Reading aloud is an enjoyable and
enriching way to spend time with others.
It’s also a way to practice more fluent speech. Children’s books,
magazines and websites offer entertaining literacy activities for every
interest and age group. Game playing cards,
museum and amusement park brochures, and written conversations between
characters of video games are opportunities to practice ‘speech tools’ even for
just a few minutes. Stickers, nickels,
smiles, hugs, thumbs-up, shared reading and other small rewards reinforce the notion
that easier speech is meant for more situations than just the speech therapy
office.
Reading testing is not quite as
fun. Reading tests measure accuracy, fluency, words-per-minute, and basic
comprehension. Reading fluency in
particular, figures prominently in our data driven educational system. While this data point may be a well - intentioned
way to assess reading ability, I’m concerned about how it affects my students
who stutter. The National Stuttering Association has a free brochure Stuttering and Reading Fluency (1)
which states, “A child should not be penalized for moments of stuttering when
assessing reading fluency. Fluency of speech is not the same as fluency of
decoding.” We need to inform teachers of this.
Every student I have ever met has a need for
speed when reading aloud. Since reading tests are timed and reading fast is
rewarded, it’s important to know that reading rate affects stuttering. (2) When does reading dysfluency represent a
stuttering problem and when does it represent a reading problem? In preparing
this article, I came to the conclusion that this question is nearly
irrelevant. The more important question is
whether or not a child’s depressed reading scores are warning signs of a more
serious problem with grade level literacy.
The definition of reading is a
matter of some debate. A recent
proposal, called the “narrow view of reading,” offered this perspective. “The essence of the proposal [the narrow view]
was to change the way in which reading is assessed. If high-stakes assessments
differentiated among word recognition, domain-general reading comprehension,
and specific subject knowledge, the reading crisis would be over because the
focus would change to the true crisis in American education – knowledge
deficiencies in the sciences, history, math, literature, and other content
domains that are important for success in the 21st century.” (3)
Here we have decoding (word recognition) relegated to one small part of reading
while the complexity of comprehension is given greater attention.
Misconceptions about reading include:
a) “word
recognition and reading comprehension are related skills that can be accurately
reduced to one measurable score or level,
b) improvements
in word recognition will always lead to improvements in reading comprehension,
and
c) measures
of reading comprehension assess the same thing.” (4)
Turns out, a problem with the narrow view of reading lies in its
implementation. If reading is defined only in terms of word recognition
(decoding), students who decode single words adequately may be dismissed from
reading programs, even if they continue to struggle with the deep reading
comprehension necessary to perform well at grade level. General education teachers
are not trained to teach language skills and comprehension strategies; they are
responsible for subject content. “Given the present climate of accountability
to curriculum standards, they [teachers] are reluctant to do anything they view
as distracting from the teaching of content that will appear on high stakes
tests.” (5) Given the
narrow view of reading, that means no one is designated to help students with
reading comprehension strategies. That is, unless school based speech-language
pathologists (SLP) are allowed to provide services that focus “on the language
underpinnings of comprehension.” (6)
“Adolescent literacy professionals are trying to
counter the popular and oft-quoted ideas that before fourth grade, children are
learning to read and after that they are
reading to learn…we know there is much to learn about reading past the
fourth grade…” (7)
Reading is hard work for some
children. Besides problems with decoding, language processing problems may prevent
them from fully comprehending increasingly complex material. Some processing
problems arise from a lack of background (world) knowledge, unfamiliar
vocabulary, complex syntax, and information that is implied but not explicitly
stated. Poor readers tend to read less than skilled readers. Children who find
reading easy and fun like to read more.
Consequently they can spend hours and hours of time decoding unfamiliar vocabulary,
deciphering complex sentences, linking information from one part of a text to
another, talking with others about what they have read, and anticipating
information in later pages and even later volumes of a story series. All the
while, they are absorbing more world knowledge as well.
An emphasis on improving word
recognition assumes that “by improving the reader’s overall word knowledge and
decoding abilities, comprehension will simultaneously improve.” (8) Decoding
instruction for unfamiliar words can include reading them aloud for the
child, reviewing phonetics, rereading, looking-up definitions, and word practice
drills. While these teaching strategies have proven useful, research suggests
that meaning-based feedback may be even
more effective with respect to reading comprehension, oral language, and
expressive vocabulary. With meaning-based feedback, “The teacher acts as a
mediator who assists in establishing the content of the author’s message before
reading, setting the scene, simplifying complex sentences, establishing
relationships between and across text units, and discussing or expanding upon
unfamiliar vocabulary or concepts in context. The teacher constantly monitors
the oral reading for indications that the author’s message is not being understood.”
(9)
The larger implications of reading
comprehension become apparent when we look ahead to the literacy skills required
of the next generation. “Adolescents entering the adult world in the 21st
century will read and write more than at any other time in human history. They
will need advanced levels of literacy to perform their jobs, run their
households, act as citizens, and conduct their personal lives. They will need
literacy to cope with the flood of information they will find everywhere they
turn. They will need literacy to feed their imaginations so they can create the
world of the future.” (10)
Our journey from word recognition to
reading comprehension makes its next stop at “high literacy”. High literacy “includes
the ability to use language, content, and reasoning in ways that are
appropriate for particular situations and disciplines, involving students’
abilities to engage in thoughtful reading, writing, and discussion about
content.” (11) SLPs are well prepared to collaborate with others on this road.
They are knowledgeable about the phonological, semantic, grammatic, and
pragmatic complexities of communication in speaking, listening, reading, and
writing. The Common Core Standards (12) released in June 2010 include
language as a unique category, inviting SLPs to address the “underlying
language requirements of rigorous curricula and intervene with students
directly or work with other professionals to provide differentiated instruction
and intervention.” (13)
At
this point, the relevance of reading fluency, and even stuttering, feels like a
distant memory. I do not wish trivialize the ability to read or speak fluently
at any grade level. But, let’s find some additional meaning in reading test
scores. When a child who stutters performs poorly on a reading test, we need to
ask questions. What kind of dysfluency was evident: decoding, stuttering, or
both? Was the child penalized for stuttering? Was the child given the option to
deliberately reduce speaking rate as a fluency strategy? How did the child
perform on each comprehension test question and why? How well does the child
read,comprehend, and talk about curriculum texts? Does the child
enjoy reading? Does the child seek reading opportunities at home? School
districts are surviving shrinking budgets by cutting personnel and services. When a child is denied services, I wish it was
more trasparent whether the decision was truly based on the child’s need or the availability of funded programs.
Reading Resources
References
(2) Vanryckeghem,
M. et. al. (1999) The Main and Interactive Effect of Oral Reading Rate on the
Frequency of Stuttering, American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 8,
164-170.
(3) Alan G.
Kamhi (2009) Solving the Reading Crisis – Take 2: The Case for Differentiated
Assessment, Language, Speech, and Hearing in Schools, 40, p. 213.
(4) Ibid. p.
214
(5) Barbara J.
Ehren (2009) Looking Through an Adolescent Literacy Lens at the Narrow View
of Reading, Language, Speech, Hearing
Services in Schools, 40, p. 193.
(6) Ibid. p. 193
(7) Ibid. p.
193
(8) L. K.
Crowe (2003) Comparison of Two Reading Feedback Strategies in Improving the
Oral and Written Language Performance of Children with Language-Learning
Disabilities, American Journal of Speech Language Pathology, 12, p. 17.
(9) Ibid. p.
18
(10) B.J. Ehren
& K. Murza (October, 2010) The Urgent Need to Address Workforce Readiness
in Adolescent Literacy Intervention, Perspectives on Language Learning and
Education,3, p.93 (a publication of ASHA SIG 1) with a reference to Moore, D.
W. et. al. (1999) Adolescent literacy: A position statement Newark, DE:
International Reading Association broken link
(11) Ibid. p.
93.
(13) Ehren
& Murza, p. 97