Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Theoretical
now in its sixth edition Alvermann
Unrau
Theoretical Models and Ruddell
Processes of Reading Editors
The sixth edition of this landmark reference represents classic and trend-
Models and
Processes
setting scholarship that is among the best in the field. Through careful
of Reading
Over half of the chapters in this edition are new to Theoretical Models
and Processes of Reading, and eight of these new chapters were specially
commissioned for this volume. Twenty percent of the chapters from
previous editions have been revised by their authors to reflect current
research and instructional developments in the field. Questions for
Reflection accompany each chapter to assist readers
in transforming their current knowledge base through Donna E. Alvermann
discussion and deeper thinking about theory, research, is a university-appointed
and instruction. distinguished research
professor in the Department
SIXTH EDITION
In this updated volume, youll find of Language and Literacy
An expanded range of research designs and their Education at the University of
applications to both basic and applied research Georgia, Athens, USA.
I S B N 978-0-87207-710-2
Donna E. Alvermann
90000 Norman J. Unrau
Robert B. Ruddell
Editors
9 780872 077102
Theoretical
Models and
Processes
of Reading
Donna E. Alvermann
Norman J. Unrau
Robert B. Ruddell
Editors
IRA BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Carrice C. Cummins, Louisiana Tech University, Ruston, Louisiana, President
Maureen McLaughlin, East Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania, East Stroudsburg,
Pennsylvania, President-elect Jill D. Lewis-Spector, New Jersey City University, Jersey
City, New Jersey, Vice President Jay S. Blanchard, Arizona State University, Tempe,
Arizona Kathy Headley, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina Joyce G. Hinman,
Bismarck Public Schools, Bismarck, North Dakota Heather I. Bell, Rosebank School,
Auckland, New Zealand Steven L. Layne, Judson University, Elgin, Illinois
William H. Teale, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois Douglas Fisher,
San Diego State University, San Diego, California Rona F. Flippo, University of
Massachusetts Boston, Boston, Massachusetts Shelley Stagg Peterson, OISE/University
of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Marcie Craig Post, Executive Director
The International Reading Association attempts, through its publications, to provide a forum
for a wide spectrum of opinions on reading. This policy permits divergent viewpoints without
implying the endorsement of the Association.
Executive Editor, Publications Shannon Fortner
Acquisitions Manager Tori Mello Bachman
Managing Editors Susanne Viscarra and Christina M. Lambert
Editorial AssociateWendy Logan
Creative Services/Production Manager Anette Schuetz
Design and Composition Associate Lisa Kochel
Cover Frank Pessia and Hemera/Thinkstock
Copyright 2013 by the International Reading Association, Inc.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form
or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, or any information storage
and retrieval system, without permission from the publisher.
The publisher would appreciate notification where errors occur so that they may be corrected
in subsequent printings and/or editions.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Theoretical models and processes of reading / Donna E. Alvermann, University of Georgia,
Norman J. Unrau, California State University, Los Angeles, Robert B. Ruddell, University of
California, Berkeley, editors. Sixth edition.
pages cm
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-87207-710-1 (978-0-87207-710-2 : alk. paper) 1. Reading. 2. Reading
Research. I. Alvermann, Donna E. II. Unrau, Norman. III. Ruddell, Robert B.
LB1050.T48 2013
428.4dc23
2012048890
Contributors xii
Preface xviii
6. Social Talk and Imaginative Play: Curricular Basics for Young Childrens
Language and Literacy 164
Anne Haas Dyson and Celia Genishi
13. Developing Early Literacy Skills: Things We Know We Know and Things
We Know We Dont Know 362
Christopher J. Lonigan and Timothy Shanahan
16. A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disabilities and Other Reading
Problems, Redux 412
Louise Spear-Swerling
ix
engage in research, and serve on California State University committees to pro-
mote academic literacy in schools.
Norm completed his masters degree at Columbia Universitys Teachers Col
lege. After teaching high school English and social studies for nearly 25 years, he
completed his doctorate in education at the University of California, Berkeley. His
work at Berkeley focused on cognition in reading and writing. Norm has served
as editor of the International Reading Associations Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy and is the author of Content Area Reading and Writing: Fostering Literacies
in Middle and High School Cultures (2nd ed., Pearson, 2008) and Thoughtful
Teachers, Thoughtful Learners: Helping Students Think Critically (2nd ed., Pippin,
2008). He served as coeditor of the fifth edition (2004) of Theoretical Models and
Process of Reading with Bob Ruddell. Norm has also published articles on reading,
writing, critical thinking, assessment, motivation, and graduate programs in edu-
cation that have appeared in the Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, The Journal
of Educational Research, Reading Psychology, Teacher Education Quarterly, Issues in
Teacher Education, and other professional journals.
When not teaching, reading, or writing, Norm enjoys playing tennis and the
saxophone, traveling with his wife, Cherene, who teaches piano, and biking by
the ocean with his daughter, Amy.
xii
Deborah R. Dillon Emily Fox
Department of Curriculum and College of Education
Instruction University of Maryland, College Park
University of Minnesota College Park, Maryland, USA
Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
James R. Gavelek
Mary Anne Doyle College of Education
Neag School of Education University of Illinois at Chicago
University of Connecticut Chicago, Illinois, USA
Storrs, Connecticut, USA James Paul Gee
Nell K. Duke Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College
School of Education Arizona State University
University of Michigan Phoenix, Arizona, USA
Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA Celia Genishi
KaiLonnie Dunsmore Teachers College
National Center for Literacy Columbia University
Education New York, New York, USA
Urbana, Illinois, USA Kenneth S. Goodman (Emeritus)
Anne Haas Dyson College of Education
College of Education University of Arizona
University of Illinois at Tucson, Arizona, USA
Urbana-Champaign Yetta M. Goodman (Emerita)
Champaign, Illinois, USA College of Education
John R. Edlund University of Arizona
Department of English and Foreign Tucson, Arizona, USA
Languages Usha Goswami
California State Polytechnic Centre for Neuroscience in Education
University, Pomona University of Cambridge
Pomona, California, USA Cambridge, UK
Linnea C. Ehri John T. Guthrie (Emeritus)
Graduate Center College of Education
City University of New York University of Maryland, College Park
New York, New York, USA College Park, Maryland, USA
Paul J. Feltovich Kris D. Gutirrez
Florida Institute for Human and School of Education
Machine Cognition University of Colorado at Boulder
Pensacola, Florida, USA Boulder, Colorado, USA
Ellice A. Forman M.A.K. Halliday (Emeritus)
School of Education Department of Linguistics
University of Pittsburgh University of Sydney
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
Contributors xiii
Brenda Hannon Mira-Lisa Katz
College of Liberal and Fine Arts Department of English
Texas A&M UniversityKingsville Sonoma State University
Kingsville, Texas, USA Rohnert Park, California, USA
Shirley Brice Heath Walter Kintsch (Emeritus)
Department of English Institute of Cognitive Science
Stanford University University of Colorado at Boulder
Stanford, California, USA Boulder, Colorado, USA
Elizabeth E. Heilman Charles K. Kinzer
College of Education Teachers College
Michigan State University Columbia University
East Lansing, Michigan, USA New York, New York, USA
Laurie A. Henry Gunther Kress
College of Education Institute of Education
University of Kentucky University of London
Lexington, Kentucky, USA
London, UK
Elfrieda H. Hiebert
Melanie R. Kuhn
TextProject
School of Education
Santa Cruz, California, USA
Boston University
Division of Social Sciences
Boston, Massachusetts, USA
University of California, Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz, California, USA Mei Kuin Lai
Woolf Fisher Research Centre
George G. Hruby
University of Auckland
College of Education
University of Kentucky Auckland, New Zealand
Lexington, Kentucky, USA Carol D. Lee
Selena Hsiao School of Education and Social
Woolf Fisher Research Centre Policy
University of Auckland Northwestern University
Auckland, New Zealand Evanston, Illinois, USA
xiv Contributors
Marla H. Mallette Allan Paivio (Emeritus)
Graduate School of Education Department of Psychology
Binghamton University, State University of Western Ontario
University of New York London, Ontario, Canada
Binghamton, New York, USA
Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar
Sandra McCormick (Emerita) School of Education
College of Education University of Michigan
The Ohio State University Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
Columbus, Ohio, USA
Giovanni Parodi
Stuart McNaughton
Department of Linguistics
Woolf Fisher Research Centre
Pontificia Universidad Catlica
University of Auckland
de Valparaso
Auckland, New Zealand
Valparaso, Chile
Mary B. McVee
Graduate School of Education & Center P. David Pearson
for Literacy and Reading Instruction Graduate School of Education
University at Buffalo, State University University of California, Berkeley
of New York Berkeley, California, USA
Buffalo, New York, USA Iliana Reyes
Elizabeth Birr Moje College of Education and Human
School of Education Development
University of Michigan University of Arizona
Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA Tucson, Arizona, USA
William E. Nagy Louise M. Rosenblatt (Deceased)
School of Education School of Education
Seattle Pacific University New York University
Seattle, Washington, USA New York, New York, USA
Katherine Nelson (Emerita) Jennifer Rowsell
Graduate Center
Department of Teacher Education
City University of New York
Brock University
New York, New York, USA
St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada
David G. OBrien
Department of Curriculum and Robert B. Ruddell (Emeritus)
Instruction Graduate School of Education
University of Minnesota University of California, Berkeley
Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA Berkeley, California, USA
Contributors xv
David E. Rumelhart (Deceased) Amy Stornaiuolo
School of Humanities and Sciences Graduate School of Education
Stanford University University of Pennsylvania
Stanford, California, USA Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
Mark Sadoski Stephanie L. Strachan
Texas A&M Health Science Center College of Education
Texas A&M University Michigan State University
College Station, Texas, USA East Lansing, Michigan, USA
S. Jay Samuels Brian Street (Emeritus)
College of Education and Human Department of Education and
Development Professional Studies
University of Minnesota Kings College London
Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA London, UK
Judith A. Scott Ana Taboada Barber
Education Department College of Education and Human
University of California, Santa Cruz Development
Santa Cruz, California, USA George Mason University
Fairfax, Virginia, USA
Timothy Shanahan
College of Education Alfred W. Tatum
University of Illinois at Chicago College of Education
Chicago, Illinois, USA University of Illinois at Chicago
Chicago, Illinois, USA
Louise Spear-Swerling
Special Education and Reading Stephen M. Tonks
Department College of Education
Southern Connecticut State University Northern Illinois University
New Haven, Connecticut, USA DeKalb, Illinois, USA
Rand J. Spiro Rolf Turner
College of Education Department of Statistics
Michigan State University University of Auckland
East Lansing, Michigan, USA Auckland, New Zealand
Steven A. Stahl (Deceased) Norman J. Unrau (Emeritus)
College of Education Charter School of Education
University of Illinois at California State University,
Urbana-Champaign Los Angeles
Champaign, Illinois, USA Los Angeles, California, USA
Laura Sterponi Chad H. Waldron
Graduate School of Education College of Education
University of California, Berkeley Michigan State University
Berkeley, California, USA East Lansing, Michigan, USA
xvi Contributors
Lynne M. Watanabe Marlene Zepeda (Emerita)
College of Education College of Health and Human
Michigan State University Services
East Lansing, Michigan, USA California State University,
Los Angeles
Allan Wigfield
Los Angeles, California, USA
College of Education
University of Maryland, College Park
College Park, Maryland, USA
Contributors xvii
P R E FA C E
W
elcome, once again, to the world of reading and literacy research. We
invite you to join us in the exciting investigation and discovery of
reading theory, models, and processes. The reading process consti-
tutes what Edmund Burke Huey, a pioneer in reading theory, called the most
intricate workings of the human mind, as well asthe most remarkable specific
performance that civilization has learned in all its history (1908/1968, p. 6). In
this sixth edition of Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (TMPR6), over
half of the chapters have never appeared in any earlier edition. Eight of these
new chapters were specially commissioned for this volume. Twenty percent of
the chapters that have appeared earlier have been revised and/or updated by their
authors to reflect current research and instructional developments in the field.
The following are our goals for this preface:
To explain the overall purposes that guided the development of TMPR6
o share a brief background of the past editions of TMPR (1970, 1976, 1985,
T
1994, and 2004) that led to the current sixth edition
T
o describe the criteria used in the selection of chapters for the current
volume and to offer a brief summary of the sixth editions content
To acknowledge those who assisted us in TMPR6s development
xviii
A Brief Background on TMPR
The first edition of TMPR emerged from a 1969 symposium presented at the 14th an-
nual convention of the International Reading Association in Kansas City, Missouri.
Robert Ruddell of the University of California, Berkeley, and
Harry Singer of the University of California, Riverside, dis-
cussed the idea that a book might evolve from invited speak-
ers informative research presentations at the convention.
The idea of honoring Professor Jack Holmes of the University
of California, Berkeley, was at the center of the volumes cre-
ation. Holmes, who passed away in 1969, had been Singers
doctoral advisor and mentor and Ruddells former senior col-
league at Berkeley.
In 1970, the collection of papers, which were edited by
Singer and Ruddell, became the first edition of TMPR. The
first part contained six papers and reactions that came directly from the sympo-
sium and dealt with linguistic, perceptual, and cognitive components of the read-
ing process. Contributors to that part included S. Jay Samuels, Joanna Williams,
George Spache, Russell Stauffer, Roy Kress, and Albert Kingston. The second
part of the first edition included nine selected articles that developed theoreti-
cal models of the reading process, including Jack Holmess substrata-factor the-
ory, Kenneth Goodmans psycholinguistic guessing game, Richard Venezky and
Robert Calfees reading competency model, and Eleanor Gibsons classic article on
learning to read. Graduate students in reading programs throughout the United
States were quick to use that first 348-page volume.
The second edition (1976) was approximately 75% new and doubled in length
to 768 pages. Several new ideas grew from conversations between Singer and
Ruddell as they planned the new edition. For example, the
editors decided to include focusing questions at the begin-
ning of each section as well as research articles that would
illustrate various research traditions. The second edition
was dedicated to researchers who had contributed to an un-
derstanding of the reading process. That 1976 edition had
four sections:
Introduction, which highlighted pioneers in read-
ing research and the nature of the reading process
Processes of Reading, which contained subsections
on language, visual processing, perception, word recognition, cognition,
affect, and cultural interaction
Models, which included pieces based on psycholinguistics (Ruddell and
Goodman), information processing (including Gough and Anderson), de-
velopmental differences (Holmes and Singer), and affect (Mathewson)
Teaching and Research Issues, with pieces by Harry Singer, Richard
Venezky and colleagues, George Miller, and Irene Athey, which focused
Preface xix
on teaching, modeling, text comprehension, and developmental processes,
respectively
The third edition of TMPR was published in 1985, again edited by Singer
and Ruddell, and dedicated to professors, researchers, and graduate students who
formulate theories of reading and literacy, test hypotheses,
and generate new knowledge in the field. With 70% new se-
lections, the four main sections of this 976-page volume are
Historical Changes in Reading, Processes of Reading,
Models of Reading, and Teaching and Research Issues.
Examination of the third editions content reveals the im-
pact of theory and research from literacys allied disci-
plines, ranging from cognitive psychology with emphasis
on schema theory and metacognition to sociolinguistics
emphasizing greater concern for cultural and ethnic diver-
sity in literacy learning. New to that volume, each part in
the Processes of Reading section included at least one research exemplar article
to complement each major theory piece.
Following a growing trend, the fourth edition, edited by Ruddell, Ruddell,
and Singer, expanded to 1,296 pages, but like the previous editions, most of the
content provided new frameworks and insights, with more
than 80% of the selected articles having not appeared in any
earlier volumes. Like earlier editions, this edition retained
four themed sections: Historical Changes in Reading:
Researchers and Their Research, Processes of Reading and
Literacy, Models of Reading and Literacy Processes, and
New Paradigms: Theory, Research, and Curriculum. The
selections in these four sections made evident the explosion
of knowledge in our field during the prior decade with new
and revised theoretical perspectives, new paradigms, the use
of multiple research stances, and new research findings.
The fifth edition, edited by Ruddell and Unrau, was by far the largest in the
history of TMPRs publication and reflected the aspirations of its editors to extend
the coverage and depth of TMPR. It consisted of 56 chapters within 1,728 pages.
Retaining the four main themes of the fourth edition, the fifth included a supple-
mentary CD that contained several TMPR classics and more recent pieces that we
could not include in that already expansive edition. During the books editing,
we strove to assemble an expanded collection of classical and up-to-date chapters
to inform readers about not only the history of research in reading but also the
spectrum of challenges that educators were encountering and engaging in their
research.
When beginning work on the fifth edition, we developed a set of questions
that we used to generate feedback and suggestions from professors and instruc-
tors around the world who taught with TMPR4 and earlier editions. Many of
those suggestions were incorporated into TMPR5, such as coverage of second-
xx Preface
language learning, critical literacy, and delayed or strug-
gling readers. Results from that survey also informed the
design of the Questions for Reflection to encourage the in-
tegration of research, theory, and practice.
New to that fifth editions first section were a conversa-
tion between Richard Allington and Anne McGill-Franzen,
who identified key trends and influences in literacy in-
struction; an exploration by Patricia Alexander and Emily
Fox of five eras of literacy research and practice over the
past 50 years; and a chapter by Sheila Valencia and Karen
Wixson that developed a base of understanding about pol-
icy, standards, assessment, and instruction that reflected educators interests in
the nationwide standards and accountability movement. New to the second sec-
tion, which focused on reading and literacy processes, were chapters that brought
greater emphasis to the roles of sociocognition and literacy development by an
array of authors, including James Gee, Anne Haas Dyson, Robert Jimnez, Patton
Tabors, and Catherine Snow. An entirely new Part 6 was added to the Section Two,
Instructional Effects on Literacy Development, and included work by Robert
Ruddell, Rachel Brown and her colleagues, Judith Langer, and Jill Fitzgerald.
Section Three contained a dozen models representing a wide range of reading
and writing theories. Many models were brought forward from earlier editions
of TMPR, such as those by Jay Samuels, David Rumelhart, Marilyn Adams, and
Louise Rosenblatt. Others were new additions, including the chapters by Marcel
Just and Patricia Carpenter and by Walter Kintsch. Mark Sadoski and Allan
Paivios dual coding model was updated, as was the sociocognitive-processing
model by Robert Ruddell and Norman Unrau, and a radically revised model for
understanding cognition and affect in writing by John Hayes replaced an earlier
cognitive process model of writing.
Section Four contained five new chapters with each focusing on a different
segment of literacys future horizon. A chapter by Deborah Dillon and her col-
leagues called for a move toward a more pragmatic stance with more concen-
tration on pressing problems in literacy that were calling for solutions and that
would promote growth in the field rather than preoccupation with narrow para-
digm conflicts and political agendas. A chapter from the then newly published
RAND Reading Study Groups report on strategies to develop a research program
on reading comprehension was included, along with a chapter envisioning a the-
ory of new literacies written by Donald Leu and his colleagues. With assessment
on the minds of educators worldwide, Lorrie Shepards chapter on the role that
assessment plays in learning cultures was added because it provided a historical
framework for assessment practices and urged educators to examine the purposes
of assessment and its relation to learning outcomes. Concluding this section,
Claude Goldenberg reviewed research on literacy learning for children from low-
income families and presented implications for research and instruction designed
to enhance their literacy development.
Preface xxi
The scope of TMPR5 was perhaps broader and more comprehensive than any
of its earlier companion volumes. It identified a range of essential factors critical
to our continued progress in helping individuals read more proficiently and in
helping educators understand reading processes more deeply. The new edition of
TMPR continues in the pursuit of that progress. As we move into the sixth edition
of TMPR, it is interesting to note that the International Reading Association has
recorded sales of over 54,000 volumes of the first five editions.
TMPR6, like its predecessors, seeks to represent earlier and current scholar-
ship that is among the best in the field. It builds on the classics of earlier editions
in two important ways. First, the sixth editions content is largely reflective of a
user survey that showed what the literacy field deemed necessary to retain from
earlier editions of TMPR as well as several perceived gaps that needed closing.
xxii Preface
Looking to the field to inform their selection of content for this edition, the editors
took into account the results of 640 completed surveys distributed and analyzed
by the International Reading Association. Survey respondents included faculty
and graduate students in literacy education departments across the United States.
The editors also initiated small focus groups at several annual meetings of key lit-
eracy organizations to determine new topics that professionals in the field wished
to see represented in the new edition. Finally, the editors used data compiled from
the surveys and focus groups to assist them in making decisions about the content
that would be included in the sixth edition. This decision-making process was
aimed at negotiating a balance between their sense of new trends in the field and
earlier classics that have retained relevancy well into the 21st century.
The titles of the four sections remain intact from earlier editions. Within each
section, there is a rich blend of newly commissioned chapters, reprints of recently
published articles, and updates to chapters that have been brought forward to
preserve the historical value of TMPR over the past five decades.
In Section One, Perspectives on Literacy Research and Its Application,
Patricia Alexander and Emily Fox have updated their earlier chapter on histori-
cal perspective in reading research and practice while simultaneously offering a
rationale for where they see the field headed. A new chapter by Norman Unrau
and Donna Alvermann traces the evolving contexts for models of reading and
writing, especially in relation to what counts as a model in an ever widening
field of theoretical stances. Just as theories have entered the field from disciplines
such as psychology, sociology, and anthropology, so also have new methodolo-
gies for studying a broader array of reading and writing practices. Capturing this
latter trend is a new chapter by Marla Mallette, Nell Duke, Stephanie Strachan,
Chad Waldron, and Lynne Watanabe in which they explore the synergy that ex-
ists among several well-known research methodologies.
Section Two, Processes of Reading and Literacy, contains 13 new chap-
ters (including commissioned pieces and reprints), plus updates for another
three chapters (Melanie Kuhn and Steven Stahl; Louise Spear-Swerling; and Ann
Brown, Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar, and Bonnie Armbruster) that were brought
forward from earlier editions of TMPR. In a newly commissioned chapter, Anne
Haas Dyson and Celia Genishi report on their research on social talk and imagi-
native play in the development of young childrens language and literacy. Another
newly commissioned piece for the sixth edition is Shirley Brice Heaths chap-
ter that builds on her earlier work Ways With Words. Iliana Reyes and Patricia
Azuaras chapter on emergent biliteracy in young Mexican immigrant children
is a reprint of their article by the same name. Another reprint, this one by Carol
Lee, uses a Vygotskian lens to explore a group of underachieving urban adoles-
cents growth in literacy and language. On a somewhat similar topic, Mei Kuin
Lai, Stuart McNaughton, Meaola Amituanai-Toloa, Rolf Turner, and Selena Hsiao
examine the sustained acceleration of students achievement in reading compre-
hension, but this time within a New Zealand context. Two reprints from a spe-
cial issue of Educational Researcher on early literacy learners address the fields
Preface xxiii
concern that more research is needed on young learners literacy skill develop-
ment (Christopher Lonigan and Timothy Shanahan) and dual-language learning
(Kris Gutirrez, Marlene Zepeda, and Dina Castro). In two updated chapters on
fluency (Melanie Kuhn and Steven Stahl) and reading disabilities (Louise Spear-
Swerling), the authors add insights and practices that have appeared in the litera-
ture since their earlier reviews of the literature.
Part 3 of Section Two contains a reprint from Katherine Nelsons work on
communities of mind as well as a reprint of Mary McVee, KaiLonnie Dunsmore,
and James Gaveleks effort to align key concepts of schema theory with sociocul-
tural theory. This part concludes with a newly commissioned chapter by George
Hruby and Usha Goswami on the implications of educational neuroscience for
reading researchers. Although one might argue that the processes associated with
motivation and engagement in Part 4 could be integrated into earlier parts of
Section Two, we chose to highlight the importance of these processes by adding
two new chapters that extend the work of the National Reading Research Center.
Both are reprints, with the first of the two (Ana Taboada, Stephen Tonks, Allan
Wigfield, and John Guthrie) providing evidence that a readers desire to compre-
hend a printed text stimulates metacognitive processing, background knowledge
activation, and the use of relevant cognitive-based strategies. The second reprint,
a chapter by Alfred Tatum, focuses on the role of enabling textsthat is, texts
which engage youths in certain sociocultural, political, spiritual, and economic
issues that they find relevant to their lives. Part 5, which concludes Section Two,
addresses the requests of several focus group members who asked for theoreti-
cally grounded research on students literacy development in instructional con-
texts. In a newly commissioned chapter (Mary Anne Doyle), the author explores
the theoretical basis for Marie Clays Reading Recovery approach to early literacy
intervention. Finally, a postscript by Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar to her coau-
thored chapter with Ann Brown and Bonnie Armbruster addresses the adapta-
tions that have been made to reciprocal teaching since its inception.
Section Three, Models of Reading and Writing Processes, contains a wide
range of models that represent markedly different reading and writing theories.
A number of these are retained from earlier editions of TMPR and are derived
from cognitive-processing theories; others draw from transactional, sociocul-
tural, and sociocognitive theories. Of the six chapters in Part 1 of Section Three
on cognitive-processing models, one is an update by Walter Kintsch on his
constructionintegration model of text comprehension. His influence on Brenda
Hannons model of reading comprehension performance in proficient adult read-
ers is evident in a new reprint that concludes the part. In Part 2 of this section,
Mark Sadoski and Allan Paivio update their dual coding theory of reading, and
in Part 3, we have retained Louise Rosenblatts chapter on the transactional
theory of reading and writing. Part4 on integrating reading and writing mod-
els contains two new chapters: one is a reprint of Giovanni Parodis article on
readingwriting connections in discourse-oriented research, and the other is a
commissioned piece by Mira-Lisa Katz, Nancy Brynelson, and John Edlund that
xxiv Preface
focuses on the reading and writing of expository texta curriculum that guides
students ability to enact rhetorical literacies and also promotes college access
and success. In Part5, Robert Ruddell and Norman Unrau integrate two of their
chapters from earlier editions of TMPR to show how the classroom teacher figures
prominently into their sociocognitive model of reading as a meaning-construction
process involving reader, text, and teacher.
Section Four, Literacys New Horizons: An Emerging Agenda for Tomorrows
Research and Practice, contains four new chapters, two chapter updates, and one
reprint. A new chapter by Donna Alvermann and Elizabeth Birr Moje deconstructs
the discourse of every teacher a teacher of reading to point out the need for a
model of adolescent literacy instruction that takes into account the complexities
of 21st-century teaching and learning in subject matter classrooms. An updated
chapter from an earlier edition of TMPR by Deborah Dillon, David OBrien, and
Elizabeth Heilman reexamines how literacy scholars preoccupation with para-
digmatic debates resulted in fewer practical advances in the field of literacy edu-
cation than might have been the case had pragmatism been adopted as a viable
alternative. In a reprint of an article focused on the National Early Literacy Panels
recommendations for teaching young children how to read, David Pearson and
Elfrieda Hiebert critique what they describe as a basic-skills conspiracy of good
intentions (p. 1145). In an updated chapter on information technologies and the
changing nature of literacy, Donald Leu, Charles Kinzer, Julie Coiro, Jill Castek,
and Laurie Henry reinforce their earlier work in TMPR5 that literacy today is
deictic, multiple, multimodal, and multifaceted. In a newly commissioned chap-
ter, Jennifer Rowsell, Gunther Kress, Kate Pahl, and Brian Street offer for the first
time an integrated perspective on new literacies and a social semiotic approach
to multimodality. In the remaining two commissioned chapters, the authors sug-
gest an agenda for future research. For example, Glynda Hull, Amy Stornaiuolo,
and Laura Sterponi provide a new taxonomy of textual strategiesone that spe-
cifically invites participation in online communication through designfulness,
overture, reciprocity, and resonance. Finally, Robert Rueda takes into account the
new and multiple literacies needed in an interconnected global economy in which
information-driven work environments depend on an individuals ability to adapt
quickly and creatively while simultaneously attending to factors that influence a
readers motivation to read and write.
Acknowledgments
As we conclude our work on the sixth edition, we would like to recognize and
express our appreciation to a number of people who have helped us complete this
multiyear project. We first want to thank a very long list of literacy researchers and
theory builders who have contributed to this edition. Second, we want to express
our appreciation to the many professors, graduate students, and literacy special-
ists who responded to our survey, participated in focus groups, and provided us
with feedback that helped us shape this volumes content. They enabled us to see
the past and the future more clearly. Third, we must acknowledge the extensive
Preface xxv
and impressive help we received from our graduate research assistants who en-
abled us to include graduate student perspectives throughout the process of creat-
ing this edition. Our gratitude goes to Gurupreet Kahlsa, a doctoral student at the
University of Southern Alabama, who worked closely with Norman Unrau, and
to Andrew Huddleston and Jairus Joaquin, both of whom were graduate students
at The University of Georgia and worked closely with Donna Alvermann. Their
thoughtful input will be long remembered.
We also wish to thank our families for their care and encouragement during
this four-year endeavor: To Jack and Jazz, who excel in the world of humans and
golden retrievers when it comes to patience and loyalty in dealing with Donnas
projects. To Norms wife, Cherene, to her listening ear, and to her understanding
as we moved step by step through the creation of this work go boundless appre-
ciation. To Bobs wife, Sandra, who has provided her support, understanding, and
love throughout the completion of this important research volume, go special
thoughts, gratitude, and respect.
Our appreciation also goes out to many individuals at IRA headquarters, past
and present. When we began this endeavor, Anne Fullerton helped us take many
of the critical first steps involved in creating this book, including facilitation with
surveys and focus groups, setting up early meetings at conventions, and creating
a road map to this projects completion. We were then fortunate to work with
Shannon Fortner, who directed IRAs collaboration on the project seamlessly, an-
swered our stream of questions in a timely and fully comprehensible manner,
and exercised her editorial skills as the book moved toward production. We also
valued the contributions of the Publications Division and many of its individual
members, including Susanne Viscarra, Tori Bachman, Christina Lambert, and
Cindy Held.
Finally, we want to thank the International Reading Associations Board of
Directors and other IRA personnel for their support, which enabled the produc-
tion of this sixth edition of Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading.
Donna E. Alvermann
Norman J. Unrau
Robert B. Ruddell
R eference
Huey, E.B. (1968). The psychology and pedagogy of
reading. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original
work published 1908)
xxvi Preface
Section One
I
n the introductory section for this edition of Theoretical Models and Processes of
Reading, we have focused more intently on the construct of theory, its manifes-
tations and transformations throughout the history of literacy research, and
methods considered useful in its development. The three chapters in this section
serve as lenses to look on three separate but interacting spheres: perspectives of
research and theory over the past 60 years, the roles that theory and models have
had in the evolution of literacy research and instruction, and research methodolo-
gies best used to address research topics or the problems of practice in literacy
and to build theory that illuminates.
Where were we? Where are we? Where are we going? Answers to these
questions come from Patricia Alexander and Emily Fox, who provide us with
A Historical Perspective on Reading Research and Practice, Redux (Chapter1).
In their chapter, the authors survey the past 60 years of reading history and
identify six perspectives on learning beginning with the Era of Conditioned
Learning that started in the 1950s and progressing to our current Emergent Era
of Goal-Directed Learning that commenced in 2006. The authors then distill les-
sons learned from those 60 years. Their review of six decades of reading research
and instruction magnifies and clarifies factors, such as trends in research, that
have guided and shaped the identity and evolution of the field of reading.
Because absolute truth often eludes our pursuit, we rely on theoretical lenses
to focus our beliefs and practices. It is from theories that researchers build models
in attempts to explain complex cognitive, cultural, and social processes. As in
Platos cave, where what is seen is but a reflection of reality, models are represen-
tations through which we make sense of abstractions. In Literacies and Their
Investigation Through Theories and Models (Chapter 2), Norman Unrau and
Donna Alvermann assay the paradigms, theories, and models through which re-
searchers have studied reading and literacies over the last half century, including
constructivism, social constructionism, information/cognitive processing theo-
ries, sociocultural perspectives, sociocognitive theory, structuralism, poststruc-
turalism, pragmatism, and motivational theories. In a discussion of how literacy
theories have given rise to theoretical models and perspectives, research direc-
tions and methodologies, instructional practices, and interventions, the authors
clarify how views of literacy continue to evolve as the 21st century witnesses mas-
sive changes in the way communication takes place in a global society.
1
An interesting proposal from Marla Mallette, Nell Duke, Stephanie
Strachan, Chad Waldron, and Lynne Watanabe in Synergy in Literacy Research
Methodology (Chapter 3) outlines a new way of thinking about research design
classifications used in literacy research. Rather than the traditional quantitative,
qualitative, or mixed-methods typologies, the authors suggest a classification
based on the type of insights that various methodologies provide. Categories of
what is, what was, what happens when, and what can be are described, with
recent studies examined for how they illuminate these insights. A classification
system such as the authors outline can provide continuity for specific foci of re-
search over time, no matter what methodological approach is selected for a study.
These three chapters also serve as an introduction to the next three sections
of this edition. Section Two provides a spectrum of studies that focus on literacy
processes and that often contribute to knowledge that has been synthesized into
the reading and other literacy theories and models presented in Section Three.
Section Four then provides us with a view of the multiple challenges that lie on
the horizon as we build our knowledge base, develop perspectives, and deepen
understandings that enrich literacy and learning.
I
n this chapter, we have been asked to revisit the past eras and future directions
that we have identified for the domain of reading, beginning with the creation
of the International Reading Association in 1956, an event regarded as trans-
formational in the history of this field (Monaghan & Saul, 1987). Without ques-
tion, the efforts of researchers during that formative period gave rise to extensive
literature on learners and the learning process that remains an enduring legacy.
Yet, this was not the only period of significant change the reading community has
experienced in the past 60 years. In fact, reading has periodically responded to
internal and external forces, resulting in both gradual and dramatic transforma-
tions to the domaintransformations that have altered reading study and prac-
tice. Our purpose here is to position those transformations within a historical
framework. As with others (VanSledright, 2002), we hold that such a historical
perspective allows for reasoned reflection and a certain wisdom that can be eas-
ily lost when one is immersed in ongoing study and practice. That is because a
historical perspective broadens the vista on reading and adds a critical dimension
to the analysis of present-day events and issues.
To capture this historical perspective, we surveyed eras in reading research
and practice that have unfolded in the past 60 years and that symbolize alterna-
tive perspectives on learners and learning. For each, we described certain internal
and external conditions that helped frame that period, as well as the views of and
principles of learning that are characteristic of that era. Moreover, we explored
both the prevailing views of learning within those periods and rival stances that
existed as educational undercurrents. To bring this historical vista into focus, we
highlighted exemplary and prototypic works that encapsulated the issues and con-
cerns of the time. Of course, we recognize that the boundaries and distinctions we
have drawn between these eras are approximations of permeable and overlapping
periods of reading research and practice. Nonetheless, these eras remain a useful
platform from which the subsequent contributions in this volume can be explored.
In revisiting the historical perspective offered in our initial venture (Alexander
& Fox, 2004), we considered the degree to which our interpretation of past and
emergent perspectives adopted by the field might be expected to remain stable
This chapter is adapted from A Historical Perspective on Reading Research and Practice, in Theoretical
Models and Processes of Reading (5th ed., pp. 3368), edited by R.B. Ruddell and N.J. Unrau, 2004, Newark, DE:
International Reading Association. Copyright 2004 by the International Reading Association.
3
over time (i.e., from one edition of Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading to
the next). It was our sense that our view of the distant eras could be expected to
remain relatively stable. What we saw as characterizing the view of the learner
by the field during a given time period and what we considered to be the forces
for change pushing toward a new perspective on learning and a new view of the
learner were not likely to change significantly in the absence of any major influx
of new information or transformative new worldview that would cast these eras
and their progressive unfolding in a radically different light. However, where we
did expect that change could occur would be in our provisional characterization
of the emergent era, and our view of where the field was heading.
When we first undertook this historical analysis (Alexander & Fox, 2004),
we held that the reading research community was poised at a new juncture in its
historya juncture that was formed in part by the juxtaposition of increasingly
varied forms of reading engaged in by globally networked students with a seem-
ingly unwavering investment in the high-stakes testing of reading skills and com-
petencies. Herein, we not only return to our description of past eras and evaluate
our skills at prognostication when it came to the then-emergent period, but we
also consider the onset of a new era only now taking form.
Guiding View
Because of the prevailing influences of behavioristic theory in educational re-
search and practice, reading during this period was conceptualized as conditioned
behavior and just another process susceptible to programming. The Skinnerian or
strict behaviorist perspective was that learning should not be conceived as growth
or development, but rather as acquiring behaviors as a result of certain environ-
mental contingencies. As Skinner (1976) states,
Everyone has suffered, and unfortunately is continuing to suffer, from mentalistic
theories of learning in education.The point of education can be stated in behavioral
terms: a teacher arranges contingencies under which the student acquires behavior
In this theoretical orientation, learning results from the repeated and controlled
stimulation from the environment that comes to elicit a predictable response
from the individual. This repeated pairing of stimulus/response, often linked
with the application of carefully chosen rewards and punishments, leads to the
habituation of the reading act. For example, the child presented with the symbols
C-A-T immediately produces the desired word, cat, seemingly without cognitive
involvement.
The philosophical grounds for this stance lay in the works of the empiricist
David Hume (1777/1963) and his narrow conception of knowledge as perception
and learning as habituated association (Strike, 1974). The investigation of aca-
demic learning, thus, involved identification of the requisite desired behaviors
and determination of the environmental conditions (i.e., training) that produced
them. Depending on how strictly the behaviorist paradigm was followed, hypoth-
eses and conclusions were more or less restricted to discussion of observable be-
haviors and the environmental stimuli that preceded them (Strike, 1974).
The task for this generation of reading researchers, therefore, was to untangle
the chained links of behavior involved in reading so learners could be trained in
each component skill. The act of reading consisted of the competent and prop-
erly sequenced performance of that chain of discrete skills. Research was addi-
tionally concerned with the structuring and control of materials effective in the
delivery of environmental stimulation and practice opportunities (Glaser, 1978;
Monaghan & Saul, 1987). There was also a concomitant interest in the identifica-
tion and remediation of problems in skill acquisition, which would require even
finer grained analysis of the appropriate behaviors so skill training could proceed
in the smallest of increments (Glaser, 1978).
Resulting Principles
Out of the labors of the reading researchers of this era came a body of literature
on the multitude of subskills required for reading. The interest in the study of the
components of reading processes was exemplified by such efforts as the interdis-
ciplinary studies at Cornell University that became the Project Literacy program
(Levin, 1965; Venezky, 1984). As a result of the behaviorist emphasis on studying
observable behavior, there was a particular focus on reading as a perceptual ac-
tivity. Such perceptual activities included the identification of visual signals, the
translation of these signals into sounds, and assembly of these sounds into words,
phrases, and sentences (Pearson & Stephens, 1994). Phonics instruction came
to be seen as part of the logical groundwork for beginning to read (Chall, 1967,
1995) and had the desirable attribute of being eminently trainable. The coun-
terpart of this emphasis on skills was an interest in developing and validating
diagnostic instruments and remedial techniques (C.E. Smith & Keogh, 1962).
Guiding View
In this new era of reading research, the conceptualization that served as the for-
mative stance was of learning as a natural process. Language, as with other innate
human capacities, was to be developed through meaningful use, not practiced
to the point of mindless reaction, as behaviorists proposed. This notion of hard-
wired capacities blended the explanatory language of physiology and psychology
(Chomsky, 1965). It was assumed that human beings are biologically programmed
to acquire language under favorable conditions. This programming involved the
Guiding View
On the basis of research published between 1976 and 1985, it was cognitive psy-
chology, and more specifically information-processing theory, that dominated the
domain of reading (R.C. Anderson, 1977). However, a psycholinguistic undercur-
rent remained evident during this period and gained momentum as new con-
stituents joined the reading community. Even given the continuing presence of
psycholinguistics, this remained the era of cognitive psychology characterized by
unprecedented research on knowledge, especially the construct of prior knowl-
edge (Alexander, 1998a). Much of this knowledge research was influenced by the
philosophy of Immanuel Kant (1787/1963). Kantian philosophy was significant
for its distinction between the sensible world and the intelligible world as varied
sources of human knowledge:
By sensible world [Kant] meant the world as perceived by the senses; he would
later call this also the phenomenal world, or world of appearances. By intelligible
world he meant the world as conceived by the intellect or reason.Here Kant al-
ready laid down his basic theses: that space and time are not objective or sensible
objects, but are forms of perception inherent in the nature and structure of the mind;
and that the mind is no passive recipient and product of sensations, but is an active
agentwith inherent modes and laws of operationfor transforming sensations
into ideas. (Durant & Durant, 1967, p. 534)
Resulting Principles
As noted, the construct of prior knowledge and its potent influence on stu-
dents text-based learning were enduring legacies of this era (Alexander, 1998a;
Alexander & Murphy, 1998). Specifically, the readers knowledge base was
This contrast between the aesthetic and efferent stances that Rosenblatt de-
scribes had the effect of casting learning from text, central to the information-
processing orientation, in an unfavorable light and countered the seemingly
analytic, less personal perspective of reading forwarded by cognitive researchers
(Benton, 1983; Britton, 1982; Rosenblatt, 1938/1995). In effect, the goal was to
lose oneself in the text and not specifically to learn from it. For those who es-
poused this goal, a learning from text perspective transformed a natural liter-
ary, aesthetic experience into an unnatural, overly analytic act.
Guiding View
As a result of the aforementioned forces, group orientations came to replace the
earlier focus on individualistic learning and instruction seen in the prior era
(Alexander, Murphy, & Woods, 1996). Literacy research now sought to capture
the shared understanding of the many rather than the private knowledge of the
Resulting Principles
In this era of literacy research, the ongoing movement was toward increased
sophistication of the conception of knowledge. Reviews of the knowledge terms
used by literacy researchers and in broader educational contexts (Alexander,
Schallert, & Hare, 1991; de Jong & Ferguson-Hessler, 1996; Greene & Ackerman,
1995) revealed that literacy involved a multitude of knowledges. Knowledge
was not a singular construct but existed in diverse forms and interactive dimen-
sions (Paris, Lipson, & Wixson, 1983; Prawat, 1989). These various knowledges
had to be coordinated or reconciled in the performance of any nontrivial lit-
eracy act.
A primary locus for this adaptive activity was in the reconciliation of schooled
and unschooled knowledge (Gardner, 1991). Students arrive at school with an
extensive prior body of conceptual knowledge guiding their understanding and
use of language. This unschooled knowledge (also known as informal knowl-
edge or spontaneous concepts) could differ markedly in character from more for-
mally acquired understandings (i.e., scientific concepts or schooled knowledge;
Alexander, 1992; Vygotsky, 1978). Research in the field of conceptual change
and misconceptions showed that this unschooled knowledge could be a more
salient factor in students learning from texts than their formally acquired knowl-
edge (Alexander, 1998b; Guzzetti & Hynd, 1998; Vosniadou, 1994). The relative
dominance of informal knowledge over formal understandings could be because
what is learned in a school setting appears of limited relevance and therefore
limited value to students (Alexander & Dochy, 1995; Cognition and Technology
Group at Vanderbilt, 1990; Whitehead, 1929/1957). Unschooled knowledge might
also possess a concrete and personal referent lacking in much of school learning
(Alexander et al., 1996).
Beyond the recognition of knowledges multiple forms, there was a growing
awareness that ones knowledge was not always a positive force in subsequent
learning and development. Ones existing knowledge could impede or interfere
with future learning in the form of misconceptions or barriers to conceptual
change (Chinn & Brewer, 1993; Perkins & Simmons, 1988; Roth, 1985). Research
on persuasion also provided insight into the possible negative role of preexisting
Guiding View
The guiding view of the learner during this era highlighted the importance of
the blending of affect, knowledge, and strategic processing that characterized the
nature of the learners interaction with the learning situation, with this blending
being termed engagement (Guthrie & Wigfield, 2000). The label engaged cap-
tured several of the aforementioned forces that shaped perceptions of reading and
informed research toward the end of the 20th century. For one, it acknowledged
that reading is not confined to traditional print materials but extends to the texts
students encounter daily, including the nonlinear, interactive, dynamic, and vi-
sually complex materials conveyed via audiovisual media (Alexander & Jetton,
2003). It also entails the discussions that occur around both traditional and alter-
native texts (Alvermann et al., 1997; Wade, Thompson, & Watkins, 1994).
Of course, understanding how students learn by means of alternative forms
of text was still emergent, and the nature of reading online has remained a topic
Resulting Principles
Several principles appeared to guide this decade of reading research. One of those
principles pertained to the complexity and multidimensional nature of reading.
Specifically, notions that reading is cognitive, aesthetic, or sociocultural in na-
ture were set aside. Instead, all these forces were seen to be actively and interac-
tively involved in reading development (Alexander & Jetton, 2000). For example,
there is a significant relation between learners knowledge and their interests
(Alexander, Jetton, & Kulikowich, 1995; Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Similarly,
encountering personally relevant texts promotes deeper student engagement in
learning (Guthrie & Wigfield, 2000).
Another guiding principle of this era was that students encounter a range
of textual materials, both traditional and alternative, that should be reflected in
the learning environment (Wade & Moje, 2000). Although their views on the
Resulting Principles
The convergence of factors that frame the current era have helped forge several
basic principles that undergird this focus on learning as goal directed. First
and foremost, there is the reconceptionalization of competence (Fox, 2009; Fox
et al., 2009). This new conceptualization encompasses the competent learners
predictable and appropriate manifestation of critical and analytic thought and
evidentiary-based reasoning relevant to the tasks and texts at hand. This ex-
panded view of competence builds on the contention of Alexander and the
DRLRL (2010) that competence in a domain should be marked by adaptive and
consistentthinking and by performance that is principled in its focus and
disciplined in its processing (p. 26).
For the domain of reading, competence would thus entail a particular con-
figuration of the readers knowledge of text structures and conventions, knowl-
edge of the topic or domain that the text addresses, strategies for interrogating
the content or claims made within the text, and the motivation to put forth the
It remains to be seen whether those who champion the notion of new lit-
eracies will be able to identify truly unique forms of textual knowledge and pro-
cesses that are not manifest in any form in the competent reading of traditional
text. For now, we remain with those who do not dismiss the growing presence
and power of the Internet or hypermedia technologies but perceive the variability
of processing across text types as iterations of already existing knowledge and
processes rather than as unique formsas variations on a theme rather than as
an entirely new melody (Afflerbach & Cho, 2009).
Concluding Thoughts
Our purpose in this historical analysis of the past 60 years of reading research
is to provide readers a lens through which to view current theory and practice.
Such a retrospective comes with no assurances. Historical analysis, after all, is
an interpretative science. However, a glance backward at where reading research
has been may serve to remind us that todays research and practice is a legacy
with roots that reach into the past. Moreover, by paying our respects to that past,
we may better understand the activities of the present and envision the paths for
reading research that lie ahead.
Q u e s t i o ns f o r R e fl e c t i o n
1. How does understanding the history of reading research and practice pro-
vide insight into the issues and trends in the field today?
2. In what ways did theoretical beliefs guide researchers in understanding
reading throughout the various eras of research and practice?
3. How has the interdisciplinary nature of reading research impacted research
findings throughout its history?
R ef er ence s
Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B.-Y. (2009). Identifying and Alexander, P.A. (1996). The past, present, and fu-
describing constructively responsive compre- ture of knowledge research: A reexamination of
hension strategies in new and traditional forms the role of knowledge in learning and instruc-
of reading. In S.E. Israel & G.G. Duffy (Eds.), tion. Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 8992.
Handbook of research on reading comprehension Alexander, P.A. (1997a). Knowledge-seeking and
(pp. 6990). New York: Routledge. self-schema: A case for the motivational dimen-
Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P.D., & Paris, S.G. (2008). sions of exposition. Educational Psychologist,
Clarifying differences between reading skills 32(2), 8394. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3202_3
and reading strategies. The Reading Teacher, Alexander, P.A. (1997b). Mapping the multidimen-
61(5), 364373. doi:10.1598/RT.61.5.1 sional nature of domain learning: The interplay
Alexander, P.A. (1992). Domain knowledge: of cognitive, motivational, and strategic forces.
Evolving themes and emerging concerns. Edu- In M.L. Maehr & P.R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances
cational Psychologist, 27(1), 3351. doi:10.1207/ in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 213
s15326985ep2701_4 250). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
T
heory and theoretical models have the power to cast both light and shadow
on our understanding of literacies. They seem to exercise their powers not
absolutely but on a continuum of degrees of illumination, so we sometimes
get from a theory only a narrow shaft of light that provides an insight into a lit-
eracy process, such as reading. Furthermore, the intensity of light that a narrow
shaft provides changes in its intensity, so a theorys powers to illuminate can
rise or fall, depending on our capacity to grasp a particular theory or model, its
individual components, their interactions, and the potential outcomes of those
interactions. In this sense, all theories are relative. Their explanatory powers fluc-
tuate, depending on our ability to appreciate their assumptions, subtleties, and
implications.
While theories of reading, both conscious and unconscious, affect readers
generally, specialized readers, such as researchers, graduate students, and read-
ing specialists, activate and use their own theories of reading. Their use of theory
may affect a wide range of activities and decisions. Regarding the identification
of issues in reading to investigate, seasoned and newly emerging researchers of-
ten turn to theory and theoretical models to provide a theoretical framework for
their investigations and to identify key issues that they plan to examine in detail.
Theories and models may also provide researchers with knowledge organized
into structures that can frame the discussion of a studys results, their bearing on
current instructional practices, and their implications for subsequent research.
In addition, researchers often use their findings to provide documentation for a
theorys validity, to reject a theory in part or in its entirety, to modify aspects of
it, and to posit new theories that more powerfully and comprehensively explain
reading processes or outcomes. In fact, the importance of findings often comes to
life when seen within a particular theoretical perspective.
For those interested in literacy research or engaged in it, grappling with lit-
eracy theory or theoretical models of reading is unavoidable. Addressing theo-
retical considerations for a research project arises in most educational research
textbooks included in undergraduate and graduate courses (Creswell, 2008).
Research studies on reading and articles published in professional journals com-
monly begin with a review of literature relevant to the research questions posed
47
and to the theory used to frame the study. Answering a call for proposals from a
governmental agency or private organization also necessitates the articulation of a
theoretical framework for the proposed research. For example, research grants or
contracts funded through the U.S. Institute of Educational Sciences (IES) to study
reading require that applicants clearly describe their intervention and the theory
(or theories) framing the intervention. The key components of the intervention
must be identified along with a description of how those components relate to
one another theoretically, as well as pedagogically and operationally. Applicants
are also urged to provide a strong theoretical and empirical justification for their
intervention. Developing a deep understanding of theory and its uses in literacy
studies can serve a broad audience comprised of researchers, teachers, teacher
educators, graduate students, and reading specialists.
In this chapter, we first clarify the meanings of theory and model, particularly
in relation to literacy studies. We then explore meanings of paradigm and their
shifts relevant to the field of literacy research over the past half century or so.
Subsequently, we review central theories and associated models that influence
literacy research, especially reading, including constructivism, social construc-
tionism, information/cognitive processing theory, sociocultural perspectives,
sociocognitive theory, structuralism, poststructuralism, and motivational theory
relevant to reading. Finally, we speculate on the evolution of literacy theories and
models for future research.
He then gave us the example of the layering of theories in physics, from atomism
to the fluid theory of electricity. While contributing a sense of order to our world
picture, these ideas could only acquire scientific status when offered in falsifi-
able form that would allow opening the door to rival theories. Asserting that sci-
ence can never claim truth, Popper wrote that we can only guess. And what we
What Is a Model?
As theory has taken on different meanings from user to user and from context
to context, so has model. In the context of the artists studio, a model can inspire
the representation of the human form on canvas. In other contexts, a model is a
prototype in design of what is to be produced or emulated. Car designers create
models of automobiles that enable them to envision the lines and curves of the
next years fleet. In scientific contexts, scientists create models to depict scientific
processes or structures that are often invisible, such as the model of an atom. In
yet another context, economists design models to render in mathematical terms a
network of complex variables, such as an economic model of international trade.
These examples of the use of the word model hardly exhaust the variations we
find in its application.
With the term model having such a rich array of meanings, we might expect
it to have different meanings even in a single rich field of research, such as that of
literacy. For example, a journal article can provide an explanation and discussion
of professional development models that have demonstrated their effectiveness in
helping teachers address language and literacy challenges that students present;
however, individual components of the models may never have been subject to
any form of independent or interdependent assessment. In the fourth edition of
Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (Ruddell, Ruddell, & Singer, 1994), the
Theory may also be seen as a model of reality. Reality serves as the ulti-
mate model of how things work. All human-created models are then replicas that
mimic or represent realitys perfect form and function. The degree to which a
human-designed model, such as a model of the reading process, represents or at
least reflects the reality of a complex and invisible process varies widely. All mod-
els are theoretical because they are an imitation of reality, an effort to describe or
explain itnot reality itself. So, calling a model of the reading process a theoreti-
cal model may be a redundancy because a model, in this instance of its use, is
already theoretical. Nevertheless, a model of reading, writing, or both represents
in ordinary language or graphic form the components of a process and explains
how those components function and interact with one another.
In the broader literacy field, we now encounter models as metaphors that
represent abstract constructs that might be quite difficult to operationalize and
calibrate as well as those that represent theoretical variables that have been opera-
tionalized and quantified. Models embodying abstract constructs have emerged
from qualitative research, as we see in the case of Lee (Chapter 10 this volume),
and render less quantifiable constructs into conceptual or graphic formats. In
comparison, a model depicting theoretical variables that have been quantified can
be found in a structural equation model, such as that depicting the contributions
of word processing, working memory, text-based processing, and knowledge ac-
cess to reading comprehension (see Hannon, 2012/Chapter 33 this volume).
Constructivism
Among educators, constructivism is a widely applied theory of learning that ex-
plains how knowledge and meanings are constructed, rather than transmitted
Schema Theory. During the mid-1970s, schema theory made its appearance
as part of the cognitive revolution that resurrected the study in psychology of
internal mental events and became an important theoretical resource for read-
ing research and pedagogy. Although sometimes considered a theory of reading
comprehension, schema theory is about how we structure knowledge and repre-
sent it in memory. A schema is a hypothetical knowledge structurehypothetical
because it is difficult to examine empirically. However, we can infer the existence
of schema from the study of memory and its influence on the interpretation of
Social Constructionism
Although Berger and Luckmann (1966) are widely acknowledged as the voices of
authority on social constructionism, Bruffee (1986), a notable figure in the field of
rhetoric and composition pedagogy, explicitly aligns a social constructionist view
of knowledge building with our purpose in writing this section of the chapter. In
his 1986 essay in College English titled Social Construction, Language, and the
Authority of Knowledge, Bruffee argues the following: A social construction-
ist position in any discipline assumes that any entities we normally call real-
ity, knowledge, thought, facts, texts, selves and so on are constructs generated
by communities of like-minded peers (p. 774). Implications of this argument
for English teachers goals and practices, which were of interest to Bruffee over
25years ago, are of no less interest to literacy researchers and teachers today.
Transactional Theory
Although some educators believe an objective meaning exists in a text, others
(Bleich, 1980; Culler, 1980) have argued that the meanings for a text are to be
found in the readers personal responses. This perspective aligns somewhat with
Rosenblatts (1978; 1994/Chapter 35 this volume) articulation of transactional
theory. According to Rosenblatt, every act of reading is a transaction between a
particular reader and a particular text at a particular time in a particular context.
The reader and the text compose a transactional moment. The meaning does not
preexist in the text or in the reader but results from the transaction between reader
and text. Meaning is the result of the readers meaning construction that engages
his or her unique background knowledge and cognitive processing. When readers
transact with a text, they create an evocation or mental representation of the text
that can be observed, analyzed, reflected on, pondered, explained, and savored.
While exploring and clarifying the evocation, readers assemble meanings for or
interpretations of the text.
When Rosenblatt (1978) created the transactional theory, she developed a
theoretical perspective that, she believed, explained all modes of reading. The
theory covered all modes of reading because she took into account the range of
stances that a reader could adopt toward a text. The two stances that she identi-
fied were the efferent and aesthetic stances. When adopting the efferent stance,
Dual Coding Theory Model. Before it was extended to explain reading com-
prehension, Dual Coding Theory (DCT) was an established theory of cognition
that takes into account both verbal and nonverbal memory processes. Sadoski
and Paivio (2004/Chapter 34 this volume) present the DCT and how it explains
decoding, comprehension, and responses to texts. The DCT model provides an
alternative to information processing models based primarily on schema theory
and verbal processes. One of the basic assumptions of the DCT model is that
every mental representation retains qualities, linguistic or nonlinguistic, of the
original experience from which it arose. According to the DCT, the different char-
acteristics of verbal and nonverbal codes lead to their development into two dif-
ferent processing systems, one for language processing and another for processing
the imagery of events and objects. Combined, the two systems or codes can take
into account all knowledge of language and the world. For Sadoski and Paivio,
models of reading that omit basic units of nonverbal information, or imagens, are
unable to capture the rich sensory contribution that reality makes to comprehen-
sion and memory. Acknowledging, explaining, and integrating mental imagery
into their model provides, they believe, a more accurate depiction of how the
mind, especially that of the reader, processes and remembers sensory experience.
Absent a thorough consideration of mental imagery, other models of reading are
Sociocultural Perspectives
Sociocultural perspectives in the literature on literacy commonly refers to both a
specific theoretical perspective, that of Vygotsky, and a set of related theoretical
perspectives that share assumptions about the mind, the world, and their rela-
tionship (Gavelek & Bresnahan, 2009). The term sociocultural, in its more inclu-
sive application, refers to a group of perspectives that includes sociolinguistics,
pragmatism, and second-generation cognitive science and that commonly mani-
fest themes distilled from Vygotskys cultural-historical theory. Those themes in-
clude the beliefs that the mind emerges from social interaction with other minds,
that activities of the mind are mediated by tools and symbol systems (languages),
and that to understand a mental function, one must understand the roots and
processes contributing to that functions development. Among the sociocultural
theorists explored here are Vygotsky, Scribner and Cole, Halliday, Heath, Gee,
and Street. These individuals and their colleagues have provided researchers with
theoretical frameworks for inquiring into a substantive body of knowledge about
language and literacies.
Vygotsky, Society, and Language. Among Vygotskys (1978, 1986) many ideas,
three are of particular importance for understanding the connections among so-
ciety, culture, and the development of minds. First, he embraced the idea that we
must understand the historical, social, and cultural contexts of a childs expe-
riences to truly understand that persons intellectual or cognitive development.
Second, Vygotsky believed that our individual development depends on language
that allows us to interact with others in our culture and to strive for self-mastery.
Language and our writing system enable us to develop skills and higher mental
functions progressively. Third, Vygotsky believed that every step in a childs cul-
tural development appears twice: first as a process between people and second as
an individual process within the child. Interpersonal processes, like our use of
language to communicate with one another, are transformed into intrapersonal
ones, like our use of inner speech when we talk our way through to the solution
of a complex problem. If in reading about this two-stage concept of development
a reader only experienced the first stage and did not internalize it for individual
use, then it has not and cannot contribute to mental development.
For Vygotsky, Bruner notes (1986), language was an agent for altering the
powers of thoughtgiving thought new means for explicating the world. In turn,
language became the repository for new thoughts once achieved (p. 143). In con-
trast to Piaget, Vygotsky believed that language could provide a path to a higher
ground (p. 143), by which he seems to have meant a more elevated level of ab-
straction or a wider perspective of ones culture. As Bruner notes, Vygotsky be-
stows on language both a cultural past and a generative present, and assigns it a
role as the nurse and tutor of thought (p. 145).
Scribner and Cole: The Vai People of Liberia. The benefits attributed to lit-
eracy were both explicit and implicit in Vygotskys work. More explicit claims of
literacys effects on cognition and higher order reasoning came through his work
with Luria in South Central Asia at a time when the Soviet Union was striving to
bring literacy to peoples of that region. Vygotsky and Luria (Luria, 1976) com-
pared the performance of newly literate and nonliterate people on reasoning tasks,
including working through syllogisms, and found significant differences between
the groups favoring the reasoning and higher order thinking skills of the newly
literate population. Benefits of literacy like those alleged by Luria and Vygotsky
have been aligned with similar and even far broader claims about the cognitive
benefits of literacy in books like The Domestication of the Savage Mind (Goody,
1977), The Literate Revolution in Greece and Its Cultural Consequences (Havelock,
1982), and Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word (Ong, 1982). Some
scholars, such as Scribner and Cole (1981), have questioned the validity of the
cognitive effects supposedly arising from literacy and wondered about the contri-
butions of culture, especially the culture of schooling, that sometimes came with
literacys benefits.
In their research with the Vai people in Liberia, Scribner and Cole (1981)
attempted to answer two crucial questions: (1) Is the difference in mental func-
tioning of literate versus nonliterate groups the result of literacy or attending
school? and (2) Is it possible to detect differences in the effects of different forms
of literacy that are used for different purposes in an individuals life or a societys
functioning? Conditions of language learning and use among the Vai provided the
researchers with an exceptional opportunity to address these questions. Three
Social Semiotic Theory. Semiosis is a process for meaning making through the
use of signs, which include both the observable signifier (e.g., the color red) and
the signified meaning (e.g., danger). Because in the field of social semiotics what a
sign stands for is not a pre-given (Hodge & Kress, 1988; van Leeuwen, 2005), the
term resource is preferred. According to van Leeuwen,
Semiotic resources are not restricted to speech and writing and picture making.
Almost everything we do or make can be done or made in different ways and there-
fore allows, at least in principle, the articulation of different social and cultural
meanings. Walking could be an example. We may think of it asbasic locomotion,
something we have in common with other species. But there are many different ways
of walking.Different ways of walking can seduce, threaten, impress and much
more.
As soon as we have established that a given type of physical activity or a given
type of material artefact constitutes a semiotic resource, it becomes possible to de-
scribeits potential for making meaning. (p. 4)
As used here, power refers not to something that is seized and held on to by a
person seeking to suppress the rights of others, but rather as something that cir-
culates and speaks through silences as well as utterances (Foucault, 1997).
Just prior to Streets (1995) critique of the autonomous model of literacy, Gees
(1990) seminal publication Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses
was helping to reshape the fields thinking about reading and why it was no longer
adequate to think of it as a process residing solely in ones head. Then, in 1996,
the New London Group published its treatise on multiliteracies. This work drew
attention to the need for a multiplicity and integration of communication modes
(e.g., language, still and moving images, speech, sound, gesture, movement) in
the context of a culturally and linguistically diverse world grown significantly
more attached to new communication technologies, although multiliteracies need
not involve digital technologies (Lankshear & Knobel, 2006). Typically, the term
multiliteracies denotes more than mere literacy (Cope & Kalantzis, 2000, p. 5),
which remains language- and print-centered in conventional classroom instruc-
tion. Over time, however, the notion of literacy with a big L and single y has
loosened to make room for the plural form, literacies or multiliteracies. In addi-
tion, terms such as situated literacies (Barton, Hamilton, & Ivanic, 2000), digital
literacies, and the New Literacy Studies (Gee, 1996; New London Group, 1996)
have become part of a burgeoning research literature, as have multimodal texts
that are part and parcel of New Literacy Studies.
Structuralism
As a theory, structuralism operates on an underlying assumption that structures
exist in the events, texts, or processes under study; that those structures can be
identified; and that their functions, often within other larger structures, can be
described or explained. Two structuralists who have influenced literacy studies
over the years illustrate the theory in action: Saussure and Lvi-Strauss. Saussure,
often considered the father of structuralism (Spivey, 1997, p. 99), was a late
19th- and early 20th-century linguist who approached the study of language with
the purpose of discovering its structures. He derived several principles about lan-
guage from his inquiry. Among them was the precept that there is a language
system belonging to a social group (langue), that there is also a language used by
an individual when communicating (parole), and that parole should be studied to
understand the abstract structure of the langue.
Lvi-Strauss was an anthropologist who was familiar with Saussurian prin-
ciples but focused his interests on mythology. Interested in myths universal
structures, Lvi-Strauss examined specific myths (parole) to discover their more
abstract structure (langue). In part, he studied myth to discover rules governing
them within and across cultures. Through the examination of myths, he was able
to understand both their internal structure and how they coalesced as constella-
tions of related myths for the cultures to which they belonged. While both of these
illustrative structuralists have, to some degree, influenced studies in literacy, we
present next a group of critical theorists along with Bourdieu whose perspectives
have been used as theoretical frameworks for many studies in literacy and read-
ing, including those that have investigated the accumulation of cultural capital
and the effects of its expression on marginalized social groups.
Poststructuralism
Texts are usually thought to signify meaningmeaning that is contingent on the
interaction of reader and context. Less typical is Deleuze and Guattaris (1987)
concept of a text. In their poststructural decentering project, Deleuze and Guattari
avoid any orientation toward a culmination or ending point. In their sense of the
term, a text is neither signifier nor the signified; therefore, it is inappropriate to
think of interpreting or understanding texts in the conventional way. As Grosz
(1993/1994) explains,
It isno longer appropriate to ask what a text means, what it says, what is the struc-
ture of its interiority, how to interpret or decipher it. Instead, one must ask what it
does, how it connects with other things (including its reader, its author, its literary
and nonliterary context). (p. 199)
Looking for middles, rather than beginnings and endings, makes it possible
to decenter key linkages and find new ones, not by combining old ones in new
ways but by remaining open to the proliferation of ruptures and discontinuities
that in turn create other linkages (Alvermann, 2000; Leander, Phillips, & Taylor,
2010). Rhizomatic cartography is a spatial methodology for studying a range of lit-
eracy practices, such as adolescents uses of popular cultural texts to renegotiate
their identities (Hagood, 2004), a Christian faith-based schools literacy practices
(Eakle, 2007), and students multimodal/embodied classroom performances that
have implications for literacy pedagogy (Leander & Rowe, 2006).
Pragmatism
In the face of an array of approaches and theoretical frameworks to literacy re-
search and to what they view as the sometimes deleterious effects of overzealous
adherence to particular paradigms, some educators have advocated for a far more
pragmatic approach to inquiry. Although often avoided by educational research-
ers because of its conceptual vagueness and misapplications, pragmatism has had
a long history in American philosophy and education with its reflection in the
works of Dewey, James, and Rorty. In its application to literacy research, pragma-
tism translates into an engagement with inquiry that results in useful outcomes
rather than in the discovery of knowledge that promotes ones ideology or epis-
temology. For a fuller description of pragmatism and its applications to literacy
research, see Dillon, OBrien, and Heilman (Chapter 40 this volume).
journals. Although earlier literacy research from the 1960s through the late 1980s
was dominated by empirical studies using experimental methods that focused
on reading and writing as cognitive activities (Shannon, 1989), the language of
literacy research has changed. According to Dressman, researchers reconceived
literacy, changing what being literate means and how researchers theorized the
relationship between literacy and other human activities. Researchers also ex-
panded their use of the term theory itself and the ways they used theories to con-
struct knowledge about literacy.
Dressman (2007) compared the uses of the term theory in articles published
in three major journals (Reading Research Quarterly, Research in the Teaching of
English, and the Journal of Literacy Research) before and after the early 1990s. He
analyzed a pre-1990s article (Fitzgerald & Spiegel, 1986) that included in its lit-
erature review section a comment that overall structure, plan, or schema is a nec-
essary condition for coherence (p. 264). The authors followed with 10 citations
by theorists or researchers on text cohesion. Fitzgerald and Spiegel then set up
the purpose of their study: to document in their research the theoretically estab-
lished relationship between cohesion and coherence. As Dressman commented,
in papers like those, the dance between theory and empirical evidence was close
and well coordinated, more like a tango than the twist (p. 335). In similar papers,
theories that offered explanations for a process or phenomenon became open to
criticism, reevaluation, and sometimes loss of dominance, as Dressman suggests
was the fate of schema theory in the early 1990s when researchers complained
1. How are the concepts of theory and model related in research on literacy?
2. How did the conception of theory and its use change in late 20th-century
literacy research?
3. How do the theories of constructivism and social constructionism differ?
4. Which of the theories presented in this chapter have helped you understand
literacy and reading processes the most? Why?
R ef er ence s
Adorno, T. (2001). The culture industry: Selected es- Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power
says on mass culture. New York: Routledge. (J.B. Thompson, Ed.; G. Raymond & M.
Alvermann, D.E. (2000). Researching libraries, Adamson, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard
literacies, and lives: A rhizoanalysis. In E.A. St. University Press.
Pierre & W.S. Pillow (Eds.), Working the ruins: Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. (1990). Reproduction in
Feminist poststructural theory and methods in edu- education, society and culture (2nd ed.; R. Nice,
cation (pp. 114129). New York: Routledge. Trans.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Alvermann, D., Friese, E., Beckmann, S., & Rezak, Bruffee, K.A. (1986). Social construction, lan-
A. (2011). Content area reading pedagogy and guage, and the authority of knowledge: A biblio-
domain knowledge: A Bourdieusian analysis. graphical essay. College English, 48(8), 773790.
Australian Educational Researcher, 38(2), 203 doi:10.2307/376723
220. doi:10.1007/s13384-011-0024-x Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds.
Anderson, R.C. (1976). Concretization and sentence Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
learning. In H. Singer & R.B. Ruddell (Eds.), Burr, V. (2003). Social constructionism (2nd ed.).
Theoretical models and processes of reading (2nd New York: Routledge.
ed., pp. 588596). Newark, DE: International Cambourne, B. (2002). Holistic, integrated ap-
Reading Association. (Reprinted from Journal proaches to reading and language arts in-
of Educational Psychology, 1974, 66(2), 179183) struction: The constructivist framework of
Anderson, R.C., Goldberg, S.R., & Hidde, J.L. an instructional theory. In A.E. Farstrup &
(1976). Meaningful processing of sentences.
S.J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say
In H. Singer & R.B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical
about reading instruction (pp. 2547). Newark,
models and processes of reading (2nd ed., pp.
DE: International Reading Association.
580587). Newark, DE: International Reading
doi:10.1598/0872071774.2
Association. (Reprinted from Journal of
Chomsky, N. (1959). A review of B.F. Skinners
Educational Psychology, 1971, 62(5), 395399)
Verbal Behavior. Language, 35(1), 2658.
Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four
essays (M. Holquist, Ed.; C. Emerson & M. doi:10.2307/411334
Holquist, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy. (2003).
Press. Identifying and implementing educational prac-
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought tices supported by rigorous evidence: A user
and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood friendly guide. Washington, DC: National
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Center for Education Evaluation and Regional
Barton, D., Hamilton, M., & Ivanic, R. (Eds.). Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences,
(2000). Situated literacies: Reading and writing in U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved July
context. New York: Routledge. 13, 2012, from www2.ed.gov/rschstat/research/
Berger, P.L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social con- pubs/rigorousevid/rigorousevid.pdf
struction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2000). Introduction:
knowledge. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Multiliteracies: The beginning of an idea. In
Bleich, D. (1980). Epistemological assumptions in B. Cope & M Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies:
the study of response. In J.P. Tompkins (Ed.), Literacy learning and the design of social futures
Reader-response criticism: From formalism to post- (pp. 38). New York: Routledge.
structuralism (pp. 134163). Baltimore: Johns Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational research:
Hopkins University Press. Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice (R. Nice, and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle
Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. River, NJ: Pearson.
A
lthough a single research study can make a difference (Russell, 1961;
Shanahan & Neuman, 1997), it typically takes a long line or lines of
research to significantly deepen understanding of a phenomenon or to
meaningfully inform practice (Duke & Martin, 2011; Shanahan, 2002). Thus,
rather than perpetuating divisions in the field, we argue that lines of research
work best when we marshal different methodologies to address the research topic
or the problem of practice. The complexity of literacy teaching, learning, and
development is such that no single research methodology is sufficient for under-
standing. Rather, insights garnered through one methodological approach must
inform the pursuit of questions by another, and so on, creating a synergy of meth-
odology over time (Duke & Mallette, 2004, 2011).
We begin this chapter with an overview of the rich array of methodologies
that have been brought to bear in literacy research. We then present three insights
about literacy teaching and learning that have resulted from research of several
methodologies, each study building on the next. In the third section of the chap-
ter, we discuss how theoretical constructs can develop through the application
of research of multiple methodologies, taking emergent literacy theory as a case.
We conclude with recommendations for enabling and encouraging synergy across
research methodologies.
91
not distinguish between them as being different forms of inquiry. We believe the
distinction is outmoded, and it does not map neatly in a one-to-one fashion onto any
group or groupings of disciplines. (p. 19)
93
heritage culture.g (continued)
94
Table 1. Some Key Research Methodologies Used in Literacy Research (Continued)
Research A Recent Example of Findings Gleaned
Methodology Descriptiona From This Methodology
Neuroimaging This kind of research tries to answer questions about neurological A study found that children with word-reading
structure and/or function. Researchers examine images of the difficulties showed less neurophysiological activity in
brain and brain activity. These studies are characterized by the some parts of the brain and more neurophysiological
use of specialized medical equipment and processes, such as activity in other parts of the brain as compared with
electroencephalography or functional magnetic resonance imaging.f typically performing readers.h
Survey Survey research usually elicits reports from participants about A study surveyed high school teachers about their
themselves. The purpose of this kind of research is usually preparation for teaching writing and their writing
to understand something about the larger group to which the instruction and assessment. Included in the findings
participants belong. For example, researchers might survey 100 was that most teachers did not believe they were
kindergarten teachers across a state to learn about the beliefs of the adequately prepared to teach writing and that almost
kindergarten teachers in that state. This kind of research may involve half did not assign at least one multiparagraph piece
different kinds of interactions, such as face-to-face or telephone of writing per month.j
interviews and computerized or mailed surveys.i
Verbal Verbal protocols, also referred to as think-aloud studies, typically A study of the processes prompted by the graphics in
Emergent Literacy
The construct of emergent literacy (Clay, 1966; Teale & Sulzby, 1986) marked
an ideological shift away from the idea that reading development does not occur
Twelve years later, Whitehurst and Lonigan (1998) theorized that emer-
gent literacy encompasses two distinct, yet related, domains (i.e., outside-in
skills and inside-out skills), which they explained through a modified version
of Whitehursts (1996) theoretical model. It is important to note that Whitehurst
and Lonigan recognized the limitations of their model, and that their model was
not completely embraced in the field. Further, their notion of two distinct do-
mains, and what constitutes each domain, remains unsettled. Whitehurst and
Lonigans review focused on: (a) addressing the multitude of skills, behaviors,
and experiences of emergent literacy theory; and (b) the inclusivity of a range of
methodologies used in emergent literacy research.
In juxtaposing these two reviews, it is evident that both include similar as-
pects of emergent literacy (i.e., context, oral and written language, book reading,
109
(continued)
Table 2. Emergent Literacy Research Reviewed by Mason and Allena (M&A) and Whitehurst and Loniganb (W&L)
110
(Continued)
Reviewer Research Reviewed Methodc Focus
Both Anderson, A.B., & Stokes, S.J. (1984). Social and institutional influences on the Descriptive, Home experiences,
development and practice of literacy. In H. Goelman, A. Oberg, & F. Smith (Eds.), observation socioeconomic status
Awakening to literacy (pp. 2437). Exeter, NH: Heinemann.
M&A Dyson, A.H. (1984). Emerging alphabetic literacy in school contexts: Toward Case study Home and classroom
defining the gap between school curriculum and child mind. Written experiences, writing
Communication, 1(1), 555.
M&A Allen, J. (1985). Inferential comprehension: The effects of text source, decoding Correlation, Classroom
ability, and mode. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(5), 603615. comparative (instructional
materials)
M&A Evans, M.A., & Carr, T.H. (1985). Cognitive abilities, conditions of learning, and Correlation, Classroom
the early development of reading skill. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(3), 327350. comparative (instructional
approach)
M&A Juel, C., & Roper/Schneider, D. (1985). The influence of basal readers on first Correlation, Classroom
111
Table 2. Emergent Literacy Research Reviewed by Mason and Allena (M&A) and Whitehurst and Loniganb (W&L)
112
(Continued)
Reviewer Research Reviewed Methodc Focus
M&A Ehri, L.C., & Wilce, L.S. (1985). Movement into reading: Is the first stage of Correlation
printed word learning visual or phonetic? Reading Research Quarterly, 20(2),
163179.
W&L Ehri, L.C. (1988). Movement in word reading and spelling: How spelling contributes to Experimental
reading (Technical Report No. 408). Champaign: Center for the Study of Reading,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
W&L Tunmer, W.E., Herriman, M.L., & Nesdale, A.R. (1988). Metalinguistic abilities Correlation (path
and beginning reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 23(2), 134158. analysis)
W&L Whitehurst, G.J. (1996, April). A structural equation model of the role of home Correlation
literacy environment in the development of emergent literacy skills in children from (structural equation
low-income backgrounds. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American modeling)
Educational Research Association, New York.
Emergent Writing
113
Table 2. Emergent Literacy Research Reviewed by Mason and Allena (M&A) and Whitehurst and Loniganb (W&L)
114
(Continued)
Reviewer Research Reviewed Methodc Focus
W&L Valdez-Menchaca, M.C., & Whitehurst, G.J. (1992). Accelerating language Experimental Dialogic reading
development through picture book reading: A systematic extension to Mexican (shared book
day care. Developmental Psychology, 28(6), 11061114. reading)
W&L Neuman, S.B., & Roskos, K. (1993). Access to print for children of poverty: Experimental Literacy-enriched
Differential effects of adult mediation and literacy-enriched play settings on play
environmental and functional print tasks. American Educational Research Journal,
30(1), 95122.
W&L Snchal, M., & Cornell, E.H. (1993). Vocabulary acquisition through shared Correlation, Shared book reading
reading experiences. Reading Research Quarterly, 28(4), 360374. comparative
W&L Arnold, D.H., Lonigan, C.J., Whitehurst, G.J., & Epstein, J.N. (1994). Accelerating Experimental Dialogic reading
language development through picture book reading: Replication and extension to (shared book
a videotape training format. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 235243. reading)
Language
115
Table 2. Emergent Literacy Research Reviewed by Mason and Allena (M&A) and Whitehurst and Loniganb (W&L)
116
(Continued)
Reviewer Research Reviewed Methodc Focus
W&L Crain-Thoreson, C., & Dale, P.S. (1992). Do early talkers become early readers? Correlation Story reading
Linguistic precocity, preschool language, and emergent literacy. Developmental
Psychology, 28(3), 421429.
W&L Payne, A.C., Whitehurst, G.J., & Angell, A.L. (1994). The role of home literacy Correlation Story reading
environment in the development of language ability in preschool children from
low-income families. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 9(3/4), 427440.
W&L Snchal, M., Cornell, E.H., & Broda, L.S. (1995). Age-related differences in the Discourse analysis, Story reading
organization of parentinfant interactions during picture-book reading. Early comparative
Childhood Research Quarterly, 10(3), 317337.
W&L Snchal, M., LeFevre, J., Hudson, E., & Lawson, E.P. (1996). Knowledge of Correlation Story reading
storybooks as a predictor of young childrens vocabulary. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 88(3), 520536.
W&L Snchal, M., LeFevre, J., Thomas, E.M., & Daley, K.E. (1998). Differential effects Correlation Story reading
117
(continued)
Table 2. Emergent Literacy Research Reviewed by Mason and Allena (M&A) and Whitehurst and Loniganb (W&L)
118
(Continued)
Reviewer Research Reviewed Methodc Focus
W&L Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children Correlation Phonological
from first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 437447. awareness
W&L Lundberg, I., Frost, J., & Petersen, O. (1988). Effects of an extensive program Quasi-experimental Phonological
for stimulating phonological awareness in preschool children. Reading Research awareness (training,
Quarterly, 23(3), 263284. intervention)
W&L Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1991). Evaluation of a program to teach Experimental Phonological
phonemic awareness to young children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(4), awareness (training,
451455. intervention)
W&L Gathercole, S.E., Willis, C., & Baddeley, A.D. (1991). Differentiating phonological Correlation Other cognitive
memory and awareness of rhyme: Reading and vocabulary development in (phonological
children. British Journal of Psychology, 82(3), 387406. memory)
W&L Gough, P.B., & Walsh, M.A. (1991). Chinese, Phoenicians, and the orthographic Correlation Alphabetic principle
cipher of English. In S.A. Brady & D.P. Shankweiler (Eds.), Phonological processes
119
development of emerging reading and writing; (b) the importance of context,
experiences, and language; and (c) the relationships between skills and reading
outcomes.
Yet, most important given the focus of this chapter is the breadth of method-
ologies used by researchers whose work has contributed to the influential concep-
tualization and theorization of emergent literacy presented by Mason and Allen
(1986) and Whitehurst and Lonigan (1998). In examining Table 2, readers can
clearly see that a broad perspective, which embraces the methodological affor-
dances of numerous research studies, is necessary to understand the complexity
of emergent literacy. For example, understanding the importance of childrens con-
text and experiences in their emergent literacy development and growth has been
advanced through research using descriptive, correlational, meta-analysis, eth-
nographic, content analysis, and discourse analysis methodologies. It is through
the plethora of methodological lenses, offering more sophistication than would be
possible with a singular methodological focus, that our understanding of emergent
literacy has developed.
As noted earlier, the reviews that were the focus of our analysis are from
1986 and 1998, demonstrating that multiple methodologies informed the early
development of emergent literacy theory. Since the publication of those reviews,
emergent literacy theory continues to develop and expand.
In 1997, McGee and Purcell-Gates suggested, the field of emergent literacy
is alive and well (p. 317). A decade and a half later, this sentiment still applies
and is reflected in the sheer volume of research published in the past 20 years.
Further, as Sulzby and Teale (1991) noted, one strength of emergent literacy re-
search currently is the openness of researchers to use many different methodolo-
gies, (p. 749) another view that is still relevant and clearly reflected in research
today. The following studies, which feature a small sampling of methodologies
currently used in research, exemplify the continuous development of emergent
literacy theory:
C
ase study: Exploring story dictation and vocabulary development (Christ,
Wang, & Chiu, 2011)
C
orrelation: Used in cluster analysis to create profiles of at-risk preschool
children (Cabell, Justice, Konold, & McGinty, 2011)
E
xperimental study: Using randomized design to determine the effectiveness
of curricular approaches (Lonigan, Farver, Phillips, & Clancy-Menchetti,
2011)
F
ormative experiment: Designed to explore, develop, and modify an inter-
vention for children ages 35 and their low-literate parents (J. Anderson,
Purcell-Gates, Jang, & Gagn, 2010)
I nstrument development: Examining a measure of emergent literacy learners
with special needs (Baker, Spooner, Ahlgrim-Delzell, Flowers, & Browder,
2010)
Moving Forward
The examples of synergy of research methodologies presented in this chapter
were made possible because scholars read and drew on work of multiple meth-
odologies. In each of the three insights, as well as theory development, schol-
ars have contextualized their research in extant research reflective of numerous
methodologies. Interesting, and noteworthy to future scholars, is that the ground-
breaking work in each example was indeed dissertation research (e.g., Clay, 1966;
Emig, 1971; Graves, 1975; Meyer, 1975; Read, 1971).
To continue, and expand, the degree to which a broad range of methodolo-
gies inform development of insights and theory in the field, we must continue
to ensure that scholars read and work from and across a broad range of research
methodologies. This task is in some respects more daunting now than it has
been in the past. However, one way to encourage synergy of research method-
ology is for journal editors to actively seek representation of a broad range of
methodologies within their journals or edited volumes. Editors can also en-
courage reviewers, and act themselves, to draw authors attention to cases in
which relevant work of different methodologies is not included within their
literature reviews. Grantors can fund work of multiple methodologies and bring
together scholars working within the same topic using different methodological
approaches. Professional organizations and conference organizers can do the
same, encouraging symposia, for example, in which multiple methodologies are
represented.
Still, the greatest responsibility for culling from research using a range of
methodologies lies with the individual scholar. Reading widely, seeking to un-
derstand the methodologies, findings, and perspectives of scholars working in re-
lated areas, even if in seemingly unrelated ways, is an important responsibility. As
argued at the outset of this chapter, the complexity of literacy teaching, learning,
and development is such that no single research methodology will be sufficient
for understanding.
NOTE
*When this chapter was written, Mallette was at Southern Illinois University, and Duke was at
Michigan State University.
R ef er ence s
Allan, D. (2009). A nation of readers: The lending li- a difference in early word recognition and devel-
brary in Georgian England. Chicago: University opmental spelling? Reading Research Quarterly,
of Chicago Press. 26(1), 4966. doi:10.1598/RRQ.26.1.3
Allen, J. (1985). Inferential comprehension: The ef- Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1984).
fects of text source, decoding ability, and mode. Learning about writing from reading. Written
Reading Research Quarterly, 20(5), 603615. Communication, 1(2), 163188. doi:10.1177/
Anderson, A.B., & Stokes, S.J. (1984). Social and 0741088384001002001
institutional influences on the development and Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psy-
practice of literacy. In H. Goelman, A. Oberg, & chology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ:
F. Smith (Eds.), Awakening to literacy (pp. 24 Erlbaum.
37). Exeter, NH: Heinemann. Bishop, D.V., & Adams, C. (1990). A prospective
Anderson, J., Purcell-Gates, V., Jang, K., & Gagn, study of the relationship between specific lan-
M. (2010). Implementing an intergenerational lit- guage impairment, phonological disorders and
eracy program with authentic literacy instruction: reading retardation. Journal of Child Psychology
Challenges, responses, and results. Ottawa, ON: and Psychiatry, 31(7), 10271050.
Canadian Council on Learning. Bissex, G.L. (1980). Gnys (genius) at wrk (work): A
Armbruster, B.B., Anderson, T.H., & Ostertag, J. child learns to write and read. Cambridge, MA:
(1987). Does text structure/summarization in- Harvard University Press.
struction facilitate learning from expository Bowers, P.N., Kirby, J.R., & Deacon, S.H. (2010).
text? Reading Research Quarterly, 22(3), 331346. The effects of morphological instruction on
doi:10.2307/747972 literacy skills: A systematic review of the lit-
Arnold, D.H., Lonigan, C.J., Whitehurst, G.J., & erature. Review of Educational Research, 80(2),
Epstein, J.N. (1994). Accelerating language 144179. doi:10.3102/0034654309359353
development through picture book reading: Bowey, J.A. (1994). Phonological sensitivity in
Replication and extension to a videotape train- novice readers and nonreaders. Journal of
ing format. Journal of Educational Psychology, Experimental Child Psychology, 58(1), 134159.
86(2), 235243. Bradley, L., & Bryant, P.E. (1983). Categorizing
Baker, J.N., Spooner, F., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., sounds and learning to reada causal connec-
Flowers, C., & Browder, D.M. (2010). A measure tion. Nature, 301(5899), 419421. doi:10.1038/
of emergent literacy for students with severe 301419a0
developmental disabilities. Psychology in the Bryant, D.M., Lau, L.B., Burchinal, M., & Sparling,
Schools, 47(5), 501513. doi:10.1002/pits.20486 J.J. (1994). Family and classroom correlates of
Ball, E.W., & Blachman, B.A. (1988). Phoneme seg- Head Start childrens developmental outcomes.
mentation training: Effect on reading readiness. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 9(3/4),
Annals of Dyslexia, 38(1), 208225. 289309.
Ball, E.W., & Blachman, B.A. (1991). Does pho- Bus, A.G., & van IJzendoorn, M.H. (1999).
neme awareness training in kindergarten make Phonological awareness and early reading: A
T
his section includes a spectrum of chapters that provide a foundation in
socially embedded language and cognitive processes upon which read-
ers build knowledge, skills, and strategies. Most emergent readers evolve
through identifiable phases of reading growth, acquire word knowledge, develop
comprehension, and become self-regulating as they gain metacognitive skills. All
of these aspects of a readers growth are explored in these chapters. But that is
not the end of the story. Because the ways readers respond to and engage with
texts vary widely, we include chapters exploring motivation and engagement.
Furthermore, engaged, responsive teachers using effective instructional strate-
gies can have profound, enduring effects on childrens development as readers,
including those who struggle to master the process. Here we provide an overview
of each parts content and contribution to our understanding of reading processes.
Questions suitable for reflection and discussion follow each chapter.
129
us how a Discourse, in Gees sense, contributes to a childs grasp of language and
formation of personal identity.
In Social Talk and Imaginative Play: Curricular Basics for Young Childrens
Language and Literacy (Chapter 6), Anne Haas Dyson and Celia Genishi explore
the tension between the official school curriculum and the more natural learn-
ing that takes place through childrens imaginative play and social activities. The
authors describe how dominant official language arts curricula have focused on
individualized basic skills and raising test scores for minority children from low-
income families, including those learning English as an additional language. The
demands of the official curriculum have frequently discouraged imaginative play
and talk. The authors present data from two case studies to demonstrate how ba-
sic childhood processes allow children to engage cross-culturally in their social
worlds.
In Exploring Vygotskian Perspectives in Education: The Cognitive Value of
Peer Interaction (Chapter 7), Ellice Forman and Courtney Cazden reveal how
adultchild interactions differ from childchild interactions in school settings and
so emphasize the importance of providing children with classroom interactions,
such as peer tutoring and collaborative work. Those forms of peer exchange pro-
vide opportunities to practice questioning and direction giving, language activities
that young children rarely perform in school-situated childteacher transactions.
The next two chapters in this part of Section Two demonstrate the inter-
subjective defining powers of language. Shirley Brice Heaths Its a Book! Its a
Bookstore! Theories of Reading in the Worlds of Childhood and Adolescence
(Chapter 8) examines the ways in which researchers study the value of reading
books to children, and particularly the degree of influence such reading practices
have had on educators. Heaths brief summation of her latest longitudinal eth-
nographic study provides the background necessary for understanding the rela-
tion of extended talk to academic language. She concludes with a cautionary note
about expecting too much of media and multitasking, especially in light of the
toxic stress (p. 222) such activity can induce.
In Emergent Biliteracy in Young Mexican Immigrant Children (Chapter9),
Iliana Reyes and Patricia Azuara report on three case studies that reveal the meta-
linguistic awareness and strategies their biliterate student participants demon-
strated. The studies offer a glimpse into how daily bilingual family interactions
positioned the young students into multiple roles as teacher and student, and as
novice and expert. Reyes and Azuara expressed hope that their study would chal-
lenge the stereotype that Mexican immigrant families fail to provide home envi-
ronments that prepare their children for formal literacy learning at school. Their
findings also challenge a deficit view of bilingualism and biliteracy.
Carol Lees Revisiting Is October Brown Chinese? A Cultural Modeling
Activity System for Underachieving Students (Chapter 10) recounts how a group
of African American students move from being disengaged underachievers to ac-
tive participants in their schools ninth-grade English curriculum. Using cultural
modeling activity theory, the author (who doubles as their teacher) analyzes a day
R ef er ence
Chall, J.S. (1996). Stages of reading development
(2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
M
y main goal here is to situate reading within a broad perspective that
integrates work on cognition, language, social interaction, society, and
culture. In light of recent reports on reading (National Reading Panel,
2000; Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998) that have tended to treat reading quite nar-
rowly in terms of psycholinguistic processing skills, I argue that such a broad per-
spective on reading is essential if we are to speak to issues of access and equity in
schools and workplaces. I also argue that reading and writing cannot be separated
from speaking, listening, and interacting, on the one hand, or using language to
think about and act on the world, on the other. Thus, it is necessary to start with
a viewpoint on language (oral and written) itself, a viewpoint that ties language
to embodied action in the material and social world.
I have organized this article into four parts. First, I develop a viewpoint on
language that stresses the connections among language, embodied experience, and
situated action and interaction in the world. In the second part, I argue that what
is relevant to learning literacy is not English in general, but specific varieties of
English that I call social languages. I then go on to discuss notions related to the
idea of social languages, specifically Discourses (with a capital D) and their connec-
tions to socially situated identities and cultural models. In the third part, I show
the relevance of the earlier sections to the development of literacy in early child-
hood through a specific example. Finally, I close the article with a discussion of the
importance of language abilities (construed in a specific way) to learning to read.
A Viewpoint on Language
It is often claimed that the primary function of human language is to convey
information, but I believe this is not true. Human languages are used for a wide
array of functions, including but by no means limited to conveying information
(Halliday, 1994). I will argue here that human language has two primary func-
tions through which it is best studied and analyzed. I would state these func-
tions as follows: to scaffold the performance of action in the world, including
social activities and interactions; to scaffold human affiliation in cultures and so-
cial groups and institutions through creating and enticing others to take certain
This chapter is reprinted from Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44(8), 714725.
Copyright 2001 by the International Reading Association.
136
perspectives on experience. Action is the most important word in the first state-
ment; perspectives is the most important word in the second. I will discuss each of
these two functions in turn.
Situated Action
Traditional approaches to language have tended to look at it as a closed system
(for discussion, see Clancey, 1997). Any piece of language is treated as representa-
tion (re-presenting) of some information. On the traditional view, what it means
to comprehend a piece of language is to be able to translate it into some equivalent
representational system, either other language (ones own words) or some mental
language or language of thought that mimics the structure of natural languages
(e.g., is couched in terms of logical propositions).
However, there are a variety of perspectives today on language that tie its
comprehension much more closely to experience of and action in the world. For
example, consider these two remarks from work in cognitive psychology: com-
prehension is grounded in perceptual simulations that prepare agents for situated
action (Barsalou, 1999a, p. 77); to a particular person, the meaning of an object,
event, or sentence is what that person can do with the object, event, or sentence
(Glenberg, 1997, p. 3).
These two quotes are from work that is part of a family of related viewpoints.
For want of a better name, we might call the family situated cognition stud-
ies (e.g., Barsalou, 1999a, 1999b; Brown, Collins, & Dugid, 1989; Clancey, 1997;
Clark, 1997; Engestrom, Miettinen, raij Punamaki, 1999; Gee, 1992; Glenberg,
1997; Glenberg & Robertson, 1999; Hutchins, 1995; Latour, 1999; Lave, 1996;
Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998). While there are differences among the
members of the family (alternative theories about situated cognition), they share
the viewpoint that meaning in language is not some abstract propositional rep-
resentation that resembles a verbal language. Rather, meaning in language is
tied to peoples experiences of situated action in the material and social world.
Furthermore, these experiences (perceptions, feelings, actions, and interactions)
are stored in the mind or brain, not in terms of propositions or language but in
something like dynamic images tied to perception both of the world and of our
own bodies, internal states, and feelings: Increasing evidence suggests that per-
ceptual simulation is indeed central to comprehension (Barsalou, 1999a, p. 74).
It is almost as if we videotape our experiences as we are having them, cre-
ate a library of such videotapes, edit them to make some prototypical tapes (or
set of typical instances), but stand ever ready to add new tapes to our library. We
re-edit the tapes based on new experiences or draw out of the library less typical
tapes when the need arises. As we face new situations or new texts we run our
tapesperhaps a prototypical one, or a set of typical ones, or a set of contrasting
ones, or a less typical one, whatever the case may be. We do this to apply our old
experiences to our new experience and to aid us in making, editing, and storing
the videotape that will capture this new experience, integrate it into our library,
and allow us to make sense of it (both while we are having it and afterwards).
While Glenberg here is talking about the meaning of the glass as an object in
ones specific experience of the world at a given time and place, he could just as well
be talking about the meaning of the word glass in ones specific experience of a piece
of talk or written text at a given time and place. The meaning of the word glass in a
given piece of talk or text would be given by running a simulation (a videotape) of
how the glass fits into courses of action being built up in the theater of our minds.
These courses of action are based on how we understand all the other words and
goings on in the world that surrounds the word glass as we read it: [T]he embodied
models constructed to understand language are the same as those that underlie
comprehension of the natural environment (Glenberg, 1997, p. 17).
If embodied action and social activity are crucially connected to the situated
meanings oral or written language convey, then reading instruction must move
well beyond relations internal to texts. Reading instruction must be rooted in the
138 Gee
connections of texts to engagement in and simulations of actions, activities, and
interactionsto real and imagined material and social worlds.
Perspective-Taking
Let me now turn to the second function of language already mentioned. Consider,
in this regard, the following quote from Tomasello (1999):
[T]he perspectivial nature of linguistic symbols, and the use of linguistic symbols in
discourse interaction in which different perspectives are explicitly contrasted and
shared, provide the raw material out of which the children of all cultures construct
the flexible and multi-perspectivalperhaps even dialogicalcognitive representa-
tions that give human cognition much of its awesome and unique power. (p. 163)
Lets briefly unpack what this means. From the point of view of the model
Tomasello was developing, the words and grammar of a human language exist to
allow people to take and communicate alternative perspectives on experience (see
also Hanks, 1996). That is, words and grammar exist to give people alternative
ways to view one and the same state of affairs. Language is not about conveying
neutral or objective information; rather, it is about communicating perspectives
on experience and action in the world, often in contrast to alternative and com-
peting perspectives: We may then say that linguistic symbols are social conven-
tions for inducing others to construe, or take a perspective on, some experiential
situation (Tomasello, 1999, p. 118).
Let me give some examples of what it means to say that words and grammar
are not primarily about giving and getting information but are, rather, about giv-
ing and getting different perspectives on experience. I open Microsofts Web site:
Is it selling its products, marketing them, or underpricing them against the com-
petition? Are products I can download from the site without paying for them free,
or are they being exchanged for having bought other Microsoft products (e.g.,
Windows), or are there strings attached? Note also how metaphors (like strings
attached) add greatly to, and are a central part of, the perspective-taking we can
do. If I use the grammatical construction Microsofts new operating system is
loaded with bugs I take a perspective in which Microsoft is less agentive and
responsible than if I use the grammatical construction Microsoft has loaded its
new operating system with bugs.
Here is another example: Do I say that a child who is using multiple cues
to give meaning to a written text (i.e., using some decoding along with picture
and context cues) is reading, or do I say (as some of the pro-phonics people do)
that she is not really reading, but engaged in emergent literacy? (For those latter
people, the child is only really reading when she is decoding all the words in the
text and not using nondecoding cues for word recognition). In this case, contend-
ing camps actually fight over what perspective on experience the term reading
or really reading ought to name. In the end, the point is that no wording is ever
neutral or just the facts. All wordingsgiven the very nature of languageare
140 Gee
Social Languages
The perspective taken thus far on language is misleading in one respect. It misses
the core fact that any human language is not one general thing (like English),
but composed of a great variety of different styles, registers, or social languages.
Different patterns of vocabulary, syntax (sentence structure), and discourse con-
nectors (devices that connect sentences together to make a whole integrated text)
constitute different social languages, each of which is connected to specific sorts
of social activities and to a specific socially situated identity (Gee, 1999a). We
recognize different social languages by recognizing these patterns (in much the
way we recognize a face through recognizing a certain characteristic patterning
of facial features).
As an example, consider the following, taken from a school science textbook:
1. The destruction of a land surface by the combined effects of abrasion and re-
moval of weathered material by transporting agents is called erosion.... The pro-
duction of rock waste by mechanical processes and chemical changes is called
weathering (Martin, 1990, p. 93).
A whole bevy of grammatical design features mark these sentences as part
of a distinctive social language. Some of these features are heavy subjects (e.g.,
The production of rock waste by mechanical processes and chemical changes);
processes and actions named by nouns or nominalizations, rather than verbs (e.g.,
production); passive main verbs (is called) and passives inside nominaliza-
tions (e.g., production...by mechanical processes); modifiers that are more con-
tentful than the nouns they modify (e.g., transporting agents); and complex
embedding (e.g., weathered material by transporting agents is a nominalization
embedded inside the combined effects of..., and this more complex nominaliza-
tion is embedded inside a yet larger nominalization, the destruction of...).
This style of language also incorporates a great many distinctive discourse
markers, that is, linguistic features that characterize larger stretches of text and
give them unity and coherence as a certain type of text or genre. For example, the
genre here is explanatory definition, and it is characterized by classificatory lan-
guage of a certain sort. Such language leads adept readers to form a classificatory
scheme in their heads something like this: There are two kinds of change (erosion
and weathering) and two kinds of weathering (mechanical and chemical).
This mapping from elements of vocabulary, syntax, and discourse to a spe-
cific style of language used in characteristic social activities is just as much a part
of reading and writing as is the phonics (sound-to-letter) mapping. In fact, more
people fail to become successful school-based, academic, or work-related readers
or writers because of failing to master this sort of mapping than the phonics one.
There are a great many different social languagesfor example, the language
of medicine, literature, street gangs, sociology, law, rap, or informal dinner-time
talk among friends (who belong to distinctive cultures or social groups). To know
any specific social language is to know how its characteristic design features are
combined to carry out one or more specific social activities. It is to know, as well,
how its characteristic lexical and grammatical design features are used to enact a
142 Gee
acquired by direct instruction. While some forms of (appropriately timed) scaf-
folding, modeling, and instructional guidance by mentors appear to be important,
immersion in meaningful practice is essential. Social languages and genres are
acquired by processes of socialization, an issue to which I will turn below.
It is inevitable, I would think, that someone at this point is going to object
that social languages are really about the later stages of the acquisition of literacy.
It will be pointed out that the current reading debates are almost always about
small children and the earlier stages of reading. What, it will be asked, has all this
talk of social languages got to do with early literacy? My answer is, everything.
Social languages (and their connections to action, perspectives, and identities)
are no less relevant to the first stages of learning to read than they are to the later
ones (and there are not so much stages here as the same things going on over time
at ever deeper and more complex levels). However, before I turn to the relevance
of social languages to early childhood at the end of this article, I need to develop
briefly a few more theoretical notions related to social languages.
Discourses
I said earlier that social languages are acquired by socialization. But now we
must ask, socialization into what? When people learn new social languages and
genresat the level of being able to produce them and not just consume them
they are being socialized into what I will call Discourses with a big D (I use
discourse with a little d to mean just language in use, Gee, 1996, 1999a; see
also Clark, 1996). Even when people learn a new social language or genre only
to consume (interpret), but not produce it, they are learning to recognize a new
Discourse. Related but somewhat different terms others have used to capture
some of what I am trying to capture with the term Discourses are communities of
practice (Wenger, 1998), actor-actant networks (Latour, 1987, 1991), and activity
systems (Engestrom, Miettinen, raij Punamaki, 1999; Leontev, 1978).
Discourses always involve language (i.e., they recruit specific social lan-
guages), but they always involve more than language as well. Social languages
are embedded within Discourses and only have relevance and meaning within
them. A Discourse integrates ways of talking, listening, writing, reading, acting,
interacting, believing, valuing, and feeling (and using various objects, symbols,
images, tools, and technologies) in the service of enacting meaningful socially sit-
uated identities and activities. Being-doing a certain sort of physicist, gang mem-
ber, feminist, first-grade child in Ms. Smiths room, special ed (SPED) student,
regular at the local bar, or gifted upper-middle-class child engaged in emergent
literacy are all Discourses.
We can think of Discourses as identity kits. Its almost as if you get a toolkit
full of specific devices (i.e., ways with words, deeds, thoughts, values, actions,
interactions, objects, tools, and technologies) in terms of which you can enact a
specific identity and engage in specific activities associated with that identity. For
example, think of what devices (e.g., in words, deeds, clothes, objects, attitudes)
you would get in a Sherlock Holmes identity kit (e.g., you do not get a Say No to
Cultural Models
Within their socialization into Discourses (and we are all socialized into a great
many across our lifetimes), people acquire cultural models (DAndrade & Strauss,
1992; Gee, 1999a; Holland & Quinn, 1987; Shore, 1996; Strauss & Quinn, 1997).
Cultural models are everyday theories (i.e., storylines, images, schemas, meta-
phors, and models) about the world that people socialized into a given Discourse
share. Cultural models tell people what is typical or normal from the perspective
of a particular Discourse (or a related or aligned set of them).
For example, certain types of middle-class people in the United States hold
a cultural model of child development that goes something like this (Harkness,
Super, & Keefer, 1992): A child is born dependent on her parents and grows up by
going through (often disruptive) stages toward greater and greater independence
(and independence is a high value for this group of people). This cultural model
plays a central role in this groups Discourse of parent-child relations (i.e., enact-
ing and recognizing identities as parents and children).
On the other hand, certain sorts of working-class families (Philipsen, 1975)
hold a cultural model of child development that goes something like this: A child
is born unsocialized and with tendencies to be selfish. The child needs discipline
from the home to learn to be a cooperative social member of the family (a high
value of this group of people). This cultural model plays a central role in this
groups Discourse of parent-child relations.
These different cultural models, connected to different (partially) class-based
Discourses of parenting, are not true or false. Rather, they focus on different
aspects of childhood and development. Cultural models define for people in a
Discourse what counts as normal and natural and what counts as inappropriate
and deviant. They are, of course, thereby thoroughly value laden.
144 Gee
Figure 1. Summary of Tools for Understanding Language and Literacy
in Sociocultural Terms
Cultural models come out of and, in turn, inform the social practices in which
people in a Discourse engage. Cultural models are stored in peoples minds (by
no means always consciously), though they are supplemented and instantiated
in the objects, texts, and practices that are part and parcel of the Discourse. For
example, many guidebooks supplement and instantiate the above middle-class
cultural model of childhood and stages. On the other hand, many religious ma-
terials supplement and instantiate the above working-class model of childhood.
Figure 1 summarizes the discussion so far, defining all the theoretical tools
and showing how they are all related to one another.
After the child uttered the above sentence, he said, See, I told you I was
learning to read. He seems to be well aware of the fathers purposes. The child,
the father, the words, and the book are all here in sync to pull off a specific prac-
tice, and this is a form of instruction, but its a form that is typical of what goes on
inside socialization processes.
The father and son have taken an activity that is for the child now a virtual
genrenamely, uncovering a piece of a picture and on the basis of it answering a
questionand incorporated it into a different metalevel activity. That is, the father
and son use the original activity not in and for itself but as a platform with which
to discuss reading or, perhaps better put, to co-construct a cultural model of what
146 Gee
reading is. The fathers question and the sons final response (See, I told you I was
learning to read) clearly indicate that they are seeking to demonstrate to and for
each other that the child can read.
Figure 2, which will inform my discussion that follows, (partially) analyzes
this event in terms of the theoretical notions we have developed above.
From a developmental point of view, then, what is going on here? Nothing
so general as acquiring literacy. Rather, something much more specific is going
on. First, the child is acquiring, amidst immersion and adult guidance, a piece
of a particular type of social language. The question he has to formand he very
well knows thishas to be a classificatory question. It cannot be, for instance, a
narrative-based question (e.g., something like What are Donald and Daisy do-
ing? or Where are Donald and Daisy going?). Classificatory questions (and
related syntactic and discourse resources) are a common part of many school-
based (and academic) social languages, especially those associated with nonliter-
ary content areas (e.g., the sciences).
The acquisition of this piece of a social language is, in this case, scaffolded by
a genre the child has acquired, namely to uncover the piece of the picture, form
a classificatory question to which the picture is an answer (when the parent isnt
there to read the question for the child), and give the answer. This genre bears a
good deal of similarity to a number of different non-narrative language and action
genres (routines) used in the early years of school.
Finally, in regard to social languages, note that the childs question is uttered
in a more vernacular style than the printed question. So syntactically it is, in one
sense, in the wrong style. However, from a discourse perspective (in terms of the
function its syntax carries out), it is in just the right style (i.e., it is a classificatory
question). It is a mainstay of child language development that the acquisition of a
function often precedes acquisition of a fully correct form (in the sense of contex-
tually appropriate, not necessarily in the sense of grammatically correct).
148 Gee
school-based Discourses and part of his acquisition of his primary Discourse.
This ties school-related values, attitudes, and ways with words, at a specific and
not some general level, to his primary sense of self and belonging. This will al-
most certainly affect how the child reacts to, and resonates with, school-based
ways with words and things.
So what are these early language abilities that seem so important for later suc-
cess in school? According to the National Research Councils report (Snow, Burns,
& Griffin, 1998), they are things like vocabularyreceptive vocabulary, but more
especially expressive vocabularythe ability to recall and comprehend sentences
and stories, and the ability to engage in verbal interactions. Furthermore, I think
that research has made it fairly clear what causes such verbal abilities. What ap-
pears to cause enhanced school-based verbal abilities are family, community, and
school language environments in which children interact intensively with adults
and more advanced peers and experience cognitively challenging talk and texts
on sustained topics and in different genres of oral and written language.
However, the correlation between language abilities and success in learn-
ing to read (and in school generally) hides an important reality. Almost all
Q u e s t i o n s f o r R e fl e c t i o n
not e
*When this chapter was written, Gee was at the University of WisconsinMadison.
R ef er ence s
Barsalou, L.W. (1999a). Language comprehension: Clark, A. (1997). Being there: Putting brain, body,
Archival memory or preparation for situated ac- and world together again. Cambridge, MA: MIT
tion. Discourse Processes, 28, 6180. Press.
Barsalou, L.W. (1999b). Perceptual symbol systems. Clark, H.H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge,
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577660. England: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, A.L., Collins, A., & Dugid, P. (1989).
DAndrade, R., & Strauss, C. (Eds.). (1992).
Situated cognition and the culture of learning.
Educational Researcher, 18, 3242. Human motives and cultural models. Cambridge,
Clancey, W.J. (1997). Situated cognition: On hu- England: Cambridge University Press.
man knowledge and computer representations. Engestrom, Y., Miettinen, R., & raij Punamaki (Eds.).
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge,
Press. England: Cambridge University Press.
150 Gee
Freire, P. (1995). The pedagogy of the oppressed. New Latour, B. (1999). Pandoras hope: Essays on the re-
York: Continuum. ality of science studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Gallas, K. (1994). The languages of learning: How University Press.
children talk, write, dance, draw, and sing their Lave, J. (1996). Teaching, as learning, in practice.
understanding of the world. New York: Teachers Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3, 149164.
College Press. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning:
Gee, J.P. (1992). The social mind: Language, ideology, Legitimate peripheral participation. New York:
and social practice. New York: Bergin & Garvey. Cambridge University Press.
Gee, J.P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Leontev, A.N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and
Ideology in Discourses (2nd ed.). London: Taylor personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
& Francis. Martin, J.R. (1990). Literacy in science: Learning
Gee, J.P. (1999a). An introduction to discourse analy- to handle text as technology. In F. Christe
sis: Theory and method. London: Routledge. (Ed.), Literacy for a changing world (pp. 79117).
Gee, J.P. (1999b). Reading and the New Literacy Melbourne, NSW, Australia: Australian Council
Studies: Reframing the National Academy of for Educational Research.
Sciences report on reading. Journal of Literacy Myers, G. (1990). Writing biology: Texts in the social
Research, 31, 355374. construction of scientific knowledge. Madison, WI:
Glenberg, A.M. (1997). What is memory for? University of Wisconsin Press.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 155. National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the
Glenberg, A.M., & Robertson, D.A. (1999). National Reading Panel: Teaching children to
Indexical understanding of instructions. read. Washington, DC: Author. Available online:
Discourse Processes, 28, 126. www.nationalreadingpanel.org.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). Functional grammar (2nd Philipsen, G. (1975). Speaking like a man in
ed.). London: Edward Arnold. Teamsterville: Culture patterns of role enact-
Hanks, W.F. (1996). Language and communicative ment in an urban neighborhood. Quarterly
practices. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Journal of Speech, 61, 2639.
Harkness, S., Super, C., & Keefer, C.H. (1992). Scollon, R., & Scollon, S.W. (1981). Narrative, lit-
Learning to be an American parent: How cultural eracy, and face in interethnic communication.
models gain directive force. In R. DAndrade & Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
C. Strauss (Eds.), Human motives and cultural Shore, B. (1996). Culture in mind: Cognition, culture,
models (pp. 163178). Cambridge, England: and the problem of meaning. New York: Oxford
Cambridge University Press. University Press.
Holland, D., & Quinn, N. (Eds.). (1987). Cultural Snow, C.E., Burns, M.S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998).
models in language and thought. Cambridge, Preventing reading difficulties in young children.
England: Cambridge University Press. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cam- Strauss, C., & Quinn, N. (1997). A cognitive the-
bridge, MA: MIT Press. ory of cultural meaning. Cambridge, England:
Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city. Cambridge University Press.
Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Tomasello, M. (1999). The cultural origins of human
Press. cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Press.
Harvard University Press. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learn-
Latour, B. (1991). We have never been modern. ing, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, England:
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Cambridge University Press.
This chapter is reprinted from Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (4th ed., pp. 7082), edited by R.B.
Ruddell, M.R. Ruddell, and H. Singer, 1994, Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Copyright 1994
by the International Reading Association. (Adapted from Dialoganalyse III: Referate der 3: Arbeitstagung, Bologna
1990 [3rd International Conference on Dialogue Analysis] (Vol. 2, pp. 417430), edited by S. Stati, E. Weigand,
and E. Hundsnurscher, Tbingen, Germany: Niemeyer.)
152
Developmental Stages
In studying child language development some 20 years ago I was struck by how
clearly this social-semantic perspective stands out once you observe how children
begin to communicateespecially if you observe it from birth and in a natural
form, without eliciting or experimenting and without using too many technical
aids. These practices tend to obscure the social nature of semiotic development,
whereas the traditional diary method of child language studies brings it out. In this
context, some fairly clearly defined developmental stages seemed to me to emerge:4
1. presymbolic (primary intersubjectivity), typically birth to 0;5
1 to 2. transition stage, typically 0;5 to 0;8
2. symbolicprotolinguistic (secondary intersubjectivity), typically
0;8 to 1;4
2 to 3. transition stage, typically 1;4 to 2;0
3. symboliclinguistic, typically 2;0 and on
Since then detailed studies of early language development have been carried out
in comparable terms, based on intensive observation of children in their homes,
by Clare Painter and by Jane Oldenburg; and Qiu Shijin has observed a population
of Chinese children living in Shanghai, over a short period but covering differ-
ent ages within the range. All have used the same theoretical framework for their
interpretations (see Oldenburg, 1990; Painter, 1984; Qiu, 1985).
From the beginning of life a childs acts of meaning are joint constructions,
dialogically enacted between himself and some significant other by reference to
whom he is achieving a personal identity. Colwyn Trevarthen documented this pro-
cess for the presymbolic stage many years ago when he showed that a newborn in-
fant within 2 or 3 weeks of birth takes part in exchanging attention.5 This exchange
of attention is the beginning of language. It has no content in the adult sense; but
it has meaning. For the child, the meaning is we are together and in communica-
tion; there is a youand a me. You and me are, of course, mutually defining;
neither can exist without the other. I shall not dwell on this stage here; but I have
found it fascinating to take part in, and have been amazed by the semogenic po-
tential of these early microencounters. They are not entirely without content, as a
matter of fact; but there is as yet no systematic construing of experience.
When the child begins to control his material environment, typically at round
about 4 to 5 months, he begins the transition to systematic symbolic construction.
He can reach out and grasp an object that is in view; and this coincides with his
154 Halliday
[Mother is holding child in her lap, throwing his toy rabbit in the air and
catching it. The child is watching attentively.]
Child: [ ]
Mother: There he goes!
Child: [ ]
Mother: Oh, you want me to throw him up again, do you? All right. There
he goes!
Child: [loudly] [mng]
Mother: No, thats enough. Lets find something else to do.
Here the material processes taking place in space-time (the mother throwing up
the rabbit and catching it) impact on the conscious processes whereby both par-
ties are attending, with shared positive affect, both to the other and to the third
party, the rabbit-commotion. It is the interpenetration of these two that generates
a meaning, such as thats fun; I want you to do it again; and also a contrasting
meaning of I insist that you do it again! These evolve dialogically as part of a
shared system of meanings in different microcontexts, which includes others such
as I want/dont want that object, lets be (you and me) together/lets attend to
this (third party) together, I like/am curious about that, and so on.
It is in protolanguage, then, that the activity of meaning comes to be con-
strued in the form of a system, such that there is an ongoing dialectic relationship
between the system and the instance. The system is the potential for generating in-
stances; and by the same token each new instance perturbs the system.6 The sys-
tem is a dynamic open system, metastable in character, that persists only through
constantly changing in interaction with its environment; and each new instance
constitutes an incursion from the environment, since the material conditions that
engender it are never totally identical. (We may note that this impacting of the
conscious with the material takes place at both ends of the symbolic process,
the semantic and the phonetic; so that the system is evolving at both these inter-
faces, both in the construction of content and in the construction of expression.
In the latter, the material conditions are those of the childs own body, his physi-
ological potentialwhich also, of course, is constantly changing.)
The second major transition is that from protolanguage into languageinto
the distinctively human semiotic that is not, as far as we know, shared by other
species. In the course of this transition the resource for making meaning is further
transformed, this time into a system of another, significantly different kind. In
the context of overall development, while protolanguage goes with crawling, lan-
guage goes with walking; and both these activities are carried out by specialized
organsmouth and legsleaving arms and hands free for other purposes. But
the criterial, and critical, difference between protolanguage and language is that
language is stratified: that is, it has a grammar. A grammar (strictly, lexicogram-
marsyntax, vocabulary, morphology if any) is a purely symbolic system that
is introduced in between the content and the expression; that is, it is a distinct
All had rising tone, and demanded a response. Contrast these with mathetic ut-
terances such as the following, all on falling tone:
2. big bll (thats a big ball), new rcord (heres a new record)
r ed sweter (Ive got my red sweater), two hmmer (Im holding two
hammers)
These were from 1;7. A later example (1;9) shows the two modes in syntagmatic
sequence:
3. n
o room walk on wll...walk on ther wall (theres no room to walk on
[this] wall; I want to walk on the other wall!).
156 Halliday
The three English-speaking children who were recorded intensively by natu-
ral language diaries all made this distinction systematically as the primary se-
mantic option in the protolanguage-language transition. All three expressed it
prosodically, by intonation and/or voice quality; and in all three the pragmatic
was the marked option. The Chinese-speaking children also made it and also
expressed it prosodically; however there were not enough data to establish the
markedness pattern.8
The pragmatic is a demand for goods-&-services; it seeks a response, in the
form of action, and the others involved in the dialogue recognize and construe it
as such (unconsciously, of course). That does not mean that they always accede to
the request; but they show that they have got the message, and in that respect no
is as effective as yes. Gradually, during the course of the transition, the pragmatic
evolves into a demand for information; thus ontogenetically (and perhaps also phy-
logenetically) the interrogative, although in the adult grammar it pairs with the
declarative, is derived by splitting off from the imperativea demand for action
becomes a demand for verbal action. The mathetic, on the other hand, does not
demand any action. What it does do is invite confirmation: Yes, thats a big ball,
Its not a big ball; its a little ball, Its not a ball; its a melon, and so on. And here
an important question arises: what is the essential condition for entering into a
dialogue of this kind, in which one interactant corroborates, or disputes, what the
other one has just said? It is that the experience must have been shared. You cannot
corroborate or dispute what happened unless you also were there to see it.
Thus the basic form of information is turning shared experience into mean-
ing: that is, telling someone something that they already know. I can construe
an experience semiotically, and offer the construction to you, provided I know
that you have shared the experience; and you then share in construing it. Thus
the construction is again dialogic: meaning is created by the impact between a
material phenomenon and the shared processes of consciousness of those who
participated in it.
Every parent is familiar with the situation where their child is asked to give
information to someone about an experience that person has not shared, and the
child is unable to do it. Mother has taken the child to the zoo; when she comes
home she says, Tell Daddy what you saw at the zoo today. Daddy is attending,
but the child cannot obligeeither he remains silent, or he turns back to Mummy
and tells her. Why? Because she was the one with whom he shared the experience.
How can he tell Daddy about it, when Daddy wasnt there?
Conversation, then, evolves as the joint construal of shared experience,
whereby phenomena that are accessible to the consciousness of both parties
things both can see, events both have experiencedare turned dialogically into
meanings. This is how conversation begins; and how it continues, for a child,
until he is well on the way from protolanguage to mother tongue. No doubt con-
versation continued in that way for many generations in the history of the hu-
man species, before its further potential was taken up. But the potential is there
once the system of meaning-making is in place; this is what enables the listener
A few hours later again he returned to the story, this time with his mother:
158 Halliday
Mother: The goat shouldnt eat the lid; its not good for it.
Nigel: goat try eat ld...man said n...goat shuldnt eat lid...[shaking head]
godfor it
160 Halliday
The Construction of Cats (Nigel From 2;10 to 3;6) (Continued)
Nigel: Do they die? [He knows that some plants do.]
Father: No, they dont die; they just dont like it.
Nigel: Why dont puppets mind snow?
Father: Well [hesitating]...puppets arent people.
Nigel: Yes, but...cats also arent people.
Father: No, but cats are alive; they go. Puppets dont go.
Nigel: Puppets do go.
Father: Yes, but you have to make them go; like trains.
Nigel: Trains have wheels. Puppets have legs.
Father: Yes, they have legs; but the legs dont go all by themselves. You have to make
them go.
From M.A.K. Halliday (1984a).
But the conversations achieve much more than that. Experientially, for example,
the dialogue constructs the general taxonomy of plants and animals (things that
grow versus things that go); compare the complex argument around a four-way
distinction of cats, puppets, people, and trains at 3;6. Interpersonally, it evolves
into a dynamic modeling of question, answer, challenge, contradiction, and the
like that is the essential component of the resources out of which all conversation
is constructed.
I have given various examples elsewhere from my own records (cf. Halliday,
1978); many more will be found in the writings of Oldenburg and Painter, as
well as throughout the now extensive literature on child language (but note that
very little of this takes any account of protolanguage). It is instructive both to
examine single instances and to track conversational motifs through time, as in
the cat extracts just cited. For example, in wondering how Nigel had construed
his experience of time and space I was able to put together conversational frag-
ments extending over several years, while Joy Phillips, from intensive study of the
earlier data, showed how he had developed the fundamental semantic strategies
of comparison and contrast. And the extraordinarily rich body of natural con-
versation between mothers and their children of 3;6 to 4;0 that Ruqaiya Hasan
has assembled, which is reported on briefly in her paper given at this conference
[i.e., Analisi del Dialogo, Bologna, May 2 to 5, 1990], adds a significant new di-
mension to our understanding of the development of dialogue. In all these early
discourses we see clearly how the text interacts with its environment, such that
meaning is created at the intersection of two contradictions: the experiential one,
between the material and the conscious modes of experience, and the interper-
sonal one, between the different personal histories of the interactants taking part.
Thus from the ontogenesis of conversation we can gain insight into human learn-
ing and human understanding.
1. If meaning is socially and culturally constructed, how does that idea
challenge earlier notions of learning as the acquisition of ready-made
information?
2. How do joint constructions between parent and child facilitate the develop-
ment of meaning within childrens early language development?
3. How do humans transition from protolanguage to systematic language?
4. In what ways are narrative discourses dialogic in childrens constructions
of meaning?
Not e s
1
This ideology is particularly characteristic of what has been called the manipulative capital-
ist society. See Martin (1989, especially Chapter 4, passim).
2
See, for example, Dixon (1967), Graves (1983). For an excellent critique, see Rothery (1990,
chapter entitled The Pedagogies of Traditional School Grammar: Creativity, Personal
Growth, and Process); see also Rothery (in press).
3
Among contemporary linguists an outstanding contributor to the development of this tradi-
tion is Claude Hagge. See, for example, Hagge (1985).
4
The initial interpretation of my observations is contained in Halliday (1975). The data to age
2;7 is available in Halliday (1984a). See also Bullowa (1979).
5
Colwyn Trevarthens important work in this field is presented in a number of his papers; see
especially (1979) and (1980). For his work on the protolanguage phase, see (1978). Bruners
work provides a valuable general theoretical underpinning from a psychological standpoint;
compare Bruner (1977).
6
Contrast genetically transmitted communication systems (like the dances of bees), where in-
stances do not perturb the system. This fundamental feature of semiotic systems is obscured
in adult language by the massive quantitative effects to which it contributes (cf. Halliday,
1987); but it is seen very clearly at the protolanguage phase of development.
For language as a dynamic open system, see Lemkes articles Towards a model of the
instructional process, The formal analysis of instruction, and Action, context, and mean-
ing, in Lemke (1984).
7
Naming (lexicalized denotation) and transitivity are the cornerstones of the potential of lan-
guage for construing experience (the experiential metafunction, in the terms of systemic
theory). They were first explicitly linked in this way by Mathesius; see, for example, (1936).
For naming in the development of conversation, see Halliday (1984b).
8
It may seem surprising that, with children learning a tone language, a major distinction such
as this could be realized by intonation. In fact, of course, Chinese uses intonation (grammati-
cal tone) as well as lexical tone; but this is irrelevant. The protolanguage is child tongue, not
mother tongue; you cannot tell, when a child is speaking protolanguage, what language his
mother tongue is going to be, and although by the time children introduce this distinction they
are already launched into the mother tongue, this particular contrast is still their own invention.
In some instances, in fact, their system runs counter to the pattern of the mother tongue.
Thus in Nigels grammar proto-imperatives, being pragmatic, were rising in tone, whereas
162 Halliday
in English the informal imperative is typically falling; while when he first used dependent
clauses, which have no macrofunction, he gave them the unmarked (falling) tone. Thus
when, at just under 1;9, he said, When New-World fnish, song about bs! (When the New
World [symphony] is finished, sing me the song about a bus), the first clause was falling and
the second rising; whereas in adult English the tones would have been the other way round.
9
From her study of long conversations among groups of adults, Suzanne Eggins postulates
that it is in fact the periodicity of consensus and conflict that is the major factor in keeping
conversations going. See Eggins (1990).
R ef er ence s
Bruner, J.S. (1977). Early social interaction and lan- Mathesius, V. (1936). On some problems of the sys-
guage acquisition. In H.R. Shaffer (Ed.), Studies tematic analysis of grammar. Travaux du Cercle
in mother-infant interaction. London: Academic. Linguistique de Prague, 6.
Bullowa, M. (1979). Infants as conversational part- Oldenburg, J. (1990). Learning the language and
ners. In T. Myers (Ed.), The development of con- learning through language in early childhood.
versation and discourse. Edinburgh: Edinburgh In M.A.K. Halliday, J. Gibbons, & H. Nicholas
University Press. (Eds.), Learning, keeping and using language:
Dixon, J. (1967). Growth through English. Oxford, Selected papers from the Eighth World Congress of
UK: Oxford University Press. Applied Linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Eggins, S. (1990). Keeping the conversation going: Painter, C. (1984). Into the mother tongue: A case
A systemic-functional analysis of conversational study of early language development. London:
structure in casual sustained talk. Doctoral dis- Frances Pinter.
sertation, University of Sydney, Australia. Qiu S. (1985). Transition period in Chinese lan-
Graves, D.H. (1983). Writing: Teachers and children guage development. Australian Review of Applied
at work. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Linguistics, 8(1).
Hagge, C. (1985). Lhomme de paroles: contribution Rothery, J. (1990). Story writing in primary school:
linguistique aux sciences humaines. Paris: Fayard. Assessing narrative type genres. Doctoral disserta-
Halliday, M.A.K. (1975). Learning how to mean: tion, University of Sydney, Australia.
Explorations in the development of language. Rothery, J. (in press). Making changes: Developing
London: Edward Arnold. (New York: Elsevier, an educational linguistics. In R. Hasan & G.
1977) Williams (Eds.), Literacy in society. London:
Halliday, M.A.K. (1978). Meaning and the construc- Longman.
tion of reality in early childhood. In H.L. Pick, Thibault, P.J. (1990). Social semiotics as praxis:
Jr. & E. Saltzman (Eds.), Modes of perceiving and Test, social meaning making and Nabokovs Ada.
processing of information. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1984a). Listening to Nigel: Trevarthen, C. (1978). Secondary intersubjectiv-
Conversations of a very small child. Sydney: ity: Confidence, confiding and acts of meaning
University of Sydney, Linguistics Department. in the first year. In A. Lock (Ed.), Action, gesture
Halliday, M.A.K. (1984b). Language as code and and symbol: The emergence of language. London:
language as behaviour: A systemic-functional Academic.
interpretation of the nature and ontogenesis of Trevarthen, C. (1979). Communication and cooper-
dialogue. In R.P. Fawcett et al. (Eds.), The semi- ation in early infancy: A description of primary
otics of culture and language (Vol. 1). London: intersubjectivity. In M. Bullowa (Ed.), Before
Frances Pinter. speech: The beginning of interpersonal communi-
Halliday, M.A.K. (1987). Language and the order of cation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
nature. In N. Fabb et al. (Eds.), The linguistics of Press.
writing. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Trevarthen, C. (1980). The foundations of inter-
Press. subjectivity: Development of interpersonal and
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in cooperative understanding in infants. In D.
discourse comprehension: A construction- Olson (Ed.), The social foundations of language
integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2). and thought: Essays in Honor of Jerome S. Bruner.
Lemke, J.L. (1984). Semiotics and education. New York: Norton.
Toronto: Victoria College, University of Toronto.
Martin, J.R. (1989). Factual writing: Exploring and
challenging social reality. Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
I
t is writing time in the kindergarten class. As she does every day, Mrs. Bee
(all names are pseudonyms), the teacher, urges her young charges to think
before they write, to make a quick sketch of their idea, and then to write that
idea, stretching their words and listening to their sounds, bravely spelling the
best they can. Each child should do their own text based on their own true
life, Mrs. Bee cautions. No one should copy anyone else, and most certainly, they
should not spend the period drawing and talking.
After Mrs. Bees directions, the children begin to draw and talk; among the
children are LaTrell and his tablemates, Cici and Della:
Soon a virtual flock of balloons are taking off on childrens papers. As for LaTrells
balloons, they sprout appendages and become him flying, propelled by his mother,
who tosses him up in the air. This how I went up in the sky when I was a baby
I didnt know I couldnt come down, he says. (See Figure 1; see Dyson, 2010a, for
the complete vignette.)
In the opening months of the school year, Mrs. Bees children were collec-
tively finding a new kind of playground, one that existed on paper. From an
164
Figure 1. A Kindergartners Transformed Balloons
official point of view, though, they drew too much, copied from each other, did
not focus on a true event, and indeed did not listen. They were unruly children
who did not fall in line with the mandated curriculum, a commercial writing pro-
gram that had been paced by Mrs. Bees school district and choreographed with
expected benchmarks.
This view of Mrs. Bees children, and Mrs. Bees own view of her teaching
challenges, were filtered through the demands of that district curriculum, which
discouraged imaginative play and talk and emphasized individuals doing their
work by yourself and thereby achieving basic skills (e.g., knowing letters and
sounds and applying that knowledge to encode a brief narrative).
Language arts curricula focused on the basics are not uncommon in young
childrens classrooms. Although a move toward more academic curricula for
young children has been clearly evident since the 1970s, it has become increas-
ingly dominant over the last 20 years (Russell, 2011). This is especially so in
schools like Mrs. Bees that serve children labeled as at risk (e.g., children from
low-income and minority families, including those learning English as an addi-
tional language). In such schools, academic curricula are designed to raise young
childrens test scores and close achievement gaps with the more economically
privileged (Pappano, 2010). Indeed, federal funds for, and the very survival of,
many central city public schools are dependent on achievement test scores tied
to the basics.
Given these trends, time-honored curricular basics for young children have
not fared well. Among these lost basics are time and space for play, for nonlin-
guistic forms of communication, such as drawing, and for extended talk among
children themselves.
In this chapter, we are interested in curricularly unruly children, especially
children who are not considered mainstream and who bring to the classroom a
Learning in Childhoods
From a sociocultural perspective, the adults in childrens lives shape their learn-
ing through the recurrent social activities of everyday life, with their embodied
human relationships, their material resources, their symbolic mediators (espe-
cially talk), and their enacted values (Cole, 1996; Rogoff, 2003; Vygotsky, 1978).
Through their participation, children learn to focus on a common topic and to
infer the relevance of their own actions; they learn to coordinate with others,
anticipating others moves and acting accordingly themselves. In these ways, they
become communicators and active participants, meaning makers in a shared life.
Children, though, learn not only through enacting activities with guiding
adults but also through observing, listening to stories (real and invented) about
how the world works, and through their own play (Rogoff, 2003). In that play,
children assume control over what can be a confusing world; they examine the
workings of the world around them, then assume roles, appropriate the language
of those roles, negotiate actions, and face the consequences of their actions as
pretend parents and children, superheroes and victims, party givers and invitees,
and so forth. Cross-culturally, these are childrens ways of learning, even though
their opportunities to observe, the nature of their interaction with others, the
cultural material they play with, and even how that play is viewed by others may
all vary (Konner, 1991).
In school, then, teachers organize practices through which children will
learn. Even if the intention is to teach this skill or that one, from childrens points
of view, the teacher is offering a kind of event, a social happening. Children are to
figure out its purpose, what is relevant in that activity given their drive to make
Alicia looks and smiles but does not respond. She is drawing the relatives who are
at her sisters and her birthday parties at the park.
LaTrell: [to the table] Her mama hit the head with a broom.
LaTrell adds more snowmen and then, like Alicia, begins to draw his relatives
amid the invading snowmen. When Alicia adds a baby brother, LaTrell does, too.
When he draws his brother being bitten by a dog, she creates her own dog. When
LaTrell adds a sun, so does Alicia (although his spells doom for the snowmen).
In this dialogic way, LaTrells yard full of wild snowmen and Alicias park full of
celebrating relatives take shape together.
When Earnest, sitting nearby, decides that he will make a snowman, the
more experienced Alicia sees trouble ahead:
As Alicia models how to write an m, LaTrell watches and then tries it himself.
Although the above interaction was quite serious, sometimes LaTrell manipu-
lated the sounds of words in quite playful ways, as in the following exchange with
Earnest. The two boys have been arguing about whose turn it is to use the eraser,
when seemingly out of the blue, LaTrell changes the subject:
This songlike poem, an index of a newly social Miguel, was one of a number
of pieces of creative writing that contrast with what he produced during writ-
ing time. The creative writing assignment was in fact not part of the balanced
literacy curriculum, but rather a teacher insertion. Moreover, it was an insertion
that Miguel responded to with long stories, as compared with his peers pieces.
His tendency to be independent revealed itself again.
The text is accompanied by a drawing of a frog with its tongue out and flies and
a drawing of a sad frog with a worm. Falchi, the observing researcher, thinks the
message is that the frog doesnt like worms.
A rana le gusta comer. (The frog likes to eat.)
Miguel wrote with difficulty, even when the topic was appealing to him, as ani-
mals were.
Indeed, when Mrs. Em assessed him early and then later in the kindergarten
year, he did not meet the expected benchmarks for the balanced literacy curricu-
lum. (Whether these were reasonable benchmarks for children who were learning
to read and write in two languages is an open question, of course.) In sum, Miguel
may not have shone as he engaged in scripted literacy lessons, but because of op-
portunities for creative writing and the inclusion of choice time, he had notable
moments of spoken and written expression about topics that interested him. As
we saw above, a favorite topic was animals of all kinds.
While playing with plastic animals, this time of the extinct kind, Miguel and
another kindergartner spoke to each other in English, occasionally making their
dinosaurs fight with each other (field notes, 3/24/08). At one point, Miguel as-
serted, You need more dinosaurs, surely a promising line to launch a prehistoric
minidrama. However, because the substitute teacher then told the two boys in
Spanish that they should be building something with their LEGOsbeing liter-
ally constructive in their playtheir conversation stopped, and they proceeded
to build things individually. Hence, the social was unintentionally curtailed, and
both boys then appeared to be loners.
At other times, when children were able to develop their play, dinosaurs re
appeared (field notes, 4/28/08). In response to his peer Marco, who asks where the
We could not help but sense a kinship between the mandated language arts curri-
cula of today and Mr. Gradgrinds proposal for commissioners of fact in Charles
Dickenss (1854/2007) 19th-century novel Hard Times. The administrators moni-
toring childrens progress according to the No Child Left Behind Act and the up-
dated Race to the Top must feel as if they have been given fact sheets, containing,
for instance, the number of letters a child should know to be ready for kinder-
garten or the number of words that must be correctly spelled in order to reach a
writing benchmark.
The facts appear to be suffocating Fancy altogether as reading and writing
become the center of early childhood curricula. Resistance to the transforma-
tion of the kindergarten into the first grade, traditionally where most children
learned to read, seems to be disappearing. Experienced teachers are leaving the
classroom, states are eviscerating public employees unions (Karp, 2011), and
teacher educators seek to align themselves with steadfast teachers like Mrs. Bee
and Mrs.Em who do the best they can.
What is also disappearing is the vision of teachers as professionals, or more
accurately put, teachers abilities and voices are disappearing as administrators
are pushed to measure the quality of teaching via the facts of students test scores.
Teachers are no longer able to make judgments within the context of childrens
own social and cultural realities, to decide that LaTrell and his peers were not pla-
giarizing but collegially, even collaboratively, constructing graphic worlds or that
Miguel could create his own sentences to later write correctly. Neither curricu-
lum developers nor diligent teachers can easily destroy childhood imagination
Q u e s t i o ns f o r R e fl e c t i o n
1.
What are the values and beliefs embedded within mandated language
curricula?
2. What do the stories of LaTrell and Miguel tell the researchers?
3. To what degree does your interpretation of these students stories corre-
spond to the researchers interpretation?
R ef er ence s
Appiah, K.A. (2005). The ethics of identity. Bialystok, E. (1991). Letters, sounds, and symbols:
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Changes in childrens understanding of written
Bakhtin, M.M. (1981). Discourse in the novel. In language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 12(1), 7589.
M. Holquist (Ed.), The dialogic imagination: Four doi:10.1017/S0142716400009383
essays (E. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.; pp. Britton, J. (1970). Language and learning.
259422). Austin: University of Texas Press. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin.
Bereiter, C., & Engelmann, S. (1966). Teaching dis- Chudacoff, H.P. (2007). Children at play: An American
advantaged children in the preschool. Englewood history. New York: New York University Press.
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Clay, M.M. (1975). What did I write? Auckland, New
Beresin, A.R. (2010). Recess battles: Playing, fight- Zealand: Heinemann.
ing, and storytelling. Jackson: University Press of Clay, M.M. (1998). By different paths to common out-
Mississippi. comes. York, ME: Stenhouse.
T
wo important and related themes in Vygotskys writings are the social
foundations of cognition and the importance of instruction in develop-
ment:
An important point to note about Vygotskys ideas on the social origins of cognition
is that it is at this point that he uses the notion of internalization. He is not simply
claiming that social interaction leads to the development of the childs abilities in
problem-solving, memory, etc.; rather, he is saying that the very means (especially
speech) used in social interactions are taken over by the individual child and inter-
nalized. Thus, Vygotsky is making a very strong statement here about internaliza-
tion and the social foundations of cognition (Wertsch, 1981, p. 146).
If all the development of a childs mental life takes place in the process of social
intercourse, this implies that this intercourse and its most systematized form, the
teaching process, forms the development of the child, creates new mental forma-
tions, and develops higher processes of mental life. Teaching, which sometimes
seems to wait upon development, is in actual fact its decisive motive force.... The
assimilation of general human experience in the teaching process is the most im-
portant specifically human form of mental development in ontogenesis. This deeply
significant proposition defines an essentially new approach to the most important
theoretical problem of psychology, the challenge of actively developing the mind.
It is in this that the main significance of this aspect of Vygotskys enquiries lies
(Leontiev & Luria, 1968, p. 365).
In all of Vygotskys writings with which we are familiar, the social relation-
ship referred to as teaching is the one-to-one relationship between one adult
and one child. When we try to explore Vygotskian perspectives for education, we
immediately confront questions about the role of the student peer group. Even
if formal education takes place in a group context only for economic reasons,
because no society can afford a teacher for each individual child, the presence of
This chapter is reprinted from Culture, Communication and Cognition: Vygotskian Perspectives (pp. 323347),
edited by J.V. Wertsch, New York: Cambridge University Press. Copyright 1985 by Cambridge
University Press. Reprinted with permission.
182
peers should not be ignored or relegated only to discussions of issues in classroom
management and control.
We see two separate but related issues concerning the group presence. First,
there are the problems posed for the teacher in carrying out direct teaching to a
group of students; second, there are the questions raised for the teachers more in-
direct planning for the social organization of all work-related talk in the classroom
setting, specifically the contribution that peers can make to each other. We focus
on the second set of questions in this chapter. This is not to underestimate the im-
portance of the first. If teaching is conceived as assistance to the child in the childs
zone of proximal development, then teaching to a group of children whose zones
overlap only in part, or not at all, poses obvious problems. But to state the problem
thus seems mainly to give new labels to the familiar problem of within-group varia-
tion in any group being taught. We focus instead on the less-discussed problem of
the potential contribution of social interactions among the children themselves.
Understanding this contribution has both practical and theoretical signifi-
cance. Practically, despite the fact that school classrooms are unusually crowded
social environments, group work is rarely encouraged (Galton, Simon, & Croll,
1980), perhaps in part because there has been no clear rationale for its value. (See
Sharan, 1980, for one review of arguments and evidence.) Theoretically, most de-
velopmental research studies in the United States have traditionally focused on
the value of peer interactions in the socialization of behavior and personality and
have said less about their possible value for cognition and intellectual learning.
According to Lawler (1980), until recently the same has been true of most writing
on education in the Soviet Unionfor example, the work of Makarenko.
Interactions among peers focused on intellectual content can be placed on a
continuum, depending on the distribution of knowledge or skill among the chil-
dren, and therefore on the roles they take toward each other. At one extreme,
one child knows more than the others and is expected to act as a peer tutor (or
consultant in the recent Soviet work of M.D. Vinogradova and I.B. Pervin, sum-
marized in Lawler [1980]). In the contrasting case, knowledge is equal, or at least
not intentionally unequal, and the give and take of equal status collaboration is
expected. We present research first on two different forms of peer tutoring and
then on collaboration. Because empirical as well as theoretical analysis of peer
interactions is at such a beginning stage, we include excerpts from interaction
protocols, not only as evidence for our interpretations, but to provide material for
alternative interpretations as well.
Peer Tutoring
The report of Vygotskys pupil, Levina, points to possible cognitive benefits to a
tutor from the activity of giving verbal instructions to peers:
Vygotsky said that speech does not include within itself the magical power to cre-
ate intellectual functioning. It acquires this capacity only through being used in its
instrumental capacity (Levina, 1981, p. 296).
Item 2
T: Okay, now number two there says...
L: No.
T: No. Whats the opposite of no?
L: Yes.
T: Okay, how do you spell yes?
L: y-E-S
T: All right. Now what are you going...
L: (L crosses out the letters Y-E-S) Told.
Note first that the ts questions serve to talk Leola through the task until
she can do it herself, as Wertsch (1978) has shown for mothers help to their pre
school children in a puzzle-copying task. That such aid does help Leola work
independently is shown by a comparison of ts instructions for the first and
second items. The first three questions are repeated, but then a much vaguer and
incomplete question, Now what are you going..., is sufficient, and Leola takes
off on her own.
The second noteworthy aspect of this ic from the LevinaVygotsky perspec-
tive is the development of increased articulateness and precision in Leolas verbal-
izations of the task. If one considers the entire instructional chain as a discourse
imitation test, the ts instructions must be reconstructed by the tutors cognitive,
linguistic, and sociolinguistic system. Whereas t taught with questions, Leola
teaches with statements, often You gotta X. (Mehan & Riel, 1982, show that his
contrast in teaching styles was characteristic of all 12 ics.)
It was not immediately easy for Leola to put the directions for this task into
words. When Leola first tried to explain to t, pretask, what she was going to tell
the group, she included explicit reference to only one of the four essential compo-
nents, the idea of having some letters left:
T: You want to cross out the opposite of new. You better say that, because
its going to be really important. They are going to read new, and then
what are they going to do?
L: Do the opposite of it.
L: The opposite of off is on, so on number three, you gotta cross on off. O-N.
And it is me left, M-E.
Overall, one is tempted to argue that the changes in Leolas instructions con-
stitute an example of what Wertsch and Stone (1978), following the Soviet psy-
chologists, call microgenesisthat is, development within an observable time
period, and it is a kind of development that Leola seemed to need. In the nine
lessons analyzed by Mehan (1979), some 3 hours of talk in all, she spoke four
times, and only twice more than one word. This is not to say she was in any way
nonverbal, but is to suggest that she could benefit from challenges to formulate
academic content in words, and that the demands of tutoring, including the need
for repeated formulation and for corrections of others, provide that challenge
well. If there is any validity to the internalization hypothesis, practice in explicit
overt formulation should ultimately aid inner speech as well. Vague, inexplicit
speechor a unitary and unformulated perception, in Levinas wordsis not the
same as predication and sense in inner speech.
Finally, there is an interesting reduction of information in Leolas instructions
after round 3. With two exceptions, in all the rounds after 3 Leola is talking out
loud, head down, while she does her own work. In the reduced rounds 45 and
710, the reduction in information is more by alternative formulations of the com-
ponents than by deletion of them altogether. For example, the critical word oppo-
site is spoken only in rounds 13, and then when the first item has to be repeated
(ir) and round 6. In the other rounds, Leola says only out is in (presupposing
that is means is the opposite of) or, even more briefly, simply places the two words
in juxtaposition: west east. In the two exceptions, ir and 6, explicitness returns
as Leola corrects her tutees and she notices that they have made a mistake.
Two alternative explanations are possible for the decreased explicitness in
the reduced rounds. It may be due either to Leolas understanding that the con-
cept of opposites can now be assumed or to the decreased explicitness that
characterizes speech to oneself. As Wertsch (1979) points out, the decay of old
or given information is functionally equivalent in dialogue and private speech.
The second analysis of peer tutoring comes from observations by Kamler
(1980) in a second-grade classroom in New Hampshire in which Donald Gravess
research team was observing the teaching of writing. The teacher, Egan, held
Note first that this is a more reciprocal model of peer assistance. The roles
of writer and helpful questioner are interchangeable among the children. All the
children can learn what to do and say in the questioner role from the teachers
model in the conferences with her, a consistent model of how to ask helpful ques-
tions that are focused on the content of writing, not form. The teacher believes
that questions focused on content are more helpful than questions about form;
they are also the kind of questions that children can understandingly ask of each
other. The teachers model thus makes it possible for the children to take turns
performing the teachers role for each otherto the benefit of each child as au-
thor, who can have so many more experiences with a responsive audience; and
to the benefit of each child as critic, who can internalize such questions through
the process of not only answering them to the teacher, but of asking them of peers
as well.
For these benefits to occur, the teachers model must be learnable by the
children. Graves reports (personal communication) that the conference structure
of another teacher in the same school was not as learnable by the children, and
so there was less of a multiplier effect via peer conferences in his classroom. This
comparison suggests that the intellectual value of peer interactions in a classroom
will be enhanced when the teacher consistently models a kind of interaction in
which the children can learn to speak to each other.
As Kamler points out, the child writer benefits in two different ways from
the peers presence. Most obviously, the peer asks questions, following the adult
model but with content appropriate to the writing at hand; some of Jills changes
(pages 4, 5, and 8) were in direct response to Debbies questions. Less obviously,
Peer Collaboration
In comparison with peer tutoring, even less is understood about the intellectual
value of peer collaboration. This may be partly due to the fact that collaboration
requires a work environment that is even further from traditional classroom or-
ganization. Peer tutoring tasks tend to resemble common classroom activities:
filling in workbooks, reading aloud, editing written assignments, and so forth.
In these activities the tutor helps inform, guide, and/or correct the tutees work.
Collaboration requires a mutual task in which the partners work together to pro-
duce something that neither could have produced alone. Given the focus on indi-
vidual achievement in most Western industrial societies, curricula that promote
collaboration are rarely found in schools or studied by educators or psychologists.
Research on peer collaboration has thus been sparse. The major exception
to this generalization is a body of research conducted by a group of Genevan
psychologists (Doise, Mugny, & Perret-Clermont, 1975, 1976; Mugny & Doise,
1978; Perret-Clermont, 1980). They have conducted a series of experiments to
examine the effect of peer collaboration on logical reasoning skills associated
with the Piagetian stage of concrete operations: perspective taking, conversation,
and so on.
Most of the Genevan research employs a training study design in which sub-
jects are randomly assigned to treatment or control groups in which they are
exposed to different social contexts. For example, the subjects in the treatment
group may be asked to solve a conservation task in a small peer group composed
of conservers and nonconservers, while subjects in the control group are asked
to solve the same problem alone. All subjects are individually pretested and post-
tested on some standard measure of concrete-operational reasoning, and the effect
of exposure to peer collaboration is assessed by comparing the pretest-to-posttest
gains in concrete-operational reasoning found in each group. The Genevans have
employed this same training study design across a number of studies in which the
particular reasoning task chosen, the social groups assembled, and the criteria
used to evaluate cognitive growth are systematically varied. After reviewing this
entire body of research, Perret-Clermont (1980) concludes that peer interaction
Formans Study
Like Perret-Clermont, Forman asked children to cooperate in the solution of a
logical reasoning task. Unlike Perret-Clermont, Forman selected a chemical re-
action task that has been used to assess the ability to isolate variables in a mul-
tivariate context (Kuhn & Phelps, 1982). In addition, her subjects were older
(approximately 9 years of age) than those selected by Perret-Clermont (47 years).
In both the study conducted by Forman (1981) and that conducted by Kuhn
and Ho (1980) the subjects were fourth- to fifth-grade, middle-class children
15singletons (Kuhn and Ho) and 4 pairs (Forman)who showed no ability to
isolate variables in a multivariate task known as the simple plant problem. In
addition to the pretest used for subject selection, all subjects were given an ad-
ditional pretest: a combinations problem in which subjects were asked to arrange
five kinds of snacks in all possible combinations. The singletons and pairs partici-
pated in 11 problem-solving sessions, approximately once a week over a 3-month
period. The two pretest measures were readministered as posttests within a week
after the final problem-solving session. All pretests and posttests were adminis-
tered individually.
The chemical reaction problem consisted of a series of seven chemical prob-
lems that were ordered in terms of logical complexity. Problem 1, the simplest,
requires that subjects identify the one chemical from a set of five odorless, col-
orless chemicals that is necessary and sufficient for producing a specified color
change when mixed with a reagent. In problems 2 and 3, two or three of the five
each other were not as apparent when each partner was asked to work alone on
similar problems.
Another reason why collaborators did not always outperform the singletons
may lie in difference among the partnerships. Due to the very small number of
dyads examined, large differences between dyads may obscure all but massive
differences between dyads and singletons. Therefore, we turn to the second set of
comparisons: those among dyads. First, we will discuss the types of social inter-
actions that occurred over time in the three collaborative partnerships examined.
Second, we will look at the experimentation strategies used by those same dyads.
Third, we will reexamine their pretest-posttest data.
The most obvious difference among the social behaviors of the three dyads
concerned the development of procedural interactions patterns. All procedural
interactions were classified as either parallel, associative, or cooperative. Table3
shows that all three dyads engaged in predominantly parallel and associative
interactions during the first session coded (session 3 for all three dyads). Only
Lisa and Linda showed any degree of cooperative behavior during this session.
However, by sessions 5, 8, and 11, George and Bruce were entirely cooperative.
Lisa and Linda retained some associative interaction patterns in session 5, but by
sessions 9 and 11 they too were engaging in cooperative interactions. In contrast,
Matt and Mitch never cooperated throughout the 3-month period. The interaction
pattern that Matt and Mitch seemed to prefer was either predominantly or entirely
parallel in nature.
Discussion
What can these results tell us about the hypothesis proposed by Perret-Clermont
that peer interaction can induce cognitive conflict that, in turn, results in cog-
nitive restructuring and growth? Forman did find an association between high
levels of social coordination (cooperative procedural interactions) and the use of
certain experimentation strategies (combinatorial strategies). However, she did
not devise a measure of cognitive conflict for her study, and her findings thus
cannot establish that social coordination results in cognitive conflict, which then
affects problem-solving skills.
One reason why cognitive conflict was not assessed was that overt indices of
conflict, that is, arguments, were relatively rare during the portion of the problem-
solving session examinedthe setting-up phase of the task during which experi-
mentation strategies were most apparent. In this portion of the session, hypotheses
concerning the experiments could be proposed but not tested. During most of the
setting-up time, children were busy working, separately or together, on laying out
and sharing task materials and on planning and choosing experiments. Among
This interchange shows the kinds of activities that conflicting solutions to the
problem seemed to induce. The children returned repeatedly to the experimental
evidence for supporting data. Because their conclusions differed, they were forced
to acknowledge information that refuted their own inferences as well as data that
After two months, they had begun to organize their combinations into groups based
on their number of elements. In addition, they had devised a deductive system for
generating two-element combinations. This deductive procedure enabled the child
who had previously done the checking to prompt, correct, and reinforce the selec-
tions of his partner. Higher-order combinations were produced empirically using
the familiar social procedure.
At the last session, the boys continued to assume complementary roles but now used
the blackboard as a recording device. They produced combinations in a highly or-
ganized fashionsingles, two-element combinations, three-element combinations,
and so onand were able to generate almost all of the 31 possible combinations. They
used a deductive procedure for generating the two-element combinations but still
relied on their empirical procedure for the higher order combinations.
At the first posttest one week after the last collaborative session, the degree to which
each boy had internalized a deductive combinatorial system was assessed by asking
It appears that these two boys were able to apply a preexisting intrapsycho-
logical rule, an empirical combinatorial procedure, to a collaborative context by
dividing the procedure into complementary problem-solving roles. With repeated
exposure to the problem, these boys were able to progress to a deductive proce-
dure for generating simple, two-element combinations. At first, deductive rea-
soning was clearly a social activity for George and Bruce. Each time one partner
selected a series of combinations, the other guided, prompted, and corrected his
selections. Later, one partner was able to demonstrate that he had internalized
this deductive procedure by using it to generate all possible two-element com-
binations on his own. Four months later, both partners were able to generate all
possible pairs of five objects deductively by themselves. Thus, for these two boys,
deductive combinatorial reasoning first appeared in a collaborative context. Only
one of the two boys was initially able to show that he had internalized this pro-
cedure when he generated combinations alone. Months later, however, both boys
had internalized this deductive process.
In summary, a Piagetian perspective on the role of social factors in devel-
opment can be useful in understanding situations where overt indices of cog-
nitive conflict are present. However, if one wants to understand the cognitive
consequences of other social interactional contexts, Vygotskys ideas may be more
helpful. In tasks where experimental evidence was being generated and where
managerial skills were required, by assuming complementary problem-solving
roles, peers could perform tasks together before they could perform them alone.
The peer observer seemed to provide some of the same kinds of scaffolding as-
sistance that others have attributed to the adult in teaching contexts.
Thus, the Vygotskian perspective enables us to see that collaborative tasks
requiring data generation, planning, and management can provide another set of
valuable experiences for children. In these tasks, a common set of assumptions,
procedures, and information needs to be constructed. These tasks require chil-
dren to integrate their conflicting task conceptions into a mutual plan. One way
to achieve a shared task perspective is to assume complementary problem-solving
roles. Then each child learns to use speech to guide the actions of her or his partner
and, in turn, to be guided by the partners speech. Exposure to this form of social
regulation can enable children to master difficult problems together before they are
capable of solving them alone. More importantly, experience with social forms of
regulation can provide children with just the tools they need to master problems on
their own. It enables them to observe and reflect on the problem-solving process as
a whole and to select those procedures that are the most effective. When they can
apply this social understanding to themselves, they can then solve, independently,
those tasks that they had previously been able to solve only with assistance.
Conclusion
In conclusion, in these analyses we are not talking about a childrens culture sepa-
rate from adults. What Leontev and Luria discuss as the most important specifi-
cally human form of mental developmentnamely, the assimilation of general
human experience in the teaching processmust ultimately be grounded in
adultchild interactions. But peer (and cross-age) relationships can function as
intermediate transforming contexts between social and external adultchild in-
teractions and the individual childs inner speech.
Although such peer interactions take place in home and community as well
as at school, they may be especially important in school because of limitations
and rigidities characteristic of adultchild interactions in that institutional setting.
Cazden (1983) argues for the value to child development of a category of parent
child interactions of which the peek-a-boo game and picture book reading are fa-
miliar examples. In interactions such as these, there is a predictable structure in
which the mother initially enacts the entire script herself and then the child takes
an increasingly active role, eventually speaking all the parts initially spoken by the
mother. The contrast between such learning environments and the classroom is
striking. In school lessons, teachers give directions and children nonverbally carry
them out; teachers ask questions and children answer them, frequently with only
a word or a phrase. Most importantly, these roles are not reversible, at least not
within the context of teacherchild interactions. Children never give directions to
teachers, and questions addressed to teachers are rare except for asking permis-
sion. The only context in which children can reverse interactional roles with the
same intellectual content, giving directions as well as following them, and asking
questions as well as answering them, is with their peers.
1. Why does it make sense that Vygotskys perspectives for education would
apply to a student peer group and not solely to one-on-one adultchild
interactions?
2. What factors influence a students learning in the zone of proximal
development?
3. How is a Vygotskian perspective useful in understanding the value of peer
collaboration?
R ef er ence s
Carrasco, R. L., Vera, A., and Cazden, C.B. 1981. Inagaki, K., and Hatano, G. 1977. Amplification of
Aspects of bilingual students communicative cognitive motivation and its effects on epistemic
competence in the classroom: A case study. In observation. American Educational Research
R. Duran (Ed.), Latino language and communica Journal, 14, 485491.
tive behavior. Discourse processes: Advances in re Inhelder, B., and Piaget, J. 1958. The growth of logi
search and theory (Vol. 6). Norwood, N.J.: Ablex. cal thinking from childhood to adolescence. New
Cazden, C. B. 1983. Peekaboo as an instructional York: Basic Books.
model: Discourse development at school and at Kamler, B. 1980. One child, one teacher, one class-
home. In B. Bain (Ed.), The sociogenesis of lan room: The story of one piece of writing. Language
guage and human conduct: A multi-disciplinary Arts, 57, 680693.
book of readings. N.Y.: Plenum, pp. 3358. Koltsova, V. A. 1978. Experimental study of cog
Cazden, C. B., Cox, M., Dickinson, D., Steinberg, nitive activity in communication (with spe
Z., and Stone, C. 1978. You all gonna hafta lis- cific reference to concept formation). Soviet
ten: Peer teaching in a primary classroom. In Psychology, 17, 2338.
W. A. Collins (Ed.), Childrens language and com- Kuhn, D., and Ho, V. 1980. Self-directed activity
munication. 12th Annual Minnesota Symposium and cognitive development. Journal of Applied
on Child Development. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, Developmental Psychology, 1(2), 119133.
Kuhn, D., and Phelps, E. 1979. A methodology for
pp. 183231.
observing development of a formal reasoning
Doise, W., Mugny, G., and Perret-Clermont, A. N.
strategy. New Directions for Child Development,
1975. Social interaction and the development of
5, 4558.
cognitive operations. European Journal of Social
Kuhn, D., and Phelps, E. 1982. The development
Psychology, 5(3), 367383.
of problem-solving strategies. In H. Reese (Ed.),
Doise, W., Mugny, G., and Perret-Clermont, A. N. Advances in child development (Vol. 17). New
1976. Social interaction and cognitive devel York: Academic.
opment: Further evidence. European Journal of Lawler, J. 1980. Collectivity and individual ity
Social Psychology, 6, 245247. in Soviet educational theory. Contemporary
Forman, E. A. 1981. The role of collaboration in prob- Educational Psychology, 5, 163174.
lem-solving in children. Doctoral disserta t ion, Leontev, A. N. 1981. The problem of activity in psy-
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. chology. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of ac-
Galton, M., Simon, B., and Croll, P. 1980. Inside the tivity in Soviet psychology. Armonk, N.Y.: Sharpe,
primary classroom. Boston, MA: Routledge & pp. 3771.
Kegan Paul. Leontiev, A. N., and Luria, A. R. 1968. The psycho
Inagaki, K. 1981. Facilitation of knowledge inte logical ideas of L. S. Vygotsky. In B. Wolman
gration through classroom discussion. Quarterly (Ed.), Historical roots of contemporary psychology.
Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative New York: HarperCollins.
Human Cognition, 3(3), 2628. Levina, R. E. 1981. L. S. Vygotskys ideas about the
Inagaki, K., and Hatano, G. 1968. Motivational planning function of speech in children. In J. V.
influences on epistemic observation. Japanese Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet
Journal of Educational Psychology, 6, 191202. psychology. Armonk, N.Y.: Sharpe, pp. 279299.
A
s the first decade of the 21st century drew to a close, everyone (or so it
seemed) jumped in to declare the death of the book and, by implication,
of reading, writing, and bookstores as well. From cognitive theorists to
devotees of books, this theme stirred either outright rebellion fed by nostalgia or
acquiescence moderated by positive projections for the future role of technology
in the learning lives of former booklovers. This chapter sets out several perspec-
tives that permit insight into the threads of thinking that run between those in re-
bellion and those who have agreed to let books live alongside other technological
inventions. In five sections, the chapter draws from the epigraph with the hope
of leading education researchers, teachers, and parents to bring into balance new
and old ways of learning to read and of reading to learn along the life span.
All sections of the chapter bear the influence of social scientists who focus
their research on what happens to those who read with different kinds of tech-
nologies. Representing primarily the disciplines of anthropology and linguistics,
the social scientists whose work is discussed here have been heavily influenced
by ideas from cognitive neuroscience and the information sciences. In general,
204
these scholars have given an unprecedented amount of attention to advances in
understanding both the brain and the ways in which socialization processes and
environmental contexts influence neurological development.
The first section takes a look at the ways in which researchers have con-
sidered the value of reading books with young children. The following section
considers how overly simplistic ideas about what happens in these reading inter-
actions have had an undeserved influence on educators ideas about early reading
and its relationship to family life, socioeconomic class, and language develop-
ment. The next section offers a brief summation of a longitudinal ethnographic
study of how 300 working-class families in the United States used reading in their
lives as they navigated the tumultuous economic twists and turns of the final two
decades of the 20th century and the opening decade of the next. The fourth sec-
tion carries on from the prior discussion of extended talk, especially deliberative
discourse and its relationship to academic language. The final section speaks of
the magic of words in all media and modes with cautions. No magic ever fully
reveals itself to those beyond the wizards curtain. Hence, we must never believe
that magic brings us full goodness and light or that it will lead us into pure evil.
206 Heath
As researchers around the world look at how and when literacy is acquired
and what people do with it, they recognize that individuals do not learn to read
with sufficient competence to be able to read to learn until both the practice of
reading and the artifact of the scroll, manuscript, or book carry meaning for the
role that they are playing in life. Moreover, readers across the ages have had to
have not only a place for reading in their lives but also dedicated time and space.
The initial cost is not the only investment that artifacts of reading require. They
must be kept in safe, dry spaces. Reading requires sufficient light, as well as rela-
tive quiet. For individuals or families who change their location often, reading
materials are heavy burdens (literally). Moreover, reading is one of the few ac-
tivities that almost entirely rules out any simultaneous activity. One cannot ride
a horse, peel potatoes, drive a car, help a child with homework, or hoe a garden
while reading a book. The intense demand for full attention that reading requires
may account for the fact that throughout the history of literacy, those who take
up books have often been portrayed as lazy, secretive, and even dangerous. Many
childrens books feature the reading child as the naughty one in a family. In the
history of fine arts, women reading books or letters have often been interpreted
as up to no good, subject to the temptations of nature, and likely to be led into
transgressions (cf. Bollmann, 2008; Updike, 2005; B.J. Wolf, 2001).
The second set of facts behind my wanting the handbook chapter to depart
from the usual biographical script expected by advocates and authors of childrens
literature relates to what we know about oral language competencies (Duranti,
Ochs, & Schieffelin, 2012; Schieffelin & Ochs, 1986). As children mature, what
is usually called for in school-based teaching of reading has little or no influence
on the development of facility and fluency with oral language(s). Instructional
modes that surround the teaching of reading in schools around the world give
much less attention to how readers talk and think about what they are reading
than they do to the oral performance of reading. Teacher requests that pupils read
aloud dominate over their queries about visual details of illustrations, interpre-
tive and comparative analyses surrounding the content of what has been read, or
speculations about the intentions of the author. When the key focus is on teaching
the young to show that they can read by doing so aloud, the free-flowing language
interactions, mental images, and hand-drawn sketches that make books live in
the memory of readers receive little time or focus. Yet, neuroscience research on
how the brain processes and stores words of printed texts has pointed to the
vital importance of surrounding the physical act of reading with oral language
and other creative forms of representation, such as dramatic action, drawing, and
extending textual ideas.2
208 Heath
In the 1980s, some studies began to point to specific differences between
home values and habits of literacy of lower class families and those of the school
(Heath, 1983/1996; Philips, 1983; Schieffelin & Gilmore, 1986). By the next de-
cade, however, several researchers of child language development began to cau-
tion against viewing this contrast as accounting for all the critical factors that
contribute to literacy and academic achievement. Indeed, these studies argued
that the matter is much more complex than studies of either socioeconomic class
or cultural norms of home and school have attested. Multiple bundles of factors
must be taken into account, and how these factors are bundled shifts not only
as children age but also continuously across the life span for both children and
parents.5 Moreover, intensity and reach of literacy habits link to developmental
maturation, physical and mental health, felt need, and other motivational incen-
tives, as well as the extent to which facility with different types of reading and
writing supports the maintenance of economic status and positioning within key
social niches of family members (Heath, 2012).
By the opening of the 21st century, researchers from across a variety of dis-
ciplines agreed in general on the following key supports for childrens successful
experiences with oral language development as well as reading and writing. For
neurologically normal children to reach young adulthood with oral language flu-
ency, competency, and confidence in reading and writing, they must have the
following:
W
ithin and beyond formal education, supportive intimate models of read-
ers, widely varying types and modes of reading materials, and meaningful
incentives to draw, write, act, and talk before, during, and after reading
Mentors and teachers who are well trained and motivated to keep their own
learning attuned to ongoing research on language development of monolin-
gual and bilingual or multilingual children
Teachers and parents who are oriented to different modes and media of
presentation for young children and adolescents and open to talking with
and learning from young people about reading and writing with recent
technologies
Safe and reliable access by children and their families to libraries staffed
by personnel who are familiar with and fond of a host of technologies that
make books and magazines available
After-school and summer opportunities that are rich in time for adults and
young learners to plan, create, and evaluate projects together using a range
of art forms and various types of scientific experimentation
Regular access of parents, teachers, and young learners from preschool into
young adulthood to museums, zoos, environmental centers, parks, and
playgrounds and the multiple forms of literature in pamphlets, childrens
literature, science and art books, and on the Internet that complement visits
to such places6
210 Heath
families living near each other in the Piedmont Carolinas in the first decade after
the Civil Rights era. One of these communities, Trackton, was black; the other,
Roadville, was white. In both communities, parents worked, often on alternat-
ing shifts, in the local textile mills. In addition, young and old family members
planted backyard gardens, helped during harvest times on nearby tobacco farms,
and bought their meat in the fall when farmers butchered calves and pigs. Hard
work, church attendance, and entertainment at home with friends and family
filled their days.
Following the legislative changes brought by the Civil Rights movement,
schools in their region were desegregated, and teachers in elementary schools im-
mediately perceived differences in how children from different communities used
language. Middle-class children, black and white, came to school familiar with
the questioning habits of formal schooling and the key role of learning to read for
success in school. However, children from working-class communities, black and
white, came to school using language in different ways.
White working-class communities, such as Roadville, were closely tied to
agrarian life, local churches, and wage labor in manufacturing. Their homes were
set apart from one another, and mothers and their young children walked to the
homes of neighbors for visits and play time after school or on summer days when
chores at home were completed. In good weather, children played outside while
their mothers visited on the porch or in the house. On rainy days, children played
quietly in the kitchen or a bedroom while adults talked together in an adjacent
room. When adults and children read together at home or in church, they closely
attended to the texts and their meanings. In the presence of their elders, children
spoke when they were addressed by an adult; otherwise, they listened and played
quietly. Adults asked straightforward questions; children answered as directly
and fully as possible. Book reading between adults and young children at home
was a time of naming pictures, talking about events portrayed in illustrations, and
memorizing titles of books and stories, many of which carried a moral or lesson.
In church services, the pastor and Sunday School superintendent did most of the
talking, while the congregation listened and responded in recitation of prayers
and scriptural readings. Using hymnals, the congregation sang under the direc-
tion of the choir leader.
Children from black working-class communities, such as Trackton, lived in
houses in close proximity to one another. In the open plaza that ran in front of
their homes, children played in cross-age groups, subject to the watchful eye of
any adults who were around. Children incorporated numerous language games
in their play. Adults and children teased one another openly. Children entered
into adult conversations frequently, often overlapping and interrupting the talk
of adults. Multiparty talk surrounded babies from birth, and oral storytelling and
repetition of jump-rope rhymes and taunts matched the pace of play activities
on the open plaza. Questions directed to children sought new information, not
affirmation, and written texts entered family life primarily in the form of docu-
ments from bureaucracies, landlords, and utility companies. Church services
212 Heath
dressmaking for more well-to-do families. With these changes in times, places,
and means of earning a living came an increasing number of shifts in patterns of
time and space surrounding cooking and eating, spending family time at home,
playing and reading with young children, and worshiping. During the 1980s,
these and other changes in daily life marked the start of a roller coaster of changes
that accelerated during the 1990s and through the first decade of the 21st century.
The generation that moved away from Roadville and Trackton when they
were parents of young children increasingly adopted the attitude that only educa-
tion could ensure their childrens achievement of a better future or the American
Dream. These parents insisted that their children work hard in school, be in-
volved in as many extracurricular activities as possible, and look ahead to further
education. Most parents did all they could to keep their children from having
to do work in the house or yard or to seek employment that might curtail par-
ticipation in after-school and weekend activities that they now saw as critical to
building social capital. As the 1990s opened, young people old enough to enter
the military service, nursing school, colleges, or apprenticeship programs did so,
while encouraging their younger siblings to stay in school and plan to move on to
a college or university.
With the dot-com era came further impetus to understanding the power of
learning by doing while also undertaking specialized advanced study. Four years
of higher education needed to be supplemented by internships and apprentice-
ships, work experience, or self-start projects that held promise as start-up com-
panies. Reading of all types and through multiple media came to be accepted as
the norm for young adults who wanted to get away from home and explore pos-
sibilities in new parts of the country, especially urban centers known for their
technology companies. The generation that was too young when their parents left
to remember Roadville and Trackton grew up never looking back. They accepted
their futures as full of opportunities, good jobs, big homes, and faraway vacations.
They had time for reading and writing, primarily as means to an end and as sup-
plements to learning by doing, talking with and watching others, and keeping up
on the Internet with key personalities, companies, and trends in the fast-moving
global economy. Their literacies had exchange value, giving them something they
wanted in return for their time, effort, and dedication.
Along with the rapid economic changes of the 1990s came changes in defi-
nitions of family and family life. The extensive and rapid inclusion of women in
the labor force and professional life meant that children and adolescents were
growing up primarily in the care of intimate strangers. Paid by parents, these
individuals watched over, guided, entertained, and fed the children of parents
whose hours of work outside the home meant that they themselves could not
fulfill these responsibilities. Day care centers for infants and preschool children
extended their hours, sometimes operating around the clock, to accommodate
parents who worked two shifts or long, unpredictable hours. Regardless of the
level of material goods and other resources of these venues, children engaged face
214 Heath
Table 1. Features of Adolescent Peer Talk and Requirements of Written
Academic Language
Feature Requirement
Layering of symbol Required: Extended written texts; images (e.g., charts,
systems including tables, figures, and photographs), if included, must be
gestural, musical, and labeled and their contents referenced within the written
body decorative text
Repetition of layered Proscribed: Repetition of content, other than in limited
collaborative narratives uses (such as transitions or summations)
based on shared
experiences
Repetitive commentary on Required: Attribution to original retrievable reference of
the same range of topics any content repeated (cited) from a source other than
current author
Strong preference for Required: Expository, reportative, and persuasive texts
narrative genre over including an argument of key points with limited use of
explanation or description narratives to illustrate points
Sequencing of events Required: Clauses linked primarily through causal and
within narratives temporal conjunctions; introduction of additive points
marked by coordinating permitted with the use of furthermore, in addition (etc.)
conjunctions and summative points with the use of thus, therefore, as a
consequence (etc.)
Frequent use of judgment Proscribed: Authors value judgments and adverbs
in absolute terms leading the reader to assess judgments of content (e.g.,
unfortunately, even, obviously)
Redundant use of Required: Technical or specialized lexical items and
shallow syntactic dependent and independent clauses
constructions and familiar
vocabulary
Dominance of present Required: Fluency with range of tenses needed to indicate
tense with narrow range of relationships among ideas and events
past or future tense
Frequent use of if-then Proscribed: Use of second person pronoun (implied or
propositions as threats or stated), thereby precluding use of hypotheticals as threats
challenges or challenges
Preference for use of Required: If-then propositions ranging across past, present,
hypotheticals for recast and future
events rather than future
projections
Preference for unbalanced Preferred: Balanced hypotheticals with variables on either
if-then propositions with side of the if-then proposition relatively equal in number
one variable on one side of and semantic weight
the proposition and several
on the other side
Note. From Words at Work and Play: Three Decades in Family and Community Life (p. 139), by S.B.
Heath, 2012, New York: Cambridge University Press. Copyright 2012 by Shirley Brice Heath.
Reprinted with permission.
216 Heath
During the 1980s, family members planned and scripted activities, such as
cleaning out the attic or garage, planning the summer vacation, or making a cake
and card for a favorite relatives birthday. By the 1990s, adults purchased or paid
others to undertake these tasks. As separate bedrooms with isolated entertain-
ment stations came to characterize households, turning off the screens and un-
plugging the networks became more and more difficult. Young people learning
on their own time increasingly mixed and layered texts, music, images, and in-
teractive technologies to build strong performative frameworks for communica-
tions that they transmitted to their peers via the Internet. Only in relatively rare
instances did parents join in these productions and share space, time, entertain-
ment, or informational sources with the young.
Throughout secondary school and beyond, young people engaged in collab-
orative peer work using electronic media and creating opportunities to learn how
to use new software for mixing, editing, and producing materials, often for niche
or highly selected audiences among their friends at school or within their spe-
cial interest niches online. As they entered universities, they continued this pat-
tern of connecting through writing whenever possible. Between 2007 and 2010,
secondary school students of descendant Roadville and Trackton families could
claim some level of expertise with an average of 60 different genres. When their
older siblings in college reviewed the list, they claimed that they created twice as
many genres in the course of their academic year. They reported to their younger
siblings that writing figured in everything they did and certainly exceeded in
frequency, variation, and quantity the amount of writing they did for their course
assignments.10 For both groups, functions and audience generated and influenced
experimentation with style, length, layering of media, and follow-up genres.
The developmental trajectory of talk among teenagers engaged in video
games, communicating, and creating multimedia performances for their online
exchanges showed some surprising results. Only young people who spent hours
and hours developing their technical expertise, especially their programming ex-
pertise and understanding of writing code in various programs, moved much
beyond a level that most of their friends regarded as OK or mediocre. Standards
were high for those who became recognized experts among their peers. These
were readers who consulted an array of online sources (and occasionally print
materials) about computers, programming, and animation techniques and cre-
ators. Some hung out in bookstores in the computer and graphic novel sections
(Heath & Wolf, forthcoming). On some occasions, they talked with their friends
about specific books or other sources. Those who read graphic novels or had
been early fans of comic book artists during elementary school had select friends
with whom they shared resources and opinions. Certain authors and artists and
their styles were frequent topics of conversation. Often, these young people were
known as geeks beyond their immediate circle of friends. It was not uncommon
for the most resourceful geeks to set up informal consulting businesses for their
parents friends who needed computer help or for their own classmates who
wanted term papers embellished with computer art.
218 Heath
they trust. Even more vital to such talk by younger speakers is their conviction
that they have the respect of their interlocutors.
An examination of the right-hand column of Table 1 indicates features of
written academic discourse, many of which also characterize extended talk. Here,
speakers must be able to indicate the source of information that they reference;
otherwise, listeners tend to regard this information as merely opinion. Causal
and temporal conjunctions are needed to support additive points, as are a range
of tenses to indicate relationships among ideas and events. Finally, in both oral
and written extended discourse, individuals engage in hypothetical reasoning,
juxtaposing the here and now as well as the future against past or universal hap-
penings and postulates.
Since the time of Aristotle and Socrates, Western traditions of oratory and
written exposition have prized deliberative language as the major carrier of moral
and ethical codes. Those who engage in deliberation reason if X, then Y, or
better yet, if A, B, and C, then D, and E; what might happen if...? The power of
deliberative discourse is its valuation of the strength of the argument over the
status of the individual putting forth the argument. The capacity for reasoned
judgment must prevail so different positions and views can be asserted, and self-
interest will give way to the common good.11 To gain the fluency of language that
is necessary to take part in written and oral deliberative discourse, individuals
need extensive experience in situations where they observe and work in thinking
collectives with others of different ages and levels and types of knowledge, skills,
and experience. Literature, film, dramatic productions, and other art forms have
long been accepted as providing vicarious means of safe observation and partici-
pation with the lives of others. Authors and scholars of young adult literature have
pointed to this value as especially important for adolescents.12
To learn to make ethical decisions, the young need to see the values and
skills involved when individuals interpret and create analogies, contrast one situ-
ation to another, and consider responses or outcomes that result from similar
and different circumstances. Young people need the intimacy of extended times
of talk and reading (which involves talking with the text) if they are to learn to
empathize and perceive the intentions and needs of others. To recognize, as well
as to deliberate, possible actions and consequences of playing out moral obliga-
tions, children need years of moral discourseeveryday interactions along with
written and performed texts that extend beyond the immediate desires of those
observing or taking part. The development of autonomy of the child derives from
practices embedded in learning how to talk and think about topics beyond the
childs own self-interests and the here and now. All of these dimensions of human
development come within childrens theater, Readers Theatre, and participation
in the literary and visual life of art and science museums and the musical life of
ensemble performance.13
Anthropologists who have studied language development in cultures around
the world in the past three decades have looked closely at situations within social-
ization that foster the concept of responsibility among children. Social awareness,
Here, Frost (1939) draws parallels between the shape of love and the fig-
ure a poem makes (n.p.). As in so many passages of English literature, the inte-
rior mind moves back and forth across time and experience, with backdrop and
foreshadowing, and consternation over lifes contradictions. Such texts rest on a
deep grasp of temporality and causality, metaphor and analogy. The hypothetical
underlies literature, enabling readers to practice the mental and linguistic perfor-
mances necessary to support what could be their own actions to come.
220 Heath
Roadville and Trackton experienced these changes and were forced to assess the
nature and extent of their emotional and intellectual resources for handling the
shifts in daily life that hit them hard as the first decade of the 21st century moved
to its end.
Following the attack on New York City in September of 2001 through the end
of the decade, the economic stability for families who had held on to their fragile
middle class lives in the prior decade turned shaky. By 20072008, many had seen
their pensions, benefits, salaries, and bonuses either decline or disappear entirely.
Some saw the loss of their homes through foreclosure followed in short succession
by alterations in family relationships that came with lifestyle shifts and dwindling
hopes of college education for their children. Separation, divorce, remarriage, or
partnering in new arrangements altered habits surrounding homework, dinner-
time, after-school activities, and allegiances to one or the other parent and adapta-
tion to new siblings.
These changes intensified the appeal of the flood of new technologies that
fed the desires of the young for isolation from their immediate world and for
unceasing connections with peers near and far. For many children, familial dis-
ruptions shut down any opportunities to objectively weigh positions or sides.
Children now increasingly found themselves sent to counselors and child psy-
chologistsintimate strangers hired to listen to children and ask questions that
might help them gain the emotional maturity to empathize with others, take on
moral responsibility, and manage their own feelings of abandonment, disillusion,
and exclusion. Lacking, in many cases, extensive positive experiences in play-
ing, planning, and working alongside caring adults before family breakups, many
young people had no guidelines or habits to lead them to plan and act responsibly
toward their own futures as young adults. Moreover, in 2012, barely half of U.S.
citizens were married, and children were increasingly being raised in households
that did not include either or both of their biological parents. More and more
children grew up living under separation and divorce agreements of joint custody.
Their own parents had, in many cases, disconnected themselves to a great extent
from their own mothers and fathers. Often relocated far from extended family
members, children and parents preferred family vacations that did not include
visits to grandparents or other relatives.
By the end of the first decade of the 21st century, questions asked in the prior
century about literacy seemed quaint, simplistic, and decidedly removed from
realities in the contemporary world. By this time, most young people who man-
aged to get their hands on several different types of technologies had no difficulty
identifying what was needed not only to make these devices work but also to
figure out how they worked.
Increasingly, the greater the facility young people had with technology, the
more they read and wrote. However, this more refers to genres of text, almost
all multimodal and directed to and received from a widening array of other
writers and readers across an expanding span of topics. Self-directed and peer-
influenced young people felt the need to learn and be on top of whats happenin
222 Heath
organizations for after-school and summer hours that help young people negoti-
ate their changing demands and possibilities. Creativity, play, collaborative work,
and shoulder-to-shoulder interactions of professionals, mentors, and novice learn-
ers take place in these organizations. Flexibility and adaptability characterize
these organizations so they keep pace with shifting demographics, interests of the
young, job and further education possibilities, and small business developments.
Here, reading, writing, financial literacy, reflective talk, and public critique take
place within high-pressure contexts that demand on-time high performance from
the young. These organizations range from social entrepreneurship dedicated to
both local and international causes to arts and science organizations that create
products and services for the public and for private sector businesses.17
Quietly and largely outside the notice of educational institutions, community
organizations such as those described here work in collaboration with paren-
tal groups, businesses, and social service agencies dedicated to health, environ-
mental sustainability, and civic learning. The wide range of resources, agents,
and environments available in different communities means that standardization
of ways of teaching and learning and ideas about the monolinearity of learning
pathways have given way to creativity and creative industries. Learning for in-
dividuals and small groups in these sites takes place voluntarily and is linked
with motivations and visions of the future for the organization and those within.
Horizontal connections that include learners of different ages, persuasions, and
levels of knowledge and skill characterize these learning environments, as does
recognition of different kinds of talents.18
Variously termed pro-ams (professional amateurs), citizen scientists and
artists, and participants in the knowledge society, individuals within these or-
ganizations are likely to see themselves as linked to the collective interests of
local communities.19 Voluntarily formed and maintained, these playful learning
environments emphasize integrity and the exercise of judgment in ways that inte-
grate intellectual and technical knowledge, on the one hand, and moral and civic
responsibility, on the other. Playful learning in the relentless work that it takes
to keep these organizations going calls on a myriad of interconnections rather
than just a few power relationships. In their playful work, learning and teaching,
trying and failing, and imagining and dreaming become community properties.
A robust understanding of how humans learn requires simultaneous empha-
ses on widely varying types of learning environments. Such understanding grows
increasingly vital for the design and sustenance of learning environments that en-
able learners to develop adaptive habits that are imperative for lifelong learning.
As new sources, types, and formats of information emerge with the accelerating
pace of innovative technologies, previously unimagined problems and possibili-
ties inevitably follow. The health of the planet will increasingly be interrelated
with how humans identify and respond with flexible thinking grounded in com-
mitment not to individual interests but to communal well-being. Young and old
together have to recognize the imperative of action over apathy, agency over nos-
talgia, and caring creativity over care-less passivity.20
1. In your classroom, how can you foster talking about reading as opposed to
the performance of reading?
2. How does the author explain the current generation of schoolchildrens in-
creasing difficulty with the experience of deliberative discourse?
3. What, if any, preconceptions about developing literacy has this chapter chal-
lenged for you?
Not e s
1
Watson (2003) tells the story of the makers of illuminated manuscripts who came to their
tasks with little or no familiarity with what it meant to have meanings conveyed through
letters and vignettes (sidebar drawings). Drawing on long-term fieldwork among indigenous
learners, Walker (1981) portrays the development of scripts, written texts, and reading habits
of adults who had known little or nothing about written languages as children.
2
By the end of the first decade of the 21st century, research from neuroscientists increased in
frequency and complexity as well as interdisciplinarity. Two summary sources for reading
researchers are Hruby and Goswami (2011) and Strauss, Goodman, and Paulson (2009). An
equally active and fast-moving topic for research by cognitive neuroscientists relates to spa-
tial understanding that results from drawing and sketching, as well as reading and interpret-
ing illustrations. Embedded within this work has been the growing focus on the direct use
of the digits and full hand in creating meaning through visual art forms, such as sketching,
sculpting, and modeling (see Ramadas, 2009; Wilson, 1998).
3
In spite of extensive scholarly writing on this topic, the most comprehensive and balanced
perspective comes from Snow, Barnes, Chandler, Goodman, and Hemphill (1991) and Snow,
Burns, & Griffin (1998). Works often cited to prove the deleterious effects of growing up in
homes of families living in poverty include Hart and Risley (1995, 1999) and Lareau (2003).
These studies emphasize lexical deficiencies, in particular, that result in families whose par-
ents have neither discretionary time nor financial resources to put toward experiences such
as those offered by libraries, museums, zoos, city park programs, and youth organizations.
4
Messages related to these topics package easily and draw interest from school administra-
tors. Tracing the career of enterprising individuals eager to meet this market demand dur-
ing the 1990s and the first decade of the 21st century is readily done (see, e.g., aha! Process
[www.ahaprocess.com], the website of Ruby Payne).
5
Those issuing such cautions speak on the basis of studies that are highly interdisciplinary
and often involve research seeking to understand reading problems of children diagnosed as
being dyslexic, hyperactive, language delayed, or on the autism disorder spectrum (see, e.g.,
M. Wolf, 2007, especially ch. 4 and 6).
6
Chapter 8 of Snow et al. (1991) lays out many of the underpinnings of these premises. Since
the early 1990s, nonprofits dedicated to learning during the after-school hours have inten-
sified attention to these premises (see, e.g., the website of the After-School Corporation
[www.tascorp.org] in New York).
7
Ironically, anthropologist Margaret Mead (1970) predicted this need more than half a cen-
tury before the introduction of the Internet and technologies through which the young
so often teach their elders. She referred to the phenomenon as prefigurative socialization,
224 Heath
interactional relationships that differed from those of postfigurative learning in which elders
passed on their knowledge to the young. Within prefigurative learning, elders learn from the
young.
8
No claim is made here or in the full study (Heath, 2012) that the families followed for three
decades represent average or typical families. Those whose lives are reported in the full study
would be the first to assert the uniqueness of their characteristics, situations, and ways of
coping. In fact, they would argue that every family has its own stories to tell in its own way.
9
Methods used to collect data on interactive talk among young people are laid out in Heath
(2012, App. B) and Heath and Street (2008).
10
For a survey of university students writing during their college years, in and out of their
classrooms, visit the Stanford Study of Writing website (ssw.stanford.edu). Numerous other
modes worked alongside and often led their writing, and their lives beyond the classroom
demanded more writing of them than their classrooms did (see also Fishman, Lunsford,
McGregor, & Otuteye, 2005).
11
Since the 1990s, the concept of deliberative democracy has been broadly considered on
university campuses and in think tanks of different political persuasions (Gutmann &
Thompson, 2004).
12
In a time of mounting attention to technology and science, philosophers and other humanists
increasingly feel compelled to argue for the benefits of the humanities (see, e.g., Nussbaum,
1997, 2010).
13
Materials advocating the value of the arts for children flooded the world of after-school pro-
viders from the 1990s forward. It is surprising, therefore, that relatively little long-term re-
search has looked at the human development dimensions of participation in the arts. Winner
and Hetland (2000) have made this point to the consternation of arts advocates.
14
In contemporary advanced economies, families of the middle class experience difficulty in
providing the young with opportunities to make mistakes and learn from them and to take
responsibility in the family context (see Ochs & Izquierdo, 2009).
15
Blascovich and Bailenson (2011) examine the edginess of virtual worlds, especially the read-
ing powers of avatars that discern and reflect facial expressions, for example, well beyond the
abilities of humans to do so. Avatars read symbol systems and situations, and they can take
action based on their interpretations of what they read. The capacities of their virtual worlds,
however, are not neutral.
16
In a National Research Council report, Shonkoff and Phillips (2000) point to many of the
same factors indicated in Heaths (2012) study of three decades in family and community
life. The council and numerous policy reports strongly argue the impact on children of sens-
ing threats all around them to both their present and their future. Advances in technolo-
gies and long-term record keeping show that children who grow up with toxic stress suffer
long-lasting biological effects, as well as a greater likelihood of social struggles throughout
adolescence.
17
To a great extent, the changing nature of community youth-led organizations means that
written accounts and extensive websites are scarce. Workers within these sites have no time
to write their own social histories or do much by way of getting our story out there. Grants,
donations, and occasional funds from local civic organizations and governments constitute
their primary means of financial support, along with sales from their products and services
(see Bornstein, 2004; Elizabeth & Young, 2006; Heath & Smyth, 1999; and the Artists for
Humanity website [www.afhboston.com]).
18
These sites of youth play and work illustrate horizontal learning that reflects expanding in-
terests and niche seeking and complements vertical learning (see Engestrm, 1987, for more
on the critical context of work for such learning).
R ef er ence s
Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A.W., & Feder, Jenkins (Eds.), Handbook of research on childrens
M.A. (Eds.). (2009). Learning science in infor- and young adult literature (pp. 3247). New York:
mal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Routledge.
Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Heath, S.B. (2012). Words at work and play: Three
Blanchard, J., & Moore, T. (2010). The digital world decades in family and community life. New York:
of young children: Impact on emergent literacy Cambridge University Press.
[White paper]. New York: Pearson Foundation. Heath, S.B., & Smyth, L. (1999). ArtShow: Youth
Blascovich, J., & Bailenson, J. (2011). Infinite reality: and community development. Washington, DC:
Avatars, eternal life, new worlds, and the dawn of Partners for Livable Communities.
the virtual revolution. New York: HarperCollins. Heath, S.B., & Street, B.V. (2008). On ethnography:
Bollmann, S. (2008). Women who read are danger- Approaches to language and literacy research. New
ous. London: Merrell.
York: Teachers College Press.
Bornstein, D. (2004). How to change the world: Social
Heath, S.B., & Wolf, J.L. (forthcoming). Brain and
entrepreneurs and the power of new ideas. New
behavior: The coherence of teenage responses
York: Oxford University Press.
Day, C.O. (2010). Our bookshop manifesto. to young adult literature. In M. Hilton & M.
Retrieved June 24, 2012, from www.mendocino Nikolajeva (Eds.), Contemporary adolescent liter-
.com/?id=4104&url=www.gallerybooks.com ature and culture: The emergent adult. Burlington,
Duranti, A., Ochs, E., & Schieffelin, B.B. (Eds.). VT: Ashgate.
(2012). The handbook of language socialization. Hochschild, A.R. (1997). The time bind: When work
Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. becomes home and home becomes work. New York:
Elizabeth, L., & Young, S. (Eds.). (2006). Works of Metropolitan.
heart: Building village through the arts. Oakland, Hruby, G.G., & Goswami, U. (2011). Neuroscience
CA: New Village. and reading: A review for reading education
Engestrm, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An researchers. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(2),
activity-theoretical approach to developmental re- 156172. doi:10.1598/RRQ.46.2.4
search. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit. Kuipers, J., & Viechnicki, G. (2008). Special issue
Finnegan, R. (Ed.). (2005). Participating in the on objectification and the inscription of knowl-
knowledge society: Researchers beyond the uni- edge in science classrooms. Linguistics and
versity walls. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Education, 19(3), 203205. doi:10.1016/j.linged
doi:10.1057/9780230523043 .2008.06.005
Fishman, J., Lunsford, A., McGregor, B., & Otuteye, Lareau, A. (2003). Unequal childhoods: Class, race,
M. (2005). Performing writing, performing lit- and family life. Berkeley: University of California
eracy. College Composition and Communication, Press.
57(2), 224252. Leadbetter, C., & Miller, P. (2004). The pro-am revo-
Garber, M. (2001). Academic instincts. Princeton, lution: How enthusiasts are changing our society
NJ: Princeton University Press. and economy. London: Demos.
Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2004). Why de-
McKnight, J. (1995). The careless society: Community
liberative democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton
and its counterfeits. New York: Basic.
University Press.
Mead, M. (1970). Culture and commitment: A study of
Hart, B., & Risley, T.R. (1995). Meaningful dif-
ferences in the everyday experience of young the generation gap. London: Bodley Head.
American children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes. Nussbaum, M.C. (1997). Cultivating humanity: A
Hart, B., & Risley, T.R. (1999). The social world classical defense of reform in liberal education.
of children learning to talk. Baltimore: Paul H. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Brookes. Nussbaum, M.C. (2010). Not for profit: Why de-
Heath, S.B. (1996). Ways with words: Language, life, mocracy needs the humanities. Princeton, NJ:
and work in communities and classrooms. New Princeton University Press.
York: Cambridge University Press. (Original Ochs, E., & Izquierdo, C. (2009). Responsibility
work published 1983) in childhood: Three developmental trajectories.
Heath, S.B. (2011). The book as home? It all de- Ethos, 37(4), 391413. doi:10.1111/j.1548-1352
pends. In S.A. Wolf, K. Coats, P. Enciso, & C.A. .2009.01066.x
226 Heath
Philips, S.U. (1983). The invisible culture: Communi- Strauss, S.L., Goodman, K.S., & Paulson, E.J.
cation in classroom and community on the Warm (2009). Brain research and reading: How emerg-
Springs Indian Reservation. New York: Longman. ing concepts in neuroscience support a mean-
Ramadas, J. (2009). Visual and spatial modes ing construction view of the reading process.
in science learning. International Journal of Educational Research and Reviews, 4(2), 2133.
Science Education, 31(3), 301318. doi:10.1080/ Updike, J. (2005). Still looking: Essays on American
09500690802595763 art. New York: Knopf.
Robinson, J.P., & Godbey, G. (1999). Time for life: Walker, W. (1981). Native American writing sys-
The surprising ways Americans use their time tems. In C.A. Ferguson & S.B. Heath (Eds.),
(2nd ed.). University Park: Pennsylvania State Language in the USA (pp. 145174). New York:
University Press. Cambridge University Press.
Rogoff, B., Paradise, R., Arauz, R.M., Correa- Watson, R. (2003). Illuminated manuscripts and their
Chavez, M., & Angelillo, C. (2003). Firsthand makers. London: V&A.
learning through intent participation. Annual Wilson, F.R. (1998). The hand: How its use shapes
Review of Psychology, 54, 175203. doi:10.1146/ the brain, language, and human culture. New York:
annurev.psych.54.101601.145118 Pantheon.
Schieffelin, B.B., & Gilmore, P. (Eds.). (1986). The Winner, E., & Hetland, L. (Eds.). (2000). The
acquisition of literacy: Ethnographic perspectives. arts and academic achievement: What the evi-
Norwood, NJ: Ablex. dence shows [Special issue]. Journal of Aesthetic
Schieffelin, B.B., & Ochs, E. (Eds.). (1986). Education, 34(3/4).
Language socialization across cultures. New York: Wolf, B.J. (2001). Vermeer and the invention of seeing.
Cambridge University Press. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Schor, J. (1991). The overworked American: The un- Wolf, M. (2007). Proust and the squid: The story
expected decline of leisure. New York: Basic. and science of the reading brain. New York:
Shonkoff, J.P., & Phillips, D.A. (Eds.). (2000). HarperCollins.
From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of Wolf, S.A., Coats, K., Enciso, P., & Jenkins, C.A.
early childhood development. Washington, DC: (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of research on childrens
National Academy Press. and young adult literature. New York: Routledge.
Snow, C.E., Barnes, W.S., Chandler, J., Goodman,
I.F., & Hemphill, L. (1991). Unfulfilled expec-
tations: Home and school influences on literacy. L it er at u r e Cit ed
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Frost, R. (1939). Collected poems. New York: Henry
Snow, C.E., Burns, M.S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Holt.
Preventing reading difficulties in young children.
Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
I
n this article, we explore the relationship between emergent biliteracy and
growing up in a biliterate environment. Our research particularly considers and
describes some of the paths that young Spanish-speaking emergent bilingual
children follow depending on their specific learning experiences and how these
experiences shape their biliteracy development. We adopt the term emergent bilin-
guals instead of English-language learners to more accurately describe young chil-
dren (ages 3 to 5 years) who speak a native language other than English and are in
the dynamic process of developing bilingual and biliterate competencies with the
support of their communities (e.g., parents, school, community; Garca, Kleifgen,
& Falchi, 2008; Reyes, 2006). We began with the following two research questions:
1. What knowledge of biliteracy (including but not limited to story reading)
do young emergent bilingual children (4- and 5-year-olds) develop in the
early years?
2. How do context and specific language environments (e.g., home, commu-
nity) influence the development of biliteracy in young Mexican Spanish
English bilingual children?
Theoretical Frameworks
We situate our study within two major theoretical frameworks: (1) a sociocultural
framework and (2) an ecology of language framework. We describe each of these
in relation to the purpose of our study.
A sociocultural framework foregrounds how children learn language through
interactions with people in their immediate contexts (Harste, Woodward, &
Burke, 1984; Prez, 2004; Vygotsky, 1978). Learning is viewed as a process in
which the childs existing knowledge interacts with mediating tools available in
the environment to promote the development of new understandings (Rogoff,
1990; Vygotsky, 1978). Children learn through direct interactions with people
and what they observe in their sociocultural context (Rogoff, 1990; Vygotsky,
1978). Specific to literacy development, childrens understanding and inventions
of written language are not individual; rather, they reflect the cultural conventions
228
and ideologies within the social contexts of which they are a part (Moll, Saez, &
Dworin, 2001). In this regard, the construct of the zone of proximal development
by Vygotsky is helpful in identifying the social guidance and scaffolding that
expertsdefined as those adults or peers who are more competent on specific
abilities or knowledge; on the other hand, novices are those members of a com-
munity whose capabilities can be extended via the zone of proximal development
by interacting with a more competent member (Williams, 2004)provide to
children who are participating in literacy activities beyond their current abilities
(Gregory, Long, & Volk, 2004). It is this scaffolding in social contexts that helps
the young bilingual child to advance his or her language and literacy develop-
ment and independent thinking in two languages (Dworin & Moll, 2006; Moll,
1990; Rogoff, 1990; Tharp & Gallimore, 1988). Writing and literacy development
emerges as a result not only of childrens interactions with objects and people but
also of their own internal representations and transformation of thoughts and
ideas and the biological basis that allows this learning (Ferreiro & Teberosky,
1982; Tolchinsky, 2003; Vygotsky, 1978). The emergence of literacy, like a childs
development, is characterized by spurts, plateaus, and regressions...development
typically is not smoothly uniform and cumulative, but asynchronous and nonlin-
ear (Yaden, 2008, p. 10).
The second major theoretical perspective that guides our understanding
of biliteracy is the ecology of language framework adapted from the work by
Haugen (1953/1969) and later used by a number of scholars (e.g., Barton, 1994;
Bronfenbrenner, 1986; Hornberger, 1989; Hornberger & Skilton-Sylvester, 2000).
Barton argued that an ecological approach to literacy is useful because it takes
as its starting point this interaction between individuals and their environments
(p. 29). This ecological framework also integrates insights from anthropology,
biology, educational linguistics, and psychology that enable an appreciation of
the interdisciplinary nature of literacy and language studies (Pahl, 2008, p. 306).
We adopt this perspective to the study of biliteracy to shed light on the ecologi-
cal environments and the complex interrelationships among the different factors
within these environments (e.g., languages used, their speakers, their interpreta-
tions of text) that influence young emergent bilinguals biliteracy development in
Spanish and English.
Early Literacy
Literacy acquisition is a multifaceted process that is different for every child
(Whitmore, Martens, Goodman, & Owocki, 2004). Although children exposed
to a writing system develop print knowledge, the age at which they become aware
of this knowledge and the processes of development vary. Young children are
active participants in the learning process, making hypotheses and construct-
ing knowledge about the writing systems they are exposed to and attempting
to derive meaning from print in their environments (Ferreiro, 2007; Goodman,
1986). Children interact with print by constructing, organizing, and analyzing
its meaning and connecting it with their own personal experiences (Goodman,
1984, 1986; Kirkland, Aldridge, & Kuby, 1991).
From an early age, children begin noticing print through being exposed to it
at home and in their communities (e.g., on signs, posters, and flyers). In addition
to making discoveries on their own, children are influenced by feedback from
others around them as they attempt to understand print in their environment and
eventually in different writing systems (Ferreiro & Teberosky, 1982; Tolchinsky,
2003). Although research findings have not pinpointed a direct correlation be-
tween the ability to read environmental print and later conventional reading abili-
ties (e.g., word identification, lettersound correspondence), it has been shown
that children acquire knowledge about the written environment through multiple
experiences before they enter school (Kassow, 2006). Later, as part of school read-
ing instruction, children learning alphabetic writing systems are guided to pay
attention to the one-to-one correspondence between letters and sounds. However,
research on phonological awareness has been unclear regarding when, where,
and how exactly it develops regardless of the context (Chaney, 1994; Morris,
Bloodgood, Lomax, & Perney, 2003; Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998). In addition,
young children begin developing metalinguistic awareness, that is, the ability to
use language to think about, play with, talk about, and analyze language in its
different domains (e.g., phonology, pragmatics, semantics; Snow et al., 1998).
Recently, Justice and Ezells (2001) work has illuminated the impact that low
income in a family has on childrens emergent literacy. They found that preschool
English monolingual children (3- to 5-year-olds) from low-income families dem-
onstrated difficulty with many of the written language awareness tasks (p. 130).
They concluded that disparities in the experiences and opportunities available to
them as compared with children from more financially privileged backgrounds
were significant contributors to their lower academic literacy knowledge (see also
Biliteracy Studies
Edelsky and Jilberts (1985) early work on naturalistic observations in bilingual
classrooms provided descriptions of the writing development of bilingual chil-
dren and how these children use their bilingual skills when reading and writing
in school contexts. However, due to the complexity of such research, only a few
researchers have explored young childrens biliteracy development in multiple
contexts (Dworin, 2003; Kenner et al., 2004; Schwarzer, 2001; Tabors, Paez, &
Lopez, 2002; Yaden & Tardibuono, 2004; Zentella, 2005).
In a recent study, Kenner et al. (2004) explored the keys to biliteracy and
found that when children have access to more than one writing system, chil-
drens ability to distinguish between different scripts is found to develop at an
early age (p. 126). Not only could children in their study distinguish between
different writing systems (e.g., alphabetic, logographic), but they also made use of
cues in their native languages (Chinese, Arabic, and Spanish) to constantly rein-
terpret their concepts of writing in what the authors described as engagement in
the process of appropriating the principles [of writing] for themselves (p. 137).
These children used the information presented to them in their school, home, and
community contexts to work out some of the underlying principles of different
writing systems. From an ecological perspective, Kenner (2004) described how
immigrant families in Britain act as supportive literacy ecosystems in promot-
ing their childrens development of biliteracy, which allows young children and
their families to adapt and integrate new forms of literacy related to new life in
Britain.
It is important to note that the scripts of some languages share many char-
acteristics in common, whereas others differ greatly. In the case of English and
Spanish, they both share an alphabetic script, which makes it easier for Spanish-
speaking children to identify the letters, although the frequency and sound of
certain letters vary between the two languages. Even when children can identify
Participants
The participants were twelve 4- and 5-year-old (M age = 5 years, 4 months) emer-
gent bilingual children (7 girls, 5 boys) whose first language (L1) was Spanish and
second language (L2) was English and who had been exposed to both languages
from an early age. The children and their families live in an urban setting in the
U.S. Southwest and are part of a larger cohort of children who are participating in
a 3-year longitudinal study (the Emergent Biliteracy and Language Development
project with Mexican immigrant families in Tucson, AZ) focusing on the study
of literacy practices at home (Reyes, 2006; Reyes, Alexandra, & Azuara, 2007).
In this article, we focus on data collected during the 1st year, when children were
in preschool. These 12 children were selected randomly from among the children
whose parents gave permission for participation in the larger study at the begin-
ning of the school year. The 12 children participated in all literacy assessments
conducted in the classroom.
bilingual, who scored higher in English vocabulary than he did in Spanish. Both
his mom and teacher considered him English dominant at the beginning of the
school year.
EPT. To find out what these 12 children knew about the print in their environ-
ment, we adapted the environmental print awareness task developed by Goodman
and Altwerger (1981) and later used by Romero (1983) with bilingual children.
Based on our home observations and information parents provided, we selected
labels in Spanish and English that the children frequently saw in their everyday
bilingual/bicultural context, such as a can of Rosarita refried beans and a bag of
Dos Ranchitos tortillas (see Appendix A for a complete list of items).
The task was divided into two parts that were presented in two different
sessions conducted a few days apart. In the first session, we presented the actual
objects and asked children to identify each item. In the second session, children
were presented with pictures showing only the labels from these items without
the product; thus, they had to rely on the print, format, and color of the label
for cues.
We developed a coding scheme for the childrens responses, based on both the
actual responses we received in this study and the coding schemes of Goodman
and Altwerger (1981) and Romero (1983). That is, we identified patterns and
grouped childrens responses into six different categories: (1) not recognized,
(2)named only the function of the object, (3) used the generic name of the item,
(4) used another brand name to name the product, (5) partially recognized the
brand, and (6) named the exact print on the label (see Appendix B for the com-
plete coding scheme).
We were also interested in the hypotheses children made regarding the lan-
guages used in their environment. Therefore, we asked them during the first and
second administration of the task to identify the language of each label and ra-
tionalize their answer. (En que idioma est escrito? Porqu crees que est escrito
en espaol [o ingls]? In what language is this written? Why do you think this is
written in Spanish [or English]?). Childrens responses were audiotaped and later
transcribed and analyzed to identify the language they selected and their reasons
for identifying it as Spanish or English.
EPT. In the EPT, we observed that the childrens responses did not differ sig-
nificantly depending on whether they were presented with the actual objects or
labels alone (see Figure 1 for frequency of responses; we only analyzed the re-
sponses of 10 of the 12 participants as we were not able to complete two of the
40
Frequency
30
Object
20
Label
10
0
NR EBN OBN PBN GN F
Type of Response
In these responses to the EPT, children focused on the functions of the items
rather than their specific brand names. As adults do, these 5-year-olds typically
used generic names to identify the objects presented. It is not uncommon for
people to use generic referents, such as toothpaste or milk, except in very spe-
cific situations, such as when choosing among specific brands in a store (Romero,
1983). It was interesting to observe that two of the children already associated the
examples of print with product advertisements. For example, in his responses,
Sercan changed his tone of voice to mimic that used in media advertisements
while pointing to the print on the Colgate toothpaste box and saying, lava los
dientes [brush your teeth].
In terms of language use, from our observations, childrens identifications
of the language of print were not based on the size or style of the font or on the
Less frequently (8 for RO and 10 for RL out of 100 responses), children identi-
fied the print in the label as bilingual and provided explanations using their two
languages. For example, one child pointed to the print on the can of beans and
read frijoles (beans) with a Spanish pronunciation, reporting that the word was
in Spanish; then he pointed to the same word and changed his pronunciation
and elongated the second syllable to indicate he was speaking in English: fri-
jool (bean). This example led us to speculate that this child knew that there are
cognates for English and Spanish words, and given the cognitive demand of the
question, he was attempting to find an explanation by making generalizations
and marking one of his languages with a different pronunciation.
In addition, three children indicated that one part of the print was written in
English and another part in Spanish. For example, when asked about the Coca-
Cola label, Sercan read soda while pointing to the word Coca, and he said
Pepsi while pointing to the word Cola, explaining Aqu dice soda Pepsi, pero
soda es en espaol y Pepsi es en ingls (Here it says soda Pepsi, but soda is in
Spanish, and Pepsi is in English). Responses like this one suggest that children
are metalinguistically aware that languages are represented in different ways,
although they do not use features of the print to identify the language of writ-
ing. Children who identified the print on the label as bilingual seemed to have
internalized that, in their particular sociocultural context, it is not unusual to
From these responses, we could not draw any conclusions in terms of whether
children could distinguish Spanish from English print based on particular gram-
matical or orthographic aspects. They were not necessarily able to explain to the
researcher how they were able to identify the language of the books. Instead, they
could provide general information about the language they used when reading at
school or at home with their mom or dad (see Example 9 above). Of interest here
is the childrens ability to talk about their two languages in relation to print, inter-
locutors, and context. That is, they demonstrate metalinguistic awareness about
which language they speak with particular individuals and in specific contexts
(Baker, 2001).
Most of the children (10 of 12) demonstrated knowledge that the print car-
ried the message when asked to show the researcher where to start reading the
book. Specifically, they pointed directly to the title of the book and then opened
Sercan: Que rico de los que me gustan a mi (How delicious, like the
ones I like). Sercan was born in a rural area of Oaxaca, Mexico, and migrated
to the United States with his family when he was 1 year old. Sercans family lives
in a trailer park where there is a large concentration of Mexican-origin residents.
He lives with his mom, dad, and 1-year-old sister. The primary language of the
246
Literacy for the
Entertainment/ Educational/ Interpersonal purpose of teaching
Daily living routines recreation school-related Religion communication or learning
1. Commercial: receipts, 1. Family cards 1. Report cards 1. Church 1. Reading the 1. Child wanting to
flyers, product labels (e.g., Christmas 2. F ieldtrip letters newsletters newspaper practice the ABCs
2. Work: job applications and Mothers (bilingual) 2. Catechism course 2. Writing letters to while writing
Chango marrano
(Spanish)
Chango marrano
(English)
Frida: La i no es; es la e! [Its not the i; its the e!]. Frida was born in
a small town in Sonora, Mexico, and migrated with her parents and grandparents
when she was 2 years old. Frida speaks mostly Spanish at home with her parents
and grandparents but speaks some English with relatives (her aunt and younger
cousin) who visit their home every evening. Frida lives with her parents, baby
sister, and grandparents in a trailer park located on a busy street just a couple of
blocks south of her preschool. The familys physical living space is very limited,
with four adults and two children living in a two-bedroom trailer. However, the
yard space in front of the trailer has enough space for the children to play, and
they have a jumping platform where Frida and her cousins spend their afternoons
playing.
At school, Frida is a curious and attentive student. According to her teacher,
she is ahead of her class and has been able to develop fluent bilingual compe-
tencies. We visited Frida and her family in the evenings. During these visits, we
observed how Frida and her cousin, Ral (a year younger than Frida), played
together at home, participating in different literacy events, including coloring,
writing, and reading together (see Table 2 for a summary of these events across
families). Her mom, Ceci, explained that the cousins like to play together often
and that they spontaneously gather around the dining table to color and write
with different materials. Frida, according to her mom, always plays the role of
the more expert writer when interacting with Ral. She also reported that Frida
is able to spell some words and recognize soundletter correspondences in both
Spanish and English, particularly when dictating to Ral how to spell words.
We were able to confirm these abilities during our home visits. We consider in
detail a transcript of a conversation between Frida and her cousin while they
wrote and colored from an activity book. Fridas mom, Ceci, and aunt, Isela,
interact with the children by providing scaffolding and supporting their biliter-
ate abilities.
write something, she wrote the word July (see Figure 4), and when asked imme-
diately after she finished writing in what language she had written this word, she
responded that it was in Spanish. Of interest here is that when Frida was asked
to read the word, she actually read the word July in English and spelled it as
LLULi, using double L to indicate the same sound in both English and Spanish
(in Spanish, double L makes a similar sound as the Y in English). This ex-
ample illustrates that she is becoming phonologically aware in her two languages
and that she uses her knowledge of Spanish when spelling in English (using the
resources in her L1 helps her to produce and interpret written language in the L2),
the same strategy we had observed at home with the interactions among Frida,
her mom, aunt, and cousin.
General Discussion
In this section, we begin with a summary of the three main findings from this
study. We then interpret these findings using both sociocultural and ecology of
language frameworks. Finally, we offer an ecological model of emergent biliteracy.
First, we found that children were developing knowledge and metalinguistic
awareness about print in both their languages. From the different reading and
writing assessments these children participated in, we learned that young bilin-
gual children are beginning to understand that Spanish and English are written
in distinct ways; however, these 5-year-olds do not necessarily come up with the
same solutions to particular problems, such as identifying the language in which
a specific sample of print is written. For example, in the print awareness task,
Not e s
This work was supported by a grant from the Foundation for Child Development Young
Scholars Program to the first author. We wish to thank David Bloome, Ian Wilkinson, David
Yaden, and especially the anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful and useful feedback. All
opinions and conclusions expressed in this article are those of the authors.
R ef er ence s
Andrade, A.M., Ruiz, O.A., & Basurto, A.G. Dworin, J.E. (2003). Insights into biliteracy develop-
(1995). Las piedras. Auckland, New Zealand: ment: Toward a bidirectional theory of bilingual
Heinemann. pedagogy. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education,
Baker, C. (2001). Foundations of bilingual educa- 2(2), 171186. doi:10.1177/1538192702250621
tion and bilingualism (3rd ed.). Buffalo, NY: Dworin, J.E ., & Moll, L .C . (2006). Guest editors
Multilingual Matters. introduction . Journal of Early Childhood Literacy,
Barton, D. (1994). Literacy: An introduction to the 6 (3), 234240. doi:10.1177/1468798406069795
ecology of written language. Oxford, England: Dyson, A.H. (1993). Social worlds of children learn-
Blackwell. ing to write in an urban primary school. New York:
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family Teachers College Press.
as a context for hum a n development: Research Dyson, A.H., & Genishi, C. (2005). On the case:
perspective s. Developmental Psychology, 22(6), Approaches to language and literacy research. New
723742. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.22.6.723 York: Teachers College Press.
Chaney, C. (1994). Language development, meta- Edelsky, C., & Jilbert, K. (1985). Bilingual chil-
linguistic awareness, and emergent literacy dren and writing: Lessons for all of us. The Volta
skills of 3-year-old children in relation to social Review, 87(5), 5772.
class. Applied Psycholinguistics, 15(3), 371394. Ernst-Slavit, G., & Mulhern, M. (2003). Bilingual
Clay, M. (1972). Reading: The patterning of complex books: Promoting literacy and biliteracy in the
behaviour. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann. second-language and mainstream classroom.
Clay, M. (1979). Stones: The concepts about print test. Reading Online, 7(2). Retrieved June 10, 2008,
Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann. from www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index
Clay, M. (1989). Concepts about print in English .asp?HREF=ernst-slavit/index.html
and other languages. The Reading Teacher, 42(4), Ervin-Tripp, S. (2001). Variety, style-shifting, and
268276. ideology. In P. Eckert & J.R. Rickford (Eds.),
Dickinson, D.K., & Snow, C.E. (1987). Interrela- Style and sociolinguistic variation (pp. 4456).
tionships among prereading and oral language New York: Cambridge University Press.
skills in kindergartners from two social classes. Escamilla, K., Andrade, A.M., Basurto, A., & Ruiz,
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 2(1), 125. O.A. (1996). Instrumento de observacin: De los
doi:10.1016/0885-2006(87)90010-X logros de la lecto-escritura inicial. Portsmouth,
Dunn, L.M., & Dunn, L.M. (1981). Peabody Picture NH: Heinemann.
Vocabulary TestRevised. Circle Pines, MN: Ferreiro, E. (2007). Letters and numbers in early
American Guidance Service. literacy. In Y. Goodman & P. Martens (Eds.),
Dunn, L.M., Padilla, E.R., Lugo, D.E., & Dunn, Critical issues in early literacy: Research and peda-
L.M. (1986). Test de vocabulario en imgenes gogy (pp. 5977). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Peabody (TVIP) [Peabody picture vocabulary test]. Ferreiro, E., & Teberosky, A. (1982). Literacy before
Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service. schooling. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
A p p e ndi x B
A p p e ndi x C
A
s individuals, we problem solve in the world by drawing on what Wertsch
(1991) calls a psychological tool kit or what Bruner (1990) calls a com-
munal tool kit, which includes symbol systems that are inherited and re-
interpreted across generations, rooted deeply in culture and history. Language
is perhaps the most ubiquitous tool kit we have for sense making, an extraordi-
narily complex resource that inherently entails what Bakhtin (1981) calls dia-
logicality, that is, the ways in which our utterances are influenced by the voices
behind and ahead of that which we hear and say. I explore these ideas about the
semiotic potential and dialogic nature of learning through language in relation
to instructional discourse in a freshman English language arts classroom in an
underachieving African American high school.
There are commonalities in the arguments articulated by Wertsch, Bruner,
and Bakhtin. First, the quality of thought demonstrated by individuals is con-
structed out of interactions with others. Second, these others include those with
whom individuals have direct contact as well as historical others from whom
cultural forms of talk, reasoning, and artifacts have been embedded in traditions.
This article is about a group of African American high school freshmen. By all
traditional criteria, they would be considered underachievers. They are disengaged
from schooling and speak variations of English that many see as indices of underde-
velopment. However, if the claims of Vygotsky, Bakhtin, Wertsch, Bruner, and oth-
ers are reasonable, then African American students who speak African American
English Vernacular both participate in and inherit semiotic potential grounded in
their use of language, ways of reasoning, thinking about the world, and thinking
about story. If these claims are reasonable, then the quality of academic work pro-
duced by underachieving students must be understood not only in terms of what
occurs in their homes, with their families, and with their peers in neighborhood
life but also in terms of what goes on in the daily life of classrooms in which they
participate year in and year out. In the effort to teach students who speak varieties
of English not valued by the academy or languages other than English, or students
whose families live in poverty, it is very important to understand the intersections
This chapter is adapted from Is October Brown Chinese? A Cultural Modeling Activity System for
Underachieving Students, American Educational Research Journal, 38(1), 97141. Copyright 2001 by the
American Educational Research Association. Adapted with permission.
265
between the ways that students use language and reason in their home and com-
munity experiences and the routine practices of classrooms.
This article offers an analysis of a day of instruction in an English language
arts classroom in an underachieving high school, Fairgate, serving African
American students. I provide an analysis of the activity of the day in question and
document the history of the classroom activity that led to the development of an
intellectual community within the class. I also describe the ways in which the
students cultural funds of knowledge (Moll & Greenberg, 1990) were incorpo-
rated to support learning. I use as a unit of analysis Bourdieus (1990) construct
of habitus, which is defined by Duranti (1997) as a system of dispositions with
historical dimensions through which novices acquire competence by entering
activities through which they develop a series of expectations about the world
and about ways of being in it (p. 44). I document the historical antecedents that
shaped the students expectations about participation in the culture of this class-
room, as well as the ways in which the culture of this classroom was explic-
itly linked to particular routine practices from the students experiences in their
home communities. Although this article concentrates on the teaching of litera-
ture, the principles of curriculum design, instructional routines, and pedagogical
knowledge apply across subject matters.
Background
Fairgate High School is in an urban district that has been known historically for
its poor schools. Over the past two decades, middle class White and Black families
have left the city to avoid sending their children to the public schools in that area.
In the last 12 years, the district has undergone radical reorganization. One major
focus of this reorganization has been to shift increasing power to the local school
community, including parents, community residents, and teachers. Although this
reform has been useful in engaging parents and community members in a num-
ber of schools, it has had marginal large-scale impact on the quality of education
for most students in the district, especially at the high school level. Even though
there has been substantive improvement across years of accountability-based re-
form efforts, students still achieve well below national norms, the discrepancies
being greatest for African American and Latino youngsters.
Fairgate High School is an all-Black high school. Sixty-nine percent of its stu-
dents are from low-income families. At the time of the intervention described in
this article, the 19941995 graduation rate was 65%, in contrast to the state grad-
uation rate of 80%. In 1995, 73% of Fairgates sophomores did not meet the basic
goals of the state-mandated achievement test in reading, 25% met state goals, and
only 2% exceeded those goals. The average ACT score in reading for all students
who took the exam was 15.4. For students who completed a core high school pro-
gram, their average was 13.7. These numbers are in contrast to the state reading
average of 23.1. This is a school in transition, with a faculty and administration
who are working hard to transform the school. One of the schools reform pro-
grams is the Cultural Modeling Project.
266 Lee
The class described in this article is part of the Cultural Modeling Project,
which supports the empowerment of the English departments in urban high
schools through curriculum development, technology infusion, professional de-
velopment, and assessment. It is based on the premise that students bring to the
language arts classroom a rich array of knowledge that is useful for learning gener-
ative concepts and strategies in reading and writing. Although the project focuses
on African American students who speak African American English Vernacular,
it has implications for students from other speech communities whose language
variety is devalued in the broader U.S. culture (Lee & Slaughter-Defoe, 1995). The
framework on which the project is based posits that strategic knowledge of the
ways that literary authors embed meaning in tropes and certain literary forms is
necessary to negotiate rich literary texts. The quality of response to literature that
the project seeks to develop goes beyond summaries of plot. An idealized response
includes personal, empathetic responses, as well as responses to form and struc-
ture. Readers must come to the literary text with a mental model (Perkins, 1992)
of language play as a worthwhile end in itself for communication. Adolescents who
speak African American English Vernacular demonstrate in their daily language
use outside of classrooms a rich understanding of and appreciation for language
play. This language play is demonstrated most directly in a genre of talk known as
signifying, although it is evident in many other forms of talk that are part of the
African American rhetorical tradition (Smitherman, 1977).
Signifying has been passed down from one generation to another within the
African American speech community since the Holocaust of Enslavement, referred
ubiquitously by many simply as slavery (with the implicit assumption that slave
and African American are synonymous). Signifying may involve, but is not limited
to, ritual insult. One specialized category of signifying is called playing the dozens,
as exemplified in phrases like Your mother is so fat, she got hit by a car and the car
sued for body damages (Percelay, Ivey, & Dweck, 1994, p. 49). Other categories
of signifying include rapping, loud talking, and marking (Mitchell-Kernan, 1981;
Smitherman, 1977). Signifying always involves indirection and double entendre
and invites participants to look beyond the surface meaning to subtle interpreta-
tions to be inferred. It is vivid in its use of metaphor and often involves satire, irony,
and shifts in point of view. African American adolescents who routinely participate
in such talk make tacit use of strategies for interpreting metaphors, symbols, irony,
and satire. These same strategies are required to negotiate literary texts in which
such tropes and literary constructs operate to communicate meaning that must be
inferred. Lee (1992, 1993, 1995a, 1995b, 1996, 1997) developed an instructional
strategy that involves having students analyze samples of signifying dialogues to
determine the intended meanings for each turn of talk, and then extrapolate the
strategies they used to construct these inferred meanings. Through this process,
the students make public and explicit their knowledge of strategies they routinely
use that have been intuitive and implicit. They then apply the same strategies to
literary texts in which characters communicate using African American English
Vernacular and in which signifying and other oral genres are appropriated and
268 Lee
Is October Brown Chinese?
Rattlebone by Maxine Claire (1994) was the first novel selected for the freshman
class. Rattlebone is an imaginatively structured novel that consists of a series of
related short stories that cohere around the experiences of a girl named Irene
Wilson and her family and friends during the 1950s in Kansas City. The novel
employs extraordinarily vivid language, with an imaginative use of African
American English Vernacular, and illustrates a subtle unearthing of sociocultural
values grounded in African American historical experiences. On this particular
day of instruction, the class had completed several days of activities involving
answering questions about the opening chapter, October Brown, that required
close reading. October Brown is told from the point of view of a child narrator,
Irene. October Brown is the teacher in a segregated African American elementary
school. Not only is she educated, but also she has tastes that distinguish her from
the working-class families of the children she teaches. Below is a summary of key
elements in the story, which is necessary to understand the class discussion.
October Brown teaches in a segregated school in Kansas City in the 1950s.
Her students are from poor families. However, October Brown is well educated and
dresses and eats her lunch in ways that clearly distinguish her from the working-
class families whose children she teaches. There is a running reference to rumors
that suggest the children and their families are jealous of October Brown. In the
beginning of the story, we are told that We heard it from our friends, who got
it from their near-eye-witness grandmothers and their must-be-psychic neighbor
ladies that when she was a child, October Browns father killed her mother in a fit
of rage. Thereafter, the rumor goes, the Devil visited October Brown and marked
her face with a white spot the neighbors called a Devils kiss (Claire, 1994, p. 3).
The child protagonist, Irene Wilson, is sent to school after her mother and
father had a fight. Her mother is pregnant, and during the fight, the father inad-
vertently pushed her down the steps. He reports the accident over the party line
telephone. Thus, Irene is embarrassed when she is called to the blackboard because
she believes her rumor-mongering classmates are aware that her father pushed her
mother down the stairs, and Irene sucks the chalk while standing at the blackboard.
Later in the school year, there is a huge snow blizzard. For the first time, Irenes
father visits school to bring food for the children in the class from the mothers
in the neighborhood. October Brown, who wears dresses draped at her waist or
flounced, crepe with sequined dragons and peacocks, glittery butterflies, dresses
that shone like the sun in the drab circle of dark clothes dark girls wore at the rear
of the classroom (Claire, 1994, p. 6), offers Irenes father, James, part of her lunch:
She peeled her orange, dangled her legs in the aisle. She held it out to him, a flower
offering on a china plate. He shook his head no. She ate one section, cherry-slick
fingertips into cherry-red lips, so proper....
Smiling, she touched the many-colored, parrot-appliqud shoulder of her dress.
(p. 12)
There is a subtle allusion suggesting that October Brown may be trying to seduce
Irenes father.
The students were required to attend to the metaphor and symbolism of these
lines.
In the second episode, one question is posed by the teacher, and two are posed
independently by students. The teachers question, Why does Irene suck chalk?,
refers to the section in the story where Irene is called to the front of the class while
embarrassed, imagining that particular students whose families share the party
line telephone with her family are aware that Irenes father pushed her pregnant
mother down the stairs, and at the same time worried about her mother and the
baby. Again, this question demands attention to an image that is both metaphori-
cal and symbolic: Certain that my mothers fall was preface to disaster, I stood
there at the blackboard with the chalk in my mouth, sucking on the fact that one
or the other, mother or baby, would die (Claire, 1994, p. 8). The teachers ques-
tion is followed by two questions initiated by students. The first student question
on the surface is unrelated to the focus the teacher is attempting to establish. The
student asks, How come a, l, and b are capitalized on the cover of the book? This
is a reference to the graphics of the title on the cover of the book, rAttLeBOnE. A
second student asks a question that implicitly directs the classs attention to the
similarities between the fact that Irenes father pushed her pregnant mother down
the stairs and the rumor that October Browns father killed her mother:
We heard it from our friends, who got it from their near-eye-witness grandmoth-
ers and their must-be-psychic neighbor ladies, that when she was our same age,
our teacher, Miss October Brown, watched her father fire through his rage right
on into her mothers heart....The story went on that immediately thereafter, Satan
himself had made a visitation to October Brown, and from that time until the year
she became our grown-woman schoolteacher, the burnt brown of her left cheek was
marked by a wavery spot of white: a brand, a Devils kiss. (Claire, 1994, p. 3)
270 Lee
Analysis of Discourse
I have analyzed the transcript from that days discussion to determine the under-
lying structure of what occurred that day. The focus of the discussion was driven
by the questions on the floor. The transcript was divided into three instructional
episodes, each focusing on a question or series of related questions. The analysis
then examines student and teacher talk in order to make assertions about the
reasoning processes in which these students engaged as well as the sources of
support for that reasoning.
272 Lee
attention to errors opens up space for provocative literary debate. Marilyn cor-
rected Shanee: Thats Irene. Shanee has linked two parallel incidents in the
story, namely, the fight between October Browns parents and the resulting vio-
lence reported as rumor in the very beginning of the story, and the fight between
Irenes parents that resulted in Irenes mother falling down the steps of the house
while she is pregnant. Implicit in the interchange that ensues are the following
questions:
What are we to make of the similarities between what happened between
October Browns parents and what is happening between Irenes parents?
Who is talking when it is reported that Irenes daddy made her mama fall
down the steps, and how was this incident known by a student in Irenes
class?
In the process of exploring these two questions as well as the question ex-
plicitly asked by the teacher (Why does Irene suck chalk?), the students end up
focusing on and interpreting oxymorons, text that represent subtle interpreta-
tions of point of view, as well as attending to warnings in the narrators voice. The
paragraph that described Irenes chagrin when fellow student Jewel Hicks, the
pink-ribboned, talks-too-much, needs-her-butt-beat Jewel daughter of the on-our-
party-line Mrs. Hicks (p. 8), shouts out, Her daddy made her mama fall down
the steps and her mamas going to have a baby (p. 9), is replete with oxymorons:
Wailing is the sound you make to straighten out a tangled throat so that you can
breathe, and to spill tears from boiling eyes so that you can see your Come on,
Irene way out into the hall. Our janitor pushing his T-broom nodded, How do,
Miss Brown in the dimness of the hallway, and the cedar-sawdust-muted click of
her high-heeled shoes comforted me as much as her arm around my shoulders all
the way to the girls restroom while I cried myself into hiccups. (Claire, 1994, p. 9,
emphases added)
I have marked in boldface the oxymorons and metaphors that posed interpretive
challenges to the students. The students had to link problems of prior knowledge,
in this case the use of the old-fashioned party telephone line, as warrants in ar-
guments about problems of point of view. For example, how did Jewel Hickss
mother think she knew what had happened between Irenes parents? Additional
problems of point of view are encountered through warnings in the authors or
narrators voice, as when Irene says (reflecting not merely her point of view but
also that of the author), Certain that my mothers fall was preface to disaster
(p.8). This is a problem of point of view because the narrator shifts throughout
the story from the voice of Irene to that of an omniscient narrator who shares val-
ues with the author. The disaster being foreshadowed is more than the physical
health of Irenes mother and the baby in the womb. Jewel Hickss revelation that
Irenes father made Mrs. Wilson fall down the steps leads students to question
whether the assertions made about October Browns parents are believable, which
in turn is a question about point of view and the reliability of the point of view of
274 Lee
Figure 1. episode 2: establishing epistemological Norms for Interpretation
and Classroom Discourse: Rattlebone by Maxine Clairea
a
Claire, M. (1994). Rattlebone. New York: Penguin.
Students signify on one another,4 display body language for emphasis, and re-
flect a rhythm and prosody in their speech that is dramatic and culturally Black.
When Yetu hypothesized that October Brown was Chinese, he was bombarded
with responses from students.
Yetus question is exciting for several reasons. As with Shanees earlier ques-
tion about possible parallels between October Browns parents and Irenes parents,
Yetus question easily can be construed as an error (although I have no doubt that
a deconstructionist critic could well launch a warrantable argument that October
Brown could be Chinese). As is the case with pedagogical techniques in some re-
form mathematics classrooms (Lampert, 1990; Stevenson & Stigler, 1992), atten-
tion to errors may reveal complex forms of reasoning pursued by students, even
though they do not get the right answer. Yetu had paid attention to particular
details used to describe October Brown:
She peeled her orange, dangled her legs in the aisle. She held it out to him, a flower
offering on a china plate....She looked eyes-through-hair at him. She snapped straight
and threw the mass of hair back....
Smiling, she touched the many-colored, parrot-appliqud shoulder of her dress.
(Claire, 1994, p. 12)
Students reference this section of the text as proof that October Brown has burnt
brown colored skin.
At that point, an intense debate ensues about how to determine whether
a person is Chinese. A young man, Marcus, who has been so disruptive that
he has been escorted out of the class to sit for a while in the hall, reenters
the discussion. On the videotape of the class on that day, Marcus can be seen
consciously making markedly grimaced faces at the camera, making faces at a
female student sitting next to him, and generally acting out the essence of what
Gutierrez et al. (1995) characterizes as student counterscripts. As Marcus is be-
ing escorted out of the class by the teacher and other students are talking out
of turn, Marilyn shouts out, HEY, excu::se me. ya::ll so RUDE!...> ^You [refer-
ring to the teacher] need to kick his BUTT <ou::t this class.5 Persons without
insider knowledge of the nature and history of the raucously loud, overlapping,
multiparty talk would most likely view the interchanges as out of turn and
disruptive. Marcus returns to class in the midst of the debate over whether
October Brown is Chinese. Monica says, after quoting from the text about the
burnt brown color of October Browns skin, Chinese people aint brown.
Marcus responds for the first time in the class discussion, Yeah they is....They
brown; they brown skinnded. Marcuss comment is interesting because what
he is doing, albeit unconsciously, is refuting the textual evidence referring to
the color of October Browns skin as sufficient proof of her being Black rather
than Chinese. He essentially questions the warrants on which definitions of be-
ing Chinese are based. Marcus suggests that if Chinese people have colored
skin, then that reference in the text is not sufficient evidence to prove Monicas
276 Lee
position. Patricia then introduces a different body of textual evidence based
on a different set of warrants: Chinese women have the dresses where they
have the like, uhh, sequined dragons and glittery butterflies and, you know, all
that. Like the sun. Another student responds to Patricia, Maybe she just like
Chinese customs. A hotly debated conversation continues around the central
question of what it means to be Chinese. This debate is significant because it is
an intellectual argument over warrants in pursuit of literary inquiry. Both Kuhn
(1991) and Toulmin, Rieke, and Janik (1984) contend that appeals to warrants
represent the most sophisticated forms of argumentative reasoning. A debate
over literary warrantsthat is, what counts as credible evidence for a hypoth-
esis when the text itself is insufficientwas initiated and sustained by low-
achieving high school freshmen. The class debate provides additional evidence
that an epistemology of literary inquiry was evolving as routine practice in this
classroom.
The interactional space typical of the second and especially the third episode
is represented by one stretch of talk captured in Figure 2. The interactional space
is entirely dominated and directed by students. Students initiate comments to one
another, contradict one another, and always cite textual evidence and real-world
warrants to support their claims.
Shanee Marilyn
Shanee
Marilyn
Yetu
KEY
Left arrow point = responds to
Initiates counterscript Right arrow point = follows
278 Lee
Shanee: At the beginning of this book it said that October Browns father had
killed her mother. Right?
T: Uh huh.
Shanee: And then its a part in this book where uhh I forget, let me see [flips
through pages in her book], it says when her mama was going to, no her
mother and her father was arguing, and then she said her daddy made her
mama fall down the steps and she going to have her baby.
Marilyn: Thats Irene, uhh, mother and father.
Shanee: I know but then at the beginning on the first page it say
Marilyn: Thats Octobers father did that to her mother,
Shanee: I know but then at the beginning on the first page it say
Marilyn: Thats Octobers father did that to her mother.
Shanee: I know but it but I believe that its something in common because it say
[inaudible comment from a student out of the cameras view. The camera
pans around the room. Most students are looking at their books and qui-
etly listening.]
Shanee: Yeah, her father.
Marilyn: But now that wasnt done on purpose. Read through it. That was not done
on purpose. That was a rumor, that was a rumor. She accidentally fell
down the steps. That was a rumor that uhh, that he made her uhh fall
down the steps. (transcript, lines 361381, November 1, 1995)
sequence in Episode 2, the major modeling is carried out by two students in the
class rather than by the teacher. Table 3 summarizes the key scaffolding moves
by the two students and the teacher and the function each serves in moving the
instructional conversation forward.
The shift in who is modeling and scaffolding from the first to the second epi-
sodes lays the preparation for the intense interactional space of the third episode.
The third episode is totally run by the students in terms of the focus of discus-
sion, the complex interactions of multiparty overlapping talk, and the norms for
argumentation. It would be possible to highlight only the talk of the third episode
as evidence of the quality of reasoning shown by the students. However, my in-
terest in this article is to construct an argument to account for the interactional
spaces in the third episode, namely, that one must understand the history behind
the evolution of the activity. The explication in the Analysis of Discourse sec-
tion of this article offers an analysis of the microhistory behind Episode 3. This
day is representative of a history of classroom routines and activities that consti-
tute what has now become classroom culture.
280 Lee
exemplary day of classroom discussion to illustrate literary reasoning and in-
terpretation carried out by a group of African American high school freshmen
who by most traditional standards would be seen as underachieving. I also chose
this layered discussion because it is carried out entirely in African American
English Vernacular, not only in terms of syntax and phonology but also in terms
of prosody and discourse style. The discussion focuses on a noncanonical African
American work of fiction. Using the three criteria (students, language use, and
text), the illustration embodies subjugated knowledge and persons. The literature
on classroom instruction needs more exemplars of this type. However, at least as
important as the exemplars are the insights into the development of this quality
of intellectual activity. Did students come in on the first day of instruction eager
and ready to engage literary texts in this way? They did not. Thus, while privileg-
ing the cultural capital or funds of knowledge (Moll & Greenberg, 1990) that the
students brought to the classroom from their home and community lives, I must
also address how a particular culture of inquiry was constructed over time in this
classroom. To address this issue, it is necessary to trace and analyze the history of
activity, the nature of interactions, and the artifacts and routines through which
certain habitshabits of mind (Perkins, 1992)evolved.
From the beginning to the end of the school year, this was a very difficult
class to manage. Students complained that the teacher gave too much work and
that the work was too difficult. They rarely completed homework, and getting
them to complete written assignments was always a major chore. They came into
the class with clear epistemologies about school and school knowledge. School
was a place where teachers told you what they wanted you to know, and your
job was to fill in blanks on worksheets or write single-sentence answers that you
could copy from the book. The answers were always either right or wrong, and
the arbiter of correctness was always the teacher. In classrooms, if you sit long
enough, the teacher will tell you what she wants you to know. If you are good, you
will sit quietly, passively, and listen. If you are more aggressive, you will try to in-
stitute countermeasures in the form of disruptive behavior to change the agenda
of the class to one more palatable to you. These students had experienced school
in this way for at least eight long years and had well-established ideas about what
you do in school. There was a clear culture that they expected to find when they
entered the classroom on the first day. The challenge for the teacher was to alter
these cultural expectations, to craft a classroom culture over time and with the
support of students that operated from a different set of norms.
The Santa Barbara Discourse Group (Green & Dixon, 1994) believes that
classroom culture is constituted through talk, activities, and artifacts. Norms for
talk tell which members can talk, when, and about what. Routine activities show
members the interactions that are valued, the problems that are worth address-
ing, and useful ways of attacking these worthwhile problems. Artifacts provide
members with tools, in the Vygotskian sense (Vygotsky, 1978), with which to
conduct inquiry. In the context of this instructional model, artifacts included
books, computer-based supports, and cognitively guided graphic organizers and
Creating Community
When discussions began on any given day, students were fairly active and un-
settled as they came in from the rowdy, noisy halls between classes. Because it
was not unusual for some students to talk about off-task subjects while instruc-
tional discussion was going on and because some students were quiet and shy, the
teacher routinely asked something like, Patricia, did you hear what Brian said?
Brian, speak up so Patricia can hear what you have to say. Time was taken on
all days to make sure every student had a book and was looking at the appropri-
ate passage under discussion. Although this may seem commonplace, it was not
uncommon to walk through the halls of this high school and look through the
windows of classrooms to see teachers lecturing to students who were sleeping
with their heads on their desks, looking out the window, or talking to other stu-
dents. This daily routine established a set of expectations for participation in this
class; that is, students at least must look at the book and give the appearance of
being alert. Second, the teacher made efforts daily to engage the most disengaged.
A student like Marcus who acted out daily in class was asked to sit outside in
the hall for a while until he was prepared to participate productively. Although
the school provided teachers with the option of sending disruptive students to the
discipline office for in-school suspension, parent conferences, or regular suspen-
sion for several days out of school, the teacher never opted to use these forms of
discipline. She wanted Marcus and the several other students who routinely acted
out to believe that they were members of this class community, that they had the
choice of engaging or not engaging, but they did not have the right to prevent
others from learning. During the November 1 discussion, Marcuss comments,
which added another dimension to the argument over whether October Brown
is Chinese, came after he returned to class from one of his regular respites in
the hall. Had Marcus seen himself only as part of the castigated other, I do not
believe that he would have come back and directly entered the evolving debate.
Several students in the class were labeled as learning disabled, went to a special
282 Lee
resource class, and as remedial readers demonstrated problems with vocabulary,
fluency, and comprehension well beyond the reading problems of the rest of the
class. Again, special efforts were made to bring them into the discussion. Special
assignments were designed for them that were consistent with the work that the
rest of the class was doing, but in smaller chunks so they would better cope.
Two other crucial routines through which a sense of community evolved in-
cluded linking the texts to students prior experience and providing routines that
made students take responsibility for their own reading. Again, daily the teacher
asked each student to write down ideas about a passage in question on one of the
routine artifacts used in the class. Daily routines might involve asking questions
about a target passage, making observations of salient details from a passage, or
making inferences from a characters actions or descriptions. This was always
done before the class discussion. The teacher understood that the students, de-
spite their low achievement, valued grades. They saw the work they produced and
the efforts they extended in class as having a utilitarian function for getting good
grades. They had high expectations for themselves in terms of grades. Knowing
that their initial reflections in response to the close reading of a text would be
collected and graded gave them a reason that they valued to extend effort. From
the teachers point of view, this routine activity socialized the students into taking
responsibility for their own thinking and did not privilege the habit of sitting and
waiting for others to think for them.
In the midst of counterscripts, the most intense and interactional discussions
occurred when students had opportunities to link their home and community
experiences in meaningful ways to extend their thinking about a passage. For
example, on November 1, the class was asked to hypothesize about what particu-
lar books October Brown might be reading to her class. During the days of legal
school segregation and explicit second-class resources to schools serving Black
youngsters, October Brown brings books from her own library to read to her stu-
dents, but no titles are given in the text. Some students suggest that she reads the
Bible, and others suggest history books. In all cases, they offer textual evidence
to support their claims. Shanee says she thinks October Brown brings the poem
Invictus. The teacher invites Shanee to bring in a copy of Invictus by William
Ernest Henley to share with the class the next day and indicates that she [the
teacher] will bring in another poem that she thinks October Brown reads to her
students. The next day, Shanee dutifully brings in Invictus and renders a moving
reading of the poem, and the teacher brings in a copy of The Creation by James
Weldon Johnson and reads that poem in the rhetorical manner of a Black preacher
from the pulpit. On another day before the November 1 discussion, the students
are working to interpret a phrase from the chapter October Brown: intuition is
the guardian of childhood (Claire, 1994, p. 4). Marilyn tells a story about being
invited to a party given by a close friend and having an intuitive feeling that she
ought not go. She follows that intuition and does not go. There is a shooting at the
party, and her friend is hurt. A history of links to the students prior knowledge
and experiences contributes strongly to the collective understanding of the text
Every day the teacher responded to students replies with the question, How do
you know? These statements were made by the teacher and communicated daily
from the beginning of the school year. They were reinforced by activities in which
all students were expected to engage. This approach helped develop habits, which
Perkins (1992) calls habits of mind.8
At Fairgate High School, the teacher must commit a great deal of energy to
ensure that even the most resistant students participate in the intellectual activ-
ity of the class. Teachers who believe that these students cannot learn, that they
contribute nothing of value from their home and community lives, and that their
language is inferior are not likely to invest the energy, the tenacity, and the sheer
will demanded to reengage students who have disengaged from school over the
course of nearly a decade. During my 34-year career in education and my three-
year experience of teaching and conducting research at Fairgate High School,
I have seen teachers who fit both categories. This observation speaks to the uneven
nature of the school experience for such students. The inconsistency of expecta-
tions and in the quality of intellectual and emotional experience with schooling
may explain students conceptions of school and how they learn to adapt.
284 Lee
This brief interchange from October 23 shows that the ways of reading and
interpreting seen on November 1 were emergent and not part of how students
perceived school-based reading before this class:
T: And third I want you to look again for unusual statements, used to describe the
act of what they did. You know what they did. They took some stones and threw
them to destroy the flowers, but Eugenia Collier describes what they did using
some unusual words. Words you wouldnt normally think of to describe kids
throwing rocks at flowers...
S: Describe some words?
T: ...but she uses some words to describe what they are doing that seem bigger than
what they did. They are unusual ways to describe throwing rocks at flowers.
S: I dont understand this.
T: Ill come over there. (transcript, lines 179199, October 23, 1995)
Using the strengths of highly verbal students like Shanee and Marilyn in whole-
group and small-group work and interacting individually with students over time
were part of the activity through which the culture of this classroom was con-
structed. Lave and Wenger (1991) describes the quality of participation by those
who are learning the activity of a community of practice as peripheral participa-
tion (p. 14). These students were learning to read literary texts in ways valued by
literary critics (Rabinowitz, 1987) and sophisticated readers of canonical litera-
ture. This statement is not meant to suggest that all literary critics or readers of
canonical literature agree on norms for interpretation. Reader response (Langer,
1990; Rosenblatt, 1978), structuralist (Culler, 1975), deconstructionist (Bloom,
deMan, Derrida, & Hartman, 1987), feminist (Donovan, 1975), and Black aes-
thetic (Gayle, 1972) traditions of literary interpretation are distinct communities
of practice. Fish (1980) argues that the norms for interpretation constitute inter-
pretive communities. Although I accept these differences, I believe strongly that
two fundamental stances are required for participation in any of these traditions,
especially for novice readers: close reading of the text, attributing generalizations
beyond the text to what the tradition signifies as salient details, and a willingness
to critique the text (Rabinowitz, 1987). Other empirical studies have suggested
common stances among expert readers of fiction (Graves & Frederiksen, 1996;
van den Broek, 1996).
286 Lee
focus over time on problems of symbolism, points of view, and interpretation of
complex inferences in this class was cultural modelings curriculum design to
apprentice these students into a community of intellectual inquiry that valued
problems that demanded close textual analysis.
288 Lee
the artifacts routinely employed in this class were physical (e.g., the use of com-
puters), most were ideational, such as routine categories of questions, graphic
organizers, and software programs that scaffolded literary response.9
In an attempt to distribute expertise (Salomon, 1993), students were asked to
answer detailed questions about each page of an assigned text in order to influ-
ence active attention to salient details while reading, rather than after they had
completed reading. Students had to answer the questions in writing before class
discussions occurred. The teacher walked around the room while students re-
sponded to the questions in order to provide support for problems individual stu-
dents were having. Although some of the activity occurred as homework, much of
it took place in class to ensure that each student engaged in the activity. Especially
at the beginning of the school year, the teacher could not depend on the majority
of students to complete homework assignments. If the teacher had depended on
homework to move along the pace of instruction, she would also have lost many
students who were disengaged from school.
In addition to the categories of close reading questions answered while stu-
dents were in the process of reading, students almost daily used another tool or
artifact aimed at apprenticing them into taking responsibility for monitoring their
own emerging understandings. Reading research documents that poor readers
do not engage in metacognitive or executive control over whether they are un-
derstanding in order to take active steps to resolve their lack of comprehension
(Garner, 1987). The reflective journal was used each time students began a new
reading assignment. In this journal, students recorded questions they had while
reading, posited possible responses to those questions, described evidence that
might support what they thought was a reasonable response to their questions,
and wrote what others might say to counter that position. Because the journal
was so detailed, students did not complete all sections all the time. The process
yielded thoughtful and complex question posing. After five weeks of instruction,
students read the short story Marigolds by Eugenia Collier (1992). The quality
of questions raised by the students in their journals reflected their understand-
ing of the quality of questions this community had come to value. They are not
questions about plot but rather about the internal motivations of characters that
must be inferred and about the meaning of specific figurative language in the
story. Table 5 includes a sample of questions generated by students weeks be-
fore November 1, during the analysis of Marigolds. These questions became the
source of whole- and small-group discussions.
As preparation for the complex literary questions listed in Table 5, students
used various graphic organizers developed by the Cultural Modeling Project to
record observations from their close reading and to structure ways of reasoning
about particular categories of questions. For example, students recorded details
from descriptions of the marigolds in Marigolds or details from descriptions of
Da-Duhs garden in To Da-Duh, in Memoriam by Paule Marshall (1992). The
visual record became an object about which hypothesizing about generalizations
and significance occurred. The activity occurred in small- and whole-group work.
It recurred from the first weeks of instruction, almost daily, not only through the
November 1 class, which is the subject of this article, but through the end of the
school year.
One particular graphic organizer tool was a table structure. When students
were given questions about symbolic images, they were asked to list in a two- or
three-column table all the references that were associated with that image in one
column. In a second column, they were asked to hypothesize about the patterns
they saw in the details listed in the first column. Through discussion in whole-
and small-group work, students weighed the evidence that supported their hy-
potheses. Whole-group discussions invited multiple and often rival hypotheses
for debate, not debate aimed at one right conclusion but rather at the reasonable-
ness of multiple possible points of view.
Finally, it was understood that vocabulary was an important variable in
negotiating texts. Although it was equally important that students memorize
vocabulary, it was also important that they be empowered to decipher the
meaning of unfamiliar words from the contexts in which they are used. Thus,
290 Lee
another routine artifact used was sheets of paper on which were listed sen-
tences and paragraphs from the assigned texts with vocabulary highlighted.
Students were asked to make predictions from the context about the meanings
of words and to match that prediction with the definitions from the dictionary.
Again, the attempt was to teach the students to fish, rather than simply to feed
them directly.
The culture of this classroom of African American underachieving freshmen
that is evident in the discussion that occurred on November 1, 1995, evolved
slowly over an eight-week period. The evolution continued during the school year
as patterns of interactions, strategies for attacking interpretive problems in ca-
nonical literature, categories and qualities of problems, and patterns of rhetorical
possibilities across texts were negotiated between the teacher and students and
among students. The talk, problems, modes of reasoning, texts, and artifacts con-
stituted the activity system (Engestrm, Miettinen, & Punamaki, 1999; Leontiev,
1981) through which classroom culture was constructed. Table 6 summarizes
each of these categories.
292 Lee
Q u e s t ions fo r R e fl e c t ion
Not e s
The research was funded by the McDonnell Foundations Cognitive Studies in Educational
Practice and the Spencer Foundation. Any opinions expressed in this article represent those of
the author and do not necessarily reflect positions of the funding agencies.
1
For example, a reader who does not understand the assumptions about the role of fate in
Greek life is not likely to view the experiences of characters like Oedipus in Oedipus Rex
as making much sense. Similarly, a reader who is not aware of the social norms under
which Hester Prynne would have operated is likely to have a less sympathetic response to
Hawthornes A Scarlet Letter. Knowledge of the social codes assumed to be operating in the
social world of the text is an important element of the knowledge a skilled reader brings to a
literary text (Rabinowitz, 1987). Such knowledge allows the reader to enter the subjunctive
world of the text but does not preclude the reader from assuming a critical stance and reject-
ing the social codes, as many generations of readers have done with A Scarlet Letter. However,
novice readers cannot assume the role of informed critic when they do not recognize the
social codes operating in the text, and assume the work to be nonsensical instead.
2
Throughout this article, I shift point of view. I refer to myself in the third-person voice as the
teacher when reporting on observable actions as part of classroom activity. When interpret-
ing those actions of myself as the teacher, I use the first-person point of view. The reason for
this shift is that I play two separate roles. When I was in the classroom teaching daily, I was
not thinking analytically as a researcher. Rather, I was thinking analytically as a classroom
teacher. My critique as the author of the analysis reported in this article is separate from my
role as the teacher. I use the pronoun referent we when referring to the work of the Cultural
Modeling Project as a whole, reflecting the collective thinking of the many persons who have
worked as researchers and teachers on that project.
3
All names of students and teachers are pseudonyms.
4
Signifying is an oral genre of talk within the African American English Vernacular speech
community that involves indirection, double entendre, and a high degree of figurative
language.
5
The following transcription codes are used: < > faster pace than surrounding talk; ^ rising
intonation (data from Jefferson, 1979); CAPS emphatic stress; :: elongation of vowel sound
(data from Tannen, 1989).
6
In this case, scaffolding supports were provided by people, but they may also be provided
through the design of smart computer-based tools that dynamically respond to changes in
competence evidenced by users.
R ef er ence s
Abrahams, R. (1970). Deep down in the jungle: Negro York: Cornell University Press. doi:10.4324/
narrative folklore from the streets of Philadelphia. 9780203449769
Chicago: Aldine. Delpit, L. (1986). Skills and other dilemmas of a
Bakhtin, M.M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: progressive Black educator. Harvard Educational
Four essays (M. Holquist, Ed.; C. Emerson & M. Review, 56(4), 379385.
Holquist, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Donovan, J. (1975). Feminist literary criticism.
Press. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.
Billingsley, A. (1968). Black families in white Duranti, A. (1997). Linguistic anthropology. New
America. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/
Bloom, H., deMan, P., Derrida, J., & Hartman, CBO9780511810190
G.M.J.H. (1987). Deconstructionism and criticism. Edelson, D.C., & ONeill, D.K. (1994, June). The
New York: Continuum. Co-Vis Collaboratory Notebook: Supporting
Bloome, D., & Egan-Robertson, A. (1993). The so- collaborative scientific inquiry. In A. Best (Ed.),
cial construction of intertextuality in classroom Proceedings of the 1994 National Educational
reading and writing lessons. Reading Research Computing Conference (pp. 146152). Eugene,
OR: International Society for Technology in
Quarterly, 28(4), 305333. doi:10.2307/747928
Education.
Booth, W. (1983). A rhetoric of fiction. Chicago:
Engestrm, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamaki, R.L.
University of Chicago Press.
(Eds.). (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. New
Bourdieu, P. (1988). The political ontology of Martin
York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/
Heidegger. Stanford, CA: Stanford University CBO9780511812774
Press. Fish, S. (1980). Is there a text in this class? The author-
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice (R. Nice, ity of interpretive communities. Cambridge, MA:
Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Harvard University Press. doi:10.2307/1772220
Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Foster, M. (1997). Black teachers on teaching. New
Harvard University Press. York: New.
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and fu- Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading com-
ture discipline. Cambridge, MA: Belknap. prehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Collins, A., Brown, J., & Newman, S. (1989). Gates, H.L. (1988). The signifying monkey: A theory
Cognitive apprenticeship; Teaching the craft of Afro-American literary criticism. New York:
of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L.B. Oxford University Press.
Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Gayle, A., Jr. (1972). The Black aesthetic. Garden
Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453493). City, NY: Doubleday.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Graves, B., & Frederiksen, C.H. (1996). A cogni-
Culler, J. (1975). Structuralist poetics: Structuralism, tive study of literary expertise. In R.J. Kruez &
linguistics, and the study of literature. New M.S. MacNealy (Eds.), Empirical approaches to
294 Lee
literature and aesthetics (pp. 397418). Norwood, Lee, C.D. (1995b). Signifying as a scaffold for literary
NJ: Ablex. interpretation. The Journal of Black Psychology,
Green, J.L., & Dixon, C.N. (1994). Talking knowl- 21(4), 357381. doi:10.1177/00957984950214005
edge into being: Discursive and social practices Lee, C.D. (1996). Cultural modeling in reading
in classrooms. Linguistics and Education, 5(3/4), comprehension: An analysis of African American
231239. students responses to culturally familiar and cul-
Gutierrez, K., Rymes, B., & Larson, J. (1995). Script, turally less familiar fiction. Unpublished manu-
counterscript, and underlife in the classroom: script, Northwestern University.
James Brown versus Brown v. Board of Education. Lee, C.D. (1997). Bridging home and school litera-
Harvard Educational Review, 65(3), 445471. cies: A model of culturally responsive teaching.
Irvine, R.W., & Irvine, J.J. (1983). The impact of the In J. Flood, S.B. Heath, & D. Lapp (Eds.), A hand-
desegregation process on the education of Black book for literacy educators: Research on teaching
students: Key variables. The Journal of Negro the communicative and visual arts (pp. 330341).
Education, 52(4), 410422. doi:10.2307/2294948 New York: Macmillan.
Lee, C.D. (2003). Toward a framework for cultur-
Jefferson, G. (1979). A technique for inviting laugh-
ally responsive design in multimedia computer
ter and its subsequent acceptance/declination.
environments: Cultural modeling as a case.
In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies
Mind, Culture, and Activity, 10(1), 4261.
in ethnomethodology (pp. 7996). New York: Lee, C.D., & Slaughter-Defoe, D. (1995). Historical
Irvington. and sociocultural influences on African
Jones, G. (1991). Liberating voices: Oral tradition in American education. In J. Banks & C. Banks
African American literature. New York: Penguin. (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural edu-
Kochman, T. (Ed.). (1972). Rappin and stylin out: cation. New York: Macmillan.
Communication in urban Black America. Urbana: Leontiev, A.N. (1981). The problem of activity
University of Illinois Press. in psychology. In J.V. Wertsch (Ed.), The con-
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. New cept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 3771).
York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/ Armonk, NY: Sharpe.
CBO9780511571350 Mitchell-Kernan, C. (1981). Signifying, loud-talk-
Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city: Studies ing and marking. In A. Dundes (Ed.), Mother wit
in the Black English vernacular. Philadelphia: from the laughing barrel: Readings in the interpre-
University of Pennsylvania Press. tation of Afro-American folklore (pp. 310328).
Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Successful teachers of African American children. Moll, L., & Greenberg, J.B. (1990). Creating zones
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. of possibilities: Combining social contexts for
Lampert, M. (1990). When the problem is not the instruction. In L. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and edu-
question and the solution is not the answer: cation: Instructional implications and applications
Mathematical knowing and teaching. American of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 319348). New
Educational Research Journal, 27(1), 2964. York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/
Langer, J. (1990). The process of understand- CBO9781139173674.016
ing: Reading for literary and informative pur- Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (1997). The big
poses. Research in the Teaching of English, 24(3), picture: The language of learning in dozens of
229260. English lessons. In M. Nystrand (Ed.), Opening
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language
Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: and learning in the English classroom. New York:
Cambridge University Press. Teachers College Press.
Pearson, P.D., & Fielding, L. (1991). Comprehen-
Lee, C.D. (1991). Big picture talkers/words walk-
sion instruction. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, P.
ing without masters: The instructional implica-
Mosenthal, & P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of
tions of ethnic voices for an expanded literacy.
reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 815860). New York:
The Journal of Negro Education, 60(3), 291305. Longman.
doi:10.2307/2295483 Percelay, J., Ivey, M., & Dweck, S. (1994). Snaps.
Lee, C.D. (1992). Literacy, cultural diversity, and New York: William Morrow.
instruction. Education and Urban Society, 24(2), Perkins, D. (1992). Smart schools: Better thinking
279291. doi:10.1177/0013124592024002008 and learning for every child. New York: Free.
Lee, C.D. (1993). Signifying as a scaffold for literary Rabinowitz, P. (1987). Before reading: Narrative con-
interpretation: The pedagogical implications of an ventions and the politics of interpretation. Ithaca,
African American discourse genre. Urbana, IL: NY: Cornell University Press.
National Council of Teachers of English. Ransom, J.C. (1941). The new criticism. Norfolk,
Lee, C.D. (1995a). A culturally based cognitive ap- CT: New Directions.
prenticeship: Teaching African American high Rogoff, B. (1995). Observing sociocultural activ-
school students skills in literary interpretation. ity and three planes: Participatory appropria-
Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 608631. tion, guided participation, and apprenticeship.
doi:10.2307/748192 In J. Wertsch, P. del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.),
296 Lee
C h a p t e r 11
S
chooling improvement interventions for culturally and linguistically diverse
students from poorer communities need to solve a set of theoretical chal-
lenges relating to more effective literacy instruction. Although recent com-
mentaries have suggested that some of the pressing issues in beginning reading
instruction have been resolved, overall effectiveness in teaching reading com-
prehension is limited, and that research has not had much impact on effective
comprehension instruction (Pressley, 2002; Sweet & Snow, 2003).
The need to address effectiveness in teaching reading comprehension is
particularly significant for schools serving culturally and linguistically diverse
populations (Garcia, 2003). The challenge to meet these needs is pressing in New
Zealand wheredespite the fact that, on average, students in the middle years of
school have high levels of reading comprehension judged by international compar-
isonsthere are large disparities in the distribution of achievement (Alton-Lee,
2004). These disparities are between children from both Maori (indigenous) and
Pasifika (immigrants from the Pacific Islands) communities in urban schools with
the lowest employment and income levels, and other children. Maori and Pasifika
children score lower in reading comprehension measures than children from other
ethnic groups. Since at least the 1950s, numerous reports have identified these dis-
parities (e.g., Openshaw, Lee, & Lee, 1993), with one in 1981 calling them a crisis
in urgent need of a solution (Ramsay, Sneddon, Grenfell, & Ford, 1981).
Like other countries, New Zealand is concerned with disparities in literacy
achievement and has responded to this enduring education debt (Ladson-Billings,
2006, p. 3) with programs of schooling improvement and reform at local, district,
and even national levels. Since 1998, New Zealand has focused on resolving these
disparities. The national policy shifts have led to deployment of resources and to
fine-tuning of early literacy programs. These changes have been associated with re-
ductions in the disparities in accuracy and fluency of early reading at a national level
(Crooks & Flockton, 2005). Experimental evidence supports the conclusion that
specific changes in beginning instruction that have been implemented in groups of
schools have been effective (e.g., Phillips, McNaughton, & MacDonald, 2004).
This chapter is reprinted from Reading Research Quarterly, 44(1), 3056.
Copyright 2009 by the International Reading Association.
297
However, the evidencesome of it presented in this reportalso indicates
that there has been little, if any, impact on reading comprehension from Year4 of
schooling. Indeed, it appears that the gaps may have increased nationally (Crooks
& Flockton, 2005). Although depressing, this is not surprising theoretically.
Much of the knowledge and many of the skills required for early fluency and ac-
curacy in reading come from acquiring discrete bodies of knowledge. Paris (2005)
called these constrained skills, which he claimed are learned relatively easily. The
more language-based and content-dependent nature of comprehension requires
unconstrained skills, which are more difficult to both teach and learn. In develop-
mental terms, becoming a good decoder is a necessary but not sufficient condition
for good comprehension, and effective instruction for decoding does not neces-
sarily presage later development (McNaughton, 2002).
There has been little evidence that the issue of disparities in literacy achieve-
ments between groups can be solved easily in schools. In the United States,
Borman (2005) showed that national reforms of schools to boost the achievement
of children in low-performing schools serving the poorest communities have pro-
duced small gains in the short term, with effect sizes of the order of less than
0.20. For those few schools that sustained reforms over a longer period of around
seven years, the effects increased (estimated effect sizes of about 0.50). Borman
concluded that although nationally some achievement gains have occurred, they
have typically been low and need to be accumulated over long periods of time.
At a more specific level, individual studies from the United States have shown
that clusters of schools serving minority children have been able to increase the
achievement of children in reading comprehension. In one set of studies, Taylor,
Pearson, Peterson, and Rodriguez (2005) intervened in high-poverty schools with
carefully designed professional development research and development. They re-
ported small cumulative gains across two years.
Implementing effective interventions poses a major challenge in New Zealand
schools serving poorer communities with high numbers of Maori and Pasifika
students. The goal is not just to produce achievement gains with acceptable effect
sizes. The issue is accelerated achievement. Students need to make more than just
an expected rate of gain.
This need for acceleration was recognized by the designer of Reading
Recovery. Clays (1979, 2005) developmental argument was that in order for an
early intervention program to be functional for an individual, it needed to change
the rate of acquisition to a rate of progress faster than the cohort to whom the
individual belonged. This acceleration was needed so that over the brief but inten-
sive period of the individualized intervention, a learner would come to function
within the average bands required for his or her classroom. Groups of students
from particular cultural groups who have not been well served by school instruc-
tion also need to make accelerated gains, to come to function like other students
at equivalent levels. Their rate of progress needs to be higher than comparison
cohorts. The issue for these students is not the same as in Reading Recovery in
that the target is not for a group of students to come to function as a group within
Method
The project was designed as a collaboration involving schools in a New Zealand
Ministry of Education schooling improvement initiative, the initiative leaders
in the schools, the Woolf Fisher Research Centre (The University of Auckland)
and representatives of the New Zealand Ministry of Education. The Ministry of
Education representatives were long-standing members of the professional learn-
ing community and were invited by the schools to participate. They had no control
over the funding for the research, and their role was to learn from the emerging
results to facilitate greater researchpolicypractice links (Annan, 2007). Seven
Decile 1 schools (i.e., schools with the highest proportion of students from the
lowest socioeconomic communities) from urban centers in the South Auckland
area took part. Two of these schools were contributing schools (Year 1Year 6);
three were full primary schools (Year 1Year 8); one was an intermediate school
(Year 7Year 8); and one was a middle school (Year 7Year 9). The schools sizes
ranged from 292 students to 593 students.
The schooling improvement initiative had been running for five years prior
to this project. In those five years, the Ministry of Education and researchers have
been working with schools on addressing student behavior and staffing, develop-
ing a shared focus on student outcomes, forming partnerships with each other
and the community, and establishing more effective teaching and management
practices (Annan, 2007; Lai, 2003).
Design
At the core of the following analyses is a quasi-experimental design from which
qualified judgments about possible causal relationships are made. Schools are
open and dynamic systems. Day-to-day events change the properties of teaching
and learning and the conditions for teaching and learning effectively. This vari-
ability is inherent to human behavior generally (see Sidman, 1960) and specifi-
cally is present in applied settings (Risley & Wolf, 1973). These circumstances
require a design that deliberately incorporates variability and the sources of the
variability and that has longitudinal properties. The quasi-experimental design
described is appropriate to the circumstances of testing effectiveness over a pe-
riod of time, given that variability is an important property (Raudenbush, 2005).
7
Mean Stanine
National average
5
3 (Year 4_03)
(Year 5_03)
(Year 6_03)
(Year 7_03)
2 (Year 8_03)
1
Feb Nov Feb Nov Feb Nov Feb Nov Feb Nov
Time
7
Mean Stanine
National average
5
3
(Year 4_04) (Year 5_04)
(Year 6_04)
2 (Year 7_04) (Year 8_04)
1
Feb Nov Feb Nov Feb Nov Feb Nov Feb
Time
in subsequent repeated measures. We accomplished this for the first year data by
checking the achievement data for those students who were present at two time
points (Time 1 and Time 2) versus those students who were only present in the
cross-sectional baseline established at Time 1 (Time 1 only).
The results of this checking are given in Table 1 for raw scores. The compari-
sons indicate that in each of all but one comparison, the two groups of students
were not significantly different.
These two additional checks add to the robustness of the design by show-
ing that the intervention cannot easily be explained as arising from external and
general effects on Decile 1 schools in these suburbs or the immediate histories
Procedures
Phase One: Analysis of Data, Feedback, and Critical Discussion. The first
phase introduced both hypothesized components (analysis and change in instruc-
tional practices) within the professional learning community without targeted
workshops. Areawide data on both achievement and instruction were first ana-
lyzed by the school leaders and researchers in two meetings and then analyzed by
senior managers and senior teachers with each school using their specific school
data. Additional meetings at school level were conducted with support from Lai.
The format of the meetings was identical: The researchers presented achieve-
ment and teacher observation data collected as part of the intervention and then
facilitated a discussion about the data and their implications for classroom prac-
tice. The analysis, feedback, and discussion process involved two key steps. The
first step was a close examination of students strengths and weaknesses and of
current instruction to understand learning and teaching needs, and the second
was a discussion of competing theories about the problem and evaluation of the
evidence for these competing theories. This meant using evaluation standards of
accuracy, effectiveness, coherence, and improvability (Robinson & Lai, 2006).
This process ensured that the collaboration was a critical examination of practice
and that valid inferences were drawn from the information.
An example of a data discussion using this process is as follows: In New
Zealand, there has been considerable debate about the causes of low reading
achievement. One school of thought is that it is primarily constrained skills, such
as students decoding, that are the cause of the low reading achievement whereas
another view is that it is primarily unconstrained skills that are the cause. In a
meeting, the professional learning community tested these two theoretical posi-
tions (the latter being held predominantly by the school leaders in the commu-
nity) by carefully examining profiles of students needs from the achievement
data. In other words, the community engaged and tested teachers and research-
ers theories using the standard of accuracy (empirical claims about practice are
well founded in evidence). The profiles indicated that students were high decoders
but were weak in other aspects of reading comprehension, thereby ruling out one
of the opposing theories (decoding was the reason for low comprehension) and
ruling in the other (students could decode but not comprehend texts). In addition,
Phase Three: Sustaining the Intervention. The third phase was planned by
the literacy leaders and researchers jointly. It added to the two core components
in several ways. The cluster collection and feedback and critical discussion of
achievement data continued. In addition, the school leaders continued to guide
the learning circles developed in the professional development phase, focusing
on the dimensions of instruction developed through the sessions. A major new
feature was the development and use of planned inductions into the focus and
patterns of teaching and professional learning in the schools. The schools experi-
enced staff turnover of differing degrees from year to year, but on average around
a third of the staff changed from year to year. This component was designed to
maintain and build on the focus with new staff.
Another new feature was a teacher-led conference, designed to build the ef-
fectiveness of the professional communities across schools even further. School
teams developed action research projects often with pre- and posttesting compo-
nents to check various aspects of their programs. The questions for these projects
were generated by teams within schools. The researchers helped shape the ques-
tions and the processes for answering the questions. Two research meetings took
place at each of six schools (the seventh had a change of principal and literacy
leader and declined to develop projects, although staff attended the conference).
Several of the research topics were concerned with increasing vocabulary both in
language programs and in instructional reading and writing programs. Others
included increasing factual information in narrative writing (to build awareness
of use of factual information), teaching of skimming and scanning in the reading
program, use of instructional strategies to increase the use of complex vocabu-
lary in writing, the effects of using a new assessment tool for writing to inform
Measures
Baseline data on reading comprehension were collected using both the revised
Progressive Achievement Tests (PAT) in Reading (reading comprehension section
only; Reid & Elley, 1991) and the STAR (Elley, 2001). These tests were designed
for repeated measurement, are used by schools, and provide a recognized, stan-
dardized measure of reading comprehension that can be reliably compared across
schools. Both tests have high reliability and validity (Elley, 2001; Reid & Elley,
1991). In addition to these assessments, the schools used other reading measures
for both diagnostic and summative purposes, and the baseline results for these
are reported elsewhere (McNaughton et al., 2004).
The revised PAT in Reading measures both factual and inferential compre-
hension of prose material in Years 49. Each prose passage consists of 100300
words and is followed by four or five response options that are multichoice. The
prose passages are narrative, expository, and descriptive, and different year levels
complete different combinations of prose passages. Different year levels complete
different parts of the PAT. The proportion of factual to inferential items per pas-
sage is approximately 50%50% in each year level. Depending on test parts, the
testretest reliability ranged from 0.85 to 0.88, and the split-half reliability ranged
from 0.88 to 0.92.
The STAR was designed to supplement the assessments that teachers make
about students close reading ability in Years 49 in New Zealand (Elley, 2001). It
has parallel forms and can be given at three points during the school year. The raw
scores can be converted to 9-point stanine scores based on New Zealand national
norms. In Years 46, the test consists of four subtests measuring word recognition
(decoding of familiar words through identifying a word from a set of words that
describe a familiar picture), sentence comprehension (completing sentences by se-
lecting appropriate words), paragraph comprehension (replacing words that have
been deleted from the text in a Cloze format), and vocabulary range (finding a syn-
onym for an underlined word). Only the paragraph-comprehension subtest is not
multichoice and consists of 20 items, 10 more than in the rest of the subtests. In
Years 7 and 8, students complete two more subtests, which involve understanding
the language of advertising (identifying emotive words from a series of sentences)
and reading different genres or styles of writing (selecting phrases in paragraphs of
different genres that best fit the purpose and style of the writer). In Years 7 and 8,
there are 12 items per subtest except for in the paragraph-comprehension subtest,
which consists of 20 items. The testretest reliability was 0.91, and the split-half
reliability was 0.91 for the total scores.
Reliability
At the beginning of the project, the schools and researchers developed an intra-
school standardized process of administering the test and moderating the accu-
racy of teacher scoring. This involved standardizing the week and time (morning)
of testing and creating a system of randomly checking a sample of teachers mark-
ing for accuracy of scoring. Accuracy of scoring was further checked by the data-
entry team from the Woolf Fisher Research Centre during data entry and during
analysis. The STAR and PAT were administered as part of schools normal assess-
ment cycle at the beginning of the school year, and thereafter STAR was adminis-
tered at the end of each year also (using the parallel form). Additional assessments
conducted at Time 1 (February 2003) involved analyzing student scores on fac-
tual and inferential questions from the PAT and from the STAR and qualitatively
coding the types of errors that students made on the Cloze passage according to
the types of errors reported in the STAR manual (Elley, 2001). Four raters were
trained to code errors. These raters subsequently discussed how to code the er-
rors and collectively rated a sample of tests so that the reliability of coding could
be determined. The coding was subsequently checked, and interobserver agree-
ment on 10% of students subtests (across ages) was 90.5% (for more details, see
Lai et al., 2004).
Data Analysis
Repeated measures using both raw scores and normalized scores in stanines pro-
vide descriptions of achievement patterns over time. Standard statistical tests
for mean differences were used as appropriate, such as Hotellings T 2 tests (cor-
rected through Bonferroni procedures as needed), chi-square tests, effect sizes
(Cohensd), and multivariate analyses of variance. The calculation of the effect
size indexes (Cohens d) was based on Cohens 1988 and 1992 equations:
Modeling the Data. We attempted to fit growth curves to the longitudinal data
(over six data points) to model the changes and to analyze subgroups. There were
six repeated measures for each student with many missing values, resulting in
a total of 6,117 records in the data set across seven schools. The obvious hierar-
chical structure of such data would be students (Level 1) nested in classrooms
(Level 2) nested in schools (Level 3). Two difficulties with this structure stem
Results
Establishing the Baseline and Initial Profiles
At the beginning of the project, the stanine distributions of both tests, STAR and
PAT, indicated that the average student experienced considerable difficulty on
these measures of reading comprehension (see Figure 3). The average student
in both tests scored in the below-average (Stanines 2 and 3) band of achieve-
ment. For both the PAT and STAR tests, the mean stanine was 3.10, indicating
that achievement was about two years below-average levels. Over 60% of stu-
dents scored in the low (Stanine 1) or below-average (Stanines 2 and 3) bands,
25
Percentage of Students
20
15
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Stanine
and less than 5% were in the above-average (Stanines 7 and 8) or superior bands
(Stanine9). Twenty-three percent of students would be expected at these lower
(Stanines 13) or higher (Stanines 79) extremes.
At Time 1 across the year levels, the pattern was the same in both tests, with
the median in every year level at Stanine 3. Figure 1 (see page 37) shows these
cross-sectional data, and the means and standard deviations for these cross-
sectional data are given in Table 1. The near stable pattern across year levels indi-
cates that the students made on average one year of progress for one chronological
year at school (including both school months and summer months). Two implica-
tions can be drawn from this: The teaching was sufficient to maintain expected
progress, albeit consistently at two years below average levels, and the teaching
was not effective enough to accelerate progress.
8.5
Cohort 1 (Year 4, 2003)
8
Cohort 2 (Year 5, 2003)
7.5
Cohort 3 (Year 6, 2003)
7
Baseline 2003
6.5 National average
6
5.5
Mean Stanine
4.5
3.5
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
Feb Nov Feb Nov Feb Nov Feb Nov Feb Nov
Time
cross-sectional data after one year, two years, and three years. Planned compari-
sons after one year and after two years confirm the visual inspection.
After one year of the intervention, all cohorts were statistically significantly
higher than the baseline projected from the cross-sectional data at Time 1 (see
Table 2). This provides the initial design-based evidence that the intervention can
be systematically attributed to the intervention.
Further analysis shows that after two years of the intervention, all cohorts
were not just statistically significantly higher than the projected baseline (see
Table 3) but that the difference between their scores and those of students in the
same year level two years previously had increased. The effect sizes were now up
to 0.59 as compared with 0.44 after one year of the intervention. This suggests
that the intervention had a cumulative and positive effect on achievement.
As noted in the description of the design, we added two features to increase
the robustness of the design. The first was to test the issue of subject selection
bias, and we showed that the students in the longitudinal cohorts did not gener-
ally differ from all students in terms of initial achievement levels (see Table 1).
A second design feature was to compare the baseline projections with a cross-
sectional baseline from a similar cluster of schools after a year had elapsed,
thereby controlling for general history and maturation and other associated con-
founding variables. We have compared the outcomes of the intervention in the
first cluster with the baseline of the second cluster established at the same time.
After one year of the intervention, all year-level cohorts scored statistically signifi-
cantly higher than the comparison cluster that had not experienced this interven-
tion (see Table4). The effect sizes were between 0.33 and 0.45. After two years,
all year-level cohorts continued to score statistically significantly higher than the
comparison cluster that had not experienced this intervention, with effect sizes
between 0.41 and 0.61 (see Table 5).
Table 6. Stanine and Raw Score Means by Cohort at Time 1 (February 2003)
and Time 6 (November 2005)
Stanine Raw Scores
Cohort Time 1 Time 6 t d Time 1 Time 6 t d
Cohort 1
M 3.41 4.5 6.68*** 0.66 17.71 34.33 23.49*** 2.16
(N = 114)
(Year 4, 2003) SD 1.32 1.94 6.69 8.59
Cohort 2
M 3.25 3.75 3.1** 0.36 20.77 42.23 17.95*** 2.16
(N = 56)
(Year 5, 2003) SD 1.31 1.43 7.21 12.04
Cohort 3
M 2.94 4.09 7.57*** 0.76 22.49 50.66 22.49*** 2.59
(N = 68)
(Year 6, 2003) SD 1.52 1.50 9.8 11.83
Total
M 3.24 4.21 9.86*** 0.62 19.79 40.86 32.49*** 2.00
(N = 238)
SD 1.39 1.73 8.06 12.53
** p< 0.01. *** p< 0.001.
25 Time 1
Time 6
20 National
15 norm
10
5
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Stanines
Growth Modeling
In modeling the growth over time, we first theorized that on the basis of initial
exploratory analyses of our data (Lai & McNaughton, 2008), we would improve
achievement across the school year but that achievement would plateau (further
progress would not occur) between school years. Hence a reasonable null model
would be a four-stage model specified by the parameter vector (m1, m2, m2, m3, m3,
m4) indicated by Figure 6. (This is similar to other models tracking achievement
over time, such as Borman, 2000.) When the full six-parameter model was tested
against this null model, the null hypothesis was not rejected, F(2, 1149) = 2.68,
p = 0.07.
We refined the model to give the most generalized representation, one in
which the increase within a year was constant for all year levels. The fixed-effect
part of this model was m + q 3 i, where i is the number of successive interven-
tions that a student had experienced prior to taking the observation. The point
estimate of intervention effect on achievement changes over time indicated that
for every additional intervention a student received, the mean stanine level was
raised by 0.42 (SD = 0.04), yielding a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.34, 0.49.
This reduced generalized model estimates that each intervention raised the mean
stanine level by between 0.34 and 0.49. The reduced generalized model was not
statistically different from the first model, F(4, 1149) = 2.07, p = 0.08.
Mean Stanine
1 2 3 4 5 6
Time
was used to develop the growth curves. The Level 1 within-students correlations
between repeated measures was fitted with an unstructured variancecovariance
structure. This means that we made no assumptions regarding equal variances
or correlations about the distribution of the measured data. The reasonable null
model was refitted with the HLM structure, where this HLM version of the reason-
able null model can be written mathematically as follows:
yit = b0 3 b1 x1t + eit(1),
where yit is the stanine results for Student i at Time t; b0 is the Level 1 intercept,
defined here as the expected achievement level; b1 is the expected rate of increase
in reading skills measured by stanine per each intervention received by Studenti;
x1i indicates the number of successive interventions Student i had experienced
prior to Time t; and is the within-student error of prediction for Student i at Timet
with the variance of eit = S. The point estimate of intervention effect on reading
achievement changes over time indicated that for every successive intervention a
student received, the mean stanine level was raised by 0.30 (SE = 0.03; 95% CI=
0.24, 0.35), t(237) = 9.86, p < 0.001. This model yielded an AIC of 4,273.4 and a BIC
of 4,363.3. Thus, the model depiction in Figure 6 also applied to this HLM basic
model. This level of gain is within the CIs of the original generalized model in
Figure 6, establishing that it can be applied to the data. The slight differences in
level of gain are due to the specificity of the HLM model to subgroups of students.
where b0ij is now the Level 1 intercept, definable by the expected achievement
level for Cohort j to which Student i belongs, with the students initial achieve-
ment level; b1 is the expected rate of increase in reading skills (in stanine) per
each intervention received by Student i of Cohort j; x1i indicates the number of
successive interventions Student i had experienced prior to Time t; x2ij indicates
the number of successive summers that Student i of Cohort j has had since the
first intervention, with b2 being the expected rate of change in reading skills (in
stanine) per each summer break for the respective cohort. The complex model
yielded an AIC of 4,006.4 and a BIC of 4,079.3 and is a better model fit.
The estimates for the complex model with respective CIs are summarized in
Table 7. Initially low-achieving students made more gain than did initially high-
achieving students. For example, the point estimate for initially low-achieving
students in Cohort 1 (Year 4 at Time 1) indicated that for every additional in-
tervention experienced, their average stanine improved by 0.45; high-achieving
students at the same cohort gained 0.22 of a stanine in their reading achievement.
Similar patterns were found for the other two cohorts.
There was a differential effect on the students reading achievements over the
summer holidays. For Cohort 1 (the largest cohort), regardless of initial reading
achievement, the average stanine dropped by only 0.05 over the summer, consis-
tent with the earlier plateau hypothesis. However, for Cohorts 2 and 3, the esti-
mated stanine drops over the summer holidays were 0.54 and 0.24, respectively.
There were no differences between students with different initial achievements
over summer.
Throughout the model-selection process, gender and ethnicity (in terms of
whether a student was New Zealand Maori or non-Maori) were not found to be
significant effects in determining reading achievement levels, as including these
factors did not improve the model fit. A series of statistical tests of significance
indicated these factors were not statistically significant.
Discussion
The question asked in this article was whether a long-standing challenge for more
effective teaching in a particular context of schools serving culturally and linguis-
tically diverse poorer communities could be addressed. The challenge has been to
accelerate levels of achievement in reading comprehension for Maori and Pasifika
Not e s
*When this chapter was written, Turner was in the Starpath Project at the University of
Auckland.
The Woolf Fisher Research Centre receives support from the Woolf Fisher Trust, the University
of Auckland, and Manukau Institute of Technology. The research reported here was funded
by the Teaching and Learning Research Initiative (New Zealand Council for Educational
Research), the Ministy of Education and the Woolf Fisher Trust. We thank all the schools,
teachers, and children who took part in this research.
R ef er ence s
Alton-Lee, A. (2004, November). A collaborative Bishop, R., Berryman, M., Tiakiwai, S., &
knowledge building strategy to improve educa- Richardson, C. (2003). Te kotahitanga phase 1:
tional policy and practice: Work in progress in the The experiences of year 9 & 10 Maori students
Ministry of Educations Best Evidence Synthesis in mainstream classrooms. Retrieved September
Programme. Paper presented at the meeting of 29, 2008, from www.educationcounts.govt.nz/
the New Zealand Association for Research in publications/series/9977/5375
Education National Conference, Wellington,
Block, C.C., & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (2002).
New Zealand.
Comprehension instruction: Research-based best
Anderson, R.C., Wilson, P.T., & Fielding, L.G.
(1988). Growth in reading and how children practices. New York: Guildford.
spend their time outside of school. Reading Borko, H. (2004). Professional development
Research Quarterly, 23(3), 285303. doi:10.1598/ and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain.
RRQ.23.3.2 Educational Researcher, 33(8), 315. doi:10.3102/
Annan, B. (2007). A theory for schooling improve- 0013189X033008003
ment: Consistency and connectivity to improve in- Borman, G.D. (2000). The effects of summer
structional practice. Unpublished doctoral thesis, school: Questions answered, questions raised.
University of Auckland, New Zealand. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child
August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Executive Development, 65(1, Serial No. 260).
summary: Developing literacy in second-language Borman, G.D. (2005). Chapter 1: National ef-
learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on forts to bring reform to scale in high-poverty
Language-Minority children and youth. Retrieved
schools: Outcomes and implications. Review of
August 31, 2007, from www.cal.org/projects/
Research in Education, 29(1), 127. doi:10.3102/
archive/nlpreports/Executive_Summary.pdf
Baker, L. (2002). Metacognition in comprehension 0091732X029001001
instruction. In C.C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Bransford, J., Derry, S., Berliner, D., & Hammerness,
Comprehension instruction: Research-based best K. (2005). Theories of learning and their role in
practices (pp. 7795). New York: Guilford. teaching. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford
Biemiller, A. (1999). Language and reading success. (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world
Cambridge, MA: Brookline. (pp. 4087). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
D
uring the last 20 years, many researchers have conducted studies to un-
derstand how children learn to read. The focus of their research has been
on the cognitive and linguistic processes that are central to the devel-
opment of reading ability rather than on methods of instruction (Adams, 1990;
Gough, Ehri, & Treiman, 1992). It is important to distinguish between learner
processes and teacher methods, because very often these are confused. For ex-
ample, some educators interpret phonics to mean worksheets or skill and drill;
in other words, a method of instruction. To other educators, however, this term
refers to the graphophonic knowledge and decoding procedures that beginners
must acquire to become competent readers. Many methods of instruction besides
worksheets and skill and drill can promote the acquisition of these reading pro-
cesses. The present article explains the processes that students acquire in learn-
ing to read and then considers their implications for instruction.
In portraying the course of acquisition of reading processes suggested by
research findings, various schemes have been proposed for distinguishing stages
or phases of development through which all readers pass on their way from pre-
reading to skilled reading (e.g., Chall, 1983; Ehri, 1987, 1991, 1994; Ehri & Wilce,
1985, 1987a; Frith, 1985; Goswami, 1986, 1988; Gough & Hillinger, 1980; Juel,
1983, 1991; Juel, Griffith, & Gough, 1985; Mason, 1980; Soderbergh, 1977; Stuart
& Coltheart, 1988). Of interest in the present article are schemes that portray the
development of word-reading processes and their instructional implications for
students who have word-identification difficulties.
Information about word-learning processes can assist teachers of problem
readers in several ways. First, it can help them understand and interpret the word-
reading behaviors they see in delayed and disabled readers. Behaviors that might be
regarded as bizarre, atypical reactions to print are in most cases just behaviors that
typify less-mature readers who are at an earlier phase of development. Information
about development can help to clarify the reading processes used by students in a
particular phase and also the constraints that limit their word learning.
This chapter is reprinted from Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 14(2), 135163.
Copyright 1998 by Taylor & Francis. Reprinted with permission.
339
Second, information about word-learning processes can clarify the locus of
difficulties that students have in learning to read words. Various studies have
indicated that some students, called delayed readers, take longer to learn to read
because of absence from school or lack of adequate instruction. Other students,
referred to as disabled readers, are thought to possess a processing deficiency that
makes it harder to learn to read. These deficits may involve greater difficulty in
processing words phonologically or slower processing speeds (Bowers & Wolf,
1993; Wimmer, 1993). Both types impede the word-learning processes described
below, making explicit instruction and practice much more important for acquir-
ing reading competence.
Third, information about phases of development can help teachers determine
how to support, scaffold, and guide their students to the next phase. Too often,
instruction in word identification is unsuccessful with problem readers because
it requires capabilities that students have not yet acquired. Taking account of the
properties of word-learning processes at each phase helps to ensure that instruc-
tion does have utility for learners. Recognizing signs of progress, or lack of it, in
learners can help teachers decide whether their teaching techniques are working
or whether a different approach might better address a learners difficulties. Space
does not allow us to consider the variety of techniques that teachers might use
with problem readers and how these techniques relate to phases of development.
However, if teachers understand the processes to be cultivated at each phase, they
have a basis for judging whether a teaching technique might work in a particular
instance. As teachers gain experience relating their methods of instruction to stu-
dents phases of development, they will become more skilled at this trouble shoot-
ing, problem-solving approach to reading instruction (Ehri & Williams, 1996).
B L O CK C O M B*
S M I L E* Y A CH* T
B U M P T O NG UE*
SH I P L I S T* E N
F L OA T B R IGH T
C A TT LE
spellings, lowercase letters between slashes indicate phonemes, and lines link-
ing letters to phonemes indicate connections. To secure sight words in memory
in this way, readers must possess alphabetic knowledge, including letter shapes,
how to segment pronunciations into phonemes, and which graphemes typically
symbolize which phonemes (Ehri, 1997).
The process of forming connections allows readers to remember how to read
not only words containing conventional lettersound correspondences but also
words that have less regular spellings. Connections that might be formed to re-
member irregular words are included in Figure 1. Note that the same types of
connections are evident. In fact, most of the letters in irregular words conform to
graphemephoneme conventions. In remembering letters that do not correspond
to phonemes, readers may remember them as extra visual forms, or they may flag
them as silent in memory, or they may remember a special spelling pronunciation
Full-Alphabetic Phase
Readers at the full-alphabetic phase of development differ from partial-alphabetic
readers in a number of respects (Ehri, 1991, 1994; Frith, 1985). The full-alphabetic
phase has also been called the spelling-sound stage (Juel, 1991) and the cipher read-
ing stage (Gough & Hillinger, 1980) to convey the point that learners acquire and
use orderly relationships for associating sounds to the letters they see in words. In
terms of development, there is a marked contrast between the previous two phases
and this phase. The pre- and partial-alphabetic phases occur inevitably among
beginners who lack full knowledge of the alphabetic system and who, as a result,
grapple with word reading in ways that are not completely effective. In contrast,
the full-alphabetic phase is an essential beginning point that enables beginners to
acquire the foundation for attaining mature reading skill in an alphabetic writing
system. Mastery of this phase is essential for moving into the next two phases.
Beginners who are taught to read words in writing systems whose spellingsound
correspondences are more regular than Englishfor example, Germanand
who receive systematic phonics instruction spend little if any time in the pre- and
partial-alphabetic phases once they learn how letters symbolize sounds (Wimmer,
1993; Wimmer & Goswami, 1994).
The following word-reading responses characterize students at the full-
alphabetic phase (Ehri, 1991, 1994; Gough & Hillinger, 1980; Juel, 1991; Juel et
al., 1985; Soderbergh, 1977):
1. Learners possess working knowledge of the major graphemephoneme
correspondences, including vowels, and they possess phonemic awareness,
which enables them to match up phonemes in pronunciations of words to
graphemes seen in the conventional spellings of words. This knowledge
enables them to decode unfamiliar words, to perform complete grapho
phonic analyses on words to store them as sight words in memory, and to
read unfamiliar words by analogy to familiar words.
2. Early in this phase, decoding operations are executed slowly. The slow,
nonfluent reading seen initially has been called gluing to print because
learners consciously and deliberately sound out and blend lettersound
associations in their word reading (Chall, 1983). Painstaking decoding
is a typical, temporary aspect of reading development often traceable to
direct instruction in sequential decoding as a means of attacking unfa-
miliar words (e.g., Barr, 1974/1975; Chall, 1983; Clay, 1967; Monaghan,
Consolidated-Alphabetic Phase
The consolidated-alphabetic phase actually begins during the full-alphabetic
phase. Its onset is characterized by the consolidation of larger units out of
graphemephoneme relations that recur in different words. This phase has also
been referred to as the orthographic phase to indicate that the focus is on spelling
patterns (Ehri, 1991; Frith, 1985). Word learning becomes more mature in several
respects (Ehri, 1991, 1994; Juel, 1983).
1. The important acquisition at this phase involves learning chunks of letters
that recur in different words and how they are pronounced. These letter
chunks might include affixes, root words, onsets, rimes, and syllables. The
patterns might be linked to their linguistic originsAnglo-Saxon, Greek,
and Latinto clarify the distinctions and regularities (Henry, 1989). The
Automatic Phase
This is the phase of proficient word reading. Chall (1983) termed this the auto-
matic phase because of readers highly developed automaticity and speed in iden-
tifying unfamiliar as well as familiar words. The majority of words that readers at
this phase encounter are words in their sight vocabularies, enabling them to read
most words effortlessly in or out of context. On the occasions when an uncommon,
technical, or foreign word is met, these readers have several strategies at their dis-
posal for identifying the word. There is some evidence that when automatic-phase
readers recognize words by sight, the other word-reading strategies are at work as
well, though at an unconscious level, and contribute to efficient reading by con-
firming the identities of words and thus creating redundancy in the processing of
text (Perfetti, 1985). The presence of multiple sources to verify word recognition
maintains a high level of reading accuracy. Automatic, fluent word recognition frees
the readers attention to focus on text meaning.
Conclusion
In this review we have indicated that as readers progress from the earliest phase of
reading to the most proficient phase, they learn to read words by several different
means: by using context, by decoding through use of lettersound associations
or spelling patterns, by analogy, and by sight. At each phase, reading improves
as new mechanisms for recognizing words are added to the learners repertoire.
When readers reach the automatic phase, all of these systems are under their
control. It is important for teachers to recognize which systems are operational at
each phase and which are beyond reach at that phase.
Knowledge of the characteristics of each phase can provide teachers with a
basis for assessing the strategies available to readers when they respond to print.
As a first step, teachers can examine the list of characteristics typical of each
phase and compare them to the predominant responses of a learner. Once the
probable phase is identified, a program of word learning can be tailored to capi-
talize on the students learning strengths, to avoid instruction that requires pro-
cesses the learner has not yet acquired, and to provide lessons that will move
the student through that phase into the next. In this way, knowledge about the
phases of word learning allows teachers of delayed and disabled readers to move
beyond generalized prescriptions for word learning. It provides them with a basis
for designing lessons that more precisely make contact with each students word-
reading knowledge and strategies.
In the past, a common approach to instruction has been to determine which
specific skill needs to be taught to studentsfor example, developing a larger sight
vocabulary, or increasing knowledge of lettersound relationships, or increasing
fluency. Once determined, a rather standard group of activities has typically been
Q u e s t i o n s f o r R e fl e c t i o n
I
t is important to remember that what members of the National Early Literacy
Panel (NELP) and the commentators in this issue of Educational Researcher (ER)
have in common is the goal of improving our understanding of childrens early
development related to literacy and advancing the field of early childhood educa-
tion so that children gain the maximum benefit of their education. We were struck
by the eitheror approach of many of these commentaries. The panels report does
not present a choice between code-focused and meaning-focused instruction, and
we do not view early childhood education in this eitheror fashion. Nevertheless,
we applaud the time and effort these authors have expended stating their views
and raising questions for the field, and we are heartened that many of the issues
raised by them are the same as those explicitly stated in the report Developing
Early Literacy (NELP, 2008; available at http://www.nifl.gov/earlychildhood/NELP/
NELPreport.html). We have divided our comments into two articles: This one ad-
dresses the critics conceptual concerns, and the other is on methodological and
statistical issues (see Schatschneider & Lonigan, this issue of ER, pp. 347351).
362
Their failure to acknowledge these variations prevents them, perhaps, from rec-
ognizing how the report advances the field. Unlike the National Reading Panel
(NRP) report (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2000),
our focus was on children of kindergarten age or younger. These reports relied on
some of the same studies of code-based teaching (about 75% of the studies were
unique to either NELP or NRP), but our focus was on understanding the impacts
of interventions specifically with younger children.
Pearson and Hiebert were concerned that we did not examine the results of
large-scale federal studies, such as the Reading First or Early Reading First evalu-
ations. We did not do so because these reports were not peer reviewed and thus
fell outside the scope of our review parameters, were not yet available when we
wrote the report, or did not include preschool or kindergarten outcomes (Reading
First), or because the reports evaluated the impact of a funding stream. Hiebert
and Pearson are correct that there are ways that such studies could have been in-
cluded in a meta-analysis. However, the Early Childhood Longitudinal Program
Kindergarten study (Denton & West, 2002) neither evaluated the effectiveness of
any intervention nor included correlations of early skills with later achievement
(its multivariate results were consistent with the NELP findings).
One consideration in determining the scope of the NELP report was to avoid
the controversies surrounding the NRP conclusions. Our aim was solely to present
a rigorous synthesis of research findings. The report was intended as a first step in a
process to develop practice recommendations; it was never intended to be a practice
document. Some critics decried the interpretations of NELP findings in publications
such as Early Beginnings, but the panelists neither wrote nor approved that publica-
tion. So we have no response to that. However, such publications highlight legiti-
mate differences in interpretation of research results, and rather than complaining
that we failed to impose our interpretations, we are amazed that the commentaries in
this issue failed to articulate their own interpretations (an exception is Schickedanz
and McGees article, pp. 323329, which focuses on how the NELP findings can be
used to better help children). Although we agree that the NELP report could be mis-
interpreted, that is not a flaw of the report. We hope that attempts to use the report to
advance practice would attend to the entirety of the report and that these uses would
neither base recommendations on selected findings nor overextend the evidence.
Furthermore,
The results suggest a need for more careful study of the role of oral language in lit-
eracy development....These results suggest that an instructional focus on vocabulary
during the preschool and kindergarten years is likely a necessary but insufficient
approach to promoting later literacy success. (Lonigan et al., 2008, p. 78)
Far from saying that oral language skills were unimportant to the development
of literacy, our call was to move beyond the narrow focus on vocabulary or creat-
ing language-rich environments often found in discussions of early childhood
education to a broader and more detailed account of what aspects of oral language
require attention and how these skills can be promoted. Indeed, the modest cor-
relations between the global oral language category and later decoding, reading
comprehension, and spelling suggest that a general focus on something labeled
oral language is unlikely to provide much literacy benefit to young children.
In many ways, these critiques appear to be echoing what we highlighted in
the NELP report: that oral language skills are substantially more important for
reading comprehension than for decoding, that a broader array of oral language
skills beyond vocabulary appears to be required for reading comprehension, that
more research on these dimensions of oral language is needed, and that there
is substantially more evidence of positive impacts of instruction for increasing
young childrens simple vocabulary than there is for promoting oral language
skills beyond simple vocabulary (e.g., grammar, deep vocabulary knowledge,
Conclusion
As noted by Whitehurst and Lonigan (1998), there are many pleasing ideas in
the realm of early literacy. When these ideas are subjected to the light of empirical
scrutiny, however, not all emerge unscathed. It is almost a certainty that when a
set of studies is subjected to the rigors of a meta-analysis, someones sacred cow
will be threatened. These critics are correct that the NELP report does not provide
simple answers or espouse a mandate for early childhood education. It summa-
rizes the available evidence, with all of its nuances and blemishes. We welcome
the fact that the report has researchers, practitioners, and policy makers discuss-
ing the implications of current evidence for improving early childhood education,
and we look forward to continuing the conversation.
Q u e s t io n s f o r R e f l e c t io n
R ef er ence s
August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). format. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86,
Developing literacy in second-language learn- 235243.
ers: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Badian, N. A. (2001). Phonological and ortho-
Language-Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, graphic processing: Their roles in reading pre-
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. diction. Annals of Dyslexia, 51, 179202.
Anthony, J. L., Solari, E. J., Williams, J. M., Schoger, Branum-Martin, L., Mehta, P. D., Fletcher, J. M.,
K. D., Zhang, A., Branum-Martin, L., et al. Carlson, C. D., Ortiz, A., Carlo, M., et al. (2006).
(2009). Development of bilingual phonological Bilingual phonological awareness: Multilevel
awareness in Spanish-speaking English lan- construct validation among Spanish-speaking
guage learners: The roles of vocabulary, letter kindergarteners in transitional bilingual edu-
knowledge, and prior phonological awareness. cation classrooms. Journal of Educational
Scientific Studies of Reading, 13, 535564. Psychology, 98, 170181.
Anthony, J. L., Williams, J. M., McDonald, R., Branum-Martin, L., Mehta, P. D., Francis, D. J.,
Corbitt-Shindler, D., Carlson, C. D., & Francis, Foorman, B. R., Cirino, P. T., Miller, J. F., et al.
D. J. (2006). Phonological processing and emer- (2009). Pictures and words: Spanish and English
gent literacy in Spanish-speaking preschool vocabulary in classrooms. Journal of Educational
children. Annals of Dyslexia, 56, 239270. Psychology, 101, 897911.
Arnold, D. S., Lonigan, C. J., Whitehurst, G. J., & Dail, A. R., & Payne, R. L. (2010). Recasting the
Epstein, J. N. (1994). Accelerating language role of family involvement in early literacy de-
development through picture-book reading: velopment: A response to the NELP report.
Replication and extension to a videotape training Educational Researcher, 39, 330333.
C
hildren who are learning English often are characterized in ways that do not
capture their linguistic repertoires. They are referred to as limited English
proficient students or English learners, defining this group of children by a
single feature, their proficiency in English. Young learners who are acquiring two
languages simultaneously or who are developing their primary language as they
learn a second language are better understood as dual-language learners (DLLs).
Four-year-old children who have developed language skills in their home language
and who enroll in early childhood educational settings with no English skills are
also known as early sequential bilinguals (Pea & Kester, 2004). A significant num-
ber of children of immigrant families grow up in bilingual environments where an
estimated 84% of individuals age 5 and older speak a language other than English
(Pew Hispanic Center, 2009). Capturing the bicultural nature of DLLs lives not
only provides a more accurate representation of childrens everyday practices but
also is important to the development of sound and appropriate educational policies
that support their full development as language and literacy learners. The purpose
of this article is to discuss the implications of findings reported by the National
Early Literacy Panel (NELP) for the early care and education of children who are
DLLs. We begin with a discussion of the participation of young DLLs in early care
and education research, including gaps in knowledge. Then we examine the rel-
evance of the NELP report for young DLLs and conclude with a discussion of the
implications of the report for future research.
This chapter is reprinted from Educational Researcher, 39(4), 334339. Copyright 2010 by the American
Educational Research Association. Reprinted with permission.
375
the fastest growing student populations in the United States, with approximately
2 million DLLs enrolled in the prekindergarten to Grade 3 cohort (Kindler, 2002);
however, young DLLs remain largely understudied, often excluded from studies
of early learning and among the least understood from a policy perspective. When
included, these children often are subsumed under a broader at-risk category,
making it difficult to understand underlying learning processes or to tease out
relevant differences and factors.
DLLs are a diverse group, yet one of the most common misconceptions is
that all DLLs are immigrants. Nearly four fifths of children in immigrant families
(79%) are U.S. citizens by birth (Hernandez, Denton, & McCartney, 2008). DLLs
also are highly variable in terms of their socioeconomic status, first-language
practices, and experiences with literacy. Thus meaningful statements about inter-
group comparability between DLLs and monolinguals must do more than rely on
simple comparisons and generalizations; they must account for their variability.
Often, conceptions of these young learnerswhose home practices and histories
of involvement with literacy differ widely, in ways that matterare so flattened
out that they become meaningless as guides for developing policy and practice.
Despite limited empirical evidence, there is a tendency to extrapolate im-
plications for the education of DLLs based on a broader population of children.
Moreover, studies of older DLLs or monolingual English-speaking children serve
as the basis for drawing implications for policy and practices for young DLLs.
As we discuss in the next section, in some cases the authors of studies of young
language and literacy learners employ the universalist principle: If it works for
mainstream children, it must work for English learners and DLLs.
Yet the achievement gap between DLLs and monolingual English-speaking
children persists even after 5 to 6 years of schooling in the United States and is ex-
acerbated by a constellation of factors that constrain DLLs opportunities to learn
(Ballantyne, Sanderman, DEmilio, & McLaughlin, 2008; Reardon & Galindo,
2006). DLLs are more likely to live in high-poverty communities and thus are
more likely to lack access to health care services and to libraries and enrichment
opportunities; they also are less likely to attend preschool (Ballantyne et al., 2008;
Dolan, 2009), where forms of support known to have a positive influence on chil-
drens early learning are available (Bowman, Donovan, & Burns, 2000).
Given the vulnerability of these young learners, we must insist on an
evidence-based approach to policy and practice for DLLs, as we would for all
children. Research that focuses on preschool-age and younger DLLs is needed to
understand how early language and literacy learning unfolds. In particular, we
call attention to the need for more studies that examine how the home language
supports second-language learning in English, including how early biliteracy
supports learning in formal schooling environments. Presently, much of what is
known either is based on short-term studies that stress English acquisition over
the continued use of the home language or is derived from school-age populations
(August & Shanahan, 2006; Genesee, Lindholm-Leary, Saunders, & Christian,
2006).
Here the NELP study first argues that its studies include mixed samples of chil-
dren from various ethnic and racial groups, socioeconomic backgrounds, and
population centers but that the studies lack sufficient specificity to examine differ-
ences across groups. Nevertheless the report recommends the intervention for all
children until there are sufficient studies to support or proffer other claims. The
report makes a similar argument regarding the positive effect of shared-reading
interventions:
At present, the number of studies in the literature that have examined specific
groups of children (such as children from different SES backgrounds, different eth-
nicities, home languages, or living circumstancesi.e., rural versus urban) is not
As before, the studys authors find it reasonable to recommend that shared read-
ing would help all or most subgroups of children:
Studies focusing on shared reading with these groups have not yet been reported in
sufficient frequency to allow definitive answers to these questions. Nevertheless,
the existing studies provide no reason to expect substantially different patterns of
results for these variables in future research. (p. 164)
The issue here is not whether shared reading is inappropriate for DLLs; that is
an empirical question. Rather, the point is that we currently do not have a suf-
ficient evidence base to support the claim. Researchers need to provide appropri-
ate caveats and proceed with care when extrapolating findings on monolingual
English-speaking children, or samples that have insufficient numbers of subpop-
ulations, to subgroup populations with distinct characteristics, such as DLLs,
that would benefit from appropriate and robust forms of instruction and support.
For instance, questions about shared reading for DLLs should ask how this strat-
egy should be implemented to be effective with DLLs at different stages in their
English acquisition (e.g., language or languages used, in which sequence, how
many times, for how long).
Further, the report makes a number of claims about what works that could
be interpreted in ways that have unintended consequences for children who are
most in need of robust literacy practices. As Dickinson, Hirsh-Pasek, Neuman,
Burchinal, and Golinkoff (2009) observed, the report may suggest a prescription
for early literacy that privileges narrow skills at the expense of oral language
skills, vocabulary, and background knowledge that form the foundation for early
and long-term literacy (p. 1). This is consequential, as large studies of the effects
of early language on reading development illustrate the relation between language
and code-related skills (Dickinson et al., 2009) and the role that language plays in
subsequent reading comprehension (Vellutino, Tunmer, Jaccard, & Chen, 2007).
Although NELPs synthesis notes that oral language skills are a moderate to
strong predictor of emergent literacy, the report also suggests that indices of oral
language development were moderate to weak predictors of later reading skills
and less predictive than conventional reading skills (e.g., phonological process-
ing skills). Despite the attention to language studies, NELPs core findings do not
emphasize the development of oral language as being critical to later reading, as
are decoding skills.
More specifically, the main table reporting predictors of reading comprehen-
sion measured at or before kindergarten lists oral language with an average r of
only .33. However, this is misleading. A secondary analysis reported later in the
chapter shows that some oral language measures have a much higher average r,
including overall language comprehension (.70), receptive language (.52), expres-
sive language (.48), and grammar (.47), and some others have an average r at least
1. What are the dangers of assuming that literacy practices that work for gen-
eral education students will work for DLLs as well?
2. What evidence did the NELP report find of the importance of oral language
skills as a predictor of emergent literacy?
3. How might the assumptions made in the NELP report be used to support
narrow drill-and-skills approaches to literacy development with DLLs?
R ef er e nce s
AERA Task Force on Reporting of Research Carlson, S. M., & Choi, H. P. (2009, April). Bilingual
Methods in AERA Publications. (2006). and bicultural: Executive function in Korean and
Standards for reporting on empirical social sci- American children. Paper presented at the 2009
ence research in AERA publications. Educational Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in
Researcher, 35(6), 3340. Child Development, Denver, Colorado.
August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Castro, D.C., Espinosa, L., & Paz, M. (in press).
Developing literacy in second-language learn- Defining and measuring quality in early child-
ers: Report of the National Literacy Panel on hood practices that promote dual language
Language-Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, learners development and learning. In M.
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Zaslow, I. Martinez-Beck, K. Tout, & T. Halle
Ballantyne, K. G., Sanderman, A. R., DEmilio, T., & (Eds.), Measuring quality in early childhood set-
McLaughlin, N. (2008). Dual language learners in
tings. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
the early years: Getting ready to succeed in school.
Castro, D. C., Pez, M., Dickinson, D., & Frede, E.
Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for
English Language Acquisition and Language (in press). Promoting language and literacy in
Instruction Educational Programs. young dual language learners: Research, prac-
Bialystok, E. (2009). Claiming evidence from tice and policy. Child Development Perspectives.
non-evidence: A reply to Morton and Harper. Cole, M., & Griffin, P. (1980). Cultural amplifiers
Developmental Science, 12(4), 499450. reconsidered. In D. R. Olson (Ed.), The social
Bowman, B. T., Donovan, M. S., & Burns, M. S. foundations of language and thought: Essays in
(2000). Eager to learn: Educating our preschool- honor of Jerome S. Bruner (pp. 343364). New
ers. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. York: Norton.
Brisk, M. E., & Harrington, M. M. (2007). Literacy Collins, M. F. (2005). ESL preschoolers English
and bilingualism: A handbook for all teachers (2nd vocabulary acquisition from storybook reading.
ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(4), 406408.
T
he process of becoming literate can be conceptualized as a series of quali-
tatively different stages through which learners progress as they become
increasingly proficient with print (Chall, 1996b; Harris & Sipay, 1990).
One of the primary advances in this process involves the shift from dealing with
words on a word-by-word basis to a rapid, accurate, and expressive rendering
of text. In other words, learners develop such familiarity with print that they
achieve fluency in their reading. Fluent reading may underlie or assist in effective
engagement with text (LaBerge & Samuels, 1974). The purpose of this chapter is
a review of the literature examining how children move toward fluent reading.
It will incorporate both theoretical discussions and practical studies relating to
fluency research. Specifically, to accomplish this purpose, we have reviewed the
theoretical accounts of reading that include an important role for fluency in the
reading process and studies that have attempted to facilitate its development.
385
of reading (Nell, 1988). This will not be reviewed here. Instead, we will concentrate
on the relative importance of automaticity and prosody to comprehension.
Contribution of Automaticity
Proficient readers have certain features in common; they not only read accurately,
but also their recognition of words is automatic. The question is, How does this auto-
maticity contribute to the primary goal of reading, which is comprehension of text?
An individual has a limited amount of attention available for any given cognitive
task (LaBerge & Samuels, 1974; Perfetti, 1985; Stanovich, 1980). This being the case,
attention expended on one activity is, necessarily, attention unavailable for another.
In the case of reading, an individual is required to perform at least two in-
terdependent tasks: The reader must determine what words compose the text
while simultaneously constructing meaning. As such, the greater the amount of
attention expended on decoding, the less that is available for comprehension. To
ensure that readers have enough attention to understand texts adequately, the
argument continues, it is necessary for them to develop decoding to the point
where each word is recognized instantaneously. Once this occurs, they will have
the necessary attention to focus on the sense or meaning of the text.
According to Stanovichs (1980) interactive-compensatory model, informa-
tion from multiple sources is available for aiding readers in their construction of
meaning. This is true at each stage of development and presumes that learners will
make use of information from orthographic, phonological, semantic, and syntactic
sources. However, if a reader is less adept at gleaning information from one source,
he or she may become overreliant on other sources. It follows that until readers
achieve automaticity in word recognition, they will necessarily depend more on
alternative knowledge sources to make sense of what is being read. In other words,
they are more likely to rely on context as an aid to word recognition and compre-
hension than are fluent readers. (This refers only to the use of context as an aid to
identifying words already in a childs lexicon, not to the use of context in learn-
ing new word meanings. Stanovich would argue that automatic word recognition
allows readers to concentrate on the meaning of text, rather than on identifying
words. Thus, automatic word recognition allows one to focus contextual analysis
on constructing meaning rather than decoding [see also Adams, 1990].)
The question then becomes, How do learners make the shift from decod-
ing accurately but deliberately to decoding automatically? According to the au-
tomaticity theorists, the best way to ensure this transition is through extensive
practice. As with any skill that requires an individual to coordinate a series of
smaller actions to create a unified process, it is practice that allows the learner to
develop expertise. In terms of reading, this practice consists primarily in provid-
ing successive exposures to print. As letters, and later words, become increasingly
familiar to the learner, less and less attention needs to be directed toward process-
ing text at the orthographic level. This ability to complete a process without con-
scious attention fulfills LaBerge and Samuelss (1974) criterion for automaticity.
In this way, the automaticity theory accounts for two of the components of fluent
reading: accurate decoding at a sufficient rate. It further posits an explanation for
Contribution of Prosody
Although the automaticity theory accounts for the accurate and effortless decoding
that fluent readers exhibit, it fails to provide a sufficient explanation for the role that
prosody plays in the reading process. When an individual provides a fluent render-
ing of a text, there is a tacit understanding that he or she is doing more than simply
reading the words quickly and accurately; he or she is also reading with expression.
Implicit in the phrase reading with expression is the use of those prosodic features
that account for the tonal and rhythmic aspects of language (Dowhower, 1991).
Prosody comprises a series of features including pitch or intonation, stress
or loudness, and duration or timing, all of which contribute to an expressive ren-
dering of a text (Allington, 1983; Dowhower, 1991; Schreiber, 1980, 1987, 1991).
Additionally, prosodic reading includes appropriately chunking groups of words
into phrases or meaningful units in accordance with the syntactic structure of
the text. Taken together, these features are classified as suprasegmental because
they extend over more than one speech sound and contribute to meaning. Given
this understanding of what constitutes prosody, it is necessary to determine the
role that prosody plays in the development of fluency and the ways in which these
features contribute to the construction of meaning from a text.
Prosody may provide a link between fluency and comprehension. Chafe
(1988) speculates that to read a sentence with intonation, one must assign syntac-
tic roles to the words in the sentence. The assignment of syntactic roles is a key
component of microprocessing, or the mental parsing of a text into hierarchically
ordered propositions (Kintsch, 1998). Schreiber (1987) also suggests that the ex-
plicit presence of prosodic cues may be one crucial difference between speech and
reading and one of the reasons that speech is easier to understand. However, he
reports that the evidence supporting a link between prosody and microprocessing
is weak, with some studies finding links between the use of prosodic features and
syntactic comprehension, and others failing to find such an effect.
Dowhower (1991) identifies six distinct markers that compose prosodic
reading: pausal intrusions, length of phrases, appropriateness of phrases, final
phrase lengthening, terminal intonation contours, and stress. From a linguistic
perspective, readers who use these markers appropriately are capable of making
the connection between written and oral language. In other words, they are able
to transfer their knowledge of syntax from speech to text by effectively applying
these features to their reading. Such readers can produce a rendering of text that
maintains the important features of expressive oral language in addition to read-
ing it accurately and at an appropriate rate.
Children who have not achieved fluency read either in a word-by-word man-
ner or by grouping words in ways that deviate from the type of phrasing that
occurs naturally in oral language (Allington, 1983; Chall, 1996b; Clay & Imlach,
1971; Dowhower, 1991; Samuels, 1988). Young children are highly attuned to the
use of prosodic features in speech (Dowhower, 1991; Schreiber, 1987; Schreiber &
Fluency 387
Read, 1980). In fact, research indicates that infants under a year old use prosodic
features as a primary cue to the syntactic structure of their language and that their
babbling follows the characteristics inherent in the prosody of their primary lan-
guage. Further, Read and Schreiber (1982) and Schreiber (1987) have determined
that children are not only highly attuned to prosodic elements in oral language but
also actually more reliant on them for determining meaning than are adults.
Given childrens sensitivity to prosody in oral language, it seems reasonable
to assume that they are equally dependent on these features in determining the
meaning of text (Allington, 1983; Dowhower, 1991; Schreiber, 1991). In fact, ap-
propriate phrasing, intonation, and stress are all considered to be indicators that
a child has become a fluent reader (Chomsky, 1978; Rasinski, 1990b; Samuels,
Schermer, & Reinking, 1992). The reasoning behind this emphasis is that such
readings provide clues to an otherwise invisible process; they act as indicators of
the readers comprehension. Given that a fluent reader is one who groups text into
syntactically appropriate phrases, this parsing of text signifies that the reader has
an understanding of what is being read.
Studies
We found 58 studies dealing with assisted reading, repeated reading, or class-
room interventions designed to improve fluency. In addition, we found nine stud-
ies dealing with segmented text and four studies dealing with speeded isolated
word recognition. This is a total of 71 studies.
Segmented text and isolated word-recognition studies were analyzed sepa-
rately. Our logic in doing so was as follows: If fluency-based instruction affects
microprocessing, then we might also expect to find effects in studies using seg-
mented text, that is, text broken up by phrases. If fluency instruction improves
comprehension by helping students develop automatic word recognition, then
we might see similar effects from studies in which readers word recognition was
speeded up through practice of reading words in isolation.
There are several reasons for the preponderance of studies without control
groups. Repeated reading and assisted readings were developed as clinical ap-
proaches for working with children with reading problems (e.g., Dahl, 1979).
Thus, testing their effectiveness with targeted children using baseline or multiple
Fluency 389
Table 1. Repeated-Reading Studies
390
Criteria
(Multiple Reading Initial Microprocessing
Readings vs. Grade of Level of Fluency of Level of Fluency Comprehension General
Study Criteria) Participants Participantsa Participants Material Read Results (Results) Comprehension Notes
Bell, Markley, Set number of 23 Average Not given Instructional Improvement No effect on
Yonker readings (3) over time attitudes
Fluency
Fuchs (1993) readings disabled (continued)
391
Table 1. Repeated-Reading Studies (Continued)
392
Criteria
(Multiple Reading Initial Microprocessing
Readings vs. Grade of Level of Fluency of Level of Fluency Comprehension General
Study Criteria) Participants Participantsa Participants Material Read Results (Results) Comprehension Notes
OShea, Set number of 3 At or above Average Above grade Improvement Improvement Improvement
Sindelar, readings grade level (70119 over time over time over time
Fluency
Experiment 1 (continued)
393
Table 1. Repeated-Reading Studies (Continued)
394
Criteria
(Multiple Reading Initial Microprocessing
Readings vs. Grade of Level of Fluency of Level of Fluency Comprehension General
Study Criteria) Participants Participantsa Participants Material Read Results (Results) Comprehension Notes
van der Set number of 57 1st grade Not given C > T; T = C
Leij (1981), readings (4)
Fluency 395
that they will improve their word-recognition skills. However, it struck the re-
searchers that by increasing the amount of practice on a given passage, students
might be able to improve not only their accuracy but also their fluency. We found
a total of 33 comparisons dealing with repeated reading, over half of the total
population of studies dealing with fluency reading instruction. These studies are
summarized in Table 1. The vast majority dealt with either students at the sec-
ond- or third-grade level or older children with reading problems who could be
presumed to be reading at a primary level.
Criteria. The majority of studies had students read each passage a set number
of times, usually three readings, rather than using the criterion suggested by
Samuels (1979; i.e., 100 wpm). Of the 15 studies with a control group, two used
criteria. Of these two, one had a significant treatment difference, and one did not.
Of the remaining 13 studies in which students read a set number of times, three
found significant differences, nine did not, and two had mixed findings. Overall,
there were too few studies that used a criterion to evaluate its effectiveness.
Other Findings. Dowhower (1987) not only used rate and accuracy as measures
of fluency but also found that repeated reading had measurable effects on speech
pauses and intonation. Herman (1985) found not only effects on speech pauses
and rate for read material but also that repeated-readings treatment transferred to
previously unread material.
Rashotte and Torgesen (1985) found that students reading texts with a high
overlap of words improved in rate and accuracy more than did students reading
texts with a low overlap. Although these two groups differed significantly, nei-
ther was significantly more fluent than a group engaged in nonrepetitive reading.
However, Rashotte and Torgesen limited students to four readings of each text;
they might have found stronger effects had they had students read to a fluency
criterion for each text.
Assisted-Reading Strategies
As with the unassisted repeated reading, assisted readings emphasize practice as
a means of improving accuracy, automaticity, and prosody as well as the learn-
ers understanding of a text. Further, they provide extensive exposure to print.
However, unlike traditional repeated reading, assisted-reading methods provide
learners with a model of fluent reading (Dowhower, 1989). There is also a greater
amount of variation among the intervention strategies. To maintain a sense of
cohesion, we outline the various methods along with several studies that evalu-
ate the effectiveness of these methods. We found 15 studies involving assisted
Fluency 397
reading. Of these, seven had a control group to evaluate effectiveness of the treat-
ment, and eight did not. These studies are summarized in Table 2.
Reading-While-Listening. Chomsky (1978) and Carbo (1981) also used tapes for
an assisted-reading approach called reading-while-listening. This intervention differs
from Hollingsworths (1970, 1978) modified assisted-reading approach insofar as
there is less direct monitoring from the teacher, and students are responsible for de-
termining the length and frequency of their sessions. One of the primary concerns
regarding such read-along techniques is that there is no way to ensure active en-
gagement on the part of the learners. Indeed, in a number of classroom observation
studies (e.g., Evans & Carr, 1985; Leinhardt, Zigmond, & Cooley, 1981), time spent
listening to tapes in class did not significantly affect achievement. In these reading-
while-listening studies, however, students were held responsible for being able to
read the text fluently, so they did actively participate in the process.
Results. Using the same vote-counting procedure as for repeated reading, five
of the seven studies using assisted reading with a control group had significant
treatment differences. When analyzed by number of comparisons, six of the nine
comparisons proved significant treatment effects.
Finally, comparisons of assisted and unassisted forms of repeated reading
(Dowhower, 1987; Rasinski, 1990a) found both to be effective. For Dowhowers
study, both approaches showed gains in rate, accuracy, and comprehension on
practiced and similar nonpracticed passages and gains in prosody for the reading-
while-listening group. Similarly, Rasinski found that both approaches led to
significant gains in speed and accuracy, but he favored reading-while-listening
because it was easier to implement and, as a result, may be a more efficient aid to
fluency development.
Fluency
accuracy
also
399
(continued)
Table 2. Assisted-Reading Studies (Continued)
400
Criteria
(Multiple Initial Level of Microprocessing
Readings Number of Grade Reading Level Fluency of Material Fluency Comprehension General
Study vs. Criteria) Participants Level of Participants Participants Read Results (Results) Comprehension Notes
Hollingsworth Set amount 8 4 Average Varied from T=C T=C
(1970) of time 1 year below
Fluency 401
were prepared for their reading performances in three ways: They were taught
to select appropriate texts for their audience, they were given opportunities to
develop fluency with the books, and they determined ways in which they could
involve kindergartners in discussions of the texts.
We found two other studies that examined cross-age tutoring but with less
salutary results. Sutton (1991) examined the effects of cross-age tutoring with
first and second graders. She reported improvement over time in fluency and the
amount of time spent engaged in reading, but she did not have a control group.
Ramunda (1994) used above-average second graders as tutors, but she did not find
a significant effect on comprehension compared with a control group.
It seems that cross-age tutoring appears to be successful with below-grade-
level tutors but does not seem to affect above-grade-level tutors. This may be be-
cause the below-grade-level tutors in Labbo and Teales (1990) study were reading
relatively difficult materials, but the above-grade-level tutors in Ramundas (1994)
study were reading relatively easy texts. It could also indicate that the procedure
aids fluency development in struggling readers but does not assist readers who
are already considered to be fluent.
Discussion
When fluency instruction was compared with the traditional instruction used
with a basal reader, fluency instruction improved childrens reading fluency and
comprehension. When different approaches to fluency instruction were com-
pared, the results were less clear-cut. Overall, these strategies seem, to a greater
or lesser degree, effective in assisting readers making the transition to fluent
reading. These include normally achieving students at the point where they are
making this transition and those who are experiencing difficulties in becoming
fluent.
This finding is subject to a caveat. Relatively few studies had conventional
experimental or quasi-experimental designs. Many of the studies, from a spe-
cial education tradition, used single or multiple baseline designs, in which prog-
ress is examined over a period of time. These studies can be robust (Neuman &
McCormick, 1995), but we find the reliance on this design in an entire body of
Fluency 403
research to be problematic. Also, in a number of studies in which progress could
be compared with a norm, students progress fell below what would be expected
(e.g., Blum et al., 1995; Chomsky, 1978).
Conclusions
Fluency Instruction and the Stage Model. According to Challs (1996b) stage
model, one would expect that fluency instruction would be most effective for
children in the confirmation and fluency stage, from the end of first grade to
third grade. This proposition is difficult to test because practically all studies
used either normally achieving second graders or older children with reading
problems who were reading at the second-grade level. That is, nearly all of the
researchers working with fluency instruction implicitly accepted a stage view
and acted accordingly. Of the few studies that used populations outside of this
range, the results supported the stage model. Hollingsworth (1970) used average
fourth graders, who should have been in the learning-the-new stage and not in
need of fluency instruction, and found that the treatment did not produce signifi-
cant improvement over a control. Hollingsworth (1978) replicated this study with
below-average fourth graders, who would have been predicted to benefit from
this training, and found that they did. Stahl et al. (1997) found that their fluency-
oriented reading instruction program was highly effective with children reading
at a primer level or higher at the beginning of second grade. Nearly all of those
students were reading at the second-grade level by the end of the year. With chil-
dren reading below the primer level, the approach brought only half to that level.
Teachers dropped children who were reading at an emergent stage from the pro-
gram because it did not seem to benefit them. Blum et al. (1995) found that only
children who entered their assisted-reading treatment with some reading abil-
ity (a preprimer level) benefited from the treatment. Both Marseglia (1997) and
Turpie and Paratore (1995) found that their repeated-readings treatment seemed
to work better for the higher level first graders that they worked with than with
the lower achieving first graders.
Therefore, the research results are consistent with the stage model. Fluency
instruction seems to work best with children between a late preprimer level and
late second-grade level. Beyond or below that level, the results are not as strong.
Children need to have some entering knowledge about words to benefit from re-
reading but not be so fluent that they cannot demonstrate improvements.
Relative Difficulty of the Text. What level should the text be? Some have argued
that having children read easy text improves fluency (e.g., Clay, 1993), but it seems
that the most successful approaches involved children reading instructional-level
text or even text at the frustration level with strong support (see Stahl et al., 1997).
Mathes and Fuchs (1993), however, used both relatively easy and relatively difficult
texts and found no effect for text difficulty. More directed work needs to be done to
assess the effects of the relative difficulty of text on learning.
Next, both practice and support are essential to the development of fluent
reading and can be provided either through repetition or modeling. Whether this
provision comes through the use of taped narrations, another individual, or rep-
etition seems to be less crucial a matter than the fact that it exists, for such sup-
port seems to allow learners to work within their zone of proximal development
(Vygotsky, 1978), offering the scaffolding that allows learners to successfully
move beyond the point at which they are able to work independently.
An Irony
The method of repeated reading, as discussed by Samuels (1979, 1988; Samuels et
al., 1992), was developed as an approach to translate LaBerge and Samuelss (1974)
automatic information processing model into an instructional approach. LaBerge
and Samuelss model is based on the notion that automatic processing of words will
free up attentional resources that can then be devoted to comprehension. Samuels
contends that through repeated reading, children will develop automatic word rec-
ognition, thus allowing them to be able to improve their comprehension. As shown
in this review, repeated reading and other fluency-oriented approaches do improve
comprehension. However, the irony is that they do not appear to improve auto-
matic word recognition, as measured by conventional experimental psychology
measures. Dahl (1979) failed to find that repeated reading improved tachistoscopic
recognition of words, and neither Dowhower (1989) nor McFalls, Schwanenflugel,
and Stahl (1996) found that fluency-oriented instruction improved childrens re-
sponse latency to words. Thus, fluency-oriented instruction seems to have salutary
Fluency 405
effects in a number of areas but not in the area that it was intended for, rapid rec-
ognition of isolated words.
Fluency 407
R eferences
Adams, M.J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and Clay, M.M. (1993). Reading recovery: A guide-
learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. book for teachers in training. Portsmouth, NH:
Allington, R.L. (1983). Fluency: The neglected read- Heinemann.
ing goal. The Reading Teacher, 36(6), 556561. Clay, M.M., & Imlach, R.H. (1971). Juncture, pitch,
Anderson, R.C., Hiebert, E.H., Wilkinson, I.A.G., & and stress as reading behavior variables. Journal
Scott, J. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers: The of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10(2),
report of the Commission on Reading. Washington, 133139. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(71)80004-X
DC: National Institute of Education. Cromer, W. (1970). The difference model: A new
Anderson, R.C., Wilson, P.T., & Fielding, L.G. explanation for some reading difficulties.
(1988). Growth in reading and how children Journal of Educational Psychology, 61(6), 471
spend their time outside of school. Reading 483. doi:10.1037/h0030288
Research Quarterly, 23(3), 285303. doi:10.1598/ Dahl, P.R. (1979). An experimental program for
RRQ.23.3.2 teaching high speed word recognition and com-
Bell, D.M., Markley, B.K., & Yonker, R.J. (1990). prehension skills. In J.E. Button, T. Lovitt, &
The effect of repeated reading on elementary stu- T. Rowland (Eds.), Communications research in
dents attitude toward reading. East Lansing, learning disabilities and mental retardation (pp.
MI: National Center for Research on Teacher 3365). Baltimore: University Park.
Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Dowhower, S.L. (1987). Effects of repeated reading
Service No. ED326844) on second-grade transitional readers fluency
Berliner, D.C. (1981). Academic learning time and and comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly,
reading achievement. In J.T. Guthrie (Ed.), Com- 22(4), 389406. doi:10.2307/747699
prehension and teaching: Research reviews (pp. Dowhower, S.L. (1989). Repeated reading: Theory
203226). Newark, DE: International Reading into practice. The Reading Teacher, 42(7),
Association. 502507.
Blanchard, J.S. (1981). A comprehension strategy Dowhower, S.L. (1991). Speaking of prosody: Fluen-
for disabled readers in the middle school. Journal cys unattended bedfellow. Theory Into Practice,
of Reading, 24, 331336. 30(3), 165175. doi:10.1080/00405849109543497
Blum, I.H., Koskinen, P.S., Tennant, N., Parker, Eldredge, J.L. (1990). Increasing the performance
E.M., Straub, M., & Curry, C. (1995). Using of poor readers in the third grade with a group-
audiotaped books to extend classroom literacy in- assisted strategy. The Journal of Educational
struction into the homes of second-language learn- Research, 84(2), 6977.
ers (Reading Research Report No. 39). Athens, Eldredge, J.L., & Quinn, D.W. (1988). Increasing
GA: National Reading Research Center. reading performance of low-achieving second
Bohlen, L. (1988). Building fluency through re- graders with dyad reading groups. The Journal of
peated reading in the third grade. East Lansing, Educational Research, 82(1), 4046.
MI: National Center for Research on Teaching Evans, M.A., & Carr, T.H. (1985). Cognitive abili-
Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction ties, conditions of learning and the early de-
Service No. ED294158) velopment of reading skill. Reading Research
Carbo, M. (1978). Teaching reading with talking Quarterly, 20(3), 327350. doi:10.2307/748022
books. The Reading Teacher, 32(3), 267273. Fleisher, L.S., Jenkins, J.R., & Pany, D. (1979).
Carbo, M. (1981). Making books talk to children. Effects on poor readers comprehension of
The Reading Teacher, 35(2), 186189. training in rapid decoding. Reading Research
Carver, R.P., & Hoffman, J.V. (1981). The effect of Quarterly, 15(1), 3048. doi:10.2307/747430
practice through repeated reading on gain in Gardner, C. (1965). Experimental use of the impress
reading ability using a computer-based instruc- method of reading rehabilitation. East Lansing,
tional system. Reading Research Quarterly, 16(3), MI: National Center for Research on Teacher
374390. doi:10.2307/747408 Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Ser-
Chafe, W. (1988). Punctuation and the prosody of vice No. ED003838)
written language. Written Communication, 5(9), Gilbert, L.M., Williams, R.L., & McLaughlin, T.F.
395426. doi:10.1177/0741088388005004001 (1996). Use of assisted reading to increase cor-
Chall, J.S. (1996a). Learning to read: The great de- rect reading rates and decrease error rates of
bate (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. students with learning disabilities. Journal
Chall, J.S. (1996b). Stages of reading development of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29(2), 255257.
(2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace. doi:10.1901/jaba.1996.29-255
Chomsky, C. (1978). When you still cant read Hannah, A.M. (1994). The effects of repeated read-
in third grade. After decoding, what? In S.J. ings on the reading fluency and comprehension of
Samuels (Ed.), What research has to say about second-grade, Chapter 1 students. Unpublished
reading instruction (pp. 1330). Newark, DE: doctoral dissertation, University of Delaware,
International Reading Association. Newark.
Fluency 409
OShea, L.J., & Sindelar, P.T. (1983). The effects of Schreiber, P.A. (1980). On the acquisition of read-
segmenting written discourse on the reading ing fluency. Journal of Reading Behavior, 12(3),
comprehension of low- and high-performance 177186.
readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 18(4), 458 Schreiber, P.A. (1987). Prosody and structure in
465. doi:10.2307/747380 childrens syntactic processing. In R. Horowitz
OShea, L.J., Sindelar, P.T., & OShea, D. (1985). The & S.J. Samuels (Eds.), Comprehending oral and
effects of repeated readings and attentional cues written language (pp. 243270). New York:
on reading fluency and comprehension. Journal Academic.
of Reading Behavior, 17(2), 129142. Schreiber, P.A. (1991). Understanding prosodys role
OShea, L.J., Sindelar, P.T., & OShea, D. (1987). The in reading acquisition. Theory Into Practice, 30(3),
effects of repeated readings and attentional cues 158164. doi:10.1080/00405849109543496
on the reading fluency and comprehension of Schreiber, P.A., & Read, C. (1980). Childrens use
learning disabled readers. Learning Disabilities of phonetic cues in spelling, parsing, and
Research, 2(2), 103109. maybereading. Bulletin of the Orton Society,
Perfetti, C.A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: 30, 209224. doi:10.1007/BF02653719
Oxford University Press. Scruggs, T.E. (1987). The quantitative synthesis
Person, M.E., & Burke, D.M. (1984, October). Oral of single subject research: Methodology and
reading in the classroom. Paper presented at the validation. Remedial and Special Education, 8(2),
annual meeting of the Northern Rocky Mountain 2433. doi:10.1177/074193258700800206
Educational Research Association, Jackson Hole, Simmons, D.C., Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Mathes, P.,
WY. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. & Hodge, J.P. (1995). Effects of explicit teaching
ED251796) and peer tutoring on the reading achievement of
Ramunda, J.M. (1994). A cross-age reading program: learning-disabled and low-performing students
Building fluency and comprehension. Unpublished in regular classrooms. The Elementary School
masters thesis, Kean College, Union, NJ. (ERIC Journal, 95(5), 387408. doi:10.1086/461851
Document Reproduction Service No. ED366940) Spring, C., Blunden, D., & Gatheral, M. (1981).
Rashotte, C.A., & Torgesen, J.K. (1985). Repeated Effect on reading comprehension of training
reading and reading fluency in learning-disabled to automaticity in word-reading. Perceptual
and Motor Skills, 53(3), 779786. doi:10.2466/
children. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(2), 180
pms.1981.53.3.779
188. doi:10.1598/RRQ.20.2.4
Stahl, S.A., Heubach, K., & Cramond, B. (1997).
Rasinski, T.V. (1990a). Effects of repeated read-
Fluency-oriented reading instruction. Athens, GA:
ing and listening-while-reading on reading flu-
National Reading Research Center; Washington,
ency. The Journal of Educational Research, 83(3),
DC: Educational Resources Information Center,
147150.
Office of Educational Research and Improve-
Rasinski, T.V. (1990b). Investigating measures of
ment, U.S. Department of Education.
reading fluency. Educational Research Quarterly, Stahl, S.A., Jacobson, M.G., Davis, C.E., & Davis,
14(3), 3744. R.L. (1989). Prior knowledge and difficult vo-
Rasinski, T.V., Padak, N., Linek, W., & Sturtevant, B. cabulary in the comprehension of unfamiliar
(1994). Effects of fluency development on urban text. Reading Research Quarterly, 24(1), 2743.
second-grade readers. The Journal of Educational doi:10.2307/748009
Research, 87(3), 158165. doi:10.1080/00220671 Stanovich, K.E. (1980). Toward an interactive-
.1994.9941237 compensatory model of individual differ-
Read, C., & Schreiber, P.A. (1982). Why short sub- ences in the development of reading fluency.
jects are harder to find than long ones. In E. Reading Research Quarterly, 16(1), 3271.
Wanner & L. Gleitman (Eds.), Language acquisi- doi:10.2307/747348
tion: The state of the art (pp. 78101). Cambridge, Stoddard, K., Valcante, G., Sindelar, P., OShea, L.,
UK: Cambridge University Press. & Algozzine, P. (1993). Increasing reading rate
Richek, M.A., & McTeague, B.K. (1988). The and comprehension: The effects of repeated
Curious George strategy for students with readings, sentence segmentation, and intonation
reading problems. The Reading Teacher, 42(3), training. Reading Research and Instruction, 32(4),
220226. 5365. doi:10.1080/19388079309558133
Samuels, S.J. (1979). The method of repeated read- Strong, M.W., & Traynelis-Yurek, E. (1983).
ings. The Reading Teacher, 32(4), 403408. Behavioral reinforcement within a perceptual-
Samuels, S.J. (1988). Decoding and automaticity: conditioning program of oral reading. East Lansing,
Helping poor readers become automatic at word MI: National Center for Research on Teacher
recognition. The Reading Teacher, 41(8), 756760. Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Samuels, S.J., Schermer, N., & Reinking, D. (1992). Service No. ED233328)
Reading fluency: Techniques for making decod- Sutton, P.A. (1991). Strategies to increase oral read-
ing automatic. In S.J. Samuels & A.E. Farstrup ing fluency of primary resource students. East
(Eds.), What research has to say about reading Lansing, MI: National Center for Research
instruction (2nd ed., pp. 124144). Newark, DE: on Teacher Learning. (ERIC Document
International Reading Association. Reproduction Service No. ED335660)
Fluency 411
C h a p t e r 16
W
hen asked to revise this chapter for the latest edition of Theoretical
Models and Processes of Reading, I thought about changes in the field of
reading disabilities (RD) that have occurred since my initial writing of
the chapter a number of years ago. Perhaps the most important changes have in-
volved those spurred by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement
Act, popularly termed IDEA 2004, which permitted schools to adopt Response
to Intervention (RTI) criteria in identification of RD and to eliminate the use of
the IQachievement discrepancy model. The latter model, long the centerpiece of
identification criteria for RD and other learning disabilities (LD), requires students
to have IQ scores substantially higher than their achievement scores to be eligible
for special education services in the category of LD. In contrast, RTI criteria do not
require the routine use of IQ tests; rather, they involve providing research-based
interventions to students who need them as part of the general education system.
RTI models conceptualize students with LD as those failing to make adequate
progress even in interventions effective for most other struggling students.
A fourth-grade student who Ill call Jamie captures the type of experience I
often had in schools a decade ago. Jamies teachers were considering him for spe-
cial education services in the category of LD. He had had trouble in reading since
early first grade but had not previously been eligible for services because he did
not meet IQachievement discrepancy criteria. Reports in Jamies file indicated
that he had a full-scale IQ score of 90, the lower end of the average range but
well above the range for intellectual disabilities (below 70). After several years
of struggling in reading and falling further and further behindbecause special
education was the main avenue for intervention in the district and required a
disability classificationJamie finally had a sufficiently large IQachievement
discrepancy to qualify for LD services. As I spoke to the district administrator
involved in his case to provide recommendations for helping him in reading, she
seemed impatient. Finally, she made a comment that stunned me. Well, you
know, she remarked dismissively, its not like his IQ is 120.
This chapter is adapted from A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disability and Other Reading Problems:
Origins, Prevention, and Intervention, in Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (5th ed., pp. 517573),
edited by R.B. Ruddell and N.J. Unrau, 2004, Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Copyright
2004 by the International Reading Association.
412
In recent years, educational policy in my state, as in some other states, has em-
phasized the use of RTI models in general education, required the use of RTI cri-
teria in identification of LD, and eliminated IQachievement discrepancy criteria.
Although implementation of RTI involves many challenges, now I rarely encounter
students going without intervention because they lack a special education label, and
educators no longer spend valuable assessment time documenting IQachievement
discrepancies. Instead, educators tend to focus heavily on questions such as the fol-
lowing: What is the most effective intervention for this student? What is the best way
to monitor his or her progress? How can we accelerate progress? These questions do
not always have straightforward answers. However, at least the questions are edu-
cationally meaningful, based on the expectation that struggling students can learn,
and focused on how to teach those students successfully.
There are indeed children who have unusual difficulty learning to read, whose
reading problems cannot be accounted for by other disabilities, broad intellectual
limitations, an impoverished home environment, or inadequate instruction. Many
of these children require ongoing, intensive educational support to learn to read,
and special education often is the appropriate avenue for providing this support.
These students, as well as other struggling readers who do not meet formal criteria
for RD but often benefit from similar interventions, are the focus of this chapter.
The chapter begins by considering core features of all definitions of RD, as
well as the influence of RTI criteria on identification of RD in recent years. This
first section reviews research on reading development and common patterns of
reading difficulties and describes a theoretical model for understanding both typ-
ical reading and reading problems. The second section of the chapter considers
the educational implications of the model, including the role of RTI in differen-
tiating RD from other reading difficulties. The third section explores important
challenges of RTI implementation for educators in relation to identification of RD.
The chapter closes with conclusions and future directions for research.
A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disabilities and Other Reading Problems, Redux 413
comprehension (Byrne et al., 2007; Olson et al., 2011). Converging evidence from
functional brain imaging studies also suggests a neurobiological basis for some
cases of RD (Lyon, Shaywitz, & Shaywitz, 2003). These findings do not mean
that children with RD are incapable of learning to read; however, they support
the view that some children find learning to read intrinsically difficult, even with
good instruction and extensive literacy experiences.
A second core concept is that RD involve unexpected reading failure: reading
difficulties not accounted for by other disabilities or lack of opportunity to learn.
Finally, a third concept, related to the idea of unexpectedness, is that a specific
cognitive deficit or set of deficits, not generalized learning problems, characterize
RD. Recent research with middle elementary children (Compton, Fuchs, Fuchs,
Lambert, & Hamlett, 2012) confirms the existence of struggling students with
difficulties specific to either reading or mathematics and with distinctive patterns
of cognitive and academic strengths and weaknesses, not attributable to broad
cognitive limitations such as intellectual disabilities.
414 Spear-Swerling
the best way to help children with reading difficulties. Approaches that target
individual poor readers specific component weaknessessuch as word reading
versus comprehensionappear to lead to improved outcomes relative to the dis-
crepancy model (Aaron, Joshi, Gooden, & Bentum, 2008).
Although not without their own challenges, RTI approaches to identification
of RD address many of the aforementioned concerns. These approaches concep-
tualize children with RD as those who experience persistent reading difficulties
over time, despite receiving intervention that is generally effective for most strug-
gling readers. RTI approaches do not require the routine use of IQ tests, they
emphasize prevention and early intervention, and they do not necessitate a label
for extra help.
Most research on RTI has focused on primary-grade reading. In general, this
research (e.g., Blachman et al., 2004; Denton, Fletcher, Anthony, & Francis, 2006;
Denton et al., 2010; Simmons et al., 2011; Speece, Case, & Molloy, 2003; Vellutino
& Scanlon, 2002) shows that early intervention in reading is very effective in
ameliorating or preventing many childrens reading difficulties. Not surprisingly,
longer interventions produce a higher percentage of intervention responders.
Nevertheless, even high-quality, sustained RTI efforts do not eliminate all read-
ing difficulties. A subgroup of at-risk readers requires long-term intervention, a
finding supporting the view that genuine RD exist and a continued role for special
education in serving these students, as well as those with other disabilities (D.
Fuchs, Fuchs, & Stecker, 2010).
RTI approaches to identification of LD and RD have proliferated across states
since the passage of IDEA 2004. However, because IDEA 2004 permitted multiple
options for LD eligibility criteria, identification practices are highly variable. As of
this writing, 15 states require the use of RTI criteria in identification of LD, either
alone or in combination with other criteria such as an IQachievement discrep-
ancy. Most states permit both RTI and discrepancy models, essentially leaving the
choice to individual school districts (Zirkel & Thomas, 2010). Furthermore, most
states implementing RTI do not prescribe a particular duration of interventions,
decision rules for movement across tiers, or other implementation details (Zirkel,
2011).
Because of their focus on prevention, early intervention, and instruction-
ally relevant information, RTI-based approaches to identification of LD are much
more educationally useful than the discrepancy approach. In addition, an analy-
sis of the specific cognitive profiles and patterns typical of struggling readers
is extremely helpful for early identification and planning instruction, both for
students with RD and poor readers in general. An important foundation for inter-
preting cognitive patterns and profiles involves understanding the development
of typical readers, reviewed in the following section. Readers interested in further
detail about typical reading development may wish to consult Ehri (2005) and the
previous version of this chapter (Spear-Swerling, 2004a).
A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disabilities and Other Reading Problems, Redux 415
Abilities Involved in Reading Development
A number of reading development models emphasize the importance of two
broad types of abilities in reading: oral language comprehension and word recog-
nition (e.g., Adams, 1990; Chall, 1983; Hoover & Gough, 1990). Each of these two
broad areas includes numerous component abilities. For instance, oral language
comprehension includes vocabulary knowledge and grammatical understanding,
whereas word recognition includes knowledge of lettersound relationships, the
ability to decode unfamiliar words, and automatic as well as accurate recognition
of words. Reading fluently in text taps both types of broad abilities, not only auto-
matic word recognition but also integrating a range of important subword-, word-,
and comprehension-level processes (L.S. Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp, & Jenkins, 2001).
Fluency development is associated with improvements in prosody of oral reading,
such as appropriate pauses and intonation while reading text. In young children,
reading prosody predicts reading comprehension independent of reading rate
(e.g., words read correctly per minute), and children may sometimes use good
reading prosody to assist comprehension, especially when reading difficult ma-
terial (Benjamin & Schwanenflugel, 2010; Kuhn, Schwanenflugel, & Meisinger,
2010).
One central set of linguistic processes in reading involves phonological pro-
cesses. Phonological processes involve the use of phonological codes (abstract
mental representations of speech sounds), or of actual speech, in a variety of cog-
nitive and linguistic tasks, including memory and oral language as well as written
language (Scarborough & Brady, 2002). Phonological processes play a key role in
word recognition, especially in an alphabetic language such as English, in which
the printed letters correspond primarily to sounds in spoken words. For example,
phonemic awareness, which involves awareness and manipulation of individual
sounds in spoken words (e.g., being able to segment a spoken word such as fish
into three separate sounds: /f/, /i/, /sh/), greatly facilitates learning to decode
printed words. Phonological awareness encompasses a more rudimentary level of
awareness that includes the ability to perform tasks such as rhyming and allit-
eration. Other phonological processes directly influence working memory and
comprehension, such as phonological memory, which facilitates holding words in
memory to integrate meaning while reading or listening to text, although work-
ing memory also may play a role in decoding, especially of long, complex words
(Compton et al., 2012). Phonological processes are a core difficulty in many cases
of RD and other reading problems.
Although many abilities are ultimately important in learning to read, abili-
ties involved in word recognition are especially important in the early elementary
grades, when word-recognition skill is developing most rapidly, and the compre-
hension demands of most texts are relatively low. By fourth grade, typical readers
already have acquired reasonably automatic, accurate word recognition for most
common words, and the comprehension demands of texts escalate substantially,
so oral language comprehension begins to account for more of the variance in
416 Spear-Swerling
reading comprehension (Chall, 1983; Rupley, Willson, & Nichols, 1998; Vellutino,
Tunmer, Jaccard, & Chen, 2007).
Phonetic-Cue Word Recognition. Ehri (1991, 2005) terms this second phase
of reading phonetic-cue word recognition or partial alphabetic reading. This phase is
typical of kindergartners and first graders but also may occur in some preschool-
ers, especially those with extensive exposure to literacy. Phonetic-cue readers can
use partial phonetic cues in word recognition because they grasp the alphabetic
A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disabilities and Other Reading Problems, Redux 417
Figure 1. A Road Map for Understanding Patterns of Reading Difficulties
and Disabilities
Highly
Proficient
Sharply increasing text fluency and comprehension Reading
(Students with reading disabilities also show insufficient response to research-based interventions and meet exclusionary criteria)
Increasing higher
order comprehension
abilities; reading comprehension equals
or sometimes even exceeds listening
comprehension
Suboptimal comprehenders:
Strategic Normal prior development of
Reading word recognition, impaired higher
Routine use of order reading comprehension
comprehension
strategies in reading;
Nonstrategic
Automatic
comprehenders:
Word
Alphabetic
insight; increasing letter
sound knowledge
Rudimentary Listening far exceeds
phonological reading comprehension
awareness Nonalphabetic word readers:
No grasp of alphabetic
Visual-Cue principle, very impaired word
Word recognition and comprehension
Recognition
418 Spear-Swerling
but not to the middle part of a word. Hence, they may confuse similarly spelled
words such as boat and boot. Because they do not make full use of all the letters in
a word, phonetic-cue readers remain dependent on pictures or sentence context
to aid word recognition.
Strategic Reading. Strategic readers have the ability to use routinely at least
some reading comprehension strategies, such as summarization and making
use of context to determine what a word means (as opposed to using context
to read words). For instance, a strategic reader reading the sentence Her scar-
let cape flashed red in the crowd would be able to recognize all the words in
the sentence accurately and easily, including scarlet, but would concurrently use
sentence context to figure out that the word scarlet means red. Childrens im-
proved morphological awareness also facilitates their vocabulary development.
Morphological awareness involves sensitivity to the morphological structure of
words (e.g., the ability to recognize constituent morphemes in words like mother-
hood, unspeakable, and plentiful and to use morphemic knowledge to infer word
meanings; see Carlisle, 2010). Children may develop and use some comprehen-
sion strategies in listening well before the phase of strategic reading, and they
A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disabilities and Other Reading Problems, Redux 419
certainly have some morphological awareness prior to this phase; for instance, a
typical first grader would recognize the use of final -s, not -z, to denote plurality
in a word like dogs. However, in the phase of strategic reading, children make
routine use of strategies in their reading as well as their listening, and they have
greatly increased morphemic awareness. Automatic word recognition facilitates
these achievements because it allows children to focus more of their mental re-
sources on comprehension of the text and provides a foundation of knowledge
about common word parts, such as common base words and affixes. Children can
now use reading extensively as a tool for gathering information, and their own
reading contributes increasingly to development of vocabulary and background
knowledge (Cunningham & Stanovich, 1991). Strategic reading typically begins
around the middle elementary grades (third to fourth grade) and continues to
develop in subsequent grades.
I should highlight several general points about the preceding model. First,
although the focus here is on reading, many of the cognitive processes typical of
a given phase of reading also reveal themselves in childrens spelling. (See Ehri,
2005, for a detailed discussion.) Second, although skilled readers clearly use con-
text to aid comprehension and have more mental resources free for doing so be-
cause their word recognition is automatic, using context to aid word recognition is
a hallmark of unskilled reading (Stanovich, 2000). Third, the phases describe an
individuals general approach to most, but not necessarily all, words and reading
tasks within a given phase. A child in the phase of controlled word recognition
might recognize automatically a few very common words; a proficient adult reader
who recognizes the vast majority of words automatically might use controlled
processing for a very unusual or technical word, such as unfamiliar science ter-
minology. Finally, the last four phases in the model overlap. For example, by the
phase of strategic reading, children have acquired the ability to use routinely at
least some comprehension strategies in reading, but further development in strat-
egy knowledge and strategy use continues into the phase of proficient reading.
420 Spear-Swerling
Research on Common Profiles of Reading Difficulties
Table 1 displays three broad profiles common among poor readers: specific word-
recognition difficulties (SWRD), specific comprehension difficulties (SCD), and
mixed reading difficulties (MRD). Reading comprehension difficulties of students
with SWRD relate entirely to their word-reading problems; with appropriate in-
tervention for these problems, these students reading comprehension should
be commensurate with their oral language comprehension. Students with SCD
have the opposite profile; they have reading comprehension difficulties despite
grade-appropriate word-recognition and phonological skills, with no history of
word-recognition difficulties. Often these reading comprehension difficulties
are associated with problems involving verbal working memory, defined as the
ability to maintain a set of items in memory while processing an additional task
(Daneman & Carpenter, 1980), and oral language comprehension (Cain, Oakhill,
& Bryant, 2004; Catts, Adlof, & Weismer, 2006). However, oral language weak-
nesses of students with SCD can be mild, and frequently these students are
not identified for speech/language services (Catts et al., 2006; Nation, 2005).
Furthermore, some students with SCD function well within the average range
on measures of broad oral language comprehension (e.g., Leach, Scarborough, &
Rescorla, 2003). These latter students may have circumscribed language weak-
nesses not detected by broad language measures, or they may have limitations in
other areas influencing comprehension, such as use of specific reading compre-
hension strategies (e.g., Garner, 1990).
Finally, students with MRD have trouble with word recognition, but they also
have reading comprehension problems that cannot be fully accounted for by their
word-recognition weaknesses; for example, they may have poor comprehension
even when reading relatively easy text that they can decode well because of limi-
tations in vocabulary, working memory, or strategic knowledge. To put it another
way, SWRD involves a reading problem specific to word recognition, and SCD
involves a reading problem specific to reading comprehension, but MRD involves
problems in both word-recognition and core comprehension abilities.
Research suggests a nontrivial prevalence of each profile (Catts, Compton,
Tomblin, & Bridges, 2012; Catts et al., 2006; Catts, Hogan, & Adlof, 2005; Compton
et al., 2012; Leach et al., 2003; Nation & Snowling, 1997; Spear-Swerling, 2004b).
However, the relative frequency of each profile varies across studies depending
on methodology (e.g., whether SCD are defined in relation to reading compre-
hension or listening comprehension), as well as on the age and characteristics
of the population studied. For example, Leach et al. studied a group of fourth
and fifth graders from schools that included both affluent and socioeconomically
diverse populations, but few ethnic-minority children and no English learners.
These investigators found that a specific comprehension deficit, defined in terms
of reading comprehension, constituted only about 6% of reading problems that
had been identified in third grade or earlier, whereas SWRD and MRD involved
approximately 49% and 46% of reading difficulties in third grade or earlier, re-
spectively. However, proportions of SWRD, MRD, and SCD were roughly similar
A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disabilities and Other Reading Problems, Redux 421
Table 1. Common Cognitive Profiles and Patterns of Reading Difficulties
422
Word-Recognition Oral Language Reading
Pattern Skills Comprehension Comprehension Overall Intervention Needsa
Specific word- Nonalphabetic Well below average Average or better Below average Systematic phonemic awareness and phonics
recognition word reader instruction, with fluency building
difficulties Inaccurate word Below average Average or better Usually below average; Systematic phonics instruction (with
Spear-Swerling
reader may perform adequately phonemic awareness instruction if phonemic
on undemanding texts awareness is weak), with fluency building
Nonautomatic word Below average, Average or better Usually below average; Instruction focused on structural analysis and
reader especially in may perform adequately decoding of multisyllabic words if needed, as
automaticity and on undemanding texts well as on automaticity of word recognition
sometimes also and fluency building
in decoding of
multisyllabic words
Delayed word Average or better, but Average or better Below average Explicit instruction in comprehension
reader with a history of word- strategies and other specific areas of
recognition problems comprehension in which student is weak
(e.g., vocabulary or inferencing)
Specific Nonstrategic Average or better, with Varies, but often Below average; lacks Explicit instruction in comprehension
comprehension comprehender no history of word- mildly below strategic comprehension strategies and other specific areas of
difficulties recognition difficulties average skills comprehension in which student is weak
(e.g., vocabulary)
Suboptimal Average or better, with Varies, but often Lacks higher order Explicit instruction in higher order
comprehender no history of word- mildly below comprehension abilities comprehension abilities (e.g., evaluating and
recognition difficulties average synthesizing information)
Mixed reading Varies depending Difficulties with Varies, but often Below average because Explicit instruction in word-recognition skills
difficulties upon the pattern of word recognition: mildly below of a combination of depending on pattern (see above), coupled
word-recognition nonalphabetic, average weaknesses in word- with explicit instruction in comprehension
difficulties and inaccurate, recognition and core strategies and other specific areas of
specific types of nonautomatic, or comprehension abilities comprehension in which student is weak
comprehension delayed
difficulties
a
Interventions should occur in the context of a comprehensive curriculum of reading and English language arts instruction. For example, although nonalphabetic, inaccurate, and
nonautomatic word readers do not need interventions in the area of vocabulary and comprehension, like all students, they require instruction in these areas; usually this instruction
would occur as part of their core reading program.
for cases identified after grade 3each profile constituted about one-third of the
poor reading group. In contrast, Lesaux and Kieffer (2010), studying a population
of low-SES (socioeconomic status), sixth-grade struggling readers that included a
large number of English learners, classified about 79% with SCD, about 21% with
MRD, and essentially none with SWRD. Vocabulary weaknesses were ubiquitous
in this sample and likely accounted for the absence of students identified with
SWRD; some students did have word-reading difficulties, but they also had con-
sistent vocabulary weaknesses, yielding a MRD rather than SWRD profile.
SWRD often emerge in the early grades, when children must acquire a foun-
dation of basic word-recognition skills, and SCD in the later grades, when com-
prehension demands increase. However, all three profiles can be found across a
wide range of grade levels. For instance, several studies have found evidence for
late-emerging cases of SWRD (e.g., Catts et al., 2012; Leach et al., 2003; Lipka,
Lesaux, & Siegel, 2006), usually defined as manifesting after third grade. Catts
and colleagues documented almost all cases of these late-emerging word-reading
difficulties by fourth grade, with word-reading difficulties involving problems in
accuracy, automaticity, or both. These investigators suggest that late-emerging
cases of SWRD may relate to changing expectations for word reading as children
enter the middle elementary grades and must read greater proportions of complex
multisyllabic words that place higher demands on childrens phonological skills,
morphological awareness, and working memory. Vocabulary knowledge also in-
fluences accurate reading of many multisyllabic words; for example, a pure de-
coding process can yield an approximation of words like sedimentary and canopy,
but oral familiarity with these words facilitates accurate reading of them.
Children with late-emerging cases of SWRD may have relatively mild pho-
nological, language, or working memory difficulties that enable them to perform
adequately in the earliest phases of reading development, especially if they have
certain compensatory strengths available to them. However, they may begin to
have more difficulties with word reading in the middle elementary grades, when
word-reading demands become more complex. Late-emerging cases of SWRD
in Catts et al. (2012) typically involved children who in kindergarten had had
relatively mild weaknesses in phonological awareness and expressive vocabulary
coupled with strengths in receptive vocabulary and letter knowledge. Likewise,
late-emerging cases of SWRD in Lipka et al. (2006) involved children with pho-
nological weaknesses, who appeared better able to compensate for these weak-
nesses in the earliest grades than later on.
A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disabilities and Other Reading Problems, Redux 423
in this research and involve a revision of a model originally described by Spear-
Swerling and Sternberg (1994, 1996). The model conceptualizes reading difficul-
ties as involving deviations from the path to proficient reading at various phases
in development (Spear-Swerling & Sternberg, 1994, 1996). Figure 1 depicts this
model, with the patterns of reading difficulties also described in Table 1. The
further children go off track and fall increasingly behind their age cohort because
of lack of intervention, the harder it is for them to get back on the road to pro-
ficient reading. For all struggling readers, the negative consequences of reading
failure, such as decreased motivation, practice, and expectationsshown on the
right-hand side of Figure 1tend to complicate reading difficulties. These com-
plications may begin as early as first grade (Stanovich, 1986). Specific patterns of
reading difficulties associated with various profiles depend on the point at which
a struggling reader has gone off track. Four patterns relate to SWRD and two pat-
terns to SCD, shown in the center of Figure 1 and discussed next.
Inaccurate Word Readers. These children go off track in the phase of phonetic-
cue word recognition. They have grasped the alphabetic principle, have some
knowledge of letter sounds, and perhaps have a rudimentary level of phonological
awareness, which enables them to use some phonetic cues in attempting to read
words. However, they do not make full use of phonetic cues, and therefore their
word recognition is inaccurate. Their difficulties may relate to poor phonemic
awareness, insufficient knowledge of lettersound relationships, or both areas.
Inaccurate word readers may continue to rely on context cues, such as pictures
or sentence context, to aid word recognition. In relatively easy texts, they may
sometimes achieve adequate reading comprehension. However, as text demands
escalate, it will become increasingly difficult for inaccurate readers to compensate
effectively for their poor word recognition, and their reading comprehension will
likely be impaired.
424 Spear-Swerling
to read most common words accurately, but their word reading is effortful, and
they may also have difficulty reading complex multisyllabic words. Their speed
of reading text may remain very slow, and their use of mental resources to speed
word recognition (e.g., via use of context cues) tends to impair reading compre-
hension, especially in more demanding texts. Nonautomatic word readers may
have underlying deficits in rapid naming (e.g., Wolf & Bowers, 1999), although
the interpretation of naming speed deficits, especially whether such deficits re-
flect a core phonological weakness, remains a matter of dispute (Kirby, Georgiou,
Martinussen, & Parrila, 2010; Scarborough & Brady, 2002). Some nonautomatic
word readers may have late-emerging SWRD (Catts et al., 2012; Lipka et al., 2006),
whereas others may have had early word-reading difficulties that only partially
resolved or responded to intervention.
A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disabilities and Other Reading Problems, Redux 425
Suboptimal Comprehenders. Like nonstrategic comprehenders, suboptimal
comprehenders have a profile involving SCD. However, they go astray somewhat
later in the process of reading development, in the phase of strategic reading, and
primarily lack higher order comprehension abilities. Although they have the abil-
ity to use at least some comprehension strategies, suboptimal comprehenders may
lack higher level strategies. Thus, the two patterns of SCD differ primarily in on-
set and degree of reading-comprehension impairment, with suboptimal compre-
henders less impaired than nonstrategic comprehenders. However, at advanced
levels of schooling, such as high school and college, suboptimal reading may still
create serious difficulties.
426 Spear-Swerling
Possible Shifts in Reading Profiles and Patterns
Reading profiles and patterns have the potential to shift over time. A variety of
influences may contribute to changes in a students profile of reading difficulties,
including developmental changes and increasing grade expectations in reading.
For example, Catts et al. (2006) found considerable stability in poor readers un-
derlying profiles of phonological word-reading versus oral language comprehen-
sion abilities from kindergarten to eighth grade. However, for students with SCD,
reading comprehension difficulties as measured by the Gray Oral Reading Test
were considerably less pronounced in second grade than in eighth grade, perhaps
because of developmental changes in the relative importance of word reading ver-
sus language comprehension to reading comprehension across grades. Similarly,
Chall et al. (1990) followed a group of low-SES youngsters with SCD whose vo-
cabulary weaknesses became apparent in fourth grade but did not significantly
influence reading comprehension until about sixth or seventh grade, with a pro-
gressive deterioration in reading comprehension thereafter. These and other stud-
ies support the idea that many students with SCD have subtle language problems
from the early grades, but those language weaknesses have a larger impact on
reading comprehension as the students progress into later grades.
Interestingly, Chall et al. (1990) found that a deceleration in vocabulary scores
also was associated with a deceleration in word recognition and spelling scores in
the later grades, and Compton et al. (2012) found that fifth-grade students identi-
fied with SWRD tended to have relative weaknesses in working memory and oral
language. Thus, as students advance into later levels of schooling where decoding
of multisyllabic words is important, oral language and working memory problems
may begin to have an impact on word reading as well as reading comprehension.
Another potential influence on struggling readers profiles involves certain
side effects of the initial reading difficulty itself. Stanovich (1986) termed these
Matthew effects after the Biblical phrase about the rich getting richer and the poor
getting poorer. For example, children who struggle in reading tend to get much
less practice reading than do good readers, both in and out of school. Because
reading contributes to the development of important linguistic and cognitive abil-
ities, individual differences in learning to read may have broad effects on back-
ground knowledge and language over time. In fact, Stanovich (1991) suggested
that some children with SWRD eventually may develop an MRD profile, as their
originally circumscribed word-recognition difficulties have a spreading effect on
other areas of language and knowledge, although some studies have not found
this spreading effect (e.g., Scarborough & Parker, 2003).
One obvious influence on patterns of reading difficulties involves instruction
and intervention. Research on RTI models has demonstrated that especially in the
area of word-level reading skills, research-based instruction and interventions
can ameliorate, or even prevent entirely, some reading difficulties. Thus, a child
with SWRD in the early grades, including one with an inherited vulnerability
to RD, might become a normally achieving reader if provided with prompt, ap-
propriate intervention; or, a student with SWRD and mild language weaknesses
A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disabilities and Other Reading Problems, Redux 427
might respond to effective phonics intervention in the primary grades but go on
to evidence an SCD profile in the later grades.
428 Spear-Swerling
inaccurate word readers might be functioning at different levels in terms of spe-
cific decoding skills; two nonstrategic comprehenders might vary substantially in
important comprehension abilities such as vocabulary or use of specific compre-
hension strategies. Teachers should supplement information about profiles and
patterns with more fine-grained analysis of students instructional needs, espe-
cially in their areas of difficulty.
A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disabilities and Other Reading Problems, Redux 429
IQs and their reading achievement are likely to have problems focused on word
recognition not on language comprehension (Fletcher et al., 2007). However,
with the use of RTI, students with a variety of reading profiles, including MRD
and SCD as well as SWRD, could be eligible for RD services if they demonstrate
inadequate response to research-based interventions in their areas of difficulty
and meet exclusionary criteria. Thus, states eliminating the discrepancy model
in favor of RTI criteria may identify a broader range of reading problems in the
category of RD than they have identified in the past.
Exclusionary criteria exclude from the category of RD reading problems as-
sociated primarily with other disabilities, such as intellectual disabilities, as well
as reading problems associated mainly with lack of instruction or lack of op-
portunity to learn. Exclusion of intellectual disabilities does not require routine
IQ testing because students with intellectual disabilities have significant impair-
ments in adaptive behaviorself-help and social skillsin addition to low IQ
scores (Fletcher et al., 2007). Therefore, only students with limitations in adaptive
behavior, not all students undergoing evaluation for RD, would require IQ tests to
rule out intellectual disabilities.
The use of RTI approaches to identify RD will likely make application of
exclusionary criteria more complex for educators than in past approaches to
identification because of the wide variety of abilities that serve comprehension
as well as the many types of disabilities associated with poor comprehension.
For instance, students with autism spectrum disorders often show a profile of
SCD in reading (Huemer & Mann, 2010). However, these students have some
unique intervention needs, such as those involving pragmatic language and
social functioning, that differ from those of students with language-based RD.
Likewise, SCD is a common profile of adolescent English learners and students
from low-SES backgrounds (Lesaux & Kieffer, 2010). Most of these previously
mentioned students would not be conceptualized as having RD because they
would not meet exclusionary criteria, although many would likely benefit from
the research-based interventions provided via RTI approaches.
Application of exclusionary criteria sometimes requires consideration of stu-
dents primary versus secondary problems. For example, an English learner could
be identified with RD if it were determined that the students primary problem
was a learning difficulty and not lack of exposure to Englishsay, as indicated
by the student having similar language and reading problems in the native lan-
guage as in English. Accurately distinguishing between primary and secondary
difficulties can be challenging but is important so students with genuine RD, such
as English learners or low-SES students with RD, are not wrongly excluded from
special education services.
430 Spear-Swerling
making about overall criteria for LD to local districts (Zirkel & Thomas, 2010).
There is some logic to this choice; large-scale implementation of RTI is recent,
and without evidence about the best ways to implement many specific details of
RTI, states understandably are reluctant to be prescriptive. Nevertheless, incon-
sistent identification practices for LD have been a problem in the past (Moats &
Lyon, 1993), and the use of RTI is unlikely to improve this situation in the near
future.
A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disabilities and Other Reading Problems, Redux 431
tests are also important in relation to individual students performance (see,
e.g., Cutting & Scarborough, 2006; Jenkins, Johnson, & Hileman, 2004; Keenan
& Betjemann, 2006). Educators must consider the nature of the comprehension
measure when interpreting individual students reading comprehension perfor-
mance. They also should interpret performance on formal tests in relation to
everyday classroom work because many standardized reading comprehension
tests do not tap the complex comprehension abilities expected of students at
upper grade levels (Allington & McGill-Franzen, 2008).
432 Spear-Swerling
harm because of inappropriate inferences based on his IQ score. Furthermore,
RTI criteria for identifying RD would have focused Jamies teachers, and other
adults trying to help him, on educationally meaningful questions, even if not all
of those questions currently have clear or easy answers.
Implementing RTI involves many challenges for schools beyond those dis-
cussed here. There certainly is a need for further research in many areas, in-
cluding the most effective approaches to measurement of progress for readers of
different profiles and ages; assessment of reading comprehension; interventions
for comprehension, including different components of comprehension; and pre-
service preparation and professional development of teachers. However, RTI cri-
teria avoid many past problems with identification of RD via the IQachievement
discrepancy model, such as failure to identify at-risk readers early, misidentifying
as disabled poor readers whose problems are largely experiential or instructional
in nature, limited educational relevance, and myriad problems associated with
the routine use of IQ tests. In conjunction with RTI, an analysis of common pro-
files and patterns of reading difficulties is highly relevant to prevention of read-
ing difficulties, as well as to early identification and planning intervention for
students with reading problems. Moreover, such an approach is useful not only
for students with RD but for other poor readers as well.
Q u e s t ions fo r R e fl e c t ion
1. What are the advantages of using RTI criteria to identify reading disabilities
rather than the IQachievement discrepancy model?
2. In what ways are the core features of reading disabilities accounted for
through RTI?
3. In what ways do the common cognitive profiles and patterns of reading
difficulties that Spear-Swerling provides account for the various challenges
that struggling readers face?
4. In what ways can the common cognitive profiles and patterns of reading
difficulties be used to identify reading disabilities?
R ef er ence s
Aaron, P.G., Joshi, M., Gooden, R., & Bentum, K. Handbook of research on reading comprehension
(2008). Diagnosis and treatment of reading dis- (pp. 551568). New York: Routledge.
abilities based on the component model of read- Benjamin, R.G., & Schwanenflugel, P.J. (2010). Text
ing: An alternative to the discrepancy model of complexity and oral reading prosody in young
LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(1), 6784. readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(4), 388
doi:10.1177/0022219407310838 404. doi:10.1598/RRQ.45.4.2
Adams, M.J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and Biemiller, A. (1999). Language and reading success.
learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.
Allington, R.L., & McGill-Franzen, A. (2008). Blachman, B.A., Schatschneider, C., Fletcher,
Comprehension difficulties among struggling J.M., Francis, D.J., Clonan, S.M., Shaywitz,
readers. In S.E. Israel & G.G. Duffy (Eds.), B.A., et al. (2004). Effects of intensive reading
A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disabilities and Other Reading Problems, Redux 433
remediation for second and third graders. Journal Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,
of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 444461. 19, 450466.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.444 Denton, C.A., Fletcher, J.M., Anthony, J.L., &
Byrne, B., Samuelsson, S., Wadsworth, S., Francis, D.J. (2006). An evaluation of intensive
Hulslander, J., Corley, R., DeFries, J.C., et al. intervention for students with persistent read-
(2007). Longitudinal twin study of early lit- ing difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities,
eracy development: Preschool through grade1. 39(5), 447466. doi:10.1177/002221940603900
Reading and Writing, 20(1/2), 77102. doi: 50601
10.1007/s11145-006-9019-9 Denton, C.A., Nimon, K., Mathes, P.G., Swanson,
Cain, K., Oakhill, J.V., & Bryant, P.E. (2004). E.A., Kethley, C., Kurz, T.B., et al. (2010).
Childrens reading comprehension ability: Effectiveness of a supplemental early read-
Concurrent prediction by working memory, ing intervention scaled up in multiple schools.
verbal ability, and component skills. Journal Exceptional Children, 76(4), 394416.
of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 3142. Ehri, L.C. (1991). Learning to read and spell words.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.31 In L. Rieben & C.A. Perfetti (Eds.), Learning to
Carlisle, J.F. (2010). Effects of instruction in read: Basic research and its implications (pp. 57
morphological awareness on literacy achieve- 73). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
ment: An integrative review. Reading Research Ehri, L.C. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory,
Quarterly, 45(4), 464487. doi:10.1598/RRQ findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading,
.45.4.5 9(2), 167188. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr0902_4
Catts, H.W., Adlof, S.M., & Weismer, S.E. (2006). Fletcher, J.M., Lyon, G.R., Fuchs, L.S., & Barnes,
Language deficits in poor comprehenders: A M.A. (2007). Learning disabilities: From identifi-
case for the simple view of reading. Journal of cation to intervention. New York: Guilford.
Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49(2), Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S., & Stecker, P.M. (2010). The
278293. blurring of special education in a new contin-
Catts, H.W., Compton, D.L., Tomblin, J.B., & uum of general education placements and ser-
Bridges, M.S. (2012). Prevalence and na- vices. Exceptional Children, 76(3), 301324.
ture of late-emerging poor readers. Journal of Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M., & Jenkins,
J.R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indi-
Educational Psychology, 104(2), 166181.
cator of reading competence: A theoretical,
Catts, H.W., Hogan, T.P., & Adlof, S.M. (2005).
empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific
Developmental changes in reading and reading
Studies of Reading, 5(3), 239256. doi:10.1207/
disabilities. In H.W. Catts & A. Kamhi (Eds.),
S1532799XSSR0503_3
The connections between language and reading dis-
Garner, R. (1990). When children and adults do
abilities (pp. 2540). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
not use learning strategies: Toward a theory of
Chall, J. (1983). Stages of reading development. New
settings. Review of Educational Research, 60(4),
York: McGraw-Hill. 517529.
Chall, J., Jacobs, V.A., & Baldwin, L.E. (1990). Gersten, R., Fuchs, L.S., Williams, J.P., & Baker, S.
The reading crisis: Why poor children fall behind. (2001). Teaching reading-comprehension strate-
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. gies to students with learning disabilities: A re-
Compton, D.L., Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Lambert, view of research. Review of Educational Research,
W., & Hamlett, C. (2012). The cognitive and 71(2), 279320. doi:10.3102/00346543071002279
academic profiles of reading and mathemat- Greenberg, D., Ehri, L.C., & Perin, D. (2002).
ics learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Do adult literacy students make the same
Disabilities, 45(1), 7995. word-reading and spelling errors as chil-
Cortiella, C. (2009). The state of learning disabili- dren matched for word-reading age? Scientific
ties. New York: National Center for Learning Studies of Reading, 6(3), 221243. doi:10.1207/
Disabilities. S1532799XSSR0603_2
Cunningham, A.E., & Stanovich, K.E. (1991). Hoover, W.A., & Gough, P.B. (1990). The simple
Tracking the unique effects of print expo- view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2(2), 127
sure in children: Associations with vocabu- 160. doi:10.1007/BF00401799
lary, general knowledge, and spelling. Journal Huemer, S.V., & Mann, V. (2010). A comprehen-
of Educational Psychology, 83(2), 264274. sive profile of decoding and comprehension in
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.83.2.264 autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism
Cutting, L.E., & Scarborough, H.S. (2006). and Developmental Disorders, 40(4), 485493.
Prediction of reading comprehension: Relative doi:10.1007/s10803-009-0892-3
contributions of word recognition, language pro- Jenkins, J.R., Johnson, E., & Hileman, J. (2004).
ficiency, and other cognitive skills can depend When is reading also writing: Sources of indi-
on how comprehension is measured. Scientific vidual differences on the new reading perfor-
Studies of Reading, 10(3), 277299. doi:10.1207/ mance assessments. Scientific Studies of Reading,
s1532799xssr1003_5 8(2), 125151. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr0802_2
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P.A. (l980). Individual Keenan, J.M., & Betjemann, R.S. (2006).
differences in working memory and reading. Comprehending the Gray Oral Reading Test
434 Spear-Swerling
without reading it: Why comprehension tests and environmental influences on vocabulary and
should not include passage-independent items. reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading,
Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(4), 363380. 15(1), 2646. doi:10.1080/10888438.2011.536128
doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr1004_2 Perfetti, C.A. (1985). Reading ability. New York:
Keenan, J.M., Betjemann, R.S., & Olson, R.K. Oxford University Press.
(2008). Reading comprehension tests vary Piasta, S.B., Connor, C.M., Fishman, B.J., &
in the skills they assess: Differential depen- Morrison, F.J. (2009). Teachers knowledge of lit-
dence on decoding and oral comprehension. eracy concepts, classroom practices, and student
Scientific Studies of Reading, 12(3), 281300. reading growth. Scientific Studies of Reading, 13(3),
doi:10.1080/10888430802132279 224248. doi:10.1080/10888430902851364
Kirby, J.R., Georgiou, G.K., Martinussen, R., & Riedel, B.W. (2007). The relation between DIBELS,
Parrila, R. (2010). Naming speed and reading: reading comprehension, and vocabulary in urban
From prediction to instruction. Reading Research first-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly,
Quarterly, 45(3), 341362. doi:10.1598/RRQ.45.3.4 42(4), 546567. doi:10.1598/RRQ.42.4.5
Kuhn, M.R., Schwanenflugel, P.J., & Meisinger, E.B. Ruddell, R.B., & Unrau, N.J. (1994). Reading as
(2010). Aligning theory and assessment of read- a meaning-construction process: The reader,
ing fluency: Automaticity, prosody, and defini- the text, and the teacher. In R.B. Ruddell, M.R.
tions of fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models
45(2), 230251. doi:10.1598/RRQ.45.2.4 and processes of reading (4th ed., pp. 9961056).
Leach, J.M., Scarborough, H.S., & Rescorla, L. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
(2003). Late-emerging reading disabilities. Rupley, W.H., Willson, V.L., & Nichols, W.D.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 211 (1998). Exploration of the developmental com-
224. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.211 ponents contributing to elementary school
Lesaux, N.K., & Kieffer, M.J. (2010). Exploring childrens reading comprehension. Scientific
sources of reading comprehension difficulties Studies of Reading, 2(2), 143158. doi:10.1207/
among language minority learners and their s1532799xssr0202_3
classmates in early adolescence. American Scarborough, H.S. (2005). Developmental re-
Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 596632. lationships between language and reading:
doi:10.3102/0002831209355469 Reconciling a beautiful hypothesis with some
Lipka, O., Lesaux, N., & Siegel, L. (2006). ugly facts. In H.W. Catts & A. Kamhi (Eds.), The
Retrospective analyses of the reading develop- connections between language and reading disabil-
ment of grade 4 students with reading disabili- ities (pp. 324). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
ties: Risk status and profiles over 5 years. Journal Scarborough, H.S., & Brady, S.A. (2002). Toward a
of Learning Disabilities, 39(4), 364378. common terminology for talking about speech
Lipson, M.Y., & Wixson, K.K. (1986). Reading dis- and reading: A glossary of the phon words and
ability research: An interactionist perspective. some related terms. Journal of Literacy Research,
Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 111136. 34(3), 299336. doi:10.1207/s15548430jlr3403_3
Lyon, G.R., Shaywitz, S.E., & Shaywitz, B.A. (2003). Scarborough, H.S., & Parker, J.D. (2003). Matthew
A definition of dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, effects in children with learning disabili-
53(1), 114. doi:10.1007/s11881-003-0001-9 ties: Development of reading, IQ, and psy-
Mathes, P.G., Denton, C.A., Fletcher, J.M., Anthony, chosocial problems from grade 2 to grade 8.
J.L., Francis, D.J., & Schatschneider, C. (2005). Annals of Dyslexia, 53(1), 4771. doi:10.1007/
The effects of theoretically different instruction s11881-003-0004-6
and student characteristics on the skills of strug- Shankweiler, D., Crain, S., Brady, S., & Macaruso,
gling readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(2), P. (1992). Identifying the causes of reading dis-
148182. doi:10.1598/RRQ.40.2.2 ability. In P.B. Gough, L.C. Ehri, & R. Treiman
Moats, L.C., & Lyon, G.R. (1993). Learning dis- (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 275305).
abilities in the United States: Advocacy, sci- Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
ence, and the future of the field. Journal Siegel, L.S. (1988). Evidence that IQ scores are ir-
of Learning Disabilities, 26(5), 282294. relevant to the definition and analysis of reading
doi:10.1177/002221949302600501 disability. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 42(2),
Nation, K. (2005). Childrens reading compre- 201215. doi:10.1037/h0084184
hension difficulties. In M.J. Snowling & C. Simmons, D.C., Coyne, M.D., Hagan-Burke, S.,
Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A hand- Kwok, O., Simmons, L., Johnson, C., et al.
book (pp. 248265). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. (2011). Effects of supplemental reading inter-
doi:10.1002/9780470757642.ch14 ventions in authentic contexts: A comparison of
Nation, K., & Snowling, M. (1997). Assessing kindergartners response. Exceptional Children,
reading difficulties: The validity and utility of 77(2), 207228.
current measures of reading skill. The British Smith, L.E., Borkowski, J.G., & Whitman, T.L.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(3), 359 (2008). From reading readiness to reading com-
370. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1997.tb01250.x petence: The role of self-regulation in at-risk
Olson, R.K., Keenan, J.M., Byrne, B., Samuelsson, children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 12(2), 131
S., Coventry, W., Corley, R., et al. (2011). Genetic 152. doi:10.1080/10888430801917167
A Road Map for Understanding Reading Disabilities and Other Reading Problems, Redux 435
Spear-Swerling, L. (2004a). A road map for under- Stanovich, K.E., & Siegel, L.S. (1994). Phenotypic
standing reading disability and other reading performance profile of children with read-
problems: Origins, intervention, and prevention. ing disabilities: A regression-based test of the
In R.B. Ruddell & N.J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical phonological-core variable-difference model.
models and processes of reading (Vol. 5, pp. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(1), 2453.
517573). Newark, DE: International Reading doi:10.1037/0022-0663.86.1.24
Association. doi:10.1598/0872075028.18 Torgesen, J.K., Alexander, A., Wagner, R.K.,
Spear-Swerling, L. (2004b). Fourth-graders per- Rashotte, C., Voeller, K., & Conway, T. (2001).
formance on a state-mandated assessment Intensive remedial instruction for children
involving two different measures of reading with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and
comprehension. Reading Psychology, 25(2), 121 long-term outcomes from two instructional ap-
148. doi:10.1080/02702710490435727 proaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(1),
Spear-Swerling, L. (2008). Response to intervention 3358. doi:10.1177/002221940103400104
and teacher preparation. In E. Grigorenko (Ed.), Valencia, S.W. (2011). Reader profiles and read-
Educating individuals with disabilities: IDEA 2004 ing disabilities. In R.L. Allington & A. McGill-
and beyond (pp. 273294). New York: Springer. Franzen (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading
Spear-Swerling, L., & Cheesman, E. (2012). disabilities (pp. 2535). New York: Routledge.
Teachers knowledge base for implementing Valencia, S.W., Smith, A.T., Reece, A.M., Li, M.,
response-to-intervention models in reading. Wixson, K.K., & Newman, H. (2010). Oral read-
Reading & Writing, 25(7), 16911723. doi:10.1007/ ing fluency assessment: Issues of construct,
s11145-011-9338-3 criterion, and consequential validity. Reading
Spear-Swerling, L., & Sternberg, R.J. (1994). Research Quarterly, 45(3), 270291. doi:10.1598/
The road not taken: An integrative theo- RRQ.45.3.1
retical model of reading disability. Journal Vellutino, F.R., & Scanlon, D.M. (2002). Emergent
of Learning Disabilities, 27(2), 91103, 122. literacy skills, early instruction, and individual
doi:10.1177/002221949402700204 differences as determinants of difficulties in
Spear-Swerling, L., & Sternberg, R.J. (1996). Off learning to read: The case for early interven-
track: When poor readers become learning dis- tion. In S.B. Neuman & D.K. Dickinson (Eds.),
abled. Boulder, CO: Westview. Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 295321).
Speece, D.L., Case, L.P., & Molloy, D.W. (2003). New York: Guilford.
Responsiveness to general education instruction Vellutino, F.R., Tunmer, W.E., Jaccard, J.J., &
as the first gate to learning disabilities identifi- Chen, R. (2007). Components of reading abil-
cation. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, ity: Multivariate evidence for a convergent skills
18(3), 147156. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00071 model of reading development. Scientific Studies
Stanovich, K.E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: of Reading, 11(1), 332.
Some consequences of individual differences Wolf, M., & Bowers, P.G. (1999). The double-deficit
in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias.
Quarterly, 21(4), 360406. doi:10.1598/RRQ.21.4.1 Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 415
Stanovich, K.E. (1991). Discrepancy definitions 438. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.415
of reading disability: Has intelligence led us Zirkel, P.A. (2011). What does the law say? Teaching
astray? Reading Research Quarterly, 26(1), 729. Exceptional Children, 43(3), 6567.
doi:10.2307/747729 Zirkel, P.A., & Thomas, L.B. (2010). State laws
Stanovich, K.E. (2000). Progress in understanding and guidelines for implementing RTI. Teaching
reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers. Exceptional Children, 43(1), 6073.
New York: Guilford.
436 Spear-Swerling
C H A P T E R 17
I
n this chapter I argue that adherence to the formulation theory of mind has
narrowed the scope of attention to developments that contribute to childrens
ability to understand social and psychological phenomena. Developments in
infancy and early childhood, such as shared attention and imitation, that are gen-
erally seen as precursors or predispositions to later theory of mind are, in the
present view, better conceived as general characteristics of early development that
have wide-ranging influences on all areas of psychological growth. At the same
time, areas of competence, such as general reasoning, that are considered outside
the domain of theory of mind can be shown to be crucial to its achievement, as
it is usually evaluated in terms of the understanding of false belief. The resulting
focus, I argue, has led theorists down a path that obscures the true importance
of developments in early childhood, of which performance on theory-of-mind
tasks is but one achievement. Further, I argue that language is the most impor-
tant general function that leads to higher-order cognitive processes, including the
processes involved in theory of mind, and that these developments begin to have
their effects during the preschool years.
In brief, theory of mind as usually considered is too narrowly construed,
while those influences that lead to success on theory-of-mind measures are more
general across development in different domains of social and general cognition.
This argument has implications for domain theories in general, as well as for mod-
ularity and theory theories in the theory-of-mind area. Having construed theory
of mind as a separate cognitive domain to begin with, researchers became vulner-
able to claims of modules, and of domain-specific theories as explanations of its
development. Meanwhile, aspects of development that are not domain-defined,
including memory, language, inference, reasoning, concept formation, knowledge
acquisition, and imagination, were considered ancillary performance factors.
Most important, social experiences, including attachment, play, and conversa-
tion, have tended to be looked on as modulating factors that influence but do not
determine the acquisition of theory of mind.
In addition, a novel developmental mechanism, implicit theory construction
or theory revision, has been invented to explain development within this domain
This chapter is reprinted from Why Language Matters for Theory of Mind (pp. 2649), edited by J.W. Astington
and J.A. Baird, 2005, New York: Oxford University Press. Copyright 2005 by Oxford University Press.
Reprinted with permission.
437
and has been extended to other areas of knowledge acquisition. Yet there has been
no specification as to how an implicit theory could be constructed in infancy or
early childhood or how it might relate to explicit theory construction or explicit
knowledge in general. Some writers seem to take implicit theory construction to
be essentially the same as general conceptual processes (and therefore a harm-
less usage), but others (Gopnik & Wellman, 1994; Wellman, 1988; Wellman &
Gelman, 1992) make the larger claim that a theory, implicit or explicit, is coher-
ent within a domain, is characterized by causal relations between its concepts,
and is subject to revision in light of new data.
The theory approach has led to the description of a succeeding series of dif-
ferent theories that infants and young children are alleged to construct during the
first 5 years of life, as illustrated in Figure 1. Note that in this figure the data lie
outside the theory, reflecting the presumption of an abstract epistemic structure
separate from its experiential source. The guiding assumption seems to be that
from birth (if not before), children have the same cognitive resources as ourselves
(i.e., educated adults) for gathering and organizing data in the domain of psycho-
logical and social functioning and for forming and testing hypothesesderived
from causally connected theoretical structuresabout these matters. I believe that
this assumption is unwarranted and that it prevents researchers from entertain-
ing both the breadth and the limitations of young childrens knowledge sources
in experience, as well as the breadth and limitations of their cognitive resources.
Theoretical approaches to this area other than the dominant theory theory
propose various precursor abilities (e.g., attachment, pretense, executive function,
meta-representation) as leading more or less directly, alone or in combination, to
a successful achievement of theory of mind (Fonagy & Target, 1997; Frye, 1999;
Leslie, 1987; Perner, 1991). Although this way of viewing the matter (illustrated in
Figure 2) has value in relating these earlier developments to the later understand-
ing of false belief, the causal directions implied are theoretically and empirically
vulnerable. It is not that any of these abilities are irrelevant to theory of mind;
rather, it is the additivity assumption and the direct causal relation assumption
that are in question here. All that has yet been shown is that some of these may be
prerequisites to theory of mind; it has not been determined that they have a direct
ToM
438 Nelson
causal relation to its achievement. And, indeed, even the evidence that they are
necessary if not sufficient is not really there.
The only ability that has clearly been shown to be directly related to theory-
of-mind competence is language, in that children without language or with im-
poverished language do not achieve theory of mind, and neither do nonhuman
primates that lack language.
In this chapter, I argue that the area under examination needs rethinking to
bring it into its proper relation to the overall course of social and cognitive devel-
opment during the crucial preschool years, and to the preceding as well as suc-
ceeding developments to which it has been related, theoretically or empirically.
I believe that what is required is a developmental systems approach (Oyama,
1985) that indicates the interactions among the many and various social and
cognitive processes as they develop. The most important development, the one
with maximum impact on all social and cognitive functioning, is the acquisition
of complex languageincluding semantics and syntaxand its use as a repre-
sentational system in conveying and reflecting on knowledge, imaginative con-
structions, reminiscence, explanations, and other social and cultural, as well as
cognitive, functions.
The metaphor that I propose to replace the theory metaphor ensconced in
current terminology is the Community of Minds, and the developmental process
I propose is that of entering into the community of minds, a process made possible
through the use, comprehension, and production of language. In the first sec-
tion I describe the construct of the community and its advantage over the theory
construct. This conception was introduced in a paper by Nelson, Henseler, and
Plesa (2000) and elaborated in Nelson et al. (2003). The second section of the
chapter describes how the child proceeds, on the basis of general developmental
processes but only with the aid of language, to begin to enter this community.
440 Nelson
discussions of these matters are distributed through journals, newspapers, and
books, as well as through electronic and audiovisual media.
Theory-of-mind theorists may protest that these are the various contents of
belief, not the construct of belief itself (which it is alleged is what the child must
attain). But it is precisely the fact that belief is always about something that is
important; it is not a thing in itself. Children must come to understand the con-
tents of belief, not primarily the concept of belief.1 They acquire knowledge of
procedures and actions that lead them to reason about whether someone could
or does know about something that differs from ones own state of knowledge
about that thing. It is this differentiation of anothers states of knowledge from
ones own that is the key to success on theory of mind, but the differentiation can
only be made on the grounds of particular contents, not on the grounds of belief
itself. Making these differentiations is a critical step in development, not only for
discerning false belief in theory-of-mind tasks, and I return to discuss it later in
the section on entering the Community of Minds.
Many theorists have attempted to place theory of mind in the context of spe-
cific human capacities evolved through natural evolutionary processes. For some,
this involves a special brain module (e.g., Leslie, 1987), but others see it as a more
general ability to deal with the demands of the social world, where social ex-
change requires vigilance against cheating, for example (Byrne & Whiten, 1988).
These ideas are based in the widely accepted proposal that primates in general
and humans in particular evolved large brains in response to the complexities of
the relations involved in social groups. This is a reasonable assumption, based on
the available evidence. However, it primarily accounts for one-to-one, face-to-face
interactions and relations. What is specific to human life space is the proliferation
of huge collections of individuals across space and time, and the cultural institu-
tions and communicative systems, including language, devised to deal with these
conditions. One-on-one relations may be typical of some family situations, but,
in general, certainly in modern societies, social interactions involve collaborative
and competitive groups of individuals, usually organized into institutions, such
as religions, educational systems, economic systems, government systems, and so
on within smaller and larger conglomerations.
The point here is that what has been studied in terms of theory of mind is a
tiny step into generalizing one-on-one social understanding from the well-known
intimate relations within the family to the same kind of relations among unfa-
miliar others. One might assume that once this kind of generalization is made,
the way is open to begin to participate more competently in the concerns of the
wider community. But it is possible that the particular one-to-one understanding
involved in false belief is not a prerequisite but an outcome of understanding the
concerns of the larger community. Conversations about the past between parents
and children during the third and fourth years often concern issues of emotions
and moral actions (Fivush, 1993, 1994). Parentchild conversations during book-
reading also frequently include the interpretation of mental states of story charac-
ters. Such discussions may explicitly present the contrast between one characters
442 Nelson
understand not only that think and know and remember and so on refer to
mental states but also that the propositions that follow these words represent the
mental contents of the other (de Villiers & Pyers, 1997). They must become ca-
pable of turning someone elses statement about belief into their own mental rep-
resentation of what the other believes. That is, they must be able to use language
as a representational system. These are difficult accomplishments that require
several years of experience with language in use.
Becoming a Participant
In contrast to this view, the beginning of theory of mind is widely held to lie in
the achievement of intersubjectivity in infancy, signaling the onset of a concept
of intentionality of self and other (e.g., Tomasello, 1999). The milestones in infant
development that provide the evidence for this attribution, in particular evidence
of shared attention, and their significance for the ensuing phase of first language
acquisition, are without doubt of real importance to the developments we are
concerned with. However, I doubt that there is a direct route from such primi-
tive intersubjectivity to a full-blown theory of mind. Rather, interaction in joint
activities, involving the focus of other and self on the same object, for example,
contributes directly to the successful achievements in motoric, communicative,
and exploratory activities of the 10- to 12-month period of development. It allows
sharing activities with another and taking different roles within the activity, as in
feeding. It also allows the child to have a sense of sharing perception and action,
while at the same time differentiating the self from the shared. It fosters the move
toward associating the sounds of language with shared attention to objects and
actions within those activities. It does not, however, require a concept of mind or
minds. There is no evidence that children are cognitively tracking anything but
the actions of self and other. The same can be said of the reciprocal imitation that
is frequently observed (and studied) at this time (Meltzoff & Gopnik, 1993).
As for the somewhat later evidence of interpretation of anothers intention
in action, or in applying words to objects, as in Meltzoffs or Tomasellos work
444 Nelson
(Meltzoff & Moore, 1999; Tomasello, 1999), the childs interpretation requires
an implicit understanding of meansends connections in others as well as ones
own actions but does not require attributing mental activity to another. It does
not require that the child attribute to the other thoughts about a goal.
It is important to be clear here. These developmentsshared attention, at-
tributed intentionality, word learningare important prerequisites for moving
toward participation in the Community of Minds. But they are not yet evidence
of participating in this community. The theoretical error arises, in my opinion,
when they are treated as evidence of childrens having some sort of theory of
mind, although not yet a successful theory (Baron-Cohen, 2000; Gopnik, Capps,
& Meltzoff, 2000). These theories, in different ways, project the same cognitive
structures and functions in the infant as are assumed to exist in the older child or
adult; thus, the descriptions of the childs accomplishments at 2 years are formu-
lated in the favored cognitive science language of theory of mind, although that
theory lies in the distant future. I refer to this as the analytic fallacy, whereby
the characteristics of a completed structure are attributed to the system in devel-
opment, for which the components may be quite different (Nelson, 1979, 1996).
The general point is that disagreements here rest on interpretations from initial
assumptions, not on any empirical evidence for intentional understanding.
In contrast, the claim here is that the understandings and practices of the
infant and toddler period serve as background knowledge that enables the child
to take part in the ongoing activities of that period, in particular, to learn basic
language and thus to move on to the next point in the developmental sequence,
when talk about causes and sequences with parents and others leads to encoun-
ters with the abstractions of mind talk. The teleology here of moving on is not in
the child; the focus of the child is on the present, not on learning for the future. In
sum, the existence of continuity in development does not justify the attribution of
a nascent theory even before the alleged achievement of theory of mind.
446 Nelson
begin to be curious about peoples intentions and emotions and to talk about them
with family members from the age of 2 years or so. However, the fact that they
talk about these matters, using the words of the mental, does not indicate that
they have a concept of mind, much less a theory of mind, or even that they have
concepts of thinking and knowing. These attributions are, I believe, overinterpre-
tations of the data, based on the simplistic idea that childrens language transpar-
ently expresses their thoughts and feelings.
The most plausible alternative interpretation is that children are eager to in-
teract with others, others who talk about mental states, thus leading children to
the topic. Woolfe, Want, and Siegel (2002) reported an important study of deaf
childrens delayed acquisition of theory of mind. They compared early sign lan-
guage learners, who were children of deaf parents, with later sign learners, chil-
dren of hearing and speaking parents, on pictorial theory-of-mind tasks. Early
signers outperformed later signers, and the authors conclude that the critical ex-
planatory factor was social understanding mediated by early experience in con-
versation. This conclusion is highly consistent with the argument put forth here.
That children are interested in talking about what lies behind actions, or why
people attribute motives to others, and that they acquire some of the terminology
for doing so, is an indication that they have entered a pathway that leads into the
larger community of minds. However, it does not mean that they have arrived at
that destination.
The following conversation between a 3-year-old child and her mother,
from Shaws (1999) study of mental-state terms, provides insight into some of the
gaps between words and concepts in the process of their acquisition.
Child K, 42 months, Meal Context, with Mother M
K: You know something?
M: What?
(Pause)
K: Let me think
(Pause)
K: Whats her name again?
M: What?
K: Whats her name again?
M: Who?
K: That girl
M: Who?
K: Dont you remember her?
K: Youve seen her before
M: No
K: Yes
M: Where is she?
Notice that this conversation is about something the child remembers but of
which the mother has no knowledge. The child (K) opens the dialogue by ask-
ing, You know something? This is a purely pragmatic conversational device.
She then continues, let me think; again, this is a familiar conversational device.
She then asks her mother what the name of someone is, and the following turns
are efforts to jog the mothers memory, including Ks assumption that her mother
should know the girl because shes seen her before, which is of course a good clue
to knowledge. However, her mother has no clue as to which girl among many shes
seen that K has in mind. Then follows the revelation that this person had a rocket
at our house. After four more turns, K acknowledges that mother wasnt home
when the rocket episode occurred, and Mother asks, so how would I know who
this is? In what follows after an irrelevant bit of talk, K acknowledges that she
knew about the rocket because the girl told her, again relevant evidence of knowl-
edge. On some basis obscure to us, Mother now reads Ks mind and guesses the
name of the child.
448 Nelson
We know from this transcript that K has a reasonably extensive lexicon of
cognitive mental-state terms: know, remember, and think. But it is also clear that
she has not quite put together how shared knowledge comes into being. She knows
that she cannot remember the name and that her mother knows the name, but,
in trying to jog her mothers memory, she mentions an episode that the mother
could not know about because she was not there. The bottom line here is that
knowing about knowing is highly complex and that children who facilely use
the language of the mind may have a very incomplete grasp of how real-world
experience maps onto the abstract theoretical structure of the concepts they are
invoking with their language.
The most important point revealed in this excerpt is that the conversation
itself provides evidence for the child about the missing pieces of her concepts of
knowing, as the mother feeds back her own ignorance of what the child is trying
to uncover. The child is confused about the private and public status of experience-
based knowledge, and her mother points this out quite clearly. Indeed, learning
the meanings of words for talking about mind-stuff depends entirely on listening
to the talk of others on these topics. For this reason, the practice of comprehen-
sionlistening, attending, and interpretingis even more important for the child
in this process than expressing ones own thoughts, although the latter is helpful
in guiding adults in how to take advantage of the state of the childs knowledge.
This point is considered further in the next section.
Representing in Language
Although learning the right words and how they are used in talking about mental
processes is helpful in following mind talk, the most important achievement in
language for entering the cultural community of minds is facility with language
as a representational medium. This point seems to be where misconceptions of
the significance of language to theory of mind are most pervasive, and it therefore
requires elaboration. Several studies carried out at the City University of New
York (CUNY) by my former students have contributed to our understanding of
this development, which I will be drawing on in the discussion of representa-
tional language. I first want to clarify what we mean by representational language.
Most uses of language by the child up to about 2 years, during the time when
basic vocabulary and simple grammar are being acquired, are highly pragmatic,
about the here and now, focused mostly on the interpersonal functions of speech,
not on the mathetic, ideational, or cognitive functions. But despite the relative
poverty of the 2-year-olds productive and receptive language, parents (at least
middle-class Western parents) typically begin addressing fairly complex ideas,
descriptions, and explanations in extended passages of speech to their children
when they are as young as 18 months to 2 years. Such talk may include reference
to sources of knowledge (such as seeing and hearing about), to the differentiation
of ones own and others knowledge and experience (as in the excerpt from Ks
dialogue), or the distinction between imagined action and real action, and other
matters of testimony (Harris, 2001).
450 Nelson
of what happened to them, or in a made-up story, to be self-explanatory and to
need little explanation in terms of mindfulness. Even 6-year-olds, when asked
to recall the narrative after watching a video based on a version of the Maxi task
story in which the motives for moving the desirable object were ambiguous, pro-
vided a simple action sequence and did not explain the action in terms of motiva-
tions, beliefs, desires, or emotions (Plesa, 2001).
At CUNY, we have become alerted to the possible significance of receptive lan-
guage competence through finding that receptive language, as measured by stan-
dardized tests, related more highly than expressive language to verbal memory
for an event, story understanding, narrative productions, and, according to some
studies, theory-of-mind tasks. In a study of episodic memory in 3- and 4-year-
olds, Walkenfeld (2000) used a clinical evaluation of language, the TELD, which
includes measures of expressive and receptive components, to evaluate the rela-
tion between language and recall of a complex novel event after a 6-week delay.
The study compared the effects of verbal reinstatement midway through the delay
period with those of re-enactment of the event and of no interim re-experience.
The difference between groups mildly favored the verbal reinstatement condition,
but the main story was the influence of language ability on performance. Receptive
language, entered as a control variable, was highly significant, overriding group
differences. In regression analyses, age was not predictive of recall when entered
with language, and receptive rather than expressive language was a significant
predictor of both recall and narrative coherence. Episodic or autobiographical
memory for a complex event demands connected and extended representations,
involving temporal and causal connections, and attributions of personal involve-
ment and actions. These are also the kinds of representations that are required
in theory-of-mind studies, although the typical events used in such studies are
shorter and less personally involving than events used in memory studies.
Listening to stories requires mastery of the representational language of nar-
rative even more than does episodic memory in that psychological causal factors
are usually involved and are either implicit or made explicit through descriptive
and explanatory language. Listening to stories is therefore an important passage
along the road to the Community of Minds. Indeed, in listening to stories, the child
must become expert at hearing and retaining a passage of speech long enough to
interpret its meaning as a whole and then to connect it to succeeding passages to
understand a whole episode. In other words, story understanding requires the use
of language as an internal personal representation, one derived from the external
presentation. Further, the story is about something that is removed from the here
and now, and from the childs own experience, possibly about something that is
totally unreal, a product of the imagination of the author. This requires the child
to represent in mind a reality that is at odds with the known and present reality.
Our assumption is that mental representations of this kind are not possible
without the use of representational language and that therefore childrens rela-
tive degree of language skill, as measured by standard tests, should be related
to their understanding of story themes and characters. As expected, Fontaines
452 Nelson
illustrated as mind pictures representing scenes where one person is thinking
that another person is thinking (Perner, 1991; Wellman, 1990). Under the present
analysis, such pictures are misleading; rather, internal linguistic representations
enable the duality of beliefs to be entertained. The proposed sequence of develop-
ment in brief is as follows: through relevant conversational experiences, the child
is exposed to increasingly complex and extended uses of representational lan-
guage and comes to master the skills, involving short-term memory and semantic
interpretationthat are necessary for the comprehension of such linguistically
formulated messages. Next, the child becomes capable of repeating to self or oth-
ers what has been heard on the same or a later occasion. (This is reflected in
tests of receptive language. It also appears in the repetition of stories or of other
peoples experiential reports.) Then the child may begin to use verbal representa-
tions both to compose stories or reminiscences (reflected in expressive language)
and to serve as internal cognitive representations, enabling the duality of mental
representations.
Children of 4 and 5 years have usually learned to receive information in
story form and to remember it for future telling to a greater extent than they
have learned to turn a memory of their own experience into a tale for the tell-
ing, including the mental states of the characters involved. Such an asymmetry
may help in understanding how children enter into the Community of Minds.
What we dont know is what the relation is between the memory for the story
and its use in further cognitive operations. Researchers often assume that young
children are very good at story understanding and recall, to the extent that they
use these modes in research on theory-of-mind and other complex tasks. Such
studies should at least include a measure of language competence to determine
to what extent childrens performance on the task of interest is in fact a product
of their skill in story understanding. Certainly, receptive language ability is a fac-
tor in story recall and story understanding, as the studies summarized here have
shown.
At the very least, good performance on tests of receptive language, even of
receptive vocabulary, such as the PPVT, is an indication of extensive experience
with talking with adults about complex topics in extended discourse formats.
Given the assumption that such discussions are a potent source of information
about the relation of mental states to peoples actions, as well as many other mat-
ters of interest to the Community of Minds, the relation between receptive lan-
guage and various cognitive tasks becomes very understandable.
Finally, it should be noted that, to the extent that experience with narratives
in stories or conversations is found to be critical to childrens achievement of
theory of mind, the case for beginning with an understanding of the relation of
mental states to action among people in stories, that is, people symbolically repre-
sented, becomes plausible. It is within a narrative that differential understandings
and motivations are highlighted as crucial to understanding the goals and means
to achieve them that constitute the plot of a story. This understanding then may
Complex language
words
riesCoM
ConversationSto
Social experience
454 Nelson
Charles Taylor (1985, p. 263) said it very well: there are three things that get
done in language:
making articulations, and hence bringing about explicit awareness;
putting things in public space, thereby constituting public space;
making the discriminations which are foundational to human concerns, and hence
opening us to these concerns.
Although all of these are involved in the childs coming into the consciousness
that language allows, it is the last, opening up to the concerns of the community,
that I believe is most significant. It takes the child beyond his own private con-
cerns and beliefs and opens up the possibility of understanding the concerns, and
thereby the beliefs, of others in the Community of Minds.
Ack nowledgments
I would like to acknowledge with grateful appreciation the invaluable contributions of Sylvie
Goldman, Sarah Henseler, Daniela Plesa Skwerer, Nechama Presler, Lea Kessler Shaw, and Faye
Fried Walkenfeld for the projects and ideas reported in this essay.
Notes
1
ToM theorists may argue that it is not possible to understand the contents without the con-
cept of belief. I believe this may be based on a conflation of the language of belief with the
concept of belief. The child may learn to use the terms think or know in complement
constructions indicating his or her own state of belief without having the requisite insight
that this construction refers to a generalized concept of a kind of mental attitude toward the
contents. Consider the following exchange: Mother: Where are your shoes? Child: I know!
Theyre in the closet. Here the child is accessing a belief (where the shoes are) and using the
expression I know. Next: Mother looks in the closet and does not find them, then says: I
think theyre in the kitchenI remember seeing them there. Child: Ill get them, moving
to the kitchen. What in this exchange requires us to assume that the child has a concept of
belief, although she both expresses her own belief and interprets the expression (I think) by
Mother? The position I take is that the concept of belief may be constructed on the basis of
experience of many such exchanges but does not require at the outset the existence of such a
concept in order to first compare ones own belief with the conflicting statement of anothers
R eferences
Bamberg, M. (Ed.), (1997). Narrative development: The remembering self: Construction and accuracy
Six approaches. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. in the self-narrative (pp. 136157). New York:
Baron-Cohen, S. (2000). Theory of mind and au- Cambridge University Press.
tism: a fifteen-year review. In S. Baron-Cohen, Fonagy, P., & Target, M. (1997). Attachment and re-
H. Tager-Flusberg, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), flective function: Their role in self-organization.
Understanding other minds: Perspectives from Development and Psychopathology, 9, 679700.
developmental cognitive neuroscience (pp. 320). Fontaine, R. G. (2002). Childrens understand-
Oxford: Oxford University Press. ing of story: The influence of genre, affect and
Bartsch, K., & Wellman, H. M. (1995). Children talk language. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, City
about the mind. New York: Oxford University University of New York Graduate School, New
Press. York.
Booth, J. R., & Hall, W. S. (1995). Development Frye, D. (1999). Development of intention: The re-
of the understanding of the polysemous mean- lation of executive function to theory of mind.
ings of the mental state verb know. Cognitive In P. D. Zelazo, J. W. Astington, & D. R. Olson
Development, 10, 529550. (Eds.). Developing theories of intention: Social
Bretherton, I., & Beeghly, M. (1982). Talking about understanding and self-control (pp. 119131).
internal states: The acquisition of an explicit Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
theory of mind. Developmental Psychology, 18, Furrow, D., Moore, C., Davidge, J., & Chiasson, L.
906921. (1992). Mental terms in mothers and childrens
Bruner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. speech: Similarities and relationships. Journal of
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Child Language, 19, 617632.
Byrne, R., & Whiten, A. (Eds.). (1988). Machiavellian Gopnik, A., Capps, L., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2000).
intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Early theories of mind: What the theory theory
Chandler, M., Fritz, A., & Hala, S. (1989). can tell us about autism. In S. Baron-Cohen,
Deception as a marker of 2-year-olds, 3-year- H. Tager-Flusberg, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.),
olds, and 4-year-olds early theories of mind. Understanding other minds: Perspectives from de-
Child Development, 60, 12631277. velopmental cognitive neuroscience (pp. 5072).
de Villiers, J. G., & Pyers, J. (1997). Complementing Oxford: Oxford University Press.
cognition: The relationship between language Gopnik, A., & Wellman, H. (1994). The theory the-
and theory of mind. In E. Hughes, M. Hughes, ory. In L. A. Hirschfeld & S. A. Gelman (Eds.),
& A. Greenhill (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Mapping the mind (pp. 257293). New York:
Annual Boston University Conference on Language Cambridge University Press.
Development (pp. 136147). Somerville, MA: Harris, P. L. (2000). The work of the imagination.
Cascadilla Press. Oxford: Blackwell.
Donald, M. (1991). Origins of the modern mind. Harris, P. L. (2001). Thinking about the unknown.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Trends in Cognitive Science, 5, 494498.
Dunbar, R. (1996). Grooming, gossip and the evolu- Henseler, S. (2000). Young childrens developing
tion of language. Boston: Faber & Faber. theory of mind: Person reference, psychological
Dunn, J. (1988). The beginnings of social understand- understanding and narrative skill. Unpublished
ing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Ph.D. dissertation, City University of New York
Fivush, R. (1993). Emotional content of parent Graduate Center, New York.
child conversations about the past. In C. A. Johnson, C. N., & Maratsos, M. P. (1977). Early
Nelson (Ed.), Memory and affect in development comprehension of mental verbs: Think and
(Vol. 26, pp. 3977). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. know. Child Development, 48, 17431747.
Fivush, R. (1994). Constructing narrative, emo- Leslie, A. M. (1987). Pretense and representation:
tion, and self in parentchild conversations The origins of theory of mind. Psychological
about the past. In U. Neisser & R. Fivush (Eds.), Review, 94, 412426.
456 Nelson
Levy, E., & Nelson, K. (1994). Words in discourse: Perner, J. (1991). Understanding the representational
A dialectical approach to the acquisition of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
meaning and use. Journal of Child Language, 21, Plesa, D. (2001). Childrens early construals of sub-
367390. jectivity: Understanding the interpretive mind.
Meltzoff, A. N., & Gopnik, A. (1993). The role of im- Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, City University
itation in understanding persons and developing of New York Graduate School, New York.
theories of mind. In S. Baron-Cohen, H. Tager- Polak, A. & Harris, P. L. (1999). Deception by
Flusberg, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Understanding young children following non-compliance.
other minds: Perspectives from autism (pp. 335 Developmental Psychology, 35, 561568.
366). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Reese, E. (2000, March). A model of the origins of
Meltzoff, A. N., & Moore, M. K. (1999). A new foun- autobiographical memory. Memory Research
dation for cognitive development in infancy: Theme Symposium: Memory development:
The birth of the representational infant. In E. Biological, cognitive and social perspectives.
K. Scholnick, K. Nelson, S. A. Gelman, & P. H. University of Dunedin, New Zealand.
Miller (Eds.), Conceptual development: Piagets Ruffman, T., Slade, L., & Crowe, E. (2002). The re-
legacy (pp. 5378). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. lation between childrens and mothers mental
Miller, P. J., Potts, R., Fung, H., Hoogstra, L., & state language and theory-of-mind understand-
Mintz, J. (1990). Narrative practices and the so- ing. Child Development, 73, 734751.
cial construction of self in childhood. American Schacter, D. L. (1992). Understanding implicit
Ethnologist, 17, 292311. memory. American Psychologist, 47, 559569.
Montgomery, D. E. (2002). Mental verbs and se- Shaw, L. K. (1999). The development of the mean-
mantic development. Journal of Cognition and ings of think and know through conversation.
Development, 3, 357384. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, City University
Moore, C., Bryant, D., & Furrow, D. (1989). Mental of New York Graduate Center, New York.
terms and the development of certainty. Child Sinclair, A. (1996). Young childrens practical de-
Development, 60, 167171. ceptions and their understanding of false belief.
Nelson, K. (1979). Explorations in the development New Ideas in Psychology, 14, 157173.
of a functional semantic system. In W. Collins Taylor, C. (1985). Philosophy and the human sci-
(Ed.), Childrens language and communication: ences: Philosophical papers. (Vol. 1). Cambridge:
Minnesota symposium on child psychology (Vol. Cambridge University Press.
12, pp. 4781). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Tessler, M., & Nelson, K. (1994). Making memo-
Nelson, K. (Ed.). (1989). Narratives from the crib. ries: The influence of joint encoding on later
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. recall. Consciousness and Cognition, 3, 307326.
Nelson, K. (1996). Language in cognitive develop- Tomasello, M. (1999). Having intentions, under-
ment: The emergence of the mediated mind. New standing intentions, and understanding com-
York: Cambridge University Press. municative intentions. In P. D. Zelazo, J. W.
Nelson, K., & Fivush, R. (2004). The emergence of Astington, & D. R. Olson (Eds.), Developing
autobiographical memory: A social cultural de- theories of intention: Social understanding and
velopmental theory. Psychological Review, 111, self-control (pp. 6376). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
486511. Tulving, E. (1983). Elements of episodic memory.
Nelson, K., Henseler, S., & Plesa, D. (2000). Entering New York: Oxford University Press.
a community of minds: A Feminist perspective on Walkenfeld, F. F. (2000). Reminder and language
theory of mind development. In P. Miller & E. S. effects on preschoolers memory reports: Do
Scholnick (Eds.), Toward a Feminist Developmental words speak louder than actions? Unpublished
Psychology (pp. 6183). New York: Routledge. Ph.D. dissertation, City University of New York
Nelson, K., Plesa, D., Goldman, S., Henseler, S., Graduate School, New York.
Presler, N., & Walkenfeld, F. F. (2003). Entering Wellman, H. M. (1988). First steps in the childs
a community of minds: An experiential ap- theorizing about the mind. In J. W. Astington, P.
proach to theory of mind. Human Development, L. Harris, & D. R. Olson (Eds.), Developing theo-
46, 2446. ries of mind (pp. 6492). New York: Cambridge
Nelson, K., & Shaw, L. K. (2002). Developing a so- University Press.
cially shared symbolic system. In E. Amsel & J. Wellman, H. M. (1990). The childs theory of mind.
Byrnes (Eds.), Language, literacy and cognitive Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
development: The development and consequences Wellman, H. M., & Gelman, S. A. (1992). Cognitive
of symbolic communication (pp. 2758). Mahwah, development: Foundational theories of core do-
NJ: Erlbaum. mains. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 337375.
Oyama, S. (1985). The ontogeny of information: Woolfe, T., Want, S. C., & Siegal, M. (2002).
Developmental systems and evolution. New York: Signposts to development: Theory of mind in
Cambridge University Press. deaf children. Child Development, 73, 768778.
Vocabulary Processes
William E. Nagy, Seattle Pacific University
Judith A. Scott, University of California, Santa Cruz
458
of this complexity that have long been recognized by vocabulary researchers are:
(a) incrementalityknowing a word is a matter of degrees, not all-or-nothing;
(b) multidimensionalityword knowledge consists of several qualitatively dif-
ferent types of knowledge; (c) polysemywords often have multiple meanings;
(d)interrelatednessones knowledge of any given word is not independent of
ones knowledge of other words; and (e) heterogeneitywhat it means to know a
word differs substantially depending on the kind of word. We consider these in
turn.
Incrementality
Word learning is incrementalit takes place in many steps. In her classic re-
search on early childhood language development, Eve Clark (1973, 1993) pro-
vided a detailed picture of how childrens knowledge of word meanings is often
initially incomplete but, over time, gradually approximates the adult understand-
ing. Likewise, Susan Careys (1978) seminal work on childrens word learning
distinguished between quick mapping (i.e., the initial establishment of a partial
representation of a word meaning, sometimes on the basis of a single encoun-
ter) and extended mapping (i.e., the process of progressive refinement of word
knowledge).
The incremental nature of word learning has sometimes been expressed
in terms of a linear scale with several points. Dale (1965) proposed four stages:
(1)never saw it before; (2) heard it but doesnt know what it means; (3) recognizes
it in context as having something to do with...; and (4) knows it well. A recent
variation by Paribakht and Wesche (1997) is similar, but adds a fifth point: (5) I
can use this word in a sentence.
Although such scales are a great improvement over an all-or-nothing picture
of word knowledge, and serve as a useful basis for more sensitive assessments of
word knowledge (Paribakht & Wesche, 1997), they are not intended to imply that
there are only four or five discrete levels of word knowledge. In a series of experi-
ments, Durso and Shore (1991) found that college undergraduates were able to
distinguish between correct and incorrect uses of words, at a rate significantly
greater than chance, even for words that they had previously judged not to be real
English words at all. These results suggest that even at the lowest levels of word
knowledge, within Dales stage 1, there are measurable differences in word knowl-
edge. At the other end of the scale, in a series of studies of high-quality vocabulary
instruction, Beck, McKeown, and their colleagues (Beck, Perfetti, & McKeown,
1982; McKeown, Beck, Omanson, & Perfetti, 1983; McKeown, Beck, Omanson,
& Pople, 1985) found that up to 40 instructional encounters with a word (and
high-quality instruction at that) do not bring students to a ceiling.
An incremental view of word learning helps explain how a great deal of vo-
cabulary knowledge can be gained incidentally from context, even when indi-
vidual encounters with words in context are not particularly informative (Schatz
& Baldwin, 1986). Several studies have used tests representing multiple levels
of word knowledge to measure the amount of word knowledge readers gain
when encountering words in natural context (Nagy, Herman, & Anderson, 1985;
Polysemy
Words often have more than one meaning, and the more frequent a word is in the
language, the more meanings it is likely to have. The simple fact that a word can
have two or more unrelated meanings (e.g., bear meaning animal and bear mean-
ing carry) adds substantial cognitive complexity to the task of using a dictionary
(Miller & Gildea, 1987). Even more troublesome, at least to the theoretician, is the
fact that the multiple meanings of words range from being completely unrelated
to being so close that the shade of meaning separating the two may exist only in
the mind of a compulsive lexicographer (Anderson & Nagy, 1991). In fact, word
meanings are inherently flexible, and always nuanced in some way by the con-
text in which they occur (Green, 1989; Nagy, 1997). The meaning of a word one
encounters must be inferred from context, even if the word is already familiar, as
in the phrase a soft distant symphony of rushing wind (Polacco, 1996, p. 25). In
many cases, the required inferences are easy and natural, but figurative language
is certainly not without its pitfalls for students (Ortony, Reynolds, & Arter, 1978;
Winner, Engel, & Gardner, 1980). If vocabulary instruction is to address this
aspect of the complexity of word knowledge, students must not only be taught to
choose effectively among the multiple meanings of a word offered in dictionaries,
but to expect words to be used with novel shades of meanings.
Multidimensionality
Discussions of the incremental nature of word learning sometimes appear to as-
sume that word knowledge can be expressed in terms of a single dimension. For
Interrelatedness
Words are often taught and tested as if they were essentially isolated units of
knowledge. Clearly such practice is inconsistent with a constructivist under-
standing of knowledge that emphasizes the importance of linking what is learned
to familiar words and concepts. How well a person knows the meaning of whale
depends in part on their understanding of mammal. A person who already knows
the words hot, cold, and cool has already acquired some of the components of the
word warm, even if the word warm has not yet been encountered.
The potential extent of interconnectedness in vocabulary knowledge is un-
derscored by the Landauer and Dumais (1997) simulation of word learning from
context. In their simulation, the input was 4.6 million words of text (in samples
Heterogeneity
Another type of complexity in word knowledge is the fact that what it means to
know a word depends on what kind of word one is talking about. For example,
knowing function words such as the or if is quite different from knowing terms
such as hypotenuse or ion. The fact that the different dimensions of word knowl-
edge are at least partially independent of each other also means that the same
word can require different types of learning from different types of students, de-
pending on what they already know about a word.
These responses show that this child is willing to ignore the syntactic structure
of the sentences (especially sentence 3) in order to maintain his original hypoth-
esis about the words meaning. McKeowns (1985) study of high- and low-ability
readers learning from context likewise included examples of responses that appear
to reflect lack of attention to the syntactic role of the target word in the sentence.
Does use of context to learn the meanings of new words always require meta-
linguistic awareness? Presumably not; the rapid vocabulary acquisition of very
young children takes place at an age when many aspects of metalinguistic aware-
ness are not measurably present. However, a distinction must be made between
incidental learning of word meanings from context and deriving word meanings.
The latter process is usually examined by asking students to come up with, or
select, an appropriate meaning for an unfamiliar word with the context available.
Such a task is likely to be more metacognitively and metalinguistically demand-
ing than incidental word learning. This may account for the fact that studies of
truly incidental word learning have often found no significant effects of verbal
ability (e.g., Nagy, Anderson, & Herman, 1987; Nagy et al., 1985; Stahl, 1989;
Stallman, 1991), whereas studies of deriving word meaning have generally found
large ability effects (e.g., Jenkins, Stein, & Wysocki, 1984; Daneman & Green,
1986; McKeown, 1985; Sternberg & Powell, 1983).
The research on learning words from context clearly documents the fact that
chances of learning very much about a word from any single encounter with that
word in natural context are very slim (Beck, McKeown, & McCaslin, 1983; Nagy
et al., 1987; Schatz & Baldwin, 1986). It is extremely important for teachers to rec-
ognize that although context may be a natural means of word learning, it is not
especially effective in the short run. Likewise, it is important for students to have
realistic expectations about the amount of information they can gain from context.
Training students on artificially helpful contexts may actually decrease their ef-
fectiveness at using the contextual clues available in natural text (Kranzer, 1988).
Conclusion
Any type of learning, if examined closely enough, looks so complex that one won-
ders how children can do it at all. In this chapter, we have tried to convey some of
the complexity of the processes involved in vocabulary acquisition.
For many children, of course, vocabulary growth appears to proceed with
astonishing ease and rapidity. Beck and McKeown (1991), comparing previously
published figures, estimated that average children learn words at a rate of some-
thing like 2,500 to 3,000 words a year. More conservative accounts put the figure
at 1,000 words a year (Goulden, Nation, & Read, 1990; DAnna, Zechmeister,
& Hall, 1991). We have argued elsewhere at length (Anderson & Nagy, 1992;
Nagy, 1998) why we consider these latter estimates unrealistically low. Anglin
(1993) conducted a major study of childrens vocabulary growth between first
and fifth grade that helped clarify the nature of the differences between conflict-
ing estimates. Given a conservative definition of vocabularycounting only root
wordsAnglin found a rate of growth identical to that reported by Goulden et
al. (1990) and DAnna et al. (1991). However, using a more inclusive concept of
psychologically basic vocabularyincluding, for example, idioms and derived
R eferences
Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. (1981). Vocabulary Anderson, R. C., & Nagy, W. (1992). The vocabu
knowledge. In J. Guthrie (Ed.), Comprehension lary conundrum. American Educator, 16, 1418,
and teaching: Research reviews (pp. 77117). 4447.
Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Anglin, J. M. (1993). Vocabulary development:
Anderson, R. C., & Nagy, W. (1991). Word mean A morphological analysis. Monographs of the
ings. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & Society of Research in Child Development, Serial
P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading re- No. 238, Vol. 58, No. 10.
search (Vol. II, pp. 690724). White Plains, NY: Baumann, J. F., & Kameenui, E. J. (1991). Research
Longman. on vocabulary: Ode to Voltaire. In J. Flood, J.
T
he last several years have witnessed the articulation of a largely new theory
of reading, a theory already accepted by the majority of scholars in the
field. According to the theory, a readers schema, or organized knowledge of
the world, provides much of the basis for comprehending, learning, and remem-
bering the ideas in stories and texts. In this chapter I attempt to explain schema
theory, give illustrations of the supporting evidence, and suggest applications to
classroom teaching and the design of instructional materials.
Notice that all of the words are familiar and that the syntax is straightforward,
yet the sentence does not make sense to most people. Now notice what happens
when the additional clue, bagpipe, is provided. At this point the sentence does
make sense because one is able to interpret all the words in the sentence in terms
of certain specific objects and events and their interrelations.
Let us examine another sentence:
The big number 37 smashed the ball over the fence.
This sentence is easy to interpret. Big Number 37 is a baseball player. The sense of
smash the ball is to propel it rapidly by hitting it strongly with a bat. The fence is at the
boundary of a playing field. The ball was hit hard enough that it flew over the fence.
This chapter is reprinted from Learning to Read in American Schools: Basal Readers and Content Texts (pp. 243
257), edited by R.C. Anderson, J. Osborn, & R.J. Tierney, 1984, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Copyright 1984 by
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Reprinted with permission.
476
Suppose a person with absolutely no knowledge of baseball read the Big
Number 37 sentence. Such a person could not easily construct an interpretation
of the sentence, but with enough mental effort might be able to conceive of large
numerals, perhaps made of metal, attached to the front of an apartment building.
Further, the person might imagine that the numerals come loose and fall, striking
a ball resting on top of, or lodged above, a fence, causing the ball to break. Most
people regard this as an improbable interpretation, certainly one that never would
have occurred to them, but they readily acknowledge that it is a good interpreta-
tion. What makes it good? The answer is that the interpretation is complete and
consistent. It is complete in the sense that every element in the sentence is inter-
preted; there are no loose ends left unexplained. The interpretation is consistent
in that no part of it does serious violence to knowledge about the physical and
social world.
Both interpretations of the Big Number 37 sentence assume a real world.
Criteria of consistency are relaxed in fictional worlds in which animals talk
or men wearing capes leap tall buildings in a single bound. But there are con-
ventions about what is possible in fictional worlds as well. The knowledgeable
reader will be annoyed if these conventions are violated. The less knowledge-
able reader simply will be confused.
It should not be imagined that there is some simple, literal level of compre-
hension of stories and texts that does not require coming up with a schema. This
important point is illustrated in a classic study by Bransford and Johnson (1972)
in which subjects read paragraphs, such as the following, written so that most
people are unable to construct a schema that will account for the material:
If the balloons popped the sound wouldnt be able to carry since everything would
be too far away from the correct floor. A closed window would also prevent the
sound from carrying, since most buildings tend to be well insulated. Since the whole
operation depends upon a steady flow of electricity, a break in the middle of the wire
would also cause problems. Of course, the fellow could shout, but the human voice
is not loud enough to carry that far. An additional problem is that a string could
break on the instrument. Then there could be no accompaniment to the message.
It is clear that the best situation would involve less distance. Then there would be
fewer potential problems. With face to face contact, the least number of things could
go wrong. (p. 719)
Subjects rated this passage as very difficult to understand, and they were unable
to remember much of it. In contrast, subjects shown the drawing on the left side
of Figure 1 found the passage more comprehensible and were able to remember
a great deal of it. Another group saw the drawing on the right in Figure 1. This
group remembered no more than the group that did not receive a drawing. The
experiment demonstrates that what is critical for comprehension is a schema ac-
counting for the relationships among elements; it is not enough for the elements to
be concrete and imageable.
Trick passages, such as the foregoing one about the communication prob-
lems of a modern day Romeo, are useful for illustrating what happens when a
reader is completely unable to discover a schema that will fit a passage and, there-
fore, finds the passage entirely incomprehensible. More typical is the situation in
which a reader knows something about a topic, but falls far short of being an ex-
pert. Chiesi, Spilich, and Voss (1979) asked people high and low in knowledge of
baseball to read and recall a report of a half-inning from a fictitious baseball game.
Knowledge of baseball had both qualitative and quantitative effects on perfor-
mance. High-knowledge subjects were more likely to recall and embellish upon
aspects of strategic significance to the game. Low-knowledge subjects, in contrast,
were more likely to include information incidental to the play of the game.
Schema theory highlights the fact that often more than one interpretation of
a text is possible. The schema that will be brought to bear on a text depends upon
the readers age, sex, race, religion, nationality, occupationin short, it depends
upon the readers culture. This point was illustrated in an experiment completed
by Anderson, Reynolds, Schallert, and Goetz (1977), who asked people to read the
following passage:
Tony slowly got up from the mat, planning his escape. He hesitated a moment and
thought. Things were not going well. What bothered him most was being held,
478 Anderson
especially since the charge against him had been weak. He considered his present
situation. The lock that held him was strong but he thought he could break it. He
knew, however, that his timing would have to be perfect. Tony was aware that it was
because of his early roughness that he had been penalized so severelymuch too
severely from his point of view. The situation was becoming frustrating; the pressure
had been grinding on him for too long. He was being ridden unmercifully. Tony was
getting angry now. He felt he was ready to make his move. He knew that his success
or failure would depend on what he did in the next few seconds.
Most people think the foregoing passage is about a convict planning his escape
from prison. A special group of people, however, see the passage an entirely dif-
ferent way; these are men who have been involved in the sport of wrestling. They
think the passage is about a wrestler caught in the hold of an opponent. Notice
how the interpretation of lock varies according to perspective. In the one case, it
is a piece of hardware that holds a cell door shut; in the other it may be a sweaty
arm around a neck. Males enrolled in a weight lifting class and females enrolled
in a music education class read the foregoing passage and another passage that
most people interpret as being about several people playing cards, but that can
be interpreted as being about a rehearsal session of a woodwind ensemble. The
results were as expected. Scores on a multiple choice test designed to reveal in-
terpretations of the passages showing striking relationships to the subjects back-
ground. Physical education students usually gave a wrestling interpretation to
the prison/wrestling passage and a card playing interpretation to the card/music
passage, whereas the reverse was true of the music education students. Similarly,
when subjects were asked to recall the passages, theme-revealing distortions ap-
peared, even though the instructions emphasized reproducing the exact words of
the original text. For example, a physical education student stated, Rocky was
penalized early in the match for roughness or a dangerous hold, while a music
education student wrote, he was angry that he had been caught and arrested.
The thesis of this section is that comprehension is a matter of activating or
constructing a schema that provides a coherent explanation of objects and events
mentioned in a discourse. In sharp contrast is the conventional view that compre-
hension consists of aggregating the meanings of words to form the meanings of
clauses, aggregating the meanings of clauses to form the meanings of sentences,
aggregating the meanings of sentences to form the meanings of paragraphs, and
so on. The illustrations in this section were intended to demonstrate the insuf-
ficiency of this conventional view. The meanings of the words cannot be added
up to give the meaning of the whole. The click of comprehension occurs only
when the reader evolves a schema that explains the whole message.
480 Anderson
can recall that the entree was fish, he will be able to infer that the beverage may
have been white wine.
The foregoing are tentative hypotheses about the functions of a schema in
text processing, conceived to provide the broadest possible interpretation of avail-
able data. Several of the hypotheses can be regarded as rivalsfor instance, the
ideational scaffolding hypothesis and the selective attention hypothesisand it
may be that not all of them will turn out to be viable. Researchers are now ac-
tively at work developing precise models of schema-based processes and subject-
ing these models to experimental test.
One Indian had this to say about the American brides dress: She was looking
alright except the dress was too old and out of fashion. Wearing an heirloom
wedding dress is a completely acceptable aspect of the pageantry of the American
marriage ceremony. This Indian appears to have completely missed this and has
inferred that the dress was out of fashion, on the basis that Indians attach impor-
tance to displays of social status, manifested in such details as wearing an up-to-
date, fashionable sari.
The gifts described in the Indian passage that were given to the grooms fam-
ily by the brides, the dowry, and the reference to the concern of the brides family
that a scooter might be requested were a source of confusion for our American
subjects. First of all, the agreement about the gifts to be given to the in-laws was
changed to the exchange of gifts, a wording that suggests that gifts are flowing
in two directions, not one. Another subject identified the gifts given to the in-laws
as favors, which are often given in American weddings to the attendants by the
bride and groom.
In another facet of the study, different groups of Indians and Americans
read the letters and rated the significance of each of the propositions. It was ex-
pected that Americans would regard as important propositions conveying in-
formation about ritual and ceremony whereas Indians would see as important
propositions dealing with financial and social status. Table 2 contains examples
of text units that received contrasting ratings of importance from Indians and
Americans. Schema theory predicts that text units that are important in the light
of the schema are more likely to be learned and, once learned, are more likely
to be remembered. This prediction was confirmed. Subjects did recall more text
482 Anderson
Table 2. Examples of Idea Units of Contrasting Importance to Americans
and Indians
American Passage Indian Passage
Idea Units More Idea Units More Idea Units More Idea Units More
Important to Important to Important to Important to
Americans Indians Americans Indians
Then on Friday Shell be lucky if Premas husband Premas in-laws seem
night they had the she can even get her had to wear a dhoti to be nice enough
rehearsal at the daughter married, for that ceremony people. They did not
church and the the way things are and for the wedding create any problem
rehearsal dinner, going. the next day. in the wedding,
which lasted until Her mother wore There were only even though Premas
almost midnight. yellow, which looks the usual essential husband is their only
All the attendants great on her with rituals: the curtain son.
wore dresses that her bleached hair, removal, the parents Since they did not
were specially and Georges mother giving the daughter ask for any dowry,
designed to go with wore pale green. away, walking seven Premas parents
Pams. Have you seen the steps together, etc., were a little worried
Her mother wore diamond she has? and plenty of smoke about their asking
yellow, which looks It must have cost from the sacred fire. for a scooter before
great on her with George a fortune There must have the wedding, but
her bleached hair, because its almost been about five they didnt ask for
and Georges mother two carats. hundred people at one.
wore pale green. the wedding feast. Premas parents were
Since only fifty people very sad when she
could be seated at one left.
time, it went on for a
long time.
Note. Important idea units are in italics.
484 Anderson
that the house had a leaky roof. Anderson and Pichert (1978; see also Anderson,
Pichert, & Shirey, 1983) went on to show that the readers perspective has in-
dependent effects on learning and recall. Subjects who switch perspectives and
then recall the story for a second time recall additional, previously unrecalled,
information important to their new perspective but unimportant to their original
perspective. For example, a person who begins as a homebuyer may fail to re-
member that the story says the side door is kept unlocked, but may later remem-
ber this information when told to assume the role of a burglar. Subjects report that
previously unrecalled information significant in the light of the new perspective
pops into their heads.
Recent unpublished research in my laboratory, completed in collaboration
with Ralph Reynolds and Paul Wilson, suggests selective allocation of attention
to text elements that are important in the light of the readers schema. We have
employed two measures of attention. The first is the amount of time a subject
spends reading schema-relevant sentences. The second is the response time to a
probe presented during schema-relevant sentences. The probe is a tone sounded
through earphones; the subject responds by pushing a button as fast as pos-
sible. The logic of the probe task is that if the mind is occupied with reading,
there will be a slight delay in responding to the probe. Our results indicate that
people assigned a burglar perspective, for instance, have slightly longer reading
times and slightly longer probe times when reading burglar-relevant sentences.
Comparable results have been obtained by other investigators (Cirilo & Foss,
1980; Haberlandt, Berian, & Sandson, 1980; Just & Carpenter, 1980).
486 Anderson
goals and motives to characters, imagine the same sequence of actions, predict
the same emotional reactions, or expect the same outcomes? This is a question
that the research community and the school publishing industry ought to address
with renewed vigor.
R eferences
Anderson, R.C. (1978). Schema-directed processes Bransford, J.D., & McCarrell, N.S. (1974). A sketch
in language comprehension. In A. Lesgold, J. of a cognitive approach to comprehension. In
Pellegrino, S. Fokkema, & R. Glaser (Eds.), W.B. Weimer & D.S. Palermo (Eds.), Cognition
Cognitive psychology and instruction. New York: and the symbolic process. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Plenum. Chiesi, H.L., Spilich, G.J., & Voss, J.F. (1979).
Anderson, R.C., Mason, J., & Shirey, L.L. (1983). Acquisition of domain-related information in
The reading group: An experimental investigation relation to high- and low-domain knowledge.
of a labyrinth (Tech. Rep. No. 271). Champaign: Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,
University of Illinois, Center for the Study of 18, 257274.
Reading. Cirilo, R.K., & Foss, D.J. (1980). Text structure
Anderson, R.C., & Pichert, J.W. (1978). Recall of and reading time for sentences. Journal of Verbal
previously unrecallable information following Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 96109.
a shift in perspective. Journal of Verbal Learning Haberlandt, K., Berian, C., & Sandson, J. (1980).
and Verbal Behavior, 17, 112. The episode schema in story processing. Journal
Anderson, R.C., Pichert, J.W., & Shirey, L.L. (1983). of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19,
Effects of the readers schema at different points 635650.
in time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2), Hayes, D.A., & Tierney, R.J. (1980, October).
271279. Increasing background knowledge through anal-
Anderson, R.C., Reynolds, R.E., Schallert, D.L., ogy: Its effects upon comprehension and learn-
& Goetz, E.T. (1977). Frameworks for com- ing (Tech. Rep. No. 186). Urbana: University of
prehending discourse. American Educational Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading. (ERIC
Research Journal, 14, 367382. Document Reproduction Service No. ED195953)
Anderson, R.C., Spiro, R.J., & Anderson, M.C. Herber, H.L. (1978). Teaching reading in content
(1978). Schemata as scaffolding for the represen- areas (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
tation of information in connected discourse. Hall.
American Educational Research Journal, 15, Just, M.A., & Carpenter, P.A. (1980). A theory of
433440. reading: From eye fixation to comprehension.
Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cog- Psychological Review, 87, 329354.
nitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart. Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city: Studies
Bobrow, D.G., & Norman, D.A. (1975). Some prin- in the black English vernacular. Washington, DC:
ciples of memory schemata. In D.G. Bobrow & Center for Applied Linguistics.
A.M. Collins (Eds.), Representation and under- Luiten, J., Ames, W., & Ackerson, G. (1980). A
standing: Studies in cognitive science. New York: meta-analysis of the effects of advance orga-
Academic. nizers on learning and retention. American
Bransford, J.D., & Johnson, M.K. (1972). Contextual Educational Research Journal, 17, 211218.
prerequisites for understanding: Some investi- Mayer, R.E. (1979). Can advance organizers influ-
gations of comprehension and recall. Journal of ence meaningful learning? Review of Educational
Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 717726. Research, 49, 371383.
488 Anderson
CHAPTER 20
T
he influence of the cognitive revolution on literacy research and practice
over the past quarter of a century has been both profound and pervasive.
This influence is, perhaps, seen most readily in relation to the development
of schema theory and the role it has played in exploring and conceptualizing read-
ing and writing (e.g., Anderson & Pearson, 1984; Tierney & Shanahan, 1991).
Recently, however, we have witnessed the growing influence of various social con-
ceptions of mind with their corresponding implications for understanding literacy
processes. These have included Vygotskys sociocultural theory (e.g., Cole, 1996;
Gavelek & Raphael, 1996; Moll, 1990; Wertsch, 1991, 1998), various renderings
of social constructivism (Au, 1998; Greene & Ackerman, 1995; Spivey, 1997), and
discursive psychology (Gergen & Gergen, 1983; Harr & Gillett, 1994). Central
to this recognition of the social is the important role of discourse processes in the
development of mind and literacy (e.g., Gee, 1997a, 2000; Santa Barbara Discourse
Group, 1994). As is often the case in pendulum sweeps that characterize educa-
tional inquiry, there is a danger of overcorrection. Either the social comes to be
emphasized to the relative exclusion of the individual, or vice versa.
With this in mind, we examine recent contributions of social and cultural
perspectives and how these might contribute to and change our current concep-
tions of schema theory. With its emphasis on individual, cognitive processes,
schema theory and research conducted through that lens have helped research-
ers and teachers to understand how knowledge is organized and has helped shed
light on the individual cognitive routines that children employ during the read-
ing process. We examine schema theory because of its resilience in the field and
because of its utility in helping teachers and researchers understand the role of
an individuals prior knowledge in comprehension. Whereas schema theory fore-
grounds the role of individual cognitive processes, sociocultural theories, par-
ticularly the work of Vygotsky (1978, 1986) and scholars who use Vygotskys work
(e.g., Au, 1998; Cole, 1996; Gavelek & Raphael, 1996; Gee, 1992; Holland & Cole,
1995; Kozulin, Gindis, Ageyev, & Miller, 2003; Moll, 1990; Rogoff, 1993; Wells,
1999) have also provided significant insights into individuals meaning-making
processes by highlighting the role of language as mediational tool, the importance
This chapter is reprinted from Review of Educational Research, 75(4), 531566. Copyright 2005 by Sage.
Reprinted with permission.
489
of social interactions, and the situatedness of language and social interactions
within cultural and historical systems. We examine sociocultural perspectives
because of their continuing influence and importance in the field and their abil-
ity to contribute to our understanding of the interplay between literate processes
and the social and cultural lives of children as they carry out meaning-making
activities. In undertaking such exploration, we seek to blur the boundaries that
have traditionally separated schema theoretic perspectives and research from so-
ciocultural perspectives and research, with the aim of rethinking the construct
of schema.
As teachers and teacher educators, we believe that schema theory has been
a powerful tool in helping us and in helping pre-service and in-service teachers
understand reading comprehension. But the growing influence of sociocultural
perspectives has also led to an additional tension. We have noted that researchers
and authors of literacy and language arts textbooks continue to talk about schema
theory as a useful model of reading comprehension, as distinct from current socio-
cultural lines of inquiry into literacy development and practice, because such in-
quiries emerged from different views of knowledge and knowledge construction.
Although discussions of schema theory inevitably raise discussions of cultural
knowledge, little work has been undertaken to bridge the gap between versions
of schema as an in-the-head phenomenon and more recent sociocultural perspec-
tives that treat schema as something that exists beyond the individual and within
an individuals social and cultural communities. For example, how might we re-
think schema in light of perspectives that argue that mind extends beyond the
skin (Wertsch, 1991, p. 14), in that mind is discursively produced (e.g., Harr &
Gillett, 1994; Harr & Stearns, 1995) and socially distributed (Gee, 1992, 1997b;
Lave & Wenger, 1991; Rogoff & Lave, 1984)? In particular, what might we learn
from sociocultural perspectives about the origins and development of schemas?
To begin exploring such questions, we first briefly consider why it is impor-
tant at this juncture to revisit schema theory. Second, we identify what we believe
are the salient features of schema theory, and we trace the origins of schema as
a construct and as related to research in the literacy field. We argue that schema
theorists have inadequately explored the issue of schema origination. The genetic
question focusing on the origins and development of knowledge is a fundamental
question essential to sociocultural examinations of learning (Wertsch, 1991), and
a question that must be considered in reconciling social and individual perspec-
tives. Third, we examine sociocultural perspectives to consider what they can
contribute to our understandings of schema. By sociocultural we refer to the
belief that thought has its genesis in social interaction (Vygotsky, 1978, 1986).
Both externally focused, interpsychological tools, such as language and other sign
systems, and internally focused, intrapsychological tools, such as thought, are
created, shaped, and sustained in social and cultural contexts. Thus cognition
does not exist as an isolated process within the individual but as a bio-social-
cultural process that is both public and private (Cole, 1996, p. 136). Sociocultural
perspectives explore the role of ideal and material tools and activities, noting that
For Bartlett, schemas highlighted the reciprocity between culture and mem-
ory. Schemas were necessary to explain the constitutive role of culturally orga-
nized experience in individual sense making. This early use of the term suggested
a transactional relationship between individual knowledge and cultural practice.
Contemporaries of Bartlett (e.g., Dewey, Bentley, and Rosenblatt) developed
psychological and literary theories that explicitly used the concept of transac-
tionalism. It is clear from Rosenblatts (1989) definition of transaction, below, that
the spirit of transactionalism was reflected in Bartletts initial construction of the
concept of schemas:
Instead of separate, already defined entities acting on one another (an interaction),
Dewey and Bentley (1949, p. 69) suggested that the term transaction be used to desig-
nate relationships in which each element conditions and is conditioned by the other
in a mutually constituted situation. This view requires a break with entrenched hab-
its of thinking. The old stimulusresponse, subjectobject, individualsocial dual-
isms give way to a recognition that such relationships take place in a context that
also enters into the event. Human activities and relationships are seen as transactions
in which the individual and the social, cultural, and natural elements interfuse. (italics
added; Rosenblatt, 1989, p. 154)
Schema was also the central mediational construct in Jean Piagets (1952)
structural theory of the origins and development of cognition. For Piaget, devel-
opment was interpreted as an ongoing dialectic in which the individual either
assimilates new experience consistent with existing schemas or changes (i.e.,
accommodates) schemas to fit his or her experience. What is more, Piaget em-
phasized the embodied nature of schema formation by calling attention to the im-
portance of sensorymotor schemata in an individuals early development. But we
find it interesting that, although Piaget shared the individualistic bias of cognitive
scientists, the latter seem to have been little influenced by either the developmen-
tal or the embodied dimensions of Piagets conceptions of schemas.
Central to our discussion in this article is the recognition that the early de-
velopment and use of the schema construct had its origin in efforts to understand
individual thought processes as inextricably embedded in cultural life. Individual
knowledge schemas were transactionally linked to culturally organized experi-
ence.2 In the analysis that follows, we argue that this connection was lost in later
applications of schema to the reading process. In fact, after a close examination of
Bartletts work and some of his experiments, Beals (1998) wrote:
Unfortunately, this view of schema as shaped by culture is not included in some
current versions of schema theory. Although Bartlett is widely cited as the source of
the term schema as a model for the organization of memory, the application of the
concept to much cognitive science and psychological theory and research washes
Although much of the early work on schema theory in the 1970s was pub-
lished by cognitive scientists exploring knowledge construction through com-
puter metaphors (e.g., Minsky, 1975; Schank & Abelson, 1975; Winograd, 1975),
such theories were readily applied to the study of reading. Cognitive scientists
studying story schemas provided a clear link between schema theory and reading
research in comprehension by exploring story structure and recall (e.g., Mandler
& Johnson, 1977; Rumelhart, 1975). Other scholars (e.g., Anderson, 1977, 1978;
Anderson & Pearson, 1984; Bransford & Johnson, 1972, 1973), working primarily
on investigations of reading comprehension, contributed significantly to the work
on schemas and helped bring schema research into mainstream reading research.
Perhaps the best summary of schema theory and its importance for the reading
field comes from Pearson (1992), who observed: Anderson and Pearsons (1984)
schema-theoretic account of reading comprehension typifies the cognitively
Vygotsky also recognized that words are imbued with psychological sense
and not just meaning as linguistically defined. The sense of a word...is the sum
of all the psychological events aroused in our consciousness by the word. It is
Wertsch acknowledges that the students have mastered other narrative forms and
understand them. What is different here is that the specific form, a historical nar-
rative, has not been mastered.
This is similar to the problem cited by Bransford (1983): that packets of infor-
mation in texts may appear unrelated to students. The great difficulty lies not in
presenting students with more information but in providing for them a means to
recognize and construct the relationships between various bits of information
that is, weaving the strands of information into a coherent schema that facilitates
students understandings of content. Wertsch makes a similar point when he
writes that, unless it is integrated into a coherent schema (i.e., a narrative, in the
cases that I am considering), information is very hard to comprehend and retain
(1998, p. 86).
Schemas as Embodied
The effort to construct knowledge relationships is affected not only by the mate-
rial and ideal tools that a learner has access to but also by the character of em-
bodied learning and embodied interaction. In the following extended quotation,
Johnson (cited in Varela, Thompson, & Rosch, 1991) explains:
Meaning includes patterns of embodied experience and preconceptual structures of
our sensibility (i.e., our mode of perception, or orienting ourselves, and of interact-
ing with other objects, events, or persons). These embodied patterns do not remain
private or peculiar to the person who experiences them. Our community helps us
interpret and codify many of our felt patterns. They become shared cultural modes
of experience and help to determine the nature of our meaningful, coherent under-
standing of our world. (p. 150)
Rather than the embodied, situated approach described by Gee, cognitive ver-
sions of schema theory privilege literacy, and to some extent language, as if it were
divorced from use and practice.
Consider, for example, the way in which many experiments on schema have
been carried out. Most have been conducted in laboratory settings with adults
who have been asked to read one or perhaps several narrative passages related
to already existing, or default, schemas (Nassaji, 2002). Although such investi-
gations were necessary to define and explore schemas as constructs and to de-
termine how schemas are activated and applied, they have also put forward a
relatively narrow view of schema activation and construction that emphasizes the
individual. In this sense, we might say that schema theoretic views have hyper-
rationalized literacy processes, foregrounding the cognitive at the expense of the
material. Yet language is a way of doing things in the world. The determination
that a child is having difficulty comprehending some particular text well involves
judgments about the values, norms, roles, and goals that position the child in a
b.
Because Brock had videotaped the session and later conducted a viewing ses-
sion with Deng, we have a window into how he interpreted the above activity.
Because Deng had been in the United States for only 2 years, Brock enlisted the
help of Vue, a Hmong translator, to increase the likelihood that her questions and
inquiries were understood and to ensure that she understood Dengs responses.
As both Brock and the translator interacted with Deng in discussing the episode
above, it became clear to them that Deng had not fully understood the teachers
purpose for the activity. He interpreted the teachers request to look at the shades
of hands in the circle as a literal task, to simply observe the colors of the students
hands. It also became clear that Deng did not fully understand the concept of rac-
ism. In contrast, Mrs. Weber, Vue, and Brock understood the figurative nature of
Mrs. Webers request. In addition, Brock noted that Vue, who had lived for 8 years
in the United States, understood the nature of racism in the United States because
he had experienced it in school (Brock, 1999, personal communication).
Before the scene described above, the class had engaged in both small and
large group activities and discussions pertaining to racism over a period of weeks,
which, according to cognitive perspectives of schema, should have assisted Deng
in constructing or activating a schema for racism. Yet, as the interaction with
Brock as researcher and Vue as translator made clear, Deng did not have a well-
developed schema for racism. In fact, even after discussing the issue in Hmong
with Vue, there was some doubt as to whether he fully understood the teachers
reasoning behind the hand activity at all. This is a case where it is possible to
conclude that, because the teacher had included many activities and strategies for
engaging with the concept of racism before the hand activity (opportunities for
activating or constructing a schema), there was something wrong with or faulty
in Dengs schemaa view predicated on a deficit model wherein the difficulty
in learning is seen as an internal deficit of the student or his culture (Sleeter &
Grant, 1988).
On the other hand, there are those who will legitimately point out that if
the teacher had more knowledge of race relations in the Asian countries where
Deng had lived, she might have been able to make more direct connections to his
prior knowledge. However, we feel that this second alternative fails to adequately
address the context and its participants. Such a perspective assumes that in-the-
head knowledge that could be conveyed from teacher to student will address
a problem that originates in a social milieu. Given the transactional nature of
knowledge, Mrs. Webers schema of race and racism both shapes and is shaped by
her engagement with the world and by the social and cultural patterns that she
Notes
*When this chapter was written, Dunsmore was at Calvin College.
The authors would like to thank the three anonymous reviewers and Diane Barone, Fenice Boyd,
Cynthia Brock, and Mary Rozendal for their feedback on numerous versions of this manuscript.
1
In keeping with the recommendations of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological
Association (5th ed.), we use the plural term schemas instead of the traditional term sche-
mata throughout this article.
2
Readers interested in the notion of transaction and cultural theories of reading may wish
to consult Smagorinsky (2001). Smagorinsky does not revisit schema theoretic perspectives
in his article, but his exploration of text generation and the role of tools and signs in the
construction of meaning through what he calls the transactional zone (p. 140) is highly
relevant to issues that we discuss in this article.
3
For readers interested in the origins of sociocultural perspectives and activity theory, includ-
ing interesting sociohistorical contexts, we suggest Blanck (1990); Robbins (2003); Rosa &
Montero (1990); and Van der Veer & Valsiner (1991).
4
Several published researchers have also written about this tension. Beals (1998) notes that,
on first being introduced to a definition of schema while taking a graduate course, she found
it relevant in explaining her own learning. However, as she continued reading about schema
theory, she quickly became disenchanted with its application to information processing
theories and methods of teaching reading. Yet she also notes that schema is a crucial idea in
the study of development (p. 11). Beals calls upon Bakhtins work to draw society into the
individual mind, and the individual mind into society (p. 11) and advocates a conception
of schema that is closer to Bartletts original version than to the later version articulated by
cognitive scientists.
Another example comes from William Frawley, who describes, in Vygotsky and Cognitive
Science (1997), how as a graduate student he studied both sociocultural and information-
processing theories of language. In reflecting on that experience he notes: The two views of
the humanas device and a personnever seemed at odds to me. Thanks to the integrity
of my teachers, they were never put at odds. That was reserved for the partisan and often
dangerous world of the profession, where suggestions that the computational and the socio-
cultural mind not only went together but belonged together met with a few worried looks
(p. 1).
R eferences
Alba, J. W., & Hasher, L. (1983). Is memory sche- Anderson, R. C. (1977). The notion of schemata and
matic? Psychological Bulletin, 93(2), 203231. the educational enterprise: General discussion
Prison/Wrestling Passage
R
ocky slowly got up from the mat, planning his escape. He hesitated a mo-
ment and thought. Things were not going well. What bothered him most
was being held, especially since the charge against him had been weak.
He considered his present situation. The lock that held him was strong, but he
thought he could break it. He knew, however, that his timing would have to be
perfect. Rocky was aware that it was because of his early roughness that he had
been penalized so severelymuch too severely from his point of view. The situ-
ation was becoming frustrating; the pressure had been grinding on him for too
long. He was being ridden unmercifully. Rocky was getting angry now. He felt he
was ready to make his move. He knew that his success or failure would depend
on what he did in the next few seconds (Anderson, Reynolds, Schallert, & Goetz,
1977, p. 372).
APPENDIX B
Card/Music Passage
E
very Saturday night, four good friends get together. When Jerry, Mike, and
Pat arrived, Karen was sitting in her living room writing some notes. She
quickly gathered the cards and stood up to greet her friends at the door.
They followed her into the living room but as usual they couldnt agree on ex-
actly what to play. Jerry eventually took a stand and set things up. Finally, they
began to play. Karens recorder filled the room with soft and pleasant music. Early
in the evening, Mike noticed Pats hand and the many diamonds. As the night
progressed the tempo of play increased. Finally, a lull in the activities occurred.
Taking advantage of this, Jerry pondered the arrangement in front of him. Mike
interrupted Jerrys reverie and said, Lets hear the score. They listened carefully
and commented on their performance. When the comments were all heard, ex-
hausted but happy, Karens friends went home (Anderson, Reynolds, Schallert, &
Goetz, 1977, p. 372).
E
verything people do, they do imperfectly. This is not a flaw but an asset.
If we always performed perfectly, we could not maintain the tentativeness
and flexibility that characterize human learning and the ways we interact
with our environment and with one another. This model of imperfection causes
us as researchers not to worry about why people fall short of perfection; rather,
we are concerned with why people do what they do and with what we can learn
about language processes from observing such phenomena.
The power of language users to fill knowledge gaps with missing elements, to
infer unstated meanings and underlying structures, and to deal with novel experi-
ences, novel thoughts, and novel emotions derives from the ability to predict, to
guess, to make choices, to take risks, to go beyond observable data. We must have
the capability of being wrong lest the limits on our functioning be too narrowly
constrained. Unlike the computer, people do not exhibit specifically programmed,
totally dependable responses time after time. We are tentative, we act impulsively,
we make mistakes, and we tolerate our own deviations and the mistakes of others.
If you doubt that perfection in human behavior is the exception rather than
the norm, consider how intensely a performer of any kindathlete, actor, musi-
cian, writer, readermust practice to achieve anything approaching error-free
performance. If you doubt our view of how people deal with mistakes, think about
the proofreader who skips over errors in a text or the native North Americans who
deliberately insert flaws in handicrafts to remind themselves that the crafts are
the work of human hands.
This chapter is reprinted from Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (4th ed., pp. 104123), edited by R.B.
Ruddell, M.R. Ruddell, and H. Singer, 1994, Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Copyright 1994
by the International Reading Association.
525
We started with the assumption that everything that happens during reading
is caused, that a persons unexpected responses are produced in the same way
and from the same knowledge, experience, and intellectual processes as expected
responses. Reading aloud involves continuous oral response by the reader, which
allows for comparisons between expected and observed responses. Such com-
parisons reveal the readers knowledge, experience, and intellectual processes.
Oral readers are engaged in comprehending written language while they produce
oral responses. Because an oral response is generated while meaning is being
constructed, it not only is a form of linguistic performance but also provides a
powerful means of examining readers process and underlying competence.
Miscue analysis requires several conditions. The written material must be
new to the readers and complete with a beginning, middle, and end. The text
needs to be long and challenging enough to produce sufficient numbers of mis-
cues for patterns to appear. In addition, readers receive no help and are not in-
terrupted. At most, if readers hesitate for more than 30 seconds, they are urged
to guess, and only if hesitation continues are they told to keep reading even if it
means skipping a word or phrase. Except that it takes place orally and not silently,
the reading during miscue analysis requires as normal a situation as possible.
Depending on the purpose of miscue analysis research, readers often have
been provided with more than one reading task. Various fiction and nonfiction
reading materials have been used, including stories and articles from basal read-
ers, textbooks, trade books, and magazines. Readers have been drawn from el-
ementary, secondary, and adult populations and from a wide range of proficiency
and racial, linguistic, and national backgrounds. Studies have been conducted in
many languages other than English and in various writing systems (Goodman,
Brown, & Marek, 1993).
Betsys oral reading of the folktale The Man Who Kept House (from
McInnes, Gerrard, & Ryckman, 1964, pp. 282283) is used throughout for exam-
ples (Goodman, Watson, & Burke, 1987). The story has 68 sentences, 711 words.
Betsy, a 9-year-old from Toronto, was selected by her teacher as representative
of students with reading difficulties. Betsy read the story hesitantly, although in
most places she read with appropriate expression. Below are the first 14 sentences
(s1s14) from the story, with the actual printed text on the left and the transcript
of Betsys oral reading on the right.
Text Transcript
s1 Once upon a time there was a woodman Once upon a time there was a woodman.
who thought that no one worked as He threw...who thought that no one
hard as he did. worked as hard as he did.
s2 One evening when he came home from One evening when he...when he came
work, he said to his wife, What do home from work, he said to his wife, I
you do all day while I am away cutting want you do all day...what do you do all
wood? day when I am always cutting wood?
Betsys performance reveals her language knowledge. These examples are not
unusual; what Betsy does is done by other readers. She processes graphophonic
information: Most of her miscues show a graphic and phonic relationship be-
tween the expected and the observed response. She processes syntactic informa-
tion: She substitutes noun for noun, verb for verb, noun phrase for noun phrase,
verb phrase for verb phrase. She transforms phrases, clauses, and sentences: She
omits an intensifier, changes a dependent clause to an independent clause, shifts
a wh question sentence to a declarative sentence. She draws on her conceptual and
linguistic background and struggles toward meaning by regressing, correcting,
and reprocessing as necessary. She predicts appropriate structures and monitors
her own success based on the degree to which she is making sense. She develops
and uses psychosociolinguistic strategies as she reads. There is nothing random
about her miscues.
By comparing our interpretation of the story with Betsys retelling and her
miscues, we are able to analyze how much learning has occurred during Betsy
and the authors transaction. For example, although the story frequently uses
woodman and to cut wood, forest, the noun used to refer to setting, is used twice.
Not only does Betsy provide evidence in her retelling that she knows that woods
and forest are synonymous, she also indicates that she knows the authors choice
is forest. The maze she works through suggests her search for the authors lan-
guage. Her oral language mazes are evidence of her intentions and self-correction
patterns. Betsy seems to believe that the teacher is looking for the authors lan-
guage rather than her own. Additional evidence of Betsys concern to reproduce
the authors language is seen in her use of woodman and husband. In the story,
the woodman is referred to as woodman and husband eight times each and as man
four times; the wife is referred to only as wife. Otherwise pronouns are used to
refer to the husband and wife. In the retelling, Betsy uses husband and woodman
six times and man only once; she called the wife only wife. Betsy always uses ap-
propriate pronouns in referring to the husband and wife. However, when cow was
the referent, she substituted he for she twice. (What does Betsy know about the
sex of cattle?)
The linguistic and conceptual schematic background a reader brings to read-
ing not only shows in miscues but is implicit in the developing conceptions or
misconceptions revealed through the readers retelling. Betsy adds to her concep-
tual base and builds her control of language as she reads this story, but her ability
to do both is limited by what she brings to the task. In the story, the husband
has to make butter in a churn. Betsy makes miscues whenever butter-making is
mentioned. For example, in s10 she substituted bread for butter. (Breadmaking is
much more common than butter-making as a home activity for North American
children.) The next time butter appears, in s15, she reads it as expected. However,
In the retelling Betsy provides evidence that her miscues are conceptually
based and not mere confusions:
And the husband was sitting down and he poured some buttermilk and um...in a jar.
And, and he was making buttermilk, and then he um...heard the baby crying. So he
looked all around in the room and um.... And then he saw a big, a big, um...pig. Um...
he saw a big pig inside the house. So, he told him to get out and he, the pig, started
racing around and um...he di...he um...bumped into the buttermilk and then the but-
termilk fell down and then the pig, um...went out.
Through miscue analysis we have learned that, other things being equal,
short language sequences are harder to comprehend than are long ones. Sentences
are easier than words, paragraphs easier than sentences, pages easier than para-
graphs, and stories easier than pages. We see two reasons for this. First, it takes
some familiarity with the style and general semantic thrust of a texts language
for the reader to make successful predictions. Style is largely a matter of an au-
thors syntactic preferences; the semantic context develops over the entire text.
Short texts provide limited cues for readers to build a sense of either style or
meaning. Second, the disruptive effect of particular miscues on meaning is much
greater in short texts. Longer texts offer redundant opportunities to recover and
self-correct. This suggests why findings from studies of words, sentences, and
To this we add that miscues are the windows on language processes at work.
note
This chapter is based on and updated from Learning About Psycholinguistic Processes by
Analyzing Oral Reading, Harvard Educational Review, 47(3), 317333; and To Err Is Human,
New York University Education Quarterly, 12(4), 1419.
R eferences
Anderson, J. (1982, July). The writer, the reader, the Cambourne, B., & Rousch, P. (1979). A psycholin-
text. Paper presented at the 19th annual UKRA guistic model of the reading process as it relates to
Reading Conference, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, proficient, average, and low-ability readers (Tech.
United Kingdom. Rep.). Wagga Wagga, NSW, Australia: Riverina
Brown, R. (1973). A first language: The early stages. College of Advanced Education, Charles Sturt
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. University.
A
dvanced knowledge acquisition in a subject area is different in many im-
portant ways from introductory learning (and from expertise). In this pa-
per we discuss some of the special characteristics of advanced learning
of complex conceptual material. We note how these characteristics are often at
odds with the goals and tactics of introductory instruction and with psychologi-
cal biases in learning. We allude to our research in biomedical cognition that has
revealed a substantial incidence of misconception attributable to various forms
of oversimplification, and we outline the factors that contribute to suboptimal
learning at the advanced stage. We then sketch a theoretical orientation for more
successful advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains, cognitive
flexibility theory. This orientation emphasizes the use of multiple mental and
pedagogical representations; the promotion of multiple alternative systems of
linkage among knowledge elements; the promotion of schema assembly (as op-
posed to the retrieval of prepackaged schemata); the centrality of cases of appli-
cation as a vehicle for engendering functional conceptual understanding; and the
need for participatory learning, tutorial guidance, and adjunct support for aiding
the management of complexity. A computer hypertext approach that implements
cognitive flexibility theory is discussed.
This chapter is reprinted from Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society Proceedings (pp. 640
653), edited by V. Patel, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Copyright 1988 by Rand J. Spiro, Richard L. Coulson,
Paul J. Feltovich, and Daniel K. Anderson. Reprinted with permission.
544
acquisition are different from those of introductory learning. In introductory
learning the goal is often mere exposure to content and the establishment of a
general orientation to a field; objectives of assessment are likewise confined to the
simple effects of exposure (e.g., recognition and recall). At some point in learning
about a knowledge domain, the goal must change; at some point, students must
get it right. This is the stage of advanced knowledge acquisition (Feltovich, Spiro,
& Coulson, 1989; Spiro, Feltovich, Coulson, & Anderson, 1989; Spiro et al., 1987):
The learner must attain a deeper understanding of content material, reason with it, and
apply it flexibly in diverse contexts. Obstacles to advanced knowledge acquisition
include conceptual complexity and the increasing ill-structuredness that comes
into play with more advanced approaches to a subject area. By ill-structuredness we
mean that many concepts (interacting contextually) are pertinent in the typical
case of knowledge application, and that their patterns of combination are inconsis-
tent across case applications of the same nominal type. (See Spiro et al., 1987, for
a more detailed treatment of the nature and consequences of ill-structuredness.)
The methods of education in introductory and advanced learning seem, in
many ways, to be at odds. For example, compartmentalizing knowledge, present-
ing clear instances (and not the many pertinent exceptions), and employing re-
productive memory criteria are often in conflict with the realities of advanced
learningknowledge, which is intertwined and dependent, has significant
context- dependent variations and requires the ability to respond flexibly to
messy application situations. These discrepancies in aims and tactics (along
with many others that we have observed) raise the possibility that introductory
learning, even when it is successful, lays foundations in knowledge and in an
approach to learning that interfere with advanced acquisition. As we have seen
repeatedly demonstrated, that possibility is an actuality (Coulson, Feltovich, &
Spiro, 1986; Feltovich et al., 1989; Spiro et al., 1987; Spiro et al., 1989).
Acknow ledgments
The research reported in this paper was supported by grants from the Army Research Institute
(MDA903-86-K-0443), the Office of Naval Research (N00014-88-K-0286, N00014-87-G-0165,
N00014-88-K-0077), the Josiah Macy Foundation (B852001), and the Office of Educational
Research and Improvement (OEG 0087-C1001). The publication does not necessarily reflect
the views of the agencies supporting the research.
The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of Jane Adami and Joan Feltovich
to various aspects of this research.
R eferences
Barrows, H.S., & Tamblyn, R.M. (1980). Problem- Spiro, R.J. (1980). Accommodative reconstruction
based learning. New York: Springer. in prose recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and
Burnstein, M. (1983). Concept formation by in- Verbal Behavior, 19, 8495.
cremental analogical reasoning and debugging. Spiro, R.J., Feltovich, P.J., Coulson, R.L., &
Proceedings of the International Machine Learning Anderson, D.K. (1989). Multiple analogies
Workshop, Champaign, IL. for complex concepts: Antidotes for analogy-
Champagne, A.B., Gunstone, R.F., & Klopfer, L.E. induced misconception in advanced knowledge
(1985). Effecting changes in cognitive structures acquisition. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.),
among physics students. In L.H. West & A.L. Similarity and analogical reasoning. Cambridge,
Pines (Eds.), Cognitive structure and conceptual UK: Cambridge University Press.
change. Orlando, FL: Academic. Spiro, R.J., & Jehng, J.C. (1990). Cognitive flex-
Collins, A., Brown, J.S., & Newman, S.E. (1989). ibility and hypertext: Theory and technology for
Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts the nonlinear and multidimensional traversal of
of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L.B. complex subject matter. In D. Nix & R.J. Spiro
Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruc- (Eds.), Cognition, education, and multimedia:
tion: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser. Hillsdale, Exploring ideas in high technology. Hillsdale, NJ:
NJ: Erlbaum. Erlbaum.
Collins, A., & Gentner, D. (1987). How people con- Spiro, R.J., Vispoel, W.L., Schmitz, J.,
struct mental models. In D. Holland & S. Quinn Samarapungavan, A., & Boerger, A. (1987).
(Eds.), Cultural models in thought and language. Knowledge acquisition for application:
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Cognitive flexibility and transfer in complex
Coulson, R.L., Feltovich, P.J., & Spiro, R.J. (1986). content domains. In B.C. Britton & S. Glynn
Foundations of a misunderstanding of the ultra- (Eds.), Executive control processes in reading.
structural basis of myocardial failure: A recipro- Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
cating network of over-simplifications (Tech. Rep. White, B.Y. (1984). Designing computer games to
No. 1). Springfield: Southern Illinois University help physics students understand Newtons law
School of Medicine, Conceptual Knowledge of motion. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 69108.
Research Project. White, B.Y., & Frederiksen, J.R. (1987, November).
Feltovich, P.J., Spiro, R.J., & Coulson, R.L. (1989). Causal model progressions as a foundation for
The nature of conceptual understanding in bio- intelligent learning environments (BBN Rep.
medicine: The deep structure of complex ideas No. 6686). Cambridge, MA: Bolt Beranek &
and the development of misconceptions. In D.A. Newman.
Evans & V.L. Patel (Eds.), The cognitive sciences Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations.
in medicine: Biomedical modeling. Cambridge, New York: Macmillan.
MA: MIT Press.
Schank, R.C. (1982). Dynamic memory: A theory of
reminding and learning in computers and people.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Educational Neuroscience
for Reading Researchers
George G. Hruby, University of Kentucky
Usha Goswami, University of Cambridge
F
or the past 30 years, research on the brain has advanced impressively. This
work, from fields known collectively as the neurosciences, has expanded our
understanding of the neural chemistry, physiology, and growth processes that
support behavior, cognition, language, emotion, sociality, and their development. It
has also cast considerable light on the nature of individual differences and relatable
disabilities, from genetic to behavioral levels of analysis. As these areas of research
have expanded, attempts to relate insights from the neurosciences to education
have been numerous, although the quality of these attempts have been variable
and often, perhaps, premature or overexuberant, as many have commented (e.g.,
Bruer, 1997; Goswami, 2006; Hirsh-Pasek et al., 2007; Willis, 2007). Nonetheless,
of all the areas addressed by the emerging field of educational neuroscience, Varma,
McCandliss, and Schwartz (2008) have suggested that the neuroscience of reading
processes has proven the most impressive in its sophistication.
In this review of the neuroscience literature on reading, we briefly describe
the current state of the science regarding neural correlates of acknowledged and
potential reading processes and reading development. Specifically, we briefly re-
view the neural correlates of decoding and language comprehension and relate
such findings to current models of reading, reading instruction, and reading dis-
ability. We then discuss what neuroscience research might mean for researchers
and practitioners in education. We conclude by suggesting that the field has a
clear need for literacy education scholars who are knowledgeable about the devel-
opmental and life sciencesindividuals who could make use of insights from dis-
ciplines such as neuroscience to help inform reading theory, policy, and research.
Although our theme is the relationship of brain research to reading educa-
tion, we do not devote extended paragraphs here to the research methods used
in neuroscience, except as this may be necessary to clarify issues for scholars of
literacy. This more technical information is interesting in its own right, of course,
but it is readily available in previously published reviews and introductory texts
(e.g., Gazzaniga, 2010; Hruby, 2009; Huettel, Song, & McCarthy, 2009; Luck,
2005; Mody, 2004; Willis, 2007). We allude to these details where helpful. (Refer
to Table 1 for a helpful glossary of terms used throughout this article.) As in all
This chapter is adapted from Neuroscience and Reading: A Review for Reading Education Researchers,
Reading Research Quarterly, 46(2), 156172. Copyright 2011 by the International Reading Association.
558
Table 1. Glossary
Terms Definition
Orientation
anterior Portion of a brain area most toward the front of the brain (e.g.,
anterior temporal = the area of the temporal lobe most toward the
front of the head)
bilateral On both sides of the brain in relatively the same hemispheric
location
central Toward the center of the brain
dorsal Toward the top or top back of the brain
inferior Portion of a brain area most toward the bottom of the brain
posterior Portion of a brain area most toward the back of the brain
superior Portion of a brain area most toward the top of the brain
ventral Toward the underside of the brain
Anatomical
amygdala Almond-shaped area near the hippocampus for rapid
identification of danger associations; regulates fear response
cerebellum Bunlike lobe beneath the occipital cortex; processes automatic or
repetitive motor movements
cerebrum Sitting atop the brain stem; the most evolutionarily advanced of
the major brain divisions; folded into gyri and sulci
cingulate cortex; Located in the middle of the cortex; processes input from
anterior/posterior the thalamus and neocortical areas; part of the limbic system
regulating memory, emotion, and executive function
cortex, cortical, The folded sheet of neural tissue outermost to the cerebrum
cerebral cortex
encephalon All the higher areas of the nervous system contained within the
skull; the brain
frontal cortex/lobe Forwardmost of the four major lobes of the cortex; associated
with executive function, decision making, planning, building
novel situation models, analyzing structure, motor associations,
and motor control
gyrus (pl. gyri) A ridge on the brain surface formed by the folding of brain tissue
in the cortex
hemisphere Halves of the neocortex; left and right
hippocampus Part of the limbic system situated below the brain; somewhat
wishbone shaped and extending into both hemispheres beneath
the temporal lobes; related to memory formation and retrieval
lobe A major anatomical region of the brain
neocortex Outermost layers of the cerebral cortex
occipital cortex/lobe Posteriormost cortical lobe; processes visual input
orbitofrontal cortex/ Area of the prefrontal lobe directly over the eye sockets;
lobe associated with decision making, emotional control, and reward
monitoring (continued)
Note. cST = central superior temporal cortex. OT = occipitotemporal cortex. pST = posterior
superior temporal cortex. PT = posterior temporal cortex. SM = sensory-motor cortex. From
Functional Brain Imaging Studies of Skilled Reading and Developmental Dyslexia, by C.J. Price
and E. McCrory, 2005, in M.J. Snowling and C. Hulme (Eds.), The Science of Reading: A Handbook,
Malden, MA: Blackwell, p. 483.
scanner, such as rhyme judgment. Turkeltaub et al. (2003) thus suggested that
activity in this area could be the neural correlate of graphemephoneme transla-
tion. When they looked at changes in activation with age, they found that activity
in left temporal and frontal areas increased, while activity previously observed
The Visual Word Form Area. The left occipitotemporal cortex is involved in
object recognition and is an area of interest in research on decoding because it
has been suggested to house a word form area. This area is in essence a part of
the visual cortex specialized for recognizing print, although there is some debate
about this (see Dmonet, Thierry, & Cardebat, 2005; Price & Devlin, 2003; Price
& Mechelli, 2005). Labeled the visual word form area (VWFA), this neural region
shows activity whenever printed words are shown to the adult brain, even if the
words are only shown in the left visual field, which means that they first activate
visual areas in the right hemisphere (see Cohen & Dehaene, 2004). The VWFA is
also active when children are shown printed words.
However, expertise clearly plays a role in brain activation, as the VWFA be-
comes more active as children get older and become better readers (Pugh, 2006).
Pugh and others have suggested that the amount of activity in the VWFA is the
best neural correlate that we have of reading expertise. However, the VWFA is also
active when one is shown nonsense words, which suggests that it is not purely an
area responsive to word forms. Rather, it appears responsive to any sequence of
printed letters. Nevertheless, activity in the VWFA increases when orthographic
strings are more familiar, such that nonsense words that contain large fragments
of real words elicit greater brain activity. Again, this supports a role for expertise
in printsound connections in modulating this brain activation, and as might be
expected, the VWFA shows reduced activation in developmental dyslexia (e.g.,
B.A.Shaywitz et al., 2002).
Recently, a number of developmental studies have analyzed how neural activ-
ity in the VWFA tunes itself to print and becomes specialized for letter strings
that are real words. In a study conducted in Switzerland, Maurer, Brandeis, and
their colleagues (e.g., Maurer, Brem, Bucher, & Brandeis, 2005; Maurer et al.,
2007) followed longitudinally, from the very beginning of learning to read in
German, a sample of children who either were at risk for developmental dyslexia
or had no risk for it in terms of family history. The researchers used EEG to mea-
sure millisecond-level changes in the electrical activity associated with the rec-
ognition of word forms. The task was to detect the repetition of either real words
or meaningless symbol strings. As noted earlier, the brain registers a difference in
activity to words versus nonsense words by about 160180 milliseconds after the
letter string is presented, hence the N170 (i.e., a negative deflection in brain elec-
trical activity approximately 170 ms after stimulus onset) was the main measure
of word-specific neural processing. Brain activity was recorded in kindergarten,
before the children had received any instruction in reading, and again in second
grade. Before any reading instruction had commenced, the children did not show
an N170 to printed words, despite having considerable knowledge about indi-
vidual letters. After approximately 1.5 years of reading instruction, the typically
developing children showed a reliable N170 to words, described by the authors as
Integrating Letters and Sounds. Since we know from behavioral work that
visual word recognition is not a purely visual task, imaging studies showing neu-
ral activation when letters are associated with speech sounds are also required to
interpret this wordsymbol string difference. Blomert, Blau, and their colleagues
have been carrying out a series of such studies using fMRI with adults who read
in Dutch. For example, Blau, Van Atteveldt, Formisano, Goebel, and Blomert
(2008) asked participants to decide whether they heard the vowel sound /a/ or /e/
in a forced-choice auditory task using degraded stimuli to avoid ceiling effects.
Participants either heard just the speech sounds or heard the speech sounds in
the presence of visually presented letters. The letters were either congruent (e.g.,
letter A for sound /a/) or incongruent (e.g., letter A for sound /e/).
Participants were significantly better at recognizing the target speech sound
in the auditoryvisual condition compared with the auditory-alone condition for
the congruent letters and significantly worse for the incongruent letters. The
fMRI data showed that brain activity in the auditoryvisual condition differed
in speech recognition areas of the brain and not in occipital areas, such as the
VWFA. When the letters were congruent with the speech sounds, activity in-
creased, and when the letters were incongruent with the speech sounds, activ-
ity decreased. However, an area very close to the VWFA was also modulated by
auditoryvisual congruency. Thus, although this study demonstrated that visual
letters have a clear effect on the neural activity in areas classically active during
speech processing, it did not demonstrate changes in neural activity in areas clas-
sically active during word decoding, but rather in closely associated areas.
Similar studies with children would be of interest in helping to pinpoint
where, or perhaps when and where, neural activity correlated with lettersound
integration is situated. Meanwhile, Blau and colleagues have used the same task
with adults with dyslexia and shown that incongruent lettersound pairs (e.g.,
A and /e/) do not suppress neural activity in these speech-processing areas com-
pared with the auditory-alone condition. The adults with dyslexia showed an en-
hancement in processing for the congruent condition (i.e., A and /a/), however,
although it was weaker than in controls. Therefore, imaging data have shown
similar neural processing in this task in typically reading adults and adults with
dyslexia when letters and sounds are congruent, with decreased activity accom-
panying decreased decoding skill. Lettersound integration as indexed by this
particular neural correlate is, however, different in dyslexia, such that when let-
ters and sounds do not match (e.g., A and /e/), incongruency does not change
Synthesis. At present, there are still relatively few neuroimaging studies of word
decoding by typically developing children. There are more studies of word decod-
ing by children with dyslexia, but these have only been mentioned in passing
here, as there are many difficulties in linking neural activation levels in these
children with word reading per se. Nevertheless, there are some very consistent
patterns of correlation in the neuroimaging studies of decoding that are available.
Word processing appears to correlate with left-hemisphere activity. There is more
neural activation in the left temporoparietal and occipitotemporal areas as read-
ing skill increases.
The studies discussed earlier suggest that these correlations depend both on
developing visual expertise (i.e., experience with the special visual stimuli that
are words) and developing skills in lettersound integration. When children have
to read words aloud, there is also left-lateralized activity in the frontal areas of the
brain that are associated with speech production and possibly articulatory codes,
even when speech is not overtly produced in the scanner. None of these studies
can as yet give us insights into developmental causal mechanisms. Nevertheless,
the careful documentation of the neural networks that are active during decoding,
their connectivity, and the time sequence of their activation are important first
steps in using neuroimaging techniques to ask educationally relevant questions.
Note. There was greater activation in the reading condition because of visual, letter-identification,
and word form processing, but also possible verbal rehearsal and/or more syntacticsemantic
processing. The comparison indicates a common language comprehension cluster in the superior
to medial left temporal cortex similar to that found in adults. From Functional Anatomy of
Listening and Reading Comprehension During Development, by M.M. Berl, E.S. Duke, J. Mayo,
L.R. Rosenberger, E.N. Moore, J. VanMeter, et al., 2010, Brain and Language, 114(2), p. 120.
more difficult semantic structures typical of written texts compared with the age-
typical semantic structures of childrens oral language (cf. Yeatman, Ben-Shachar,
Glover, & Feldman, 2010).
Synthesis. The anatomical areas of the brain that correlate with the foundational
language comprehension functions (i.e., vocabulary, syntax, semantics) are gener-
ally more active in the left hemisphere of the neocortex, although homologous
areas in the right hemisphere are typically activated as well, especially for reading,
possibly for related but distinct discourse processing or textual representations
(Ferstl, Neumann, Bogler, & von Cramon, 2008). Higher order comprehension
processes and strategic analysis involve a much more distributed set of brain loci.
The ERP time-course studies of syntactic and semantic processing during text
comprehension in competent adult readers have indicated that syntactic process-
ing begins in the left frontal and anterior temporal lobes with phrase-structure
monitoring at approximately 150250 milliseconds (Segalowitz & Zheng, 2009);
expanding to verbsubject or syntactic/thematic processing around 300350
milliseconds in the left inferior gyrus; an assessment of the semantic intention
within the sentence at approximately 400 milliseconds (Marinkovic et al., 2003);
and culminating, especially in cases of more complex syntactic structures, with a
syntactic recheck or incongruity/novelty effect, peaking at approximately 600 mil-
liseconds (Hagoort, 2003). Integration of syntactic and semantic processes occur
at approximately 400600 milliseconds (Friederici & Weissenborn, 2007). More
global-level processing of text features occur subsequently. Although anatomi-
cal localization of these events in time-course studies does not always precisely
match that suggested by functional anatomical studies, both types of studies are in
agreement regarding the distinctive nature of word meaning, syntax, and semantic
processes.
The neuroscience work on comprehension is far more variable than that on de-
coding processes in part because it ranges over a more extended and theoretically
Final Comments
In this review of the neuroscience research related to reading and literacy, we
briefly reviewed findings on neurological correlates of decoding and comprehen-
sion, as well as some higher order processes in reading. We also elaborated on
several issues regarding neuroscience methodology and theoretical framing for
bringing neuroscience and literacy education research into an interdisciplinary
conversation. We discussed some general cautions and mistaken assumptions.
As we hope we have made clear, the potential of neuroscience to help expand
our understanding of reading processes, their development, and their occasional
dysfunction is profound. We hope that our review of the research provides a help-
ful overview of the terrain and the issues confronting any attempt at an inter-
disciplinary conversation between literacy education research and neuroscience
research. A successful interdisciplinary conversation could helpfully address
many questions about literacy and its instruction and development. Until such
time as knowledgeable literacy education scholars prepare themselves to engage
in such a conversation, the full promise of the biological sciences for analyzing
educational issues will remain obscure.
R eferences
Alexander, P.A., & Fox, E. (2004). A historical functional neuroimaging studies. Cerebral
perspective on reading research and practice. Cortex, 19(12), 27672796. doi:10.1093/cercor/
In R.B. Ruddell & N.J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical bhp055
models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. Binney, R.J., Embleton, K.V., Jefferies, E., Parker,
3368). Newark, DE: International Reading G.J.M., & Ralph, M.A.L. (2010). The ventral and
Association. doi:10.1598/0872075028.2 inferolateral aspects of the anterior temporal
Balass, M., Nelson, J.R., & Perfetti, C.A. (2010). lobe are crucial in semantic memory: Evidence
Word learning: An ERP investigation of word ex- from a novel direct comparison of distortion-
perience effects on recognition and word process- corrected fMRI, rTMS, and semantic dementia.
ing. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(2), Cerebral Cortex, 20(11), 27282738. doi:10.1093/
126140. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.04.001 cercor/bhq019
Beauchamp, M.S., Nath, A.R., & Pasalar, S. (2010). Blau, V., Van Atteveldt, N., Formisano, E., Goebel,
fMRI-guided transcranial magnetic stimulation R., & Blomert, L. (2008). Task-irrelevant visual
reveals that the superior temporal sulcus is a letters interact with the processing of speech
cortical locus of the McGurk effect. The Journal sounds in heteromodal and unimodal cortex.
of Neuroscience, 30(7), 24142417. doi:10.1523/ European Journal of Neuroscience, 28(3), 500
JNEUROSCI.4865-09.2010 509. doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2008.06350.x
Beaucousin, V., Lacheret, A., Turbelin, M., Morel, Boulenger, V., Hauk, O., & Pulvermller, F. (2009).
M., Mazoyer, B., & Tzourio-Mazoyer, N. Grasping ideas with the motor system: Semantic
(2007). FMRI study of emotional speech com- somatotopy in idiom comprehension. Cerebral
prehension. Cerebral Cortex, 17(2), 339352. Cortex, 19(8), 19051914. doi:10.1093/cercor/
doi:10.1093/cercor/bhj151 bhn217
Beddington, J., Cooper, C.L., Field, J., Goswami, Bozic, M., Marslen-Wilson, W.D., Stamatakis, E.A.,
U., Huppert, F.A., Jenkins, R., et al. (2008). The Davis, M.H., & Tyler, L.K. (2007). Differentiating
mental wealth of nations. Nature, 455(7216), morphology, form, and meaning: Neural cor-
10571060. doi:10.1038/4551057a relates of morphological complexity. Journal
Bennett, C.M., Baird, A.A., Miller, M.B., & Wolford, of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(9), 14641475.
G.L. (2009). Neural correlates of interspecies doi:10.1162/jocn.2007.19.9.1464
perspective taking in the post-mortem Atlantic Brown, G.G. (2007). Functional magnetic reso-
salmon: An argument for multiple comparisons nance imaging in clinical practice: Look before
correction. Prefrontal.org. Retrieved November you leap. Neuropsychology Review, 17(2), 103
26, 2010, from prefrontal.org/files/posters/ 106. doi:10.1007/s11065-007-9027-9
Bennett-Salmon-2009.pdf Bruer, J.T. (1997). Education and the brain: A bridge
Bennett, C.M., & Miller, M.B. (2010). How reli- too far. Educational Researcher, 26(8), 416.
able are the results from functional magnetic Brunswick, N., McCrory, E., Price, C.J., Frith, C.D.,
resonance imaging? Annals of the New York & Frith, U. (1999). Explicit and implicit pro-
Academy of Sciences, 1191, 133155. doi:10.1111/ cessing of words and pseudowords by adult de-
j.1749-6632.2010.05446.x velopmental dyslexics: A search for Wernickes
Bennett, C.M., Wolford, G.L., & Miller, M.B. Wortschatz. Brain, 122(10), 19011917. doi:
(2009). The principled control of false positives 10.1093/brain/122.10.1901
in neuroimaging. Social Cognitive and Affective Cabeza, R., & Nyberg, L. (2000). Imaging cogni-
Neuroscience, 4(4), 417422. doi:10.1093/scan/ tion II: An empirical review of 275 PET and fMRI
nsp053 studies. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(1),
Berl, M.M., Duke, E.S., Mayo, J., Rosenberger, 147. doi:10.1162/08989290051137585
L.R., Moore, E.N., VanMeter, J., et al. (2010). Caplan, D. (2004). Functional neuroimaging stud-
Functional anatomy of listening and reading ies of written sentence comprehension. Scientific
comprehension during development. Brain Studies of Reading, 8(3), 225240. doi:10.1207/
and Language, 114(2), 115125. doi:10.1016/ s1532799xssr0803_3
j.bandl.2010.06.002 Carreiras, M., Seghier, M.L., Baquero, S., Estvez,
Binder, J.R., Desai, R.H., Graves, W.W., & Conant, A., Lozano, A., Devlin, J.T., et al. (2009). An ana-
L.L. (2009). Where is the semantic system? tomical signature for literacy. Nature, 461(7266),
A critical review and meta-analysis of 120 983986. doi:10.1038/nature08461
Introduction
Reading instructional programs increasingly focus on comprehension skills as
children matriculate through school. Researchers and practitioners (Alexander &
Jetton, 2000; Kintsch, 1998) have acknowledged the importance of students reading
comprehension skills to success in a variety of school subject areas as well as other
achievement outcomes. Given its importance to childrens school success, research-
ers are investigating what predicts the growth of reading comprehension skills.
Studies have shown that both motivational (Chapman & Tunmer, 1995; Guthrie,
Wigfield, Metsala, & Cox, 1999; Guthrie et al., 2006) and cognitive variables (e.g.,
Pressley & Harris, 2006) predict reading comprehension and other achievement
outcomes. However, most studies, to date, have looked either at the relation of mo-
tivation variables to reading comprehension or the relation of cognitive variables
to reading comprehension. Few works have examined how both sets of variables
predict reading comprehension when controlling for the other set of variables. The
overall purpose of this study was to examine how both motivational and cognitive
variables predict late elementary school-aged childrens reading comprehension.
Motivation researchers have discussed how motivational and cognitive pro-
cesses interact, and how each affects achievement outcomes (Pintrich, 2003;
Pintrich, Marx, & Boyle, 1993; Wigfield, Eccles, Schiefele, Roeser, & Davis-
Kean, 2006). In particular, such research has focused on how motivation pro-
vides an activating, energizing role for cognitive processes, which in turn can
impact achievement (Pintrich; Wigfield et al., 2006). For example, Wigfield et al.
reviewed work showing that motivational variables such as self-efficacy and in-
trinsic motivation predict students achievement in different areas such as reading
ability, math, language arts, sports, and occupational choice. However, Pintrich
noted that there is little specific information in the literature about the strength of
these activating processes or how they operate. For instance, it is likely, that there
are multiple motivational pathways for the energization of students behaviors
This chapter is reprinted from Reading and Writing, 22(1), 85106. Copyright 2009 by Springer.
Reprinted with permission.
589
such that some students may be motivated by their self-efficacy beliefs, whereas
others may activate cognitive processes through personal interests or contextual
factors. Research that examines the different ways that motivation relates to vari-
ous cognitive processes speaks of the need for integrated models of motivation
and cognition that has been emphasized in the motivation field (Pintrich).
In the field of reading motivation, in particular, several researchers have
examined the relations among motivation variables and literacy skills. For ex-
ample, research has found relationships of young childrens reading self-concept
(assessed as students perceptions of reading competence, the difficulty of read-
ing, and their attitude towards reading) with word recognition and reading com-
prehension skills (Chapman & Tunmer; 1995; Chapman, Tunmer, & Prochnow,
2000). Findings showed that children who reported negative reading self-concepts
performed more poorly on reading-related tasks than did children with positive
reading self-concepts (Chapman et al.).
In her study with first through fourth graders, Gottfried (1990) showed that
reading comprehension positively correlated with intrinsic motivation for reading.
Research with gifted populations has also shown that students with exceptionally
high academic intrinsic motivation performed better on various reading measures
from the elementary through the high school grades (Gottfried, Cook, Gottfried,
& Morris, 2005). Also, late-elementary school students task-mastery goals have
been found to be associated with their use of active (as opposed to superficial)
learning strategies in literacy tasks (Meece & Miller, 1999, 2001), and students
intrinsic motivation has been associated with high-level, complex literacy tasks
(Turner, 1995) and reading amount and text comprehension (Guthrie et al., 1999).
In addition, research has established that specific dimensions of reading
motivation (such as involvement and curiosity) and reading comprehension are
correlated (Baker & Wigfield, 1999; Wang & Guthrie, 2004). This research has
contributed by identifying the multiple dimensions of motivation, as well as dem-
onstrating the specificity of motivation within the domain of reading (Guthrie et
al., 1999; Wigfield, Guthrie, Tonks, & Perencevich, 2004). However, little work
has been done that examines simultaneously the role of both cognitive and mo-
tivational variables on reading comprehension. Further, there is even less work
that addresses the role that both cognitive and motivation predictors play in the
growth of reading comprehension (Guthrie et al., 2007). Given these limitations
in previous literature, in this study we examine possible ways in which cognitive
and motivational variables operate in relation to reading comprehension and its
growth. We turn next to specific dimensions of motivation and how they relate to
reading comprehension.
Method
Participants
Fourth-grade students (N = 205) from four schools in a small mid-Atlantic city
school district participated with parental permission. Table 1 shows descriptive
statistics for the sample. In regards to ethnicity, our sample was somewhat more
diverse than the school district as a whole, where the proportions are as follows:
8% African American, 2% Asian, 87% Caucasian, 2% Hispanic, and 1% other.
With regard to students socioeconomic status, approximately 20% qualified for
free and reduced-price meals; the district-wide average was 13%.
Measures
Five measures were used in this study: (a) background knowledge, (b) student
questioning, (c) multiple-text reading comprehension, (d) Gates-MacGinitie
Reading Test, and (e) internal motivation. The first three measures, (a), (b), and
(c) were accompanied by a researcher-designed reading packet. We administered
three alternative forms of the reading packet, each with a different theme: Oceans
and Forests (Form A), Ponds and Deserts (Form B), or Rivers and Grasslands
(Form C). The three reading packets were parallel in content difficulty, text struc-
ture, text difficulty, length per section, number of relevant sections and distract-
ers, and number and type of illustrations (e.g., biome versus animal illustrations).
Each 75-page reading packet contained 22 sections. Reading packets contained an
equal number of easy (Grades 23) and difficult (Grades 46) texts, representing
Internal Motivation. The internal motivation measure used in this study con-
sisted of five items that measured the five dimensions of internal motivation de-
scribed earlier. Teachers answered five items about each student in their class.
The purpose of the internal motivation measure was to assess the extent to which
Results
The means and standard deviations of all the variables are reported in Table 2,
while Table 3 reports correlations among the variables. Note that the two read-
ing comprehension measures, the Gates-MacGinitie (GM) and the multiple-text
reading comprehension (MTC), were administered at Times 1 and 2. Data for the
Discussion
In recent years, motivational researchers have called for research that helps the
field understand how motivational constructs relate to various cognitive pro-
cesses, in such a way that more integrated models of motivation and cognition
emerge (e.g., Pintrich, 2003). The present study contributes to extant work on the
relations of motivational and cognitive processes to reading comprehension by
showing how motivational and cognitive variables independently predict reading
comprehension. Results support the notion that even with strong statistical con-
trols, internal motivation, as well as the cognitive variables of background knowl-
edge and student questioning, make significant and independent contributions to
variance in two separate measures of reading comprehension. In addition, each of
the predictor variables contributed significantly to growth in reading comprehen-
sion with the effects of previous comprehension controlled.
Acknowledgements
The work reported herein was supported by the Interagency Educational Research Initiative
(IERI) (Award #0089225) as administered by the National Science Foundation. The find-
ings and opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect the position or policies of the
Interagency Educational Research Initiative, the National Science Foundation, or the University
of Maryland. The authors of this manuscript thank Eileen Kramer and Vanessa Rutherford for
their assistance in preparing this document.
R eferences
Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (1998). Profiling
from text: A multidimensional and developmen- the differences in students knowledge, interest,
tal perspective. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, and strategic processing. Journal of Educational
P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of read- Psychology, 90, 435447.
ing research (Vol. 3, pp. 285310). Mahwah, NJ: Allen, L., Cipielewski, J., & Stanovich, K. (1992).
Erlbaum. Multiple indicators of childrens reading habits
A ppendi x A
A ppendi x B
Questioning Rubric
Level 1: Factual information
Questions are simple in form and request a simple answer, such as a single fact.
Questions are a request for a factual proposition. They are based on nave con-
cepts about the world rather than disciplined understanding of the subject mat-
ter Questions refer to relatively trivial, non-defining characteristics of organisms
(plants and animals), ecological concepts or biomes.
Examples: How big are bats? Do sharks eat trash? How much do bears weigh? Are
there crabs in a river? How old do orangutans get? How big are grasslands? How many
rivers are there in the world?
A
ccording to many standardized assessments, educators in the U.S. contin-
ually fail to advance the literacy development and academic achievement
of African American male adolescents, particularly the ones who live and
go to schools in high-poverty communities. There is an absence of interdisciplin-
ary depth, theoretical grounding, and focus on responsive pedagogy required to
provide effective literacy instruction for these young men. For example, when
policymakers plan literacy reforms, they often do not consider research on resil-
ience (Henderson & Milstein, 2003; Werner & Smith, 1992), life outcome perspec-
tives (Mizell, 1999), the relationship between masculinity and schooling (Gilbert
& Gilbert, 1998; Young, 2000), the relationship between neighborhood quality
and schooling (Ceballo, McLoyd, & Toyokawa, 2004), and how social processes
of race, class, and gender are interwoven with literacy (Greene & Abt-Perkins,
2003; Lesko, 2000; Swanson, Cunningham, & Spencer, 2003). In efforts to reverse
trends of poor reading outcomes among this group, the multiple in-school and
out-of-school contexts that African American male adolescents have to negotiate
are often ignored when developing or adopting instructional plans, selecting cur-
ricula, or examining students placement in low-level or remedial courses.
My experience over the past fourteen years as a teacher, researcher, and
professional developer in middle and high schools leads me to assert that many
school leaders are not openly and critically discussing issues of race, language,
gender, social class, and adolescent literacy. Discussion of race and social class
creates tension in schools, and is often devoid of the critical analysis such a dia-
logue deserves. I am often asked to explain why I feel the need to write about
African American adolescent males when the data are clear about their dismal
reading achievement and the deleterious outcomes these young men experience
in school and society. It is because there is an urgent need to address both the
literacy needs and life outcomes of African American male adolescents in order
to improve the conditions of these young men in school and society. It has be-
come perfunctory to describe African American males using high school dropout,
This chapter is reprinted from Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 155180. Copyright 2008 by the
President and Fellows of Harvard College. Reprinted with permission.
611
incarceration, and unemployment statistics, without also providing the necessary
careful analysis done by social scientists and educators to unearth the root causes
of these outcomes (Roderick, 1994). Questions related to educational malfeasance
toward poor adolescents, particularly African American males, are not asked, and
our educational discourse suffers as a result.
In this article, I describe the need for a more anatomically complete model of
literacy instruction for African American male adolescents. After describing the
model, I explain how the adolescent literacy crisis and its framing can potentially
interrupt the implementation of such a model for young men of color. The last
section of the article focuses on a qualitative case study with a sixteen-year-old
African American male and highlights the centrality of meaningful texts to any
literacy model that aims to advance the literacy development of African American
male adolescents.
By expressly focusing on African American males in this article, I do not in-
tend to undermine the significance of addressing the literacy needs of all adoles-
cents in the United States, where an adolescent literacy crisis has been identified
(Biancarosa & Snow, 2006). A false polarization is often evoked when efforts are
aimed specifically to address the literacy needs of African American male adoles-
cents. It is often intimated that a concentrated focus on African American males
suggests that the literacy needs of African American adolescent girls or other ado-
lescents are less important or do not require the same attention. This is simply not
the case. It is the case, however, that literacy reform efforts aimed at improving
African American male adolescents reading achievement and life outcomes have
been woefully inadequate and have underestimated the depth of their literacy
needs in both racially segregated and racially integrated schools. Therefore, I have
been working for the past eight years to develop a model for advancing the literacy
development of African American male adolescents. Though the model is theo-
retically grounded in the literacy needs of these young men, it does not exclude
other populations and may even be useful in promoting the literacy development
of all students.
My work began as an eighth-grade social studies teacher on Chicagos South
Side, working with struggling adolescent readers. In trying to improve their read-
ing achievement, I was confronted with myriad challenges, including students
accumulation of failure, poor concepts of reading, and lack of self-efficacy stem-
ming from years of ineffective instruction. Offsetting the resistance toward read-
ing among my African American male students was particularly challenging. Four
of the eighth-grade boys I taught during my third year of teaching simply refused
to read. I began to engage their voices as a teacher-researcher to find ways to break
down the barriers that disenfranchised these boys, who had been assigned to a
low-level reading track (Tatum, 2000). Over time, I realized that the four major
barriers to their engagement with reading were the fear of being publicly embar-
rassed if they failed in front of their peers, their limited vocabulary knowledge,
the lack of attention their former teachers placed on reading books and engaging
with texts, and their perceptions that teachers expected them to fail.
612 Tatum
Since that time, I have conducted two qualitative case studies exploring the
root causes of reluctance among some African American male adolescents. The first
was a case study of a professional development initiative aimed at identifying the
aspects of professional development that teachers found most useful for advanc-
ing the literacy development of seventh- and eighth-grade African American stu-
dents (Tatum, 2002, 2003). The second was a case study of an African American
teenage male, in which I sought to identify texts and textual characteristics he
found effective for becoming a better reader and shaping his own identity (Tatum,
in press). Some aspects of the latter study are described in this article. Currently,
I am in my nineteenth month of working to help close the reading achievement
gap in a large, racially integrated high school where the African American males
are among the lowest-performing readers and have not made Adequate Yearly
Progress under No Child Left Behind in the past five years. Additionally, my own
status as an African American male who was educated in several of Chicagos
inner-city schools in high-poverty neighborhoods, and who later became a teacher
and reading specialist in similar communities, informs the call I make to move
toward a more anatomically complete model of literacy instruction for adolescents
(Tatum, 2003, 2005).
The more anatomically complete model of literacy instruction that I pro-
pose integrates effective instructional practices informed by the extant reading
research on adolescent literacy (Alvermann, Hinchman, Moore, Phelps, & Waff,
2006; Biancarosa & Snow, 2006; Jetton & Dole, 2004; Rush, Eakle, & Berger;
2007), by research on African American males (Fashola, 2005; Polite & Davis,
1999), and by research on boys and literacy (Brozo, 2002; Smith & Wilhelm,
2002). My model also gives attention to multiple conceptualizations of literacies
and identities, some of which are situated within power structures such as class,
gender, and race (Collins & Blot, 2003; Street, 1995). Finally, it aims to support
teachers in structuring their students day-to-day activities in a way that maxi-
mizes their engagement with meaningful, relevant texts.
As displayed in Figure 1, the model I am advancing has multiple theoretical,
instructional, and professional development strands. Theoretical strands consti-
tute the head of the model and focus on defining the role of literacy instruction for
adolescents in their present-day contexts, creating curriculum orientations that
empower them, and using a culturally responsive approach to literacy teaching.
Each of these strands is glaringly omitted in many school literacy reform efforts.
The instructional strands comprise the body of the model and focus on research-
based reading practices. The professional development strands serve as the legs of
the model and focus on in-school teacher professional development and teacher
preparation.
At present, most literacy reform efforts focus primarily on the instructional
strands (body), and thus constitute what I refer to as an anatomically incomplete
model of literacy instruction. For example, Chicago Public Schools, the third-
largest school district in the United States, uses a literacy reform framework
that focuses primarily on word study, fluency, comprehension, and writing. Yet
Professional
Development Professional Development
Strands
Professional Preparation
(Legs)
614 Tatum
elements for improving students reading achievement. The vital signs refer to
aspects of instruction that should be cultivated in classrooms and tailored to the
characteristics of educators and students. As shown in Table 1, the vital signs
categories correspond to four parallel gaps affecting students literacy-related
outcomes: a reading achievement gap, a relationship gap, a rigor gap, and a re-
sponsiveness gap.
The vital signs of reading provide the necessary working tools (e.g., decod-
ing, self-questioning and comprehension-monitoring techniques, summarizing,
and other strategies) that students need to handle texts independently, and they
constitute a necessary minimum set of tools for all literacy efforts. Attending to
the vital signs of reading by focusing on students reading skills is important in
addressing the reading achievement gap. The vital signs of readers direct educa-
tors attention to students lived experiences, both in school and outside of school,
and are useful for considering ways to improve the human condition. When ed-
ucators attend to the vital signs of readersthe everyday lives of the students
they teachthey begin to build supportive relationships with their students and
thereby address the relationship gap.
The third set of vital signs, those of reading instruction, are intimately related
to rescuing and refining the significance of literacy teaching for adolescents in
this current era of accountability. In other words, they are useful for conceptu-
alizing the rationale for literacy teaching and enhancing academic rigor in the
classroom. Attention to the vital signs of reading instruction should cause edu-
cators to reflect on texts, quality instructional supports, assessments, and the
potential uses of technology in an attempt to shape rigorous learning experiences
for adolescents.
616 Tatum
Table 2. Seven Critical Elements Shaping the Landscape of Literacy
Instruction in the United States
Accountability Accountability has a gripping influence on the national
NCLB dialogue about adolescent literacy. Discussions and
AYP literacy reform efforts are framed by No Child Left
NAEP Behind, Adequate Yearly Progress, and National
Assessment of Educational Progress outcomes.
618 Tatum
3. Educators find it difficult to use texts to counter in-school and out-of-
school context-related issues that heighten the vulnerability level of Afri-
can American males.
The goals of literacy for African American male adolescents remain trapped
in an achievement-score quagmire. At the same time, solutions to the adolescent
literacy crisis are grounded in economic referents, such as the market economy
and the need for future workers. These foci have unintended, negative conse-
quences for schools efforts to promote the literacy of African American male
adolescents. First, they position adolescent literacy development as an in-school
phenomenon related to standardized scores. Secondly, the crisis, as it is currently
framed, affects the definition of adolescent literacy. A limited view of the crisis
results in observable practical and theoretical vacillations among educators, poli-
cymakers, and educational publishers. The search for solutions to the adolescent
literacy crisis remains scattered; teachers of adolescents lack clarity about what
competencies outside their disciplines they need to develop; and the support pro-
vided by professional developers remains as varied as the professional developers
themselves. The lives of many adolescents, particularly adolescent males of color,
are treated as expendable, both within and outside of schools.
In subsequent sections of this article, I draw from a qualitative case study
I conducted that supports my proposed model of a more anatomically complete
model of literacy instruction. This study examined how choosing the right texts
is central to advancing the literacy development of African American male ado-
lescents. By illustrating the importance of engaging African American adolescent
males with texts they find meaningful, the case study affirms the need for a more
anatomically complete model of literacy instruction in schools.
Thomas
Paine
Kahlil Gibran
Malcolm X
Poetry
Robert F. Jack
Williams Kerouac
Negroes On the
With Guns Road
Frederick
Douglass
(The shaded boxes denote texts that recur in the textual lineages of African American males from
the 1960s onward.)
620 Tatum
Figure 3. Tatums Textual Lineage From Middle and High School
Dick Gregory
Nigger, an
Autobiography
Malcolm X Booker T.
Richard Wright William Harper Lee
The Washington
Black Boy and Henley To Kill a
Autobiography Up From
Native Son Invictus Mockingbird
of Malcolm X Slavery
Frederick Douglass
Claude McKay
Narrative of the Life of
America
Frederick Douglass
collected 243 textual lineages from African American males in middle and high
schools in an attempt to identify the characteristics of texts they found meaning-
ful and significant, and to compare these characteristics to those identified in the
examination of the textual lineages of Black male archetypes and myself (Tatum,
in progress). Early analysis suggests that there are four characteristics of texts
that African American males find meaningful and significant:
1. They contribute to a healthy psyche.
2. They focus on a collective struggle.
3. They provide a road map for being, doing, and acting.
4. They provide modern awareness of the real world. (Tatum, 2007)
Kaeson
Directions: In each box below, place the title of a book, essay, or poem that you think
you will always remember. Place only one title in a box. Explain why you think you
will always remember the book, essay, or poem. Look at the example.
Invictus
I love the last two
lines of this poem. Example
It was the first
poem I ever
learned.
622 Tatum
to his identity formation could not be ignored. At the time of the study, Quincy
lived in one of Chicagos inner-city neighborhoods, which he described in the
following way:
I know the West Side of Chicago is ghetto...On my little three block[s], Mona, Mavis,
and Monte, where I stay at, there may be a lot of kids, but all blocks got drugs on
them....Its like a drug house or something. In that three-block area you see cars,
everything, police cars comin through twenty-four seven.
Data Collection
The study was designed to gather Quincys views on how texts (i.e., poems, es-
says, speeches, books, and news clippings) affected the way he viewed himself
as he negotiated his home and community contexts. I attempted to identify texts
that would provide Quincy with capital to become resilient amid some of his
negative environmental conditions. Consistent with the anatomically complete
model in which an understanding of a students context drives instructional deci-
sions, I planned to use these texts to provide explicit reading skill and strategy
instruction. Quincy consented to participate in the study by agreeing to do the
following:
1. Read books, articles, newspaper clippings, and speeches I recommended.
He was given the final decision about the material he chose to read.
2. Participate in twenty 90-minute audio-taped discussions about the reading
materials that took place every other Saturday morning at a bookstore or
library near his home.
3. Write reflections in a journal during the last ten minutes of each discussion.
4. Participate in four 30-minute interviews to reflect on the discussions. The
interviews were scheduled at ten-week intervals.
Data Analysis
I analyzed discussion and interview transcripts line by line in order to name
and identify characteristics of texts or in-school and out-of-school variables that
Results
During the study, Quincy read or attempted to read four books, two speeches, two
poems, and excerpts from two books (see Table 3). His text-related discussions
provide valuable insights for shaping educational contexts and selecting and me-
diating text with an African American male adolescent who struggles with read-
ing. Three major themes emerged in the study: perceived supports, meaningful
engagement with texts, and self-organizing processes.
Perceived Supports
During the first interview I conducted with Quincy, we discussed teachers per-
ceptions of African American males. I wanted to know how he believed others
viewed him. Excerpts from our conversation are included below:
624 Tatum
Tatum:
When you come in contact with people who are not African
American, how do you think they perceive you?
Quincy: ...I was in school with all Whites; they treated me the same way they
treated all the other people. So basically, I dont see nothing wrong.
I think they do a good job.
Tatum: So you would agree that they do not have a negative perception of
you?
Quincy:
No, only thing that is wrong, they just didnt know how to handle
the African American kids.
Tatum: Are you talking about the teachers?
Quincy:
Yeah...They are, like, scared or something. I dont know what it is,
but I think African American teachers know what to do. They look
at our work and they see our grades and tell us what we need to do,
unlike other teachers. They give us afterschool help, give us help
on this and this and this, give us some private time, and help you
out. The other teachers, they do a good job too, but theyre not like
African American teachers. My point: African American teachers
when we act up, they know how we are, they know what it is, and
the other teachers, they be quick to send you out for a quick descent
to the principal and get suspended for something.
Tatum: Do you have specific examples?
Quincy:
I dont know what it was, but I kept asking the teacher for help, and
shes like, youre doing good in this class; you dont need help. And
I told her all I need help is with one problem, and you can go finish
whatever you were doing. And she thought I was really being smart,
and she sent me out. And the rest of the class tried to get me out of
trouble, but she made a big deal and I got suspended for it.
Tatum: You said something interesting to me. You said that some teachers
dont know how to handle African American kids; some of them
might be scared. Talk about that a little more.
Quincy:
Cause they just think were worthless. They think we are just going
to give up. We wont do what we need to do right. They try to help
us, but they wont constantly help us to get us on track. Like the rest
of the class, we fall behind, but they dont take the time when they
can get the class started on work. They just go on grades and try to
get their stuff together, but they just need to come over and give us
a little sermon. But they just dont do that.
Quincy perceived that the support of classroom teachers was lacking, and
assessed this lack of support as a form of rejection stemming from teachers per-
ceptions of African American students as worthless. A month into the study, he
continued to describe the lack of support, this time in the midst of a reading
626 Tatum
shaping classroom contexts to pay attention to students lived experiences and
providing opportunities for meaningful engagement with texts.
Tatum: Why do you think those pages of the text stood out to you?
Quincy:
Because my friends dad drove me and two other guys, and we all
were Black in the car, and we really werent doing nothing. We were
going the speed limit and all, and as he was driving, the police
pulled him over and all of us. He made us get out of the car, think-
ing we had drugs and stuff on us, even though we all had suits on.
He searched us, then he searched the car, and the guy asked the of-
ficer why it was he was stopped. And then I heard this with my own
ears, he was like DWB, but I dont know what that means.
Tatum: Who said DWB?
Quincy: The officer.
Tatum: Was he White or Black?
Quincy: I think he was White. I dont really remember. When he said that, I
really didnt know what he means until I read this. When I thought
about it, DWB, I dont know how it popped back to [the day of] my
luncheon, but then I realized what DWB was.
Quincy could not get into the book cause every time [he] took a break [he]
gotta read over what [he] read. To continue the session, I read part of the text
with Quincy and provided him with strategies for decoding the text and moni-
toring his comprehension, areas I had assessed to be his weaknesses. He became
engaged with the text during the session:
628 Tatum
be sufficient to move them toward engagement. Instructional supports that in-
clude explicit strategy instruction and ways of finding an entry point or entry
passage to the text may be necessary to get adolescents engaged. In this conversa-
tion, I asked Quincy questions about his own educational experiences in order
to make the argument in the text more concrete. Quincy became more engaged
when these supports were provided. For instance, in this conversation, he chal-
lenged and then expanded upon the authors assertions. I look back at this session
and this text as the tipping point when Quincy starting viewing texts as a tool to
think about his own life. He stated at the end of this session and the subsequent
sessions, I got to get it right. I got to get my life right.
Self-Organizing Processes
Quincys engagement with texts had increased by the sixteenth week of the case
study. By this time, he had reenrolled in an alternative high school after sitting
out for several months. In our meetings, he began to ask more questions about
the texts and engage in more reflection, whereas at the beginning of the study, he
would simply identify parts of the texts that stood out to him and read those parts
during our time together. I often initiated those discussions by asking Quincy
questions to help him gather his thoughts about the readings. During our seventh
session, however, Quincy initiated the discussion with a question based on his
reading of the poem, Does the World Care if I Exist (Tatum, 2005), which is
excerpted here:
Does the world care if I exist?
Or, am I just Americas problem?
Dont they know I am dying like no other?
No, they just fear me, they cant hear me
Hell, you cant even teach me how to readMr. and Mrs. Teacher
Then you flunk me, and blame it on me
Some of its my fault
Probably some of my mommas fault as well
But youre at fault, too
I dont want your pity or your crying
Teach me how to man-up, and be a man
Help me to stop dying
If you dont this nation will continue to spill over with the black mans blood
Youll have to build more jails.
It is now your time to act
If you dont act
I now believe that, America does not care if I exist, is a fact.
No more peace until we all get a piece (American pie)
Damn, my time expired. Im gone... (p. 7)
As we entered the library to have our discussion about the poem, he asked, I
wanna know what made you, like, write. What made you describe that type of
boy? Excerpts from the interview follow:
630 Tatum
Quincy:
Dont laugh; this might be funny, but dont laugh. My teacher teach-
ing us literature, right, but he doing measurements and stuff. Aint
literature something like reading? We didnt even have no books.
The only thing we got books for is the science.
This poem led Quincy to examine his existence in the alternative high school
setting, and further, it led to a meaningful exchange of ideas between us, initi-
ated by Quincys questions. He questioned curriculum orientations and analyzed
the plight of African American males and their shared culpability in their social
demise. Quincy did not understand why teachers refused to challenge him and
his African American classmates. Sadly, the time that was allocated for literature
instruction was co-opted by math because of the absence of other texts. He asked
me not to laugh, but I think his warning would have been more targeted if he had
told me not to explode with anger or cry.
Quincy continued to ask questions about the texts during our discussions. In
our last session together, he read the following excerpt from Martin Luther King
Jr.s discussion of Black power (Hord & Lee, 1995):
But we are also Americans. Abused and scorned though we may be, our destiny is
tied up with the destiny of America. The Negro must face the fact that America is
now his home, a home that he helped to build through blood, sweat, and tears. Since
we are Americans the solution to our problem will not come through seeking to
build a separate black nation within a nation, but by finding that creative minority
of the concerned from the ofttimes apathetic majority, and together moving toward
that colorless power that we all need for security and justice. (p. 295)
The last text-based question Quincy asked me was, What did he mean by
creative minority? After sharing my thoughts on the phrase creative minor-
ity, I asked him why he had asked the question. Quincy said, I just wanted to
understand it. He began to seek understanding from texts as he thought about
his own life. He found that the texts and our discussions of them led him to some
self-correcting processes, such as reenrolling in school after dropping out and
forming a better relationship with his mother (Tatum, in press).
Early in the study, Quincy shared his belief that he was poorly served by his
literacy experiences in school because teachers failed to read him. When I asked
him how teachers could read him without living his experiences, he offered:
It like the same thing Tupac (Shakur, 1999) is saying in life in his eyes. I mean, you
gotta see what you see in your eyes, what you see every day. Its like a good book or
something. You reading it at home and you think somebody else might like it. You
ask them to read the title. If you tell a student that you really liked a book and it was
good, they gonna notice it and give it a chance, the first couple of pages, or chapter
or something. They dont like it; they will let you know...You can hear conversations
sometimes. What they are going through...I aint doubting teachers dont care; they
care. If they didnt care, they wouldnt be there, but it just that they are doing what
they want to do. They doing what they think they need to teach; they aint doing
what the students need. They aint reading us.
Quincy dropped out of the study after his mother kicked him out of the
house and told him to move in with his father, who had recently been released
from prison. The potential to use literacy instruction and texts to empower this
African American male adolescent was not realized. Sadly, his recent reentry into
high school had done nothing to jumpstart that potential, and, in fact, seemed to
squander it.
During the study, Quincy was slowly becoming more convinced about the
power of texts, particularly the enabling texts he selected from the choices I pro-
vided. When he reenrolled in the alternative high school, he expected to be able
to read these kinds of texts in school, but he discovered that the same old mate-
rial he had been provided before he had dropped out was still the standard fare.
Quincy believed me as I discussed how texts could help him shape a positive life
trajectory. He also discovered something about himself as he read the material
texts that I hope will become a part of his textual lineage.
The stakes are much higher for Quincy now. He has a son and another child
on the waytwo kids who will be raised by a father who has yet to receive a high
school diploma.
Concluding Thoughts
In this article, I discussed the need for a more anatomically complete model of
literacy for African American male adolescents, particularly the ones living under
the weight of a widening gulf of social, economic, and educational disparity. I as-
sert that literacy instruction can serve as a mechanism to shape a more egalitarian,
just society by paying attention to the varied needs of adolescents now living in
high-poverty communities. It is naive to believe, or mendacious to suggest, that
the broader societal aims that should be associated with literacy instruction can
be reached by focusing on research-based skills and strategies alone. There are
multiple tangible and intangible influences on adolescent literacy development. In-
school factors and out-of-school factors function in concert with students external
and internal resources, and they all combine to impact their literacy development.
Educators and policymakers must assiduously question how policy, peda-
gogical practices, and research will benefit and advance the literacy development
of both the poorest and the most privileged adolescents in this nation. The eco-
nomically privileged and economically disadvantaged adolescents of today will be
bound together to solve the nations political, social, and educational problems.
Literacy development has to be conceptualized in such a way that it addresses the
632 Tatum
needs of all adolescents, including African American male adolescents. It also has
to be conceptualized to preserve American democracy and the American economy,
which are now threatened by the large number of high school dropouts who will
not be able to find sustainable employment or participate in the political process.
There is a need to include the voices of African American adolescent males in
literacy research. While qualitative research provides powerful data, large-scale
research studies are needed to specifically examine the literacy development of
African American adolescent males. This can be accomplished by conducting
carefully controlled studies in schools where we find African American adoles-
cent males who struggle with reading. The results of these studies can then be
combined with the best practices found in descriptive and qualitative studies.
This approach will potentially guard against essentializing African American
male adolescents literacy experiences in the United States.
Additionally, more attention needs to be given to text types, characteristics
of texts, and the role of texts in advancing the literacy development of African
American males. There is ample historical precedent for the role of texts in shap-
ing the lives of African American males in the United States. Educators often
overlook this precedent when making curricular decisions purportedly designed
to improve the reading outcomes of African American males.
It may be helpful to adopt a life course perspective (Mizell, 1999) that aligns
neatly with cultural-ecological theories addressing out-of-school and in-school
contexts, students identities, and the structural barriers that exist in a highly
stratified class-based and race-based society. But taking on such a perspective re-
quires a broader conceptualization of literacy instruction for African American
male adolescents, who can be both resilient and vulnerable at the same time.
I suggest that educators and school reformers adopt a more anatomically complete
model of literacy instruction that integrates theoretical, instructional, and profes-
sional development strandshead, body, and legs, respectivelyas a comprehen-
sive approach to advancing the literacy development of African American male
adolescents. Moving toward a more anatomically complete model of literacy devel-
opment can expand the lens of the adolescent literacy field, inform and shape the
direction of educational research, and advance the literacy development of African
American male adolescents in ways that will benefit them in school and society.
R efere nces
Alliance for Excellent Education. (2006). Whos Brozo, W. (2002). To be a boy, to be a reader: Engaging
counted? Whos counting? Understanding high teen and preteen boys in active literacy. Newark,
school graduation rates. Washington, DC: Author. DE: International Reading Association.
Alvermann, D. E., Hinchman, K. A., Moore, D. Ceballo, R., McLoyd, V., & Toyokawa, T. (2004).
W., Phelps, S. F., & Waff, D. R. (Eds.) (2006). The influence of neighborhood quality on ado-
Reconceptualizing the literacies in adolescents lescents educational values and school effort.
lives (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Journal of Adolescent Research, 19(6), 716739.
Baldwin, J. (1963). The fire next time. New York: Dial Cleaver, E. (1968). Soul on ice. New York: Dell.
Press. Collins, J., & Blot, R. K. (2003). Literacy and lit-
Biancarosa, C., & Snow, C. E. (2006). Reading eracies: Texts, power, and identity. Cambridge,
nextA vision for action and research in middle England: Cambridge University Press.
and high school literacy: A report to Carnegie Cosby, W. (2004, 17 May). Address at the NAACPs
Corporation of New York (2nd ed.). Washington, commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of
DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Brown v. Board of Education. Retrieved December
634 Tatum
Tatum, A. W. (2006). Engaging African American Tatum, A. W. (in progress). Rebuilding the textual
males in reading. Educational Leadership, 63(5), lineages of African American male adolescents.
4449. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Tatum, A. W. (2007). Building the textual lineages Tatum, A. W., & Fisher, T. A. (in press). Nurturing
of African American male adolescents. In K. resilience among adolescent readers. In S.
Beers, R. Probst, and L. Rief (Eds.), Adolescent lit- Lenski and J. Lewis (Eds.), Addressing the needs
eracy: Turning promise into practice (pp. 8185). of struggling middle level and high school readers.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. New York: Guilford.
Tatum, A. W. (in press). African American males Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (1992). Overcoming the
at risk: A researchers study of endangered odds: High-risk children from birth to adulthood.
males and literature that works. In S. Lehr (Ed.), New York: Cornell University Press.
Shattering the looking glass: Issues, controversy, Young, J. P. (2000). Boy talk: Critical literacy and
and trends in childrens literature. Norwood, MA: masculinities. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(3),
Christopher Gordon. 312337.
M
arie M. Clay was a clinical child psychologist who chose to study young
learners during their initial, formative years of literacy acquisition.
Applying the perspectives and practices of developmental psychology
(Clay, 2001), she sought to document behavioral changes in childrens literacy
development by capturing performance in reading and writing tasks collected
over time. She therefore designed studies to gather empirical evidence collected
in controlled conditions, and she grounded her tentative theories in the resulting
data (Clay, 1998).
Clays initial work was motivated by questions resulting from the correla-
tions found between learners literacy performance in the first year of school and
their rankings among peers in subsequent years. Specifically, she found that those
with very limited progress in reading and writing at the end of their first year of
instruction remained among the lowest performing students year after year. To
address this challenge and create instructional opportunities to change predic-
tions of failure, Clay chose to initiate her work by pursuing clarification of opti-
mal literacy development among young learners, that is, securing descriptions of
the literacy progress of successful children.
Applying the perspectives and practices of developmental psychology (Clay,
1991a), she documented changes in childrens literacy development by captur-
ing behavioral performance in reading and writing tasks collected longitudinally.
There were no existing accounts of learners engaged in their earliest school-based
encounters with literacy; therefore, she set out to document what occurs, which
she referred to as a legitimate first step (Clay, 2001). Although delineation of be-
haviors changing over time was her first objective, related goals, aligned with
her developmental orientation, were explanations of observed changes and con-
sideration of how to modify learning conditions to optimize development for all
individuals (Clay, 2004). For struggling learners, she described this as leading
children back...to a more secure developmental track, that is, to the recovery of a
more normal trajectory (Clay, 1998, pp. 288289), which brought her to the study
of intervention.
Resulting from her earliest investigations of literacy, Clay (2001) embraced a
complex theory of literacy and defined reading as
636
a message-getting, problem-solving activity, which increases in power and flexibil-
ity the more it is practised. It is complex because within the directional constraints
of written language, verbal and perceptual behaviours are purposefully directed in
some integrated way to the problem of extracting sequences of information from
texts to yield meaningful and specific communications. (p. 1)
638 Doyle
When children reached the end of their first year of instruction and were
tested with standardized instruments, Clay used the results to create four
groups of varying levels of proficiency: high, high average, low average, and low.
Comparing the performance within and between groups, Clay (1966) discovered
that children were significantly different in their literacy learning. The results
revealed multifactored ways in which children constructed complex literacy
processing systems for both reading and writing (Clay, 2001, p. 288). Her docu-
mented map of literacy behaviors allowed her to describe literacy learning in the
process of change, which gave Clay the genesis of her literacy processing theory.
This study prompted ongoing research conducted by Clay and her colleagues
to pursue and confirm understandings and to test alternative hypotheses. The
foci of her extensive body of research include the reading behaviors of children in
their third year of instruction, syntactic analyses of reading errors, self-correction
behavior, writing development, oral language performance, language proficiency
of bilingual children, analysis of linguistic variables in oral reading (juncture,
pitch, stress), concepts about print, visual perception, prevention, and early inter-
vention (see Clay, 1982, 2001).
640 Doyle
information, often only an initial letter. The important processing advance was
the childs increased receptiveness to visual information and ability to pull a new
kind of information in print knowledge together with other knowledge sources
(i.e., syntactic information) to read a message (Clay, 2001, p. 64).
Clay determined that early writing experiences served as a significant source
of new learning that contributed to the childs construction of more effective
working systems for processing literacy. Children in her studies were learning
to read and write concurrently, which created benefits supporting the acquisi-
tion of foundational knowledge and the inner control of literacy processing. By
writing a single sentence, the learner coordinates a range of behaviors: movement
patterns required for dealing with print, ordering written language in appropri-
ate sequences, visual scanning of letters and words, and the analysis of sounds
in words. The learner attends to features of letters, learns new letters and some
words, and begins to link sounds with letters. Writing experiences help build
the working systems needed to search for information in print, strategies used to
combine and check information, an awareness of how to construct a message, and
awareness of the sources of knowledge available in written language (Clay, 2001,
p. 17). These represent key, foundational aspects shared by writing and reading.
Based on her study of writing development over time, Clay (1975) observed
that in the writing context, young writers
do not learn about language on any one level of organization before they manipulate
units at higher levels. When they know a few letters they can produce several words,
and with several words they can make a variety of sentences. (p. 19)
Their attention to letters, sounds, and words serves their efforts to record per-
sonal messages, and they manage the complexity of the full range of information
sources to complete their intentions. Clay (1982) noted that although their initial
understandings are perhaps intuitive, her observations and evidence suggest that
children learn on all levels of the language hierarchy at once, and it is the rich
intermingling of language learning across levels which probably accounts in some
way for the fast progress which the best children can make (Clay, 1975, p. 19).
This represents the reciprocity between writing and reading that is so beneficial
to the learners construction of early literacy systems and acquisition of language
knowledge that extends processing in both reading and writing.
Interestingly, Clay (1982) found no developmental sequence apparent in her
records of proficient readers emerging and changing behaviors in reading and
writing. Individual children exhibited unique developmental histories, includ-
ing by-passing many of the steps which another child may follow (Clay, 1982,
p. 14). This discovery confirmed that individual learners take different paths to
proficient reading and writing development (Clay, 1998, 2001). However, records
also revealed that some children had difficulties with various aspects of the four
early areas of development, and others persisted with inappropriate responses to
reading and writing, such as a consistent right to left approach to print or invent-
ing stories when asked to read (Clay, 1982).
642 Doyle
from the very beginning of a sentence or a line of text and progresses to the reread-
ing of a phrase, then rereading of a word, then an initial letter. Clay (2001) reported
that this sequence, a pattern found to be identical in the records of high and low
progress readers, provides a way to judge progress and observe change in the read-
ers literacy processing over time.
At the point when proficient learners transitioned into formal instruction,
Clays (2001) records of behaviors revealed the following:
They could not read, but they identified the words in the text with 80%
accuracy.
They selected words one after the other to construct viable sentences.
They could reject a response and try a different one.
They began to self-correct.
They knew a few words in reading and/or writing.
They could bring two kinds of behaviors together (e.g., verbal and pointing
behavior).
They often stressed the separation (juncture) between words.
Gradually, readers demonstrated the ability to construct what a line of text might
say, locate the sequence of information to attend to, and detect, or monitor, mis-
matches between their seeing and saying (Clay, 2001).
As these beginning readers worked with different kinds of information, their
processing was labored, observable, and sequential. The transitions and develop-
ment that Clay observed were replicated by Nalder (as cited in Clay, 2001) and
delineated as follows:
(Readers) begin to try to use the language of the book, to match what they
say line by line and (later) word by word with some attention to occasional
visual cues in known words. Language composed by the child supports any
processing but can override the printed text.
Another change is detected when the reader uses the language of the book,
matched word to word, and definitely attends to some visual information.
There is a lot of searching, checking and self-correcting with appropriate
appeals for help and some omissions.
Within about six months, fluent accurate reading is achieved by many with
some successful solving, and two or more sources of information are used
for one decision.
After six months at school, proficient readers can be independent when
handling the challenges in appropriately selected easy texts, using several
sources of information (semantic, syntactic, visual, or sounds in sequence),
and knowing how to check one kind of information against another.
644 Doyle
In addition to the observed changes over time in a proficient readers aware-
ness of and increasing knowledge of the range of sources of language information
in text, Clays (2001) evidence also revealed how the early, primitive literacy pro-
cessing expanded into more efficient decision-making. She discovered that profi-
cient readers were constructing a network of strategic behaviors, action systems,
or cell assemblies for processing textcognitive terms useful in describing what
readers do as they work sequentially on the information sources in print to get
the authors message (Clay, 2001, p. 198). The readers had learned how to search
and check information, how to go back to search again, and how to monitor their
reading and confirm their decision making. The types of strategic behaviors they
applied include the following:
controlling serial order according to the directional rules for the script being read,
across lines and within words
using what you know about in reading to help writing and vice versa
problem-solving with more than one kind of information
actively searching for various types of information in print
using visual information
using language information
drawing on stored information
using phonological information
working on categories, rules or probabilities about features in print
using strategies which maintain fluency
using strategies which problem-solve new features of printed words and meanings
using strategies which detect and correct error (Clay, 2001, p. 199)
These working systems are neural networks, perceptual and cognitive systems,
which are constructed by the learner as a result of engagement in reading con-
tinuous texts to discern meaningful messages. For the proficient reader after
one year of instruction, these working systems have the capacity to function as
646 Doyle
self-extending systems, allowing the learner to expand his or her competencies in
acts of processing texts of increasing demands.
Readers operate on multiple sources of information to read for meaning, and
Clay found this processing reflective of Rumelharts (1994; see Chapter 29 this vol-
ume) interactive theory of reading. Rumelharts theory posits that all knowledge
sources are decision-making sources, and the readers perceptions during read-
ing are the product of interactions among all levels of the language hierarchy. For
Rumelhart, this involves hypothesis generating and evaluating during the act of
reading as tentative decisions about the message are made and then confirmed or
revised on the basis of perceiving more and more information. For example, de-
cisions regarding perceptions of letter features, letter sounds, letter clusters, and
words are evaluated and confirmed or revised in conjunction with decisions re-
garding syntactic information, at either a phrase or clause level, and decisions on
the basis of semantic information, which is more general knowledge of the topic or
genre. Thus, the reader attends to all available sources of information in text (visual,
syntactic, semantic), and the reading process is the product of the simultaneous
joint application of all the knowledge sources (Chapter 29 this volume, p. 732).
The readers knowledge of the language information sources in text support
his or her complex processing systems, that is, the decision making that serves
reading for meaning. The readers working systems consider, scan, and integrate
information from all levels of the language hierarchy when processing text, and
therefore, giving more value to any level of the linguists hierarchy of language in-
formation is unproductive and may be misleading. It is agreement across informa-
tion sources that confirms a good decision and incongruity that signals the need
for more searching, confirming, and perhaps correcting. To add understanding
of the perceptual and cognitive working systems, Clay (2001) referenced Singers
concept of assembling the working systems for a specific task, a theory that allows
more scope for knowledge sources and neurological networks to be used flexibly
and effectively by readers (p. 101).
According to Singer (1994), readers who have acquired the necessary work-
ing systems are able to mobilize rapidly and flexibly a hierarchical organization
of subsystems in which a minimum of mental energy and attention are devoted to
input systems (perceptual systems involved in the perception of stimuli, includ-
ing visual information) and a maximum is expended on mediation and output
systems (cognitive systems involved in interpreting, inferring, integrating, and
responding). Thus, when reading is proceeding in a fluent, proficient manner, the
perceptual working systems operate without conscious attention, allowing the
reader to focus attention on thinking about and responding to meaning, which
engages the cognitive systems.
This processing suggests that the reader is employing working systems to
search and monitor information sources supportive of his construction of mean-
ing with ease. In terms of visual information specifically, this means that the in-
formation is located and scanned proficiently and recognized instantly. However,
when a reader detects any disruption of meaning, the reader will shift attention
648 Doyle
While aspects of both Singer and Rumelharts models of reading resonated
with Clays observations, she found that because neither theorist had addressed
the early formative period of literacy acquisition, their explanations were incom-
plete. Clays (2001) theory offers literacy awareness and orientation to print as
essential aspects of early literacy learning:
Children have to adapt their preschool working systems to make them work on the
written code, learn some new skills, lay down the foundational knowledge sources
and learn how knowledge from very different sources can be found, assembled, and
integrated. (Clay, 2001, p. 137)
It was her perspective that this complex processing theory was critically impor-
tant in creating powerful learning opportunities for any child struggling with
early literacy.
650 Doyle
the learner (Vygotsky, 1962) and ultimately act as a resource as the child pur-
sues a large amount of the activity by himself, pushing the boundaries of his
own capacities (Clay, 1991b, p. 255). Because the self-extending system creates a
bootstrapping effect (Stanovich, 1986), Clay (2001) likened it to what Stanovich
labeled the positive Matthew effect; she attributed this effect to the complexity of
interacting neural networks.
Complex learning results from instruction that starts with a childs strengths
and builds on his or her existing, perhaps primitive, processing systems (Clay,
1998, 2005a). Teachers accomplish this by drawing on the childs competent sys-
tems while supporting new tentative responding until new strengths are estab-
lished (Clay, 2001). As a result, the child experiences success, feels in control of
his or her learning, and gains awareness of new features of text and/or new ways
of responding (Clay, 1998). Teachers make use of each individuals existing re-
sponse repertoire; therefore, each childs series of lessons is unique, and different
paths to efficient processing are expected and supported (Clay, 1998).
Clay (2005a) identified two key hypotheses that informed her intervention
plan. The first is that the childs instruction should be based on the teachers con-
tinuous, detailed observations of literacy behaviors. Thus, the reflective teacher
considers her observations of the childs problem-solving strategies in writing
and in reading daily (using running records). The childs new discoveries, par-
tially correct responses, and self-correction behaviors inform instructional deci-
sions, which often occurs on a moment-to-moment basis. The second hypothesis
is that the reciprocal relationship between reading and writing creates powerful
opportunities for the learners competencies in one area to support learning in
the second.
More specifically, Clay (2001) discerned that the similar aspects shared by
reading and writing include the following:
1) the stores of knowledge about letters, sounds and words which they can draw
upon, 2) the ways in which known oral language contributes to print activities,
3)some similar processes that learners use to search for the information they need
to solve new problems, and 4) ways in which they pull together or integrate different
types of information common to both activities. (p. 33)
More specific examples of processes common to both reading and writing activi-
ties include the following:
controlling serial order
problem-solving with more than one kind of information
drawing on stored information and acting on it
using visual information
using phonological information
using the meaning of what was composed
using the vocabulary and structure of what was composed
Clays (2005b) instructional plan for daily lessons includes reading texts of
easy and instructional levels, writing personal stories, and using brief decontex-
tualized activities to support learning items such as letters and words, which are
encountered in and linked to reading and writing activities. The texts for reading
are not controlled or contrived; they are selected to give the young reader access
to all levels of the language hierarchy as working systems for perceiving, integrat-
ing, and evaluating information sourcesstrengthened only as a result of reading
continuous, meaningful texts.
In describing the instruction that reflects important theoretical constructs,
Clay (2001) emphasized the following:
The teacher would support the development of literacy processing by astute se-
lection of tasks, judicious sharing of tasks, and by varying the time, difficulty,
content, interest and methods of instruction, and type and amount of conversation
within the standard lesson activities.
The teacher would foster and support active constructive problem-solving, self-
monitoring, and self correction from the first lesson, helping learners to under-
stand that they must take over the expansion of their own competencies. To do
this the teacher would focus on process variables (how to get and use information)
rather than on mere correctness and habitual responses, and would temporarily
value responses that were partially correct for what ever they contributed toward
correctness.
The teacher would set the level of task difficulty to ensure high rates of correct
responding plus appropriate challenge so that the active processing system could
learn from its own attempts to go beyond current knowledge. (p. 225)
652 Doyle
Clay (2009) conducted studies to explore questions regarding teaching proce-
dures, teacher-training possibilities, implementation issues, decisions about when
to end a childs series of lessons, and sustained effects for participants one year
as well as three years following the intervention (Jones & Smith-Burke, 1999).
In this way, working with teachers and testing the intervention in schools, Clay
was able to confirm instructional decisions and discern important training and
implementation issues.
Professional development and implementation issues received extensive at-
tention as Clay was asked to scale up Reading Recovery, and she approached all
challenges with tentativeness, flexibility, and a problem-solving attitude (Clay,
2001). Always supportive of classroom teachers, she designed a trainer-of-trainer
model of professional preparation and found teachers astute learners of her com-
plex literacy theory and instructional procedures. She was masterful in addressing
implementation issues, and as educators from other countries and in languages
other than English worked with her to adopt and implement Reading Recovery,
she was sensitive to cultural and educational differences. Using a process of ac-
commodation, she found adaptive ways to implement Reading Recovery without
lessening the high standards that lead to optimal results for both teachers and
children (Doyle, 2009, pp. 292293).
The success of these efforts is assessed in evaluation studies replicated by
each country with a national implementation, and the resulting data, collected
and analyzed for each participating child, are reported annually (see Watson &
Askew, 2009, for full descriptions). These reports confirm that Reading Recovery
has been successful in accelerating learning and securing a firm literacy founda-
tion for children in diverse settings and in multiple languages, including English,
Spanish, and French.
Clay (2001) has attributed the success of Reading Recovery to five key as-
pects, including the specific guidelines for program delivery, the training that
prepares teachers to be astute decision makers, a theory of constructive learning,
a complex theory of literacy learning, and lesson components that support per-
ceptual and cognitive processing. These components suggest that she based her
early intervention on considerations of behaviors observed in proficient learners
over time and instructional modifications needed to optimize literacy develop-
ment for struggling learners.
Summary
This discussion has presented a review of Marie M. Clays complex literacy pro-
cessing theory, her theoretical perspective of literacy learning, and implications
of her theory for her design of an intervention for children struggling with early
literacy. From these efforts, via a grounded theory process, Clay solidified her
literacy processing theory of reading and writing continuous texts, explaining
how literacy learning is transformed in a series of changes from simple to more
complex processes. Her studies afforded examination of behavioral evidence re-
vealing the nature of the learners construction of literacy processing abilities
654 Doyle
Additional indicators of effectiveness are found in evaluations conducted by
nonReading Recovery entities. The National Center on Response to Intervention
in the United States has endorsed her assessment tool, An Observation Survey
of Early Literacy Achievement (Clay, 2006), and the What Works Clearinghouse
(2008a, 2008b) has substantiated the scientific evidence resulting from multiple
researchers investigations of instructional effects. Reading Recovery is currently
recognized as a powerful, scientifically based Response to Intervention, and in
fact, Clays contribution to the movement is considered seminal (Vellutino, 2010).
Vellutino has acknowledged that Marie Clay was actually the first reading re-
searcher to use RTI to identify children who might be afflicted by organically
based reading difficulties (p. 7) as opposed to limitations resulting from expe-
riential or instructional deficits which Reading Recovery instruction addresses.
Clay (2001) has written that she used theory as a tool to explain the changes
in literacy behaviors discovered in the reading and writing processes that she
documented so astutely. Always tentative, she described herself as living in a
perpetual state of enquiry (Clay, 2001, p. 3) and sought refinement of her per-
spectives through her ongoing search for answers to important, new questions.
Her quest for explanations and her actions relative to promoting the optimal de-
velopment of learning potential among young learners are profound contribu-
tions to the literacy community and millions of children around the world.
1. What implications for instruction arise from Clays finding that there is no
single consistent developmental sequence that exists for all young readers
and writers?
2. How can an early-literacy teacher use Clays findings and theories to struc-
ture effective interventions for each child?
3. Why is it important, according to Clay, to integrate reading and writing
activities for emergent readers?
R eferences
Bruner, J.S. (1957). On perceptual readiness. Psy- Clay, M.M. (1975). What did I write? Beginning writ-
chological Review, 64(2), 123152. doi:10.1037/ ing behaviour. Auckland, NZ: Heinemann.
h0043805 Clay, M.M. (1982). Observing young readers: Selected
Bruner, J.S. (1974). The organisation of early skilled papers. Exeter, NH: Heinemann.
action. In M.P.M. Richards (Ed.), The integra- Clay, M.M. (1987). Learning to be learning dis-
tion of a child into a social world (pp. 167184).
abled. New Zealand Journal of Educational
London: Cambridge University Press.
Clay, M.M. (1966). Emergent reading behaviour. Studies, 22(2), 155173.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Clay, M.M. (1991a). Child development. In J. Flood,
Auckland, New Zealand. J. Jensen, D. Lapp, & J.R. Squire (Eds.), Handbook
Clay, M.M. (1974). The spatial characteristics of the of research on teaching the English language arts
open book. Visible Language, 8(3), 275282. (pp. 4045). Newark: DE: International Reading
656 Doyle
C H A P T E R 27
Instructing Comprehension-Fostering
Activities in Interactive Learning Situations
Ann L. Brown, University of California, Berkeley*
Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar, University of Michigan*
Bonnie B. Armbruster, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Introduction
Pupils dont learn to comprehend by osmosis (Cushenbery, 1969). As with any
definite statement concerning the acquisition of reading skills, this could be a con-
troversial position, but a main theme of this chapter is that, at least for a sizable
number of children, the statement is true. It is also argued that children who need
extensive instruction in comprehending written materials most are least likely to
receive it. The latter part of the chapter describes cognitive-skills training studies
that have provided extensive practice in comprehension-fostering activities and
have resulted in substantial improvements in students ability to learn from texts.
Resnick (1979) has argued that there are two main biases in reading instruc-
tion, namely direct instruction of decoding and informal teaching of comprehen-
sion. Those who advocate a heavy emphasis on decoding mechanisms in early
reading also tend toward the direct-instruction approach, whereas those who
emphasize early attention to language processing, language arts, or comprehen-
sion tend also to espouse learner-directed, informal instructional approaches. As
Resnick also argued, there is no reason in principle why one cannot have direct
instruction in comprehension or (a little harder to envisage) informal instruction
in decoding. In this chapter, concern is with one of the underpopulated cells, rela-
tively direct or explicit instruction in comprehension. Of particular concern is the
explicit instruction of comprehension-fostering skills with children at risk for aca-
demic failure precisely because they experience unusual difficulties in this arena.
Prereading Experiences
Preschool Reading Dyads
Learning to read does not begin when the child enters school; the child brings a
history of preschool learning experiences that, to a greater or lesser extent, have
prepared the way for a smooth transition. Some of these experiences could clearly
This chapter is reprinted from Learning and Comprehension of Text (pp. 255286), edited by H. Mandl, N.L.
Stein, and T. Trabasso. Copyright 1984 by Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar and Bonnie B. Armbruster.
Reprinted with permission.
657
be classified as prereading activities; others are more general learning practices
with some relevance to reading. Many of these early experiences have taken place
in social settings that share pertinent features with common school learning ac-
tivities. Some children have considerable preschool experience in interactions
that are very similar to school reading groups; others have not.
Certain parentchild interactions are ideal practicing grounds for subsequent
teacherchild activities that will be of central importance in the early grades.
Social settings such as these, where the child interacts with experts in a problem-
solving domain, are settings where a great deal of learning occurs in and out of
school. Indeed, some would argue that the majority of learning is shaped by so-
cial processes (Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, in press; Vygotsky,
1934/1978). From this perspective it is claimed that children first experience a
particular set of problem-solving activities in the presence of others and only
gradually come to perform these functions for themselves. First, the adult (par-
ent, teacher, etc.) guides the childs activity, doing much of the cognitive work
herself, but gradually the adult and child come to share the cognitive functions
with the child taking initiative and the adult correcting and guiding where the
child falters. Finally, the adult allows the child to take over the major thinking
role and adopts the stance of a supportive and sympathetic audience.
This developmental progress from social to individual cognitive processing
(other regulation to self-regulation) is nicely illustrated in parentchild learn-
ing dyads such as those reported by Wertsch (1978). Of particular interest to the
argument here are the interactions of mothers and children as they engage in
picture book reading.
At least in middle class homes, a stable locus of parentchild interactions is the
picture book task. Ninio and Bruner (1978) observed one motherinfant dyad longi-
tudinally, starting when the child was only 8 months old and terminating (unfortu-
nately) when he was 18 months old. From the very beginning, their interaction can
best be described as a dialogue with the timing of mothers and childs behavior fol-
lowing an almost complete alternation pattern strikingly similar to the turn-taking
conventions observed in dialogue. The mother initially is very much in command
and seduces the child into the ritual dialogue for picture book reading by accept-
ing any response from the baby as appropriate for his turn in the conversation.
Indeed, Ninio and Bruner point out that the mother accepts an astonishing variety
of responses as acceptable turn-taking behavior interpreting anything as having a
specific, intelligible content. The imputation of intent and content to the childs
activities constitutes an important mechanism by which the child is advanced to
more adult-like communicative behavior (Ninio & Bruner, 1978, p. 8).
A dramatic shift in responsibility comes when the child begins to label pic-
tures for himself. Now the mother acts as if she believes the child has uttered
words rather than babble. As the mothers theory of the child changes, so does her
part in the dialogue. At first she appears to be content with any vocalization, but
as soon as actual words can be produced the mother steps up her demands and
asks for a label with the query Whats that? The mother seems to increase her
Comprehension-Fostering Activities
Before proceeding to a discussion of instruction, an attempt is made to be some-
what more explicit about the nature of the comprehension processes involved in
effective reading. We concentrate on those that promote comprehension and lead
to effective comprehension monitoring, i.e., activities engaged in by readers to
ensure that comprehension is proceeding smoothly. Although far from a detailed
task analysis of reading comprehension, there are several overlapping skills that
have been mentioned repeatedly as prime comprehension-fostering activities in
a variety of recent theoretical treatments (Baker & Brown, 1984a, 1984b; Brown,
1980; Collins & Smith, 1982; Dansereau, 1980; Markman, 1981). These activities
include
1. clarifying the purposes of reading, i.e., understanding the task demands,
both explicit and implicit;
2. activating relevant background knowledge;
3. allocating attention so that concentration can be focused on the major con-
tent at the expense of trivia;
4. critical evaluation of content for internal consistency and compatibility
with prior knowledge and common sense;
5. monitoring ongoing activities to see if comprehension is occurring by en-
gaging in such activities as periodic review and self-interrogation; and
6. drawing and testing inferences of many kinds, including interpretations,
predictions, and conclusions.
All of these activities appear as academic tasks in their own right; for ex-
ample, it is a common practice to call on children to concentrate on the main
idea, to think critically about the content of what they are reading, to summarize
or answer questions on a passage. But, in addition, these activities, if engaged in
while reading, serve to enhance comprehension and afford an opportunity for the
student to check whether it is occurring. That is, they can be both comprehension-
fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities if properly used. Self-directed
summarization is an excellent comprehension-fostering and -monitoring tech-
nique (Brown & Day, 1983; Brown, Day, & Jones, 1983; Day, 1980; Linden &
Wittrock, 1981). Monitoring ones progress while reading, to test whether one can
pinpoint and retain important material, provides a check that comprehension is
comprehension-fostering skills. In support of this statement are the data from peer
tutoring sessions taken at the termination of the study. Trained tutees faced with
naive peers did attempt to model main idea paraphrase and questions (Palincsar
& Brown, work in progress).
In addition to the qualitative changes in the students dialogues, there was
a gratifying improvement in the level of performance on the daily assessment
Study 2. Encouraged by the success of the initial study, it was decided to repli-
cate the main features of the successful reciprocal-teaching procedure with 6ad-
ditional students, in 3 groups of 2. In addition to group size, the second study
also differed from the first in that (1) a criterion level of 75% correct on 4 out of 5
consecutive days was established; (2) students received explicit (graphed) knowl-
edge of results; and (3) tests of transfer were included.
The tests of transfer were selected because it was believed that they tapped
the skills taught during the reciprocal teaching and, pragmatically, because a con-
siderable body of prior work has established normal levels of performance for
seventh graders. Two of the four transfer tests were measures of the two most
frequently engaged in activities during the reciprocal-teaching sessions, summa-
rizing (Brown & Day, 1983) and predicting questions that might be asked concern-
ing each segment of text. In addition, two other tests were used as measures of
general comprehension monitoring, error detection (Harris, Kruithof, Terwogt,
All students were appraised of their progress on a daily basis. They were shown
graphs depicting the percentage correct for the previous days assessment.
The data from the daily assessment passages are shown in Figure 1. The
6 students of Study 2 had baseline accuracy not exceeding 40% correct. They
proceeded to make stepwise progression toward means in excess of 75%. Four
of the six students reached a stable level of 80% for 5 successive days, taking
12, 11, 11, and 15 days respectively to do it (Students 1, 3, 4, and 6). Student 5
reached criterion of 75% correct in 12 days. Student 2 was the only failure; she
progressed from a baseline of 12% correct and reached a steady level of 50% cor-
rect in 12 days, a significant improvement, but she never approached the criterion
level of the remaining 5 students. All students maintained their improved level of
performance on both short- and long-term maintenance tests.
A similar improvement in the quality of the dialogues over time was found
in Study 1 and Study 2 (see Palincsar & Brown, 1983, for details). At the outset,
students required more assistance with the dialogue, asked more unclear and
detailed questions, and made more incomplete/incorrect or detailed summaries
than they did on the last intervention day. Both main-idea questions and para-
phrases increased significantly over time.
Students improved at differential rates. For example, Student 6, a minority
student whose Slossen test indicated an IQ of 70, made steady but slow progress
as indicated by the dialogue shown in Table 3. The data are taken from Days 1 to
15, the day on which he reached criterion. From a very slow start, this student did
achieve an acceptable level of performance both on the dialogues and on his daily
assessment passages.
Generalization probes taken in the classroom setting resulted in variable
performance but did show clear evidence of improvement. Probes were taken in
two settings, social studies and science. At baseline on the social studies probe
the range of percentile rankings was .943, with four students at or below the
5th percentile. The percentile rankings were typically higher in science with a
50
0
100
S2
50
0
100
Group 2
Percent Correct Comprehension
S3
50
0
100
S4
50
0
100
Group 3
S5
50
0
100
S6
50
0
5 10 15 20 25 8 Weeks Later
Successive Sessions
These
These dataare
data are taken
taken from
fromthethe
sixsix
experimental subjects
experimental of Palincsar
subjects and Brownand
of Palincsar (1983), Study(1983),
Brown 2. Study 2.
Day 4
S: (no question)
T: Whats this paragraph about?
S: Spinners mate. How do spinners mate....
T: Thats good. Keep going.
S: How do spinners mate is small than.... How am I going to say that?
T: Take your time with it. You want to ask a question about spinners mate and what
he does, beginning with the word how.
S: How do they spend most of his time sitting?
T: Youre very close. The question would be, How does spinners mate spent most of
his time? Now you ask it.
S: How does spinners mate spend most of his time?
Day 7
S: How does the pressure from below push the mass of hot rock against the opening?
Is that it?
T: Not quite. Start your question with What happens when?
S: What happens when the pressure from below pushes the mass of rock against the
opening?
T: Good for you! Good job.
Day 11
S: What is the most interesting of the insect-eating plants, and where do the plants
live at?
T: Two excellent questions! They are both clear and important questions. Ask us one
at a time now.
Day 15
S: Why do scientists come to the south pole to study?
T: Excellent question. This is what this paragraph is all about.
70
60
Number of Points
Quality
Quality
Match
Main Idea
Paraphrase
50 Match
Paraphrase
Main Idea
40
Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post
Study 2 Study 3 Control Comparison
These data are taken from the Question-Prediction Task. The degree and type of posttest
improvement of the experimental subjects are detailed.
Study 3. Given the success of Studies 1 and 2, another replication was attempted,
but this time the teacher would be a real teacher, not an investigator, and the
instruction would take place in naturally occurring groups within the school set-
ting. In Study 3, four groups of students were considered, two classroom reading
groups for the poorest readers and two reading groups that met regularly in a
resource room. The group size ranged from 4 to 7 students. In all other respects
the study was a replica of Study 2.
The teachers received three training sessions. In the first, they were intro-
duced to the rationale behind the reciprocal-teaching intervention and were
shown the results of Study 1. They also viewed a videotape of the investigator
employing the technique with a group of students.
In the second training session, the teacher and the investigator practiced the
procedures privately with the investigator modeling both the teachers role and
behaviors that might be expected from students. Difficulties that could arise were
An example of the results is shown in Figure 3, where the data from one of the
rules, selection, are shown. The degree of posttest improvement was significantly
related to the explicitness of training. Merely telling students to stay on task,
.7
Selection Rule Use
Posttest
.6
.5
.4
Mean Proportion
.3
.2 Pretest
Notes
*When this chapter was written, Brown and Palincsar were at the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign.
1
The students were of low-normal intelligence (mean IQ 84) and low socioeconomic status.
Their decoding was judged adequate as they could read grade-appropriate texts at a rate of
80100 wpm with no more than 2 errors per minute. Their standardized reading comprehen-
sion scores averaged 3 years delayed.
2
In Study 1, another group of students received a second intervention, locating information
(see Palincsar & Brown, 1983, for details), where they were trained to answer comprehension
questions by using the text intelligently. These students did improve from their starting level
of 15% to approximately 50%, but they never reached the level of the reciprocal-teaching
group, and they failed to maintain this level over time.
3
In Studies 2 and 3, there were treated and untreated control groups consisting of students
matched with the experimental subjects for decoding and comprehension scores, as well
as IQ, standardized tests, and class placement. These students demonstrated no significant
change on their performance on the baseline, maintenance, and follow-up stages of the study.
Neither did they improve their performance on any of the tests of generalization (to the class-
room) or transfer (across laboratory tasks). For full details on the control groups included in
Studies 1 to 3, see Palincsar and Brown (1983).
R eferences
Allington, R. (1980). Teacher interruption behav- Bartlett, E.J. (1979). Curriculum, concepts of lit-
ior during primary-grade oral reading. Journal of eracy and social class. In L.B. Resnick & P.A.
Educational Psychology, 72(3), 371377. Weaver (Eds.), Theory and practice of early read-
Andr, M.D.A., & Anderson, T.H. (1978/1979). The ing (Vol. 2). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
development and evaluation of a self-question- Bernstein, B. (1971). Class codes and control (Vol. 1).
ing study technique. Reading Research Quarterly, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
14, 605623. Binet, A. (1909). Les ides modernes sur les infants.
Armbruster, B.B., Echols, C.H., & Brown, A.L. Paris: Flammarion.
(1982). The role of metacognition in reading Bird, M. (1980). Reading comprehension strategies: A
to learn: A developmental perspective. Volta direct teaching approach. Unpublished doctoral
Review, 84(5), 4556. dissertation, University of Toronto, Ontario,
Au, K.H. (1979). Using the Experience-Text- Canada.
Relationship method with minority children. Brown, A.L. (1980). Metacognitive development
The Reading Teacher, 32(6), 677679. and reading. In R.J. Spiro, B. Bruce, & W. Brewer
Au, K.H. (1980). A test of the social organizational (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehen-
hypothesis: Relationships between participation sion. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
structures and learning to read. Unpublished Brown, A.L. (1982). Learning how to learn from
doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, reading. In J.A. Langer & M.T. Smith-Burke
Urbana-Champaign. (Eds.), Reader meets author/bridging the gap: A
Baker, L., & Brown, A.L. (1984a). Cognitive moni- psycholinguistic and social linguistic perspective.
toring in reading. In J. Flood (Ed.), Understanding Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
reading comprehension (pp. 2144). Newark, DE: Brown, A.L. (in press). Mental orthopedics: A con-
International Reading Association. versation with Alfred Binet. In S. Chipman, J.
Baker, L., & Brown, A.L. (1984b). Metacognition Segal, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Thinking and learn-
and the reading process. In P.D. Pearson, R. Barr, ing skills: Research and open questions (Vol. 2).
M.L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
of reading research (pp. 353394). New York: Brown, A.L., Bransford, J.D., Ferrara, R.A., &
Longman. Campione, J.C. (1983). Learning, remembering,
I am thankful to the editors for this opportunity to include a sequel to the chap-
ter Instructing Comprehension-Fostering Activities in Interactive Learning
Situations. Whereas the original chapter was comprehensive in its attention to
comprehension instruction, this postscript focuses on reciprocal teaching (RT),
specifically on the evolution of the intervention itself, as well as the evolution of
research on RT. Finally, I speak to the evolution of the field with respect to com-
prehension instruction, as informed by research on RT.
There are two transformations in the design and use of RT that seem notewor-
thy. One was the introduction of thematically related passages as the grist for the di-
alogues. The initial studies of RT employed grade-appropriate texts that addressed
a broad array of (fairly random) unrelated topics; the limitation of this choice was
that it did not promote the use of the dialogues for knowledge building over time.
In contrast, in a line of inquiry conducted with first-grade students in which RT
was used to teach listening comprehension, we wrote texts that presented simple
science concepts related to animal survival: protection from elements, natural pest
control, adaptation and extinction, camouflage, and mimicry. For example, the
theme protection against elements included passages about porcupines, turtles,
R eferences
Alfassi, M. (1998). Reading for meaning: The ef- principles, and systems. In L. Schauble & R.
ficacy of reciprocal teaching in fostering read- Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New envi-
ing comprehension in high school students in ronments for education (pp. 289325). Mahwah,
remedial reading classes. American Educational NJ: Erlbaum.
Research Journal, 35(2), 309332. Connor, C.M., Morrison, F.J., & Petrella, J.N.
Al-Hilawani, Y.A. (2003). Clinical examination of (2004). Effective reading comprehension in-
three methods of teaching reading comprehen- struction: Examining child instruction inter-
sion to deaf and hard-of-hearing students: From actions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(4),
research to classroom applications. Journal of
682698. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.4.682
Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 8(2), 146156.
Dewitz, P., Jones, J., & Leahy, S. (2009).
doi:10.1093/deafed/eng001
Brown, A.L., & Campione, J.C. (1994). Guided dis- Comprehension strategy instruction in core
covery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly reading programs. Reading Research Quarterly,
(Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive 44(2), 102126. doi:10.1598/RRQ.44.2.1
theory and classroom practice (pp. 229270). Fung, I.Y.Y., Wilkinson, I.A.G., & Moore, D.W.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (2003). L1-assisted reciprocal teaching to im-
Brown, A.L., & Campione, J.C. (1996). prove ESL students comprehension of English
Psychological theory and the design of innova- expository text. Learning and Instruction, 13(1),
tive learning environments: On procedures, 131. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00033-0
691
First, with respect to understanding reading, a model integrates research
findings, makes theory graphic, and provides an explanation of how reading
takes place in accord with what we currently know. Whereas taking apart a cars
engine helps us see how it works and so discover how to repair it, dismantling
the reading process presents us with a very different problem. Although reading
is a highly complex and hidden process with no pistons, valves, or crankshafts to
pull out for observation, we have a substantial amount of research and theoretical
knowledge about it. What we know enables us to construct a model to visualize
this mysterious, invisible process. Furthermore, once we have begun to make
more visible our understanding of reading through models, we tend to move
those models toward greater sophistication.
Second, a model of reading helps us detect where breakdowns in compre-
hension could occur. A model helps us visualize what components may fail to
contribute to smooth meaning making while reading. For example, weak or slow
word recognition can cause poor comprehension. In short, models help us under-
stand what contributes to a struggling readers troubles.
Third, a model provides clues about instructional approaches and interven-
tion strategies that could help readers at different stages in reading development.
Although using a reading model to develop prescription-based instruction is a
risky practice, we can use models as resources for good hints. A well-designed
model based in solid research can create more opportunities to envision instruc-
tional interventions.
Many of the models presented in this section rely on these and other re-
search studies, theories that evolved from them, and hypotheses about how fea-
tures focused on in one study may interact with features of another. For example,
hypotheses based on schema theory provided several model builders with an ex-
planation of how background knowledge may affect the reading process.
Bottom-Up (Wave 1)
Goughs (1972) one second of reading model depicts a process that began with
low-level sensory representations (letter input) and proceeded through phonemic
and lexical-level representation to deeper structural representation. The flow of
information is completely bottom-up with no higher level process, such as infor-
mation held in long-term memory, affecting lower level representations. In One
Second of Reading: Postscript, Gough (1985) acknowledged the problems inher-
ent in his model.
Top-Down (Wave 2)
The next (or second) wave of models focused on what readers remembered after
reading a text, and the discovery that text memory was systematic. The questions
guiding the design of that generation were, What do readers remember about
the text they read, and what do those memories tell us about the nature of the
memory representations resulting from reading? The theories arising from this
wave focused on top-down memory influences, especially that of text structure.
Story grammars (Stein & Glenn, 1979), script theory (Schank & Abelson, 1977),
and hierarchical theories based on text structure (Meyer, 1975; Meyer & Poon,
2001) arose as answers to the questions guiding these researchers.
Top-Down (Wave 3)
Nearly synchronous with the second wave of theories was a third wave focused
on a broader view of what readers bring to a text. Note that the second wave text
structurerecall theories described earlier focus only on the connection between
the background knowledge that a reader brings to a text and the readers com-
prehension of the text (Pearson & Stephens, 1992). The provocative, third wave
question became, What influence does a readers background knowledge have on
the meanings constructed when reading? Schema theory (Anderson, Chapter19;
McVee et al., Chapter 20) arose from efforts to answer that question, and the
Bottom-Up/Top-Down (Wave 4)
A fourth wave of models emerging mostly in the early 1980s favored a focus on
a bottom-up plus top-down interaction that shaped comprehension. The ques-
tion for these researchers was, What do readers do as they move through a
text? These fourth wave models took into account readers efforts to construct
coherent text representations with respect to that texts referential and causal
structure. Different manifestations of the fourth wave appear in Samuelss au-
tomatic information- processing model (Chapter 28), Rumelharts interactive
model (Chapter 29), Just and Carpenters model that accounts for eye fixations
(Chapter 30), Adamss processor model (Chapter 31), Kintschs construction
integration model (Chapter 32), and Hannons cognitive components-resource
model (Chapter 33). Many of these model designers influenced one another, as
is the case with Just and Carpenters influence on Adamss model, and Kintschs
influence on Hannons model.
R ef er ence s
ACT. (2005). Crisis at the core: Preparing all stu- Intersegmental Committee of the Academic Senates
dents for college and work. Iowa City, IA: Author. of the California Community Colleges. the
Retrieved October 15, 2012, from www.act.org/ California State University, and the University
research/policymakers/pdf/crisis_report.pdf of California. (2002). Academic literacy: A state-
Alvermann, D.E., Young, J.P., Green, C., & ment of competencies expected of students enter-
Wisenbaker, J.M. (1999). Adolescents percep- ing Californias public colleges and universities.
tions and negotiations of literacy practices Sacramento: Author.
in after-school read and talk clubs. American Joftus, S. (2002). Every child a graduate: A frame-
Educational Research Journal, 36(2), 221264. work for an excellent education for all middle and
Beck, I.L. (1989). Improving practice through high school students. Washington, DC: Alliance
understanding reading. In L.B. Resnick & for Excellent Education.
L.E. Klopfer (Eds.), Toward the thinking cur- Meyer, B.J.F. (1975). The organization of prose and its
riculum: Current cognitive research (pp. 4058). effects on memory. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Meyer, B.J.F., & Poon, L.W. (2001). Effects of struc-
Curriculum Development. ture strategy training and signaling on recall of
Cromley, J.G., & Azevedo, R. (2007). Testing and text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1),
refining the direct and inferential mediation 141159.
model of reading comprehension. Journal of Pearson, P.D., & Stephens, D. (1992). Learning
Educational Psychology, 99(2), 311325. about literacy: A 30-year journey. In C. Gordon,
Cromley, J.G., Snyder-Hogan, L.E., & Luciw-Dubas, G.D. Labercane, & W.R. McEachern (Eds.),
U.A. (2010). Reading comprehension of scien- Elementary reading instruction: Process and prac-
tific texts: A domain-specific test of the direct tice (pp. 418). Lexington, MA: Ginn.
and inferential mediation model of reading com- Sadoski, M., & Paivio, A. (2001). Imagery and
prehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, text: A dual coding theory of reading and writing.
102(3), 687700. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gough, P.B. (1972). One second of reading. In J.F. Schank, R.C., & Abelson, R.P. (1977). Scripts, plans,
Kavanagh & I.G. Mattingly (Eds.), Language by goals, and understanding: An inquiry into human
ear and by eye: The relationships between speech knowledge structures. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
and reading (pp. 331358). Cambridge, MA: MIT Stein, N.L., & Glenn, C.G. (1979). An analysis of
Press. story comprehension in elementary school chil-
Gough, P.B. (1985). One second of reading: dren. In Freedle, R.O. (Ed.), New directions in
Postscript. In H. Singer & R.B. Ruddell (Eds.), discourse processing (pp. 53120). Norwood, NJ:
Theoretical models and processes of reading (3rd Ablex.
ed., pp. 687688). Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.
T
he LaBergeSamuels (1974) model of automatic information processing in
reading is now two decades old and has had a long and useful life. In reading
methods textbooks, it is the most widely quoted of all the reading theories
(Blanchard, Rottenberg, & Jones, 1989). When the model was in its infancy, it at-
tracted the interest of teachers and researchers because it used the concept of auto-
maticity to explain why fluent readers are able to decode and understand text with
ease while beginning readers have difficulty. Later the model provided the concep-
tual groundwork for repeated reading (Samuels, 1979), a method for helping begin-
ning readers become automatic decoders. Researchers have also realized that the
concept of automaticity can be extended to any skill in reading. Most recently, it has
spurred cognitive psychologists to offer new explanations concerning what happens
when one develops a skill to the automatic level. In fact, Logan (1988a) believes the
new explanations of automaticity are so important that he stated as follows:
There is a battle raging in the ivory tower over the concept of automaticity. One fac-
tion represents the old guard, the modal view of the field, and construes automa-
ticity as a way to overcome resource limitations. The other function is revolutionary
(or sees itself as such) and construes automaticity as a memory phenomenon re-
flecting the consequences of running a large database through an efficient retrieval
process. The battle may turn out to be a tempest in a teapot, affecting no more than
academic promotion and tenure.
This chapter is reprinted from Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (4th ed., pp. 816837), edited by R.B.
Ruddell, M.R. Ruddell, & H. Singer, Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Copyright 1994 by the
International Reading Association.
698
predictions about the future. From a scientific viewpoint, the ability to make pre-
dictions is most important because the accuracy of the predictions is what allows
one to test the models validity. When the test results fail to support the predic-
tions, then the model has to be revised. The LaBergeSamuels automaticity model
has these three characteristics of summarizing the past, explaining the present,
and predicting the future. Many aspects of the modelsuch as its description of
how the eye processes printwere taken from past research on visual processing.
Further, the model brings together research findings from a variety of areas in an
attempt to explain the present. For example, it explains the crucial differences
between beginning and fluent reading so that one can understand why beginning
readers have so much difficulty understanding what they read. And finally, over
the years a number of tests and revisions have been made of the model.
Attention
The LaBergeSamuels model attempts to identify components in the information-
processing system, trace the routes that information takes as it passes through the
system, and identify changes in the form of the information as it moves from the
surface of the page into the deeper semantic-linguistic centers of the brain. At
the heart of the model is attention. Attention has two components, internal and
external. To the layperson, the external aspects of attention are the more familiar.
When a classroom teacher says that a student does not pay attention and there-
fore is not living up to his or her potential, it is external attention that is being
described. Other manifestations of external attention have to do with what may
be called orienting behavior, the directing of ones sensory organs (such as eyes and
ears) in such a way as to maximize information input. If an observer can watch
the behavior of another and determine whether that person is paying attention (as
a teacher often does), it is the level of external attention that is being determined.
External attention has important implications for learning in general and for
learning to read in particular. In fact, most psychologists would agree that it is a
prerequisite, that without the external and internal components of attention there
can be no learning. Classroom observation has thrown some light on the relation-
ship between external attention and reading. A fairly well-documented finding is
that during elementary school years, girls surpass boys in reading achievement.
Is this superiority the result of some maturational genetic sex-linked advantage
or of cultural forces at work in the classroom? One line of research showed that
when boys were put in booths that resemble airplane cockpits for a reading hour,
they learned more from texts than did girls, this suggesting a cultural rather than
genetic advantage. These booths are not only exciting to boys but also help them
focus their attention on the reading by reducing extraneous sources of stimula-
tion. Another line of classroom research found that girls were significantly more
attentive during the reading hour than were boys; these same girls were also su-
perior readers. In this classroom study, as external signs of attention (such as
looking in books and working on reading assignments) increased in both boys
and girls, so did reading scores (Samuels & Turnure, 1974).
700 Samuels
WAY this TO hypothesis DELIVER suggests POWER that FROM when THE a
ENGINE picture TO and THE a REAR word WHEEL are IT presented WILL
together NOT the SPRAY student YOU will WITH focus OIL on NOR that
WILL part IT of BREAK the AS stimulus EASILY which AS most A readily
CHAIN elicits IN a FACT correct A response SHAFT a IS poor ALMOST
reader INDESTRUCTIBLE finds AND the BECAUSE picture IT easier IS to
ENCLOSED use IN than A the BATH word OF and OIL attends IT to IS the
ALMOST picture SILENT
What are the advantages of a drive shaft?
Most people who read this passage have no difficulty selecting the message
on which to place their attention. Furthermore, the passage on drive shafts
usually is read with a high level of literal comprehension.
3. L
imited capacity. The human mind, like the fastest computer, has limited
capacity to process information. With the human mind, the limitation
comes from the limited amount of attention available for information pro-
cessing. Attention may be thought of as the effort or energy used to pro-
cess information. When we are learning a complicated skill, the demands
of learning that skill use up all our attention resources and we find we
can pay attention to only one task at a time. For example, beginning driv-
ers often find that while driving, they dislike experiencing any competing
demands on their attention, such as conversation with a passenger. With
extensive practice, the attention demands of driving decrease sufficiently
so drivers can process multiple sources of information at the same time.
Experienced drivers can simultaneously operate the car, engage in conver-
sation, and enjoy music.
702 Samuels
Figure 1. Attention and Reading
A. Beginning Reading
Decode
Switch Attention
Comprehend
In beginning reading, attention is switched alternately from decoding to comprehension. Only one
task can be done at a time.
B. Fluent Reading
Decode
(Automatic)
Attention
Comprehend
In fluent reading, decoding is done automatically and attention remains on comprehension. Both
tasks get done at the same time.
readers put their attention on the decoding task and then switch attention to
comprehension to understand what they have decoded. The process is similar to
what happens at a cocktail party when one tries to take in several conversations
by switching attention back and forth among them. A beginning reader often
reads a passage several times: first to decode from symbol to spoken words (this
puts considerable strain on attention and memory systems) and subsequently to
comprehend.
Although the beginning reader is able to comprehend by switching attention
back and forth in this way, the process is slow, laborious, and frustrating. For
those of you who doubt this, can you recall or imagine the difficulty of trying
to comprehend a foreign language not yet mastered? To determine meaning, you
first have to translate the foreign words and then you must comprehend what has
been translated.
In many ways the problem facing the beginning reader is similar to that fac-
ing the beginning driver who is trying to drive a car and listen to a passengers
conversation. The beginning driver places attention on the mechanical aspects
of driving, such as steering; controlling the accelerator, brake, clutch, and gears;
704 Samuels
guide the movements. Any attempt on my part to talk was met with his request to
hold off on conversation; he said he could not concentrate on knot tying and talk
at the same time. It would appear that his attention was being directed at the knot
tying, thus preventing him from processing conversation. After years of practice
on the knot-tying board, my friend was able to tie the knots while watching televi-
sion and conversing.
Automaticity. When a task that formerly required attention for its perfor-
mance can be performed without attention, the task is being done automatically.
Automaticity in information processing, then, simply means that information is
processed with little attention. One way to determine if a person is performing a
process automatically is to give him or her two tasks to perform at the same time.
If the tasks can be performed simultaneously, at least one of them is being done
automatically.
With the concept of automaticity in mind, it is now a simple matter to describe
how the fluent reader is able to perform the two-step decodingcomprehension
process in reading. The decoding is done automaticallyand thus attention is
available for getting meaning from the printed words. This is shown in Figure 1B.
There are times, however, when skilled readers turn their attention away
from getting meaning from the printed words. One such situation arises when
unusual wordssuch as foreign words or scientific terminologyare encoun-
tered. The reader must then put attention on decoding in order to translate these
verbal symbols. Another such situation occurs when a skilled reader is proofread-
ing. As most experienced writers know, it is a poor idea to read for meaning while
trying to locate errors. Proofreading is done most efficiently when ones attention
is directed away from meaning and put on possible errors in the text.
VM PM SM
sp1
v(w1) m(w1)
sp2
Sensory Surface
EM
e1
c1
A
e2
c2
e3
Key
e temporal-spatial event code m(w) word-meaning code
c episodic code m(wg) word group-meaning code
sp spelling-pattern code code activated without attention
v(w) visual word code code activated only with attention
v(wg) visual word-group code code momentarily activated by attention
p(sp) phonological spelling-pattern code momentary focus of attention
p(w) phonological word code information flow without attention
p(wg) phonological word-group code information flow only with attention
706 Samuels
Model of Visual Memory
Figure 3. Model of Visual Memory
VM
f1 A
f2
f3
Sensory Surface
f4 l1
sp1 Key
f5
l2 v(w1) f feature detector
sp2
l3 v(w2)
l letter code
f6 sp spelling-pattern code
sp3
f7
l4 v(w) visual word code
l5 code activated without attention
f8 code activated only with attention
momentary focus of attention
information flow without attention
information flow only with attention
1136 Samuels
For example, what feature does one use to recognize the letter b? By analysis,
one can separate b into a vertical line and a circle. But this is entirely unsatisfac-
tory as a method for identifying a letter because d, p, and g share these compo-
nents. By adding relational features, such as up or down and left or right, we
arrive at a set of features uniquely descriptive of bthe circle is to the right and
at the bottom of the vertical. By contrast, the letter p would be described as hav-
ing the circle to the right and at the top of the vertical. Thus each letter can be
described by a set of unique features.
To continue with this explanation of how a perceptual code is learned, as one
goes from left to right in the hierarchical model of VM, one notes that different
kinds of information get processed. The model shows how the visual informa-
tion is analyzed by detectors into features, which at the next level are combined
to form letters. At the next level in the model, letter combinations such as sh, th,
bl, -ing, and anti- may be combined to form spelling patterns, and the spelling
patterns feed into word codes. The use of the term codes in the model refers to
the form in which information is represented. Thus there may be letter codes,
spelling-pattern codes, and word codes.
There are two additional features in this model of VM, labeled f1 and f2.
Unlike the other features that lead into letters, f1 and f2 indicate that features other
than letters may be used in the identification of a word. For example, word con-
figuration and length may be used in combination with other sources of textual
information in word recognition. Assume that the words we wish to identify are
708 Samuels
rate at which children are able to identify the features of letters is quite slow.
However, with practice they develop improved strategies, and the rate at which
they can identify features increases. In order to help new readers select the ap-
propriate features, it is important to have them make samedifferent judgments
among visually similar letters in groupsfor example, huvn, mnuv, coeu, klth,
and xvzw. In the next stage of perceptual learning, students must combine these
separate features into a single letter code, a process that at first requires attention.
With practice, students will unitize the separate features into a single letter code;
skilled readers, for example, see b and not l plus o. With extended practice at
letter identification, students unitization of the features occurs without attention.
710 Samuels
example, as verbal concepts, the meanings of fierce and dog may exist separately.
When, however, the noun phrase the fierce dog is encountered, it has one mean-
ing, and it is in semantic memory that the blending of these two verbal concepts
occurs. This example simply illustrates how attention might be used to determine
the relationships in meaning within a grammatical unit.
NP NP
Key
information flow without attention VP verb phrase
information flow only with attention V(W) visual word
S sentence M(W) word meaning
NP noun phrase
712 Samuels
The role of schema-based prior knowledge in acquiring comprehension skills
is an important issue. Automatic word-decoding skills and prior knowledge of a
texts content may interact and strongly affect success in comprehension. It has
been observed that skilled readers can efficiently process texts covering unfa-
miliar materials almost or just as easily as familiar materials, whereas some less
skilled readers demonstrate differential success in processing and recalling infor-
mation from text. Schneider, Krkel, and Weinert (1988) showed such differential
performance with materials that were either familiar or unfamiliar to skilled and
less-skilled children in a German elementary school. They found that children
who knew a great deal about soccer efficiently and accurately comprehended and
recalled texts about soccer, regardless of their general mental aptitude (measured
with IQ-type tests). In addition, children who had extensive knowledge about soc-
cer but low general mental aptitude recalled significantly more details from soccer
texts than did children who had little soccer knowledge and either high or low
aptitude. It would appear that a strong relationship exists between reading perfor-
mance and prior knowledge. When judging the degree of automaticity in readers
decoding skills based on their comprehension and recall of text, familiarity with
the subject matter must therefore be taken into account.
This contextual effect in reading also may result from readers acquisition of
internal lexicons and vocabulary through repeated experience. These lexicons
may be thought of as particular organizations of vocabulary, with many overlap-
ping entries between lexical categories. A German child who lives for soccer has
a soccer lexicon that can be activated more easily and rapidly than could be the
soccer lexicon of an American child who lives for baseball. In other words, speed
of access is faster for the vocabulary we are most familiar with. Prior knowledge
and the lexicon associated with that knowledge can interact with the decoding of
words in texts on familiar topics. The process of retrieving lexical information may
enhance readers matching of phoneme combinations with appropriate context-
related words. For example, a child who is familiar with soccer might decode a
soccer-related word never read before faster than could a child who is unfamiliar
with soccer, even if both children are inefficient decoders. The child familiar with
the sport may need only to sound out the first few phonemes of penalty, for exam-
ple, to access this word and conclude that it is an appropriate choice to precede the
more familiar word kick; the child with little knowledge about soccer may struggle
with the sounds of penalty and not be able to access the meaning of this word very
readily. Thus lexical access and knowledge of a subject can compensate somewhat
for poor decoding skills.
Option 1. The visual word v(w1) is automatically decoded, and the word mean-
ing m(w1) is available automatically. This occurs when a skilled reader reads a
common word such as dog or car.
Option 4. A visual word such as digraph is coded automatically into two spelling
patternsdi and graphrepresented by sp4 and sp5. Next, the phonological code
for these spelling patterns is activated automatically. However, from this point
on, attention is used to blend the two spelling patterns into one word, to excite
the episodic code, and to access the meaning code for the word. This course of
events would occur with a skilled reader who has no difficulty with decoding but
is somewhat uncertain about the technical definition of digraph.
Option 5. A highly unfamiliar visual word is coded with attention into v(w5)
Attention is used to activate the episodic code, the phonological code, and the
meaning code. This sequence of events might occur with a foreign name that is
difficult to pronounce easily.
Option 6. There is another route to word meaning that is now shown on the
model as depicted in Figure 2. A reader can visually recognize the word as a ho-
listic unit without constructing it from the spelling of individual letters, and then
go directly to meaning in semantic memory. A study by Samuels, LaBerge, and
Bremer (1978) demonstrated that students who were not automatic decoders did
letter-by-letter word recognition, while students who were automatic decoders
recognized words as holistic units.
714 Samuels
departure from the original automaticity model. The present automaticity model
has feedback loops, because what happens in semantic memory may influence
processes that occur earlier.
716 Samuels
A useful modification of this technique is to have the helper make a tape re-
cording of the story. While listening to the story on the tape, the student can read
along silently. As soon as possible, the student then practices rereading the story
silently without the tape recorder. Thus there is a progression from reading with
auditory support to reading without support. The practice is continued until the
student can read the selection aloud with fluency.
In this view, there are two routes to a correct response: One is an automatic,
direct, and rapid memory retrieval that comes only after a long training period,
while the other uses an algorithm acquired during the early stages of learning.
At the simplest level, the beginning reader who laboriously sounds out a word is
using an algorithm, whereas the reader who has had extended practice can recog-
nize the same word rapidly and automatically as a memory phenomenon.
Anderson (1982) has suggested a model of memory and learning that incor-
porates ideas about effortful early learning and effortless skilled learning. These
ideas are similar to those put forth by Logan and Stanovich. Anderson proposes
three phases in learning a skill. During the first or declarative knowledge phase,
the knowledge is encoded in separate compartments, and execution of the skill
requires considerable effort. (One may assume that during the first phase, the
execution of the skill is as through an algorithm.) In the second or compilation
phase, the knowledge is aggregated into larger units. In the third or procedural
knowledge phase, the knowledge is compiled in large enough units that it allows
the task to be performed with little effort from an easily accessed memory. These
R eferences
Anderson, J.R. (1982). Cognitive skills and their Samuels, S.J., LaBerge, D., & Bremer, C. (1978). Units
acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. of word recognition: Evidence for developmental
Blanchard, J., Rottenberg, C., & Jones, J. (1989). changes. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal
Foundational literature in elementary reading Behavior, 17, 715720.
methodology textbooks. Tempe: Arizona State Samuels, S.J., & Naslund, J.C. (1994). Individual
University, College of Education. differences in reading: The case for lexical access.
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S.J. (1974). Toward a theory Reading and Writing Quarterly, 10(4), 285296.
of automatic information processing in reading. Samuels, S.J., & Turnure, J. (1974). Attention and
Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293323. reading achievement in first grade boys and girls.
Liberman, A.M., Cooper, F., Shankweiler, D., & Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 2932.
Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Perception of the Schneider, W., Krkel, J., & Weinert, F.E. (1988,
speech code. Psychological Review, 74, 431461. July). Expert knowledge, general abilities, and text
Logan, G. (1988a). Automaticity, resources, and processing. Paper presented at the Workshop on
memory: Theoretical controversies and practical Interactions Among Aptitudes, Strategies, and
implications. Human Factors, 30, 583598. Knowledge in Cognitive Performance, Munich,
Logan, G. (1988b). Toward an instance theory Germany.
of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, Stanovich, K. (1990). Concepts in developmental
492527. theories of reading skill: Cognitive resources,
Samuels, S.J. (1979). The method of repeated automaticity, and modularity. Developmental
reading. The Reading Teacher, 32, 403408. Review, 10, 72100.
718 Samuels
CH APTER 29
R
eading is the process of understanding written language. It begins with a
flutter of patterns on the retina and ends (when successful) with a definite
idea about the authors intended message. Thus, reading is at once a per-
ceptual and a cognitive process. It is a process that bridges and blurs these two
traditional distinctions. Moreover, a skilled reader must be able to make use of
sensory, syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic information to accomplish his task.
These various sources of information appear to interact in many complex ways
during the process of reading. A theorist faced with the task of accounting for
reading must devise a formalism rich enough to represent all of these different
kinds of information and their interactions.
The study of reading was a central concern of early psychologists (see Huey,
1908). Now, after years of dormancy, reading has again become a central concern
for many psychologists. It would seem that the advent of the information-processing
approach to psychology has given both experimentalists and theorists paradigms
within which to study the reading process. The formalisms of information process-
ing, the flowcharts, notions of information flow, and so forth have served as useful
vehicles for the development of first approximation models of the reading process.
Unfortunately, the most familiar information-processing formalisms apply most
naturally to models assuming a series of noninteracting stages of processing or (at
best) a set of independent parallel processing units. There are many results in the
reading literature that appear to call for highly interactive parallel processing units.
It is my suspicion that the serial, noninteracting models have been developed not
so much because of an abiding belief that interactions do not take place, but rather
because the appropriate formalisms have not been available. It is the purpose of this
chapter to adapt a formalism developed in the context of parallel computation to the
specification of a model for reading and then show that such a model can account
in a convenient way for those aspects of reading that appear puzzling in the context
of more linear stage-oriented models. No claim is made about the adequacy of the
particular model developed. The primary claim is that this richer formalism will al-
low for the specification of more detailed models. These will be able to characterize
aspects of the reading process that are difficult or impossible to characterize within
the more familiar information-processing formulations.
First, I will review two recent models of the reading process. Then, I will
discuss some of the empirical evidence that is not conveniently accounted for
This chapter is reprinted from Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (3rd ed., pp. 722750), edited by
H. Singer & R.B. Ruddell, Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Copyright 1985 by the
International Reading Association.
719
by these models or their natural extensions. Finally, I will develop a reading
model that makes use of a formalism allowing highly interactive parallel pro-
cessing units and then show that this model offers a reasonable account of the
Problematic Results section.
LaBergeSamuels Model
In another paper, LaBerge and Samuels (1974) have developed an equally detailed
(although somewhat more perceptually oriented) model of the reading process.
720 Rumelhart
Figure 1. Goughs Reading Model
Graphemic
Input
Visual
System
ICON
Pattern Scanner
Recognizer
Character
Register
Phonemic
Tape
Lexicon Librarian
Primary
Memory
Syntactic
Semantic Merlin TPWSGWTAU
Rules
722 Rumelhart
4. When a word has not been learned as a visual stimulus, information can be
translated directly from visual spelling patterns into phonological spelling
patterns, p(sp1), from these into phonological word codes, and finally into
word-meaning codes. In addition, word-meaning codes feed into word-
groupmeaning codes.
Ultimately, when the entire set of inputs has been presented, a set of word-group
meanings will emerge and the reader will be said to have understood the input.1
Again, I do not want to discuss the particular merits or demerits of the
LaBergeSamuels model. Rather, I again point out the general form of the model
and suggest that it takes that form, at least to some extent, because of the formal-
isms used to represent the ideas. The LaBergeSamuels model, like the Gough
model, is a strictly bottom-up process.2 Although there are alternative routes, the
basic sequence is from features to letters, to spelling patterns, to visual word rep-
resentations, to phonological word representations, to word meanings, to word-
group meaningsa series of stages, each corresponding to a level of analysis in
which no higher level can in any way modify or change the analysis at a lower
level. The LaBergeSamuels model (unlike the Gough model) does allow certain
stages to be bypassed. This allows multiple paths of analysis and alleviates some
of the empirical problems of the Gough model. Nevertheless, there are a number
of results in the literature that are difficult to account for with either model. I turn
now to a discussion of a number of these problems.
Problematic Results
All of the results discussed in this section have one characteristic in common. In
each case it appears that the apprehension of information at one level of analysis
is partially determined by higher levels of analysis. By and large, such results are
very difficult to incorporate in a processing model that assumes that information
flows strictly from lower to higher levels. I will begin with a discussion of the
effects of orthographic structure on the perception of letters, proceed to a discus-
sion of the effects of syntax on word perception, then to the effects of semantics
on word and syntax perception, and finally to the effects of general pragmatic
factors on the perception of meanings.3
the letter level, a higher-level perception affecting a lower-level one. These results
can be accounted for by bottom-up models, but only at some cost. No final deci-
sion can be made at the letter level. Either a set of alternative possibilities must be
passed on, or the direct feature information must be sent to the higher levels. In
either of these cases, the notion that letter perception precedes word perception
becomes suspect. Word and letter perception occur simultaneously.
Perhaps the strongest objection to a demonstration such as this one is that it
is unusual to find such ambiguous letters and that the norm involves characters
that are perfectly discriminable. Although this may be true of printed text, it is
not true of handwriting. Characters often can be interpreted only with reference
to their context. Yet I would not want to argue that the reading process is essen-
tially different for handwritten than for printed material.
There are many other results that appear to call for this same conclusion. For
example, more letters can be apprehended per unit time when a word is presented
than when a string of unrelated letters is presented (Huey, 1908/1968). A letter
string formed either by deleting a letter of a word or replacing one or two of the
letters of the word is often clearly perceived as the original word (Pillsbury, 1897).
Even when great care is taken to control for guessing, a letter is more accurately
perceived when it is part of a word than when it is among a set of unrelated letters
(Reicher, 1969). All of these results appear to argue strongly that letter percep-
tions are facilitated by being in words. Word-level perceptions affect letter-level
perceptions. Here again, the only way that the types of models under consider-
ation can account for these effects is to suppose that partial letter information is
somehow preserved and the additional constraints of the word level are brought
to bear on the partial letter information.
It is of some interest that these effects can be observed in letter strings that
are not words but that are similar to words in important ways. For example, the
more the sequential transition probabilities among letters in a string approximate
those of English, the more letters can be perceived per unit time (Miller, Bruner,
& Postman, 1954). Similarly, even when guessing is controlled (as in the Reicher,
1969, experiment), letters embedded in orthographically regular strings are more
accurately perceived than those embedded among orthographically irregular
strings (McClelland & Johnston, 1977). Thus, not only is a letter embedded in
724 Rumelhart
a word easier to see, but also merely being a part of an orthographically well-
formed string aids perception virtually as much. This suggests that orthographic
knowledge plays a role nearly as strong as lexical knowledge in the perception of
letter strings.
Not only does orthographic structure have a positive effect on the perception
of letters embedded in an orthographically regular string, but also our apprehen-
sion of orthographically irregular strings often is distorted to allow us to perceive
the string as being orthographically regular. This point is nicely illustrated in a
recent experiment carried out in our laboratory by Albert Stevens. In this experi-
ment, subjects were presented with letter strings consisting of two consonants
(i.e., an initial consonant cluster designated CCi) followed by two vowels (a vowel
cluster, designated VC) followed by two more consonants (a final consonant clus-
ter, CCf ). The initial consonant cluster was constructed from pairs of consonants
that can occur at the beginning of English words in only one order (e.g., English
words can begin with pr but not rp). Similarly the vowel clusters used occur as
diphthongs in English in one order but not in the other (e.g., ai but not ia). The
final consonant clusters were similarly chosen so that they occur at the end of
English words in one order but not the other (e.g., ck but not kc). Strings were
then constructed in which each letter cluster was either in its legal or illegal order.
Table 1 illustrates several examples of the various types of letter strings.
Subjects were given tachistoscopic presentations of the various letter strings
and asked to name the letters they observed. Of particular interest are the times
when they were presented illegal strings but made them legal by transposing the
letter pair in their reports. Figure 4 illustrates the comparison of interest. The figure
compares the percentage of times an illegally ordered letter cluster is transposed
into a legal cluster with the number of times a legal letter cluster is transposed into
an illegal one. The results show that although initial consonant clusters are never
transposed, illegal vowel clusters are transposed almost 25% of the time as com-
pared to only about 3% transposition for the legal vowel clusters. Similarly, final
consonant clusters are transposed almost 14% of the time when they are illegal, but
only about 3% of the time when they are legal. These results show clearly the effect
that orthographic structure has on our perception of letter strings. The perception
of a certain letter in a certain position depends on what we perceive in adjacent
Illegal
Pairs
Percent Transpositions 20
10
Legal Pairs
12 34 56
CCi VC CCf
Letter Location
positions as well as on the sensory evidence we have available about that position
in the string.
To summarize, then, it appears that no model that supposes that we first
perceive the letters in a stimulus and then put them together into higher-order
units can be correct. However, models such as the Gough model and the LaBerge
Samuels model can survive such results if they assume that partial information
is somehow forwarded to the higher levels of analysis and that the final decision
as to which letters were present is delayed until this further processing has been
accomplished.
Whereas it is not too difficult to see how, say, the LaBergeSamuels model
could account for the effects of orthographic structure on letter perception, it is
somewhat more difficult to see how the effects of syntax and semantics can be me-
diated within such a model. I now turn to evidence for syntactic effects in reading.
726 Rumelhart
on geometrically transformed text were of the same part of speech as the correct
word. By chance, one would expect only about 18% of the errors should be of the
correct part of speech.
In another study, Weber (1970) analyzed reading errors by first graders and
found that over 90% of the errors made were grammatically consistent with the
sentence to the point of the error. Although it is not clear what percentage to
expect under assumptions of random guessing, it is obviously much lower than
90% in most texts. One might argue that these results and those of Kolers occur
because words in the same syntactic class are more similar to each other than
they are to words outside that class. It is interesting to note in this regard that in
the Weber study, the ungrammatical errors were significantly more similar to the
correct word than were the grammatical wordsat least an indication that this is
a syntactic effect and not a visual one.
In another experiment, carried out by Stevens and Rumelhart (1975) with
adult readers, an oral reading task showed that about 98% of the substitution er-
rors that were recognizable as words were grammatical. Moreover, nearly 80% of
the time the substituted words were of the same syntactic class as the class most
frequently predicted at that part in a cloze experiment. Once again, it appears that
we have a case of grammatical knowledge helping to determine the word read.
In addition, in an important experiment, Miller and Isard (1963) compared
perceptibility of spoken words under conditions in which normal syntactic struc-
ture was violated with the case in which syntactic structure was intact. They
found that many more words could be reported when the sentences were syntacti-
cally normal. Although I do not know of a similar study with written materials,
it is doubtless that similar results would occuranother case of a higher level of
processing determining the perceptibility of units at a lower level.
It is difficult to see exactly how the models under discussion would deal
with results such as these. In the Gough model, syntactic processing occurs only
very late in the processing sequenceafter information has entered short-term
memory. It seems unlikely that he would want to assume that partial information
is preserved that far in the process. It is not clear just where syntax should be put
in the LaBergeSamuels model. It is particularly difficult to represent productive
syntactic rules of the sort linguists suggest in the LaBergeSamuels formalism.
As I will discuss, it would appear to be essential to be able to represent systems of
rules to account for such results.
728 Rumelhart
per word. The control group scanned at a rate of 180.0 msec per word. At the 15th
hour of practice, the background lists were changed. Both groups now searched
for their targets against the Associated Nontarget background. Now the experi-
mental group was searching for its targets against a background of nontargets, all
semantically associated with the target set. The control group also was switched,
but the Associated Nontargets were not semantically related to the control target
set. After the change, we found that the control group scanned against the new
background at about the same rate as they scanned the old one179 msec per
word scanned. The experimental group, however, scanning through words se-
mantically related to the target set, was slowed to a rate of 197.4 msec per word.
One might suppose that the subjects in the experimental group were just sur-
prised to see related words in the background and a few long pauses accounted for
the entire difference. However, on this account one would expect the difference
soon to disappear. But this did not happen. Through 5 additional hours of search-
ing (they searched through 2,000 words during a 1-hour session), the difference
between the control and experimental subjects remained at about 20 msec per
word. It would thus appear that, even when searching for particular words, our
expectations are based on meaning as well as visual form.
Using still another experimental procedure, Tulving and Gold (1963) and
Tulving, Mandler, and Baumal (1964) both found that the prior presentation of
a sentence context lowers the threshold at which a tachistoscopically presented
word can be recognized.
Again we have a case of a higher level of processing (meaning) apparently
affecting our ability to process at a lower level (the word level). Notice, moreover,
that semantic relatedness can either make our processing more efficient (as with
the Meyer et al., 1974, and Tulving and Gold, 1963, experiments), or it can inter-
fere with our processing (as with the Graboi, 1974, experiment). It is again diffi-
cult to see how a strictly bottom-up, stage-by-stage processing model can account
for results such as these.
In Examples (1), (2), and (3), semantics play the determining role as to which
surface structure we apprehend. Thus, just as orthographic structure affects our
ability to perceive letters and syntax, and semantics affects our perception of
words, so too does semantics affect our apprehension of syntax.
730 Rumelhart
Here our interpretation of the second clause is thus quite different depending
on the nature of the first clause. In Sentence (4a) for example, the term figure is
readily interpreted as being a number, the term table a place for writing numbers,
and the relation larger can properly be interpreted to mean >. In Sentence (4b) on
the other hand, the term figure presumably refers to a small statue, the term table
refers to a physical object with a flat top used for setting things on, and the rela-
tion larger clearly means something like of greater volume. Here we have a case
in which no determination about the meaning of these individual words can be
made without consideration of the entire sentence. Thus, no decision can be made
about the meaning of a word without consideration of the meaning of the entire
sentence in which the word appears.
Not only is the interpretation of individual words dependent on the sentential
context in which they are found, but the meaning of entire sentences is depen-
dent on the general context in which they appear. The following example from
Bransford and Johnson (1973) is a case in point:
(5)
Watching a Peace March From the 40th Floor
The view was breathtaking. From the window one could see the crowd below.
Everything looked extremely small from such a distance, but the colorful cos-
tumes could still be seen. Everyone seemed to be moving in the same direction
in an orderly fashion and there seemed to be little children as well as adults.
The landing was gentle, and luckily the atmosphere was such that no special
suits had to be worn. At first there was a great deal of activity. Later, when the
speeches started, the crowd quieted down. The man with the television camera
took many shots of the setting and the crowd. Everyone was very friendly and
seemed glad when the music started. (p. 412)
In this passage, the sentence beginning The landing was gentle... appears to
make no sense. No clear meaning can be assigned to it in this context. As such,
when subjects were given the passage and later asked to recall it, very few subjects
remembered the anomalous sentence. On the other hand, when the passage was
titled A Space Trip to an Inhabited Planet the entire passage was given quite a
different interpretation. In this case, the anomalous sentence fits into the general
interpretation of the paragraph very well. Subjects given the Space Trip title re-
called the critical sentence three times as often as those given the Peace March
title. Many other examples could be given. The dependence of meaning on con-
text would appear to be the norm rather than the exception in reading.
To summarize, these results taken together appear to support the view that
our apprehension of information at one level of analysis often can depend on our
apprehension of information at a higher level. How can this be? Surely we can-
not first perceive the meaning of what we read and only later discover what the
sentences, words, or letters were that mediated the meaning. To paraphrase a re-
mark attributed to Gough (as cited in Brewer, 1972), it is difficult to see how the
syntax [or semantics, for that matter] can go out and mess around with the print
An Interactive Model
Perhaps the most natural information-processing representation of the theoreti-
cal ideas suggested in the previous section is illustrated in Figure 5. The figure
illustrates the assumption that graphemic information enters the system and is
registered in a visual information store (VIS). A feature extraction device is then
assumed to operate on this information, extracting the critical features from the
VIS. These features serve as the sensory input to a pattern synthesizer. In addi-
tion to this sensory information, the pattern synthesizer has available nonsensory
information about the orthographic structure of the language (including infor-
mation about the probability of various strings of characters), information about
lexical items in the language, information about the syntactic possibilities (and
probabilities), information about the semantics of the language, and information
about the current contextual situation (pragmatic information). The pattern syn-
thesizer, then, uses all of this information to produce a most probable interpreta-
tion of the graphemic input. Thus, all of the various sources of knowledge, both
sensory and nonsensory, come together at one place, and the reading process is
the product of the simultaneous joint application of all the knowledge sources.
Although the model previously outlined may, in fact, be an accurate repre-
sentation of the reading process, it is of very little help as a model of reading. It
is one thing to suggest that all of these different information sources interact
(as many writers have) but quite another to specify a psychologically plausible
Syntactical Semantic
Knowledge Knowledge
Orthographic Lexical
Knowledge Knowledge
732 Rumelhart
hypothesis about how they interact. Thus, it is clear why serious theorists who
have attempted to develop detailed models of the reading process (e.g., Gough,
1972; LaBerge & Samuels, 1974) have stayed away from a formulation of the sort
illustrated in Figure 5. All that is interesting in the model takes place in the box
labeled Pattern Synthesizer. The flowchart does little more than list the relevant
variables. We need a representation for the operation of the pattern synthesizer
itself. To represent that, we must develop a means of representing the operation
of a set of parallel interacting processes.
Flowcharts are best suited to represent the simple serial flow of information.
They are badly suited for the representation of a set of parallel, highly interac-
tive processes. However, with the advent of the parallel computer (at least as a
conceptual device), computer scientists have begun to develop formalisms for the
representation of parallel processes. It is interesting that the major problem in
each case seems to have been the representation of the lines of communication
among the otherwise independent processes.
Of the several different systems of communication that have been pro-
posed, two were developed in the context of language processing by computer
and seem to be most promising as a formalism for the development of a reading
model. One of these was developed by Kaplan (1973) and is called the General
Syntactic Processor (GSP). The second was developed by Reddy and his associ-
ates at Carnegie Mellon University (see Lesser, Fennell, Erman, & Reddy, 1974)
as an environment for a speech understanding program. This system is called
HEARSAY II. These two systems have a good deal in common and solve the com-
munication problem in much the same waynamely, both systems consist of sets
of totally independent asynchronous processes that communicate by means of a
global, highly structured data storage device. In Kaplans system the communica-
tion center is called a chart; in the HEARSAY system it is called a blackboard. I use
the more neutral term message center in my development below. This development
is most closely related to the HEARSAY system and could well be considered as an
application of the HEARSAY model to reading. However, I also draw from aspects
of GSP, and the model as I develop it has the Rumelhart and Siple (1974) model of
word recognition as a special case.
Following HEARSAY, the model can be characterized as consisting of a set
of independent knowledge sources. (These knowledge sources correspond to the
sources of input to the pattern synthesizer in Figure 5.) Each knowledge source
contains specialized knowledge about some aspect of the reading process. The
message center keeps a running list of hypotheses about the nature of the input
string. Each knowledge source constantly scans the message center for the ap-
pearance of hypotheses relevant to its own sphere of knowledge. Whenever such
a hypothesis enters the message center, the knowledge source in question evalu-
ates the hypothesis in light of its own specialized knowledge. As a result of its
analysis, the hypothesis may be confirmed, the hypothesis may be disconfirmed
and removed from the message center, or a new hypothesis can be added to the
message center. This process continues until some decision can be reached. At
734 Rumelhart
The figure illustrates hypotheses at five different levels (feature level, letter
level, letter-cluster level, lexical level, and syntactic level). The diagram is only a
two-dimensional slice inasmuch as no alternative hypotheses are illustrated. In
practice, of course, many alternative hypotheses would be considered and evalu-
ated in the course of reading this phrase. It should be pointed out that the tree-like
structure should not be taken to mean that the tree was constructed either from a
purely bottom-up process (starting with the features, then hypothesizing the let-
ters, then the letter clusters, etc.), nor from a purely top-down analysis (starting
with a view that we have a noun phrase and that noun phrases are made up of
determiners followed by nouns, etc.). Rather, the hypotheses can be generated at
any level. If it is likely that a line begins with a noun phrase, then we postulate a
noun phrase and look for evidence. If we see features that suggest a t as the first
letter, we postulate a t in the first position and continue processing. If we later
have to reject either or both of these hypotheses, little is lost. The system makes
the best guesses and checks out their implications. If these guesses are wrong, it
will take a bit longer, but the system will eventually find some hypotheses at some
level that it can accept.
Figure 7. A Scene
Figure 8. The Message Center Shortly After Processing Has Begun on THE CAR
736 Rumelhart
phrase will refer to some object in the picture. Thus, the semantic-level object
hypothesis can be entered and assigned a high likelihood value from the start.
Moreover, through looking at the picture and perceiving certain aspects of it as
salient, the subject will develop expectations as to the probable referent of the
phrase. In this case, I have assumed that the subject set up special expectations
for a phrase referring to the lake or to the Volkswagen.
Similarly, at the syntactic level, the subject can be quite certain that the input
will form a noun phrase. Thus, the hypothesis NP is entered into the message
center and assigned a high value. Noun phrases have a rather characteristic struc-
ture. About 25% of the time they begin with a determiner (DET). Thus, in the
example, I have assumed that the hypothesis that the first word was a determiner
was entered. Similarly, we can expect the second word of a noun phrase to be a
noun about 20% of the time. Thus, I have entered the hypothesis that the second
word is a noun. Now, in the case where the first word is a determiner, we could ex-
pect it to be the word the about 60% of the time and the word a about 20%. Thus,
I have assumed that these two hypotheses have also been entered.
As all these hypotheses are being entered in top-down fashion, hypotheses at
the letter level also are being entered bottom-up on the basis of featural informa-
tion. In the example, I have assumed that for each of the first five letter positions
the two most promising letter possibilities were entered as hypotheses. For the
sixth letter position, which contains very little featural information, I have as-
sumed that only its most likely letter hypothesis has been entered.
Figure 9 illustrates the state of the message center at a later point in the pro-
cessing. In the meantime, the lexical hypothesis a has led to a letter hypothesis
that was then tested against the featural information and rejected. The hypoth-
esization of an initial t has led to the hypothesization of an initial th at the
letter cluster levela hypothesis that is given added validity by the possible h
in the second position. The lexical-level hypothesis of the word the also has led
to the hypothesization of the letter cluster th followed by the letter e. The prior
existence of these hypotheses generated from the bottom up has led to a mutual
strengthening of all of the hypotheses in question and a resultant weakening of
the alternative letter hypotheses at the first three letter positions.
While this processing was taking place, lexical hypotheses were generated
from the semantic level as possible nouns. In this instance I have assumed that the
semantic hypothesis lake has led to the lexical hypothesis that the word lake was
in the string and that the semantic hypothesis Volkswagen has led to the lexical
hypothesis Volkswagen and to the lexical hypothesis car. Meanwhile, the letter
hypotheses have led to alternative letter-cluster hypotheses ch and at.
Figure 10 illustrates the state of the message center at a still later point in the
processing of the input. By this point, the hypothesis that the first word is the has
reached a sufficient value that further processing has ceased. No new hypotheses
have been generated about the first word. On the other hand, lexical hypotheses
on the second word have proliferated. The existence of the letter hypothesis c
followed by the letter-cluster hypothesis at has led to a hypothesization of the
lexical item cat. Similarly, the letter hypothesis f followed by at has led to
hypothesizing the lexical item fat. The lexical hypothesis cat is consistent
with the noun hypothesis, thus strengthening the view that the second word is
a noun. At the same time, the lexical hypotheses lake, Volkswagen, and car
either have strengthened existing letter hypotheses or have caused new ones to be
generated. Notice, in particular, that the prior existence of the letter hypotheses
c and a strengthened the semantically derived lexical hypothesis car, which
in turn strengthened the letter hypothesis reven though the letter hypothesis
738 Rumelhart
Figure 10. The Message Center Well Into the Processing Sequence
r has not yet been evaluated in light of the featural information in the final
position.
Finally, Figure 11 illustrates a state of processing after the letter hypotheses
have been tested against the featural information. At this point only three lexi-
cal hypotheses for the second word remainfat, cat, and car. The lexical
hypothesis fat has led to the syntactic hypothesis that the second word is an
adjective (ADJ), and the lexical hypothesis cat has led to the semantic-level
hypothesis that there should be a cat in the picture. Meanwhile, the semantic
hypothesis Volkswagen has been strengthened by the finding that the final fea-
tural information is consistent with the hypothesis that the last letter is an r. At
this point the semantic hypothesis Volkswagen is probably high enough to lead
to a response. If not, a test of the semantic hypothesis cat will lead to the rejec-
tion of that hypothesis and the consequent strengthening of the Volkswagen
hypothesis and thus the lexical hypothesis car and the letter-level hypotheses
c, a, and r.
740 Rumelhart
It should be clear from this example how, in principle at least, one could
build a model of reading that actually would employ constraints from all levels
concurrently in the process of constructing an interpretation of an input string.
Of course, this example is a long way from the specification of such a model. All
I have illustrated here is the nature of the message center and how it is structured
to facilitate communication among processes acting at various levels. Before a
concrete model of reading can be specified, the nature of the various knowledge
sources must be specified as well. I now turn to a brief discussion of the separa-
tion of the various knowledge sources.
742 Rumelhart
However, it would appear that a HEARSAY-type model such as this offers promise
as a framework for the development of serious models of reading that nevertheless
assumes a highly interactive parallel processing system.
where si is the overall strength of the hypothesis hi, vi is a measure of the direct
evidence for hi, and i is a measure of the contextual evidence for hi. Now we can
define the values of vi and i in terms of the parents and sisters of hi. Equation (2)
gives the value of the contextual strength of hi:
Pr(hi) Pi = Li = j
(2)
i =
Ss Pr(hi|hk) otherwise,
k
vi
744 Rumelhart
where the sum is over all hk Pi or Li. Thus, when hi has no parents or left sis-
ters, its contextual strength is given by its a priori probability. Otherwise, its
contextual strength is given by the sum, over all of its left sisters and parents of
the strength of the left sister or parent, hk, times the conditional probability of the
hypothesis given hk. The sum is then divided by its own direct strength so that
its direct strength will not contribute to its contextual strength (because as we
shall see, its own direct strength contributes to the strength of its parents and left
sisters and is represented multiplicatively in sk).
Direct evidence for a hypothesis comes only from its daughters. Equation (3)
gives the direct evidence for a hypothesis as a function of a value associated with
its daughters:
Cik Pr(hk|hi) Di j
(3)
vi =
1 otherwise,
where the sum is over all hk Di, and where Cik is the cumulative evidence for hy-
pothesis hi associated with the sequence of hypotheses whose left-most member is
the daughter hk. Thus, in the diagram, the direct evidence for car is determined
jointly by the direct evidence for c, for a, and for r. The value of Cik is given
by the following equation:
Rk = j
(4) vk
Ci, k =
Svk Ci, j Pr(hj|hi, hk) otherwise,
j
where the sum is over all hj Rk. Thus, the cumulative evidence for hypothesis hi
associated with hypothesis hk is determined by the product of the direct evidence
for hk and the cumulative evidence for its right sister. If its probable right sisters
are very strong, then the cumulative evidence is very strong and thus offers good
support to its parent. Otherwise, it offers support against its parent.
Finally, we must give special attention to the first-level hypotheses associated
with featural-level inputs. For any letter hypothesis hi, featural-level inputs have
cumulative values of CiF given by:
(5) Ci, F = [Pr(F)]1
where F is the set of features observed in that location. This, in effect, is a normal-
izer designed to keep the strengths in the 0 to 1 range.
The equations (1) to (5) define a system of evaluation that makes near opti-
mal use of the information available at any given point in time. Whenever a new
hypothesis is postulated and a new connection is drawn, new values must be
computed for the entire set of hypotheses. Resources can be allotted to the knowl-
edge sources based upon their momentary evaluations. Effort can be focused on
generating hypotheses from the top down whenever we have hypotheses with
strong contextual strengths and few daughter hypotheses. Effort can be focused
on the generation of hypotheses from the bottom up whenever there is strong
1. Why does Rumelhart disagree with linear models of reading processing that
suggest letter perception precedes word or syntactic recognition?
2. How does Rumelhart use the concept of hypothesis testing to explain his
theory of message center processing?
3. Rumelhart proposed that bottom-up models do not fully describe the in-
fluence of higher level processing on lower level perceptions. What is his
evidence for this proposition?
4. Why did Rumelhart consider his model interactive rather than bottom-up
or top-down?
Ack nowledgment
Research support was provided by grant NS 07454 from the National Institute of Health.
Notes
*When this chapter was written, Rumelhart was at the University of California, San Diego.
1
LaBerge and Samuels were particularly interested in the role of attention and the notion of
automaticity in reading. I also have omitted discussion of episodic memory because neither
one of these aspects of their model is relevant to my point here.
2
Actually, the aforementioned attention mechanism of the LaBergeSamuels model offers some
top-down capacity. However, within their model it is limited and serves to speed up certain
weak bottom-up paths.
3
I use the term perception rather freely here. In general, it is my opinion that the distinction
between the perceptual and conceptual aspects of reading is not that useful. As I will suggest
later, there appears to be a continuity between what has been called perception and what has
been called comprehension. My use of the term perception in the present context is simply the
use of the one term to cover the entire process.
4
This is the same relationship between these two sorts of evidence assumed by Luce (1959)
and which is incorporated into the Rumelhart and Siple (1974) model for word recognition.
746 Rumelhart
R eferences
Bransford, J.D., & Johnson, M.K. (1973). Miller, G.A., Bruner, J.S., & Postman, L. (1954).
Considerations of some problems of comprehen- Familiarity of letter sequences and tachis-
sion. In W.G. Chase (Ed.), Visual information toscopic identification. Journal of Genetic
processing. New York: Academic. Psychology, 50, 129139.
Brewer, W.F. (1972). Is reading a letter-by-letter Miller, G.A., & Isard, S. (1963). Some perceptual
process? In J.F. Kavanagh & I.G. Mattingly consequences of linguistic rules. Journal of
(Eds.), Language by ear and by eye: The relation- Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2, 217228.
ships between speech and reading. Cambridge, Nash-Weber, B. (1975). The role of semantics in au-
MA: MIT Press. tomatic speech understanding. In D.B. Bobrow
Gough, P.B. (1972). One second of reading. In J.F. & A. Collins (Eds.), Representation and under-
Kavanagh & I.G. Mattingly (Eds.), Language by standing. New York: Academic.
ear and by eye: The relationships between speech Pillsbury, W.B. (1897). A study in apperception.
and reading. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. American Journal of Psychology, 8, 315393.
Graboi, D. (1974). Physical shape, practice and mean- Reicher, G.M. (1969). Perceptual recognition as
ing in visual search. Unpublished doctoral disser- a function of meaningfulness of stimulus ma-
tation, University of California, San Diego. terial. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81,
Huey, E.B. (1968). The psychology and pedagogy of 274280.
reading. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original Ruddy, M.G., Meyer, D.E., & Schvaneveldt, R.W.
work published 1908) (1973, May). Context effects on phonemic encod-
Kaplan, R.M. (1973). A general syntactic processor. ing in visual word recognition. Paper presented
In R. Rustin (Ed.), Natural language processing. at the meeting of the Midwestern Psychological
New York: Algorithmics. Association, Chicago, IL.
Kolers, P.A. (1970). Three stages in reading. In H. Rumelhart, D.E., & Siple, P. (1974). Process of rec-
Levin & J.T. Williams (Eds.), Basic studies in ognizing tachistoscopically presented words.
reading. New York: Basic. Psychological Review, 81, 99118.
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S.J. (1974). Toward a the- Schank, R.C. (1973). Identification of conceptual-
ory of automatic information processing in read- izations underlying natural language. In R.C.
ing. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293323. Schank & K.M. Colby (Eds.), Computer models
Lesser, V.R., Fennell, R.D., Erman, L.D., & Reddy, of thought and language. San Francisco: Freeman.
D.R. (1974). Organization of the HEARSAY II Schvaneveldt, R.W., & Meyer, D.E. (1973). Retrieval
speech understanding system (Working Papers and comparison processes in semantic memory.
in Speech Recognition III). Pittsburgh, PA: In S. Kornblum (Ed.), Attention and performance
Carnegie Mellon University. IV. New York: Academic.
Luce, R.D. (1959). Individual choice behavior. New Stevens, A.L., & Rumelhart, D.E. (1975). Errors
York: Wiley. in reading: Analysis using an augmented net-
McClelland, J.L., & Johnston, J.C. (1977). The role work model of grammar. In D.A. Norman,
of familiar units in perception of words and D.E. Rumelhart, & the LNR Research Group,
nonwords. Perception and Psychophysics, 22, Explorations in cognition. San Francisco:
249261. Freeman.
Meyer, D.E., & Schvaneveldt, R.W. (1971). Tulving, E., & Gold, C. (1963). Stimulus informa-
Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: tion and contextual information as determi-
Evidence of a dependence between retrieval op- nants of tachistoscopic recognition of words.
erations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 319327.
227234. Tulving, E., Mandler, G., & Baumal, R. (1964).
Meyer, D.E., Schvaneveldt, R.W., & Ruddy, M.G. Interaction of two sources of information in ta-
(1972, November). Activation of lexical mem- chistoscopic word recognition. Canadian Journal
ory. Paper presented at the meeting of the of Psychology, 18, 6271.
Psychonomic Society, St. Louis, MO. Weber, R.M. (1970). First graders use of gram-
Meyer, D.E., Schvaneveldt, R.W., & Ruddy, M.G. matical context in reading. In H. Levin & J.T.
(1974). Functions of phonemic and graphemic Williams (Eds.), Basic studies in reading. New
codes in visual word recognition. Memory and York: Basic.
Cognition, 2, 309321.
A Theory of Reading:
From Eye Fixations to Comprehension
Marcel Adam Just and Patricia A. Carpenter, Carnegie Mellon University
A
lthough readers go through many of the same processes as listeners, there
is one striking difference between reading and listening comprehension
a reader can control the rate of input. Unlike a listener, a reader can skip
over portions of the text, reread sections, or pause on a particular word. A reader
can take in information at a pace that matches the internal comprehension pro-
cesses. By examining where a reader pauses, it is possible to learn about the
comprehension processes themselves. Using this approach, a process model of
reading comprehension is developed that accounts for the gaze durations of col-
lege students reading scientific passages.
The following display presents an excerpt from the data to illustrate some
characteristics of eye fixations that motivate the model. This display presents a
protocol of a college student reading the first two sentences of a passage about the
properties of flywheels. The reader averages about 200 words per minute on the
scientific texts. In this study, the reader was told to read a paragraph with under-
standing and then recall its content. Consecutive fixations on the same word have
been aggregated into units called gazes. The gazes within each sentence have been
sequentially numbered above the fixated word with the gaze durations (in msec)
indicated below the sequence number.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
1566 267 400 83 267 617 767 450 450 400
Flywheels are one of the oldest mechanical devices known to man. Every
2 3 5 4 6 7 8 9 10 11
616 517 684 250 317 617 1116 367 467 483
internal-combustion engine contains a small flywheel that converts the jerky motion
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
450 383 284 383 317 283 533 50 366 566
of the pistons into the smooth flow of energy that powers the drive shaft.
One important aspect of the protocol is that almost every content word is
fixated at least once. There is a common misconception that readers do not fixate
every word, but only some small proportion of the text, perhaps one out of every
This chapter is reprinted from Psychological Review, 87(4), 329354. Copyright 1980 by the American
Psychological Association. Reprinted with permission.
748
two or three words. However, the data to be presented in this article (and most
of our other data collected in reading experiments) show that during ordinary
reading, almost all content words are fixated. This applies not only to scientific
text but also to narratives written for adult readers. The current data are not novel
in this regard. The eye fixation studies from the first part of the century point to
the same conclusion (Buswell, 1937, chap. 4; Dearborn, 1906, chap. 4; Judd &
Buswell, 1922, chap. 2). When readers are given a text that is appropriate for their
age level, they average 1.2 words per fixation. The words that are not always fix-
ated tend to be short function words, such as the, of, and a. The number of words
per fixation is even lower if the text is especially difficult or if the reader is poorly
educated. Of course, this is not the case when adults are given simple texts, such
as childrens stories; under such circumstances, these same studies show an in-
crease to an average of two words per fixation. Similarly, readers skip more words
if they are speed-reading or skimming (Taylor, 1962). These old results and the
current results are consistent with the report of McConkie and Rayner (1975;
Rayner, 1978) that readers generally cannot determine the meaning of a word that
is in peripheral vision. These results have important implications for the present
model; since most words of a text are fixated, we can try to account for the total
duration of comprehension in terms of the gaze duration on each word.
The protocol also shows that the gaze duration varies considerably from word
to word. There is a misconception that individual fixations are all about 250 msec
in duration. But this is not true; there is a large variation in the duration of in-
dividual fixations as well as the total gaze duration on individual words. As the
preceding display shows, some gaze durations are very long, such as the gaze on
the word Flywheels. The model proposes that gaze durations reflect the time to
execute comprehension processes. In this case the longer fixations are attributed
to longer processing caused by the words infrequency and its thematic impor-
tance. Also, the fixations at the end of each sentence tend to be long. For example,
this reader had gaze durations of 450 and 566 msec on each of the last words of
the first two sentences. The sentence-terminal pauses will be shown to reflect an
integrative process that is evoked at the ends of sentences.
The link between eye fixation data and the theory rests on two assumptions.
The first, called the immediacy assumption, is that a reader tries to interpret each
content word of a text as it is encountered, even at the expense of making guesses
that sometimes turn out to be wrong. Interpretation refers to processing at several
levels such as encoding the word, choosing one meaning of it, assigning it to its ref-
erent, and determining its status in the sentence and in the discourse. The imme-
diacy assumption posits that the interpretations at all levels of processing are not
deferred; they occur as soon as possible, a qualification that will be clarified later.
The second assumption, the eyemind assumption, is that the eye remains
fixated on a word as long as the word is being processed. So the time it takes to
process a newly fixated word is directly indicated by the gaze duration. Of course,
comprehending that word often involves the use of information from preceding
parts of the text, without any backward fixations. So the concepts corresponding
Theoretical Framework
Reading can be construed as the coordinated execution of a number of processing
stages such as word encoding, lexical access, assigning semantic roles, and relating
the information in a given sentence to previous sentences and previous knowl-
edge. Some of the major stages of the proposed model are depicted schematically in
Figure 1. The diagram depicts both processes and structures. The stages of reading
in the left-hand column are shown in their usual sequence of execution. The long-
term memory on the right-hand side is the storehouse of knowledge, including
the procedural knowledge used in executing the stages on the left. The working
memory in the middle mediates the long-term memory and the comprehension
processes. Although it is easy to informally agree on the general involvement of
these processes in reading, it is more difficult to specify the characteristics of the
processes, their interrelations, and their effects on reading performance.
The nature of comprehension processes depends on a larger issue, namely
the architecture of the processing system in which they are embedded. Although
the human architecture is very far from being known, production systems have
been suggested as a possible framework because they have several properties that
might plausibly be shared by the human system. Detailed discussions of pro-
duction systems as models of the human architecture are presented elsewhere
Extract Physical
Features LONG TERM
WORKING MEMORY MEMORY
activated representations Productions that
Encode Word and
physical features represent
Access Lexicon
words orthography
Assign Case meanings phonology
Roles case roles syntax
clauses semantics
Integrate With text units pragmatics
Representation domain of discourse discourse structure
of Previous Text variable-binding memory scheme of domain
episodic knowledge
No End of
Sentence
?
Yes
Sentence Wrap-up
Solid lines denote data-flow paths, and dashed lines indicate canonical flow of control.
(Anderson, 1976; Newell, 1973, 1980). The following three major properties are of
particular relevance here.
1. Structural and procedural knowledge is stored in the form of conditionaction
rules, such that a given stimulus condition produces a given action. The productions
fire one after the other (serially), and it is this serial processing that consumes
time in comprehension and other forms of thought. In addition to the serial pro-
ductions, there are also fast, automatic productions that produce spreading ac-
tivation among associated concepts (Anderson, 1976; Collins & Loftus, 1975).
These automatic productions operate in parallel to the serial productions and in
parallel to each other (Newell, 1980). These productions are fast and automatic
because they operate only on constants; that is, they directly associate an action
with a particular condition (such as activating the concept dog on detecting cat).
By contrast, serial productions are slow because they operate on variables as well
as constants; they associate an action with a class of conditions. A serial produc-
tion can fire only after the particular condition instance is bound to the variable
specified in the production. It may be the binding of variables that consumes
Research
Texts
This section describes the texts that were used in the reading research because
their properties, both local and global, have a large influence on the processing.
The content of the passages was analyzed by segmenting the text into idea units
and categorizing these units by means of a simple text grammar. First, all of the 15
passages were segmented into text units called sectors, producing 274 sectors. The
average sector length was seven words. Each sector was judged to be a single mean-
ingful piece of information, whether it consisted of a word, phrase, clause, or sen-
tence. The general criteria for segmentation into sectors were similar to those used
by Meyer and McConkie (1973), who related such text units to recall performance.
A simplified grammar was developed to categorize the sectors of the texts.
The grammar (shown schematically in Figure 2) classifies the text units into a
structure that is quasi-hierarchical. This abbreviated grammar captures most of
the regularities in our short passages (see Vesonder, 1979, for a more complete
grammar for longer scientific passages). The initial sentences generally intro-
duced a topica scientific development or event. The beginnings of the passage
sometimes gave details of the time, place, and people involved with the discovery.
Familiar concepts were simply named, whereas unusual concepts were accom-
panied by an explicit definition. The main topic itself was developed through
specific examples or through subtopics that were then expanded with further de-
scriptions, explanations, and concrete examples. Consequences, usually toward
the end of the passage, stated the importance of the event for other applications.
Table 1 shows how each text unit or sector in the Flywheel passage was classified
Subtopic
where GWi is the gaze duration on a word i, am is the regression weight in msec
for independent variable Xm, and Xim are the independent variables that code the
following seven properties of word i: (a) length, (b) the logarithm of its norma-
tive frequency, (c) whether the word occurs at the beginning of a line of text,
(d)whether it is a novel word to the reader, (e) its case grammatical role (one of
11 possibilities), (f) whether it is the last word in a sentence, (g) whether it is the
last word in a paragraph.
The equation for the analysis of the gaze duration on individual sectors was
GSj = b0 + Sbn Zjn + j
where GSj is the gaze duration on sector j, and bn is the regression weight in msec
for independent variable Zn. The Zjn are the independent variables that code the
following eight properties of sector j: (a) its text grammatical level, multiplied by
the number of content words; (b) length; (c) the sum of the logarithms of the fre-
quencies of its component words; (d) the number of line-initial words it contains;
(e) the number of novel words it contains; (f) the sum of the case role regression
weights of its component words; (g) whether it is the last sector in a sentence;
(h)whether it is the last sector in a paragraph.
Results
The mean gaze duration on each word (239 msec) indicated reading rates that
are typical for texts of this difficulty. If the 239 msec per word is incremented by
12% to allow for saccades, blinks, and occasional rereading, the reading rate is
Interclause Integration
Clauses and sentences must be related to each other by the reader to capture the
coherence in the text. As each new clause or sentence is encountered, it must
be integrated with the previous information acquired from the text or with the
knowledge retrieved from the readers long-term memory. Integrating the new
sentence with the old information consists of representing the relations between
the new and the old structures.
Several search strategies may be used to locate old information that is related
to the new information. One strategy is to check if the new information is related
to the other information that is already in working memory either because it
has been repeatedly referred to or because it is recent (Carpenter & Just, 1977a;
Kintsch & van Dijk, 1978). Using this strategy implies that adjacency between
clauses and sentences will cause a search for a possible relation. For instance, the
Sentence Wrap-Up
A special computational episode occurs when a reader reaches the end of a sen-
tence. This episode, called sentence wrap-up, is not a stage of processing defined
by its function, but rather by virtue of being executed when the reader reaches
It took about 500 msec longer to process Sentence 2b than 1b, presumably due
to the more difficult inference linking killer to die. There were two main places
in which the readers paused for those 500 msec, indicating the points at which
the inference was being computed. One point was on the word killer, and the
other was on the end of the sentence containing killer. Another eye fixation study
showed that integration linking a pronoun to its antecedent can occur either
when the pronoun is first encountered or at the end of the sentence containing
the pronoun (Carpenter & Just, 1977b).
Recall Performance
The recall of a given part of a text should depend in part on what happens to the
information as it is read. A clause that is thoroughly integrated with the repre-
sentation of the text should tend to be stored in long-term memory, and therefore
should be recalled better. There are two factors that determine how well a clause
will be integrated. First, those sectors on which more integration time has been
spent, like topics and definitions, should be recalled better. As predicted the in-
tegration parameter for a text role (i.e., the five weights at the bottom of Table
2) reliably affected the probability that a sector would be recalled, t(271) = 2.01,
p<.05. A second factor affecting integration is the number of times an argument
of a clause is referred to in the text; each repetition involving that argument may
initiate another integration episode that increases its chances of being recalled
(Kintsch & van Dijk, 1978). A rough index of this kind of repetition was obtained
by counting the number of times the arguments of each sector were repeated in
subsequent sectors. The frequency of reference to the arguments did increase the
probability of recalling a sector, t(271) = 5.90, p < .01.
The recall measure just reported was the proportion of the 14 subjects that
recalled each of the 274 sectors. Two independent judges assigned 100%, 50%, or
0% credit for the recall of each sector, depending on whether it had been fully,
partially, or not at all correctly recalled. Synonyms and paraphrases were given
full credit if they were close to the gist of the sector. If only a part of a sector was
recalled, then partial credit was given. The two judges were in full agreement
about 80% of the time and in partial agreement (i.e., within 50%) on 94% of the
judgments; disagreements were resolved by a third judge.
Discussion
This section discusses three aspects of the theory: first, the implications of the
immediacy assumption for language processing in general; second, how variation
in reading modes can be handled by the theory; and third, the relation of the cur-
rent theory to other theories of reading.
Variation in Reading
There is no single mode of reading. Reading varies as a function of who is read-
ing, what they are reading, and why they are reading it. The proposed model for
the reading of scientific texts in this task is only one point in a multidimensional
space of reading models. However, such variation can be accommodated within
the framework presented in this article.
The readers goals are perhaps the most important determinant of the reading
process. A reader who skims a passage for the main point reads differently than
someone who is trying to memorize a passage, or another person who is reading
for entertainment. Goals can be represented in several aspects of the theory, but
the main way is to require that each goal is satisfied or at least attempted before
proceeding on to the next word, clause, or sentence. These goals correspond to
the major products of each stage of comprehension and to the specific demands
of a particular task. For example, an obvious goal associated with lexical access
might be that one interpretation is selected. An added goal associated with the
task of memorizing a passage may require rehearsing phrases or constructing
explicit mnemonics before going on to the next phrase or sentence. But goals can
be deleted as well as added. A speed-reader may well eliminate goals for syntactic
coherence, because the strategy of skipping over many words will destroy the
syntax. Variations in goals can be detected with the current theory and analytic
Theories of Reading
Previous theories of reading have varied in their choice of dependent measures,
the levels of information represented in the theory, and the implementation of
top-down effects. It is useful to consider how the current theory compares to
these alternative proposals along these three dimensions.
One important feature of the current theory is its attempt to account for read-
ing time on individual words, clauses, and sentences. This approach can be dis-
tinguished from research that is more centrally concerned with recall, question
answering, and summarizing (e.g., Rumelhart, 1977b). The dependent measure is
not an incidental aspect of a theory; it has important implications for which issues
the theory addresses. The present focus on processing time has resulted in a the-
ory that accounts for the moment-by-moment, real-time characteristics of read-
ing. By contrast, the theory pays less attention to retrieval and reconstruction,
two later occurring processes that are important to an account of summarization.
Another feature of the theory is the attempt to account for performance at sev-
eral levels of processing. Previous theories have tended to neglect certain stages.
Future Directions
The current theory suggests two major avenues of reading research. One direc-
tion is to construct computer simulations that are driven by reading performance
data. The postulated human heuristics can be implemented in a computer pro-
gram to examine the resulting complex interactions among knowledge sources.
Reading-time data may be sufficiently constraining to select among various alter-
native heuristics. We are currently implementing aspects of the model presented
here as a production system in collaboration with a colleague, Robert Thibadeau,
to develop greater specification and more stringent tests of the model.
Although the production system framework is not essential for the interpre-
tation of the empirical results in the present study, it has other benefits. First,
it provides an architecture that can accommodate the flexibility and interaction
Ack nowledgmen ts
The research was supported in part by Grant G-79-0119 from the National Institute of Education
and Grant MH-29617 from the National Institute of Mental Health.
We thank Allen Newell and Robert Thibadeau for their very helpful discussions.
The order of authorship was decided by the toss of a coin.
Note
1
It might be argued that the variables coding the text-grammatical roles ought to be indepen-
dent of the number of content words. One might argue that a definition, for example, takes
a fixed amount of time to integrate, regardless of the number of content words it contains.
R efere nces
Aaronson D., & Scarborough, H.S. (1976). R. Siegler (Ed.), Childrens thinking: What devel-
Performance theories for sentence coding: Some ops? Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
quantitative evidence. Journal of Experimental Chafe, W.L. (1970). Meaning and the structure of lan-
Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, guage. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2, 5670. Charniak, E. (1972). Toward a model of childrens
Anderson, J.R. (1976). Language, memory, and story comprehension (Tech. Rep. No. 266).
thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Cambridge, MA: MIT Artificial Intelligence
Baron, J. (1977). Mechanisms for pronounc- Laboratory.
ing printed words: Use and acquisition. In D. Clark, H.H., & Clark, E.V. (1977). Psychology and
LaBerge & S.J. Samuels (Eds.), Basic processes in language. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
reading: Perception and comprehension. Hillsdale, Collins, A.M., & Loftus, E.F. (1975). A spread-
NJ: Erlbaum. ing activation theory of semantic processing.
Bayle, E. (1942). The nature and causes of regressive Psychological Review, 82, 407428.
movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P.A. (in press).
Education, 11, 1636. Individual differences in working memory and
Bever, T.G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal
structures. In J.R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the Behavior, 19, 450466.
development of language. New York: Wiley. Dearborn, W. (1906). The psychology of reading
Bouma H., & deVoogd, A.H. (1974). On the control (Columbia University contributions to philoso-
of eye saccades in reading. Vision Research, 14, phy and psychology). New York: Science Press.
273284. Dixon, P., & Rothkopf, E.Z. (1979). Word repeti-
Bransford, J.D., & Johnson, M.K. (1973). Consider- tion, lexical access, and the process of searching
ations of some problems of comprehension. In words and sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning
and Verbal Behavior, 18, 629644.
W.G. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing.
Fillmore, C.J. (1968). The case for case. In E. Bach
New York: Academic Press.
& R.T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in linguistic the-
Breitmeyer, B.G. (1980). Unmasking visual mask-
ory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
ing: A look at the why behind the veil of how.
Flesch, R.F. (1951). How to test readability. New
Psychological Review, 87, 5269.
York: Harper.
Buswell, G.T. (1937). How adults read (Supplemen-
Fraser, C., Bellugi, U., & Brown, R. (1963). Control
tary Educational Monograph 45). Chicago: Uni- of grammar in imitation, comprehension, and
versity of Chicago Press. production. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal
Carpenter, P.A., & Daneman, M. (1980). Lexical Behavior, 2, 121135.
access and error recovery in reading: A model Frazier, L., & Fodor, J. (1978). The sausage machine:
based on eye fixations. Unpublished manuscript, A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition, 6,
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA. 291325.
Carpenter, P.A., & Just, M.A. (1977a). Integrative Glanzer, M., & Ehrenreich, S.L. (1979). Structure
processes in comprehension. In D. LaBerge & and search for the internal lexicon. Journal of
S.J. Samuels (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 381398.
Perception and comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Goodman, K.S., & Niles, O.S. (1970). Reading pro-
Erlbaum. cess and program. Urbana, IL: National Council
Carpenter, P.A., & Just, M.A. (1977b). Reading of Teachers of English.
comprehension as eyes see it. In M.A. Just & P.A. Gough, P.B. (1972). One second of reading. In J.F.
Carpenter (Eds.), Cognitive processes in compre- Kavanagh & I.G. Mattingly (Eds.), Language by
hension. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. eye and ear. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Carpenter, P.A., & Just, M.A. (in press). Cognitive Haviland, S.E., & Clark, H.H. (1974). Whats new?
processes in reading: Models based on readers Acquiring new information as a process in com-
eye fixations. In A.M. Lesgold & C.A. Perfetti prehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal
(Eds.), Interactive processes in reading. Hillsdale, Behavior, 13, 512521.
NJ: Erlbaum. Hitch, G.J. (1978). The role of short-term work-
Case, R. (1978). Intellectual development from birth ing memory in mental arithmetic. Cognitive
to adulthood: A neo-Piagetian interpretation. In Psychology, 10, 302323.
S
killful reading is the product of an amazingly complex array of knowledge
and abilities. How is it, then, that so much of the scientific literature on read-
ing is centered on word recognition? One answer is that the field has lacked
the scientific sophistication to go much beyond words; another, however, is that
until we truly began to understand the relation of words to the rest of the reading
process, we were hard pressed to move on.
True, the ability to recognize words is but a tiny component of the larger lit-
eracy challenge. Also true, the knowledge and activities involved in visually recog-
nizing individual printed words are useless in and of themselves. And equally true,
word recognition is only valuable and, in a strong sense, only possible as it is re-
ceived and guided by the larger activities of language comprehension and thought.
On the other hand, unless the processes involved in individual-word recogni-
tion operate properly, nothing else in the system can either. The purpose of this
article is to explore the relationship between word recognition and literacy. It is,
moreover, to show how scientific efforts to understand these relationships have
brought us ever closer to a larger understanding of the nature of reading.
783
more than the occasional misfire of a spark plug or impurity in the gas will stop a
car. Even so, the engine is only indirectly responsible for making the car go. The
engine turns gas to kinetic energy, and the energy turns the wheels. Similarly, the
perceptual system turns print to mental energy, such that it can be understood.
Obviously a car couldnt be driven without gas, without spark plugs, without
a crankshaft, and without a differential and wheels. But it is also important to
recognize that a car wouldnt be driven if it didnt run well. Imagine that you had
to push a button every time you wanted a spark plug to fire. Imagine that the car
would only go a couple of miles per hour or that it stalled unpredictably every
few moments. You would very likely choose not to drive at all. These problems
are analogous to the difficulties that must befall the reader who cannot transform
print to language and meaning with reasonable speed and ease. In particular, if a
childs word-recognition skills are sufficiently poor, the time and effort involved
in reading may well overwhelm its hoped-for rewards. If so, the child is likely to
choose not to read at all. And here is the tragedy: To the extent that children do
not read, they forfeit the practice and experience needed to make reading easier
and more profitable. To the extent that children do not read, they can only con-
tinue to have difficulty reading, to fall farther and farther behind their peers in
both reading and the conceptual returns it offers (see, especially, Stanovich, 1986,
1993).
Clearly, without gas and without an engine and mechanics in adequate
working order, the car will not go. Suppose, however, that your reading system
has plenty of print to consume and a fine mechanical system. Are you on your
way? No. First you have to want to go somewhere, and you have to have some
idea of how to get there. As you travel, you must monitor and control your path.
Periodically, you must assess your whereabouts and progress with respect to your
final destination. At the same time, you must attend to the local details of the road
and control your car through them. Indeed, the amount of active attention you
will have to devote to your immediate progress will necessarily depend on such
variables as the navigability of the routehow far you can see ahead and whether
the way is bumpy, winding, congested, or unpredictableand its familiarity.
Similarly, if texts are difficult in wording or structure or unfamiliar in con-
cept, they require the active attention of the reader. But the more one must direct
attention to local difficulties of reading, the less attention one has available to
support larger understanding. Only to the extent that the ability to recognize and
capture the meaning of print is rapid, effortless, and automatic can the reader
have available the cognitive energy and resources on which true comprehension
depends. Only to that extent can the reader have the perspective and capacity to
reflect upon the journey.
As it happens, everybody wants to go somewhere. Everybody wants the stimu-
lation of new challenges and the sense of growth and accomplishment that comes
with conquering them. Understandably, if reading seems tedious or unproduc-
tive, children will seek other ways to spend their time; indeed, they may avoid it
altogether. In a recent survey of fourth graders, 40% of the poor readers claimed
784 Adams
that they would rather clean their rooms than read. One child stated, Id rather
clean the mold around the bathtub than read (Juel, 1988).
Fortunately, for purposes of schooling, most young children will go almost
anywhere they are ledso long as they are neither frustrated nor bored. But even
as this eases our task as reading educators, it greatly increases our responsibility.
It is up to us to lead our children in the right direction.
And it is here that the car analogy breaks down. So apt for describing the
operation of the system, it is wholly inappropriate for modeling its acquisition.
Building a car is a modular, hierarchical activity. From the bottom up, the discrete
and countable parts of the cars subsystems are fastened together; then, one by
one, from the inside out and only as each is completed, the subsystems are con-
nected to one another. In contrast, the parts of the reading system are not discrete.
We cannot proceed by completing each one in isolation and then fastening it to
another. Rather, the parts of the reading system must grow together. They must
grow to and from one another.
For the connections and even the connected parts to develop properly, they
must be linked in the very course of their acquisition. And this dependency works
in both directions. We cannot properly develop the higher order processes with-
out due attention to the lower; nor can we focus on the lower order processes
without constantly clarifying and exercising their connections to the higher.
The great challenge for reading educators, therefore, is one of understanding
the parts of the system and their interrelations. In this article, I will focus on cur-
rent models of skillful readers. What special kinds of knowledge do skillful read-
ers have? How is it organized, and what are the processes that bring it into play?
And how does our evolving understanding of skillful readers help us understand
the learning process and its difficulties?
Some Questions
Do skillful readers, in fact, recognize words as wholes? In recognizing an individ-
ual word, do readers depend on its overall pattern or shape rather than any closer
analysis of the letters within it? If so, then doesnt it seem counterproductive to
train children to focus on the letter-by-letter spellings of words?
Do skillful readers access the meaning of a word directly from seeing it? If
so, then doesnt it seem counterproductive to teach children to sound words out?
Do skillful readers use context to anticipate upcoming words so as to reduce
the visual detail they need from the text? If so, then in place of rigorous decoding
The last word of each of these sentences is, in itself, ambiguousbut would you
have noticed if that hadnt been pointed out? Although it feels as though con-
text preselects the appropriate meanings of such words, that is not exactly what
happens. Research demonstrates that all the meanings of an ambiguous word
are aroused in the course of perception. Very shortly (within tenths of a second)
thereaftertoo quickly for us to become aware of the confusioncontext selects
the most appropriate meaning from among the alternatives. (For a review of re-
search in this area, see Seidenberg et al., 1982.)
786 Adams
Finally, research proves that skillful readers habitually translate spellings
to sounds as they read (see Barron, 1981a, 1981b; Patterson & Coltheart, 1987).
But why? If visually familiar words do indeed activate their meanings directly
for readersand they dothen of what conceivable value are such phonological
translations? The answer to this question has come only through many years of
work and many research studies: Such spelling-to-sound translations are vital to
both fluent reading and its acquisition. To see why, we must look more deeply into
the reading system.
Context
Processor
Meaning
Processor
Orthographic Phonological
Processor Processor
788 Adams
experience. The more frequently a pattern of activity has been brought to mind,
the stronger and more complete will be the bonds that hold it together. Ultimately
it is these bonds, these interrelationsas they pass excitation and inhibition
among the elements that they link togetherthat are responsible for the fluency
of the reader and the seeming coherence of the text.
For the skillful reader, as the letters of a word in fixation are recognized, they
activate the spelling patterns, pronunciations, and meanings with which they are
compatible. At the same time, using its larger knowledge of the text, the context
processor swings its own bias among rival candidates so as to maintain the coher-
ence of the message. Meanwhile, as each processor homes in on the words iden-
tity, it relays its progress back to the others such that wherever hypotheses agree
among processors, their resolution is speeded and strengthened.
In this way, speed and fluency are seen as an emergent property of the mature
reading system. With recognition initiated by the print on the page and hastened
by the connectivity both within and between the processors, skillful readers ac-
cess the spelling, sound, meaning, and contextual role of a familiar word almost
automatically and simultaneously. But note: Speed and fluency are not just an
outgrowth of skillful reading; they are necessary for its happening. To understand
better the knowledge and processes involved, let us examine each of the proces-
sors in turn.
790 Adams
Processing Letter Order. Although the visual system is remarkably efficient at
extracting information necessary for letter identification, it is quite sloppy about
processing letter order. This is a physical limitation, affecting skillful readers as
much as unskilled ones (Estes, 1977). Nevertheless, skillful readers almost never
make mistakes in reporting the order of the letters in words they read; poor read-
ers, in contrast, may often do so. Although letter-order difficulties were once taken
as symptomatic of a basic perceptual deficit, that explanation has been proven
incorrect (Liberman et al., 1971). Such difficulties seem instead to reflect insuffi-
cient orthographic learning. Specifically, among skillful readers, knowledge about
the likely ordering of a string of letters is captured in the learned associations
between them. In the very course of perception, therefore, this knowledge serves
to corroborate the sensory systems noisy transmission of letter order. In keep-
ing with this view, good readers rarely err in reporting the order of the letters in
either real words or regularly spelled nonwords (such as bome or mave). Yet when
faced with orthographically irregular strings such as gtsi or ynrh, they make just
as many ordering errors as do poor readerseven more if they were expecting to
see a regularly spelled string (Adams, 1979b).
There are several ways in which readers can conquer the letter-order prob-
lem even without well-developed interletter associations. One is to stick with
print that is sufficiently large and spaced out so that no two letters will share
the same physical input channel; no doubt this is the underlying reason for our
time-honored practice of setting primers in large type. Another is for readers
to increase the number or duration of their fixations on each word. In keeping
with this, note that prolonged and repeated fixations on words are characteristic
of young and disabled readers (Just & Carpenter, 1987). In the long run, how-
ever, the only efficient and reliable way around this difficulty is for readers to
learn more about likely and unlikely sequences of letters in the words of their
language. Eventually, this knowledge will come to compensate for the visual
systems inherent difficulty with letter order.
Breaking Words Into Syllables. Struggle as they might, poor readers char-
acteristically block on long, polysyllabic wordseven when those words are fa-
miliar within their oral vocabulary. In contrast, skillful readers rarely experience
such difficulty. As an example, try reading the following: trypsinogen, anfractuos-
ity, prolegomenous, interfascicular. Although none of these words may be familiar
to you, chances are that your attempts to read them were relatively forthcoming
as well as correct, or nearly so. Moreover, if you listened carefully to your reading
performance, you may have heard yourself producing them in a manner much
closer to syllable by syllable than holistically or letter by letter.
It turns out that skillful readers ability to read long words depends insepa-
rably on their ability to break the words into syllables (Mewhort & Campbell,
1981), and this is true for familiar as well as unfamiliar words. Laboratory stud-
ies prove that skillful readers break words into syllables automatically and in the
very course of perceiving their letters. The means by which skillful readers do
Helping Beginners. Before leaving this section, it is worth reflecting that all
the orthographic processors magic presumes a deep and ready knowledge of the
letterwise spellings of words. Quick, holistic word recognition, comfort with
grown-up-sized print, automatic syllabification, morphemic sensitivityall of
these depend on such knowledge. At the same time, research indicates that diffi-
culties at the level of letter and word recognition are the single most pervasive and
792 Adams
debilitating cause of reading disability (Perfetti, 1985; Stanovich, 1986; Vellutino,
1991; Vernon, 1971).
Fortunately, theory and research also affirm that human memory is well de-
signed for learning about such relations among lettersbut only if it is induced
to attend to them in the course of perception. Here, then, is a problem. In general,
children seem disposed to view words not as ordered and analyzable strings of
letters but holistically, rather like pictures (Byrne, 1992; Masonheimer, Drum, &
Ehri, 1984). Indeed, given a good visual memory, children have shown themselves
able to recognize several thousand words through this approach (Juel, 1991). But
can they learn 50,000? And when they find they cannot, how difficultcogni-
tively and emotionallywill it be to effect repairs?
Beginning reading is quite difficult for some children. One of the reasons
is surely that the knowledge to respond instantly, effortlessly, and accurately to
frequent words and spelling patterns involves an impressive amount of percep-
tual learning. Regardless of intelligence, effort, rearing, or desire, this learning
settles in more quickly for some children than for others. There are many ways to
support this learningincluding writing, spelling, and phonics instruction; pa-
tience; encouragement; and lots of beneath-frustration-level reading and reread-
ing. However, research argues firmly that there is no substitute for it.
794 Adams
explains, these tendencies reflect a necessary and highly functional phase in
the acquisition of any complex skill. The only way for the visual system to learn
about the spellings of words is by devoting attention to them. As the spellings
of more and more words are internalized, decoding will become more and more
automatic, and only when it becomes automatic can it properly work in concert,
rather than in competition, with contextual processing. Meanwhile, the instruc-
tional challenge is not to quash this phase but to help children through it as ef-
ficiently, effectively, and supportively as possible. To this end, there may be no
better means than encouraging a lot of reading and rereading of interesting and
beneath-frustration-level text.
Learning New Word Meanings From Context. Suppose that, while read-
ing a story, a child encounters a word that he or she has neither seen nor heard
before. As usual, the spelling and pronunciation of this word will be shipped au-
tomatically to the meaning processor, but because the word is entirely unfamiliar,
it cannot in itself evoke any particular meaning. Instead, when the word reaches
the meaning processor, all it will find is the pattern of activation provoked by the
context processor. This pattern may be more or less diffuse, depending on how
tightly the context has anticipated the unknown word. Nevertheless, when the
orthographic pattern meets these activated meaning units, a bond will begin to
form between them.
The impact of such an incidental learning experience is expected to be small:
Context is rarely pointed enough to predict the precise meaning of a word. On
the other hand, its a start. When the same word is encountered again, it will meet
whatever was learned from the prior context plus the meaning set off by the new
context. Wherever the meaning units of the old and new contexts overlap, they
will become more strongly associated with one another and with the orthographic
and phonological representations of the word. Given a number of encounters with
this word over a variety of different contexts, the units that are reinforced most
often will be those that belong to the meaning of the word itself. In this way, the
word may eventually be learned well enough to contribute independently and
appropriately to the meaning of a text, if not to allow the child to generate a well-
articulated dictionary definition.
Prefixes, Suffixes, and Roots. The direct link between the orthographic and
meaning processors may also be responsible for skillful readers perceptual sensi-
tivity to the roots and affixes of polysyllabic words (see Fowler, Napps, & Feldman,
1985; Manelis & Tharp, 1977; Taft, 1985; Tyler & Nagy, 1987). Moreover, this link
prompts the idea that teaching children about derivational morphologies might
be a useful step toward both spelling and vocabulary development.
For example, once one sees that concurrent consists of with (con-) plus cur-
rent, the word is no longer a spelling problem; it must have two rs as in current,
796 Adams
and it cant end in -ant or it would mean with a raisin. Conversely, knowing the
meanings of common roots may qualitatively and profitably change ones un-
derstanding of other words in their derivational family. Thus, learning that fid
means trust or faith may significantly alter and connect ones understanding
of words like confidence, fidelity, fiduciary, and bona fide; discovering that path
means suffering may alter and connect ones understanding of words like sym-
pathy, psychopath, and pathologist. Moreover, a well-developed sensitivity to mor-
phological clues may be useful for inferring the meanings of new words.
All such advantages notwithstanding, research demonstrates that adult
readers of English are surprisingly oblivious to the morphological structure of
words (Kaye & Sternberg, 1982), and efforts specifically intended to teach chil-
dren about the derivational morphologies of words have yielded mixed results
(Johnson & Baumann, 1984; Otterman, 1955). Although such lessons have been
shown to increase childrens proficiency with both the spellings and meanings of
the words studied, they have produced little increase in their ability to interpret
new derivationally complex words.
In the end, it may be that such morphologically based insights never come
automatically but only through deliberate search. Perhaps the wordsmiths ad-
vantage is principally strategic; he or she has learned to examine each new word
for familiar parts and to think about their implications with respect to the words
usage and meaning. If so, then perhaps the objectives of our lessons on deriva-
tionally complex words should be rethought. Perhaps instead of teaching children
about any particular sets of roots or affixes, our objective should be one of devel-
oping childrens awareness of word structure and their inclination to look for and
think about such relations in new words.
As an inspiring example of the promise of this approach, I refer you to a
monograph by ORourke (1974). As ORourke led his students to make a habit of
seeking, comparing, contrasting, and categorizing the meanings and spellings of
complex words, their measurable vocabulary scores increased quite dramatically.
In addition, showing that these lessons had affected not just their knowledge
of particular words but also their thinking about them, the children tended to
create new words to suit their expressive needs while writingfor example, jec-
tor (hurler), tracted (pulled, hauled), audict (someone who likes to hear records),
intraction (pulling from within), solarscope (sun viewer), phonomatic (something
that makes sounds by itself), astrometer (a device that measures stars). While
some of these words are endearingly funny, others are soberingly legitimate.
In any case, it may also be wise to recognize that word roots and syllabic
units rarely coincide. In terms of syllables, for example, the word information may
be parsed into in-for-ma-tion; in terms of morphemes, it is in-form-ation. Research
has demonstrated that the spelling patterns to which children are asked to attend
during instruction significantly influence the patterns to which they do attend
during word recognition (Juel & Roper/Schneider, 1985). Research also indicates
that, for purposes of facilitating word recognition, it is familiarity with patterns
that occur in a large variety of words that is most helpful (Juel, 1983). Thus, while
798 Adams
To the extent that any word is both orally and visually familiar, this process
ensures that the meaning processor will receive activation from both the pho-
nological and the orthographic processor. As these contributions support and
interact with one another, they serve to ease and speed recognition of the word.
Further, as the response of the meaning processor is strengthened and focused, so
too is the activation that it passes back to the other processorsand the stronger
the feedback, the greater the learning. Thus, the contributions of the phonologi-
cal processor act to hasten and consolidate the direct connections between all the
processors, and that includes the direct connections between sight and meaning.
The connections running from the phonological processor back to the or-
thographic processor are equally important in supporting visual learning.
Specifically, where the efforts of the orthographic processor arouse pronounce-
able responses in the phonological processor, the phonological processor will
reciprocally send excitation right back. In this way, the feedback from the pho-
nological processor provokes the orthographic processor to attend to letters that
might otherwise be overlooked, even while helping it glue the whole, correctly
ordered string together. The prior knowledge and constraints offered by the pho-
nological processor play an indispensable role in helping young readers organize,
consolidate, and remember spelling patterns visually.
Finally, note that there is also an arrow running from the meaning processor
to the phonological processor in Figure 1. Because of this connection, the activa-
tion of a words meaning will send stimulation to the phonological units corre-
sponding to its pronunciation. The readers tendency to translate print to speech
is thus doubly stimulated, both from the words spelling and from its meaning.
This is one reason that phonological translation of print is so automaticand
beyond that, it completes the circularity and feedback of the system in both direc-
tions. It is this circularity and feedback that ultimately underlies the automatic-
ity of the word-recognition system. Because of this circularity, the responses of
all the processors speed and support one another wherever they are consistent;
wherever they are inconsistent, they are automatically corrected or flagged for
special attention.
The phonological processor has two other features that set it apart from the
others. First, like the orthographic processor, the phonological processor accepts
information from the outside, although the information it accepts is speech. (The
orthographic processor remains the only one to receive information directly from
the printed page.) Secondand this turns out to be an important asset in read-
ingthe knowledge represented within the phonological processor can be acti-
vated at will. We can speak, subvocalize, or otherwise generate speech images
whenever we wish.
800 Adams
to work with whole, cohesive grammatical unitswhole phrases or sentences
worth of wordsat once. Whether in listening or reading, the process through
which it does so is much the same (Jarvella, 1971; Kleiman, 1975). In either case,
the words of a message are presented and perceived one by one. And although
they are tentatively interpreted on the fly, they are fully digested only afterward,
when the clause or sentence is complete. In mystical deference to this process,
speakers drop their pitch and pause at the end of every sentence; by dropping
their pitch, they let their listeners know that its time to interpret, and by pausing,
they afford their listeners time to do so. Mimicking this rhythm, skillful readers
are found to march their eyes through all the words of a sentence from beginning
to end, and when they reach the period, they pause and think (Just & Carpenter,
1987).
Again, it is during these end-of-sentence pauses that listeners or readers ac-
tively construct and reflect on their interpretations, that they work out the collec-
tive meaning of the chain of words in memory and that meanings contribution
to their overall understanding of the conversation or text. Yet in order for this
interpretive process to succeed, the whole clause or sentence must still exist,
more or less intact, in the listeners or readers memory when she or he is ready
to work on it. So what does this have to do with phonological translations? A lot.
Whereas the visual system is designed for encoding spatial patterns and transi-
tions, the auditory system is designed for remembering ordered temporal patterns
of information. Thus, by thinking or speaking the words to themselves, skillful
readers effectively extend the longevity and holding capacity of their verbatim
memory. Preventing skillful readers from subvocalizing does not impair their
ability to interpret single, familiar words or simple sentences; on the other hand,
it severely disrupts their ability to remember or comprehend long or complex sen-
tences (Baddeley, 1979; Levy, 1977, 1978; Waters, Caplan, & Hildebrandt, 1987).
In keeping with this, you may notice that your own tendency to subvocalize be-
comes more noticeable when you are trying to read sentences that are especially
long and difficult.
Even though this particular advantage of phonological translation has noth-
ing to do with word identification per se, it points up one more reason the speed
and effortlessness of the word-recognition process is so important. Auditory
memory is highly sensitive to the pace with which information arrives (Dempster,
1981). If it takes a child too long to identify successive words, the beginning of
the sentence will fade from memory before the end has been registered. Further,
where a child is actively engaged in sounding out individual letters and syllables,
the phonological processor is necessarily unavailable for retaining the wording
of clauses. (For a discussion of the trade-offs between processing and storage
demands in the reading situation, see Daneman & Tardif, 1987; Perfetti, 1985.)
802 Adams
Summary
Relative to the overall literacy challenge, learning to recognize words really is
a very small component. Yet it is also wholly necessary. In the end, the print on
the page constitutes the basic perceptual data of reading. Rather than diverting
efforts in search of meaning, the readers letter- and word-wise processes supply
the text-based information on which comprehension depends. As fluent readers
move quickly and easily through the print, literal comprehension automatically
unfolds apace.
But neither is literal comprehension the goal of reading. The full interpreta-
tion of a complex text may require retrieval of particular facts or events that were
presented many pages earlier. It may also require consideration of knowledge and
construction of arguments that are entirely extraneous to the text. And it cer-
tainly requires the critical and inferential activities necessary for putting such
information together.
To be sure, it is this level of interpretation that we think of as true under-
standing. Yet interpretation at this level is not automatic; it requires active atten-
tion and can only be as fruitful as the effort and quality of thought that readers
invest in it. But the effort and thought that readers can invest depends, in turn, on
the ease and completeness with which they have executed the levels that support
it. Deep and ready working knowledge of letters, spelling patterns, and words,
and of the phonological translations of all three, are of inescapable importance to
both skillful reading and its acquisitionnot because they are the be-all or the
end-all of the reading process, but because they enable it.
1. How does the model that Adams developed help us understand why poor
readers block on long, polysyllabic words?
2. In the introduction to her model, Adams poses the question, Do skillful
readers use context to anticipate upcoming words so as to reduce the visual
detail they need from the text? (p. 785). How does her model answer that
question?
3. Do you agree or disagree with the importance that Adams gives to phono-
logical translation in her model? Explain your position in the context of her
model and your understanding of phonological processing.
4. Why do you think Adams decided to present a description of her models
four processors in the order she presents them?
Note
*When this chapter was written, Adams was at Bolt Beranek and Newman.
804 Adams
Kleiman, G.M. (1975). Speech recoding in reading. Olson, R., Wise, B., Conners, F., & Rack, J. (1990).
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, Organization, heritability, and remediation
14, 323339. of component word recognition and language
Kucera, H., & Francis, W.N. (1967). Computational skills in disabled readers. In T.H. Carr & B.A.
analysis of present-day American English. Levy (Eds.), Reading and its development (pp.
Providence, RI: Brown University Press. 261322). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Levy, B.A. (1977). Reading: Speech and meaning ORourke, J.P. (1974). Toward a science of vocabu-
processes. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal lary development. The Hague, the Netherlands:
Behavior, 16, 623628. Mouton.
Levy, B.A. (1978). Speech processes during reading. Otterman, L.M. (1955). The value of teaching pre-
In A.M. Lesgold, S.W. Pellegrino, S.W. Fokkema, fixes and word-roots. Journal of Educational
& R. Glaser (Eds.), Cognitive psychology and in- Research, 48, 611616.
struction. New York: Plenum. Patterson, K.E., & Coltheart, V. (1987). Phono
Liberman, I.Y., Shankweiler, D., Orlando, C., logical processes in reading: A tutorial review.
Harris, K.S., & Berti, F.B. (1971). Letter confu- In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance
sions and reversals of sequence in the beginning XII: The psychology of reading. Hillsdale, NJ:
reader: Implications for Ortons theory of devel- Erlbaum.
opmental dyslexia. Cortex, 7, 127142. Perfetti, C.A. (1985). Reading ability. New York:
Manelis, L., & Tharp, D. (1977). The process- Oxford University Press.
ing of affixed words. Memory and Cognition, 5, Perfetti, C.A., Bell, L.C., & Delaney, S.M. (1988).
690695. Automatic (prelexical) phonetic activation in
Masonheimer, P.E., Drum, P.A., & Ehri, L.C. silent word reading: Evidence from backward
(1984). Does environmental print identifica- masking. Journal of Memory and Language, 27,
tion lead children into word reading? Journal of 122.
Reading Behavior, 16, 257271. Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1987). Eye movements
Mayzner, M.S., & Tresselt, M.E. (1965). Tables of in reading: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart
single-letter and digram frequency-counts for (Ed.), Attention and performance XII: The psy-
various word-length and letter position combi- chology of reading (pp. 327362). Hillsdale, NJ:
nations. Psychonomic Monograph Supplements, 1, Erlbaum.
1332. Rumelhart, D.E., & McClelland, J.L. (1986). On
McClelland, J.L., & Elman, J.L. (1986). The learning the past tenses of English verbs. In J.L.
TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive McClelland & D.E. Rumelhart (Eds.), Parallel
Psychology, 18, 186. distributed processing, Vol. 2: Psychological and
McClelland, J.L., & Rumelhart, D.E. (1981). An biological models (pp. 216271). Cambridge, MA:
interactive activation model of context effects MIT Press.
in letter perception: Part 1, an account of basic Seidenberg, M.S. (1987). Sublexical structures in
findings. Psychological Review, 88, 373407. visual word recognition: Access units or or-
McConkie, G.W., & Zola, D. (1981). Language con- thographic redundancy. In M. Coltheart (Ed.),
straints and the functional stimulus in reading. Attention and performance XII: The psychology of
In A.M. Lesgold & C.A. Perfetti (Eds.), Interactive reading (pp. 245263). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
processes in reading (pp. 155175). Hillsdale, NJ: Seidenberg, M.S., & McClelland, J.L. (1989). A
Erlbaum. distributed, developmental model of word rec-
McKeown, M.G., Beck, I.L., Omanson, R.C., & ognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96,
Pople, M.T. (1985). Some effects of the nature 523568.
and frequency of vocabulary instruction on the Seidenberg, M.S., Tannenhaus, M.K., Leiman, J.M.,
knowledge and use of words. Reading Research & Bienkowski, M. (1982). Automatic access of
Quarterly, 20, 522535. the meanings of ambiguous words in context:
Mewhort, D.J.K., & Campbell, A.J. (1981). Toward Some limitations of knowledge-based process-
a model of skilled reading: An analysis of per- ing. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 489537.
formance in tachistoscopic tasks. In G.E. Spoehr, K.T. (1981). Word recognition in speech
MacKinnon & T.G. Waller (Eds.), Reading re- and reading: Toward a theory of language pro-
search: Advances in theory and practice (Vol. 3, cessing. In P.D. Eimas & J.L. Miller (Eds.),
pp. 39118). New York: Academic. Perspectives on the study of speech. Hillsdale, NJ:
Miller, G.A., & Gildea, P.M. (1987): How children Erlbaum.
learn words. Scientific American, 257(3), 9499. Stahl, S.A., & Fairbanks, M.M. (1986). The effects
Nagy, W.E., Anderson, R.C., & Herman, P.A. of vocabulary instruction: A model-based meta-
(1987). Learning word meanings from context analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56(1),
during normal reading. American Educational 72110.
Research Journal, 24, 237270. Stanovich, K.E. (1980). Toward an interactive-
Nagy, W.E., Herman, P.A., & Anderson, R.C. compensatory model of individual differences
(1985). Learning words from context. Reading in the development of reading fluency. Reading
Research Quarterly, 20, 233253. Research Quarterly, 16, 3271.
806 Adams
CH APTER 32
This chapter is adapted from The ConstructionIntegration Model of Text Comprehension and Its
Implications for Instruction, Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (5th ed., pp. 12701328), edited by
R.B. Ruddell and N.J. Unrau, 2004, Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Copyright 2004 by the
International Reading Association.
807
effortful problem solving. On the other hand, when this normal process breaks
down, the reader (or perceiver) becomes a problem solver who must figure out what
it is he or she reads (or sees). Comprehension in this technical sense is automatic
meaning construction via constraint satisfaction, without purposeful, conscious ef-
fort. Normal reading involves automatic comprehension, as well as conscious prob-
lem solving whenever the pieces of the puzzle do not fit together as they should.
The theory of text comprehension outlined here is a comprehension model
in the sense discussed, but it leaves room for problem solving and planning when
that becomes necessary to complement normal reading. This is a matter with con-
siderable educational implications because instruction by its very nature pushes
readers beyond what they already know and are comfortable with, requiring ac-
tive, effortful, resource-demanding problem-solving activities that are difficult to
maintain and direct.
808 Kintsch
representations, but so far they have not developed the tools to deal effectively
with imagery. Various systems are in use to represent the meaning of words.
Feature systems are used widely; for instance, bachelor has the features male and
unmarried, plus some others. Alternatively, word meanings are represented by
their position in a semantic structure: Shark is defined as a member of the cat-
egory fish, with special properties, such as dangerous. Or one can define word
meanings by their position in a semantic space: Lion might be characterized by
high values on the dimensions size and ferocity, whereas mouse would have low
values. High-dimensional, abstract semantic spaces are especially effective for
representing the meaning of words. Propositions are idea units, combining more
than one word in a schematic form: The hiker watches the elk with his binoculars is
a conceptual unit that relates, by means of the predicate watches, an agent, object,
and an instrument in a meaningful, conventional way. Propositions thus allow
the theorist to represent the meaning of sentences, independent of their syntactic
structure (e.g., a sentence in passive or active voice would be represented by the
same proposition). Furthermore, propositions can be combined to form repre-
sentations of whole texts, as described in more detail below. The structure of
these text representations is of great significance because it allows the theorist to
distinguish important ideas from mere detail, and it predicts how a text is com-
prehended and remembered.
Propositional structures are useful to represent the meaning of a text because
they tend to mimic the properties of how people represent the meaning of a text.
As yet we do not have comparable systems to represent mental images. Pictures
will not do, for much the same reason that a text is not well represented by the
actual words used: The picture does not make explicit the psychologically im-
portant aspects of an image. In the auditory domain, phonemic features capture
quite well the salient aspects of how people perceive and remember the sounds of
a language. However, visual feature systems have been only partially successful
and have limited use. Although propositions provide the theorist with a conve-
nient and workable representation for the meaning of texts, at present there really
is no language that we can use to represent the salient features of complex men-
tal images. This deficiency is a major reason why much of the research on text
comprehension has focused on the verbal aspects, neglecting the role of mental
imagery for all its acknowledged significance. We shall, however, point out that
significance wherever possible.
Note that this representation does not represent all information in a sentence
(e.g., the past tense in (2), which is not important enough in many situations in
which such propositional representations are used).
A complex proposition is a network of atomic propositions corresponding to
a (simple) sentence. Propositions are linked in a network either because they are
related referentially, as in (3), or because of propositional embedding (in (4) the
arguments of the proposition are themselves atomic propositions).
(3) The little boy chopped wood [CHOP, BOY, WOOD] [LITTLE, BOY]
(4) Although the boy was little, he chopped the wood
[ALTHOUGH] [LITTLE, BOY]
810 Kintsch
it is not a teaching tool). Unfortunately, because it depends on hand coding, it is
extremely laborious and not fully objective (a current guide is W. Kintsch, 1998,
Chap. 3.1.1).
The syntactic information in a sentence largely determines the structure of the
propositional network. For instance, the main verb of a sentence is taken to form the
superordinate proposition, and modifiers are subordinated to it, as in (3). However,
there is more structure in a discourse than the sentence syntax. Discourses are
organized globally, often according to conventional rhetorical formats. Thus, the
simplest stories are of the form settingcomplicationresolution; instructional
texts may employ various structures such as a compare-and-contrast schema or a
generalization-plus-examples schema. To distinguish this discourse-level structure
from the sentence-level structure, the terms macrostructure and microstructure are
used. The microstructure of a text is the network of propositions that represents the
meaning of the text. One can think of it as a translation from the actual words used
into an idea-level format. The macrostructure is the global organization of these
ideas into higher order units. Thus, a story may have many propositions linked in
a complex network, but at the macrostructure level, these propositions are grouped
into the conventional sections: setting, complication, and resolution. However, a
writer also could have chosen a different way of telling his story, for example, start-
ing with the resolution and then filling in the setting and complication in the form
of a flashback. That approach yields a very different macrostructure, while the mi-
crostructure might not be changed very much.
Microstructure and macrostructure together form the textbase, the semantic
underpinning of a text. However, for purposes of psychological research on text
comprehension, as well as for understanding educational practice, it is impor-
tant to distinguish a further level of text representation, the situation model. The
situation model represents the information provided by the text, independent of
the particular manner in which it was expressed in the text, and integrated with
background information from the readers prior knowledge. What sort of situa-
tion model readers construct depends very much on their goals in reading the
text as well as the amount of relevant prior knowledge they have. Thus, coopera-
tive and attentive readers will more or less form the same textbase micro- and
macrostructures, as invited by the author of the text. But depending on readers
interests, purposes, and background knowledge, they may form widely different
situation models. In instruction, it is usually the situation model that the student
forms from reading a text that is of interest; the teacher does not care whether the
student can recite the text but whether the student understood it correctly and,
for future use, was able to integrate the textual information with whatever back-
ground knowledge there was.
Situation models are not necessarily verbal. Texts are verbal, and textbases
are propositional structures, but to model the situation described by a text, peo-
ple often resort to imagery. Mental images of maps, diagrams, and pictures are
integrated with verbal information in ways not well understood by researchers.
812 Kintsch
Table 1. The Macrostructure of the Story Connected
Setting
Location: on a farm
Time: old days
Actors: Katie, Tom, and their parents
Electricity is coming to town.
The children wonder what sort of appliance their parents are going to buy.
Complication
Their father asks them to guess what electricity-using appliance they will get first.
Katie finds out how electricity works and what it is used for.
She finds out that the appliance is not to produce either heat or motion.
Resolution
Because there are two wires on the electric line being installed, the first appliance
their parents buy will be a telephone.
really know what an appliance is, this may be a major stumbling block, requiring
the reader to regress and figure out that the appliances are the lamp (which makes
light), the iron (which makes heat), and the sewing machine (whose parts moved).
What is necessary here is a conscious, strategic process of meaning construction,
814 Kintsch
The Process of Comprehension:
Construction and Integration
Most of the research on reading deals with the decoding problem: How do read-
ers translate the written text into words and sentences? In other words, how is
the surface representation generated from a written text? This is, of course, an
extremely important question with complex answers, but it is not the question
that will be addressed here. Instead, we shall assume this level of representation
as given and look at the formation of the textbase and the situation model.
Microstructure
Given a texta structured string of sentenceshow are the corresponding idea
units derived, and how are they organized? For the most part, the language pro-
vides good cues as to the underlying ideas: The goat ate the grass unproblematically
translates into [EAT, GOAT, GRASS]. However, language is full of ambiguities.
We understand both of the following sentences:
(6) The grade was too steep.
(7) His grade was an A.
There are two kinds of explanations of how people deal with such ambigui-
ties, top-down theories and bottom-up theories. According to the top-down view,
a schema filters out incorrect interpretations: We know we are talking about a
hill, or a student, and hence assign the right meaning to grade; the nursepatient
schema dictates the referent for she; and the grizzly bear schema specifies who
has to be afraid. Schema theory is very powerful (e.g., Schank & Abelson, 1977),
and schema effects in perception and comprehension are well documented.
Nevertheless, schema-as-filter theories of comprehension cannot fully account
for comprehension processes and have been replaced by theories that assign a
more decisive role to bottom-up processes, such as the constructionintegration
(CI) model (W. Kintsch, 1988, 1998). Instead of trying to construct only the cor-
rect meaning of a sentence, the CI model generates several plausible meanings
in parallel and only later, when a rich context is available, sorts out which con-
struction is the right one. This sorting out is done by means of an integration or
constraint satisfaction process that suppresses those constructions that do not fit
in well with the context and strengthens those that do. Specifically, activation is
spread around in the propositional network that has been constructed, including
the contradictory elements; the activation eventually settles on those nodes of
the network that hang together, while outliers and isolated nodes become deac-
tivated. Thus, in (6) and (7), propositions will be constructed initially involving
NURSE-SCHEMA
where the dotted line indicates an inhibitory link. In the integration process, the
correct proposition will win out because it is connected to prior knowledge about
nurses and patients (here labeled the NURSE-SCHEMA). Thus, schemata play a
role in the CI model, too, not as filters that control construction but as context
that influences the integration process. The inference in (9) is handled similarly:
In the construction phase, the model is not sure whether the hiker or the bear is
afraid, but prior knowledge settles that question during the integration phase.
Thus, the CI model uses a bottom-up construction phase in which contradic-
tory assumptions are explored, resulting in an incoherent network that needs to
be cleaned up in the integration phase. The computational advantage of such a
dual process is that the construction rules do not have to be very smart because
errors can be corrected in the integration phase. Psychological data that suggest
that human comprehension processes employ a similar scheme are discussed in a
subsequent section on word identification.
To illustrate the construction of a microstructure, let us return to the
Connected story discussed earlier. The list of propositions in Table 2 corre-
sponds to the network shown in Figure 1. The links in Figure 1 are based on
referential overlap between propositions. Two obligatory inferences are required
to identify the pronouns for P8 and P12.
The final activation values for the network in Figure 1, once the process of
spreading activation has stabilized, are shown in Figure 2. Figure 2 implies that
after reading this paragraph, the strongest information in memory should be that
Katie bought a belt, browsed in the general store, and saw an electric iron, electric
lamps, and a sewing machine. On a recall test, those should be the items most
frequently recalled. A large number of studies have borne out such recall predic-
tions (e.g., W. Kintsch, 1974).
Also shown in Figure 2 are the strength values obtained if the reader makes
the optional inference [IS-APPLIANCE, IRON, LAMP, SEWING-MACHINE].
This inference changes the picture a great deal by emphasizing the relationship
between the (complex) propositions corresponding to the last two sentences of
the text. It will be remembered that this was an instructional text supposed to
teach about electricity. Note that without this deep processing (the inference
about appliances), the present paragraph would not contribute much to the goal
of learning physics.
816 Kintsch
Figure 1. The CI Network for a Paragraph From the Connected Story
(Corresponds to the Proposition List in Table 2)
IN-TOWN
FATHER FILL-GASTANK
OF-MODEL-T
WHILE
BUY-BELT
KATIE
FOR-SEWING-MACHINE
BROWSE-STORE
ELECTRIC-IRON
SEE ELECTRIC-LAMP
SEWING-MACH-WITHOUT
IS-APPLIANCE
APPLIANCE-MAKE-LIGHT
REALIZE
APPLIANCE-MAKE-MOVE
Macrostructure
Generally (except for the case of very brief texts), understanding a text requires
formulating a mental representation of its macrostructure. Just what role a propo-
sition plays in a text depends on its function in the overall structure: It may be
part of the gist of an essay, or it may be an expendable detail; it may be a crucial
link in the causal chain of a story, or it may be irrelevant to the main story line.
To capture this kind of intuition, van Dijk (1980) has introduced the concept of a
macrostructure. The macrostructure of a text consists of those propositions that
are globally relevant, that form its gist in everyday language. Macrostructures are
frequently but not necessarily schematic; that is, they are based on conventional
rhetorical forms. Thus, narratives have a conventional structure in our culture;
essays may be in the form of arguments, or definitions-plus-illustrations, and so
on (see van Dijk & Kintsch, 1983, Chap. 2.9, for a detailed discussion). Van Dijk
(1980) has enumerated three rules that describe the formation of macrostructures:
(1) selection of macrorelevant propositions (and correspondingly the deletion of
propositions that are not macrorelevant); (2) generalization, that is, substitution of
a superordinate proposition for subordinate propositions; and (3) construction, the
substitution of a general proposition describing a whole sequence of interrelated
818 Kintsch
propositions. Given a text and a set of macropropositions, these rules can be used
to show how the macropropositions were derived from the text. However, these
rules are post hoc: They describe how macropropositions were derived after the
fact, but they are not rules that allow us to generate macropropositions from a
text. They do not tell us what is to be deleted or what is to be generalized. In order
to use these rules, one must already know what is macrorelevant, what can be
subsumed under a construction, and so on. In other words, the macrorules are
incomplete because they do not include the conditions for their application. This
shortcoming has seriously limited the modeling of macrostructures, which is un-
fortunate because macrostructures play such an important role in comprehension
(e.g., W. Kintsch & van Dijk, 1978).
A logical analysis of the relations linking linguistic units that overcomes
some of the limitations of macrorules has been suggested by Le (2002), who dis-
tinguishes three types of relations among text units: (1) coordination (either in
the form of elaboration or parallelism), (2) subordination, and (3) superordina-
tion. After one specifies the relations among text units (sentences or complex
propositions), hierarchical structures at levels higher than the sentence can be
generated that allow the identification of macropropositions. To illustrate Les
procedure, consider the brief paragraph analyzed in Table 2 that consists of four
complex propositions, C1C4. As shown in Table 4, C1 is subordinated to C2; C2
and C3 are coordinated, C3 being an elaboration of C2. C4 is logically superordi-
nated to C3 because it expresses a generalization based on C3. Thus, Les analysis
identifies C4the complex proposition at the highest level in the paragraph hier-
archyas the macroproposition for that paragraph.
A different approach to the generation of macrostructures has been taken by
W. Kintsch (2002). It is not based on a logical analysis of the relations among text
units, but rather on the centrality of the content of the (complex) propositions.
Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA; Landauer, McNamara, Dennis, & Kintsch, 2007)
C4
C2 C3
C1
Situation Models
The problems faced by the researcher trying to model the formation of situa-
tion models are formidable. Textbases at the micro- and macrolevel are tightly
constrained by the nature of the text, which a faithful reader must respect. The
text, however, is only one factor in the situation model: The readers goals, in-
terests, beliefs, and prior knowledge also must be taken into account. Generally,
these are only incompletely known. Furthermore, even the form that a situation
model takes is not fully constrained: Situation models may be imagery based, in
which case the propositional formalism currently used by most models fails us.
Nevertheless, in well-defined contexts, modeling situation models is quite fea-
sible and will surely be the focus of research on text comprehension in the next
decade.2
How one might approach this task has been demonstrated by Schmalhofer,
McDaniel, and Keefe (2002). The CI model simulates the construction of a text-
base: A network of propositions derived from the text is constructed and inte-
grated via a spreading activation constraint satisfaction process. Schmalhofer et
al. added two other networks to the propositional network: (1) a surface level,
where the nodes are linguistic structures and words; and (2) a situation represen-
tation, where the nodes are schemata. Nodes are interconnected at each level, but
820 Kintsch
importantly, there are also links between levels, so a sentence in the surface struc-
ture is connected to the corresponding proposition in the textbase, which in turn
is connected to the appropriate schema at the situation model level. Schmalhofer
et al. illustrate their model with an example that is reproduced here in simplified
form in Figure 3. The text is a story about a movie stunt that results in a fatal ac-
cident. For the surface level of analysis, one sentence is shown, with word units
L9 to L12 and syntactic units S8 and S9; of course, all this is part of a much larger
network with rich interconnections not shown here. The units at the surface level
are connected not only to each other but also to the propositional units at the
textbase level. The propositions of the textbase are linked, in turn, to the situa-
tion model units, which here are schemata. The STUNT-SCHEMA has been partly
filled in with information from previous portions of the text, but it is updated
now with current information from the sentence being processed: An action and
a result slot are filled in. When activation is spread in such a triple network, it is
TEXTBASE
SUDDENLY [FALL[ACTRESS]]
DEAD[ACTRESS]
S8 S9
Note. L = word units. S = syntactic units. Based on A Unified Model for Predictive and Bridging
Inferences, by F. Schmalhofer, M.A. McDaniel, and D. Keefe, 2002, Discourse Processes, 33(2),
105132.
Word Identification
A great deal of research has gone into determining how the letter shapes on a
page are turned into meaningful words. The results of this work will not be re-
viewed here because they have been discussed in other chapters of this volume
(see Ehri & McCormick, Chapter 12; Kuhn & Stahl, Chapter 15; Nagy & Scott,
Chapter 18). Instead, a body of research will be introduced here that comple-
ments this research in that it is concerned with the question of how readers arrive
at the correct sense or meaning of a word 3 when they encounter it in a discourse
822 Kintsch
context. To give a concrete example of what the issue is here, consider the follow-
ing sentences:
(10) A beautiful sight in downtown Denver is the mint.
(11) A fragrant tea is made with mint.
How do we know that mint is a building in the first sentence but the leaves of a
plant in the second? Mint is a homonym in English, that is, a word with more than
one meaning, and readers obviously and effortlessly find the right meaning when
they read (10) and (11). Similarly, when words with only a single meaning are
used in different senses, readers readily perceive what is meant:
(12) The fox ran faster than the hedgehog.
(13) The chancellors decree ran into strong opposition.
The correct response for the last three items was yes, but interesting differ-
ences in response speed were observed. When the test item was presented imme-
diately after the sentence, response times for associated items were significantly
shorter than response times to unrelated control items, whether or not the asso-
ciation was contextually appropriate. That is, mint in (10) primed both money and
tea. When the test item was presented with a 350-millisecond (msec) delay after
the sentence, the response time for the contextually appropriate associate was
shorter than the response time for either the control word or the inappropriate
associate. That is, 350 msec after reading (10), only money was primed, not tea.
The Till et al. (1988) data clearly contradict the schema-as-filter model and
support a model that posits a bottom-up activation of all word meanings, fol-
lowed by a contextual constraint satisfaction process that deactivates inappropri-
ate meaning. Indeed, these data were one of the original inspirations for the CI
model (W. Kintsch, 1988). Today there exists a very large and complex literature
on this subject, which cannot be reviewed here (see, e.g., Rayner, Pacht, & Duffy,
1994). Results depend on various boundary conditions, but on the whole, they
effectively rule out the schema-as-filter model. It appears that, generally, multiple
meanings and senses of a word are activated initially but that context-inappropri-
ate meanings and senses are suppressed rapidly.
It is difficult to imagine, however, how such a meaning selection model could
work. Just what are the cues that allow the selection of the right meaning or sense
among so many alternatives? Furthermore, just what are the alternatives in the
mental lexicon? How do we decide how many meanings or senses a word has?
People learn to use words in ever-novel ways. Can a mental lexicon in which every
use must somehow be explicitly defined do justice to this complexity? What if the
different word meanings and senses are not predefined in a mental lexicon but
emerge in context? How could such a generative lexicon be constructed? One at-
tempt to do so invokes the idea of semantic elements that can be combined to form
all meanings, much like the 100+ chemical elements can be combined to form all
the manifold substances in the universe. This approach has not been successful,
however, because no one has been able to come up with a principled list of seman-
tic elements or the rule system that would allow us to construct all meanings from
the combination of these elements. An alternative approach that appears promis-
ing to achievement of the goal of a generative lexicon is based on some recent
developments in statistical semantics.
824 Kintsch
Macrostructures as envisaged by van Dijk (1980) and discussed in van Dijk
and Kintsch (1983) are hierarchies of propositions. Macropropositions put into
words are summary statements at different levels of generality. They subsume
what the different sections of a text are about. They are derived from the text by
the operations of selection, generalization, and construction, but propositional
macrostructures cannot be computed automatically from a text. The macrorules
merely help us explain what can be done, but they are not algorithms or compu-
tational procedures that generate macropropositions from a text automatically.
A computationally more feasiblebut in other ways more limitedalternative
for the representation of macrostructures is provided by LSA (Landauer et al.,
2007). LSA serves as a model of how human verbal knowledge is represented and
is of considerable benefit for modeling the use of knowledge in comprehension.
Instead of representing the meaning of a sentence by a proposition, the meaning
can be represented as a vector in an existing high-dimensional semantic space.
For some purposes, such a representation is all that is needed. For example, one
can compare new texts, such as summaries students write, with these macrovec-
tors; one can compute the importance or typicality of sentences from the text,
and so on.
For other purposes, verbal statements corresponding to macropropositions
are needed. W. Kintsch (2002) has described how LSA can be used to select topic
sentences from a text and to generate a summary by concatenating these topic sen-
tences. There is more to a summary than just selecting topic sentences, but it is
instructive to see what can be achieved in that wayand what is still missing. The
text analyzed by Kintsch is a chapter titled Wind Energy, taken from a junior
high school science textbook. It is 960 words long and divided by its author into
six sections, each with its own subtitles. Thus, the author indicates the intended
macrostructure and even provides appropriate macropropositions, in the form of
six subtitles. Macrorules can be used to explain where these subtitles come from.
Consider the following paragraph (the second subsection of the chapter):
(14) The history of windmills
Since ancient times, people have harnessed the winds energy. Over 5,000
years ago, the ancient Egyptians used the wind to sail ships on the Nile River.
Later, people built windmills to grind wheat and other grains. The early
windmills looked like paddle wheels. Centuries later, the people in Holland
improved the windmill. They gave it propeller-type blades. Holland is still fa-
mous for its windmills. In this country, the colonists used windmills to grind
wheat and corn, to pump water, and to cut wood at sawmills. Today people
still sometimes use windmills to grind grain and pump water, but they also
use new wind machines to make electricity.
or
(16) The history of windmills.4
Thus, macrorules allow us to postdict, or explain, what the author did. But the
application of these rules depends on our intuitions about the text and our knowl-
edge about it. By themselves, these rules cannot compute anything.
LSA provides a computational mechanism that can compute macrostructures
of a kind. For instance, we can compute a vector in LSA space that is the centroid
of all the words in paragraph (14). Such a vector may seem to be totally uselessit
is, after all, a list of 300 uninterpretable numbersbut that is not so. It can be
quite useful, for instance, to decide how appropriate a proposed subtitle is. The
cosine between the paragraph vector and the proposed subtitle is a measure of
how close the subtitle is to the paragraph as a whole. For instance, (15) and (16)
have rather similar cosines with the paragraph: .39 and .48, respectivelyhigh
enough to indicate that they are both acceptable summary statements. But sup-
pose we had chosen an ill-considered subtitle for the paragraph such as Holland
is still famous, or something totally inappropriate such as Rain douses forest
fires. The cosine measure would have allowed us to reject these choices (the co-
sine is .26 in the first case and only .05 in the secondboth much lower than the
cosines for (15) and (16)).
There are other uses for vector representation of a macrostructure, too. For
instance, we can compute how closely related the sections of a text are to each
other. This kind of information can be of interest in various ways. If two sections
of a text are very closely related, one might consider combining them. Or if two
similar sections are separated by a dissimilar one in the text, one might consider
reordering the sections of the text. We also can obtain a measure of how impor-
tant a section is to the overall text. One way to do this is to compute the cosine
between the whole text and each section.
To generate the full range of macropropositions is beyond the scope of LSA;
operations such as generalization and construction are not readily modeled within
this framework. But we can generate a degenerate macrostructure using only the
selection operation. For each section, we can find the most typical sentence in the
section. For this purpose, we define most typical as the sentence with the highest
average cosine to all the other sentences in the section. This will not always yield
826 Kintsch
the best result because the ideal macroproposition may involve generalization or
construction, but it will serve as a reasonable approximation.
Thus, some progress can be made toward a computational model of macro-
structure generation. LSA allows us to generate an abstract vector representation
of the macrostructure of a text (at least in those cases where the subsections of the
text are clearly indicated, as in the example above). Furthermore, procedures can
be devised to select the most typical sentence for each section of a text. However,
that does not make a summary yet, and the operations for reducing the selected
typical sentence to an essential phrase or fragment depend on more analytic pro-
cedures that go beyond LSA.
There are other, more practical uses of LSAs ability to represent the content
of a text mathematically and compare it with other texts. For instance, we can
express the summary written by a student as a vector and compare it with the
vector of the to-be-summarized text. If the cosine between summary and text is
high, the summary has much the same content as the original text. However, if
the cosine is low, the summary does not reflect the content of the original text. A
system, called Summary Street, that employs this method to help students write
better summaries has been used with considerable success in some classrooms
(E. Kintsch et al., 2000; E. Kintsch, Caccamise, Franzke, Johnson, & Dooley,
2007). For instance, students in sixth-grade classes were routinely asked to write
summaries of chapters of their science textbooks. The teachers assigned a text
to be summarized, say, on energy sources (coal, wind, petroleum, etc.) or Meso-
American civilizations (Incan, Mayan, or Aztec). Each text is usually composed
of four or five sections, and the teachers wanted the content of each section to
be covered in the summary. Furthermore, the teachers required the summary to
be of a certain length, say, between 150 and 200 words. The students write their
summaries on an interface that is much like a standard word processor and send
them to the LSA system for analysis via the Web. The feedback is received almost
immediately and involves a number of steps.
Content feedback indicates whether all sections of the text have been covered
in the summary. For this purpose, the cosine between the students summary and
each of the sections of a text are computed. If a cosine is below a certain threshold
value, the student is told that this section is not adequately covered in the sum-
mary. The student then has the option to look at the appropriate section of the
text on the computer screen and add some material about this section to the sum-
mary. If the threshold is exceeded for all sections, the student is told that he or
she has now covered all parts of the text. Because the length of the summaries is
restricted to avoid extensive copying from the source texts, students are told how
long their summaries are so far and which of their sentences may be redundant
or irrelevant.
Summary Street has been shown to be effective in helping students write bet-
ter summaries. When summary writing was compared with and without sys-
tem feedback (Wade-Stein & Kintsch, 2004), the analysis showed that students
were willing to work harder and longer when given feedback. Indeed, their time
Classification of Inferences
A distinction should be made between problem-solving processes on the one hand,
where there are premises from which some conclusion is drawn (not necessarily
by the rules of logic)which may be justly called inferencesand knowledge-
retrieval processes on the other hand, where a gap in the text is bridged by some
piece of preexisting knowledge that has been retrieved (W. Kintsch, 1998). Both
inferences proper and knowledge retrieval may be either automatic (and usually
unconscious) or controlled (and usually conscious and strategic). This classifica-
tion results in the 2-by-2 table shown in Table 5.
828 Kintsch
Retrieval adds preexisting information to a text from long-term memory.
Generation, in contrast, produces new information by deriving it from informa-
tion in the text by some inference procedure. Thus, while the term inference is suit-
able for information-generation processes, it is a misnomer for retrieval processes.
A prototypical example for cell A, the automatic retrieval process that en-
riches the information in a text, would be the activation of with a hammer by John
nailed down a board, or cars have doors by A car stopped. The door opened. In both
cases sufficient retrieval cues for the information retrieved exist in short-term
memory. These cues are linked with pertinent information in long-term memory.
Such knowledge use is automatic and rapid, and it places no demands on cogni-
tive resources.
There are two theories that describe automatic knowledge retrieval. One is
the long-term working memory theory of Ericsson and Kintsch (1995), which
is described in more detail in the next section of this chapter. According to the
long-term working memory theory, for well-practiced associations, retrieval cues
in short-term memory are linked to contents in long-term memory, which thereby
become directly available, thus expanding the capacity of working memory. An
alternative model for this kind of knowledge retrieval is the resonance theory of
Myers (Myers, OBrien, Albrecht, & Mason, 1994). According to this model, cues
in short-term memory produce a resonance in long-term memory, so the reso-
nating items become available for further processing in working memory. Thus,
either via retrieval structures or resonance, relevant, strongly related items in
long-term memory become potential parts of working memory, creating a long-
term working memory that is much richer than the severely capacity-restricted
short-term working memory. Indeed, it is only this long-term working memory
that makes discourse comprehension (or, indeed, any other expert performance)
possible. Smooth, efficient functioning would be impossible if we had no way
of expanding working-memory capacity beyond the rigid limits of short-term
memory.
In cell B of Table 5 are cases where automatic retrieval is not possible. That
is, the cues present in short-term memory do not retrieve relevant information
that bridge whatever gap exists in the text. An extended search of memory is
required to yield the needed information. A memory search is a strategic, con-
trolled, resource-demanding process in which the cues available in short-term
memory are used to retrieve other likely cues from long-term memory that, in
turn, are capable of retrieving what is needed. Consider the following sentences:
(17) Danny wanted a new bike. He worked as a waiter.
Purely automatic, associative elaboration might not retrieve the causal chain from
want-bike to buy-bike to money to work. However, a directed search for causal con-
nections between the two sentences would easily generate these by-no-means-
obscure links. In all probability, genre-specific strategies exist to guide such
search processes. In a story, one would look for causal links. In a legal argument,
one routinely looks for contradictions. In an algebraic word problem, algebraic
the statement The turtles are above the fish is immediately available to a reader.
Indeed, readers often are unable to distinguish whether they were explicitly told
this information (e.g., Bransford, Barclay, & Franks, 1972). Note, however, that
this is not merely a question of knowledge retrieval as in doors are parts of cars:
The statement the turtles are above the fish is not something that already exists in
long-term memory and is now retrieved, but it is generated during the compre-
hension process. The reason why it is so highly available in the readers working
memory is, presumably, that the fish-log-and-turtle scene is encoded as an im-
age, and this mental image constitutes a highly effective retrieval structure that
provides ready access to all its partsnot just the verbal expression used in its
construction.
The information that allows the reader to infer that the turtles are above the
fish is, presumably, in the form of a spatial image. It is given directly by the im-
age that serves as the situation model representation of the sentence in question.
Indeed, at this level of representation, there is no difference between explicit and
implicit statements. A difference only exists at the level of the textbase and sur-
face representation, which, however, may not always be effective (as in the experi-
ments of Bransford et al., 1972, in which subjects could not distinguish between
explicit and implicit statements, given study and test sentences as in the example
discussed here).
However, what happens in cell C of Table 5 should hardly be called an infer-
ence either. It is simply a case, in which due to the analog nature of the mental
representation involved, more information is generated in forming a situation
model than was explicit in the text. The term inference really should be reserved
for cell D of Table 5. This is the domain of deductive reasoning. It is a domain that
extends far beyond text comprehension, although deductive reasoning undoubt-
edly plays an important role in text comprehension, too. Explicit reasoning comes
into play when comprehension proper breaks down. When the network does not
integrate, and the gaps in the text cannot be bridged any other way, then reason-
ing is called for as the ultimate repair procedure.
Inferences (real inferences, as in cell D) require specific inference proce-
dures. What these inference operations are is a matter of considerable contro-
versy in psychologywhether inference proceeds by rule (Rips, 1994) or mental
830 Kintsch
model (Johnson-Laird, Byrne, & Schaeken, 1992). Inferences in domains where
the basic representation is an action or perceptual representation, that is, analog
rather than linguistic or abstract, probably involve operations on mental models.
Inferences in truly symbolic, abstract domains may be by rule. Inferences in the
linguistic domain, where the representation is at the narrative level, may be based
on mental models but also could involve purely verbal inference rules.
832 Kintsch
with rain, that node is most likely lost from working memory. Hence, although
the retrieval structures in the readers long-term memory make available both
antecedent and consequent information, only the former is likely to survive the
integration process and become a stable component of the readers text memory.
834 Kintsch
of decoding processes, rather than comprehension. To focus research on decod-
ing was a perfectly defensible and successful strategy: We now have a fairly good
understanding of the cognitive bases of decoding processes in reading and about
reading instruction in the early grades. Surely, there remain problems to be re-
solved, but there exists an underlying consensus today about early reading in-
struction in the United States, as exemplified by the National Research Councils
report Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children (Snow, Burns, & Griffin,
1998). Educators know what to do, even if getting it done in schools on a national
scale is still another matter.
There also is agreement among reading researchers today that research on
reading comprehension lags far behind research on decoding processes and early
reading instruction and that it is time to shift the research focus onto reading
comprehension beyond the early years. Recent assessments of research needs by
the RAND Reading Study Group (2002) and the Strategic Education Research
Partnership report of the National Research Councils Panel on Learning and
Instruction (Donovan, Wigdor, & Snow, 2003) agree on the need for a better un-
derstanding of the processes of text comprehension as well as instructional meth-
ods to improve comprehension.
My goal in this chapter has been to show that there exists a solid basis for fur-
ther research in reading comprehension. We do not have to start from zero; there
is a sparse but solid database, as well as a theoretical framework, that can serve
at least as a good starting point for further research on reading comprehension.
Throughout this chapter, open research questions have been pointed out, most
pressingly about the formation of situation models and the modeling of macro-
structures. There is much to be learned, but we also have already learned quite
a bit about comprehension. This chapter was not intended as a general review of
research on comprehension, but rather as a description of one particular research
program and theoretical approach. A broader discussion would certainly have
provided further evidence of the considerable progress made in the study of read-
ing comprehension in recent years.
In the meantime, the way we read is changing: Web-based materials have
become more and more important. Thus, comprehension research must deal with
hypertext and multimedia because students today depend on these sources for
information and learning. How comprehension theory can be expanded to incor-
porate these modern developments has been discussed by Butcher and Kintsch
(2013).
The explicit goal of the comprehension research presented here is to inform
instructional practice. As yet, this link is weak because there are so many un-
answered questions and limited, conditional answers, but there is no reason to
suppose that a focused research effort in this area would not yield results that
achieve this goal.
Theories of discourse comprehension such as the one presented here are based
on data from proficient readers. Indeed, these readers, as long as they read famil-
iar material, can be considered to be comprehension experts. Comprehension for
836 Kintsch
experiment for every new question; instead, we need a broad theoretical frame-
work that provides reasonably good answers to these questions. Educational re-
searchers need a reliable theory to navigate by, much as engineers do in other
fields, when they only occasionally resort to experiment because they know they
can rely on their computations, except for special problems.
Notes
1
The term proposition was borrowed from logic, where it is used quite differently.
2
The distinction between textbase and situation model is made for the convenience of the theo-
rist; mental representation integrates aspects of both.
3
Different word meanings are unrelated, as in bank-(of river) and bank-(financial institution);
different word senses are related, as in chill-(bodily coldness with shivering) and chill-(moderate
coldness).
4
For comparison, the autosummary computed by MS Word is Later, people built windmills to
grind wheat and other grains.
5
Based in part on W. Kintsch (1998, Chap. 6).
R eferences
Albrecht, J.E., & OBrien, E.J. (1995). Goal process- interpretive approach. Cognitive Psychology, 3,
ing and the maintenance of global coherence. In 193209.
R.F. Lorch & E.J. OBrien (Eds.), Sources of co- Butcher, K.R., & Kintsch, W. (2013). Text compre-
herence in reading (pp. 263278). Hillsdale, NJ: hension and discourse processing. In I.B. Weiner
Erlbaum. (Series Ed.), A.F. Healy, & R.W. Proctor (Vol.
Albrecht, J.E., OBrien, E.J., Mason, R.A., & Myers,
Eds.), Experimental psychology: Vol. 4. Handbook
J.L. (1995). The role of perspective in the ac-
cessibility of goals during reading. Journal of of psychology (2nd ed., pp. 578604). Hoboken,
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Cognition, 21, 364372. Donovan, M.S., Wigdor, A.K., & Snow, C.E. (Eds.).
Bransford, J.D., Barclay, J.R., & Franks, J.J. (1972). (2003). Strategic Education Research Partnership.
Sentence memory: A constructive versus Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
838 Kintsch
OBrien, E.J., Shank, D.M., Myers, J.L., & Rayner, K. context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and
(1988). Elaborative inferences during reading: Verbal Behavior, 18, 645659.
Do they occur on-line? Journal of Experimental Tapiero, I. (2007). Situation models and levels of
Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, coherence: Toward a definition of comprehension.
14(3), 410420. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Perfetti, C.A. (1993). Why inferences might be re- Till, R.E., Mross, E.F., & Kintsch, W. (1988).
stricted. Discourse Processes, 16(1/2), 181192. Time course of priming for associate and infer-
Perrig, W., & Kintsch, W. (1985). Propositional ence words in a discourse context. Memory &
and situational representations of text. Journal Cognition, 16(4), 283298.
of Memory and Language, 24, 503518. Todaro, S., Millis, K., & Dandotkar, S. (2010).
RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for The impact of semantic and causal relatedness
understanding: Toward an R&D program in read- and reading skill on standards of coherence.
ing comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Discourse Processes, 47(5), 421446.
Rayner, K., Pacht, J.M., & Duffy, S.A. (1994). Effects Trabasso, T., & Suh, S. (1993). Understanding text:
of prior encounter and global discourse bias on Achieving explanatory coherence through on-
the processing of lexically ambiguous words: line inferences and mental operations in work-
Evidence from eye fixations. Journal of Memory ing memory. Discourse Processes, 16(1/2), 334.
and Language, 33, 527544. van der Meer, E., Beyer, R., Heinze, B., & Badel,
Rips, L.J. (1994). The psychology of proof: Deductive I. (2002). Temporal order relations in lan-
reasoning in human thinking. Cambridge, MA: guage comprehension. Journal of Experimental
MIT Press. Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,
Sachs, J.S. (1967). Recognition memory for syntac- 28(4), 770779.
tic and semantic aspects of connected discourse. van Dijk, T.A. (1980). Macrostructures: An interdis-
Perception and Psychophysics, 2, 437442. ciplinary study of global structures in discourse, in-
Schank, R.C., & Abelson, R.P. (1977). Scripts, plans, teraction, and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
goals, and understanding: An inquiry into human van Dijk, T.A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of
knowledge structures. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. discourse comprehension. New York: Academic
Schmalhofer, F., McDaniel, M.A., & Keefe, D. Press.
(2002). A unified model for predictive and Wade-Stein, D., & Kintsch, E. (2004). Summary
bridging inferences. Discourse Processes, 33(2), Street: Interactive computer support for writing.
105132. Cognition and Instruction, 22(3), 333362.
Singer, M., Graesser, A.C., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Zwaan, R.A., Magliano, J.P., & Graesser, A.C.
Minimal or global inference during reading. (1995). Dimensions of situation model con-
Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 421441. struction in narrative comprehension. Journal of
Snow, C.E., Burns, M.S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Cognition, 21, 386397.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Zwaan, R.A., & Radvansky, G.A. (1998). Situation
Swinney, D.A. (1979). Lexical access during sen- models in language comprehension and mem-
tence comprehension: (Re)consideration of ory. Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 162185.
T
here is considerable evidence concerning the contributions of lower-level
word processes, higher-level processes, and working memory to individual
differences in reading comprehension performance. However, because the
bulk of the research has focused on a single source of individual differences in
isolation, little is known about the relationships among these sources (Cornoldi,
De Beni, & Pazzaglia, 1996; McNamara & Magliano, 2009; Perfetti, Landi, &
Oakhill, 2005) or whether one or all of them make separate and important contri-
butions to reading comprehension (Cornoldi et al., 1996). Furthermore, although
most theories of reading comprehension provide details about the nature of men-
tal representations of text, they frequently fail to account for complex relation-
ships among the sources of individual differences that both form these mental
representations and predict reading comprehension performance (McNamara
& Magliano, 2009). The present study addresses these shortcomings by using
structural equation models (SEMs) to examine the relationships among sources
of individual differences in reading comprehension for proficient adult readers.
Specifically, the principal SEM tested in this study, which is called the cognitive
components-resource model of reading comprehension (CC-R model), proposes a
set of relationships among (a) lower-level processes that decode words, (b) higher-
level processes that extract explicit and implicit information from text and in-
tegrate text-based information with prior knowledge, and (c) limited cognitive
resources that are shared by many processes (i.e., working memory).1
Background
Most studies of reading comprehension have investigated the contribution of a sin-
gle source of individual differences to reading comprehension performance in isola-
tion (Hannon & Daneman, 2001a). However, the actual source under investigation
This chapter is reprinted from Reading Research Quarterly, 47(2), pp. 125152. Copyright 2012 by the
International Reading Association.
840
has often varied from study to study, and there is little agreement among theories
as to which source contributes the most to reading comprehension (Hannon &
Daneman, 2001a). According to the simple view of reading (e.g., Gough, Hoover,
& Peterson, 1996; Hoover & Gough, 1990; Tunmer, 2008) and two popular de-
velopmental theories of reading comprehension acquisition, the verbal efficiency
(e.g., Perfetti, 1985, 1997) and automaticity theories (e.g., LaBerge & Samuels,
1974), word fluency (i.e., speed at accessing the meanings of words) is an important
contributor to reading comprehension performance. In support of this assumption
are a number of studies, including those assessing normal adult readers that show
accuracies/efficiencies of lower-level word processes vary as a function of read-
ing comprehension skill. For instance, studies that have classified adult readers as
skilled or less skilled by using a mean split of performance on a measure of read-
ing comprehension have shown that skilled adult readers are more efficient than
less skilled adult readers at recognizing printed words (e.g., Bell & Perfetti, 1994).
Skilled adult readers are also faster and more accurate at deriving phonology from
print (e.g., Cunningham, Stanovich, & Wilson, 1990) and faster at accessing word
meanings (e.g., Chabot, Zehr, Prinzo, & Petros, 1984). Indeed, for adult readers, the
correlations between lower-level word processes and reading comprehension can
be as high as 0.55 (Cunningham et al., 1990; see also Holmes, 2009).
According to other theories, higher-level processes that extract explicit and
implicit information from text and integrate this text-based information with
prior knowledge are the major source of individual differences in reading com-
prehension for adult readers (Graesser, Singer, & Trabasso, 1994; Hannon &
Daneman, 2001a, 2009; Kintsch, 1998). In fact, studies assessing proficient adult
readers have shown that higher-level processes account for as much as 3460%
of the variance in performance on standardized measures of reading comprehen-
sion (e.g., Hannon & Daneman, 2001a). Compared with less skilled adult readers,
skilled adult readers are better at using their prior knowledge to connect or bridge
ideas in a text (Singer & Ritchot, 1996), are better at inferring themes spontane-
ously as they read (Hannon & Daneman, 1998; Long, Oppy, & Seely, 1994), and
are more likely to compute the antecedent referent of a pronoun (Long & De Ley,
2000). Adult skilled readers are also better than less skilled adult readers at re-
membering new explicit information presented in a text (Masson & Miller, 1983),
are more likely to make correct text-based inferences (Long, Oppy, & Seely, 1997),
and are better than less skilled adult readers at accessing semantic information
from long-term memory (Hannon & Daneman, 2001a). For example, skilled adult
readers are better at accessing facts, such as an elephant is larger than a dog, or an
ostrich is larger than a robin (e.g., Hannon & Daneman, 2001a, 2001b, 2006, 2009).
Still other theories promote working memory, a limited resource shared by
many cognitive processes, as a major source of individual differences in adult
reading comprehension. According to the working memory theories proposed by
Daneman and Carpenter (1980) and Just and Carpenter (1992), less-skilled readers
are at a disadvantage with all of the processes that require the successive integra-
tion of information in a text because they have less working memory capacity to
842 Hannon
The CC-R Model
The CC-R model is a SEM that was developed to examine the relationships among
three sources of individual differences that contribute to reading comprehension
performance: lower-level word processes, higher-level processes, and working
memory. Other popular models of comprehension, such as the construction
integration model (e.g., Kintsch, 1988, 1994, 1998), also include some or all of
these sources as predictors, although as mentioned earlier, these models fail to
provide assumptions about how these processes might interact. Furthermore,
the simple view of reading (e.g., Gough et al., 1996; Tunmer, 2008) includes word
decoding and comprehension (as measured by tests of listening comprehension),
the learning from text model (e.g., Britton et al., 1998) includes inferential pro-
cesses and working memory, and the direct and mediation model of reading
comprehension for adolescents (e.g., Cromley & Azevedo, 2007) includes infer-
ential processes and lower-level word processes. This section covers a descrip-
tion of the CC-R model, explanations of its assumptions in the context of some
reading comprehension theories, and a review of the literature supporting the
relationships among its components. Although most of the supporting literature
involves normal adult readers, developmental literature is also described in in-
stances where the literature is limited.
text memory process(es) are used to learn the explicit facts (e.g., The plane flew
over the house; the plane landed in a field.), whereas text inferencing process(es) are
used to learn the implicit facts (e.g., The plane flew over Saskatoon.). In contrast,
knowledge access processes that are used to recall semantic information from
long-term memory (e.g., Planes can fly; planes can land in fields.) are not used to
learn explicit and implicit text-based information.
Finally, working memory, a resource shared by many cognitive processes
(Daneman & Hannon, 2007), is also hypothesized to directly influence knowl-
edge integration. However, because the CC-R model defines working memory as a
limited cognitive resource, its influence on reading comprehension is largely indi-
rect, mediated by those processes that draw on working memory, such as knowl-
edge integration, and directly influence reading comprehension performance
(i.e., working memory knowledge integration reading comprehension).
Further, the CC-R model hypothesizes that speed at reading, deciding,
and/or processing sentences directly influences reading comprehension. For the
purposes of this article, this speed measure is called sentence processing speed
or just speed. Comprehending text is information laden, and consequently, speed
at sentence processing influences comprehension inasmuch as slow and ineffi-
cient sentence processing can delay overall information processing, which in turn
might result in information loss. In addition, the CC-R model hypothesizes that
lower-level word processes, specifically speed at processing words (i.e., word flu-
ency), directly influence reading comprehension. Like sentence processing speed,
word fluency influences reading comprehension inasmuch as quick, efficient,
and more accurate word processing decreases passage reading time, which in
turn increases question answering time (see Bell & Perfetti, 1994, for more on the
importance of word fluency in adult reading). Word fluency also has an indirect
influence on reading comprehension because word fluency directly influences
sentence processing speed, and sentence processing speed directly influences
reading comprehension (i.e., word fluency speed reading comprehension).
This latter direct influence on sentence processing speed is expected because
speed at accessing the meanings of words (i.e., word fluency) is a component of
sentence processing speed.
844 Hannon
Assumptions of the CC-R Model
Assumption 1: Word-Level and Higher-Level Cognitive Processes Are
Separate Constructs in Adult Readers. The quality/efficiency of an adult
readers lower-level word processes that are used for decoding and recognizing
words are separate from his or her higher-level cognitive processes that are used
for learning and integrating text with prior knowledge (and vice versa). Although
little to no adult research has examined the relationship between lower- and
higher-level processes, there are a number of developmental studies that have
shown nonsignificant relationships between measures of these two sources of in-
dividual differences (e.g., Aaron, Frantz, & Manges, 1990; August, Francis, Hsu,
& Snow, 2006; Cain et al., 2004; Crain, 1989; Frith & Snowling, 1983; Oakhill,
Cain, & Bryant, 2003). For instance, August et al. (2006) showed that measures
assessing lower-level letter-word identification/pronunciation processes and the
higher-level processes of text memory, text inferencing, and knowledge integra-
tion were, at best, weakly related in 58-year-olds. Similarly, Oakhill et al. (2003)
showed that measures assessing word reading and knowledge integration were
dissociable in 79-year-olds.
846 Hannon
Figure 1. Path Diagram of the Cognitive Components and Resource Model
of Reading Comprehension
word 7
speed
processing
6
working
memory
reading
4
comprehension
1
text-based
2
processing knowledge
integration
3
knowledge
access
generation is related to reading comprehension skill. Long et al. (1994), for in-
stance, showed that skilled adult readers (as determined by performance on a
comprehension measure) are more likely than less skilled adult readers to gener-
ate inferences about themes of short passages. Murray and Burke (2003) showed
that skilled adult readers are more likely than moderately or less skilled adult
readers to generate predictive inferences automatically as they read. Still other
researchers have shown that skilled adult readers are more likely to use prior
knowledge to bridge ideas in a text to make otherwise incoherent text coherent
(Halldorson & Singer, 2002; Keenan & Kintsch, 1974; Singer, Halldorson, Lear,
& Andrusiak, 1992). For more examples, see Schmalhofer, McDaniel, and Keefe
(2002) and Zhang and Hoosain (2001); for a minimalist view on inferences, see
McKoon and Ratcliff (1992).
848 Hannon
1985; Bell & Perfetti, 1994; Cunningham et al., 1990; Dixon et al., 1988; Holmes,
2009; Landi, 2010). Bell and Perfetti, for instance, showed that speed at reading
lists of high-frequency words, low-frequency words, and pseudowords accounted
for as much as 21% of the variance in adult reading comprehension. Cunningham
et al. observed that speed at pronouncing pseudowords (e.g., danter, comt) ac-
counted for 30.2% of the variance in adult reading comprehension. Baddeley et al.
showed that speed at classifying words, nonwords, and homophones accounted
for as much as 25% of variance in adult reading comprehension. Similar findings
have also been found in the developmental literature (e.g., August et al., 2006;
Jenkins et al., 2003; Kendeou, van den Broek, White, & Lynch, 2009; Klauda &
Guthrie, 2008). However, findings from a meta-analysis by Gough et al. (1996)
suggest that the influences that lower-level word processes exert on reading com-
prehension decrease with increases in age.
Method
Participants
The participants were 150 University of Texas at San Antonio students who were
1825 years of age and received $35 for their participation. All students were
850 Hannon
prescreened to ensure that they were free of any known learning disability and
that they were monolingual, native English speakers who spoke few words in
another language. Thirty-two participants were male, 116 were female, and there
was no information about the remaining two participants.
RS
working
OS memory
LKI
TM
knowledge
integration HKI
text-based
TI
processing
LKA
knowledge
HKA
access reading R1
comprehension
R2
word
OLD
processing
speed S
PLD
852 Hannon
Measures of Lower-Level Word Processing
The phonemic and orthographic lexical decision tasks were variants of tasks used
by Bell and Perfetti (1994) and Olson, Kliegl, and Davidson (1983). In the phone-
mic task, students decide which of two pseudowords can be pronounced as a real
word (e.g., bair boir), whereas in the orthographic task, they decide which of two
letter strings is a real word (e.g., bear bair). In each task, students viewed two letter
strings positioned in the middle of a computer screen (e.g., frute frait) and then
pressed a key marked L (left) or R (right) to represent their decision. Students
completed four practice trials and then two blocks of 48 trials each. Average re-
action times for correct responses were the dependent measures. The total time
needed to complete the phonemic task was about 1015 minutes, whereas for the
orthographic task, it was about 810 minutes. Appendix B includes additional
examples of stimuli.
Linear orderings (i.e., size: wemp > whale > piranha > tiln > lork) can be con-
structed by combining the relations described in a paragraph with world knowl-
edge accessed from prior knowledge (i.e., A whale is larger than a piranha.). For
more about the paragraphs and their presentation, see Hannon and Daneman
(2001a, 2001b, 2006, 2009).
Test statements followed each paragraph, half of which were true and half
false. In total, there were 240 accompanying statements. Explicit paragraph infor-
mation was assessed by 84 text memory statements (e.g., A WEMP is larger than
a WHALE.), whereas implicit paragraph information was assessed by 36 text in-
ferencing statements (e.g., A PIRANHA is larger than a LORK.); neither of these
statement types required prior knowledge. In contrast, the knowledge access
statements measured access to prior knowledge, and no text-based information
was required. There were 36 low-knowledge access statements (e.g., A WHALE
is larger than a GOLDFISH.) and 24 high-knowledge access statements (e.g.,
SHARKS are typically vicious, whereas WHALES are not.). Low-knowledge ac-
cess statements included a feature (e.g., larger than) and a real term from the para-
graph (e.g., WHALE), whereas high-knowledge access statements included just a
real term from the paragraph (e.g., WHALES). By including a feature and a term
854 Hannon
Measures of Working Memory
Students completed two measures of working memory, reading span (Daneman
& Carpenter, 1980) and operation span (Turner & Engle, 1989). Because the read-
ing and operation span tasks are described in full elsewhere (e.g., Daneman &
Hannon, 2001, 2007; Turner & Engle, 1989), they are only briefly described here.
In the reading span task, students read aloud a set of unrelated sentences, made
a sensibility judgment about each sentence, and then at the end of a set, recalled
the last word of each sentence. For example, in a two-sentence set, students may
have read An eerie breeze chilled the warm, humid air. The umbrella grabbed its
bat and stepped up to the plate. Students should have responded yes after reading
aloud the first sentence and no after reading aloud the second sentence. At the end
of the set, they would recall air and plate.
In the operation span task, students read aloud a set of math equations fol-
lowed by words, made judgments about the truthfulness of each math equation,
and then at the end of a set, recalled the words accompanying each equation. For
example, students may have read (1 2) - 1 = 5 judge; (8/4) + 6 = 8 husband.
They should have responded no after reading the first equation and word, re-
sponded yes after reading the second equation and word, and then at the end of
the set, recalled judge and husband. Reading and operation span were the total
number of words out of 100 that a student could recall. The total administration
time for the reading span task was about 25 minutes, whereas the total adminis-
tration time for the operation span task was about 1520 minutes.
Measurement Model. Each latent variable included at least two observed vari-
ables except speed, which included a single observed variable (see Britton et al.,
1998, for a similar situation). As per the recommendations of Schumacker and
Lomax (1996) and Jreskog and Srbom (1993), the reliability of the sole ob-
served variable for the latent variable speed was specified; specifically, for the
Structural Model. As Figure 3 shows, the CC-R model has seven direct paths:
(1) knowledge integration to reading comprehension, (2) speed to reading com-
prehension, (3) word processing to reading comprehension, (4) text-based pro-
cessing to knowledge integration, (5) knowledge access to knowledge integration,
(6) working memory to knowledge integration, and (7) word processing to speed.
For all models, paths leading from one latent variable to another exert direct in-
fluence when their coefficients are significantly different from 0. from word pro-
cessing to reading comprehension and the path leading from speed to reading
comprehension would be negative because faster readers, who have lower reac-
tion times, would tend to have higher comprehension scores. It was also expected
that these path coefficients would be negative in the alternative models that were
used to assess assumptions 4 and 5 of the CC-R model.
word .37
speed
processing
.45
.17
working
memory
.19 reading
comprehension
.41
text-based
.58
processing knowledge
integration
.38
knowledge
access
856 Hannon
Two types of comparisons were made between the CC-R and baseline/alter-
native models. Comparison 1 assessed the fit indexes that are described later.
Model(s) with fit indexes outside acceptable limits were deemed to be less suc-
cessful. Comparison 2 statistically compared the CC-R model to the baseline/
alternative models using a c2-difference test. In a c2-difference test, the c2 value for
the baseline/alternative model is subtracted from the c2 value for the CC-R model.
The remaining difference is then assessed using a c2 table and the net number of
degrees of freedom (i.e., df for CC-R model - df for baseline/alternative model). If
the c2 difference is significant, then one model is significantly better at explain-
ing the data than the other. It is important to note that of these two comparisons,
comparison 2 is the most important.
The CC-R model was first compared with the upper and lower boundary
baseline models, which were models that represented the best (i.e., upper bound-
ary) and poorest (i.e., lower boundary) fits for the existing data. At the upper
boundary was the measurement model. This model provided the best fit to the
data because no explicit relations were defined among the latent variables. At
the lower boundary was the lower bound null model. This model was similar to
the measurement model except that its latent variables were constrained to be
uncorrelated. In other words, this model assumed no relations among the latent
variables and, therefore, represented the poorest fit to the data. Ideally, the theo-
retical model of interest (i.e., the CC-R model) should be significantly better at
explaining the data than the lower bound model.
Besides the baseline models, alternative models were included to test some
of the assumptions of the CC-R model. For assumption 1, which states that word-
and higher-level processes are separate constructs, comparisons were made be-
tween two SEMs: (1) an independent SEM that included separate latent variables
for word- and higher-level processes and (2) a nonindependent SEM that did not
include separate latent variables for word- and higher-level processes. Both of
these SEMs were similar to the measurement model except that the indepen-
dent SEM had four latent variables (i.e., word processing, text-based processing,
knowledge access, knowledge integration), whereas the nonindependent SEM had
three latent variables (i.e., text-based processing, knowledge access, knowledge
integration). In both SEMs, the latent variables were measured with the same
observed variables used in the measurement model except that in the noninde-
pendent SEM, each latent variable also included the two observed variables that
assessed word processing (i.e., the orthographic and phonemic lexical decision
tasks). If lower-level word processes and higher-level processes are separate con-
structs, then the independent SEM would be significantly better at explaining
the data than the nonindependent SEM would. Conversely, if lower-level word
processes and higher-level processes are not separate constructs (i.e., a violation
of assumption 1), then the nonindependent SEM would be significantly better at
explaining the data.
For assumption 2, which states that there are multiple higher-level processes,
comparisons were made between (a) a multifactor SEM that included separate
858 Hannon
Figure 4. Structural Equation Model of the CC-R1-WM Model With Path
Coefficients
word .38
speed
processing
.49
.37
.16
working
memory
.23 reading
comprehension
.34
text-based
.61
processing knowledge
integration
.40
knowledge
access
Note. Solid lines represent significant path coefficients, whereas the broken line represents
nonsignificant structure coefficients. This structural equation model is identical to the cognitive
components and resource model of reading comprehension (CC-R model) except for the addition
of a path leading from word processing to working memory.
word .34
speed
processing
1.27
.05
.11
working
memory
.10 reading
comprehension
.41
.64 text-based
.62
processing knowledge
integration
.35
.64 knowledge
access
Note. Solid lines represent significant path coefficients, whereas broken lines represent
nonsignificant structure coefficients. This structural equation model is identical to the cognitive
components and resource model of reading comprehension (CC-R model) except for the addition
of paths leading from word processing to the higher-level processes of text-based processing,
knowledge access, and knowledge integration.
word .37
speed
processing
.45
.16
working .25
memory
.15 reading
comprehension
.24
text
.60
processing knowledge
integration
.39
knowledge
access
Note. Solid lines represent significant path coefficients, whereas broken lines represent
nonsignificant structure coefficients. This structural equation model is identical to the cognitive
components and resource model of reading comprehension (CC-R model) except for the addition
of a path leading from working memory to reading comprehension.
model should be better at explaining the data than the CC-R model is. Conversely,
if word processing does not directly influence higher-level processes, then the
CC-R model should be better at explaining the data than the CC-R1-WP model is.
Finally, for assumption 5, which states that working memory exerts little
to no direct influence on reading comprehension, comparisons were made be-
tween two nearly identical SEMs: (1) the CC-R model, which does not include a
path leading from working memory to reading comprehension; and (2) the CC-R2
model, a variant of the CC-R model that includes a path leading from working
memory to reading comprehension. As Figure 6 shows, the CC-R2 model is iden-
tical to the CC-R model except that the CC-R2 model includes a path leading from
working memory to reading comprehension. If working memory directly influ-
ences reading comprehension (i.e., a violation of assumption 5), then the CC-R2
model should be significantly better at explaining the data than the CC-R model
is. In contrast, if working memory does not directly influence reading compre-
hension, then the CC-R model should be significantly better at explaining the
data than the CC-R2 model is.
Fit Indexes
Following Hoyle and Panters (1995) recommendations, model fit was evaluated
using a collection of fit indexes. The absolute fit indexes were the traditional c2
test of exact model fit, the c2 test of close model fit (Browne & Cudeck, 1993), the
860 Hannon
goodness-of-fit index (GFI), the adjusted GFI (AGFI; Jreskog & Srbom, 1981),
the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA; Steiger & Lind, 1980), and
the 90% confidence intervals for the RMSEA. The incremental fit statistic was the
comparative fit index (CFI; Bentler, 1989). For the c2 test of exact fit (i.e., p exact),
the hypothesis being tested assumes an exact model f it that is acceptable. Thus,
a good-fitting model is indicated by nonsignificant c2 results, and the greater the
p value, the better the fit. For the c2 test of close fit (i.e., p close), the hypothesis is
for the alternative model, which states that RMSEA is >0.05. If the value for p close
is >.05, then it is concluded that the model fit is close (Kline, 2011). For the AGFI
and GFI, the guideline is that good-fitting models have values of 0.90; for the CFI,
the value was set to 0.95 (Russell, 2002). Conversely, for the RMSEA statistic, the
guideline is that values of 0.05 indicate a good-fitting model (Steiger, 1989). For
other views on the criteria for good model fit indexes, see Fan, Thompson, and
Wang (1999), Fan and Sivo (2005), Hu and Bentler (1999), and Marsh, Hau, and
Wen (2004).
Results
The results include four sections. Section 1 reports the results of the data screen-
ing, section 2 reports the preliminary descriptive statistics including the correla-
tional analysis, and section 3 reports the measurement model. Finally, section4
reports the results of the CC-R SEM, comparisons of the CC-R model with the
baseline models, and the statistical tests of four of the assumptions of the CC-R
model.
Data Screening
SAS and PRELIS were used to screen the data for the following: (i) outliers (uni-
variate statistics: studentized residual, DFITTS, DFBETAS, Cooks D; multivariate
statistic: Mahalanobis distance values; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007); (ii) values
that exerted excessive leverage (leverage statistic, h, also known as the hat value);
(iii) linearity (bivariate scatterplots); (iv) normality (univariate: normality prob-
ability plots; multivariate: Mardias statistic; West, Finch, & Curran, 1995); and
(v) multicollinearity (tolerance test via regression analysis).
Preliminary regression analyses, which included all of the measures as pre-
dictors, revealed that one outlier exerted considerable leverage (i.e., studentized
residual, DFITTS, DFBETAS, and the leverage statistic, h, all above acceptable
limits). The outlier was removed, and all data screening was repeated on the
data for the remaining 149 students. The results revealed that all univariate and
multivariate screening statistics were within acceptable limits. Most notably, all
Mahalanobis distance scores were well below the limit (indicating no multivariate
outliers); Mardias statistic was 1.014, which is well below the critical 1.96 limit
(i.e., there was multivariate normality); and tolerance values were all above the
0.20 limit (indicating very little multicollinearity).6
Measurement Model
As shown in the last row of Table 1, all the factor loadings for the measurement
model were significant (ranging from 0.62 to 0.97). Further, all of the fit indexes
reported in Table 2 suggest that the measurement model fits the data well. Thus,
based on these two criteria, it appears that each observed variable is suitable
for measuring its respective latent variable. That is, the observed variables text
memory and text inferencing are suitable for measuring the latent variable text-
based processing, the observed variables low- and high-knowledge integration
are suitable for measuring the latent variable knowledge integration, and so forth.
862 Hannon
Table 1. Correlations, Descriptive Statistics, Cronbachs s, and Factor Loadings for Measures of Lower-Level Word
Processes, Higher-Level Processes, Working Memory, and Reading Comprehension (n = 149)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1. Reading 0.69 -0.43 -0.39 0.34 0.32 0.33 0.44 0.28 0.25 -0.29 0.27 0.41
comprehension 1
2. Reading -0.33 -0.36 0.37 0.37 0.34 0.43 0.24 0.25 -0.37 0.26 0.39
comprehension 2
3. Orthographic 0.53 -0.30 -0.21 -0.18 -0.24 -0.12 -0.16 0.28 -0.11 -0.16
lexical decision
4. Phonemic lexical -0.11 -0.06 -0.13 -0.15 -0.21 -0.04 0.22 0.01 -0.15
decision
5. Text memory 0.86 0.63 0.71 0.29 0.33 -0.07 0.34 0.44
6. Text inferencing 0.56 0.66 0.24 0.29 -0.06 0.36 0.48
7. Low-knowledge 0.62 0.41 0.40 -0.13 0.36 0.36
integration
8. High-knowledge 0.34 0.37 -0.17 0.39 0.47
integration
9. Low-knowledge 0.40 -0.17 0.12 0.22
access
10. High-knowledge -0.15 0.17 0.23
access
11. Speed -0.05 -0.21
12. Operation span 0.58
13. Reading span
Mean 24.30 27.54 1,147.20 3,390.90 68.03 26.56 20.53 27.34 33.70 22.37 3,871.10 68.89 56.90
Standard deviation 5.25 5.33 221.28 1,085.80 11.32 5.20 2.78 4.95 2.10 1.70 662.93 12.79 11.17
Skewness -0.37 -0.10 1.13 1.09 -0.82 -0.59 -0.71 -0.31 -1.27 -1.14 0.13 0.48 0.01
Kurtosis -0.53 -0.55 1.42 1.32 -0.90 -0.44 -0.29 -0.70 1.75 1.46 -0.77 -0.25 -0.06
Lowest score 11.00 15.00 721.84 1,882.80 38.00 13.00 12.00 15.00 22.00 15.00 2,469.33 37.00 35.00
Highest score 34.00 37.00 1,964.00 7,074.72 83.00 36.00 24.00 36.00 36.00 24.00 5,477.81 94.00 90.00
Maximum score 36.00 38.00 84.00 36.00 24.00 36.00 36.00 24.00 100.00 100.00
863
Note. For r 0.161, p < .05. The measures of word processing are items 3 and 4. The measures of higher-level processes are items 511. The factor loadings reported are for the
measurement model.
Table 2. Fit Statistics for Models of Reading Comprehension (n = 149)
864
CI90 for
Competing Models c2 df Dc2 Ddf p Exact p Close GFI AGFI RMSEA RMSEA CFI
Measurement 48.24 45 .34 .86 0.95 0.90 0.022 0.0000.061 1.00
Hannon
CC-R 59.23 53 10.99 8 .26 .84 0.94 0.90 0.028 0.0000.061 0.99
Lower bound nulla 465.84 66 406.61* 13 .00 .00 0.67 0.55 0.200 0.1900.220 0.76
Independent 16.81 14 .27 .59 0.97 0.93 0.032 0.0000.092 1.00
Nonindependentb 53.54 15 36.73* 1 .00 .00 0.92 0.80 0.132 0.0950.170 0.93
Multifactor 4.36 6 .63 .80 0.92 0.97 0.000 0.0000.089 1.00
Single-factorc 54.53 9 50.17* 3 .00 .00 0.89 0.74 0.185 0.1400.230 0.94
CC-R1-WMa 86.70 55 27.47* 2 .00 .20 0.92 0.86 0.062 0.0360.087 0.97
CC-R1-WPa 99.21 55 39.98* 2 .00 .05 0.91 0.85 0.074 0.0500.097 0.96
CC-R2a 54.27 52 4.96* 1 .39 .90 0.95 0.91 0.017 0.0000.056 1.00
CC-R2+IWMd 57.17 53 3.10 1 .32 .88 0.94 0.90 0.023 0.0000.058 0.99
2.06 0
Note. CC-R model = cognitive components and resource model of reading comprehension. CC-R1-WM = the CC-R model plus a path leading from word
processing to working memory. CC-R1-WP = the CC-R model plus paths leading from word processing to the higher-level processes of text-based processing,
knowledge access, and knowledge integration. CC-R2 = the CC-R model plus a path leading from working memory to reading comprehension. CC-R2+IWM =
the CC-R2 model minus the path leading from working memory to knowledge integration. CI90 = 90% confidence interval for RMSEA.
a
With the exception of the CC-R model, Dc2 represents the difference in c2 between the model of interest and the CC-R model. The Dc2 and Ddf for the CC-R
model represent the difference between the CC-R model and the measurement model.
b
Dc2 is between the independent and nonindependent models.
c
Dc2 is between the multiple- and single-factor models.
d
The first Dc2 is the difference between the CC-R2 and the CC-R2+IWM, and the second Dc2 is the difference between the CC-R and the CC-R2+IWM; p exact
tests for discrepancies between the data and the model (Kline, 2011), and p close tests the alternative model that the RMSEA is >0.05. If the value for p close is
>0.05, then it is concluded that the fit of the model is close (Kline, 2011).
*A significant difference from the model at p < .05.
Table 3. Direct, Indirect, and Total Effects of Predictors on Reading
Comprehension Performance for the CC-R and CC-R2 Models (n = 149)
Variable Direct Indirect Total
CC-R model
Knowledge integration 0.410 0.410
Speed -0.170 -0.170
Word processing -0.450 -0.063 -0.513
Working memory 0.078 0.078
Text-based processing 0.238 0.238
Knowledge access 0.156 0.156
CC-R2 model
Knowledge integration 0.240 0.240
Speed -0.160 -0.160
Word processing -0.450 -0.056 -0.506
Working memory 0.250 0.036 0.286
Text-based processing 0.144 0.144
Knowledge access 0.094 0.094
Note. p < .05 for all values. The CC-R2 model is identical to the cognitive components and resource
model of reading comprehension (CC-R) model except for the addition of a direct path from
working memory to reading comprehension (see Figure 6).
Testing Assumption 2. To test the assumption that there are multiple higher-
level processes, comparisons were made between (a) a multifactor SEM that in-
cluded separate latent variables for each of the major higher-level processes and
(b) a single-factor SEM that included a single latent variable that represented all
of the higher-level processes. Table 2 shows the fit indexes for the multiple- and
single-factor SEMs. As the table shows, all of the fit indexes for the multifactor
SEM were within acceptable limits. In contrast, some of the fit indexes for the
single-factor SEM, such as the p-exact, p-close, AGFI, and RMSEA indexes, were
outside acceptable limits. Further, the c2-difference test between the multiple-
and single-factor SEMs suggested that the multifactor SEM was significantly bet-
ter at explaining the data than a single-factor SEM was: c2-difference(3) = 50.17,
p < .001. In other words, these findings support the CC-R models assumption that
there are multiple higher-level processes.
866 Hannon
these findings support the CC-R models assumption that lower-level word pro-
cesses do not consume limited working memory resources.
To test the assumption that lower-level word processes do not influence higher-
level processes, comparisons were made between (a) the CC-R model, which does
not include a direct path leading from lower-level word processes to higher-level
processes, and (b) the CC-R1-WP model, which is identical to the CC-R model ex-
cept that the CC-R1-WP model includes direct paths leading from lower-level word
processes to text-based processing, from lower-level word processes to knowledge
access, and from lower-level word processes to knowledge integration. As shown
in Table 2, some of the fit indexes for the CC-R1-WP model (e.g., p-exact, RMSEA)
were poor, especially when they were compared with those of the CC-R model.
Also, the c2-difference test suggested that the CC-R1-WP model had a poorer fit to
the data than the CC-R model did: c2-difference(2) = 39.98, p < .001. Thus, taken as
a whole, these findings suggest that a model that excludes paths leading from word
processing to the higher-level processes (i.e., the CC-R model) explains the data
better than does a model that includes these paths (i.e., the CC-R1-WP model). In
other words, these findings support the CC-R models assumption that lower-level
word processes do not influence higher-level processes.
word .37
speed
processing
.45
.15
working .25
memory
reading
comprehension
.24
text-based
.65
processing knowledge
integration
.45
knowledge
access
Note. Solid lines represent significant path coefficients, whereas the broken line represents
nonsignificant structure coefficients. This SEM is identical to the cognitive components and
resource model of reading comprehension (CC-R model) except for the addition of a path leading
from working memory to reading comprehension (CC-R2 model) and the exclusion of the path
leading from working memory to knowledge integration.
868 Hannon
c2-difference(1) = 3.10, p = .078. Based on this latter finding and the earlier
finding that the CC-R2 model is better at explaining the existing data than the
CC-R model is, it appears that the CC-R2 model is the best model for explaining
the relationship between working memory and reading comprehension perfor-
mance. That is, rather than have an indirect (i.e., CC-R model) or direct (i.e.,
CC-R2+IWM model) influence on reading comprehension performance, the
present findings suggest that working memory has both direct and indirect in-
fluences (i.e., CC-R2 model).
Discussion
Although it is generally accepted that comprehension is not simply the sum of
its processes (Kintsch & Rawson, 2005), little is known about how many of its
processes interact (Cornoldi et al., 1996; Perfetti et al., 2005) or whether one or
all of them make separate and important contributions to reading comprehension
performance (Perfetti et al., 1996). This lack of knowledge is quite surprising
given that it has strong implications for major theories of comprehension that
include lower-level word processes, higher-level cognitive processes, and working
memory capacity. The present study addresses these limitations by developing
and testing a SEM called the CC-R modela model of reading comprehension
that proposes a set of relationships among lower-level processes, higher-level pro-
cesses, and working memory.
The results show that a variant of the CC-R model, namely the CC-R2 model,
explains the present data well. That is, the CC-R2 model is suitable for both un-
derstanding the relationships among lower-level word processes, higher-level
processes, and working memory and for predicting performance on standardized
measures of adult reading comprehension. Next is a detailed discussion of the
results, their theoretical and practical implications, and their limitations.
870 Hannon
future research that might assess how other processes or resources, not assessed
in the present study, might interact with the higher-level processes that were as-
sessed in the present study.
In addition, these findings inform the simple view of reading (e.g., Gough et
al., 1996), a very popular conceptualization of reading comprehension that de-
fines reading comprehension as a multiplicative function of two separate clusters
of abilities: word decoding language comprehension (i.e., R = D C). Consistent
with the simple view of reading, the present study supports the notion that lower-
level word processes are separate or independent of higher-level processes that are
used for comprehension. Conversely, the simple view of reading defines compre-
hension as a single unitary factor/process, whereas the present study suggests that
there are multiple higher-level processes used for comprehension that form a very
specific pattern of relationships. Furthermore, the results suggest that whereas
some of these higher-level processes are related to one another (e.g., text process-
ing with knowledge integration, knowledge access with knowledge integration),
others are, at best, weakly related (e.g., text processing and knowledge access).
Finally, the present findings inform a number of theories of reading com-
prehension. As mentioned earlier, theories of reading comprehension have
primarily focused on understanding and explaining the nature of mental rep-
resentations of text rather than complex relationships among lower-level word
processes, higher-level processes, and characteristics of the reader (McNamara
& Magliano, 2009). The present study informs these theories by (a) proposing a
set of relationships between lower- and higher-level processes, (b) showing that
an individual-differences approach is suitable for assessing the relationships be-
tween lower- and higher-level processes, and (c) showing that SEMs are a viable
statistical tool for assessing models of reading comprehension. In other words,
the present study provides a foundation for future research to test and compare
theories of reading comprehension, to assess the relationships among lower- and
higher-level processes and other sources of individual differences, and to assess
the relative predictive powers of sources of individual differences with various
genres of text.
872 Hannon
via reaction time. Finally, whereas the reading comprehension measures allowed
readers to refer back to the passages, the measures for the higher-level processes
and working memory had greater memory demands inasmuch as both tasks re-
quired readers to retain information in memory and then recall it.
Also, it is important to acknowledge the utility of the CPT. Measures with
strong psychometric properties are invaluable for assessing cognitive constructs
delineated by theories of comprehension processing in cognitive science (e.g.,
Pellegrino, Baxter, & Glaser, 1999; Pellegrino & Glaser, 1979). Unfortunately,
prior to the CPT, there were few measures assessing higher-level processes with
good psychometric properties. Consequently, research was hampered because
researchers were unable to assess the relative contributions of lower-level word
processes, higher-level processes, and working memory to performances on mea-
sures of reading or listening comprehension. Researchers were also unable to as-
sess or compare theoretical models of comprehension. The findings of the present
study suggest that with measures like the CPT, researchers can advance knowl-
edge about higher-level processes, their relationships with one another, their re-
lationships with other important constructs such as lower-level word processes
and working memory, and their predictive powers with respect to important
constructs such as reading comprehension, listening comprehension, and fluid
intelligence.
Also of practical interest is the finding that performance on a standardized
measure of adult general or global reading comprehension consists of many sep-
arate sources of individual differences. This finding is of interest to educators
because it implies that no single source is likely to be the cause of poor compre-
hension. Indeed, the results of the present study add to a growing developmen-
tal literature that suggests that poor comprehension might be attributed to one
or many sources of individual differencespoor word decoding, weak knowl-
edge integration, and/or small working memory capacities (e.g., Cain et al., 2004;
Oakhill et al., 2003)and each of these sources of individual differences might
require a different intervention.
Finally, of theoretical interest is the finding that high-knowledge integration
is an important source of individual differences in adult reading comprehen-
sion. This finding is consistent with recent research that has advocated integra-
tion of text-based information with prior knowledge as an important process in
reading comprehension (Britton et al., 1998; Hannon & Daneman, 2001a, 2006,
2009). This finding also supports theories of reading comprehension that advo-
cate building text structures (Gernsbacher, 1990), extending working memory by
integrating prior knowledge with text-based information (Ericsson & Kintsch,
1995), and models of learning from instructional text (Britton et al., 1998).
Limitations
Although the present study has a number of theoretical and practical implica-
tions, the present study is only a beginning, as other factors, such as test ad-
ministration, might influence the relative predictive powers of lower-level word
874 Hannon
processes, such as lower-level word processes, might become less predictive (see
Andreassen & Braten, 2010, for evidence of these latter two possibilities with fifth-
grade students).
A third factor that might influence the relative predictive powers of the
sources of individual differences for reading comprehension is the type of text,
narrative versus expository. The reading comprehension measures administered
in the present study consisted of short, expository texts. Although this type of
text is representative of the texts that students frequently encounter, expository
texts differ substantially from narrative texts, particularly in their potential for
using existing knowledge, schemas, and scripts. Whereas narrative texts share
conversational characteristics that occur frequently in everyday conversations
(e.g., contextual situations, temporal/causal sequences), expository texts share
characteristics with lectures and factual oral documentaries that occur less fre-
quently (Graesser et al., 1994). Narrative texts often include familiar content (e.g.,
eating a meal), which makes it easier to draw on existing knowledge and schemas.
In contrast, expository texts often include unfamiliar content (Graesser et al.,
1994; Singer, Harkness, & Stewart, 1997), which reduces the potential for draw-
ing on existing knowledge and schemas.
Because the present study used standardized reading comprehension mea-
sures composed of expository texts and because expository and narrative texts
differ in their potential for using prior knowledge and schemas, it is possible
that the predictive powers of the sources of individual differences differ for these
two types of texts. For example, perhaps lower-level word processes will be less
predictive of comprehension of narrative texts than expository texts would be
because the common conversational characteristics inherent in narrative texts
might place fewer demands on accessing word meanings. In contrast, knowledge
access might be more predictive of comprehension of narratives because it mea-
sures access to prior knowledge, a resource that is more important for reading
narrative texts rather than expository ones.
A fourth factor that might influence the relative predictive powers of the
sources of individual differences is the use of the Nelson-Denny as the only mea-
sure of reading comprehension. At present, there are conflicting views about the
extent to which the Nelson-Denny might be assessing elemental processes (e.g.,
text memory) versus more sophisticated processes (e.g., knowledge integration).
On the one hand, researchers have pointed out that a large percentage of the
multiple-choice questions in form F of the Nelson-Denny assess elemental facts
rather than knowledge acquired from more sophisticated inferences and concepts
typically found in the global context or situation model (Magliano, Millis, Ozuru,
& McNamara, 2007). On the other hand, researchers have shown that even if
multiple-choice questions are assessing knowledge for basic elemental facts, the
cognitive processes that these questions assess are not necessarily basic elemen-
tal processes. Rather, the questions may be assessing more sophisticated pro-
cesses. For example, Hannon and Daneman (2001a) showed that multiple-choice
876 Hannon
research, it is important to remember that it does not reduce the differences in
the relative influences that lower-level word processes versus higher-level pro-
cesses make on reading comprehension performance. Nor does this limitation
explain the minimal relationship between lower- and higher-level processes.
Yet another limitation is that the latent variable speed had only one observed
variable. As mentioned earlier, this is an acceptable practice, although it is not
recommended (Jreskog & Srbom, 1993). By using a single observed measure of
a latent variable, it is assumed that the observed variable is a perfect measure of
the latent variable. It is for this reason that Schumacker and Lomax (1996) and
Jreskog and Srbom (1993) recommended that the reliability of the observed
variable be set, which was the procedure used in the present study. Further, it
should be noted that using only one or two observed variables for each latent
variable is also a limitation; using three observed variables is preferable. For this
reason, future research should explore the CC-R and CC-R2 models with more
than two observed variables representing the latent variables.
Finally, it should be noted that unlike the constructionintegration model
(Kintsch, 1998), which explains different types of comprehension for a number of
different populations, the present findings provide evidence only that the CC-R
model and its variant, the CC-R2 model, are good SEMs for explaining reading
comprehension in a rather circumscribed population of adult readers, namely
university students. Future research should test whether these models are suit-
able for predicting other types of comprehension (e.g., listening) and whether
they generalize to other populations, such as a community sample of adult read-
ers, adolescents, or beginning readers.
Conclusion
The present study used SEMs to examine the relationships among three sources
of individual differences in adult reading comprehension: lower-level word
processes, higher-level processes, and working memory. Using a population
of proficient adult readers, the results show that a variant of the CC-R model,
the CC-R2 model, is suitable for both understanding the relations among the
sources of individual differences and predicting performance on standardized
measures of reading comprehension. Indeed, the CC-R2 model accounted for
62% of the variance in reading comprehension performance. Of course, the
present findings are limited to the measures used in the present study, and
future research should examine whether they generalize to other measures.
In addition, future research should explore the relationships among lower-
level word processes, higher-level processes, and working memory using other
types of methodology. For example, the assumptions of the CC-R and CC-R2
models could be tested experimentally or in real time using computer models.
Finally, future research should assess whether the CC-R and CC-R2 models
prevail across the life span.
Notes
*When this chapter was written, Hannon was at the University of Saskatchewan.
I would like to thank Joe Magliano for his very helpful comments. I also thank Jill Argus for
helping with data collection and Corey Vogel for helping with data scoring.
1
There are many ways to classify cognitive processes and resources. For the purposes of the
present study, I classify cognitive processes and resources in terms of a hierarchy. More spe-
cifically, those processes that are used to pronounce sounds and decode/identify words are
classified as lower-level word processes. Those processes that are used to process larger units
of information, such as ideas or propositions, are classified as higher-level processes.
2
In many respects, this process account of the text representation is analogous to the process
account of memory. That is, rather than propose a host of different types of memory that
are presumably stored in different locations in our brains, memory researchers are starting
to explain different types of memory in terms of different cognitive processes acting on the
same memories (see Haberlandt, 1999, for more on this point).
3
The major assumption of the automaticity and verbal efficiency theories is the opposite of as-
sumption 4 of the CC-R model (LaBerge & Samuels, 1974; Perfetti, 1985). According to these
developmental theories, word processes directly influence working memory because their
efficiency influences the amount of working memory available for executing higher-level
processes (Jenkins, Fuchs, van den Broek, Espin, & Deno, 2003). Slower word processes
consume many working memory resources that are needed for executing higher-level pro-
cesses, whereas faster word processes consume few working memory resources. Of course,
the former two theories describe the acquisition of reading in beginning readers, whereas the
CC-R model describes the processes of reading in proficient adult readers. For this reason,
the automaticity and verbal efficiency theories might be a more appropriate model for begin-
ning readers, whereas the CC-R model might be more appropriate for adults.
4
In retrospect, it was unwise to counterbalance the forms of the Nelson-Denny because it
potentially increases error and reduces power. However, the alternate form reliabilities for
the Nelson-Denny are high (0.77 or higher), which suggests that the forms are interchange-
able. Further, the subsequent analysis shows that the counterbalancing had a minimal
878 Hannon
influence (see Engle, Tuholski, Laughlin, & Conway, 1999, who also made a similar error
with counterbalancing).
5
Although speed is a composite score of the reaction time for the test statements for the higher-
level processes, speed is not really a higher-level process, nor can it be considered a lower-level
word process. Rather, consistent with Verhaeghen, Marcoen, and Goossens (1993), speed
should perhaps be classified as a general or more global factor/resource that may or may not
influence other resources (e.g., working memory) or specific processes (e.g., lower-level word
processes, text memory, text inferencing, knowledge access, knowledge integration).
6
As noted by one of the reviewers, maximum likelihood estimation is very sensitive to non-
normal data (see also Fan et al., 1999). For this reason, the reviewer suggested examining
the statistics for univariate skew and kurtosis. The results of this analysis revealed that the
skew and kurtosis for the low-knowledge access measure exceeded the maximum allow-
able limits for normality for skew and kurtosis (i.e., +/-1.5 for skew, +/-3.0 for kurtosis). A
closer inspection of the data for this measure revealed that three data points were below the
-3.0 standard deviation limit for univariate outliers. Based on the recommendations of Kline
(2011), these three data points were replaced with values that were equivalent to the mean
minus three standard deviations. Table 1 shows the new, recalculated descriptive statistics
for the low-knowledge access measure. As this table shows, all the descriptive statistics for
this measure are within normal limits. All subsequent data analysis (i.e., correlations, factor
analysis, SEMs) are based on this transformed data.
7
Factors affecting the relative influences of lower-level word processes, higher-level processes,
and working memory apply to all theories of reading comprehension, not just the CC-R
model.
R eferences
Aaron, P.G., Frantz, S.S., & Manges, A.R. (1990). Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative
Dissociation between comprehension and pro- ways of assessing model fit. In K.A. Bollen & J.S.
nunciation in dyslexic and hyperlexic children. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models
Reading and Writing, 2(3), 243264. doi:10.1007/ (pp. 136162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
BF00257974 Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Childrens
Andreassen, R., & Braten, I. (2010). Examining the reading comprehension ability: Concurrent pre-
prediction of reading comprehension on differ- diction by working memory, verbal ability and
ent multiple-choice tests. Journal of Research in component skill. Journal of Educational Psychol-
Reading, 33(3), 263283. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817 ogy, 96(1), 3142. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.31
.2009.01413.x Calvo, M.G. (2001). Working memory and in-
August, D., Francis, D.J., Hsu, H.A., & Snow, C.E. ferences: Evidence from eye fixations during
(2006). Assessing reading comprehension in bi- reading. Memory, 9(4), 365381. doi:10.1080/
linguals. The Elementary School Journal, 107(2), 09658210143000083
221238. doi:10.1086/510656
Calvo, M.G. (2005). Relative contribution of vo-
Baddeley, A., Logie, R., Nimmo-Smith, I., &
cabulary knowledge and working memory
Brereton, N. (1985). Components of fluent read-
span to elaborative inferences in reading.
ing. Journal of Memory and Language, 24(1), 119
Learning and Individual Differences, 15(1), 5365.
131. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(85)90019-1
Bell, L.C., & Perfetti, C.A. (1994). Reading skill: doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2004.07.002
Some adult comparisons. Journal of Educa- Chabot, R.J., Zehr, H.D., Prinzo, O.V., & Petros,
tional Psychology, 86(2), 244255. doi:10.1037/ T.V. (1984). The speed of word recognition sub-
0022-0663.86.2.244 processes and reading achievement in college
Bentler, P.M. (1989). EQS structural equations pro- students. Reading Research Quarterly, 19(2), 147
gram manual. Los Angeles: BMDP Statistical 161. doi:10.2307/747359
Software. Cornoldi, C., De Beni, R., & Pazzaglia, F. (1996).
Britton, B.K., Stimson, M., Stennett, B., & Glgz, Profiles of reading comprehension difficulties:
S. (1998). Learning from instructional text: An analysis of single cases. In C. Cornoldi & J.
Test of an individual-differences model. Journal Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficul-
of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 476491. ties: Processes and intervention (pp. 113136).
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.90.3.476 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
880 Hannon
Hoover, W.A., & Gough, P.B. (1990). The simple reading: A handbook (pp. 209226). Malden, MA:
view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2(2), Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9780470757642.ch12
127160. Klauda, S.L., & Guthrie, J.T. (2008). Relation-
Hoyle, R.H., & Panter, A.T. (1995). Writing about ships of three components of reading fluency
structural equation models. In R.H. Hoyle (Ed.), to reading comprehension. Journal of Educa-
Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and tional Psychology, 100(2), 310321. doi:10.1037/
applications (pp. 158176). Thousand Oaks, CA: 0022-0663.100.2.310
Sage. Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and practice of struc-
Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria tural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York:
for fit indexes in covariance structure analy- Guilford.
sis: Conventional criteria versus new alterna- LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S.J. (1974). Toward a
tives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 155. theory of automatic information processing in
doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 293323.
Jackson, N.E. (2005). Are university students doi:10.1016/0010-0285(74)90015-2
component reading skills related to their text Landi, N. (2010). An examination of the relation-
comprehension and academic achievement? ship between reading comprehension, higher-
Learning and Individual Differences, 15(2), 113 level and lower-level reading subskills in adults.
139. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2004.11.001 Reading and Writing, 23(6), 701717. doi:10.1007/
Jenkins, J.R., Fuchs, L.S., van den Broek, P., Espin, s11145-009-9180-z
C., & Deno, S.L. (2003). Sources of individual Lomax, R.G., & McGee, L.M. (1987). Young
differences in reading comprehension and read- childrens concepts about print and reading:
ing fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology, Toward a model of word reading acquisition.
95(4), 719729. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.719 Reading Research Quarterly, 22(2), 237256.
Jreskog, K.G., & Srbom, D. (1981). LISREL V: doi:10.2307/747667
Analysis of linear structural relationships by Long, D.L., & De Ley, L. (2000). Implicit causality
the method of maximum likelihood and least and discourse focus: The interaction of text and
squares methods. Chicago: National Education reader characteristics in pronoun resolution.
Resources. Journal of Memory and Language, 42(4), 545570.
doi:10.1006/jmla.1999.2695
Jreskog, K.G., & Srbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8:
Long, D.L., Oppy, B.J., & Seely, M.R. (1994). Individ-
Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS
ual differences in the time course of inferential
command language. Chicago: Scientific Software
processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
International.
Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(6), 1456
Jreskog, K.G., & Srbom, D. (2002). LISREL 8:
1470. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.20.6.1456
Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS
Long, D.L., Oppy, B.J., & Seely, M.R. (1997).
command language (Rev. ed.). Chicago: Scientific
Individual differences in readers sentence- and
Software International. text-level representations. Journal of Memory
Just, M.A., & Carpenter, P.A. (1992). A capacity and Language, 36(1), 129145. doi:10.1006/
theory of comprehension: Individual differences jmla.1996.2485
in working memory. Psychological Review, 99(1), Lubinski, D. (2004). Introduction to the special
122149. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.99.1.122 section on cognitive abilities: 100 years after
Keenan, J.M., & Kintsch, W. (1974). Memory for Spearmans (1904) General intelligence, ob-
information inferred during reading. In W. jectively determined and measured. Journal of
Kintsch (Ed.), The representation of meaning in Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 96111.
memory (pp. 153178). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.96
Kendeou, P., van den Broek, P., White, M.J., & Lynch, Magliano, J.P., Millis, K., Ozuru, Y., & McNamara,
J.S. (2009). Predicting reading comprehension D.S. (2007). A multidimensional framework
in early elementary school: The independent to evaluate reading assessment tools. In D.S.
contributions of oral language and decoding McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strate-
skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), gies: Theories, interventions, and technologies (pp.
765778. doi:10.1037/a0015956 107136). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in Magliano, J.P., Millis, K.K., the RSAT Development
discourse comprehension: A construction Team, Levinstein, I., & Boonthum, C. (2011).
integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), Assessing comprehension during reading with
163182. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163 the Reading Strategy Assessment Tool (RSAT).
Kintsch, W. (1994). Text comprehension, mem- Metacognition and Learning, 6(2), 131154.
ory, and learning. American Psychologist, 49(4), doi:10.1007/s11409-010-9064-2
294303. Magliano, J.P., Trabasso, T., & Graesser, A.C.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm (1999). Strategic processing during comprehen-
for cognition. New York: Cambridge University sion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4),
Press. 615629. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.4.615
Kintsch, W., & Rawson, K.A. (2005). Comprehension. Marsh, H.W., Hau, K., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search
In M.J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing
882 Hannon
Verhaeghen, P., Marcoen, A., & Goossens, L. issues, and applications (pp. 5675). Thousand
(1993). Facts and fiction about memory aging: Oaks, CA: Sage.
A quantitative integration of research findings. Zhang, H., & Hoosain, R. (2001). The influ-
The Journal of Gerontology, 48(4), P157P171. ence of narrative text characteristics on the-
West, S.G., Finch, J.F., & Curran, P.J. (1995). matic inference during reading. Journal of
Structural equation models with non-normal Research in Reading, 24(2), 173186. doi:10.1111/
variables: Problems and remedies. In R.H. Hoyle 1467-9817.00140
(Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts,
A ppendi x A
A
s noted in the Methods section, students completed two forms of the
Nelson-Denny, either set 1 (forms E and H) or set 2 (forms F and G). To
test whether the zero-order correlations between scores on the predictors
and the reading comprehension forms are equivalent, I completed a number of
z-tests. These z-tests were computed between forms that were matched in the
same session. That is, comparisons were made between form E and form F and
between form H and form G for each of the predictors. For instance, a z-test as-
sessed whether the correlation between scores on text memory and form E (i.e.,
set 1, session 1) was equivalent to the correlation between scores on text memory
and form F (i.e., set 2, session 1); a z-test assessed whether the correlation be-
tween scores on text memory and form H (i.e., set 1, session 2) was equivalent to
the correlation between scores on text memory and form G (i.e., set 2, session 2);
and so forth. None of the z-tests was significant. For example, for the largest z =
-1.28, p > .10.
A ppendi x C
Features/Relations
speed NORT > JET > CAR > BERL > SAMP
weight NORT > JET > CAR > SAMP > BERL > CAR
Test Statements
Text Memory
A NORT is faster than a JET. (true)
A JET is faster than a NORT. (false)
884 Hannon
Text Inferencing
A SAMP is slower than a CAR. (true)
A CAR is slower than a SAMP. (false)
Low-Knowledge Access
A JET is faster than a CAR. (true)
A CAR is faster than a JET. (false)
High-Knowledge Access
A JET has a pilot, whereas a MOTORCYCLE doesnt. (true)
A JET has a driver, whereas a MOTORCYCLE doesnt. (false)
Low-Knowledge Integration
A NORT is faster than a CAR. (true)
A CAR is faster than a NORT. (false)
High-Knowledge Integration
Like ROCKETS, NORTS travel in the air. (true)
Like MOTORCYCLES, NORTS travel across the land. (false)
Like MOTORCYCLES, BERLS travel across the land. (true)
Like ROCKETS, BERLS travel in the air. (false)
Speed
Average reaction time for all correctly answered test statements.
D
ual Coding Theory (DCT) is an established theory of general cognition
that has been directly applied to literacy. This theory was originally
developed to account for verbal and nonverbal influences on memory,
and it has been extended to many other areas of cognition through a system-
atic program of research over many years (Paivio, 1971, 1986, 1991). DCT has
been extended to literacy as an account of reading comprehension (Sadoski &
Paivio, 1994; Sadoski, Paivio, & Goetz, 1991), as an account of written composi-
tion (Sadoski, 1992), and as a unified theory of reading and writing (Sadoski &
Paivio, 2001). For the fullest understanding of the theory, these references and
the specific studies they cite should be consulted. This article briefly discusses
the DCT account of certain basic processes in reading, including decoding, com-
prehension, and response.
The value of explaining reading under the aegis of a theory of general cogni-
tion is compelling. Reading is a cognitive act, but there is nothing about reading
that does not occur in other cognitive acts that do not involve reading. We perceive,
recognize, interpret, comprehend, appreciate, and remember information that is
not in text form as well as information that is in text form. Cognition in reading
is a special case of general cognition that involves written language. Theories spe-
cific to reading must eventually conform to broader theories of general cognition
for scientific progress to advance. DCT provides one vehicle for that advancement.
Another value offered by DCT is that it provides a combined account of de-
coding, comprehension, and response. Theories of reading often focus on one or
another of these aspects of reading but not all. As we shall see, the same basic
DCT principles apply to graphemephoneme correspondences, word meaning,
grammar, the construction of mental models of text episodes, and even imagina-
tive responses to text. In this article, we will briefly explain the theorys basic
assumptions; provide accounts of decoding, comprehension, and response; com-
pare and contrast DCT with other theories of reading; and discuss its implications
for research and practice.
This chapter is reprinted from Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (5th ed., pp. 13291362), edited
by R.B. Ruddell and N.J. Unrau, Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Copyright 2004 by the
International Reading Association.
886
Basic Assumptions
A basic premise of DCT is that all mental representations retain some of the con-
crete qualities of the external experiences from which they derive. These experi-
ences can be linguistic or nonlinguistic. Their differing characteristics develop
into two separate mental systems or codes: one specialized for representing and
processing language (the verbal code) and one for processing nonlinguistic ob-
jects and events (the nonverbal code). The latter is frequently referred to as the
imagery system or code because its functions include the generation, analysis,
and transformation of mental images. Each code has its own characteristic units
and hierarchical organization. Together, the two codes account for knowledge of
language and knowledge of the world.
The two mental codes and our five senses are orthogonal in DCT. This means
that the two codes each have subsets of mental representations that are quali-
tatively different because of the different sensory experiences from which they
originated. Because sensory systems are linked to motor response systems in per-
ception (e.g., eye movements, listening attitudes, active touch), these subsets have
sensorimotor qualities. We develop visual representations in the verbal code for
language units we have seen, such as letters, words, or phrases (e.g., baseball bat).
But we also develop visual representations in the nonverbal code for nonlinguistic
forms that we have seen, such as common objects or scenes (e.g., a wooden or alu-
minum baseball bat). Likewise, we develop auditory representations in the verbal
code for speech units we have heard, such as phonemes and their combinations
(e.g., the phoneme /b/, the rime /-at/, the word /bat/), and auditory representations
in the nonverbal code for nonlinguistic environmental sounds we have heard
(e.g., the crack of a wooden bat or the clink of an aluminum bat hitting a ball).
Likewise, we develop haptic (i.e., kinesthetic or tactile) representations in the ver-
bal code for linguistic motor acts (e.g., pronouncing /b/ or writing the letter b or
touching the Braille sign for b), and we develop haptic representations in the non-
verbal code for the active feel of objects, textures, and movements (e.g., the heft
and swing of a baseball bat). We do not represent language in the chemical sense
modalities (smell and taste), but we have nonverbal representations for them (e.g.,
the smell and taste of a juicy hot dog at a baseball game). Images in these modali-
ties are typically less vivid for most people. (Table 1 provides a diagram of this
orthogonal relationship.) To these modalities might be added affectemotional
feelings and reactions. These are nonverbal by definition, although we have many
names for emotional states. We also have imagery for such states, and it forms an
important component of meaning. We might imagine the excitement of an enthu-
siastic fan at a baseball game, for example.
Understanding these codes and modes is basic to understanding the
DCT interpretation of reading. The overall system can be imagined as a set of
modality- and code-specific subsystems that are laced with interconnections.
These subsystems are independent and appear to be specialized in certain, some-
times multiple, areas of the brain. For example, some persons with alexia cannot
read the phrase baseball bat but can recognize the phrase when it is spoken and
Basic Units
Cognitive theories usually specify basic units or building blocks of cognition.
The basic units in the verbal system are logogens, and the basic units in the non-
verbal system are imagens. These terms are merely jargon for the way the brain
represents different types of information, but DCT assumes that they are concrete,
SENSORY SYSTEMS
R E P R E S E N T A T I O N A L C O N N E C T I O N S
V Logogens Imagens N
E O
R N
ASSOCIATIVE STRUCTURE
ASSOCIATIVE STRUCTURE
B V
A REFERENTIAL E
L CONNECTIONS R
B
S A
Y L
S
T S
E Y
M S
T
E
M
VERBAL RESPONSES NONVERBAL RESPONSES
Empirical Evidence
The constellation of predictions derived from the DCT model of reading has been
only partially developed and tested, but relevant evidence is available on several
research fronts. Next, we will review certain empirical evidence in the areas of
decoding, comprehension, and response.
Decoding
Printed words usually are recoded promptly into an auditorymotor (phonemic)
form. In DCT, this involves activation of verbalassociative connections between
visual logogens and auditorymotor logogens. As discussed previously, these con-
nections generally are assumed to occur at the representational level because they
usually can be achieved before a syntactic or semantic interpretation is gener-
ated. However, this does involve associative processing, and the time required for
this processing will presumably vary with word familiarity, graphemephoneme
consistency, and other factors. Therefore, spreading activation could theoretically
reach and activate still other representations during this time. These representa-
tions include imagens, possibly implicating imagery as a semantic factor in word
recognition.
In fact, word imageability is one of the best predictors of oral reading per-
formance in beginning reading or in certain acquired disorders of reading.
Beginning readers read concrete, imageable words more accurately than abstract
words, with these effects more prominent for poor readers (Coltheart, Laxon,
& Keating, 1988; Jorm, 1977; Juel & Holmes, 1981). Neurological patients with
severe phonological deficits, whose reading ability is assumed to rely mainly
on direct access from orthography to semantic interpretations, often are mark-
edly more successful in reading concrete, imageable words than abstract words
Response
Mental imagery and its correlate, emotional response, are vital to aesthetic re-
sponse to text. Imaginative and affective processes are how a text is realized,
lived through, or brought to life. As discussed earlier, some aspects of re-
sponse may be contemporaneous with the formation of a mental model of the
text, so that the distinction between comprehension and response is somewhat
fuzzy. Response can take more objective forms as well, such as critical evaluation
against some standard as in rating the importance of a text segment relative to
the whole.
The empirical evidence for the relationship between imaginative and affec-
tive processes in responding to text was reviewed by Goetz and Sadoski (1996). A
program of research carried out over 10 years revealed that imagery and affective
response to text can be measured reliably and validly using conventional meth-
ods. Both the strength of response, as measured by quantitative ratings, and the
nature of response, as measured by qualitative reports, were investigated in this
research program.
The core of this research program was a set of complementary studies using
literary short stories. In one study (Sadoski & Goetz, 1985), participants read and
Decoding
Considerable evidence now exists that the concreteness or imageability of written
language is a factor in its phonological recoding. This evidence is consistent with
the interactive nature of reading, where top-down semantic and syntactic factors
and bottom-up decoding factors interact at all levels. This evidence also reinforces
the assertion that there may be more to the phenomena of phonological recoding
and inner speech than providing us with a strategy for lexical accessmeaning
may precede phonology more than we realize. While much phonological recod-
ing may occur at a deep, cortical level, its more conscious manifestation is inner
speech.
Despite the pervasiveness of inner speech in reading, too little is known
about this phenomenon. Huey (1908/1968) devotes a chapter to it, regarding in-
ner speech as a ubiquitous short-term memory phenomenon. In a landmark study
in which subvocalization was measured by surgically inserting electrodes into
the speech musculature, Edfeldt (1960) found that (a) all readers appear to en-
gage in inner speech to varying degrees, especially as reading becomes increas-
ingly difficult; (b) inner speech has no detrimental effect on reading; and (c) good
readers engage in less inner speech than poor readers. Both Huey and Edfeldt
point out that inner speech is not inevitable in reading. Later research reviews
by Gibson and Levin (1975) and Rayner and Pollatsek (1989) arrived at the same
general conclusions: Inner speech seems to be a useful but not obligatory vehicle
for recoding text in short-term memory in order to parse sentences, associate
words contextually, and inwardly express a spoken interpretation.
But these explanations raise unanswered questions. If inner speech is not
strictly necessary, why not simply an inner semantics that operates directly
on print input, at least for good readers past the early developmental stages of
reading? Speed reading courses have long advocated breaking the sound bar-
rier and reading purely visually to increase rate and improve comprehension
and retention (Frank, 1994). However, Carver (1982) empirically determined that
for skilled readers the optimal rate of comprehending prose while reading was
identical to the optimal rate of comprehending prose while listening. This rate
was about 300 wpmabout the maximum rate at which speech can be produced
Comprehension
An issue in need of renewed research from the viewpoint of all cognitive theories
is that of the nature of grammar and its role in comprehending text. Over the
years, grammars of various kinds have been formulated, including traditional
grammar, structural grammar, case grammar, and transformational grammar.
The similarities and differences between these grammars are more complex than
is usually assumed. Chomskys (1957) transformational grammar, which shared
much with traditional grammar and was contrasted with the descriptive patterns
of structural grammar, enjoyed considerable popularity during the second half
of the 20th century. However, its explanation of sentence comprehension has be-
come heavily strained and has not met with empirical support.
According to the transformational view, all mental activity is rule governed
and verbal. Complex sentences are mentally broken down into their deep-structure
kernels and understood in terms of transformational rules that are basically innate
and universal. Therefore, sentence comprehension is a function of transformational
Response
Considerable progress has been made in linking theories of literary interpretation
to scientific theories of cognition with empirical verification, a situation little
entertained as recently as 25 years ago (Kruez & MacNealy, 1996). Indeed, the
study of reader response to literature has become one of the more popular sub-
jects in reading research. Mental imagery and affect obviously are crucial to liter-
ary response because the sensuous realization of setting, episode, character, and
conflict is central to the lived through experience of a literary text. If evidence
is needed to support this point, Miall and Kuiken (1995) factor analyzed a ques-
tionnaire of 68 items covering a broad spectrum of literary responses and found
factors for imagery and empathy. They grouped these into a higher-order fac-
tor they called experiencing, the dimension of being absorbed in a literary work.
Conformably, much research from the DCT perspective has shown that imagery
and emotional response are persistently related in responding to literature. This
research was reviewed by Goetz and Sadoski (1996) and was summarized earlier.
An issue that deserves attention is the challenge posed by this research for
some reader-response theories. Rosenblatts (1994, see Chapter 35 this volume)
transactional theory has enjoyed considerable attention in recent years as an
explanation for the way readers approach texts with different stances in mind.
Specifically, this theory proposes that the reading transaction exists on a con-
tinuum between efferent reading and aesthetic reading. In the efferent stance, the
reader is mainly concerned with information to be extracted and retained after
the reading event. In the aesthetic stance, the reader is mainly concerned with the
evocation of sensations, images, and scenes as they unfold in the moment. The
reader may vary stances so that, for example, poetry could be read as a source
of historical information, or a historical exposition could be read to imagine the
sights, sounds, and emotions of the historical events. Moreover, readers can slide
along the continuum from moment to moment within a reading so that no read-
ing is probably ever purely efferent or aesthetic.
The challenge involved is that considerable evidence shows that what is most
imaged and felt in a reading is what is most retained over the long term. For ex-
ample, Sadoski and Quast (1990) had their participants read and then rate the
paragraphs in three feature journalism stories for the imagery experienced, the
emotions experienced, or the importance to the story as a whole. Readers were
assigned to read the articles as they would normally read an article about current
Decoding
Recently, decodable texts have been used extensively in beginning reading.
Decodable texts use a high proportion of graphophonemically regular words that
are intended to assist students in learning to decode and gain a sight vocabulary.
However, word imageability also has been found to strongly affect sight-word
learning. That is, decodability may not be enough.
Hargis and Gickling (1978) taught kindergartners a set of concrete sight
words and a set of abstract sight words that were matched for length and fre-
quency. All the words were familiar words that were initially unknown to the
children by sight. During training, the children (a) were shown the words on flash
cards, (b)heard each word pronounced, (c) heard each word used in a sentence,
(d) used the word in a sentence of their own, and (e) repeated the word. Two days
Comprehension
Throughout history, DCT principles have been extensively appliedoften
intuitivelyto teaching reading comprehension. Sadoski and Paivio (2001)
reviewed the history of teaching text comprehension from ancient to modern
times and found an alternation between emphasis on the abstract and the verbal
(e.g., outlines, epitomes) and the concrete and the imaginal (e.g., object lessons,
imagery training). Clark and Paivio (1991) reviewed decades of empirical stud-
ies relevant to DCT in education and determined that mental imagery, concrete-
ness, and verbal associative processes play major roles in the representation and
There is no easy solution to this problem. Images and feelings are deeply per-
sonal, and instruction in what to imagine and feel is surely less appropriate than
to imagine and feel. The basis of an effective literary education is in nurturing
response but also in disciplining it so that it is not simply a flight of the imagina-
tion or an exercise in the affective fallacy. Finding a way to do this is a pressing
problem for researchers and educators. One educationally valid method from a
reading viewpoint might involve the avoidance of didactically explaining the ef-
fects of a literary work, instead investigating how authors achieve whatever effects
they cause in readers.
Sadoski (2002) discusses how DCT principles might explain the way poets
use imagery and language in collaboration or contention to obtain effects on read-
ers. Several commonly taught poems are presented, showing that the mental im-
ages evoked by the poem are sometimes in contrast with the language of the
poem. For example, John Masefields poem Sea Fever (Masefield, 1951) deals
with a sailors yearning to go back to sea, although the reasons for not doing so
are unclear. Images are evoked of tall sailing ships, the kick of the wheel, the
song of the wind, and the clouds flying by. But the rhythm of the poem alternates
between rollicking, fast-paced lines and slower, languorous lines. The images are
all of freedom, but the lines constrain the reader every time the poem gets going
again. The language, therefore, is inconsistent with the images evoked, and the
contrast is provocative. Does this mean that the sailor is somehow incapacitated
and either spiritually or physically unable to go back to sea? No explicit mean-
ing can be assigned because it is all inferred and ambiguous. Rather, the effects
caused in the readers are discussed in a disciplined way without acceptance or
rejection. This approach may be more appropriate for some poems than others,
but as a general approach, the scrutiny of the effects produced by language and
imagery in collaboration or in contrast may be one useful solution to how to best
deal with reader response in education.
Conclusion
DCT is a theory of general cognition that addresses reading in all its psycho-
logical aspects. Few theories offer this scope and have achieved its broad base of
Q U E S T I O N S F O R RE F L E C T I O N
1. How do verbal and nonverbal processes influence and support each other
during reading?
2. To what effect can a reading teacher use DCT to support struggling readers?
3. How does response theory in DCT compare with Rosenblatts transactional
theory of reader response?
R ef er ence s
Baluch, B., & Besner, D. (2001). Basic processes in Coltheart, M., Laxton, V.J., & Keating, C. (1988).
reading: Semantics affects speeded naming of Effects of word imageability and age of acqui-
high frequency words in an alphabetic script. sition on childrens reading. British Journal of
Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, Psychology, 79, 112.
55(1), 6369. Coltheart, M., Patterson, K., & Marshall, J.C.
Bell, N. (1986). Visualizing and verbalizing for lan- (Eds.). (1980). Deep dyslexia. London: Routledge
guage comprehension and thinking. Paso Robles, & Kegan Paul.
CA: Academy of Reading Publications. Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., &
Black, J.B., Turner, T.J., & Bower, G.H. (1979). Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded
Spatial reference points in language compre- model of visual word recognition and reading
aloud. Psychological Review, 108(1), 204256.
hension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal
Denis, M. (1982). Imaging while reading text:
Behavior, 18, 187198.
A study of individual differences. Memory &
Carver, R.P. (1982). Optimal rate of reading prose.
Cognition, 10, 540545.
Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 5688. Eddy, J.K., & Glass, A.L. (1981). Reading and listen-
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The ing to high and low imagery sentences. Journal
Hague, the Netherlands: Mouton. of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20(3),
Clark, J.M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory 333345.
and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3, Edfeldt, A.W. (1960). Silent speech and silent reading.
149210. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Coltheart, M., Curtis, B., Atkins, P., & Haller, M. Ellis, A.W., & Monaghan, J. (2002). Reply to Strain,
(1993). Models of reading aloud: Dual-route Patterson, and Seidenberg (2002). Journal of
and parallel-distributed-processing approaches. Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Psychological Review, 100, 589608. Cognition, 28, 215220.
T
he decade since our chapter appeared in the last edition of this volume has
been a propitious time for Dual Coding Theory (DCT). We have elaborated
those developments in Sadoski and Paivio (2013), and we highlight a few
selected developments here.
Neuropsychological Support
DCT predictions have a particularly strong record of neuropsychological con-
firmation (see Paivio, 2007, 2008; Sadoski & Paivio, 2013, Chap. 6). As noted
earlier, differences in processing concrete and abstract language are central to
DCT and provide a crucible for neuropsychological tests. Findings consistently
indicate that both concrete and abstract language activate brain areas associated
with language, but concrete language additionally activates areas associated with
mental imagery.
For example, Dhond, Witzel, Dale, and Halgren (2007) used magnetoen-
cephalography (similar to electroencephalography) to measure brain responses
in judging whether words were concrete or abstract. They concluded that abstract
words in particular may be initially understood using a left lateralized fronto-
temporal verbal-linguistic system that for concrete words is supplemented after
a short delay by a right parietal and medial occipital imagistic network (p. 355).
Similarly, a differential pattern of brain area activation occurs in reading con-
crete and abstract sentences (e.g., Bergen, Lindsay, Matlock, & Narayanan, 2007;
Holcomb, Kounios, Anderson, & West, 1999).
In a pair of seminal studies, Sadoski (1983, 1985) found that people report an
image of the climax of a short story more than any other story part. Furthermore,
such an image is associated with integrated story recall and emotional response.
Xu, Kemeny, Park, Frattali, and Braun (2005) used functional magnetic resonance
imaging to track brain activity during the reading of Aesops fables. Consistent
with Sadoskis results, they found that brain activation in the early stages was
mainly, but not completely, in the left perisylvian language areas associated with
word and sentence processing. However, as the story progressed and climaxed,
R ef er ence s
Alba, J.W., & Hasher, L. (1983). Is memory sche- Mead, G.H. (1934). Mind, self, and society: From the
matic? Psychological Bulletin, 93(2), 203231. standpoint of a social behaviorist (C.W. Morris,
doi:10.1037/0033-2909.93.2.203 Ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Barsalou, L.W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Paivio, A. (1979). Imagery and verbal processes.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(4), 577609. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. (Original work pub-
Bergen, B.K., Lindsay, S., Matlock, T., & lished 1971)
Narayanan, S. (2007). Spatial and linguistic Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual
aspects of visual imagery in sentence com- coding approach. New York: Oxford University
prehension. Cognitive Science, 31(5), 733764. Press.
doi:10.1080/03640210701530748 Paivio, A. (2007). Mind and its evolution: A dual cod-
Dhond, R.P., Witzel, T., Dale, A.M., & Halgren, ing theoretical approach. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
E. (2007). Spatiotemporal cortical dynamics Paivio, A. (2008). Looking at reading comprehen-
underlying abstract and concrete word read- sion through the lens of neuroscience. In C.C.
ing. Human Brain Mapping, 28(4), 355362. Block & S.R. Paris (Eds.), Comprehension instruc-
doi:10.1002/hbm.20282 tion: Research-based best practices (pp. 101113).
Glenberg, A.M. (1997). What memory is for: New York: Guilford.
Creating meaning in the service of action. Sadoski, M. (1983). An exploratory study of
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20(1), 119. the relationships between reported imagery
Gredler, M.E. (2007). Of cabbages and kings: and the comprehension and recall of a story.
Concepts and inferences curiously attributed Reading Research Quarterly, 19(1), 110123.
to Lev Vygotsky (Commentary on McVee, doi:10.2307/747341
Dunsmore, and Gavelek, 2005). Review Sadoski, M. (1985). The natural use of imagery in
of Educational Research, 77(2), 233238. story comprehension and recall: Replication and
doi:10.3102/0034654306298270 extension. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(5),
Holcomb, P.J., Kounios, J., Anderson, J.E., & West, 658667. doi:10.2307/747949
W.C. (1999). Dual-coding, context-availability, Sadoski, M. (1992). Imagination, cognition, and
and concreteness effects in sentence compre- persona. Rhetoric Review, 10(2), 266278.
hension: An electrophysiological investigation. doi:10.1080/07350199209388971
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Sadoski, M. (2005). A dual coding view of vocabu-
Memory, and Cognition, 25(3), 721742. lary learning. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 21(3),
doi:10.1037/0278-7393.25.3.721 221238. doi:10.1080/10573560590949359
Krasny, K.A., Sadoski, M., & Paivio, A. (2007). Sadoski, M., McTigue, E.M., & Paivio, A. (2012).
Unwarranted return: A response to McVee, A dual coding theoretical model of decoding in
Dunsmore, and Gaveleks (2005) Schema Theory reading: Subsuming the LaBerge and Samuels
Revisited. Review of Educational Research, 77(2), model. Reading Psychology, 33(5), 465496.
239244. doi:10.3102/003465430301958 doi:10.1080/02702711.2011.557330
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S.J. (1974). Toward a Sadoski, M., & Paivio, A. (2001). Imagery and
theory of automatic information processing in text: A dual coding theory of reading and writing.
reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 293323. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
doi:10.1016/0010-0285(74)90015-2 Sadoski, M., & Paivio, A. (2007). Toward a unified
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in theory of reading. Scientific Studies of Reading,
the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to 11(4), 337356. doi:10.1080/10888430701530714
Western thought. New York: Basic. Sadoski, M., & Paivio, A. (2013). Imagery and text:
McVee, M.B., Gavelek, J.R., & Dunsmore, K.L. A dual coding theory of reading and writing (2nd
(2007). Considerations of the social, indi- ed.). New York: Routledge.
vidual, and embodied: A response to com- Sadoski, M., Paivio, A., & Goetz, E.T. (1991). A
ments on Schema Theory Revisited. Review critique of schema theory in reading and a dual
of Educational Research, 77(2), 245248. coding alternative. Reading Research Quarterly,
doi:10.3102/003465430301677 26(4), 463484. doi:10.2307/747898
Terms such as the reader are somewhat misleading, though convenient, fictions.
There is no such thing as a generic reader or a generic literary work; there are in re-
ality only the potential millions of individual readers of individual literary works....
The reading of any work of literature is, of necessity, an individual and unique oc-
currence involving the mind and emotions of some particular reader. (Rosenblatt,
1938/1983)
T
hat statement, first published in Literature as Exploration in 1938, seems es-
pecially important to reiterate at the beginning of a presentation of a theo-
retical model of the reading process. A theoretical model by definition is
an abstraction, or a generalized pattern devised in order to think about a subject.
Hence, it is essential to recognize that, as I concluded, we may generalize about
similarities among such events, but we cannot evade the realization that there are
actually only innumerable separate transactions between readers and texts.
As I sought to understand how we make the meanings called novels, poems,
or plays, I discovered that I had developed a theoretical model that covers all
modes of reading. Ten years of teaching courses in literature and composition
had preceded the writing of that statement. This had made possible observation
of readers encountering a wide range of literary and nonliterary texts, dis-
cussing them, keeping journals while reading them, and writing spontaneous
reactions and reflective essays. And decades more of such observation preceded
the publication of The Reader, the Text, the Poem (Rosenblatt, 1978), the fullest
presentation of the theory and its implications for criticism.
Thus, the theory emerges from a process highly appropriate to the pragmatist
philosophy it embodies. The problem arose in the context of a practical classroom
situation. Observations of relevant episodes led to the hypotheses that constitute
the theory of the reading process, and these have in turn been applied, tested,
confirmed, or revised in the light of further observation.
Fortunately, while specializing in English and comparative literature, I was in
touch with the thinking on the forefront of various disciplines. The interpretation
of these observations of readers reading drew on a number of different perspec-
tivesliterary and social history, philosophy, aesthetics, linguistics, psychology,
This chapter is reprinted from Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (4th ed., pp. 10571092), edited by
R.B. Ruddell, M.R. Ruddell, & H. Singer, Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Copyright 1994 by
the International Reading Association.
923
and sociology. Training in anthropology provided an especially important point of
view. Ideas were developed that in some instances have only recently become es-
tablished. It seems necessary, therefore, to begin by setting forth some of the basic
assumptions and concepts that undergird the transactional theory of the reading
process. This in turn will involve presentation of the transactional view of the
writing process and the relationship between author and reader.
924 Rosenblatt
Language
The transactional concept has profound implications for understanding language.
Traditionally, language has been viewed as primarily a self-contained system or
code, a set of arbitrary rules and conventions that is manipulated as a tool by
speakers and writers or imprints itself on the minds of listeners and readers. Even
when the transactional approach has been accepted, this deeply ingrained way of
thinking continues to function, tacitly or explicitly, in much theory, research, and
teaching involving texts.2
The view of language basic to the transactional model of reading owes much
to the philosopher John Dewey but even more to his contemporary Charles
Sanders Peirce, who is recognized as the U.S. founder of the field of semiotics
or semiology, the study of verbal and nonverbal signs. Peirce provided concepts
that differentiate the transactional view of language and reading from structural-
ist and poststructuralist (especially deconstructionist) theories. These reflect the
influence of another great semiotician, the French linguist Ferdinand de Saussure
(Culler, 1982).
Saussure (1972) differentiated actual speech (parole) from the abstractions of
the linguists (langue), but he stressed the arbitrary nature of signs and minimized
the referential aspect. Even more important was his dyadic formulation of the re-
lationship between signifier and signified, or between words and concept. These
emphases fostered a view of language as an autonomous, self-contained system
(Rosenblatt, 1993).
In contrast, Peirce (1933, 1935) offered a triadic formulation. A sign, Peirce
wrote, is in conjoint relation to the thing denoted and to the mind.... The sign
is related to its object only in consequence of a mental association, and depends
on habit (Vol. 3, p. 360). The triad constitutes a symbol. Peirce repeatedly refers
to the human context of meaning. Because he evidently did not want to rein-
force the notion of mind as an entity, he typically phrased the conjoint link-
age as among sign, object, and interpretant, which should be understood as
a mental operation rather than an entity (Vol. 6, p. 347). Peirces triadic model
firmly grounds language in the transactions of individual human beings with
their world.
Recent descriptions of the working of the brain by neurologists and other sci-
entists seem very Peircean. Although they are dealing with a level not essential to
our theoretical purposes, they provide an interesting reinforcement. Many lead-
ing scientists, including Dr. Francis Crick, think that the brain creates unified
circuits by oscillating distant components at a shared frequency (Appenzeller,
1990, pp. 67). Neurologists speak of a third-party convergence zone [which
seems to be a neurological term for Peirces interpretant] that mediates between
word and concept convergence zones (Damasio, 1989, pp. 123132). Studies of
childrens acquisition of language support the Peircean triad, concluding that a
vocalization or sign becomes a word, a verbal symbol, when the sign and its object
or referent are linked with the same organismic state (Werner & Kaplan, 1962,
p. 18).
926 Rosenblatt
on in speaking, listening, writing, or reading. We make sense of a new situa-
tion or transaction and make new meanings by applying, reorganizing, revising,
or extending public and private elements selected from our personal linguistic
experiential reservoirs.
Linguistic Transactions
Face-to-face communicationsuch as a conversation in which a speaker is ex-
plaining something to another personcan provide a simplified example of the
transactional nature of all linguistic activities. A conversation is a temporal activ-
ity, a back-and-forth process. Each person has come to the transaction with an
individual history, manifested in what has been termed a linguisticexperiential
reservoir. The verbal signs are the vibrations in the air caused by a speaker. Both
speaker and addressee contribute throughout to the spoken text (even if the lis-
tener remains silent) and to the interpretations that it calls forth as it progresses.
Each must construct some sense of the other person. Each draws on a particular
linguisticexperiential reservoir. The specific situation, which may be social and
personal, and the setting and occasion for the conversation in themselves pro-
vide clues or limitations as to the general subject or framework and hence to the
references and implications of the verbal signs. The speaker and addressee both
produce further delimiting cues through facial expressions, tones of voice, and
gestures. In addition to such nonverbal indications of an ongoing mutual inter-
pretation of the text, the listener may offer questions and comments. The speaker
thus is constantly being helped to gauge and to confirm, revise, or expand the
text. Hence, the text is shaped transactionally by both speaker and addressee.
The opening words of a conversation, far from being static, by the end of the
interchange may have taken on a different meaning. And the attitudes, the state of
mind, even the manifest personality traits, may have undergone change. Moreover,
the spoken text may be interpreted differently by each of the conversationalists.
But how can we apply the conversation model of transaction to the relation-
ship between writers and readers, when so many of the elements that contribute
to the spoken transaction are missingphysical presence, timing, actual setting,
nonverbal behaviors, tones of voice, and so on? The signs on the page are all that
the writer and the reader have to make up for the absence of these other elements.
The reader focuses attention on and transacts with an element in the environ-
ment, namely the signs on the page, the text.
Despite all the important differences noted above, speech, writing, and read-
ing share the same basic processtransacting through a text. In any linguistic
event, speakers and listeners and writers and readers have only their linguistic
experiential reservoirs as the basis for interpretation. Any interpretations or new
meanings are restructurings or extensions of the stock of experiences of lan-
guage, spoken and written, brought to the task. In Peircean terms, past linkages
of sign, object, and interpretant must provide the basis for new linkages, or new
structures of meaning. Instead of an interaction, such as billiard balls colliding,
Selective Attention
William Jamess concept of selective attention provides an important insight
into this process. During the first half of this century, a combination of behavior-
ism and positivism led to neglect of the concept, but since the 1970s psychologists
have reasserted its importance (Blumenthal, 1977; Myers, 1986). James (1890)
tells us that we are constantly engaged in a choosing activity, which he terms
selective attention (Vol. I, p. 284). We are constantly selecting out of the stream,
or field, of consciousness by the reinforcing and inhibiting agency of attention
(Vol. I, p. 288). This activity is sometimes termed the cocktail party phenom-
enon: In a crowded room where many conversations are in progress, we focus
our attention on only one of them at a time, and the others become a background
hum. We can turn our selective attention toward a broader or narrower area of the
field. Thus, while language activity implies an intermingled kinesthetic, cogni-
tive, affective, associational matrix, what is pushed into the background or sup-
pressed and what is brought into awareness and organized into meaning depend
on where selective attention is focused.
The transactional concept will prevent our falling into the error of envisag-
ing selective attention as a mechanical choosing among an array of fixed entities
rather than as a dynamic centering on areas or aspects of the contents of con-
sciousness. The linguistic reservoir should not be seen as encompassing verbal
signs linked to fixed meanings, but as a fluid pool of potential triadic symboliza-
tions. Such residual linkages of sign, signifier, and organic state, it will be seen,
become actual symbolizations as selective attention functions under the shaping
influence of particular times and circumstances.
In the linguistic event, any process will be affected also by the physical and
emotional state of the individual, for example, by fatigue or stress. Attention may
be controlled or wandering, intense or superficial. In the discussion that follows,
it will be assumed that such factors enter into the transaction and affect the qual-
ity of the process under consideration.
The paradoxical situation is that the reader has only the black marks on
the page as the means of arriving at a meaningand that meaning can be con-
structed only by drawing on the readers own personal linguistic and life experi-
ences. Because a text must be produced by a writer before it can be read, logic
might seem to dictate beginning with a discussion of the writing process. It is
true that the writer seeks to express something, but the purpose is to communi-
cate with a reader (even if it is only the writer wishing to preserve some thought
or experience for future reference). Typically, the text is intended for others. Some
sense of a reader or at least of the fact that the text will function in a reading
process is thus implicit in the writing process. Hence, I shall discuss the read-
ing process first, then the writing process. Then, I shall broach the problems of
928 Rosenblatt
communication and validity of interpretation before considering implications for
teaching and research.
930 Rosenblatt
both reader and text, the transactional theory requires an underlying metaphor of
organic activity and reciprocity.
The optical studies of Adelbert Ames (1955) and the AmesCantril trans-
actional psychology (Cantril & Livingston, 1963), which also derived its name
from Dewey and Bentleys Knowing and the Known (1949), deserve first mention
in this regard. These experiments demonstrated that perception depends much
on the viewers selection and organization of visual cues according to past experi-
ence, expectations, needs, and interests. The perception may be revised through
continued transactions between the perceiver and the perceived object.
F.C. Bartletts theory of Remembering (1932; which I regret having discovered
even later than did his fellow scientists) and his term schema are often called on to
explain psychological processes even broader than his special field. It is not clear,
however, that those who so readily invoke his schema concept are heeding his
fears about a narrow, static usage of the term. Rejecting the image of a warehouse
of unchanging items as the metaphor for schemata, he emphasized rather active,
developing patternsconstituents of living, momentary settings belonging to
the organism (Bartlett, 1932, p. 201). His description of the constructive char-
acter of remembering, his rejection of a simple mechanical linear process, and
his concepts of the development and continuing revision of schemata all have
parallels in the transactional theory of linguistic events. His recognition of the
influence of both the interests of the individual and the social context on all levels
of the process also seems decidedly transactional.
932 Rosenblatt
sounds and rhythms of the words themselves, heard in the inner ear as the
signs are perceived.
The aesthetic reader pays attention tosavorsthe qualities of the feelings,
ideas, situations, scenes, personalities, and emotions that are called forth and
participates in the tensions, conflicts, and resolutions of the images, ideas, and
scenes as they unfold. The lived-through meaning is felt to correspond to the text.
This meaning, shaped and experienced during the aesthetic transaction, consti-
tutes the literary work, the poem, story, or play. This evocation, and not the
text, is the object of the readers response and interpretation, both during and
after the reading event.
Confusion about the matter of stance results from the entrenched habit of
thinking of the text as efferent or aesthetic, expository or poetic, literary or non-
literary, and so on. Those who apply these terms to texts should realize that they
actually are reporting their interpretation of the writers intention as to what kind
of reading the text should be given. The reader is free, however, to adopt either
predominant stance toward any text. Efferent and aesthetic apply, then, to the
writers and the readers selective attitude toward their own streams of conscious-
ness during their respective linguistic events.
To recognize the essential nature of stance does not minimize the importance
of the text in the transaction. Various verbal elementsmetaphor, stylistic con-
ventions or divergence from linguistic or semantic norms, even certain kinds of
contenthave been said to constitute the poeticity or literariness of a text.
Such verbal elements, actually, do often serve as cues to the experienced reader
to adopt an aesthetic stance. Yet it is possible to cite acknowledged literary works
that lack one or all of these elements. Neither reading theorists nor literary theo-
rists have given due credit to the fact that none of these or any other arrangements
of words could make their literary or poetic contribution without the readers
prior shift of attention toward mainly the qualitative or experiential contents of
consciousness, namely, the aesthetic stance.
The Continuum
The metaphorical nature of the term the stream of consciousness can be called
on further to clarify the efferentaesthetic continuum. We can image conscious-
ness as a stream flowing through the darkness. Stance, then, can be represented
as a mechanism lighting updirecting the attention todifferent parts of the
stream, selecting out objects that have floated to the surface in those areas and
leaving the rest in shadow. Stance, in other words, provides the guiding orienta-
tion toward activating particular areas and elements of consciousness, that is,
particular proportions of public and private aspects of meaning, leaving the rest
at the dim periphery of attention. Some such play of attention over the contents
of what emerges into consciousness must be involved in the readers multifold
choices from the linguisticexperiential reservoir.
Efferent and aesthetic reflect the two main ways of looking at the world, often
summed up as scientific and artistic. My redundant usage of predominantly
A B C D
Proportion
of Readers
or Writers
Selective
Attention
A B C D
Efferent Aesthetic
Stance Stance
Any linguistic activity has both public (lexical, analytic, abstracting) and private (experiential, affective,
associational) components. Stance is determined by the proportion of each component admitted into
the scope of selective attention. The efferent stance draws mainly on the public aspect of sense; the
aesthetic stance includes proportionally more of the experiential, private aspect.
Reading or writing events A and B fall into the efferent part of the continuum, with B admitting more
private elements. Reading or writing events C and D both represent the aesthetic stance, with C
according a higher proportion of attention to the public aspects of sense.
934 Rosenblatt
Although many readings may fall near the extremes, many others, perhaps
most, may fall nearer the center of the continuum. Where both parts of the ice-
berg of meaning are more evenly balanced, confusion as to dominant stance is
more likely and more counterproductive. It is possible to read efferently and as-
sume one has evoked a poem, or to read aesthetically and assume one is arriving
at logical conclusions to an argument.
Also, it is necessary to emphasize that a predominant stance does not rule
out fluctuations. Within a particular aesthetic reading, attention may at times
turn from the experiential synthesis to efferent analysis, as the reader recognizes
some technical strategy or passes a critical judgment. Similarly, in an efferent
reading, a general idea may be illustrated or reinforced by an aesthetically lived-
through illustration or example. Despite the mix of private and public aspects of
meaning in each stance, the two dominant stances are clearly distinguishable. No
two readings, even by the same person, are identical. Still, someone else can read
a text efferently and paraphrase it for us in such a way as to satisfy our efferent
purpose. But no one else can read aestheticallythat is, experience the evocation
ofa literary work of art for us.
Because each reading is an event in particular circumstances, the same text
may be read either efferently or aesthetically. The experienced reader usually ap-
proaches a text alert to cues offered by the text and, unless another purpose inter-
venes, automatically adopts the appropriate predominant stance. Sometimes the
title suffices as a cue. Probably one of the most obvious cues is the arrangement
of broad margins and uneven lines that signals that the reader should adopt the
aesthetic stance and undertake to make a poem. The opening lines of any text are
especially important from this point of view, for their signaling of tone, attitude,
and conventional indications of stance to be adopted.
Of course, the reader may overlook or misconstrue the cues, or they may
be confusing. And the readers own purpose, or schooling that indoctrinates the
same undifferentiated approach to all texts, may dictate a different stance from
the one the writer intended. For example, the student reading A Tale of Two Cities
who knows that there will be a test on facts about characters and plot may be led
to adopt a predominantly efferent stance, screening out all but the factual data.
Similarly, readings of an article on zoology could range from analytic abstracting
of factual content to an aesthetic savoring of the ordered structure of ideas, the
rhythm of the sentences, and the images of animal life brought into consciousness.
Expressed Response
Response to the evocation often is designed as subsequent to the reading event.
Actually, the basis is laid during the reading, in the concurrent second stream of
reactions. The reader may recapture the general effect of this after the event and
may seek to express it and to recall what in the evocation led to the response.
Reflection on the meaning of even a simple text involves the recall, the reactiva-
tion of some aspects of the process carried on during the reading. Interpretation
tends to be a continuation of this effort to clarify the evocation.
The account of the reading process thus far has indicated an organizing, syn-
thesizing activity, the creation of tentative meanings, and their modification as
new elements enter into the focus of attention. In some instances, the reader at
some point simply registers a sense of having completed a sequential activity and
936 Rosenblatt
moves on to other concerns. Sometimes a sense of the whole structure crystallizes
by the close of the reading.
Expressed Interpretation
Actually, the process of interpretation that includes arriving at a sense of the
whole has not been given enough attention in theories of reading, perhaps be-
cause reading research has typically dealt with simple reading events. For the
term interpret, dictionaries list, among others, several relevant meanings. One is
to set forth the meaning of; to elucidate, to explain. Another is to construe, or
understand in a particular way. A third is to bring out the meaning of by perfor-
mance (as in music). These tend to reflect the traditional notion of the meaning
as inherent in the text.
The transactional theory requires that we draw on all three of these usages to
cover the way in which the term should be applied to the reading process. The evo-
cation of meaning in transaction with a text is indeed interpretation in the sense of
performance, and transactional theory merges this with the idea of interpretation
as individual construal. The evocation then becomes the object of interpretation in
the sense of elucidating or explaining. The expressed interpretation draws on all
these aspects of the total transaction.
Interpretation can be understood as the effort to report, analyze, and explain
the evocation. The reader recalls the sensed, felt, thought evocation while at the
same time applying some frame of reference or method of abstracting in order to
characterize it, to find the assumptions or organizing ideas that relate the parts
to the whole. The second stream of reactions will be recalled, and the reasons for
them sought, in the evoked work or in prior assumptions and knowledge. The
evocation and the concurrent streams of reaction may be related through stress-
ing, for example, the logic of the structure of ideas in an efferent evocation or the
assumptions about people or society underlying the lived-through experience of
the aesthetic reading.
Usually, interpretation is expressed in the efferent mode, stressing underly-
ing general ideas that link the signs of the text. Interpretation can take an aes-
thetic form, however, such as a poem, a painting, music, dramatization, or dance.
Interpretation brings with it the question of whether the reader has produced
a meaning that is consonant with the authors probable intention. Here we find
ourselves moving from the readertext transaction to the relationship between
author and reader. The process that produces the text will be considered before
dealing with such matters as communication, validity of interpretation, and the
implications of the transactional theory for teaching and research.
938 Rosenblatt
The Writers Stance
The concept of stance presented earlier in relation to reading is equally impor-
tant for writing. A major aspect of the delimitation of purpose in writing is the
adoption of a stance that falls at some point in the efferentaesthetic continuum.
The attitude toward what is activated in the linguisticexperiential reservoir
manifests itself in the range and character of the verbal symbols that will come
to mind, and to which the writer will apply selective attention. The dominant
stance determines the proportion of public and private aspects of sense that will
be included in the scope of the writers attention (see Figure 1).
In actual life, the selection of a predominant stance is not arbitrary but is a
function of the circumstances, the writers motives, the subject, and the relation
between writer and prospective reader or readers. For example, someone who
had been involved in an automobile collision would need to adopt very differ-
ent stances in writing an account of the event for an insurance company and in
describing it in a letter to a friend. The first would activate an efferent selective
process, bringing into the center of consciousness and onto the page the public
aspects, such as statements that could be verified by witnesses or by investiga-
tion of the terrain. In the letter to the friend, the purpose would be to share an
experience. An aesthetic stance would bring within the scope of the writers at-
tention the same basic facts, together with feelings, sensations, tensions, images,
and sounds lived through during this brush with death. The selective process
would favor words that matched the writers inner sense of the felt event and that
also would activate in the prospective reader symbolic linkages evoking a similar
experience. Given different purposes, other accounts might fall at other points of
the efferentaesthetic continuum.
Purpose or intention should emerge from, or be capable of constructively
engaging, the writers actual experiential and linguistic resources. Past experi-
ence need not be the limit of the writers scope, but the writer faced with a blank
page needs live ideasthat is, ideas having a strongly energizing linkage with
the linguisticexperiential reservoir. Purposes or ideas that lack the capacity to
connect with the writers funded experience and present concerns cannot fully
activate the linguistic reservoir and provide an impetus to thinking and writing.
A personally grounded purpose develops and impels movement forward. Live
ideas growing out of situations, activities, discussions, problems, or needs pro-
vide the basis for an actively selective and synthesizing process of making mean-
ing. The quickened fund of images, ideas, emotions, attitudes, and tendencies to
act offers the means of making new connections, for discovering new facets of the
world of objects and events, in short, for thinking and writing creatively.
Authorial Reading
Thus far, we have been developing parallels between the ways in which readers
and writers select and synthesize elements from the personal linguistic reser-
voir, adopt stances that guide selective attention, and build a developing selective
purpose. Emphasis has fallen mainly on similarities in composing structures of
meaning related to texts. If readers are in that sense also writers, it is equally
and perhaps more obviouslytrue that writers must also be readers. At this
point, however, some differences within the parallelisms begin to appear.
The writer, it is generally recognized, is the first reader of the text. Note an
obvious, though neglected, difference: While readers transact with a writers fin-
ished text, writers first read the text as it is being inscribed. Because both reading
and writing are recursive processes carried on over a period of time, their very
real similarities have masked a basic difference. The writer will often reread the
total finished text, but, perhaps more important, the writer first reads and carries
on a spiral, transactional relationship with the very text emerging on the page.
This is a different kind of reading. It is authoriala writers reading. It should be
seen as an integral part of the composing process. In fact, it is necessary to see
that writing, or composing, a text involves two kinds of authorial reading, which
I term expression oriented and reception oriented.
940 Rosenblatt
they can be fitted into the tentative meanings already constructed for the pre-
ceding portion of the text. If the new signs create a problem, this may lead to a
revision of the framework or even to a complete rereading of the text and restruc-
turing of the attributed meaning.
The writer, like readers of anothers text, peruses the succession of verbal
signs being inscribed on the page to see whether the new words fit the preceding
text. But this is a different, expression-oriented reading, which should be seen as
an integral part of the composing process. As the new words appear on the page,
they must be tested, not simply for how they make sense with the preceding text
but also against an inner gaugethe intention, or purpose. The emerging mean-
ing, even if it makes sense, must be judged as to whether it serves or hinders
the purpose, however nebulous and inarticulate, that is the motive power in the
writing. Expression-oriented authorial reading leads to revision even during the
earlier phases of the writing process.
942 Rosenblatt
social, and literary forces that shaped the writers intention. The contemporary
reception of the work also provides clues. Such evidence, even if it includes an
authors stated intention, still yields hypothetical results and cannot dictate our
interpretation. We must still read the text to decide whether it supports the hy-
pothetical intention. The reader is constantly faced with the responsibility of
deciding whether an interpretation is acceptable. The question of validity of inter-
pretation must be faced before considering implications for teaching and research.
Validity of Interpretation
The problem of validity of interpretation has not received much attention in read-
ing theory or educational methodology. Despite the extraordinary extent of the
reliance on testing in our schools, there seems to be little interest in clarifying
the criteria that enter into evaluation of comprehension. Actual practice in the
teaching of reading and in the instruments for testing of reading ability has ev-
idently been tacitly based on, or at least has indoctrinated, the traditional as-
sumption that there is a single determinate correct meaning attributable to each
text. The stance factor, the efferentaesthetic continuum, has especially been ne-
glected; operationally, the emphasis has been on the efferent, even when litera-
ture was involved.
The polysemous character of language invalidates any simplistic approach to
meaning, creating the problem of the relationship between the readers interpre-
tation and the authors intention. The impossibility of finding a single absolute
meaning for a text or of expecting any interpretation absolutely to reflect the
writers intention is becoming generally recognized by contemporary theorists.
Intention itself is not absolutely definable or delimitable even by the writer. The
word absolute, the notion of a single correct meaning inherent in the text, is
the stumbling block. The same text takes on different meanings in transactions
with different readers or even with the same reader in different contexts or times.
Warranted Assertibility
The problem of the validity of any interpretation is part of the broader philo-
sophical problem cited at the beginning of this chapter. Perception of the world
is always through the medium of individual human beings transacting with their
worlds. In recent decades, some literary theorists, deriving their arguments from
poststructuralist Continental writers and taking a Saussurean view of language
as an autonomous system, have arrived at an extreme relativist position. They
have developed a reading method that assumes all texts can be deconstructed
to reveal inner contradictions. Moreover, the language system and literary con-
ventions are said to completely dominate author and reader, and agreement con-
cerning interpretation simply reflects the particular interpretive community in
which we find ourselves (Fish, 1980; Rosenblatt, 1991).
Such extreme relativism is not, however, a necessary conclusion from the
premise that absolutely determinate meaning is impossible. By agreeing on cri
944 Rosenblatt
discussions of alternative criteria for interpretation of the U.S. Constitution pro-
vide another complex example.
946 Rosenblatt
signinterpretantobject triad is, as Peirce said, dependent on habit indicates an
even more important level of influence. Cross-fertilization will result from rein-
forcement of linguistic habits and thinking patterns resulting from shared trans-
actional processes of purposive selective attention and synthesis. How fruitful the
interplay between the individual students writing and reading will be depends
largely on the nature of the teaching and the educational context.
Collaborative Interchange
In a favorable educational environment, speech is a vital ingredient of transac-
tional pedagogy. Its importance in the individuals acquisition of a linguistic
experiential capital is clear. It can be an extremely important medium in the
classroom. Dialogue between teacher and students and interchange among stu-
dents can foster growth and cross-fertilization in both the reading and writing
processes. Such discussion can help students develop insights concerning trans-
actions with texts as well as metalinguistic understanding of skills and conven-
tions in meaningful contexts.
Students achievement of insight into their own reading and writing pro-
cesses can be seen as the long-term justification for various curricular and teach-
ing strategies. For example, writers at all levels can be helped to understand their
transactional relationship to their readers by peer reading and discussion of texts.
Their fellow students questions, varied interpretations, and misunderstandings
dramatize the necessity of the writers providing verbal signs that will help read-
ers gain required facts, share relevant sensations or attitudes, or make logical
transitions. Such insights make possible the second, reader-oriented authorial
reading.
Similarly, group interchange about readers evocations from texts, whether
of their peers or adult authors, can in general be a powerful means of stimulating
948 Rosenblatt
growth in reading ability and critical acumen. Readers become aware of the need
to pay attention to the authors words in order to avoid preconceptions and mis-
interpretations. When students share responses to transactions with the same
text, they can learn how their evocations from the same signs differ, can return to
the text to discover their own habits of selection and synthesis, and can become
aware of, and critical of, their own processes as readers. Interchange about the
problems of interpretation that a particular group of readers encounters and a
collaborative movement toward self-critical interpretation of the text can lead to
the development of critical concepts and interpretive criteria. Such metalinguistic
awareness is valuable to students as both readers and writers.
The teacher in such a classroom is no longer simply a conveyor of ready-made
teaching materials and recorder of results of ready-made tests or a dispenser of
ready-made interpretations. Teaching becomes constructive, facilitating inter-
change, helping students make their spontaneous responses the basis for rais-
ing questions and growing in the ability to handle increasingly complex reading
transactions (Rosenblatt, 1983).4
950 Rosenblatt
The view of language as a dynamic system of meaning in which the affec-
tive and the cognitive unite raises questions about the emphasis of past research.
Researchers preoccupation with the efferent is exemplified by their focus on
Piagets work on the childs development of mathematical and logical concepts
and the continuing neglect of the affective by behaviorist, cognitive, and artifi-
cial intelligence psychologists. This is slowly being counterbalanced by growing
interest in the affective and the qualitative (e.g., Deese, 1973; Eisner & Peshkin,
1990; Izard, 1977). We need to understand more fully the childs growth in capac-
ity for selective attention to, and synthesis of, the various components of meaning.
Research in reading should draw on a number of interrelated disciplines,
such as physiology, sociology, and anthropology, and should converge with the
general study of human development. The transactional theory especially raises
questions that involve such broad connections. Also, the diverse subcultures and
ethnic backgrounds represented by the student population and the many strands
that contribute to a democratic culture present a wide range of questions for re-
search about reading, teaching, and curriculum.
Developmental Processes
The adult capacity to engage in the tremendously complex process of reading
depends ultimately on the individuals long developmental process, starting with
learning how to mean (Halliday, 1975; Rosenblatt, 1985b). How does the child
move from the earliest, undifferentiated state of the world to the referential, emo-
tive, and associative part processes (Rommetveit, 1968, p. 167)? Developmental
research can throw light on the relation of cognitive and emotional aspects in the
growth of the ability to evoke meaning in transactions with texts.
Research is needed to accumulate systematic understanding of the positive
environmental and educational factors that do justice to the essential nature of
both efferent and aesthetic linguistic behavior, and to the role of the affective
or private aspects of meaning in both stances. How can childrens sensorimotor
explorations of their worlds be reinforced, their sensitivity to the sounds and
qualitative overtones of language be maintained? In short, what can foster their
capacity to apprehend in order to comprehend, or construct, the poem, story, or
play? Much also remains to be understood about development of the ability to
infer, or make logical connections, or, in short, to read efferently and critically.
How early in the childs development should the context of the transaction
with the text create a purpose for one or the other dominant stance, or help the
reader learn to adopt a stance appropriate to the situation? At different develop-
mental stages, what should be the role or roles of reflection on the reading experi-
ence through spoken comments, writing, and the use of other media?
An overarching question is this: How can skills be assimilated in a context
that fosters understanding of their relevance to the production of meaning? How
can the young reader acquire the knowledge, intellectual frameworks, and sense
of values that provide the connecting links for turning discrete verbal signs into
meaningful constructs? The traditional methods of teaching and testing recognize
Performance
Assessment of performance level is usually required as a means of assuring the
accountability of the school. Whether standardized tests accurately measure the
students ability is currently being called into question. Research on correlation of
reading ability with factors such as age, gender, ethnic and socioeconomic back-
ground, and so on has confirmed the expectation that they are active factors.
However, such research reports a state of affairs that is interpreted according to
varying assumptions, not all conducive to the development of mature readers and
writers. The transactional emphasis on the total context of the reading act rein-
forces the democratic concern with literacy and supports the call for vigorous
political and social reform of negative environmental factors. At the same time
teachers must recognize that the application of quantitatively based group labels
to individual students may unfairly create erroneous expectations that become
self-fulfilling prophecies.
Teaching Methods
In the current transition away from traditional teaching methods, there is the
danger that inappropriate research designs may be invoked to evaluate particular
teaching methods. What criteria of successful teaching and what assumptions
about the nature of linguistic processes underlie the research design and the
methods of measurement? Any interpretations of results should take into account
the various considerations concerning reader, text, and context set forth in the
transactional model.
Results of research assessing different teaching methods raise an important
question: Did the actual teaching conform to the formulaic labels attached to the
methods being compared? The vagueness of a term such as reader-response method
can illustrate the importance of more precise understanding of the actual teach-
ing processes being tested in a particular piece of research. The same term has
been applied to teachers who, after eliciting student responses to a story, fall back
on habitual methods of demonstrating the correct interpretation and to teachers
who make the responses the beginning of a process of helping students grow in
their ability to arrive at sound, self-critical interpretations.
Much remains to be done to develop operational descriptions of the ap-
proaches being compared. Studies are needed of how teachers lead, or facilitate,
without dominating or dictating. Ethnographic study of classroom dynamics, rec
ords of interchange among teacher and students, videotapes of classrooms, and
analyses of text give substance to test results.
952 Rosenblatt
Response
Students empirical responses to a text (mainly written protocols) form the basis
of much of the research on methods generally referred to as reader response or
transactional. (The term response should be understood to cover multiple activi-
ties.) Protocols provide indirect evidence about the students evocation, the work
as experienced, and reactions to it. Such research requires a coherent system of
analysis of students written or oral reports. What evidence, for example, is there
that the reading of a story has been predominantly aesthetic?
The problem of empirical assessment of the students aesthetic reading of a
text offers particular difficulties, especially because no single correct interpre-
tation or evaluation is posited. This requires setting up criteria of interpretation
that reflect not only the presence of personal feelings and associations, which are
only one component, but also their relationship to the other cognitive and attitu-
dinal components. In short, the assessment must be based on clearly articulated
criteria as to signs of growing maturity in handling personal response, relating
to the evoked text, and use of personal and intertextual experience vis--vis the
responses of others.
In order to provide a basis for statistical correlation, content analysis of pro-
tocols has been used largely to determine the components or aspects of response.
The purpose is to distinguish personal feelings and attitudes from, for example, ef-
ferent, analytic references to the sonnet form. This requires a systematic set of cat-
egories, such as The Elements of Writing About a Literary Work (Purves & Rippere,
1968), which has provided a common basis for a large number of studies. As the
emphasis on process has increased, refinements or alternatives have been devised.
The need is to provide for study of the relationship among the various aspects of
response, or the processes of selecting and synthesizing activities by which readers
arrive at evocations and interpretations (Rosenblatt, 1985a). Qualitative methods
of research at least should supplement, or perhaps should become the foundation
for, any quantitative methods of assessing transactions with the written word.
Experimental designs that seek to deal with the development of the ability to
handle some aspect of literary art should avoid methodologies and experimental
tasks that instead serve to test efferent metalinguistic capacities. For example,
levels of ability to elucidate metaphor or to retell stories may not reflect childrens
actual sensing or experiencing of metaphors or stories so much as their capacity
to efferently abstract or categorize (Verbrugge, 1979).
The dependence on single instances of reading in assessing an individuals
abilities is currently being called into question. The previous reminder that we are
dealing with points in a continuing and changing developmental process is espe-
cially relevant. Habits are acquired and change slowly; it may be found that the
effects of a change, for example, from traditional to response methods of teaching
literature, cannot be assessed without allowing for a period of transition from
earlier approaches and the continuation of the new approaches over time.
Basal readers have in the past offered especially clear examples of questions
and exercises tacitly calling for an efferent stance toward texts labeled stories and
Research Methodologies
The preceding discussion has centered on suggesting problems for research
implied by the transactional model. Research methods or designs have been
mentioned mainly in reference to their potentialities and limitations for pro-
viding kinds of information needed and to criteria for interpretation of data.
Quantitatively based generalizations about groups are usually called for, but
currently there is interest in clarifying the potentialities and limitations of both
quantitative and qualitative research. Empirical experimental designs are being
supplemented or checked by other research approaches, such as the case study
(Birnbaum & Emig, 1991), the use of journals, interviews during or after the
linguistic event, portfolios, and recordings in various media. Because the single
episode test has various limitations, research in which researcher and teacher col-
laborate, or carefully planned research carried on by the teacher, provides the op-
portunity for extended studies. The transactional model especially indicates the
value of ethnographic or naturalistic research because it deals with problems in
the context of the ongoing life of individuals and groups in a particular cultural,
social, and educational environment (Kantor, Kirby, & Goetz, 1981; Zaharlick &
Green, 1991). The developmental emphasis also supports the call for longitudi-
nal studies (Tierney, 1991). Interdisciplinary collaboration, desirable at any time,
seems especially so for longitudinal studies. Research will need to be sufficiently
complex, varied, and interlocking to do justice to the fact that reading is at once
an intensely individual and an intensely social activity, an activity that from the
earliest years involves the whole spectrum of ways of looking at the world.
Q U E S T I O N S F O R RE F L E C T I O N
954 Rosenblatt
Ack nowl edgmen ts
I want to thank June Carroll Birnbaum and Roselmina Indrisano for reading this manuscript,
and Nicholas Karolides and Sandra Murphy for reading earlier versions.
Not e s
1
The 1949 volume marks Deweys choice of transaction to designate a concept present in his
work since 1896. My own use of the term after 1950 applied to an approach developed from
1938 on.
2
By 1981, transactional theory, efferent stance, and aesthetic stance were sufficiently current
to be listed and were attributed to me in A Dictionary of Reading and Related Terms (Harris
& Hodges, 1981). But the often confused usage of the terms led me to write Viewpoints:
Transaction Versus InteractionA Terminological Rescue Operation (1985).
3
The transactional model of reading presented here covers the whole range of similarities and
differences among readers and between author and reader. Always in the transaction between
reader and text, activation of the readers linguisticexperiential reservoir must be the basis
for the construction of new meanings and new experiences; hence, the applicability to bilin-
gual instruction and the reading of texts produced in other cultures.
4
Literature as Exploration emphasizes the instructional process that can be built on the basis
of personal evocation and response. Illustrations of classroom discussions and chapters such
as Broadening the Framework, Some Basic Social Concepts, and Emotion and Reason
indicate how the teacher can democratically moderate discussion and help students toward
growth not only in ability to handle increasingly complex texts but also in personal, social,
and cultural understanding.
R ef er ence s
Ames, A. (1955). The nature of our perceptions, pre- Cantril, H., & Livingston, W.K. (1963). The con-
hensions and behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton cept of transaction in psychology and neurology.
University Press. Journal of Individual Psychology, 19, 316.
Appenzeller, T. (1990, November/December). Chomsky, N. (1968). Language and mind. New York:
Undivided attention. The Sciences. Harcourt Brace.
Applebee, A.N. (1974). Tradition and reform in the Clifford, J. (Ed.). (1991). The experience of read-
teaching of English. Urbana, IL: National Council ing: Louise Rosenblatt and reader response theory.
of Teachers of English. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/_Cook.
Bartlett, F.C. (1932). Remembering: A study in Cox, C., & Many, J.E. (Eds.). (1992). Readers stance
experimental and social psychology. London: and literary understanding. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Cambridge University Press. Culler, J. (1982). On deconstruction. Ithaca, NY:
Bates, E. (1979). The emergence of symbols. New Cornell University Press.
York: Academic. Damasio, A.R. (1989). The brain binds entities by
Beach, R., & Hynds, S. (1990). Research on re- multilingual activities for convergence zones.
sponse to literature. In E. Farrell & J.R. Squire Neural Computation, 1.
(Eds.), Transactions with literature (pp. 131205). Deese, J. (1973). Cognitive structure and affect
Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of in language. In P. Pliner & T. Alloway (Eds.),
English. Communication and affect. New York: Academic.
Birnbaum, J., & Emig, J. (1991). Case study. In J. Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry. New
Flood, J.M. Jensen, D. Lapp, & J.R. Squire (Eds.), York: Henry Holt.
Handbook of research on teaching the English lan- Dewey, J., & Bentley, A.F. (1949). Knowing and the
guage arts (pp. 195204). New York: Macmillan. known. Boston: Beacon.
Blumenthal, A.L. (1977). The process of cognition. Eisner, E.W., & Peshkin, A. (1990). Qualitative in-
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. quiry in education: The continuing debate. New
Bohr, N. (1959). Discussion with Einstein. In York: Teachers College Press.
P.A. Schilpp (Ed.), Albert Einstein, Philosopher- Emig, J. (1983). The web of meaning. Portsmouth,
Scientist (p. 210). New York: HarperCollins. NH: Boynton/Cook.
956 Rosenblatt
Chapter 36
ReadingWriting Connections:
Discourse-Oriented Research
Giovanni Parodi, Pontificia Universidad Catlica de Valparaso
Introduction
The concern for the study of reading and writing has boomed in the last 10 or 15
years. Now that the revolution has come full cycle in cognitive sciences and dis-
course processing, no one doubts that adults must develop reflective and critical
thinking that enables them to interact in an environment with increasing com-
municative demands. It is no news, however, that the discourse comprehension
and production levels students show are below expected standards. Extensive re-
search accounts for their underachievement, but many questions are yet to be an-
swered, despite efforts made by researchers in the field (Brem, Russell, & Weems,
2001; Felton & Kuhn, 2001; Graesser, Gernsbacher, & Goldman, 1997; Graesser,
Swamer, Baggett, & Sell, 1996; Parodi, 2002, 2003, 2005a, b; Peronard, Gmez,
Parodi, & Nez, 1998).
A quick review of the literature reveals researchers have only recently ex-
amined the relationships between processes involved in the comprehension and
production of written texts. The high-level cognitive processes have been treated
by various disciplines and interdisciplines as two separate, independent fields
of study. Therefore, a new research area is emerging that systematically inves-
tigates comprehension and writing from the same discourse and cognitive per-
spective aiming at shedding light on their connections (Boscolo & Cisotto, 1999;
Eisterhold, 1991; Parodi 1998, 2003; Sadoski & Paivio, 1994, 2001; Spivey, 1997;
Van Dijk, 1985; Van Dijk & Kintsch, 1983).
The purpose of the present study is to explore the text readingwriting re-
lations from a discourse and cognitive perspective adopting a naturalistic ap-
proach (Graesser, Magliano, & Haberlandt, 1994a; Kent, 1999; Parodi, 2003; Van
Oostendorp & Zwaan, 1994; Weisser & Dobrin, 2001). Research on these re-
lationships should eventually move beyond correlational studies (Parodi, 2003;
Tierney & Shanahan, 1991), yet there is still a lack of investigation that compares
measures from a text linguistics perspective. While our study is correlational, it
nevertheless examines text variables. Moreover, our focus on argumentative text
moves beyond the prevailing emphasis on narrative discourse.
The present study has three objectives. They are (1) to advance the study of
connections by documenting a table of indexes from a psycholinguistic perspec-
This chapter is reprinted from Reading and Writing, 2007, 20(3), 225250. Copyright 2006 by Springer.
Reprinted with permission.
957
tive; (2) to obtain contrastive data on performance measures for argumentative
discourse comprehension and production; and (3) to determine correlations be-
tween reading and writing processes at different text levels (local versus global
coherence and superstructural organization). We assume there are similarities
between reading and writing, but we want to compare them systematically and
analytically. Two main conclusions emerge. First, significant correlations are
found between reading and writing. Second, the strongest links are detected at the
level of local cohesion and the microstructural level. Since reading and writing
argumentative texts are some of the most difficult tasks students face in academic
life, we assume participants have problems in comprehending and producing this
written organizational superstructure (thesis, arguments, and conclusion).
In order to achieve these objectives, we designed four tests: two compre-
hension tests and two writing tasks, as will be described later. The tests were
administered to a group of 439 eighth graders attending subsidized schools in
Valparaso, Chile.
Theoretical Scope
Connections Between Textual Comprehension
and Textual Production
The literature on readingwriting connections is scant, particularly among the pub-
lications available before the late 70s. Irwin (1992) and Tierney (1992) agree that
the first published work on this line dates back to 1929 and that the 80s and the 90s
were the decades when the reader/writer relation and cognitive processes were of
major concern. According to these authors, no attempt at linking comprehension
and written production was made before the 90s. Reading was essentially conceived
as a receptive skill, while writing was a productive one, so they were taught inde-
pendently. Stotsky (1983) presented a variety of correlational studies of comprehen-
sion and production, paying special attention to those carried out between 1965
and 1977. Most of these efforts correlate comprehension achievements with writ-
ing ability, and most of them reveal highly significant correlations. Subsequently,
Shanahan (1984) and then Shanahan and Lomax (1986) detected positive correla-
tions among various factors, which associated comprehension and production.
Tierney and Shanahan (1991) reviewed the state of research on reading
writing connections, including many aspects that had been neglected up to that
time. The outcomes of several investigations were documented and critically ex-
amined, including educational implications. Their efforts to account for progress
on the subject, from their perspective, reveal the limitations affecting the devel-
opment both of theories and research to date. According to Irwin (1992), 83% of
the research in this area until 1984 was classified as educational and were mainly
experimental. Most efforts focused on instructional models with no incorpora-
tion of basic theoretical models (Eckhoff, 1983; Harp & Brewer, 1991; Hass, 1989;
Heller, 1995; Sager, 1989). A very limited number of these studies included textual
variables, most of them concentrating only on narrative texts.
958 Parodi
From our perspective, most of these investigations have a number of prob-
lems. As a result of influential theories at particular historical moments, the un-
derlying models in many cases were under strong structuralist influence that
limited them to word and sentence units. Consequently, the instruments used to
assess comprehension did not tap comprehension of a text, but instead typically
tapped literal reproduction of the information (shallow level questions) or/and
fluent reading aloud and recognition of particular syntax patterns (cloze test).
The tests that measured production focused mainly on formal aspects rather than
on substantive referential content; that is, the tests paid particular attention to
spelling, use of assorted vocabulary items and diversity of syntax structures. They
did not take into consideration other aspects, such as the implied audiences, the
writers role, the subject matters, and rhetorical composition (Ede & Lundford,
1988; Kucer, 2001; Langer, 2002; Spivey, 1997).
Investigations on readingwriting connections have not been guided by a
consensual framework or unified theory of language processing. Therefore, the
standards used to correlate reading and writing were not necessarily comparable
and did not share a common ground of similarity. It is important to point out
that the concepts of discourse, comprehension, and production have evolved dra-
matically during the last few years. Modern concepts of written discourse assign
a central role to mental processes and the role of the reader/writers previous
knowledge (de Beaugrande, 1997; Gmez, 1994; Nystrand, 1987; Van Dijk, 1985).
The main obstacles are: (a) problems with the theoretical definitions or theories
underlying reading and writing, and (b) problems with the measures that are
being compared when they do not focus on the same psycholinguistic construct.
This new emerging line of research maintains that reading and writing are
related processes, and that there are insightful frameworks that relate the two
activities. Examples of these are the investigations conducted by Spivey (1990,
1997) and by Sadoski and Paivio (1994, 2001). Spivey (1990) argues that if a writ-
ten text is produced from particular sources, then the reader becomes a writer
because the source text is transformed into a new text. That is to say, the writer,
while using other texts in the creation of a new one, employs constructive op-
erations of organization, selection, and connection to elaborate meaning. Spivey
(1997) explored a discourse approach from the point of view of discourse analysis,
semiotics, post-structuralism, and deconstructivism. Sadoski and Paivio (1994)
were initially concerned with reading and were in search for a unified theory of
literacy, so they proposed a dual coding theory for reading and writing. Sadoski
and Paivio (2001) developed a systematic theoretical approach that covered the
processes of comprehension and production and their different components,
stressing the importance of integrating verbal and non-verbal cognition. Sadoski
and Paivio justified (step-by-step) the central and integrated role of linguistics
and mental imagery by articulating a unified theory for reading and writing with
non-linguistic knowledge and imagery components (Dual Coding Theory).
960 Parodi
Figure 1. Diagram of a Bidirectional Model
Reading Writing
In Van Dijk and Kintsch (1983) the processes start as strategic ones, based
on situational models. Van Dijk (1985, 1990, 1999, 2002) argues that an interdisi-
ciplinary approach is needed to establish an explicit relation between discourse,
cognition and social situations. Such a model should contain information about:
(1) A cognitive theory of strategic processing of information which assumes
the strategic nature of comprehension and discourse production are flex-
ible processes, having multiple levels functioning in tandem with one
another.
(2) A sociocognitive theory of discourse, which extends the strategic model
of processing, including the role of beliefs and attitudes in discourse
processing.
962 Parodi
Table 1. Guideline for Evaluating Reading and Writing Argumentative
Discourse
Level Comprehension Production
Microstructure (a) Inferred nominal (a) Maintained nominal
(local coherence correference correference
relations) (b) Inferred nominal ellipsis (b) Maintained nominal ellipsis
(c) Inferred causeeffect (c) M
aintained causeeffect
relations relations
Macrostructure (a) Inferred main topic (a) Main topic development
(global coherence (b) Inferred macroproposition 1 (b) M acroproposition 1
relations) organization
(c) Inferred macroproposition 2 (c) Macroproposition 2
organization
Superstructure (a) Inferred thesis (a) Explicit adequate thesis
(text type (b) Inferred arguments (b) A dequate and coherent
canonical arguments
relations) (c) Inferred conclusion (c) A
dequate and coherent
conclusion
Table 1, the main distinction in three discourse levels (micro coherence, macro
coherence, and superstructural organization) is taken from our theoretical frame-
work: Van Dijk (1980, 1985, 1990) and Van Dijk and Kintsch (1983).
In each of these processing textual levels, subdivisions have been made in
order to obtain a display of subprocesses that may account for some of the most
important variables involved. In comprehension tests, inferential questions were
elaborated based on information in the text; for example, referential items were
selected because they are known to provide crucial inferences required to com-
prehend a text (Gernsbacher, 1990; Graesser et al., 1994a; Peronard et al., 1998).
In reading comprehension, a noun and a pronoun need to be linked together
through an inference process in order to build local coherence (e.g., Peter and
he); this was called Inferred nominal co-reference. In relation to the writing tests,
in Spanish written discourse structure, a subject form is not repeated after an
initial clarification because the verb shows agreement in person and number; so
an elliptical noun or pronoun is required (e.g., The man is here. Needs help). This
was called Maintained nominal ellipsis.
When we constructed the tests, we considered evidence showing that most
Chilean eighth graders tend to produce two main arguments when writing argu-
mentative texts (Parodi, 2000; Parodi & Nez, 1998, 1999). Similarly, there was
evidence that most texts selected by teachers for sixth and eighth graders had two
macropropositions. These data were used when deciding what to include in the
guideline (see Appendix 3) for designing and evaluating argumentative written
discourse (Parodi, 1992, 1998, 2003, 2005a, b).
964 Parodi
Figure 2. Achievement According to Structural Level
this light, the demands required by the argumentative structure stand out as the
weakest level in these subjects, and greater difficulties can be seen in the command
of discourse categories involved in the comprehension/production of the argumen-
tative texts. According to these data, our hypothesis is confirmed: local coherence
gets the highest scores and the organization structure of argumentation is one of
the major difficulties for students, both in reading and writing. An explanation for
this behavior can be found in that students this age are better at short-term memory
challenges and their inferential processes work much better at relating information
close together than information separated by several paragraphs or information that
must be reduced and thoroughly processed in the light of a global idea. On the other
hand, narrative discourse is still being overused in the school system, so students are
not well trained in spoken or written argumentation, not only in Chile but in many
other countries (Brem et al., 2001; Felton & Kuhn, 2001; Golder & Coirier, 1994;
Parodi, 2003, 2005b; Peronard et al., 1998; Snchez & lvarez, 1999).
The comparative analysis of the percentages between the two skills shows an
interesting progressive drop, which in turn, reveals great cross-sectional homo-
geneity between discourse comprehension and production. This illustrates the
potential relations between the two higher cognitive processes being compared.
A progressive relation of difficulty in each area of the analyzed discourse struc-
ture can be detected, and this gives evidence of a similar difference between each
structural level, both in comprehension and production.
Based on a non-systematic qualitative analysis of the data collected, that is,
on some random answers obtained from the comprehension and production tests,
Correlational Statistics
Results between discourse comprehension and production showed an overall
positive correlation (0.72). That is to say, there was 51.8% of intersection (com-
monality) between both variables. The detailed analyses of these figures led to
determining that the relations between comprehension and production on the
microstructural (0.57), macrostructural (0.68), and superstructural (0.79) levels
were highly positive and significantly different from zero. All of this indicates
that, in considering the final numbers, 51.8% commonality reveals a quite exten-
sive intersecting area between comprehension and production from the cognitive/
textual perspective, as far as written argumentative discourse is concerned.
In facing these results, a number of questions arise. First, what correlates
these tests substantially? And, what is the underlying common factor?
One answer can be found in the bidirectional theory. Given the positive and
significant correlations on all levels of comprehension/production, there must be
966 Parodi
a set of strategies in common, that is, procedural knowledge constituting the sup-
port of the textual comprehension and production mechanisms. Or, in the sense
of Reuter (1995), there must be a general macrocompetence sustaining writing
and reading, though such knowledge may vary throughout the subjects devel-
opment. In other words, the present findings suggest both a basic general com-
mon competence and the possibility of having mode-specific, diversified discourse
competences. This reveals the possibility of exploring a more eclectic theoretical
perspective of the mind such as the one proposed by Karmiloff-Smith (1992) in her
representational redescription theory (RR). She suggests an approach in which a
Piagetian constructivism and a general-based domain emphasis is combined with
nativism and a Fodorian modularist view. In this new approach, Karmiloff-Smith
proposes that the human cognitive development does not operate through stages
but states, in opposition to classical Piaget perspective. The RR model focuses on
ontogenetic progressive modularization process; this means that the child starts
with general knowledge that progressively gets specialized in relatively indepen-
dent modules. It could be that, therefore, reading and writing skills evolve from
a general domain approach and move progressively towards a more modularist
perspective as the human being develops. Of course, all this would favor a hy-
brid model of reading and writing in search for a general cognitive paradigm
(Karmiloff-Smith, 1992; Kintsch, 1998) with a combination of symbolic and con-
nectionist representations. Hybrid models such as this seem to be very useful
nowadays, but face a lot of problems not clearly and properly addressed because
the combination of these two kinds of cognitive representations (propositions and
connectionist neural nodes) are not utterly unveiled (Parodi, 2002, 2003). This is-
sue goes beyond the scope of this article, but it is nevertheless a major concern in
the frameworks related to this line of research.
It is important to emphasize the difficulty in determining common strate-
gies. Spivey (1997) and Sadoski and Paivio (2001) presented data on some com-
mon strategies, but they are so general that we believe their usefulness is very
restricted and do not seem to help much in defining the possible psycholinguistic
links. Also, Kucer (1985, 2001) has contributed some other common strategies for
reading and writing (e.g., previous knowledge activation, discourse genre orga-
nization); again, the generality of the propositions imply that determining more
specific common strategies might be a difficult task, based on the present avail-
able methods.
Another answer to the aforementioned questions could be found in the three
levels of cognitive representation (surface code, textbase, and situation model) pro-
posed by Van Dijk and Kintsch (1983) and Kintsch (1988, 1998). We agree with
Graesser, Singer, and Trabasso (1994b) in that these are non-controversial compo-
nents widely accepted by researchers in discourse processing. The data collected
here helps us propose that students tend to process deeper readingwriting con-
nections when constructing situational models, but it is possible students use less
similar strategies in constructing surface code (i.e., the exact wording and syntax)
and textbase (explicit text propositions plus inferences needed for text cohesion
Conclusion
The empirical evidence provided helps us conclude that our research hypothesis
are confirmed and that the assumptions are correct: microstructuctural relations
(the ones studied here) are the easiest relations comprehended and produced by
this group of students; at the same time, argumentative text organization (su-
perstructure) is not easy to manage by the 439 eighth graders. The highest posi-
tive and significant correlations are found in argumentative superstructure; this
means that the strongest connections are detected in the schematic text struc-
ture. So, based in these results, we can offer new information on favor of the
readingwriting relations, supported by comparable guidelines on argumenta-
tive discourse. The positive correlations between comprehension and production
with an important degree of commonality are proofs of it. This means that the
968 Parodi
bidirectional hypothesis is confirmed as an interesting explanation of the results
under analysis. At the same time, the analysis of our data leads us to confirm the
existence of common basic strategies used by these 439 eighth graders when ac-
complishing writing and reading tasks, although more specific resources for each
of the skills should be explored and detected.
These data contribute some empirical evidence collected from tests designed
on similar discourse psycholinguistic grounds from text-oriented perspective.
This information gives support to our initial questions that inquired about the
potential existence of a general common cognitive system for both skills, though
not denying the existence of some other more specific subsystems. This implies
that the processes involved in both activities share some common knowledge-
based strategies, yet to be determined in future research.
As pointed out at the beginning of this article, although we are certain we
must move from correlational studies into more qualitative ones, the data col-
lected has some degree of originality because it advances into the argumentative
discourse and the parameters employed are more amenable to comparison. Of
course, research should be conducted with empirical experiments on a multidi-
mentional design, i.e., having proposed more than one line of data to help develop
the objectives and support the information collected from one source of data or
as this was called by Graesser et al. (1994b) the three-pronged method. There
have been some lively debates over the proper measures and experimental de-
signs that test whether or not reading and writing processes can be explored and
compared from the same empirical and theoretical approach. However, in this
article, we do not dissect the methodological problems with each of the existing
measures and tasks. There does not appear to be a perfect measure and task; there
are merely trade-offs, with each enjoying some benefits and some shortcomings.
The decisions made for this research are based on empirical studies that, in our
opinion, have minimal methodological problems and are supported by previous
experimental research.
In relation to the students achievement levels, it is important to emphasize
the fact that, not only in Chile but also in several other Latin American countries
as well as Spain and the United States, teaching practices currently in use do not
seem to lead to the expected levels of language performance. The efforts being
made to remove students from the social and cultural isolation in which they are
immersed have shown little impact until now (Arnoux, Nogueira, & Silvestri,
2002; Felton & Kuhn, 2001; Golder & Coirier, 1994; Parodi, 2001, 2003, 2005a, b;
Peronard et al., 1998; Snchez & lvarez, 1999). An educational reform is under-
way in Chile and in many other countries, and it would be desirable to take some
adequate steps towards the consideration of discourse practices as the nucleus
of the construction of meaning. Argumentation should be the focus of much in-
vestigation and the development of better teaching strategies. Also, the discourse
approach in education should bring greater freedom in the access to knowledge
and society.
R ef er ence s
Arnoux, E., Nogueira, S., & Silvestri, A. (2002). La Test validity (pp. 319). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
construccin de representaciones enunciativas: Erlbaum.
El reconocimiento de voces en la comprensin de Beaugrande, R. (1997). New foundations for a sci-
de textos polifnicos [The construction of rep- ence of text and discourse: Cognition, communica-
resentations: Voice recognition in reading poli- tion, and the freedom of access to knowledge and
phonic texts]. Revista Signos [Signs Journal], 35, society. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
129148. Eckhoff, S. (1983). How reading affects childrens
Belanger, J. (1987). Theory and research into read- writing. Language Arts, 60, 234256.
ing and writing connections: A critical review. Ede, L., & Lundford, A. (1988). Audience ad-
Reading-Canada Lecture, 5, 1021. dressed/audience invoked: The role of audi-
Boscolo, P., & Cisotto, L. (1999). On narrative ence in composition theory and pedagogy. In G.
readingwriting relationships: How young writ- Tate & E. Corbett (Eds.), The writing teachers
ers construe the readers need for inferences. sourcebook (pp. 248259). New York: Oxford
In S. Goldman, A. Graesser & P. Broekvan den University Press.
(Eds.), Narrative comprehension, causality, and Eisterhold, J. (1991). Readingwriting connections:
coherence. Essays in honor of Tom Trabasso (pp. Toward a description for second language learn-
161178). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. ers. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing:
Brem, S., Russell, J., & Weems, L. (2001). Science Research insights for the classroom (pp. 88101).
on the web: Students evaluations of scientific ar- Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
guments. Discourse Processes, 32, 191213. Felton, M., & Kuhn, D. (2001). The development
Camps, A. (1995). Aprender a escribir textos ar- of argumentative discourse skill. Discourse
gumentativos: Caractersticas dialgicas de la Processes, 32, 135153.
argumentacin escrita [Learning to write argu- Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading
mentative texts: Dialogic characteristics in com- and writing relations and their development.
posing argumentation]. Infancia y Aprendizaje Educational Psychologist, 35, 3950.
[Childhood and learning], 25, 5163. Gernsbacher, M. (1990). Language comprehension
Camps, A., & Millian, M. (2000). Metalinguistic ac- as structure building. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
tivity in learning to write. Amsterdam: Amsterdan Erlbaum.
University Press. Golder, C., & Coirier, P. (1994). Argumentative
Coirier, P., Gaonach, D., & Passerault, J. (1996). text writing: Developmental trends. Discourse
Psycholinguistique textuelle [Text psycholinguis- Processes, 18, 187210.
tics]. Paris: Hachette. Gmez, L. (1994). La dimensin social de la com-
Cooper, L., & Odell, R. (1977). Evaluating writ- prensin textual [Social dimension of textual
ing: Describing, measuring, judging. Urbana, IL: comprehension]. Revista Signos [Signs Journal],
NCTE. 27, 3546.
Cooper, L., & Odell, R. (1998). Evaluating writing: Graesser, A., & Bower, G. (1992). Inferences and
The role of teachers knowledge about text, learning text comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
& culture. Urbana, IL: NCTE. Erlbaum.
Crombach, L. (1988). Five perspectives on valid- Graesser, A., Gernsbacher, M., & Goldman, S.
ity argument. In H. Wainer & H. Braun (Eds.), (1997). Cognition. In T. Van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse
970 Parodi
as structure and process. Discourse studies: A Langer, J. (1986). Children reading and writing.
multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 727). Vol. 1 Structures and strategies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex
London: SAGE. Publishing.
Graesser, A., Magliano, J., & Haberlandt, K. Langer, J. (2002). Effective literacy instruction.
(1994a). Psychological studies of naturalistic Building successful reading and writing programs.
text. In H. Van Oostendorp & R. Zwaan (Eds.), Urbana, IL: NCTE.
Naturalistic text comprehension (pp. 933). Madden, C., & Zwaan, R. (2003). How does verb
Norwood, NJ: Ablex. aspect constrain event representation?. Memory
Graesser, A., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994b). & Cognition, 31, 663672.
Constructing inferences during narrative text Myers, T., Brown, K., & McGonigle, B. (1986).
comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, Reasoning and discourse processes. London:
371395. Academic Press.
Graesser, A., Swamer, S., Baggett, W., & Sell, M. Nelson, N., & Calfee, R. (1998). The reading
(1996). New models of deep comprehension. In writing connections viewed historically. In
B. Britton & A. Graesser (Eds.), Models of under- N. Nelson & R. Calfee (Eds.), The reading
standing text (pp. 527). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence writing connection (pp. 152). Chicago, IL: The
Erlbaum. University of Chicago Press.
Greene, S., & Ackerman, J. (1995). Expanding the Nystrand, M. (1987). The role of context in written
constructivist metaphor: A rethorical perspec- communication. In R. Horowitz & J. Samuels
tive on literacy research and practice. Review of (Eds.), Comprehending oral and written language
Educational Research, 65, 383420. (pp. 197212). New York: Academic Press.
Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, J., & Black, W. Nystrand, M. (1990). Sharing words: The ef-
(1999). Multivariate data analysis. New York: fects of readers on developing writers. Written
Prentice Hall. Communication, 7, 324.
Harp, B., & Brewer, J. (1991). Reading and writ- Olson, G. (1999). Toward a post-process compo-
ing: Teaching for the connections. Orlando, FL: sition: Abandoning the rhetoric of assertion.
Harcourt Brace Yovanovich. In T. Kent (Ed.), Post-process theory. Beyond the
writing-process paradigm (pp. 715). Carbondale,
Hass, A. (1989). Collaboration through writing and
IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
reading. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
Parodi, G. (1989). La inferencia una aproximacin
Hedges, L. (1988). The meta-analysis of test valid-
al concepto [Inferences: Approaching the con-
ity studies: Some new approaches. In H. Wainer
cept]. In: Proceedings 8th congress of the Chilean
& H. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 191213).
society of linguistics (pp. 211220). Santiago de
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Chile.
Heller, M. (1995). Readingwriting connections:
Parodi, G. (1990). Los procesos inferenciales en
From theory to practice. London: Longman.
la comprensin de textos escritos [Inferential
Irwin, J. (1992). Research in reading/writing from processes in reading comprehension]. Pontificia
1900 to 1984. In J. Irwin & M. Doyle (Eds.), Universidad Catlica de Valparaso. (Unpub-
Reading/writing connections: Learning from re- lished Masters dissertation).
search (pp. 308333). Newark, DE: IRA. Parodi, G. (1992). Estructura textual y estrategias
Irwin, J., & Doyle, M. (Eds.) (1992). Reading/writ- lectoras [Text structure and reading strate-
ing connections: Learning from research. Newark, gies]. Lenguas Modernas [Modern Languages], 19,
Delaware: IRA. 8998.
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond modulary: A Parodi, G. (1998). Conexiones entre compren-
developmental perspective on cognitive science. sin y produccin de textos escritos: Estudio
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. exploratorio en alumnos de educacin bsica
Kent, T. (Ed.) (1999). Post-process theory. Beyond [Readingwriting connections: Exploratory
the writing-process paradigm. Carbondale, IL: study with elementary schools students]. Revista
Southern Illinois University Press. Lingstica en el Aula [Journal of Classroom
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in Linguistics], 2, 718.
discourse comprehension: A construction Parodi, G. (2000). La evaluacin de a produccin
integration model. Psychological Review, 95, de textos escritos argumentativos: Una alter-
163182. nativa cognitivo discursiva [Evaluating written
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for argumentative texts: A discourse and cognitive
cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University alternative]. Revista Signos [Signs Journal], 33,
Press. 151167.
Kucer, S. (1985). The making of meaning: Reading Parodi, G. (2001). Comprensin y produccin del
and writing as parallel processes. Written discurso escrito: Estudio emprico en escolares
Communication, 2, 317356. chilenos [Reading and writing texts: Research
Kucer, S. (2001). Dimensions of literacy. A conceptual with Chilean students]. Revista Iberoamericana
base for teaching reading and writing in school set- de Discurso y Sociedad [Iberoamerican Journal of
tings. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Discourse and Society], 3, 75101.
972 Parodi
Peronard [Linguistics and interdisciplinarity: escritura [Design and administration of read-
Challenges of the new millennium. Essays in honor ing and writing tests of interests]. In: G. Parodi
of Marianne Peronard] (pp. 3043). Valparaso: (Ed.), Conexiones entre comprensin y produccin
Editorial Universitaria de Valparaso. de textos escritos en alumnos de educacin bsica
Van Dijk, T., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of dis- [Reading-writing connections in elementary school
course comprehension. New York: Academic Press. students] (pp. 4771). Valparaso: Pontificia
Van Oostendorp, H., & Zwaan, R. (1994). Universidad Catlica de Valparaso.
Introduction: Naturalistic texts and natural- Weisser, C., & Dobrin, S. (2001). Ecocomposition:
istic tasks. In H. Van Oostendorp & R. Zwaan Theoretical and pedagogical approaches. Albany,
(Eds.), Naturalistic text comprehension (pp. 18). NY: State University of New York Press.
Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing. Zwaan, R., & Radvansky, G. (1998). Situation mod-
Vergara, M. (1999). Diseo y aplicacin de en- els in language comprehension and memory.
cuestas de intereses en temas para lectura y Psychological Bulletin, 123, 162185.
A p p e ndi x 1
Writing Task
Taller de Escritura 1
Nombre: ...........................................................................................................
Colegio: ...........................................................................................................
Curso: 8 ao bsico Sexo: ..............................................
En la actividad que viene a continuacin, te invitamos a escribir un texto en el que te
pedimos hacer tu mejor esfuerzo. Desde ya, agradecemos tu cooperacin.
Actividad
Los directores de los canales de televisin han decidido que:
Se eliminaran todos los programas acerca de deportes peligrosos.
T has sido elegido para comentar acerca de esta decisin en la nueva Revista del
Colegio. Esta revista sera enviada a los directores de los canales de televisin.
Usa estas dos hojas para redactar tu artculo a ser publicado muy pronto.
Tiempo asignado: 45 minutos aproximadamente.
A p p e ndi x 1
974 Parodi
Sin el uso de la fotografa, se habran demorado meses en ubicar estas estrellas
en un solo mapa.
(6) Sin importar las tcnicas empleadas, es indudable que los instrumentos que
registran imgenes han permitido el avance cientfico en diversas reas. Se
puede esperar que en un futuro cercano, el hombre sea capaz de inventar
instrumentos con un nivel tecnolgico cada vez ms especializados. Estos
avances permitirn a los investigadores descubrir cosas insospechadas hasta
ahora.
Open Questions:
1. De acuerdo con el texto, quprocedimiento entrega datos precisos del desa
rrollo del ser que est por nacer?
2. Cul es la idea principal del prrafo 4?
3. Segn el texto, qu desea probar el autor?
4. Seala las razones ms importantes que da el autor para probar la respuesta
anterior.
5. De acuerdo con el texto, por qu los mdicos mantienen al recin nacido en
incubadoras?
6. Cul es la idea principal del prrafo 2?
7. De acuerdo con el texto, a qu conclusin llega el autor?
8. Segn el texto, quines se habran demorado meses en ubicar todas las estre
llas en un mismo mapa?
9. Escribe un resumen del texto en tres lneas.
A p p e ndi x 2
Open Questions:
1. According to the text, which procedure does give precise data about the evolu-
tion of the baby?
2. Which is the main idea of paragraph 4?
3. According to the text, which is the authors purpose?
4. Explain the most important reasons given by the author to prove his thesis.
5. Why do doctors keep babies in special machines after having been delivered?
976 Parodi
6. Which is the main idea of paragraph 2?
7. According to the text, which is the authors conclusion?
8. Based on your reading, who would have taken months in searching stars in the
same map?
9. Write a summary of the text in three lines.
A p p e ndi x 3
Scoring Guideline for Argumentative Discourse
(Reading and Writing)
Level Scoring Total
Microstructural
Nominal co-reference 1 3 5 5
Nominal ellipsis 1 3 5 5
Causeeffect relation 1 3 5 5
Macrostructural
Macroproposition 1 1 5 9 9
Macroproposition 2 1 5 9 9
Topic 1 5 9 9
Superstructural
Thesis 1 5 9 9
Arguments 1 5 9 9
Conclusion 1 5 9 9
Total Test 69
Explanation: The scoring numbers were organized according to the weight we wanted
to give to each psycholinguistic skill involved. Therefore, local coherence was given a
maximum of 5 points for each feature (total 15). Macrostructural and superstructural
levels, because of their higher importance in discourse processing, were given a
maximum of 9 points (total 27). The numbers 3 or 5 in the medium scale were given
when the expected process was not wrong but the answer was incomplete or the text
produced was partly cohesive or coherent at the required level.
All true readings are subversive, against the grain, as Alice, a sane
reader, discovered in the Looking-Glass world of mad name givers.
The Duchess calls mustard a mineral; the Cheshire Cat purrs and
calls it growling; a Canadian prime minister tears up the railway
and calls it progress; a Swiss businessman traffics in loot and calls
it commerce; an Argentinean president shelters murderers and calls
it amnesty. Against such misnomers readers can open the pages
of their books. In such cases of willful madness, reading helps us
maintain coherence in the chaos. Not to eliminate it, not to enclose
experience within conventional verbal structures, but to allow chaos
to progress creatively on its own vertiginous way. Not to trust the
glittering surface of words but to burrow into the darkness.
Alberto Manguel (2010, p. 8)
T
his chapter analytically describes a promising high school English course,
the Expository Reading and Writing Curriculum (ERWC), that effectively
integrates multiple theories from the fields of reading comprehension,
rhetoric, literacy, and composition to foster college readiness, academic literacy
development, and literate identity formation at the high school level. Following a
discussion of the policy context that spawned this statewide educational initia-
tive in California, authors describe the curriculum, discuss significant theoreti-
cal influences, and explain how the ERWC puts these theories into practice in
diverse instructional contexts. The chapter subsequently explains how the ERWC
establishes a classroom environment in which the opinions of both students and
teachers are actively sought and respected; provides strategic instructional scaf-
folding that enables students at varying levels of proficiency to more effectively
978
read, think critically about, and compose sophisticated expository texts; inte-
grates literacy pedagogies with concepts and practices from Aristotelian rheto-
ric to promote principled debates about ideas and texts that both students and
teachers find highly engaging; and flexibly supports teachers development of
generative pedagogies that enable students to acquire high-level rhetorical litera-
cies. Blending effective practices based on research in reading comprehension,
rhetoric, literacy, and composition, the ERWC supports the development of young
peoples academic identities and civic literacies and strengthens teachers capaci-
ties to further cultivate the deeply literate habits of mind that students need to be
successful in college, career, and community.
Policy Context
In 2009, President Barack Obama announced the American Graduation Initiative
and its goal of achieving the highest proportion of college graduates in the
world by 2020 (Office of the Press Secretary, 2009, para. 3). Although calls for
increased rates of college completion are louder today than ever before (Bill &
Melinda Gates Foundation, 2010; J.M. Lee, Edwards, Menson, & Rawls, 2011;
Lumina Foundation, 2010; National Governors Association [NGA], 2010; NGA
& Council of Chief State School Officers [CCSSO], 2010c; U.S. Department of
Education, 2011), they are hardly new, and the factors contributing to the lack of
college completion have been well documented over time (Adelman, 1999, 2006;
Lewis & Farris, 1996; Mansfield & Farris, 1991; Parsad & Lewis, 2003). The
debate regarding the purpose of higher education and the role of remedial edu-
cation within itquality versus equitybegan after World War II and the G.I.
Bill, rose a second time in response to Sputnik, and escalated yet again in the
1970s after the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights movement (Parker, Bustillos, &
Behringer, 2010), as higher education experienced increasing shifts in student de-
mographics. The current debate regarding remediation has shifted yet again; now
the choice is access versus efficiency due to the enormous costs of remediation.1
The view that remedial programs are largely ineffective (based on college comple-
tion rates) heads the list of reasons why remediation during college should be
prevented and eliminated (Alliance for Excellent Education, 2006, 2011c; Strong
American Schools, 2008).
As readers of this volume are well aware, critiques of elementary and second-
ary education in general, and literacy education in particular, were brought into
sharp focus with the publication of A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational
Reform (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983) and Becoming
a Nation of Readers: The Report of the Commission on Reading (Anderson, Hiebert,
Scott, & Wilkinson, 1984) and with the results of the 1994 National Assessment of
Educational Progress in reading (Williams, Reese, Campbell, Mazzeo, & Phillips,
1995). Initially, the concern regarding the decline in levels of reading proficiency
centered on the early elementary grades; attention turned, however, from the wars
surrounding beginning reading to the crisis of adolescent literacy in the 2000s
(ACT, 2006; Biancarosa & Snow, 2006; Committee to Improve Reading and Writing
982
Module Order Module Summary & Final Writing Assignment Texts
1. Fast Food: Based on four newspaper articles and several letters to Barboza, David. If You Pitch It, They Will Eat. New York
Whos to the editor, this module engages students in analyzing Times 3 Aug. 2003, late ed., sec. 3: 1.
Blame? various perspectives on who is to blame for the rise Brownlee, Shannon. Its Portion Distortion That Makes
in childhood obesity. Final Writing: timed writing, America Fat. Sacramento Bee 5 Jan. 2003: E1+.
rhetorical evaluation of the letters to the editor, or text- Weintraub, Daniel. The Battle Against Fast Food Begins in
based argumentative essay. the Home. Sacramento Bee 17 Dec. 2002: B7.
Zinczenko, David. Dont Blame the Eater. New York Times
23 Nov. 2002, late ed.: A19.
983
reflecting metacognitively on their own reading practices.
Figure 1. Expository Reading and Writing Curriculum Matrix of Modules (Continued)
984
Module Order Module Summary & Final Writing Assignment Texts
10. L anguage, Drawing on readings in literature and sociolinguistics, Ehrlich, Gretel. About Men. The Solace of Open Spaces. New
Gender, and Language, Gender, and Culture invites students to explore York: Penguin, 1985. 4953.
Culture how language conveys cultural values and gender-based Kingston, Maxine Hong. The Woman Warrior: Memoirs of a
communication styles. Students conclude with a text- Childhood Among Ghosts. New York: Random House, 1976.
based academic essay. 16582.
Tannen, Deborah. His Politeness Is Her Powerlessness. You
Just Dont Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New
York: William Morrow/HarperCollins, 1990. 20305.
986
Reading Rhetorically
To read rhetorically means to focus not only on what the text says, but also on the purposes it serves, the intentions of the author, and
the effects on the audience. This section is designed to scaffold the practices of fluent academic readers for students who are developing as
academic readers, writers, and thinkers.
Prereading Prereading describes the processes that readers use as they prepare to read a new text.
Getting Ready to Read It involves surveying the text and considering what they know about the topic and the
Exploring Key Concepts text itself, including its purpose, content, author, form, and language. This process helps
Surveying the Text readers to develop a rationale for reading, anticipate what the text will discuss, and
Making Predictions and Asking Questions establish a framework for understanding the text when reading begins.
987
and pathos, the appeal to the emotions of the audience. Logos may be privileged
in academic circles in general, and in the Common Core in particular, but the
ERWC goes beyond the CCSS, apprenticing students to ways of analyzing the
texts they read by using rhetoric and then applying those understandings to their
writing. Because single texts often use multiple forms of persuasion, text analysis
in the ERWC requires that students have a broad knowledge of rhetorical appeals.
Although the ERWC embraces the CCSS in terms of teaching students to write
effective logical arguments (as evidenced by the elements of the assignment tem-
plate Taking a Stance and Gathering Evidence to Support Your Claims), the
ERWC goes beyond the CCSS to include a broader range of stances and appeals
that students may need to generate as writers themselves.
However, if students participating in the ERWC analyze and produce the
kinds of texts envisioned by the curriculum, they will have gone well beyond the
Common Core, and as well they should because they will need such skills and
habits of mind to participate fully not only in college and career but also in many
spheres beyond them. As the CCSS aptly assert:
The value of effective argument extends well beyond the classroom or workplace....
As Richard Fulkerson (1996) puts it in Teaching the Argument in Writing, the proper
context for thinking about argument is one in which the goal is not victory but a
good decision, one in which all arguers are at risk of needing to alter their views, one
in which a participant takes seriously and fairly the views different from his or her
own (pp. 1617). Such capacities are broadly important for the literate, educated
person living in the diverse, information-rich environment of the twenty-first cen-
tury. (NGA & CCSSO, 2010b, p. 25)
This explains why it is not enough to teach both reading and writing in the same
class (as has so often been done during the past three decades in the name of inte-
grating reading and writing). Research suggests that individuals combine read-
ing and writing in different ways for various [real-world] tasks (p. 177). Their
usage must be truly woven together in ways that resonate deeply with authentic
uses of reading and writing in the worlds of school, work, and civic life.
How we employ texts at school, at work, and in our communities determines,
reflects, and supports the varied social and cultural purposes for which they are
used. Shanahan (2006) concludes that a rich empirical research base demon-
strates how
We suggest that the ERWCwhich is both a curriculum and a method that puts
rhetorical, sociocultural, composition, and comprehension theories of language
and learning simultaneously into practiceis moving in this promising direction.
Studies of this approach yielded fairly robust benefits for students comprehen-
sion (p. 362).
Programs that fall within this fourth wave include Concept-Oriented Reading
Instruction (CORI), in-depth expanded applications of science, and Reading
Apprenticeship (Greenleaf, Schoenbach, Cziko, & Mueller, 2001; Schoenbach &
Greenleaf, 2009; Schoenbach, Greenleaf, Cziko, & Hurwitz, 1999). What these
programs share is a focus on teaching comprehension within specific subject ar-
eas. Of particular note is the ability of programs like Reading Apprenticeship to
help educators teach reading comprehension in middle and high school contexts
where subject matter demands are more complex.
Unsurprisingly, classroom discussion plays a critical role in promoting com-
prehension. Although this idea is not new, its implementation is now based on
more robust research and theory from sociocognitive, sociocultural, and other
approaches to teaching and learning.
From a sociocognitive perspective, discussion enables students to make public their
perspectives on issues arising from the text, consider alternative perspectives pro-
posed by peers, and attempt to reconcile conflicts among opposing points of view
(Almasi, 1995). From a sociocultural perspective, discussion enables students to
co-construct knowledge and understandings about the text and internalize ways
of thinking that foster the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed to transfer to
the reading of new texts (Wells, 2007). And from a dialogic perspective, the tension
and conflict between relative perspectives and competing voices in discussion about
a text helps shape the discourse and students comprehension (Nystrand, 2006).
(Wilkinson & Son, 2011, p. 369)
As we might expect, the quality and types of talk matter; open discussion,
authentic questions, and uptake of learners ideas in the context of academically
challenging tasks correlate positively with students reading comprehension
Applebee et al. assert that students whose classroom literacy experiences empha-
size discussion-based approaches in the context of high academic demands inter-
nalize the knowledge and skills necessary to engage in challenging literacy tasks
on their own (p. 685). Although their study looks more broadly at the effects
of discussion-based approaches on literacy development, Applebee et al. found
that the approaches that contributed most to student performance on...complex
literacy tasks...were those that used discussion to develop comprehensive under-
standing, encouraging exploration and multiple perspectives rather than focusing
on correct interpretations and predetermined conclusions (p. 722). They note
that typically, research on comprehension strategy instruction has focused on
an array of specific techniques for structuring discussion and embedding com-
prehension strategies (p. 722). In contrast, their measures of discussion-based
activities focused,
[m]ore generally, on the presence and extent of discussion and related activities
designed to involve students in the exploration of ideas. The positive results that we
obtained suggest that the spontaneous scaffolding or support for developing ideas
that are generated during open discussions is a powerful tool for learning. This
conclusion parallels one from the National Reading Panel review of comprehen-
sion strategy instruction (Langenberg, 2000), which found particular strength in
approaches that involved a variety of strategies embedded in the natural flow of
classroom discussion of difficult texts, because skilled reading involves an ongoing
adaptation of multiple cognitive processes (p. 4.47). (p. 722)
Like many of the ERWCs rhetorical literacy activities, Collins and Madigans in-
teractive thinksheets (see also Englert & Raphael, 1989) engage students in what
these authors call two-handed reading. [Students] write with one hand on the
book they are writing about and one hand on the thinksheet they are using
(p. 110). Such targeted readingefferent, scaffolded reading for a particular
purpose (or a series of different purposes)focuses students attention on spe-
cific areas of text to answer a question or respond to a writing task (p. 110).
Importantly, thinksheets, graphic organizers, and other questioning and annota-
tion strategies externalize the reading process, making assistance, modeling, and
scaffolding easier for teachers to design. As Collins and Madigan astutely point
out, Having students write their way through reading comprehension problems
may be better than only talking them through the same problems because [writ-
ing about reading] records the effects of the dialogue students have with teacher,
peers, and text; such writing also ensures that every student contributes to the
Interest and intrinsic motivation can lead to long-term and deeper levels of text-
based learning (Naceur & Schiefele, 2005) and, like the ERWC, both CORI and
Reading Apprenticeship harness authentic interest and inquiry to encourage stu-
dents to invest personally in literacy tasks (Alexander & Fox, 2011; Alexander &
Murphy, 1998; Schiefele, 1999).
The reading selections for the ERWC modules represent topics or themes of
interest to adolescents (e.g., fast food and obesity, workplace discrimination based
The ERWC modules support teachers as they attempt to balance deep literacy
learning with matters of interest, autonomy, and self-efficacy in promoting stu-
dent engagement and motivation.
As students enact rhetorical literacies in the ERWC, they are often led to new
conceptions of themselves as real players in the academic conversation. Given
the high-stakes testing context from which the ERWC emerged, it is significant
that students, who are preparing for college, and their teachers have the tools
First Study
In 2005, a nonexperimental pilot study was conducted with a small sample of
participating ERWC teachers (n=10) in representative schools in California to
assess the Early Assessment Programs Professional Development in English
(California State University, 2005). The ERWC teachers were asked to identify
colleagues in their schools who had not yet participated in ERWC professional de-
velopment to serve as a comparison group. All teachers (ERWC and non-ERWC)
administered a Reading and Composing Skills Test at the end of their students
senior year. The results indicated a positive impact for students who participated
in the ERWC on the skills associated with college readiness in English. Survey re-
sults also revealed the students enthusiasm for the course, suggesting that strong
Second Study
In 2008, a larger study was conducted to assess implementation and associated
student gains in a series of implementation designs. The Reading Institute for
Academic Preparation2 was an 80-hour program of professional learning con-
ducted over a 12-month period that also incorporated professional learning for
the ERWC. In this study, 37 schools were identified and matched on characteris-
tics of school size, socioeconomic status, and percentage of English learners. The
authors reported that in the highest implementing ERWC schools, an increase
in the percentage of students who gained proficiency in English was 5 times the
state average and 10 times the rate found in the comparison group. The outcome
measure was the grade 11 California Standards Test. Participating teachers re-
ported high levels of satisfaction with the curriculum and the related professional
development (Program Evaluation and Research Collaborative, 2008).
Third Study
In 2010, a mixed-methods evaluation of the ERWC was released (Hafner et al.,
2010). The study captured a variety of survey-based findings indicating broad
support for the curriculum. For example, participating teachers reported that the
course had a positive impact on students reading and writing skills, motivation,
and increased time on task associated with improvements in English proficiency.
Quantitative student outcomes were collected to measure the percentage of stu-
dents identified as proficient in English by the CSU upon entry. The authors re-
ported that the improvement of scores on the California Standards Test in English
Language Arts from 2006 to 2010 (rate of gain) was higher for schools implement-
ing the ERWC than the statewide average (a 7 percentage-point gain versus a
4-point gain statewide).
Taken together, these studies illustrate strong support from educational pro-
fessionals on the content richness of the ERWC and the associated engagement of
students. These initial nonexperimental studies and opportunistic matched-case
designs suggest some promising indications of student gains associated with the
intervention; however, only with a rigorous quasi-experimental or experimental
design could an inferential statement on the gains associated with the ERWC cur-
riculum be made. Such a study, currently underway, is described next.
Current Research
An Investing in Innovation development grant from the U.S. Department of
Education is currently funding additional research on the efficacy of the ERWC.
The project, From Rhetoric to College Readiness: The Expository Reading
and Writing Course, is a collaborative effort of the Fresno County Office of
Education, the CSU, and WestEd and aims to (1) expand, update, and refine the
curriculum; (2) increase the scope and effectiveness of professional development;
Some of the current ERWC units (e.g., module 9: Bring a Text to Class,
described in Figure 1) invite students to explore personally meaningful out-of-
school texts of their own choosing (e.g., song lyrics and spoken word, poetry,
video game instructions, car or bicycle repair manuals, articles from popular
magazines, online blog and social network postings). Like many other literacy
scholars, we believe that if teachers can become more familiar with the texts stu-
dents read voluntarily outside of school, these literacies can in turn help create
connections to the types of reading and writing that are highly prized within
schools.3 The reality, though, is that because we live in an increasingly technolog-
ically complex and textually demanding world, it is imperative that we do a better
job of preparing young people for colleges, universities, workplaces, civic institu-
tions, and community organizations where it will be taken for granted that they
are highly conversant with a wide range of media and able to seamlessly toggle be-
tween multiple modes of expression, including formal academic or academic-like
reading and writing. It is our intention to maintain a strongsome might even
say relentlessemphasis on print modalities because students taking the ERWC
are preparing for a freshman year of college in which print may be the symbolic
domain with which they interact and create texts most intensely. Nevertheless,
the ERWCs rhetorical underpinnings also naturally lend themselves to analyzing
and authoring an extremely broad range of texts, including multimodal, multime-
dia, and multigenre texts. In future years, we will remain committed to continu-
ing to expand students access to myriad literacies through the ERWC.
To date, multimodal research has contributed considerably to helping lan-
guage and literacy educators and researchers reconceptualize learning in a number
of crucial ways. For example, we are now aware that (1) modes almost always oc-
cur in concert, rarely alone; (2) meanings are distributed across modes in distinc-
tive ways at different times according to social contexts and purposes; (3)modes
of representation interact with media; (4) modes shape what is represented and
learners uptake of those representations; and (5) varied forms of representation
and learners abilities to take them up are greatly affected by teachers strategic
pedagogical choices, hence their vital importance (Katz, in press). We will con-
tinue to reflect on these aspects of the ERWC pedagogically and theoretically.
Also of great interest to the ERWC design team are the arguments of genre
theorists who have debated for years about the best ways for individuals to gain
1. What kinds of gaps in students performance during their first year in col-
lege or in the workplace have contributed to the development of the ERWC?
2. What rhetorical features has the ERWC integrated into its reading and writ-
ing curriculum?
3. What does a review of the topics and texts included in the ERWC modules
(Figure 1) suggest about the content of the curriculum and the challenges it
presents to high school students?
4. How does the assignment template (Figure 2) function as a model for the
development of curricula that promote academic literacy?
5. What does a teacher need to do to encourage students roles as coconstruc-
tors in thinking and analysis?
Notes
1
Even though sometimes presented as new concerns, debates regarding efficiency have haunted
education reform movements since the Industrial Revolution (Ravitch, 2010).
2
The CSUs Early Assessment Program is a major collaborative effort by three California agen-
cies, the CSU, the California Department of Education, and the California State Board of
Education. Under the programs umbrella are several components, including a professional
R eferences
ACT. (2005). Crisis at the core: Preparing all stu- Alliance for Excellent Education. (2011c). Saving
dents for college and work. Iowa City, IA: Author. now and saving later: How high school reform can
Retrieved October 26, 2012, from www.act.org/ reduce the nations wasted remediation dollars
research/policymakers/pdf/crisis_report.pdf [Issue brief]. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved
ACT. (2006). Reading between the lines: What the October 26, 2012, from www.all4ed.org/files/
ACT reveals about college readiness in reading. SavingNowSavingLaterRemediation.pdf
Iowa City, IA: Author. Retrieved October 26, Alvermann, D.E. (2002). Effective literacy instruc-
2012, from www.act.org/research/policymakers/ tion for adolescents. Journal of Literacy Research,
reports/reading.html 34(2), 189208.
Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the tool box: Alvermann, D.E. (Ed.). (2010). Adolescents online
Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bach- literacies: Connecting classrooms, digital media,
elors degree attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. and popular culture. New York: Peter Lang.
Department of Education. Retrieved October 26, Alvermann, D.E. (2011). Popular culture and lit-
2012, from www2.ed.gov/pubs/Toolbox/index eracy practices. In M.L. Kamil, P.D. Pearson,
.html E.B. Moje, & P.P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of
Adelman, C. (2006). The toolbox revisited: Paths to reading research (Vol. 4, pp. 541560). New York:
degree completion from high school through college. Routledge.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Alvermann, D.E., & Moore, D.W. (1991). Secondary
Retrieved October 26, 2012, from www2.ed.gov/ school reading. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, P.
rschstat/research/pubs/toolboxrevisit/toolbox Rosenthal, & P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of
.pdf reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 951983). New York:
Ainley, M. (2006). Connecting with learning: Longman.
Motivation, affect and cognition in interest pro- Alvermann, D.E., Young, J.P., Green, C., &
cesses. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), Wisenbaker, J.M. (1999). Adolescents percep-
391405. doi:10.1007/s10648-006-9033-0 tions and negotiations of literacy practices
Alexander, P.A., & Fox, E. (2011). Adolescents as in after-school read and talk clubs. American
readers. In M.L. Kamil, P.D. Pearson, E.B. Moje, Educational Research Journal, 36(2), 221264.
& P.P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of read- American Diploma Project. (2004). Ready or
ing research (Vol. 4, pp. 157176). New York: not: Creating a high school diploma that counts.
Routledge. Washington, DC: Achieve. Retrieved October
Alexander, P.A., & Murphy, P.K. (1998). Profiling 26, 2012, from www.achieve.org/readyornot
the differences in students knowledge, interest, Anderson, R.C., Hiebert, E.H., Scott, J.A., &
and strategic processing. Journal of Educational Wilkinson, I.A.G. (1984). Becoming a na-
Psychology, 90(3), 435447. tion of readers: The report of the Commission on
Alliance for Excellent Education. (2006). Paying Reading. Washington, DC: National Institute of
double: Inadequate high schools and community Education, U.S. Department of Education.
college remediation [Issue brief]. Washington, Anderson, R.C., & Pearson, P.D. (1984). A schema-
DC: Author. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from theoretic view of basic processes in reading com-
www.all4ed.org/files/remediation.pdf prehension. In P.D. Pearson, R. Barr, M.L. Kamil,
Alliance for Excellent Education. (2011a). Assessing & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading re-
deeper learning [Policy brief]. Washington, DC: search (pp. 255291). New York: Longman.
Author. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from www Applebee, A.N. (1996). Curriculum as conversation:
.all4ed.org/files/AssessingDeeperLearning.pdf Transforming traditions of teaching and learning.
Alliance for Excellent Education. (2011b). A time for Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
deeper learning: Preparing students for a changing Applebee, A.N., Langer, J.A., Nystrand, M., &
world [Policy brief]. Washington, DC: Author. Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussion-based ap-
Retrieved October 26, 2012, from www.all4ed proaches to developing understanding: Class-
.org/files/DeeperLearning.pdf room instruction and student performance
Reading as a Motivated
Meaning-Construction Process:
The Reader, the Text, and the Teacher
Robert B. Ruddell, University of California, Berkeley
Norman J. Unrau, California State University, Los Angeles
R
eading as a meaning-construction process enables us to create carefully rea-
soned as well as imaginary worlds filled with new concepts, creatures, and
characters. The complexity of the process, however, is largely hidden from
our view, and over the centuries, it has taken on the aura of the magical and myste-
rious. A central goal of our model is to provide insight into the nature of the process
that Huey (1908/1968) described early in the 20th century as the most remarkable
specific performance that civilization has learned in all its history (p. 6).
The challenge, then, is to explain what we do when we read and comprehend
printed language in sociocultural contexts. This challenge is complicated by our
belief that such an explanation needs to account for how the process is acquired
and used not only from the perspective of the reader but also from the perspective
of the teacher. It is the teacher who frequently assumes major responsibility for
facilitating meaning negotiation within the social environment of the classroom.
Our first goal and a major emphasis of this discussion is to provide an ex-
planation of how the reading process occurs in the classroom context involving
reader, text, and teacher. A second goal is to create a model that is productive,
that will provide explanations and predictions useful to both teachers and re-
searchers. In effect, it should allow us to generate hypotheses that will explain
new phenomena encountered in the reading process. Our third goal is to develop
a model that has utility not only in connecting current and past research but also
in charting future research directions.
The construction of an abstract representation of reading and language process-
ing is really an attempt to create a metaphor that resembles or suggests the nature
of the process. However, there is still much to learn about the nature of reading and
its representation in a sociocognitive model. This is especially true if we are to take
into account the complex roles of reader, text and classroom context, and teacher.
Our explanation of the reading process has evolved over the years as new
knowledge has accrued from various disciplines. Readers who are familiar with
This chapter is adapted from Reading as a Meaning-Construction Process: The Reader, the Text, and the Teacher,
in Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (5th ed., pp. 14621521), edited by R.B. Ruddell and N.J. Unrau, 2004,
Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Copyright 2004 by the International Reading Association.
1015
the earlier models (Ruddell, 1974; Ruddell & Kern, 1986; Ruddell & Speaker,
1985) will recognize the influence of work in many fields, ranging from anthro-
pology and sociolinguistics to cognitive psychology and literary theory. In effect,
the creation of this model has relied on what Beach (1992) referred to as adopting
multiple stances. Because of our interest in incorporating the reader, the text and
classroom context, and the teacher into the model, we have drawn on research and
theory that accounts for textual, social, cultural, and field/disciplinary perspec-
tives. We have been especially sensitized to the importance of the social context of
the classroom and the influence of the teacher on the reading process through our
research and writing on teaching effectiveness (Fleming, Unrau, Cooks, Farnan,
& Grisham, 2007; Quirk et al., 2010; Ruddell, 1994; Ruddell & Boyle, 1989;
Ruddell, Draheim, & Barnes, 1990; Ruddell & Harris, 1989; Ruddell & Ruddell,
1994; Ruddell & Unrau, 2004; Unrau, 2008a, 2008b; Unrau & Schlackman, 2006),
classroom observations, and direct teaching of students at a variety of levels.
Several key assumptions underlie the model. These are implicit in the re-
search supporting the models components and the interactions between and
among components. They are as follows:
1. Readerseven beginning readersare active theory builders and hypoth-
esis testers.
2. Language and reading performance are directly related to the readers so-
ciocultural environment.
3. The driving force behind language performance and reading growth is the
readers need to obtain meaning.
4. Oral and written language development, which affect thinking processes,
contributes directly to the development of reading ability.
5. Readers construct meanings not only of printed manuscripts but also of
events, speech, and behaviors as they read gestures, images, symbols,
signs, and signals that are embedded in a social and cultural environment.
6. Texts are constantly reinvented as readers construct different understand-
ings for them over time. Meanings for texts are dynamic, not static, as
individuals, texts, and contexts change and interact.
7. The role of the teacher is critical in negotiating and facilitating meaning
construction in the text and social context of the classroom.
The remainder of our discussion will be devoted to four areas designed to il-
luminate the nature of the model:
1. A brief overview of the three major components of the model
2. A detailed discussion of the rationale and research foundation underlying
each of the three major components
3. A discussion of the model components illustrating strategy-based instruc-
tion and meaning negotiation in the classroom
4. Our conclusion, with implications for practice and new research directions
1018
Reader Knowledge Use and Control Knowledge Use and Control Teacher
Knowledge-Construction Text and Classroom Instructional Decision-
Process Context Making Process
purpose setting purpose setting
Prior Beliefs Prior Beliefs
The Reader
As we consider various factors that contribute to the readers meaning-construction
process, we should keep in mind that these factors function in a simultaneous and
integrated manner. This is reflected in the circular flow of arrows surrounding
prior beliefs and knowledge in Figure 2, and in the two-way arrows connecting
various reader components.
The Developing Self. Although a full description of the developing self in relation
to students as readers and learners and teachers as instructors and guides is be-
yond our scope, we can provide an overview of components of the developing self
in relation to literacy and learning. The developing self comprises those aspects
of the readers or teachers self-system that shape purpose and meaning, especially
for us in relation to the life of the literacy classroom.
Identity and Self-Schema. According to the developmental psychologist Erik
Erikson (1968), core identity includes two aspect of self: (1) a sense of self gar-
nered from the integration of many selves or aspects of those selves that have been
Cognitive Conditions. The readers cognitive conditions play a vital role in the
reading process. Again, however, we must emphasize that in meaning construc-
tion, the cognitive conditions are socially embedded and interact with the affective
conditions just discussed. Furthermore, we assume that these cognitive condi-
tions not only serve as a readers text processing resources but also contribute to
the readers motivation and engagement in reading (Ruddell & Unrau, 2004).
We now turn to cognitive conditions and the role of declarative, procedural,
and conditional knowledge in the meaning-construction process. Declarative
knowledge includes the readers what knowledge of facts, objects, events, lan-
guage, concepts, and theories about the world. The readers procedural knowl-
edge consists of how-to skills and strategies for using and applying knowledge,
ranging from using a context strategy in identifying a new word to the use of a
text organization strategy in reading a chapter. Conditional knowledge accounts
for the readers awareness of knowledge use. This may be viewed as when and
why knowledge, which provides for application of declarative and procedural
knowledge forms. Conditional knowledge thus accounts for understanding the
social context in which reading is taking place and for the readers intent (Paris,
Lipson, & Wixson, 1983).
The readers declarative, procedural, and conditional knowledge forms are
stored and represented in memory and include a variety of knowledge essential to
meaning construction. As noted in Figure 2, they include knowledge of language,
word recognition and identification skills, text-processing strategies, metacogni-
tive strategies, classroom and social interaction, and self and world. Before dis-
cussing the specific knowledge forms, we first briefly examine how these forms
are represented in memory. In the model, we assume that the readers declarative,
procedural, and conditional knowledge forms are stored in knowledge structures
known as schemata. Furthermore, we assume that those schemata are not merely
in-the-head information structures but were acquired in social contexts and are
socioculturally embedded (McVee, Dunsmore, & Gavelek, Chapter 20 this vol-
ume). Schemata can be thought of as information packets or knowledge modules,
each of which is used to organize a particular class of concepts formed from our
experience (Adams & Collins, 1985). As described in work by Rumelhart and his
associates (Rumelhart, 1980, 1981; Rumelhart & Ortony, 1977), schemata may be
seen as generic patterns or abstract representations of knowledge. These knowl-
edge structures are composed of slots to be filled with specific information when
a problem is to be solved or a text is to be processed. As knowledge is stored
in memory, these structures set up expectations for the reader when new infor-
mation is encountered for interpretation. If new information fits the slots of an
existing schema so that it becomes filled with concrete instancesa condition
called instantiationthat schema may exert control over the readers meaning-
construction process (Anderson, 1975, Chapter 19 this volume; Rumelhart, 1980).
The Teacher
Interest in how skillful teachers function in the learning environment is not new.
Five centuries before the birth of Christ, Confucius (as cited in Mller & Legge,
1885) observed that when we know the causes that make instruction success-
ful and those that have no effect, we can become successful teachers: Opening
the way and not conducting to the end makes [the learner] thoughtful (p. 87).
Accordingly, the teacher engages the student in a collaborative process of inquiry
and self-improvement in which both teacher and student seek to refine respective
skills and knowledge. The goal of teaching, then, is to model thought in action
and allow the student to discover answers for himself or herself (Ruddell & Kern,
1986; Unrau, 2008b).
Teachers who have been influential in the academic and personal lives of stu-
dents (Ruddell, 2004, 2009) possess a number of common characteristics. These
teachers consistently use clearly formulated instructional strategies that embody
focused goals, plans, and monitoring for student feedback. They possess in-depth
knowledge of reading and literacy processes as well as content knowledge, and
they understand how to teach these processes effectively to students. They also
Teacher Executive and Monitor. The teacher executive and monitor provides
for managing and monitoring the instructional decision-making process and
meaning construction. As noted in Figure 3, it is in a central position and linked
to instructional representation, instructional decision making, and prior knowl-
edge and beliefs.
The executive and monitor controls attention allocation during instruction,
review of interactions and content discussed, and guidance for reconstructing of
inferences and conclusions. In effect, the executive and monitor evaluates the on-
going instructional process reflected in instructional representation. This teacher-
monitoring process draws on metacognitive strategies to evaluate the relationship
among the original instructional purpose, plan, strategy use, and meaning con-
struction reflected in instructional representation. Assuming the classroom in-
teraction and meaning-negotiation process are successful and aligned with the
original purpose and plan, instruction proceeds; if they are not, a shift in plan
and strategy may be necessary to achieve the original purpose more effectively.
Learning Environment
Meaning-
Negotiation
Process
R T
CC
R = Reader
T = Teacher
CC = Classroom Community
The authority of a classroom community has also been taken as a standard for
validity (Fish, 1982). In this case, the meaning that is constructed as students and
teacher interact in the classroom is the only meaning that counts. Intersubjective
negotiation without adherence to textual content becomes paramount in such
Unrau explored these and other meanings with the students. He frequently
asked them to explain how an interpretation could be grounded in the text and
how it made sense in relation to the whole story. But he tried not to impose his
own reading of the story on the students, favoring interaction among them
and with the text. The whole-class discussion gave students an opportunity to
create a classroom community meaning for the story or parts of it. One student
wrote, The discussion changed my view of the story completely. I never saw any
link between the Coachs life and his bizarre stories. I didnt understand that the
Laughing Mans death meant anything.
A few days after the small-group discussions, students were asked to write
their current understanding of the story and describe how and why their interpre-
tation changed, if it had. Most students reported that they had formed or reformed
the meanings they had given to the story during or after the small-group and class
discussions. Mira, who said she did not really have an understanding when she
first read the story, arrived at a meaning that went significantly beyond that initial
summary. She wrote,
I think that the story of the Laughing Man that the Chief would tell the Comanches
was in a sense the way he saw himself. The Laughing Man was an alter ego of John
Gedsudski, the Chief. Both were not handsome and shunned by the society and
peers. Both had a band of loyal followers who looked up to them. For the Chief, it
was the kids; for the Laughing Man, it was a dwarf, a Mongolian, and a beautiful
Eurasian girl. At around the time that the Laughing Man is held captive by Dufarge,
the Chief is having problems with Mary Hudson. When the Laughing Man gets shot,
it is at the same time the Chief and Mary break up. This just enforces my theory that
the Chief and Laughing Man are one in the same. The Chief takes the installments
from his own day-to-day life, but he enhances them and makes them more exciting.
Although Emily interprets the meaning of Laughing Mans death quite differ-
ently from Mira, she wrote that the vial of eagles blood, which might have saved
Laughing Man, represented Johns crushed love for Mary.
In summary, many readersthe initially clueless as well as those who of-
fered early interpretationsbegan to share a community interpretation of the story.
Almost everyone agreed that a close correspondence existed between the Chiefs
life and that of Laughing Man. Many came to think that the trouble the Chief was
having in his relationship with Mary translated into the death of Laughing Man.
Nevertheless, many readers still held divergent meanings about several aspects of
the story.
Being in an environment that allowed alternative or unconventional readings
was important to several students. As one student, Sarah, wrote,
Too many teachers think that their understanding is the only correct one....Now I
understand that a story can mean so many things, and as long as you can back it with
at least some good thought, its right for yourself. Now I feel I can just put more of my
thoughts out there even if other people dont agree. I basically think thats the way
my interpretation of The Laughing Man has changed. I think I have a little more
freedom to say what I think.
What is important about The Laughing Man example for our discussion
is not only the divergent readings of the story by different readers but also the
dialogue, the meaning-negotiation process, that occurred among students and
teacher. The meaning-negotiation process enabled readers of the story to engage
their prior beliefs and knowledge in the meaning-construction process to develop
a text representation of The Laughing Man. This representation was strongly
influenced by the negotiation of text, task, source of authority, and sociocultural
meanings.
Although this example is from the high school level, the key model compo-
nents can also be readily applied to the elementary school learning environment
(Ruddell et al., 1990; Ruddell, 2009) as well as to that of the college classroom
(Hull & Rose, 2004).
Our model thus takes a constructivist perspective of learning. The teacher
creates an instructional environment in which students are involved in active
R eferences
Adams, M.J., & Collins, A. (1985). A schema- Anderson, R.C., & Freebody, P. (1981). Vocabulary
theoretic view of reading. In H. Singer & R.B. knowledge. In J.T. Guthrie (Ed.), Comprehension
Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes and teaching: Research reviews (pp. 77117).
of reading (3rd ed., pp. 404425). Newark, DE: Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
International Reading Association. Anderson, R.C., & Pearson, P.D. (1984). A schema-
Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B. (2010). Determining and theoretic view of basic processes in reading
describing reading strategies. In H.S. Waters comprehension. In P.D. Pearson, R. Barr, M.L.
& W. Schneider (Eds.), Metacogntion, strategy Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of read-
use, and instruction (pp. 201225). New York: ing research (pp. 255291). New York: Longman.
Guilford. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139524513.007
Alba, J.W., & Hasher, L. (1983). Is memory sche- Anderson, R.C., & Pichert, J.W. (1978). Recall of
matic? Psychological Bulletin, 93(2), 203231. previously unrecallable information following
doi:10.1037/0033-2909.93.2.203 a shift in perspective. Journal of Verbal Learning
Alvermann, D.E., Young, J.P., Green, C., & and Verbal Behavior, 17(1), 112. doi:10.1016/
Wisenbaker, J.M. (2004). Adolescents percep- S0022-5371(78)90485-1
tions and negotiations of literacy practices in Applebee, A. (1978). The childs concept of story: Ages
after-school read and talk clubs. In R.B. Ruddell two to seventeen. Chicago: University of Chicago
& N.J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and pro- Press.
cesses of reading (5th ed., pp. 870913). Newark, Baddeley, A. (2007). Working memory, thought, and
DE: International Reading Association. action. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198528012.001.0001
and student motivation. Journal of Educational Baker, L. (2005). Developmental differences in
Psychology, 84(3), 261271. doi:10.1037/0022 metacognition: Implications for metacognitively
-0663.84.3.261 oriented reading instruction. In S.E. Israel, C.C.
Anderson, R.C. (1975). The notion of schemata and Block, K.L. Bauserman, & K. Kinnucan-Welsch
the educational enterprise: General discussion (Eds.), Metacognition in literacy learning: Theory,
of the conference. In R.C. Anderson, J. Osborn, assessment, instruction, and professional develop-
& R.J. Tierney (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisi- ment (pp. 6179). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
tion of knowledge (pp. 415431). Hillsdale, NJ: Barthes, R. (1977). Image, music, text. New York:
Erlbaum. Hill and Wang.
A
s the title suggests, we seek in this last section to catch a glimpse of
tomorrows literacy perspectives, practices, policies, and promising
research. Judging from the sections contents, it could be said that crossing
social and cultural divides is of paramount interest to 21st-century researchers,
at least among the authors represented hereso much so, in fact, that we are
reminded of a story told about a time in American history (around the 1940s)
when the line between high culture and popular culture was beginning to
blur. This blurring has since been captured in the memorable image that film
critic Neal Gabler (2011) used in his historical tracing of cultural authority in
the United States. In Gablers account, a telling moment in the breakdown of
unbending distinctions between high culture and popular culture occurred when
the classical conductor Leopold Stokowski shook hands with Mickey Mouse in
Walt Disneys production of Fantasiaa symbolic gesture, yes, but as the anecdote
demonstrates, not even an icon of high culture was interested in maintaining an
arbitrary cultural divide of earlier times.
The extent to which this story applies to contemporary and future literacy
research is, of course, arguable. On the one hand, there are numerous examples
of literacy practices that have morphed across previously firm disciplinary
boundaries, some of which are illustrated in the chapters that follow. On the other
hand, some paradigmatic parameters are as unyielding as ever, with little or no
sign of bending. In each instance, context plays a role, and the authors in Section
Four are particularly adept at teasing out the underlying assumptions that are
relevant to their particular situations.
In the first chapter in this section, Adolescent Literacy Instruction and
the Discourse of Every Teacher a Teacher of Reading (Chapter 39), Donna
Alvermann and Elizabeth Birr Moje provide a brief overview of the key issues
and individuals that have influenced models of adolescent literacy instruction
from the early 20th century to the present. Then, using a Foucaultian genealogy
as their analytic, they disrupt assumptions about the naturalness or inevitability
of every teacher a teacher of reading and conclude with a call for a relational
model of adolescent literacy instruction, one that uses both a theory of action and
a theory in action.
1069
In Literacy Research in the 21st Century: From Paradigms to Pragmatism
and Practicality (Chapter 40), Deborah Dillon, David OBrien, and Elizabeth
Heilman urge researchers to move beyond political affiliations with paradigms
that can result in endless debate to practical intervention in education issues that
matter in the lives of students and teachers on an everyday basis. Specifically, the
authors advance pragmatism as a viable alternative to paradigmatic reasoning.
They believe their recommended stance offers several significant benefits that
advance research in the field of literacy
A targeted critique by David Pearson and Elfrieda (Freddy) Hiebert (Chap
ter 41) of the 2008 National Early Literacy Panel (NELP) finds limitations in the
reports usefulness, despite the care and precision with which it was produced.
The authors argue that NELPs findings fail to take into account data from other
large-scale federal initiatives, such as Reading First and Early Reading First, and
descriptive studies of early literacy, a research category excluded from the panels
considerations. These omissions increase the likelihood that NELPs findings
could be misconstrued, such as teaching phonemic awareness and letter recogni-
tion at the expense of engaging young children in meaning-making activities
a result the authors describe as a basic-skills conspiracy of good intentions.
In a dual theory of new literacies, Donald Leu, Charles Kinzer, Julie Coiro, Jill
Castek, and Laurie Henry (Chapter 42) describe how the educational challenges
presented by shifting social needs and forces influence how people communicate
with one another. Literacy today is deictic, multiple, multimodal, and multifaceted.
The popularity of the Internet and social media has changed how we think about
knowledge; for example, transmission of knowledge is no longer top-down, thus
allowing for the enrichment of lives and the exploration of new domains and
perspectives. The ability to navigate relatively unregulated founts of information
to construct new knowledge is available to those who can afford access to the
Internet, which in turn creates a need for new forms of critical literacy.
In their chapter on the social practice of multimodal reading, Jennifer
Rowsell, Gunther Kress, Kate Pahl, and Brian Street (Chapter 43) offer for the first
time an integrated perspective on new literacies and a social semiotic approach
to multimodality. Situated within these two complementary approaches, reading
and writing (particularly in digital environments) involve navigating through
multiple forms of textual representation in various social settings. The authors
discuss data from their studies of early childhood literacies, youth literacies,
and adult academic literacies to account for their perspective on reading (and
writing, although reading is the focus of this chapter). A concluding section draws
implications of their integrated perspective on the social practice of multimodal
reading for pedagogy and policy.
In a fascinating study of online reading and authoring, Glynda Hull, Amy
Stornaiuolo, and Laura Sterponi (Chapter 44) explore the strategies students
use to create hospitable texts. The importance of intercultural communication
in a digital world makes it necessary to understand how semiotic decisions
can influence meaning making, especially in terms of how youths develop an
R ef er ence
Gabler, N. (2011, January 29). Everyones a critic
now. The Observer. Retrieved July 2, 2011, from
w w w.guardian.co.uk /culture /2011/jan /30/
critics-franzen-freedom-social-network
T
he endless task of conducting and interpreting studies aimed at improving
literacy instruction for young people at the middle and high school levels has
demanded the attention of researchers of adolescent literacy teaching and
teacher education to recent large-scale national and international reform efforts
(e.g., Garbe, Holle, & Weinhold, 2010; National Governors Association Center for
Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers [NGA & CCSSO], 2010).
In an era marked by todays neoliberal perspectives on how literacy should func-
tion in a society, no discourse (or way of doing life) is left untouchedpolitically,
educationally, or otherwise. For example, in the United States, organizations such
as the National Governors Association (n.d.) exist for the express purpose of en-
suring that [its members] views are represented in the shaping of federal policy
(para. 1). Even among professional organizations that represent literacy councils
at the international, national, state, and local levels, the prevailing sense is that
adolescent literacy teachers and teacher educators must attend to the 21st cen-
turys rapidly changing conditions and their impact on how adolescents engage
with text (International Reading Association, 2012a, p. 2). Practically speaking,
how such changes are to be communicated and enacted is often left up to age-old
discourses that may or may not be in sync with the times.
Our purpose in this chapter is to examine the conditions that have enabled
the discourse of every teacher a teacher of reading to exist for nearly a cen-
tury, yet without widespread implementation in American secondary schools.
We examine this phenomenon in two ways: first, through a brief chronological
overview of the key issues and individuals that have influenced models of adoles-
cent literacy instruction in the past; and second, through Foucaults (1984/1988,
1971/1998) historical analytic, genealogy, which is a means by which to disrupt
assumptions about the naturalness or inevitability of discourses such as every
teacher a teacher of reading. We conclude with a call for a relational model of
adolescent literacy instruction, one that uses both a theory of action and a theory
in action.
1072
First, however, three terms need clarifying: discourse, adolescent, and ado-
lescent literacy. Bov (1995), a noted authority on Foucaultian concepts, defined
discourse in terms of its functions:
Discourses produce knowledge about humans and their society. But since the
truths of these discourses are relative to the disciplinary structures, the logical
framework in which they are institutionalized, they can have no claim upon us ex-
cept that derived from the authority and legitimacy, the power, granted to or ac-
quired by the institutionalized discourses in question. (p. 56)
Thus, the discourse of every teacher a teacher of reading produces its own truth
value and its subjects (content area teachers) to the extent that the logical frame-
work in which adolescent literacy instruction resides has the institutional author-
ity to make that discourse seem natural and inevitableas if the discourse itself
is indispensable to adolescent literacy instruction.
Regarding the parameters of adolescent and adolescent literacy, we reject defi-
nitions in the dominant discourse that position young people as belonging to a
group determined largely by chronological age and associated age-driven factors
(e.g., irresponsibility, emotionality). Rather than view adolescents as isolatable
from the adult population, we favor arguments in the literature that show how
claims of hierarchical positioning and sameness often preclude accounting for
data that support generational interdependency. For example, Hagood, Stevens,
and Reinkings (2002) review of cross-generational research revealed concrete in-
stances in which adolescents proficiencies in some literacy practices exceeded
those of adults engaged in the same practices (see Barton, 2000; Green, Reid, &
Bigum, 1998). The sameness principle, which would attribute to all youths the
coming-of-age syndrome portrayed in books and popular media, is both limit-
ing and regularly challenged by researchers who view adolescence as a culturally
constructed concept (Lesko, 2001; Vadeboncoeur & Stevens, 2005). We use the
term adolescent literacy not solely as a label that depends on arbitrary age cat-
egorizations but rather as a descriptor for the vast array of literate practices that
young people bring to schooled learning, as well as take away from such learn-
ing. Depending on a writers preference and the period of time in which one was
writing, the term adolescent literacy has been linked to teaching or instruction
using various descriptors: secondary or content area reading instruction, content
literacy instruction, and disciplinary literacy instruction. Our decision to use ad-
olescent literacy instruction was a conscious choice, based largely on its prevalence
in the literature at the time of writing.
A Chronological Overview
of Adolescent Literacy Instruction
Two overarching and competing models of literacy instruction have dominated
the field of adolescent literacy instruction in the United States up to now: the
autonomous and the ideological models (Street, 1984, 1995). The autonomous
Discovering how such accidents are inherently complex networks of power re-
lations (involving domination, submission, and resistance) rather than natural,
linear progressions is genealogys project, and in our case, the means by which to
disrupt assumptions about the commonsensical notion of every teacher a teacher
of reading.
Genealogy, or the analysis of descent, is also concerned with emergence, a
concept derived from the German word entstehung, which means the moment
of arising, made possible by a network of events (Foucault, 1971/1998, p.576).
Worth keeping in mind, however, is that just as it is incorrect to search for
In the first instance, phrases such as college and career readiness, complex
texts, and these standards...ensure are presumed to carry sufficient rationale and
weight for ensuring that teachers in other disciplines are also focusing on read-
ing and writing to build knowledge within their subject areas (NGA & CCSSO,
2012, para. 27). In contrast to the specificity of the intended audience in the first
instance (disciplinary teachers), phrases alluding to the involvement of teachers
in the second instance are vague (relied on teachers and standards experts, state
experts; NGA & CCSSO, 2012, para. 31).
Networked Events
The fact that ACT (2011), by its own admission, played a significant role in the
wording of the Common Core and that it regularly provides benchmarks on the
students it testsfor example, nationwide only 30% of the high school students
tested in 2011 met the College Readiness Benchmark in sciencewould seem to
point to an adjacency of events (Bov, 1995), including the proclaimed crisis in
adolescent literacy, that make the discourse of every teacher a teacher of reading
thinkable. At the same time, according to Prado (2000) a genealogical analysis of
the relations of power embedded in networked events makes it possible to dis-
cern a collision of forces, some of which enhance, nullify, or redirect others, and
some of which combine with others to form new forces (p. 37). Thus, in a second
and closer analysis of the near-simultaneously released documents produced by
Common Core State Standards Initiative and ACT, and written in words that take
Here it is worth noting that on the same page and within contiguous para-
graphs, ACT (2010) seems to have reversed (or at least been unclear about) its
stance on the discourse of every teacher a teacher of reading. For example, is it
the case that teachers in disciplines other than English language arts are free to
use their own subject area expertise to teach students how to read, write, and
communicate, or must they participate in professional development opportuni-
ties aimed at building their knowledge of literacy instruction, such as that spelled
out in the Common Cores College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for
Reading and Writing? Whether merely a difference in wording meant to appeal to
different audiences or a collision of forces working to enhance the implementa-
tion of every teacher a teacher of reading, there is room for potential misinterpre-
tation. At the very least, a misreading of either document stands to destabilize the
discourse of every teacher a teacher of reading.
Tracing lines of descent for other proclaimed crises in adolescent literacy in-
struction offers a rare glimpse into similar patterns of networked events that have
made every teacher a teacher of reading a tenable but difficult discourse to enact.
For instance, the RRSG panel charged with producing a literacy research agenda
for the United States at the close of the 20th century argued in its executive sum-
mary that the country was experiencing still another crisis in teaching adoles-
cents to comprehend complex texts. At that point in time, the crisis was equated
to scores on tests that showed students in the United States were performing in-
creasingly poorly in comparison with students in other countries (RRSG, 2002,
PST: So am I supposed to use the same text as before? I know I need to
shorten it based on [my cooperating teachers] reflection, but should I
just shorten and use basically the same text and use it for this different
activity?...Sorry I keep bugging you, but I just feel like I am in a con-
stant state of confusion with this.
This response by the science teacher educator was but one of several exchanges he
had with the preservice science teacher throughout the semester.
In a separate instance, but one that was again related to the preservice teach-
ers difficulty in selecting appropriate texts, the science teacher educator wrote,
Maybe I am just not seeing the forest for the trees overall, in that I am so used to
the way information is structured in a well-written science text, that it is transparent
and unproblematic for me in a way that it is not for either students or for teachers in
other disciplines. (Alvermann, Rezak, et al., 2011, p. 48)
His response suggests he was aware that the discourse of every teacher a teacher
of reading assumes parity in subject matter knowledge, when in fact little or none
may exist. Although both the literacy teacher educator and the literacy teach-
ing assistant were intent on helping the preservice science teacher fuse reading
and science instruction, their combined knowledge of the subject matter was
not on par with the science teacher educators knowledge and expertise. This
same pattern surfaced in subsequent multisite case studies (Alvermann, Friese,
Beckmann, & Rezak, 2011; Marsh, Lammers, & Alvermann, 2012) that involved
preservice mathematics teachers.
In sum, when disciplinary knowledge is inadequate, and contradictory dis-
cursive practices prevail, every teacher a teacher of reading seems less natural and
inevitable than it might appear on first glance. This is not to claim that a discourse
that has weathered the discontinuities of nearly a century is of little or no value to
the field of adolescent literacy education. Rather, it is to acknowledge that the com-
plexities of adolescent literacy instruction increase substantively when variables
of interest include disciplinary and classroom/social structures and practices that
exceed what designers of earlier models took into account. It is also to recognize
the value of reconceptualizing every teacher a teacher of reading as a discourse
that has neither origins nor endings (in a linear sense), but only becomings.
iocultural
Soc
TEXT ACTIVITY
READER
C o n t ext
Note. Reprinted from Reading for Understanding: Toward an R&D Program in Reading Comprehension
(p. 12), by RAND Reading StudyA Heuristic
Figure S.1 Group, 2002, Santa About
for Thinking Monica, CA: Comprehension
Reading RAND. Copyright by RAND.
Reprinted with permission.
knowledge (vocabulary and topic knowledge, linguistic and discourse knowl-
edge, knowledge of comprehension strategies); and experiences.
Word knowledge,
Text structure, vocabulary knowledge,
vocabulary, print style background knowledge,
and font, discourse, linguistic/textual
genre, register, knowledge, strategy
motivating features use, inference-making
abilities, motivation,
identity
Text Reader
Reading
Broader context comprehension Broader context
Cultural models,
institutional practices,
Activities in sociopolitical regimes,
contexts etc.
Funds of knowledge
and Discourse
Popular culture
Schools Communities
Information technologies
Funds of knowledge
and Discourse
Note. Reprinted from Working Toward Third Space in Content Area Literacy: An Examination
of Everyday Funds of Knowledge and Discourse, by E.B. Moje, K.M. Ciechanowski, K.E. Kramer,
L.M. Ellis, R. Carrillo, and T. Collazo, 2004, Reading Research Quarterly, 39(1), p. 46. Copyright
2004 by the International Reading Association.
Discipline
Classroom Discourse
Discourse Knowledge
Knowledge Practices
Practices Identities
Identities
Classroom Discipline
Families Discourse Discourse
Discourse Knowledge Knowledge
Knowledge Peer groups
Discourse Practices Practices
Practices
Identities Knowledge Identities Identities
Practices
Communities Identities
Discourse
Knowledge Ethnicities Pop culture Classroom Discipline
Practices Discourse Discourse Discourse
Identities Knowledge Knowledge Discourse
Practices Knowledge Knowledge
Practices Practices
Identities Identities Practices
Identities Identities
Classroom Discipline
Discourse
Discourse
Knowledge
Knowledge
Practices
Practices
Identities
Identities
Note. Reprinted from Developing Disciplinary Discourses and Identities: Whats Knowledge Got to Do
With It? by E.B. Moje, April 2008, paper presented at the Conference on Discourse, Identity, and
Educational Practices, Universidad Autnoma de Baja California, Ensenada, Mexico.
Communities Discipline
Ethnicities (e.g., mathematics)
Communities Families Discourse
Communities
Ethnicities Peer groups Knowledge
Communities Ethnicities
Families Pop cultureCommunities Communities Practices
Ethnicities Ethnicities Families
Peer groups Peer groups Ethnicities Identities
Families Families
Pop culture Pop culture Families Texts Communities
Peer groups Peer groups Ethnicities
Pop culture Communities Peer groups
Pop culture Ethnicities Pop culture Families
Families Peer groups
Communities Peer groups Pop culture
Ethnicities Subject matter teacher & classroom Pop culture Subject matter teacher & classroom
Families (e.g., world history) CommunitiesCommunities (e.g., algebra) Communities
Peer groups Discourse Ethnicities Ethnicities Discourse Ethnicities
Pop culture Knowledge Families Families Knowledge Families
Communities Practices Peer groups Peer groups Practices Peer groups
Discipline Identities Communities Pop culture Identities Pop culture
Ethnicities Ethnicities Pop culture Communities
(e.g., history/ Families Texts Communities Texts
social sciences) Families Ethnicities
Communities Peer groups Peer groups Ethnicities Families
Discourse Families
Knowledge EthnicitiesPop culture Pop culture Peer groups
Families Communities Peer groups Pop culture Communities
Practices Ethnicities Communities Pop culture
Identities Peer groups Communities Ethnicities
Pop culture Families Ethnicities Families
Texts Peer groups Ethnicities
Families Communities Families Communities Peer groups
Pop culture Communities Peer groups Ethnicities Peer groups Ethnicities Pop culture
Ethnicities Pop culture Families Pop culture Families
Families Peer groups Peer groups
Necessary discipline- Peer groups Pop culture Pop culture Necessary discipline-
specific tools and habits Pop culture
of mind of each youth Discipline specific tools and habits
and each teacher: (e.g., literature/ of mind of each youth
Discursive skills composition/ and each teacher:
Linguistic skills Discipline Discursive skills
linguistics)
Knowledge (word, world, Discourse (e.g., natural Linguistic skills
disciplinary, topic) Knowledge sciences) Knowledge (word, world,
Stances and practices Practices Discourse disciplinary, topic)
Identities Identities Knowledge Stances and practices
1097
by particular school context or teacher knowledge/background). Thus, we have
placed the circles that represent the disciplines in different places relative to the
classroom circles. Some disciplines sit more on the fringes of classroom practice,
whereas others are more central to the classrooms, depending on the kind of
disciplinary knowledge and practice teachers bring to their teaching, the level of
the subject, the timing and structures of the school day (e.g., block scheduling vs.
shorter periods), and the views of the school in regard to what counts as valid ped-
agogical practice. The teachers are tasked with teaching the discursive practices,
knowledge, and linguistic skills of the discipline to anywhere from 100 to 180
students a year, a task made even more critical with the adoption of the Common
Core State Standards, which will make valuable, but in many cases only vaguely
defined, disciplinary practice demands on teachers. All the while, teachers, like
their students, are navigating this multiplicity of discourses, practices, identities,
and knowledge while working toward predetermined goals and outcomes. Not
only must they navigate these discursive and other differences, but they must
also navigate the reality of their students distinctly varied literacy skills, subject
matter knowledge, and stances, practices, and identities. Moreover, it is the sub-
ject matter teachers obligation to teach youths the necessary discipline-specific
knowledge, linguistic skills, discursive practices, stances, and identities signaled
in Figure 5s boxes. Is it any wonder that few secondary school teachers are eager
to take on the label of reading teacher in addition to everything else they must do?
This model of adolescent literacy teaching may make the task of encouraging
every teacher to see him- or herself as a teacher of reading seem hopeless, but we
see the model as opening a space for informed action. No longer should policy be
aimed solely at fixing a reader who measures below grade level on a single assess-
ment, because the model of disciplinary literacy teaching represented in Figure5,
which draws from and extends the RTAC and other models of comprehension
we have reviewed, makes clear that far more than skill shapes the demonstration
of comprehension or of literate practice writ large. No longer should secondary
school teachers be asked to teach reading in any generic way, because the model
situates reading inside particular disciplinary discourses, practices, knowledge
domains, texts, and tools. No longer should teachers be expected to do this work
armed with sets of cognitive strategies alone, because the model clarifies the role
of multiple social practices in the work of teaching and the various discourse
communities and funds of knowledge youths bring into secondary school subject
matter classrooms. In short, no longer should teachers be asked to be teachers
of reading in simple terms, because the model makes clear that there is nothing
simple about this work. The development of discipline-specific literacy practices,
habits of mind, and skills needs to be situated not just in what one reader brings
to one act of reading in one moment in time and in one classroom but also in the
multiplicity of a readers experience. The act of teaching literate practice to ado-
lescents at the secondary level, then, is as much about teaching youths to navigate
the texts, discourses, identities, and knowledge of different subject areas, class-
rooms, and relationships (see Moje, in press) as it is about teaching word-level
R eferences
ACT. (2010). A first look at the Common Core and col- Alvermann, D.E., Fitzgerald, J., & Simpson, M.
lege and career readiness. Iowa City, IA: Author. (2006). Teaching and learning in reading. In
Retrieved November 6, 2012, from www.act.org/ P.A. Alexander & P.H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook
research/policymakers/reports/firstlook.html of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 427455).
ACT. (2011). The condition of college and ca- Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
reer readiness. Iowa City, IA: Author. Alvermann, D., Friese, E., Beckmann, S., & Rezak,
Retrieved November 6, 2012, from www A. (2011). Content area reading pedagogy and
.act.org /research /policymakers/cccr11/pdf / domain knowledge: A Bourdieusian analysis.
ConditionofCollegeandCareerReadiness2011 Australian Educational Researcher, 38(2), 203
.pdf 220. doi:10.1007/s13384-011-0024-x
Alexander, P.A. (2003). Profiling the developing Alvermann, D.E., & Moore, D.W. (1991). Secondary
reader: The interplay of knowledge, interest, reading. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal,
and strategic processing. In C.M. Fairbanks, & P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading re-
J. Worthy, B. Maloch, J.V. Hoffman, & D.L. search (Vol. 2, pp. 951983). White Plains, NY:
Schallert (Eds.), The 52nd yearbook of the National Longman.
Reading Conference (pp. 4765). Oak Creek, WI:
Alvermann, D.E., Rezak, A.T., Mallozzi, C.A.,
National Reading Conference.
Boatright, M.D., & Jackson, D.F. (2011).
Alexander, P.A., & Jetton, T.L. (2000). Learning
Reflective practice in an online literacy course:
from text: A multidimensional and developmen-
Lessons learned from attempts to fuse reading
tal perspective. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal,
P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of read- and science instruction. Teachers College Record,
ing research (Vol. 3, pp. 285310). Mahwah, NJ: 113(1), 2756.
Erlbaum. Anders, P.L., Hoffman, J.V., & Duffy, G.G. (2000).
Alvermann, D.E. (2009). Sociocultural construc- Teaching teachers to teach reading: Paradigm
tions of adolescence and young peoples lit- shifts, persistent problems, and challenges. In
eracies. In L. Christenbury, R. Bomer, & P. M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, & R.
Smagorinsky (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent lit- Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3,
eracy research (pp. 1428). New York: Guilford. pp. 719742). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Alvermann, D.E. (2010). The teaching of reading. In Bain, R.B. (2008). Into the breach: Using research
E. Lindemann (Ed.), Reading the past, writing the and theory to shape history instruction. Journal
future: A century of American literacy education of Education, 189(1/2), 159168.
and the National Council of Teachers of English Barton, D. (2000). Researching literacy practices:
(pp. 5590). Urbana, IL: National Council of Learning from activities with teachers and stu-
Teachers of English. dents. In D. Barton, M. Hamilton, & R. Ivanic
A
little more than 10 years ago, we wrote an article for Reading Research
Quarterly (Dillon, OBrien, & Heilman, 2000), later reprinted in the fifth
edition of the Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (TMPR5). In the
article, we reviewed and reflected on what we had learned about the conduct of
our inquiry in the field to consider future directions for literacy research. This
chapter in TMPR6 provides an opportunity to revisit and update this work. The
foci of this new chapter are to (a) examine broadly how inquiry paradigms have
been defined, (b) critique how paradigms are used in inquiry in literacy and to
question their usefulness, (c) consider pragmatism as a perspective that may be
more useful in helping us decide what we study and how we engage in inquiry,
and (d) discuss the future of literacy inquiry.
Our current chapter is set within a new context of events that have occurred
over the past 10 years. These events, associated primarily with political agen-
das resulting in new policy changes, have had profound implications for what
research was conducted in the field, what findings were valued and taken up by
researchers and policymakers, and the impact of the nature of both the research
and policies on practices associated with K12 students learning. It is interesting
to note that a caution we offered in 2000 about the danger of getting stuck in one
paradigm did, in fact, play out during this time period. This getting stuck did
not occur by choice, however, and many literacy researchers lived with the con-
sequences of what happens when one research paradigm is valued over all others,
particularly if these researchers need federal funding to engage in scholarship.
This chapter is adapted from Literacy Research in the Next Millennium: From Paradigms to Pragmatism and
Practicality, in Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (5th ed., pp. 15301556), edited by R.B. Ruddell
and N.J. Unrau, 2004, Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Copyright 2004 by the International
Reading Association.
1104
To begin, research in the early 2000s was impacted by several pivotal events
that shaped what inquiry would be valued and how it would be used to impact
policy, research, and practices. A definition of scientific research was constructed
to determine programs that could be used by the Reading Excellence Act (REA)
of 1999 grant awardees. This action began a process in which policy shaped the
educational services that could be funded under particular initiatives. In addi-
tion, the National Reading Panel (NRP) report, published in 2000 by the National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), had a profound im-
pact on what research was deemed worthy of including in a policy document that
eventually had tremendous bearing on practice in U.S. schools, as well as having
an impact on federally funded research projects that followed. That is because the
panel of experts who compiled the report decided to include research that met
particular parametric and statistical standards for validity and generalizability,
leaving out a large body of scholarshipmuch of which was qualitative.
Shortly thereafter, federal education policies such as the No Child Left Behind
(NCLB) Act of 2001 and the Education Sciences Reform Act (ESRA) of 2002 were
published and used the term scientifically based research, promoting the follow-
ing methods as exemplary: randomized controlled experiments for primary re-
search studies, and meta-analyses as the standard for combing results and drawing
conclusions across studies. It should be noted that the definitions of scientifi-
cally based research included in the reauthorization by the Office of Educational
Research and Improvement (OERI; e.g., H.R. 4875 in 2000, H.R. 3801 in 2002, and
ESRA in 2002) outlined the types of educational research that could be funded by
the new Institute of Education Sciences (IES). Thus, these policies greatly affected
the kinds of inquiry literacy researchers might undertake. In addition, during the
George W. Bush presidency, several high-profile positions were awarded to indi-
viduals from positivist research perspectives (e.g., the director of the IES, and the
chief of the Child Development and Behavior Branch within the NICHD at the
National Institutes of Health). These appointments added to the already mounting
concerns scholars were expressing about how particular agencies and individuals
were crafting narrow definitions of scientific research in education. Before long,
educational researchers were also faced with proposed legislation that would de-
fine the nature of rigorous scientific methods for conducting education research.
At this same moment, and in response to a request from the National Educational
Research Policy and Priorities Board, a National Research Council (NRC) commit-
tee was commissioned in 2000 by the National Academy of Sciences. This group
engaged in work resulting in the Scientific Research in Education (SRE) Study (NRC,
2002). The committee was given the charge to review and synthesize recent lit-
erature on the science and practice of scientific educational research and consider
how to support high quality science in a federal education research agency (NRC,
2002, p. 1). The overall goal for this group of scholars and policymakers was to
clarify the definition of scientific inquiry in education and speculate how the fed-
eral government could endorse and foster research that leads to evidence-based
education policy and practice. The definition that emerged from the SRE report
positioned research in education as akin to that in the sciences, noting that research
The definition goes on to state that multiple methods, applied over time and tied
to evidentiary standards, are essential to establishing a base of scientific knowl-
edge (p. 2). Six guiding principles were posited as forming a foundation for all
scientific inquiry:
1. Pose significant questions that can be investigated empirically
2. Link research to relevant theory
3. Use methods that permit direct investigation of the question
4. Provide a coherent and explicit chain of reasoning
5. Replicate and generalize across studies
6. Disclose research to encourage professional scrutiny and critique (pp. 35)
The authors goal was not to provide the federal government with a definition of
what constitutes scientific research on education, but rather to provide six design
principles to foster a scientific culture within the agency (e.g., design principle
#3: Insulate the agency from inappropriate political interference, p. 8).
Despite the reasonable ideas expressed in the report and the numerous and
insightful critiques written in response to the call for a scientific culture as an
alternative to the hard-and-fast narrow definition of research created by other re-
ports and policy brokers (see the November 2002 issue of Educational Researcher),
in January 2002, right after the SRE report was released, NCLB was passed into
law. NCLB included a definition of scientifically based research that privileged
testing hypotheses and using experimental and quasi-experimental designs only,
including a preference for random assignment. This definition also specified what
would count as evidence to justify the use of federal program dollars. However, it
was stated as a restriction to the programs used within research initiatives (e.g.,
Reading First), not the kinds of educational research that might be funded by the
The implicit message was that educational research outside of this narrow band,
often referred to as the gold standard, would not be funded, and the results
would not be taken up by practitioners who were guided to the WWC site. In
time, the voices of educational researchers created changes in the WWC criteria
for reviewing and accessing the research that could be included to support par-
ticular programs and materials reviewed on the website.
Despite some movement toward a broader set of criteria for assessing research,
Eisenhart and Towne (2003) noted that many researchers were deeply troubled
by the prominence of experimental designs and the positivist epistemology that
sometimes underlies them (p. 31), and other researchers worried that critiques of
positivism would be ignored and that other ways of knowing (e.g., philosophical,
historical, cultural, affective, postmodern, practice-oriented) would be rejected
by funding agencies. Literacy researchers were among the most vocal critics in
this educational policy arena, primarily based on their experiences in seeking
REA and Reading First grants, their concerns over the NRP report and its im-
pact on the field, and their frustration with the narrow range of literacy studies
funded by IES grant monies. But many literacy researchers who did not pursue
large grants to fund their research watched what occurred and maintained a low
profile, often plugging away on topics of interest to themselves and/or problems of
practice within local university and school and community settings.
We reviewed the critical influence of politics, policies, and funding on edu-
cational research over the past 10 years because it sets the stage for revisiting our
ideas about the types of research literacy scholars are engaged in, the theoretical
frameworks they use, and the role pragmatism plays in the milieu. For example,
we observed an increase in experimental and quasi-experimental research pub-
lished in literacy journals, and there have been more qualitativequantitative
mixed design studies and formative or design-based papers published. That said,
multiple genres of qualitative research studies still enjoy a prominent role in lit-
eracy journals and books.
Patton (2002) is concerned that a great deal of our inquiry is based on the
ways we have previously conducted research rather than attending to the needs
of particular situations with appropriate methodologies. He reminds us that para
digmatic blinders constrain methodological flexibility and creativity: Instead of
being concerned about shifting from one paradigm to another, we may adhere rig-
idly to the tenets of a paradigm, perhaps because of philosophical arguments about
adherence to assumptions underlying our worldview, rather than adjust the para-
digm to meet the challenges of new issues and problems we encounter in research.
The label pragmatism, like other vague terms, has been avoided by leading ed-
ucational philosophers and researchers because it is overused and misconstrued
Conclusions
Many complex questions relating to how learners become and remain literate
and how teachers can support this process remain uninvestigated. However, our
past practices in selecting questions and formulating inquiry approaches must
continue to be adapted to address current and future questions about teaching
and learning. An individual researchers beliefs and expertise no longer can be
the sole rationale for the research questions selected and pursued. Instead, the
complexity of problems and social situations that affect practice and concern local
constituents must be key to the creation of shared research agendas.
We continue to propose pragmatism as a stance for academics and commu-
nities of inquirers. Pragmatism is not a paradigm adapted from those that are
currently popular; rather, it is a revolutionary break in our thinking and practice
relating to inquiry. As a literacy community, we need to challenge ourselves to step
back and think collectively and individually about the inquiry in which we are
engaged. Is our research meaningful, credible, and prone to making a difference in
students learning and teachers pedagogy? Does our inquiry work toward concrete
alternatives for students and teachers? As Rorty (1982) explains, For the pragma-
tists, the pattern of all inquiryscientific as well as moralis deliberation con-
cerning the relative attractions of various concrete alternatives (p. 164). We see
the goal of research at its best as practical rationality serving moral concerns with
social justice at its core. Pragmatic research can be a practical and hopeful inquiry,
which avoids the arrogance of modernist empiricism and the angst of postmodern
Our recent history as educational researchers has been fraught with anxiety, an-
guish, and despair. But there have been moments of enlightenment. Perhaps one
might be an adaptation of Eugne Ionescos quote: Ideologies need not separate us.
Dreams of what could be can bring us together.
1. If you were to write a summary of the impact of 21st-century federal legisla-
tion on reading research, what would you highlight as being the most signif-
icant development? Be sure to identify your stance (e.g., that of a researcher,
teacher, policymaker, student, or parent).
2. What, if any, evidence exists to suggest that pragmatismthe recommended
approach to literacy research in the authors chapter in TMPR5was taken
up by researchers in 2000 and beyond?
3. The authors claim that a diversity of paradigms can enrich or hamper re-
search. Can you think of a research question in reading that could be fruit-
fully explored with multiple theories and methodologies? Can you think of
another question that is best researched with just one theory or methodology?
4. How would you apply the pragmatic orientation that the authors advocate
to the investigation of a problem you have identified in the field of literacy?
I
n this article we have combined our independent invitations to provide reviews
of the report of the National Early Literacy Panel (NELP; 2008), Developing Early
Literacy (available at http://www.nifl.gov/earlychildhood/NELP/NELPreport
.html), for two reasons: (a) because we agree on so many of the virtues and issues
of the report and (b) because, by avoiding redundancy between us, we can cover
a wider range of issues. Another feature of this response, which may be related to
our long personal histories in reading research (Pearson is a decade up on Hiebert,
however), is that we take a decidedly historical stance toward this document by
reminding readers of the many syntheses of early reading that came before the
NELP report and by asking, very pointedly, whether that report adds value to our
cumulative knowledge, wisdom, and insight about early reading instruction.
The History
Research syntheses have become an academic art form over the past half-century.
By 1960, educational scholars had completely embraced the classic literature re-
view that has been a staple of the field (as evidenced in Review of Educational
Research, the yearbooks of the National Society for the Study of Education, and
the obligatory dissertation chapter that serves as an initiation fee for entry into
the academy), and we were starting down the road to what has now become some-
thing of an education cottage industryproducing the increasingly ubiquitous
Handbook of X (where X is a variable whose values embrace the entire landscape of
educational scholarship). The classic methodology was to empower (or require) a
scholar to conduct an exhaustive, critical, and interpretive review of a given piece
of the education research landscape. Gene Glass (1976) made his contribution
to this art form by bringing us meta-analysis and the powerful convenience of
treating each and every statistical test in each and every experimental study of a
phenomenon as a subject in a grand experiment as an alternative to the classic
literature review synthesis. And like the handbook chapter phenomenon, meta-
analysis has become its own independent entity, with an ever-growing literature,
This chapter is reprinted from Educational Researcher, 39(4), 286294. Copyright 2010 by the American
Educational Research Association. Reprinted with permission.
1133
its own methodological debates, and a broad programmatic presence in all fields
of scholarship (Cooper & Hedges, 1994; Shanahan, 2000).
The NRP used the most scientific review approaches (i.e., meta-analysis, wher-
ever it could) to distill from existing research what was known about the efficacy
of teaching PA, phonics, fluency (instantiated as either guided reading instruc-
tion or independent reading), comprehension, and vocabulary; in addition, the
panel investigated the status of the research base on teacher education and profes-
sional development and attempted to review research on technology and literacy.
The findings from the NRP (NICHD, 2000) were straightforward: Teach PA in
K1, phonics first and fast, comprehension strategies through explicit instruction,
vocabulary through a range of approaches, and fluency through oral reading prac-
tices. The panel declined to make substantial recommendations about silent read-
ing (claiming the research base was too weak to draw any credible conclusions
about its efficacy) and made very modest claims about technology and teacher
education. Unlike its ancestral cousins in the synthesis enterprise (save Challs
book), the report of the NRP has proved to be amazingly influential in shaping
policy and practice at both the federal level (through the Reading First provisions
The Review
NELP Adds Weight and Strength to Earlier Reviews
The findings of NELP focus on two issues: (a) those skills or abilities that, mea-
sured early in childrens development, predict later literacy proficiency and (b) the
effects of interventions (i.e., specific preschool or kindergarten programs, specific
instructional emphases in preschool or kindergarten literacy programs such as a
code focus or shared reading, home and parent programs, and language enhance-
ment interventions) on supporting those skills or abilities directly. Although the
panel provided a chapter for each of five interventions, we believe, for purposes
of clarity and brevity, that these programmatic efforts can be clustered together.
Regardless of the context (i.e., home, preschool, kindergarten) or content focus
(e.g., language, code, shared reading), the studies in each of the reviews described
a form of intervention. That is, unlike analyses of the effects of attending any
kindergarten (e.g., Prince, Hare, & Howard, 2001) or preschool (e.g., V. E. Lee,
Brooks-Gunn, Schnur, & Liaw, 1990), the studies in these five chapters of the
NELP report analyzed the effects of some form of intervention in preschools, kin-
dergartens, or homes. For convenience in the rest of this review, we summarize
the key findings of NELP in Table 1.
If that was, indeed, panel members goal, they have failed themselves and us. And,
in the case of code-focused instruction, they have taken a step backward from the
immediate predecessor, the NRP (NICHD, 2000).
We base this claim on the comprehensive review conducted by the NRP
(NICHD, 2000) on code-focused instruction. The NELP (2008) states that the
NRP did not examine the implications of instructional practices used with chil-
dren from birth through age 5 (p. v.). In the case of alphabetics (NRPs term to
encompass PA and phonics instruction), that observation is simply inaccurate.
The subgroup on alphabetics defined the scope of its review as preschoolers,
kindergartners, 1st graders, or 2nd through 6th graders (NICHD, 2000, pp. 23).
Our point is that there was an existing national database for the NELP. Not only
did the NELP not build on the NRPs analysis, but the NELPs conclusions fail to
go as far as those of the NRP. The generous interpretation of this failure is that the
NELP found more to be cautious about than did the NRP; an alternative interpre-
tation is that the NELP failed to exercise its scholarly prerogative in taking the
next step in the interpretation of the evidence. The conclusions of the NRP had
been quite sophisticated, even nuancedat the level where useful information is
provided to policy makers, practitioners, parents, and publishers (the stated goal
of the NELPp. iii). Not only did the NELP not build on the findings of the NRP,
1141
classroom teachers children (NICHD, 2000, pp. 24). designed and implemented by researchers (NELP, 2008, p. 119).
By ignoring these initiatives, the NELP report fails to acknowledge the elephant
in the room, namely, that the code-based variables the report identifies as both
predictive and causative of success are neither new nor untested; to the contrary,
(a) the evidence for their effectiveness is at least as old as Adamss Beginning to
Read volume in 1990, and (b) they have been the driving force of the American
early childhood literacy curriculum over at least the past decade, perhaps longer.
Federal policies and large-scale initiatives have promoted a particular kind of
code-centric curriculum in kindergarten through Reading First and for 4-year-
olds through Early Reading First. Further, the national kindergarten curriculum
has been heavily influenced by the code-driven textbook mandates of California
and Texas (California English/Language Arts Committee, 1999; Texas Education
Agency, 1997) that almost always determine what is available to the remainder of
the country. To assert, as the NELP report does, that the NELPs definitive find-
ings should point the way to reform represents an implicit denial of the reality of
early reading pedagogy in the United States at the present time.
We understand why these national reports were excluded from the main
NELP analysis: They do not meet the prima facie peer reviewed journal test.
That is well and good, but it forces the NELP panel to face a curious risk: The
panel might include a minor small-n study that passed peer review in a third-tier
regional journal while excluding a large-n federally supported, peer-advised, and
well-designed study that was, for reasons of heft, never submitted to a journal. At
the very least, the panel might have discussed its findings in relationship to these
other national efforts, attempting to explain any similarities and differences in
findings or implications for policy.
Recent federal and state initiatives have escalated code-focused instruction in
kindergarten (Goldstein, 2007; Hiebert, 2008). In many kindergarten contexts (as
well as preschool ones), young children are involved with instruction that aims to
promote at least two of the code-based predictor variables identified in the NELP
reportletter naming and phonological awareness. In the Executive Summary,
Lonigan and Shanahan (2008) state, Most young children develop few conven-
tional literacy skills before starting school (p. vii). This is simply not the case, as
is evident in the findings of the ECLS (Denton & West, 2002). Although the NELP
report does not acknowledge Early Reading First and Reading First, the existence
of the ECLS is recognized, albeit in passing. NELP refers to the ECLS report as
evidence that there is a substantial amount of variance in conventional literacy
within a cohort. About the variance in the ECLS cohort, the panel is right. But
there is more to be garnered from ECLS: Differences in the literacy proficiencies
of a cohort of young children notwithstanding, the ECLS also indicates that on
the strongest predictor variablealphabet knowledgethe target cohort (class of
2010, since students entered kindergarten in 1998) left kindergarten quite knowl-
edgeable. Data from the ECLS are presented in Table 3. According to the ECLS,
67% of the class of 2010 could recognize letter names at the beginning of kinder-
garten, rising to 95% at the end.
31% who begin kindergarten close to mastery of two of the most prominent skills
in the typical code-based kindergarten curriculum (i.e., matching initial sounds
with letters and recognizing letters).
Consider the first group of students, those in the bottom third of the perfor-
mance distribution: When this report makes its way into the policy arena, those
students will be subjected to an even more aggressive curriculum of pieces of
language. As Perkins (2008) describes it, they will be faced with elementitis,
where skills are broken into elements and taught discretely, where playing the
whole game of reading is put off until later, once the pieces are in place. They are
at risk of falling victim to what we have called the basic-skills conspiracy of good
intentions: First things first, then well get to the good stuff, so the conspiracy
goes. We wont dwell long on the code, but surely it must be in place before we get
to reading. Or, First, lets make sure they get the letters and words right before
we get to the what ifs and I wonder whats of the curriculum. This focus on mo-
lecular, rather than molar, aspects of the curriculum has surfaced again and again
in our history. As far back as 1975, Johnson and Pearson (1975) described the psy-
cholinguistic navet of conceptualizing reading as a string of minute behavioral
objectives, and as recently as 2005, Paris pointed out the mischief that is done
1. What do the authors caution regarding the translation of the NELP reports
predictive findings into classroom practice?
2. What do the authors feel are shortcomings of the NELP reports findings on
phonemic awareness/code-focused instruction regarding recommendations
for teacher practice?
3. What are the implications of the data in Table 4 for classroom practice and/or
future research?
R eferences
Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and Bond, G. L., & Dykstra, R. (1967). The cooperative
learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. research program in first-grade reading instruc-
Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Horsey, C. S. tion. Reading Research Quarterly, 2, 5142.
(1997). From first grade forward: Early foun- California English/Language Arts Committee.
dations of high school dropout. Sociology of (1999). English-language arts content stan-
Education, 70(2), 87107. dards for California public schools (kindergarten
Anderson, R. C., Hiebert, E. H., Scott, J. A., & through grade twelve). Sacramento: California
Wilkinson, I. A. G. (1985). Becoming a nation of Department of Education.
readers: The report of the Commission on Reading. Chall, J. S. (1967). Learning to read: The great debate.
Champaign, IL: Center for the Study of Reading. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Literacy as Deixis
Today, the nature of literacy has become deictic. This simple idea carries impor-
tant implications for literacy theory, research, and instruction that our field must
begin to address. Deixis is a term used by linguists (Fillmore, 1966; Murphy,
1986; Traut & Kazzazi, 1996) to define words whose meanings change rapidly as
their context changes. Tomorrow, for example, is a deictic term; the meaning of
tomorrow becomes today every 24 hours. The meaning of literacy has also be-
come deictic because we live in an age of rapidly changing information and com-
munication technologies, each of which requires new literacies (Leu, 1997, 2000).
Thus, to have been literate yesterday, in a world defined primarily by relatively
static book technologies, does not ensure that one is fully literate today where
we encounter new technologies such as Google docs, Skype, iMovie, Contribute,
Basecamp, Dropbox, Facebook, Google, foursquare, Chrome, educational video
games, or thousands of mobile apps. To be literate tomorrow will be defined by
even newer technologies that have yet to appear and even newer discourses and
social practices that will be created to meet future needs. Thus, when we speak of
new literacies, we mean that literacy is not just new today; it becomes new every
day of our lives.
How should we theorize the new literacies that will define our future, when lit-
eracy has become deictic? The answer is important because our concept of literacy
defines both who we are and who we shall become. But there is a conundrum here.
This chapter is adapted from Toward a Theory of New Literacies Emerging From the Internet and Other
Information and Communication Technologies, by D.J. Leu Jr., C.K. Kinzer, J.L. Coiro, & D.W. Cammack, in
Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (5th ed., pp. 15701613), edited by R.B. Ruddell and N.J. Unrau, 2004,
Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Copyright 2004 by the International Reading Association.
1150
How can we possibly develop adequate theory when the object that we seek to study
is itself ephemeral, continuously being redefined by a changing context? This is an
important theoretical challenge that our field has not previously faced. The purpose
of this chapter is to advance theory in a world where literacy has become deictic.
It suggests that a dual-level theory of New Literacies is a useful approach to theory
building in a world where the nature of literacy continuously changes.
We begin by making a central point: Social contexts have always shaped both
the function and form of literate practices and been shaped by them in return. We
discuss the social context of the current period and explain how this has produced
new information and communication technologies (ICTs), and the new literacies
that these technologies demand. Second, we explore several lowercase new lit-
eracies perspectives that are emerging. We argue that a dual-level New Literacies
theory is essential to take full advantage of this important and diverse work. Third,
we identify a set of principles, drawn from research, that inform an uppercase
theory of New Literacies. Then, we present one lowercase theory of new literacies,
the new literacies of online research and comprehension, to illustrate how a dual-
level theory of New Literacies can inform new literacies research that takes related
but different theoretical perspectives. We conclude by considering the implica-
tions of a dual-level theory of New Literacies for both research and practice.
CEO
Line supervisor and Line supervisor and Line supervisor and Line supervisor and
line worker team line worker team line worker team line worker team
The figure shows new management and communication structures. Communication occurs in both directions at all levels,
both horizontally and vertically, as indicated by the dashed box that shows teams communicate and work with one another
across teams within a horizontal level but can also draw team members and communicate with teams vertically. Teams are
often composed of members from all levels through liaison and communication, which occurs largely through information
and communication technologies. The importance of communication and cross-team liaison/membership shows that new
literacies are required for this structure to occur.
This change has had a fundamental effect on the nature of literacy within
organizations. At the broadest level, members of these teams must:
Quickly identify important problems in their work
Locate useful information related to the problems they identify
Critically evaluate the information they find
Synthesize multiple sources of information to determine a solution
Q
uickly communicate the solution to others so everyone within an organi-
zation is informed
M
onitor and evaluate the results of their solutions and decisions and mod-
ify these as needed
How do teams do this? Often they rely upon the Internet. Many economists
have concluded that productivity gains realized during the past several decades
have been due to the rapid integration of the Internet into the workplace, enabling
units to better share information, communicate, and solve problems (Matteucci,
OMahony, Robinson, & Zwick, 2005; van Ark, Inklaar, & McGuckin, 2003).
Internet use in U.S. workplaces, for example, increased by nearly 60% during
a single year (2002) among all employed adults 25 years of age and older (U.S.
Department of Commerce, Economic and Statistics Administration & National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, 2002).
In the United States, the Common Core State Standards Initiative (National
Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School
Officers, 2010) has sought to establish more uniform standards across states to
prepare students for college and careers in the 21st century. One of their key de-
sign principles, research and media skills, shows that literacy and new technolo-
gies are beginning to be considered together:
To be ready for college, workforce training, and life in a technological society, stu-
dents need the ability to gather, comprehend, evaluate, synthesize, and report on
information and ideas, to conduct original research in order to answer questions
or solve problems, and to analyze and create a high volume and extensive range of
print and non-print texts in media forms old and new. The need to conduct research
and to produce and consume media is embedded into every aspect of todays cur-
riculum. (p. 4)
A.S. 8. Gather relevant information from multiple print and digital sources, assess
the credibility and accuracy of each source, and integrate the information while
avoiding plagiarism. (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices &
Council of Chief State School Officers, p. 41)
What do we know about the new literacies of online research and compre-
hension? We are beginning to uncover many elements of this aspect of new litera-
cies. They include the following:
1. Online research and comprehension is a self-directed process of text con-
struction and knowledge construction.
2. Five practices appear to define online research and comprehension pro-
cessing: (1) identifying a problem and then (2) locating, (3) evaluating,
(4)synthesizing, and (5) communicating information.
3. Online research and comprehension is not isomorphic with offline read-
ing comprehension; additional skills and strategies appear to be required.
4. Online contexts may be especially supportive for some struggling readers.
5.
Adolescents are not always very skilled with online research and
comprehension.
6. Collaborative online reading and writing practices appear to increase com-
prehension and learning.
Assessment
We currently lack valid, reliable, and practical assessments of new literacies to in-
form instruction and help students become better prepared for an online age of in-
formation and communication. As a result, new literacies are not often integrated
into reading or language arts instruction (Hew & Brush, 2007) and are, instead,
1. What are some examples of new literacies that have arisen or will arise in
the Internet age?
2. How can you apply the recommendation for collaborative online read-
ing and writing practices [that] appear to increase comprehension and
learning?
3. With respect to new literacies, what can schools of education do to avoid
misalignments of assessment and instruction?
NOT E S
Portions of this material are based on work supported by the U.S. Department of Education
under Award Nos. R305G050154 and R305A090608. Opinions expressed herein are solely
those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the position of the U.S. Department of
Education, Institute of Educational Sciences.
R eferences
Afflerbach, P. (2007). Understanding and using the evidence. British Journal of Educational
reading assessment. Newark, DE: International Technology, 31(9), 775786.
Reading Association. Bilal, D. (2000). Childrens use of the Yahooligans!
Afflerbach, P.A., & Cho, B.Y. (2008). Identifying Web search engine: Cognitive, physical, and
and describing constructively responsive com- affective behaviors on fact-based search tasks.
prehension strategies in new and traditional Journal of the American Society for Information
forms of reading. In S. Israel & G. Duffy (Eds.), Science, 51(7), 646665. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-
Handbook of reading comprehension research (pp. 4571(2000)51:7<646::AID-ASI7>3.0.CO;2-A
6990). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Boyarin, J. (Ed.). (1993). The ethnography of read-
Afflerbach, P.A., & Cho, B.Y. (2010). Determining ing. Berkeley: University of California Press.
and describing reading strategies: Internet and doi:10.1525/california/9780520079557.001.0001
traditional forms of reading. In H.S. Waters & Brten, I., Strms, H.I., & Britt, M.A. (2009). Trust
W. Schneider (Eds.), Metacognition, strategy matters: Examining the role of source evalua-
use, and instruction (pp. 201255). New York: tion in students construction of meaning within
Guilford. and across multiple texts. Reading Research
Quarterly, 44(1), 628. doi:10.1598/RRQ.44.1.1
American Association of School Librarians. (2007).
Brten, I., Strms, H.I., & Salmern, L. (2011).
Standards for the 21st-century learner. Retrieved
Trust and mistrust when students read mul-
from www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/guidelines
tiple information sources about climate change.
andstandards/learningstandards/standards.cfm
Learning and Instruction, 21(2), 180192. doi:
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.02.002
Authority. (n.d.). The Australian Curriculum Britt, M.A., & Gabrys, G.L. (2001). Teaching ad-
(Version 1.2). Retrieved from www.australian vanced literacy skills for the World Wide Web.
curriculum.edu.au/Home In C.R. Wolfe (Ed.), Learning and teaching on
Becta. (2003). What the research says about barriers the World Wide Web (pp. 7390). San Diego,
to the use of ICT in teaching. Retrieved October 29, CA: Academic. doi:10.1016/B978-012761891-3/
2012 from www.mmiweb.org.uk/publications/ 50007-2
ict/Research_Barriers_TandL.pdf Broch, E. (2000). Childrens search engines from
Bennett, R.E., Persky, H., Weiss, A.R., & Jenkins, F. an information search process perspective.
(2007). Problem solving in technology-rich environ- School Library Media Research, 3. Retrieved from
ments: A report from the NAEP technology-based www.ala.org/arasl/ aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/
assessment project. Retrieved from nces.ed.gov/ slmrcontents/volume32000/childrens
pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2007466 Callow, J. (2010). Spot the difference: The chang-
Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ing nature of page-based and screen-based texts.
digital natives debate: A critical review of Screen Education, 58, 106110.
T
he aim of this chapter is to situate reading within two complementary ap-
proaches: New Literacy Studies (NLS) and a social semiotic approach to
multimodality (SSMM). We use the term reading both as a fairly neutral
description of an activity (as in, what are you reading now?) and as a topic for
theoretical attention (as in, how can we understand reading in contemporary
environments?). In the latter sense, we argue that reading appears differently
when it is viewed in the frame of social practices and environments and in the
perspective of modally complex compositions than it does in other approaches.
As concepts, reading and writingmaking meaning in and with textsname
practices and processes today that differ in many respects from those some 30 or
40 years ago. At the same time, there are constants about reading and about writ-
ing as composition that provide a strong enough reason for us to look at reading
from these two fields of research and theory, both of which focus on meaning
making as located in social environments. Whereas the emphasis of NLS leans
more toward an attention to understanding and describing social environments
(where meaning is made and by whom), that of SSMM leans more toward semi-
otic factors (how meaning is made, by what agents, with what principles of and
resources for making meaning), or in other words, toward the (material) realiza-
tion of meanings.
This chapter is organized in five parts. First, we develop a view of reading
through the lens of NLS and SSMM and show how these two approaches may
be integrated. In the second, third, and fourth parts, we present ages and stages
of reading, from early childhood literacies to youth literacies to adult academic
literacies, and try to account for reading in different social settings. In the final
section, we conclude with a discussion of ways forward with literacy, pedagogy,
and policy. Throughout the chapter, we offer an integrated model of reading and
1182
of the reading process rooted in an epistemology that draws on both NLS and
SSMM as a viable frame for thinking about reading in new times.
Note. From Raggedy Ann in the Magic Book (p. 7), by J. Gruelle, 1939, New York: Atheneum.
Copyright 1939 by Atheneum. Reprinted with permission.
text, but the pictures are visual supports without a substantive function. As the
story continues, most of the illustrations that support the written text are black-
and-white, smaller format line drawings (in fact, there are 34 black-and-white
illustrations compared with 20 color illustrations).
Figure 2 shows the first page of a 2008 reader, designed for a similar read-
ing level to that of the 1939 reader. There is a privileging of black-and-white line
drawings with speech bubbles and cells for each characters part in the dialogue.
The title of the Scholastic text by Terry Deary (2008) is Horrible Histories: Savage
Stone Age. There is a distinct and immediately discernible difference between the
1939 text and this one. The 1939 reader resembles a classic storybook genre. It
begins, The Deep, Deep, Woods always filled with cool, blue-green shadows
and ends with The adventure through the Fuzzywumps magic book had ended,
very happily. THE END. It closely follows the convention of Once upon a time
Note. From Horrible Histories: Savage Stone Age (p. 5), by Terry Deary, 2008, London: Scholastic.
Copyright 1999 by Terry Deary and Martin Brown. Reprinted with permission by Scholastic.
and they all lived happily ever after. The 2008 book, by comparison, seems more
journalistic in genre with frequent editorializing comments: History can be hor-
rible. And the further back in time you go, the more horrible it becomes. The
book ends with Someone helped him, someone shared their hard-earned food,
someone tended his wounds. Someone cared. The savage Stone Age? The cartoon
accompanying the text shows an upwardly mobile couple discussing living in
the Stone Age and some of the realities of Stone Age life, such as no teachers, no
policemen, no soft toilet paper, and dying from a rotten tooth. The visual image
is no longer supplementary but an integral part of the text. The book exploits
multiple points of view, including age-appropriate tropes and themes to address
its audience, such as toilet humor, overgeneralizations, irony, and commentary on
contemporary social trends, and it contrasts and compares these with rites and
practices typical of (cartoon) representations of Stone Age people.
different to that of the narrative. While the narrative strongly insists on one kind
of reading and, in that, implicitly suggests a particular social order, the website is
the product of a rhetoricians assumptions about the varied interests of a diverse
audience, and it is designed to allow the interest of any one reader to shape the
coherence of the text resulting from his or her interested engagement. Texts, if
read as they are meant to be, habituate their readers to a certain stance to text, to
reading practices and to meaning, to authorial authority or to the readers exercise
of individual interested agency, and to the social writ large.
The characteristics of a text are the effect of a closely integral relation of
reading, readership, and identity, which forms the basis of the SSMM approach
to reading. Active semiotic workthe agency of individualsis entailed in pro-
ducing texts, whether in outward or inward production. The production is the
semiotic work of engaging with an aspect of the world seen as text. That work
entails selection of what is to be attended to and an interpretation/transformation
The textile side of our heritage comes from the women in the family. We have older
relatives that do appliqu, crochet, embroidery, sewing and knitting (from the girls
mothers side their grandmothers sister and cousin and from their fathers side, his
two cousins who live close by). My younger sister loves craft type of activities and
buys the girls a lot of resources to do sewing and fabric work especially on birthdays,
Christmas and Eid.
Kate: When you see a nasty word, do you think it is good or bad?
Marianne: Bad. We have got one on our gates someone wrote it! When I first
moved into my house, there was graffiti all over the wall, and
they had had a paintball fight. You can still see it. It were black,
and it were white, and it was hard to get off. Me granddad had to
do that. (audio recording, June 2011)
Kate: I want to know what you think of the graffiti on this slide?
Luke: Its all rude! We should spray it. Its not fair on young children.
Reading signs in the community can be hurtful and problematic. The children
commented on the racist nature of some graffiti and how the everyday reading
matter in the environment was damaging their sense of their community (see
Figure 6).
Reading the linguistic landscape is a process of acquiring what Mackey (2010)
calls an embodied understanding of the local world (p. 329), a world that is dis-
covered through pathways, through walls and boundaries, through the lines that
are taken, from home to school and back again, and also through the lines that are
presented to children in the form of words and symbols on the street. For young
children, reading is sensory and embodied (Pink, 2009). Letters and print are in-
scribed within material objects (Miller, 2010). The small embodiments that are
1. What is the import of the authors observation that a 2008 book published
in the United States may have limited frames of reference for children in
other countries?
2. What different genres have arisen in response to the development of multi-
modal approaches to text, where different methods of production, different
representations, and different principles of composition are employed?
3. What suggestions in this chapter are important for teachers of early readers?
What suggestions are important for parents?
4. What can teachers do to foster multimodal literacy, building on childrens
cultural and literacy backgrounds?
Note
Thank you to Tara McGowan for her assiduous editorial skills and reading of the manuscript.
R eferences
Alvermann, D.E. (Ed.). (2002). Adolescents and lit- Cross-cultural perspectives on policy and practice:
eracies in a digital world. New York: Peter Lang. Decolonizing community contexts (pp. 4357).
Alvermann, D.E. (2006). Ned and Kevin: An on- New York: Routledge.
line discussion that challenges the not-yet- Compton-Lilly, C., Rogers, R., & Lewis, T.Y. (2012).
adult cultural model. In K. Pahl & J. Rowsell Analyzing epistemological considerations re-
(Eds.), Travel notes from the new literacy studies: lated to diversity: An integrative critical lit-
Instances of practice (pp. 1938). Tonawonda, erature review of family literacy scholarship.
NY: Multilingual Matters. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(1), 3360.
Barton, D., & Hamilton, M. (1998). Local literacies: Davies, J. (2006). Escaping to the borderlands: An
Reading and writing in one community. New York: exploration of the Internet as a cultural space for
Routledge. teenaged Wiccan girls. In K. Pahl & J. Rowsell
Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: (Eds.), Travel notes from the new literacy studies:
The genre and activity of the experimental article Instances of practice (pp. 5771). Tonawonda, NY:
in science. Madison: University of Wisconsin Multilingual Matters.
Press.
Ferreiro, E., & Teberosky, A. (1982). Literacy be-
Bezemer, J., & Kress, G. (2008). Writing in multi-
fore schooling (K.G. Castro, Trans.). Exeter, NH:
modal texts: A social semiotic account of designs
Heinemann.
for learning. Written Communication, 25(2), 166
Gebre, A.H., Openjuru, G., Rogers, A., & Street, B.
195. doi:10.1177/0741088307313177
(2009). Everyday literacies in Africa: Ethnographic
Bezemer, J., & Kress, G. (2009). Visualizing
English: A social semiotic history of a school studies of literacy and numeracy practices in
subject. Visual Communication, 8(3), 247262. Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Fountain.
doi:10.1177/1470357209106467 Gee, J.P. (1990). Social linguistics and literacies:
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power Ideology in Discourses. New York: Falmer.
(J.B. Thompson, Ed.; G. Raymond & M. Gee, J.P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies:
Adamson, Trans.). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Ideology in Discourses (2nd ed.). New York:
Carrington, V. (2005). New textual landscapes, Falmer.
information and early literacy. In J. Marsh Gonzlez, N., Moll, L.C., & Amanti, C. (2005).
(Ed.), Popular culture, new media and digital lit- Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in house-
eracy in early childhood (pp. 1020). New York: holds, communities, and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ:
RoutledgeFalmer. Erlbaum.
Comber, B. (2010). Critical literacies in place: Green, B. (1998). The new literacy challenge?
Teachers who work for just and sustainable Literacy Learning: Secondary Thoughts, 7(1),
communities. In J. Lavia & M. Moore (Eds.), 3646.
I
n our radically interconnected world, with its global and digital flows of peo-
ple, capital, and information, texts can rapidly circulate far and wide, across
cultural, geographic, and linguistic borders. These texts require of those who
would communicate effectively the flexible capacity to make meaning across an
increasingly complex range of textual forms that integrate multiple semiotic mo-
dalities (Alvermann & McLean, 2007; Hull & Nelson, 2005; Leander & Lewis,
2008; Leu, 2000). These texts also require an ethical capacity to imagine ones
literate responsibilities as author and reader in a global world (Hull, Stornaiuolo,
& Sahni, 2010; Silverstone, 2007; Smith & Hull, 2012). Carrying their meanings
multimodally through language, sound, and image, these texts compel us to con-
sider how authorship and readership are shifting in a networked world. Indeed,
authors and audiences now interact in ways previously unimagined (Warschauer
& Grimes, 2007), as digital platforms increasingly include social media compo-
nents that facilitate rapid and widespread sharing, and communication regularly
requires interaction with audiences distant and unfamiliar.
In this chapter, we explore the new textuality of a digital and global age by
examining how adolescent youths around the world engaged in one kind of read-
ing practicereading an audiencewhereby they imagined projected readers
who were potentially different from themselves geographically, culturally, lin-
guistically, and ideologically. Our larger interest is in dimensions of authorship
that entail sensitivity to the range of possible interpretations and responses to
ones texts, as well as reflexive and hospitable dispositions toward a distant read-
ership. In effect, we wish to explore the ethics of literate practice in a global world.
Although concerns over audience have long been considered a central part
of the composing process (e.g., Ede & Lunsford, 1984), we suggest that relation-
ships between authors and audiences have now become more fluid, less bounded,
and ever more salient (Lunsford & Ede, 2009). No longer can we separate com-
posing from reading, if ever we could, nor can we assume the division of author
from audience in time and space. Instead, composing texts for online audiences
involves both imagining a reader of ones assembled artifacts and messages and
1208
interacting with that reader.1 Young peopleand indeed, all respondentswill
need to become adept at constructing projected readers and in communicating
and/or collaborating with those readers, particularly in transnational and inter-
cultural contexts that require imaginative authorial and readerly leaps across po-
tential geographic, linguistic, and ideological differences (cf. Appadurai, 1996).
Thoughtful authors and responsive audiences adept at moving between those
roles, we believe, are the quintessential literate identities of a global and digital
age (cf. Brandt, 2009).
We demonstrate in this chapter that the youths in our study who were most
adept at taking up these roles thoughtfully and artfully were highly strategic in
the ways that they did so. Further, we argue that such a capacity to be hospitable
readers and writers (cf. Silverstone, 2007)and to be able to be both simultane-
ouslyis an important ethical dimension of being literate in the 21st century (cf.
Coiro, 2012; James, 2009). While much of the ethical impulse around online com-
munication has arisen from concerns regarding bullying or privacy management
(cf. Davis, Katz, James, & Santo, 2010; Livingstone & Brake, 2010; Mishna, Cook,
Gadalla, Daciuk, & Solomon, 2010), we have found that interpersonal challenges
and opportunities to communicate and interact ethically were in fact deeply em-
bedded in small gestures of online communication: greetings, responses, the
design of online artifacts to share (Stornaiuolo, Hull, & Sahni, 2011). In this chap-
ter, we describe participants strategic moves in becoming audience-alert reader/
writers online, and in so doing, we also reveal the fortitude with which our young
people persisted in the face of daunting challengesa rhetorical and ethical
stance that is consistent with the practice of cosmopolitan citizenship in a global
age (cf. Hansen, 2011; Hull et al., 2010; Rizvi, 2009; Stornaiuolo, Hull, & Sahni,
2011).
a
Pseudonym of a 17-year-old girl from New York.
her readers: What do you think of my song? She also offered information about
herself in the right column, listing her hometown as bronx new york and writ-
ing about herself, in part: i love fashion an i love learning new things about
people an i am very friendly. And also love questions =).4 At the bottom of the
page (not visible in Figure 1), she posted a number of messages on her public wall.
By taking advantage of the opportunity to add written text in all of the possible
predetermined areas, Nakida presented herself as a welcoming interlocutorpro-
viding information that would help others find common ground with her, charac-
terizing herself as a friendly person who welcomed questions, and inviting others
to pursue a conversation with her.
The second way that participants could customize their profiles was via im-
age and color in three areas of the page: an avatar image, the background, and the
font color. On Nakidas page, for example, she added a close-up picture of herself
as her avatar image, editing it to add a white border that coordinated with the
white stripe in her scarf. She wallpapered the page with an image of a fashion
model on a runway, repeating the image in a checkerboard pattern across the
entire page. To contrast with the reds and pinks in the background image, she
chose a bold, navy blue font for the text. The final way that users could customize
their profile pages was by embedding other texts within the page. Students could
post four kinds of embedded texts: music, blogs, videos, and photos. For example,
Nakida posted a song to play as background music so that anytime someone came
hospitable texts was the overture approachregularly changing her status mes-
sages to invite others to talk to her and embedding media that reached out.
Like Nakida, we found that the 35 authors whose pages we examined used
these first two approaches the most often in creating open texts. Many students
also used a number of reciprocal strategies when interacting with others: answer-
ing questions, elaborating responses, and offering extensions, connections, and re-
pairs to keep conversations moving and maintain intersubjectivity. However, these
reciprocity strategies were not as widely used as strategies of designfulness and
overture, and only a handful of students took a reciprocity approach as their central
one. It is plausible that students engaged in fewer responsive strategies for a number
of reasons, the most salient being that it was difficult work to sustain a conversation
with unknown others across time zones, languages, and cultural and ideological
A Designfulness Approach:
Taking Advantage of Multimodal Resources
To explore the ways in which youths strategically mobilized semiotic resources
on the social network, we first turn to Nelson, an energetic and thoughtful eighth
grader, as the Space2Cre8 user who capitalized on the varied multimodal re-
sources of the network most vividly and frequently. An articulate 12-year-old boy,
Nelson was young for his eighth-grade class but a popular figure with kids of
all ages, on and off the network. Regularly sporting a wide grin and a sharp wit,
Nelson often bounded into the computer lab after school, dropping his backpack
on the ground and dramatically announcing, Im here! He had grown up his
whole life in West Oakland, an urban area in the East Bay of San Francisco, as an
only child who was part of an extended African American family living all around
the neighborhood. On Space2Cre8, Nelson was one of the most prolific and popu-
lar users, with hundreds of friends and numerous postings across the network. In
an early blog titled My Cool Life, he described himself:
My life is interesting. I am 12 years old and in the 8th Grade. I like to play video games
and I like to go out doors. Once, I hiked all day on the Castro Valley Mountains. I like
to play adventurous, shooting, and puzzling games. I like to play football, basketball,
and soccer. I am really good at basketball. I was on a team last year. (blog, 9/18/09)
This blog was posted on his profile page along with numerous other artifacts that
he layered there carefully. For Nelson, the profile page was his communicative
window into the networked space, and he spent a considerable amount of time
designing it.
a
Pseudonym of a 12-year-old boy from California.
In this message, he exhorted Colette to show herself via a personal photo, and
reciprocally, he regularly pointed people to his profile page to see pictures of him-
self. Interestingly, in this case, Nelsons preference for personal profile pictures
seems to have been activated through the coconstruction of resonance across con-
versational turns. Colette opened with a bid for authenticity (tell me your real
name), to which Nelson first affirmatively responded and then made a similar
authenticity bid (show a picture of yourself). Here in miniature, then, via a brief
sequence of turns, Nelson and Colette began to stipulate the ethical conditions
and commitments that would underpin their textual practices and friendship.
By coordinating the texts, images, and colors on his page to send a greet-
ing to people in the space of the network, Nelson designed his profile page as an
open text that invited others to make meaning with him. Through its carefully
choreographed design, his profile page as a whole created a sense of openness
that invited readers to make meaning across the images and texts. Whether oth-
ers responded to the use of his own photo, his greeting to the world, or his space
backgroundor ideally, all three working in concerthis audience was invited
to interact with someone who represented himself as a friendly and welcoming
interlocutor across different modalities. This strategy was very useful for com-
municating with others who spoke different languages, and Nelson was mindful
of building in multiple ways for his friends who spoke English as a second, third,
or fourth language to understand him.
Nelson used this strategy of synesthetic design in almost all of his interac-
tions on the network, not just his profile page. That is, he regularly used multiple
modes to invite others to read his work and to interact with him. Even in primar-
ily textual media like chat or private messages, Nelson incorporated emoticons or
emotive punctuation to amplify or provide nuance for his message. In his status,
for example, he added three exclamation marks to emphasize his greeting, and
in his chat with Colette, he used repeated question and exclamation marks to
both mirror her own textual enthusiasm and add affect to his messages. He also
regularly used emoticons, which the site converted to images in the chat window.
Nelson knew how to make all kinds of emoticons appear in chats, and people on-
and off-line regularly asked him what to type to generate the smiley face with sun-
glasses as well as other kinds of emoticons. Nelsons chat with 14-year-old Olina
in Norway was punctuated with many such emoticons from both participants,
and the following excerpt illustrates how Nelson used them not just to amplify
his message but also to complicate it:
a
Pseudonym of a 12-year-old boy from California.
a
Pseudonym of a 13-year-old girl from Norway.
In this iteration of her profile page, Nadra still attended to the synesthetic aspects
of the design (e.g., matching the colors of the flower and font) and continued to
invite readers to connect with her through popular culture, music, language, or
a
Pseudonym of a 13-year-old girl from Norway.
Bhakti assumed that her readers would be interested in the details of her
everyday life, such as the time her school day began and her grade level, as well
as her feelings about these things. By sharing her struggles and her hopes and
dreams, Bhakti displayed an orientation toward others as potentially caring
friends, ones worthy of her confidence and trust. In all of her postings online,
she adopted this stance toward others, frequently asking others to be friends and
sharing sometimes intimate parts of her life in the hopes that her interlocutors
would do the same.
In addition to representing herself as an open and trustworthy person through
her personal sharing, Bhakti signaled friendly intent by incorporating messages
of welcome in every posting across the site. She regularly infused her messages
with deep care for and awareness of her audience, writing status messages like
I LOVE YOU ALL and hi!!!everybody and posting regular greetings to visitors
to her page with wall posts like hello every one how are you i miss you all. These
postings conveyed a sense of openness to others through both her message (e.g.,
love, care) as well as her orthographic choices (e.g., capital letters, multiple
exclamation points). Furthermore, she characterized her audience as members of
a collective community (e.g., everybody, you all), which positioned them in
relationship with her and with one another. She wrote frequent messages like the
following, posted on her wall for everyone who came to her page to read:
hello everyone how you all and how is going your kidnet class i miss you all . and
what you all are doing at this time ? after 2 month ago what you all do and how you
all sped your holidays. m...well i went to my grand mother house and there i was
spend my holidays and enjoyed so many thing . and after i came to my house sud-
denly i join.this is companys name where i work. right now i am doing job so i
dont have time to spend to our kidnet class . i miss my all kidnet class. this time i
am feeling so bad . but there is problems so i need to do that .because this time i have
so many problems at my home reply me soon about your holidays.
Anyone in the community who read this posting could be part of the you
all she addressed here, as she solicited her readers advice about her conflict in
working instead of attending the Kidnet classes. In addition to addressing readers
directly, she inquired about them as well, reciprocally asking them to reply me
soon about how they spent their holidays. She spoke to her readers as members
of a community whom she had missed, inviting them to interact with her in the
role of concerned friend. Through her strategic positioning, Bhakti framed her-
self and her readers as reciprocal members of a supportive community, roles that
readers often took up.
Notes
We gratefully acknowledge the support given the larger project from which this chapter grew:
the Spencer Foundation; the UC Links project of the University of California; the Graduate
School of Education at the University of California, Berkeley; and the Steinhard School of
Culture, Education and Human Development at New York University. Special thanks are due
Lauren Jones Young, P. David Pearson, and Mike Wood, whose considerable early assistance
with and belief in the work made all that followed possible. We also acknowledge the members
of the research, development, and teaching team of the Kidnet project: Anand Chitravanshi,
Ola Erstad, Anna Floch, Matthew Hall, Adrienne Herd, Jennifer Higgs, Suenel Holloway, Garth
Jones, Gary Jones, Stacy Marple, Mark Nelson, Urvashi Sahni, John Scott, Kenneth Silseth,
Anna Smith, Xolani Tembu, Sean Turner, Kristin Beate Vasb, Tracie Wallace, Duncan Winter,
and Rian Whittle.
We refer here to interacting with the reader in a literal sensethat is, the actual exchange
1
between author and audience. Such an exchange does not negate the anticipated interaction
that the writer had imagined and encoded in the text, but rather builds on it. In fact, in the
actual exchange between reader and writer, the reader can variously reject, negotiate, subvert,
or ratify the position and interpretive actions that the writer had projected.
The philosophical construct of hospitality has a long lineage: Kants (1983) work from the
2
period of 17841795, Levinas (1969), Arendt (1998), and Derrida (1999, 2001). Among con-
temporary theorists, Silverstone (2003, 2007) has used hospitality quite powerfully to frame
the moral challenge of living in an age of media saturation and radical connectivity (see also
Chouliaraki & Orgad, 2011). In other work (Hull & Stornaiuolo, 2012), we have followed
Silverstone in linking hospitality to the related construct of proper distance to theorize the
challenges of interacting with mediated others. In that work, as in the present chapter, our
interest was in exploring the digital, literate entailments of hospitable dispositions and habits
of mind.
All names of individuals and schools are pseudonyms. In the screenshots reproduced in this
3
on the network and used the postings as learning moments, the students were free to use any
R eferences
Alvermann, D.E., & McLean, C.A. (2007). The Connections in and out of school (pp. 111153).
nature of literacies. In L.S. Rush, J. Eakle, & A. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Berger (Eds.), Secondary school literacy: What re- Chandler-Olcott, K., & Mahar, D. (2003). Tech-
search reveals for classroom practice (pp. 120). savviness meets multiliteracies: Exploring
Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of adolescent girls technology-mediated literacy
English. practices. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(3),
Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: Cultural 356385. doi:10.1598/RRQ.38.3.3
dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis: Univer- Chouliaraki, L., & Orgad, S. (2011). Proper dis-
sity of Minnesota Press. tance: Mediation, ethics, otherness. International
Arendt, H. (1998). The human condition (2nd ed.). Journal of Cultural Studies, 14(4), 341345.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press. doi:10.1177/1367877911403245
Bakhtin, M.M. (1981). Discourse in the novel. In Coiro, J. (2012). Understanding dispositions toward
M. Holquist (Ed.), The dialogic imagination: Four reading on the Internet. Journal of Adolescent &
essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.; pp. Adult Literacy, 55(7), 645648. doi:10.1002/
259422). Austin: University of Texas Press. JAAL.00077
Bakhtin, M.M. (1986). Speech genres and other late Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the on-
essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Eds.; V.W. line reading comprehension strategies used by
McGee, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and
Press. locate information on the Internet. Reading
Beach, R., & Doerr-Stevens, C. (2011). Using so- Research Quarterly, 42(2), 214257. doi:10.1598/
cial networking for online role-plays to develop RRQ.42.2.2
students argumentative strategies. Journal of Das, R. (2011). Converging perspectives in audi-
Educational Computing Research, 45(2), 165181. ence studies and digital literacies: Youthful
Beach, R., Hull, G., & OBrien, D. (2011).
interpretations of an online genre. European
Transforming English language arts in a Web 2.0
Journal of Communication, 26(4), 343360.
world. In D. Lapp & D. Fisher (Eds.), Handbook
doi:10.1177/0267323111423379
of research on teaching the English language arts
Davis, K., Katz, S., James, C., & Santo, R. (2010).
(3rd ed., pp. 161167). New York: Routledge.
Fostering cross-generational dialogues about
Bearne, E. (2009). Multimodality, literacy
the ethics of online life. The Journal of Media
and texts: Developing a discourse. Journal
Literacy Education, 2(2), 124150.
of Early Childhood Literacy, 9(2), 156187.
doi:10.1177/1468798409105585 DePew, K.E. (2011). Social media at academias
Bezemer, J., & Kress, G. (2008). Writing in multi- periphery: Studying multilingual writers Face-
modal texts: A social semiotic account of designs book composing strategies. Reading Matrix,
for learning. Written Communication, 25(2), 166 11(1), 5475.
195. doi:10.1177/0741088307313177 Derrida, J. (1999). Hospitality, justice and respon-
Black, R.W. (2009). Online fan fiction, global iden- sibility: A dialogue with Jacques Derrida. In R.
tities, and imagination. Research in the Teaching Kearney & M. Dooley (Eds.), Questioning ethics:
of English, 43(4), 397425. Contemporary debates in philosophy (pp. 6583).
Bogdan, R.C., & Biklen, S.K. (2007). Qualitative New York: Routledge.
research for education: An introduction to theo- Derrida, J. (2001). On cosmopolitanism and forgive-
ries and methods (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson ness (M. Dooley & M. Hughes, Trans.). New
Education. York: Routledge.
Brandt, D. (2009). Writing over reading: New di- Dowdall, C. (2009). Impressions, improvisations
rections in mass literacy. In M. Baynham & M. and compositions: Reframing childrens text pro-
Prinsloo (Eds.), The future of literacy studies (pp. duction in social network sites. Literacy, 43(2),
5474). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 9199. doi:10.1111/j.1741-4369.2009.00521.x
Burke, A., & Rowsell, J. (2008). Screen peda- Du Bois, J.W. (2007). The stance triangle. In R.
gogy: Challenging perceptions of digital read- Englebretson (Ed.), Stancetaking in discourse:
ing practice. Changing English, 15(4), 445456. Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction (pp. 139
doi:10.1080/13586840802493092 182). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Castek, J., Leu, D.J., Coiro, J., Gort, M., Henry, L.A., Eco, U. (1979). The role of the reader: Explorations
& Lima, C.O. (2008). Developing new literacies in the semiotics of text. Bloomington: Indiana
among multilingual learners in the elementary University Press.
grades. In L.L. Parker (Ed.), Technology-mediated Ede, L., & Lunsford, A. (1984). Audience ad-
learning environments for young English learners: dressed/audience invoked: The role of audience
T
he purpose of this chapter is to examine the issue of 21st-century skills,
focusing specifically on cultural, linguistic, and motivational aspects. The
chapter begins with the current context and then moves to a focus on how
current developments are likely to shape and modify educational practice, with
a particular focus on literacy. A discussion follows about what we have learned
from the 20th century related to these issues and focuses on the educational ex-
periences and outcomes of students from diverse language and cultural back-
grounds and the ways that schools have addressed these concerns. The chapter
then moves to a focus on addressing the needs of these students from a research
and policy perspective, both in terms of what has been done and what might
need to be different. Given the focus of this volume, the focus is on literacy, al-
though, as argued later in the chapter, the divisions between cognitive, affective,
and social dimensions of language, literacy, and learning are less pronounced and
important than once thought.
1241
These changes have been marked, since the last half of the 20th century,
by changes in the industrial economy based on manufacturing, which has now
shifted to a service economy driven by information, knowledge, and innovation.
Scholars in business and economics have documented the nature of this shift.
For example, in 1967, the production of material goods (e.g., automobiles, chemi-
cals, industrial equipment) and delivery of material services (e.g., transportation,
construction, retail) accounted for nearly 54% of the U.S. economic output. By
the beginning of the 21st century, information services grew from 36% to 56%
of the economy (Apte, Karmarkar, & Nath, 2008; Karmarkar & Apte, 2007).
Of course, technology will play no small part in this continuing and dramatic
change. Already, student use of computers to find information has been growing
exponentially: 94% of students now use the Internet for at least some portion of
their writing assignments for school (Lenhart, Arafeh, Smith, & Macgill, 2008).
Although routine cognitive work and routine manual labor jobs were prevalent
in the last several decades, these are the exact types of tasks that are easiest to
automate with computers. Thus, jobs will increasingly emphasize expert think-
ing and complex communication for ill-structured problems, the kind which are
more difficult for computers to handle (Levy & Murnane, 2004).
One important consideration that overlays this entire discussion and the is-
sues raised in the remainder of the chapter is the issue of curriculum control and
the purpose of education. Who or what should drive educational priorities? Is the
purpose of schooling to serve as a simple training camp for industrial and corpo-
rate purposes? Or is the purpose a broader one that involves producing critical
thinkers who are informed, self-regulated learners who are active and engaged
citizens and community members? Is there a danger in shifting all educational
priorities to fit corporate needs? How will the issue of privatization play in to the
preparation of both teachers and students? What implications does this have for
the diverse students who make up an increasingly large component of the U.S.
population? As Dede (2010) notes, the primary barriers to altering curricular,
pedagogical, and assessment practices are not conceptual, technical, or economic,
but instead psychological, political, and cultural. These lenses should be kept in
mind as the chapter unfolds, and the implications for teachers, students, and the
larger society should be considered.
Interesting, at the same time that the shifts noted above are occurring, major
changes in the makeup of the U.S. population are occurring as well. These are
briefly summarized next.
1242 Rueda
because more than half of all children will be from minority groups by
2023.
I t is projected that by 2030, the point at which baby boomers will be at least
65, they will compose about 20% of the population, more than doubling the
2008 number of 38.7 million.
T
he population that is 85 and older will increase at an even faster rate, more
than tripling by 2050 from 5.4 million in 2008.
B
y 2049, the U.S. population is expected to reach over 400 million, and
minorities will compose about 236 million of that total.
T
here will only be a slight change in the non-Hispanic, single-race white
population between the present time and 2050 (203.3 million vs. 199.8 mil-
lion). It is expected that this group will lose about 20% of the total popula-
tion share, dropping from 66% (the current level) to about 46%.
B
etween now and 2050, the Hispanic population will nearly triple from the
current level of 46.7 million, approximately doubling their percentage of
the total population to 30% of the total. More than one-third of the popula-
tion is expected to be Hispanic.
T
he black population will increase only slightly by 2050, from 14% (41.1
million currently) to 15% (65.7 million).
A
sian Americans will almost double their percentage of the total popula-
tion (from 5.1% to 9.2%), and their actual numbers will increase from 15.5
million to 40.6 million.
G
roups that make up a smaller percentage of the total population, such as
American and Alaskan Indians, will only increase slightly (from 1.6% to 2%
of the total population). Similarly, native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders
will more than double in number from 1.1 million to 2.6 million.
A
n interesting demographic phenomenon is the growth of mixed-race
Americans, who will more than triple their current number of 5.2 million.
T
he population composition of children is changing as well. About two-
thirds of the children will be from minority groups, an increase from the
current level of 44%. The percentage of Hispanics in this group will in-
crease from 22% now to 39% in 2050, while white children will decrease
from 56% now to 38% then.
B
y 2050, about 55% of the working age population will be minority, up from
the current level of 34%. About a third of this group will be Hispanic, about
15% will be black, and about 10% will be Asian American (Campbell, 1996;
U.S. Census Bureau, 2008; Vincent & Velkoff, 2010).
Language differences are a big factor in these changes as well. The number of
school-age children (ages 517) who speak a language other than English at home
more than doubled their percentage of the population from 10% to 21% in the
three-decade span between 1980 and 2009 (Aud et al., 2011).
1244 Rueda
the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD; 2005).
There are other groups and individuals who have tried to explicate needed skills
and competencies in ICT specifically, including the revised ISTE (International
Society for Technology in Education; 2000) student standards for technology
in the curriculum, as well as digital literacy standards from the International
ICT Literacy Panel (2002). In addition to organizations, individual scholars such
as Dede (2005) have also formulated lists of literate skills for technology, apart
from traditional reading, writing, and mathematics, as essential skills for the
21st century. Although a complete examination and analysis of all of these major
frameworks is beyond the scope of this chapter, Dede (2010) provided a thorough
comparison of these frameworks; in his thoughtful analysis, Dede concluded that
there is significant overlap and consistency in the various frameworks. However,
he also found that there are some differences, especially in those frameworks that
are for education at all levels (from preschool through college) and those focused
on business and industry. For example, business and industry frameworks in-
clude things such as students acting autonomously and student risk taking, which
are not always stressed in most school curricula.
It is clear that the competencies demanded by employers and civic partici-
pation alike in the 21st century are and will be expanding to include abilities
that are more interpersonal, as opposed to individual, in nature. Although indi-
vidual skills such as reading, writing, computation, and information processing
will be demanded at more complex levels (e.g., Carnegie Council on Advancing
Adolescent Literacy, 2010), social competencies such as collaboration, adapt-
ability, and oral communication will be increasingly required in the contexts in
which those skills are applied as well (Wagner, 2008). The frameworks noted are
consistent in emphasizing that ICT and technological literacy are at the core of
21st-century skills, as the rapid development of ICT requires a whole new set of
competencies related to ICT. Taken as a whole, the frameworks draw on ICT de-
mands as an argument for the need of 21st-century skills, but they also consider
ICT as a tool that can support the acquisition and assessment of these skills.
New Literacies
In addition to the frameworks noted that focus on 21st-century skills in general,
a parallel area of work has focused on the literacy aspects of 21st-century skills
in the context of changing technology. Several authors argue that the Internet
and all the dynamically changing uses and products are the defining technology
for literacy and learning, and the backdrop for the range of 21st-century skills.
As part of this change, the medium of literacy is beginning to change from the
printed page to the electronic screen. Much of the thinking of the nature and
implications of these changes is found in what has come to be called new lit-
eracies. However, even though there is a single label, there are many different
perspectives under this umbrella, as Leu, McVerry, and colleagues (2009) have
noted. These authors point out that some scholars focus on new social practices
from a critical theory approach (Street, 2003), while others (Gee, 2003) focus on
In spite of the lack of consensus on the exact definition or focus of new lit-
eracies work, recent reviews (Coiro, Knobel, Lankshear, & Leu, 2008; Leu et al.,
2007) have observed that most of the new literacies research is consistent in four
aspects:
1. New literacies include the new skills, strategies, dispositions, and so-
cial practices that are required by new technologies for information and
communication.
2. New literacies are central to full participation in a global community.
3. New literacies regularly change as their defining technologies change.
4. New literacies are multifaceted, and our understanding of them benefits
from multiple points of view.
Recently, some scholars have attempted to refine the notion of new literacies
by proposing a new literacies theory (Coiro et al., 2008; Leu, Kinzer, et al., 2004;
Leu, OByrne, Zawilinski, McVerry, & Everett-Cacopardo, 2009). These authors
suggest that the Internet is not a technology issue, as it is commonly viewed,
but rather a context in which literate skills are displayed and constructed. These
continually developing contexts and associated activities include a range such as
personal blogs, the strategic use of search engines to solve everyday problems or
answer questions, e-mail, online gaming, podcasting, videocasting, photoshar-
ing, shopping, chatting, and social networking sites.
1246 Rueda
This emerging theoretical framework includes two levels: an uppercase New
Literacies and a lowercase new literacies. The capitalized New Literacies encom-
passes the broader and more inclusive framework, which is fed by the more spe-
cific work in a narrow area. The lowercase new literacies approach is exemplified
in the active work on the narrower topic of reading comprehension in online en-
vironments by Leu and collaborators (Leu et al., 2007, 2011). These authors have
argued that while the reading and literacy field has continued to focus on the key
dimensions of phonemic awareness, decoding (phonics), fluency, vocabulary, and
comprehension, the very nature of reading itself is changing and that online and
print-based comprehension is not always equivalent. Interestingly, the RAND re-
port on reading that has been so influential in research, policy, and practice does
not focus on this dimension (RAND Reading Study Group, 2002).
As one example, Leu et al. (2007) found no significant correlation, among
seventh-grade students, between performance on a measure of offline reading
comprehension and a measure of online reading comprehension for adolescents,
using a blog to provide prompts and record responses. Coiro (2007) has found
that knowing a students online reading ability adds significantly to predicting
performance on another online reading task, over and above knowing their off
line reading ability and prior knowledge of the topic. The basic argument is that
these new environments demand not only extensions of existing skills but also
new skills; yet, to date, it appears that little attention is given to these new skills
in most classrooms or assessments (Madden, Ford, Miller, & Levy, 2005).
Coiro (2007) has found at least five different types of evaluation that occur
during online reading comprehension:
1. Evaluating understanding: Does it make sense to me?
2. Evaluating relevancy: Does it meet my needs?
3. Evaluating accuracy: Can I verify it with another reliable source?
4. Evaluating reliability: Can I trust it?
5. Evaluating bias: How does the author shape it?
This list suggests that there may be only a partial overlap with traditional reading
comprehension skills. Leu (2006) and Leu et al. (2011) have argued that the lack
of attention to these critical skills in schools is especially problematic for those
students who have the least access to the Internet or other technologies at home.
In sum, there is wide agreement that the social and economic context is rap-
idly changing, that some existing skills will be much more important than be-
fore, and that some new skills will receive more emphasis than in the past. The
fundamental nature of the social contexts and social practices in which cognitive
skills in general, but in literacy specifically, will be used will be different than in
the past. Technology, especially the Internet, is a driving force and, at the same
time, is itself characterized by dynamic change. It is clear that expertise in these
areas will be required to assure participation in local as well as global networks
and communities.
1248 Rueda
gaps, namely, the existence of two distinct achievement gaps: a high/low achieve-
ment gap and a global achievement gap. The high/low gap is primarily due to
systematic and long-standing differences among U.S. subgroups.
These differences cut across the important content areas of math and read-
ing. In the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in math-
ematics, 384,200 U.S. students in grades 4 (209,000) and 8 (175,200) were tested
(National Center for Education Statistics, 2011a). Of the fourth graders, 52% of
white students scored in the proficient or advanced performance bands. However,
only 24% of Hispanic students and 17% of black students scored in these bands.
For grade 8, 44% of white students scored in the proficient or advanced perfor-
mance bands, whereas only 21% of Hispanic students and 14% of black students
scored in these bands. In a similar vein, the scale score difference between stu-
dents not eligible for free or reduced-priced lunches and those who were was
24 points for grade 4 and 29 points for grade 8 (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2011a).
In the 2011 NAEP in reading, 381,300 U.S. students in grades 4 (213,100)
and 8 (168,200) were tested (National Center for Education Statistics, 2011b). Of
the fourth graders, 44% of white students scored in the proficient or advanced
performance bands. However, only 19% of Hispanic students and 16% of black
students scored in these bands. Of the eighth graders, 44% of white students
scored in the proficient or advanced performance bands, whereas only 21% of
Hispanic students and 14% of black students scored in these bands. For grade 8,
43% of white students scored in the proficient or advanced performance bands,
whereas only 19% of Hispanic students and 15% of black students scored in these
bands. In terms of socioeconomic differences, the scale score difference between
students not eligible for free or reduced-priced lunches and those who were was
29 points for grade 4 and 25 points for grade 8 (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2011b). Similar patterns to those described for ethnicity/race and family
income levels are found for eighth graders in the area of science (National Center
for Education Statistics, 2012) and for eighth and 12th graders in writing (Salahu-
Din, Persky, & Miller, 2008) from the 2007 assessments.
There is also what has been termed a global gap related to comparisons be-
tween top-performing students in the United States and those in international
settings. This suggests that the achievement issues just noted are more apparent
with students of color but go beyond specific ethnic or racial subgroups. The
main pattern is that the United States is not doing well as compared with other
countries. Evidence for this is found in data from international assessments such
as TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study), which is a
periodic set of assessments in mathematics and science in four-year cycles. In the
results from the 2003 administration of this measure, the United States ranked
above the international average but ranked only 15th of 46 countries in grade 8
mathematics and 12th of 25 countries in grade 4 mathematics. In science, the
United States ranked 9th of 45 countries at the eighth-grade level and 6th of 25
1250 Rueda
Figure 1. Percentage of Children in Nursery School and Students in
Grades K12 Using Computers at Home and at School in 2003
(a)
Percent
100
86 88
84 82 84 84
78
75 72
Home
55
50 School
35
25
0
Less than High Some Bachelors Graduate
high school school college degree education
credential credential
Parent educational attainment
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey (CPS), October 2003.
(b)
Percent
100
86 88
81 80 84 86
80
75 71
Home
55
50 School
37
25
0
Under $20,000 $35,000 $50,000 $75,000
$20,000 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 or more
Family income
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey (CPS), October 2003.
(continued)
(c)
Percent
100
85 82 83 86
78 80 79
74 74
75
Home
48 46 School
50 43
25
0
White Hisp. Black Asian Amer. More than
Indian one race
Race/ethnicity
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey (CPS), October 2003.
Note. From Computer and Internet Use by Students in 2003 (NCES 2006065, pp. 16 and 17), by
M. DeBell and C. Chapman, 2006, Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics,
Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
differences have largely disappeared for students but that home-based differences
exist, and some of the key patterns are tied to various sociocultural variables
(DeBell & Chapman, 2005, 2006). Table 1 indicates the nature of some of these
patterns. One general pattern is that computer use is relatively high across all
groups, whether examined by students grade level, gender, race/ethnicity, physi-
cal disability status, school size, parental education, household type, language,
poverty status, income level, or urban/rural location. In all cases, computer usage
is 80% or above, with the highest percentage characterizing 12th-grade students
(97%).
There are significant differences, however, when these same categories de-
scribe Internet use. The percentage of computer users relative to Internet users
is higher across all categories, but there are big differences within some of the
categories. For example, 67% of whites use the Internet, whereas only 44% of
Hispanics and 47% of blacks do. Also, parental education is a factor: Only 37%
of students whose parent does not have a high school education use the Internet,
whereas the figure is 73% if the parent has some graduate education. Some of the
more striking differences are related to home language, poverty status, and fam-
ily income level. The percentage of Internet users where Spanish is spoken is 28%
1252 Rueda
Table 1. Percentage of Children in Nursery School and Students in
Grades K12 Who Use Computers and the Internet, by Student and
Family/Household Characteristics: 2003
Percent Using Percent Using
Number Computers the Internet
of Students Standard Standard
Characteristic (in thousandths) Percent Error Percent Error
Total 58,273 91 0.3 59 0.4
Student Characteristic
Grade level
Nursery school 4,928 66 1.5 23 1.3
Kindergarten 3,719 80 1.4 32 1.7
15 20,043 91 0.4 50 0.8
68 12,522 95 0.4 70 0.9
912 17,062 97 0.3 79 0.7
Sex
Female 28,269 91 0.4 61 0.6
Male 30,005 91 0.4 58 0.6
Race/ethnicity1
White 35,145 93 0.3 67 0.5
Hispanic 10,215 85 1.2 44 1.7
Black 8,875 86 0.9 47 1.4
Asian 2,293 91 1.6 58 2.7
American Indian 346 86 4.8 47 7.0
More than one race 1,400 92 1.9 65 3.3
Physical disability status
Disabled 646 82 3.3 49 4.3
Not disabled 47,949 91 0.3 61 0.5
School enrollment
Public 50,653 91 0.3 60 0.5
Private 7,620 86 0.8 54 1.2
Family and Household Characteristic
Parent educational attainment
Less than high school 5,691 82 1.1 37 1.4
credential
High school credential 13,804 89 0.6 54 0.9
Some college 16,548 93 0.4 63 0.8
Bachelors degree 8,590 92 0.6 67 1.1
Graduate education 10,713 95 0.5 73 0.9
Family/household type
Two-parent married 40,987 92 0.3 62 0.5
household
Male householder 3,129 90 1.2 55 1.9
Female householder 13,463 89 0.6 52 0.9
Other arrangement 694 89 2.6 55 4.1
(continued)
compared with 61% where Spanish is not spoken. With respect to poverty status,
the figures are 66% for those students who do not live in poverty versus 40% for
those who do. There are also dramatic effects associated with income level. The
percentage of users is 41% for those from families with incomes under $20,000
and 75% for those from families with incomes of $75,000 and over. These differ-
ences are important because the Internet significantly extends the power of the
computer to communicate and access information (DeBell & Chapman, 2005,
2006).
Outside-of-school technology use and access is complex and interesting as
well. For example, type of technology is important because access to some forms
of technology seems to be equalizing among different ethnic and racial groups.
There are indications that the between-group differences seen in other areas seem
to have dissipated when examining laptop ownership. For example, 55% of whites
1254 Rueda
own laptops, compared with 51% of blacks and 54% of Hispanics. There is also
evidence that black and English-speaking Hispanics are active users of the Web
for a variety of purposes through the use of cell phones. Interesting, cell phone
ownership is greater for Hispanics and blacks (87% of each group) compared with
whites (80%; Smith, 2010). Moreover, the first two groups use cell phones more
often than whites for communicative purposes, such as sending e-mail, sending
and receiving text messages or instant messages, or accessing the Web. Blacks
and Hispanics also use cell phones more often than whites do for recreational or
personal uses, such as playing a game, recording a video, playing music, using a
social networking site, or watching a video (Smith, 2010).
These patterns have led to questions about the effects and consequences re-
lated to how the technology is used. As the previous paragraph suggests, there is
some suggestion (Washington, 2011) that recreational and social use is greater
among minority youths than other groups. Thus, some have pointed out that
these uses of technology are not those that might further academic goals or serve
to reduce academic inequities. This is no hard evidence related to the possible
consequences of this pattern, but it is an issue that deserves attention. It is reason-
able to expect that technology, like other cultural tools, will be actively adapted to
different ecocultural niches in ways that make sense to those who occupy them.
There is no guarantee that all the things that technology may afford will be ap-
propriated in all cases.
In sum, there are reasons to be cautious about the information just presented.
There is increasing diversity along several dimensions, continuing and systematic
achievement differences, and a changing world context that will demand new and
more complex skills. Given that achievement differences continue to exist, it is
fair to say that current approaches have not been entirely successful in address-
ing gaps in traditional literacy skills for diverse students. What is the likelihood
that new and more complex skills will be addressed in a more favorable fashion?
In light of anticipated changes, there is a very real danger that students of color
and from low-income families face the threat of a double deficit, with differences
continuing to surface not only in traditional literacy but also in the literate skills
required in the 21st-century workplace.
Instructional Considerations
Although considerable investment has been made in improving literacy instruc-
tion, as noted previously, as of yet there is little that systematically targets the
instruction of specialized knowledge, such as online reading comprehension
and other new skills. The problem is that research in this area is in its infancy
(Leu, McVerry, et al., 2009), especially for students of color (Castek et al., 2007;
Parker, 2007). These and other authors have suggested that socially mediated and
inquiry-based experiences may be especially useful as instructional models are
developed for teaching the new literacies of online reading comprehension (Leu,
Leu, & Coiro, 2004). Unfortunately, these are the kinds of educational experi-
ences that underachieving students have traditionally received in lesser amounts.
With respect to students who are English learners, there have been several
attempts to synthesize the general findings regarding literacy instruction (August
& Shanahan, 2006; Genesee, Lindholm-Leary, Saunders, & Christian, 2006;
Goldenberg, 2006, 2011; Goldenberg & Coleman, 2010; Rolstad, Mahoney, &
Glass, 2005; Slavin & Cheung, 2005). There is relative agreement about the gener-
alization that teaching students to read in the primary language promotes higher
levels of reading in English, but that when taught in English, students require ad-
ditional supports (e.g., clarifications, explanations, instructing the strategic use
of cognates to aid work-attack skills and comprehension) primarily because of
low English proficiency. Although these patterns likely hold for the instruction of
21st-century skills and new literacies, the research in this area is nonexistent. An
additional issue for English learners is that although additive and first-language
learning approaches have been recommended by many researchers in the field,
there is an increasing tendency to eliminate or reduce these types of programs in
1256 Rueda
favor of English-only and related restrictive language policies, with scarce theo-
retical or empirical justification (August, Goldenberg, & Rueda, 2010).
An interesting debate in the instructional literature focused on students of
color is related to the question of universality of practices and approaches. That is,
is good instruction universally applicable, or do certain groups of students profit
from instruction tailored to meet their unique cultural frameworks and practices
(Tharp, 1989)? While authorities in the 1960s and 1970s often considered student
cultural and language differences as deficits, more recent work has come to view
these as assets to be used in designing instruction (Gonzlez et al., 2005; C. Lee,
2007), often lumped under the label of culturally responsive instruction. While
a variety of intriguing approaches have been described in the literature, a re-
cent review (August & Shanahan, 2006) has found a lack of systematic evidence,
primarily because the issue has not been well studied, not because it has been
systematically and extensively studied and found not to work. Rueda (2011) has
discussed the cognitive and motivational considerations as they might influence
future work in this area.
Rueda (2006) has noted that there have been important shifts related to how
cultural issues have been treated in the literature. From the 1960s through the
1980s, as compared with the current context, for example, the consideration of
culture in the research and writing in the areas of reading and literacy has changed
from minimal treatment to more substantial treatment; from being viewed as a
minor topic to a central topic; from a deficit to an instructional resource; from
a focus on differences to a focus on access; from a focus on school primarily to a
focus on school, home, and community; from a single literacy to multiple litera-
cies; from a view of universal processes to a view of situated processes; and from
a focus on cultural matching of teachers and students and increasing awareness
and sensitivity to cultural modeling and other uses of funds of knowledge. Given
the goals of this chapter, it is useful to think about a third column: what will it
be like with 21st-century skills? How will this shift in the next few years given
all the changes detailed earlier in this chapter? It will be important to devote at-
tention to these issues from both a research and a policy perspective, as cultural
factors and differences will be important mediators for the acquisition and use of
21st-century skills and new literacies.
1258 Rueda
The large-scale, high-stakes tests used to support accountability have been
criticized for being overly narrow in content, lacking a match with curricula and
instruction, neglecting higher order thinking skills, and having limited response
formats. However, Leu, OByrne, and colleagues (2009) have noted an additional
problem, notably that current assessments do not address new competencies such
as online reading comprehension. Schools, especially the lowest achieving ones,
are under tremendous pressure to raise scores and often tend to respond to teach-
ing what the tests measure in a narrow fashion, thus de-emphasizing higher or-
der and technology-related literacy skills. Thus, schools may be replicating the
oft-noted pattern that those who require the most receive the least. Whether or
not assessments continue to drive curricula in this way, there needs to be consid-
eration given to a closer link to the changing nature of real-world and workplace
skills and the content and formats of assessments.
1260 Rueda
Motivational Considerations
In a comprehensive review of current work and issues in motivation, Pintrich
(2003) outlines key motivational generalizations based on current research and
theory:
Adaptive self-efficacy and competence beliefs motivate students.
Adaptive attributions and control beliefs motivate students.
Higher levels of interest and intrinsic motivation motivates students.
Higher levels of value motivate students.
Goals motivate and direct students. (p. 672)
How will these affective dimensions play out for teachers and students from
diverse backgrounds as they confront the teaching and learning of new skills
and abilities surrounding 21st-century skills? In the past, work on learning and
motivation has been seen as separate research areas, but more and more they are
being seen as part of an integrated whole, and hot cognition has replaced the view
of thinking as a cold, unfeeling set of mental processes.
When one considers that active choice, persistence, and effort are key indica-
tors of motivation (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008), it is striking to consider
the multitude of educational issues that fall within this scope in urban schools.
On the part of students, consider the issues of dropout rates, low levels of engage-
ment, failure to complete assignments, choosing the wrong peer group, lack of
clear goals, low interest, and so forth. Additionally, for teachers in urban schools,
consider the low rates of persistence in the profession, burnout rates, and other
concerns. What will be needed to engage an increasingly diverse group of stu-
dents in mastering new and more complex sets of skills than had been required
in the past?
Although the research is not yet well developed, as noted earlier, it has been
hypothesized that culturally compatible instruction and culturally responsive
learning environments and materials can have a significant impact on key mo-
tivational variables and thus mediate student participation in ways that help (or
hinder) their reading and comprehension and ultimately achievement. Certainly,
much of the descriptive research on cultural factors describes increased student
engagement as a product of culturally compatible teaching (Au & Mason, 1981;
Goldenberg, Rueda, & August, 2006). Although engagement is not necessarily
the same as achievement, fostering engagement is not a trivial concern. There
is, in fact, a robust literature from a reading engagement perspective (Guthrie
& Wigfield, 2000) that has explored the motivational dimensions of reading
and demonstrated the connection between reading engagement and reading out-
comes. It is well established that mental effort is associated with motivational
beliefs such as interest (Salomon, 1984) and that academic engagement and
other achievement-related behaviors are associated with measured achievement
(Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004) and reading comprehension in particular
(Guthrie et al., 2004, 2006).
Conclusion
The consideration of 21st-century skills in the context of reading and literacy
provides an interesting challenge to the field by presenting some interesting
paradoxes:
The most rapidly increasing groups are those who are least likely to get the
educational experiences that prepare them for future challenges.
Although literacy is often included in the discussion regarding future edu-
cational considerations, it is often framed narrowly around technological
literacy, at the risk of downplaying broader considerations related to lit-
eracy education and a wide range of literate cultural practices.
In an increasingly global context, the ability to speak and write and read
in more than one language will be increasingly important, yet the cur-
rent trend in many schools across the country is to promote restrictive
language and immigration practices and policies, including English-only
approaches.
Motivation (for students and teachers) is rarely emphasized in conversa-
tions around 21st-century skills, although it is critical for learning in gen-
eral and for literacy specifically and may be especially important for the
outcomes of the groups who are the focus of this chapter.
1262 Rueda
QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION
1. Rueda brings up an ongoing debate about the purposes of education and the
control of curriculum. Where do you weigh in on this debate?
2. What kinds of assessments might be used to determine a students online
reading ability as described by the author?
3. What can schools of education do to prepare teachers to work with linguisti-
cally and culturally diverse student populations?
R eferences
Abelmann, C., & Elmore, R. (with Even, J., Kenyon, replace English language development? Bilingual
S., & Marshall, J.). (1999). When accountability Research Journal, 30(1), 121. doi:10.1080/15235
knocks, will anyone answer? (CPRE Research 882.2006.10162863
Report No. RR-42). Philadelphia: Consortium Campbell, P.R. (1996). Population projections for
for Policy Research in Education, University of states by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin: 1995
Pennsylvania. to 2050. Washington, DC: Population Division,
Apte, U.M., Karmarkar, U.S., & Nath, H.K. (2008). U.S. Bureau of the Census..
Information services in the U.S. economy: Value, Capps, R., Fix, M., Murray, J., Ost, J., Passel, J.S.,
jobs, and management implications. California & Herwantoro, S. (2005). The new demography
Management Review, 50(3), 1230. of Americas schools: Immigration and the No
Association of American Colleges and Universities. Child Left Behind Act. Washington, DC: Urban
(2007). College learning for the new global cen- Institute.
tury. Washington, DC: Author. Carnegie Council on Advancing Adolescent
Au, K. (2006). Multicultural issues and literacy Literacy. (2010). Time to act: An agenda for ad-
achievement. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. vancing adolescent literacy for college and career
Au, K.H., & Mason, J.M. (1981). Social organiza- success. New York: Carnegie Corporation of New
tional factors in learning to read: The balance York.
of rights hypothesis. Reading Research Quarterly, Castek, J., Leu, D.J., Coiro, J., Gort, M., Henry, L.,
17(1), 115152. & Lima, C.O. (2007). Developing new literacies
Aud, S., Hussar, W., Kena, G., Bianco, K., Frohlich,
among multilingual learners in the elementary
L., Kemp, J., et al. (2011). The condition of edu-
grades. In L.L. Parker (Ed.), Technology-mediated
cation 2011 (NCES 2011033). Washington,
learning environments for young English learners:
DC: National Center for Education Statistics,
Connections in and out of school (pp. 111153).
Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department
New York: Routledge.
of Education.
August, D., Goldenberg, C., & Rueda, R. (2010). Coiro, J. (2007). Exploring changes to reading com-
Restrictive state language policies: Are they sci- prehension on the Internet: Paradoxes and possibil-
entifically based? In P. Gndara & M. Hopkins ities for diverse adolescent readers. Unpublished
(Eds.), Forbidden language: English learners and doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut,
restrictive language policies (pp. 139158). New Storrs.
York: Teachers College Press. Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C., & Leu, D.J.
August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). (2008). Central issues in new literacies and
Developing literacy in second-language learners: new literacies research. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel,
Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language- C. Lankshear, & D.J. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of
Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, NJ: research on new literacies (pp. 121). New York:
Erlbaum; Washington, DC: Center for Applied Erlbaum.
Linguistics. Cooper, M. (2004). Expanding the digital divide and
Bloome, D., Katz, L., Solsken, J., Willett, J., & falling behind on broadband: Why a telecommuni-
Wilson-Keenan, J. (2000). Interpellations of cations policy of neglect is not benign. Washington,
family/community and classroom literacy prac- DC: Consumer Federation of America. Retrieved
tices. Journal of Educational Research, 93(3), 155 May 17, 2012, from www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/
163. doi:10.1080/00220670009598704 digitaldivide.pdf
Callahan, R.M. (2006). The intersection of account- Darling-Hammond, L., & Baratz-Snowden, J.
ability and language: Can reading intervention (Eds.). (2005). A good teacher in every classroom:
1264 Rueda
Journal of Educational Research, 99(4), 232246. Fairbanks, J. Worthy, & B. Maloch (Eds.), 55th
doi:10.3200/JOER.99.4.232-246 Yearbook of the National Reading Conference
Harris, D.N., & Herrington, C.D. (2006). (pp. 120). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading
Accountability, standards, and the growing Conference.
achievement gap: Lessons from the past half- Leu, D.J., Jr., Kinzer, C.K., Coiro, J.L., & Cammack,
century. American Journal of Education, 112(2), D.W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies
209238. doi:10.1086/498995 emerging from the Internet and other informa-
Hoffman, J.V., Assaf, L.C., & Paris, S.G. (2001). tion and communication technologies. In R.B.
High-stakes testing in reading: Today in Texas, Ruddell & N. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models
tomorrow? The Reading Teacher, 54(5), 482492. and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 15701613).
Hull, G., & Schultz, K. (Eds.). (2002). Schools out! Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Bridging out-of-school literacies with classroom doi:10.1598/0872075028.54
practice. New York: Teachers College Press. Leu, D.J., Jr., Leu, D.D., & Coiro, J. (2004). Teaching
Institute of Museum and Library Services. (2009). with the Internet K12: New literacies for new times
Museums, libraries, and 21st century skills (MLS- (4th ed.). Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.
2009-NAI-01). Washington, DC: Author. Leu, D.J., McVerry, J.G., OByrne, W.I., Kiili, C.,
International ICT Literacy Panel. (2002). Digital Zawilinski, L., Everett-Cacopardo, H., et al.
transformation: A framework for ICT literacy. (2011). The new literacies of online reading com-
Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. prehension: Expanding the literacy and learn-
International Society for Technology in Education. ing curriculum. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
(2000). National educational technology stan- Literacy, 55(1), 514.
dards for students: Connecting curriculum and Leu, D.J., McVerry, J.G., OByrne, W.I., Zawilinski,
technology. Eugene, OR: Author; Washington, L., Castek, J., & Hartman, D.K. (2009). The new
DC: U.S. Department of Education. literacies of online reading comprehension and
Jacob, B.A., & Levitt, S.D. (2003). Rotten apples: the irony of No Child Left Behind: Students who
An investigation of the prevalence and predic- require our assistance the most actually receive
tors of teacher cheating. The Quarterly Journal it the least. In L.M. Morrow, R. Rueda, & D. Lapp
of Economics, 118(3), 843877. doi:10.1162/ (Eds.), Handbook of research on literacy and diver-
00335530360698441 sity (pp. 173194). New York: Guilford.
Karmarkar, U.S., & Apte, U.M. (2007). Operations Leu, D.J., OByrne, W.I., Zawilinski, L., McVerry,
management in the information economy: J.G., & Everett-Cacopardo, H. (2009). Expanding
Information products, processes, and chains. the new literacies conversation. Educational
Journal of Operations Management, 25(2), 438 Researcher, 38(4), 264269. doi:10.3102/
453. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2006.11.001 0013189X09336676
Kochhar, R., Fry, R., & Taylor, P. (2011). Wealth Leu, D.J., Zawilinski, L., Castek, J., Banerjee, M.,
gaps rise to record highs between whites, blacks Housand, B.C., Liu, Y., et al. (2007). What is
and Hispanics. Washington, DC: Pew Research new about the new literacies of online reading
Center. comprehension? In L.S. Rush, A.J. Eakle, & A.
Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. New Berger (Eds.), Secondary school literacy: What re-
York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203164754 search reveals for classroom practice (pp. 3768).
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2006). New literacies: Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of
Everyday practices and classroom learning (2nd English.
ed.). New York: Open University Press. Levy, F., & Murnane, R.J. (2004). The new division
Lee, C.D. (2007). Culture, literacy, and learning: of labor: How computers are creating the next job
Taking bloom in the midst of the whirlwind. New market. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
York: Teachers College Press. Press; New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Lee, J. (2002). Racial and ethnic achievement Lieberman, A., & Mace, D.H.P. (2008). Teacher
gap trends: Reversing the progress toward learning: The key to educational reform.
equity? Educational Researcher, 31(1), 312. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(3), 226234.
doi:10.3102/0013189X031001003 doi:10.1177/0022487108317020
Leithwood, K., Steinbach, R., & Jantzi, D. (2002). Los Angeles Unified School District. (2009).
School leadership and teachers motivation to R30 Language Census Report, Spring 2009
implement accountability policies. Educational (Publication No. 371). Los Angeles: Planning
Administration Quarterly, 38(1), 94119. and Assessment Division, Los Angeles Unified
Lenhart, A., Arafeh, S., Smith, A., & Macgill, School District.
A.R. (2008). Writing, technology, and teens. Madden, A., Ford, N., Miller, D., & Levy, P. (2005).
Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Using the Internet in teaching: The views of
Life Project. Retrieved May 21, 2012, from practitioners (A survey of the views of secondary
www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2008/Writing- school teachers in Sheffield, UK). British Journal
Technology-and-Teens.aspx of Educational Technology, 36(2), 255280.
Leu, D.J. (2006). New literacies, reading research, Martin, M.O., Mullis, I.V.S., Gonzalez, E.J., &
and the challenges of change: A deictic per- Chrostowski, S.J. (2004). TIMSS 2003 interna-
spective. In J.V. Hoffman, D.L. Schallert, C.M. tional science report. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS
1266 Rueda
Shepard, L.A. (1990). Inflated test score gains: Is annual report on teacher quality. Washington, DC:
it old norms or teaching the test? Educational Office of Policy Planning and Innovation, Office
Measurement: Issues and Practice, 9(3), 1522. of Postsecondary Education, U.S. Department of
doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.1990.tb00374.x Education.
Slavin, R.E., & Cheung, A. (2005). A synthesis U.S. Department of Education. (2007). Guide to U.S.
of research on language of reading instruc- Department of Education programs. Washington,
tion for English language learners. Review DC: Office of Communications and Outreach,
of Educational Research, 75(2), 247284. U.S. Department of Education.
doi:10.3102/00346543075002247 U.S. Department of Education. (2010). Guide to U.S.
Smerdon, B., Cronen, S., Lanahan, L., Anderson, J., Department of Education programs. Washington,
Iannotti, N., & Angeles, J. (2000). Teachers tools DC: Office of Communications and Outreach,
for the 21st century: A report on teachers use of U.S. Department of Education.
technology (NCES 2000102). Washington, DC: Valencia, R.R. (2010). Dismantling contemporary
National Center for Education Statistics, Office deficit thinking: Educational thought and practice.
of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. New York: Routledge.
Department of Education. Retrieved May 21, Vincent, G.K., & Velkoff, V.A. (2010). The next four
2012, from nces.ed.gov/pubs2000/2000102.pdf. decades: The older population in the United States:
Smith, A. (2010). Mobile access 2010. Washington, 2010 to 2050 (Report No. P251138). Washing-
DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project. ton, DC: U.S. Census Bureau, Economics and
Retrieved May 18, 2012, from www.pewinternet Statistics Administration, U.S. Department of
.org/Reports/2010/Mobile-Access-2010.aspx Commerce.
Snow, C.E., Burns, M.S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Wagner, T. (2008). The global achievement gap: Why
Preventing reading difficulties in young children. even our best schools dont teach the new survival
Washington, DC: National Academy Press. skills our children needand what we can do about
Street, B. (2003). Whats new in new literacy it. New York: Basic.
studies? Critical approaches to literacy in the- Washington, J. (2011). For minorities, new digital
ory and practice. Current Issues in Comparative divide seen. Washington, DC: Pew Internet &
Education, 5(2), 7791. American Life Project. Retrieved May 18, 2012,
Tharp, R.G. (1989). Psychocultural variables and from www.pewinternet.org/Media-Mentions/
constants: Effects on teaching and learning in 2011/For-minorities-new-digital-divide-seen
schools. American Psychologist, 44(2), 349359. .aspx
doi:10.1037/0003-066X.44.2.349 Williams, C. (2000). Internet access in U.S. pub-
U.S. Census Bureau. (2008). An older and more di- lic schools and classrooms: 199499 (NCES
verse nation by midcentury. Washington, DC: U.S. 2000086). Washington, DC: National Center
Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce. for Education Statistics, Office of Educational
Retrieved May 21, 2012, from www.census.gov/ Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of
newsroom/releases/archives/population/cb08 Education. Retrieved May 21, 2012, from nces
-123.html .ed.gov/pubs2000/2000086.pdf.
U.S. Department of Education. (2002). Meeting the
highly qualified teachers challenge: The secretarys
1269
Arafeh, S., 1242 Baldwin, R.S., 13, 459, 467
Arauz, R.M., 216 Ball, D.L., 19, 300
Archodidou, A., 27 Ball, E., 346
Arendt, H., 1237 Ball, E.W., 99, 117
Armbruster, B.B., 13, 101, 135, 657, 682, 693, Ballantyne, K.G., 376, 380
1044 Ballenger, C., 1099
Arnold, D.H., 114 Baluch, B., 899
Arnold, D.S., 367 Bamberg, M., 450
Arnoux, E., 969 Bandura, A., 82t, 591592, 994, 1002
Arter, J., 461 Banet, B., 174
Asarnow, J., 681 Baquendano-Lopez, P., 508
Ash, M., 5 Baratz-Snowden, J., 1260
Askew, B., 653 Barbosa, P., 994
Assaf, L.C., 1257 Barclay, J.R., 830
Asselin, M., 470 Barnes, J., 1016
Association of American Colleges and Barnes, L., 391
Universities, 1244 Barnes, M.A., 414
Atkins, P., 894 Barnes, W.S., 111, 224
Au, I.K.H., 300 Barney, L., 10
Au, K., 1257 Barnhart, J., 113
Au, K.H., 489, 499, 660, 662, 1030, 1261 Baron, J., 99, 349, 760
Au, K.K., 113 Baron-Cohen, S., 445
Aud, S., 1243, 1260 Barr, R., 20, 351, 492, 1076, 1256
August, D., 328, 369, 376, 380382, 845, 847, Barrar, H., 303
849, 870, 12561257, 1261 Barron, R.W., 787, 1146
August, D.L., 13 Barrows, H.S., 555
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Barsalou, L.W., 137138, 919
Reporting Authority, 1154 Barthes, R., 1049
Ausubel, D.P., 486 Bartlett, B.J., 1032
Avila, E., 900 Bartlett, E.J., 662
Axelrod, Y., 166 Bartlett, F.C., 493, 495, 931, 950
Azevedo, R., 694, 842843 Barton, D., 76, 229, 259, 1073, 1192, 1199
Azuara, P., 130, 228, 233 Bartsch, K., 446
Bastiaansen, M., 563, 575
Basurto, A., 236
B Bates, E., 809, 926
Baars, B.J., 9 Bauer, J., 1036
Baddeley, A., 118, 801, 842, 846, 848849, 869, Baumal, R., 729
1037 Baumann, J.F., 458, 464, 797
Badel, I., 834 Bauserman, K.L., 1044
Badian, N.A., 365366 Baxter, G.P., 873
Baggett, W., 832, 957 Bayle, E., 759, 771
Bailenson, J., 225 Baynes, K., 876
Bailey, F., 1034, 1049 Bazerman, C., 1188
Bain, R.B., 1099 Beach, R., 13, 101, 950, 1016, 1025, 1034, 1113,
Baird, A.A., 580 1163, 1210
Baker, C., 241 Beal, A.L., 760
Baker, J.N., 120 Beals, D.E., 494, 500, 519
Baker, L., 121, 333, 590, 664, 679, 682, 1032 Bean, J.C., 994
Baker, S., 425 Bean, T.V., 10751077
Bakhtin, M.M., 84, 169, 265, 994996, 998, Bean, T.W., 492
1211, 1215 Bearne, E., 1210
Bakken, J.P., 102 Beauchamp, M.S., 577
Balass, M., 573 Beaucousin, V., 577
Baldwin, J., 624 Beck, I., 20, 100, 117, 355, 369, 458459, 467,
Baldwin, L.E., 426 470471, 503, 688, 691, 1030
1302
autonomous model, 7475, 10731074; choral reading, 398
influences of, 10741075 cingulate cortex, definition of, 559t
avatars, 225n15, 1224f cipher reading stage, 351354
city, reading, multimodality and, 11971198,
1197f
B clarifying, direct instruction in, 665678
baby boom, 4 class: and development models, 144145; effects
background knowledge. See prior knowledge; on literacy instruction, 617t; and reading
schema theory models, 204227. See also socioeconomic
beginning readers, and spelling, 792793 status
behavioral theory, 82t classroom: childrens agency in, 167168;
behaviorism, 48 comprehension interventions in, 314319;
beliefs, prior, meaning-construction model on, cultural history and, 280291, 291t; culture
10201034, 10411046 of, comprehension intervention and, 316;
bidirectional hypothesis, 960, 961f fluency instruction in, 401403; knowledge
bilateral, definition of, 559t of, 660, 1033; meaning-construction model
bilingual students. See dual-language learners on, 1019, 10471054, 1048f; schema theory
biliteracy: literature review on, 229233; and, 511516; setting, 1051; structure, 1051;
multiple-method study of, 233259, 235t, support in, perceptions of, 624625
239f, 243f, 246t249f, 253f, 255f; prayer book, Clay, Marie M., 636656
253254, 255f; researcher roles and, 235; closed-caption television, and fluency, 398
in young Mexican immigrant children, coaching: on interpretation, 288; nature of,
228264 294n7
bizarre texts, 497 code-focused instruction: in balance, 362; and
book-handling knowledge, 236237, 241243 DLLs, 378
books: early experiences of, 205207; code-switching, 538
persistence of, 204227. See also text(s) cognates, 465
bottom-up processing, term, 1035 cognition: constructionintegration model on,
bound morphemic rules, miscues and, 533 808809; embodiment and, 505
Brocas area, 575 cognitive components-resource model
Bush, George W., 1105 (CC-R), 840885, 847f; assumptions of,
845846; fit of, 860869; limitations of,
873877; literature supporting, 846849;
C measurement model for, 851852, 852f
Canada, ICT instruction in, 11541155 cognitive conditions, meaning-construction
CAP. See concepts about print model on, 1017, 10271034, 10431045
capacity, limited, 701 cognitive deficits, 414
career driven literacy scholar, 1108 cognitive development, factors affecting, 197198
case grammars, 908 cognitive flexibility theory, 544557
case learning, 551 cognitive grammar, 908
case roles, assigning, in JustCarpenter model, cognitive processing models, 693695
764766 cognitive science, 1015, 6267; and schema
case studies, 93t, 120; of African American theory, 495496, 501
males and texts, 622632; of emergent cognitive variables: and reading
biliteracy, 238 comprehension, 589610, 595t, 598t600t;
CC-R. See cognitive components-resource research directions for, 603604
model collaboration: definition of, 592; and
central, definition of, 559t motivation, 591; online research and,
cerebellum, definition of, 559t 11681169; peer, 188201, 193t195t;
cerebral cortex, definition of, 559t recommendations for, 1123; transactional
cerebrum, definition of, 559t theory and, 948949
challenge, and motivation, 591 collaborative analysis, and effective
childhood: agency in, 167168; learning in, interventions, 302
168169; nature of, 166169. See also under college completion, 979
early communication: authorreader, transactional
childism, 152 theory on, 942946; ethics of, 1224, 1232