Beginning to read : thinking and learning about print

doi:10.2307/415121

Journal Article•DOI•

Beginning to read : thinking and learning about print

01 Jun 1991-Language (MIT Press)-Vol. 67, Iss: 2, pp 388

TL;DR: Marilyn Adams proposes that phonies can work together with the "whole language" approach to teaching reading and provides an integrated treatment of the knowledge and processes involved in skillful reading, the issues surrounding their acquisition, and the implications for reading instruction.

read less

Abstract: "Beginning to Read reconciles the debate that has divided theorists for decades over what is the "right" way to help children learn to read Drawing on a rich array of research on the nature and development of reading proficiency, Marilyn Adams shows educators that they need not remain trapped in the phonics versus teaching-formeaning dilemma and offers instructional alternatives She proposes that phonies can work together with the "whole language" approach to teaching reading and provides an integrated treatment of the knowledge and processes involved in skillful reading, the issues surrounding their acquisition, and the implications for reading instruction Broad in scope and clearly written, "Beginning to Read provides fresh insights into the relationship between thinking and learning Developing the new connectionist theory as it relates to reading and its acquisition, Adams underscores the automatic nature of print perception in skillful readers while contrasting it with the attentive thought required for conceptual learning and understanding Adams reviews the history of debate over approaches to reading instruction as well as the research on their effectiveness, She consistently integrates instructional concerns with meticulous attention to research and theory from education, developmental and cognitive psychology, and linguistics Throughout, she emphasizes the interdependence of meaning appreciation and orthographic facility in both fluent reading and its acquisition Relevant learning theory is presented along with discussion of the roles of experience, practice, direct instruction, rules, thinking and understanding Adams stresses the importance of preschool language andliteracy experiences and includes descriptions of those that will best prepare children for reading instruction Marilyn Jager Adams is a Senior Scientist at Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc She was Principal Author and Curriculum Coordinator/Editor for the five volume classroom instruction series, "Odyssey: A Curriculum for Thinking Beginning to Read was developed in conjunction with the Reading Research and Education Center at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Learning, Development, and Conceptual Change series

...read moreread less

Citations

PDF

Open Access

More filters

Book•

Preventing reading difficulties in young children

[...]

Catherine E. Snow, M. Susan Burns, Peg Griffin

01 Jan 1998

TL;DR: This chapter discusses strategies for helping children with Reading Difficulties in Grades 1 to 3, as well as recommendations for practice and research.

...read moreread less

Abstract: 1 Front Matter 2 Executive Summary 3 Part I: Introduction to Reading 4 1. Introduction 5 2. The Process of Learning to Read 6 Part II: Who Are We Talking About? 7 3. Who Has Reading Difficulties? 8 4. Predictors of Success and Failure in Reading 9 Part III: Prevention and Intervention 10 5. Preventing Reading Difficulties Before Kindergarten 11 6. Instructional Strategies for Kindergarten and the Primary Grades 12 7. Organizational Strategies for Kindergarten and the Primary Grades 13 8. Helping Children with Reading Difficulties in Grades 1 to 3 14 Part IV: Knowledge into Action 15 9. The Agents of Change 16 10. Recommendations for Practice and Research 17 References 18 Biographical Sketches 19 Index

...read moreread less

5,743 citations

Journal Article•DOI•

Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across languages: a psycholinguistic grain size theory.

[...]

Johannes C. Ziegler¹, Usha Goswami²•Institutions (2)

University of Provence¹, University of Cambridge²

01 Jan 2005-Psychological Bulletin

TL;DR: The authors develop a novel theoretical framework to explain cross-language data, which they label a psycholinguistic grain size theory of reading and its development.

...read moreread less

Abstract: The development of reading depends on phonological awareness across all languages so far studied. Languages vary in the consistency with which phonology is represented in orthography. This results in developmental differences in the grain size of lexical representations and accompanying differences in developmental reading strategies and the manifestation of dyslexia across orthographies. Differences in lexical representations and reading across languages leave developmental “footprints” in the adult lexicon. The lexical organization and processing strategies that are characteristic of skilled reading in different orthographies are affected by different developmental constraints in different writing systems. The authors develop a novel theoretical framework to explain these cross-language data, which they label a psycholinguistic grain size theory of reading and its development.

...read moreread less

2,437 citations

Cites background from "Beginning to read : thinking and le..."

...…empirical evidence for a causal link between a child’s phonological awareness skills and his or her progress in reading and spelling has been called “a strikingly successful one” (Goswami & Bryant, 1992, p. 49; see also Adams, 1990; Lundberg, 1991; Stanovich, 1992; Torgesen et al., 1999)....
[...]
...49; see also Adams, 1990; Lundberg, 1991; Stanovich, 1992; Torgesen et al., 1999). Nevertheless, perhaps surprisingly, there are still those who dispute that the link exists. For example, Castles and Coltheart (2004) recently argued that “no single study has provided unequivocal evidence that there is a causal link from competence in phonological awareness to success in reading and spelling acquisition” (p. 77). In a critical review, they considered and dismissed even those studies seen as particularly influential within the developmental arena (e.g., the large-scale studies by Bradley & Bryant, 1983; Bryant et al., 1990; Lundberg et al., 1988; Schneider et al., 1997). These studies have been considered particularly influential because (a) they used strong research designs whereby the nature of the studies was longitudinal; (b) they began studying the participants when they were prereaders; and (c) they tested the longitudinal correlations found between phonological awareness and literacy via intervention and training, thereby demonstrating a specific link that did not extend, for example, to mathematics. In assessing the arguments used by Castles and Coltheart (2004) to eliminate even these strongest studies, it is instructive to consider the a priori assumptions that they made concerning phonological development and reading acquisition. Castles and Coltheart (2004) set out to test the status of “the original hypothesis that phonological awareness represents a distinct set of spokenlanguage skills [italics added] that (a) precede and (b) directly influence the process of reading acquisition” (p. 78). However, they then stated two assumptions that made the rest of their analyses largely irrelevant. These assumptions are that (a) the most basic speech units of a language are phonemes (p. 78) and (b) it is impossible to derive a pure measure of phonological awareness if a child knows any alphabetic letters (p. 84). In adopting these two assumptions, they diverged from the developmental literature. As demonstrated above, and indeed as argued for some time in the speech-processing literature (Greenberg, Carvey, Hitchcock, & Chang, 2003; Jusczyk, 1999; Warren, 1993), the most basic speech units of a language are syllables, not phonemes. Work with infants has suggested that the lexical system is set up initially on the basis of information about prosody, onsets, duration, and vocalic nuclei (e.g., Jusczyk, Goodman, & Baumann, 1999; Plunkett & Schafer, 2001; Trehub, Thorpe, & Morrongiello, 1987), all of which aid syllable extraction. Phones (in contrast to phonemes) may be processed early, but as documented above, letter learning is required for phonemic awareness to develop. Measures of phonological awareness in preschoolers are hence syllable, onset, and rime measures. The adevelopmental criteria adopted by Castles and Coltheart (2004) led them to reject all the available developmental studies as unsuitable for assessing their version of the causal hypothesis. For example, Bryant et al.’s (1990) study was excluded because measures of phoneme awareness were not taken when the children were aged 4 years, only when they were aged 5 years (at 4 years, most English-speaking children are unable to solve phoneme awareness tasks; see, e.g., Anthony et al., 2002). Studies by Lundberg et al. (1988) and Schneider et al. (1997) were eliminated for including preschoolers who already knew four to five letters. Yet even 2-year-olds in literate societies tend to know the letters in their names and thereby probably know four to five letters. In our view, Castles and Coltheart (2004) were unable to find evidence for their version of the causal hypothesis about phonological awareness because (a) they had narrowed the focus to studies showing a causal link between phonemic awareness and literacy and (b) phonemic awareness must be demonstrated in prereaders who do not know any letters....
[...]
...49; see also Adams, 1990; Lundberg, 1991; Stanovich, 1992; Torgesen et al., 1999). Nevertheless, perhaps surprisingly, there are still those who dispute that the link exists. For example, Castles and Coltheart (2004) recently argued that “no single study has provided unequivocal evidence that there is a causal link from competence in phonological awareness to success in reading and spelling acquisition” (p. 77). In a critical review, they considered and dismissed even those studies seen as particularly influential within the developmental arena (e.g., the large-scale studies by Bradley & Bryant, 1983; Bryant et al., 1990; Lundberg et al., 1988; Schneider et al., 1997). These studies have been considered particularly influential because (a) they used strong research designs whereby the nature of the studies was longitudinal; (b) they began studying the participants when they were prereaders; and (c) they tested the longitudinal correlations found between phonological awareness and literacy via intervention and training, thereby demonstrating a specific link that did not extend, for example, to mathematics. In assessing the arguments used by Castles and Coltheart (2004) to eliminate even these strongest studies, it is instructive to consider the a priori assumptions that they made concerning phonological development and reading acquisition. Castles and Coltheart (2004) set out to test the status of “the original hypothesis that phonological awareness represents a distinct set of spokenlanguage skills [italics added] that (a) precede and (b) directly influence the process of reading acquisition” (p....
[...]
...49; see also Adams, 1990; Lundberg, 1991; Stanovich, 1992; Torgesen et al., 1999). Nevertheless, perhaps surprisingly, there are still those who dispute that the link exists. For example, Castles and Coltheart (2004) recently argued that “no single study has provided unequivocal evidence that there is a causal link from competence in phonological awareness to success in reading and spelling acquisition” (p. 77). In a critical review, they considered and dismissed even those studies seen as particularly influential within the developmental arena (e.g., the large-scale studies by Bradley & Bryant, 1983; Bryant et al., 1990; Lundberg et al., 1988; Schneider et al., 1997). These studies have been considered particularly influential because (a) they used strong research designs whereby the nature of the studies was longitudinal; (b) they began studying the participants when they were prereaders; and (c) they tested the longitudinal correlations found between phonological awareness and literacy via intervention and training, thereby demonstrating a specific link that did not extend, for example, to mathematics. In assessing the arguments used by Castles and Coltheart (2004) to eliminate even these strongest studies, it is instructive to consider the a priori assumptions that they made concerning phonological development and reading acquisition. Castles and Coltheart (2004) set out to test the status of “the original hypothesis that phonological awareness represents a distinct set of spokenlanguage skills [italics added] that (a) precede and (b) directly influence the process of reading acquisition” (p. 78). However, they then stated two assumptions that made the rest of their analyses largely irrelevant. These assumptions are that (a) the most basic speech units of a language are phonemes (p. 78) and (b) it is impossible to derive a pure measure of phonological awareness if a child knows any alphabetic letters (p. 84). In adopting these two assumptions, they diverged from the developmental literature. As demonstrated above, and indeed as argued for some time in the speech-processing literature (Greenberg, Carvey, Hitchcock, & Chang, 2003; Jusczyk, 1999; Warren, 1993), the most basic speech units of a language are syllables, not phonemes. Work with infants has suggested that the lexical system is set up initially on the basis of information about prosody, onsets, duration, and vocalic nuclei (e.g., Jusczyk, Goodman, & Baumann, 1999; Plunkett & Schafer, 2001; Trehub, Thorpe, & Morrongiello, 1987), all of which aid syllable extraction. Phones (in contrast to phonemes) may be processed early, but as documented above, letter learning is required for phonemic awareness to develop. Measures of phonological awareness in preschoolers are hence syllable, onset, and rime measures. The adevelopmental criteria adopted by Castles and Coltheart (2004) led them to reject all the available developmental studies as unsuitable for assessing their version of the causal hypothesis. For example, Bryant et al.’s (1990) study was excluded because measures of phoneme awareness were not taken when the children were aged 4 years, only when they were aged 5 years (at 4 years, most English-speaking children are unable to solve phoneme awareness tasks; see, e.g., Anthony et al., 2002). Studies by Lundberg et al. (1988) and Schneider et al. (1997) were eliminated for including preschoolers who already knew four to five letters....
[...]
...A large number of studies have shown that good phonological awareness skills characterize good readers, whereas poor phonological awareness skills characterize poor readers (for reviews, see Adams, 1990; Brady & Shankweiler, 1991; Goswami & Bryant, 1990; Scarborough, 1998; Wagner & Torgesen, 1987)....
[...]

Journal Article•DOI•

Child development and emergent literacy

[...]

Graver J. Whitehurst¹, Christopher J. Lonigan²•Institutions (2)

Stony Brook University¹, Florida State University²

01 Jun 1998-Child Development

TL;DR: It is proposed that emergent literacy consists of at least two distinct domains: inside-out skills and outside-in skills, which appear to be influential at different points in time during reading acquisition.

...read moreread less

Abstract: Emergent literacy consists of the skills, knowledge, and attitudes that are developmental precursors to reading and writing. This article offers a preliminary typology of children's emergent literacy skills, a review of the evidence that relates emergent literacy to reading, and a review of the evidence for linkage between children's emergent literacy environments and the development of emergent literacy skills. We propose that emergent literacy consists of at least two distinct domains: inside-out skills (e.g., phonological awareness, letter knowledge) and outside-in skills (e.g., language, conceptual knowledge). These different domains are not the product of the same experiences and appear to be influential at different points in time during reading acquisition. Whereas outside-in skills are associated with those aspects of children's literacy environments typically measured, little is known about the origins of inside-out skills. Evidence from interventions to enhance emergent literacy suggests that relatively intensive and multifaceted interventions are needed to improve reading achievement maximally. A number of successful preschool interventions for outside-in skills exist, and computer-based tasks designed to teach children inside-out skills seem promising. Future research directions include more sophisticated multidimensional examination of emergent literacy skills and environments, better integration with reading research, and longer-term evaluation of preschool interventions. Policy implications for emergent literacy intervention and reading education are discussed.

...read moreread less

2,383 citations

Journal Article•DOI•

Specific reading disability (dyslexia): what have we learned in the past four decades?

[...]

Frank R. Vellutino¹, Jack M. Fletcher², Margaret J. Snowling³, Donna M. Scanlon¹•Institutions (3)

University at Albany, SUNY¹, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston², University of York³

01 Jan 2004-Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry

TL;DR: Evidence is presented in support of the idea that many poor readers are impaired because of inadequate instruction or other experiential factors, and Hypothesized deficits in general learning abilities and low-level sensory deficits have weak validity as causal factors in specific reading disability.

...read moreread less

Abstract: We summarize some of the most important findings from research evaluating the hypothesized causes of specific reading disability (dyslexia) over the past four decades. After outlining components of reading ability, we discuss manifest causes of reading difficulties, in terms of deficiencies in component reading skills that might lead to such difficulties. The evidence suggests that inadequate facility in word identification due, in most cases, to more basic deficits in alphabetic coding is the basic cause of difficulties in learning to read. We next discuss hypothesized deficiencies in readingrelated cognitive abilities as underlying causes of deficiencies in component reading skills. The evidence in these areas suggests that, in most cases, phonological skills deficiencies associated with phonological coding deficits are the probable causes of the disorder rather than visual, semantic, or syntactic deficits, although reading difficulties in some children may be associated with general language deficits. Hypothesized deficits in general learning abilities (e.g., attention, association learning, cross-modal transfer etc.) and low-level sensory deficits have weak validity as causal factors in specific reading disability. These inferences are, by and large, supported by research evaluating the biological foundations of dyslexia. Finally, evidence is presented in support of the idea that many poor readers are impaired because of inadequate instruction or other experiential factors. This does not mean that biological factors are not relevant, because the brain and environment interact to produce the neural networks that support reading acquisition. We conclude with a discussion of the clinical implications of the research findings, focusing on the need for enhanced instruction.

...read moreread less

2,275 citations

Cites background from "Beginning to read : thinking and le..."

...…that training that helped children acquire these skills had a beneficial effect on word identification, spelling, and reading ability in general (Adams, 1990; Blachman, 1994, 2000; Bradley & Bryant, 1983; Foorman, Francis, Novy, & Liberman, 1991; Foorman, Francis, Fletcher, Schatschneider, &…...
[...]
...…observed in children who also experience early reading difficulties and can certainly contribute to early reading and language difficulties (e.g., Adams, 1990; Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998), limitations in such knowledge are probably not basic causes of specific reading disability, in the…...
[...]
...mapping may be causally related to reading difficulties comes from naturalistic studies, controlled laboratory studies, and intervention studies in which it was found that training that helped children acquire these skills had a beneficial effect on word identification, spelling, and reading ability in general (Adams, 1990; Blachman, 1994, 2000; Bradley & Bryant, 1983; Foorman, Francis, Novy, & Liberman, 1991; Foorman, Francis, Fletcher, Schatschneider, & Mehta, 1998; Hatcher, Hulme & Ellis, 1994; Lundberg, Frost, & Petersen, 1988; Olson, Wise, & Ring, 1999; Scanlon & Vellutino, 1996; Scanlon, Vellutino, Small, & Fanuele, 2000; Torgesen, Rose, Lindamood, Conway, & Garvan, 1999; Vellutino & Scanlon, 1987a; Vellutino et al., 1996; Williams, 1980)....
[...]

Book•

Reading for Understanding: Toward an R&D Program in Reading Comprehension

[...]

Catherine E. Snow

17 Apr 1998

TL;DR: It is argued that the primary challenge of improving reading performance in the early grades is now to incorporate research based knowledge systematically into teacher preparation and practice.

...read moreread less

Abstract: : This draft report from the Rand Reading Study Group (RRSG)1 formulates an initial proposal concerning the research issues that the community of reading researchers most urgently needs to address over the next 10-15 years. We encourage readers of this draft version to respond with feedback about our summary of the issues, the coherence of our model of reading comprehension, and our sketch of the research enterprise. Ultimately, this document may become the basis for more formal agenda setting. At this point it is an invitation to join a conversation about an area of great practical importance: reading development and reading instruction. The proposed research agenda builds upon a number of recent efforts to summarize the knowledge base in the field of reading. These efforts include the National Research Council report on Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children, the Report of the National Reading Panel, and the recently published edition of the Handbook of Reading Research. Given the availability of these and other older sources,2 the RRSG did not see the need to replicate recent efforts to synthesize the knowledge base concerning initial reading and its implications for instruction and assessment of the general population. Thus we argue that the primary challenge of improving reading performance in the early grades is now to incorporate research based knowledge systematically into teacher preparation and practice. We still have much to learn, however, about how children become good comprehenders, how to design and deliver instruction, and how to prevent comprehension failure.

...read moreread less

1,791 citations

Cites background from "Beginning to read : thinking and le..."

...In fact, abundant evidence now shows that most children who have difficulty learning to read have deficient phoneme awareness and alphabetic coding skills and that such deficiencies are causally related to deficiencies in word recognition, spelling, and writing (Adams, 1990; Liberman, 1983; Snow et al., 1998; Vellutino, 1979, 1987)....
[...]
...…that most children who have difficulty learning to read have deficient phoneme awareness and alphabetic coding skills and that such deficiencies are causally related to deficiencies in word recognition, spelling, and writing (Adams, 1990; Liberman, 1983; Snow et al., 1998; Vellutino, 1979, 1987)....
[...]
...…comprehension (applying world knowledge, reasoning, etc.) do not become fully operative in comprehending text until the child has acquired such facility (Adams, 1990; Gough & Tunmer, 1986; Hoover & Gough, 1990; Perfetti, 1985; Stanovich, 1991; Sticht & James, 1984; Vellutino et al., 1991,1994)....
[...]
...…of world knowledge, reasoning, etc.) do not become fully operative in comprehending text until the child has acquired reasonable fluency (Adams, 1990; Gough & Tunmer, 1986; Hoover & Gough, 1990; Perfetti, 1985; Stanovich, 1991; Sticht & James, 1984; Vellutino et al., 1991; Vellutino,…...
[...]
...) do not become fully operative in comprehending text until the child has acquired reasonable fluency (Adams, 1990; Gough & Tunmer, 1986; Hoover & Gough, 1990; Perfetti, 1985; Stanovich, 1991; Sticht & James, 1984; Vellutino et al., 1991; Vellutino, Scanlon, & Tanzman, 1994)....
[...]

Collapse

References

PDF

Open Access

More filters

DOI•

The Non-Uniqueness of Phonemic Solutions of Phonetic Systems

[...]

Yuen Ren Chao

01 Jan 1934

TL;DR: The main purpose of the present paper is to show that given the sounds of a language, there are usually more than one possible way of reducing them to a system of phonemes, and that these different systems or solutions are not simply correct or incorrect, but may be regarded only as being good or bad for various purposes.

...read moreread less

Abstract: In reading current discussions on the transcription of sounds by phonemes, one gets the impression of a tacit assumption that given the sounds of one language, there will be one and only one way of reducing them to a system of phonemes which represent the sound-system correctly. Since different writers do not in fact agree in the phonemic treatment of the same language, there arise then frequent controversies over the ”correctness” or ”incorrectness” in the use of phonemes. The main purpose of the present paper is to show that given the sounds of a language, there are usually more than one possible way of reducing them to a system of phonemes, and that these different systems or solutions are not simply correct or incorrect, but may be regarded only as being good or bad for various purposes.

...read moreread less

131 citations

"Beginning to read : thinking and le..." refers background or methods in this paper

...The point is that (1) if John or countless children like him were to participate in one of our experiments, he would be classified as a nonreader with reasonably good phonemic awareness and letter recognition skills, and that (2) when John eventually receives formal reading instruction, he will do fine....
[...]
...Two major justifications are generally offered for their presLnce: (1) pictures may provide cues for identifying words that are otherwise hard to recognize; and (2) pictures may stimulate interest in reading a text and promote a better understanding of the information in the text....
[...]
...Chapters in the summary include: (1) "Words and Meanings: From an Age-Old Problem to a Contemporary Crisis"; (2) Research about Readers: Two Perspectives"; (3) "Preparing Young Children to Read"; (4) "Moving into Reading"; and (5) "Words and Meaning: Toward a Resolution."...
[...]
...The twenty-two instructional models examined fell into three groups: (1) those en,phasizing basic academic skit's, (2) those emphasizing cognitive or conceptual development,...
[...]
...Meanings: From an Age-Old Problem to a Contemporary Crisis"; (2) Research about Readers: Two Perspectives"; (3) "Preparing Young...
[...]

Journal Article•

Effects of Grapheme Substitutions in Connected Text Upon Reading Behaviors.

[...]

Richard L. Allington, Michael Strange

01 Jan 1977-Visible Language

39 citations

Beginning to read : thinking and learning about print

Citations

Cites background from "Beginning to read : thinking and le..."

Cites background from "Beginning to read : thinking and le..."

Cites background from "Beginning to read : thinking and le..."

References

"Beginning to read : thinking and le..." refers background or methods in this paper

Related Papers (5)