|
|
Before outlining the philosophy and design features of The
Sentence Master, it is useful to set it within the context of
the major developments that have been taking place in the field
of reading disabilities and reading instruction.
THE PROBLEMS OF POOR READERS
Beyond a Visual Deficit
From the standpoint of diagnosis, the past two to three decades
have been remarkable. We now know far more than we ever did
about the problems disabled readers face when they look at the
printed page (Stanovich, 1985; Vellutino, 1987). And, what we
now know is far different from what was formerly thought to be
the case.
For many years, studies of poor readers focused on the
supposition that visual processing problems were central to
their difficulties (Orton, 1937). This was only reasonable;
after all, almost all of them seemed to have mastered their
spoken language, but were not mastering their written language.
The salient difference between the two systems is the sensory
modality. Spoken language primarily involves the auditory
modality while written language primarily involves the visual
one. From this perspective, it was an easy jump to conclude that
failure with written language was based on problems in
processing visual information.
In some cases, this was, and is, true. Visual problems can
account for some reading difficulties. But, as summarized by
Keith Stanovich, the overwhelming conclusion of this line of
research is that "deficits in visual processing account for an
extremely small proportion of the variance in reading ability"
(1985, p.70).
A New Understanding
The visual deficit hypothesis was based on an erroneous
assumption. It assumed that individuals who were speaking, and
often speaking rather well, did not have problems in oral
language. The mistake was understandable. Articulate speech is
an amazingly complex affair and one can easily be led to think
that a person who speaks well has a fully intact language
system.
Nevertheless, we know that people can speak in amazingly
intricate, persuasive, and effective ways - and still have
significant language problems. The problems do not run the gamut
of abilities; instead they affect selected areas of skill.
The phenomenon is so common that each of us has probably
experienced it in one form or another. It is behind the
uncomfortable feeling that arises when we have problems
remembering names, pronouncing a long, cumbersome word, or
figuring out the meaning of a particularly complicated sentence.
Language is not 'of a piece.' It is a complicated tapestry that,
even when it is quite beautiful, can have many knots and holes.
Often, the imperfections are so small that they can be
overlooked. But then there are other times - times when the
language imperfections become central. Then, they must be
carefully examined and corrected!
This is precisely what has happened in the area of reading
research. The findings from widely varying approaches have
pointed, again and again, to a group of language problems that
are responsible for the vast bulk of reading failures ( Blank,
1978, 1985; Liberman, 1982; Vellutino, 1987).
NAMING OR LABELING
The Problem
A chief language difficulty among poor readers concerns problems
in 'naming' (Denckla & Rudel, 1976; Jansky & DeHirsch, 1973;
Mattis, French & Rapin, 1975). For example, a typical test
involves showing pictures of common objects which have to be
labeled (e.g., pictures of a comb, clock, umbrella, key and
scissors). This is a simple task - notable only for the fact
that each object appears many times so that the person sees, and
has to name, 40 to 50 objects. In other words, the person
carrying out the task has to repeatedly call up labels. As a
result, it is not just a process of calling up a few names, but
rather coming up with labels one after the other. This is termed
confrontational naming.
Under these conditions, poor readers have a much harder time
than do others. They generally do not have problems knowing the
objects, or even remembering the names. They simply take far
longer to retrieve the names than do their peers. Whereas the
average student might take 30 seconds to complete the labeling
of all the objects, a poor reader of the same age might take
anywhere from 60 to 120 seconds.
How does this relate to reading? Reading, particularly early
reading, involves calling up names; not the names of things but
the names of words. Basically, it is the same confrontational
naming process that was required in the test just described.
Even when poor readers can recognize the words they have to
decode, the deficit causes their reading to be slow and tedious.
Each page of text is almost unbearable; and the more text that
appears, the more unbearable it becomes.
The Treatment
This weakness, or deficit of poor readers, has been recognized
now for many years. But the diagnosis has not led to any
significant effects on intervention. There are good reasons why
the problem has been avoided. It is hard to imagine how one can
speed up the naming process in any systematic way.
The one major technique that we know of is overlearning - that
is, having many, many trials so that the word, or words, being
trained are learned to a point of immediate recognition. In the
jargon of the field, this achievement is termed automaticity.
All of us have had some experience with this process. It is what
accounts for our instant identification of a STOP sign. The word
has been seen so often that it is overlearned and therefore
immediately available without any conscious processing.
How can this technique be useful in the general training of
reading? There are so many words in the language. Which ones
should be overtrained? And even if some words are learned
through overtraining, there are so many other words remaining.
The overtrained words would seem to be no more than 'a drop in
the bucket.' This view of matters has left interventionists
stymied as to how to use the important diagnosis of 'naming
problems' to guide changes in instruction.
The Two Groups of Words
But there is a way - a way that comes from understanding our
language system. English, like many other languages, is composed
of two basic categories: content words and non-content words.
Content words are the nouns, verbs and adjectives that make up
the bulk of our language. They are a vast array of words that
can range:
-from simple (CAR) to complex (VEHICULAR);
-from single syllable (BAD) to multi-syllable (CATASTROPHE); and
-from familiar (BIBLE) to strange (APOCRYPHA).
What they have in common is their reference to reality; that is,
they refer to some event, thing, action, or attribute which
people can think about, perceive or sense.
Among their other attributes, content words are an open class of
words. They forever allow new entries. For instance, words such
as ASTRONAUT, YUPPIE, and VIDEO JOCKEY did not exist some years
ago. As new ideas come into being, new content words are
created. Given their richness and meaning, content words are the
words that have dominated the instruction of reading.
Non-content words are the parts of speech which are classified
under such categories as articles, pronouns, and prepositions.
They also include bound morphemes such as -S, -ED, and -ING
which have no meaning unless they are affixed to a word.
Frequency is one of their most notable characteristics. To
illustrate, the ten most frequently used words in written
material ranked in order of occurrence are THE, OF, AND, A, TO,
IN, IS, YOU, THAT, and IT (Carroll, Davies, & Richman, 1971). No
content word in the language can even approach the frequency of
these words.
For good reason, non-content words are often referred to as the
closed class of words. That means they are restricted to a
certain, unchanging number. In English, that number is
approximately two hundred. (And even this limited number is
somewhat exaggerated because it includes rarely used, rather
esoteric non-content words such as HERETOFORE and WHENCE.)
Unlike the class of content words, the non-content words are an
elite group that keeps out all newcomers.
They may be small, but they certainly are powerful! A glance at
any page of text will soon show that the non-content words
occupy 50% or more of the words that a reader has to decode. To
illustrate, consider the two segments of text below. One is from
a second grade reader; the other from a text for adults. In both
cases, the non-content words (whether unbound such as IS or
bound such as -ED) are in boldface and have been counted to show
their prevalence.
First the text for children:
It is April 10, 1912. The whole world is talking about an
amazing new ship. Its name is the Titanic.
The ship is getting
ready to leave on its first trip across the ocean.
It is going
all the way from England to America.
(25 non-content units out of 42 words)
from The Titanic - Lost and Found
J. Donnelly, N.Y., Random House, 1987.
Now the text for adults:
America was the best-kept secret in history. Before Columbus
the
peoples of Europe did not even imagine that this continent
was
here. Their maps and globes showed only Europe, Asia
and Africa
and left no room for another continent. The greatest surprise
was that there really was an America.
(33 non-content units out of 50 words)
from The Landmark History
of the American People
D. J. Boorstein, N.Y., Random House, 1987.
So here we have it - a limited, closed class of words that
dominates any text readers may see, whether they are at the
start of the reading process or years into it. Overlearning of
any and all words is clearly an impossibility. But overlearning
the small set of non-content words is clearly within the realm
of possibility. And the payoff from this overlearning is
immense. It enables a reader to be prepared to instantly decode
half or more of any text he or she will ever encounter.
Teaching the Limited, Closed Class
Designers of reading programs have long sensed the power of
these words. They are part of the 'sight words' taught in almost
every reading program. What the designers have not done,
however, is to take account of the naming problems that poor
readers have. As a result, they do not overtrain on each word
before proceeding to the next. Instead, they cluster a number of
the sight words together and go through them as a group. The
limited exposure may be adequate for individuals who are adept
at reading, but it is far from adequate for individuals with
reading problems.
As you will soon see, overtraining is a major feature of The
Sentence Master. All the words are presented and taught prior to
the stories in which they will appear. Words such as THE, IS,
HERE, and CAN are offered - with approximately 40 to 50 trials
available for each word. Slight variations are introduced into
the trials to hold the learner's interest and attention. But the
slow-paced, highly repetitive overlearning that is required is
always there. This is a vital feature of the program. The four
levels of The Sentence Master, in combination, teach over 100 of
the most common non-content words and bound morphemes. All the
words taught at one level are maintained in the succeeding
levels so that review and retention are ensured.
Repetition Need Not Be Boring
Overlearning, which is a key principle in The Sentence Master,
is achieved through high levels of repetition. Skilled readers
may find this component curious and even unnecessary because
their competence frees them from the need for this sort of
teaching. But it is precisely what unskilled readers require.
They are also willing to move at a slow, repetitive pace - if
the experience is fun and productive. The Sentence Master is
designed to ensure both.
At the same time, you, the adult, are the determiner of what the
learner should do. The program has been designed to allow you to
select, for each and every one of the words that is taught, the
range of tasks that will be presented. If you see that the
student can progress effectively with fewer trials, you are able
to set the program accordingly. However, when in doubt, err in
the direction of providing more rather than fewer trials.
Further, you should always ensure that the students complete the
Spelling component of the word training. This component is vital
in helping the student become aware of all the letters contained
in any word.
SYNTAX
The Problem
Another spoken language deficit spotlighted through modern
research concerns problems with syntax; that is, problems with
the grammar of the language (Johnson & Grant, 1989). In raising
this area, we are not referring to difficulties students may
have in learning grammatical categories (such as knowing how to
identify nouns, verbs, subjects, predicates, etc.). They may
well have problems in this realm, but these are not the ones at
issue.
Instead, their problems reside in the skills underlying the
production and comprehension of complex sentences. Their
difficulties can be seen when they are given tests in which they
have to imitate complicated sentences or complete sentences that
contain omissions (Newcomer & Magee, 1977; Wiig, Semel & Crouse,
1973; Vogel, 1974). Under these conditions, the unskilled reader
is prone to leave out words or to shift words in ways that
significantly affect the meaning.
Syntax problems are of great significance in comprehension. To
illustrate, let's take the relatively simple sentence:
HE WALKED TO THE DOG.
but let us assume that it has been perceived as:
HE WALKED THE DOG.
The deletion of the little two letter word TO has dramatically
transformed the meaning of the sentence.
When one extends this type of problem to the full text of a
book, one can begin to understand some of the comprehension
problems that have been reported. It helps to explain, for
instance, the problems poor readers have in using the text they
are reading, at the moment, to predict the text that they will
be reading, a few moments hence; in other words, to predict what
will be appearing next on the page. Essentially, the limited and
distorted meanings they glean from the text do not provide them
with the input needed for effective anticipation of the text.
Syntax problems are, of course, not responsible for all
comprehension difficulties. However, they do play a major role.
The Treatment
Like naming problems, syntax problems have been identified for
over two decades as a deficit in poor readers. As in the case of
naming problems, relatively little has been done to alter the
teaching material to address these problems.
The major efforts undertaken thus far have focused on
metalinguistic strategies which are designed to lead students to
reason about the text so that they will monitor it in a more
careful fashion (Bransford et al, 1982; Brown, 1981; Clark,
1988; White, Pascarella & Pflaum, 1981). For example, a series
of questions may be presented prior to seeing the actual
material itself. The hope is that the questions will guide the
reading that follows.
Cognitive strategies of this sort are vital, but they are often
insufficient or inappropriate for many readers, particularly
those in the early acquisition stages. As in the HE WALKED TO
THE DOG example, syntax problems mean that much information will
not be taken in correctly. Asking students to reason about that
information will not be helpful. Essentially, they are being
asked to reason about incorrect input which they do not perceive
as having been incorrect. Before higher level strategies can be
useful, more basic and elementary strategies have to be
employed!
Teaching More About the Non-Content Words
One strategy flows easily from the focus on non-content words.
Their high frequency alone would justify their being emphasized
in any reading program. But their power is not restricted simply
to their high rate of use. Non-content words play a vital role
in the syntax of the language (Sapir, 1921). For example, a
single non-content word is responsible for the different
meanings of HE WALKED TO THE DOG and HE WALKED THE DOG. These
tiny, easily overlooked words dramatically determine the meaning
of sentences. Non-content words may not have clear referents;
that in no way implies that they are without meaning.
Understanding the power and role of these words is vital in
helping the students overcome their syntax difficulties. The
Sentence Master program achieves this by structuring the
teaching of the non-content words to focus not only on the
letters through which they are transmitted, but also on the
grammatical properties they possess.
For example, the first non-content word in the program is the
word THE. In terms of its grammatical properties, THE is key to
noun phrases such as the boy and the house. Further, in English,
the word THE can accompany any noun regardless of whether it is
singular, plural, masculine, feminine or neuter. This property
is what allows us to say the ball, the balls, the animals, the
plant, and so on. (Those who are familiar with foreign languages
such as French, Russian, Spanish, or German will recognize that
quite different rules apply in different languages.)
The central characteristics of the non-content words are
conveyed to the student through careful structuring of the
material. As you will see when you look at the computer screen,
the user does not have to face complicated verbal
interpretations. Such interpretations often serve primarily as
painful obstacle courses to individuals whose language abilities
are problematic. Instead, in The Sentence Master, the material
is organized to permit the user to glean the information through
clear and repeated examples.
For example, imagine a student who is right at the beginning of
the reading process. He or she as yet knows no written word and
the first non-content word being taught is the word THE. By
pairing that word with a picture of an object, this non-reading
individual can still be led to "read" a phrase. This rubric-type
procedure yields phrases such as:
Naturally, this technique can also be used with written words
that the student has learned to decode. Thus, the first content
word taught in the program is the word BUS. This can easily be
combined with the word THE to form the phrase: THE BUS. Similar
pairings can be shown incorporating any other nouns the program
user has learned.
Integrating the Material
Once a word is learned, it is kept in the program and used
repeatedly as a building block to other non-content words. For
instance, the second non-content word taught is the word IS.
This can now be combined with THE to form sentences such as:
The next word taught is HERE and this can now be combined with
the previous words to have the student deal with sentences such
as:
THE BUS IS HERE.
and
HERE IS THE BUS.
The repeated use of the same words in increasingly complex
material serves two key purposes. (1) It meets the students'
need for the multiple trials necessary for overlearning. (2) It
helps them integrate new material into their already established
repertoire.
The repetition and interweaving is also of enormous benefit to
the teacher. Teachers commonly face the need to review 'old'
material in order to see whether it has been retained. By
interweaving the old and the new in a steady and regular manner,
there is no need to review past material. Re-use of the material
ensures retention.
COMPREHENSION
The Problem
The non-content words have effects that go beyond the meaning of
the sentences in which they appear. They also affect the meaning
of the sentences that follow.
For example, consider two simple sentences containing identical
content words. The words are BOY, SEE and DOG and the sentences
are:
1. THE BOY CANNOT SEE HIS DOG.
and
2. THE BOY CAN SEE A DOG.
The content words in the two sentences are the same.
Nevertheless, the meanings of the sentences are very different.
The differences are the direct result of the non-content words
surrounding and modifying the content words.
Now let's move on to consider a sentence that might follow the
examples just offered. Given the way in which text develops, the
succeeding sentence would be likely to contain referents to both
the BOY and the DOG. A possible sentence therefore might be: HE
WANTS TO FIND THEM. For ease of discussion, we will refer to
this new sentence as sentence 3.
If sentences 1 and 3 are combined, we get the quite reasonable
pairing of:
1. THE BOY CANNOT SEE HIS DOG.
3. HE WANTS TO FIND HIM.
On the other hand, if sentences 2 and 3 are combined, we get the
unreasonable pairing:
2. THE BOY CAN SEE A DOG.
3. HE WANTS TO FIND HIM.
These examples illustrate the critical role that non-content
words play in the linkages between sentences. Identical content
words can convey a meaningful, or meaningless message -
depending upon the non-content words that accompany them. This
aspect of language represents another area of significance for
those with reading problems.
Having minimized their attention to the non-content words,
unskilled readers often have little sense as to how the
sentences will unfold. For example, any student who concentrated
on the words BOY SEE and DOG in the illustration above will find
the 1-3 sentence pairing to be as probable, or as improbable, as
the 2-3 pairing. This is precisely the situation in which many
poor readers repeatedly find themselves. Essentially, teaching
programs which neglect the non-content words result in unskilled
readers being locked into reading without true meaning.
The Treatment
The stories in The Sentence Master program are specifically
designed to help poor readers overcome their difficulties in
understanding the links across sentences. The stories are first
presented on the computer. Each is designed to provide the
experience of seeing and hearing well-organized text that
conveys a story, even at the earliest stages of reading. Once a
story has been read on the computer, students are given a
printed version of the story. The Sentence Master includes
reproducible Story Booklets so that students may begin to build
a library of their very own.
The Sentence Types: Simple Yet Complex
Level I contains 8 stories. All of them are confined to three
sentence types. These are:
HERE IS AN X.
THE X CAN Y.
THE X IS YING.
These sentence patterns might seem to be inordinately simple.
Paradoxically, this is just the response we would like the users
to have. We want them to have the sense of being totally in
command of the material. This is an experience that is
unfortunately all too rare in those with reading problems.
At the same time, within the framework of simplicity, we can
still expose the students to some of the complexities of our
language system. For instance, consider the variety of
permutations and combinations possible with just the three
sentence types listed above. The basic structure HERE IS A can
appear in an array of guises including, but not limited to the
following:
HERE IS A ______.
THERE IS A ______.
HERE ARE ______S.
THERE ARE ______S.
Each of the other types can appear with a similar range of
variation. And each of the variations can be paired with the
others to form an enormous range of possibilities. Thus, the
text might read:
HERE IS A GIRL.
SHE CAN RUN.
SHE IS RUNNING.
On the other hand, another reasonable combination might be:
HERE ARE SOME GIRLS.
THEY ARE RUNNING.
As before, people who are sophisticated in language might find
the endless permutations to be unnecessary. The material appears
simply to be 'stating the obvious.' For those with language
problems, however, the perspective is quite different. For them,
the slow, systematic changes in the material are a relief. They
are the means for becoming aware of language principles that
more competent individuals are able to 'pick up' without
conscious effort.
Each of the four levels of the Sentence Master presents the
student with increasingly complex sentence patterns. The
sentence patterns have been selected so as to represent ideas
that are central to understanding any coherent text. As in the
teaching of the words, every pattern taught is retained at the
higher levels along with the new forms.
Listed below are some of the major patterns contained within
each of the levels.
In Level 1, the student sees patterns that:
identify relevant people and objects. This is conveyed through
the sentence patterns THIS IS AN X and HERE IS AN X.
offer information that extends or elaborates on the people and
objects that have been identified. This is conveyed in the
sentence patterns THE X CAN Y and THE X IS YING.
In Level 2, the student sees patterns that:
present ideas about the non-present. These are conveyed through
sentence patterns containing the past (as in THE X WAS YING) and
the negative (as in THIS IS NOT AN X and THE Xs ARE NOT YING).
express differences between intention and action. These are
conveyed through sentence patterns containing the concept of BUT
(as in X WANTS TO Y, BUT X CANNOT Y).
present ways for seeking information. These are conveyed through
sentence patterns containing question forms (as in IS THE X
YING?).
present ways for responding to requests for information. These
are conveyed through sentence patterns that represent answers to
questions (as in YES, THAT IS AN X and NO, THE X WAS NOT YING).
In Level 3, the student sees patterns that:
involve attributes and qualities of people and objects. These
are conveyed through sentence patterns containing adjectives (as
in THE X is ___ and THE ___ X is YING).
refer to concepts of time and place. These are conveyed through
sentence patterns containing prepositional phrases (as in ON THE
___, TO THE ___, IN THE ___) and adverbs involving recurrence
(AGAIN, ANYMORE, TOO).
In Level 4, the student sees patterns that:
involve more complex forms of information seeking. These are
conveyed through the sentence patterns containing WH questions
(as in WHAT, WHO, WHOSE, HOW).
involve generalization and classification. These are conveyed
through sentence patterns that elaborate on generic
characteristics of both animate and inanimate groups (as in Xs
HAVE A, B, and C and Xs CAN A, BUT NOT B).
extend the awareness of the non-present. These are conveyed
through sentence patterns containing references to the future
(as in WILL and GOING TO) and to the conditional (as in WOULD
and COULD).
The sentence patterns are presented in books, with each level
containing 8 books. The increase in complexity from Level 1 to
Level 4 is slow, but nevertheless, dramatic. Thus, at Level 1,
the student will have been limited to texts like the following:
SOME MONSTERS CAN JOG.
THIS MONSTER CAN JOG.
HE IS JOGGING.
By Level 4, however, the student can read and understand
segments like the following:
EACH OF THE FROGS IS JUST LIKE THE BIRDS. EACH ONE IS THINKING,
"THERE IS NO WAY THAT WE WANT THIS THING AS A FRIEND. BUT THE
FROGS DON'T SAY THAT. THEY JUST SAY, "YOU DO NOT JUMP AS WELL AS
WE DO SO YOU CANNOT BE OUR FRIEND."
In essence, The Sentence Master brings to the fore language
principles that have been hidden from those with reading
disabilities. In so doing, it provides them with the opportunity
to attain a secure foundation for reading comprehension.
By the completion of Level 4, the student will have become
comfortable in dealing with the range of linguistic complexity
that he or she will find in the world of interesting and
exciting books.
PHONICS
The Problem
Anyone who has been involved in the area of reading knows the
importance of phonics and phonological analysis in reading
problems. It is vital for a reader to establish clear linkages
between letters and the sounds they represent. The research of
the past few decades has only reinforced the power this
long-recognized skill holds in effective reading (Jorm & Share,
1983; Liberman, 1973; Stanovich, 1985). (Interestingly, in
English, phonic skills lend themselves primarily to the domain
of content words. The lack of applicability of these rules to
the non-content domain is largely responsible for the teaching
of these words as sight words.)
The Treatment
Because issues in phonics and phonology are so fundamental and
so well-studied, a wide variety of programs has been developed
in this area. Further, the general acceptance of phonic-based
approaches means that most students are being offered this
material, in one form or another. Because of this, and because
of the fact that so many different approaches are used, we have
chosen not to address the phonics issue directly in the design
of The Sentence Master. Were we to have implemented one
particular approach, it would have meant that many individuals
would have been forced to deal with a different system from the
one to which they have become accustomed.
At the same time, The Sentence Master does require the learner
to deal with content words. Each of the four levels of The
Sentence Master presents content words that allow the
development of meaningful stories. The four levels, in
combination, teach about 150 of the most frequently used content
words. In all cases, the content words are relatively common
words that readers should know and use. They have been selected
to encompass important nouns (such as MAN, CAR, LEGS, FRIEND,
TIME), verbs (such as GO, SEE, PUT, MAKE, FIND) and adjectives
(such as SAD, HAPPY, LITTLE, LONG, OLD). Many of them will be
familiar to students from training they have already had. Even
when this is not the case, they can use their decoding skills to
'figure them out.'
Nevertheless, we do want to ensure that the students
unwaveringly recognize the words they will encounter.
Consequently, each of the content words is taught through a
range of analytic procedures similar to those used with the
non-content words. These procedures are particularly important
for selected groups of individuals who present special problems.
This is the case, for example, for many deaf students and some
language disabled students who fail to master a phonics
approach.
WHEN CAN THE PROGRAM BE STARTED?
The Non-Reader
Level 1 of the Sentence Master has been specifically designed to
be used even with students who cannot read a single word.
Nevertheless, all students need to possess a small core of
prerequisite skills before they can start on the program.
You'll readily see the skills that are needed when you think of
the basic demands entailed in word recognition. Specifically, a
student must have the ability to retain, on a consistent basis,
four to five visual elements. This skill allows one to recognize
and recall a large number of words. On the other hand, if a
student does not yet have this skill, recall of even the
simplest of words will not be possible. Visual recognition of a
series of sequential letters is the key skill that an individual
must have in order to benefit from the program.
If a student is already able to read and write some words, then
it's almost certain that he or she has a sufficient base in the
skills just outlined. Consequently, you can start the program.
On the other hand, if a student has not yet attained any
discernible reading skill, then you'll need to do a brief
assessment. In this, you'll show the student a word such as STOP
and state the word that it represents (e.g., "this says stop.").
Further, tell the student to look at the word for as long as he
or she wishes to do so. Then, when the student is ready, you
take the word away and ask him or her to write it from memory.
(At no time does the student have to label the letters; he or
she only has to reproduce them.)
If the student cannot write, you can carry out the task by
showing him or her a sequence of letters containing the letters
of the word STOP along with two additional letters. In other
words, the student might see S M T O E P. The letters of the
word in question always have to be presented in a left-right
sequence (so that T, for example, would not appear to the left
of the S). You can then indicate to the student that he or she
has to select the letters that make the word 'stop'.
If the student can complete this task using three or four
different words, then he or she almost certainly has the skills
to begin the Sentence Master program. At the same time, do not
be too hasty about concluding that a student who has difficulty
with this task will not benefit from the program.
Many students are unaccustomed to this sort of task so that they
might fail solely because of lack of familiarity. To see if this
factor is operating, it's important to carry out at least 8 to
10 trials. In that way, you'll be able to see if the student can
complete the task correctly once he or she understands what is
required.
During these trials, you can offer the feedback that the student
needs for a correct response. For example, the student might
have written, or placed, the letters out of order. In this
situation, you can say, "No, the letters have to go in this
order" and then you can ask the student to complete the task
again.
If a student demonstrates a continuing inability to carry out
the task even with this level of support, then it's likely that
he or she is not ready to begin on The Sentence Master at that
point. Work could and should be done, however, to build up the
student's memory for visual elements - since this skill is
critical to reading, no matter what method of reading
instruction is used (see Blank, McKirdy, & Payne, 1991).
The Beginning Reader
You're also likely to encounter students who have some beginning
reading skills. Then the decision that you have to make moves
from whether or not to start the program to the level at which
you should begin the work. As long as the student possesses the
necessary skills, it is perfectly feasible to start the program
at Levels 2, 3, or 4. Guidelines to help you make the
appropriate determination are presented at the conclusion of
this discussion.
WHEN SPOKEN ENGLISH IS A PROBLEM
The analysis of language underlying The Sentence Master can be
useful for groups other than students with language
disabilities. For example, the program is well-suited to
individuals who have problems with English, not because of a
disability, but rather because it is their second language. This
includes (1) hearing impaired individuals whose primary language
may be a signing system and (2) individuals for whom English is
a Second Language (ESL).
'Cracking the code' of a foreign language can often be difficult
and frustrating. The task is greatly eased, however, when the
essential structures of the language are revealed to the
learner. The carefully controlled patterns available in The
Sentence Master provide just this sort of experience.
A CONCLUDING NOTE
The discussion here has concentrated on the philosophy and the
design features of the program. At the same time, we recognize
that no program, regardless of its educational value, is going
to reach - and teach - if it fails to be appealing. We believe
we have achieved this vital goal. When students look at The
Sentence Master, they immediately identify it as a reading
program - except that they see it as one filled with enjoyment,
success, and entertainment.
For a start, the characters are delightful. Who can resist
'blobs' and 'monsters' that have only the best of intentions?
Further, the materials are paced so as to ensure a high degree
of success. Reading is no longer a guessing game filled with
failure, but a secure achievement. And if anyone has any doubts
about that, there are skeletons and snakes to offer ample
appreciation for correct answers.
These motivational features are essential for reaching students
who, until now, have found reading to be a mire of confusion and
failure. We hope, and believe, that the combination of
well-structured and highly motivating materials will similarly
enable your students to realize their dreams of becoming
competent readers.
Brief Assessment: Finding Out Where to Start
Beginning readers vary greatly in their skills. To maximize
learning and motivation, it’s important to have children learn
what they need to learn, while at the same time, not having them
spend time repeating material they’ve already mastered.
The Sentence Master is designed to meet children’s varied
abilities through a series of four levels that systematically
increase in difficulty. You begin with the level that best suits
the child’s abilities.
The following brief assessment helps you determine which of the
four levels of The Sentence Master is the right starting point
for your student. In this assessment, you dictate a few
sentences and the student writes each one in turn. Of course, if
the student has no reading or writing mastery at all, bypass the
assessment and begin The Sentence Master with Level 1.
The procedure is as follows:
1. Start with the sentences listed below under Sentences for
Level 1.
2. Provide the child with lined paper and a pencil or thin
marker, and say, “I want you to do some writing for me.” (In
case the child cannot handwrite, allow him or her to use the
computer for writing.)
3. Read a complete sentence aloud (e.g., “There are some
robots.”). Follow this by offering a word at a time (e.g., “Now
write the word there.”). Give the student whatever time he or
she needs in order to write the word.
4. Proceed through each word until the sentence is completed.
5. Repeat this procedure to complete all the sentences for Level
1.
6. During the assessment, do not offer the student any help. If
the student requests help, say, “You have to do this on your
own. Later on, I’ll help you, but not now.”
7. After the sentences for Level 1 have been completed, score
the student’s performance. For the scoring, a word is counted as
either correct (if it is written correctly) or incorrect (if it
has one or more errors in it). For example, a word like robots
may have various misspellings (e.g., robts, robuts, robst- any
of these would be counted as one error). Repeated errors on a
particular word are only counted once in the group of sentences
for a level. For example, if the student misspells the word
“are” three times in the sentences for Level 1, it is still only
counted as one error. Do not score punctuation.
8. At the end of the sentences for each level, you will see the
scoring criteria for the sentences.
If the student’s performance on the sentences for Level 1 does
not meet the set criterion, then The Sentence Master: Level 1 is
the appropriate level at which to start the work.
On the other hand, if the student’s performance is above the set
criterion, you move on to the sentences for Level 2. Continue in
this manner until you find the level that is the right one for
the student.
The sentences the child will write:
Sentences for Level 1
There are some robots. They are jogging.
These men are helping the king. They like to help.
That is a kid. She is swimming here.
Criterion
0-4 errors; continue on to the Sentences for Level 2.
5 or more errors, stop the assessment; start the child on Level
1 of The Sentence Master.
Sentences for Level 2
The man wanted to clean his car but he did not have a rag.
The puppy was trying to rest.
This duck does not have to fly.
Criterion
0-4 errors; continue on to the Sentences for Level 3.
5 or more errors (and fewer than 5 errors on Level 1), stop the
assessment; start the child on Level 2 of The Sentence Master.
Sentences for Level 3
Your friend says he can bring some pencils.
Did everyone still need to fly on the plane?
Can the barber cut the kid's long hair?
Criterion
0-4 errors; continue on to the Sentences for Level 4.
5 or more errors (and fewer than 5 errors on each of Levels 1
and 2), stop the assessment; start the child on Level 3 of The
Sentence Master.
Sentences for Level 4
Why didn't the bird just stay where it was?
Once the animal was alone, they never got to see it.
When could you open that?
Criterion
0-4 errors; your child is probably beyond the Sentence Master
program.
5 or more errors (and fewer than 5 errors on each of Levels 1, 2
and 3), stop the assessment; start the child on Level 4 of The
Sentence Master.
References
Blank, M. Review of "Toward an Understanding of Dyslexia:
Psychological Factors in Specific Reading Disability." In A.L.
Benton & D.J. Bakker (Eds.), Dyslexia: An Appraisal of Current
Knowledge. New York: Oxford Uni ity Press, 1978.
Blank, M. A Word Is A Word - Or Is It? In D.B Gray & J.F.
Kavanagh (Eds.), Biobehavioral Measures of Dyslexia. Parkton,
MD: York Press, 1985.
Blank, M., McKirdy, L., & Payne, P. Cognitive and Linguistic
Prerequisites for Classroom Discourse (Links to the Language of
Learning). Paper presented at American Speech-Language-Hearing
Association, Atlanta, GA, 1991.
Bransford, J., Stein, B. & Vye, N. Helping Students Learn How to
Learn from Written Texts. In M. Singer (Ed.), Competent Reader,
Disabled Reader: Research and Application. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlebaum, 1982.
Brown, A. Metacognition: The Development of Selective Attention
Strategies for Learning from Texts. In M. Kamil (Ed.), 30th
Yearbook of the National Reading Conference. Clemson, SC,
National Reading Conference, 1981.
Carroll, J., Davies, P., & Richman, B. Word Frequency Book. New
York: American Heritage, 1971.
Clark, D. Dyslexia: Theory and Practice of Remedial Instruction.
Parkton, MD: York Press, 1988.
Denckla, M.B. & Rudel, R. Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN):
Dyslexia Differentiated from Other Learning Disabilities.
Neuropsychologia, 1976, 14, 471-478.
Dickinson, D., Wolf, M. & Stotsky, S. Words Move: The Interwoven
Development of Oral and Written Language. In J. Berko Gleason
(Ed.), The Development of Language. Columbus, OH: Merrill, 1989.
Jansky, J. & DeHirsch, K. Preventing Reading Failure. New York:
Harper & Row, 1973.
Johnson, D & Grant, J. Written Narratives of Normal and Learning
Disabled Children. Annals of Dyslexia, 1989. 39, 146-153.
Jorm, A. & Shaare, D. Phonological Recoding and Reading
Acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1983, 4, 103-147.
Liberman, A. A Language-Oriented View of Reading and Its
Disabilities. In H. Myklebust (Ed.), Progress in Learning
Disabilities, Vol. 5, New York: Grune & Stratton, 1982.
Mattis, S., French, J.H. & Rapin, I. Dyslexia in Children and
Young Adults: Three Independent Neuropsychological Syndromes.
Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 1975, 17, 150-163.
Newcomer, P. & Magee, P. The Performance of Learning (Reading)
Disabled Children on a Test of Spoken Language. The Reading
Teacher, 1977, 30, 896-900.
Orton, S. T. Reading, Writing and Speech Problems in Children.
New York: Norton, 1937.
Sapir, E. Language. New York: Harcourt Brace, 1921.
Stanovich, K. Explaining the Variance in Reading Ability in
Terms of Psychological Processes: What Have We Learned? Annals
of Dyslexia, 1985, 35, 67-98.
Tallal, P. Developmental Language Disorders. In J.F. Kavanagh &
T. J. Truss, Jr. (Eds.), Learning Disabilities: Proceedings of
the National Conference. Parkton, MD: York Press, 1988.
Vellutino, F.R. Dyslexia. Scientific American, 1987, 256, 34-41.
Vogel, S. Syntactic Abilities in Normal and Dyslexic Children.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1974, 7, 103-109.
White, C., Pascarella, E. & Pflaum, S. Effects of Training in
Sentence Construction on the Comprehension of Learning Disabled
Children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1981, 73, 697-704.
Wiig, E., Semel, E. & Crouse, M. The Use of English Morphology
by High-Risk and Learning Disabled Children. Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 1973, 6, 457-465.
|
|
