Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
The voice of the American Consortium for Equity in Education at ace-ed.org | Host Larry Jacobs facilitates rich discussions with innovative educators, thought leaders, authors and the leaders within the education industry to promote equity, access and opportunity for every student in every school.
I'm David Cicero, and this
is Education Talk Radio.
There's been a lot of attention paid
to the science of reading, but what if
knowing what the science tells us about
reading isn't the same thing as knowing
how a child actually learns to read?
That distinction is at the heart
of my conversation today with Dr.
Carolyn Brown.
She's argued that the science of
reading by itself may not be enough,
and that we need to think about it
alongside the science of learning.
So what changes when we look at reading
through both lenses, and what might
we be missing when we focus so heavily
on what we teach without thinking as
much about what the learner has to do?
Dr.
Brown, welcome to Education Talk Radio.
Thanks for joining me.
Oh, thank you so much, David,
for the invitation today, and
for that really excellent, um,
introduction to frame the question.
I, I think it was terrific.
Thank you.
Fantastic.
I'm excited for our, for
our conversation today.
So if we just jump right in, when
we say a child is learning to read,
what are we actually talking about?
What does a child have to learn
to become a proficient reader?
So I would say, first, learning
to read is a complex and
it's a developmental process.
So in the beginning, focus is placed, um,
heavily on helping students learn how to
hear s- a sound independently from a word,
so they, they can isolate that sound.
And then they map that sound to a letter
or maybe even more than one letter.
And getting that correspondence
in place is really important.
It's called the alphabetic principle,
that what you can hear, you can
actually map to a visual form.
And so there are two parts, as you
mentioned earlier, there's what you
have to know to actually decode.
When you see a word, you can map
the sounds and letters, but we
also have to know what processes
the student is employing to
actually learn this information.
So there are lots of inputs.
First of all, you have to be
able to hear the spoken word, and
language and language development is
foundational to reading development.
But then how does that information
get structured into instruction that
is meaningful, that not only lets the
child make those connections, but also
use them and generalize them so that it
becomes generative Does that make sense?
Yeah, I, I think it does.
So is decoding the, the right
place to kind of start there?
I'm wondering if you could
walk us through decoding.
So when the child encounters an
unfamiliar word, works it out,
what's happening for that learner?
Okay.
So once again, this is early on in the
reading process, and that child has to
bring the visual or letter, um, uh, to the
sound structure, and then, um, that allows
them to actually, um, sound out a word.
So they can look at a word like
bat, and they can Begin to make
those correspondences, b-a-t.
And then eventually it's not just bringing
the visual and sound together, it's
recognizing that word and what it means.
And that's a really important
part of reading and reading well.
And then after you recognize
what it means, so it has,
it has this meaning hook.
It's not just decoding so that you
can sound out words, but then with
the right practice and the right
experiences, you actually begin to
automatically recognize patterns.
So what the human brain is incredibly
good at, it, it's a pattern recognizer.
So when you have structured experiences
that allow you to see how to use those,
um, letters and sounds in new words that
you've not seen, then you're actually
automatically, you've integrated that
information in a way that when you get
a new context, you can transfer what
you've learned from your earlier reading
experiences to get decoding in place.
And with the right practice experiences
and learning opportunities, you
can begin to generalize that.
And then we're in a very,
very different situation about
getting to, um, to proficiency.
But what's really important to know is
that you can't get to fluency if you
don't have automatic word recognition.
So think about decoding, getting to
recognize words, and then automatically
recognizing those patterns so
you can go across new context.
You can actually put words together
in a sentence and begin to, to get a
much deeper understanding of meaning.
So I understand that we, we have the, the
sound, let's say, of a letter or a couple
letters, and then we see the symbol and
we make that connection, and we might
be able to say, you know, b-a-t, bat.
So within decoding, so does
decoding end at just being able to
say the word, or is there meaning
attached at that moment as well?
Like, if I'm good at decoding,
am I able to say the word
and understand what it means?
So, um, this gets into part
of the complexity of reading.
If you bring, um, a wide range of words,
vocabulary, knowledge, knowledge of how
sentence structure works, you come with,
um, a neural network that's sort of
primed to pull this out And so for many
students, being able to decode a word is
really important, and recognize patterns,
but there has to be this coordination
with meaning and structure, and that
coordination is what makes, um, the
neural networks consolidate and go to
long-term memory, and then you can easily
and quickly retrieve that information.
So for some children who come in with
less experience with language, or
maybe they don't speak the English
language, they, um, go through
these stages in different ways.
But, um, research has shown that with the
right practice and the right awareness
of what their needs are, they too can
begin to not only decode, but the quicker
that they realize that what they're
doing is making meaning while they're
decoding, then reading begins to have a
very different level of meaning for them.
So if we say this child can decode this
word, that doesn't automatically mean
that they know what the word means.
Right.
Is that, is that accurate?
Okay.
So then if we- That
could be the case, yes.
Okay.
So if we say this child can read, and
I'm not even sure if this would be
an accurate way to try to describe
this, but I'm trying to understand
the difference between decoding a word
and being able to read it fluently.
So if we were to say this child can
decode this word, that automatically,
you know, doesn't necessarily
mean they know what it means.
If we were to say the child can fluently
read it, at that point are we implying
that they also know what it means?
Wow.
Well, that's a really good question
because what you can do is, I, I
mean, as a learner, you can discern
what the patterns are, and you may
not know fully what that word means,
and until you hear it in context, it
may not become as apparent to you.
But you can, with the right
experience, begin to extract those
patterns and the way they work
inside words, and you can actually
get to- automatic word recognition.
And automatic word recognition means
that whenever you see words in text,
you're not going sound by sound,
sounding out the words laboriously.
You're able to pick them off the page.
Even if you don't know what
every word means, often you have
that automatic word recognition.
You're hearing and you're putting
it in the context, and that is
part of what has to be coordinated
to actually get to fluency.
So I don't think it's as, um,
you know, um, cut and dry that
first you do this, and then you
do this, and then you're here.
We know you have to be able to decode.
We know that children start recognizing
patterns, and they get more accurate.
But to actually generalize that, they need
practice in some very systematic ways that
allow them to transfer that information.
And then the coordination with the
language, the meaning, how syntax or
sentence structure works, all of those
things start early with a reader.
So if we spend all our time making sure
they can accurately decode without making
sure they can get to automatic word
recognition, and that we're from the
very beginning putting them in context
in which they can begin to consolidate
that information, which makes their
brain much more efficient and not as
diffuse trying to remember all these
rules or possibilities, but rather they
begin consolidating, becoming efficient,
and, um, th- using real brain power.
I think I, I suspect anyway, but that's,
that's why I'm speaking with you, that we
might be getting to this tension between
science of reading, science of learning.
So you, you've used the phrase, "The
science of reading is not enough."
What do you mean by that exactly?
Okay.
So I would like first to define
that the science of reading in
a very big frame would include,
um, lots of extant research.
The science of reading that we're
hearing a lot about now, and in fact,
um, legislation has been adopted
in 43 s- states, um, that require
science of reading in the early
grades, and this is primarily, um
The focus primarily is on the early,
um, pieces of decoding and phonics.
And it's tied to explicit and direct
instruction so that all children figure
out what those letter sound combinations,
how they work, and they get to accuracy.
And there is a lot of time and
effort spent doing that, which has
been shown to be better than if you
don't have a very systematic and
direct approach to teaching phonics.
But that doesn't get us to
proficiency for many, many children.
It works for some, and those
children who come with a really, um,
well-developed language system and,
um, it begins to make sense, they
translate that much more quickly.
So for many of the children that we're
seeing, um, and in s- many places, I mean,
nationally, um, it's about 60% of our
children who still are not reading with
proficiency, even in those states in which
we have this really important beginning.
So we're saying that we need to extend
and work on bringing in information
from the science of learning, which is a
different framework for thinking about it.
It's not focused on what the students
must learn, but the science of learning
framework actually, um, is a framework
that looks at the underlying processes
of how students learn and what
conditions support that learning so that
they can get it to long-term memory.
That was a really long answer.
I'm sorry, David.
No.
Um- No, that was, that was great.
That was great.
So when we're thinking about proficiency,
um Now does that imply that I can, um,
I, I, I have a hold on the phonics, I can
decode, and I understand what I'm reading?
Is that safe to say when we're, we're
s- we're talking about proficiency?
Yep.
I think with proficiency, that you could
say that you are comprehending that text,
because if we are not comprehending the
words on that page, if we're just lifting
them off but we've not got them integrated
into any meaning base, then we're not
comprehending, we're just reading words.
And if you have automaticity and you've
coordinated, um, and consolidated in
those neural networks, um, all of that
information, then you actually are fluent.
So that, that enhances comprehension,
and comprehension enhances fluency.
So proficiency is able to read
with fluency and comprehension,
and that's our goal Okay.
And it sounds like that next step
after decoding, which one, one of
the things sounds like automaticity
and, um, maybe comprehension, I'm
not sure, that's what pulling in the
science of learning can help us do.
So if, so if I, um, you know, I'm
a school leader, and we are- we've
invested in making sure we've got a
good foundation, um, that's standing
on the, the science of reading, can
you talk to us about what might be
missing from that and what we should be
looking to, I mean, sort of examples of
how to step forward towards leveraging
what the science of learning tells us?
Yes, I will try to do that, and feel
free to interrupt me if, um, it's going
in a direction that you think isn't,
um, helpful, and I'll try to, um,
maybe do a little better storytelling.
Um, so don't hesitate to interrupt.
Um, so I think what we're speaking
about now is this intersection
actually between the science of
reading and the science of learning.
And what I would think the best
way to think about it is that
it's not two separate, umâ¦
It, it's not like you have
to paste something together.
The science of learning is sort of
this overall frame, and within the
science of learning, um, it's recognized
that initially you need that explicit
instruction in the fundamentals so
that you know what to pay attention
to, that you know you're working with
some very explicit, identifiable parts.
But the science of learning then says once
you have, um, that explicit instruction
and you can begin working with those
parts, you need to move into conditions of
learning that actually make the learning
stick in a way that the s- the student
can use that effectively and efficiently.
So the science of learning, um,
actually is a framework that- Takes
complex skill development and it,
it helps provide the conditions to
support both automaticity and fluency.
So some examples are the science of
reading as in, in its most narrow and very
early form, the phonics, um, piece, is
focused on what has to be learned with all
those parts of sounds and, and letters.
The science of learning is a general
approach that goes across many
domains, um, like language development.
Um, sports are using the science of
learning to make practice more effective.
Um, mathematics is pulling in,
uh, these principles of practice.
Chess.
I mean, it's, it is something that
is a generalizable, um, uh, set of
principles that go into any complex
learning, and reading is complex.
And we've actually spent 15 years
translating these principles of practice
to reading, and show that it works,
these principles work also to make sure
that the information that's coming in
gets into long-term memory, is usable,
and is transferring So one example
that I often use when I'm talking with
teachers is that even though this may
sound really, um, like far field, but,
um, Caitlin Clark, um, who went to the
University of Iowa and we're in Iowa City,
Iowa, um, talks a lot about practice.
And when you watch Caitlin Clark, the
thing that you notice about her is
that no matter where she is on that
court, she has the flexibility to see
all the players at once, know where to
pass, um, whether she shoots herself
or sets someone else up, but she
talks in her, um, messaging to young
people about getting the fundamentals
in place, but then practicing them.
Practicing them in many
different conditions.
Getting so comfortable and so flexible
that when you get into the game, you
don't just see the fundamentals, you see
how those fundamentals actually support
you, and how you have gotten better
at them is doing it in many context.
Um, separating the easy from the hard,
then mixing all those conditions up.
Um, it's how you maintain focus by
making it harder, w- making that
you have to discriminate more.
And so it's not just rote and
repetit- repetitive practice.
And sometimes in the science of learning,
we wanna get them so accurate, I
mean in the science of reading, with
that decoding, that we put them in
conditions where what we're measuring
is not f- how they're learning, but
whether or not they can get to a certain
level of accuracy, and that does not
necessarily support long-term memory.
And to become automatic and fluent,
you have to be able to instantaneously
retrieve whatever, whether it's moves on
the court or whether it is, um, sounds
that have different patterns, they have
to be available to you Yeah, I really like
that, um, analogy to the basketball court.
In fact, um, my, my, my 11-year-old
is getting into basketball now, and we
go to the cul-de-sac, um, you know, a
couple times a week to, to practice,
and there it's very different to
say, "Okay, I can make it from this
spot and that spot and that spot."
It's very different to, to, to make
those shots when you get to choose
your spot, there's no one around you.
There-- You're right, it's, it's sort
of a really controlled environment.
Maybe you can become extremely proficient
and accurate at making that shot.
That doesn't mean that when you're live in
the game you'll be able to do that, right?
And so, um, you know, we do things
like do scrimmages, and we play
one-on-one and, um, you know,
shooting under pressure or you may
not be able to get to that one spot.
You might have to find a new spot
that you hadn't shot from before
if you, if you really need to.
And so I'm wondering really, what does
that look like in-- So it, it sounds like
what you're saying is that, okay, I can,
I can decode words, like I can say the
words, and it sounds like I know what I'm
talking about, and perhaps just continuing
to read texts, you know, quietly is not
the practice, is important practice,
but may not be the practice that we're
really after, that really promotes,
um, learning to read proficiently.
So how do we-- what are some examples
of changing what that practice
looks like to make sure that you've
got that automatic retrieval?
Yeah, no, that's a, a wonderful
question actually, um, and to the point.
If we set practice up in, for reading,
we can set it up in some very specific
ways so that then depending on where
the student comes into the process,
both with their background knowledge
and h-how they learn, then they are
going to need different conditions.
And I think what we're seeing in
schools across the country is that we're
trying to sort of make, in this early
period of phonics, one size fit all.
That we say, "Oh, let's
get them accurate."
But actually, if you can't attend to the
features that differentiate something,
so maybe the vowels that we don't even
recognize are very, um, what we call
close neighbors, they're very close in
the way they're produced and they might
sound, then you need to pull those apart
and contrast words with vowels that
are very different And that helps the
student know what to pay attention to
and to differentiate, and then as they
get better, you change those contrasts so
then they're seeing and practicing m- more
difficult ones, and you change the task.
So maybe you have them do an
fill-in-the-blank task, or you
have them, um, recognize words, or
you have them recognize syllables.
And what happens when you're changing
the task, and m- many people would
say, "Oh, you shouldn't go to syllables
until you get that really squared
away in the one-syllable word."
But what happens when you change
those task, the regularities
and the patterns start to pop.
So th- itâ¦
And it's not, it's practicing,
nobody's teaching you.
You're in a condition where you're
practicing, you're trying to figure
things out, and your brain is
recognizing those patterns, and it's
building th- those neural assemblies
that allow you to say, "Aha."
And so initially there's a lot of explicit
instruction, but gradually as a learner
becomes more and more experienced and
having opportunities to practice, there's
a lot of implicit or statistical learning.
Their brain is picking up on those
patterns, and they're not thinking about
each one of those steps they take, or
where their body is positioned to shoot
that ball, or how those letters line up.
They recognize patterns, and then
it is actually reading and doing
it that actually f- starts further
filling in that implicit information.
So another thing that can be done
is that you review and elaborate.
What they learned yesterday, you
bring it in, and you put it in
another context or in another task.
So you don't just assume that they got
to accuracy yesterday, they know that.
You, you ask them questions, you have them
expand or elaborate on what they know.
And what that does is it actually,
um, the harder that you work to
remember something, to use it, it
goes into long-term memory, and then
it's there to automatically retrieve.
And you do that practice systematically,
and we know what the principles are that
actually support, um, long-term memory,
and we know what the practice is that
allows children to move at their own
level to begin making these connections.
So there are many things that we can
bring this complementary practice
into the direct explicit instruction
Thanks for joining us on Education Talk
Radio, a part of the B Podcast Network.
If there's a topic you'd like us to
tackle or have a guest idea, send me
a message at dciceroedutalk@gmail.com.
Thanks for listening, and
we'll see you next time.