lawrence school community seminar · lawrence school community seminar why wait for failure? early...
TRANSCRIPT
Lawrence School Community Seminar
WHY WAIT FOR FAILURE?
Early Identification, Early Intervention
And Preventing Reading Failure
NUTSHELL SUMMARY OF ENTIRE PRESENTATION
Ø The NICHD research base on the environmental risk factors, on the underlying neurological deficits, and on the instructional deficits that cause reading failure is irrefutable.
Ø Early identification of children who will struggle or fail to learn to read is quick, cheap, easy and accurate.
Ø Early intervention can prevent failure and is up to 16 times faster and more successful than later attempts to remediate.
Ø The most effective teaching practices for intervention have been clearly established by voluminous research.
TONIGHT’S TOPIC WHY WAIT FOR FAILURE
PLAN FOR TONIGHT
A. ACQUAINT YOU WITH RESEARCH BASE
B. REVIEW STEPS IN LEARNING TO READ
C. SOURCES OF READING PROBLEMS
D. BEST APPROACHES FOR PREVENTING READING FAILURE
TONIGHT’S TOPIC WHY WAIT FOR FAILURE
PLAN FOR TONIGHT
A. ACQUAINT YOU WITH RESEARCH BASE
B. REVIEW STEPS IN LEARNING TO READ
C. SOURCES OF READING PROBLEMS
D. BEST APPROACHES FOR PREVENTING READING FAILURE
PROBLEMS WITH MOST ED. RESEARCH
MOST EDUCATION RESEARCH IS UNDERFUNDED:
Ø Too few students in studies (avg 40) and too short (avg. 6 months) to generalize results
Ø Most not conducted by the top research scientists
Ø Research designs often not “scientifically valid” with randomly assigned treatment and control groups
Ø Lack large replication studies producing same results
Ø other researchers, in other regions, use same research design, with other students, get same results
Ø Results are not supported by converging evidence from multiple replication studies
PROBLEMS WITH MOST ED. RESEARCH
IT PRODUCES
“RESEARCH RESULTS”
OR
“RESEARCH FINDINGS”
BUT
NOT
SCIENCE
PROBLEMS WITH READING RESEARCH
RESULT:
READING “RESEARCH”
HAS OFTEN SUPPORTED
CONFLICTING
RECOMMENDATIONS
ON HOW TO TEACH
READING
PROBLEMS WITH READING RESEARCH
Ø In field of READING INSTRUCTION, research studies have often seemed to be particularly contradictory.
Ø Reading studies are like Bible verses: you can find one to support any position.
PROBLEMS WITH READING RESEARCH
The resulting conflict came to be known as “THE READING WARS”
phonics vs whole language
AFTER NEARLY 50 YEARS OF BITTER AND DESTRUCTIVE CONFLICT, A SOLUTION TO THE READING RESEARCH PROBLEMS WAS FOUND IN THE UNLIKELIEST PLACE
BELIEVE IT OR NOT …….
YOUR FEDERAL TAX DOLLARS AT WORK
SOLUTION TO THE READING RESEARCH PROBLEMS
Ø Over $250 million of Congressional funding
Ø for over 30 years of reading research
Ø by top research scholars at world class research universities & medical centers
Ø administered through the NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT (NICHD) v National Academy of Sciences; National Research Council
Ø has solved the reading research problem
NICHD READING RESEARCH
FOR 35 YEARS, NICHD HAS
SUPPORTED TEAMS OF
DISTINGUISHED RESEARCH
SCIENTISTS AT 41 UNIVERSITY AND
MEDICAL RESEARCH SITES IN NORTH
AMERICA, EUROPE, ASIA.
NICHD READING RESEARCH
Ø NICHD research has studied normal reading development and reading difficulties continuously since 1965.
Ø In the past 33 years, NICHD scientists have studied the reading development of over 75,000 children and adults.
NICHD READING RESEARCH
Ø Many studies have been devoted to understanding the normal reading process, and over 30,000 good readers have participated in studies, some for over 12 years.
Ø ALSO focused on understanding why many children do not learn to read. Over 30,000 individuals with reading difficulties have been studied, some for as long as 16 years.
NICHD READING RESEARCH
NICHD studies developed
screening tests that
identify children at risk
for reading failure during
kindergarten and the first
grade.
NICHD READING RESEARCH
Ø These tests were used in prevention and early intervention projects at 11 sites in the U.S. and Canada.
Ø Since 1985, nearly 10,000 children (both good and poor good readers) participated in reading instruction studies, and nearly 5,000 have been enrolled in longitudinal early intervention studies in TX, WA, GA, MA, NY, FL, CO, NC, and D.C.
SO WHAT’S THE POINT? ANSWER:
We now have a huge body of widely replicated,
scientifically valid research speaking with one voice
on the key issues of reading instruction
and reading failure prevention.
NICHD READING RESEARCH FINDINGS
WITH CONVERGING RESULTS FROM OVER 100 LONG TERM STUDIES,
WE NOW HAVE A SOLID KNOWLEDGE BASE OF THE: Ø Cognitive, genetic, & neurological
conditions that foster strong reading
Ø Developmental conditions that promote or inhibit reading acquisition
Ø Risk factors that predispose youngsters to reading failure
NICHD READING RESEARCH FINDINGS
WITH CONVERGING RESULTS FROM OVER 100 LONG TERM STUDIES,
WE NOW KNOW:
Instructional approaches that work
best, especially for struggling readers
Instructional approaches that DO NOT WORK
for struggling readers
NICHD READING RESEARCH FINDINGS
WITH CONVERGING RESULTS FROM OVER 100 LONG TERM STUDIES,
WE NOW KNOW:
Ø Which screening tests and in depth evaluation tests reliably identify students with neurologically based reading problems
Ø Which teaching methods are most effective in remediating reading deficits at the earliest possible time
Additional Evidence Was Supplied by the
NATIONAL READING PANEL In 2000, federal NRP meta-analysis of over
115,000 scientific reading studies reached conclusions supporting NICHD studies in the 5 critical domains of teaching reading:
1. PHONEMIC AWARENESS
2. SYSTEMATIC PHONICS
3. ORAL READING FLUENCY
4. VOCABULARY
5. COMPREHENSION
So if we have all this scientific evidence, why do we still have a
massive reading problem with 40% of American students failing
to learn to read effectively?
Because we still have a massive problem incorporating this
knowledge into the instructional practices employed by our
colleges of education, school districts and teachers.
TONIGHT’S TOPIC WHY WAIT FOR FAILURE
PLAN FOR TONIGHT
A. ACQUAINT YOU WITH RESEARCH BASE
B. REVIEW STEPS IN LEARNING TO READ
C. SOURCES OF READING PROBLEMS
D. BEST APPROACHES FOR PREVENTING READING FAILURE
TONIGHT’S TOPIC WHY WAIT FOR FAILURE
PLAN FOR TONIGHT
A. ACQUAINT YOU WITH RESEARCH BASE
B. REVIEW STEPS IN LEARNING TO READ
C. SOURCES OF READING PROBLEMS
D. BEST APPROACHES FOR PREVENTING READING FAILURE
WHAT DOES RESEARCH TELL US ABOUT THE PROCESS OF LEARNING TO READ ?
Ø Reading is translating written symbols into oral language
Ø Learning to read requires mastering a lengthy series of complex neuro-developmental steps
PROCESS OF LEARNING TO READ WHAT DOES THE RESEARCH TELL US?
Ø The brain has several large chunks of neurological turf hardwired for producing and processing oral (spoken) language.
Ø The brain has no elements designed for or hardwired for reading.
PROCESS OF LEARNING TO READ WHAT DOES THE RESEARCH TELL US?
Learning to read is a process of rewiring the brain – recruiting neurons and building new neural networks – in areas already devoted to performing other neural activity such as talking and interpreting oral language.
IT IS VERY TOUGH WORK!
PROCESS OF LEARNING TO READ WHAT DOES THE RESEARCH TELL US?
Ø NICHD studies show that all
learning readers go through the same series of skill development steps
Ø Some can master steps so easily or intuitively that they appear to have “skipped” the step
Ø Struggling readers break down at one or more steps due to easily identifiable neurological deficits
LETS TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT
THE NEURO-DEVELOPMENTAL
TASK
AT EACH STEP,
AND AT THE ROLE
THAT THE STEP
PLAYS IN READING
PHONOLOGICAL AWARENESS Ø Comes from Greek “phono” meaning
“sound” phonological = “sound system”
Ø The term “phonological awareness” refers to the ability to auditorily distinguish separate clumps of sounds or individual sounds within the continuous stream of spoken language
Ø Does not refer to the process of discriminating separate sounds in reading printed language
PHONOLOGICAL AWARENESS IS:
Ø Knowing that the continuous stream of sounds in oral language can be divided into smaller components
Ø Knowing how to segment the continuous speech stream into • sentences • phrases • words • syllables • phoneme clusters • individual phonemes
PHONEMIC AWARENESS IS:
Ø the capacity to distinguish individual sounds in spoken words
Ø the capacity to segment individual sounds in spoken words
Ø the capacity to identify individual sounds in spoken words
PHONEMIC AWARENESS IS:
Ø the understanding that SPOKEN words can be divided into individual phonemes
Ø the understanding that individual phonemes can be blended into words
PHONEMIC AWARENESS SIGNIFICANCE: Ø The most common problem in
learning to read is presented by the asymmetry between ª the continuous, connected, blended nature of
sounds in the speech stream
ª and the separated, disconnected, discreet nature of sounds (phonemes) as represented by letter symbols
Ø Phonemes, words, phrases are compressed in speech with no spaces between them
Ø The “maresydoats” effect
EFFECT OF LOW PHONEMIC AWARENESS
Ø A child who lacks the capacity to detect, segment, and manipulate the individual sounds (PHONEMES) in spoken words CANNOT learn to link those individual sounds to written letters.
Ø RESULT: they cannot DECODE words by “sounding them out” but must try to remember and identify whole words by their appearance
Ø Remember “maresy-doats”
EFFECT OF LOW PHONEMIC AWARENESS
Ø If low phonemic awareness is not improved by explicit instruction and practice, the child will fail to learn how to sound out or spell words.
Ø All subsequent steps in learning to read will be impaired.
PHONOLOGICAL PROCESSING:
Ø Is using phonemic awareness skill to perceive, segment, and manipulate the sub-units of oral language Ø examples: Rosner Test of Auditory Awareness; “elision” subtest in CTOPP
Ø The critical element in linking speech sounds to printed symbols, i.e., learning to sound out (read) words and learning how to spell words
EFFECT OF LOW PHONEMIC AWARENESS
Ø If poor phonological processing is not improved by explicit instruction and practice, the child will fail to learn how to sound out or spell words.
Ø All subsequent steps in learning to read will be impaired.
DECODING & ENCODING (PHONICS)
Ø Decoding = “sounding out” words Encoding = spelling words
Ø Phonics = system of rules that determines how individual WRITTEN LETTERS and groups of letters represent the sounds of SPOKEN WORDS.
Ø Decoding and encoding rely on phonics, i.e., the
rules that govern how written letters represent sounds
Ø Lack of phonics mastery impairs the ability to learn the decoding and encoding systems.
ORTHOGRAPHIC WORD RECOGNITION
The capacity to recognize a word instantly based on its configuration.
ORTHOGRAPHIC WORD RECOGNITION
Ø The capacity to recognize a word instantly based on its configuration.
Ø A capacity that must be built upon an experiential foundation of skillful decoding (phonics).
Ø Cannot be built by starting out to memorize the shapes of unfamiliar words (whole word/whole language)
Ø Lack of orthographic word rec. makes reading halting, laborious; prevents development of fluency, prosody, and comprehension.
FLUENCY: RAPID AND ACCURATE ORAL READING
Ø Fluency is the capacity to deploy a subskill, rapidly and accurately, without conscious thought or effort, in the performance of a higher level skill.
Ø In reading, it is recognizing (or decoding) words automatically so all attention and effort is focused on comprehending meaning.
Ø Lack of fluency severely limits comprehension of complex text
FLUENCY & “RAPID NAMING”
Ø “RAPID NAMING” is the neurological capacity to retrieve known linguistic information from memory rapidly and accurately
Ø Students may know and remember the sound each symbol makes, but if they retrieve that knowledge too slowly, decoding is too slow, and automatic word recognition (fluency) does not develop.
FLUENCY & “RAPID NAMING”
Ø Without fluency, students guess
at words, insert wrong words in the text, skip words, alter meaning.
Ø Without fluency, comprehension is impaired; the more complex the text the greater the impairment.
READING COMPREHENSION
Ø The ultimate goal of reading instruction.
Ø Each of the previous steps is necessary, but not sufficient in itself.
Ø Reading comprehension entails many additional components beyond previous “steps”
Ø A deficit in any one of those components will impair comprehension
TONIGHT’S TOPIC WHY WAIT FOR FAILURE
PLAN FOR TONIGHT
A. ACQUAINT YOU WITH RESEARCH BASE
B. REVIEW STEPS IN LEARNING TO READ
C. SOURCES OF READING PROBLEMS
D. BEST APPROACHES FOR PREVENTING READING FAILURE
TONIGHT’S TOPIC WHY WAIT FOR FAILURE
PLAN FOR TONIGHT
A. ACQUAINT YOU WITH RESEARCH BASE
B. REVIEW STEPS IN LEARNING TO READ
C. SOURCES OF READING PROBLEMS
D. BEST APPROACHES FOR PREVENTING READING FAILURE
NICHD RESEARCH FINDINGS: THE PREVALENCE OF READING PROBLEMS
READING DEMOGRAPHICS: The 60/40 split
Ø 60% learn to read reasonably well regardless of instructional method
Ø 20% struggle to learn and never read with ease or fluency
• don’t read for pleasure
• fall steadily behind in fluency and vocabulary and comprehension strategies
Ø 20% read below 4th grade level
NICHD RESEARCH FINDINGS: THE PREVALENCE OF READING PROBLEMS
U.S. READING DEMOGRAPHICS
Approximately 50 million school children
§ 60% (30 million) learn to read fairly well
§ 20% (10 million) poorly/with difficulty
§ 20% (10 million) fail to learn to read
NICHD RESEARCH FINDINGS: THE PREVALENCE OF READING PROBLEMS
CLEVELAND (CDMA) OHIO READING DEMOGRAPHICS
Approximately 500,000 school children
60% (300,000) learn to read fairly well
20% (100,000) read poorly/with difficulty
20% (100,000) fail to learn to read
NICHD RESEARCH FINDINGS: THE SOURCE OF READING PROBLEMS
RISK FACTORS Ø Genetic factor - parents or other close
blood relatives with reading and spelling difficulties = high risk (85%)
Ø Delayed or difficult acquisition of oral language
Ø Early hearing impairment such as results from chronic ear infections
Ø Inadequate oral language or literacy exposure Ø Uncommon in independent schools except
for ESL
#1 CAUSE OF READING PROBLEMS : NEUROLOGICAL DEFICITS IN KEY ELEMENTS OF
LANGUAGE PROCESSING AREAS OF THE BRAIN
Ø phonemic awareness deficit
Ø phonological processing deficit
Ø rapid automatic naming deficit
Ø phonological memory deficit
NICHD RESEARCH FINDINGS: THE SOURCE OF READING PROBLEMS
#2 CAUSE OF READING PROBLEMS
Ø Inadequate preservice teacher education on reading instruction and problems
Ø Lack of district commitment to proven instructional methods
Ø Lack of district commitment to early identification and intervention
Ø District commitment to “remedial” methods that don’t remediate
NICHD RESEARCH FINDINGS: THE SOURCE OF READING PROBLEMS
TONIGHT’S TOPIC WHY WAIT FOR FAILURE
PLAN FOR TONIGHT
A. ACQUAINT YOU WITH RESEARCH BASE
B. REVIEW STEPS IN LEARNING TO READ
C. SOURCES OF READING PROBLEMS
D. BEST APPROACHES FOR PREVENTING READING FAILURE
TONIGHT’S TOPIC WHY WAIT FOR FAILURE
PLAN FOR TONIGHT
A. ACQUAINT YOU WITH RESEARCH BASE
B. REVIEW STEPS IN LEARNING TO READ
C. SOURCES OF READING PROBLEMS
D. BEST APPROACHES FOR PREVENTING READING FAILURE
3 KEYS TO PREVENTING READING FAILURE
1ST KEY: EARLY IDENTIFICATION
2ND KEY: EARLY INTERVENTION
3RD KEY: RESEARCH PROVEN INSTRUCTION THAT REMEDIATES NEURO-BASED READING PROCESSING DEFICITS
3 KEYS TO PREVENTING READING FAILURE
1. EARLY IDENTIFICATION
2. EARLY INTERVENTION
3. RESEARCH PROVEN INSTRUCTION THAT REMEDIATES NEURO-BASED READING PROCESSING DEFICITS
1ST KEY: EARLY IDENTIFICATION ~ THE BIG QUESTION ~
CAN WE IDENTIFY THE CHILDREN WHO
WILL STRUGGLE TO READ BEFORE THEY FAIL?
ANSWER:
YES!
EARLY IDENTIFICATION: STEP 1
ASSESS FOR THE RISK FACTORS THAT PREDISPOSE STUDENTS TO READING PROBLEMS At enrollment, obtain and make a record of info from parents on risk factors:
Ø Genetic factor: parent or other immediate blood relative with reading and spelling difficulties = high risk (85%)
Ø Delayed or difficult acquisition of oral language
Ø Early hearing impairment such as results from chronic ear infections (otitis media)
Ø Inadequate English literacy exposure (language other than English spoken or read at home?) Ø Risley: the 20 - 40 million gap
Use reliable assessments such as the PAR (Predictive Assessment of Reading) or
the CTOPP (Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing)
to screen for the presence of the common neurologically-based processing deficits known to cause reading problems such as :
Ø phonemic awareness deficit
Ø phonological processing deficit
Ø phonological memory deficit
Ø rapid automatic naming deficit
EARLY IDENTIFICATION: STEP 2
NICHD: THE PREDICTIVE VALUE OF PHONOLOGICAL AWARENESS
Ø “The lack of phonological awareness is the most powerful determinant of the likelihood of failure to learn to read.” (Adams, 1990; Moats & Foorman, 1997)
Ø “Phonological awareness is more highly correlated to early reading success than tests of general intelligence, reading readiness, and listening comprehension.” (Stanovich, 1994)
Ø Screening tests of phonological awareness skills in grades K & 1 predict with 95% accuracy who will have difficulties learning to read. (Lyon, 1997; California State Dept. of Ed., 2000)
EARLY INTERVENTION KEY #2
THE RULE IS:
DON’T WAIT!
INTERVENE WITH
RESEARCH PROVEN INSTRUCTION AS SOON AS SCREENING
OR SLOW PROGRESS
IDENTIFIES A PROBLEM!
EARLY INTERVENTION:
KEY TOOLS: EARLY IDENTIFICATION SCREENS Ø PAR - Predictive Assessment Of Reading
Ø CTOPP - Comprehensive Test Of Phonological Processing
Ø DIBELS (Dynamic Indicators Of Basic Early Literacy Skills)
CAN BE USED FOR: Ø early identification of fluency deficits in core skills
Ø early intervention, goal setting, intervention decision making
Ø intervention progress monitoring
NICHD INTERVENTION STUDIES:
“early intervention efficiency” Ø At K-1st-2nd, 1 trained teacher working
with a group of 4 students for 30 minutes a day can remediate skills to grade level in 1 year. (teacher time req. - 30 min./day)
Ø At 5th grade, it will take 16 times the personnel time to obtain the same result: 1 teacher working 2 hours per day with each of the 4 students individually. (teacher time req. – 8 hours/day)
RESEARCH PROVEN INSTRUCTION
NICHD intervention studies clearly show that the only reliably effective instruction for students at risk for reading failure is the • explicit • intensive • systematic • multisensory
• diagnostic & prescriptive
teaching of each skill set in the developmental reading sequence below.
RESEARCH PROVEN INSTRUCTION Explicit, intensive, systematic, multisensory, diagnostic/prescriptive instruction of each skill set in the developmental reading sequence is provided by such programs as:
Ø Lindamood-Bell’s LiPS program Ø Orton-Gillingham Ø OR O-G Based Programs such as: • Lawrence’s “CODE BREAKERS” system • Wilson Reading System • Road To The Code • Language! • Spire • Alphabetic Phonics • Herman Method • Lexia Reading software
KEY FACTORS IN APPLYING RESEARCH PROVEN INSTRUCTION EFFECTIVELY
1. TRAINING OF INSTRUCTOR Ø ask about instructor certification
level
2. FREQUENCY OF LESSONS Ø 3 time per week minimum
3. DURATION OF LESSONS Ø 45 minutes per lesson minimum
Fewer lessons or less time not sufficient to produce neural network growth needed to remediate deficits
RESEARCH PROVEN INSTRUCTION:
THE CRUCIAL QUESTION
Will more intensive application of the same instruction provided in traditional reading programs work for the child with one or more of these neurological deficits in their sound processing systems?
ANSWER:
NO!
RESEARCH PROVEN INSTRUCTION: KEY CONSIDERATION
IF SCHOOL IS USING INTERVENTION ASSISTANCE TEAM (IAT)
OR
RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION (RTI)
WAIT NO MORE THAN SIX WEEKS FOR TEST DATA SHOWING SKILL
IMPROVEMENT
IF NO IMPROVEMENT, INSIST ON SWITCH
RESEARCH PROVEN INSTRUCTION: THE KEY CONSIDERATION
IF SCHOOL IS USING READING RECOVERY
OR
LEVELED LANGUAGE INTERVENTION
OR
“BALANCED APPROACH”
MY ADVICE:
REJECT IT, INSIST ON SWITCH.
RESEARCH IS CLEAR: THEY DON’T WORK FOR DYSLEXIC CHILDREN
RESEARCH PROVEN INSTRUCTION ~ NEXT QUESTION ~
WHY DON’T THEY WORK?
ANSWER: Because traditional instructional methods assume that the students start with the phonemic awareness,
the phonological memory, the phonological processing, and the rapid retrieval needed to learn to
read relatively easily.
RESEARCH PROVEN INSTRUCTION
To put it another way, traditional
approaches work best with the 60%
of students who will learn to read
relatively easily and well without
intensive remediation of the neuro-
processing deficits causing the
reading problems.
RESEARCH PROVEN INSTRUCTION WHAT IS SO DIFFERENT IN RESEARCH PROVEN INSTRUCTION?
Ø Starts by assuming students may need help to develop underlying neurological sound processing capacities first.
Ø Uses diagnostic tests to pinpoint deficits.
Ø Uses methods proven to remediate underlying deficits that block the acquisition of reading skill.
Ø Uses frequent measures of progress to judge effectiveness of interventions.
SUMMARY Ø The NICHD research base on the environmental
risk factors and on the underlying neurological deficits which cause reading failure is irrefutable.
Ø Early identification of children who will struggle or fail to learn to read is quick, cheap, easy and accurate.
Ø Early intervention can prevent failure and is up to 16 times faster and more successful than later attempts to remediate.
Ø The most effective teaching practices for intervention have been clearly established by voluminous research.