handouts johnny sight words_vea conference 2014

11/22/14

1

Why Johnny Doesn’t Know Sight Words:

The Effects of Concept of Word on Sight Word AcquisiCon

Presented by: Jennifer A. Floyd

VSRA 2013

But what does concept of word have to do with sight word

acquisiCon?

A lot, actually!

First, let’s define what a sight word is.

•  A sight word can be any word (Ehri, 1997; Ehri, 2005). – Sight words are not just those words that are not spelled regularly.

•  Sight words are not limited to lists such as the Dolch or Fry lists, but can be any word that the student reads automaCcally (Ehri, 1997; 1998; 2005).

•  RecogniCon should happen in about 1 second (Ehri, 1997).

11/22/14

2

Sight Word AcquisiCon •  Ehri’s (1998; 2005) phases of sight word acquisiCon provide us with a framework to guide our understanding of how kids learn words and will be important in our discussion of concept of word. –  Four phases represent the process through which sight words are acquired.

–  These phases illustrate a developmental conCnuum reflecCng the reader’s growing knowledge of the alphabeCc principle.

–  Emphasizes the development of connecCons between le`ers, sounds, and pronunciaCon of words.

Adapted from Ehri, 1998

Pre-‐alphabeCc phase

ParCal alphabeCc phase

Full alphabeCc phase

Consolidated alphabeCc phase

Ehri’s Phases of Sight Word AcquisiCon

Adapted from Ehri, 2005

11/22/14

3

Pre-‐alphabeCc phase

•  Students at this phase have very li`le, if any, knowledge of leèrs and sounds (Ehri, 1998; 2005).

•  They rely on the visual aspects of words for idenCficaCon because they lack the necessary leèr-‐sound knowledge (Ehri, 1998; 2005). – Because of the focus on the visual aspects and are not anchored to leèrs and sounds, their recogniCon of words by students at this phase is fleeCng and inconsistent (Ehri, 1998; 2005).

ParCal alphabeCc phase •  Students at this phase have an increased amount of leèr-‐

sound knowledge, which enables them to use iniCal and final consonant sounds to idenCfy some words (Ehri, 1998; 2005). –  But students do not yet have a full grasp of the alphabeCc principle.

–  Also do not have the phonemic segmentaCon skill that is necessary.

•  They are starCng to establish the connecCons between sounds, spelling, and pronunciaCon that are necessary for sight word acquisiCon (Ehri, 1998; 2005).

•  According to Ehri (2005), students are able to “read a few words out of context” (p. 143).

ParCal alphabeCc phase, conCnued •  However, students at this phase do not pay aènCon to the

medial (vowel) sound which is why this phase is described as “parCal alphabeCc” (Ehri, 1998; 2005). –  Since they are not using all of the available informaCon, words with similar iniCal and final consonants can be confused.

•  Sap/Sip •  Fan/Fin •  Jog/Jug

•  Students at this phase are not to the point where they are decoding words (Ehri, 1998; 2005). –  Involves guessing that is based on the limited amount of phoneCc informaCon in addiCon to context.

•  They are also not able to benefit from the use of analogy to idenCfy words (Ehri, 1998; 2005).

11/22/14

4

Full alphabeCc phase

•  This phase is marked by an increased level of phonemic awareness (Ehri, 1998; 2005).

•  Students have the ability to establish the requisite connecCons between leèrs, sounds, and pronunciaCons in words (Ehri, 1998; 2005).

•  Students aènd to the beginning, middle, and ending sounds, which enable them to establish stronger connecCons to support their word recogniCon (Ehri, 1998; 2005).

Full alphabeCc phase •  Increased accuracy in word recogniCon is evident at this phase (Ehri, 1998; 2005).

•  Students no longer confuse words with similar iniCal and final consonants because they are able to aènd to medial sounds (Ehri, 1998; 2005).

•  Decoding strategies can be employed at this phase (Ehri, 1998; 2005).

•  Can use analogies to idenCfy words (Ehri, 1998; 2005) –  If they know “dark,” they can use that knowledge to idenCfy “spark.”

Ehri, 2005

Consolidated alphabeCc phase

•  At this phase, students can use chunks of words instead of proceeding leèr-‐by-‐leèr and sound-‐by-‐sound (Ehri, 2005).

•  Longer, more complex words can be idenCfied (Ehri, 2005).

•  Morphology becomes a tool used by students at this phase (Ehri, 2005).

11/22/14

5

So…what do Ehri’s phases have to do with COW?

Furthermore, what do Ehri’s phases

have to do with Johnny and Concept of Word?

RelaCng Ehri’s phases with COW

•  As we will see in the coming slides, Ehri’s phases have quite a bit to do with COW.

Phonemic awareness is a common link between Ehri’s phases and COW.

Phoneme Awareness

Ehri’s phases of word

recogni5on

Concept of word in text

11/22/14

6

So, let’s get to concept of word in text

•  Concept of word in text represents the ability to match the spoken word with the printed word through finger-‐point reading.

•  Concept of word in text can be represented on a conCnuum of knowledge. –  Is not an all-‐or-‐nothing skill –  Ranges from developing to rudimentary to firm concept of word.

•  However, COW is more than just finger point readingJ

Concept of word in text is linked to the development of the alphabeCc principle and to the acquisiCon of

phonemic awareness, which are required for literacy

acquisiCon!

The AlphabeCc Principle AND Phonemic Awareness: Required Elements For Early

Literacy Development •  The alphabeCc principle portrays the relaConship

between graphemes and phonemes and is essenCal for literacy acquisiCon (Adams, 1990; Bowman & Treiman, 2004; Ehri, 1998).

•  Phonemic awareness, and in parCcular, phonemic segmentaCon ability is essenCal for word recogniCon (Adams, 1990; Ehri, 1998; Invernizzi & Hayes, 2011).

•  In order to make the connecCons that Ehri idenCfied as necessary for word recogniCon, the alphabeCc principle AND phonemic segmentaCon are required (Ehri, 1998; Invernizzi & Hayes, 2011).

11/22/14

7

Morris’s Model of Literacy AcquisiCon

•  Darrell Morris has spent a number of years invesCgaCng concept of word and its role in early literacy acquisiCon.

•  The result of that research is a model that illustrates the key role of COW in literacy acquisiCon. – Addresses the alphabeCc principle and phonemic segmentaCon that are key to literacy acquisiCon

–  Validated in several research studies (Morris, 1993; Morris et al., 2003; Flanigan, 2007).

Alphabet Knowledge

Beginning consonant knowledge

Concept of Word

Spelling with beginning and ending consonants

Phonemic segmenta5on

Word Recogni5on

Reading in context

The Role of COW

•  According to the Morris (1993; 2003) model, COW assists the development of sight word acquisiCon because it is has an important relaConship with other key early literacy skills. – Alphabet and beginning consonant knowledge develops before COW

– COW, in turn, develops before the ability to segment phonemes, which comes before word recogniCon.

11/22/14

8

Why is this model important?

•  This model represents the progression through which students move as they acquire literacy.

•  This model clearly illustrates the role of COW in the literacy acquisiCon process. –  Leèr-‐sound knowledge is required for COW. –  COW happens before word recogniCon.

•  No COW=no word recogniCon! –  COW creates a bridge between early and later levels of phonemic awareness.

•  Facilitates the acquisiCon of phonemic segmentaCon

This model shows us that COW acts as a “bridge” between earlier levels of phonemic awareness and later

phonemic awareness.

Concept of Word

Early levels of Phoneme awareness (Beginning Consonant)

Later levels of Phonemic Awareness (phoneme segmentaCon)

Morris, D., Bloodgood, J., Lomax, R., & Perney, J. (2003). Developmental steps in learning to read: A longitudinal study in kindergarten and first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 3, 2-‐24.

Why is Alphabet Knowledge and Beginning Consonant Knowledge Necessary For Developing COW?

•  Leèr-‐sound knowledge is a necessary condiCon for developing COW. –  Students need to be able to use leèr sound knowledge when working with texts.

•  For example, when finger-‐point reading the poem, “Old Mister Rabbit,” students can use their beginning consonant knowledge to scaffold their fingerpoint reading of the text.

•  This support allows students to further develop their COW so that instead of just looking at the first leèrs and sounds in each word, they can start aènding to other leèrs in words.

–  Students will move from using the beginning only, to also paying aènCon to the ending sound before then considering the medial sound.

11/22/14

9

ow, ow, ow our oat

o , o , o ou oa

We also need to consider that…

• Not all COW is the same! • COW exists on a conCnuum ranging from developing to firm, which is related to the ability to recognize sight words recogniCon.

11/22/14

10

Developing Rudimentary Firm

The COW ConCnuum

(Morris et al., 2003; Blackwell-‐Bullock, Invernizzi, Drake, & Howell, 2009)

Developing COW •  Lowest level of COW •  There is some variability within this phase from a complete lack of direcConality to poinCng to individual leèrs as they recite text to tapping rhythmically as they recite the poem.

•  Students possess li`le leèr-‐sound knowledge –  Inability to match the spoken word to the printed word

•  Unable to voice point to idenCfy words in context.

•  Also unable to idenCfy words out of context. (Morris et al., 2003; Blackwell-‐Bullock et al., 2009)

Rudimentary COW •  Students at this level on the COW conCnuum possess more developed leèr-‐sound knowledge.

•  Students are able to track text, although words with two syllables open throw them off. –  However, students with Rudimentary COW can usually catch and correct these errors on their own.

•  Students are able to idenCfy words in the context of the poem.

•  Students can idenCfy a few (but not many) words out of context.

•  Students may confuse words with similar iniCal and final consonants.

(Morris et al., 2003; Blackwell-‐Bullock et al., 2009)

11/22/14

11

Firm COW

•  Students are not only able to track text, but they can also idenCfy words both in and out of context.

•  Word recogniCon is not fleeCng, but long term.

(Morris et al., 2003; Blackwell-‐Bullock et al., 2009)

•  When a student has a firm COW, he is able to devote his a`enCon to the words in text.

•  As a result, the student is able to idenCfy words from the text when they are presented in isolaCon.

•  Then, the student’s sight word vocabulary is able to grow.

Comparing Ehri’s Phases of Word RecogniCon With the Concept of Word ConCnuum

Ehri’s phases of word recognition

Characteristics The COW Continuum

Pre-alphabetic • Little alphabet knowledge • Relies on visual clues to “read” words

Developing

Partial alphabetic • Increased alphabet knowledge • Can use that alphabet knowledge for word recognition. • However, does not have full phoneme segmentation, so cannot pay attention to the medial vowel (that’s why children at this stage may mix-up words with the same initial and final consonants but different vowels)

Rudimentary

Full alphabetic • Alphabet knowledge is secure • Has phonemic segmentation • Increased sight word knowledge!

Firm

11/22/14

12

How do these levels of COW coordinate with the COW task on PALS?

Poin5ng Word ID COW Word List

Developing COW 0-‐5* 0-‐5 0-‐3

Rudimentary COW 5* 9-‐10 3-‐7

Firm COW 5* 10 7-‐10

Adapted from Blackwell-‐Bullock, R., Invernizzi, M., Drake, E.A., & Howell, J.L. (2009). Concept of word in text: An integral literacy skill. Reading in Virginia, 31, 30-‐35.

*Humpty Dumpty=5

So, let’s get back to Johnny…

•  Johnny’s PALS data can give us some important clues.

•  Let’s start off by checking out Johnny’s performance on the COW task. – We parCcularly want to consider his scores on the COW Word List.

•  The COW Word List allows us to see if he was able to idenCfy any words in isolaCon aper fingerpoint reading the poem.

–  Scores of 7-‐10 are what we are looking for to demonstrate a firm COW.

Let’s Look at Johnny’s PALS scores

Group Rhyme 10

Group Beginning Sound 6

Lowercase ABC 11

Le`er Sounds 13

Spelling 2

COW PoinCng 4

COW Word ID 8

COW Word List 2

11/22/14

13

Johnny’s PALS scores

Group Rhyme 10


Lowercase ABC 11

Le`er Sounds 13

Spelling 2

COW PoinCng 4

COW Word ID 8

COW Word List 2

What do you noCce about Johnny’s PALS scores?

•  Let’s start with his COW scores, and his COW Word List scores, in parCcular. –  Johnny’s COW Word List score was 2.

•  So, based on this informaCon, what can we iniCally determine about Johnny’s level of COW?

•  Let’s consider Johnny’s poinCng and word idenCficaCon scores for further informaCon. – His COW PoinCng score was 4. – His COW Word ID score was 8.

•  What does this informaCon tell us?

11/22/14

14

Some addiConal informaCon to consider

•  Morris’s model noted that alphabet knowledge and beginning consonant knowledge is present before COW.

•  Let’s take a look at Johnny’s alphabet knowledge and beginning consonant scores and see if that data provides addiConal informaCon.

Group Rhyme 10


Lowercase ABC 11

Le`er Sounds 13

Spelling 2

COW PoinCng 4

COW Word ID 8

COW Word List 2

What does the data tell us?

•  Johnny obviously does not have strong beginning consonant knowledge.

•  He only knows about half of his le`ers and sounds.

•  He does not have a firm concept of word in text.

•  Johnny was not developmentally ready to acquire sight words.

11/22/14

15

•  Therefore, before Johnny should be expected to build a corpus of high-‐frequency words, there are issues that need to be addressed first. –  Johnny needs to acquire the alphabeCc principle. –  Johnny needs to acquire a firm concept of word in text.

–  Johnny needs to move from the lower level of phonemic awareness to achieve a higher level of phonemic awareness (phonemic segmentaCon).

ImplicaCons

•  Instead of spending valuable instrucConal Cme drilling sight words, students like Johnny would benefit from structured experiences in achieving the alphabeCc principle, acquiring a full concept of word, and developing phonemic awareness (especially phonemic segmentaCon).

•  Then, he could be expected to acquire a sight word vocabulary. –  Exposure to high-‐frequency words is fine.

What should we be doing for students like Johnny?

•  First, we need to make sure that we are using the available PALS data to plan instrucCon that is developmentally appropriate. –  Look at the COW scores and determine the level of COW.

– Determine the amount of le`er-‐sound knowledge. – Don’t forget to check out the Beginning Sound scores. –  Evaluate the Spelling score-‐is the child using iniCal consonants? IniCal and final consonants? Are vowels being included in the medial posiCon?

11/22/14

16

RecommendaCons •  Make sure that a firm grasp on the alphabeCc principle is

established. •  Picture sorts •  Font sorts •  Leèr hunts •  Games that emphasize leèr/sound relaConships •  The ABC Song (you should track it too!)

•  Provide opportuniCes to develop COW –  Through modeling and pracCce

•  Nursery rhymes •  Dictated stories/Language Experience AcCviCes

•  Build phonemic awareness with the goal of acquiring phonemic segmentaCon.

•  Use tools like PALS Quick Checks to evaluate student growth in between the regular administraCon of the PALS assessment.

Materials

•  Words Their Way and Le;er and Picture Sorts for Emergent Spellers are great resources for instrucCon.

•  Ganske’s book-‐Word Sorts and More – Many useful acCviCes

•  PALS website –  Electronic Lesson Plans

Materials •  Other tools are available

that not only include a COW component, but also address leèr-‐sound knowledge, etc. –  Book Buddies assessment in the Book Buddies manual

–  Howard Street Tutoring Manual

•  Early Reading Screening Instrument (ERSI)

–  Beverly Tyner’s Small-‐Group Reading InstrucHon

11/22/14

17

References Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: The

MIT Press. Bowman, M. & Treiman, R. (2004). Stepping stones to reading. Theory into PracHce, 43,

295-‐303. Blackwell-‐Bullock, R., Invernizzi, M., Drake, E.A., & Howell, J.L. (2008-‐2009). Concept of word in

text: An integral literacy skill. Reading in Virginia, 31, 30-‐39. Ehri, L.C. (1991). Development of the ability to read words. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal,

& P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research Vol. II. New York: Longman. Ehri, L.C., (1997).Sight word learning in normal readers and dyslexics. In B.E. Blachman (Ed.)

FoundaCons of Reading AcquisiCon and Dyslexia: ImplicaCons for Early IntervenCon pp.

163-‐190. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

References Ehri, L.C. (1998). Grapheme-‐phoneme knowledge is essenCal for learning to read words in

English. In J.L. Metsala and L.C. Ehri (Eds.) Word recogniHon in beginning literacy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Flanigan, K. (2007). A concept of word in text: A pivotal event in early reading acquisiCon.

Journal of Literacy Research, 39, 1, 37-‐70. Invernizzi, M. & Hayes, L. (2011). Developmental pa`erns of reading proficiency and reading

difficulCes. In A. McGill-‐Franzen & R.L. Allington (Eds.) Handbook of Reading Disability (pp. 196-‐207). New York: Routledge.

References Morris, D. (1980). Beginning readers’ concept of word. In E.H. Henderson & J.W. Beers (Eds.),

Developmental and cogniHve aspects of learning to spell: A reflecHon of word knowledge (pp.

97-‐111). Newark, DE: InternaConal Reading AssociaCon.

Morris, D. & Henderson, E.H. (1981). Assessing the beginning reader’s “concept of word.”

Reading World, 20, 4, 279-‐285. Morris, D. (1992). Concept of word: A pivotal understanding in the learning-‐to-‐read process. In

S. Templeton & D. Bear’s (Eds.), Development of orthographic knowledge and the

foundaHons of literacy: A memorial festschriW for Edmund H. Henderson (pp. 53-‐77),

Hillsdale, NH: Erlbaum.

11/22/14

18

References Morris, D. (1993). The relaConship between children’s concept of word in text and phoneme

awareness. Research in the Teaching of English, 27, 2, 133-‐153. Morris, D., Bloodgood, J., Lomax, R., & Perney, J. (2003). Developmental steps in learning to

read: A longitudinal study in kindergarten and first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 3,

2-‐24. Morris, D., Bloodgood, J., & Perney, J. (2003). Kindergarten predictors of first-‐and-‐second grade

reading achievement. The Elementary School Journal, 104, 2, 93-‐109.

Tracey, D. H. & Morrow, L.M. (2006). Lenses on reading: An introducHon to theories and

models (1st ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

handouts johnny sight words_vea conference 2014

Education