Posting 1: Reading For Instruction

Ten Myths of Reading For Instruction

By: Sebastian Wren, Ph.D. Michael Pressley, in his excellent book, Reading Instruction that Works, concluded with a discussion of what he considered to be Dumb and Dangerous. Claims about all of the points he made were quite compelling, but one wonders if these are his "top ten" picks for the most dangerous myths about reading instruction. Curious readers are directed to his book to review his "top ten" list (the book is well written and highly informative), but here we will examine a second perspective of the most damaging myths and misconceptions about reading for instruction. Let us begin with a myth that Pressley did not mention, but which is arguably the most pernicious myth currently influencing reading instruction: Myth 1- Learning to read is a natural process It has long been argued that learning to read, like learning to understand spoken language is a natural phenomenon. It has often been suggested that children will learn to read if they are simply immersed in a literacy-rich environment and allowed to develop literacy skills in their own way. This belief that learning to read is a natural process that comes from rich text experiences is surprisingly prevalent in education despite the fact that learning to read is about as natural as learning to juggle blindfolded while riding a unicycle backwards. Myth 2- Children will eventually learn to read if given enough time This is arguably the second most pernicious myth, and it is closely related to the first. Many who claim that reading is natural also claim that children need to be given time to develop their reading skills at their own pace. We should always address instruction to each child's zone of proximal development, we should not simply wait for children to develop reading skills in their own time. Myth 3- Reading programs are "successful" It is extremely common for schools to buy a reading program to address their reading instruction needs, and trust that the program will solve their school's literacy issues. Typically these programs require a great deal of commitment from the school, both in terms of time and money. Research has repeatedly indicated that the single most important variable in any reading program is the knowledge and skill of the teacher implementing the program. Myth 4- We used to do a better job of teaching children to read Nothing illustrates this better than the National Assessment of Educational Progress (the NAEP). This assessment has been given to children across the country aged 9, 13, and 17 since 1970. Student performance at those three age levels has not changed substantially in over 30 years -- us great insights into why some children have difficulty learning to read, and the next frontier in reading education is to help teachers understand and apply that research information. Myth 5- Skilled reading involves using syntactic and semantic cues to "guess" words, and good readers make many "mistakes" as they read authentic text Research indicates that both of these claims are quite wrong, but both are surprisingly pervasive in reading instruction. The semantic and syntactic information are critical for comprehension of passages of text, but they do not play an important role in decoding or identifying words. Good readers make virtually no mistakes as they read because they have developed extremely effective and efficient word identification skills that do not depend upon semantics/context or syntax. Myth 6- Research can be used to support whatever your beliefs and lots of programs are "research based" Unfortunately, it is true that a lot of people do selectively search and sample the research literature, citing only the research that seems to support their pre-conceived notions. Often research results are skewed or biased to appear to be consistent with hypotheses proposed. All of us need to adopt a bit of healthy skepticism, and we need to demand that a substantial research base be provided as evidence to support claims. And we also need to learn to pay more attention to the research evidence. In short, we should always remember the researcher's credo: "Remarkable claims require remarkable evidence." Myth 7- Phoneme awareness is a consequence (not a cause) of reading acquisition The evidence showing the importance of phoneme awareness to literacy acquisition is overwhelming. Still, there are some that are not convinced. Some claim that teaching children to develop phoneme awareness is not necessary or even beneficial. The research evidence, however, does not support this view. First, it is quite clear that phoneme awareness is a necessary prerequisite for developing decoding skills in an alphabetic writing system such as English. Second, phoneme awareness instruction can be very authentic and natural. Teachers can use music, tongue twisters, poetry and games to help children develop phoneme awareness. Myth 8- Some people are just genetically "dyslexic" The belief in an underlying genetic cause for dyslexia ignores the fact that reading and writing simply have not been around long enough to become part of our genetic make up. It was long argued that when a disparity existed between a person's intelligence and their reading skill, the person should be described as a "dyslexic." The term "dyslexic" eventually became a catch-all term used to account for people who failed to learn to read despite apparent intellectual capacity and environmental support. The three reasons people have difficulty developing basic reading skills are: 1. They have difficulty developing decoding skills, 2. They have difficulty developing language comprehension skills or, 3. Both have difficulties developing decoding skills very often arise from difficulties processing sounds in speech (phonological processing skills). Myth 9- Short-term tutoring for struggling readers can get them caught up with their peers, and the gains will be sustained Pull-out programs for reading instruction are extremely common in schools. Typically in one of these programs, a highly trained teacher will pull individual students out of the classroom for short, intensive, one-on-one instruction sessions. After a few weeks of this intensive intervention, the students are exited from the program, and they resume normal classroom activities. Myth 10- If it is in the curriculum, then the children will learn it, and a balanced reading curriculum is ideal This is only a half-myth. Clearly, if something is not a part of the curriculum, then children are very unlikely to learn it, but just because a concept or skill is taught, there is no guarantee that every child will learn it. Standards are starting to shift from an emphasis on what is taught to an emphasis on what is learned, and curricula are starting to make the same shift instructional strategies. Reflections: The reading text was basically about how to achieve success for all children, teachers and others to become extremely sophisticated and diagnostic in their approach to reading instruction. Besides that, it could make them responsible for providing ongoing, job imbedded professional development and coaching for the other teachers that can develop expertise in reading theory. By learning that, it could also provide explicit systematic instruction for all reading strategies. The use of knowledge will also employ an abundance of diverse, interesting texts for reading for instruction.

URL: http://www.sedl.org/reading/topics/myths.pdf