R. Malatesha Joshi

THE COMPONENT MODEL OF READING: SIMPLE VIEW OF READING MADE A LITTLE MORE COMPLEX

The “Simple View of Reading” proposes that reading comprehension could be predicted by the product of decoding and linguistic comprehension. A somewhat modified version of this model suggests that the relationship between decoding and linguistic comprehension should be additive rather than multiplicative. This research is comprised of two studies. The first study compared the efficacy of the two formulas: (a) Reading Comprehension = Decoding ◊ Listening Comprehension, and (b) Reading Comprehension = Decoding + Listening Comprehension. The second study reported here explored whether adding another factor, speed of processing, to the Simple View of Reading formula improves its ability to predict reading comprehension. Forty third-grade children were administered word-attack and listening comprehension subtests from the Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery; the reading comprehension subtest from the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests; and a list of 40 letters to measure speed of processing. The results showed that Decoding and Listening Comprehension, whether multiplied with each other or added to each other, did not significantly alter the outcome. Furthermore, while 48% of the variance for Reading Comprehension could be explained by Decoding and Listening Comprehension, speed of naming the letters added another 10%. A modified model of reading is proposed which can be expressed by the formula, R = D ◊ C + S.The “Simple View of Reading” proposes that reading comprehension could be predicted by the product of decoding and linguistic comprehension. A somewhat modified version of this model suggests that the relationship between decoding and linguistic comprehension should be additive rather than multiplicative. This research is comprised of two studies. The first study compared the efficacy of the two formulas: (a) Reading Comprehension = Decoding × Listening Comprehension, and (b) Reading Comprehension = Decoding + Listening Comprehension. The second study reported here explored whether adding another factor, speed of processing, to the Simple View of Reading formula improves its ability to predict reading comprehension. Forty third-grade children were administered word-attack and listening comprehension subtests from the Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery; the reading comprehension subtest from the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests; and a list of 40 letters to measure speed of processing. The results showed that Decoding and Listening Comprehension, whether multiplied with each other or added to each other, did not significantly alter the outcome. Furthermore, while 48% of the variance for Reading Comprehension could be explained by Decoding and Listening Comprehension, speed of naming the letters added another 10%. A modified model of reading is proposed which can be expressed by the formula, R = D × C + S.

Reading and Spelling: Development and Disorders.

Contents: Part I:The Development of Decoding Skills. A.M. Liberman, Why Is Speech So Much Easier Than Reading? P.B. Gough, S. Wren, The Decomposition of Decoding. W.E. Tunmer, J.W. Chapman, Language Prediction Skill, Phonological Recoding Ability, and Beginning Reading. U. Goswami, Rime-Based Coding in Early Reading Development in English: Orthographic Analogies and Rime Neighborhoods. L.C. Ehri, Word Reading by Sight and by Analogy in Beginning Readers. V. Muter, Phonological Awareness: Its Nature and Its Influence Over Early Literacy Development. J. Morais, P. Mousty, R. Kolinsky, Why and How Phoneme Awareness Helps Learning to Read. R.W. Barron, Proto-Literate Knowledge: Antecedents and Influences on Phonological Awareness and Literacy. Part II:Developmental Impairments of Decoding Skills. M. Bruck, Outcomes of Adults With Childhood Histories of Dyslexia. M. Snowling, N. Goulandris, N. Defty, Development and Variation in Developmental Dyslexia. R.H. Felton, The Development of Reading Skills in Poor Readers: Educational Implications. J.L. Metsala, G.D.A. Brown, Normal and Dyslexic Reading Development: The Role of Formal Models. J. Alegria, The Origin and Functions of Phonological Representations in Deaf People. R.S. Johnston, The Role of Letter Learning in Developing Phonemic Awareness Skills in Preschool Children: Implications for Explanations of Reading Disorders. N.K. Goulandris, A. McIntyre, M. Snowling, Fixed Reference Eye and Reading Disability: Is There a Connection? Part III:Reading Comprehension. R.M. Joshi, K.A. Williams, J.R. Wood, Predicting Reading Comprehension From Listening Comprehension: Is This the Answer to the IQ Debate? K. Cain, J. Oakhill, Comprehension Skill and Inference-Making Ability: Issues of Causality. J. Oakhill, K. Cain, N. Yuill, Individual Differences in Childrens Comprehension Skill: Toward an Integrated Model. Part IV:Spelling. R. Treiman, Beginning to Spell in English. C. Lennox, L.S. Siegel, Phonological and Orthographic Processes in Good and Poor Spellers. P.G. Aaron, S. Wilczynski, V. Keetay, The Anatomy of Word-Specific Memory. C.K. Leong, Strategies Used by 9- to 12-Year-Old Children in Written Spelling. K. Nation, C. Hulme, The Role of Analogy in Early Spelling Development. Part V:The Remediation of Reading Problems. C. Juel, What Kind of One-on-One Tutoring Helps a Poor Reader? B.W. Wise, R.K. Olson, Studies of Computer-Aided Remediation for Reading Disabilities.

Handbook of orthography and literacy

Contents: Introduction to the Volume. Part I: Literacy Acquisition in Different Writing Systems. J. Pind, Evolution of an Alphabetic Writing System: The Case of Icelandic. B.E. Hagtvet, T. Helland, S-A.H. Lyster, Literacy Acquisition in Norwegian. C. Elbro, Literacy Acquisition in Danish: A Deep Orthography in Cross-Linguistic Light. H. Lyytinen, M. Aro, L. Holopainen, M. Leiwo, P. Lyytinen, A. Tolvanen, Childrens Language Development and Reading Acquisition in a Highly Transparent Orthography. A. Lehtonen, Sources of Information Children Use in Learning to Spell: The Case of Finnish Geminates. J. Jaffre, M. Fayol, Orthography and Literacy in French. R. Job, F. Peressotti, C. Mulatti, The Acquisition of Literacy in Italian. K. Landerl, V. Thaler, Reading and Spelling Acquisition and Dyslexia in German. A.M.T. Bosman, S. de Graaff, M.A.R. Gijsel, Double Dutch: The Dutch Spelling System and Learning to Spell in Dutch. J.S. Sainz, Literacy Acquisition in Spanish. C. Cardoso-Martins, Beginning Reading Acquisition in Brazilian Portuguese. C.D. Porpodas, Literacy Acquisition in Greek: Research Review of the Role of Phonological and Cognitive Factors. T. Nunes, A. Aidinis, P. Bryant, The Acquisition of Written Morphology in Greek. A.Y. Durgunoglu, How Language Characteristics Influence Turkish Literacy Development. V. Csepe, Literacy Acquisition and Dyslexia in Hungarian. A.A. Reid, Developmental Dyslexia: Evidence From Polish. A. Janyan, E. Andonova, Word Reading in Bulgarian Children and Adults. I. Sprugevica, I. Paunina, T. Hoien, Early Phonological Skill as a Predictor of Reading Acquisition in Latvian. E.L. Grigorenko, If John Were Ivan, Would He Fail in Reading? S. Abu-Rabia, H. Taha, Reading in Arabic Orthography: Characteristics, Research Findings, and Assessment. D. Ravid, Hebrew Orthography and Literacy. B. Baluch, Persian Orthography and Its Relation to Literacy. J. Kim, C. Davis, Literacy Acquisition in Korean Hangul: Investigating the Perceptual and Phonological Processing of Good and Poor Readers. P. Karanth, The Kagunita of Kannada--Learning to Read and Write an Indian Alphasyllabary. K.J. Alcock, Literacy in Kishwahili. H. Cheung, C. McBride-Chang, B. Wing-Yin Chow, Reading Chinese. Part II: Literacy Acquisition From Cross-Linguistic Perspectives. P.H.K. Seymour, Theoretical Framework for Beginning Reading in Different Orthographies. U. Goswami, Orthography, Phonology, and Reading Development: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. N. Akamatsu, Literacy Acquisition in Japanese-English Bilinguals. M. Caravolas, Learning to Spell in Different Languages: How Orthographic Variables Might Affect Early Literacy. K. Landerl, Reading Acquisition in Different Orthographies: Evidence From Direct Comparisons. M. Aro, Learning to Read: The Effect of Orthography. P.G. Aaron, R.M. Joshi, Learning to Spell From Print and Learning to Spell From Speech: A Study of Spelling of Children Who Speak Tamil, a Dravidian Language. R.M. Joshi, T. Hoien, X. Feng, R. Chengappa, R. Boulware-Gooden, Learning to Spell by Ear and by Eye: A Cross-Linguistic Comparison. Part III: Literacy Acquisition: Instructional Perspectives. R. Treiman, Knowledge About Letters as a Foundation for Reading and Spelling. P. Bryant, H. Deacon, T. Nunes, Morphology and Spelling: What Have Morphemes to Do With Spelling? W.E. Tunmer, J.W. Chapman, Metalinguistic Abilities, Phonological Recoding Skill, and the Use of Context in Beginning Reading Development: A Longitudinal Study. T. Nicholson, G.L. Ng, The Case for Teaching Phonemic Awareness and Simple Phonics to Preschoolers. L.C. Ehri, Alphabetics Instruction Helps Students Learn to Read. R.S. Johnston, J.E. Watson, The Effectiveness of Synthetic Phonics Teaching in Developing Reading and Spelling Skills in English-Speaking Boys and Girls. R.K. Olson, Genetic?? and Environmental Influences on the Development of Reading and Related Cognitive Skills. D. Aram, O. Korat, I. Levin, Maternal Mediation in a Young Childs Writing Activity: A Sociocultural Perspective. R.L. Venezky, Foundations for Studying Basic Processes in Reading.

Instruction of Metacognitive Strategies Enhances Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary Achievement of Third‐Grade Students

The use of metacognitive strategies helps students to “think about their thinking” before, during, and after they read.

Why Elementary Teachers Might Be Inadequately Prepared to Teach Reading

Several national reports have suggested the usefulness of systematic, explicit, synthetic phonics instruction based on English word structure along with wide reading of quality literature for supporting development in early reading instruction. Other studies have indicated, however, that many in-service teachers are not knowledgeable in the basic concepts of the English language. They may be well versed in children’s literature but not know how to address the basic building blocks of language and reading. The authors hypothesized that one of the reasons for this situation is that many instructors responsible for training future elementary teachers are not familiar with the concepts of the linguistic features of English language. This hypothesis was tested by administering a survey of language concepts to 78 instructors. The results showed that even though teacher educators were familiar with syllabic knowledge, they performed poorly on concepts relating to morphemes and phonemes. In a second study, 40 instructors were interviewed about best practices in teaching components and subskills of reading. Eighty percent of instructors defined phonological awareness as letter-sound correspondence. They also did not mention synthetic phonics as a desirable method to use for beginning reading instruction, particularly for students at risk for reading difficulties. In conclusion, providing professional development experiences related to language concepts to instructors could provide them the necessary knowledge of language concepts related to early literacy instruction, which they could then integrate into their preservice reading courses.

Vocabulary: A Critical Component of Comprehension

ABSTRACT Vocabulary development and the role it plays in reading skills acquisition have received much less attention than decoding and comprehension strategies. There is a close relationship between vocabulary and comprehension; hence, individuals with poor vocabulary have difficulty understanding written text. Further, students with poor vocabulary knowledge read less and acquire fewer new words, while students with better vocabulary knowledge read more and improve their comprehension (the Matthew Effect). To prevent the Matthew Effect from taking hold, vocabulary assessment and instruction should become important components of reading programs for struggling readers with vocabulary problems.ABSTRACT Vocabulary development and the role it plays in reading skills acquisition have received much less attention than decoding and comprehension strategies. There is a close relationship between vocabulary and comprehension; hence, individuals with poor vocabulary have difficulty understanding written text. Further, students with poor vocabulary knowledge read less and acquire fewer new words, while students with better vocabulary knowledge read more and improve their comprehension (the Matthew Effect). To prevent the Matthew Effect from taking hold, vocabulary assessment and instruction should become important components of reading programs for struggling readers with vocabulary problems.

Are preservice teachers prepared to teach struggling readers

Reading disabilities such as dyslexia, a specific learning disability that affects an individual’s ability to process written language, are estimated to affect 15–20% of the general population. Consequently, elementary school teachers encounter students who struggle with inaccurate or slow reading, poor spelling, poor writing, and other language processing difficulties. However, recent evidence may suggest that teacher preparation programs are not providing preservice teachers with information about basic language constructs and other components related to scientifically based reading instruction. As a consequence preservice teachers have not exhibited explicit knowledge of such concepts in previous studies. Few studies have sought to assess preservice teachers’ knowledge about dyslexia in conjunction with knowledge of basic language concepts. The purpose of the present study was to examine elementary school preservice teachers’ knowledge of basic language constructs and their perceptions and knowledge about dyslexia. Findings from the present study suggest that preservice teachers, on average, are able to display implicit skills related to certain basic language constructs (i.e., syllable counting), but fail to demonstrate explicit knowledge of others (i.e., phonics principles). Also, preservice teachers seem to hold the common misconception that dyslexia is a visual perception deficit rather than a problem with phonological processing. Implications for future research as well as teacher preparation are discussed.

Reading and writing disorders in different orthographic systems

1. Developmental Dyslexia: A Cognitive Developmental Perspective..- 2. Decoding Instruction Based on Word Structure and Origin..- 3. Orthographic Memory and Learning to Read..- 4. Relationship between Cognitive Development, Decoding Skill, and Reading Comprehension in Learning-Disabled Dutch Children..- 5. Cerebral Laterality in a Group of Danish Dyslexic Children..- 6. Dyslexia in the German Language..- 7. Developmental Dyslexia in French Language..- 8. The Italian Language: Developmental Reading and Writing Problems..- 9. Reading Errors in Spanish..- 10. The Phonological Factor in Reading and Spelling of Greek..- 11. A Linguistic Study of Reading and Writing Disorders in Turkish, an Agglutinative Language..- 12. Orthography and Reading of the Arabic Language..- 13. Hebrew Orthography and Dyslexia-A Note..- 14. Language Representation and Reading in Kannada - A South Indian Language..- 15. Linguistic Parameters in the Diagnosis of Dyslexia in Japanese and Chinese..- 16. Reading and Reading Difficulties in a Morphemic Script..- 17. Lexical Access Viewed from the Information Processing Approach: Reading and Writing (Data from Pathology)..- 18. A Model of the Spelling Process: Evidence from Cognitively Impaired Subjects..- 19. Working Memory and Learning to Read..- 20. A Neuropsychological Model for the Role of Articulation in Verbal Short-term Memory and in Reading Comprehension..- 21. Mirror-Writing..- 22. Orthographic Systems and Developmental Dyslexia: A Reformulation of the Syndrome..

Cognitive Component of Componential Model of Reading Applied to Different Orthographies

Whether the simple view of reading (SVR) as incorporated in the componential model of reading (CMR) is applicable to other orthographies than English was explored in this study. Spanish, with transparent orthography and Chinese, with opaque orthography were selected because of their diverse characteristics. The first part reports a study of students from grades 2 and 3, whose home language and medium of instruction was Spanish, and were administered tests of decoding, listening, and reading comprehension. A comparison group of 49 children from Grade 2, 54 children from Grade 3, and 55 children from Grade 4, whose home language and instruction was English, were also administered tests of decoding, listening, and reading comprehension. Multiple regression analysis showed that approximately 60% of the variance in reading comprehension of Spanish participants and 50% of the variance in reading comprehension of English participants were explained by decoding and listening comprehension. Furthermore, the performance of third grade Spanish participants resembled that of fourth grade English-speaking participants. In the second study, 102 Chinese students from Grade 2 and 106 students from Grade 4 were administered tasks of Chinese character recognition, reading fluency, listening, and reading comprehension. Multiple regression analyses showed character recognition and listening comprehension accounted for 25% and 42% of the variance in Chinese reading comprehension at Grades 2 and 4 respectively. These results indicate that the simple view of reading is applicable to writing systems other than that of English.

Peter Effect in the Preparation of Reading Teachers

The Peter Effect (Applegate & Applegate, 2004) claimed that one cannot be expected to give what one does not possess. We applied this notion to reading teacher preparation and hypothesized that teacher educators who do not possess an understanding of basic language constructs would not prepare teacher candidates with an understanding of these constructs considered essential for early reading success. Results from a survey of basic language constructs revealed similar patterns in performance between teacher educators and their respective teacher candidates, which served as initial validation of the Peter Effect in reading teacher preparation.