Return-Path: <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id fA6MFb007577; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 17:15:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 17:15:37 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <3BE8625D.B2506750@webster.edu> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Jeri Levesque <levesqjr@webster.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-LD:3741] Re: reading IS comprehension X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 (Macintosh; I; PPC) Status: O Content-Length: 12299 Lines: 239 Clif, Tsk, tsk, I haven't seen your style of rancor on a NIFL posting in years. Do you always shoot the messenger? Let's try again for a civil conversation -- You state: "Your post exemplifies the reason for the disaster surrounding reading disabilities and is the basic cause the emotional problems, failures, and lack of education for so many with these disabilities. This kind of attitude is what prevents quite capable students from" The disaster surrounding reading difficulties is far older than my posting. Only the zealots in the field carry the banner for a Holy Grail approach to teaching reading. Among those who do, some often have a stake in a business venture associated with their instructional recommendations. I have taught many to read and must say there was never a single method that worked for everyone.. However, in the busy confines of elementary and secondary education - rarely was there time for a quick MRI to confirm brain activity centers and then a laser beam approach to remediation. The same has held for adults. You say, "A major function of teaching is to empower, not hover over someone and not listen to them." Interesting finding from our research here in St. Louis - listening comprehension is a major correlate of a reading disability that is connected with LD. So language and listening connect with making meaning from print. Some people "don't listen" because they can't make meaning from the words they hear. Not surprisingly, they can't make sense of print. We know a number of ways to teach listening skills, but I'm not exactly sure how the ability to listen and make meaning manifests itself in the brain. Vocabulary is also linked with reading and LD - hence the active discussion regarding a definition of reading on this list. (word recognition is the third). As you can see, a term may mean different things to different people. Still, given a context and a message we need to make similar meanings for comprehension to occur. So, if I say we reading teachers don't dwell on where a difficulty comes from - we get busy teaching - I am not ruling out diagnostic measures that describe the specific type of disability - it's pretty sophisticated -- but it is different from an LD approach. You describe 8 hour marathons teaching -- most tutorial sessions are an hour or less. Kids get 30 minutes of one on one instruction if they are labeled with a severe reading disability. That doesn't mean folks like me are mean spirited -- we don't mock a learner - we build first on strengths. Now if this is demeaning from your perspective - I don't know what I can say. Clif - teaching someone how to read or how to cope with specific skill deficits IS more important than knowing where the deficit comes from. You mention Shaywitz work with brain research - she's the first to say that reading an MRI is far different from knowing how and what to teach a disabled reader. She says the future may include ways to rewire the brain so reading becomes easier. I'm not sure how that will go if the phrase, "I'm LD and I'm proud." holds water. Maybe science will provide the tools to rewire a learner - I am not sure that we should. I'm in agrement that many reading difficulties are linked to ineffective teaching. Shaywitz isn't talking about those kinds of problems she's looking at clinical profiles of brain activity. Nasty little academicians like myself and Dr. Lyons are trying to bridge the gap (from theory to practice). We're always meeting theoretical, practical and collegial trolls along the way. You ask, If the theories were so good, why do you have a job????? Because, Clif, theories are tentative explanations of how we think something works. There are lots of theories about how people do or do not learn how to read. Smarter folks than either you or me have spent their careers developing theories after working with thousands of children and adults. I have a job because far too many children have the opportunity to learn to read, but despite the best efforts of all, do not emerge as readers. So I teach using the best theories of learningand teaching -- including some of those you passionately defend. Who's cramming here? And finally Clif, respect is based on shared values. I highly value my students, other people's students, and even angry practitioners -- but in return, I expect a calm discussion where as educated people - we can agree to disagree. That's not so stupid is it? Jeri Levesque, Ed.D; Associate Professor, Webster University Director, Webster University Literacy Center Clifton Willard wrote: > At 02:57 PM 11/3/01 -0500, you wrote: > > >In a message dated 10/30/01 3:27:36 PM, levesqjr@webster.edu writes: > > > ><< Clif, > >Regarding your statement: > >Comprehension however is not part of reading. Comprehension is ones ability > >to understand information. Reading is a means of accessing the information > >that is then understood. > > > >I really must disagree. Comprehension is both a process and product of > >reading. If you look at any theoretical explanation of reading you will find > >comprehension to be a critical attribute. Take a look at the International > >Reading > >Association's stance on reading and you'll find comprehension inherent in the > >definition of reading. This contradicts a position that calling out, or > >sounding out words > >without comprehending the meaning and use of the word is not reading. > >I've taught reading methods classes at the graduate and undergraduate > >level for > >nearly two decades - methodologies go in and out of fashion - but > >comprehension > >stays fixed as the inherent goal of reading. Look back at work by Durkin > >in the 80's > >-- she criticized teachers for testing but not teaching comprehension. Why? > >Because it involves all of the complex reading processes. This is one > >reason people keep > >pointing out that we have yet to find the Holy Grail of teaching > >methods. One approach does not fit all learners. Phonemic awareness, > >phonological > >understanding, word analysis, vocabulary, listening, speaking, writing, and > >reading together in concert constitute literacy. Rather than dwell on > >"where did the reading difficulty come from?" reading teachers concentrate > >on using > >a variety of strategies to first prevent reading difficulties. Of course > >they work to > >remediate difficulties too. Take a look at the Snow et al study by the > >National Research Council available at no cost at http://ed.gov/pubs > > > >Jeri Levesque, Ed.D. > >Associate Professor, Webster University > >Director, Webster University Literacy Center > >St. Louis, MO > > Dear Jeri, > > --NEWS FLASH-- --NEWS FLASH-- --NEWS FLASH--There is no Holy Grail of > teaching. There are some things you cannot teach and that is just a fact. > The students do have a part in learning. The sooner you realize that, the > sooner you can begin to really help people with these disabilities, but not > until then. A major function of teaching is to empower, not hover over > someone and not listen to them. > > Your post exemplifies the reason for the disaster surrounding reading > disabilities and is the basic cause the emotional problems, failures, and > lack of education for so many with these disabilities. This kind of > attitude is what prevents quite capable students from completing high > school and college, and causes the emotional problems as described by Dr. > Lyons in his report, and is the reason for the high underemployment of > people with these disabilities. > > How could you make this statement. "Rather than dwell on "where did the > reading difficulty come from?" reading teachers concentrate on using a > variety of strategies to first prevent reading difficulties. > > There is nothing more important then knowing where the difficulty comes > from. How can you prevent something if you do not know what that something is?? > > You cannot develop a strategy, prevent reading difficulties, or have any > idea what you are doing if you are not constantly diligent with each and > every student to find out where the reading difficulties are coming from. > If you see a pattern then you most look for exceptions to that pattern and > re-think what you are doing. The research reflects this same kind of "not > thinking or no interest in thinking" which is why there are so many teacher > induced failures. It is just incredible that people with good educations > refuse to think. I guess they quote research and know it all. > > There are many good teachers and many who have serious doubts about all > this peddling of phonetic awareness but are intimidated by all those who > constantly quote research and cram it down everyone's throat. If the > theories were so good, why do you have a job????? > > You cannot approach any problem by trying to find the one cure that will > cure everybody who seem or might have every language based problem. How do > you know if your students really have a reading disability??? If you do not > know where the difficulties came from for an individual, you could not > know. So how can you decide what to do??? You can't. > > Is it too much to ask to acknowledge that your student is person with > feelings and a future??? If you have such little respect for them that you > do not even care what is causing their difficulties, why are you > teaching??? We are not objects for you to justify yourself with. We are > people, just like you. > > Reading is a process of remembering what you already know. You cannot read > a word if you do not know it's meaning. A word is a symbol for a meaning. > AFTER you know the meaning of the words you can begin the process of trying > to understand this information. The meaning of a sentence is determined by > the sequence of the meanings as presented in the word order of the sentence. > > If you cannot get meaning from printed words, you cannot have comprehension > because there is nothing to understand. Word meaning must come first. If > you cannot accurate perceive the printed form of the word, you cannot > derive meaning from the parts of the word you might perceive. Without > perception of the printed form of the word, word image, you simply cannot > gain any meaning to then comprehend. One of the main reasons that people > with reading disabilities have poor comprehension is that they are spend > all their time figuring out what the word is. Phonics is essential to > figuring out what the word is and is the brains way of compensating for > this lack of accurate perception of the printed form of the word. When you > listen you will hear them guessing many little guesses until they guess > something they recognize the heard word. They then will often stop for a > very short time and you can watch them retrieve the meaning. They are > guessing though. This is why they say cat for car and was for saw. This is > also why they appear to reverse letters when they write. They do not > reverse letters however they are just guessing and sometimes they guess > right and sometimes wrong. It is inconsistent. Auditory memory can help but > not for long words. There are other tricks to remembering the spelling of > words. There is no consistency though and it is not reliable. > > This summer at a party, a young man with a reading disability, a college > education, and founder and owner of an architectural firm miss read table > for tablet when in school. In a conversation he referred to the Egyptians > writing on tables. He was humiliated when some one explained to him that it > was a tablet, not a table. My heart went out to him. It is not unusual for > that to happen and inhibits many with these disabilities from speaking out. > He would have been much more able to deal with that kind of mistake if he > understood that he had a perceptual deficit in reading and not a result of > being "stupid." He had been taught he was "stupid" because the remediating > he had when he was in school did not work. He had been told that those > techniques would work. When they did not, he blamed himself. I use the word > "stupid" because it how they are made to feel and the word they use > themselves to describe the feeling. Clearly it is pejorative and that does > reflect the feeling accurately. > > Clif
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 11:28:04 EST