Simple questions: Should a baby be made to feel he is falling behind at learning to walk if he does not keep up with the median age group? Should he be made to feel that he is failing at learning to walk? Should we think of him as learning disabled? There are lots of normal babies who do not learn to walk until *twice* the age of the earliest walkers. Why should learning to read be thought to be any different?
I didn’t learn to read well until I was twelve, and that had a lot to do with having to *unlearn* some of the “basics” of reading which I had been so well instructed in–-“basics” which have stood me in very good stead ever since. The “basics” I am referring to is graphemes. I was not ready to be told that reading is decoding, and so I could only read by decoding–-I could not see the word as a whole unless someone told me what the word said. I could decode just fine. Try reading the text below as if it were a single word and you may see what I mean.
thecenterforthestudyoflanguageandinformationisanindependentlaboratory
atstanforduniversitydevotedtoresearchintheemergingscienceofinformation
computingandcognitionthisnewsciencehaditsoriginsinthelate1970sas
computerscientistslinguistslogiciansphilosopherspsychologistsandartificial
intelligenceresearchersseekingsolutionstoproblemsintheirowndisciplines
turnedtooneanotherforhelptheproblemsthatbroughtthemtogetherwere
rootedinissuesthatcrossedthetraditionalboundariesamongthedisciplinesa
sharedinterestinhowagentswhetherbiologicalorartificialacquireprocess
andconveyinformationforcedresearchersinthesedifferentfieldstoconfront
manyofthesameissuesconcerningcommunicationperceptionaction
reasoningandrepresentationmanyresearcherssawthatproblemstargetedby
theirowndisciplinewerelinkedtosolutionsintheothersandasinteraction
developedbegantoviewthecommonissuesasdefiningascienceinitsown
rightCSLIsforemostgoalistoprovideaninterdisciplinarysettingforresearch
inthisnewsciencealloftheresearchprojectscurrentlyunderwaybenefitfrom
significantinteractionacrossdisciplinesmanyarecollaborativeprojects
involvingseniorresearchersfromdifferentfieldstheinteractionhasbornfruitin
bothexpectedandunexpectedwaysbesidesbeinginterdisciplinaryCSLIisan
interinstitutionallaboratoryfoundedin1983byresearchersfromstanford
SRIinternationalandXeroxPARC CSLIhassinceitsinceptionpromoted
collaborationbetweenindustriallaboratoriesandacademicdepartmentsin
recentyearsthiscollaborationhasexpandedtoincluderesearchersfrom
additionaluniversitieslaboratoriesandcompaniesbothwithintheimmediate
geographicalvicinityandaroundtheworldCSLIsindustrialaffiliatesprogram
currentlyincludestwentycorporatemembersmanyofwhichsendresearchers
toparticipateinresearchprojectsonsitethisinterinstitutionalcollaborationhas
hadanequallyimportanteffectonthenatureandprogressofmanyCSLI
projectsithasinformedthemoretheoreticalprojectswithanawarenessof
currenttechnologyandpotentialapplicationswhileprovidingthemore
appliedprojectswithaccesstothelatesttheoreticaladvanceseachproject
focusesononeormoreaspectsoftheuseofinformationbynaturalandartificial
agentsroughlyhalfdealwithlanguagesvehiclesbywhichinformationis
communicatedbetweenagentstheseinturndivideintothoseconcernedwith
natural(human)languagesandthoseconcernedwithcomputerlanguagesthe
otherhalfdealwithavarietyofquestionsinvolvingtheacquisitionand
manipulationofinformation:howagentsacquireanduseinformationtoguide
actionwhatinformationprocessingarchitecturesarebestsuitedtovarious
taskshowrepresentationalformataffectsinformationprocessingandhuman
comprehensionandsoforththeinformationhereisintendedasarecordofthe
researchersandprojectsassociatedwithCSLIduring1994—95thepurpose
istocatalogtheprojectscurrentlyunderwayandtogiveabriefstatusreporton
eachofthemtheindividualprojectdescriptionsareprovidedvoluntarilyby
projectleadersandnoeffortismadetoguaranteeuniformityinthescopeor
detailofthedescriptionsinparticularwedonottrytogivedetaileddescriptionsof
projectresultsthoughwedopointtheinterestedreadertopublicationsinwhich
thosedetailsappear
Every word in that text is easy to make out in isolation, but, when trying to read them all stuck together like that, you have to keep figuring out where one word ends and another begins, and that is no automatic process. Now, that reading you just did was at the level of the words, so imagine the difficulty (and eye strain) of reading if you were to have to pick apart each word according to its graphemes in order to recognize the word. Imagine, further, that you are faced with a whole page of such a thing.
Good thing the ability of the visual recognition system is not limited to even a few thousand objects. I was trying ever harder to decode, and it was starting to ruin my (young and unmatured) eyes. I had assumed, since “reading is decoding”, and that people could read with ease and great speed, that there must be some simple algorithm for each word by which to decode it so quickly. Hah! No one told me of any such thing, and I didn’t ask (I *really* didn’t care at all about being able to read). I had thought that people learned to “read” (and for pleasure, no less!) by sheer practice. But I wasn’t getting one wit better at it. I did eventually begin to unlearn this decoding-is-reading nonsense, and without realizing it. But, I did not begin to read very well and for enjoyment until I was twelve or thirteen. That was after I had been “taken” out of this “school” thing. No more “learning to read” chores. Now, I read far more and widely than anyone I know, and some of these people are scholarly readers and read maybe ten hours a day sometimes.
Re: falling behind?
You make an excellent point. Some children are simply programmed to read later than others just as some babies are programmed to walk later than others. We don’t label babies as failures when they don’t walk at the same age.
But sadly that’s exactly what we do in schools. It’s also true that when I was a child, no child was expected to read in kindergarten. We all entered first grade not reading and many left first grade still not reading.
We’ve speeded up our expectations and now look askance at the child who leaves kindergarten not reading.
I recently read that in European countries, children are routinely not expected to read until the third grade and even the fourth grade.
Re: falling behind?
I have been reading this thread with interest because it mirrors what my feelings about reading readiness. “Read by grade three” is exactly what it means, expectations as to when a child should be reading multi-syllable words should be by grade three and not before. Of course, some children read earlier but we should not feel that a child is ‘learning disabled’ because they aren’t reading by first grade. Noone in the educational community seems to be looking at not only recent research, but what Piaget told us a long time ago. Our expectations for children’s reading readiness is terrible, we are making children feel terrible about themselves and then what do we do, put a label on them, aren’t we wonderful. I am a special educator who hates not only special education but the term learning ‘disabled’. In my first lecture to my 11th grade ‘learning disabled’ students, I took the blame off of them for being disabled and not being able to read or write and put it on me. Most of my students are ‘disabled’ because they weren’t taught how to read or write due to the ‘whole language’ nightmare. I told them to think of themselves as having learning ‘quirks’. That is what my daughter calls her ‘disability’. I then told them that I was going to improve their reading, writing, and comprehension skills this year and they were going to have to work hard. I have a wonderful group of students and they are now eating out of my hands. I have very small classes and I should be able to do a lot this year. I will be starting with PG, grammar and writing on Monday. Almost all of my students have aspirations of going to collage but thought that they would never be able to. I hope to make that possible. I am blessed on again finding a school that will let me do this. As a matter of fact, my Dean of Special Ed and some of the staff, including me, are going to apply for a grant, that is available through our school district. We are proposing that if, in the summer, the many programs that I use, are incorporated into a single class taught by trained staff, will improve SOL (state tests) scores for students who generally fail the SOLs. This group are, of course the LD kids. We can receive up to $50,000 for this project! The programs involved are: PG, Step Up to Writing, V/V, On Cloud Nine, Language Wise, Roots (Sopris West) and Visual Grammar by McDougal Littell (the literature program we use). I am very excited. I will let you know how it turns out. Sorry about the long post, but the preceding posts hit a nerve!
Awesome -- got my fingers crossed!!
I was amazed the first time or two at how students who were supposed to be so difficult would dig in and work… then I figured out it wasn’t just that special group of students, it was that no, most students haven’t *really* given up on themselves yet, if you don’t — *and* if you are proving to them that they can learn because they *are* learning.
YOu go Shay :) :) :)
Glad you can read now. Sorry that it seemed like a bunch of graphemes strung together before.
You said you never had any trouble decoding. It would make sense, then, that when you got the piece that was missing for you, you’d figure out how to read.
Other people have trouble decoding.
If you hadn’t learned to decode, I don’t think you’d be reading yet.