This is The Reading Instruction Show. I am your
genial host, as always, kindly ol' Dr. Johnson.
And this podcast is coming as an excerpt from
my book, Understanding the Science of Reading,
Focal and Context Matters. It will be published
by Guilford sometime in 2025. Research to support
the three cueing systems. In this chapter that
I'm writing, I have included many more citations
that are necessary, and that's because science
of reading enthusiasts insist that there's no
research to support the three cueing systems.
However, as you see, if you read my chapter excerpt
on LinkedIn or other places, or if you buy my
book, I've got a plethora of reference citations
to actual research in which they collected data
and sent it to academic journals that were peer
-reviewed, the whole thing. So let's take a look
at this. First of all, a predicting machine.
Our big human brains have evolved to become very
efficient predicting machines. They're constantly
accessing multiple data sources in order to give
us a sense of what will happen next. Most of
this is done at levels below our conscious awareness.
For example, baseball players are able to run
to just the right spot in the outfield to catch
balls because they can predict where it's coming
down. Their big human brains instantly process
a variety of information related to the sound
of the bat hitting the ball, as well as the height,
the speed, and angle of trajectory. The same
prediction process is used in language comprehension
and reading. Here, our prediction machine uses
semantic, syntactic, and phonological information
to make micro -predictions about words and meaning
during the process of reading. Very much like
baseball players catching pop flies, this enables
us to efficiently and effectively create meaning
with the print before us. Let's look at lexical
priming studies. Priming research examines how
something that comes before impacts that which
comes after. For example, it examines how what
precedes a target word impacts, one, the speed
and accuracy of word recognition, two, the movement
of the eyes during reading, and three, the organization
of things stored in the brain. Let's look first
at semantics. To isolate the semantic element,
subjects in priming studies are often asked to
recognize words in sentences and other contexts.
For example, the cat chased a blank mouse and
the cat chased a blank round. In these studies,
subjects were able to recognize target words
faster and more accurately when they were preceded
by related things. Clearly, readers in these
studies use semantic information, or the semantic
cueing system, along with letter information,
phonetic cueing system, to recognize words and
create meaning with Now here are some relevant
findings related to semantic queuing. And there
are four of them and these are all cited. One,
semantic information enhances comprehension.
Yes, there's research to support that. Two, semantic
priming results in faster word recognition time
and enhanced accuracy. Yes, then just using phonological
information. Three, training with close to develop
semantic queuing improves comprehension. And
four, close skills learned apart from reading
transfer to real reading situations. And a close
for those who don't know it, C -L -O -Z -E, is
a sentence in which there is a word missing and
the reader must use the context clues to understand.
it is a way to develop the semantic cueing system.
Alright, let's look at syntax. Similar types
of priming research studies have been conducted
with sentences in which syntax was isolated as
a cueing mechanism. Again, it's clear in these
studies that readers were using syntactic information
or the syntactic cueing system. along with letter
information, phonetic cueing, to recognize words
and create meaning. Here are five bits of relevant
findings related to the syntactic cueing system.
And again, if you see my page, you'll find a
plethora of research studies cited. One, syntax
contributes to reading comprehension. 2. Syntactic
awareness is correlated with reading comprehension,
comprehension monitoring, and reading achievement.
3. Syntactic information contributes to enhanced
word recognition. 4. Training students to develop
syntax using sentence anagrams and sentence organization
improves comprehension. And five, syntactic awareness
facilitates reading comprehension. Let's look
now at phonics. To isolate phonics as a variable,
subjects are usually asked to recognize words
or nonsense words in isolation. Here, syntax
and semantics are eliminated as variables. But
unlike syntax and semantics, you can't compare
phonics to some other cueing system because all
written words contain letters. And besides, we've
always known that teaching children to use letter
sounds to sound out words improves their ability
to use letter sounds to sound out words. This
has never been in question. The question has
always been, is instruction that isolates a single
queuing system more effective than instruction
that includes all three? And the answer is, wait
for it, no. While research has shown that phonics
-based instruction can lead to increased scores
on phonics -based measures, There's little transfer
of these skills to authentic reading conditions.
And there is little evidence to demonstrate that
heavy phonics instruction has any long -term
effect on students' ability to create meaning
with print. Now, the National Reading Panel,
which is cited quite often, they did quite a
thorough study of this. And here are some of
the relevant findings related to phonics from
the National Reading Panel Report. One, the impact
of phonics on comprehension is limited. Two,
phonics instruction contributed only weekly,
if at all, in helping poor readers apply these
skills to actually reading text. 3. There were
insufficient data to draw any conclusions about
the effects of phonics instruction with normally
developing readers above first grade. 4. Phonics
instruction fails to exert a statistically significant
impact on poor readers in second through sixth
grade. Now, the National Reading Panel also identified
six ways to teach phonics, and it found that
each of these were equally effective. Synthetic
phonics, that's putting letter sounds together.
And our science of reading friends, that's the
only kind of phonics that they want. Practice
sounding out words and putting them together.
Analytic phonics is analyzing words that are
there. Find the sounds and what sounds do you
hear in this word. Embedded phonics, phonics
within the context of real reading and writing.
Analogy phonics, or known as large unit phonics,
teaching students to look at letter patterns
and phonograms. Onset rhyme phonics, taking the
beginning of a word and connecting it with the
rhyme or phonogram, D plus AM equals DAM, and
phonics through spelling. Okay, this has been
the Reading Instruction Show. I hope you learned
a little something today.