Unravelling reading

Transferring to the Dyslexia Positive website

2017-01-16T12:41:00.002+00:00

Many thanks to my loyal followers at this site.

I have decided this year to transfer my efforts to the Dyslexia Positive website. You will find some archive material, book reviews and continuing updates on Unravelling Reading at http://www.dyslexiapositive.org.uk/unravellingreading/

I have revived and updated some of the discusion points at /http://www.dyslexiapositive.org.uk/discussion/

Please continue to post comments there. I still want to encourage debate and sharing of ideas about adults' reading, as I move into this next phase of dissemination of my research.

Two giants in the field of reading research

2016-03-14T11:26:00.000+00:00

I have to confess to having been very excited at the prospect of hearing Elena Grigorenko speak for the first time (having heard her co-author on the Dyslexia Debate, Joe Elliott previously). I was less excited at the prospect of Maggie Snowling, as I have heard her many times and been disappointed in her narrow stance on reading and dyslexia .

At this conference, however, I was proved wrong. Grigorenko was boring and uninspiring, spending far too long on the historical context and then whizzing through some rather difficult information from her latest research about mapping the phenotype of reading difficulty to specific points in the genome. We were told of exciting news coming out in a journal soon... (too hush, hush for her to share it)

By contrast, Maggie Snowling brought well-reasoned insights into her now more balanced view of dyslexia, as broader phenotype that includes underlying language difficulties and possible co-occurring difficulties in motor and executive function (including attention and concentration). Her account of longitudinal studies (so far from age 3.5 to age 9) was fascinating. I do hope she and her group carry on to see those children into early adulthood!.

Clarification about what Tom Nicholson said

2016-03-14T11:10:00.001+00:00

I have been asked for clarification about what Tom Nicholson actually said about phonological awareness.

His keynote address gave a historical overview about the impact on phonological awareness training on success in acquiring reading skills, with little input from more recent studies. He comes from the point of view of "liking phonics and enjoying giving phonics instruction."

However, in his last but one slide he cited research from Castles and Coltheart (2004), Ehri (1998), Johnston and Watson (2005) to say that this could be an issue of chicken and egg. Maybe we see good phonemic awareness in successful readers, not because they have been specifically trained in this, but because the process of learning to read itself gives a degree of phonemic awareness.

He reminded us of studies denying the effect of phonemic awareness training, though these are well outweighed by the studies that show a positive effect. Finally, he made the remark (without a formal reference) that phonemic awareness training should be combined with reading of text to help improve letter-sound awareness.

Insights from the BDA conference on reading

2016-03-11T14:24:00.001+00:00

There are some really big names at the conference this year, many of them world experts on reading (though still no one who talks specifically about adults), Professors Susan Gathercole, Tom Nicholson, Karin Landerl, Don Compton, and this is even before Elena Grigorenko (coauthor of the Dyslexia Debate) later this afternoon. Here are a few highlights for me:

In a recent study, Gathercole has been looking at underlying factors that might explain difficulties with reading, vocabulary and maths, concentrating on executive function, working memory and inattention. Perhaps surprisingly she has found that poor working memory is not a good predictor of reading difficulty. However, good working memory may be a protective factor for problems with reading and maths.
Landerl, researching German speaking children was surprised to find a link between problems with reading and maths but not between reading and spelling. She is still not sure of the reason for this. Relevant to my work with adults, a longitudinal study showed that reading difficulties are persistent through childhood, despite support. Even more reason for us to find new approaches for adults.
Tom Nicholson was speaking to the converted in urging us to combine phonics with real reading. He did however drop in a controversial point. Phonological awareness may be a consequence of reading acquisition, rather than a requirement for reading.
Don Compton has investigated more about comprehension and found a positive link between reading/listening comprehension and prior knowledge. Is this surprising?
A new version of the Adult Reading Test (ART) is due out soon, with improvements. Rob Fidler pleased me by mentioning not just their extensive validation data, but also case study findings that highlight the strength of a diagnostic problem solving approach ch to reading support, using qualitative observations from testing.

More to come!

BDA international conference 2016

2016-03-10T07:49:00.000+00:00

I will be commenting here over the next 3 days at this conference. For more general reflections on all the talks I go to, see www.dyslexiapositive.org.uk. For headlines and possible gossip see also Twitter @unravellingread and @dyslexiapos. Please send comments back

Review of Baron (2015) Words onscreen: the fate of reading in the digital world

2015-10-14T18:04:00.003+01:00

Professor Baron is Executive Director of the Center for Teaching, Research and Learning World Languages and Culture, at the American University in Washington DC.

She has written an extremely thought provoking book, prompted by a concern that new media for reading and communication might, "alter the very nature of human interaction," and in particular the way we read.

The book is thorough in its academic rigour, citing a wealth of useful references and documenting her own research into the reading habits and opinions of students in 3 countries. It is also extremely readable, illustrating points with reflections on her own personal preferences when reading.

In my professional life I read the majority of non-fiction texts on screen (for ease of access, as someone not attached to a university with easy borrowing rights to the library) and have an equal preference for reading real book or e books when reading for pleasure. I chose to read this book in iBook format on my iPad, prompting self-observation of my reading style in an electronic medium. This book is great to read as a e book, as it has lots of headings and subheadings for navigation, and perfect hyperlinking from page to footnote to reference list and back again. Some people (including Professor Baron) might call this a distraction, but for me it is a welcome and productive diversion, so long as I can find my way back easily to the point in the text I had reached.

Despite this, Professor Baron claims that "navigation is simpler on paper - a point students in my own studies confirmed." There is real variation in the quality of academic texts on line, from fixed format PDF files or even scanned documents with the quality of poor photocopies, through to bespoke electronic resources, like Professor Baron's own book and multi-media sources that go well beyond the printed word. She herself mentions a new era of "what we might call eBook 2.0" with such consistent quality that soon students may reverse this preference, at least in terms of acessibility.

Professor Baron is concerned that reading onscreen encourages browsing, which is in some way substandard to deeper reading on paper. She likens it to "driving on cruise control [whereas] print invites stopping" to reflect on deeper meaning. She is worried that the electronic era is leadng to deficiencies generally in attention and concentration.

For me, concentration when reading has always been an issue, way before the age of computers. My main distractions are fidgeting and thinking (in the sense that my mind can wonder from the topic to other thoughts)! As a teenager studying, I set up my desk with the book propped at an angle so I could read and knit at the same time (to stop my fingers wandering) and listened to classical music on the radio so as to tune out the inner voice of my thoughts). Advising students nowadays on effective study skills, there are a number of strategies to help maintain focus, not least to pace oneself and read in manageable chunks. A good e book can help with this, as the running countdown of "pages left in the chapter" at the base of the screen gives one an incentive to keep going. Reflective thinking at the end of each convenient break is crucial, whether reading on screen or on paper, as is previewing what might be coming up next.

Professor Baron claims that comprehension if "reading when scrolling" is worse that for reading in print (I need to follow up the reference to that research - but later!). She seems to think that using the "FIND" button is somehow cheating, encouraging students to read selectively rather than the whole article. Yet, this is a strategy that is essential for a busy researcher, an aid to critical thinking (how much evidence is there for this point of view?) and also a boon for students with dyslexia, for instance, who struggle to read dense academic texts.

Luckily, Professor Baron is not so old-fashioned as to think "smart search techniques" are not worthwhile for the modern student. Teaching techniques for "meaningful reading on screen" are part of her manifesto for the future, along with allowing for readers' preferences for different media and "respect for ....authorship in any medium." She also has an interesting concluding chapter outlining the latest developments in digital media (whilst acknowledging that this is probably already out of date, with the timelapse between writing her book and publishing it, such is the pace of development).

There is one aspect in which I, like Professor Baron, have a preference for printed material. She calls it "productive happenstance" that occurs with a physical source; the serendipity of discovering something you weren't looking for or thinking about. For me, this phenomenon occurs most often when leafing through a newspaper or magazine, which is so different from the sequential format of an online publication, where I easily get bored.

I like the way this book invites us to examine the process of reading. This is what my research has been all about...and maybe in the fulness of time my own book on the subject will appear, in a lovely electronic format?

Reference

Baron, Naomi., S. (2015) Words onscreen: the fate of reading in the digital world. New York, Oxford University Press

What is happening with Unravelling Reading?

2015-10-05T10:18:00.001+01:00

Those of you who have been kind enough to subscribe to an email alert when a new post appears on this website may well be wondering where I have got to...the only explanation is that things happen and distractions take over.

However, a few things have happened this week that prompt me to resume blogging:

1. I am two chapters away from completing Unravelling Reading the book, and those chapters happen to include technology aids and maintaining an online community...hence the need to think about the future of this website.

2. My bid to present a poster at the BDA International Conference in Oxford , March 2016, has been accepted, so I have to make progress against the abstract I submitted. I will test things out between now and next March on this website, and hope to entice some of you to attend the conference!

3. I listened with interest to a radio programme Word of Mouth, hosted by the children's author, Michael Rosen. The broadcast in question on 28 September (you can "listen again" on BBC i player radio ) is entitled Reading: Print v eBooks.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qtnz/episodes/downloads

This is a fascinating insight into the different types of reading experience, delving into the history of printed and electronic media, and examining preferences. It introduced to me a book published earlier this year: Naomi S Baron (2015)Words onscreen: the fate of reading in a digital world. New York, Oxford University Press
https://global.oup.com/academic/product/words-onscreen-9780199315765?facet_narrowbyproducttype_facet=Digital&lang=en&cc=gb

I am half way through reading this book (on my iPad!) and it is both fascinating and at times infuriating... so hopefully my next post here will be a review of this book.

Insights from the Dyslexia Debate

2014-05-29T14:54:00.000+01:00

Elliott, J.G. and Grigorenko, E.L (2014) The Dyslexia Debate, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

I have just finished reading this book, which, it is fair to say, has caused and possibly courted some controversy in the media as well as in academic circles and among practitioners. Even before it was published, there were two excellent commentaries on it by academics who had clearly obtained advance copies:

Dorothy Bishop of St John's College Oxford
http://deevybee.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/my-thoughts-on-dyslexia-debate.html

Anne Castles, Kevin Whedall and Mandy Nayton from universities in Australia
https://theconversation.com/should-we-do-away-with-dyslexia-24027

They are both well-reasoned arguments for why we should read the book and respect its evidence base, though not necessarily agree with its ultimate conclusion that the term dyslexia should no longer be used.

Here are my thoughts. You can also read some more general comments of mine on:
http://www.dyslexiapositive.org.uk/discussion/

Elliott and Grigorenko should be commended for the thoroughness with which they review the literature on reading, touching on adults and their reading skills as well as, understandably, focussing on children. They have refreshingly wide view of the facets of reading skill, both when considering how we assess and how we make meaningful interventions to help struggling readers. They cover fluency, vocabulary and comprehension as well as decoding skills. They comment that phonics is not everything, "as the use of phonics tends to be less powerful for older struggling readers" (p 957).

They have some really useful insights into the methodology for researching reading interventions, warning the researcher about large confidence intervals in standardised test scores that make it hard to judge whether an increase in test performance (which may be statistically significant) actually reflects a "real gain." They point out that teacher interventions often generate smaller effect sizes than lab-style experiments, making it hard to compare these two fields.

The book debates the tension, when designing an intervention strategy, between going for longer duration or higher intensity of instruction, rather pessimistically concluding that neither can guarantee success with older children and adolescents who are resistant to learning. The authors seem to argue for the use of sufficiently "individualized and structured" (p 1046) programmes of support to address specific needs. However, they conclude that there is nothing special about support that is designated dyslexia support, and are particularly down on multisensory strategies.

I applaud a book that says that the most important thing is to concentrate on developing approaches that will help a struggling reader. However, I think their mission to discredit the term dyslexia has blinkered the authors, somewhat, to the strategies that those of us working in the field, particularly of adult dyslexia, have to offer to the reading debate!

Unravelling Reading, the book

2013-04-29T09:23:00.000+01:00

Apologies to my regular followers that I haven't written for some time. No real excuse. Perhaps creating new content for www.dyslexiapositive.org.uk which will be launched soon...

Anyway, I have finally made a start on Unravelling Reading, the book, designed as a guide for practitioners supporting adult readers in the AE, FE and HE sectors. I have written 5000 words so far of a chapter on assessment of reading and have a plan for the whole book. I need to have written 2 chapters before i can go searching for a publisher.

I am planning to put a box with "Summary for Key Points" with each chapter - a book about supporting reading should have tools to aid readability! I would like your opinion about whether this is best:

at the start of the chapter
at the end of the chapter
both
not at all.

Please will you all post a comment back giving your view? Thanks.

A review of WIAT

2012-11-19T12:56:00.002+00:00

I bought the WIAT-II UK-T assessment tool in my role as an assessor of adults with dyslexia. There had been a ruling that Exam Boards preferred having a standardised score for reading speed when granting Exam Access Arrangements. I didn't read the specification quite closely enough and actually the norms only go up to age 16.11 for a British test sample, but it is still useful to have US normative information for guidance.

The other thing that attracted me to this test is that it has a structured way of assessing reading comprehension, based on reading extended text, rather than sentences (as in WRAT4). Colleagues who use the Adult Reading Test (ART) for this purpose, mention several frustrations with it. I still use miscue analysis of reading for qualitative analysis, but on a less frequent basis.

So, some reflections:

The word reading subtests is similar to WRAT 4, but allows you to start at more complex words for adult subjects. The downside of this is a complicated process for returning to easier items if a reader struggles.
There is also evidence of reading accuracy and the extent of sight vocabulary embedded in the reading comprehension subtest.
The reading comprehension subtest requires adults over 18 to read and answer questions on 5 passages with no option to stop if this proves hard, which could be demoralising.
The way the test "stimulus book" is set up, the tester cannot see the passages as the reader reads. I must get round to printing off copies for myself!
The questions are sorted into categories so you can make revealing judgements about types of comprehension, e.g. drawing conclusions, implied detail, identifying fact or opinion. There are useful prompts for other qualitative observations, e.g. fluency, phonetic decoding skills.
The method of scoring and converting scores is annoyingly complicated and long-winded, requiring you to navigate through different sections of the manual and tables in the appendices. This takes time.
There is also a test of spelling.

I will continue to use this assessment tool when I want particular insights into reading comprehension or if I want to compare reading speed closely to a norm. However, I would not use it where time is tight. Nor would I use it for a reader below about GCSE level, as the passages for adults are hard and the option to reverse backwards into easier material is potentially demoralising.

I would be grateful for comments from other practitioners who have used WIAT.

WIAT-II-UK-T: Pearson Education (2006): WIAT-II-UK-T, London, Pearson Assessment.

Update on "John"

2012-11-19T12:55:00.000+00:00

It would be lovely to have a few more predictions on what you think I did next with John....

In the meantime, I am posting a review of WIAT, as promised

Intensive support the improve reading strategies

2012-11-15T10:37:00.002+00:00

I recently did a dyslexia assessment on a young man who I shall call John. John is in his second year of sixth form and applying to university to study history. John's exam grades last year were below his predicted ones. As a result of the assessment, John will have extra time in his module exams.

John's reading profile is interesting. He came out above average for word recognition and comprehension (using WIAT-II-UK-T) but his reading speed of 127 words per minute (wpm) is below average for his age. His scores in CTOPP were all average, as was his reading of non-words (TOWRE-2). I concluded that he did not have any significant problems with phonological processing, though he did show some signs of challenge with focus and attention (his speed of writing was also adversely affected by having to think abut what to write, rather than because of any difficulty with manual dexterity).

What was also notable was that John invariably chose to read aloud (to the annoyance of some of his classmates). I was intrigued about why he had got into this habit and volunteered a few hours of support during half term to look into this more.

Between the feedback on the assessment and our support session, John actually decided to go for reading silently and was happy with the result! Issue sorted? Maybe yes, maybe no. I carried on.

I decided to use an experimental method with a pre-test, post-test format, even with just 3 hours of intervention between. Using passages deemed to be A level standard (one from Klein 2003 and one of my own devising, measured to be of similar readability), John read at 153 wpm - already an improvement from reading silently - but his comprehension and recall was limited (I predicted this might be a spin off of not getting the auditory feedback loop to hold attention).

In the post-test, three hours later John achieved a reading speed of 182 wpm,and his recall covered a wider range of the passage... so what did I do in between? What would you have done? Comments please (to make this an active piece of learning!). I will reveal all in a few days time. I also plan to review the usefulness of WIAT as a test of reading in the next few weeks so stay posted to this site.

Klein, C. (2003) Diagnosing dyslexia: a guide to the assessment of adults, London, The Basic Skills Agency.

An acquired form of reading disorder

2012-10-28T12:35:00.002+00:00

Those of you who have followed this blog for some time may recall that I wrote about my mother reading using the i pad I bought to help her. She experiences wet macular degeneration, for which she periodically receives Lucentis injections. The damage in her left eye is irremediable, but her right eye is still amenable to the treatment, at least to try to maintain current levels of sight.

Her eyesight has deteriorated in the last few months, such that she is now on the largest font size that the i reader allows. Over the past few weeks I have been doing paired reading with her, to help her get back her confidence with reading, and also as a subtle way of observing how she reads. My Mum knows I am doing this partly out of intellectual curiosity and we talk about how she differs from my dyslexic clients.

The disadvantages of having such a large font size are that occasionally the longer words are hyphenated, which we know is disruptive. Also, the fact that there are so few words on the page, means it is harder to get a holistic view of the sense of the passage and what is coming up in the story line (my Mum reads fiction).
My mum's working memory is also deteriorating (she is 94!), so she doesn't always have the capacity to recall what happened a page or two ago. Paradoxically, I like having a few large words per page when reading on my i phone, as I find I can read quite rapidly, using a fast eye sweep, and challenge myself to keep up a good rhythm of turning the page.
The gaps in my Mum's visual field (a physical aspect of macular degeneration, which causes scarring on the retina, mean she misses off odd letters, or makes an incorrect prediction of what the word is because of this interference (a little like in Meares Irlen syndrome). However, unlike many of my clients she rarely missequences letters (she has gaps in her vision not distorted visual perception). Another difference is she still has a massive semantic vocabulary, so when told the correct word (during paired reading), she knows its meaning and significance and can pronounce it without faltering.

So reading with my Mum serves not only to keep us close (this harks back to my childhood when we read together right up to my teenage years) but allows me professional insight into the nature of reading difficulty in the context of dyslexia.

Reading versus listening

2012-08-17T12:50:00.000+01:00

Radio 4's Open Book programme http://bbc.in/PdKg5x hosted a discussion on talking books this week, including a brief commentary by Professor Sophie Scott of London University's Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience, on what is the difference for the brain between reading and listening.

She said that, to some extent, there is an "amodal" area of the brain that stores information, regardless of the medium by which it is acquired (whether the words are seen or heard). However, there are likely to be individual differences in which way people prefer to focus on information. Yet, because reading is a skill valued in society, some people may feel reading is superior.

One of the other commentators (Carol Blake, a literary agent) said she found it hard to concentrate when listening compared with reading and did not get so involved with the story. By contrast, Christina Hardyment (a literary critic), said that she liked audio books when reading complex novels, e.g. by James Joyce or Charles Dickens, as it was easier that way. The programme's host, Russell Kane liked audio books for listening to when driving long distances to his comedy gigs.

Listening Books is a really good subscription service if you want to access audio books. See www.dyslexiapositive.org.uk for a special offer for this organisation if you live in Birmingham.

All this reminds me of the difference, when I am assessing, between listening comprehension and reading comprehension. It is really helpful to get information on both, as illustrated in my recent discussion of "Mary."

I have been trialling WIAT-II-UK as an assessment tool that gives more detailed analysis of reading comprehension. I hope to give you a preview of some of my thoughts on this fairly soon.

More on comprehension...

2012-07-17T11:16:00.002+01:00

Many thanks to Margaret and Marysia for responding to my "brain teaser." You both have some really interesting thoughts, I agree with Margaret that comprehension can be taught. One of the strategies I devised as part of my research was an approach which I call "strategic reading" - very much about being well prepared and in the frame of mind to notice more things and taking more meaning when you read. I also concur with Marysia that an over concentration on phonics can get in the way of comprehension - both for children (getting the right strategy for reading acquisition is crucial) but also for adults. Another thing I tried in my research was keeping the approach to word attack skills a separate stage from building up fluent reading of a passage (much more to say on this!).

Anyway, back to "Mary." She had a particularly low score on the digit memory test, so that is a big factor in reading comprehension and also scored low on phonological memory in CTOPP. She also appeared to have problems with concentration, not helped by low self-esteem. Finally, "Mary" did not realise she was experiencing distortions in print. A cerium overlay test showed magenta or turquoise helped put this right and a couple of weeks later she said she was reading much faster with her reading ruler overlay. In summary, though Mary has mastered the mechanics of reading, and is an avid reader of fiction, lots of other things get in the way of her recall and understanding of facts. My conclusion is that Mary's main areas for improvement are her memory and concentration. Her strength is her fluency in reading and I wouldn't want to interfere with that.

Let me know if you would like more of these sort of case studies to discuss? I am keen to find a variety of ways of disseminating my research findings and current practice.

What is it about reading comprehension?

2012-07-11T15:11:00.000+01:00

I am doing quite a lot of dyslexia assessments at the moment and thought I would share some reflections about reading comprehension. I use WRAT 4 for word recognition and sentence level comprehension, TOWRE2 to get insight into processing visual and auditory patterns at speed and miscue analysis when I want something a little more in depth. I hope to share some more thoughts about assessment of reading in the near future on this site, so look out.

"Mary" came out in th average range for word recognition and comprehension from WRAT. Her score for nonsense words was also just average on the TOWRE (see an earlier post for my views on non-word tests), though her lower score for real words at speed brought her overall word reading efficiency down below average. She read extended text at 142 words per minute and with 98% accuracy, so miscue analysis was not possible, there being so few errors.

The big surprise came when she could only recall 40% of the detail of what she had read. Even more intriguingly, this score did not improve when I read her an equivalent level passage for listening comprehension.

I might have gone along with Kate Cain (see an earlier post) and said she had a specific problem with comprehension, but on reflection I thought....

Well why don't I let you think about it and comment back... ? I will post again in a day or two and let you know what I decided!

Readability

2012-06-22T15:29:00.002+01:00

While in California over Easter I took this photo and had the surreal thought of how good it would be to get a drive in test of readability at any time, so we could all write more accessible and crystal clear English. SMOG incidentally stands for "simplified measure of gobbledygook."

pollution is a big factor in the Bay area

Second best is the NIACE facility for checking documents:
http://www.niace.org.uk/misc/SMOG-calculator/smogcalc.php#

Readability and coherence of text is such a big factor in adults' success with reading.

Reading between the lines

2012-06-01T13:37:00.000+01:00

Followers of this blog may recall that last August I posted my thoughts on the piloting of a new phonics screening test for 6 year olds that included nonsense words.

The introduction of this test across all primary schools has prompted media interest once more. Apparently 43% of teachers involved in the pilot said the screening test highlighted children struggling with phonics that might potentially have slipped through the net. On the basis of this finding, the screening is accepted as useful for wider use (yes, like you I thought, but the other 57% presumably thought the test did not add value to the other assessments they already do...).

A particularly well rounded account of early reading experience was given by Michael Morpurgo (a former children's laureate and brilliant author for children) in the Radio 4 programmes "Reading between the Lines." You can still catch these 2 half-hour gems on i player:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01j74zc

Starting from his own view that a solution that aims to suit all children is unlikely to succeed as well as an approach that caters for individual needs, Michael discusses systematic synthetic phonics with experts from both sides of the debate. The second programme explores the history of different approaches to learning reading and looks at research that might influence interventions in the future. In particular, he talks to Usha Goswami about her work on various different aspects of the perception of sound with reference to checks on reading ability.

As usual I really wish that sometimes researchers and the media would focus on those who, for whatever reason, have slipped through the net and reached adulthood without being confident readers. In particular, my thoughts went on to those people, children now, being bombarded with phonics, who might seriously be put off reading, because phonics are not easy for them and who may end up in adult literacy classes (N.B. we don't see any particular downturn in adult literacy numbers with the different trends of child education). They, of all people, will want a mixed methodology, individualised approach to reading support that can find a creative solution for them at last.

Update from Dr Partridge

2012-05-31T17:36:00.001+01:00

So sorry to have been silent on this blog for such a long time. I can't use the excuse that I have been unaccountably busy - it doesn't take that long to post an idea. Maybe I have been waiting for closure on my Doctorate in Education, and it has finally come. I have been awarded the degree! However, I shall not be flaunting the title (much).

What this does mean, however, is that I can now start in earnest to disseminate my ideas about supporting adults' reading skills. One of my outlets will be this blog. I promise to write something new at least once a fortnight and hopefully get the debate going again. So watch this space.

Stop what you are doing and read this.

2012-01-10T14:43:00.000+00:00

If you get a chance, listen to BBC Radio 4's Book of the Week this week.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b019lvg7/Book_of_the_Week_Stop_What_Youre_Doing_and_Read_This_A_Bed._A_Book._A_Mountain/

I just heard Jeannette Winterson read the second episode and have ordered the book from Blackwells.

It is a book of essays on the process of reading and the impact it has had on the authors' lives. It has already had an airing in the book reviews, including articles and letters in the Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/30/humans-hardwired-read-books?INTCMP=SRCH

I was particularly struck by Winterson saying that "reading at a high level" (not necessarily hard material) needs a process of acclimatisation. When successful it is a way through to the world of "private thinking" and "a trained mind," with the freeedom to roam (she uses a lot a metaphors from a book she loved reading about climbing mountains).

Rather controversially she says that ADHD could be prevented by helping a person immerse themselves in the private thinking world of reading.... What do you think?

Thoughts from the Skills Conference

2011-11-09T09:02:00.000+00:00

Many thanks to everyone who came to my workshops at the Skills Conference in Nottingham on 8/11/11. See: http://wordpress.bksb.co.uk/SkillsConference/index.php/category/the-skills-conference-2011/
There were lots of very stimulating conversations and my ideas seemed to be well received. This gives me inspiration to continue on the quest to write that book and get my recommendations more widely disseminated.

Here are some initial thoughts:

It was good to hear from Ofsted that the revised common inspection framework (due to be introduced in September 2012) will embed a strengthened emphasis on the quality of teaching and learning. You can still contribute to the consultation on the new CIF for a couple of weeks: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/common-inspection-framework-2012. It certainly means any ideas to raise standards in the teaching of reading should be welcome. I still see variable coverage of reading in my inspection of literacy and functional skills.
Yes, comprehension is the key goal of reading, but I realised in responding to a query that comprehension comes at so many different levels that it is hard to pin it down, let alone measure it. It could be a look in someone's eye as you see they "get the point" or even a different intonation as you hear them read a sentence with understanding. So many of our traditional measures of comprehension rely on memory, so that the "score" can often get corrupted.
A practical thing to do might be to try to articulate some sample SMART targets for ILPs for practitioners to capture progress in developing reading skills. Watch this space for input on that!

Let me know what you think.

Reading about reading

2011-09-22T12:27:00.000+01:00

I have been doing a proof read of my thesis this week, for resubmission, and decided to use Texthelp Read &Write www.texthelp.com - to help with the process. It has been a great aid, enabling me to spot the tiniest of typos that slipped through the net the first time. It also, somehow, helped me read with greater awareness of meaning. I actually had to pause it on occasion to stop and think, not because I was displeased with what I had written, but because I perceived the message with greater clarity.

The reader (I chose "Emily", a UK English reader, and speeded her up slightly, to get through the task in an efficient way) has a pleasant voice and nice intonation. She helped me spot errors of punctuation (e.g. if the apostrophe was the wrong way round she told me it was a 'back quote.' She read 'et al.' reassuringly as 'and others.'

Most amusing, however, was the way she chose to read 'reading.' When it starts with a capital letter, as in "Reading is a complex process," she read it as a town in Berkshire,UK. She also mixed up the present and past tenses of the verb 'to read,' (obviously spelled the same) but I wasn't able to tell precisely what rule of grammar she was going by!

Yes I know should train Emily with different pronunciations, but actually I quite like her idiosyncrasies.

Congratulations

2011-08-16T09:11:00.001+01:00

Congratulations to the Gatehouse Books' title "Yes we can read" which this month won the People's Book Prize 2011 award for special achievement. I reviewed the book way back in March 2010 when it was first out (see the archive for March 2010). It has great potential as an integrated approach to phonics and reading through meaning.

You can read more about this book on http://yeswecanread.co.uk/

I would love to hear from anyone who has used this resource with adults.

Reading tests - are they all non-sense?

2011-08-12T13:36:00.000+01:00

There was a lot of fuss earlier this year about new tests of reading that are being piloted with 6 year olds this summer. The press picked up on the fact that these tests would include a set of non-words in an attempt to screen children for difficulty with phonics. The anti-testing lobby said they thought this might confuse children Wasn't reading about reading with enjoyment and interest in meaning? Non-words, by definition have no meaning.

However, I am on the side of the testers on this one. If you are going to try to identify readers who find sounding out words hard, then a test including non-words is good. The result is not biased by prior knowledge of whole word vocabulary. Readers may still use visual cues as well as phonic ones when trying to work out the non-word item (looking for patterns similar to those found in real words) but not for the word as a whole. Testers can observe whether the difficulty is in segmenting or blending sounds.

I use a test of non-words in my reading research and also in diagnosing adults with dyslexia. I favour Martin Turner's non-word test, which used to be freely available on the Dyslexia Action website. You can still get hold of it if you do a Google search. I only use it in combination with other tests, however, as it is not powerful enough on its own.

With adults, you can never be entirely sure whether a difficulty with non-words is evidence of a phonological processing difficulty or just that they were never taught phonics (depending which era they attended school). Also some adults can't avoid making the items into real words in an effort to make some sense. As always I would ask an adult about their experience and what they thought of the test to get more insight.

Coming back to the screening of children at the age of six. Finding out that a child struggles with phonics at that early stage may well be useful. However, there will always be some readers for whom phonics is a more difficult route to learning. It is to be hoped that a poor result in the screening would not just lead to more and more intensive phonics, but to a closer look at why they child is not succeeding and perhaps trying a different method.

Kate Cain and David Saldana

2011-06-05T18:13:00.000+01:00

On the final day of the BDA conference, Kate Cain (University of Lancaster) spoke very engagingly about her insights into reading comprehension. She covered the fact that good comprehension is an integrative process that allows the reader to draw information and make inferences when linking different sentences within a text. It is also a constructive process, as the reader brings in knowledge about the world from long term memory. Her research is all about children (what a shame we can't persuade more people to apply these sort of insights to adults). She has really added to our knowledge of what it means to be a poor comprehender. I have bought her book, which I hope to review here.

Incidentally, she, like many theoreticians, says that poor comprehension is not the same as dyslexia, which applies primarily to word recognition difficulties. What do we think about that, adult dyslexia practitioners?

David Saldana (University of Seville) gave one insight which rather troubled me, in distinguishing poor comprehension from hyperlexia. Hyperlexia, according to his thinking is when "the surprise" is that a child who has low intellectual capacity can nevertheless decode words easily but doesn't comprehend the messages in them. Poor comprehension is where "the surprise" is that despite good intellectual ability the reader has problems with comprehension.

Whereas I like the concept of reacting to surprises diagnostically, I was left with the sour thought that if we now reject the deficit model of dyslexia (spurious comparisons with IQ), why would we still do the same with comprehension?

I wonder what anyone else thinks?

The rest of David's talk waas rather confusing, I found, as he tried to explain how his research into autism did not seem to quite match other people's findings.