Reflection on Reading in the 20th Century

 

What is the difference between the look-say and the phonics approaches to teaching reading. What did the first grade studies tell us about these methods?

Mitford Mathews’s reading method words-to-reading, or look-say, introduces a large amount of vocabulary words as sight words to the reader. For instance, the teacher would introduce a letter and then provide a list of words and ask the learner to “note or listen for similarity between sounds of letters in each word” (Cobb & Kallus, 2011, p. 16). Matthews look-say method was widely accepted for most of the 20th century. After sight words are introduced, the student would be introduced to analytic phonics, or generalizations, which were applied to a particular sound correspondence.  The idea that readers would respond more rapidly as they recognize whole words, or look-say, rather than a letter-sound relationship.

Phonics approaches to reading teach the student the sound to say each time they observe a symbol, or a sound to a letter approach. The learner is then motivated to decode words that they encounter. Prior to the first grade studies, reading began in first grade. Sight words, or the look-say method, was used, and analytic phonics introduced. Vocabulary was tightly controlled in grades 1-3, and children worked in small groups. However, the first grade studies highlighted a need to revamp the entire education system, as Chall found that an early code emphasis would be beneficial toward word recognition at an earlier age. As a result, a greater emphasis and intensity was placed on phonics at an earlier age. A change in curriculum was implemented. No longer did schools employ the Dick and Jane approach in first grade. Students were introduced to a wider library collection, to include a focus on children’s literature, with little vocabulary restriction.

Look at the examples of texts in the table on p. 29. What was the underlying assumption about how reading should be taught for each type of text?

Each example provides an opportunity for educators to explore how to best help a student learn to read, not to to focus on teaching a student to read, an idea expanded upon by Frank Smith (1971). Smith valued the importance of literacy experiences on cognition and stressed the importance of value texts for early readers.  He also suggested that a mistake was an opportunity to explore the inner workings of the child’s mind, with a focus on cognitive processes and strategies. Each example provides a strategy using value text to assist the teacher. Example one employs patterns, language rhyming,  so that the early reader can predict what is coming next and then understands the meaning. It reminds me of the same principles and strategies that we currently utilize when using a program like flocabulary. It is a great way to introduce vocabulary to students. Students are engaged and can predict what is coming next using language rhyming. The other two examples rely on high frequency words and are the best approach toward engaging beginning readers. Example two utilize rhythm patterns, repetition, and rendition so that the learner can interpreting and interacting with text. Decoding text, the third example, utilize phonics and is not the preferred choice. A beginner can learn one or two words from repetition but do they really know what the words mean? Example one incorporates an improved approach because it encompasses a language rhyme and patterns to help the emerging reader make sense of the words read. It is interesting to me that Smith (1971) warns of the dangers of relying heavily of visuals when so much screen time is placed in front of our students in K-12 environments.

How does the notion of integrated curriculum relate to the ideas proposed by sociolinguistics?

Both rely on the premise that perspectives, rooted in cultural heritages, should be valued and contribute toward improving knowledge acquisition through a global lens. Both examples create a more meaningful approach, as differences are valued and not seen as a shortcoming. For example, integrating curriculum can break down barriers between core content areas so that diverse learners can make sense of how each content area contributes to the “real world”. Sociolinguistics adopts this same concept, as the idea values dialects. Integrating dialects exposes learners to new cultures and communities of thought through perspectives. Learners can learn dialects from each other, and as a result, learners develop a better understand of how language differences can contribute toward a better understanding of community. Both approaches create a more globally competent student. In addition, both integrated curriculum and sociolinguistics adopt the idea that reading and language is best understood when put to use for another purpose, learning activity, or event.

Cobb, J. B., & Kallus, M. K. (2011). Historical, theoretical, and sociological foundations of reading in the united states. Boston, MD: Pearson Education Inc.

Smith, F. (1971). Understanding Reading: A Linguistic Analysis of Reading and Learning to Read. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

 

 

Comments

One response to “Reflection on Reading in the 20th Century”

  1. Mark Pennington Avatar

    It seems, if I understand you correctly, that you are lumping the look-say sight word method with phonics. A mistake Goodman (and Smith) make regarding the cueing systems.

    We can’t go back to the psycholinguistic guessing games of the past. Since the National Reading Panel in 1985, the reading research has overwhelming supported teaching the alphabetic code to beginning and remedial readers.

    Phonics is simply a means to an end. To say that phonics does not lead to meaning begs the question.

Leave a comment