Feedback on Phonic Check

Moderators: Debbie Hepplewhite, maizie, Lesley Drake, Susan Godsland

Locked
Kiki
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:05 am

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by Kiki » Fri Oct 11, 2013 12:04 pm

As Maizie tried to tell us:
never.jpg
never.jpg (36.75 KiB) Viewed 4059 times

chew8
Posts: 4175
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:26 pm

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by chew8 » Fri Oct 11, 2013 12:57 pm

Before I spend any more time on this, I'd like to know which particular Stanovich article you have in mind, Toots. I asked about this a few days ago, but you didn't respond. I've now done a search for all your references to Stanovich on this message-board and the only post which mentions more than just 'Stanovich' is one on 2 November 2012 in which you referred to Stanovich and Stanovich 1995. I think, but am not sure, that this may be an article by Keith and Paula Stanovich published in 1995 in Journal of Research in Reading, to which I subscribe

When others have referred to Stanovich, I think they often mean his book Progress in Understanding Reading (500+ pages) published in 2000. This is a selection, made by him, of 14 articles first published elsewhere. They are arranged in sections according to topic and each section has an introductory chapter by him, so there are 21 chapters altogether. No 1995 Stanovich and Stanovich article is included, but, as I say, I do have a copy of one, which is entitled 'How research might inform the debate about early reading acquisition'. Is this the one you have in mind, or are you thinking of one or more other Stanovich articles, whether or not included in his 2000 book?

Jenny C.

User avatar
maizie
Administrator
Posts: 3121
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 10:38 pm
Location: N.E England

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by maizie » Fri Oct 11, 2013 1:45 pm

Jenny,

Jenny,

I think it was I who referred toots to Stanovich's findings on the use of context for word ID. It can be found in 'Progress in Understanding Reading' p6 (where he describes his surprise at finding that his results did notconfrim Frank Smith's assertions about the use of context in word ID) and Ch 2 which has an edited version of the research study.

The 'debate' we were engaged in was concerning the value of teaching children to use context for word identification. I expect at some point toots had said that it was a strategy which children should be taught, else I would not have been debating the point. (It was a number of years ago and I don't intend to trawl through numerous TES threads in which toots & I have had basically the same argument over and over again in order to find it). My contention was that, as Stanovich had found that skilled adult readers did not use context for word ID why teach a faulty strategy to children learning to read when they didn't need it and it hampered automaticity in decoding and blending..

As I recall, toots countered with her interpretation that there was nothing wrong with teaching the strategy as it was clear that as readers became more skilled they 'grew out of' using it (at least, I think that was her argument).

:?:

chew8
Posts: 4175
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:26 pm

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by chew8 » Fri Oct 11, 2013 3:04 pm

Thanks for that maizie. I wonder, though, whether Chapter 2 in Progress in Understanding Reading is really relevant in the present debate. Toots referred yesterday to ‘Stanovich's longitudinal study of the use of context’, but the study summarised in Chap 2 is not a longitudinal study – it’s a study of three separate groups (4th-graders, 6th-graders and college students) not of one group followed over time. Moreover, even the youngest subjects (the 4th-graders - mean age 9-9) were well beyond the beginner stage, and as this discussion is apparently related to the Y1 screening check, I’m assuming that what Toots is concerned about is whether the check is causing teachers of the youngest children to over-emphasise phonic decoding at the expense of other word-identification strategies (e.g. use of context). I feel that I really need to hear directly from Toots about which Stanovich article I should be focusing on.

Jenny C.

Toots

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by Toots » Fri Oct 11, 2013 4:32 pm

I find I did not bookmark or file the article at the time but believe it was this one:


http://www.rfwest.net/Site_2/Welcome_fi ... JECP81.pdf

My contention would not have been that it's OK to teach children to use context because children grow out if it. My contention would have been that if the feature of SP teaching which is so strongly against teaching children to use context is based on this study it is a very shaky foundation, and that it seems at least possible that the use of context is a natural developmental stage in the early stages of reading which becomes less and less useful as the reader amasses a lexicon of known words, rather in the way that phonic decoding is an important strategy in the early stages.

User avatar
maizie
Administrator
Posts: 3121
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 10:38 pm
Location: N.E England

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by maizie » Fri Oct 11, 2013 4:43 pm

Toots wrote:it seems at least possible that the use of context is a natural developmental stage in the early stages of reading which becomes less and less useful as the reader amasses a lexicon of known words, rather in the way that phonic decoding is an important strategy in the early stages.
In other words, they'll 'grow out of it'.

chew8
Posts: 4175
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:26 pm

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by chew8 » Fri Oct 11, 2013 4:50 pm

Thanks. That article is not in Progress in Understanding Reading. I'll need to read it with the particular point you now make in mind. I don't think, though, that s.p. attitudes to children's use of context would be based on this one article.

Jenny C.

Toots

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by Toots » Fri Oct 11, 2013 5:13 pm

maizie wrote:
Toots wrote:it seems at least possible that the use of context is a natural developmental stage in the early stages of reading which becomes less and less useful as the reader amasses a lexicon of known words, rather in the way that phonic decoding is an important strategy in the early stages.
In other words, they'll 'grow out of it'.
Yes good readers grow out of it, but I would not have said that that justifies supporting it. After all, (most) children grow out of wetting the bed but you wouldn't use that fact to deliberately encourage them to wet the bed.

When I say it might be a developmental stage I mean that it is possible that in the early years of reading it performs a useful function in the same way that phonic decoding performs a useful function. Like crawling.

User avatar
maizie
Administrator
Posts: 3121
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 10:38 pm
Location: N.E England

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by maizie » Fri Oct 11, 2013 7:03 pm

Reading is a taught skill, not a developmental one.

Toots

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by Toots » Fri Oct 11, 2013 7:22 pm

I was trying to help you understand by using an example from child development rather than reading development. Would you argue with the idea that learning a skill might involve the development of certain subskills which vary in importance at different stages of expertise?

I prefer to think of reading as a skill that is learnt rather than taught. I am fairly sure that a lot of self-teaching goes on during the development of reading skill.

Kiki
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:05 am

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by Kiki » Fri Oct 11, 2013 8:33 pm

Toots wrote:
maizie wrote:
Toots wrote:it seems at least possible that the use of context is a natural developmental stage in the early stages of reading which becomes less and less useful as the reader amasses a lexicon of known words, rather in the way that phonic decoding is an important strategy in the early stages.
In other words, they'll 'grow out of it'.
Yes good readers grow out of it, but I would not have said that that justifies supporting it. After all, (most) children grow out of wetting the bed but you wouldn't use that fact to deliberately encourage them to wet the bed.

When I say it might be a developmental stage I mean that it is possible that in the early years of reading it performs a useful function in the same way that phonic decoding performs a useful function. Like crawling.

So when teaching, how are you going to tell the difference between the children you claim will 'grow out of' using this ineffective, inefficient strategy (ie ferret out how reading works for themselves because they are receiving insufficient help, support and instruction) and the children who will be permanently damaged?

And why the aversion to 'teaching'?

User avatar
maizie
Administrator
Posts: 3121
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 10:38 pm
Location: N.E England

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by maizie » Fri Oct 11, 2013 9:08 pm

Toots wrote:Would you argue with the idea that learning a skill might involve the development of certain subskills which vary in importance at different stages of expertise?
I wouldn't argue with that; what I would argue with is the deliberate teaching of an ineffective 'subskill'. If I were being taught a new skill I wouldn't expect my instructor to teach me an inefficient 'subskill' which I would later have to 'unlearn'.
Toots wrote:I prefer to think of reading as a skill that is learnt rather than taught.
Oh dear...

Toots

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by Toots » Fri Oct 11, 2013 10:06 pm

Kiki wrote:

So when teaching, how are you going to tell the difference between the children you claim will 'grow out of' using this ineffective, inefficient strategy (ie ferret out how reading works for themselves because they are receiving insufficient help, support and instruction) and the children who will be permanently damaged?

And why the aversion to 'teaching'?
I didn't say it was an ineffective strategy. That's your belief, which the preceding discussion opens to question. Well, believe that use of context is an ineffective strategy if you like, but don't attribute that belief to me please. As far as I can see the jury is still out. You haven't proved otherwise.

I have not expressed an aversion to teaching.

What teachers teach children have to learn. Children are as responsible for their own success as their teachers, possibly more so. Do you want all the credit? With reading, avid independent reading on the part of children is a major success factor.
Last edited by Toots on Fri Oct 11, 2013 10:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Toots

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by Toots » Fri Oct 11, 2013 10:09 pm

Maizie, ditto.

kenm
Posts: 1495
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Berkshire

Re: Feedback on Phonic Check

Post by kenm » Sat Oct 12, 2013 8:36 am

Toots wrote:
Kiki wrote:So when teaching, how are you going to tell the difference between the children you claim will 'grow out of' using this ineffective, inefficient strategy (ie ferret out how reading works for themselves because they are receiving insufficient help, support and instruction) and the children who will be permanently damaged?

And why the aversion to 'teaching'?
I didn't say it was an ineffective strategy. That's your belief, which the preceding discussion opens to question. Well, believe that use of context is an ineffective strategy if you like, but don't attribute that belief to me please. As far as I can see the jury is still out. You haven't proved otherwise.
From the Wikipedia article on Direct Instruction:

"Direct Instruction is widely and successfully used with students from every population segment (with regard to poverty, culture, and race). In Project Follow Through, the DI model was ranked first in achievement for poor students, students who were not poor, urban students, rural students, African American students, Hispanic students, and Native American students. Today, many of the Bureau of Indian Affair's highest-performing schools use Direct Instruction materials".
"... the innovator has as enemies all those who have done well under the old regime, and only lukewarm allies among those who may do well under the new." Niccolo Macchiavelli, "The Prince", Chapter 6

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests