fluency

: I’d only gently say that if your son can read the archaic language of a 1939 reader, he’s doing all right. Readers from 1939 to now have changed a great deal as has society. I’m impressed that he could read it as the tone and rhythm of those old readers was very different from the way we actually speak now.Fluency is rarely a bad goal to establish for anybody. EVen adults can become more fluent readers. If they feel fluency is his issue, that means they think he can read phonetically, can sound out unfamiliar words, and just needs to pick up his speed.If you feel your son is reading at a good speed, what other problem could there be? Rarely if ever do children with reading issues read quickly. If your son is reading quickly, I would welcome understanding of what other reading issues he could possibly have.Does he understand what he reads? If he reads at a reasonable rate and understands what he reads, he’s a good reader.My son’s school district is designing a program for him around
: fluency. I am not convinced that this is his primary problem but I
: may be all wet. I timed him this morning and wondered how these
: numbers compare to norms. He is in second grade but these are for
: first grade readers which he can read pretty comfortably.: Material he had read many times before (Danny dinosaur) 85
: words/minute New material (a first grade 1939 reader called Long
: Long Ago) three separate timings-57, 54, 53, words a minute.: Thanks!

I had to laugh at your post! I actually love these old readers because they rely less on sight words than present day ones.To answer your question— My son is not reading at grade level. It has taken an inordinate amount of work on our part to get him reading fairly fluently on a mid first grade level—he is in second grade. We have just moved him into second grade readers (also of 1930-40 vintage). He has taken a very long time to remember the code and even now is now doesn’t consistently remember it. Through sheer repetition, he has become fairly automatic at a number of words. However, it still is a lot of work for him to read—he really tires—and he avoids it whenever possible. On the other hand, he does seem to understand what he reads.Testing clearly shows auditory processing problems—this is school’s testing and our private testing. If you say a word like “frog” and ask him to delete the “r” sound, he can’t do it. This is what I think is the core of his reading problems rather than fluency. The school has off the shelf programs to address fluency and prefers to focus on it, I think, even though auditory processing goals are also written into his IEP.: Fluency is rarely a bad goal to establish for anybody. EVen adults
: can become more fluent readers. If they feel fluency is his issue,
: that means they think he can read phonetically, can sound out
: unfamiliar words, and just needs to pick up his speed.: If you feel your son is reading at a good speed, what other problem
: could there be? Rarely if ever do children with reading issues
: read quickly. If your son is reading quickly, I would welcome
: understanding of what other reading issues he could possibly have.: Does he understand what he reads? If he reads at a reasonable rate
: and understands what he reads, he’s a good reader.: My son’s school district is designing a program for him around

: My son’s school district is designing a program for him around
: fluency. I am not convinced that this is his primary problem but I
: may be all wet. I timed him this morning and wondered how these
: numbers compare to norms. He is in second grade but these are for
: first grade readers which he can read pretty comfortably.: Material he had read many times before (Danny dinosaur) 85
: words/minute New material (a first grade 1939 reader called Long
: Long Ago) three separate timings-57, 54, 53, words a minute.: Thanks!A warning to keep in mind:Fluency does NOT equal speed. Fluency means reading *smoothly* and **CORRECTLY** and above all **with comprehension.**Fluency means reading at an APPROPRIATE speed, *easily*, and if reading aloud, with appropriate *expression* (which requires comprehension.)Even adults change their speeds! I had a lovely, amusing, and devastating article titled “How Fast Are the World’s Best Readers?” (Worth looking up on ERIC; 1980’s I think) In it, people from four groups were tested: Evelyn Woods/”speed reader” students, professionals in writing fields, other professionals who wrote a lot (eg medical journal editor), and high-scoring test takers. Results were: (a) fantastic speeds reported by “speed readers” are false. (b) All excellent readers go at close to the same speeds; (c) These speeds are about (I am going by memory, may not be exact) 1000 to 2000 wpm very light skimming (for topic only), 800 wpm for extremely light reading for enjoyment, 250 wpm for serious reading to learn, and even lower for special study.Many college students read at below 250wpm; I meet many at 100 to 150wpm, and remember these are high school graduates, college/university students at good schools, successful on SAT’s, and not LD.WHAT IS THE ALL- FIRED RUSH? How can it be so important to push students above 100wpm in Grade 2 — and then leave them there for the rest of their educational careers and lives??This strikes me as a very close parallel to the word-memorization system of introducing reading — we make kids imitate good readers by having them memorize words and pages right off, so at the beginning of Grade 1 they can rip off whole stories and sound like they can really read. Then they hit a brick wall where memorization won’t serve them any more, and they are stuck at a Grade 3 vocabulary for the rest of their lives.Now we are going to kill fluency the same way. We push and push for speed until the kids reach the maximum of their forcing abilities at age 7, hitting 100 to 150wpm, and while we are pushing for speed we neglect any higher-order thinking skills (takes too long to think about it, just do it) until the kids stall on ability to force themselves, and then we leave them there at a primary-school speed for the rest of their school careers and lives.Why not take some time developing skills/speed gradually?? If you gain 50wpm every year, you’ll be at 50 in Grade 1, slow but literate, 100 in Grade 2, up there with a number of high schoolers, …, 250 in Grade 5, up with high school/college; 600 at the end of Grade 12, up with the world’s best. Wouldn’t this kind of gradual and steady approach make a heck of a lot more sense than trying to do everything all at once and guaranteeing failure?I have seen too many speed-based pressures absolutely destroy a child’s reading by pushing for speed above all else.If he starts to skip words and lines and to make mistakes in meaning, you have real trouble on your hands. He has learned that the “right” thing to do is to be sloppy and careless and inaccurate, that a rough guess is good enough as long as you do it fast. This is the situation of MOST of the students I have to tutor, that they are saying things plenty fluently, but the trouble is the things they are saying have little or no relation to what is on the page.If your child is reading over 50wpm, he can read a 300-word story in six minutes, and an 500-word story in ten minutes. Look at his textbooks. I defy you to find any single topic in a Grade 2 book that will take him more than ten minutes to read at 50wpm. And most of these stories are gone over and over and over anyway.So what is the problem with this speed? Wouldn’t we rather see 50wpm accurate than 100wpm all mixed up? It’s easy to work with a 50wpm accurate reader; practice until he picks up, and if he doesn’t, make some small accommodations for extra time. It’s a killer to work with a 100wpm guesser; you have to fight tooth and nail to get him to admit he isn’t really reading and to make him slow down and actually look at the page.If a “fluency” program really helps his fluency, if he is reading more easily and smoothly and understanding better because he is not breaking off and going back too often, good!If not, stop it fast.The best fluency approach I know is to (1) teach decoding well, and then (2) to real a LOT out loud, on a reasonably easy level, reading many many books on his mastery level before moving higher. You have one 1939 reader; I also collect old books (used book stores are a good resource), and read aloud as many as four or five first readers, plus Dr. Seuss etc., for fluency before moving into Grade 2 books. I use two or three readers on each grade level, and fluency comes with practice. I won’t say it’s easy, but it does come, and the work needed is mostly just real reading.

Victoria,Thank you for your thoughtful comments. By your definition, my son is not a fluent reader. He reads correctly, with comprehension, but not easily. It is a lot of work for him to read. I don’t know if “fluency programs” will make this easier or not. As I noted to Sara, I think his underlying problem is auditory processing—inability to easily manipulate sounds in words.We have read all the Dr. Suess multiple times. We have recently started with the Nate the Great books, which he loves. I like your idea of multiple readers at first grade level. How do you balance that with his desire for more complex material? I think he is bored. He has been reading first grade material since August and it has lost its charm. I had tried out an old second grade reader on him yesterday and after my little timings, that is what he wanted to read. We do “buddy reading”—I read a page, and he reads a page. He can manage it and likes it but I don’t know if it is the best thing for him now.By the way, when I brought out the stop watch, he wanted to know “why is it important that I read fast?” He must have been talking to you.Beth: A warning to keep in mind: Fluency does NOT equal speed. Fluency
: means reading *smoothly* and **CORRECTLY** and above all **with
: comprehension.**: Fluency means reading at an APPROPRIATE speed, *easily*, and if
: reading aloud, with appropriate *expression* (which requires
: comprehension.): Even adults change their speeds! I had a lovely, amusing, and
: devastating article titled “How Fast Are the World’s Best
: Readers?” (Worth looking up on ERIC; 1980’s I think) In it,
: people from four groups were tested: Evelyn Woods/”speed
: reader” students, professionals in writing fields, other
: professionals who wrote a lot (eg medical journal editor), and
: high-scoring test takers. Results were: (a) fantastic speeds
: reported by “speed readers” are false. (b) All excellent
: readers go at close to the same speeds; (c) These speeds are about
: (I am going by memory, may not be exact) 1000 to 2000 wpm very
: light skimming (for topic only), 800 wpm for extremely light
: reading for enjoyment, 250 wpm for serious reading to learn, and
: even lower for special study.: Many college students read at below 250wpm; I meet many at 100 to
: 150wpm, and remember these are high school graduates,
: college/university students at good schools, successful on SAT’s,
: and not LD.: WHAT IS THE ALL- FIRED RUSH? How can it be so important to push
: students above 100wpm in Grade 2 — and then leave them there for
: the rest of their educational careers and lives??: This strikes me as a very close parallel to the word-memorization
: system of introducing reading — we make kids imitate good readers
: by having them memorize words and pages right off, so at the
: beginning of Grade 1 they can rip off whole stories and sound like
: they can really read. Then they hit a brick wall where
: memorization won’t serve them any more, and they are stuck at a
: Grade 3 vocabulary for the rest of their lives.: Now we are going to kill fluency the same way. We push and push for
: speed until the kids reach the maximum of their forcing abilities
: at age 7, hitting 100 to 150wpm, and while we are pushing for
: speed we neglect any higher-order thinking skills (takes too long
: to think about it, just do it) until the kids stall on ability to
: force themselves, and then we leave them there at a primary-school
: speed for the rest of their school careers and lives.: Why not take some time developing skills/speed gradually?? If you
: gain 50wpm every year, you’ll be at 50 in Grade 1, slow but
: literate, 100 in Grade 2, up there with a number of high
: schoolers, …, 250 in Grade 5, up with high school/college; 600
: at the end of Grade 12, up with the world’s best. Wouldn’t this
: kind of gradual and steady approach make a heck of a lot more
: sense than trying to do everything all at once and guaranteeing
: failure?: I have seen too many speed-based pressures absolutely destroy a
: child’s reading by pushing for speed above all else.: If he starts to skip words and lines and to make mistakes in meaning,
: you have real trouble on your hands. He has learned that the
: “right” thing to do is to be sloppy and careless and
: inaccurate, that a rough guess is good enough as long as you do it
: fast. This is the situation of MOST of the students I have to
: tutor, that they are saying things plenty fluently, but the
: trouble is the things they are saying have little or no relation
: to what is on the page.: If your child is reading over 50wpm, he can read a 300-word story in
: six minutes, and an 500-word story in ten minutes. Look at his
: textbooks. I defy you to find any single topic in a Grade 2 book
: that will take him more than ten minutes to read at 50wpm. And
: most of these stories are gone over and over and over anyway.: So what is the problem with this speed? Wouldn’t we rather see 50wpm
: accurate than 100wpm all mixed up? It’s easy to work with a 50wpm
: accurate reader; practice until he picks up, and if he doesn’t,
: make some small accommodations for extra time. It’s a killer to
: work with a 100wpm guesser; you have to fight tooth and nail to
: get him to admit he isn’t really reading and to make him slow down
: and actually look at the page.: If a “fluency” program really helps his fluency, if he is
: reading more easily and smoothly and understanding better because
: he is not breaking off and going back too often, good!: If not, stop it fast.: The best fluency approach I know is to (1) teach decoding well, and
: then (2) to real a LOT out loud, on a reasonably easy level,
: reading many many books on his mastery level before moving higher.
: You have one 1939 reader; I also collect old books (used book
: stores are a good resource), and read aloud as many as four or
: five first readers, plus Dr. Seuss etc., for fluency before moving
: into Grade 2 books. I use two or three readers on each grade
: level, and fluency comes with practice. I won’t say it’s easy, but
: it does come, and the work needed is mostly just real reading.

: Through sheer repetition, he has become fairly
: automatic at a number of words. However, it still is a lot of work
: for him to read—he really tires—and he avoids it whenever
: possible.It sounds as if he does not read phoenetically.: Testing clearly shows auditory processing problems—this is school’s
: testing and our private testing. If you say a word like
: “frog” and ask him to delete the “r” sound, he
: can’t do it.Are they saying that’s auditory processing? I’m not saying your son might not have an issue with auditory processing, but asking a young child to “drop the r” from the spoken word frog is more relying on their ability to break the code than processing language. To drop the r, even in spoken language, you have to be able to break the word into its sounds and you have to know that a “r’ is the symbol for rrrrr sound which in frog is hiding behind the ef sound. Spoken language is well blended. Frankly, I think the task of dropping the r from frog is a hard one for any young child, reading issues or not.Does he IEP include any work with a reading specialist?Good luck.This is what I think is the core of his reading
: problems rather than fluency. The school has off the shelf
: programs to address fluency and prefers to focus on it, I think,
: even though auditory processing goals are also written into his
: IEP.

My son has been taught to read using PG. It took him an incredible amount of time to become automatic at all. For example, he must have encountered the word “must” a hundred times and sounded it out each time before he recognized the word “must”. That’s what I meant by repetition. The school tried last year to teach him sight words. It was a total failure because, as we have since learned, his visual memory is weak.PG refers to manipulating sounds as auditory processing but you are right it is a much broader term. I have been told though by several different people, both in the school and outside it, that the ability to easily manipulate sounds is a critical skill to reading. My son also has CAPD so he certainly has other auditory processing problems as well.He is supposed to be in resource room but that’s another story.: It sounds as if he does not read phoenetically.: Are they saying that’s auditory processing? I’m not saying your son
: might not have an issue with auditory processing, but asking a
: young child to “drop the r” from the spoken word frog is
: more relying on their ability to break the code than processing
: language. To drop the r, even in spoken language, you have to be
: able to break the word into its sounds and you have to know that a
: “r’ is the symbol for rrrrr sound which in frog is hiding
: behind the ef sound. Spoken language is well blended. Frankly, I
: think the task of dropping the r from frog is a hard one for any
: young child, reading issues or not.: Does he IEP include any work with a reading specialist?: Good luck.: This is what I think is the core of his reading

: Victoria,: Thank you for your thoughtful comments. By your definition, my son is
: not a fluent reader. He reads correctly, with comprehension, but
: not easily. It is a lot of work for him to read. I don’t know if
: “fluency programs” will make this easier or not.I am in agreement with a previous post by victoria. My feeling is that if the child has read a book numerous numerous times before,he’s learning to memorize a script more than anything else. Using many different “readers” is a good idea because it allows him to keep reading different material at an easy level. I would recomend also using exercises from books like Reading Reflex-McGuinness and Hooked on Phonics. You can vary the material. Maybe do some reading, some exercises for a while, only one or the other for a while. With the exercises,you can get a game like Jenga( you build a tower with blocks and keep taking blocks from the bottom until it collapses) jigsaw puzzles, etc. Each time the child reads a word or a line of words they get a turn. It keeps them doing the phonics without complaint longer. Sometimes if you see a pattern to the errors you can make up your own material. Right now I’m still having trouble with my son attaching unnecessary consonant clusters to letters when reading out of context. I took the consonant cluster section from hooked on phonics and added similar words without the cluster like lack back (black), or bunch (brunch)and I’m making him switch back and forth without establishing a set pattern. When he’s got the phonics down the fluency will come. ( I hope he’s had an eye exam- and you should know there are eye problems that don’t show up in a standard eye test that require specialist to diagnose.)As I
: noted to Sara, I think his underlying problem is auditory
: processing—inability to easily manipulate sounds in words.: We have read all the Dr. Suess multiple times. We have recently
: started with the Nate the Great books, which he loves. I like your
: idea of multiple readers at first grade level. How do you balance
: that with his desire for more complex material? I think he is
: bored. He has been reading first grade material since August and
: it has lost its charm. I had tried out an old second grade reader
: on him yesterday and after my little timings, that is what he
: wanted to read. We do “buddy reading”—I read a page,
: and he reads a page. He can manage it and likes it but I don’t
: know if it is the best thing for him now.: By the way, when I brought out the stop watch, he wanted to know
: “why is it important that I read fast?” He must have
: been talking to you.: Beth

: Victoria,: Thank you for your thoughtful comments. By your definition, my son is
: not a fluent reader. He reads correctly, with comprehension, but
: not easily. It is a lot of work for him to read. I don’t know if
: “fluency programs” will make this easier or not. As I
: noted to Sara, I think his underlying problem is auditory
: processing—inability to easily manipulate sounds in words.: We have read all the Dr. Suess multiple times. We have recently
: started with the Nate the Great books, which he loves. I like your
: idea of multiple readers at first grade level. How do you balance
: that with his desire for more complex material? I think he is
: bored. He has been reading first grade material since August and
: it has lost its charm. I had tried out an old second grade reader
: on him yesterday and after my little timings, that is what he
: wanted to read. We do “buddy reading”—I read a page,
: and he reads a page. He can manage it and likes it but I don’t
: know if it is the best thing for him now.: By the way, when I brought out the stop watch, he wanted to know
: “why is it important that I read fast?” He must have
: been talking to you.: BethOK, when first-grade readers have lost their charm, that’s a very good sign that he’s ready to make the move into second-grade readers.I see in your other notes that you have done Phonographix. I’m not personally familiar with the program, but it certainly sounds like a good one from posts by responsible and knowledgeable people here.Have you done any workbooks on phonics, either with PG or others? I am absolutely all for oral phonics (only way to go teaching auditory stuff!) but a written workbook has a couple of advantages too: it reinforces the oral learning by providing yet another form of repetition, writing the letters is a kinesthetic tie-in to the phonics and letter recognition, and getting a gold star for a completed page and a reward certificate (or some such) for a complete book is a great success motivation. I sound like a salesperson for Scholar’s Choice, but I just like the Check & Double-Check phonics - clear and no-frills; many others are good too.If I were working with a kid at your son’s level, ie having gotten a good start with oral phonics from PG and having read Grade 1 material to death, I would tell him he’s ready to “graduate” into a new level with more advanced reading. Then I’d start on a two-pronged approach, Grade 2 readers with carefully planned progressive language development, and a “review” (actually reteaching as needed) of Book 1 phonics for a month or two before progressing into Book 2 (Book 2 is pretty close to the PG “advanced code” from what I can pick up in casual reading here). I would show him Books 2 and 3 and tell him he’s graduating into this advanced work, but just to warm up we’ll go over Book 1 quickly first. This integrates the student into the new program without either insult or omission of any vital steps.Your buddy reading approach is exactly the pattern I use — you read a page, I read a page. It makes the reading a cooperative effort, a shared interest, and gives the student a chance to take a breather in between his phases of hard work. Also, you get to model the pattern you are looking for, a nice steady pace, pointing to each word, pronouncing clearly, and reading with expression. We also stop each page or two for a short discussion — not a quiz, but an honest discussion of what is going on and what we think about the characters and plots.When working with new readers on a higher level, if you haven’t done so already, you might want to start a “word bank”. I use file cards and a marker. Every time we come to a new word and sound it out, I print it neatly on its own card with a good large marker. We spell it, sound it out again, have the student trace the letters with his finger to get the feel of how it’s written (that’s why large marker), note silent letters and irregular letters and digraphs/vowel combinations, say it again, discuss its meaning, etc. Then we place the new words in a file box. Every now and then we go through the file box and work on recognizing these words. Those that give no further trouble get retired to a stack on the shelf, and we note now and then how big the mastery stack is getting. Good practice and motivation.Don’t worry about fluency — it *will* come with the kind of work you are doing. Right now your son is not fluent on Grade 1 work, although he probably reads pre-primers prety easily. If you work on Grade 2 work and automatizing decoding, in six months he will be fluent on Grade 1 books. Fluency falls behind highest instructional level, by nature. Highest instructional level is where he is pushing himself to learn something new, and fluent level is the level he has alredy mastered.Enjoy yourselves!

I think I’ve asked this question multiple times, but it’s always good for me to get ‘refreshers’.What are some of your ideas for helping the 100wpm poor guesser? I think my dd is in that category - or a least heading for it. A week ago, both my husband and I felt we had made progress - she seemed to be decoding more words(longer multisyllable words) from start to finish. This week, I feel like we are back to where we were a month ago?She tends to be a fast talker. I’m also realizing that when I read to her, I need to be slowing down more.Any other suggestions? (I like Scribin’s Jenga idea too).

My son actually is still in eye therapy—still working on eye teaming. Supposedly his tracking was OK in October but he has been skipping lines lately. I think it has showed up because now there is more text on the page, as his reading has progressed.: I am in agreement with a previous post by victoria. My feeling is
: that if the child has read a book numerous numerous times
: before,he’s learning to memorize a script more than anything else.
: Using many different “readers” is a good idea because it
: allows him to keep reading different material at an easy level. I
: would recomend also using exercises from books like Reading
: Reflex-McGuinness and Hooked on Phonics. You can vary the
: material. Maybe do some reading, some exercises for a while, only
: one or the other for a while. With the exercises,you can get a
: game like Jenga( you build a tower with blocks and keep taking
: blocks from the bottom until it collapses) jigsaw puzzles, etc.
: Each time the child reads a word or a line of words they get a
: turn. It keeps them doing the phonics without complaint longer.
: Sometimes if you see a pattern to the errors you can make up your
: own material. Right now I’m still having trouble with my son
: attaching unnecessary consonant clusters to letters when reading
: out of context. I took the consonant cluster section from hooked
: on phonics and added similar words without the cluster like lack
: back (black), or bunch (brunch)and I’m making him switch back and
: forth without establishing a set pattern. When he’s got the
: phonics down the fluency will come. ( I hope he’s had an eye exam-
: and you should know there are eye problems that don’t show up in a
: standard eye test that require specialist to diagnose.): As I

PASSWORD>aabL3A4qSQ7sAMy son (9yrs, 3rd grade, getting Resource Room help) has a significant word retrieval deficit (also called RAN). His decoding is fine, but it takes a while for him to retrieve the word and say it outloud. In the reading I’ve done (Journal of Learning Disabilities August 2000) if I understand the MRI studies, it’s as if these people with rapid naming/word retrieval —when they are reading — sort of “hold onto” the word they’re looking at for a little longer (micro/milli?? seconds) before they move onto the next word, thus their overall rate is slowed.We have been using Read Naturally at home (and now my son’s Special Ed teacher is buying it for the school). Also Great Leaps— we mostly use the phrases section.Also, when reading with my son, we often alternate pages (he reads one, then I read one)or more often alternate with him reading one page alone and me reading the next along with him. When we read together, it does a couple of things…it speeds him upa bit, I model the expression and the pauses at the periods and commas, and it supplies the unknown words without any stress. But it provides more “work” for him than just listending to me read. (Although I’ve been doing this for some time, I’ve been told that this method has a fancy name —neurological impress.So with all these methods, we are making progess slowly but surely. Kathleen

: I think I’ve asked this question multiple times, but it’s always good
: for me to get ‘refreshers’.: What are some of your ideas for helping the 100wpm poor guesser? I
: think my dd is in that category - or a least heading for it. A
: week ago, both my husband and I felt we had made progress - she
: seemed to be decoding more words(longer multisyllable words) from
: start to finish. This week, I feel like we are back to where we
: were a month ago?: She tends to be a fast talker. I’m also realizing that when I read to
: her, I need to be slowing down more.: Any other suggestions? (I like Scribin’s Jenga idea too).The fast guesser is not easy to work with. As I said, I find it to be a battle of wills. You want the kid to really read, and she has learned a habit of rushing that gets her a modicum of success and praise from everybody else except you, you old meanie.I insist on going back and really reading any sentence read with an error. Once the student sees how many errors she is really making, she may be embarrased enough to try to do better.A gold star or other symbolic award for each page read without guessing can help sometimes.In an extreme case, I had to cut a notch out of a corner of a file card and lead it along the line of print to force the boy’s eyes to track the line and attend to the word he was supposed to be reading. He hated it, said he sounded like a robot, but quickly started to actually track along the lines.Reading lists of words in isolation, with a gold star or such for each list read perfectly, may also help attention, but you still have to put your foot down to stop the return to rushing when you go back to connected text.For a bright student who rises to challenges, you can try giving her a book that is on the high edge of her reading level, so she cannot guess enough of the words to get away with it.You can also try giving a high-level book and comprehension exercises written for it, so she has to read for detail to answer the questions.There’s a grab-bag of ideas; try them on for size and see, I guess.

Thanks, I will try those. It’s very frustrating. I find a good majority of the time, she is not even looking at the words -but rather the pictures. You can see her eyes float back and forth from text to picture - mid-sentence(happens more with the higher level books, the harder ones to decode). What’s frustrating is that, if we get her to look and READ the word - she usually gets it right!I think it’s a decoding issue - she’s not terrific at blending and segmenting. It’s not natural for her and she has a hard time remembering the code. (just today, an easy word like BUG - she read, BIG, then BAG and finally BUG.)

From reading this thread I see those of us who labelled as being on the fluency bandwagon have a lot of educating to do. As mentioned earlier, fluency is far, far more than speed. Yet, to those critics who do not feel we should measure the rate of reading - rate is a critical measure. Yet, for there to be comprehension, a number of elements are involved - more than I will list, time be a restraining factor:(1) the reading rate must comfortably approach oral rates of speech - by comfortably, the reader needs to have mastered the work of reading so the words come rather effortlessly;(2) there must be correct intonation as the passage is read - no computer or tape recorder can measure this accurately at present;(3) the reader must have background (prior knowledge) about the subect being read;(4) there must be motivation - one of the main reasons we do intensive work in small one minute bursts of time is to reduce the “fatigue factor” so it approaches zero. Punishment is one of the main inhibitors of performance for our children having reading difficulties. For reasons beyond my comprehension, this society teaches children to read through a vast array of punishers - one example being our insistance upon focusing upon the inappropriateness of errors. Eventually, we extinguish the child’s willingness to take a chance.I hope this helps those who oppose timers and timings see our perspective: in 25 years of teaching, I have yet to encounter a student who could not comfortably perform and improve with regular timings. For those encountering problems, I’d suggest something else behavioral is up. As usual, thanks to all on this board for their informed comments and good attitudes!

Ah, yes, the circle around and guess pattern. My fourth-grade non-reader did that.Short and simple solution — cover the pictures.Note I didn’t say easy; she will complain bitterly. Of course; you’ve taken away her crutch.First try — cover the pictures with a large file card and tell her you will uncover the picture and let her see it as a reward when she reads the story.Second try, if she insists on peeking — take a good story and either photocopy or computer-copy the text with no pictures at all. You can try telling her she’s too grown-up to read picture books and is ready to learn to read real words; it might work, or you might have to just insist.If you can get her to track and really attend to the words in this way for even a few hours, a week or so of tutoring time, you and she will suddenly one day find that her reading skills are a heck of a lot better than either of you realized. She has just been using something easier and not putting her thinking skills into practice.: Thanks, I will try those. It’s very frustrating. I find a good
: majority of the time, she is not even looking at the words -but
: rather the pictures. You can see her eyes float back and forth
: from text to picture - mid-sentence(happens more with the higher
: level books, the harder ones to decode). What’s frustrating is
: that, if we get her to look and READ the word - she usually gets
: it right!: I think it’s a decoding issue - she’s not terrific at blending and
: segmenting. It’s not natural for her and she has a hard time
: remembering the code. (just today, an easy word like BUG - she
: read, BIG, then BAG and finally BUG.)

Ken — I do agree with you totally that *fluency* is a valid goal. The problem is that a lot of stuff is being done called “fluency” that is nothing of the sort. As is typical in this society, if enough is good, far too much is better; children are being pushed to do triathlons (forget just running, that’s passe) before they can walk. You mention the punishment problem; well, here’s a kid age seven who has just mastered an astoundingly complex system of thinking, our reading system, in only one year, and who is still thinking deeply about the basics; and instead of complimenting the kid on mastering what took thousands of years of history to develop, we put a timer on him and make him feel horrible and ashamed and stressed because he isn’t already up to adult speed.Maybe you haven’t seen a kid who couldn’t improve with timing; well, I have — most of my students. I work as a small-time low-profile private tutor, and I get people who are in the last stages of desperation in teaching their kids, people who will hunt me out. Most of the kids I teach have underlying difficulties, from genetic disorders on one side to never having been taught the alphabet on the other, and they have been severely damaged by well-intentioned but misguided attempts to help them, often focusing on speed. If you can’t tell “cat” from “dog”, guessing it twice as fast will only double the number of errors you make!! If reading is a painful mystery to you, running at speed is just going to make it more painful and even less meaningful.When I taught in a classroom, the kids I had were very economically/socially marginalized and had to be dragged out of an expectation of failure; speed tests would only have confirmed to them that they were indeed hopeless.Yes, I *do* work on fluency, a *lot*. First I make sure my students know the alphabet and the basic phonic code and a base vocabulary, and until that is done fluency, by any responsible definition, is not yet on the horizon. Then I work on oral reading and developing vocabulary and basic comprehension. Again, until you know a couple of hundred words dependably, fluency is pretty far down the road. And until you will open a book and actually read it and care a little about what you’re reading, fluency is not the issue.Then I start working on very carefully chosen, very well-designed books that use real sentence structure, complex sentences and all, at restricted/developmental vocabulary levels. I read extensively with my students, providing a lot of support and modelling by alternating pages with them, and discussing the pages we read as long as and in any way we feel like. We slog our way through related writing exercises and workbooks to develop vocabulary and handwriting and sequencing and all that, and we talk honestly about how we feel about that, too. Fluency starts to creep in under the door with steady practice, success, modelling, comprehension, interest, personal involvement, and all the rest.One of the best things about biting my tongue and waiting for fluency in its own good time is that there is never any regression; kids who learn something by taking it into their personal mental construction of the universe really learn it, and something really learned is not forgotten. My kids consistently keep improving on test scores after they leave me.A few years ago I took a math education course with a nice but misguided young lady who was all for what went under the name that year of “content-free math.” The idea was that you would teach (in high school or even elementary, yet!) the theories of mathematical logic, without hanging up on the details of particular mathematical applications. Proofs without geometry to hang them on, equations without algebra problems to develop them from, trig functions without any messy real angles, and so on. Of course this was the “New Math” disastrous idea all over again. It didn’t work then, and it isn’t going to work now or ever. (Senior university and grad school math majors do study formal logic unattached to applications, but that’s after several years of preparation and a deliberate choice to learn this)Fluency training without really reading books strikes me as much the same thing. What are we getting fluent *for*? Why should the student care, and for that matter, why should I?Well, yes, a student who has bogged down or plateaued out may need a push forward to get going again, and I’m not going to say it’s always a bad idea.Just to reiterate what I said, that fluency does *not* equal speed, and that speed (and fluency) develop out of a complex of skills — in which case I’m *agreeing* with you, durnit! — and going over the same sheet until it is committed to memory, and stress-inducing sessions with timers are, in all my experience, very counterproductive.: From reading this thread I see those of us who labelled as being on
: the fluency bandwagon have a lot of educating to do. As mentioned
: earlier, fluency is far, far more than speed. Yet, to those
: critics who do not feel we should measure the rate of reading -
: rate is a critical measure. Yet, for there to be comprehension, a
: number of elements are involved - more than I will list, time be a
: restraining factor: (1) the reading rate must comfortably approach
: oral rates of speech - by comfortably, the reader needs to have
: mastered the work of reading so the words come rather
: effortlessly;: (2) there must be correct intonation as the passage is read - no
: computer or tape recorder can measure this accurately at present;: (3) the reader must have background (prior knowledge) about the
: subect being read;: (4) there must be motivation - one of the main reasons we do
: intensive work in small one minute bursts of time is to reduce the
: “fatigue factor” so it approaches zero. Punishment is
: one of the main inhibitors of performance for our children having
: reading difficulties. For reasons beyond my comprehension, this
: society teaches children to read through a vast array of punishers
: - one example being our insistance upon focusing upon the
: inappropriateness of errors. Eventually, we extinguish the child’s
: willingness to take a chance.: I hope this helps those who oppose timers and timings see our
: perspective: in 25 years of teaching, I have yet to encounter a
: student who could not comfortably perform and improve with regular
: timings. For those encountering problems, I’d suggest something
: else behavioral is up. As usual, thanks to all on this board for
: their informed comments and good attitudes!

: I stand appropriately corrected on the simplistic definition of fluency as mere speed. I stand inappropriately quoted as saying fluency is a bad goal. I’d also offer that no post of mine ever labelled anyone as “being on the fluency bandwagon.”Your points about timers and timings would be a separate discussion and one you must have had with someone else.From reading this thread I see those of us who labelled as being on
: the fluency bandwagon have a lot of educating to do. As mentioned
: earlier, fluency is far, far more than speed. Yet, to those
: critics who do not feel we should measure the rate of reading -
: rate is a critical measure. Yet, for there to be comprehension, a
: number of elements are involved - more than I will list, time be a
: restraining factor: (1) the reading rate must comfortably approach
: oral rates of speech - by comfortably, the reader needs to have
: mastered the work of reading so the words come rather
: effortlessly;: (2) there must be correct intonation as the passage is read - no
: computer or tape recorder can measure this accurately at present;: (3) the reader must have background (prior knowledge) about the
: subect being read;: (4) there must be motivation - one of the main reasons we do
: intensive work in small one minute bursts of time is to reduce the
: “fatigue factor” so it approaches zero. Punishment is
: one of the main inhibitors of performance for our children having
: reading difficulties. For reasons beyond my comprehension, this
: society teaches children to read through a vast array of punishers
: - one example being our insistance upon focusing upon the
: inappropriateness of errors. Eventually, we extinguish the child’s
: willingness to take a chance.: I hope this helps those who oppose timers and timings see our
: perspective: in 25 years of teaching, I have yet to encounter a
: student who could not comfortably perform and improve with regular
: timings. For those encountering problems, I’d suggest something
: else behavioral is up. As usual, thanks to all on this board for
: their informed comments and good attitudes!

Ken,I have your Great Leaps program in my study. I would be curious to hear from the horse’s mouth where/when you see such programs as fitting in to a reading program. It looks like a good program but my gut instinct is my child isn’t ready for it yet. I would be interested in your reaction.I did some timed readings with him. He seemed to think it was a good game for a day, really pushed himself on day 2, and then balked on day 3. I didn’t push n day 3 because on day 2 (he had got near 70 words a minute from mid 50’s the day before) I saw him making lots of errors. He was going for speed and missing words that given a few minutes he could correctly decode (for example he said “eat” for “ate” and “poil” for “boil”. He is not a fast reader (40-50 words a minute I would guess when not timed, mid 50-65 timed) but my instinct is that his greater problem is with decoding. He still does not consistently decode new words correctly, even those which are similar in structure to those he already knows. I was thinking that getting decoding down should be first priority and that an emphasis on speed should come afterwards. In the mean time, lots of reading at his present reading level should help both goals.What do you think? I also guess I am concerned that emphasizing speed at this stage of the game through timed readings will make him sloppy at decoding. He already tends towards guessing when he doesn’t know something instead of decoding it and as his speed increased this got much worse. I have always thought of fluency programs as for kids who have decoding down pretty well but still aren’t reading very fast.BethFrom reading this thread I see those of us who labelled as being on
: the fluency bandwagon have a lot of educating to do. As mentioned
: earlier, fluency is far, far more than speed. Yet, to those
: critics who do not feel we should measure the rate of reading -
: rate is a critical measure. Yet, for there to be comprehension, a
: number of elements are involved - more than I will list, time be a
: restraining factor: (1) the reading rate must comfortably approach
: oral rates of speech - by comfortably, the reader needs to have
: mastered the work of reading so the words come rather
: effortlessly;: (2) there must be correct intonation as the passage is read - no
: computer or tape recorder can measure this accurately at present;: (3) the reader must have background (prior knowledge) about the
: subect being read;: (4) there must be motivation - one of the main reasons we do
: intensive work in small one minute bursts of time is to reduce the
: “fatigue factor” so it approaches zero. Punishment is
: one of the main inhibitors of performance for our children having
: reading difficulties. For reasons beyond my comprehension, this
: society teaches children to read through a vast array of punishers
: - one example being our insistance upon focusing upon the
: inappropriateness of errors. Eventually, we extinguish the child’s
: willingness to take a chance.: I hope this helps those who oppose timers and timings see our
: perspective: in 25 years of teaching, I have yet to encounter a
: student who could not comfortably perform and improve with regular
: timings. For those encountering problems, I’d suggest something
: else behavioral is up. As usual, thanks to all on this board for
: their informed comments and good attitudes!

There is quite a lot of response I feel entitled to do - tonight, I can’t. I have to go teach tomorrow - and yet have a bundle of work to get ready for my staff tomorrow. Sara, my response - in particular the use of the words “fluency bandwagon’ were not an address to you, but to a host of ld onliners. Great Leaps became known as a fluency program because the word is in vogue - we in the movement known as precision teaching having been going for fluent speeds and measuring them with timers for quite some time.Students stressed and destroyed by many in education often find redemption with our techniques. We can be very easily misinterpreted. There are others who look like us with their timers, etc. but haven’t a clue.I’ll respond to this line in depth near the weekend. I have to go to Tallahassee to lobby for lower ESE class sizes, better college coursework, and the addition of a specialty area: the educational behavior analyst.thanks to all for the work on this board: Ken Campbell

Trying what I interpreted to do to receive this topic and posts associated with it. Thank you.