This is the reading instruction show.
I'm your host, as always, Dr.
Andy Johnson, the title of today's podcast clarifying a couple more
ununderstandings about whole language reading instruction.
Three things up front.
Cuing is not an approach or method of reading instruction.
That is an ununderstanding.
Two, we don't teach children to guess at words.
That also is an ununderstanding of whole language reading instruction.
And third, tinfoil hats do not keep the FBI from reading your mind.
That is an ununderstanding as well.
So let us look at number one, not an approach.
Now, you'll have to admire the penguins who are so incredibly adamant in their
opposition to whole language, who continue to insist that whole language does not work,
who declare publicly and without shame that whole language has been debunked.
They never let a lack of knowledge get in the way of coming to conclusions about things.
There is a sort of gritty determination on display here that at some level,
you'll have to appreciate.
They never seem to tire.
They are continually trying to jam the square peg of their belief system into the round
hole of reality.
It may be displaced fortitude, but it is fortitude nonetheless.
So here is a bit of penguin based clownery I recently came across.
The writer was very adamant in her view, stating that the queuing approach to reading
instruction doesn't work.
The queuing approach to reading instruction, she said, has been debunked.
It doesn't work.
It doesn't work. The queuing approach.
Now, I have no idea what she's talking about here and obviously neither does she.
The queuing approach.
If you're going to insist that something doesn't work, you should at the very least know what
that something is that doesn't work.
There is no such thing as a queuing approach.
The three queuing systems is what I think she was referring to, but this is not an approach
to teaching reading.
It's also not a method nor is it a technique.
It's not even a strategy.
So what is this thing that is said not to work?
The three queuing systems in reading refers to three systems the brain uses to recognize
words during the act of reading.
As we encounter text, we use three queuing systems to recognize words.
Our brain does this, the phonological, the semantic and the syntactic.
These systems work together to enable us to quickly and efficiently recognize the words
on the page.
Now, more on this in a bit, but first word recognition and word identification are not
the same thing.
This could be the basis of some of this confuser eight and going on.
So let me clarify this again.
Recognizing words is different from identifying words.
The three queuing systems work together to recognize words, not identify words.
Now, recognizing words is when we encounter a word in print and we automatically know
what it is.
We recognize it instantly.
We don't have to process the individual letters and put them together in short term
memory to form words.
We don't.
Identifying a word on the other hand is when we encounter a word in print and we don't
recognize it.
It's in the dictionary in our head or at lexicon, but we don't immediately know what
it is.
We don't recognize it.
So we have to consciously employ a strategy to identify it.
We have to intentionally decide to use some sort of method to identify words.
We have to intentionally decide to use some sort of plan or tactic to figure out what
in the heck that word is.
There are four word identification strategies.
Word parts or analogy, that's looking for familiar parts within a word, sometimes
known as large unit phonics.
Morphemic analysis is looking for familiar prefixes, suffixes and roots.
Context clues is looking to see what makes sense within a sentence.
And letter clues, sounding out the letters and putting the letter sounds together to
create words.
Those are four ways to identify words.
Now, unless you're playing golf, bigger numbers are usually better than smaller numbers.
Having four strategies to employ is better than having only a single strategy.
We should develop students ability to use all four word identification strategies,
not just a single strategy.
Students should be taught all four strategies for identifying unknown words.
So we teach the strategy to develop the skill.
We teach these four strategies explicitly using very direct and very, very explicit
instruction.
We teach the strategy to develop the skill.
We teach and practice these four strategies and eventually these four strategies.
And eventually these cognitive operations are internalized and automaticity is achieved.
Now, a strategy in the cognitive sense is something we consciously employ.
A skill on the other hand occurs automatically.
So let's take a look at the three queuing systems.
Queuing systems, the three queuing systems, as I said earlier, is not an approach to reading
instruction.
It's an understanding that the brain uses three interconnected systems to recognize words
during the act of reading.
Semantic, syntactic and graphophonetic.
Now, the research supporting these is pretty overwhelming and taken from a variety of fields
including linguistics, psycholinguistics, neuroscience, cognitive science, eye movement
and miscue analysis as well as reading instruction among others.
So let's look at the first one, semantic.
The semantic queuing system is the most efficient of the three in terms of speed and space
required in working memory to recognize words.
Semantics refers to meaning.
As you read, you use context and background knowledge to identify words and figure out
what the next word might be.
For example, if I saw the sentence, the monkey ate a blank.
You most likely know what the next word is or might be.
As your brain reads the sentences, it focuses on the word monkey and ate.
This narrows the possibility of the word to something monkeys eat.
Based on your knowledge of monkey stereotypes, cartoons and Tarzan movies, you most likely
inserted the word banana.
If you did not immediately insert the word banana, your brain would have used the first
letter to figure it out.
If the word banana fit with what went in before and after, you would have continued.
We use the knowledge in our head to predict the meanings and confirm meetings or make
revisions during the reading process.
The syntactic queuing system is the second queuing system syntax has to do with the grammatical
structure of the language. As your brain reads, you also use your knowledge of grammar, sentence
structure, word order, tense and plurality and function words such as prepositions and
pronouns to recognize words.
This is the second most efficient queuing system.
For example, in the monkey sentence previous, you focused on the word monkey, which is a
noun and eight, which is a verb.
Your brain knew the missing word had to be a noun of some sort.
It narrowed the possibilities using syntax together with semantics.
You are able to easily fill in the missing word.
This is how reading works.
Your brain works holistically to create meaning with print to recognize words.
Grapho phonetic refers to symbols, phonos, sound.
The grapho phonetic queuing system uses letter sounds to predict what the next word might be.
Of the three queuing systems, this one is the least efficient.
Why? Because it focuses on individual letters and letter patterns instead of words and ideas.
Your working memory has a very limited capacity.
You can try to stuff in a few letters in there or a few words or a few ideas.
But which would be the most efficient in terms of creating meaning with print?
Let me give you a hint.
An idea is much bigger than a letter.
There are far more things contained in an idea than in a letter.
Therefore, carrying ideas is more efficient than letters.
Reading programs that use only a phonics-based approach to develop the least efficient queuing system
while ignoring the development of the other two queuing systems are not good.
This actually makes it harder for children to learn to read.
If they focus only on phonics and let the other two queuing systems actrify,
you are asking students to create meaning with print using only one third of their word recognition brain.
All students benefit most from instructional programs that develop all three queuing systems simultaneously.
However, students with reading difficulties usually are force-fed, a steady diet of pure phonics.
And when this does not work as indubitably, it will not.
They are given more phonics so that they cannot succeed at an even higher rate.
And when this still does not work, they are sent out of the classroom for special remedial help
or to a special education teacher where they get even more lower level instruction
at a slower pace with the idea that they will someday be able to catch up with their peers.
But the question is, do they ever catch up?
In what universe would you tell somebody to slow down so they could catch up?
This sounds more like a Buddhist Cohen.
What is the sound of one hand clapping?
And by the time schools realize that this uber-phonics approach doesn't work
with students with reading difficulties, it's time for them to graduate from high school.
Or in most cases, it's time for them not to graduate from high school.
Abraham Maslow once said, if the only tool you have is a hammer, all the world becomes a nail.
If the only tool you have in your toolbox for teaching reading is phonics,
all the world becomes one giant phonics worksheet.
Phonics instruction is necessary but far from sufficient.
Again, phonics instruction is necessary but far from sufficient.
Alright, let's get to the next big understanding, guessing at words.
You whole language teachers you.
You teach children to guess at words.
What's wrong with you?
They say to me as they shake their finger in my face.
Now, I wonder if this silly idea will ever go away.
This is the idea that whole language teachers teach children to guess at words.
Now, what would that instruction even look like?
Would I use a directed instruction with input?
Would I break down the desinat word steps?
Would I demonstrate using cognitive modeling?
Would I use guided practice with gradual release of responsibility to provide scaffolding?
And would I then provide independent practice to reinforce and practice this word guessing learning?
Would I have guessing at word practice?
Would I offer up lists of words every day and make students practice their word guessing skills?
Real whole language teachers do not teach students to guess at words.
That's a simplistic notion and a massive understanding.
Good whole language teachers do not teach students to guess at words.
Now, here's a true story.
One that has occurred countless times.
I was tutoring a third grade girl.
It was an online tutoring session and we were reading out loud.
When she came to a word she didn't recognize, she stopped.
And what do we do when a student stops?
They don't recognize it.
We say, uh, sound it out.
Duh, as if they hadn't thought of that.
If they could sound out the word, they wouldn't have stopped in the first place, would they?
So I watched this young lady struggle to sound out each individual letter.
It took her about 10 seconds to sound out all the letters and put them together and to make a guess as to what the word was.
And at the end of all this sounder out and then guessing and stuff, she still didn't know what the word was.
She pronounced it incorrectly and continued on.
In the meantime, it had taken her about 10 seconds to sound out each of the letters and put them together.
Instead of focusing on ideas, on ideas, she was focusing on letters and sounds.
This briefly moved her offline, interrupted the meaning making comprehension process.
So I taught her a little trick. I said, say blank and let your eyes bounce on both sides of the words to look for clues.
And we did practicing sentences with a blank and clue words on each side.
She would say blank and continue on down the sentence.
And usually within two to four seconds, she'd identify the word, go back and fill it in.
And she said to me, Dr. A, that's what she called me.
Your magic. The word just pops into my head.
10 seconds versus two or four.
Hmm. Am I magic? Well, perhaps I am.
Did I abandon phonics? Nope. Not at all.
We included synthetic phonics, analytic phonics and large unit phonics.
As well, we taught all four word identification strategies and we engaged in activities to develop all three queuing systems.
So the lesson here, four lessons.
First, understanding how the brain creates meaning with print versus simply sounding out words is essential in understanding and designing effective reading instruction and interventions.
Yes, direct instruction in phonics must be used along with activities and instruction to develop the semantic and syntactic queuing systems.
Limiting instruction to just phonics impedes rather than enhances students ability to create meaning with print.
Second, we must differentiate between recognizing words and identifying words.
Third, queuing is not an approach or a method.
And fourth, whole language teachers do not teach children to guess at words.
This is a simplistic, ununderstanding.
This has been the Reading Instruction Show. I am your host, Dr. Andy Johnson.