to work words out using explicit strategies acquisition of conventional literacy. and the level of vocabulary knowledge (Ouellette & Beers, Phonics instruction, on the other hand, recognizes the cog- 2010). nitive skills that children may begin with and provides a ”kick- start” to phonological decoding for children who come to Teaching Practices reading with little emergent literacy skills, and who tend to rely The strongest schools of thought around literacy education mostly on picture cues, partial visual cues, and sentence con- are based on whole-language and phonics instruction. Whole- text cues, with little interaction between the graphemes of language approaches have, at their core, an emphasis on the printed words and phonemes of spoken words (Tunmer & ”natural learning” of reading, which is based on the assumption Greaney, 2010). For these children the word recognition skills that learning to read is similar to learning to speak (Goodman that the inside-out emergent literacy components lead to & Goodman, 1979; Smith, 1999). The reading of unfamiliar remain weak because they are unable to develop a rich net- words is thought to make use of multiple cues in text; text work of stored relationships between graphemes and pho- meaning, sentence structure, visual, and phonological (Clay & nemes. The use of inefficient word recognition processes make Cazden, 1990; see also Stuart, Stainthorp, & Snowling, 2008). the reading of text capacity draining, with less capacity for Children are expected to use these cues from the start of learn- comprehending the text being read, even if the language and ing to read and to build the use of multiple cues into a “self- experiences of the child are similar to those in the text being improving system” (Clay & Cazden, 1990, p. 207). That is, the read (Pressley, 2006). What the phonics approach does not do more children read, the better they are at making use of the four is recognize the importance of the different forms of literacy cues. However, the cues are not all equal, according to this practices that are relevant to children from diverse language view, as text meaning is paramount, and teachers should not and ethnic backgrounds (Makin, Jones Diaz, & McLachlan, dwell on the detail of print (Clay & Cazden, 1990). It is this 2007. view that also underpins the practices within the Reading Recovery® (RR) program. Reading Difficulties and Interventions Scarborough and Brady (2002) define phonics as “an Regardless of which classroom reading program is adopted, approach to, or type of, reading instruction that is intended to there will always be children who are not a good fit. Connor promote the discovery of the alphabetic principle, the corre- and colleagues (Connor, Morrison, & Katch, 2004; Connor, spondences between phonemes and graphemes, and phono- Morrison, & Slominski, 2006; Connor, Morrison, & Underwood, logical decoding” (p. 326). This definition highlights the 2007; Connor, et al., 2009) have shown that children’s emer- purpose of phonics, which is to teach the alphabetic principle gent literacy knowledge is an influence on their ability to learn to enable children to learn to read words through induced within the classroom reading program. Children who have phonological decoding. Phonological decoding is the ability to come to conventional literacy instruction with large amounts of implicitly map letters and letter-patterns to phonemes (Tunmer emergent literacy abilities in phonological awareness, alphabet & Arrow, in press). Instruction that provides the learner with a knowledge, and vocabulary, typically need less teacher man- firm grasp of the alphabetic principle allows children to come aged code-focused instruction than children who begin formal to the explicit realization that speech maps onto print, and that schooling with less emergent literacy abilities. There is growing looking more closely at the spellings of words enables them to evidence that the types of literacy opportunities and pedago- find out how this mapping occurs (Snow & Juel, 2005). gies that children experience in early childhood settings influ- Both approaches to instruction recognize the period of ence how well they make the transition to conventional literacy. emergent literacy, but in different ways. Whole-language recog- Early childhood teachers with a well calibrated knowledge of

36 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association literacy can bridge differences in children’s background experi- References ences and individual abilities to aid the acquisition of these Anthony, J. L., & Francis, D. J. (2005). Development of phonological awareness. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 255–259. predictors of reading achievement (Cunningham, Perry, Arrow, A. W. (2007). Potential precursors to the development of phonological aware- Stanovich, & Stanovich, 2004; Phillips, Clancy-Menchetti, & ness in preschool children. Ph.D. doctoral thesis, University of Auckland, New Lonigan, 2008; Cunningham, Zibulsky, & Callahan, 2009; Zealand. Justice, Kaderavek, Fan, Sofka, & Hunt, 2009; Piasta & Wagner, Chapman, J. W., & Tunmer, W. E. (2011). Gender, ethnicity and literacy performance 2010; Wasik, 2010). Children with greater amounts of emer- among young adults: When more seems to result in less. Paper presented at the Workshop on Gender, Ethnicity and Education: Should we be worried about young gent literacy do better when they engage in instruction that is men and, if so, which ones?, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. more child-managed and more meaning-focused, similar to Clay, M. M. (2002). An observation survey: Of early literacy achievement (2nd ed.). that underpinning the whole-language approach, and the RR Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann Education. approach to intervention (see also, Juel & Minden-Cupp, 2000; Clay, M. M., & Cazden, C. B. (1990). A Vygotskian interpretation of Reading Recovery. Tunmer, Chapman, & Prochnow, 2003, 2006). When children In L. C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applica- tions of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 206–222). Cambridge, United Kingdom: come to school with less phonological awareness, alphabet Cambridge University Press. knowledge, and vocabulary, they need more teacher managed Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., & Katch, L. E. (2004). Beyond the reading wars: code focused instruction to provide the “kick-start” to begin- Exploring the effect of child-instruction interactions on growth in early reading. ning to read effectively. Scientific Studies of Reading, 8, 305–336. The RR model of reading intervention that is developed from Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., & Slominski, L. (2006). Preschool instruction and chil- a philosophy of whole-language teaching does not directly pro- dren’s emergent literacy growth. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 665–689. vide instruction in the components of emergent literacy that Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., & Underwood, P. S. (2007). A second chance in second grade: The independent and cumulative impact of first- and second-grade reading may still be necessary for individual children. Although the instruction and students’ letter-word reading skill growth. Scientific Studies of instruction is said to include phonological awareness and pho- Reading, 11, 199–233. nics, they are incidental rather than the core part of the inter- Connor, C. M., Piasta, S. B., Fishman, B., Glasney, S., Schatschneider, C., Crowe, E., vention (Clay, 2002; Clay & Cazden, 1990). Additionally, the Underwood, P., & Morrison, F. J. (2009). Individualizing student instruction pre- cisely: Effects of child instruction interactions on first graders literacy development. model specifies that children are not in need of intervention Child Development, 80, 77–100. until after a year of instruction, so on the child’s sixth birthday Cunningham, A. E., Perry, K. E., Stanovich, K. E., & Stanovich, P. J. (2004). Disciplinary in New Zealand, where school entry is on the child’s 5th birth- knowledge of K–3 teachers and their knowledge calibration in the domain of early day, or in first grade after a year of instruction in kindergarten in literacy. Annals of Dyslexia, 54(1), 139–167. the United States. The RR approach will work well for children Cunningham, A. E., Zibulsky, J., & Callahan, M. D. (2009). Starting small: Building preschool teacher knowledge that supports early literacy development. Reading who have all of the emergent literacy skills, but for some reason and Writing, 22, 487–510. have not managed to work out phonological decoding. When Ehri, L. C., & Wilce, L. S. (1985). Movement into reading: Is the first stage of printed RR programs have been modified to better suit children who do word learning visual or phonetic? Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 163–177. not have emergent literacy abilities, the program works faster Foorman, B. R., Chen, D.-T., Carlson, C., Moats, L., David, J. F., & Jack, M. F. (2003). than the standard program itself (Iversen & Tunmer, 1993). The necessity of the alphabetic principle to phonemic awareness instruction. Reading & Writing, 16, 289–324. Goodman, K. S., & Goodman, Y. M. (1979). Learning to read is natural. In L. B. Summary Resnick & P. A. Weaver (Eds.), Theory and practice of early reading (Vol. 1, pp. The act of learning to read does not begin at the beginning 137–154). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. of conventional literacy instruction in formal school contexts. Iversen, S., & Tunmer, W. E. (1993). Phonological processing skills and the Reading The act of learning to read begins from birth, through the devel- Recovery program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 112–126. opment of emergent literacy. When children do not achieve in Juel, C., & Minden-Cupp, C. (2000). Learning to read words: Linguistic units and instructional strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 458–504. reading in the classroom the most common reason is because Justice, L. M., Kaderavek, J. N., Fan, X., Sofka, A., & Hunt, A. (2009). Accelerating they did not start school with levels of emergent literacy that preschoolers’ early literacy development through classroom-based teacher-child are necessary for conventional reading ability to develop and storybook reading and explicit print referencing. Language, Speech and Hearing have had limited opportunities in which to develop these. The Services in Schools, 40, 67–85. abilities of such children will be earlier in the continuum of Lonigan, C. J., Burgess, S. R., & Anthony, J. L. (2000). Development of emergent literacy and early reading skills in preschool children: Evidence from a latent- literacy abilities. Reading interventions can start as early as the variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 36, 596–613. beginning of the first year of schooling, once the levels of pho- Makin, L., Jones Diaz, C., & McLachlan, C. J. (Eds.). (2007). Literacies in childhood: nological awareness, alphabet knowledge, and vocabulary Changing views, challenging practice. Sydney, Australia: Elsevier. have been assessed. In this way, the majority of intervention McBride-Chang, C., & Kail, R. V. (2002). Cross-cultural similarities in the predictors of will be effective classroom practice where the levels of teacher- reading acquisition. Child Development, 73, 1392–1407. managed, child-managed, code-focused, meaning-focused McNaughton, S. (1995). Patterns of emergent literacy. Oxford, United Kingdom: instruction are balanced for the needs of the children in the Oxford University Press. classroom. If this is not effective, then more intensive instruc- Moats, L. C. (2000). Speech to print: Language essentials for teachers. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes. tion in the lacking skills are necessary. Although RR may be Muter, V. (1994). Influence of phonological awareness and letter knowledge on begin- effective for children who already have had effective instruction ning reading and spelling development. In C. Hulme & M. Snowling (Eds.), or started school with emergent literacy knowledge and are still Reading development and dyslexia (pp. 45–62). London, United Kingdom: Whurr. not achieving in the classroom, it may not be effective for chil- Nicholson, T. (2005). At the cutting edge: The importance of phonemic awareness in dren who do not start school with sufficient levels of emergent learning to read and spell. Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER Press. literacy abilities. Continued on page 38

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 37 Emergent Literacy Approach continued from page 37

Ouellette, G., & Beers, A. (2010). A not-so-simple view of reading: How oral vocabu- Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (in press). Does set for variability mediate the influ- lary and visual-word recognition complicate the story? Reading and Writing, 23, ence of vocabulary knowledge on the development of word recognition skills? 189–208. Scientific Studies of Reading. Phillips, B. M., Clancy-Menchetti, J., & Lonigan, C. (2008). Successful phonological Tunmer, W. E., Chapman, J. W., & Prochnow, J. E. (2003). Preventing negative awareness instruction with preschool children. Topics in Early Childhood Special Matthew effects in at-risk readers: A retrospective study. In B. R. Foorman (Ed.), Education, 28(1), 3–17. Ingredients of effective preventions and interventions for children at risk of reading Piasta, S. B., & Wagner, R. K. (2010). Developing early literacy skills: A meta-analysis difficulties or with identified reading disabilities (pp. 121–163). Baltimore, MD: of alphabet learning and instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(1), 8–38. York Press. Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced literacy Tunmer, W. E., Chapman, J. W., & Prochnow, J. E. (2006). Literate cultural capital at instruction (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press. school entry predicts later reading achievement: A seven year longitudinal study. Scarborough, H. S., & Brady, S. A. (2002). Toward a common terminology for talking New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 41, 183–204. about speech and reading: A glossary of the “phon” words and some related terms. Tunmer, W. E., & Greaney, K. T. (2010). Defining dyslexia. Journal of Learning Journal of Literacy Research, 34, 299–336. Disabilities, 43, 229–243. Senechal, M., Ouellette, G., & Rodney, D. (2006). The misunderstood giant: On the Walley, A. C., Metsala, J. L., & Garlock, V. M. (2003). Spoken vocabulary growth: Its predictive role of early vocabulary to future reading. In D. K. Dickinson & S. B. role in the development of phoneme awareness and early reading ability. Reading Neuman (Eds.), Handbook of Early Literacy Research (Vol. 2, pp. 173–182). New & Writing, 16, 5–20. York, NY: Guilford Press. Wasik, B. A. (2010). What teachers can do to promote preschoolers’ vocabulary Smith, F. (1999). Why systematic phonics and phonemic awareness instruction con- development: Strategies from an effective language and literacy professional devel- stitute an educational hazard. Language Arts, 77, 150–155. opment coaching model. Reading Teacher, 63(8), 621–633. Snow, C., Griffen, P., & Burns, M. S. (Eds.). (2005). Knowledge to support the teaching Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. of reading. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. Child Development, 69, 848–872. Snow, C. E., & Juel, C. (2005). Teaching children to read: What do we know about how to do it? In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A hand- book (pp. 501–520). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Sonnenschein, S. (2002). Engaging children in the appropriation of literacy: The Alison Arrow, Ph.D., is a senior lecturer in literacy at Massey importance of parental beliefs and practices. In O. N. Saracho & B. Spodek (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives in literacy in early childhood education (pp. 127–149). University. Alison’s research interests include the develop- Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. ment of emergent literacy, particularly alphabet knowledge Sonnenschein, S., & Munsterman, K. (2002). The influence of home-based reading and phonological awareness, and what knowledge primary- interactions on 5-year-olds’ reading motivations and early literacy development. school children use to read and spell. Alison is currently Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17, 318–337. involved in research that examines the role of early child- Sprenger-Charolles, L., & Casalis, S. (1995). Reading and spelling acquisition in French first graders: Longitudinal evidence. Reading and Writing, 7, 39–63. hood educators in developing emergent literacy knowledge Stuart, M. (2005). Phonemic analysis and reading development: Some current issues. and in research that examines the differences between Journal of Research in Reading, 28, 39–49. home and school literacy practices and beliefs. Stuart, M., Stainthorp, R., & Snowling, M. J. (2008). Literacy as a complex activity: Deconstructing the simple view of reading. Literacy, 42, 59–66. Claire McLachlan is Associate Professor, Early Years Sulzby, E., & Teale, W. (1991). Emergent literacy. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. Education at Massey University College of Education. Her 727–757). White Plains, NY: Longman. research has focussed on teachers’ beliefs and practices Tannenbaum, K. R., Torgesen, J. K., & Wagner, R. K. (2006). Relationships between about literacy, curriculum, and assessment for children prior word knowledge and reading comprehension in third-grade children. Scientific to school entry. Claire is co-editor of Literacies in Child- Studies of Reading, 10, 381–398. hood: Changing Views, Challenging Practice (Makin, Jones Tolchinsky, L. (2004). Childhood conceptions of literacy. In P. Bryant & T. Nunes (Eds.), Handbook of children’s literacy (pp. 11–29). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Diaz, & McLachlan, 2007) published by Elsevier and is an Kluwer Academic Publishers. author of Early Childhood Curriculum: Planning, Assessment Tunmer, W. E., & Arrow, A. W. (in press, 2012). Reading: Phonics instruction. In J. and Implementation (McLachlan, Fleer, & Edwards, 2010), Hattie & E. Anderman (Eds.), Handbook of student achievement. London, United published by Cambridge University Press. Kingdom: Routledge.

Fact Sheets from IDA! Visit the IDA website to access these fact sheets and more: s$YSLEXIA"ASICS s!0ARENTS'UIDETO s(ELPFUL4ERMINOLOGY Effective Instruction s!T2ISK3TUDENTSANDTHE s)S-Y#HILD$YSLEXIC Study of a Foreign Language s%VALUATING%DUCATIONAL in School Professionals s4ESTINGAND%VALUATION s!$($AND$YSLEXIA

http://www.interdys.org/FactSheets.htm

38 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association IDA MEMBERSHIP BENEFITS Membership in IDA brings you many unique opportunities to advance your profession and interact with peers in the LD community. We equip you with the latest dyslexia research, developments in the field and best-practices. In addition, your Membership includes:

ANNALS OF DYSLEXIA online PERSPECTIVES ON IDA’s semi-annual journal of LANGUAGE AND the most current, peer-reviewed LITERACY print & online dyslexia research. Annals IDA’s quarterly publication (including all back issues) is discusses educational available online and as an bestpractices, curriculum optional (2 volumes/yr.) methods, case studies and printed edition. first-person application of multisensory structured language techniques.

THE JOURNAL OF MEMBERS-ONLY READING & WRITING online DISCOUNTS AT NATIONAL In addition to online access & LOCAL CONFERENCES to Annals of Dyslexia, Enjoy Members-only IDA Members also have registration discounts when Members-only access to all attending IDA’s national issues of Reading & Writing: conference or any local An Interdisciplinary Journal. Branch conference.

INSURANCE, CAR RENTAL IDA PUBLICATION DISCOUNTS & VISA CARD DISCOUNTS Enjoy members-only pricing IDA has special member- discounts on LD-related affinity relationships with publications and other items Liberty Mutual Insurance, purchased in the IDA online Avis, and VISA, offering bookstore. (www.interdys.org) IDA-discounted products.

PROFESSIONAL REFERRAL LOCAL BRANCH MEMBERSHIP PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY FOR SERVICE DATABASE Your membership in IDA includes INSURANCE IDA Professional members may membership and affiliation with For Independent Educators opt for a contact listing in the any one of 48 IDA local Branches with EducatorProtect program national IDA Referral For Services in North America. database as a service provider.

Become a member of IDA and take advantage of substantial Members-Only registration discounts to our Annual Conference!

FOR MEMBERSHIP INFORMATION: Visit www.interdys.org and click the “Join IDA” link or call 1-800-ABCD123 x405

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 39 GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

Welcome Global Partners The International Dyslexia Association’s Global Partners Program continues to grow. We celebrate this growth and appreciate the opportunities for collaborating and sharing information during our national conference and at the Global Partners Caucus held Saturday at the close of conference sessions. Please extend warm welcomes to our international colleagues who are attending the conference. All of us at IDA benefit from the support and good work done by our international Global Partners. Warm wishes for a productive conference, Susan C. Lowell, Chair, Global Partners Committee; Vice President, IDA Anna Reuter, Director of Field Services Christy Blevins, Manager of Field Services

Australia Costa Rica Dyslexia Foundation Australian Dyslexia Association Fundacion Costarricense de Dislexia Steven O’Brien, CEO Jodi Clements, President Beth Berkowitz, MD, Director 24 Edward Pavilion 68 Coronet Crescent Parque Montana del Sol, #16 Albert Dock, Liverpool, England Burleigh Waters Santa Ana, San Jose Phone: 08000778764 Queensland, Australia Costa Rica [email protected] Phone: 617 557 65045 Phone: 506 8345-3866 www.dyslexia-help.org [email protected] [email protected] www.dyslexiaassociation.org.au www.dyslexiacenterofcostarica.com India Maharashtra Dyslexia Association Austria Czech Republic Kate Currawalla, President Berufsverband akademischer LRS- Czech Dyslexia Association 101 Amit Park, Therapeutinnen (BALT) Olga Zelinkova, President Lala Jamnadas Gupta Marg, Dipl.Päd. Svatoslavova 17 140 00 Deonar Farm, Angelika Pointer, President Prague 4—Nusle Mumbai 400 088 Moos 72 Czech Republic India 5431 Kuchl/Salzburg [email protected] [email protected] AUSTRIA Phone/Fax: ++91 22 2556 5754 Phone: 0043 (0)680/3060831 Egypt www.mdamumbai.com [email protected] The Egyptian Society for Developing Skills of www.lrs-therapeuten.org Children with Special Needs Ireland (ADVANCE) Dyslexia Association of Ireland Qualitatszirkel Legasthenie Maha Helali, Chair & Exec. Dir. Rosie Bissett, Director Dr. Renate Strasser 34 Al-Nadial-Gadeed Street 1 Suffolk Street 1190 Wien. Hartachkerstra. 23/1 New Maadi, Cairo 11434 Dublin 2 AUSTRIA Egypt Ireland Phone: 0043 650 750 3158 [email protected] [email protected] www.Qualitatszirkel-Legasthenie.at www.dyslexia.ie Germany Brazil Bundesverband Legasthenie und Dyskalkulie Japan Brazilian Dyslexia Association Christiane Lowe, President Japan Dyslexia Research Association Maria Angela Nico, Coordinator Postfach 1107 Junko Kato, M.D., President Avendia Angelica, 2318 7° andar 30011 Hannover c/o Kato Clinic Higienopolis Germany Kowa Bldg, 3F Nakasaiwaicho Sãn Paulo –SP 01228-200 BRAZIL [email protected] 3-32-7 Saiwai-ku Phone: (5511) 3231-3296 / Kawasaki-city 212-0012 (5511) 3258-7568 England JAPAN www.dislexia.org.br British Dyslexia Association Phone: 0-(118) 144-5220-011 Kate Saunders, acting CEO Fax: 0-(118) 114-5985-7525 Cameroon 98 London Road [email protected] Association of Educational Foundation (AEF) Reading, England Charley Mbwoge Ewane, Pres. RG1 5AU Jordan P.O. Box 468 www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/ Jordanian Association Dyslexia Buea, South West Region, Cameroon Rashad Al-Kamiseh, President Phone: 00237 74 21 97 88 P.O. Box: 1932 – 11196 [email protected] Amman – Jordan http://www.aefcam.co.nr Phone: (00962) 777466223 [email protected]

40 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association Kuwait Latvia Singapore Centre for Child Evaluation & Teaching Pro Futuro Dyslexia Association of Singapore (CCET) Eva Birzniece, President Robin Moseley, MA MSc CPsychol AFBPsS; Gad Elbeheri, PhD Elviras iela 13b-36 CEO Executive Director Riga LV-1083 DYSLEXIA CENTRE Kuwait- Al Surra – block 4, Street 14 Latvia 1 Jurong West Central 2, P.O. Box: 5453 Safat 13055 Kuwait Phone: 371 29183269 #05-01 Jurong Point, Phone: 009 651 832 000 [email protected] Singapore 648889 Fax: 009 652 5358 914 www.disleksija.lv Phone: +65 6444 5700 [email protected] Fax: +65 6444 7900 www.ccetkuwait.org Philippines [email protected] Philippine Dyslexia Foundation [email protected] Kuwait Dyslexia Association Wynna Medina, President www.das.org.sg Mohammad Y. Al Qatami, Chair #28 7th Street P.O. Box 24409 New Manila Quezon City, Yemen Safat, 13105 Philippines Yemen Dyslexia Association Kuwait Phone: (632) 724-3871 Abdulrhman Abdullah Alhakemi Fax: (632) 416-9285 Yemen, Taiz. [email protected] P.O. BOX: 55222 [email protected]

K-2 Curriculum & Remedial K-4+ Having trouble decoding words? Go Phonics®Reading Program That’s because some words just aren’t fair! connects skills in stories—93% decodable!

In this story,
  empowers parents/educators to effectively Tweasel, the teach the foundational literacy skills with phonics steering pooka (elf) the course—explicit, systematic, multi-sensory, and in a entertains Molly sequence that minimizes confusion. In building block with his version fashion, decodable stories link phonics/language arts to of how words meaningful reading as they are taught. Early on, students were invented. are phonetically spelling and reading words, then stories. This tale Handwriting, vocabulary, comprehension, language arts, is both fluency... are taught in support of each phonics skill. charming and  Assessments  Guided Lesson Plans  5 Workbooks encouraging  50 Phonics Games  6 Volumes of Stories for struggling Go Phonics Overview: readers. www. gophonics.com 
 
 
  And, as it 800-553-5950 PT ______
 ______turns out, ______  %   
% 1 1 most words really From start    ______" 2   !  #


%
!


are fair once you learn the code! ______
"

!%
$! __ xx xx x x____________!
"
 !" 
!
$
"
    !
$!
"!
!
!%
$ 
        ______!

!
!

$% __ xx xx x x ______"!    
!
$
!
!!

%
% x x x 

"
#
& !
$!
$
 
x

  ______x x % "!
!

 
% 
Check out Words Aren’t Fair ______      !______ ! ______! !


!
x x x ______
!x
!
  30 "!

 "
!
!
 
%!'
x x " ______



     by Martha J. Biery x x x x ______x x x x $   ______   at www.amazon.com today! 12  To finish 34   Be the first to read Perspectives on Language and Literacy online! Did you know that as a member of IDA you have immediate access to all articles in Perspectives? Login today at http://www.interdys.org/webmember/login.aspx to enjoy the Fall 2011 Edition in a new digital format you can read online, cover to cover.

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 41
   
           !!  "  !
# $! % !   & ' (''   & ! )
*"  !!!)
$ !& !!

+ , - ! "  !( ! 
                  

( 
(!& 
!'  
(
-

! ' !. / !/"#//$
0 
! 1    ! 

       
      



42 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association BOOK REVIEW by Mary Farrell, Francie Matthews, Judy Shapiro, and Marilyn Martin

Speech to Print: complexity, she describes a myriad of ways roots typically Language Essentials for change when combined with other morphemes. Sometimes, a Teachers, Second Edition morpheme can alter a base word phonologically as in the case of sane and sanity where there is an audible shift in the vowel Louisa Cook Moats, Ed.D. (2010) sound or in electric and electricity where the sound of the con- sonant changes. In addition, Moats offers enlightening statistics Paul H. Brookes Publishing. to support the assertion that English is indeed governed by logi- Paperback. cal rules. She points out that 80% of all derived words really do 272 Pages. $24.95 mean what their parts suggest (p. 137). Fans of sentence diagramming will be very pleased with the extensive review of this subject in the chapter on syntax. The Louisa Moats contends that language is the missing piece in numerous examples will enhance teachers’ understanding of teacher education, and the purpose of her book, Speech to how parts of speech come together to elaborate sentences, thus Print: Language Essentials for Teachers, Second Edition) is to better enabling them to teach children how to expand their address this gap. Her premise is that to teach reading, spelling, sentences. Readers will also enjoy the discussion in the seman- and composition effectively, teachers must provide an explana- tics chapter of the various parameters of word meaning, such as tion of both spoken and written language. Successful teaching denotation, connotation, metaphor, and idioms. This frame- establishes an understanding of how language works that work will help teachers to evaluate the level of their student’s enables children to learn words, interpret sentences, and write vocabulary and plan effective vocabulary instruction. fluently. In order to understand printed language well enough A final chapter covers language and reading instruction. to be able to teach it explicitly, teachers must study its systems Developmental sequences are listed for reading, spelling, and and forms, both spoken and written. writing through grade 3, supplying readers with a guide for The book is unique in providing, under one cover, a uniform appropriate expectations for pupil performance, general guide- depth of information in the areas of phonetics, phonology, lines for instruction for each stage, and a variety of interesting orthography, morphology, syntax, and semantics. Each chapter case histories. A major strength of the book is Moats’ presenta- includes extensive review and clarification of key linguistic tion on spelling both in terms of developmental stages and its concepts, activities for self-study (with answer key), general relationship to phonology as a basis for understanding common principles of instruction, sample instructional activities, and spelling errors. With this information, diagnosticians examining recommended resources for further instruction. The book does spelling errors can determine whether they are developmental not endorse a particular method but supplies background or deviant in nature, and plan intervention accordingly. information from which teachers can develop their own In summary, Speech to Print: Language Essentials for approaches. It is a comprehensive reference tool for the key Teachers is a unique and ambitious text, addressing a far more language areas listed above and includes a glossary and an advanced level of linguistic knowledge for teacher training than elementary level spelling assessment tool. conventional “how to teach reading” manuals. It provides While a summary of each chapter is not within the scope of teachers, speech and language therapists, diagnosticians, and this review, a few highlights should be mentioned. In the chap- particularly, trainers of teachers with a framework from which ter on phonetics, an area typically absent from most reading to develop applications for teaching struggling readers. It arms instruction texts, teachers will come away with a better under- the reader with background knowledge in linguistics that could standing of why phonemic awareness is so difficult for the potentially change the way they look at a child’s reading and young child. Moats explains the elusive phoneme and co- writing patterns and develop intervention strategies. articulation carefully. “An effect of co-articulation is that sounds within words are slightly changed by the sounds that come Mary L. Farrell, Ph.D., Professor at Fairleigh Dickinson before and after them.” (p. 28) Because of this phenomena, a University, Director of the Center for Dyslexia Studies and child may have no problem capturing and spelling the /k/ in the University Director of the Regional Center for College word kitten but may not quite get it in the word sink, where it Students with Learning Disabilities is not perceived the same way. Moats explains the distinguish- Francie Matthews, Ph.D., Founder and Director of Academic ing features of consonants and the details of vowel production, Success Associates, Westfield, New Jersey bringing the terminology of speech/language pathology to the teacher. This integration gives teachers additional insights into Judy Shapiro, M.S., Director of Children’s Dyslexia Center, typical errors children make and provides them with informa- adjunct Fairleigh Dickinson University tion needed for more specific and informed instruction. Marilyn Martin, M.Ed., Learning Specialist and author in Even for the well versed, Moats offers unique insights into private practice English morphology. For example, in the section on derivational

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 43 SUCCEEDEVERY STUDENT DESERVES THE CHANCE TO

A NATIONAL LEADER IN EDUCATING STUDENTS WITH LANGUAGE-BASED LEARNING DIFFERENCES, OUR STUDENTS EXCEL IN ACADEMICS, ATHLETICS AND THE ARTS.

WALK-IN OPEN HOUSES DVFS HOSTS FINANCIAL AID WEDNESDAYS Sunday, Oct. 23 2011 PBIDA INFO SESSION Sept. 28 | Oct. 5 1:00-3:00 PM CONFERENCE Wednesday, Oct. 19 | Nov. 30 Wednesday, Nov. 2 Friday, November 16 ALL SESSIONS 9:00-11:00 AM 9:00-11:00 AM October 14 9:00-11:00 AM Meet with Admissions officer Wednesday, Dec. 7 Learn about the process and and tour. No RSVP required. 9:00-11:00 AM resources we provide. Admissions presentation and tour. RSVP required.

Call 610.640.4150 or visit dvfs.org | Paoli, PA

44 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association ALTA invites everyone

who successfully

completes the Alliance Academic Language Therapy Association® Dedicated to the remediation of written-language skills. Exam to make ALTA

ALTA is the only national group organized his or her national solely for written-language professionals. professional certifying ALTA promotes high standards of education, practice and conduct for professionals providing Multisensory organization. Structured Language Education (MSLE). ALTA offers four levels of membership: Certified Academic Language Practitioner (CALP), Instructor of Certified Academic Language Practitioners (ICALP), Certified Academic Language Therapist For more information, (CALT), and Qualified Instructor (QI). visit www.ALTAread.org ALTA offers a variety of services to its members and the community, including continuing education opportunities, or call 1-972-233-9107, a national directory, website, newsletter, referral helpline and a national conference. ext. 208 ALTA seeks and supports opportunities for state licensure.

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 45 Because some students learn differently... Our schools teach differently.

Now you can choose a school that provides a customized approach for students who are challenged by dyslexia, ADHD, and other learning www.FusionAcademy.com differences. Contact one San Diego, CA Also OLosrange Angeles, Count CAy , CA of our schools to schedule OpeMissionning Spring Viejo, CA 2010 Huntington Beach, CA a private tour. Tampa, FL Coming Soon: Westlake Village, CA South Bay, CA Scottsdale, AZ Now Enrolling! Pasadena, CA Las Vegas, NV Oakland, NJ

25 Ionia Avenue SW, Suite 400 | Grand Rapids, MI 49503 | www.AmericanEdGroup.com Coming Soon from IDA!

Expert Perspectives on Interventions for Reading: A Collection of Best-Practice Articles from the International Dyslexia Association Edited by Louisa C. Moats, Karen E. Dakin, and R. Malatesha Joshi At long last, by popular demand, IDA is gathering many of its most requested articles by leading authorities on dyslexia and other reading problems from Perspectives on Language and Literacy and other IDA publications into one handy, soft cover anthology. Learn how, with the guidance of these experts, to translate research into meaningful practice. s 2ESEARCH&RAMEWORKSFOR5NDERSTANDING)NTERVENTIONWITH$YSLEXIAAND2ELATED$IFFICULTIES WITH,ITERACY!CQUISITION s 4HE0RINCIPLESOF-ULTI #OMPONENT 3TRUCTURED,ANGUAGE4EACHING s 0HONOLOGICAL!WARENESS 7ORD2ECOGNITION AND3PELLING s 6OCABULARY)NSTRUCTION s &LUENCYIN"ASIC3KILLS s #OMPREHENSIONOF7RITTEN4EXT s $EVELOPING7RITTEN%XPRESSION s !DOLESCENTSAND!DULTSWITH2EADING 7RITING AND ,ANGUAGE$IFFICULTIES s !SSISTIVE4ECHNOLOGY

46 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association Visit these Exhibitors at the 62nd Annual Conference! 3D Literacy High Noon Books Organization 95 Percent Group Hyde Park Day School Play 2 Read Acacia Academy & IMSLEC Phonics Q The Achievement Centers, Inc. Landmark School Pro-Ed Academic Language Therapy Language Circle/Project Read Read Naturally, Inc Association (ALTA) Learning Ally Really Great Reading Assistive Writing Solutions, Inc (formerly Recording for the Blind & Dyslexic) Rowland Reading Foundation Barton Reading & Spelling Learning By Design School Specialty Intervention Bookshare LexiaTech Shape Math Brehm Preparatory School Lindamood Bell and OPTIONS Slingerland Institute of Literacy Linden Hill School Brightlines Paper Spalding Education International Links 2 Learning Online Brookes Publishing Co. St. Stanislaus Maplebrook School Callirobics Super Duper Publications Marie’s Words Cambium Learning Syllables Reading Marshall University H.E.L.P. Program Camp Spring Creek The Alliance Math-U-See/Mastery Durango Mountain Camp Educational Services The Forman School Dyslexia Training Institute Mayerson Academy The Gow School Eagle Hill School Moose Materials The Kildonan School Educator Protect National Center for The Siena School English on a Roll Learning Disabilities Trident Academy Flyleaf Publishing Nemours BrightStart! University of Michigan DyslexiaHelp Ginger Software Neuhaus Education Center Valley Speech Language Great Leaps Fluency Neuroconnection and Learning Center Hands-On English with Orton Academy VC Consulting Linking Blocks Pedia Learning Inc. Wilson Language Training Handwriting Without Tears Piel Canela Peru/Fair Trade Wiz-Com

As of October 1, 2011

TheThe AllianceAlliance for Accreditation)RU$FFUHGLWDWLRQDQG&HUWLÀFDWLRQ and Certification of Structured Language, Inc. Promoting Standards for Qualityof Professional Preparation Structured Language Inc

Academic Language Therapy Association (www.altaread.org) International Multisensory Structured Language Education Council (www.imslec.org)

www.allianceaccreditation.org

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 47 

Windward Teacher Training Institute 6OLQJHUODQGŠ0XOWLVHQVRU\6WUXFWXUHG Accredited at IMSLEC’s Teaching and Instructor of Teaching Levels /DQJXDJH,QVWUXFWLRQ Windward Teacher Training Institute provides professional development SURYLGHVV\VWHPDWLFVHTXHQWLDOLQVWUXFWLRQDOVWUDWHJLHVIRUDOOVHWWLQJV based on scientifically validated research in child development, learning theory and pedagogy. The accredited training program offers extensive coursework and supervision leading to national certification in multisensory structured language education. ƒDocumented Success ƒEarly Identification Programs, Courses and Workshops ƒCost Effective t
/BUJPOBM
$FSUJmDBUJPO
JO
.VMUJTFOTPSZ
4USVDUVSFE
-BOHVBHF
&EVDBUJPO ƒO-G Classroom Adaptation t
&YQPTJUPSZ
8SJUJOH
*OTUSVDUJPO
t
.VMUJTFOTPSZ
3FBEJOH
*OTUSVDUJPO ƒIntegrates with any Reading t
.VMUJTFOTPSZ
*OTUSVDUJPO
JO
4QFDJmD
$POUFOU
"SFBT or Language Arts curriculum

Save the Date 7UDLQLQJ2SWLRQV Robert J. Schwartz Memorial Lecture ŒComprehensive Courses (with practicum*) Louisa C. Moats, Ed.D. 3Oral Language Development Wednesday evening, April 25, 2012 ŒShort Courses 3Phonological Awareness ŒTeaching Workshops 3Encoding ŒIn-Service and For further information: 3Written Language Consultation Phone: 


t

E-Mail: [email protected] 3Decoding
t
Website: www.windwardny.org Visit us at 3Reading Comprehension BOOTH  Windward Teacher Training Institute is a division of The Windward School, an independent school for and Fluency And See us students with language-based learning disabilities, located in White Plains, New York. on the BINGO CARD

Follow Us on Twitter *Accredited by IMSLEC at Teaching and Instructor of Teaching Levels @WindwardTTI 12729 Northup Way, Suite 1, Bellevue WA 98005 y Phone: 425-453-1190 y Fax: 425-635-7762 Email: [email protected] yWeb: ZZZVOLQJHUODQGRUJ



     &DQ¶W0DNH7LPH" Professional Development is Convenient with our Online Classes.  1HXKDXV (GXFDWLRQ &HQWHU is dedicated to preventing reading failure by providing teach-               ers professional development in research-                 based methods of literacy instruction.                  !"#         Visit us online for a listing of our current online classes and to utilize the Neuhaus re- $ "  %" & '   ( source, Reading Teachers Network. Stop by
)    
    &    booth #807 at the IDA Conference to learn    (  * 
   more QHXKDXVRUJUHJLVWHUIRUFODVVHV      UHDGLQJWHDFKHUVQHWZRUNRUJ     

  
  
            

 *  + 

 
  

48 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association Serving Bright Students with Dyslexia and other Learning Differences

The Summit School offers: ‡ 4:1 student/staff ratio ‡ Cutting edge methodology

‡ Evidence-based instruction
5HDOL]LQJWKH*LIWVDQG*UHDW 3URPLVHRIOHDUQLQJGLIIHUHQW   VWXGHQWVVLQFH

     
     

410.798.0005 www.thesummitschool.org 664 East Central Avenue, Edgewater, MD 21037 Experience Dyslexia® RESCUE THE STUDENTS NOW A Learning Disabilities Simulation

At last, What is it like to have dyslexia? something that A lively, thought-provoking group activity, works! Experience Dyslexia
is designed for anyone interested in better understanding the lives of individuals with a learning disability.

This updated simulation from the Northern Step by step instruction: California Branch of IDA lets participants Reading Spelling Penmanship experience the challenges and frustrations faced each day by people with dyslexia. TAUGHT TO THE INTELLECT Structured, sequential, multi-sensory. Addresses the needs of one student or an entire classroom including students with dyslexia and attention deficits. We owe the best instruction possible for every student. That is exactly what you will find when you order the FREE DVD. Experience Dyslexia® is available at www.dyslexia-ncbida.org Website: rescuethestudents.com

The International Dyslexia Association Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 49 CLASSIFIEDS Want to Advertise

CONNECT TO COMPREHENSION in Perspectives? Connect to Comprehension is a comprehensive inter- vention program proven effective for struggling readers in grades 1–8. Scripted instructional guides teach s 2EACHOVER READERS upper-level comprehension skills while providing explicit instruction and practice in sequential decoding s &ULL HALF QUARTERANDBUSINESSCARD skills. www.connecttocomprehension.com SIZESINBLACKWHITE s &ULLANDHALFAVAILABLEINFULL#/,/2 PROVEN AND SUSTAINABLE CLINIC FOR SALE IN GUILFORD, CONNECTICUT s &REQUENCYDISCOUNTSAVAILABLE Learning House, LLC, the only facility in Connecticut offering Orton-Gillingham teacher training and FOR MORE INFORMATION: instruction that is accredited by the Academy of Orton- Gillingham. Recognized throughout the state, it is Please contact Darnella Parks staffed by teachers who have Fellow, Certified, and at (410) 296-0232 ext. 406 or Associate certification or are working toward Academy [email protected] certification. Contact Susan Santora, Owner and Director: 264 Church Street, Guilford, CT 06437, Tel: (203) 453-3691, www.learninghouse-ct.com Is This Your First Issue of Perspectives? Will It Be Your Last? Not If You Subscribe!

Don’t let this be your last issue of Perspectives! If you’re not already an IDA member, you can still subscribe and receive four quarterly issues. Subscription prices: ,QIRUPDWLRQ6XSSRUW&RPPXQLW\ Individual $60.00 USD; Institutional $110.00 %HFRPHDQ,'$PARENTMEMBER USD (international 7KHLQIRUPDWLRQVXSSRUWDQGFRPPXQLW\ZLOOODVWDOLIHWLPH customers may be subject to additional charges). Or, join IDA as a member and keep Perspectives coming! Annual membership with subscription is $45.00 USD for parents; $80.00 USD for advocates; $95.00 USD for professionals. Subscriptions may be ordered from $%&' ZZZLQWHUG\VRUJ Linda A. Marston at (410) 296-0232 ext. 409 or [email protected] or SDUHQWVXSSRUW#LQWHUG\VRUJ visit the IDA bookstore at www.interdys.org

50 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Fall 2011 The International Dyslexia Association Try S.P.I.R.E.®, see results with your students!

Purchase a S.P.I.R.E. Trial Package for $200.00* Educators who have used S.P.I.R.E. have seen positive results with their students—and we want you to experience the same results.

A Special Savings NEW! of 65%! S.P.I.R.E. Trial Package provides materials needed to work with up to 3 students in Level 1 of S.P.I.R.E. Visit eps.schoolspecialty.com/spiretrial for details.

*One per customer, while supplies last.

NEW! See S.P.I.R.E. in action 10-Step Lesson demonstration videos Visit eps.schoolspecialty.com/PD to view our S.P.I.R.E. lesson demonstration clips. See each step of the S.P.I.R.E. 10-step introductory lesson modeled with students.

#ALLs&AX eps.schoolspecialty.com

11-190-ADV 40 York Road, 4th Floor Baltimore, MD 21204-5202 Phone: (410) 296-0232 Fax: (410) 321-5069 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: www.interdys.org

BALTIMORE

READING, LITERACY & LEARNING 63RD ANNUAL IDA CONFERENCE OCTOBER 24-27, 2012