Brian Cambourne, University of Wollongong, Foundation for Learning and Literacy, April 2021

Brian Cambourne provides a summary of the history of the debates about reading instruction dating from as far back as 1779 and outlines the debates that have occurred, and reoccurred through the 1950’s, 1960’s, 1970’s and continue to resurface every decade since. Cambourne’s history  begs the following question: 'Why is reading education pedagogically confused? The answer to this question lies in history as well as different understandings about what reading is.' This short paper published by the Foundation for Learning and Literacy provides a very useful perspective with Cambourne concluding that‘ Such theoretical arguments are not helpful for the teaching profession or the teaching of reading. To date, not enough attention has been paid to educators’ experiences and their evidence in helping children learn to read in classroom contexts.’  
 
Key words: Reading Reading wars Reading research Reading pedagogies
 

Wilhelm, Jeffrey D. Edutopia; October 30, 2017

This article summarises a study by Jeffrey Wilhelm and Michael Smith that finds reading for pleasure has many forms, and each form provides distinct benefits that are outlined in the article. It concludes; “Make no mistake, the next generation standards worldwide require profound cognitive achievements. Meeting such standards and the demands of navigating modern life will require student effort and the honing of strategies over time. Promoting the power of reading for pleasure is a proven path there.”

Key words:  Reading  Pleasure  Choice  Research  Lifelong reading

Hruby, G. J
In this video clip the presenter outlines why literacy educators should beware of how and when the term the Science of Reading is used in an informative and humorous manner. He takes the claims about the Science of Reading and provides evidence as to why the branding requires caution. Perhaps the Science of Reading is more about advocacy than science.
Key words: Reading   Phonics  Science of reading  Research  Program

C. Compton-Lily, A. Mitra, M. Guay & L. Spence. 2020
Reading Research Quarterly

This article examines a range of evidence that demonstrates the complexity of reading. The authors argue that multiple factors, processes, and sources of information inform reading. They support this with research findings including emerging research related to the brain and reading coupled with observations of emerging readers and conclude that singular reading models do not account for the individual needs of learners.

Keywords: Reading processes  Reading research  Complexity of the reading process   Processes, factors and information informing reading

The Teacher’s Tool Kit For Literacy is the free podcast for motivated teachers and school leaders who want the latest tips, tricks and tools to inspire their students and school community in literacy learning. Literacy experts and founders of Cue Learning, Sharon and Phil Callen, along with their special guests, provide practical literacy insights that you can apply in the classroom today.

'At Cue Learning, our literacy specialists draw on over 30 years of teaching and international consulting experience to deliver world-class learning solutions. We equip, empower and support teachers to become their authentic selves, using the fullness of the Australian curriculum'.

To find out about upcoming webinars, and about how Cue can help you and your school, visit http://www.cuelearning.com.au/. And you can get  more amazing teaching resources at https://www.teachific.com.au/.

Teresa Cremin, 2019.   Scottish Book Trust

Those who choose to read for pleasure are often high achievers in both literacy and numeracy.  In this article, Cremin discusses how important it is for teachers to develop a rich and wide knowledge of children's literature.  At the same time, they must be able to model their enjoyment of reading so they can nurture reading for pleasure in the classroom.  

Key words: Reading  Reading for pleasure  Children’s literature

TDuke, N. D., Pearson, P. D., Strachan, S. L., Billman, A. K. (2011). In S. J. Samuels & A. Farstrup (Eds.). What research has to say about reading instruction, 4th Edition (pp. 51-93). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

This is a comprehensive account of 10 major instructional practices that teachers of primary and secondary students might adopt to develop reading for understanding. Australian primary and high-school teachers are likely to be familiar with ideas such as building disciplinary and world knowledge, providing exposure to a volume and range of texts, providing motivating texts and contexts for reading, engaging students in discussion, building  vocabulary and language knowledge, integrating reading and writing, observing and assessing, and differentiating instruction. They are likely to find the table, “What Good Readers Do When They Read”, useful and most useful the details in the section “Teaching Strategies for Comprehending”.

Key words: Reading  Meaning  Comprehension

Debra Crouch and Dr Brian Cambourne

The authors have collaborated to discuss the eight Conditions of Learning that Brian has been describing for teachers for quite some time. They also discuss the importance of the Four Processes that Enable Learning in relation to the effectiveness of the conditions. Detailed explanations of the conditions and the processes are described as they would occur in classrooms in the teaching of reading and specific examples are provided to explain what would occur in Read-aloud, Shared Reading, Guided Reading and Independent Reading. Teachers will find this article extremely helpful as they think about their theory and practice about the teaching of reading. For more detailed information educators will be pleased to know that Brian and Debra have written a book,  Made for Learning - How the Conditions of Learning Guide Teaching Decisions, published by Richard Owen, 2020.

Keywords: Conditions of learning  Reading 

August 2020

This Foundation for Learning and Literacy published article is one of two partner articles on supporting struggling readers and writers and expands on Touchstone 6. The partner article is Meeting the needs of struggling readers and writers, particularly in the later primary years and secondary years.

This article outlines principles aimed to assist teachers in adjusting their literacy teaching for individual students who are experiencing some difficulty with reading and writing. They are based on what research tells us about struggling readers and writers.

Key words: Reading  Writing  Engagement  Support

August 2020

This Foundation for Learning and Literacy published article is one of two partner articles on supporting struggling readers and writers and expands on Touchstone 6. The partner article is Principles for working with struggling readers and writers- advice for teachers across primary and secondary schools.

This article draws on research and practice in order to provide teachers and school leaders with research evidence and informed instructional and organisational practices to meet the needs of those students who are struggling as readers and writers.

Key words: Reading  Writing intervention  Engagement  Support  Strategies  Expectations

Rosen, Michael.   Blogspot- Friday, 26 February 2021

In this blog, well-known author Michael Rosen unpacks the question How does Reading for Pleasure produce this seemingly magic effect without direct instruction? To answer that question, Rosen looks at the process of reading and how children and young people respond. Rosen has a check list for teachers to discuss, adapt, argue with in whatever ways they choose. The checklist includes reading for pleasure creates a space for readers to interpret; to experience empathy; to leap from the oral code of English to the written code; to learn knowledge and wisdom; to learn about stylistic devices and to learn about possibility and change.

Rosen concludes this blogpost with “There is a lot of talk in the air about how to help children 'catch up' because of the pandemic. Helping children to read widely and often for pleasure will help them ... This is a kind of education in a holistic way.”

Key words: Reading  Pleasure  Choice  Research  Lifelong reading

Richard Allington: Reading Teacher Vol. 66 Issue 7 pp 520-530 International Reading Association 2013

This article argues that we have a research base demonstrating that ‘virtually’ every child could be reading at grade level by the end of first grade. The author links his arguments to US schools but the compelling arguments on teaching reading based on evidence are applicable anywhere. The author raises issues such as not having expert teachers working with struggling readers, providing texts that are too difficult and the observation that struggling readers often spend more time doing worksheets than reading. The article calls the teachers to rethink current approaches with struggling readers for better outcomes.

Key words: Reading  Struggling readers  Independent reading  Support  Research  Text difficulty  Intervention

Maren Aukerman and Lorien Chambers Schuldt

Reading Research Quarterly, 2021 56(s)

This is a very important article. The authors have drawn on research from all sides of the debates about the Science of Reading . As they state Science of Reading is a term that has been used variously, but its use within research, policy and the press has tended to share one important commonality: an intensive focus on assessed reading proficiency as the primary goal of reading instruction. They argue such a focus is problematic as it leads to a very narrow slice of reading. They propose a different framework that draws on a wide range of research and has implications for all grade levels and literacy more widely. It is a most useful article and strongly based on a wide range of evidence.
 
Key words: Science of reading  Textual dexterity  Critical reading  Student reading proficiency  Socially just

NCTE 24 October 2020 by Dorothy C. Suskind

There is a critical story behind “the science of reading,” one whose players and plotlines have been misconstrued by political agendas. As a former classroom teacher and reading specialist and current literacy professor, Suskind interrogates four themes threading this narrative.

 Key words: Engagement in reading  Teacher knowledge

 Foundation touchstones: 1,3 and 7

Heidi Anne E. Mesmer & Priscilla L. Griffith. (2005) Everybody’s selling it—International Reading Association (pp. 366–376) 

Very experienced K-3 teachers from across the United States, who were members of the ‘International Reading association’, responded to a questionnaire which was used to gauge their perceptions about explicit and systematic phonics instruction. There were 382 respondents, a 38.2% return rate, which “was in line with other U.S. surveys.” Six common phonics strategies were considered: “(1) songs, (2) word sorts, (3) making words, (4) scripted teacher directions, (5) worksheets, and (6) games”. The strategies, which required teacher-student interaction,’ word sorts’ and ‘making words’, were most often identified as ‘highly explicit and systematic’. The strategy ‘worksheets’ was least often identified and the researchers concluded that: “teachers seemed to demonstrate that explicit, systematic phonics instruction should be engaging and responsive.

Key words: Phonics   Explicit  Systematic phonics instruction

Teresa Cremin, 2019.   Scottish Book Trust

Those who choose to read for pleasure are often high achievers in both literacy and numeracy.  In this article, Cremin discusses how important it is for teachers to develop a rich and wide knowledge of children's literature.  At the same time, they must be able to model their enjoyment of reading so they can nurture reading for pleasure in the classroom.  

Key words: Reading  Reading for pleasure  Children’s literature

Gambrell, Linda B. (2011) The Reading Teacher Vol.65 Issue 3 pp 172-178

International Reading Association

Linda Gambrell shares the findings from a major international study – that interest in reading predicted students’ reading comprehension and that students who enjoyed reading the most performed significantly better than students who enjoyed reading the least. Then Gambrell gives clear guidelines and practical tips about research-based classroom experiences that help all students to be intrinsically motivated to read. ‘Clearly, instruction that provides students with decoding and comprehension skills and strategies is not sufficient’ but Gambrell’s guidelines help teachers to fill the gap. It is refreshing to read about the importance of motivation and engagement in reading.

Key words: Reading  Comprehension  Engagement  Motivation  Sustained reading  Classroom libraries 

The Educator November 30, 2020

This article discusses a study carried out by Associate Professor Laura Scholes, Barbara Comber and Nerida Spina .

The study challenges the belief that boys choose to read mainly non-fiction texts and that this has changed since the early 2000’s.  The article stresses the important place of fiction in developing long term reading skills, highlights the place of digital texts, and also challenges teachers to expand their knowledge of literature that may be engaging for boys.

 Key words: Boys’ education  Engagement in reading  Teacher knowledge about literature  Digital texts

 Foundation touchstones: 1,3 and 7 in particular

Misty Adoniou, Brian Cambourne and Robyn Ewing  The Conversation Nov 12 2018

Money for books must surely be a good thing. But what exactly is a “decodable reader”? After all, surely all books are decodable. If they weren’t decodable they would be unreadable.

Key words: Decodable readers  Decoding  Quality texts  Phonics  Teaching reading  Books

The International Reading Association has published this useful and important list for teachers and parents to keep in mind.

Brian Cambourne The Reading Teacher; Oct 1999; 532; eLibrary pg.126

This is an interesting article given the date of publication and what it says about explicit and systematic learning. These words are widely used so a reminder of the use of these terms in the mid-80s and 90s will be of interest to many educators as they reflect on the use of those terms today. The author discusses the inclusion of two other dimensions; mindfulness —>mindlessness, contextualised—> decontextualised. The article will raise some thoughts for educators about programs claiming to be"explicit and systematic" and whether they are in fact mindless and decontextualised.  

Key words: Explicit  Systematic  Reading

Frank Smith, Language Arts, 1983 Vol 5, No 5 pp558-567

In this seminal article Frank Smith questions ‘the myth that one could learn to write to diligent attention and practice’ (p.558). Smith asks: ‘Where do people who write acquire all the knowledge they need?’ The conclusion Smith reaches is that it can only be through reading that writers learn all the ‘tangibles that they know’. He claims that ‘to learn to write, children must read in a special kind of way’ (p558). Smith clearly and logically shares his reasoning, discussing the complexities of writing, learning as a collaborative activity and how readers collaborate with the author whose writing they are reading. Finally, he outlines what this means for teaching writing.

Key words: Reading  Writing  Reading/writing connection

NEPC Newsletter, 29 November 2018

Q&A with Elizabeth Moje, Dean of the University of Michigan School of Education in the National Education Policy Center 

 The National Education Policy Center (NEPC), housed at the University of Colorado Boulder School of Education, produces and disseminates high-quality, peer-reviewed research to inform education policy discussions.  This conversation between a member of the NEPC and Elizabeth Moje provides expert insights into some of the key issues regularly debated regarding effective literacy instruction. The conversation is set out with a Q&A style and provides the clarity,  perspective and research that educators, policy makers and parents need to understand some of the polarising debate that arises from time to time and restores confidence in the important and complex work of teachers in supporting young readers and writers.

Key words:   Reading  Reading wars  Balanced literacy  Literacy instruction  Phonics  Research

Jane Braunger and Jan Patricia Lewis,  pages 124-128, 1997. 

This extract is from a book that provides a research baseline for teachers, policy makers and anyone interested in helping all children learn to read. Although it was published in 1997,  and there has been a great deal more research in this field since that time, the content is still extraordinarily helpful in guiding the best practices in the teaching of reading and what influences children's success as readers. This part of the book distills the knowledge base about beginning reading into 13 core understandings and one of those is that ‘students need many opportunities to read, read, read’.  It provides extensive details of the research supporting that particular core understanding.  In recent times the main discussion about the teaching of reading tends to focus on approaches used to teach reading, but the importance of students having time to read, plus all of the practical issues relating to that, receives little attention. This extract is extremely important to read in that context.

Key words:   Beginning reading  Core understandings  Reading  Choice  Texts  Assessment

George Hruby and Leslie Burns in Critical Perspectives on Literacy Policy and Practice Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy Vol 3 No6 pp. 693-696

In this paper Hruby and Burns critique the use of the phrase ‘science of reading’. Their main concern is that the assumptions made by the proponents of this ‘science’ are made without direct evidence from the students of classrooms. Further, they are concerned that these assumptions will be transferred into adolescent literacy instruction where even less evidence can be found of deficient decoding skills as the most pressing issue. They particularly question the use of the term ‘science’ as being something that is fixed and never changing. Science, they argue is never ‘settled’ or fixed. It is an ongoing process of conjecture, testing and discovery. Moreover, they critiqued the term ‘adolescent’ as if it too is some fixed ‘time’ in one’s life. It is an interesting short paper that would be useful for discussion by teachers of older students who may be disengaged or struggling with reading.

Key words: Literacy  Science  of reading   Adolescent

Nell Duke and Kelly B. Cartwright

Reading Research Quarterly S6(1) pp. S25-544 (2021)

The simple view of reading is commonly presented to educators in professional development about the science of reading. The simple view is a useful tool for conveying the undeniable importance – in fact necessity – of both decoding and linguistic comprehension for reading. Research in the 35 years since the theory was proposed has revealed additional understandings about reading.

(Duke & Cartwright, 2021, p. S25)

This paper by researchers who work in the field of the science of reading presents a logical argument about the utility of the Simple View of Reading (SVR), first proposed by Gough and Tunmer 35 years ago in 1986 (see Gough & Tunmer, 1986), while also providing a clear and convincing justification about the importance of providing teachers with access to the benefits of research conducted since the SRV was first proposed.

The paper accurately reviews the research literature to propose that three, well-researched and evidence-based dimensions of what we know about how ‘reader’ factors influence reading and learning to read should now be included in models of reading. These are:

1)     Reading difficulties are the result of a diverse range of issues and cannot be explained by merely attending to decoding or linguistic/language comprehension complications. Citing multiple research projects that have detailed a rich array of reader profiles for those children who experience difficulties with learning to read, Duke and Cartwright (2021) rearticulate what many reading and literacy experts have argued for decades – reading difficulties can have causes beyond word recognition (resulting from delays in phonic knowledge acquisition) and language comprehension. As one example the authors explicitly suggest the importance of drawing teachers’ attention to the important role of content knowledge and cultural understandings in children’s learning to read. The result of this would be a clear instructional focus on building children’s knowledge as part of learning to read.

2)     The elements of word recognition and language/linguistic comprehension are neither separate nor sequential. Again, by providing a well-rounded review of research in this field, Duke and Cartwright (2021) demonstrate the inaccuracy of the assumption that word recognition (through decoding) and linguistic/language comprehension - the processes focused on in the SVR - are separate and hierarchical. This unfounded assumption has led to popular – although unfounded - beliefs that decoding must be taught first and in isolation, before instruction moves to other elements of learning to read such as comprehension. According to evidence cited in this paper, there is considerable overlap between word recognition (via decoding) and language comprehension, and there are several other skills and capacities that bridge these two factors as well. “Presenting practitioners with models that depict word recognition and language comprehension as entirely separate is inconsistent with the research” (p. S30). The authors also demonstrate that research has identified important constructs, including but not limited to vocabulary, fluency, and morphological awareness that bridge children’s development of word recognition and language comprehension in critical ways. Research has also demonstrated that constructs such as vocabulary, fluency and morphological awareness are highly susceptible to focused teaching and can support the development of reading.

3)     Good readers are active, strategic and engaged and these executive skills can and should be taught to young learners. The authors detail a large body of research that demonstrates that executive functioning skills such as cognitive flexibility and working memory contribute to young learners ability to engage in the complex process of reading and as such should be featured in teachers’ approaches to teaching children to read. Duke and Cartwright (2021) also successfully argue for the importance of motivation and engagement, and a flexible repertoire of strategies for young learners of reading. Based on this research the authors argue that any model of reading for practitioners “must include these elements” (p. S32).

As well as providing the evidence for these arguments against providing teachers with access to a simplified and inadequate model of reading to inform their teaching of children, this paper also provides succinct and clear explanations of a diverse range of models of reading including:

·       The Simple View of Reading (Gough & Tumner, 1986) and more current updates such as that proposed by Nation (2019) and Hoover and Tumner (2020).

·       The Rope Model (Scarborough, 2001)

·       The DIME and DIER Models (Ahmed et al., 2016; Kim, 2017)

·       The Componential Model of Reading (Joshi & Aaron, 2000)

Duke and Cartwright (2021) also offer their own model which attempts to build on the latest understandings that result from research in the field of the sciences of reading, and explains the ‘reader’ factors involved in reading. They clearly state that what they call the Active View of Reading only considers the ‘reader’ factors of the reading process, and as such does not address how “texts, tasks and sociocultural context impact on reading” (p. S38). A final important consideration put forward by Duke and Cartwright (2021) is that the model they propose is based on current research evidence, and they “fully expect that as research on the science of reading continues, [the] model will need to be updated or replaced” (p. 38).

Key takeaway:

Duke and Cartwright (2021) acknowledge that while their model helps to explain some dimensions of how people read and how young children can be supported to learn to read (the reader factors), they expect the model will need to be adapted or rejected as science learns more and our understandings move on. The Simple View of Reading was first proposed 35 years ago, and it is imperative that educators, researchers and policy writers are open to the latest evidence, and flexible enough to work with those new understandings.

Full article here:
https://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/rrq.411

References

Ahmed, Y., Francis, D.J., York, M., Fletcher, J.M., Barnes, M., & Kulesz, P. (2016). Validation of the direct and inferential mediation (DIME) model of reading comprehension in grades 7 through 12. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44(45), 68–82.

Duke, N., & Cartwright, K. B. (2021). The science of Reading progresses: Communicating advances beyond the Simple view of Reading. Reading Research Quarterly 56(1) S25-S44.

Gough, P.B., & Tunmer, W.E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10.

Hoover, W.A., & Tunmer, W.E. (2020). The cognitive foundations of reading and its acquisition. Springer.

Joshi, R.M., & Aaron, P.G. (2000). The component model of reading: Simple view of reading made a little more complex. Reading Psychology, 21(2), 85–97.

Kim, Y.S.G. (2017). Why the simple view of reading is not simplistic: Unpacking component skills of reading using a direct and indirect effect model of reading (DIER). Scientific Studies of Reading, 21(4), 310–333.

Nation, K. (2019). Children’s reading difficulties, language, and reflections on the simple view of reading. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 24(1), 47–73.

Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S.B. Neuman & D.K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (vol 1) (pp. 97-110). Guilford.

ABC News on line 4 July 2021 by Sarah Scopelianos

This short online article provides insights for parents and educators into the benefits of using audible books with children alongside reading aloud to them. The article cites research undertaken by the UK National Literacy Trust that found “benefits to listening to audio that mirror those of reading, and [these] really helped legitimise their place as part of a child's reading journey”.

Advice from Australian literacy expert Misty Adoniou was sought. She advises parents to read to their children, not only to build their relationships but also for greater learning outcomes. Dr Adoniou, an adjunct associate professor in literacy and language at the University of Canberra and a principal fellow at the University of Melbourne, says reading isn’t just about sounding out words. She describes it as “gaining meaning”. Misty Adoniou acknowledges that some of the benefits of reading aloud carry over into audiobooks, like exposing young readers to harder books they can’t read yet. “If we leave it, we’ll just have kids reading what they’re able to read by themselves [and] then they’re stuck on low-level, low-interest books in the beginning,” Dr Adoniou says. More complex stories increase a child’s vocabulary, which is a huge benefit. "We know that the size of your vocabulary is the best indicator of success at school; not just in reading, in every curriculum area," Dr Adoniou says.

Key words: Reading  Vocabulary  Audible books

A Study of Benefits to Adults of Regular Reading for Pleasure

A report from Quick Reads, in partnership with Dr Josie Billington, Centre for Research into Reading, Literature and Society at the University of Liverpool

This report is a valuable evidence-based document which shares some definitive benefits of developing a culture of reading for pleasure, especially when these benefits are understood by teachers, educational leaders and parents. The conclusions and recommendations include information that reading for just 30 minutes a week:
- Produces greater life satisfaction;
- Enhances social connectedness and sense of community spirit;
- Helps protect against and even prepare for life difficulties.

Key words: Reading  Reading habits  Reading for pleasure