An appallingly tardy response to such an important element of reading - apologies. The growing recognition of fluency as the crucial developmental area for primary education is certainly encouraging helping us move away from the obsession with reading comprehension tests.

It is, as you suggest, a nuanced pedagogy with the tripartite algorithm of rate, accuracy and prosody at times conflating the landscape and often leading to an educational shrug of the shoulders, a convenient abdication of responsibility and a return to comprehension 'skills'.
Taking each element separately (but not hierarchically) may be helpful but always remembering that for fluency they occur simultaneously (not dissimilar to sentence structure, text structure and rhetoric in fluent writing).
Rate, or words-read-per-minute, is the easiest. Faster reading speeds are EVIDENCE of fluency development but attempting to 'teach' children(or anyone) to read faster is fallacious (Carver, 1985) and will result in processing deficit which in young readers will be catastrophic.
Reading rate is dependent upon eye-movements and cognitive processing development along with orthographic development (more on this later).
Prosody-the ability to make reading sound like authentic oral speech-is clear evidence of developing fluency (and comprehension-lots of evidence) but can also be encouraged through phrasing activities (Whalley,2006) and pitch rises and falls (Miller,2006)and repeated reading.
However, developing prosody indicates a top-down cognitive approach to reading (Stanovitch, 1980) with the reader bringing knowledge and schema to bear on the text - rather than merely extracting meaning from the words.
Thus, prosody is not merely expression, it is evidence of developing types of knowledge. Think how much easier it is to understand Shakespeare read by an experienced Shakespearean actor because of the prosodic reading.
Accuracy is often the most ignored. Historically, prosody has been the touchstone. Victorian teachers only received pay rises (from inspectors) for prosodic pupils (so they got them to learn the text) so obsessed with fluency was education.
Accuracy relates to instant word recognition which is the next stage after decoding becomes faster. This remarkable human ability to recognise multiple, legitimate letter patterns such that we can read the word faster than the letters is a bottleneck in reading development.
It requires lots and lots of practice and the regular exposure to words which means that it is self-taught (Share, 2002). That does not mean we just leave it to the pupils. The more children read and the more exposures they have to a word, the faster they will develop accuracy.
That requires regular and extended leveraged reading activities (probably whole class) with repeated reading - also used as an intervention - along with assisted reading. Decoding strategies for unknown words need to be well developed.
The danger is that we rush to fluency too quickly without allowing pupils the time to stutter and stumble over words as they develop their orthographic accuracy. As the Roman pedagog Quintilian insisted, reading should be ‘at first sure, then continuous and for a long time slow’
And the beauty of leveraged reading is that it benefits prosodic reading - through teacher-led exemplification - as well as rate through repeated reading.
Some of the instructional practices for fluency with research bases you may want to check out: FLUENCY ORIENTATED READING INSTRUCTION,WIDE READING,ORAL RECITATION LESSON,SHARED BOOK EXPERIENCE,FLUENCY DEVELOPMENT LESSON, RETRIEVAL AUTOMATICITY VOCABULARY ELABORATION ORTHOGRAPHY
GUIDED REPEATED ORAL READING WITH FEEDBACK,READING PARTNER ASSISTED FLUENCY PRACTICE,NEUROLOGICAL IMPRESS METHOD

More from Education

Last month I presented seven sentences in seven different languages, all written in a form of the Chinese-character script. The challenge was to identify the languages and, if possible, provide a


Here again are those seven sentences:

1) 他的剑从船上掉到河里去
2) 於世𡗉番𧡊哭唭𢆥尼歲㐌外四𨑮
3) 入良沙寢矣見昆腳烏伊四是良羅
4) 佢而家喺邊喥呀
5) 夜久毛多都伊豆毛夜幣賀岐都麻碁微爾夜幣賀岐都久流曾能夜幣賀岐袁
6) 其劍自舟中墜於水
7) 今天愛晚特語兔吃二魚佛午飯

Six of those seven sentences are historically attested. One is not: I invented #7. I’m going to dive into an exploration of that seventh sentence in today’s thread.

Sentence #7 is an English-language sentence written sinographically — that is, using graphs that originate in the Chinese script. I didn’t do this for fun (even though it is fun), or as a proposal for a new way to write


I did it as a thought experiment. Why? Because thinking about how the modern Chinese script might be adapted to write modern English can give us valuable insights into historical instances of script borrowing, like those that took place centuries ago in Japan, Korea, and Vietnam.
I was a recipient of KGSP for my Msc from 2013-2016

Korean Government Scholarship Program (KGSP) Application made easy

Application period- 1 February 2021- 31 March, 2021

MS- 3yrs (1 year Korean language + 2 years MS)

PhD- 4yrs (1 year Korean language + 3 years PhD)

How to navigate the
https://t.co/6Ne99JDfyv page

1. Type https://t.co/ow51lWVKcQ in your browser and hit the enter button

2. Click on scholarships and select GKS notice as attached in the picture👇

3. Play with the notice dashboard to see various announcements from NIIED.


4. E.g in 2020, the Global Korea Scholarship for Graduate Degrees was announced on 11, February as indicated by no 205. You can click to download the application materials to get familiar with what is expected. I attached series of links in this thread to assist too.

Category- All fields

Benefits

1. Visa fee

2. Airfare: Actual cost (To and fro from your home country to Korea and upon completion to your home country)

3. Resettlement Allowance: KRW 200,000 (Given upon arrival in Korea)

4. Monthly stipend: Graduate (MS/PhD)-KRW 1000,000 (362,610.35 Nigerian Naira) per month ,Research Program including Postdoctoral fellow and visiting Professors - 1,500,000 KRW (542,824.78 Nigerian Naira) per month
When the university starts sending out teaching evaluation reminders, I tell all my classes about bias in teaching evals, with links to the evidence. Here's a version of the email I send, in case anyone else wants to poach from it.

1/16


When I say "anyone": needless to say, the people who are benefitting from the bias (like me) are the ones who should helping to correct it. Men in math, this is your job! Of course, it should also be dealt with at the institutional level, not just ad hoc.
OK, on to my email:
2/16

"You may have received automated reminders about course evals this fall. I encourage you to fill the evals out. I'd be particularly grateful for written feedback about what worked for you in the class, what was difficult, & how you ultimately spent your time for this class.

3/16

However, I don't feel comfortable just sending you an email saying: "please take the time to evaluate me". I do think student evaluations of teachers can be valuable: I have made changes to my teaching style as a direct result of comments from student teaching evaluations.
4/16

But teaching evaluations have a weakness: they are not an unbiased estimator of teaching quality. There is strong evidence that teaching evals tend to favour men over women, and that teaching evals tend to favour white instructors over non-white instructors.
5/16

You May Also Like