Reading education

in the United States

This article has multiple issues. Please help

improve it or discuss these issues on the talk more
Learn

Reading education is the process by which

individuals are taught to derive meaning
from text. Schoolchildren not capable of
reading competently by the end of third
grade can face obstacles to success in
education. The third grade marks a crucial
point in reading because students start to
encounter broader variety of texts in their
fourth grade.[1]

Government-funded research on reading

and reading instruction in the United
States began in the 1960s. In the 1970s
and 1980s, researchers began publishing
findings based on converging evidence
from multiple studies. However, these
findings have been slow to move into
typical classroom practice.[2]

Competencies for proficient

reading
Proficient reading is equally dependent on
two critical skills: the ability to understand
the language in which the text is written,
and the ability to recognize and process
printed text. Each of these competencies
is likewise dependent on lower level skills
and cognitive abilities.[3]

Children who readily understand spoken

language and who are able to fluently and
easily recognize printed words do not
usually have difficulty with reading
comprehension. However, students must
be proficient in both competencies to read
well; difficulty in either domain undermines
the overall reading process. At the
conclusion of reading, children should be
able to retell the story in their own words
including characters, setting, and the
events of the story.[4] Reading researchers
define a skilled reader as one who can
understand written text as well as they can
understand the same passage if spoken.
[5]

There is some debate as to whether print

recognition requires the ability to perceive
printed text and translate it into spoken
language, or rather to translate printed text
directly into meaningful symbolic models
and relationships. The existence of speed
reading, and its typically high
comprehension rate would suggest that
the translation into verbal form as an
intermediate to understanding is not a
prerequisite for effective reading
comprehension. This aspect of reading is
the crux of much of the reading debate.

The purpose of reading is to have access

to the literature of a specific language.
Reading materials have traditionally been
chosen from literary texts that represent
'higher' forms of culture. According to
many traditional approaches, the learner's
aim is to study vocabulary items, grammar
and sentence structures, with a concern
for learning the syntax of these 'higher'
cultures. These approaches assume that
authentic reading material is limited to the
work or experience of great authors.

Instructional methods
A variety of different methods of teaching
reading have been advocated in English-
speaking countries. In the United States,
the debate is often more political than
objective.[6] Parties often divide into two
camps which refuse to accept each other's
terminology or frame of reference. Despite
this both camps often incorporate aspects
of the other's methods. Both camps
accuse the other of causing failure to learn
to read and write.[6] Phonics advocates
assert that, to read a large vocabulary of
words correctly and fluently requires
detailed knowledge of the structure of the
English language, particularly spelling-
speech patterns.[7] Whole Language
advocates assert that students do not
need to be able to sound out words, but
should look at unknown words and figure
them out using context.[7]

Research

In 2000, the National Reading Panel (NRP)

issued a report based on a meta-analysis
of published research on effective reading
instruction. The report found varying
evidence-based support for some
common approaches to teaching
reading.[8]

Phonemic awareness

The NRP called phonemic awareness (PA)

instruction "impressive":

Overall, the findings showed that

teaching children to manipulate
phonemes in words was highly effective
under a variety of teaching conditions
with a variety of learners across a range
of grade and age levels and that
teaching phonemic awareness to
children significantly improves their
 reading more than instruction that lacks
any attention to PA.

The report singles out PA instruction

based on teaching children to manipulate
phonemes with letters as highly effective.
Phonemic awareness instruction also
improved spelling in grade-level students,
although it did not improve spelling in
disabled readers.

Lexical reading

Lexical reading[9][10][11][12] involve acquiring

words or phrases without attention to the
characters or groups of characters that
compose them or by using Whole
language learning and teaching
methodology. Sometimes argued to be in
competition with phonics methods, and
that the whole language approach tends to
impair learning how to spell.

Historically, the two camps have been

called Whole Language and Phonics,[13]
although the Whole Language instructional
method has also been referred to as
"literature-based reading program" and
"integrated language arts curriculum".[14]
Currently (2007), the differing perspectives
are frequently referred to as "balanced
reading instruction" (Whole Language) and
"scientifically-based reading instruction"
(Phonics).[15]

Whole Word

Whole word, also known as "Sight Word"

and "Look and Say", teaches reading skills
and strategies in the context of authentic
literature. Word recognition accuracy is
considered less important than meaning
accuracy; therefore, there is an emphasis
on comprehension as the ultimate goal.

Students in this method memorize the

appearance of words, or learn to recognize
words by looking at the first and last letter
from rigidly selected vocabularies in
progressive texts (such as The Cat in the
Hat). Often preliminary results show
children taught with this method have
higher reading levels than children learning
phonics, because they learn to
automatically recognise a small selection
of words.[16] However, later tests
demonstrate that literacy development
becomes stunted when hit with longer and
more complex words later.[7]

Sub-lexical reading

Sub-lexical reading,[9][10][11][12] involves

teaching reading by associating
characters or groups of characters with
sounds or by using Phonics learning and
teaching methodology. Sometimes argued
to be in competition with whole language
methods.

Phonics

[17][18] Phonics refers to an instructional

method for teaching children to read. The
method teaches sounds to be associated
with letters and combinations of
letters.[14][19] "Phonics" is distinct from the
linguistics terms "phoneme" and
"phonetics", which refer to sounds and the
study of sounds respectively.

Varieties of phonics include:

Embedded phonics is an instructional
approach where letter sounds are taught
opportunistically, as the need arises and
in meaningful contexts, such as the
reading of a storybook. Embedded
phonics is often associated with a
whole language approach to teaching
reading.
Synthetic phonics and analytic phonics
are different but popular methods of
teaching phonics. Synthetic and analytic
phonics approaches both generally
involve explicit, carefully sequenced
instruction that teach a large body of
phonics patterns.
Synthetic phonics emphasizes the
one-to-one correspondences
between phonemes and
graphemes. In synthetic phonics
programs students say the sounds
for the graphemes they see and
orally blend them together to
produce a spoken word. In the
context of phonics, the word "blend"
takes on a different meaning from
its use in linguistics.
In analytic phonics, students often
learn phonograms, the rime parts of
words including the vowel and what
follows it. Students are taught to
generalize the phonogram to
 multiple words. The phonogram -ail
can be used to read fail, trail, mail,
wail, sail, and other words.

The Orton phonography, originally

developed to teach brain-damaged adults
to read, is a form of phonics instruction
that blends synthetic and analytic
components. Orton described 73
"phonograms", or letter combinations, and
23 rules for spelling and pronunciation
which Orton claimed would allow the
reader to correctly pronounce and spell all
but 123 of the 13,000 most common
English words.[20]

Pronunciation guides
In contrast to phonics which teaches the
pronunciation rules of English, a new
technology Phonetically Intuitive English
directly shows English words'
pronunciation by adding diacritical marks
on them. This solves the problem that
pronunciation rules can often be confusing
(for example, "ea" has a wide range of
diverse pronunciations in "speak", "steak",
"bread", "Korea", "reality", "create" and
"ocean").

The pronunciation-guide approach has

been proven very successful in reading
education for languages with very
complex orthography such as Chinese.
Pinyin and Zhuyin are systems of phonetic
transcription for Mandarin Chinese used in
China and Taiwan respectively, and are
printed above or next to Chinese
characters in children's books, textbooks
and newspapers as a pronunciation guide,
and have enabled Chinese-speaking
countries to achieve high literacy rates for
one of the most difficult languages in the
world.

Other instructional methods

Guided Reading
During guided reading teachers work with
small groups of students. These are
students with similar reading levels.
Students will read with teachers in books
at their personal reading level, not where
the grade level is at. During this time the
teachers will work with students to
practice decoding, fluency, vocabulary and
comprehension skills.

Native reading

Some methods of mix phonics and whole

word. Native reading, for example, differs
from both in that it emphasizes teaching
reading beginning at a very early age,
when the human brain is
neurodevelopmentally most receptive to
learning language.[21] Native readers learn
to read as toddlers, starting at the same
time they learn to speak, or very soon
thereafter.[22]

Reading Workshop

Reading Workshop is based on the

premise that readers need time to read
and discuss their reading. Readers need
access to a wide variety of reading
materials of their choice. Classrooms
must acquire a wide variety of reading
materials to accommodate this need.
Readers need to respond to the text and
demonstrate quality literate behaviors.
There is not a script to follow but a frame
work to guide instruction. Students are
exposed to a variety of learning
experiences. There is time for student
collaboration and a time for engaged
reading.[23]

During reading workshop, the teacher

models a whole-group strategy lesson and
then gives students large blocks of time to
read and to practice the strategy. This
practice can occur independently, with
partners, or in small groups with a book or
text chosen by the student. The teacher
moves around the room and confers with
the students about their reading. The
teacher can meet with small, flexible
groups to provide additional needs-based
instruction. At the end of the workshop the
whole groups comes together to share
their learning.[24]

Examples of Improving
Reading

An adult or peer reads with the student by

modeling fluent reading and then asking
the student to read the same passage
aloud with encouragement and feedback
by the adult or peer. A student listens to a
tape of a fluent reader reading text at the
student's independent level at a pace of
about 80-100 words a minute. The student
listens to the tape the first time and then
practices reading along with the tape until
the student is able to read fluently. The
student reads with a peer partner. Each
partner takes a turn reading to the other. A
more fluent reader can be paired with a
less fluent reader to model fluent reading.
The more fluent reader can provide
feedback and encouragement to the less
fluent reader. Students of similar reading
skills can also be paired, particularly if the
teacher has modeled fluent reading and
the partner reading involves practice.[25]
The following is a list of the seven
important strategies that all readers must
be able to apply to text in order to read and
understand content. The seven strategies
are:

1. Making Connections;
2. Creating Mental Images;
3. Making Inferences/Drawing
Conclusions;
4. Asking Questions;
5. Determining What Is Important;
6. Synthesizing; and
7. Monitoring Comprehension and
Meaning.[23][24][26]
Reading comprehension

Reading comprehension requires making

sense of text, which allows a reader to
gain knowledge, enjoy a story, and make
connections with the larger world.[27]
Several skills support reading
comprehension, including making
predictions and inferences, monitoring
understanding, using text structures, and
using prior knowledge effectively.[27][28]
Two of the most important aspects of
successful comprehension are activating
prior knowledge and metacognition, which
are two of the principles of learning
identified in the National Research
Council's report.[29]

Many studies have identified the

importance of prior knowledge in reading
comprehension.[30] "Many researchers
have shown that having some prior
knowledge about the topic of a passage
enables both greater comprehension of
the text and better memory for it."[31] "if we
have prior knowledge about a topic in a
text, we construct meaning based on our
experience, and we can adjust and change
those plans as we go along."[28] Some
authors specify two types of prior
knowledge necessary for successful
comprehension. World knowledge aids in
understanding fiction and domain-specific
knowledge facilitates comprehension of
nonfiction.[32] Students who lack this,
request background information, so as to
make connections with and within the
text.[33]

Another learning principle that greatly

influences reading comprehension is the
use of metacognition. The 'metacognitive'
approach to instruction can help students
learn to take control of their own learning
by defining learning goals and monitoring
their progress in achieving them."[29] A
great deal of research indicates that
accomplished readers "monitor their
comprehension as they read by engag[ing]
in strategic processing, such as rereading
previous text, to resolve comprehension
failure."[27] Students who are not able to
track their own understanding gain neither
information or enjoyment from reading as
they do not know how to obtain meaning
from the text.

Many strategies have been applied.[32][33]

Many studies point to the success of
strategy instruction, particularly for
students who are poor
comprehenders.[32][33] Some strategies
that have been helpful are summarization,
question generation, making predictions
and inferences, image making, knowledge
and use of text structure, rereading, self-
regulation, activation of prior knowledge,
questioning the author, and using graphic
organizers.[27][32][33][34] The variety of
strategies allows the teacher to choose a
strategy or strategies to suit the text and
the needs of the student.

For an example of a specific intervention

incorporating four strategies for
comprehension building, utilized reciprocal
teaching to model summarizing,
questioning, clarifying, and predicting.[35]
The authors indicate that they choose
these skills due to their dual functions as
"comprehension-fostering and
comprehension monitoring activities."[35]
The reciprocal teaching method, which
involves the teacher modeling the
designated activities and gradually turning
the procedure over to the students
themselves, uses Vygotsky's idea of
scaffolding. In this process, "children first
experience a particular set of cognitive
activities in the presence of experts, and
only gradually come to perform these
functions by themselves.[35] In this study,
the students who participated in the
reciprocal teaching intervention showed
dramatic improvement in comprehension
scores and maintained them for at least
eight weeks.[35]

Non-traditional approaches

Programs have been established to

provide certified therapy animals, such as
dogs, as non-judgmental "listeners" to
build motivation and help children build
proficiency and gain confidence in their
reading ability.[36]

Success rate of reading

education in the US
National literacy rates range from about 10
percent to 99+ percent.
There are several approaches used to
teach reading and the U.S. Office of
Education Cooperative Research Program
has a compilation of these.[37] For
example, there is a list based on 29
individual studies that identify effective
approaches when teaching reading for
beginners. The bulk of the studies revealed
that successful instructional strategies
include systematic phonics and
approaches that focus on connected
reading and meaning. These strategies
were proved to be more effective than
basal alone approaches. Specific studies
that show instructional models that
achieve high success rates in reading
education include the so-called Actual
Community Empowerment (ACE) program,
which is a small-group tutoring framework
that focuses on fluency, word recognition,
decoding and the concept of
comprehension that is based on the
appropriate pace of learning according to
individual learning profiles.[38] The
program, thus, has different variations.
Once ACE was implemented in 40
locations in Philadelphia, learners posted a
95 percent success rate for significant
reading improvement.[38] Traditional
reading instruction approaches that are
considered effective include those under a
cognitive-based model, which treats
reading acquisition and reading
comprehension to be dependent on
cognitive development.[39]

Print exposure
Print exposure the amount of time a child
or person spends being visually aware of
the written word (reading)--whether that be
through newspapers, magazines, books,
journals, scientific papers, or more.
Research has shown that the amount of
print material that a child accesses has
deep cognitive consequences. In addition,
the act of reading itself, for the most part
irrespective of what is being read,
increases the achievement difference
among children.

Children who are exposed to large

amounts of print often have more success
in reading and have a larger vocabulary to
draw from than children who see less
print. The average conversations among
college graduates, spouses or adult
friends contain less rare (advanced) words
than the average preschool reading book.
Other print sources have increasingly
higher amounts of rare words, from
children's books, to adult books, to popular
magazines, newspapers, and scientific
articles (listed in increasing level of
difficulty). Television, even adult news
shows, do not have the same level of rare
words that children's books do.

The issue is that oral language is very

repetitive. To learn to read effectively a
child needs to have a large vocabulary.
Without this, when the child does read they
stumble over words that they do not know,
and have trouble following the idea of the
sentence. This leads to frustration and a
dislike of reading. When a child is faced
with this difficulty he or she is less likely to
read, thus further inhibiting the growth of
their vocabulary.
Children who enjoy reading do it more
frequently and improve their vocabulary. A
study of out-of-school reading of fifth
graders, found that a student in the 50th
percentile read books about 5 minutes a
day, while a student in the 20th percentile
read books for less than a minute a day.
This same study found that the amount of
time a child in the 10th percentile spent
reading in two days, was the amount of
time a child in the 90th percentile spent
reading all year.

Print exposure can also be a big factor in

learning English as a second language.
Book flood experiments are an example of
this. The book flood program brought
books in English to the classroom.
Through focusing their English language
learning on reading books instead of
endless worksheets the teachers were
able to improve the rate at which their
students learned English.

Alphabetic principle and

English orthography
Beginning readers must understand the
concept of the alphabetic principle in order
to master basic reading skills. A writing
system is said to be alphabetic if it uses
symbols to represent individual language
sounds. In comparison, Logographic
writing systems such as Japanese kanji
and Chinese hanzi use a symbol to
represent a word. And both cultures also
use syllabic writing systems such as
Japanese kana and Chinese Yi script,
there are also many Chinese alphabets.

English is one of several languages using

the Latin Alphabet writing system. The
orthographic depth of such languages
varies. The Italian and Finnish languages
have the purest, or shallowest
orthographies, and English orthography is
the deepest or most complex. In the
shallow Spanish orthography; most words
are spelled the way they sound, that is,
word spellings are almost always regular.
English orthography, on the other hand, is
far more complex in that it does not have a
one-to-one correspondence between
symbols and sounds. English has
individual sounds that can be represented
by more than one symbol or symbol
combination. For example, the long |a|
sound can be represented by a-consonant-
e as in ate, -ay as in hay, -ea as in steak, -ey
as in they, -ai as in pain, and -ei as in vein.
In addition, there are many words with
irregular spelling and many homophones
(words that sound the same but have
different meanings and often different
spellings as well). Pollack Pickeraz (1963)
asserted that there are 45 phonemes in
the English language, and that the 26
letters of the English alphabet can
represent them in about 350 ways.

The irregularity of English spelling is

largely an artifact of how the language
developed. English is a West Germanic
language with substantial influences and
additional vocabulary from Latin, Greek,
and French, among others. Imported
words usually follow the spelling patterns
of their language of origin.[40] Advanced
English phonics instruction includes
studying words according to their origin,
and how to determine the correct spelling
of a word using its language of origin.

Clearly, the complexity of English

orthography makes it more difficult for
children to learn decoding and encoding
rules, and more difficult for teachers to
teach them.[40] However, effective word
recognition relies on the basic
understanding that letters represent the
sounds of spoken language, that is, word
recognition relies on the reader's
understanding of the alphabetic
principle[41]

Spelling reform
Attempts to make English spelling behave
phonetically have given rise to various
campaigns for spelling reform; none have
been generally accepted. Opponents of
simplified spellings point to the
impossibility of phonetic spelling for a
language with many diverse accents and
dialects. Several distinguished scholars,
however, have thoroughly disproven all
reasonable objections to spelling reform,
including this objection. See, for example,
Dictionary of Simplified American
Spelling.[42] Thomas Lounsbury presented
a devastating rebuttal to all reasonable
objections to spelling reform in 1909.[43] A
shorter rebuttal of all the reasonable
objections to spelling reform was made by
Bob C Cleckler in 2005.[44]

Linguists documenting the sounds of

speech use various special symbols, of
which the International Phonetic Alphabet
is the most widely known. Linguistics
makes a distinction between a phone and
phoneme, and between phonology and
phonetics.[45] The study of words and their
structure is morphology, and the smallest
units of meaning are morphemes.[46] The
study of the relationship between words
present in the language at one time is
synchronic etymology, part of descriptive
linguistics, and the study of word origins
and evolution is diachronic etymology, part
of historical linguistics

English orthography gives priority first to

morphology, then to etymology, and lastly
to phonetics. Thus the spelling of a word
is dependent principally upon its structure,
its relationship to other words, and its
language or origin. It is usually necessary
to know the meaning of a word in order to
spell it correctly, and its meaning will be
indicated by the similarity to words of the
same meaning and family.[47]

English uses a 26 letter Latin alphabet, but

the number of graphemes is expanded by
several digraphs, trigraphs, and
tetragraphs, while the letter "q" is not used
as a grapheme by itself, only in the digraph
"qu".[48]

Each grapheme may represent a limited

number of phonemes depending on
etymology and location in the word.
Likewise each phoneme may be
represented by a limited number of
graphemes. Some letters are not part of
any grapheme, but function as
etymological markers. Graphemes do not
cross morpheme boundaries.[49]
Morphemes are spelled consistently,
following rules inflection and word-
formation, and allow readers and writers
to understand and produce words they
have not previously encountered.[50]

Initial teaching alphabet

This method was designed to overcome

the fact that English orthography has a
many-to-many relationship between
graphemes and phonemes. The method
fell into disuse because children still had
to learn the Latin alphabet and the
conventional English spellings in order to
integrate with society outside of school. It
also recreated the problem of dialect
dependent spelling, which the
standardization of spelling had been
created to eliminate.[51]

Augmenting spelling with

pronunciation information

Unlike spelling reforms, we can actually

keep a word's original spelling intact but
add pronunciation information to it, e.g.
using diacritics. Phonetically Intuitive
English is a Chrome browser extension
that automatically adds such a
pronunciation guide to English words on
Web pages, for English-speaking children
to recognize a written word's
pronunciation and therefore map the
written word to the mental word in his
mind.

Practical application
In practice, many children are exposed to
both "Phonic" and "Whole Language"
methods, coupled with reading programs
that combine both elements.[52] For
example, the extremely popular book,
Teach Your Child to Read in 100 Easy
Lessons, by Siegfried Engelman, et al.
(ISBN 0-671-63198-5), teaches
pronunciation and simple phonics, then
supplements it with progressive texts and
practice in directed reading. The end result
of a mixed method is a casually phonetic
student, a much better first-time
pronouncer and speller, who still also has
look-say acquisition, quick fluency and
comprehension. Using an eclectic method,
students can select their preferred
learning style. This lets all students make
progress, yet permits a motivated student
to use and recognize the best traits of
each method.[53]

Speed reading continues where basic

education stops. Usually after some
practice, many students' reading speed
can be significantly increased. There are
various speed-reading techniques.[54]

However, speed reading does not

guarantee comprehension or retention of
what was read.

Readability indicates the ease of

understanding or comprehension due to
the style of writing.[55] Reading recovery is
a method for helping students learn to
read.[56]

History
1905 edition cover of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland
retold in words of one syllable

In colonial times, reading instruction was

simple and straightforward: teach children
the code and then let them read. At that
time, reading material was not specially
written for children but consisted primarily
of the Bible and some patriotic essays; the
most influential early textbook was The
New England Primer, published late 1680s.
There was little consideration for how best
to teach children to read or how to assess
reading comprehension. [57] Not until the
mid-19th century did this approach change
significantly. Educators, in particular
Horace Mann, began to advocate changes
in reading instructional methods. He
observed that children were bored and
"death-like" at school, and that instruction
needed to engage children's interest in the
reading material by teaching them to read
whole words.[57] The McGuffey Readers
(1836) were the most popular of these
more engaging graded readers. In the mid-
19th century, Rebecca Smith Pollard
developed a sequential reading program of
intensive synthetic phonics, complete with
a separate teacher's manual and spelling
and reading books.[58]

From the 1890s to at least 1910, A. L. Burt

of New York and other publishing
companies published series of books
aimed at young readers, using simple
language to retell longer classics. Mrs J.
C. Gorham produced three such works,
Gulliver's Travels in words of one syllable
(1896), Alice's Adventures in Wonderland
retold in words of one syllable (1905), and
Black Beauty retold in words of one syllable
(1905). In the UK, Routledge published a
similar series between 1900 and 1910.
The meaning-based curriculum did not
dominate reading instruction until the
second quarter of the 20th century.
Beginning in the 1930s and 1940s, reading
programs became very focused on
comprehension and taught children to
read whole words by sight. Phonics was
not to be taught except sparingly and as a
tool to be used as a last resort.[57]

In the 1950s Rudolf Flesch wrote a book

called Why Johnny Can't Read,[59] a
passionate argument in favor of teaching
children to read using phonics.[57]
Addressed to the mothers and fathers of
America, he also hurled severe criticism at
publishers' decisions that he claimed were
motivated by profit, and he questioned the
honesty and intelligence of experts,
schools, and teachers.[57] The book was
on the best seller list for 30 weeks and
spurred a hue and cry in general
population. It also polarized the reading
debate among educators, researchers, and
parents.[57]

This polarization continues to the present

time. In the 1970s an instructional
philosophy called whole language (which
de-emphasizes teaching phonics out of
context) was introduced, and it became
the primary method of reading instruction
in the 1980s and 1990s.[60] During this
time, researchers (such as the National
Institute of Health) conducted studies
showing that early reading acquisition
depends on the understanding of the
connection between sounds and letters.[61]

The sight-word (Whole Word) method was

invented by Rev. Thomas H. Gallaudet, the
director of the American Asylum at
Hartford in the 1830s.[62] It was designed
for the education of the Deaf by
juxtaposing a word, with a picture.[63] In
1830, Gallaudet provided a description of
his method to the American Annals of
Education which included teaching
children to recognize a total of 50 sight
words written on cards and by 1837 the
method was adopted by the Boston
Primary School Committee.[64] Horace
Mann the then Secretary of the Board of
Education of Massachusetts, USA favored
the method and it soon became the
dominant method statewide.[65] By 1844
the defects of the new method became so
apparent to Boston schoolmasters that
they issued an attack against it urging a
return to an intensive, systematic
phonics.[65] Again Dr. Samuel Orton, a
neuropathologist in Iowa in 1929 sought
the cause of children's reading problems
and concluded that their problems were
being caused by the new sight method of
teaching reading. (His results were
published in the February 1929 issue of
the Journal of Educational Psychology,
"The Sight Reading Method of Teaching
Reading as a Source of Reading
Disability.")[66]

See also
Accessible publishing
Basal reader
Common Core State Standards Initiative
Dolch Word List
Phonics
Phonetically Intuitive English
 Synthetic phonics
Whole language

References
Notes

1.
"http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/r
esearch/learning-read-reading-learn-
glance" .
www.centerforpubliceducation.org.
Retrieved 2018-06-15. External link in
|title= (help)
2. "Research and the reading wars" .
Retrieved 2018-06-15.
3. Hoover, Wesley A.; Gough, Philip B.
"Overview - The Cognitive Foundations of
Learning to Read: A Framework" . The
Cognitive Foundations of Learning to Read:
A Framework.
4. Wren, Sebastian. "The Cognitive
Foundations of Learning to Read: A
Framework" (pdf).
5. Byrne, Brian (2005), "Theories of Learning
to Read", in Snowling, Margaret J. and
Charles Hulme, The Science of Reading: A
Handbook (First ed.), Blackwell Publishing,
pp. 104–119, 978-1-4051-6811-3
6. Adams, Marilyn Jager (1995). Beginning
to read: thinking and learning about print.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
p. 13. ISBN 0-262-51076-6.
OCLC 469305891 .
7. Adams, Marilyn Jager (1995). Beginning
to read: thinking and learning about print.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
pp. 23, 24. ISBN 0-262-51076-6.
OCLC 469305891 .
8. "Report of the National Reading Panel:
Teaching Children to Read" .
9. Borowsky R, Esopenko C, Cummine J,
Sarty GE (2007). "Neural representations of
visual words and objects: a functional MRI
study on the modularity of reading and
object processing". Brain Topogr. 20 (2):
89–96. doi:10.1007/s10548-007-0034-1 .
PMID 17929158 .
10. Borowsky R, Cummine J, Owen WJ,
Friesen CK, Shih F, Sarty GE (2006). "FMRI
of ventral and dorsal processing streams in
basic reading processes: insular sensitivity
to phonology". Brain Topogr. 18 (4): 233–9.
doi:10.1007/s10548-006-0001-2 .
PMID 16845597 .
11. Sanabria Díaz G, Torres Mdel R, Iglesias
J, et al. (November 2009). "Changes in
reading strategies in school-age children".
Span J Psychol. 12 (2): 441–53.
doi:10.1017/S1138741600001827 .
PMID 19899646 .
12. Chan ST, Tang SW, Tang KW, Lee WK, Lo
SS, Kwong KK (November 2009).
"Hierarchical coding of characters in the
ventral and dorsal visual streams of
Chinese language processing".
NeuroImage. 48 (2): 423–35.
doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.06.078 .
PMID 19591947 .
13. Reyhner, Jon. "Reading Wars: Phonics
vs. Whole Language" . jan.ucc.nau.edu.
Retrieved 2018-10-19.
14. Chall, Jeanne S. and Helen M. Popp,
Teaching and Assessing Phonics: Why,
What, When and How, Educators Publishing
Service, 1996
15. Louisa Moats, Whole Language Lives
On: The Illusion of "Balanced" Reading
Instruction, The Fordham Foundation, Oct
2000. Downloaded from
http://www.edexcellence.net/doc/moats.p
df July 30, 2007.
16. Adams, Marilyn (1995). Beginning to
Read: Thinking and Learning About Print.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
p. 38.
17. Smith, Nila B. (1 January 1957). "What
Research Says about Phonics Instruction".
The Journal of Educational Research. 51
(1): 1–9. JSTOR 27530006 .
18. Smith, Nila B. (September 1957). "What
Research Says about Phonics Instruction".
The Journal of Educational Research. Taylor
& Francis, Ltd. 51 (1). JSTOR 27530006 .
19. Moats, Louisa (1995). Spelling:
development, disabilities, and instruction.
Baltimore, Md: York Press. ISBN 0-912752-
40-8. OCLC 33404834 .
20. "Teaching of Reading - ESL Articles -
eslHQ" . www.eslhq.com. Retrieved
2017-02-16.
21. Native Reading Chapter 1 by Timothy
Kailing
22. Kailing, Timothy D. (2008). Native
Reading. Elliptical Research Books.
ISBN 978-1-4348-4881-9.
23. Serafini, Frank. "Workshop Handouts
Serafini, F. (2008)" . Retrieved March 26,
2011.
24. Anne Goudvis; Stephanie Harvey (2007).
Strategies that work: teaching
comprehension for understanding and
engagement. York, Me: Stenhouse
Publishers. pp. 37–38. ISBN 1-57110-481-X.
OCLC 232347335 .
25. "What Is Guided Oral Reading?" .
Reading Rockets. Retrieved 4 March 2015.
26. Miller, Debbie S. (2002). Reading with
meaning: teaching comprehension in the
primary grades. York, Me: Stenhouse
Publishers. pp. 53–157. ISBN 1-57110-307-
4. OCLC 48773960 .
27. Cain, Kate (2009). "Making Sense of
Text: Skills That Support Text
Comprehension and Its Development"
(PDF). Expert Perspectives on Interventions
for Reading: A Collection of Best Practice
Articles from the International Dyslexia
Association.
28. Duffy, Gerald (2009). Explaining
Reading: A Resource for Teaching
Concepts, Skills, and Strategies. New York:
The Guilford Press. p. 19. ISBN 978-1-
60623-075-6.
29. Donovan, M. S.; J. D. Bransford (2005).
"Introduction". How Students Learn: History
Mathematics, and Science in the
Classroom. pp. 1–28. ISBN 0-309-07433-9.
OCLC 61353694 .
30. Carr, S. C.; B. Thompson (1996). "The
Effects of Prior Knowledge and Schema
Activation Strategies on the Inferential
Reading Comprehension of Children With
and Without Learning Disabilities" .
Learning Disability Quarterly. 19 (1): 49.
Retrieved 2/7/2012. Check date values in:
|accessdate= (help)
31. Priebe SJ, Keenan JM, Miller AC (July
2011). "How Prior Knowledge Affects Word
Identification and Comprehension" . Read
Writ. 7: 581–586. doi:10.1007/s11145-010-
9260-0 . PMC 3142886 . PMID 21799586 .
32. McNamara, Danielle (2009). "The
Importance of Teaching Reading
Strategies" (PDF). Expert Perspectives on
Interventions for Reading: A Collection of
Best-Practice Articles form the International
Dyslexia Association.
33. McKeown, Margaret; Isabel Beck;
Ronette Blake (2009). "Reading
Comprehension Instruction: Focus on
Content or Strategies?" (PDF). Expert
Perspectives on Interventions for Reading:
A Collection of Best-Practice Articles from
the International Dyslexia Association.
34. Tolman, Carol (2012). "Working Smarter,
Not Harder: What Teachers of Reading
Need to Know and Be Able to Teach" .
Expert Perspectives on Interventions for
Reading: A Collection of Best-Practice
Articles from the International Dyslexia
Association.
35. Palinscar, Aannemarie Sullivan; Brown,
Ann L. (1984). "Reciprocal Teaching of
Comprehension-Fostering and
Comprehension-Monitoring Activities".
Cognition and Instruction. 1 (2): 117–175.
doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1 .
ISSN 0737-0008 .
36. Newton, Ronni (editor) (June 21, 2013).
"Reading with Dogs Benefits All in Bugbee
Classroom" . West Hartford Patch. Archived
from the original on July 21, 2013.
37. Burns, Bonnie (2006). How to Teach
Balanced Reading and Writing. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. p. 51.
ISBN 1412937418.
38. Reeb, Roger (2006). Community Action
Research: Benefits to Community Members
and Service Providers. New York: Haworth
Press. ISBN 9780789030467.
39. Royer, James (2006). The Cognitive
Revolution on Educational Psychology.
Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
p. 28. ISBN 1593111630.
40. Diana Hanbury King (2000). English isn't
crazy!: the elements of our language and
how to teach them. Baltimore, Md: York
Press. pp. xii, 15. ISBN 0-912752-59-9.
OCLC 45166702 .
41. Adams, Marilyn (1995). Beginning to
Read: Thinking and Learning About Print.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
p. 29.
42. Rondthaler, Edward and Edward J. Lias,
Dictionary of Simplified American Spelling
(New York: The American Language
Academy, 1986)
43. Lounsbury, Thomas Raynesford (1970).
English spelling and spelling reform .
Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.
pp. 331–341. ISBN 0-8371-4264-4.
OCLC 134359 .
44. Bob C. Cleckler (2005). Lets End Our
Literacy Crisis: The Desperately Needed
Idea Whose Time Has Come. Salt Lake City:
American University & Colleges Press.
pp. 166–170. ISBN 1-58982-230-7.
OCLC 636405856 .
45. Shoebottom, Paul. "Language
differences - Phonetics and phonology" .
esl.fis.edu. Retrieved 2018-06-15.
46. "What are Morphemes? | SEA -
Supporting English Acquisition" .
www.ntid.rit.edu. Retrieved 2018-06-15.
47. "English Orthography - The English
Writing System - English Spelling" . My
English Language. Retrieved 2018-06-15.
48. "What is a grapheme?" . TheSchoolRun.
Retrieved 2018-06-15.
49. "What is the Difference Between a
Phoneme, a Grapheme and a Digraph?" .
prowritingaid.com. Retrieved 2018-06-15.
50. "Morphemes in English grammar |
TESOL Direct" . TESOL Direct. Retrieved
2018-06-15.
51. "Initial Teaching Alphabet Foundation |
What is i.t.a.?" . itafoundation.org. Retrieved
2018-06-15.
52. "Whole Language or Phonics: Which
Approach Is Best?" .
www.allaboutlearningpress.com. Retrieved
2018-06-15.
53. "Eclectic approach to teaching
language" . www.observerbd.com.
Retrieved 2018-06-15.
54. Ferriss, Tim (2014-05-13). "How I
Learned to Read 300 Percent Faster in 20
Minutes" . Huffington Post. Retrieved
2018-06-15.
55. "Using readability analysis to make
students stronger writers" . Profweb.
Retrieved 2018-06-15.
56. "Basic Facts - Reading Recovery Council
of North America" . Reading Recovery
Council of North America. Retrieved
2018-06-15.
57. Adams, Marilyn Jager (1990). Beginning
to read: thinking and learning about print.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
pp. 21–25. ISBN 0-262-01112-3.
OCLC 256731826 .
58. Glavin, Chris (2014-02-06). "History of
Reading Education in the U.S. | K12
Academics" . www.k12academics.com.
Retrieved 2018-06-15.
59. Flesch, Rudolf Franz (1986). Why
Johnny can't read: and what you can do
about it. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
ISBN 0-06-091340-1. OCLC 12837722 .
60. "Whole Word Method" .
www.helpingeverychildtoread.com.
Retrieved 2018-06-15.
61. Adams, Marilyn Jager (1994). Beginning
to read: thinking and learning about print.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
ISBN 0-262-51076-6. OCLC 256731826 .
62. "Sight Words Teaching Strategy | Sight
Words: Teach Your Child to Read" .
www.sightwords.com. Retrieved
2018-06-15.
63. Vicars, William. "Reverend Thomas
Hopkins Gallaudet" . www.lifeprint.com.
Retrieved 2018-06-15.
64. "Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet American
Sign Language (ASL)" . www.lifeprint.com.
Retrieved 2018-06-15.
65. "PBS Online: Only A Teacher:
Schoolhouse Pioneers" . www.pbs.org.
Retrieved 2018-06-15.
66. "Sight Method of Teaching Reading
Causes Dyslexia" . Retrieved 2018-06-15.

Bibliography
 National Right To Read Foundation -
Many articles on comparison between
Phonics and Whole language
techniques and effects

External links
The Cognitive Foundations of Learning
to Read: A Framework - Southwest
Educational Development Laboratory
"Reading Can Make You Smarter" by
Anne Cunningham and Keith Stanovich;
National Academy of Elementary School
Principles
Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Reading_education_in_the_United_States&oldi
d=887845162"

Last edited 1 month ago by Dawnse…

Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless

otherwise noted.