DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 218 649 CS 207 072

AUTHOR Reed, Linda, Ed.; Ward, Spencer,TITLE Basic Skills Issues and Choices: Approaches to Basic

Skills Instruction. Volume 2.INSTITUTION CEMREL, Inc., St. Louis, Mo.SPONS AGENCY Department of Education, Washington, DC. Basic Skills

Improvement Program.; National Inst. of Education(ED), Washington, DC.

PUB DATE Apr'82CONTRACT 300-80-0611NOTE 189p.; For related document see CS 207 071.

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC08 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Basic Skills; *Communication Skills; *Educational

Research; Elementary Secondary Education; ListeningSkills;°*Mathematics Instruction; MinimumCompetencies; Program Content; Program Development;Reading Comprehension; *Reading Instruction; ReadingSkills; Speech Instruction; Teaching Methods;

en*Writing Instruction; Writing Skills

'TheoryTheory Practice' Relationship

ABSTRACT -

Resulting from a project-involving district, state,and federal educational agencierrthe papers in this, the second oftwo volumes, are intended to provide information from research andpractice that -can help school districts in their efforts to makedecisions about goals and methods of basic skills instruction. Thetopics a the papers in the volume were chosen in response to threemajor concerns: Should basic skills be thought of as minimum

,--competenciis? Should they be taught in\isolation from each other andfrom the rest of the curriculum or integrated in some form? and, Whatcan be done to help assure that an emphasis on basic skillsinstruction will lead to improvements in educational practice andstudent outcomes? Specific-topics'covered in the 17 papers include(1) the movement toward meaning-focused writing, (2) the writer asexperimenter, (3) teaching the mechanical conventions of writing, (4)standards for effective oral communications and basic skills writingprograms, (5) the application of the minimal speaking and listeningskills competencies, (6) basic skills in mathematics, (7) theoriesand prescriptions for early reading instruction, (8) a whole-languagecomprehonsion-centered_view of reading development, (9) directreading instruction, and (10) learning to learn from text. -(FL)

**********************************************************;:************

*. =Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrowthe original document.

**********************************************************************

O

NS. °VARMINT OFSOUCATION*

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATIONEDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION

CENTER /ERIC/1...This document has been reproduced as

received from the person or organitenOnoriginating it.

o Minor chamois have been made to Improve

reproduction quality.

Points of view or opinions stated in this docu,mint do not necessarily : ressntofficialNIE

position or policy.

asic SkillsAim sues and Choices

Approaches to Basic Skills Instruction

Edited by:Linda Rec.!CEMREL, Inc.St. Louis, MissouriandSpencer WardNational Institute of EducationU.S. Department of Education

Lorraine Mercier and Helen 0'Basic Shills Improvement

CEMREL, Inc.3120 59th StreetSt. Louis, Missouri 63139

Project Officerso

Project OfficersJ4graine Mercier, Project OfficerBasic Skills Improvement ProgramU.S. Department of EducationSpencer Ward, Project OfficerNational Institute of EducationU.S. Department of EducationCEMREL Production Steff: Linda Reed, Jennie Scaggs, Jan Gardner,

*Patric:la Corrigan, Mary Ann Isaacs, Sandra Ruder

Book Design: Rene Michel-111page, Oira PartnershipTypesetting and Production: Just Your Type, St. Louis, Missouri

Published April 1982Printed in the United States of AmericaCEMREL, Ipc.3120 59th StreetSt. Louis, Missouri 63139

This publication was prepared with funding from the Basic Skills Improvement Program and theNational Institute of Education of the U.S: Department of Education under contract #300800611.The opinions expressed in this collection of papers do not necessarily reflect the positions orpolicies of BSIP, NIE, or the Department of Education.

3

Contents

Basic Skills Issues and Choices 1

PrefaCe , viiAcknowledginents viiiForeword ixIntroduction 1

Summaries of Papers 25

Issues in Basic Skills Instruction'Classroom Management: Making Time to Learn Basic SkillsLinda M. Anderson

Integrating the Basic Skills through the Content AreasDorothy S. StricklandThe Essentials of Education: Basic Skills in ContextMarjorie Farmer

State Leadership in Basic SkillsJohn L. Meehan

Forward to the Basics Ontario StyleJames It MacLeanLearning in Real-Life ContextsBetty M. Beck

What's Basic? A Constructivist ViewThomas C. O'Brien

33

41

55

65

77

85

Issues in Basic Skills Outcomes and Classroom Planning and AssessmentBasic Skills for the World of WorkRobert W Stump and Nina Selz 97A Holistic View of Adult AbilitiesGeorgine Loader and Marcia L. Meritkowski 109Skills for the FutureLena Lupica 117

iv

Classroom Monitoring and AssessmentVito Perrone and Walter HaneyPlanning and Management of InstructionPatricia Weiler

Issues in Basic Skills Planning 4 " -

Making Choices in Basic Skills InstruOtion: Research and TheoryMichael L. KamilMaking Basic Skills.Choices: Values and ConstraintsGerald G. Duffy

At the Barricades: A Cautionary TaleCharles E. AllenCharacteristics of Successful School Programs in Basic SkillsS.' Jay SamuelsSkill Definition in State COmpetericy Testing Programs'William Phillip Gorth and Marcy R. PerkinsLiteracy Is Rising, But So Is Demand for LiteracyJohn R. Bormuth

Basic Skills Issues and Choices 2

PrefaceAcknowledgments

ForewordSummaries of Papers

WritingNCTE Statement on Standards for Basic Skills Writing Programs

Chprles-SuhorThe Movement toward Meaning-Focused WritingRobert L. Brown, Jr.

The Writer as ExperimenterThomas NewkirkTeaching the Mechanical Conventions of WritingVivian I. Davis

Speaking and ListeningStandards for Effective Oral Communication ProgramsBarbara Lieb-BrilhartOral Communication: Holistic Skills/Functional ApproachBarbara S. WoodOral Communication: Individual Skills FocusFred E. JandtApplication of the Minimal Speaking and Listening CorripetenciesClarice P. Lowe

a

0

125

131

139

149

157

163

173

183

3

19

29.

41

49

57

71

-V

MatheniaticsBasic Skills in Mathematics: The Issue Regarding Computational SkillsMarilyn N. Suydam 81

The Mathematics Education Profession's View of Basic Mathematical SkillsRoss Taylor 69A'Child Is More than a MachineAlan R. Hoffer 103

Reading -

Theories and Prescriptions for Early Reading Instruction.. Lauren .B. Resnick 111

A Whole-Language Comprehension-Centered View of Reading DevelopmentKenneth S. Goodman and Yetta M. Goodman 125Direct Instiuction: A Bottom Up Skills Approach to Elementary Reading InstructionDouglas W. Carnine 135An Integration of Instructional Approaches for Teaching Reading and Learning from TextHairy Singer . . . 147Learning to Learn from Text: A Framework for Improving Classroom PracticeRoberej. Tierney and P. David Pearson 157Direct Instruction Reconsidered ,

Penelope L. Peterson 1690

et

Preface

This two-volume collection is the result ofcooperation among federal education programsand many researchers and practitioners recog-nized as experts in basic skills instruction. Thepapers' iescribe choices and issues to be con-sidered in reviewing current basic skills pro-grams or planning for program improvements.They have been prepared on the assumptionthat, in planning and reviewing of basic skillsprograms, it is helpful to know what the choicesare, what the important differences among thechoices are, and how those differences will in-fluence the outcomes of instruction in a givensituation.

We believe a, parallel exists between ourexperience in .this project and the experience ofmany school distrias in reviewing, planning,and implementing improvements in basic skillsprograms. Three important approaches used inpreparing this collection were (1) the coopera-tion among programs responsible for researchand programs responsible for school improve-ment and, more generally, among researchersand practitioners, (2) the open presentation and -discussion of conflicting views, leading to aposition which respects the strongest points ofcompeting views, and (3) the continuing devel-opment and refinement of ideas based an newknowledge and experience.

We suggest that these same approaches areneeded in planning at the district level. Thus, in

vii

any district there are experts in the schools andin the district office who have important knowl-edge to contribute to planning for basic skillsinstruction. Parents and other s3ommunitymem-bers also have important perspectives to con-tribute. In addition, in most districts there arealso college or university personnel who mightbring essential perspectives to the process. Ba-sic skills planning' must be done in an atmo-sphere that encourages input from all of thesepeople and that allows time to build under-standing and' consensus among participantswith differing or opposing perspectives.

We commend this collection to you as a re-source which we believe can be a helpful tool inthe review of current basic skills instruction orplanning for improvements in instruction. Weinvite your responses on how it is useful, or onhow it might have been made. more useful.

Shirley JacksonActing Director for Educational

Support Programs,Office of Elembntary and

Secondary Education

Michael B. KaneActing Associate Director 4Dissemination and Improvement

of PracticeNational Institute of Education

Acknowledgments

These papers are the result of collaborationamong many educators, including educationalresearchers and staff of federal, state, and dis-trict educational agencies. Approximately twohundred people have been involved in the plan-ning of the project, preparation of the papers,review of the papers, and preparation of the in-troduction. We want to acknowledge our appre-ciation to the following individuals and groupsfor their good ideas, hard work, and cooperatiiiespirit.

All of the consultants from school districtsand universities who worked intensively withus in different phases of the project. These in-cluded representatives from each of the basicskills areas who met `with us in July 1979;members of the _p_lanning.group which met inSeptember 1979; the educators and research-ers who met to synthesize the issues andchoices in late. September 1979; the reviewersfor each of the basic skills areas, who workedwith us in February 1980;, and the reviewersfor the introduction.The more than 100 people who provided writ-ten or telephone reviews of thelpapers in thiscollection.

People who were interviewed to help usdetermine the questions to be considered, in-cluding staff of.appropriate House and Senatecommittees,. members of the .Department ofEducation's Basic Skills Coordinating Com-mittee, staff members of the National Instituteof Education, staff members in several StateDepartments of Education, and parents andprofessionals from several school districts.

viii

The American Federation of Teachers (AFT)and the National Education Association(NEA), for their assistance in reviewing Theproject plan and in identifying teachers toparticipate in the three -day synthesis meeting.

Staff of the Basic Skills Improvement Program,especially Shirley Jackson, Lorraine Mercier,Helen O'Leary, and Ann Drennan. These peo-ple helped us determine the issues to be ad-dressed, provided critiques and suggestionsalong the way, and were instrumental in thefinal preparation and publication of the pa-,pers. Our special thanks to LorraineMercier,Program Officer for the project, who exhibitedpatience and a dedication to the project aboveand beyond the call of duty.Sandy Robinson and Tom Sticht, who-played_crucial roles in initiating the basic skills focusof this collection of papers.Joann Kinney, who, as a member of the Read-ing and Language Studigs Team of NIE's Pro-gram on Teaching and Learning, helped tokeep the project responsive to concerns ofother NIE staff.

Ed Myers, Director of CEMREL's School Im-provdment Group, whose contributions andconstructive criticism during the writing ofthe introduction were invaluable.

Michael Kane, Assistant Director for Researchand Educational Practice, NIE, who gave sup-port and encouragement.

8

S.W. /L.J.R.

4

0

Foreword

The Purpose of this collection of papers is toprovide information from research and practicewhich can help school districts in their effortsto make decisions about goals and methods ofbasic skills instruction.* The papers include de-scriptions of different approaches to instructionin each of the basic skills areas writing,speaking and listening, mathematics; and read-ing = and discussions of issues to be consid-ered in deciding on the best mix of the differentapproaches for a particular school or school dis-trict. Generally, the papers reflect an expandedview of the basic skills, rather than a minimumCompetence view.

The &llection is intended to be useful to pro-fessionals involved in basic' skills planning forclassrooms, schools, and .school districts, but .we have assumed that it will also be of use tostate and federal policy makers, to people in-volved in preservice and inservice education,and to researchers.

Often basic skills planning is done with toolittle time, limited involvement of professionalsand community members, and in the absence ofadequate information and knowledge. The pa-pers included in this collection are intendedto provide or give references to much of the

*For persons interested in more detail about thisproject, Spencer Ward has described the procedureused and some of the complications in "An Explora-tory Study of a Consensus-Building Approach toKnowledge Synthesis and Interpretation," whichwasl be available in 1982 in Knowledge Structure andUs'e: Theory and-Practice of Synthesis and Interpre-tation, edited by Spencer Ward and Linda Reed andsponsored by the National Institute of Education.

ix

knowledge relevant to reviewing and planningbasic skills programs. We hope that this knowl-edge base will serve as a resource for schooldistricts.and will also encourage them to extendthe time provided for basic skills planning andthe range of involvement' in that planning.

The collection grew out of the needs of theBasic Skills Improvement Program and the Na-tional Institute of Education. The Basic,SkillsImprovement Program staff were then respon-sible for coordination of basic skills activities inmore than twenty federally supported programsand for facilitating coordination for basic skillsimprovement in states and school districts. Inorder to do that effectively, staff of the programfelt that they needed to have a clearer under-standing of the approaches and issues,to 13,3 con-sidered in basic_ skills planning. The National'Institute of Education is responsible for supportof educational research and for making knowl-edge resultingsfrom research available to practi-tioners in useful forms. Thus, the needs of theBasic Skills Improvement Program for infor-mation meshed with the National Institute ofEducation's responsibility to make knowledgeavailable in a useful form.

Over the last two years, planning and man-.

agement of the project has boil a cooperativeventure among Basic SkillscImprovement Pro-gram staff and staff members in two programswithin the National Institute of Education: theDissemination and Improvement of PracticeProgram and the Teaching and Learning Pro;.gram. In the last year, staff of the Research andDevelopment Interpretation Service at CEMREL,Inc., a regional educational laboratory located inSt. Louis, Missouri, have become involved in

9

the project. In addition, eighty researchers andpractitioners were involved in writing papers,.project planning, and analysis of issues. Anoth-er two hundred practitioners, policy, croakers,and. researchers helped to identify questions tobe addressed or provided reactions to one ormore of the papers.

' We have considered this to be a synthesisproject. Although that term is little used in thevolumes, we wanted to highlight here that as-pect of the project. Educational research anddevelopment have produced much new knowl-edge in the past twenty years. That research hasoften not been helpful in improving education.One of the reasons for this failure appears to,be that new knowledge is often not organizedso the many pieces of knowledge relate to oneanother and to planning and instruction inschools.

To organize the knowledge, project staff de-., cided to use a modification of a method used by

the R&D Interpretation Service for the develop-ment of the products in ittiReseerch WithinReach series. Those productAorganize knowl-edge about reading and mathematics instruc-tion around questions asked by teachers. In thepresent project, we chose to organize knowl-edge around the questions asked during inter-views with thirty state, federal, and districtpolicy makers, and with a smaller sample ofparents and teachers.

aThe interviews were conducted during the

period when the Basic-Skills Improvement Pro-, gram was soliciting proposals for a grants com-petition among local school districts and plansfor. basic skills coordination from the state de-partments of education. It was not surprising,therefore, that many of the people who wereinterviewed expressed concerns or fears about'how the basic skills might be misinterpretedas a result of the language in the Basic SkillsImprovement Act, rather than asking questions.Some of those interviewed feared that basicskills would be seen as too narrow, thus exclud-

, ing many of the skills that contribute:to success-ful ---%rather than just adequate functioningin our society. Others believed that basic skillsshould be nadowly interpreted.

Based on the interview responses, three re-lated problems were identified: first, there is

widespread disagreeMent on the goals andmethods of basic skills instruction; second,there is not a clear understanding of the dif-ferent approaches to basic skills instruction, sothere is no basis' for thoughtful choice amongdifferent perspectives; and, finally, there existsarinaccurate ;perception Cif the basic skills leg-islation'as enbhasizing-individual skills taughtin isolation from other content. The interviews,also revealed concerns about the relationshipsamong the-four basic skills areas and other partsof the curriculum.

After discussing the interview findings witha number of consultants, we chose to addresstwo questions in the project: (1) What issuesshould be considered in planning basic skillsprograms? and (2) What are the choices in plan-ning basic skills instruction? Our initial goalwas to present the major issues and choices andto avoid advocating any particular approach.Our planwastditind people to prepare papersanalyzing different approaches to basic skillsinstruction and the issues to be considered indveloping a basic skills program, and then tohfive, a group of researchers and practitionersuse the papers as a resource for making senseof the various issues and choices, much as wehope school districts will do with the publisheddocument.

We wanted to present descriptions and ra-tionales for different choices. in the basic skills,representing the different opinions we heard inthe interviews. We chose to have different writ-ers prepare brief descriptions a difficult taskin it:Af of what we perceived to be_the threedifferent approaches to instruction in each ofthe four basic skills a subskills apfipach, aholistic approach, and a balanced approach (ablending of the first two). We also identifiedpeople with special interests in such areas ascoordination of instruction, classroom manage-ment, assessment, and program planning andasked them to write about those issues as theyrelated to basic skills planning and instruction.

Most of the "issues" papers worked out asplanned. Several topics, however, proved to betoo complicated to deal with in a short paperwithout being more confusing than helpful.These papers focusing on motivation, pre-school education, adult education, and bilingual

1 0

:Os

education were removed from the collection.The "choices"' papers and the choices

themselves proved to be far more complexthan we nal anticipated. Only in the area ofreading were we able to find experts who wouldadvocale rjuite° differencapproaches, but it wasiiOt a clear split, betweenta subskills approachand a holistic or meaning-focus approach. All ofthe papers on reading empha ized the impor-tance of instrucliop in comprehension. In theareas of written communication, oral commu-nication, and mathematics, however, we werenot able to find widely respected advocatesof opposing approaches. Although the authorsagreed to place an emphasis on one approach orthe other, they would not agree to encouragean exclusively subskills or holistic approach.Many argued that, in fact, this dichotoihynot reflect the issues in these areas of the basicskills. .

The approach used involved ongoing review. andievision of the papers, with each round tak-

ing into account the comments and suggestionsof a variety of reviewers. In addition to thisconsensus-building approach to the papers, weused a strategy of identifying the most in*or-

between a narrow (subskills) and a broader(holistic) definition of the basic skills andtoward an emphasis on finding the richest mixof the two, a mix which is responsive to theneeds and concerns' of the students, teachers,and parents. The introduction to the two vol-umes reflects that shift in our thinking.

We have found this experience with collab-oration totbe a challenging venture and a per-sonalry and professionally rewarding one. Wehope the ideas presented here will lead to fur-

.zer' cooperation among practitioners, policymakers; and researchers at the federal, state, anddistrict levels. This project has also impressedus with the need for a possible new direction inresearch on basic skills, research that looks atthe ways in which educators create mixes ofvarious ap roaches in order to meet the needsof individua hil ren in a variety of situations:

Spencer WardNational Institute of EducationLinda ReedCEMREL, Inc.

tant assumptions behind opposing positions"and testing them by open critique. * * This sec-ond strategy involved a group of thirty-five re-searchers and practitioners who worked with usfor three days to make sense of the choices andissues. This group was responsible, ultimately,for a major shift in our thinking about the choic-es that teachers have available to them as theyplan basic skills instruction.

The group suggested, strongly that the impor-tant question for school districts is not "Whichapproach is the best approach?" but "How canthe teacher, school, or school district create abasic skills program that will take advantage ofthe strengths and avoid the weaknesses of eachapproach?" In other words, "HOW- can a schoolcreate the richest mix of approaches?" We beganto move away from our emphasis on choosing

* *The consensus-building and assumptions-testingtechniques used in this project were adapted fromprevious work done by Edward Glaser and Ian.Mitroff, who consulted with us in planning theproject.

C.

ii

1r

sea

Summaries. of the Papers

Volume 1

Issues in Basic Skills Instruction ,

Management:Linda M. Anderson. Classroom Management:Making Time to Learn Basic SkillssBecausepurpose is to support instruction and to createan environment for learning, effective class-

. room management is critical to the successof any basic skills instructional program. In-volving much more than discipline, classroommanagement includes organizing .the physical

4

environment of the classroom, scheduling andpacing activities, organizing supplies and in-structional materials, and monitoring students'progress, attention, and behavior. The amountof time that students spend on leaming tasksdetermines theusefulness of mapaggnent strakegies in various classroom.settings.

' Dorothy S. Strickland. Integrating the BasticSkills through the Content Areas. If the basicskills are to provide students with the means toattain the information required for successfulliving in modern'society, then teachers and ad-ministiatois must reorganize the curriculum tointegrate the basic skills into a unified commu-nications program. Such a program requires thatbasic skills be applied in combination with oneanother and that they be taught in a context thatis of interest and importance td the children.This integration of skills allows instruction totake-place in a holistic manner and provides forthe monitoring of basic skills objectives in anorganized way.

Majorie Farmer. 'Mc Essentials of Education:Basic Skills in Context. "Tha Essentiali of Edu-

V

' cation" represents a joint effort by leaders in -

over 20 major national professiona educatoriassociations to develop, disCuss, disseminate,and iniplemen't a working definition of educa-tional int- rdependence at all levels of the edu-cational process. Some of the implicatioofthis si,atement include: a definition of basicskilk that includes_writtervancLoraLcommuni-cation; the teaching of language and reasoningin. all content areas; multicultural awareness integching; inaintaihing the natural interrelation-ship between learning and interest; attention iathe physical environment and social contextpflearning; and life-long learning for parents andteachers. '

John L. Meehan. State Leadership in .BasicSkills. The Pennsylvania Comprehensive Read:ing /Communications Art Plan (PCRP) evolvedfrom a 1976 decision by the Pennsylvania Boardof Education to define quality education in,terms of basic skills. With advancing studentcompetence in reading and oral and writtencommunication as a goal, PCRP defined four tmajor categories of action: responding to liter-ature (heard, read, visualized, or dramatized);sustained silent reading; written and oralcomposing; 'and mastering language patterns(spelling, syntax, meaning).

.languageits inceptions

PCRP has been piloted in small rural districtsand medium-sized, semi-rural districts, hasserved as an intermediate unit for 12 districtsand 99 schools, and has served as model forhundreds of schools throughout thoe ountry.

James R. MacLean. Forivard to the B ics 'Ontario Style. In an effort to involve teachers,students, and parents more actively in the inte-

22

4 I

gTation of basic skills with other segments of thecurriculum, the Piovince of Ontario, Canada,adopted a curriculum model composed of care-fully balanced components. These componentsstress the individuality of the child and focuson the following: aims and objectives based onknowledge' of children's and society's needs;content selected from the environment; dynam-ic teaching andlearning.processes derived fromthe content; and the assessment of outcomesin terms of effectivenessl, appropriateness, and

,relevance. .-

Betty M. Beck. Learning in Real-Life Con-texts. Real-problem solving classes, where stu-dents are'involved in changing school or com-munity situations that are important to them,-reinforce a wide.- variety of mathematical andlanguage arts inquiry skill's. In these classes thestudents, not the teacher, choose the problem tobejackled, dpcide. what factors'need to be in-' vestikated, search out the facts, try out possiblesolutions, and judge the effectiveness of theirresults. Several assessment studies of schools,that offer these classes reveal that participating

__students are. highly motivated, interact well,with -s;antheirchoose and apply objectively measurable rea-sons for their decisions and to discern effectivesolutions..

. Thomas C. O'Brien. What's Bask?, A Con-'struCtivist View. In a constrnctivist view ofbaSic slcills, the goal of education is to causeintellectual growth to take place by providing a.striktural framework of basic skills or opera-tions such as-classifying, ordering, logically

and inferring that enable thechild to construct and test relationships, andfrom which' s,Thsequent ,knowledge can evolve.

-TA-classroom atmosphere based on a construc-tivist approach to education allows the studentsto develop an understanding of the relation-ships among 'environment, experience and in-ference and an ability to regulate their owninternal needs And perceptions within the de-mands of reality,

Issues in Basic Skills Outconiesand Classroom Planning and Assessment

Robert W Stump and Nina Selz. Basic Skills forthe World of Worlc. A study sponsored by the

. 9

National Center for Research in Vocational Edu-cation defines the three most important abilitiesrequired for the world of work as follows: usingthe reading, mathematics, and writing skills thejob ,calls for; using the tools and equipment thejob calls for; and getting along with others.Results of the study, suggest that the curriculumat every stage of elementary, middle, junior,and senior high school can focus on the devel-opment of these essential skills and others (de-scribed in the paper) necessary for adequateperformance in the world of work. However,this task requires close Cooperation and partiCi-pation from school personnel, families, and em-ployers in the preparation of children for theworld of work.

Georgine Loacker and Miircia L. Mentkowski.A Holistic View of Adult Abilities, The facultyof a midwest college undertook a ten -year pro-cess to define and measure the knowledge andbasic skills that they wished their students toacquire and to assess effective ways to measurethe achievement of these goals. In addition tothe practical information provided by the col-lege curriculum, the Study yielded the follow-

-ing_implications for elementary and secondaryeducators: students need ear y involvemen,the developmental education process; assess-ment,shoUld be diagnostiC as well as evaluative;students learn better in an environment thatteaches them how to learn; developing the po-tential of each student means that studentsmust be treated individually; and realizing im--.portant outcomes in education requires a care-fully planned educational process.

Lena Lupica. Skills For the Future. Rapid°changes in cultural, ethnic, Ad languagetrends, in the composition of the nation's workforce, and in technological, leadership require abroader definition of the basic educational skillsneeded to survive in Our society. Some skillsthat focus on reducing daily tension and im-proving the quality of life include: knowinghow to cope with change; being abl&to antic-ipate alternative future developments; knowinghow to lean; being able to use computer, voice,and visual equipment; having the ability todevelop effective human relations; and know-ing how to be an effective citizen.

Vito Perrone and Walter Haney. Classroom

XV

Mohitering and Assessment. If teachers are tobe able to design instruction that successfullyhelps children to learn the basic skills andif communication with parents is to be effec-tive, then teachers must use consistent, well-organized 'informal assessment proceduresin the classrooin, in addition to formal proce-dures such as norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests. Assessment must be done fre-

&:,

qpintly, so that it can inform decisions aboutInstruction, and it must be relevant to the in-struction that has taken place.

Patricia Weiler. Planning and Management ofInstruction. If a child-centered basic skills pro-gram is to insure continued student skill devel-opment and achievement, the responsibility forthe instructional prdcess must be shared byteachers, paraprofessiricuhim specialists, stuthose who make up thresponsibilities include p

s, administrators, cur-ents, d parents. For

i structional team,ing the instruc-

tional package, organizing the classroom, deter-mining an appropriate diagnostic and eval-uative process,, and participating in inserviceprograms. Parents support the program throughthe use .of learning games and selective tele-

ision viewin at home.

Issues in Ba c Skills Planning

Michael L. Kamil. Making Choices in BasicSkills Instruction: Research and Theory. Inplanning a basic skills program that is based onwhat the students need to learn, the collabora-tive planning group needs an instructionalframework that includes working definitions ofthe words "basic" and -"Skills" and theoreticalbases for determining units of learning, contentand forthat of instruction, individual differ-encesin students, and the role of social dynam-ics. Possible instructional model; for consid-eration include a subskills mot that focuseson the individual components of instruction, aholistic model that places instruction in a wholesituation context, and a balanced model thatcombines specific features of the other twomodels.

Gerald G. Duffy. Making Basic Skills Choices:Values and Constraints. Some issues consid-ered by a collaborativeprogram planning group.

--iii designing a specific basic skills program

include the following: assessing the local dis-trict's position with respect to subject matter,the learner, the teacher, and the learning envi-ronment; identifying those constraints whichsociety, special interest groups, and scho man-agers place upon curriculum- programs;identifying the, realities of the classroom whicaffect the implementation of any program.

Charles E. Allen. At the Barricades: A Can-Tale. In response to a state mandate that

students meet minimum . requirements beforegraduation, one school district developed amathematics curriculum based on the func-tional application of computation skills. Fo-cused'. primarily on those mathematics skillsneeded for survival in the modern world, thematerials grouped specific tasks under eight1:;,adings: banking, expenses, measurements,money, prices, taxes, wages, and whole num-bers. Problems encountered in planning thematerials ranged from implementation-of objec-tives to the actual test format and word choices.

S. Jay Samuels. Chfracteristics of SuccessfulSchool Programs in Basic Skills. An analysisof research studies that dealt with basic skillsprograms during the past fifteen years indi-cates that effective programs have a number ofcharacteristics in common. These comporienthinclude the following: strong administrativeleadership; high expectations and the beliefthat the teacher can make the difference; teacheraides used in direct instruction; teacher train-ing; specific reading objectives; instruction andmaterials relevant to goals; efficient use of time;high intensity of treatment; and frequent evalu-ation of student progress.

William Phillip Gorth and Marcy R. Perkins:Skill Definition in State Competency TestingPrograms. Programs from five states Georgia,Michigan, Virginia, Massachusetts, and NewYork are described. These states identifiedand defined minimum competencies and basicskills and considered a variety of instructionalapproaches before developing their particularstate programs. Four programs identified read-ing, mathematics, and oral communication asbasic skills subject areas, and the fifth programalso specified listening. The focus of programobjectives varied from functional to academicskills. Two states combined both skills catego-

xvi

ries, but differed in the, degree of emphasisplaced on one or the other. Three states requireda state test for promotion or graduation whiletwo states used test'results for remediation andcurriculum improvement.

John R. Bormuth. Literacy Is Rising, But SoIs Demand for Literacy. An analysis of severalresearch studies that indicated a decline in theliteracy level in the United States reveals a needfor a clear definition of literacy and calls for theidentification of major flaws in literacy assess-ment studies. In contrast, a study based oneconomic trends specific to literacy-relatedexpenditures concludes the following: literacyis a major economic force in our society; a de-mand for higher levels of literacy exists over abroad portion of the population; and studies onliteracy must first ask 'what norms determinewhether, or not a person is literate.

Volume 2

Writing

Charles Suhor. NCTE Statement on Stan-dards for Basic Skills Writing Programs. Pre-pared with input from professional associationsas well as from the staffs of several school dis-tricts and universities, "The Standards BasicSkills_361ritirsi Programs" suggests a basicallyholistic approach to writing iistruction thatfocuses on effective communication of the writ-er's ideas in relation to his or her purposeand audience. The practical implications of theStandards require that commercially publishedmaterials deal with the whole writing process,that classroom drills be based on student writ-ing needs, and that inservice for teachers pro-vide techniques for increasing student moti-vation, using group discussion, and teachingeffective writing skills.

Robert L. Brown, jr -The Movement towardMeaning-Focused Writing. Since most profes-sional writers do not write the way that text-books say that writing should be done, an effec-tive approach to writing instruction requiresrethinking the traditional definitions of thewriting process. Such an approach focuses onthe 'cognitive processes involved in writing anduses teaching strategies that stress the follow-ing: prewriting, drafting, revising, and editingskills; student assessment through writing con-

ferences with the teacher or other students; andsentence-combining exercises for fluency andsyntax development.

Thomas Newkirk- The Writer as Experi-menter. A meaning-focused approach to writinginstruction assumes that writing is a natural ac-tivity closely related to thought and emphasizesallowing the child to, explore and experimentwith ideas. Based on a process of prewriting,writing, and revision, this approach providesthe student with techniques for evaluating writ-ing, stresses the importance of reading studentwriting aloud, employs individual conferencesrather than class presentation, and focuseson the assessment of content, thought devel-opment, and communication before that ofmechanical or grammaticarerrors.

Vivian I. Davis. Teaching the MechanicalConventions. of Writing. Effective teaching ofthe conventions of handwriting, 3pelling,punc:tuation, capitalization, and grammar requiresthat these skills be taught within the context ofthe experiences of the individual ,student andthe writing process as a whole.' Some tech-niques that stress effective written communica-tion include the following: individualized prac-tice in handwriting; the test-study-test methodfor spelling focused on words needed in stu-dent writing; dictation exercises, followed byproofreading and editing in capitalization andpunctuation; and grammar presented throughstudenesentence development.

Speaking and Listening

Barbaralieb-Brilhart. Standards for EffectiveOral Cofiununication Programs. While theBasic Skills legislation includes oral communi-cation skills in its definition of "basics," severalassumptions and some potential conflicts meritunderstanding and consideration in implement-ing the "Standards for Effective Oral Communi-cation Programs," prepared by the Speech Com-munication Association (SCA) and the Amer-ican Speech-Language-Hearing Association(ASHA) as guidelines in curriculum planning.These assumptions are that oral communicationinstruction is critical in teaching of the contentareas, is worthy of instruction for its own sake,and should be viewed as a separate discipline.Conflicts can arise regarding such issues as the

5

xvii

definition of communication, academic stan-dards, teacher qualifications, and methods ofassessment.

Barbara S. Wood. Oral Communication:Holistic Skills/Functional Approach. One in-structional approach to oral language develop-ment in children incorporates a functional viewof communication centered on five critical func-tions of everyday interactions; attempting todirect or control the behavior of another; shar-ing feelings; providing ideas and information;ritualizing (greeting, thanking); and imagining,or dealing creatively with reality. These com-munication functions are taught through a pro-cess that stresses the development of a reper-toire of communication strategies, that developsselection criteria for choosing appropriate strat-egies, that provides practice in implement-ing communication choices, and that offersmethods that children can use to evaluate theircommunication.

Fred E. Jandt. Oral Communication: Individ-ual Skills Focus. After "effective communica-tion, both written and oral" was added to thewording of the Basic Skills Improvement Act in1978, research specialists. identified nineteenspeaking and listening competencies as basicto two-person interactions, small group discus-sions, and public speaking. A number of statesthen developed minimal competencies inspeaking and/or listening to be implemented oneither a statewide basis or as a local option. Theapproaches used by five states Vermont, Vir-ginia, Oregon, Utah, and Massachusetts aredescribed here. The lists developed by thesestates describe competencies in a way thatallows their assessment through both informaland formal means.

Clarice P. Lowe. Application of the MinimalSpealdng-and-Listenb2g Competencies. Instruc-tion in basic communication skills can integrateboth conceptual and experiential learning in amanner that facilitates the mastery of a complexgrouping of skills called competencies. An ap-proach to teaching one speech communicationcompetency, that of "organizing messages sothat otherscan understandthem;" involvesactivities such as topical and chronologicalordering that progress from simple to com-plex levels of learning and also meet John

Dewey's four criteria for meaningful experien-tial learning.

Mathematics

Marilyn N. Suydam. Basic Skills in Mathe-Matics: The Issue Regarding ComputationalSkills. While the definitions of basic skills in-struction in mathematics vary from teachingcomputation skills exclusively to presentingcomputation along with an expanded set ofmathematics skills, factors such as the needs ofdaily life, tradition, achievement scores, avail-ability of calculators, and teacher capabilitiesboth stress the importance of computation andcall for the application of mathematics skills ina broader context. However, despite evidencethat drill-oriented instruction produces limitedoutcomes, trends indicate a return to drill as theprimary mode of instruction. A need exists todefine teaching methods that produce mathe-matical competency in children.

Ross Taylor. The Mathematics Education Pro-fession's View of Basic 'Mathematical Skills.Three professional mathematics education or-ganizations have agreed on ten basic mathemat-ics skills to be taught in addition to computa-tion. School districts that are in agreement withthe statements of these organizations need toreevaluate curriculum objectives, initiate appro-priate curriculum revision, and provide staff de-velopment. One school district engaged in thisprocess used the following procedure: defini-tion of objectives by a professional task force;parent and community evaluation of standards;administration and teacher evaluation of avail-able standardized tests; and development oflearning activities that place mathematics skills,including computation, in a context of problenisolving.

Alan R. Hoffer. A Child Is More than aMachine. Along with memorizing, drill, andcomputation skills, a good mathematics pro-gram emphasizes the teaching of insight, a spe-cial human skill of seeing and understandingproblems. Insight demands creativity and risk-

40king on the part of the student and requires-'-',that the teacher provide appropriate learning

experiences in a supportive, positive, and en-couraging classroom atmosphere. Competencein Insight provides the child with the ability to

re

perform in unfamilker situations, choosing theacts required by the situation and eventually re-solving the situation.

Reading

Lauren B. Resnick. Theories and Prescrip-tions for Early Reading Instruction. The twomain strands of theory regarding the nature ofreading can be defined as reading as translationand reading as an autonomous language pro-cess. Although patterns in research indicate thatcode-oriented programs show better results inthe primary grades than do language-orientedprograins, the need exists for consistent investi-gation and trial of the language approach beforecomparison of the two methods is valid. At pres-ent, successful' instructional programs includeboth strategies successively: However, a moreeffective approach presents the code and lan-guage aspects of reading simultaneously.

Kenneth S. Goodman and Yetta M. GoodmantA Whole-Language Comprehension-CenteredView of Reading Development. A whole-lan-guage comprehension-centered approach todeveloping reading ability requires a child-centered classroom where the focus in read-_ing instruction is on meaning, where learningmotivation is intrinsic, and where the selectedreading materials appeal to the experience, con-cepts, and interests of the children in the class-room. Specifics of such a developmental read-ing program include periods of sustained silentreading, a wide selection of books, emphasis onthe reading strengths of the students, and stu-dent self-evaluation as an integral part of theassessment process.

.

Douglas W. prnine. Direct 'Instruction: ABottom Up Skills Approach to ElementaryReading Instruction. Given that a child's capac-ity for processing information and creatingmeaning from gie environment is limited, a sub-skills approach to reading instruction makesmeaningful learning possible. It reduces the in-formation load, simplifies the learning act, andallows for mastery learning. Implementing sucha program in the classroom requires the follow-ing: knowledge of the essential skills or objec-tives that make up the reading process; programdesign that involves evaluation and selection ofmaterials; presentation techniques that moti-vate, reinforce, and, assess; effective organize-

.

tion of classroom time; and individualizedinstruction determined by frequent studentevaluation.

Harry Singer. An Integration of InstructionalApproaches far Teaching Reading and Learn-ing from Text. Reading development consists oftwo distinct phases: teaching students how toread printed words and then construct meaning .

from them, and teaching students how to com-prehend or learn from texts in the content areas.The initial phase of reading instruction involvesthe use of informal techniques such as readingaloud to children or discussing books withthem, aid formal techniques that include thepicture-story method, rebus method, baspl read-er, and individualized instruction. In teachingstudents to learn from text, teachers can employsingle-text strategies, like the SQ3Iiinethod, ormultiple-text strategies that involve libraryusage,-concept techniques, and projects,

Robert J. Tierney and P David Pearson. Learn-ing to Learn from Text: A Framework for

°Improving Classroom Practice. A schen:la-theo-retic approach to reading comprehension con-siders the nature and influence c.,f the reader'sbackgro. .4 knowledge, attempts a balance beftween reader-based and text-based processing,and stresses the importance of skitected moni-toring strategies. Effective instructional prac-tices that evolve from this approach providethe reader with the following: a relevant schemafor a text; appropriate activation of this schemaprior to, during, and after reading; flexible pro-cesses of activating, focusing, maintaining, andrefining an interpretation; adequate understand-ing of the text and purpose for the reading; andawareness of potential applications.

Penelope L. Peterson. Direct InstructionReconsidered. An analysis of research onthe . effectiveness -of'iteacher-directed" versus"open" instruction indicates that the traditionalapproach is slightly more effective, on the aver-age, in increasing students' achievement inbasic skills. However, an open approach appearsto increase students' creativity, independence,curiosity, and favorable attitudes toward schooland learning. Because neither approach meetsthe needs of all students, educators must incor-porate both teaching approaches in a workablecombination, if a wide range of educationalgoals is to be achieved.

17

Overview: Although we find little disagreement among the experts on how to teachwriting, a significant difference exists between what experts agree on and what someteachers and parents believe is good instruction. The authors of the four papers on writingagree that the teaching of writing should focus on helping the student to express ideasclearly. Punctuation, grammar, and spelling are necessary for effective writing, but theevidence suggests that, students learn to write best if the emphasis is on their clearlyconveying ideas which are important to them. It also appears that students should betaught from the, beginning to review and revise their papers, with attention being given tothe mechanics of writing in th, final draft after the ideas are clear. Charles Suhor's paperdescribes the background and implications of a set of standards for writing instructionprepared by the profession. Robert Brown, Thomas Newkirk, and Vivian Davis provideadditional rationale for that position and suggest instructional strategies in their papers.

19

lj

NCTE Statement on Standardsfor Basic Skills Writing Programs

Charles SuhorDeputy Executive Director for Professional Programs

National Council of Teachers of English

;Editors Note: Several professional associations have prepared sets of standards to help guide the planning ofbasic skills programs. This paper provides background on how the NCTE "Standards for Basic Skills WritingPrograms" were prepared, and suggestesome of the major implications of the Standards for writing instruction.Part of the value of each set of standards is that they were prepared, reviewed, and revised with input fromassociation, university, and school district staff. They generally represent the best thinking of professionals con-cemed with instruction in the area under consideration. The author of this paper was actively involved in theprocess, of developing the _NCTE standards_for writing- instruction.

In fall of 1978 the U.S. Office of Educationinvited the National Council of Teachers ofEnglish (NCTE) to prepare a statement on stan-dards for basic skills writing programs for possi-ble inclusion with federal regulations to be sentto school districts and others applying for fundsunder ESEA Title II legislation. The Councilhad already urged Congress to include oral andwritten language in the new fegislatior (pastlegislation had been limited to reading andmathemati,:s), so the NCTE Executive Commit-tee was pleased to comply with this -request.This brief paper qe;cribes how the basic skillswriting program standards were prepared andoffers my intw.pretrition of some major implica-tions of the standards.--The -first step,ta Ken by the_Executive_Conmait,,tee was to authorize an Ad Hoc Committee onStandards for Basic Skills Writing Programs. Onthe committee were theorists, researchers, andpractitioners; university, high school, and ele-

mentary school representatives; specialists incurriculum, instruction, evaluation, and super-vision and administration. Philosophically, thegroup included advocates of change as well asmoderates. At the outset, then, there seemedto be two separate but '-elated problems: whatwould be the substance of a statement on stan-dards for basic skills writing programs, and howwould a group so diverse come to agreement onsuch a statement?

John Maxwell, then NUTE's Deputy Execu-tive Director for National Relations, started theprocess by creating an initial set of standardssomething concrete yet highly tentative, hesaid, a set of ideas that the committee "couldshoot down" in creating its own content andformat. The Maxwell document was circulatedby mail to the. committee. Gary IlittilTexti:77*Christian University), then director OjeitsCommissiceon _Composition, served (midi:sit

Other members were Marjorie Farmer

O.

4

District of Philadelphia), Richard Gebhardt(Findlay College, Ohio), Martha King (OhioState University), Barbara Lieb-Brilhart (thenwith the Speech Communication Association),Betty Murray (Lexington Schools, Massachu-setts), Lee Odell (State University of New York,Albany), and Eileen T\vay (Miami University,Ohio).

Members of the group did indeed exercisetheir shooting privileges in preparation for ameeting in Columbus, Ohio, on January 5-7,1979. Maxwell asked me to attend the meetingas headquarters staff representative so that hewould not be tempted to defend his initial ef-forts in the development of the statement. Themeeting was one of those fasCinating, exhaust-ing, prolonged sessions in which articulate pro-fessionals with different opinions try to find acommon ground. All were mindful of the factthat the final statement could not be an overlycautious dilution of various viewpoints. Thestatement would have to be a lucid, straight-forward set ,of guidelines that can be used bynon-specialists district-level federal programwriters, _teachers, school and community com-mittees, and the lay public. After two daysof earnest, sometimes harried discussion, thegroup created a near-final draft. I

After the Ohio meeting, Maxwell circulatedthe document again, polling the entir commit-tee on unresolved points and conferriAg withGary Tate on details of language. The resultseemed to be an uncommonly strong statementthat presents not merely a "position" but a listof elements that are essential to good waitingprograms from kindergarten through the twelfthgrade.

Response from the Office of Education andfrom the field supported thvjew. Shirley Jack-son, then acting director of th'e Right to Readeffort, called the statement "a skillful integra-tion of elements of teaching writing, mechanics,and evaluation that should form the foundationof any good writing program. The nation's Chmdren will indeed profit as these insights arepassed on to administrators and teachers." Thedociument became a part of t-he mateifals sent-topotential applicants for ESEA funding. From all

Q.,.la standards,provide clear,helpful guidelines fig basic skills writing pro-

_

grams. The statement was published in Educa-tion Daily and in a Support for Learning andTeaching of English (SLATE) Starter Sheet,a newsletter of NGTE's SLATE committee onsocial and political concerns. It has also beenadopted for inclusion in a number of state andlocal school district curriculum bulletins.

At the suggestion of the committee, JohnMaxwell consulted with the headquarters staffto devP',op an operational definition of writing.This was appended to the Standards and is in-cluded here.

Comments on the StandardsA Personal View

My view of the significance of NGTE's "Stan-dards for Basic Skills Writing Programs" isclosely related to the original intention of thestatement, which in turn is linked with thepurpose of this handbook: "to present informa-tion for teachers, parents, and administratorswhich would help them in defining the con-tents of the basic skills at the school anddistrict level." A problem explored in the hand-book how basic skills can be taught "holisti-cally" (in broad, developmental contexts) andin isolation is also a significant issue inthe NCTE statement. The comments that follow,then, will explore the statement in terms of itsimplications for holistic instruction and iso-lated skills instruction.

Several items' in the "Standards for BasicSkills Writing Programs" imply holistic ap-proaches. The standards call for writing instruc-tion that is "part of an integrated language artscurriculum" (#2); that relates to "other subjectmatters across the curriculum" (#3); that dealswith "all aspects of the writing process: gener-ating ideas, drafting, revising, and editing"(#8); that calls for "complete pieces of writing"(#12); and that is evaluated on the basis of"complete pieces of writing, utilizing a recog-nized procedure" (#18). The statement's em-phases on student-centered writing (#4) and onwriting in a variety of forms (#5), for a varietyof audiences (#6), and for a wide range of pur-pCise- (#7) also strongly suggest a holistic ap-proach, instruction rather than a sequencingofisolated skills. It appears that the authorsof the Standards see the learning of writing pre-

5

Operational Definition of Writing

Writing is the process of selecting,.combining, arranging and developing ideas in effective sentences,paragraphs, and, often, longer units of discourse. Tie process 'requires tha writer to cope with emumberof variables: method of development (narrating, explaining, describing, reporting and persuading); tone(from very personal to quite formal); form (from a limerick to a formal letter to a long research report);purpose (from discovering and expressing personal feelings and values to conducting the impersonal"business" of everyday life); possible audiences (oneself, classmates, a teacher, "the world"). Learningto write and to write increasingly well involves developing increasing skill and sensitivity in selecting fromand combining these variables to shape particular messages. ii also involves learning to conform toconventions of the printed language, appropriate to the age of the writer and to the form, purpose andtone of the message.

Beyond the pragmatic purpose of shaping messages to others, writing can be a means of self-discovery, of finding out what we believe, know, and cannot find words or circumstances to say to others.Writing can be a deeply personal act of shaping our perception of the world and our relationships topeople and things in that world. Thus, writing serves both public and personal needs of students, and itwarrants the full, generous and continuing effort of all teachers.

Standards for Basic Skills Writing Programs

An effective basis skills progra'm in writing has the following characteristics:

Teaching and Learning

1. There is evidence that knowledge of current theory and research in writing has been sought andapplied in developing the Writing program.

2. Wr.iting instruction is a substantial and clearly identified part of an integrated English language artscurriculum.

3. Writing is called for in other subject matters across the curriculum.

4. The subject matter of writing has its richest source in the students' personal, social, and academicinterests and experiences.

5. Students write in many forms (e.g., essays, notes, surf Aeries, poems, letters, stories, reports,scripts, journals).

6. Students write for a variety of audiences (e.g., self, classmates, the community, the teacher) to learnthat approaches vary as audiences vary.

7. Students write for a wide range of purposes (e.g., to inform, to persuade. to express the self,to explore, to clarify thinking).

8. Class time is devoted to all aspects of the writing process: generating ideas, drafting, revising,and editing.

9. All students receive instruction in both (a) developing and expressing ideas and (b) using theconventions of edited American English.

10. Control of the conventions of edited American English (supporting skills such as spelling, hand-writing, punctuation, and grammatical usage) is developed primarily during the writing process andsecondarily through related exercises.

11. Students receive constructive responses from the teacher and from others at various stages inthe writing process.

12. Evaluation of individual writing growthf(a) is based on complete pieces of writing;(b) reflects informed judgments, first, about clarity and content and then about conventions of

spelling, mechanics, and usage;(c) includes regular responses to individual pieces of student writing as well as periodic assessment:

measuring growth-overe-period-of-time. --_,t

-

6

Standards for Basic Skills Writing Programs (Continued)

Support

13. Teachers with major responsibility for writing instruction receive continuing education reflectingcurrent knowledge about the teaching of writing.

14. Teachers of other subjects receive information and training in ways to makeuse of and respond towriting in their classes.

15. Parent and community groups are informed about the writingprogram and about ways in which they'can support it.

16. School and class schedules provide sufficient time to assure that the writing process is thoroughlypCirsued.

17. Teachers and students have access to and make regular use of a wide range of resources (e.g.,library services, media, teaching materials, duplicating facilities, supplies) forsupport of the writing

__program._ _ .

,. Progiam Evaluation ....

z 18. Evaluation of the writing program focuses on lie- and post-program sampling of complete pieces ofwriting, utilizing a recognized procedure (e.g.,ETS holistic rating, the Diederich scale, primary traitscoring) to arrive at reliable judgments about the quality of the program. .

19. Evaluation of the program might also include assessment of a sample of student attitudes; gatheringof pertinent quantitative data (e.g.,_frequency of student writing, time devoted to writing activities);and observational data (evidence of prewriting activities, class anthologies, writing folders, andstudent writing displays).

6

I.

4 7

dominantly as integrated and contextual, not asa series of step-by-step tasks, each to be "mas-tered" before the next step begins, On the otherhand, the statement recognizes that certain as-pects of writing might be treated, at least insome sense, in isolation. "Conventions of editedAmerican English ... such as spelling, punc-tuation, and grammatical usage" are developed"primarily during the writing process and sec-ondarily through related exercises" (#10). Eval-uative judgments are "fiat, about clarity andcontent," to be sure, but then about conventionsof spelling, mechanics, and usage (#12). Fur-ther, the statement makes a' distinction betweeninstruction in "developing and expressingideas" and instruction in "using the conven-tions of edited American English" ( #9). All of

4 these items imply the treatment of conventionsof edited American English in isolated exer-cises, at least-part of the time.

The picture of writing instruction suggestedby the Standards is, then, a basically holisticapproach, with primary attention to effectivecommunication of the writer's ideas in relationto his or her purpose and audience. Presumably,the student's writing-in-context reveals prob-lems in spelling, punctuation, and usage thatcan be treated in appropriate exercises.

This realistic approach runs counter to manyconventional English textbooks and curricula,which are based on the assumption that stu-dents should start by learning an array of rules,definitions, and labels about writing which theywill then "plug into" their communications inthe real world. The assumptions in the Stan-dards are also opposed to the romantic beliefthat students engaged in holistic tasks will beso highly motivated that they will digest theconventions of edited American English readily,almost automatically, once they see how a par-ticular convention relates to their compositionalneedi.

By insisting that holistic approaches are pri-mary but that appropriate exercises can be bene-

_ficial, the NCTE statement holds fast to its firstand overriding recommendation that knowl-edge-of current theory and research be applied

in developing a writing program. Recent theoryand research in thecomposing processes of stul,dents, in peer interaction and peer editing, instrategies for revision,. and in fear of writingsuggest that purposeful, audience-oriented writ-ing tasks should be at the center of writing in-struction. But some research most notably insentence combining and diagnosis of individ-ual student errors indicates that certain skillstaught in relative isolation will carry over intothe student's writing efforts. Some researchersand teachers are also exploring whether or notthinking skills used in pre-writing and writingactivities can be taught in isolation.

In 'summary, the NCTE statement leavesample room for, research-tested methods forteaching of separate skills even though- itstrongly .empha'sizes holistic instruction as thefundamental approach to basic skills writing.programs.

I believe that the implications of this discus-sion should be clear for parents, teachers, text-book committees, and district-level programwriters and curriculum developers:

1. The content of any basic skills writing pro-gram should be fundamentally but not totally

and not ideologically holistic.

2. Commercially published materials that areused in writing programs should deal withthe entire writing process, from pre-writingbrainstorming and discussion, to drafting, toinitial feedback, to revising and editing.

3. Provisions should be made for drills relatedto specifit skills not through a comprehen-sive program of formal grammar, but throughdiagnosis and functional prescription basedon the student's actual writings.

4. Inservice for teachers should help themdevelop techniques for motivating studentsthroughout the writing process, skill in han-dling large and small group discussion, _skillin diagnosing student errorS, and methods forhelping students to write more effectively ateach stage of their personal and intellectualdevelopment.

8

Selected BibliographyThe bibliography which follows is someth ng of

a potpourri. Each item, though, contains val ableteaching ideas. A teacher of basic writing skill canuse these materials with confidence that the i easflow from thoughtfully developed theory and re-search. Moreover, the ideas have generally neffective in classroom situations. Curricalum gen r-alists and parents will see in these materials particlar instances of many ideas presented in the N"Standards for Basic Skills Writing Programs.'Those involved wjth inservice or preservice educa-tion or the development of a professional libraryfor teachers Might also make use of the materials.The -letters i parentheses refer to the grade levelsto which the books apply: HS-High School; JHS-.Junior High School; MS-Middle School; ES-Ele-mentary and/4r Pre-Elementary School.

\ -Ashton-Warner; Sylvia:. Teacher. New York: Bantam,

1967. (ES) \

Bernhardt, Bill. yust Writing Exercises to ImproveYour Writing.\ New York: Teachers and WritersCollaborative, 1977. (HS)

Brown, Rosellen, et al. (Nis.). The Whole Word Cata-log. New York:\ Teachers and Writers Collabora-tive, 1972. (ES, MS, JHS, HS)

Carlson, Ruth Kearney. Sparkling Words: ThreeHundred and Fifteen Practical and Creative'Writ-ing Ideas. Geneva, Illinois: Paladin House, 1979.(ES, MS)

Clapp, Ouida H. On Righting Writing. 1975-76 edi-tion of Classroom Practices in Teaching English.Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers ofEnglish.(NCTE), -1976. (ES, MS, JHS, HS)

Davis, Ken, and Hollowell, John (Eds.). Inventingand Playing Games in the English Classroom.Urbana, Illinois: NCTE, 1977. (MS, JHS, HS)

Gerbrandt, Gary. An Idea Book for Acting Out andWriting Language, K-8. Urbana, Illinois: N1974. (ES, MS)

Hillocks, George. Observing and Writing. Urban ,

Illinois: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading andCommunication Skills (ERIC/RCS) and NCTE,1975. (MS, JHS, HS)_

-JensenjUlie (Ed.). Language Arts. Special issues on"Learning to Write" (October- -1977 and October

-- 1978): Urbana, Illinois: NCTE, 1977, 1978. (ES,MS)

Judy, Stephen (Ed.). English Journal. Special issueson "Teaching Writing" (December 1977 andNovember 1978). Urbana, Illinois:- NCTE, 1977,1978. (MS, JHS, HS)

Koch, Kenneth. Rose, Where.Diti You Get That Red?New York: Random House, 1973. (ES, MS, JHS)

Koch, Kenneth. Wishes, Lies and Dreams. New York:Vintage, 1971. (ES, MS)

Landrum, Roger. A Day Dream I Had at Night andOther Stories. New York: Teachers and WritersCollaborative, 1971. (ES),

Long, Littleton (Ed.). Writing Exercises from "Exer-cise Exchange." Urbana, Illinois: NCTE, 1977. (HS)

Macrorie, Ken. Writing to be Read. Rochelle Park,New Jersey: Hayden Book Company, 1976. (13S)

Moffett, James, and Wagner, Betty,J. Student-Cen-tered Curriculum in Language Arts and Reading,K-13. Second Edition. New, York: Houghton Mif-flin, 1976 (ES, MS, JHS, HS)

National Council of Teachers of English. Howto Help Your Child Become a Better Writer. Freebrochure. Urbana, Illinois: NCTE, 1980. (ES, MS,JHS)

Stanford, 'Gene. Developing Effective ClassroomGroups...:New-York:-Hart- Publishing Company,1977. (MS, JHS, HS)

Stanford, Gene (Ed.). How to Handle the Paper Load.1979-80 edition of Classroom Practices in Teach-ing English. Urbana, Illinois: NCTE, 1979. (MS,JHS, HS)

Tiedt, Iris. Individualizing Writing in the Elemen-tary Classroom. Urbana, Illinois: ERIC/RCS andNCTE, 1975. (ES, MS)

1

The Movement toward Meaning-Focused Writing

Robert L..Brown, jr.Director' of Composition

The University of Minnesota

Editors' Note: In this paper Robert Brown, Jr., presents the rationale for a significant change in the emphasis ofmuch current writing instruction. He reviews our current knowleOge.of writing as a process in which the writer'skleae are focused and changed in the course of writing. Writing is presented as a complex creative process onwhich the-teacher can provide specific help or hindrance. The primary function of writing should be to convey .

meaning or ideas effectively, and that, Brown emphasfies, should be both the initial and the ongoing emphasis ofinstruction.

a I

Writing Instruction and.Conunon Sense.Common sense is a faithful guide for most of

us, especially in educational matters where wefind ourselves returning after each experi-ment with some fashionable riew idea towhat =de better sense in the first place. Inwriting inruction many of us have a clear,common-s nsb view of what ought to be done:"If it's broken, fix it." And with many of ourstudents at all levels it looks like everythingis broken. Spelling and punctuation stand outclearest; followed by the collection of problemsusually leveled "gram unaticar:-laek-of-subject-verb agreement, missing or wrong inflectionalendings, dangling or misplaced modified, tens-es wrong or shifting, and the whole text puttogether out of strings of comma splices-andrun-on sentences. And then there's "logic" v_ari.-ously defined: ideas tuinble over each other, solittle information is provided that it's hard toidentify what the writer's talking about, greatholes gape in the arguments, and the paragraphunits if there are any are mixtures of topicswith no clear pajhl om one to the next.

The common -sense solution often seems tobe to break down what's wrong into reasonablecategories and fix each one: spelling drills forspelling errors, punctuation work for punctu-ation problems, grammar review and chill forgrammar errors, and Juactice with logical anal-ysis and methods of "paragraph development"to correct the many ways the essays go haywire.Each symptom gets a specific remedy. It is thisview of writing instruction that has 'persistedfrom the seventeenth century thrbugh recent"back-to-basics" approaches. The assumptionsupon which such a view is based are so com-monly held, such a part of our culture, that it's'hafd to imagine any other way of proceeding.What are those assumptions? Most people seewriting as the business of makingoproducts ofdifferent_kinds, essays,let.ters,poerns, shortstories, or whatevet And good texts have certaingood parts: correct spelling, topic sentences, aclear introduction, and the right mix of sentencetypes are some of them. So it seems naturalthat writing instruction should be organized bytreating each part: a unit on sentences, one on

1.

10

wards, one oh paragraphs, one on figurative lan-guage, and so on. 'Frorri the skills for makingeach part cif good writing will come good prod-ucts_So goes the grand plan underlying mosttextbooks and most writing programs writingis a series of skills for' making the various partsof the finished' product:

But why doesn't it, work? Anyone who hasbeen talking with teachers knows that mostwriting instruction doesn't work. Most teachersfiel, rightly, that they're. overworked. They saythat they ought to assign more writing, but thattheylr&-intimidated.by_the_pmspect of having to,read, the resulting hundreds of pa s of studentwork, a genuine concern '1 a ess later. Butmost also feel that the results they get don't

_match the effOrt that they and their students putin Most important, equivalent; work in other

,areas literary studies, social science, history,.` even grapimar yields far more than writing

,-).-iinstructkor, ever does, arid k<onostperceptiveteachers know thareV6i ifeWey were able to_devote the time they feel:they should to writinginstruction, tjie results would only ,be disap-pointing.- Those of us whaeach know we're not incom-petent, and we know that as bad as the problemsof overcrowding, morale, discipline, and schoollife generally may be, students can and do learn=in same areas. But they do not learn to writeBasil}, a fact-Which suggests` that many of ourtraditional views of writing instruction aresimply wrong. Current research in language,learning, did writing stiPports,this view. All thesigns, in fact, point.to.the Conclusion that whatpasses for,cominon`sense in writing instructioninayi'not be common-sensicat at all. ,

, We need to redefine the basics to get at whatis really basic. When Yv-e know something abouthow the mind w,orks, and wh-at is involved inwriting and learning to write, we find our com-mon sense leading us, in interesting new direc-tions. My intention here is to give teachers andothers concerned about teaching Writing thisnecessary knowledge so that they will be able todesign writing. programs approprike for, theirparticular students, and so they will understandwhy so much' teacher effort, concern, and gen-eral good will-often result in very little improve-ment. .

Why Writing Is a Difficult Skill toUnderstand :-

< Most professional writers, and experiencedwriters_ in_general,_know that they don't writethe way textbooks say writing should be done.They claim never to "find a topic, narrow it,garner support, and outline.'! Instead, they findproblems to be solved or a specific audienceto be informed, taught, insulted, or praised, orthey pose questions to answer. They spend con-siderable time in thought, much of it prettychaotic or so many writers claim. T,hey jotand scribble. They start and restart. They throwout vast chunks of th-draftsr-ancl-cat-and.paste--others. They think consciously about an audi-ence full of surly objectors whose queries must'be answered, whose obtuse refusal to under-stand must be met with great amounts of ex-planation, and whose disagreements must becountered. And, crucially,_ they- worryi;little

-.about the formal patterns manuscript form,punctuationpellin an sentence and pare-graph. structure until final, polished draft.Although they claim ?lever to'Nrite accordingto the .prescriptions of textbooks, they acvusethemselves of sloppy thinking for not doing so.

They probably shouldn't feel guilty. Ctirrent tk:;:research on the writing process confirms oursuspicion that no one writes as_ the books,describe and shows further that experientllwriters, as a result of having acquired the cOni-plex skills that constitute writing ability, hivedifferent habits of mind '`cognitive strate-gies" or "cognitive styles," as they're calledfrom those of inexperienced writers. From thesefew points we can draw four very importantconclusions about the very special nature ofwriting and the effects of learning to write onpeoples' thinking.

First, writing is a process, largely internaland mental and involving many separatefaculties. Most of the work Of writing, at least forexperienced writers, goes on in the mind beforea single mark gets made,onthe paper. And evenafter the actual writing begins, much of the realwork Is thinking with words. The product, thewords on the page, is only the tip of a hugecognitive iceberg; and that is the process weneed to teach. But little traditional instructiontreats this process. Instead,. it often begins

k./

e.

0 11

after a few words about selecting and narrowingtopics by asking for an essay of story of someiiumber of pages or words.

Second; learning' to write literally changes aperson's mind. Writers (who, interestingly, arealso always competent readers as well) processinformation differently fromnonzWriters. Writ-ers have ,a greater range of cognitive strategiesthan non-writers; they are more orderly in theway they go' about solving probleins, and theyare able to see more alternative approaches toany given problem. So the writer thinks dif-ferently from the non-writer, and it is thisbroadening and clarifying of thinking processesthat makes the best argument for a good writinprogram. 5

Third, experienced writers are, not aware oftheir own cognitive processes, and they areusually unable to imagine how it is possible tothink any other way. It's here that the problemarises for many teachers they have been writersand readers for so long that they are unable tounderstand the very different minds of ,theirnon-literate students. As a result, what seemslike good, clear, sensible advice to a teacheroften may as well be in Sanskrit for the tenthgrader who receives it. What, for example, havewe told a student when we write "logic" in amargin to draw her attention to a piece of illogi-cal prose? Unless perverse, the Kuaent hasn'tintended to be illogical and will not understandhovir -to correct the problem. She will 'know it'san error, though, and.will learn once again thatwriting is full of hidden traps. We must make-sure that we have taught and that the studentunderstands the process for developing anargument from start to finish, so that theeventual product won't contain fkults in logic.

Fourth, and finally, we can't help peoplelearn to write by describing the formal patternsin written products. Every teacher laiOws howlittle good it does to teach a class any of the

through asusual formal models, such as paragraph devel-opment modes. We run-the claseries of exercises to introduce them to develop-ment by "topic sentence, sentence of support,and a sentence of conclusion:" We give themexamples of such paraglaphs and have them un-derline topic sentences, only to find that thenext essay turned in is as undeveloped as the

last one. We might as well try to teach pastrycooking by dissecting pies good ones and badones showing the student chefs light, flakycrust and how it's not at all like a stiff soggyone. They can see the difference clearly enough.What they need is' guided practice in makingtheir own.

So several things are clear. First, proper writ-ing instruction must emphasize the whole writ-ing process in order to teach how to do writing,not just to show them what good writing prod-ucts look like. Second, we should recognize thatmuch of our writing instruction will not have to

'th having students make texts, but witho make explicit what good writers do

re during their actual drafting. It willbreak do and make 'explicit those hiddenmental ope tions that make . up real writing.Finally, we sh ulil recognize that, we are ratherdifferent from our students. In a sense they arelike young children in the early stages of lan-guage acquisition: they think differently fromus, and what's clear to us may be very foreign tothem. Fortunately, we now have sufficient infor-mation from current research in writing andlanguage to tell us how the ,writing processworks and how we can best help our students'minds to develop.

Leartling_to Write and Language 6se inEveryday Life.

Why is it that as scores on various nationaltests dropped in the 1960s and 1970s, scoresbased on verbal skills went down more thanthose based on quantitative skills? We usuallyexplain declining scores by pointing out over=crowding, underpay, and problems of a gener-al moral/morale nature. But those things causeproblems equally for all teaching. Language re-search points to a powerful general explanation.Quantitative skills depend little on everyday ex-perience;most of us learn all our mathematics,for example, in school. Not so verbal skills. Achild entering school at age six is already anaccomplished, language learner, having mas-tered the complex grammar of language. Andduring all the years of school, the major influ-ence on a person's language ability is thelanguage experience encountered outside theclassroom. What we do in schools is simply totry to add to the student's repertoire of language

12

abilities a major part of this responsibility isto teach the student the rather rare and special-ized abilities of writing. Two things fight us inthis job: first, writing is very little like speech,and, second, the role of written language in so-ciety has changed radically in the last few years.Cognitive skills basic to writing are learnedfrom experience other than schoolroom train-ing: from problem solving inyarious areas, fromreading, and from oral discussion, for example.Today's students write little outside of school,but they also don't read much, and when speak-ing, they seldom speak long without a support-ing response. Students-of twenty years ago atleast those, more academically orientedbrought-more-of these relevant, skills to schoolwith them; today, schools must provide most ofthe experience.

. . . proper writing Instruction mustemphasize the whole writing process in or-der to teach how to do writing, not just toshow students what good writing productslook like.

We can quickly get a sense for the type andrange of skills writing requires by comparingwriting and everyday language use. We can alsocome to appreciate how big the job of learningto write is for most students. And from all ofthis, we can see just where choices are possiblein designing a basic skills writing program.

Today's students most people, in fact areconversationalists; conversation, not writing, isthe model' for language use.,And their habits ofmind, their language skills, are those of conver-sation, not writing. Some points .about thenature of conversation follow:1. Conversation isn't' sustained and it's not

structured. Conversation goes by two or threesentence chunks, each interspersed with a.response which gives speakers immediatefeedback on how their speech is being re-ceived. In conversation, if the audience islost, skeptical, or confused, the speakerknows about it immediately and can changelanguage strategies to correct the problem.

And conversationalists seldom need . tostructure and plan a long, complex argumentor explanation in their minds before they be-gin to speak.. Instead there's no set structure;the topics arise as the conversation grows orare dictated by the activity. Researchers findthat when long stretches of speech do occur,they're most often narratives, organized byevents in time. And narratives are probablythe easiest to structure: very young children(about five years old) can handle them withease, and college freshmen who are unable toorganize short-essay exam questions feelcomfortable with journals and personalstories. They can do it just because they havehad everyday experience with story telling,and because all they need to .do to formthe story is consult their visual memoriesfor "what happened next" and tell or writ&about it.

Researchers have found that this ability toform and understand long and structuredstretches of language is the major cognitivedifference between literate and non-literatestudents. A person whocan write a paragraphof explanation, for example, will also be ableto read one with speed and ease, since thesame psycholinguistic mechanisms operatefor reading and writing. Persons who can'twrite one, however will respond Y very

strangely on tests of reading comprehension:aced to summarize a paragraph of rose,they will remember the last parts x d best,the first, worst. They will not b able tocapture the general idea in 'a sente e or twoof their own, and, when asked to summarizethe ideas, they'll use actual pieces of the text

sentences, phrases, and words while lit-erate readers will just invent a sentence ortwo of their win.

It seems that a very basic skill for writing isthe ability to form large stretches of languagewith specific structures. It is not a skill thatcomes from everyday experience with con-,,versation. And it's not a skill limited to writ-ing but a very basic cognitive abilityra yay ofthinking which lies behind reading, writing,and more complex speech. Further, as I'll ex-plain shortly, it's a skill so basic that until it'smastered, other writing skills which dependupon it simply can't be taught.

9kw

13

2. Conversation isn't explicit. Human beings arepractical creatures who never expend morelinguistic energy than it takes to get the jkebdone. In everyday conversation, we're used tospeaking to an audience with whom we sharea huge store of common knowledge. So fre-quently we need only make a small linguisticgesture toward our meaning, and our audi-ence will figure it out "You know what Imean?" The point is just that most of the timethey do know. When a spouse or roommatesays, "Where is that stuff?" meaning the newbottle of almond extract for the Christmascookies, you probably can answer, "On thekitchen sink board," with little hesitation.And speakers whose primary language ex-perience is of this sort have great problemsimagining arid--writing to audience.which shares little with their in attitudes,beliefs, and factual knowledge.

The consequences Can be seen in each as-pect of writing. In syntax, for example, wefind that students at every level prefer thesimple, subject-verb-object sentence to the"embedded" or "subordinated" forms of ma-ture writing. Student writing, even that ofcollege students, is often a string of simplesentences hooked together by a conjunction,usually and.

One of our freshmen, writing about his de-cision to study agricultural engineering, pro-duced the paragraph below largely simplesentences linked by conjuctions:

My dad farmed all his life. We have 600 acresdown by New Prague. He never really gotahead. When prices were up, we did prettywell but when they were down, we hurt. Hejust couldn't see ahead. I'm not letting that hap-pen to me. I'm going to learn how to fann. I'llbe an agricultural engineer.

The reader must - and easily can makethe logical connections. But with subordi-

nated sentence structure the relations aremade clear in the text. For example,

Having watched my dad Inn our 600 acresdown by New Prague all his life and neverreally get ahead, I've decided to learn how tofarm. I'll study agricultural engineering, free-ing myself from being tied to market conditionsby learning_to see ahead.

30

Appeals for sentence variety, exercises inthe grammatical bases of sentences, and prac-tice with copying sentence models all havethe same dismal results. The students becometoo anxious to fill a page, suddenly blossominto weedy excess and inappropriateness, orremain the same. Shortly, as one of my recom-mendations, I'll suggest a workable solution.But for now, a brief explanation.

When we examine transcripts of everydayspeech, we find very fev complex, subordi-nated sentences. In fact, we find few sen-tences at all, since most conversation is anexchange, of sentence fragments!, So is muchadvertising copy in printed and -electronicmedia. Most people have few occasions toform ailed use complex syntactic forms, andonly a few more opportunities to read them.As a consequence, most student writers arenot "syntactically.fluent"; they know how toform all the types Of sentences in the lan-guage, but they don't have them at the tips oftheir tongues or fingers. They haven't, in fact,developed the cognitive ability to plan andexecute complex sentences. Certain veryspecific areas of the brain are not trained toautomatically organize the concepts into therequired complex structures; as 'a result, stu-dents with complex ideas to express oftenstruggle so severely for the syntax to handle itthat they end up like beginning rollerskaters:falling all over the place and getting no-where. Many ostensible "grammar errors" arereally the result -of- this cognitively basedsyntactic unfluency, not of students' unfamil-iarity with rules of graminar, and no amountof ordinary grammar study will remedy theproblem.

Though it may seem unrelated, the peren-nial problem we label "vague," "undevel-oped;" or- even "incoherent " writing ;has-thesame source as student writers' impoverishedsyntax. Researchers often talk about begin-ning writers (of wl4t.ever age) as 'ago-centric," and, stripped of its psychothera-peutic or moral connotations, the term's agood one (Britton et al., 1975). We all formour lafguage according to what we think ouraudience is like; we make automatic, uncon-scious guesses about their minds. We're onlyas explicit as we need to be; we only spell.out

14Q

the logical connections bewein ideas when. we think the audience won't figure them outon their own, and we only.provide long, rea-soned arguments if we think we'll encounterobjections. The more experience we have incommunicating with people very differentfrom us, the better we become at adjustingwhat we say or write to very different minds.The conversationally trained student who'sused to talking only to people much likehim, and to people whose background knowl-edge is much the same, will write and talk asthough writing or talking to himself and willbe shocked to find that, the message hasn'tbeen received.So a variety of apparently dissimilar prob-

lems .improvished syntax, lack of details, lackof logical connections, underdeveloped ideasall share .the same source. We only get good atthings we need to do. And modern Americanshave very little need to form complex, extended,texts which state their meanings fully ratherthan assuming that the reader or hearer will "fillin" the missing information from the vast bodyof knowledge he or she shares with the speakeror writer.

I've ignored the obvious and more usual dif-ferences between writing and speech: the'special rules of spelling, punctuation, andmanuscript form., the special constraints on

The more experience we have in com-municating with people very different fromus, the better we become at adjusting what,we say or write to_vetydifferent minds.

-would be complete without_treating them. Sincethey're all skills which must be learned bymemory, they must be addressed early on andtreated 7-- in small systematic, regular chunksall through the grades. It is these skills that mustbe addressed through an individual skilli ap-proach. But these skills are only a small part ofwriting. Students who master only these skills(if that's possible and it probably isn't) willonly be able to produce products which imitatewriting.

First Things First: The Writing Process andthe Teaching-Process

Anyone who jogs knows about "referredpain," the mysterious process by which the achein your leg has its source in some pinchedsomething or other in your lower back. It doesno good to massage the leg; the symptom's notthe problem, and the cause is far away. There'san exact analogy in writing, "referred errors,"pethaps. Most researchers see writing as a com:plex skill involving such disparate thingi ascontrol over the nerves and muscles of thewriting hand, the idea-structuring, audience-analyzing, and sentence-forming operations I'vediscussed, and all of the usual vocabulary, punc-tuation, and mechanical skills involved in mak-ing the final draft. They've also discovered thatmany of these skills depend upon each other ininteresting ways. Clearly, some must becomeautomatic before others can be learned. Begin-ning writers who are asked to "write an essay"withoUt help in the preliminary steps must han-dle all the skills simultaneously. They can't, andconfusion in one area manifests itself in others,so that in writing, as in sports medicine, treat-ing the symptom won't get at the ,cause. (SeeShaughnessy, 1977, for further discussion ofthese points.) .

syntax and usage, andThe expanded vocabulary.I've done so because I want to suggest thatthey're not our primary concern in workingwith today's students. I realize this seems to vio-late common sense. After all, nothing stands outin a piece of writing like barbarous usage, spell-ing errors all over the place, and punctuationscattered over the page like mushrooms on apizza. These are just the things /that infuriateparents, concerned citizens, and employers.And they are important; no writing program

The clearest example comes from wiTEfiingwhat happens when anxious, beginning writersare asked to concentrate on the details ofmechanics, surface grammar, usage, and othermatters of manuscript form, that is, on makingan error-free product. Simply said, they're para-lyze& -Mina Shaughnessy -gives this perfectexample of a beginning writer, unsure of him-self and terribly afraid of erring in his attempt towrite the perfect first sentence. He rewrites aperfectly good sentence into perfect garbage:

31

15

Start ,1Seeing.andhearingis something beautiful and

strange to infant.

Start 2To a infant seeing and ,hearing is somethingbeautiful and strange to infl

*' Start 3I agree that seeing and hearing is somethingbeautiful and strange to a infants. A infantsheres a strange sound such as work mother, hethan acc

Start 4I agree that child is more sensitive to beauty,because its all so new to him and he apprec

Start 5 ,

The main point is that a child is more sensitiveto beauty than there parents, because its thechild a inftant can only express it feeling withreactions,

Start 6J agree a child is more senstive to seeing andhearing than his parent, because its also new tohim and more appreciate. His

Start 7I. agree that seeing and hearing have a differentquality for infants than grownup, becausewhen infants come aware of a sound and canassociate it with the object, he is indefeyingand the parents acknowledge to to this

Start 8I agree and disagree that seeing and hearinghave a different quality for infants than forgrownups, because to see and hear for infantsits all so new and mor appreciate, but I alsofeel that a child parent appreciate the sharing

Start 94I disagree I feel that is has the same quality to

Start 10I disagree I fell that seeig and hearing hasthe same quality to both infants and parents.Hearing ancLseeingjs_such_a_greaLquality toinfants and parents, and they both appreciate,just because there aren't that many panters ormusicians around doesn't mean that infantsare more sensitive to beautiful that thereparents. (1977, pp. 7-8)

A related problem occurs with studentswho have done little actual writing and havetherefore not brought the nerve-and-muscle net-works respohsible for small muscle movementof handwriting under control. The words won't

flow; it takes all of the writer's attention toworry about transcription. Often the errorswhich result look likegrammarexample, failures of agreement caused by thewriter forgetting that the subject is singularbecause a modifying dame with a plural nounhas come between the subject and verb. It doeslittle good with such students to mark theerrors, comment on the logic, or drill them ingrammar. First they need tn write a lot.

If the research on language, learning, andthought processes which I've discussed is cor-rect, the choices we have in designing writinginstruction are fewer than we may have thought.There's some good news and some bad news.First the bad news. We've probably consistentlyunderestimated the complexity of what seem tobe simple and typical writing assignments in allsubject areas. "Write an essay discussing thecase for banning general admission seating atrock concerts" is an impossibly complex' dermand on many college freshmen just because itasks them to c. mifront too many rhetorical prob-lems at once. Such assignments and ones likethem at lower levels must be broken downinto a series of clear, small steps to help thestudents explore and organize the topic, decideon a, purpose for their writing, identify and, ana-lyze an audience, and adopt a definite voice be-fore they begin to write.

InIddition, much of our effort may well havebeen exerted in less-than-useful directions. Bythemselves, exercises in grammar, vocabulary

`drill, mechanics, punctuation, and usage willnot' significantly or permanently improve stu-dents' writing ability. In a recent study, tobe published soon, Charles Cooper found thatthese aspects of writing had little effect on 'theway readers judged the quality of essays. Whatthe readers were looking for was such things asclear overall structure, a well-defined purpose,coherent units within the text, clear logicalstructure, rich and complex ideas, and fluentsyntax. Other research, including mine.withUniversity of Minnesota students, shows thatthe improvement from the usual workbook,drill, and formal pattern-practice leaching isshort-lived. Minnesota students tested in 1976,six months after taking a traditional course in.grammar, mechanics, '.and usage, were back tonearly the level at which they began, while stu-

- -r

16

dents who learned to write in a process-basedcourse held their level of accomplishment.

--Mbst-crucially,-wewilLwaste our efforts if wetry to teach skills that depend onother skills notyet mastered. There's a general but necessaryorder for teaching writing, and if we ignore it,we'll end up with frustrated and anxious teach-ers and students. At all levels, we find that stu-dents who feel a clear need for some writingskill in order to express an idea important tothem will learn the skill willingly and well.

Now for the good news. First of all, thereare many perennial writing problems whichwill cure themselves in an affective, process-oriented writing course in which students writea great deal in a supportive, exploring; and chal-lenging environment. Among the problems aremost of . those related to "grammar," incoher-ence, vagueness, and insufficient development.Se,cond, freed from the need to mark every erroron every paper, teachers can easily and withclear consciences assign more writing andwriting-related projects in all subject areas.Finally,---and;-- most important, when we cometo `see writing as a process, we can give overmuch of the teaching process to the studentsthemselves.

So What Do We Do?

A writing program provides students withthe language experience which is necessary forwriting and which is absent in their everydaylives. It fills in the holes left when the writtenlanguage (and speech structured like written,language) stopped being a major part of mostpeople's lives. The writing program is givenlittle time in the curriculum, . so it must beefficient, and -it must be consistent: Any con-tradictions between teachers or between grades

the writing process: prewriting, drafting, re-vising, and editing. And teachers should em-phasize that the process is often not straight-forward; writers_often find that an idea thatpops up in the piocess of editing what shouldbe a final draft needs to be explored and de-veloped with further prewriting techniques. tobecome a complete new section or piece; wenever get completely there. And it's onlywhen we feel that we've come as far as we canin, exploring, revising, and rethinking that webegin to think about forming afinal draft withelegant sentences, the best words, and thecommas in their proper places. Courses mustreflect this sensible sequence.

Students who understand the writing Pro-cess and courses based on HETI much freer toexperiment, to take chances, and to learnthrough writing. Practice in the techniquesfor prewriting and ,drafting must come first.Students develop the Text- forming skills con-spicuously absent in everyday experience.And when they do encounter the usual punc-tuation, grammar, mechanics, and spellingwork as part of the editing stage, then under-stand its function and learn it willingly andeasily.

Writing must bet taught as a process,- with first things first. At every

level, and in aim writing project,teachers must treat each part ofthe writing process: prewriting,drafting, revising, and editing.

undermine the students' confidence. It can be-gin as early as first grade, and it must continuein every course of the curriculum through everygrade. .

My rather long discussion of the nature ofwriting and writing problems should indicatehOurthe best pro-grattircan-Work. Now for a fewsimple, specific suggestions:

1. Writing must be taught as a process, with firstthings first. At every level, and in every writ-ing project, teachers must treat each part of

2. Student writers must talk to each other. Writ-ing is best and most easily taught as a collec-tive activity, and students can take over muchof the work usually done by teachers: 'theycan learn to assess their own and each other'swork. At every stage of the writing process,students should read each other's writing,share ideas, ask each other questions, andgenerally provide the immediate, specific re-sponses. necessary to lead each other out oftheir egocentric views of language. Writingconferences student/teacher, student/stu-dent or groups with or without a teacher

33

17

may be the strongest single teaching devicewe have.

The conference does not correct ,the paperNor does it explain- its structure at least.as we would-explain-it---with-grammatical_terminology and economical, pointed com-ments, nor does it direct the student to a per-

_ feet revision. What it does, simply, Is providea place for student writers to practice beingaudiences:, reading prose, responding to it,positing alternatives, and clarifying their in-

.- stints about writing. Students in conferencesare learning how to read as writers readcomparing what they've written to what theymeant- to say. It's thks ability to see disso-nances between what's written and what'smeant that separates 'experienced writersfrom beginners. And it's that perceived dis-sonance that motivates both rewriting andgrowth in writing skill generally, Some re-searchers have suggested that this ability toassess writing particularly to assess yourown writing may be a central writing skill,though it's one that we- cannot evaluate bythe usual tests or even by judging students'essays.

3. Sentence-combining practice should begirtin the 'Middle or upper' elementary gradesand continue through high, school. We sel-dom encounter one teaching technique thatworks -consistently at all levels, that solves,a range of probleMs, and that finds over-whelming support from empirical research.But sentence combining does all that. Andit's relatively foolproof. It develops students'syntactic fluency by allowing them to makecomplex sentences out of simpler sentencesorganized so that they will go together toform coherent large sentences, groups 'of sen-tences, whole paragraphs, or even completeessays. The beauties of the techniques are-many, but the primary one is that all studentscan do the exercises, so there is no fear offailure. A fringe benefit of sentence-combin:ing work is that as students' syntactic fluencyincreases, they also begin to understand sen-tence boundaries and write fewer-and fewerfragments and comma splices. They also be-gin to understand the principles by whichsentence structure helps form coherent para-

graph units."The varieties of exercises and theresearch background are so vast that I, can'treasonably summarize them here. Mellon(1969) and O'Hare (1971) are the authors ofthe two major theoretical books that began

the-enterprise.---T-hree_excellent textbooks atthree different levels are included in the listof references (O'Hare, 1975; Strong, 1973;Daiker et al., 1979).

4. Finally, teachers must know the best newinformation about language, -learning, andchildren. No textbook or new program, how-ever good, will do the primary job of teachingfor us. Conversely, good teachers need verylittle in the way of materials to teach writing,since writing is learned by writing under the

.':'' direction of a good teacher who can explainwhat's going on in a studen't's work and howto change it. Curricula and textbooks lag farbehind what we do know, and common senseis often misleading. The instincts of a good'and humane teacher informed by the bestthat's known and supported by other teachers)in all subject areas, are th6 best gu'de.

ReferencesBerthoff, Ann E. Forming Thinking Writing: The

Composing Imagination. Rochelle Park, New Jer-sey: Hayden, 1978. (A theoretical book for theteacher or curriculum planner.)

Britton, James; Burgess, Tony; Martin, Nancy;McLeod, Alex; and Rosen, Harold. The Devel-opment of Writing Abilities (11-18). London:

'Macmillan Education Ltd., 1975.Daiker, Donald; Kerek, Andrew; and ,Moremberg,

Max. The Writer's Options: College SentenceCombining. New York: Harper & Row, 1979. (HS,C)*

Elbow, Peter. Writing Without Teachers. New York:Oxford University Press, 1973. (MS, JHS, HS, C)

Freedle, Roy 0. (Ed.): New Directions in DiscourseProcessing, Volume I. Norwood, New Jersey:Ablex, 1977. (This and the following volume arevery complex and very current anthologies of re-search in language perception.)

*C-College; HS-High School; JHS-Junior High School;MS-Middle School; ES-Elementary School or Pre-Ele-'mentary School.

Freed le, Roy 0: (Ed.). New Diiections in DiscourseProcessing, _Volume NOrwocid' New Jersey:Ablex, 1979,

Mellon, John C. nansformational Sentence-Combin-ing: A Method for Enhancing the 15eVelopmentof Syntactic Fluency -in-English ,Composition.Urbana, Illinois: National Council of TeLchers ofEnglish,1969.

Moffett, James. Teaching the UzUniverse oBoston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin, 1968.(JHS, I-IS, C)

Murray,--Donald. -A Writer Teaches. Writing. Boston,Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin, 4968. (JHS,HS, C)

O'Hare, Frank. Sentence Combining: ImprovingStudent Writing without Formal Grammar In-struction. Urbana, Illinois: National Council ofTeachers of English, 1971.

O'Hare, Frank: Sentence Craft. Lexington, Massa-chusetts: Ginn &Company, 1975. (ES, MS)

Shaughnessy, Mina. Errors and Expectations. NeWYork: Oxford University Press, 1977. (This isperhaps -the most useful book on understanding,diagnosing, and changing students' writing.)

Strong, William. Sentence Combining: A ComposingBook. New York: Random House, 1973. (MS, HS)

vJ

.40

----The-Writer as perimenter

Thomas NewkirkEnglish Department

University of New Hampshire

Editors Note: Thomas Newkirk provides further support for the meaning-focused approach to writing, as discussed by Brown in the previous paper. The major emphasis of this paper is on approaches to teaching writingand on the planning of an entire writing curriculum. Newkirk provides specific suggestions on what the teachershould look for in reading a student's draft and what kind of feedbackcan be helpful to the student. Procedures forhelping students help each other are also discussed*ith proper guidance, students can be effective teachers.Thus, the teacher can assign more writing, and students can get more feedback on early drafts of papers.

Four Assumptions. ,

. \The second assumption is that children learnAt age two, most children are speaking in language because it can help them fulfill inten-

single words 9r in short telegraphic,sentences. tion\s,.. Language is functional. The very firstFour years later, they have mastered the major worcklearned are those of special importance togrammatical rules of the language, a stunning the child because they name something speciallearning feat miraculous if it weren't so corn- ("Momtha," "Dada," "dog") or because they can\mon. Even "mistakes" ("ringed" for "rang") tes- re Mate behavior ("all done," "more," and,tify to children's capacity to perceive a rule and of course:411o"). Language soon becomes an

adaptable instrumer.t for realizing intentions.newapply it to a new situation.. In almost all cases,this learning proceeds without formal instruc- Unless child (or language learner of any age)tion. Children attend to the language around can see some use for an aspect of language, itthem and particularly to the ways in which their will not be learned. Frank Smith writes:parents expand their early telegraphic sen- Children must understand the intention. If theytences. Young children experhnent incessantly, can see no purpose to an aspect ofjanguage, ifcreating sentences that are closer and closer they cannot see thit makes-any difference, theyapproximations of those they hear. Thus,Dthe will not attend to it. It,i because children are onlyfirst assumption ,--- the six year old who enters concerned with the purposes to which languageschool is not a beginner, but an accomplished can be put that they group speaking languagelanguagelenmer. A writing program shoUld and not imitating the noise of the vacuum cleaner.

.

11979, p.. 120)provide an opportunity for thisaiiielind-of-ex=------perimentation that has been used successfully Smith's statement holds true even-forlearm---------\by' the child in learning to speak. It has been ing the conventions of language usage spell-iaid that if we were alltaught to speak in the ing, punctuation, capitalization thatfigure so .error-oriented way most of us were taught to prominently in the debate over the basic. Lucywrite, we would be a nation of stutterers. Calkins .(1980) has found that third-grad stu-

-

36

20

. t

dents taught punctuation indirectly, throughconferences on their own writing, learned itmore effectively than a group taught punctua-tion directly, by means of exercises and drill.She found. the group taught indirectly usedmore types of marks (probably because theywrote more and used a greater variety of sen-tences), and they used them more accurately.

Even more striking were the reasons given forusing punctuation. The group taught indirectlysaw punctuation as a device for helping themsay what they wanted to say. Exclamation points(often used by the dozens) helped create empha-

------sisit____heir sentences could shout. Students usedcommas to-get- rid,of all the "ands" that con-nected words in series. The devicesaved work,and the series 'sounded better. Periods showedthe reader where to pause. Otherwise, explaineda student, "one minute you'd be sledding downthe hill, and the next minute you're inside thehouse without even stopping."

By contrast, those taught directly often sawno use for punctuation. It was just one moredifficulty foisted on them. Their reasoningabout punctuation reflected the workbook men-tally. One student, when asked how he knewwhen to place a period, replied, "Easy, you putit right before a capital letter."

Writing is a natural activity that can beginvery early. The urge to write precedes even theurge to read. This third assumption runs coun-ter to much educational practice. Often teacherswill delay teaching writing until the second orthird grade, feeling that reading must come firstand that, unless the child can spell a numberof words correctly, he or she cannot begin towrite. We still call elementary schools "gram-mar schools," the implication being that stu-dents need to know a great deal about languagebefore they can use it.

Carol Chomsky (1971) has shown that youngchildren, between the ages of three and four,have an urge to write that is similar to their urgeto draw. They use what has been called "inven-tive spelling," employing at the beginning onlya handful of consonants and vowels. Initially,the writing is pure self-expression; the childdoesn't care if anyone else can read it. The lackof concern for audience allows the child to ex-periment freely and fearlessly. Gradually, as the

child is exposed to more written language, thespellings approach the conventional. For exam-ple, a four-and-one-half year old wrote:

YUTS A LADE YET FEHEG AD HE KOT FLEPROnce a lady went fishing and she caught Flipper.

Eight months later the same child wrote:

WUNS,A LITL MINE HOPT A CROS MI LONaOnce little bunny hopped across my lawn.

AND THAT BLINE HOPT RUYT IN MI HOWSAnd that bunny hopped right in my house.

It is possible to recoil at these misspellings. Yetto delay writing instruction, to insist on perfectspelling as a prerequisite for writing, is to de-prive the child of a rich time of experimentationa_ nd learning.

The fourth assumption is that language isintimately related to thought. We use languageto convey meaning, but more critically, weuse language to discover meaning. Experienceand knowledge do not come prepackaged; anylearner must sort and sift, give shape and mean-ing to the new, relate the new to the pre-exist-ing. Even the most austere scientific report hpsits beginning in the notes and casual explora-tory talk of the scientist: It follows then thatin any subject which requires them to the*(and those subjects which don't should have atenuous status), students should be required touse exploratory language, including writing, tomake sense of what is to be learned. Paiadozi=cally, the more learned a student sounds (that is,the more like a textbook), the less likely it is thathe or she has truly mastered the material, that is,has brought his or her own language to bear onthe content.

Teaching the Writing ProcessIf tennis coaches only scheduled matches and

kept score, we would probably think theyweren't doing their. job. Yet traditional writinginstruction requires little more. Teacher asiiiniTstudents write; teacher grades. The student isgiven no help along the way. If writing is taughtas a process, the teacher is involved at variousstages of the writing, particularly during thestages of prewriting and revising.

Prewriting, as the term indicates, includesthose activities which help the writer discoversubject, information, focus, and point of view,

21

usually before the actual writing of the piecebegins. For young children, drawing is an im-portant form of preWriting. The child in theearly elementary grades often doesn't knowwhat he will write until the drawing is finished.Indeed; the drawing and writing are oftenviewed as inextricably bound. The (drawing onthe next page, done by a second grader, illus-trates this close relationship. The writing bendsaround the drawing to form one unified crea-tion. As the child moves out of this,stages thedrawing comes to be done after,the writing andserves as illustration. Then, for many children,it disappears or, more probably, becomes apurely mental picture.

Talk can be a form of prewriting. British edu-cators have persuasively argued that talk is notonly essential to writing but to all thinking:

... the rapids exchanges of conversation allowmany things to go on at once exploration, clar-ifibation, shared interpretation, insight into dif-ferences of (pinion, illustration and anecdote,explanation by gesture, expression of doubt; andif something is not clear you-can-goon until it is.(Britton et al., 1975, p. 29)

tion of the Mississippi and sense the tranquilityof floating on the raft at night. Not only canthe student be moved ,by the literature, but shecan be reminded of her own private place thatbrings her peace.

I do not want to suggest that literature whichis read aloud should be limited to establishedwriters. Students write literature too, sometimesas evocative as that of professionals and oftenmere real to their peers. One of my collegefreshmen wrote the following as the opening toa description of his job: .

I pulled open the heavy exit door and stepped in.It began to close behind me, but suddenly flungitself open as !stepped on the triggering mat. Thatwas the way all the employees had to enter thestore before hours; the entrance door remainedlocked until the store opened. Most bf the workersseemed to know just where to step before comingthrough the exit door so that it would not reopenafter they entered. I never bothered to learn thattrick; for me it was always a good feeling knowingit would be easier to walk out than it was to*walkin. (Vince Graziani)

----Most of my students have worked at some time,There are a number of ways to encourage talk in and they-recognize this feeling; the writing stirsthe classroom small group discussions, class memories.discussions, informal debates, interviews with Revision, literally "seeing again," refers toclassmates, and interviews with outsides

Fex-

anges-made-in--an-orignratdraftnttattreshniques-ve-seetriaddi-tions, 'deletions, and reordering of informittion;variation of the ancient and wonderful practice

of "show and tell," an activity that can workon any level. Each student brings to class some-thing of importance, and the class asks ques-tions to discover its significance. After thequestioning, the students write.

Writing itself is a form of prewriting; bywriting we discover more to write. We begin agrocery list thinking we want six items, and thcmere contact of pen to paper helps us think oftwelve more. . ,

Literature can also be a useful stimulus fordiscoveg. The healthiest relation of literature towriting instruction, of least in the pre-collegeyears, is not as content for writing (book reports,analyses) or as a model that students (justifi-ably) .resent being asked to imitate. Literature,especially when read well aloud, can be a spurto memory; it can call up kindred experiences.A student can listen to Mark Twain's descrip- -

changes in tone, focus, and point of vieWT-61. --changes in sentence structure, spelling, andother conventions of written English. At theheart of the revising stage is the teacher-studentconference. At these conferences the role of theteacher is not that of final evaluator but of sensi-tive reader, alert to strengths and possibilities.The conference is not an oral version of written'comments where the teacher tells the studentwhat's wrong and what needs to be done. Nordoes the teacher play non-directive therapistand withhold judgment. The conference is anexchange of perceptions, a dialogue.

Since many teachers, particularly those atthe secondary level, have-large teaching loads,these conferences must be short. TfieSr-shoulfocus on only one or two ,major problems ata time. This focus should shift as the studentmoves through the process. It is hardly produc-tive, for example, to offer counsel on the semi-

22

.

o

.

si

.

. 1

!

1l ...--. '1.1

(......- : 1 'His spider has made a egg sac. The spider had made (a) little web.

'39

23

colon when a student is groping for a focus.Suct' instructioishould wait until an editingsession near the end, of the process.

A writing teacher needs to define a sequenceofjocusesilat_cart_bolk match the progressionof the writing process and direct the teacher'sown 'reading process. At least three differentstages can be distinguished (Newkirk, 1979).

Reading for discovery. One of the major prob-lems, perhaps the major problem, of studentpapers at all levels is underdevelopment. Thewriter failsto adequately anticipate the informa-tion needs of the. audience. He describes LakeWinneNesaukee as "breathtaking" but fails torealize that readers still won't know what LakeWinnepesaukee looks like.

Early in the process, the teacher often has toread what isn't on the paper. The paper shouldbe read with a benevolent tentativeness, theteacher looking for the opportunities, the pos-sibilities implicit in the piece, At this stage thefollowing questions can help guide the reading:

What is effective in the draft?At what points does the paper need more

detail?At what points dots the paper need further

d^cumentation?Is the paper sufficiently complex? Are impor-

tant alternatives explored? Are importantquestions answered?

Is the paper focused? Does it seem to sayone thing? Does it make one dominant.impression?

,resolved, the reading focus should shift to sen-tence structure and mechanics. It is not theteach&'s job to be the student's proofreader,responsible for locating every error. Rather, theteacher should read a sample of the student'swork; no-more-than -500 -if' there are ma-jor problems, they should appear in that sample:Once these difficulties have been explained, itis the student% job to complete the editing. Atthis stage the following questions can be useful:

When possible, has the. students use'd thesubjectverb-object sentence, thus avoidinthe wordiness of the passive voice and setences beginning with "there is" and"there are"?

Are there sentences that can be profitablycombined?

Is the movement from sentence to sentenceclear?

What types of spelling errors is the writermaking?

Are sentence boundaries clearly marked?Has the writer violated rules of usage or

punctuation, drawing attention away fromthe content?

The goal here should not be the detectionof a great number of errors, but the diagnosisof a major type of error. Such a disciplined ap-proach Suggests,to students that their problemswith sentence structure and mechanics aremanageable.

Reading for arrangement. Once the studenthas discovered the focus and located the neces-sary information, the teacher needs to examinehow that information is arranged. A new set ofquestions should be asked:

What has been improved?Does the beginning begin the piece?Does the ending end it?Is the information presented in a clear order?Are transitions between paragraphs effective?Are there any weak sections that can be

eliminated?Here, the emphasis..is not on generating but on

.cutting and tightening.Reading for language or style. Once the

problems of content andorganization have been

It is not the teacher's job to be the ..

student's proofreader, responsible forlocating every error. Rather, the teachershould read a sample of the student'swork. . . . If there are major problems, theyshould appear in that sample.

Students can also benefit from responses of' peers to their writing, by pairing and swapping.

papers, sharing in groups of four or five, or shar-ing with an entire class. Mat of the problems inrunning workshops seem.to occur at the begin-ning of the course. Like any type of group work,workshops may be unproductive if students are*given no guidelines. Listed below are someproblems.and possible solutions:

.40

6

24

40 Students are 'reluctant 'to' share. Here theteacher can be a model and share his workwith the class. One posiible way is for theteacher to free -write on the board while thelass also free-writes. The class canethen com-

ment on strengths and weaknesses. Anotherway to ease anxiety is to begin by having stu-den& work in pairs, a lessthreatening formatthan sharing with a large group. Finally, initialcomments can be limited to specific Stiengths-

-brthe papers read:Students'-comment's seem erratic and off the

_ mirk. Often Students will offer evaluationsand Suggestions without attempting to under-standwhat the writer is trying to say. One way

--- lo avoid this is by structuring responses,_ so that students summarize the main idea of

the,piece. Peter Elbow suggests the followingsequence:

m.

1. Give- a 15-second summary of the mainPoints of thepiece.

.2. Condense the-summary into a sentence.3. Sunimariie it in a Word that is in the piece.4. Summarize it in a word that is not in the

piece. (1973, p. 86)

AnOther form of-summary. would be to have'students :think up alternative' titles.

Shidents begin by focusing on mechanicalerrors. The teacher can avoid this problemby giving students specific questions, such asthose listed in the section on conferencing. Or,rather than duplicating papers, students canread them aloud and classmates never see thehandwriting and spelling.Students try to rewrite the paper for,the writer.If, in a workshop, students attempt to rewritethe paper, they are making decisions that thewriter should make. The purpose of the work-slops is to clarify and explore the reactionsof readers to the text, to answer the question,"What happened in you when you read thewords this tiin,e ?" Peers can locate, problems,places where the writer's intention is not ful-filled, or where they are confused. But it isthe. writer's job to solve the problems that thegroup has uncovered..The approach I'Ve outlined would require

changes in the way most classes are organized.More, time should be devoted to writing., A sur-

vey of U.S. high schools in the 1960s found thatEnglish teachers devoted 16 percent of theirtime to writing instruction (Squire and 'Apple-bee, 1968). Results of national writing assess-ments carried out since the. Squire and Apple:bee study suggest that, if anything, the amountof required Writing has declined (Mellon, 1976).Graves (197* has shown that larrguage artstexts which form the heart of many elementaryprograms, virtually ignore the comPosing pro-cess. The sad fact is that writing has not had ahigh priority in schools.

The teacher should spend more class time'working with individual students and less timegiving full class instruction. While the teacheris conferencing, students can work indepen-dently writing, sharing their writing, or do-ing other class work. By"dealing with papersin class, teachers can actually reduce the papergrading load that grinds so many of them down.Each paper dealt with in class is one less paperto be taken home.

Most writing programs that use. the processapproach require a certain volume of writing (aset number of "pages per week, for example) withrevisions 'counting toward that . requirement.Then, at certain,points in the term, thestudent

"gradedher best work from her folder to be

graded on criteria such as those suggested byDonald Murray:

Information Is there An abundance of infor-mation? Is it specific? Is it accurate? Is ithonest? Is it used effectively to develop anddocument what the writer has to say?Subject Has the student found his or hersubject(s)? Is the student an authority onthe subject? Has the student made the subjectworth reading about? Is the writing focused onthe subject? Is the subject limited = developedand completed? Are-the reader's questions answered? Does the writing have a meaning'?Structure Is the writing ordered? Are thereaders' questions answered when they areasked? Are the title and the lead honest? Dothey lead the reader toward the subjeCt? Is eachpoint documented? Does the ending work tobring the writing to a satisfying conclusion?Language Does the writer have a strongvoice? Is it appropriate,, consistent, and effec-tive?' Does the writer get out of the way of theinformation to be delivered to the reader? Does

1

25

the writer use language honestly? Is the writer'smeaning clear? Does the writer use the simplestlanguage appropriate to the subject and the au-dience? Does the writer break the conventionsof usage, mechanics; and 'spelling only to clar-ify meaning?

Process -- Has the student experienced the en-tire writing process from finding his or her ownsubject through final editing? Can the studentwrite to discover meaning? Can the student re-vise to disceVer, explore, and clarify meaning?Does the student understand the writing pro-cess? Can the student use the writing processeffectively? Will the student be able to apply thewriting process to future writing tasks?

These criteria should be applied to the student'sbest drafts, chosen by the student at the endof the unit and presented by the student for agrade, Grading the student on her best work isanother way of saying that revision is important.

Planning the Writing, Curriculum

Often, writing curricula resemble a definitionof history given by a struggling student. Thestudent had made it through a frustrating se-mester and on the final exam was asked to de-fine "history." The student answered, "Historyis one damn thing:after anothet" Attempts atstudent-centered education have often becomeone damn activity after another. As long as thestudent was involved and happy, education waspresumably taking place.

Yet it is possible to design a writing curricu-lum without imposing a rigid and arbitrary setof skills and tasks and at the same time without

"spawning anarchy. A sound writing curriculumshould be based on two types of objectivesrecurring objectives, those that can be repeatedyear after year, and developmental objectives,those that define lines of growth.

Psychologist Jerome Bruner has stressed theimpbrtance of the "spiral curriculum", wherethe student deals with the same concepts yearafter year although at different levels of sophis-tidation. He writes:

Any subject can be taught to any child in somehonest form ... it should follow that a curriculumought to be built around the great issues, princi-ples and values that a society deems worthy of thecontinual concern of its members. (1960, p. 52)

'What then are the continual concerns when itcomes to a writing curriculum?

The qualities of good writing should bestressed year -after year. The ,concept of focus,for example, is one that should be regularlystressed. The young child may struggle withfocus when shifting from sprawling narratives(that may roam several galaxies) to narrativeslimited to specific incidents. The high schoolstudent may deal with foCus while attemptingto limit the scope of a term paper. The kinds ofconcerns listed in Ivlurray's evaluation sheet areconstant preoccupations for the writer. They arenever mastered "once and for all." They shouldbe central to any course that requires writingno matter what the grade level.

Students should repeatedly work to achievedifferent aims in their writing. The basic aims,for writing might be defined as: ,

Expressive: language close to the self, used toconvey emotion and to explore experienceand information (journals, free writing,many first drafts, learning logs)

Persuasive: language to change or confirm abelief of the reader, to move the reader toaction (editorials, advertisements)

Informative: language to convey facts, ob-servations, perceptions, concepts (news re-Ports, interviews, research papers)

Literary: language to entertain (short stories,plays, poetns, anecdotes)

These aims do not exist in pure forms. Persua-sive essays, for example, usually convey bothinformation and emotional attitudes of the writ-er. Most writing does, however, have a primaryaim, with the other aims subordinate to thatprimary aim. The most thorough discussionof aims can be found in James KinneaVy'sA Theory of Discourse (1971).

A third kind of recurring element is modeof thought. Modes of thought are variously de-fined but usually include narration, descrip-tion, analysis of cause and effect, comparison/contrast, definition, and classification. Thesemight be 'thought of as means of helping thewriter achieve his aims. A writer might argueagainst compulsory education, for example, bydescribing a secondary school where studentsare just passing time. Or he might contrast that

2

le

r-

26

type of school with private schools where stu-dents have a choice about attending. Or he canargue that once students attain "literacy" theyshould not be required to attend school; in thatase,the writer would, need to define "literacy."

. .

Besides the ret:urring attention tostandards, to aims, and to modes, a ,

currkulum should define lines of develop-ment, not so specifically that each studentat each grade should be expected to meetthe same goals ,. . but so that teachers .have a clear idea of the'changes they seekto promote.

The modes can also be turned into questions:.

What happened to X? (narration)What tlid X look/feel/gmell/sound/taste like? (de'

scriptiqn) .

What is the difference between X and Y? (com-parison/contrast)

What do you mean by X? (definition)What caused X?'(cause-effect)What will be the results.of X? (cause-effect) .

What typespr groups. can X be divided into? (clas-sification) (Berke, 1976, pp. 19-21)

'These questions can be used in conferences andworkshops to help students develop their work.

Besides the recurring attention to sta4rds,to aims, and to modes, a curriculum should de-fine lines of development, not so specificallythat each. student at each grade should be ex-pected to meet the same goals students don'tdevelop in lockstep fashion but so that teach-ers have a clear idea of the changes they seek topromote. What follows is a brief outline of sev-eral major 'lines of development.

From story to plot. The novelist, E.M. Forster,distinguishes between story and plot asfollows:

... a story (is) a narrative of events, the empha-sis on time-sequence. A plot is.also a narrativeof events, the emphasis falling on causality."The king died and the queen died" is story."The king died' and then the queen died, ofgrief" is a plot. The time sequence is preserved,but the sense of causality overshadows it ... If itis a story, we say, "And then?" If it is a plot, weask, "Why?" (1927, p. 86)

Young children string together their storieswith "and then"; there is little sense of logicaldevelopment. In a detective story the crime isoften solved not by the methodical examina-tion of leads, but because the detective acci-dentally bumps into the criminal, who thenconfesses. As the child matures, she is capableof exploring the motivation of characters andthe logic of plot.From stringing --a narrative to shaping a narra-tive. The young writer, when recounting anevent, often gives everything the same weight.The narrative is a string of beads that areall the same size. The writer, in ,an account ofclimbing Mt. Washington, will spend as muchtime describing what he ate for breakfast as hewill describing the view from the summit. Asthe student matures he should be encouraged ,to. shape the narrative, to feel free to compresslong stretches of time into single sentences,and to expand important moments into sev-eral. The student eventually is able to controlthe movement of time in a narrative and thuscontrol the shape of the narrative.From narrative to non-narrative modes. Theyoung writer is often limited to the narrativemode, which fits most easily the sequence ofexperience. When the student experimentswith other modes, where an intellectual ordermust be imposed on experience,, she often hasdifficulty. These failures, though, are criticallyimportant if the student is to grow, and signsof disorder ,often indicate active engagementwith new ideas and new forms. By the. sametoken, a lack of disorder could indicate "thatthe student has found a comfortable formulathat actually inhibits creative thought.

From writing for an intimate audience towriting for a wider, unknown audience. Theyoung writer often writes with the belief thatthe reader knows aii'd cares about her. The fol-lowing piece, written by an eleven-year-old, isa charming and (for the writer) a successfulaccount of an experience. The writer does,however, require the reader to fill in missinginformation.

Once when I went horse riding about three orfour weeks back up at Morwich house on YorkRoad. I was on a horse Called Sweet Williamping round a field there, a man was holding

()

27

the reins because I never rode a horse before.Then a boy, Wit liam Kemp took the reins, thehorse bit himiind &,horse went off canteringand then started gall%oing for d bit bucked meabout four times. I Weritsflying and landed onmy side. I thought I had brokeninytegs again sayI started to cry, but not for long. I went\up to thefencing for a, rest. The man said "Teas verygood for staying on so long." When I hqd hadmy rest the man brought a lovely white stallion,much bigger than me, called Cobweb. I got on itand the man said "Are you feeling better now."I said "yes" After when we had payed and wereon the way home still limping on my right leg.

I said that I was glad the horse buCked mebecause I was glad to be on the White Stallionbecause the White Stallion was the most beauti-ful horse I had ever seen. The man said that itWas his own horse and that knowbody went onit only me at that time.

The writer assumes her reader knows abouther previous broken leg and assumes'the read-er knows where York, Road is. She assumesthat by calling the horse-the "most beautiful"she'd ever seen, the reader knows what thehorse looks like, and she assumes that wedon't want to know what happened to WilliamKemp's hand. She assumes The reader knowsthe identity of the "we" at the end of the firstparagraph. As-writers mature they can go out-side their own perspective and anticipate bet-ter the information needs of a wider audience.

From random rewriting to revising. LucyCalkins has defined stages of revision throughwhich writers seem to pass (1980). The "ran:dom drafters" do not revise in any real sense.When a paper is finished, it is finished. Theymove on to the next draft without lookingback to consider what they have done. The"refiners," the second group she notes, dolook back at their work but only toMake minorchanges a misspelling corrected, a detailadded, a phrase reworded, They are unable tosee major alternatives.Next, Calkins defines a group in transition. Nolonger. content to simply tinker like the refin-ers, this group sees real weaknesses in their

.writing but feels inadequate to make the majorchanges. It is as if their critical abilities haveoutrun their composing abilities, and they feelvery frustrated.

Fortunately, those in the transition stageusually pass into the final stage and become"interactors." These writers can experimentwith an evolving draft, exploring differentpoints of view, different plans of organiza-tion, different relationships with the intendedaudience.

From over- and undergenemlizing to,move-ment among the levels of generalization. (Seeespecially Moffett, 1968, and Britton et al.,

.1975). Young writers often confine themselvesto accounts of specific events for example,an account of having to stay after school orto wide generalities -- "Teachers don't careabout students." They alterniite between thespecific and theglobal. As they mature, theyare able to formulate middle-level 'generaliza-tions that truly fit the specific information"teachefs who must deal with '150 studentsand handle administrative work will oftendeal unjustly with students."Growth should not be thought of as the abilityto think more abstractly, but as the abilityto move among levels. George Orwell demon-strated this movement in his essay, "Politicsand the English Language." Early in the essayhe writes:

... an effect can become a cause, reinforcing theoriginal cause and producing the same effect inan intensified form, and so on indefinitely.

This sentence is heavy going. But Orwell doesnot leave us floating in the clouds. His nextsentence:

A man may drink because he feels himself to bea failure, and then fail all the more completelybecause he drinks. (p. 355)

The message is clear.

From the passive acceptance of values to in-formed' commitment. As the student matures,he. comes to question truths that before hadseemed self-evident, and an age of skepticismbegins. The adolescent begins to see the con-tradictions (often viewed as hypocrisies) inhis society. Author William Golding recountsan argument he had with a pious Methodistgirl when he had reached this stage. In tryingto convert him, she mentioned that there weremillions of Methodists and they couldn't allbe wrong:

28

That was too easy ... and I said, restively, [that]there were more Roman Catholics than Method-ists anyway; and they couldn't all be wrong,could they not all those hundreds of mil-lions? An awful flicker of doubt appeared in hereyes.

But Golding admits that this skepticism, whilenecessary, is a retreat from responsibility; itdestroys without having the power to create.For The skeptic, the question, "What is truth?"is always the end to the argument. For th4 truethinker, it is the beginning. The true thinkerasks, "What is truth?" and sets out to find.it. (Golding's essay is available in Muscatineand Griffith, 1980; a more .thorough discussionof this type ef growth can be found in Perry,1970.)

I have tried to put forward a view of the learn-er as an experimenter, as someone who must begiven the right to fail. Experimenting, workingthfough a range of options, failing, failingagain, finally making progress this is whatwe all do when we learn, but it is too rarelywhat students do when they are taught to write.Too often students are put in the position of achemistry student, later a famous scientist, whowa4 required to take an undergraduate chemis-try lab. The student wotild consistently workout different procedures for conducting the as-signed experiments. At first the instructor triedto be genial but finally shouted, "There will beno experimenting in this laboratory!"

ReferencesBerke, Jacqueline. Twenty Questions for the Writer.

Second edition. New York: Harcourt BraceJovanovich, 1976.

Britton, James; Burgess, Tony; Martin, Nancy; Mc-Leod, Alex; and Rosen, Harold. The Developmentof Writing Abilities (11-18). London: MacmillanEducation Ltd., 1975.

Bruner, Jerome. The Process of Education. New York:Vintage Press, 1960.

Calkins, Lucy McCormick. "Children's Rewriting 'Strategies." Research in the Teaching of English,14 (December 1980): 331-341.

Calkins, Lucy McCormick. "Research Update: WhenChildren Want to Punctuate: Basic Skills ,Belongin Context."' Language Arts, 57 (May 1980):56i-573.

a

Chomsky, Carol. "Invented Spelling in the OpenClassraoni." Word, 27 (1971): 499-518.

Elbow, Peter. Writing Without Teachers. New York:Oxford University Press, 1973.

Forster, E.M. Aspects of the Novel. New York:Harvest Books, 1927.

Graves, Donald. "Language Arts Textbooks: A Writ-ing Process Evaluation." Language Arts, 54(October 1977): 817-823.

Kinneavy, James, A Theory of Discourse. EnglewoodCliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1971.

Mellon, John. "Round Two of the National WritingAssessment Interpreting the Apparent Decline'of Writing Ability: A Review." Research in theTeaching of English, 10 (February 1976):86-74.

Moffett; James. Teaching the Universe of Discourse.Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin, 1968.

Mutcatine, Charles, and Griffith, Marlene, eds. TheBorzoi Reader. Fourth edition. New York: AlfredA. Knopf, 1980. -

Newkirk, Thomas. "Read the Papers in Class." InClassroom Practices in Teaching English, 1979-1980: How to Handle the Paper Load. Urbana,Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English,1979.

Orwell, George. The Orwell Reader. New York:Harcourt Brace, 1956.

Perry, William. Forms of Intellectual and EthicalDevelopment in the College Years. New York:Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970. (This book alsohas relevance to the older secondary student.)

Smith, Frank. "The Language Arts and the Learner'sMind." Language Arts, 56 (February 1979);, 118-125.

o

Squire, James, and Applebee, Roger K. High SchoolEnglish Instruction Today. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1968.

.to

Teaching the Mechanical Conventions of Writing

Vivian I. DavisStaff Coordinator'

. The Tri-Ethnic Committee, Dallas, Texas .

Editors' Note: In this paper Vivian Davis provides an overview of perspectives on and some specific approachesto teaching the more mechanical skills of writing. She emphasizes in her introduction that these mechanical skillsare important but should not be the focus of writing Instruction. Given a general emphasis on meaningful writingand a focus on conveying meaning clearly, it appears that students generally do need instruction focusedon handwriting and spelling. In addition specific exercises focused on capitalization, punctuation, grammarand usage are sometimes useful. The approaches discussed in this paper provide examples but are, notpresented as the best or only way to teach these skills. Effective teachers develop approaches suited to them-selves and their students.

Writing is a complex of many skills broughttogether and produced by the writer as a kind of"print-out" of socially agreed-upon symbols,The symbols are letters, marks, and spatial ar-rangements. Educated society expects the.writerto adhere to certain, rules and traditions abut

ways the symbols are to be used. In manycases, however, those rules and traditions arearbitrary. In other cases there are so many excep-tions to the rules and traditions that the writerbecomes confused. To further complicate mat-ters, the rules and traditions are not stablethey change. The skills necessary to make ef-fective use of the symbol code are calledmechanics, or mechanical skills, oi mechanicalconventions.

Traditionally, on the theory that, followingprescribed rules leads to improved writing,the mechanics have been the focus of writinginstruction. Such an approach, however, ignoresthe writing process and the fundamental re-lationship between thinking and writing. Cur-

rently, many writing teachers seem to realize,that while mechanics significantly affect writ-ing, they properly are taught as part of acomplex of skills that enable writers to expresstheir ideas effectively. A large segment of thelay public, however, including educators nottrained in the teaching of writing, continues toassume that mastery of,mechanical skills leadsto improvement of writing. Based on that as-sumption, particularly in this back-to-the-basicsera, some schools ate demanding a strong em-phasis on teaching the mechanics. The teacher'sproblem becomes determining how to teach themechanics as they properly relate to the wholewriting process, rather than as an end inthemselves.

There is little disagreement about whatshould be included in the teaching of themechanical conventions of writing. Spelling;punctuation, capitalization, and grammar areincluded on any list compiled by experts as wellas by lay people. Sometimes grammar is distin-

30

guished from usage, and sometimes handwrit-ing is included. This paper will discuss brieflyapproaches to and practices for the teaching ofhandwriting, spelling, capitalization, punctua-tion, and grammar and usage. As each of theseaspects of mechanics is considered, relevantresearch about teaching the skill will be dis-cussed, and brief suggestions for instructionwill be presented. The reader is reminded thatthere has been relatively little research on thesesubjects. Unieg specifically stated as the resultsof research or study, the lists, sequences, andsuggestions represent the best opinion of thepersons referenced. Such non-research-basedmaterial is proyided because it is the best avail-able and because it may provide some guid-ance.Vhe chapter ends with suggestions aboutthe role of the community in helping studentslearn to write.

HandwritingLegible handwriting is essential to students'

success in writing, at least until small comput-ers are readily available free to everyone. Chil-dren need to learn how to write with ease andwith enough speed that handwriting does notbecothe frustrating or problematic to the expres-sion of ideas. They should also be able to formletters with enough clarity that the reader canread easily for content.

'Drilling children in a specific style of hand-writing 'is not recommended as an approach tothe teaching of perimanship, Children may berequired to reproduce models until they havedeveloped the ability to write letters, figures,and words unconsciously. At that point theywill have begun to develop their own styles.Teachers should be alert to pr.oblem areas inthe learning of handwriting certain letters aredifficult for many children, and individual chil-dren may experience specific problems withlearning to writ legibly. The teaching of hand-writing needg be individualized so that allchildren have the opportunity to master hand-writing skills early in their writing experience.They will then be able to turn their/attention toother phases of the writing process.

Shane and Mulry, in their review of researchon the teaching of handwriting from grades

three through six (Shane, Walden, and Green,1971), report that the rate of. handwriting ismore closely related to quality of instruction,duration of practice, and traits of the writer thanto a particular style of handwriting. They alsopoint out that fluency in handwriting, like otherskills, indicates high automatization of the skill.These authors also report a study of personalhandwriting habits of sixth, seventh, eighth,and ninth-grade students. The study, completedby Seifert, showed that one third of the studentsat each grade level Shad developed their ownpersonal handwriting styles. More than.half thestudents studied believed their own personalhandwriting styles were faster and easier forthem to use than some style they were requiredto copy (Shane, Walden, and Green, 1971).

Generally, handwriting should be well devel-oped by the junior high years. However, for. anumber of students this is not true: consequent-ly, instruction, but more probably increasedpractice, must continue into junior high schooland high school for some students. Shaughnes-sy (1977), studying the writing skills of inexpe-rienced writers at the college level, found poorhandwriting a significant problem, because dif-ficulty with reproducing the written symbolscan interfere with the composing process.

SpellingA wide range of spelling ability exists at all

levels. Some children are good spellers by thetime they come to school. On the other hand,Shaughnessy (1977) found that the inability tospell correctly, greatly hampered inexperiencedwriters at the college level. Mellon's review ofdata from the National Assessment of Writing(1975) indicates .that spelling errors decreasedby one half in each of the four-year periods test-ed. That is, the average number of spelling er-rors per 100 words of writing for nine year oldswas eight; by thirteen years of\age the averagenumber of errors was four; and by seventeenyears the average number of spelling errors per100 Words of writing was two. These findingsimply the effectiveness of spelling instructionthroughout the school experience. The findingsalso suggest that spelling instruction should be-gin in the early elementary grades and continuethrough high school for some students.

7

Allred (1977) believes that formal spelling in-struction Should not be undertaken with young"children until they have satisfied "basic readi-ness criteria." To begin earlier may cause thechildren to experience frustration and lack ofsuccess. that could lead to negative attitudesabout spelling and writing.' Read, Allred, andBaird (Allred, 1977) developed the followinglist of abilities that they believe young childrenshould have before being required to studyspelling formally:

1. Have the ability to write and name all the let-ters of the alphabet correctly.

2. Be able to copy words correctly.3. Be able to write his or her own name without

copying.4. Be reading at about a second-grade reading

level or better.5. Be able to enunciate words clearly.6. See that words are composed of different

letters.7. Have a beginnini phonetic sense and recog-.

nize the common letter-sound combinations.8. Be able to write a few simple words from

memory.9. Ask for words he or she is in doubt about and

be able to express a few thoughts in writing.10. Demonstrate a desire and interest in learning

to spell. (p. 20)

For the most part, spelling instruction shouldfollow the same general pattern throughout thegrades. Research indicates that the test-study-test method is the most effective means of teach-ing spelling. Though much spelling is learnedincidentally outside the classrooin and from thecontext of reading, research shows that morelearning takes place when specific lists are pre-sented and conscious instruction takes place.Because there is a wide range of spelling abilityat every grade level, Fitzgerald (1951) recom-mends that a pretest be given at the beginningof the school year covering all the words to bemastered that year., Test results will indicate tothe teacher the kinds of spelling problems thewhole class will face. Perhaps most important,the test will alert each student to the words heor she needs to work on during the year.

Fitzgerald suggests that after the pretest re-sults have been analyzed spelling instruction beindividualized, with weekly spelling lists beingdrawn from a core of words that includes words

a

31

the children need in their own writing. Instruc-tion would include a weekly pretest.

There is some controversy in the literatureabout the words students should learn to spell.Allred (1977) points out that Horn has devel-oped comprehensive lists of words that children.need to be able to spell and lists of words thatadults need to be able to spell. Like Fitzgerald,Horn suggests that the words presented -ftirspelling instruction be those that students willuse in their Own work.

. .

Fitzgerald suggests that children be taught afive-step process by which they can effectivelylearn how to spell:

1. Meaning and pronunciation. Look at the word.Pronounce the word. Use the word correctly ina sentence.

2. Imagery. See and say the word. See the syl-lables of the word. Say the word, syllable bysyllable. Spell the word.

3. Recall. Look at the word. Close your eyes andspell it. Check to see whether your spelling iscorrect. (In case you made an error, do steps 1,2, and 3 again.)

4. Writing the wotd. Write the word correctly. Dotthe i's. Cross the t's. Close the o's. Check yourWriting to see that every letter is legible. Checkyour spelling.

5. Mastery. Cover the word and write it. If it is'correct, cover the word and write it again. If itis correct, cover it and write it once more.

If you made a mistake, do all the steps overagain until you learn to spell the word. (p. 38;

Some variation of this process is recommendedat all grade levels. It is essential that studentsunderstand the meanings and pronunciations ofwords they are learning to spell. Beyond simplyspelling the words, students need to be able touse the words in their own speech and writing.

Teaching spelling rules, is less helpful thanleading students to deduct common patterns inthe spelling of a variety of words. Allred (1977)suggests that young children be taught onlythose rules that have few or no exceptions; thatone rule be taught at a time; that rules be taughtonly when there is need of them; and that therebe ample reviews of rules both in the gradeswhere the rules are taught and in subseqUentgrades. Current research (Loban et al., 1969)indicates that knowing a particular rule can pro-

\

8

vide a clue to spelling a certain workbut rulescan be frustrating and obstructive when they areso complex as to be confusing. The best prac-tice strikes a medium between teaching so manyrules that they become burdensome, and teach-ing enough rules to provide guidance. Rulesshould never be taught abstractly without exam-ples for application (Allred, 1977, p. 27).

The most recommended methods for teachingspelling are test-study-test; self-corrected teststhat allow students to spell the word and re-ceive feediwck immediately so that they cancorrect any spelling errors just after writingthe word; and individualized instruction thatallows students to fiL1 out what words theyneed to learn to spell and gives the teacher op-portunity to help students move along at theirown pace (Petty, 1968; Allred, 1977; Sherwin,1973). The class should be organized to accom-modate group instruction, peer teamwork, andindividual study. New material can be presentedto and discussed with the whole class. Pretest-ing at the beginning of the year and posttestingat the end of the year can be administered to theentire class. During the year, pretests and post-tests for weekly spelling lists should be admin-istered to small groups or individuals in theclass depending on the different level of prog-ress. Peers can work together to dict e the testsand to study spelling.

Editing and revising are essential thelping students find and correct t eirown misspellings. The real test of peltingis the student's own writing.

Researchers and experienced practitionersagree that the most significant thing teacherscan do to help students improve their spelling isto lead them in the development of "spellingconsciousness." If students learn to use the dic-tionary, to enjoy knowing words and using themin their own writing, they will be motivated tolearn how to spell.

It is important that spelling instruction notdegenerate to drill work or to filling in blanks inworkbooks. Both dictation drills and carefully

prescribed workbook exercises may be usefulfor individual students from time to time, de-pending on their spelling problems. Editing andrevising are essential to helping students findand correct.their own misspellings. The real testof spelling is the student's own writing. Fitz-gerald (1951) points to the existence of 'stan-dardized spelling tests but warns that suchscales are useless if they are not composed ofwords students need to spell in their own Work.

CapitalizationMellon's review of the National Assessment

of Writing (1975) 'shows that, on the average,One capitalization error appears per 100 wordsof writing at age nine, and that that average con-tinues at ages thirteen and seventeen. Shaugh-nessy (1977) found a superfluity of capital let-ters in the work of inexperienced writers at thecollege level. She believed the practice followedthe idiosyncrasies of individual students ratherthan any logic or rules. Loban, Ryan, and Squire(1969) suggest that instruction in capitalizationcontinde through secondary school. Accordingto these writers, "errors in capitalization ofproper nouns account for a large percentage ofmechanical problems. Frequent capitalizationerrors at the beginning of sentences result fromlack of sentence sense rather than misunder-standing of the need for initial capitalization"(p. 108). They suggest the need to stress thedif-ference between common and proper nouns andto concentrate on exercises that will help stu-dents intuit sentence completeness.

Petty (1968), considering the variation instudent abilities as well as the need for certainkinds of capitalization at different grade levels,has compiled a. list of suggested objectives thatmay be used for the teaching of capitalizationfroin first through sixth grades. While a teachermay not find it possible or desirable to followPetty's suggestions to the letter, every teacher,throughout the grade levels, ought to definespecific objectives that insure the teaching andreinforcing of capitalization as a part of instruc-,tion in.the whole writing process.

Grade One: 1. The first word in a sentence.2. The child's name.3. The pronoun "I."4. The names of his or her teachers,

school, town, etc.A ,t

33-

Grade Two: 1. Names of days and months.2. Names of titles Mr., Mrs., Miss3. Proper names used in daily

writing.4. First and important words in

titles oThooks and stories.

Grade Three: 1. First word in a line of verse.2. First word of salutation, as

"Dear," and of closing, as "Yours."3. Names of holidays.

Grade Four: 1. Names of cities and states and'other geographical names.

2. "Mother" and "Father" whenused in place of the name.

3. Names of organizations, as BoyScouts, Grade Four, and so forth.

Grade Five: 1. Names of all places and persons,countries, oceans, and so forth.

2. Capitalization necessary in out-:ining.

3. Titles when used with names,such as President Lir zoln.

4. Commercial trade na:nes.

Grade Six: 1. First word of a quoted bc-ience.2. Proper adjectives, showing race,

nationality, and so forth.3. The Bible and names for the Deity.4. Abbreviations of proper nouns

and titles. (p. 73)

Instruction in capitalization can be individ-ualized through pretesting. Experienced practi-tioners suggest that capitalization is learnedbest in relationship to the student's own wr:t-ing. Students should learn rules as they areneeded and should be given practice exercisesin applying the rules. Student discussion of theuses of capitalization helps them clarify therules for themselves and helps the teacher de-cide what instruction may be necessary.

Students should work in small groups orteams with dictation exercises primarily basedon their own writing. Appropriate instructionin capitalization should precede writing assign-Ments to reinforce the relationship between theexpression of ideas in writing and the technicalconventions of the written code. Time shouldalways be allowed for student editing and revi-sion of their 'written work. Students should beable to refer to the teacher and resource mate-., rials if they are confused about any capitaliza-tion items as they write. Capitalization should

be reviewed at any grade level where studentwriting indicates the need. Loban, Ryan, andSquire (1969) suggest having secondary stu-dents study the writing of professionals to in-

,crease consciousness about the accepted uses ofcapitalization.

PunctuationPunctuation, according to a -in, "is a set

of special symbols that we use ; show in writ-ing what we would indicate quite naturally inspeaking by facial expression, body gesture, orvolume and tone of voice" (1966, p.,36). Rulesfor punctuation are extremely complicated, anddependence on oral expression only for guid-ance in punctuation-can lead to confusion andfrustration. Mellon (1975) reports that data fromthe National Assessment of- Writing indicatethat at age nine, children show two punctuationerrors for every 100 words of writing, but thenumber of errors increases to three at agesthirteen and seventeen. Mellon explains thatas student writing "grows more syntacticallycomplex ... errors of punctuation are boundto occur ..." (p. 32). This fact indicates theneed for a systematic approach to the teachingof punctuation from the early eleMentary gradesthrough secondary school. Shaughnessy (1977)found that lack of punctuation skills limits writ-ing development for many college students.

In the elementary grades, the focus is onteaching the basic punctu ion code and help-ing children to become cons 'ous of the e),cep-lions as well as the rules that overn the use ofpunctuation. At the second level, students,should review these rules and am more aboutthe rhetorical uses of punctuati n and how, tomake judgments about the use of various punc-tuation marks. At both levels learning is b staccomplished when students have a clearderstanding of what is being taught. The weltl-trained teacher can judge the levels of thestudents' understanding by their written workand by their participation in the class discus-sion particularly the questions they ask.

Punctuation, like the other mechanical con-ventions, cannot be taught at only one gradelevel in the student's experience. The rules arebest learned inductively, and students need

34

to use their own writing to reinforce what theylearn About how to punctuate.

Petty (1968) outlines punctuation objectivesfor elementary grade levels. The list illustratesone method that teachers may use to be certainthat punctuation instruction extends through-out the entire elementary school experience.Regardless of order or j acing of punctuation in-truction, it is necessary to review and reinforce

p vious instruction each year in new contexts.

Gra e One: 1. Period at the end of a declarativesentence. ,

2. Period after the numerals in alisting.

Grade Two 1. Question mark at the end of aquestion.Comm'a after the salutation in a

iendly letter.. Tuna after the closing in afrigidly letter.

4. Corn\na between the day of themonth\and the year in the writingof a datet

5. Comma between the name Of acity and name of a state whenwritten together.

Grade Three: 1. Period after\a abbreviation or

initial.2. Apostrophe in co on contrac-

tions, such as isn't, aren't, I'll.3. Commas between words in a list.

Grade Four: 1. Apostrophe. in words to showpossession.

2. Exclamation point at the end of anexclamatory statement.

3. Period following a command.4. Commas setting off appositives.5. Colon after the salutation of a

business letter.6. Quotation marks around direct

quotations.7. Comma between explanatory

words and a-quotation.8. Periods after numbers or letters in

an outline.9.,Hyphen ho division of a

wor a the end of a line.Grade Five: 1.,Colon in writing time, as 8:40.

2. Comma to show changed wordorder.

3. Underlining the title of a book.4. Quotation marks around the titles

of, booklets, pamphlets, poems,stories, and the name of a chapterin a hook.

Grade Six: 1. Commas setting off nouns in di-rect address.

2. Colon at the beginning of a list.-3. Hyphen in compound numbers.4. Commas in sentences as needed

to make meaning clear. (pp. 73-74)

Students should be given diagnostic teststo determine what items 'of punctuation need tobe taught to the entire class or to individuals.Helping students to develop an intuitive under-standing of the written sentence is basic to theteaching of punctuation. Dictation exercises re-quiring students to punctuate help to reinforcethe rules. Care should be taken that dictationexercises reinforce the correct use of punctua-tion that students have already learned. Discus-sion of punctuation rules is important becausestudents often make generalizations from pat-terns they observe that serve only to confusethem later. Students should check their ownwork and correct their own errors as well as askquestions for clarification just after taking thedictation. Time should be allowed for discus-sion of items that have a number of variations.

Frequent short punctuation -drills, both oraland written, are preferred to the teaching ofrules, although some teachers and students findthat rules are helpful when used with drills.Students should work in small groups or teamson the aspects of punctuation that they have notyet mastered.

Students should be taught how punctuationattempts to reproduce features of spoken lan-guage. They should be taught how to proofreadand should always be required to do so. Theyshould be given time to edit and to revise theirwritten work. Students at the secondary levelshould be made aware of how the rules of punc-tuation can be used to make rhetorical choicesin writing. This can be accomplished throughconscious analysis of literature and popularwriting and through opportunities to practicethe rhetorical uses of puNctuation.

In general, punctuation should be presentedin such a way that students feel they are in con-trol of it, rather than feeling that their writing isinhibited-liy, a complicated maze of rules.

51

35

Grammar and' UsageGramthar and usage are often considered part,

of what is now called the study of language.According to Corbin (1966), grammar "dealswith the predictable structures and word formsthat characterize our language, spoken or writ-ten" (p. 38). Generally, it may be said that gram-mar is the means by which the different ele-ments clf our language can be put together ingroups of sounds or written symbols so thatideas, feelings, and images can be communicat-ed. For example,' it is grammatically incorrect tosay or write "A chocolate me baked she cake,"because the words. are strung together in sucha way that they convey no meaning. Put intoa grammatical sequence, the stri of wordswould read, ':She baked me a c colate cake."All speakers of English recogni the differencebetween a grammatical and ungrammaticalutterance or written sentence, b t most of us donot consciously think of the rules we must useto make our sentences or spoken words havemeaning. Nonetheless, we use the rules of gram-mar each time we speak or write. We use certainrules to ask questions, to show emotions, tostate facts. These rules and the patterns, theyengender in language are the grammar of thelanguage.

On the other hand,we must abide by a set oflanguage rules other than the rules of grammarif we are to be accepted as proper speakers andwriters in certain social settings. This set ofrules is referred to as "usage rules." Usage rulesare often confused with grammar rules to theextent that we commonly refer to usage as gram-mar. For example, it is grammatical to say orwrite "This ain't the book y'all was readin',"because the words are put together in such fash-ion that ary English speaker understands theintended meaning. The sentence, "This ain't thebook y'all was readin'," when judged by thestandard usage rules, is not an example of"proper", English usage. English usage has agreat deal to do with one's ethnicity and socialclass as well as with the particular dialect ofEnglish one has learned to speak.

Normal children come to school alreadyunderstanding how to use spoken language.This means that they already know the grammarof language that is, the rules by which the

language carries meaning. They do not, how-ever, know grammar theories or terminology.They are not consciously aware of what makesthe language work the way it does. They are notconsciously aware of what makes the languagework the way it does. On the other hand, manychildren bring to school their own language ordialect, which may nbt be one of the variationsof standard American English the kind of En-glish accepted in educated circles. Teachershave to be aware of language differences with-out making value judgments about the languageof their students. There is much controversyabout whether teachers should attempt tochange unacceptable usages in their students.

It is the teacher's responsibility Whelpstudents understand the social implica-tions of language and the need to developflexibility in usage necessary for differentsocial settings.

The best approach is to find out what problemsthe student has with making the .language con-vey his or her message in writing, and to workwith the student on solving these problems. Itis the teacher's responsibility to help students'understand the social implications of languageand the need to develop flexibility in usagenecessary for different social settings. Teachersneed to select only those usage items that areessential according to language habits accept-ed in the . com unity and the larger societyand according t what research reveals aboutchanges in usage. Perhaps it would be well for aschool district to make known its definition ofreceptable school usage from time to time. OnceLhese determinations are made, the teacher isre3ponsible for identifying instructional needsof students.

A communication-skills __approach to theteaching of grammar and usage gives the stu-dent opportunities to learn how to use languageappropriate to various situations. Rather thanhaving students speak or write to prescriptions,the communication-skills approach urges stu-dents to strive for clarity and precision in ex-pression of ideas, feelings, and images. The

. cto4.

36

objective is to help students learn how theycan make the language work for them, ratherthan to inhibit their creativity by substitutingrules and formulas for the communication of asubstantive message.

1. The teacher writes five sentences on the_board and- asks the students to rewrite eachsentence, changing the tenses of all verbs inthe sentences. The sentences should be fromstudents' writing o'ishouldshe of high interestto students.Seme.ef.th&grammaticakproblensb

dents experience with written English are theinability to express tense through verbs and the,inability to indicate accurately the relationshipsbetween persons, between things, and betweenpersons and things. Developing an understand-ing of the written sentence also presents diffi-culties for a great number of students, who arelikely to produce sentence fragments or run-onsinstead of sentences. Part of this difficulty re-sults from their inexperience in using the gram-mar of written school English, which does notparallel the spoken language of anyone, includ-ing educated. And part of the difficulty isthe suit of grammar instruction that focuseson rules and the use of exercises that demandediting or labeling sentences written by some-one other than the student.

Goldstein (1966) believes that the study ofgrammar properly belongs in the junior hi0school. Loban, Ryan, and Squire (1969), hoW;ever, believe that grammar instruction shouldcontinue through secondary school. Shaugh -.nessy (1977) points to the need for immaturecollege freshmen to study grammar. None ofthese experts recommends the formal study ofany grammatical theory. Rather, they believegrammar is useful only as a tool that allows stu-dents to analyze the ways they can make sen-tences particularly written sentences workfor them. Loban, ityan, and Squire report thatstudies done by Ellen Frogner in 1939 indicatedthat instruction analyzing errors 'in sentencestructure as problems in the thinking processes;rather than as grainmar errors, produces im-provement in writing.

Rather than using workbooks to teach gram-mar and usage, teachers are advised to developeparcises that push students to practice sen-tence development in their own writing. Thekey is to help students develop competency inwriting grammatical sentences rather than pro-viding them with prescriptions or having themanalyze the writing of others. Sample exercisesfor sixth grade and above follow:

-2:The teacher- asks students to write five sen-tences using certain grammatical features,such as an introductory adverbial phrase.

3. The teacher asks students to write dialogsthat allow for argumentation on a particularpoint.

4, The teacher has students keep a notebookof sentences or statements or definitions thatthey like. The students are encouraged to re-write these entries.

Teachers and students should discuss togetherwhat works and what does not work in the stu-dents' writing. Generally, when students exam-ine their writing closely, they at able to pointout errors in grammar. The need then is to havea resource on which the student can draw forimprovement.

It should be pointed out here that whilethe study of grammar must not become boggeddown in rules and prescriptions, students mustlearn some common terminology and gain somecomprehension of language functions if thestudy of grammar is to be useful to them. Thisdoes not mean'that students should learn theeight or nine parts of speech and parse sen-tences, but that language about language shouldbe taught from a functional point of view.

Community Role in Teachingthe Language Arts

The community should be inforied andconcerned about what their schools are leachingchildren in the language arts. As growto understand our interdependence, it becomesclearer that communication is crucial to oursurvival. The community, then, should be com-mited to supporting useful language studies.That kind of commitment demands objectivityand careful study of the communication needsof the ,whole community and, more specifically,of students. While sloganeering may call atten-tion to problems, it does not solve them. Edu-

53

37

cators need opportunities to learn more aboutthe ways different students can learn to uselanguage effectively. The community needs to,support inservice experiences, including con-ferences, workshops; and college classes, thatwill help educators increase their knowledge_abo-uf.and skills In teaching tlielinguage arts.The schools also need the freedom to arrangeclass time and to allot teaching personnel sothat individualized instruction is maximized.The community should support the movetoward individualized instruction, not as a fad,but as a lasting, effective educational practice..

Mechanical conventions are the least creativecomponent of the writing process, but they areeasily spotted by parents and members of-thecommunity who have had their consciousnessheightened by English teachers somewhere intheir own school experience. As Mauree Apple-gate pointedout over twenty years ago,, "Excel-lence in a paper is never mere ... mechanics; itis the vital essence of the ... writing on thatpaper that is truly important (1957, p. 39).

ReferencesAllred, Rod. The Application of 1,1

Recearch Findings. The Curriculum Series. Wash-. ington, National Education Associatiion,

1977.

itApplegate, Mauree, "Language Arts: To MakeMechanics Serve Ideas." Grade Teacher, 74 (June1957): 38-39.

Corbin, Richard. The Teaching of Writing9in OurSchools. New Yprk: The Macmillan. Company forNational Cour3911of the Teach'ers of English, 1966.

Fitzgerald, James A. The Teaching of Spelling.Milwaukee, Wisconsin: The Bruce PubliShingCompany, 1951.

Goldstein, Miriam B. Thel'enching of Language inOur Schools. New York: The Macmillan Companyfor National Council of the Teachers of English,1966.

Loban, Walter; Ryan, Margaret; and Squire; James R.Teaching Language and Literature Grades Seven-Twelve. Second Edition. New York: Harcourt,Brace and World, Inc., 1969.

Mellon, John C. National Assessment and the Teach-ing of English. Urbana, Illinois: National Councilof Teachers of English, 1975. 1

Petty, Walter ,L. The Language Arts in Elementary'Schools. New York: The Center for Applied Re-search in Education, 1968.

Shane, Harold G.; Walden, James; and Green,Ronald. Interpreting Language Arts Research forthe Teacher. Washington, D.C.: Association forSupervision -an n-Curricuium Development and-the, National Education Association, 1971.

Shaughriessy, Mina P. Errors end Expeptations: AGuide for the Teacher of Basic Writing. New York:Oxford University Press, 1977.

Sherwin, J. Stephen. "Research and the Teachingof English." In Readings for Teaching Englishin Secondarjr Schools, edited by Theodore W.Hippie. New York: The Macmillan Company,1973.

tit

4.0

r

t.

Speaking and ListeningC

/ /

Overview: Oral communication is being increasingly emphasized in basic skills instruc-ti mparents and teachers are recognizing that effective oral communication skills areneeded for in must situations in work, in families, in friendships, and in school.The four papers in this section present background on the importance of oral communica-tion' and on ,approaches. to oral communication' instruction. Oral communication ispresented 'here as a complex set of skills on which students need specific help. In the firstpaper Barbara Lieb-Brilhart presents, the background, content, and implications of thestatement of standards for oral instruction prepared by professional associations. Thatpaper discusses some of the cbntrastsbetween current instruction in many schools and therecommended best instruction. The next three papers help show how the recommendationscan be carried out. Barbarq.Wood tliscusses the approach most generally accepted by theprofession, the functional approach to teaching oral communication; Fred Jandt discussesseveral efforts to define and measure specific skills in oral communication; and ClariceLite suggests an apprOach to planning instruction around one of the skills presented in theJandt paper.

Standards For Effective Oral Communication Programs

Birbara Lieb- BrilhartNational Institute of Education

Dissemination and Improvement of Practice

Editors' Note: Barbara Lieb-Brilhart begins this paper with a discbssion of the importance of oral communicationand its place as one of the basic skills. She discusses major assumptions about basic skills instruction in oralcommunication and indicates some of the potential difficulties in implementing oral communication instruction.She also gives a brief account of how the "Standards for Effective Oral Communication Programs" were preparedand some ways the Standards can be used. Dr. Lieb-Brilhart was actively involved in development of theStandards and in revising them after they were reviewed by university and school district staff. The Standards areincluded with her paper.

° The description of the basic skills in Title Hof the Elementary and Secondary Education Act(ESEA) as "reading, mathematics and effectivecommunication, both written and oral" reflectsan expanded view of what is considered basic ineducation. This view emerges from our knowl-edge that oral language skills are central to thedevelopment of other language skills and toachievement in other areas of the curriculum.

Oral communication skills are also importantfor the effective functioning of adults in socialand career contexts. For example, the 1978 En-dicott Report stated that communication wasamong the top three skills cited as important forsuccess by managers in business, engineering,and ,the arts (Endicott, 1978). McBath andBurhans (1975) summarize several studieswhich support the notion that oral communica-tion skills including public speaking, listen-ing, conference leadership, and other groupcommunication skills are among the mostvalued in business and industry. The Stump and

Selz paper in this volume presents further evi-dence for this yiew.

The burgeoning of adult courses in areas suchas "communication skills for teachers" (Lynn,1976), family communication, and conflict reso-lution is reflective of the need for communica-tion training. Also relevant is a study of 2,543adults, 40 percent of whom selected as theirmajor fear that of "speaking before groups"(Bruskin, 1973).

Despite the acknowledged importance of oralcommunication in career and personal success,only a small portion of American high schbolgraduates has received formal instruction tohelp them develop effective oral communica-tion skills. Recent data from the National Centerfor Educational Statistics indicate that, -at best,65 percent of senior high schools offer identifi-able speech communication courses. Few ofthese schools require speech courses for gradua-tion, and it is difficult to determine the degreeto which speech is taught in English courses.

42

When available, speaking and listening instruc-tion is usually offered through electives, whichare selected largely by those students whoalready perform well in oral communicationactivities. At the elementary school level, suchinstruction is either fortuitous (i.e., contingentupon the teacher's training and interests) or isavailable primarily for students with speechpathologies or disorders: Because of the notionthat written literacy should be the primary goalof formal education, most students with so-called normal speech development receive littleformal training to develop oral communicationskills.

Despite the acknowledged importanceof oral communication in career andpersonal success, only a small portionof American high school graduates hasreceived formal instruction to help themdevelop effective oral communicationskills.

Because it includes oral communicationskills in its definition of "basics," the BasicSkills legislation provides educators with op-portunities to integrate oral communication in-struction into the curriculum. In order to helpeducators design appropriate oral communica-tion instruction, this paper includes the SpeechCommunication Association (SCA) and theAmerican Speech-Language-Hearing Associa-tion's (ASHA) Standards for Effective OralCommunication Programs and describes thoseassumptions which must be understood whenimplementing them.

The Standards were drafted by staff membersof SCA and ASHA in February 1979. The docu-ment was reviewed by several boards of bothorganizations, includin,gASHA's Task Force onBasic Skills. Members o are National Council ofTeachers of English (NOTE) Ad Hoc'Committeeon Standards for Basic Skills Writing Programsalso offered suggestions for revisions. All of thesuggestions for modification were then incor-porated into the final document by StanleyDublinske, then director of ASHA's School

Services Program, and this writer, who was thanSCA's Associate Executive Secretary for Educa-tion and Research. The final document- wasapproved for publication in April 1979 by ap-propriate officials in both SCA and ASHA.

When the SCA/ASHA standards are com-pared with those of NCTE for writing programs(included in Charles Suhor's paper), it is clearthat there are parallel issues and concerns in thetwo documents. However, there are also distinctdifferences between oral and written communi-cation which must be understood by teachers.These differences and other concepts are em-bodied in the three assumptions which underlythe Standards.

Assumption 1: Oral communication instructionis critical in the teaching of reading and writingskills and the content areas. Both empirical re-search and instructional experience support thenotion that speaking and listening skills arecentral to the acquisition of other learning.Moreover, educators increasingly support thenotion that language developmentis influencedby experienceS and learning in reading, writing,and oral communication and that these inte-grated prodesses should be reflected in com-munication instruction.

Assumption 2: Oral communication is worthyof instruction for its own sake. While manyteachers readily accept the first assumption;there is less awareness of the need to provideoral communication instruction apart from itsrole in developing written communicationskills. A myth that persists is that because thewritten code is a new "language" that must betaught, and because most children already enterschool using the oral code, there is no need forfurther education in the skills of speaking andlistening. A related myth is that "anyone canteach oral communication." While there havealways been qualified, certified teachers forspeech electives, language arts and Englishinstruction has often been the responsibilityof teachers with little or no training in oralcommunication.

An SCA project reported elsewhere in thisvolume (see Barbara Wood's paper) studied thedevelopment of communication competence.Findings indicated that children need continu-

43

ous help throughout their schooling in orderto develop a repertoire of communication be-haviors for functional purposes. The fact is thatmany children and adults have failed to developmany of the verbal and non-verbal skills whichare critical in human interactions. Teacherstrained to understand and to facilitate com-munication develQpment could significantly

__improve these skills.

Assumption 3: Including language arts activi-ties in classroom instruction does not ensurelearning'of communication skills. Some of thebest elementary school teachers will .describetheir oral language activities as "listening tostories and reports," "reading aloud," "sharingtime," and so on. While these activities are use-ful in developing some critical language skills(e.g., recall of information, vocabulary, and ex-pressiVe 'skills), they do not go far enough indeveloping the communication skills of inter-action. Interaction is a fluid process wherespeaker/listener roles are constantly changingand where messages are continuously modifiedon the basis of our own and others' perceptions,moods, and responses of the moment. Develop-ing communication skills involves a focus onspeaker/listener interaction.

Bader (1975), in summarizing the work in.social perception and learning disabilities, de-icribes the importance of developing children'sabilities to recognize and respond appropriatelyto the attitudes of others. Such abilities differwidely among speakers of the same language.The Standards emphasizathe interactive natureof speaking and listening and the notion thatcommunication competence is not entirely de-pendent upon use of a particular form of lan-guage but upon the use of a variety of otherskills as well.

While children should engage in a widerange of speaking and listening experiences,such as those described in the Standards, such"expOsure" is not enough. As the child movesthrough the curriculum, teachers mist teach theprinciples of effective communication directly.Hence, there are 'standards which emphasize thenotion that "oral communication behaviors canbe improved through direct instruction" andthat "individuals responsible for oral communi-cation instruction [should] receive continuing

t.:1

education on theories, research, and instructionrelevant to communication."

In implementing the Standards for Effec-tive Oral Communication Programs, the profes-sional community is likely to experience sometensions:

The tension between the functional view ofcommunication and the notion of speech arts.The Standards emphasize the everyday needs ofstudents, the classroom as a practical communi-cation environment, and the expansion of arepertoire of effective speaking and listening be-haviors (this functional approach is describedby Barbara Wood in her paper). However, therewill be some who argue that the primary' goalof the oral communication curriculum is toperfect speaking as an art forM in formalactivities such as drama, debate, public speak-ing, and oral interpretation. The fifth standard inthe "Teaching/Learning" section attempts tp re-solve the tension by indicating that all'studentsshould have experience in both informal andformal activities for a broad range of purposes.

oral communication instruction shouldbe systematically related to the other com-munication areas. However, theresnustalso be a place in the elementarY schoolcurriculum where oral communicationprocesses are taught directly and explicitly(just as we teach reading, mathematics,and science).

The tension between w oral communicationinstruction as an identifiable part of the cur-riculum and as a vehicle to learning in all areasof the curriculum. Underlying the Stanc.ards isthe belief that all teachers should utilize oralcommunication activities in the teaching andlearning process. Furthermore, as the secondstandard under "Teaching/Learning" indicates,instruction should be systematically related tothe other communication areas. However, theremust also be a place in the elementary schoolcurriculum where oral communication pro-cesses are taught directly and explicitly (just aswe teach reading, mathematics, and science). In

44

the secondary school each student should ex-perience courses or units which are devoted tothe development of oral communication skills.Instruction should not be reserved only forthose with highly- developed abilities. In addition, oral communication instruction should beintegrated with instruction in reading and writ-ing and across other areas of the curriculum.

The tension between the notion that all teachersare responsible for oral communication instruc-tion and the notion that specialists should bearthe major responsibility. The Standards state;that "oral communication instruction is pro-vided by individuals adequately trained ... asevidenced by appropriate certification." Thismeans that all' elementary school.. teacherswho have responsibility for language arts in-struction should be trained in language andcommunication development and shoulddemonstrate 'competence in their own com-munication abilities. They should also be ableto identify students with communication dis-orders and refer them, when necessary, to spe-cialists who deal with such disorders. Special-ists are currently available, but in too few num-bers, in most school districts.

At the secondary school level, there arespeech teachers who teach courses in speechcommunication, theatre, or debate. In manystates, however, English teachers who may havehad no preparation or as few as three credits inspeech are responsible for oral communicationinstruction. For guidance in improving thecompetence of teachers in oral communication,SCA has published guidelines for preparing allteachers and for preparing elementary teachersand secondary school teachers of speech com-munication, debate, theatre, and mass com-munication (SCA and ATA, 1978). Effective oralcommunication programs, will provide in-service training for all teachers, but they willalso ensure that, whenever possible, specialistsprovide the primary instruction and assistothers in utilizing oral communication as avehicle to learning.

The tension between the desire to include oralcommunication in the curriculum and the diffi-culty of assessing oral communication skills. Ifspeaking were merely the analogue of writing,and listening the analogue of reading, assess-

ment would be relatively simple. For we couldthen evaluate speech samples apart from theirresponses by listeners; likewise, listening fac-tors could be evaluated on the basisof-re-sysoicsasto materials which are spoken or read and not aspart of their function in the interactive process.However, if we view speaking and listening in acommunication context, involving fluid ex-changes of speaker-listener roles, it is difficultto "freeze" the process for purposes of assess-ment. While assessment may be difficult, it isalso important that educators not use this as a Yr

reason for leaving oral communication out ofthe basic skills curriculum. In fact, as oral com-munication programs are being designed, morestate and federal agencies, as well as researchorganizations, are developing, assessment pro-cedures. Furthermore, an SCA Task Force onAssessment has compiled listings ofprint andhuman resources and has produced the Criteriafor Evaluating Instruments and Procedures forAssessing Speaking and Listening, whichappear in Fred Jandt's paper. SCA has alsopublished a product which describes concep-tual issues involved in assessing oral communi-cation and reviews ninety ,instruments or proce-dures which could be adapted fOr school use(Larson et al., 1978). Test publishers are alsoparticipating in the development of suitable in-struments. Although these activities are helpfuland encouraging, it is important that ease ofassessment not determine the content of thecurriculum.

Using the StandardsThe

I

tandards are organized into fivesections. The first two sections provide therationale for establishing an oral communica-tion program. The last three sections can beused as guidelines for establishing programs,for deciding what should be included in them,and for evaluating them. .

The Definition describes a view of communi-cation which emphasizes interactive behaviors,including listening and speaking and verbaland non-verbal behaviors in a variety of socialsituations. Speaking and listening are describedas a complex of many specific behaviors.

The Basic Assumptions may seem at firstglance like common sense statements. Although

Go

45

they represent beliefs which are widely held byoral communication -professionals and Willaare supported by research and teaching experi-ence, they may be very new to other educators.It is highly recommended that teachers receiveinservice training to understand the bases fortheie beliefs.

Sections on Teaching/Learning and Supportdescribe practices now evident in many highschools and, more frequently, in two- and four-year higher education institutions. While fewprograms in elementary schools exhibit thesecharacteristics, they could easily be incorpo-rated by teachers trained in oral communication(see Barbara Wood's paper for initial guidance).

The section on Assessment and Evaluationrepresents goals toward which schools shouldstrive. These standards are discussed further inFred Jandt's paper.

Clearly, for schools just building an oral com-munication program, all these characteristicswill not be present initially, but the goal shouldbe to build a.comprehensive program by the endof two pr three years. The Basic Skills legisla-tion has 'given elementary and secondaryschools an opportunity to incorporate oral com-munication instruction into their curricula..TheSCA and ASHA Standards for Effective OralCommunication Programs offer guidelines fordoing so. It is important that we seize this op-portunity to do so is to increase our students'chances for academic and personal success.

References---Bader, Betty W. Social Perception and Learning Dis-

abilities. Des Moines, Iowa: Moon Lithographingand Engraving, 1975.

R.H. Bruskin Associates. "What Are AmericansAfraid Of?" The Bruskin Report, No. 53 (1973).

Endicott, Frank S. 1978 Endicott Report: 32ndAnnual Survey'of Well-Known Business and In-dustrial Firms Concerning Employment Trendsfor College Graduates. Evanston, Illinois: North-western University, 1978.

Larson, Carl; Backlund, Phil; Redmond, Mark; andBarbour, Alton. Assessing Functional Communi-cation. Annandale, Virginia: Speech Communica-tion Association and the ERIC Clearinghouse onReading and communication Skills, 1978.

Lynn, Elizabeth M. Improving Classroom Communi-cation: Speech Communication Instruction forTeachers. Annandale, Virginia: Speech Com-munication Association and the ERIC Clearing-house on Reading and Communication Skills,1976.

McDath, James H., and Brrhans, David T., Jr. Com-munication Education for Careers. Annandale,Virginia: Speech Communication Association andthe ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Com-munication Skills, 1975.

Speech Communication Association and AmericanTheatre Association. Preparation of Elementaryand Secondary Teachers in Speech Communica-tion and Theatre. Annandale, Virginia: SpeechCommunication Association; Washington, D.C.:American Theatre Association, 1978. (Write ATAat 1029 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, D.C.20005; SCA at 5105 Backlick Road, Annandale,VA 22003.)

fi

46

Standards for Effective Oral Communication ProgramsPrepared by

American*Speech-Language-Hearing Associationand

',Speech Communication Association

Adequate oral communication frequently determines an individual's educational, social and vocationalsuccess. Yet, American education has typically neglected formal instruction in the basic skills of speakingand listening. It is important that state and local education agencies implement the most effective oralCommunication programs possible.

The following standards for oral communication were developed by representatives of the SpeechCommunication Association and the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.

If effective oral communication programs are going to be developed, all components. of the recom-mended standards must be considered. Implementation of these standarth will facilitate development ofadequate and appropriate oral communication necessary for educational, social and vocational success.

Definition

Oral Communication: the process of interacting through heard and spoken messages in a variety ofsituations.

Effective oral communication is a learned behavior, involving the following processes:

1. Speaking in a variety of educational and social' situations: Speaking involves, but is not limited to,arranging and producing messages through the use of voice, articulation, vocabulary, syntax andnon-verbal cues (e.g., gesture, facial expression, vocal cues) appropriate to the speaker andlisteners.

2. Listening in a variety of educational and social situations: Listening involves, but is not limited to,hearing, perceiving, discriminating, interpreting, synthesizing, evaluating, organizing and remem-bering information from verbal and non-verbal messages.

Basic Assumptions

1. Oral communication behaviors of students can be improved through direct instruction.

2. Oral communication instruction emphasizes the interactive nature of speaking and listening. \

3. Oral communication instruction addresses the everyday communication needs of students rndincludes emphasis on the classroom as a practical communication environment.

4. There is a wide range of communication competence among speakers of the same language.

5. Communication competence is not dependent upon use of a particular form of language.

6. A primary goal of oral communication instruction is to increase the students' repertoire and use \ofeffective speaking and listening behaviors.

7. Oral communication programs provide instruction based on a coordinated developmental con-tinuumof skills, pre-school through adult.

8. Oral communication skills can be enhanced by using parents, supportive personnel, and appro-\priate instructional technology.

47

Standards for Effective Oral Communication Programs(Continued)

An effective communication program has the following characteristics:

Teaching /Learning

1. The oral communication program is based on current theory and research in speech and languagedevelopment, psycholinguistics, rhetorical and communication theory, communication disorders,speech science, and related fields of study.

2. Oral communication instruction is a clearly identifiable lied of the curriculum.

3. Oral communication instruction is systematically related to reading and writing instruction and toinstruction in the various content areas.

4. The relevant academic, personal and social experiences of stUdents,previde core subject matter forthe oral communication program.

5. Oral communication instruction provides a wide range of speaking and listening experiences, inorder to develop effective communication skills appropriate to:

a. a range of situations; e.g., informal to formal, interpersonal to mass communication.

b. a range of purposes; e.g.,. informing, leaming, persuading, evaluating messages, facilitatingsocial interaction, sharing feelings, imaginative and.creative expression.

c. a range of audiences; e.g., classmates, teacher& peers, employers, family, community.

d. a range of communication forms; e.g., conversation, group discussion, interview, drama, debate,public speaking, oral interpretation.

e. a range of speaking styles; impromptu, extemporaneous, and reading from manuscript.

6. The oral communication program provides class time for systematic instruction in oral communica-tion skills, e.g., critical listening, selecting, arranging and presenting messages, giving and receivingconstructive feedback, non-verbal communication, etc.

7. The oral communication program includes development of adequate and appropriate language,articulation, voice, fluency and listening skills necessary for success in educational, career andsocial situations through regular classroom instruction, co-curriculat activities, and speech-language pathology and audiology services.

8. Oral communication program instruction encourages and provides appropriate opportunities for thereticent student (e.g., one who is excessively fearful in speaking situations) to participate moreeffectively in oral communication.

Support

1. Oral communication instruction is provided by individuals adequately trained in oral communicationand/or communication disorders, as evidenced by appropriate certification.

2. Individuals responsible for oral communication instruction receive continuing education on theories,research and instruction relevant to communication.

3. Individuals responsible for oral communication instruction participate actively in conventions, meet-ings, publications, and other activities of communication professionals.

C3u

48

Standards for Effective Oral Communication Programs(Continued)

41. The Oral communication program includes a system for training classroom teachers to identify andrefer students who do not have adequate listening and speaking skills, or are reticent, to thosequalified individuals who can best meette needs of the student through further assessment and/orinstruction.

5. Teachers in all curriculum areas receive information on appropriate methods for: a) using oralcommunication to facilitate instruction, and b) using Iv subjsct matter to improve students' oral-communication skills.

- 6. Parent and community groups are informed about and provided with appropriate materials for-effective involvement in the oral communication program.

7. The oral communication program is facilitated by availability and use of appropriate instructionalmaterials, equipment and facilities.

Assessment and Evaluation

1. The oral communication program is based. on a school-wide assessment of the speaking andlistening needs of students.

2. Speaking and listening needs of students will be determined by qualified personnel utilizing ap-propriate evaluation tools for the skills to be assessed, and educational levels of students beingassessed.

3. Evaluation of student progress in 9ral communication is based upon a variety of data includingobservations, self-evaluation, listeniars' responses to messages, and formal tests.

4. Evaluation of students',oral communication encourages, rather than discourages, students' desiresto communicate by emphasizing those behaviors,which students can improve, thus enhancing theirabilityjo do so.

5. Evaluation of the total oral communication program is based or achievement of acceptable levels oforal communication skill determined by continuous monitoring of student progress in speaking andlistening, use of standardized and criterion-referenced tests, audience-based rating scales, andother appropriate instruments.

Speech Communication Association5105 Back lick Road, Annandale, VA 22003

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association10801 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852

tk

I

Oral Communication:Holistic Skills/Functional Approach

Barbara S. WoodProfessor of Communication

University of Illinois, Chicago Circle

Editors' Note: After outlining five kinds of functional oral communication skills, Barbara Wood provides an overviewof a functional approach to oral communication instruction. She also discusses how to plan and organize such aprogram. Dr. Wood notes that such Instruction is intended to relate to students' current interests and to providevery practical skills. This approach is parallel to the current emphasis on meaningful or purposeful communicationin writing instruction.

Developing Communication Competein Children and Youth

Most schools expect their graduates to be ableto fill out a job application, conduct themselveseffectively in an interview, ask for help whenthey need it, or express sympathy to a friendwho has lost a loved one. These functional lan-guage skills require competence in reading andwriting, of course, but they also require compe-tence in oral communication. Too often parentsand teachers assume that, because children andyouth "can talk," they are necessarily skilled inoral communication. Studies of children's com-munication effectiveness suggest that manychildren and youth lack adequate oral com-munication skills; in fact, many are reticent tospeak in important communication contexts(Garrison and .Garrison, 1979). If the goat of lan-guage arts instruction in the schools is the de-velopment of functional communication skillsin students, then effective development of oralskills speaking and listening must carryweight in such a program.

This paper presents an approach to oral/lan-guage development of children and youth thatincorporates a functional view of communica-tion centering on.five critical functions of every-day interactions: controlling, sharing feelings,informing (and responding), ritualizing, andimagining. These communication functions aretaught according to an instructional processwhich stresses the development in children of arepertoire.of communication strategies, the de-velopment of selection criteria for choosing the

- most effective and appropriate strategies, prac-tice in implementing communication choices,and the development of methods that childrencan use to evaluate their communication.

Content of the Basic Skills inOral Communication

The basic skills in oral communication in-clude the dominant functions of language incontemporary life. Adopting the sysfem pro-posed by Gordon Wells (1973), a scheme whichorganizes communication (speech)' acts under

ti

v--

50

major communication functions, experts haveidentified these five important functions asworthy of instruction:

The controlling function includes our com-munication attempts to direct or otherwiseaffect the behaviorof another; as well as ourresponses to control. Requests, suggestions,refusing, and assenting are examples of thisfunction. When teachers ask their students tofollow certain rules, they are using the con-trolling function (both teachers and studentsare engaging in control).Sharing feelings involves communication actssuch as praising, commiserating, ridiculing,approving, and rejecting. All are messages weuse,to express feelings and to react to the ex-pression of feelings by others. Teachers showtheir students how they feel about their per-formance through their verbal and nonverbalmessages of praise, rejection, and the like.

The informing function occurs when we pro-vide ideas and information to others, as innaming and giving examples, and when werespond to information given .by others, as inanswering, questioning, or denying. Teachersand students are probably involved in the in-forming (responding) function most of thetime in the traditional classroom.

When our messages help to sustain our socialrelationships, we are ritualizing. The ritualiz-ing function includes communication actssuch as greeting, thanking, introdticing, tak-ing turns in conversations, and teasing.Though teachers might only give instructionon the subject of introducing, the functionalview of communication development couldinclude practice in any one of these importantcommunication acts.

The imaging function asks us to deal creative-ly with reality through our language. Exam-ples include speculating. dramatizing, fanta-sizing, and storytelling. The holistic view ofcommunication instruction is based on theeffectiN eness of the imagining function forpracticing or "trying on" new communicationbehaviors in the classroom.

Development of the five communicationfunctions is the heart of the functiohal approachto oral communication learning. Four guide-

lines help set the proper perspective for instruc-tion in oral communication.

Communication in everyday situationsusually involves a very fluid flow of ideas andfeelings, such that no one person is "thespeaker" while another is "the listener."' In-stead, persons serve the roles of speaker andlistener simultaneously. Likewise, communica-tion acts for all five functions include initiatingstrategies (as in requesting) and respondingstrategies (as in assenting).

Most communication situations inchidemultiple functions at any one time, so that aperson can be controlling and sharing feelingsat the same time. While one of the functionsmay be primary and one or more secondary,multiple 'functions are typical of most con-versations.

Oral communication is more than justspeech. Gestures, facial expressions, intonation,and posture, among other cues, play an im-portant role in communicating our message toothers.

Finally, a domino nt mode of learning in allbasic skills areas is the oral mode. Instructionalstrategies in all basic skills include the im-portant oral skills of the teacher and students.For example, in the effective learning of math-ematical concepts, instruction may hinge oneffective use of the informing fuktion, as wellas the imagining function. Without attentionto oral communication skills Ifor all students,instruction in other basic skills may fall shortof ou.. targets.

. . . a dominant mode of learning in allbasic skills areas is the oral mode. Instruc-tional strategies in all basic skills includethe important oral skills of the teacher andstudents.

The Instructional ProcessThe instructional process which suits well

the development of functional communicationcompetencies in children and youth is one

0 ,r1

51

based on the four components of competenceoutlined by Connolly and Bruner (1974, pp.3-7):

Competence must first include an adequaterepertoire of skills in any area. For communi-cation, ',we seek to develop in children andyouth an adequate and varied repertoire ofcommunication strategies (acts) with' whichthey can deal with" important communicationsituations in their .daily lives. Instructionshould be geared toward increasing children'srepertoires so that they are able to gaint some-one's attention effectively,- express affectionand hostility appropriately; ask for help whena task is 4 o difficult, and assertively lead agroup (Win ,-1975). i

The second omponsAlt Lcompetence in-cludes t e selactibil criteria childre need sot e can select frOm among the straties in 1

heir repertoire he most appropriate one(s)for the particula moment. Helpful criteria tiinclude commun ation parameters, that is iadapting a messag to persons, setting, topic iand task (Cazden, 1 72; also Williams, 19701pp. 81-101), and co versational rules: quantity say enough b t 'not too much; qualit

speak the truth a d have evidence wheinecessary; relevance stay on the topic; mildmanner = be clear a out what you say, andsay it with-dispatch ( ice, 1975).

The implementation of communica ionchoices is the _third omponent of flo pe-tence. Our children an youth must 11 wenopportunities to practic /Verbal and non erbalstrategies which they ecide are appr priatein a particular situatiq The environ ,ent forpractice must be sup "c tive and nontAing; children shoul n t fear failur ps theymay in everyday c nve 'sations. Role playing

tiand discussion ar, key methods st &lilts canuse to implement bas c oral skil s. Ole in-structor must not e pr scriptive nd

Ibuthori-

tative; instead, t is per on must/ very hard

children discov r what they ca com unicateto be a ssion 1 ader, helping

Iand how it feels to do it that way. I teachersinsist en tellin stude s, "I o it this way" or"Here are the best ways," then the lapprpachwill not wor effectively.

fFinally, chil ren and yputh musti use solid

valuation procedures in assessing the appro-priateness and effectiveness of their com-munication. Students must know how to eval-uate success and failure both in terms of per-,sonal objectives ("Did I make my point?") andin terms of relationship objectives ("I hope hestill likes me as a friend."). Were communica-tion choices appropriate to the situation orwas something "out of place"? Evaluationprocedures require that children and youth beaware that they must adapt their communica-tion to their listeners (Delia and Clark, 1977a,1977b).

Organization Of Instruction

The oral/functional approach to language artsinstruction is centered on communication func-tions critical to everyday life; this focus con-trasts, with the more traditional speech activitiesapproach to oral language where public speak-ing, discussion, and articulation skills are para-mount. While the functional approach stresseseveryday private discourse, the inire traditionalapproach is centered on popu tar, public dis-course. In one sense, however, the communi-cation functions approach cuts across publicmeetings, theatrical performances, group dis-cussions, and daily conversations. While thefunctional approach does involve the use ofexercises, these exercises must meet certainstandards.

First, an exercise must specify and focus on amajor communication function, though it canfocus' on secondary functions as well. The pro-cedures outlined for the students must high-light the use of this function through associatedcommunication strategies or acts. The exercisemust be practical, worthy of the students'attention, and well thought out in terms ofprocedures.

Next, the exercise must involve as many stu-dents as possible in the implementation pro-cess. Students gain important opportunities inoral communication practice when they aregiven a chance to role play or communicate inthe classroom. Role-playing exercises that arehighly familiar to the students, where they caneasily imagine what to say and do, are thefundamental approach of the implementationprocess. Through the effective discussion-

7

. 52

leadership techniques of the teacher, the stu-dents themselves provide the observations andevaluations in the question-and-answer portionof the activity. Exampleg' of the question ap-proach are:

1. What different approaches did my friendstry? (repertoire)

2. What were factors that may have helped themdecide to do it that way? (selection criteria)

3. How effective was their approach, in terms ofhow they handled themselves? (implementa-tion)

4. Was one message better than another? Why?(evaluation)

The question-and-answer portion of the activityrequires that students observe, classify, com-ment, and support judgments about their owncommunications and those of their classmates.

Students benefit most from communica-tion exercises in which they make choices,try out strategies, evaluate their effective-ness, and then discUss their personal andrelational goals . . . Let the students handlethe evaluation process so that learning canbe maximized.

A

The functional communication competenciesbuild outward from the classroom, to the family,to peer group, and further outward to the neigh-borhood and the community. Students at allgrade levels, from preschool through highschool seniors (Wood, 1977), practice using thefive communication functions. The only differ-ences for the different age groups are our.expec-tations oft their performances in the activitiesand in the question-and-answer period. Moreexperienced and older students give more ex-amples, use a larger repertoire of strategies, anduse a more refined set of selection criteria. Fur-ther, they are better able to express the criteriathey use in making choices. Their role playingor communication performances will probablybe more creative, and their evaluations in the

question-and-answer session will be supputedwith more evidence.

Teachers at all levels must have certain skillsin classroom management. The instructor mustbe able to summarize effectively the action andconversations taking place. Comparisons of thedifferent approaches employed by the groups ofchildren should be made, and the instructor canserve as the discussion leader eliciting thesecomparisons. The three most important skills ofthe instructor in the functional approach.to orallanguage development are (1) observation anddescription of communication, (2) summarizingcommunication, and (3) leading discussionabout comparisons of communication behavior.Note that not one of these three skills is offer- .

ing evaluations of children's communicationchoices. The technique of classroom manage-ment underlying the functional approach is forthe instructor to lead students into makingevaluations of themselves and their peers. Theinstructor should refrain from offering sug-gestions on how the children "might handle"the situation or "should communicate." Instead,by leading the discussion of Oats and inten-tions of those communicating, the teacher canoften lead students into drawing evaluative con-clusions. How then will educators evaluate theprogress of instruction centered on the oral!:functional approach?

Evaluation of students' progress using thefunctional approach to communication rests inthe student-teacher discussion of their observa-tions and analyses of classroom efforts. Theevaluative component :3 based on the richnessof those observations and of assessments offeredby the students in the question and follow-upsession. Since this period contains questionsbased on the four components of instructionrepertoire, selection criteria, implementation,and evaluation the instructor will be able toassess the students' developing ability to viewcommunication from this perspective. Studentsbenefit most from communication exercises inwhich they make choices, try out strategies,evaluate their effectiveness, and then discusshow their communication accomplished theirpersonal and relational goals. Though studentsmay benefit from suggestions cffered Ly theinstructor, suggestions of this nature are not

Q

53

often incorporated into the students? ccimmuni-cation systems.

If the instructor believes that students havebehaved quite inappropriately, she or he can useone of the folloWing approaches to get the chil-dren-evaluating their peers' behavior: "Johnnyjust did 'thus and so;,how do you think his ap-proach Would work?" illow do you think Bill

_ felt when Johnny just did thus and so ?" "Bill,how did you,, feel when Johnny said that toyOU?",.,!'llill,'-would you try that approach with'someone else?" Let the students handle theevaluation prOcess so that learning can be max-,

imiied. Teachers must not become preachers;. -instead, children must learii to think, feel, and

evaluate fp(themselves.

An example' of the oral communication ap-proacri ftt each of the if* functioni is given bythe T011Owing exercise, taken from Develop-meat of Functional Communication colllpeten-

- ores: Pre -K-6 and 7-12 (Wood,. ,

both Theory and Research Into - Practice bookletspublished by.the.Speech-Eornmunication Asso-ciation and the ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading

-and Commi.w cation :Skills.

Making A Pitch (Grades 7 and 8)

Primary function: ControllingObjective; Choosing, developing, and testingpsychalpgicat appeals in persuading2someone to

Procedures: :Have the students select a Causewhich Is operative in the school or comrz\unity,and gitren them one week to find out about theactual needs of that particular cause. For example,the Red' Cross n,.edi blood donors; a senior citi-zens group needs telephone volunteers; a scouttroop, needs used camping 'equipment; a day-care

',center needs odds and ends for craft supplies; andan elementary school needs older students totutor reading. Ask the students to make a persua-sive speech, in which they attempt to gelassis-

-- lance from the memberiof the -class. Try to let thestedittp talk until they -actually persuade some-

. one to db what they want, but` if ten or moreminutes go by,jhe teacher may have to call time.After each talk, interview the volunteer andidentify what appeal the person responded to.Make alist of these successful appeals. limo one,volunteers, discuss why they did not. ;

V

Questions/follow-up:1. What appeals were successful? Unsuccess-

ful? (R)*2. What special factors might also account for

success or failure? (For example, "I said itwas all right because John is my friend." "I,said it was fine because I always wa..ed todo that anyway." "I did not respond, becausewe don't have any used camping equipment.If I had any, I would have said yes.") (E)

3. In cases of failure, can you think. of otherapproaches? (S)

4. Within two or three weeks, follow up theassignment. Did the volunteers go throughwith it? (I) (Incidentally, you may wishto have each volunteer report his or herexperience.) ,

. '5. What sorts of piychological appeals seem towork best? (E) Not as well? (E)

How Would You Feel? (Grades 1-3)

Primary function: FeelingObjective: Expressing feelings concerning posi-tive and negative situations that happen to allchildren.Materials: Some readily available prompt picturesof events discussed might help things get startedwith some groups.Procedures: Break -op the class into groups of fivechildren. Set the scene for potentially emotion-laden situations. Examples are: (1) How would youfeel if you were lost in a big department store?(2) How would you feel if you got a bike for yourbirthday? (3) How would you feel if, your favoritefriend gave you a hug? (4) How would you feel ifyou got a new pair of shoes? (5) How would youfeel if yo,u,didn-'t get invited to your friend's birth-day party? Students respond to each situation,one, at a time, in a group.

Questions/follow-up:1. HoW many different words for feelings

can we list? (Write on the board or justbrainstorm.)

2. Point to one feeling word (or say one) andask, "How many ways can you think of toexpress this one feeling? (Encourage non-verbal ways also.) (R)

3. Would you tell your friend that you're angry

*Repertoire (R), Selection (S), Implementation (I),

Evaluation (E)'

any differently than you would tell your dador mom? (S)

4. Which ways do you think best for tell-ing someone you are happy or angry withthem? (E)

5. Let's say that you wanted to tell me, yourteacher, that you were very mad' at me be-.cause I asked:you to stay in from recess, Howwould you tell me? (I)

s:a

The Investigators (Grades 9-12)

Primary function: Informing ,

Objective: Identifying, evaluating, and engagingin information skills, such as questioning, investi-gating, answering, and reporting.

Materials: A list of information sources and spe-cific task assignments.

Sample task assignments: (1) a minister to findout what kind of training was necessary for thatposition; (2) a florist ----7 to find out the seasonaltrends in flower sales; (3) a mechanic -7- to findout how the person started his or her career;(4) the bank to find out the advantages anddisadvantages of different savings plans; (5) theguidance counselor to find out what SATscores are down; (6) the principal to find outwhy he or she went into administration. Othersources include field trips to a radi&television,station and a newspaper office, and a discussionwith a professional reporter about his or herperception of the job.

Procedures: The class is divided into groups offive or six students. Each group is given an infor-mation source and a specific task assignment and

\must talk with and secure the proper informationfrom the sou e. After the information is col-lected, the gro p will select the most interestingpieces of info ation and design an informationpresentation. T e presentation may come in anyform television program, radio program, film,pictures, slides, issue of a magazine, newspaperarticle, theater presentation, or a - combination.

Questions/follow-up:1. What diffeient methods were used to get

information from your source (for example,direct questions, soliciting brochures, on-

.'the -job observation, and so on)? (R) Which ofthese yielded the most inforMation? (S,E)

2. How did you select which information youwould present? (S,E)

3. If you were to do the assignment again, whatwould you do differently? (I) Why would youdo it differently? (E) _

Notice Me (Pre-KK)

Primary. function: Ritualizing

ObjeCtive: Gaining the attention of adults t getanswers to difficult questions through the se ofacceptable ravels. .

Materials: Situation cards for presentatio s.

Sample situations: (1) A grocery stgre clerk ischecking out items, and children arrive, inquireabout a ost puppy that might have wandered in.How w uld you address the clerk? V9V/ilat wouldyou sat? (2) A group of children hay been play-ing catch, and an older child took thep- ball. Theynotice' a teacher talking to other tea hers on theother ide,of the playground. How ould you gethelp rom the teacher who is busy lking .

Proc, dares: Divide the class into groups of Tourto five Present a situatio to them andask them to pretend to be people the story (forexample, clerk, customer, and tw children whohave lost their puppy). Let each roup role playh4Iv they think it might-happen.

Questions /follow -up:1. What things did you do to make the person

notice you? (R). Did you say different thi gs to the teacherthan to the grocery stor clerk? (S) What

_

would you say to get the

1

ttention of a policeofficer? (S)

3'\What

do you think are the fastest ways to getan adult's attention? (E) /Are the fastest wayslways the best ways? ()hat if you couldn't interrupt at all you

c uldn't say a word to get my attention onth playground. Showy me ways you couldge me to notice you without talking at all.II)

1Restaurant (Grades 4-6)

Primary fu ction: Imaginiiig

Secondary unction: Ritu lizingObjective: R le playing t e "typical" behaviors ofchildren and dults in a estaurant scene; analyz-ing verbally t e portray a of those roles.Materials: Tabl , chairs, table setting, menus, tray,notepad, and a slip of japer describing the role-playing situation.

IProcedures: Six \ students assume the followingroles: Mom, Da* Su' ie the Dreamer, CrabbyJimmy, the busy Waitre s, and the Hostess. A-tableis set up with four\ cha rs and a variety of objects.Ideally, menus are obtained from a local restau-rant, and some flat are and dishes are used. The

70

__ ------

't,

55

0.

teacher may vary the situation by changing thecharacter names or selecting another familiar res-taurant. The six role players are given directionsthat indicate their roles in the situation. The restof the class members act as observers. The direc-tions may be the following:,You are a family hy-ing breakfast at Howard Johnson's Restaurant.Dad will pay for the meal but he only has eightdollars with him. The hostess will seat you andthe busy waitress is assigned to your taWe. Theplayers then have the freedom of interpretingtheir parts, such as age and personality. The Job ofthe class obiervers is to decide if the role-players'behavior is appropriate for the personality chosenand if it is appropriate for the situation.

Questions/follow-up:1. How did the role players tell us by tone of

voice or by body langdage what their roleswere? (R) What did the role players say to tellus what their roles were? (R)

,2-. What else might have been done or said byeach character? (a)

3. Try it again, with different people in thesame roles. (I)

4. Are the roles more fully developed in thesecond try? (E) Did we learn anything moreaboutperson? (E) How did we learn?(E,S,R)

Instructional Planning

Because the functional communication ap-proach has only been developed within the pastfive to ten years, no large-scale application hasoccurred. Many school districts and state educa-tion agencies are incorporating the functionalapproach into their curricular goals ..and re-visions, though few programs have been de-signed and tested for their effective deVelop-ment of communication competencies. Ideally,input for functional development should, comefrom needs and perceptions of students andtheir families and friends. Since instructionsupposedly deals with critical communicationsituations, definitions of just what is criticalmust come from the most appropriate sources.Children, their families, and educational ex-perts can participate together in defining thecritical communication situations and asso-ciated functional skills. Getting good summerjobs, talking to customers, being a good parent,getting along with your neighbor all are gen-eral situations which include possible Critical

communication skills. If interviewing for a jobis an important communication situation forhigh school. seniors in a community, then in-struction must focus on the informing function(e.g., stating job objectives, asking good job-related questions), as well as the controllingfunction (e.g., convincing a prospective em-ployer that yOu are qualified for the positionand highly motivated).

For much too long a time, teachers and text-book writers have decided which communica-tion situations are critical for children., Inputfrom the children themselves, as well as theirfamilies and members of the community, wasnot really important. The functional approachto .the development of oral communication in-sists that the children, their families, and mem-bers of the community participate in definingthe thrust of the curriculum.

Strengths and WeaknessesThe greatest plus for the functicnal com-

munication approach is that it is extremely sen-sitive to the needs of children and youth. Sinceeveryday functions in the students' lives be-come the core of the program, and since instruc-tion is geared to the five functional skills, stu-dents benefit morelproadly from their-classroomexperiences. Classroom exercises which focuson practical .issues, everyday concerns, andhuman relationships make the classroom comealive for children.

The major weakness of this approach mostoften cited by administrators and teachers isthat it is difficult todo properly. Teachers areusually trained to give information, guidance,and advice. They find it extremely frustratingwhen they are told not to evaluate; their naturaltendencies are to say what they think went welland what failed. A second weakness is related tothe fact that this approach is still in its infancy:few materials have been developed for class-room use. Consequently, school districts andcurriculum committees are forced to developprograms "from scratch." While some materialsare useful in starting these programs (Allen andBrown, 1976; Allen and Wood, 1978; Bassett etal., 1978; Larson, 1978; Wiemann, 1978; Hopperand Wrather, 1978; Book, 1978), the task of put-ting together an oral communication program

56

based on functions is a difficult and time-consuming one.

Programs have been developed in Berea,Ohio, St. Paul, Minnesota, and many school dis-tricts in Massachusetts, California, and Texas.Other programs are in progress in hundreds ofcities across the country, though the SpeechCommunication Association is just beginning togather information on methods and evaluationinstruments.

With instruction on the development of oralcommunication competencies, children andyouth will acquire a new perspective on life.They will understand and use effectively thedominant functions of language. They will feelconfident in their use of language as theyinterview for that special job, when they ask anexpert for help, or when they express sympathyto a friend who has just lost a loved one.

There is no subject of instruction in anyeducational program more important to achild's future than oral communication, and thefunctional approach to developing oral com-munication skills is both effective and sensitivein meeting the communication needs of chil-dren and youth today.

References S

Allen, R.R., and Brown, Kenneth L., eds. DevelopingCommunication Competencies in Children.Skokie, Illinois: National Textbook Company,1976.

Allen, R.R., and Wood, Barbara S. "Beyond Readingand Writing to Communication Competence."Communication Education, 27 (1978): 286-292.

Bassett, Ronald; Whittington, Nilwon; and Stanton-Spicer, Ann. "The Basics in Speaking and Listen-ing for High School Graduates: What Should BeAssessed? Communication Education, 27 (1978):253-303.

Book, Cassandra. "Teaching Functional Communi-cation Skills in the Secondary Classroom." Com-munication Education, 27 (1978): 322-327.

Cazden, Courtney. Child Language and education.New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1972.

Cazden, Courtney. "The Neglected Situation inChild Language Research and Education." InLanguage and Poverty: Perspectives on a Theme,edited by F. Williams. Chicago, Illinois: MarkamPress, 1970.

Connolly, Kevin J., and Brunner, Jerome S. TheGrowth of Competence. New York: AcademicPress, 1974.

Delia, Jesse, and Clark, Ruth Anne. "CognitiveComplexity, Social Perception, and the Develop-ment of Listener-Adapted Communication in Six-,Eight -, Ten-, and TWelve-Year-Old Boys." Com-m uniclltion Monographs, 44 (1977:. 32 -345.

Delia, Jesse, and Clark, Ruth Anne. "Cognitive Com-plexity, Social Perspective-Taking, and Func-tional Persuasive Skills in $econd- to Ninth-GradeChildren." Human Communication Research, 3(1977): 128434.

Garrison, John, and Garrison, Karen. "Measurementof Oral Communication Apprehension amongChildren: A Factor in the Development of BasicSpeech Skills." VCommunication Education, 28(1979): 119-128.

Grice, H.P. "Logic and Conversation." In Syntax andSemantics: Speech Acts, Volume 3, edited byP. Cole and J. Morgan. New York: Academic Press,1975.

Hopper, Robert, and Wrather, Nancy. "TeachingFunctional Communication Skills in the Elemen-tary Classroom." Communication Education, 27(1978): 316-321.

Larson, Carl. "Problems in Assessing FunctionalCommunication." Communication Education, 27(1978): 304-309.

Wells, Gordon. Coding Manual of the Descriptionof Child Speech. Bristol, England: University ofBristol, School of Education, 1973.

White, Burton. "Critical Influences in the Originsof Competence." MerrillPalmer Quarterly, 21(1975): 243-266.

Wiemann, John. "Needed Research and Training inSpeaking and Listening Literacy." Communica-tion Education, 27 (1978): 310-315.

Wood, Barbara, ed. Development of FunctionalCommunication Competencies: Pre-KGrade 6.Urbana, Illinois: Speech Communication Associ-ation and ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading andCommunication Skills, 1977.

Wood, Barbara, ed. Development of Functional Com-munication Competencies: Grades 7-12. Urbana,Illinois: Speech Comrhunication Association andERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communica-tion Skills, 1977.

Oral Communication: Individual Skills Focus

Fred E. JandtExecutive Director

Human Productivity Institute

Editors' Note: Fred Jandt reviews efforts of several states to define minimal competencies for speaking andlistening. He gives examples of specific competencies adopted bystates and districts including competenciesfor different grade levels. He notes some of the difficulties in assessing oral communication and discusses a set ofcriteria for evaluating tests and procedures for assessing speaking and listening skills. Dr. Jandt's paper includesthe Speech Communication Association's "Guidelines for Minimal Speaking and Listening Competencies for HighSchool Graduates."

Barbara Lieb-Brilhart, acting then as Asso-ciate Executive Secretary of the Speech Commu-nication Association, wrote to Senator ThomasEagleton in an April 3, 1979, letter:

Increasing evidence points to the importance oforal communication skills in 'achieving academic,vocational and personal success. Yet, it is esti-matedmated that fewer than half of our nation's elemen-tary and secondary pupils receive adequate oralcommunication training from qualified teachers.Indeed, our strongest oral communication pro-grams are found in institutions of higher learningwhich are attended by only a portion of our citi-zens, at a time when it is almost too late for suchinstruction to begin.

During the past several decades, the languagearts b.ave emerged as a core part of the curricu-lum in elementary schools. It would seem logi-cal that speech communication would be an in-tegral part of language arts programs, yet thathas not been the case. Kenneth Brown's 1965review of language arts textbooks revealed thatapproximately 25 percent of their contents dealtwith speech curriculum. Textbooks in 1980 do

not show a substantial increase in their at-tention to the speech communication needs ofstudents. William Possien, in reflecting uponlanguage arts curricula, said:

It is apparent that a wide discrepancy existsbetween the recommended philosophy and pro-cedures for language instruction and the actualpractices in classrooms .... Our programs wouldappear to be based on two assumptions: first, thatwritten communication is more important thanand precedes oral communication, and, second,that people learn to speak by writing. (pp. 9 -16)

The responsibility for such erroneous assump-tions, which continue today, must be assumedby both elementary educators and scholars at,speech communication.

The need to rethink the role of speech com-munication instruction iQ the secondary schoolcurriculum is alsd4critical. As part. of a study ofstate practices in secondary schools sponsoredby the Speech Communication Association,Brown surveyed Massachusetts (Brown et al.,1979). Because Massachusetts has well-devel-

MI

58,

oped statements of competencies, data from thatstate are particularly useful. Among their majorfindings are that a majority (53.5%) of second-ary,schools responding to the survey have aspeech program, but a substantial minority ofschools (46.4%) reported that no speech pro-gram exists in their schools. The typical basiccourse is an elective, one-semester course of-

, fered each year sometime between tenth andtwelfth grade. It generally includes one sectionof 20-25 students who meet every day for 40- to60-minute class periods. The basic course mostfrequently combines public speaking, interper-sonal communication, and other activities suchas debate and group discussion. Students areevaluated through both written examinationsand or presentations.

In 66.4 percent of the schools, instructionin speech is not combined with instruction inother courses. When this does happen, speech'instruction is found most frequently in Englishcourses (24.1% of the schools). The majority ofteachers teaching speech

received their undergraduate degrees withinthe past twenty years;more often majored in English (46.6%) thanin speech, communication, or theatre (26.7%)at the undergraduate Tavel; their minors aredistributed fairly evenly between education(18%) and English (16%);are either engaged in or have completedgraduate work (71.5%); at the graduate levelthey tend to major in speech/communication/theatre or English;are not affiliated with professional organiza-tions in speech or in other fields; andhave been teaching the subject and directingspeech activities ten or fewer years (64.6%).

About one third of the schools respondingto the survey have one speech-trained teach-er. Eighteen percent have two 'speech- trainedteachers, and less than 10 percent have threespeech-trained teachers. In only 19.8 percentof the schools do speech-trained teachers teachonly speech communication: courses. Whenteachers are assigned courses other than speech,they are typicallyassigned,English courses.

In 1978, Congress very wisely expandedthe National Reading Act to the Basic Skills Im-provement Act (Title II) in order to assist chil-

dren in mastering "the basic skills of read-ing, mathematics and effective communication,both written and oral." Over the course of thenext few years, this will probably mean thatmore attention will be given to speech commu-nication instruction, at both the elementary andsecondary levels. With this increased attentionwill come increased concern it is alreadyvery evident about what skills should betaught and about assessment procedures (Hout,1977). Much has already been done by theSpeech Communication Association and by anumber of states to assist administrators anteachers as they tackle these. problems.

Minimal Competencies

In 1977 the Educational Policies Board ofthe Speech Communication Association estab-lished a task force to recommend minimalspeaking and listening competencies for highschool graduates (Bassett et al., 1978). A searchwas conducted to identify the speaking andlistening competencies which state educationagencies and research specialists consider es-sential for high school . graduates. Nineteenspeaking and listening skills were agreed uponas basic to two-person interactions (face-to-faceor by telephone), small group discussions, andpublic speaking situations. The listening skillsare applicable to messages from radio, televi-sion, and motion pictures. The guidelines theydeveloped, "Guidelines kir Minimal Speakingand Listening Competencies for High SchoolGraduates," follow this paper.

Five states Vermont, Virginia, Oregon,Utah, and Massachusetts have developedminimal competencies in speaking and/or lis-tening to be implemented either on a statewidebasis or as a local option. The lists developed bythese states provide examples for writing com-petencies in such a way that they can actually beassessed.

Vermont (Vermont Department of Education,1977; 1978) has developed seven speaking andthree listening competencies:

.

Speaking (paraphrased for brevity)1. Give geographical directions2. Demonstrate organization, sequence, clarity,

and accuracy in explaining a process, making areport, or expressing an opinionI*1

59

3. Answer a busines's telephone and take amessage

4. Get information using a telephone5. Introduce self and others6. Interview for a job7. Participate in and listen to others in informal

group diicussionsListening1. Follow three-step directions2. Retell important events in a story sequentially3. Summarize essential details of an oral

presentation

Virginia's Basic Learning Skills Program isdesigned for grades K-6 (Virginia Division ofElementary Education, 1977). It includes twomajor speaking skills and two major listeningskills, each of which is further defined by morespecific minimum objectives. Each minimumobjective is keyed\ to a grade range (K-2, 1-3,4-6). The four major objectives are: -

Speaking ,1. The student will use correct and appro-

priate language. (This goal has six minimumobjectives.)

2. The student will speak effectively in a varietyof situations. (Sixteen minimum objectives)

Listening1. The student will comprehend main ideas

and specific details of an dal communication.(Eight minimum objectives)

2. The student will comprehend that the meaningof an oral communication is influenced bymany factors. (Eleven minimum objectives)

Oregon's minimum competencies includedemonstration of ability to read, write, speak,and listen (Oregon Department of Education,1978a and 1978b). School districts must includelanguage arts/English in their K-12 curriculum.Suggested goals that pertain to speaking andlistening are -

1. Speaking effectively when addressing differentpurposes and different audiences

2. Using language effectively in interacting withindividuals and groups

3. Using appropriate conventions in communicat-ing ideas clearly and concisely

4. Listening purposefully in acquiring, interpret-ing, and evaluating information

5. Using non-verbal communication to expreqsideas, attitudes, and feelings

6. Describing a variety of ways in which ideas areexpressed

Utah requires two kinds of minimal compe-tencies: basic skills and life skills (Utah StateBoard of Education, 1977). Basic skill compe-tencies are reading, writing, speaking, listening,computation, and problem solving. Life compe-

,,,tencies are in four areas: consumer of goods andservices, career, health and safety, and demo-cratic governance. Both sets of competencies areinterrelated. For example, there are four speak-ing and four listening competencies. Each oneis related to a life competency, as in the follow-ing examples:

Speaking1. Consumer of goods and services. Negotiates

business transactions, expresses needs and con-ducts other consumer-related oral communi-cation with sufficient clarity, volume, andpurpose.

2. Gtireer. Conducts career-related oral communi-cation; for example; responding to questions ina job interview with sufficient clarity, volume,and purpose.

3. Health and safety. Explains symptoms to doc-tor, requests safety information, and ,-conductsother health- and safety-related oral commu-nication with sufficient clarity, volume, andpurpose.

4. Democratic governance. Expresses views, ques-tions officials, and conducts other citizenship-related oral communication with sufficientclarity, volume, and purpose.

Listening1. Consumer of goods and services. Listens and

responds appropriately to commercials, in-structions, and other oral communication nec-essary as a consumer of goods and services.

2. Career. Listens and responds appropriatelyto questions and other oral communications re-lated to career.

3. Health and safety. Listens and responds appro-priately to doctors! instructions, safety warn-ings, and other oral communications related tohealth and safety.

4. Democratic governance. Listens and respondsappropriately to statements by elected officials,participants in, a discussion, and other citizen-ship-related oral communication.

In Massachusetts, Project Signals is devel-oping statements of student outcomes. Still indraft form only, the list includes:

Speaking1. When the purpose is giving information, stu-

dents can:\-\ .

"^, r-t)

60

a. Give directions others can follow .

b. Describe objects, events, experiences, andideas

2. When their purpose is controlling others, stu-dents are able to:a. State an opinion effectively.b. Persuade others when appropriate

3. When the purpose is communicating feelingsor attitudes to others, students can:a. Express their opinions, feelings, and thoughtsb. State feelings so others are not offended

4. When the purpose of speaking is to use theimagination, students can demonstrate:a. Improved story tellingb. Improved creativityc. Improved appreciation of oral language

5. When the purpose is effectivd ritualizing(social interaction) with others, students candemonstrate:a. Improved comfort in social situationsb. Increased flexibility in language

Listening1. When the purpose is getting information, stu-

dents can demonstrate:a. Improved comprehension of spoken mes-

sages outlining events and ideasb. Improved following of directionsc. Improved ability to work effectively in a

group2. When the speaker's purpose is controlling, lis-

teners can: .a. Distinguish fact from fictionb. Evaluate the consequences

3. When the purpose is understanding another'sfeelings, students can demonstrate:a. Improved attentivenessb. Improved empathy -

4. When the purpose is listening imaginatively,students can produce:a. More heuristic responsesb. More creative responses

Massachusetts has also adopted a set ofspeaking and listening competencies for highergrade levels (Commonwealth of MassachusettsDepartment of Education, 1979).

Speaking .1. Basic oral Communication skills

a. Use words and phrases appropriate to thesituation

b. Speak loudly enough to be heard by a lis-tener or group of listeners

c. Speak at a rate the listener can understandd. Say words distinctly

.

2. Planning, developing, and stating spokenmessagesa. Use words in an order that clearly expresses

the thoughtb. Organize main ideas for presentationc. State main ideas clearly -

d. Support main ideas with important detailse. Demonstrate knowledge of standard English

usage3. Common uses of spoken messages

a. Use survival words ,to cope with emergencysituations

b. Speak so listener understands purposec. Ask for and give straightforwarg'informationd. Describe objects, events, and experiencese. Question other viewpoints

Listening1. Basic listening skills

a. Recognize words' and phrases used by thespeaker

b. Indicate why the speaker can or cannot beunderstood

. Understanding what you hear .a. Understand spoken words and ideasb. Identify and understand main ideasc. Associate important delails%with main ideasd. Understand descriptions of events and

experiencese. Understand speaker's purpose

3. Using what you heara. Understand and,,respond to survival words

used in emergency situationsb. Summarize information and draw conclusionsc. Recognize when words and phrases are used

to convince or persuaded. Follow straightforward directions

Taken together, these statements reflect atminimum a concern that students be able tocommunicate in a variety of situations withclarity appropriate to the audience and that theybe able to hear and restate spoken messages.

Concern for minimal competencies is alsoreflected at the local school district level, asBrown discovered in correspondence with sev-eral districts. The Parkrose School District ofPortland, Oregon, requires students to demon-strate two major listening competencies andfour major speaking competencies. Each compe-tency is further diVided into several specific"indicators." The school district providescourses in speaking and listening at both thejunior and senior high school levels. Successfulcompletion of the courses constitutes sufficient

61

evidence that the minimum competencies havebeen met. Thus, speech teachers certify that stu-dents have met the competencies through theregular instructio-Aal program.

The Lincoln, Nebraska, schools employ thespeaking/listening competencies developed bythe Speech Communication Association (seeBassett, Whittington, and Staton-Spicer, 1978).Each competency is assessed informally in theelementary grades and more formally in thejunior and senior high school yearS. "Formal"assessment includes evidence that the studenthas achieved more than 50 percent of a set ofspecific indicators for each of the ten majorcompetencies. Also, students who have success-

. fully completed speech, debate, or dramacourses are judged as having achieved the givencompetencies.

The Westside Community Schools of Omaha,Nebraska, also require students to demonstrateminimal competencies in oral communication.In the second semester of their sophomore year,students are tested on their ability to presentideas orally. The test situation may be a formaltalk or a talk in a more informal setting. Sevencompetencies are assessed; all emphasize speak-ing more than listening. The test a dichoto-

' mous rating scale (yes-no) is administered bythe student's homeroom advisor. Students mustreceive 100 percent yes responses before theminimum competency is met. School adminis-trators indicate that the lack of rater reliability isthe -biggest weakness" with the oral communi-cation competencies.

The Gary, Indiana, school district assessesstudents' oral proficiency in seven areas: articu-lation, pronunciation, verbal utterances, rate,word usage, voice qurdities, and volume. Stu-dents are assessed in the sophomore level "Gen-eral Speech" course. I4 hile this course includeslistening, listening is not assessed as a part oforal proficiency..

In Gary, oral proficiency was tested originallyin one of four situations selected by the stu-dent: an interview with a personal interest, edu-cational, or biographic theme; a topic formatstressing an impromptu response; a questionformat; and a prepared speech format. Currentlystudents are evaluated only in an interview situ-ation. The examining team of two speech teach-

P-1

ers randomly selects three to five situationsfrom a master list of thirty-two questions.Student responses are rated holistically '21if foreach proficiency on a four-point scale: 1 =severely deficient; 2 = deficient to moderatelydeficient; 3 = average proficiency; and 4 =moderate to high proficiency. Using this scale,ratings of 1 and 2 are failing. Ratings of 3 and 4are passing. Audio tapes of student responsesare kept confidential and are used only uponstudent/parent objection to the score. Teachersdo not rate students in their own school.

Assessment ProceduresThe difficulty of assessing speaking and

listening skills represents one of the great ol(al-lenges to the educational community as Title Htakes effect. The problems of assessment haveled some states and localities to adopt com-mercially available tests of reading and mathe-matics as their initial competence assessmentdevices. Available tests can very easily come todefine the competence rather than desired com-petencies guiding the selection of appropriateassessment instruments (Haney and Madaus,1978).

The few samples of minimum competencytests that are available suggest that, despisetheir new name, most such tests are quite oldin format: multiple choice, true-false, or shortanswer (NASSP, 1976). Instead of having stu-dents actually perform certain tasks in order todemonstrate their competencies, as is the case,for example, with the performance part of thedriver's license test, these instruments assesscompetencies indirectly by having students per-form paper-and-pencil tasks that are presumedto correlate with the competencies of real inter-est. In assessing competence for high schoolgraduation, for example, districts often do notrequire students to write anything. Instead, stu-dents are asked to identify mistakes in a writingsample using a multiple-choice format (NASSP,1976).

The prime virtue ,of such indirect formsof assessment is that they are inexpensive toadminister and to score. Yet with the care andtime given to developing minigial competen-cies, can any loss care or tic- e be given to hav-ing the student demonstrate the competency as

62

it is described in the competency statement?If students are expected to be able to summonemergency help using the telephone, shouldthey not be asked to demonstrate that compe-tency rather than respond to a multiple-choicequestion concerning dialing emergency num-bers? As Banesh Hoffmann warned in hisTyranny of Testing (1962), indirect techniquesof assessment may themselves become the focusof concern instead of the real competencieswhich they are presumed to measure.

Another problem is that in some cases mini-mum competency tests are not measuring whatstudents have been taught or at least notwhat they've been taught recently (Haney andMadaus, 1978). Children from ethnic and cul-tural minorities, for example, may well havebeen taught communication skills appropriatefor their culture. Even testing itself maybe val-ued differently. Maria Ramirez, Assistant Com-missioner for General Education and CurricularServices, New York State Department of Educa-tion, explained this at the 1978 National Confer-ence on Achievement Testing and Basic Skills(1979). There is no such thing as culture-freeachievement testing, she argued. The very act ofachievement testing assumes a cultural value,placed on achieving. A number of subculturesdo Rot value achievefient quite as highly as themajority population!-"Some groups are more co-operative than aggressive, more deferential thancompetitive. Rewards are primarily for thegroup, not for the individual. Thus, the firstcultural bias of achievement testing is the veryconcept itself."

The question becomes not how toeliminate cultural bias from achievementtests, but how to be sure that the biasesare valid.

The question becomes not how to eliminatecultural bias from achievement tests, but howto be sure that the biases are valid. Ramirezmade specific suggestions: The area selected forachievement testing should be an importantpart of the culture in which a child has func-tioned or is to function. If the area is not one

likely to have been experienced outside theschool's curriculum, it should be an actual partof the curriculum. And if the area is part of thecurriculum, it muss actually be taught in theclassroom of the student to be tested. Languageknowledge and skills knowledge should not beconfounded in the preparation and administra-tion of tests. Tests of skills knowledge must begiven in a student's first, that is, most pioficjent,language while second language skills must beunderstood and measured for proficiency in thesecond language alone. Translation is notenough. Many monosyllabic English words be-come polysyllabic words in Spanish, and levelsof difficulty may not be equivalent.

More directly, at the same conference, HaroldHowe II, Vice President for Education and Re-search, the Ford Foundation, stated:

I have to raise the difficult question of whether thenational mood for improving basic skills perfor-mance has hidden within it overtones of racism.There is no simple answer ... we do black chil-dren a disservice not to hold them to the sameexpectations we do white children. At the sametime, we know that inequalities in the lives ofchildren outside the school are reflected in schoolperformance, and the black, Hispanic, and nativeAmerican children are peculiarly subject to hand-icaps from both poverty and discrimination.

In light of these legitimate concerns, theSCA Educational Policies Board Task Force onAssessment and Testing proposed a set of cri-teria for evaluating tests and procedures for as-sessing speaking and listening. The followingcriteria were adopted by the association:

1. Stimulus materials should require the indi-vidual being tested to demonstrate skill as aspeaker or listener.

2. Assessment instruments and proceduresshould clearly distinguish speaking and lis-tening performance from reading and writ-ing ability; i.e., inferences of speaking andlistening competence should not be madefrom tests of reading and writing, and direc-tions and responses for speaking and/or lis-tening tests should not be mediated throughreading and writing modes.

3. Assessment instruments and proceduresshould be free of sexual, cultural, racial, andethnic content and/or stereotyping.

63

4. Assessment confirming the presence or ab-sence of skills should not be confused with

4ether testing to determine why imlividuals(/demonstrate or fail to demonstrate the skills.

5. Assessment should emphasize the appli-cation of speaking and listening in familiarsituations; i.e., stimulus material should re-

-fer-to-the situations to the individ-uql being tested, and responses should beevaluated for demonstration of skills ratherthan for accuracy of content.

6. Assessment should allow for various com-munication settings rather than be limited toone setting.

7. Assessment should involve situations thatallow for a range of acceptable responses.

8. Assessment should demonstrate that out-comes are more than just chance evidence.

9. Assessment should provide results that areconsistent with other evidence that might beavailable.

10. Assessment should have content validity.11. Assessment procedures should be standard-

ized and, detailed enough so that studentresponses will not be dependent on theadministrator's skills in administering thepraedures..

12. AWessment procedures should be as freeas possible of such negative outcomes asundue stress or anxiety.

13. Assessment procedures should be practicalin terms of cost and time.

14. Assessment should volve simple equip-ment.

15. Assessment should . iitable for the indi-vidual being tested.

Conclusion

Concern for competent communication skillsin today's society was expressed by then U.S.Commissioner of Education Ernest L. Boyer in a1977 address to the national convention of theSpeech Communication Association in Wash-ington, D.C. Dr. Boyer called for educatorsto redefine literacy by acknowledging the com-munications revolution of print, radio, andtelevision and to redefine the basics to help

students become more sophisticated senders ofmessages:

One of the unhappy characteristics of our cultureis the trend toward increased passivity. We aresoaking up the messages' f others and becomingless effective in formulating messages of our own.All across America tonight, millions of familieswill be transfixed by their glowing televisionscreens. Millions of people will spend from threeto five hours in those darkened rooms watch-ing, listening, absorbing. They will be spongessoaking up the messages. They will be passive,not active, communicators. Instead of speaking,they will be listening. Instead of formulating theirown ideas, they will be the targets of thoughts "'hurtled at them. We have become a %lion of re-ceivers, not of senders. Small wonder. that signspoint to a decline in. our ability to express our-selves clearly and precisely.

There is general agreement that listening andspeaking skills are critical for a fully function-ing adult. Professional organizations and somestates and local districts have moved to definethose skills and the levels of performance re-quired. Textbook publishers and teacher train-

. ing institutions must also begin to recognizethat speaking and listening skills must betaught directly, independent of their relation toreading and writitig.skills. As Dr. Boyer argues,we must educate our youth to be more criticalreceivers of messages particularly those ofthe m'dia and to be better senders of spokenmessages. These skills are most critical at theyounger grade levels where many of our na-tion's schools are not providing children withthe help they need to become critical and effec-tive communicators.

ReferencesAchievement Testing and Basic Skills: Conference

Proceedings. Washington, D.C.: Department ofHealth, Education, and Welfare, 1979.

Bassett, R.E.; Whittington, N.; and Staton-Spicer, A."The Basics in Speaking and Listening for HighSchool Graduates: What Should Be Assessed?"Communication Education, 27 (1978): 293-303.

Boyer, E.L. "Redefining Literacy and Basic Commu-nication: Message Senders and Receivers." Com-munication Education, 27 (1978): 271-276.

Brown, K. "Notes on an Analysis of the Speech andListening Content of Selected Pupil Textbooksin the Language Arts for the Elementary School:Grade Three through Six." Paper presented at themeeting for the Speech Association of America,December, 1965. Cited in Curriculum Handbookfor School Executives, edited by W. Ellena.Arlington; Virginia: American Association ofSchool Administrators, 1973.

Brown, K.L., at al. Assessment of Basic Speakingand . *stening Skills: State of the Art and Recom-menJations for Instrument Development, VolumeI. Boston: Massachusetts State Department of Edu-cation, 1979. (107 pp.),

Brown, K.L., et al. Asse4sment of Basic Speakingand Listening Skills: State of the Art and Recom-mendations for Instrument Development, VolumeII. Boston: Massachusetts State Department of

. Education, 1979. (413 pp.)Haney, . W., and Madaus, G. "Making Sense of the

Competency Testing" Movqment: Staff Circular No.2." Cambridge, Massachusetts: National Con-sortium on Testing, 1978.

Hoffman, B. The Tyranny of Testing. New York:Collier, 1962.

Houts, P. (Ed.). The Myth of Measurability. NewYork: Hart, 1977.

Madaus, G., and Rippey, R. "Zeroing in on the STEPWriting Test: What Does It Tell a Teacher?"Journal of Educational Measurement, 3, 1 (1966):19-25.

National Association of Secondary School Principals(NASSP). Competency Tests and GraduationRequirements. Reston, Virginia: NASSP, 1976.

Possien, W. They All Need to Talk. New York:Appleton-Century-Croft& 1969.

"Standards for Effective Oral Communication Pro-grams." Spectra 15 (June 1979).

State PublicationsMassachusetts Department of -Education. Regula-

tions for Implementation of the Basic SkillsImprovement Policy. Boston, Massachusetts,1979..

Oregon Department of Education. Elementary-Secondary Guide for Oregon Schools. Part 1,Minimum Standards for Public Schools; Part II,Suggestions. Salem, Oregon, 1978.

Utah State Board of Education. State High SchoolGraduation Requirements and State Programs ofStudies in Secondary Schools. Salt Lake, City,Utah, 1977.

Vermont Department of Education. Basic Compe-tencies: A Manual of Information and Guidelinesfor Teachers and Administrators. Montpelier,Vermont, 1977.,

Vermont Department of Education. Language ArtsCurriculum Guide. Montpelier, Vermont, 1978.

Virginia Division of Elementary Education. BasicLearning Skills, Grades K-6. Richmond, Virginia:Virginia Department of Education, 1977.

C0

-0/

65

//-Communication EducationFigure 1

/uidelines for Minimal Speaking and Listening., Competencies for High School Graduates*

1. Communication Codes. This set of skills deals with minimal abilities in speaking and understandingspoken English, and using nonverbal signs (e.g., gestures and facial expressions).

Competencies

A. Listen effectivelyto spoken English.

.

Application Examples

...

B. Use words, pro--1.- nunciation and

grammar appro-priate for situation.

C. Use nonverbalsigns appropriatefor situation.

Occupational

Understand directionsgiven by jobsupervisor.

Understand com-plaints and needsof customers.

Understand sugges-tions and questionsof fellow workers.

Use appropriatelanguage duringemploymentinterviews.

Use words, pronuncia-tion, and grammarwhich do not alienateco-workers.

Use words understoodby co-workers.

Use appropriate ges-tures and eye contactduring employmentinterviews.

Use appropriate facialexpressions and toneof voice when con-versing with asupervisor.

Use gestures whichaid a co-worker inlearning to perform aproduction task.

Citizenship

Understand directionsgiven on TV or radioon proceduresnecessary to vote.

Understand directionsto a jury from a judge.

Understand directionsgiven by policemen.

Use language under-stood by memberb ofdiverse groups at civicmeetings.

Use inoffensive wordswhen expressing \political views.

Use language under-stood by publicofficials.

Use appropriate facialexpressions and pos-ture when expressingyour point of view atcivic meetings.

Use appropriate non-verbal signs whencampaigning for apolitical candidate.

Use appropriate non-verbal signs whenengaging in informaldiscussions of politicalviews with friends.

Maintenance

Understand weathEirbulletins broadcast onradio or TV.

Understand a doctor'sdirections for takingprescribed medication.

Understand a plumb-er's suggestions forpreventive householdmaintenance.

Describe an ailmentsothat a doctor canunderstand thesymptoms.

Use language under-stood by a policemanwhen making acomplaint.

Use language under-stood by a bankerwhen making a loanapplication.

Use gestures whichenhance a child'sunderstanding of howto perform a house-hold task. .

Use gestures whichenhance a friend'sunderstanding of howto play a game.

Use nonverbal signsto indicate sympathyto a friend.

'Reprinted with the permission of the Speech Communication Association, Annandale, Virginia.

8

66

(Figure 1 Continued)

D. Use voiceeffectively.

Use sufficient volumewhen making a pre-sentation to a largegroup in an on-the-job setting.

Use appropriate vol-ume when conversingwith a customer viatelephone.

Speak with appro-priate rate, volumeand clarity whenconversing with yoursupervisor.

Speak clearly andioudly enough tobe heard in publicdebate or discussion.

Speak with appro-priate rate, volumeand clarity when ex-pressing,your views t.)an elected official.

Speak clearly andloudly enough to beheard and understoodwhen giving testimonyin court.

What Should Be Assessed?

Speak with appro-priate rate, volumeand clarity in socialconversations.

Speak with appro-priate rate, volumeand clarity whenreporting a fire oraccident.

Speak with appro-priate rate, volumeand clarity whensoliciting funds fora charity.

II. Oral Message Evaluation. This set of skilis involves the i'se of standards of appraisal to makejudgments about oral messages or their effects.

Competencies Occupational

Application Examples

Citizenship Maintenance

A. Identify mainideas in messages.

B. Distinguish factsfroni opinions.

Identify the taskto be performed whengiven instructionsorally.

Recognize perfor-mance standards forwork assigned orally.

Recognize commit-ments, promises,threats, andcommands.

Obtain factual infor-mation about jobopportunities.

Distinguish betweenfacts and opinions incustomer complaints.

Distinguish betweenfacts and opinions inlabor-managementdisputes.

Select main ideaswhen listening topolitical speeches.

Identify key points inbroadcast interviewswith politicalcandidates.

Identify critical issuesin trial testimony.

Distinguish betweenfacts and opinions inpolitical speeches.

Distinguish betweenevidence and opinionin testimony.

Distinguish tetweenfact and opinion innewscasts..

0

Obtain main ideas inmessages concerninghealth related news.

Identify main ideas inbroadcast messagesabout tax returnpreparation.

Identify main ideas ina contract agreement. _

Distinguish facts .

from opinions inadvertisements.

Distinguish facts fromopinions with respectto effective illness . atreatment.

Distinguish facts fromopinions regradingnutrition.

n "

ty 67,

,

(Figure I Continued)

A,

C. Distinguishbetween informa-tive and persuasive

-messages,

D. Recognize whenanother-does notunderstand your.

-.message. ,

C.!

Distinguish betweeninformatiyend per-suasive messages inajObsinterview,

z)'Distinguish betweeninfo-nuative'andsuasivemessagesfront!. union organizer,

Distinguish betWeeninformative and persuasive messages of .

management.

Recognizetack ofunderstanding in eother-empfoyees.

ecogiai when it job:interviewer doein't

nder*taritourekplareion of yourvac experience.

FtecOgne when acustomer doesn'tunderstand your direc-Ilene' for product use.

identify when beingsubjected topropaganda.

DiStinguilh betweeninformative and per-suasive messages ofpolitician&

Distinguish betweeninformative and per-

_ suasive messages oftrial attorneyg:

.s,_Recognize when

- another doesn't Under-standstand .. fr.n ona publia'

Recognize when a .

publicofficiatolgesn'tunderstand yourrequest.-

'ReaSgnize when ajudge does notunderstand yourtestimony.

Communication EdUcation

'

Identify when beingsubjected to a salespresentation.

Distinguishbetweeninformative and per-suasive messagesabout *chasingon credit.

Distinguish beiweeninformative and per-'suasive messages'about bonprescriptiondrugs.

Recognize whimamity

!flambe doesn'tunderstand yourinstructions. .

Ratognize when adoctor doesn't under-,,stand your descriptiqnof your illness.

Recognize when asalesperson doesn'tunderstand yourrequest: ,,

Basic S(eoch Communication Skills. This set of skills deals with the process of selecting messageelements and arranging them to produce .4x)ken messages,

CoMpetencies

A. Express ideasclearly andi:oncisety.

7-occupational ;Application Examplet

Make a report to yourJot ouPer4s0r.

Explain job require -,,merits to P newemployee.

Statclearty relevantInformation about yourwork experience whenaPP/Ying for a}ob

u L.

Citizenship

Describe a desiredcourse of politicalaction.

Describe an accidentor crime to apoliceman.

Explain citizens' rghtsto another.

2 maintenahce

Explain an appliancemalfunction to a repairperson'

Explain an unfamiliartask to a child orother family matter.

Explain your valuesto your child or afriend.

68,

(Figure 1Continued)

B. Express and defendwith evidence yourpoint of view.

../C. Organize (order)

..messages-solhatothers can under-them.

D. Ask questions toobtain information.

E. Answer questionseffectively.

Express and defendyour view in a unionmeeting.

. Express and defendyour suggestions fbrchanges in jobconditions.

Express and defendyour reasons for jobabsence to ydUrsupervisor.

Use a chronologicalorder to explain a com-plex businessproce-dure to a co-worker.

Use a topical orderwhenexplaining pro-duction problems toa supervisor.

Use a problem-cause-solution order whenmaking a suggestionto a superVisor.

Obtain informationabout correct job per-formance procedures.

Obtain informationabout job benefits.

Obtain suggeitionsabout how to improveyour job performance.

Answer a potentialemployer's questionsabout yourqualifications.`

Answer customerquestions.

Answer a supervisor'squestions about yourjob performance.

Express and defendyour view in a politicaldiscussion..

Express and defend

council meeting.

your innocence incourt.

Express and defendyour position ina city

Use a topical order toexplain your politicalviews.

Use a cause -effectorder when giving anaccident report.

Use a chronologicalorder to explain yourcomplaint to anelected official.

Obtain informationfrom public officialsabout laws andregulations.

Obtain informationabout another's evi-dence on a politicalissue.

Obtain i imatiOnabout a i :1

candidate' ws.N

Answer questionsabout your positionon public fssues.

Answer questions of acensus taker.

Answer queltions.as awitness.

4

Express a d defendyour refusal to acceptproducts or servicesyou didn't order.

Express and defend ,your faith or rel\gion. .

Express and defendyour feelings in afamily discussion,

Use a problem-cau\se-solution order to exlplain your financial'position when applyingfor i loan'.

Explain to your childhow to prevent acci-dents using a cause-effect order. , '

Use a chrory)lOgicalorder to explain to amechanic the develop-ment of an automobilemalfunction.

Obtain informationabout interest rates forpurchases bought oncredit.

Obtaininformationabout your creditrating.

Obtain informationabout product safety.

Answer a doCtor'squestions about anillness you hai.te.

Answer altax auditor'squestions.

Answer a child's ques-tions so that the childunderstands.

er-

0.b69

(Figure 1 Continued)

F. Give concise and Direct co-workers oraccurate directions. subordinates in per-

forming unfamiliarjobs.

Instruct customersabout product use.

G. Summarizemessages.

Instruct an employeeabout improving jobperformance.

Summarize oralinstructions given byyour job supervisor.

Give a summary ofcustomer suggestionsto your job supervisor.

Summarlie yourqualifications in a jobinterview.

Give directions toanother about theprocedures necessary

Jo vote.

Give directions to an-other about the proce-dures necessary tofile a tax return.

Give directions toanother about theprocedures necessaryto appear before thecity council.

Summarize the posi-tion of a political candi-date on a campaignissue.

Summarize the argu-ments for and againsta controversial issue.

Summarize for anotherthe laws/regulationspertaining to someaction.

What Should Be Assessed?,

Teach your child howto play a game.

Instruct repairpersonson how you want somerepair made.

Teach your child whatto do in case of fire.

Summarize a publicservice message onauto safety.

Summarize for familymembers a telephoneconversation.

Summarize for familymembers the familyfinancial position.

IV. Human Relations. This set of skills is used for building and maintaining personal relationships and forresolving conflict.

Competencies

A. Describe another'sviewpoint.

Occupational

Application Examples

Citizenship Maintenance

Describe the viewpointof a supervisor whodisagrees with yourevaluation of your jobperformance.

Describe the viewpointof a co-worker whodisagrees with yourrecommendations.

Describe the viewpointof union officials in acontract dispute.

Describe the viewpointof a friend with whomyou disagree aboutpublic issues.

Describe the viewpointof a legislator whoproposes a law youoppose.

Describe the viewpointof a jury member withwhom you disagree.

Describe the viewpointof a retail storemanager to whom youreturn merchandise.

Describe the viewpointof your spouse whenyou disagree on amajor decision.

Describe the viewpointof your neighbor whocomplains about yourchildren's behavior.

vJ

ore

70

(Figure 1 Continued)

B. Describedifferences inopinion.

C. Express feelingsto others.

D. Perform socialrituals.

Describe differencesin opinion withco-workers about workrelated issues. .

Describe differencesin opinion with yoursupervisor about thesteps necessary toaccomplish a goal.

Describe differencesin opinion with cus-tomers about productperformance.

Express personal re-actions to changes injob conditions to yoursupervisor.

Express satisfaction toa co-worker about his/her work.

Express feelings ofdissatisfaction with co-workers regarding thequality of workinteractions.

Introduce yourself atthe beginning of ajob interview.

Greet customass.

Conclude a conversa-tion with youremployer.

Describe differencesin opinio ith alegislator t ro-posed legislation.

Describe differencesin opinion with otherjurors.

Describe differencesin opinion in a zoninghearing.

Express feelings ofanger to your citycouncilperson.

Express your positivereactions to an electedofficial's work.

Express feelings ofdisapproval regardinga legislators position.

tritroduce a motion ata public meeting.

Request an appoint-ment with an electedofficial.

Introduce a speaker ata political rally.

Describe differencesin opinion with spouseabout child rearingpractices.

Describe differencesin opinion with yourdoctor regardinghealth care.

Describe difference-in opinion with spoUseabout the responsi-bility for householdchores.

Express dissatisfac-tion to a store clerk.

Express feelings ofapproval to your childfor his/her schoolachievement.

Express fEielings ofsympathy to a friendwhose parent has(tied.

Make, small talk incasualscaaLsettin

Introduce stranger toone anoth,......

Introduce yourself.

Application of the Minimal Speakingand Listening Competencies

Clarice P LoweDepartment of SpeechCommunication

Texas Southern University

Editors' Note: Clarice Lowe walks us through one approach to implementing the Speech Communication Associa-tion's "Guidelines for Minimal Speaking and Listening Competencies foi High School Graduates." Taking one ofthe competencies from the list provided at the end of the preceding paper, she gives an example of one approachto instructional planning. Her example takes both conceptual and experiential perspectives as she moves to levelsof greater detail, ending with a potential classroom activity. Dr. Lowe's discussion and examples emphasize theimportance of the students' practicing communication after the basic concepts are presented.

The current emphasis in educational pro-gramming is on life-orientation and functionalskills. Teachers are being urged to design con -

-- ---"tent and. methods of instrr:tion that developstudents' al"lity to perform at adequate levelsthose tasks required of functioning and con-trihuting members of our society. Although theidentification Gf these tasks may vary from onecontent area to the next and among theoristswithin a content area, the tasks themselves aredesigned to build upon the characteristics ofour society and those factQrs which serve tomake an individual truly functional within hisor her day-to-day environment.

Competency-Based Instructionin Oral Communication t,

In the area of oral communication the sameprogramming emphasis is increasingly re-flected in approaches toinstruction. In 1977 aSpeech Communication Association task forcewas charged with recommending minimalspeaking andiistening competencies needed byAdults "from all regions of the United States,

from all cultural and economic origins and withall career and life goals" to achieve "typicalpurposes in adult life", (Bassett, pp. 296-297).

Three criteria were used by the task force inselecting competencies. (1) Skills must be func-tional capable of application for occupation-al, citizenship, and personal maintenance, prposes. (2) Skills must be educational capableof development by instruction. (3) Skills mustbe general needed by all adults. The compe-tencies selected were then grouped as

1. Communication codes those skills whichdeal with minimal abilities in speaking andunderstanding spoken English and nonverbalsigns.

2. Oral message evaluation those skills whichinvolve the use of standards of appraisal tomake judgments about oral messages or theireffects.

3. Basic speech communication skills thoseskills which deal with the process of select-ing message elements and arranging them toproduce spoken messages:

I

72

4. Human relations °those skills used forbuilding and maintaining personal relation-ships and for resolving conflict. (Bassett,1978)

The full list of competencies is included in thepaper by Fred Jandt elsewhere in this handbook.

Instructional approaches in oral communica-tion, as in other subject matter areas, can em-phasize either skills practice or behavior thatrequires the application of the skills. In actualpractice, teachers generally combine these em-phases rather than attempting either emphaSisin its pure form. Ideally, the extent to whicheither is stressed should depend upon such con-siderations as the academic level of the stu-dents, their individual needs and capacities, theteacher's own preparation, and the resourcesavailable to the teacher. In any event, the focusin. developing competencies should be onlearning on expanding students' abilities tounderstand and cope.with their environmentrather than on standardizing performance orits assessment.

In order to realize this goal, teachers mustrecognize the ?act that the achievement of com-petencies in oral communication has both aconceptual and a behavioral (experiential) base.Further, the integration of conceptual and ex-periential learning can be achieved throughthoughtful curriculum design, providing num-erous options for both-teaching and learning.The results of this integration can be the" en-hancement of both the acquisition of individualskills by students and their mastery of morecomplex groupings of skills, known as compe-

. tencies. The following discussion suggests twoapproaches to the integration of conceptual andexperimental instruction using as an illustra-tion one competency from the Speech Com-niunication Associat;on's "Guidelines for Mini-mal Speaking and Listening Competencies forHigh School Graduates."

Learning of Concepts

The first approach to the effective implerhehtation of learning in oral communication ;s de.signed to strengthen the student's conceptualba -e. It allows the student to master informatioi.concerning the nature, of the desired behaviorusing progressive learning levels. FollowingBloom's (1956) theory of cognitive learning,

information is presented so that the studentprogresses from simple to complex learninglevels. These levels are recall and recognition,comprehension, application, analysis, synthe-.sis, and evaluation.

The following illustration applies this pro-gression to a competency from the third grow)of competencies (basic speech communicationskills) in the "Guideliges," "Organize (order)messages so that others can understand them."This example deals only with topical andchronological ordering.

Learning Level Skill

Simple 1. Recall andrecognition

2. Comprehen-sion

To be able to statedefinitions of topicaland of chronologicalorder which incXtdethe essential charac-teristics of each.

To be able to classifyexamples of topicaland chronologicalorder.

3. Application To be able to phraseexamples of topicaland chronologicalorder.

4. Analysis be able to identify.instances of topicaland chronologicalorder in inessagei

5. Synthesis To be able to phrasemessages includingboth topical andchronological order.

Complex 6. Evaluation To be able to applythe essential charac-teristics of both top-ic.al and chronolog-ical order in testingthe presence of eachin messages.

It is helpful if these levels of learning can beexplained to students as they p; ogress throughthem. There is a definite morale factor existingin the knowledge students will have that theyare gaining in their ability to think and reasoncritically. In addition, if this progression is ap-plied consistently, students can experience aconscious carryover of their 'abilities into othercontent areas as well as into real-life situations.

Ci r

73

_Experiential Learning

The second approach emphasizes experien-tial contexts for skills mastery. It is possible forstudents to learn skills in isolation, but in orderfor students to master those skills they mustlearn them within a context that gives the stu-dents responsibility for their selection, com-prehension, application, analysis, synthesis,and evaluation. Some educators go so far as tosay that all communication learning is necessar-ily experiential and must take place by means ofexperiences structured in communication pn-texts. They reason that a person can learn'therules of a game, that is, the behaviors that areexpected, without knowiug how to play Thegame, without understanding how those be-haviors are habitually used or how to developnew ways of using them (Conville, 1977, pp.114-115). Also, active participation in learningmakes it easier to understand abstract process-es for elementary, middle school. and highschool students alike.

Dewey established four criteria for meaning-ful experiential learning:

1. Continuity of experience. The learningexperience must provide a link betweenearlier experience and probable futureexperiences.

2. Recurring experiences. The learning ex-perience must provide a thread that links.recurring experiences and affords an op-portunity for analyzing the relationship be-tween behavior and specific consequences.

32Action and reflection. The learning expe-rience should enable the learner to be de-tached enough to reflect upon the experi-ence and then to reconstruct it as activity orconcrete referent.

4. Emergence of subject matter. Facts, con-cepts, and generalizations should emergefrom the learning experience as the learnersees how his experience already containswithin itself these basic facts, concepts,and generalizations. (Chiarelott, 1978)

Using Integrated Instructionin the Classroom

Table 1 (an adaptatiiin from Brooks. 1973,p. 41) illustrates hew the conceptual and expe-

riential bases can be integrated by means of thetwo approaches described: Bloom's progressivelearning levels, and learning experiences whichmeet Dewey's criteria. The activities suggestedserve to expand students' abilities in the first ofthe progressive levels, recall and recognition.

The activities listed in the column "Contin-uity of Experience" are phrased in such a waythat they identify the basic nature of the activity.This phrasing can be changed to adapt the ac-tivities to the age, grade level, or experientiallevel of the students. Similar modifications canbe applied to the activities in the remainingthree columns activities can be increased incomplexity or further simplified to meet theneeds of the particular situation.

Most of the activities can be done by studentsindividually, with feedback from class discus-sions, the teacher, or both. More interaction canbe obtained, however, if these activities are car-ried out in groups. Group leaders can 'be ap-pointed or may emerge or even be "voted on" asthe activity progresses.

An Example of Integrated Instruction

The following example expands on an activ-ity from Table 1. Under "Define topical order,"in the "Action and Reflection" column, stu-dents are asked to "take an assortment of mis-cellaneous objects and group them according tocharacteristics that they have in common." Thedescription below gives the specifics on howthat activity might be conducted in .the upperelementary grades.

Objective. To give students experience is creatingorganization (order).

Activity: Have the students take an assortment ofmiscellaneous objects and group them accord-ing to characteristics that the isms have incommon.

Nfaterials. A box of miscellaneous obverts.marbles; key, eraser, chalk, cotton ball, scissors,etc (Decide on possible categories for groupingin advance and be sure that at least two itemswill fit into each category.)

Directions. Divide the class into small groups.(Put as many students in a group as there arepossible categories for grouping the objects.) Astuuent in each group volunteers to sort theobjects in the box as the other students watch

. ,. . .

Table 1. Competency: Organizing (Ordering) Messages So That Others Can Understand Them.

Conceptual 3ase '

,Activities Providing .

.

Continuity of Experience Recurring Experiences Action and Reflection Emergence of Subject Matter

Knowledge

.Define order

.

Delete topical order

Delete chronological order

.

Define problem causesolubon order

Use a familiar social groupfamily, school, government.'etc as basis for activities

1 Name the members of thegroup and describe their roles

, ,2 List as many tasks as possible

performed by the group

3 Is there a reason that panic-ular tasks are assigned toparticular members?

4 Do certain members have cerlain kinds of tasks to perform'?

5 State purposes that thesetasks serve

6 Group under each purposethe tasks that relate to them

,.

7 What tasks must beperformed before others canbegins

0

8 Arrange these tasks showingthe order in which they mustcome from first to fast if thepurpose is to be acuomplished

9 Check and back check thetask order to determine whatproblems coutd occur if anytask is omitted or onlyparhary completed'

10 List possible remedies to the. omission or partial comple

Pon of a particular task

Name the groups that youbelong to in which members areassigned tasks

Name groups that you can thinkof in which members areassigned tasks

Name ways in which pupils canbe grouped in school (e g . sex.age. grade)

State where you would fit intoeach group

Set the stage for activities thatyou commonly engage in (e g ,going to bed or getting up.studying).

Explain how you do chores youdislike and how you do thingsyou particularly enjoy

List changes that have occurredin you during the past year andtheir effects

List changes that have occurredin your neighborhoOd (school.city) during the past year andgive the reason for the change

Draw your family treeOr

Locate and reproduce a chartshowing the organization of yourlocal (state. federal) government

Simulate a group situation inwhich tasks are described andassigned

Take an assortment of miscellaneous objects and group themaccording to characteristics thatthey have in common

Simulate a situation in whichindividuals have to be groupedso that they can produce a talentshow

"N....Make a list of your daily activitiesfrom breakfast through dinner

orKeep a daily diary for a week

Or

Write a brief autobiography

Simulate a situation in which Incfather is explaining to themembers of his family whyallowances must be cut

#Continue the simulation.bydepicting how the members ofthe family decide upon a wayto help the family budget

The concept of order

The concept of topical order

The concept of chronclug,calorder

The concept of problemcause solution order

.

t1

75

without helping. When all objects have beenused, the student explains to the others in thegroup the basis for the arrangement by color,by use, by materials they are made of, and soon. Other students may question, disagree, orsuggest changes, if they wish. .

Another student volunteers, using a differentbasis for arranging the objects. Wfien the pos-sibilities have been exhausted, the class re-assembles to° dis,,uss the experience and theconcepts learned, for example, order, topicalorder. and illogical or overlapping categories.

Follow-up:1. Describe any object in the group. Now

describe another object. Are you describingthem in the same ways? How many featuresare you describing? Color? Size? Materialsthey are made of? Shape? Use? What others?

2. How did you decide how to arrange theobjects into groups? Did you make a choicethat would not work for all? Why wouldn't itwork? Did you try to place an object intomore than one group? What happened? Wereyou undecided about what group a particu-lar object should go in? Why? What did youfinally do?

3. Now,many different choices for grouping theobjects did the members of your group use?Name the characteristic that determinedeach choice.

This activity can be made more complex inseveral ways. The sorting of objects could bedone by the group is a whole, thus demonstrat-ing the dynamics typical of a problem-solvinggroup. Another variation could have the groupaddress communication functions as well as thespecific competency. For example, the numberof students in each group could be increased sothat one student would serve as recorder/reporter and another as observer/reporter. Therecorder /reporter would give the entire class achronological repolgof what took place withinthd 'group; the observer/reporter wouid degcribethe dynamics within the small group nonver-bal cues, the roles played, the method used toidentify the leader, and so on. In this way, theclass could also study the communication func-tions of informing and controlling (Allen andWood, 1978).

Complexity shad not be added for the sakeof complexity, however. Nor should so much be

added that the original focus of the learning ex-perience is lost. The variations described abovemerely underscore the fact that communicationis learned through acts of-communicating. Awell-planned activity can be modified, depend-ing upon the students' level of development, sothat one or more concepts can be explored.

The example which follows is an adaptationof the previous activity so that it is suitable forsecondary students.

Objective: To give students experience in creatingorganization (order).

Attivity: Have the students take a list of the tasksnecessary for the production of a school-widetalent show and group them by the several pro-duction functions which the tasks have incommon.

Materials: Chillkboard, chalk

Directions:1. Ask two students to serve as recorders at

adjacent chalkboards. They will alte nate inrecording student responses.

2. Explain the problem to the class: there is tobe a school-wide talent show, and it is theresponsibility of the Class to plan the show.In a brainstorming session the class is tomake a 'shopping list" of the things that...ast be done through the night of the show.All responses are significant and should berecorded.

3. When the class has exhausted its resources,it must then'arrange these tasks into groupsaccording to the production functions thatthese tasks serve. The students will prob-ably need some prompting in order to under-stand the basis for grouping "productionfunction."

Consider this approach as one possibility forthe teacher: "Among the many items on theboard, you have listed duties like 'timingeach act,' seeing that props and equipmentget moved on and off stage,"giving perform-ers their cues to go on stage,' arranging thesequence of acts,' and so on. Do you knowthe title given to the person in the theatrewho has these responsibilities?" The stu-dents may know the answer, "stage manag-er," ifthey have had previous theatre experi-enCe. If probing does not appear productiveafter a point, the teacher may wish to supplythe answer.

a

76

Once the label "stage manager" has beendetermined, the questioning can proceed:Why is he or she called a manager? Whatdoes "managing" mean? What do managersdo? Can you identify those duties from the"shopping list" which fit this productionfunction?

4. The class may be divided into groups at thispoint with instructions to group togetherother duties from the "shopping list" usinga specific production function as a basis,fo example, publicity and ticket sales, stage&ating and lighting, and so on. Thegroups may proceed in one of two ways.They may name a production function whilechecking sample duties against it to seewhether or not there is a "fit." Or the groupsmay examine the list for related duties andarrive at a label for each category aftergrouping the duties, as was done with "stagemanager."

Ak the teacher interacts with individualgroups, he or she can aid each in movinginto the approach that will work better forthe emerging dynamics and thought patternsof the group.

5. When each group has placed all items onthe list in a category, the class reassemblesto discuss the experience and the conceptslearned, for example, order, topical order,and illogical.or overlapping categories.

Follow-up:1. List the catiigory 15ffeIs, that is, the produc-

tion functions, which were used. D:d eachgroup list the same ones? If not, what fea-tures accounted for the differences? Withineach group vhrit characteristic is commonto all ea t egory !abet si_for_example._11m_peo-ple involved? Materials involved? Financesinvolved?

2. How did group members decide to arrangethe items into categories? Did they 'chooselabels that would not work for all items?Why wouldn't they work? Did they try toplace items into more than one Category?What happened? Were they undecidedabout what category a particular item wouldgo into? Whit? What did they finally do?

It is apparent that a progression into the con-cept of chronological order is not an easy one.Not only must the students understand whatneeds to be done in order to produce a success-ful talent show; they also need to determine the

chronological sequence of duties soIhat a goalcan be reached. Other modifications are alsopossible, depending upon the concepts theteacher wishes to explore.

Cautions Concerning the Use ofIntegrated Instruction

The greatest benefit' that can be derived fromthe use of experiential learning in the classroomis that students will be able to explore their feel-ings during the activity, and they will becomemore aware of their thought processes. Thesefeelings and thoughts are better recognized andexa.ained when students are able balizethem and to give them labels. Therefore, exami-rigicin and discussion of the experience shouldfollow immediate}, upon the conclusion ofeach activity.

It is important that the teacher guide this"discovery," probing gently rather than tellingthe students what he or she thinks happened orshould have happened. The teacher's sensitivityin 'summarizing and synthesizing the group ex-,periences is equally important. This is often,new and difficult role for teachers accustomedto being assertive and "in control." However,the mutually gratifying results reward and re-inforce this role.

Training teachers to define competencies ex-plicitly and comprehensively, rather than to usevague and sometimes ill-defined objectives, is adifficult task but is becoming more and morewidespread. It is not easy to design a curricu-lum in oral communication, or to identify anddescribe the various levels of competency. Theintegrated approach is also difficult to nester,because it calls for both vertical and horizontaltracking. That is, each activity progresses from'simple to complex learning levels and eachmust also meet the foulcriteria for experientiallearning. An added difficulty is ensuring con-sistency within and across activities.

It is clear that initial planning requires time,care, and adequate resources for the individualteacher, the team, or the curriculum committeedeveloping the curriculum. Such careful plan-ning will result in experiences that keep theneeds, capabilities, and backgrounds of the stu-dents in mind. This will be turn result in a highdegree of student involvement and a

f)3

77

sponding increase in students' ability to thinkcritically and creatively and to master the fullrange of oral communication skills. This mas-tery will. carry them a great way toward becom-ing functioning and contributing members ofour society.

ReferencesAllen, R.R., and Wood, Barbara S. "Beyond Reading

and Writing to Communication Competence."Communication Education, 27 (November 1978):287-288.

Bassett, Ronald 'E. "The Basics in Speaking andListening for High School Graduates: WhatShould .Be Agiessed?" Communication Educa-tion, 27 (November 1978): 293-303.

Bloom, B.S. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: Long-mans, Green and Company, 1956.

Brooks, William -D. Teaching Speech Communica-tion-in-the-Secondary School. Boston, Massachu-setts: Houghton Mifflin, 1973.

Chiarelott, Leigh. "John Dewey's Theory of Expe-rience as a Base for Developing Citizenship Edu-cation Curricula." Educational Technology, 18(December 1978): 18-24.

Conville, Richard. "Cognitive Goals in Communica-tion Learning." Communication Education, 26(March 1977): 112-120.

91

4.

"N.

4.4 4,4.

.4

1

4

Overview: The three papers in this section examine ten categories, offlbasic riigtherhatics.skills. Murilyn.Suydam reviews results of research studies which _have focused on ont-putation and, nine other mathematics skills. She introduces the case for expan trig,mathematics instruction beyond computation. Ross Taylor uses the recomrnendatio s ofthe professional mathematics associations to explore the imPlicatioits of a broader Jewof mathematics instruction. In the third paper Alan Hoffer provides suggestions on liov toteach insight as part of problem solving in mathematics.

.3

Basic Skills in Math\nea tics:The Issue Regarding Comput4ional Skills

Marilyn N. SuydamThe Ohio State University

Editors' Note: Marilyn Suydam reviews the research and other literature on instruction in computation and otherareas of mathematics.' She then explores .the issue of whether mathematics instruction should include onlycomputation or should also include a brpader range of mathematics skills. Dr. Suydam discusses six factors whichinfluence mathematics instruction :-needs of daily life, tradition, prerequisites for later study, declines in achieve -'m e n t scores; a v a i l a b i t i t r o f c a l . , : .

.. .She- then considers -the-implications- of-thosc

factors for curriculum content and instructional methods. Thepaper includes the ten "Tenets on the Teaching ofComputation."

IntroductionMost discussion of basic skill!: in mathemat-

ics center on the role that computational skillsplay in mathematics instruction Many peopleequate mathematics with computation and haverelatively liitle difficulty identifying the corn-'putational skills which a person must have to beconsidered competent in mathematics.

Other people feel that an emphasis on com-:putational skills is inadequate for preparing stu-dents for their futures. They believe that othermathematical ideas have assumed increasingimportance and must, along with computa-tional skills, be considered basic skills.

The purpose of this paper is to explore thisissue: the content distinctions for the cur-riculum, the factors to consider on each side,and, finally, the implications of and for educa-tional practice.

Content of BasiC Skills in Mathematics

If the basic skills in matheinatiCs consisonly

of computational skills, then the emphasis is onthe following:

1. Addition, subtraction, multiplication, and\ division with whole numbers, including

A mastery of the basic facts, such as 6 t 7= 16, 12 4 = 8,2 x 5 = 10, and 27 + 3 =,9..The ability to compute with multidigitnumbers, using a paper-and-pencil proce-dure (called an algorithm), such as

26x3410478

884

An understanding of certain generalizai-tions related to computation, such as 3 += 7 + 3, 9 1- 0 = 9, 8 X 1 = 8, and "12 +is undefined."-

2. Addition, subtraction, multiplication, an91division with common fractions (for exani-ple, 1 /4 :I- = 0).

07

4

82

3. Addition, subtraction, multiplication, anddivision-with decimal fractions (for exam-ple, 7.2 x 3.8 = ).

Certain other skills contribute to mastery ofthese computational skills: Place-value skills(for example, knowing that in 37 the 3 is in thetens place) is an important example. Algorithmsfor each operation depend on an understandingof place value. Thus, to add 377 ± 59, the stu-dent must realize that ones must be added toones and tens to tens; that the vertical form .

377+ 59

facilitates the addition of ones, tens, and so on;that the sum of 7 and 9, 16, is 1 ten and 6 ones,and therefore 1 ten is added with 7 tens and 5tens. .Without understanding place value, thestudent must strive to commit to memory analgorithm whose steps scern.arbitrary...Why. notwrite 37,7.,4-59as-Shown in a below, or why not

multiply 46 and 32 as shown in b?(a)-3-77 "--(b) 46

+59 x3281'1

1213

Place-value skills help to provide the answers tosuch questions. The are seldom identified as"basic skills," yet they may be more basic thanmany others._ However, the key role which thisskill and other skills, such as mrmeration, playin learning mathematics is not always recog-nized, and they are tested sparingly,

An increasing number.of people-believe thatthe basic skills in mathematics consist of morethan computational skills. The list of skill areasdeveloped by the National Council of Super-visors of Mathematics (NCSM,41977) and en-doried by the National Council of Teachers ofMathematics (NCTM) in 1978 is the one mostfrequently cited:

1. Problem solving2. Applying mathematics to eVeryday

situations3. Alertness to the reasonableness of results4. Estimation and approximation5. Appropriate computational skills,

6. Geometry

7. Measurement8. Reading, interpreting, and constructing

tables, charts, and graphs9. Using mathematics to predict

10. Computer literacy4

NCTM's An Agenda for Actiorit Recommen-dations" for School Mathematics of the 1980s re:inforces the Council's endorsement. One of theeight recommendations states that "the conceptof basic skills in mathematics must encompass .more than Computational facility" (NCTM,1980, p. 5). Furthermore, the belief is expressedthat acceptance of a wide variety of basic skillsmust occur "if we are to design a basic skillscomponent of the curriculum that enhancesrather than undermines education" (NCTM,1980, p. 5). (The above list of basic mathe-matical, skills and the recommendations of AnAgenda for Aciiciri ar7e discussed furtherby RossTaylor in the next paper.)

Factors to ConsiderMany reasons are given for supporting one or

the other side of the issue. These reasons fallinto at least six categories: (1) needs of daily life;(2) tradition; (3) prerequisites for later study;(4) declines in achievement scores; (5) availabil-ity of calculators; and (6) capabilities of teachers.Each of these factors will be considered in addi-tional detail in this section.

Needs of Daily Life

The "Priorities in School Mathematics"(PRISM) project surveyed over 3000 teachersof mathematics at all levels from kindergar-ten through college, mathematics supervisors,mathematics teacher educators, principals,school board memberg, anchparents. Ninety per-cent of those who placed computation higheston the list of priorities for curriculum develop-ment in the 1980s supported the statement,"Computational skills are absolutely crucial"(Osborne et al., 1980).

This belief in the, importance of computa-tional skills seems to stem largely from thenotion that computational skills are vital ineveryday, real-life situations. People see compu-tation being used daily or at least believe they

c3

83

see it being used when numbers are involved,whether at home, in stores, or elsewhere.

Those who argue for extending the curricu-lum beyond the computational skills point outthat

the changing needs of society, the explosion of theamount -of quantitative data, and the availabilityof computers and calculators demand a redefiningOf the priorities for basic mathematics skills.(NCSM, 1977, p. 1)

They note that computation is not used as fre-quently as estimation, measurement, and otherskills. Moreover, the ability to anply computa-tion in solving problems is vita.

The need of the -4udent to deal with the personal,professional, and daily eXperiences of life re-quires a curriculum that emphasizes the selectionaid use of these skills in unplanned, unexpectedsettings. (NCTM, 1980, p. 2) .

... a citizen who cannot analyze real-life situa-tions to the point of recognizing what computa-tions must be made to 'solve real-life problems has ,

not entered the mainstream of functional citizen-ship. (NCTM, 1980, p. 6)

Supporters of an expanded definition of basicskills argue that, in a world in which machines

-- _can__compute- more-accurately-than- people-oan,_people should be learning to do what machinescannot do (at least as yet): think.

Tradition

Computational skills are traditional com-ponents of mathematical competency. "What Ilearned in school is what my children shouldlearn" is rarely said so bluntly, but it is the basis

. for many arguments about why computationalskills should continue to be taught. Traditionplays a large part in shaping American educa-tion; and it affects mathematics particularly.Some of the dissatisfaction with the "newmath" arose because children were not learn-ing "how to do things the way they should bedone." For instance, the.changed procedure fordoing long division was not considered "right."

Others point out that the world has changeddramatically in the past thirty years, that thetechnological revolution is having an impact atleast as great as that of the industrial revolutionin the last century. They .believe that children

must learn the mathematics which will enablethem to cope with the changes technology hasbrought and will continue to bring:

It is dangerous to assume,that skills from one erawill suffice for another. Skills are tools. Their im-portance rests in the needs of the times. Skillsonce considered essential become obiolete, andthis is likely to increase in pace and scope asadvances in technology revolutionize our individ-ual, ffcial, and economeliyes. Necessary newskills arise from the dim sions of the mathemat-ics pertinent to an age of population explosion,space exploration, economic and fiscal complex-ity, and microelectronic wonders.. Time and "spacefor including these new skills in the curriculummust be purchased by eliminating the obsolete.(NCTM, 1980. p. 6)

Prerequisites for Later Mathematics

The view that students need to master com-putational skills in order to be able to do moremathematics is expressed by people who be-lieve that computational skills are essential tothe-study-of-algebrai-caletilusi-or-any-othermathematics:

Others (including many mathematicians)view computation as "trivial." They argue thatmost-mathematical -thinking- is=net--based-on-computational skills but involves the ability tohandle abstract quantitative and spatial ideas.Computation is viewed simply, as a hurdleuntil computational skills-are mastered, moststudents are not allowed to go on to study anymore mathematics, Man Ts tuslents become dis-couraged, lose interest in mathematics, and areexcluded from a wide range of vocations forwhich work in mathematics is essential:

When a student discontinues the study of mathe-matics early in high school, he or she is foreclos-ing on many'options. Many doors, both in collegeprograms and in vocational training, are at onceclosed to that person. (NCTM, 1980, p. 17)

Declines in ACI; ievement Scores

The news media have reinforced the idea thatstudents today are generally weaker in basiccomputational skills than students used to be."The schools have not been placing sufficientemphasis on computational skills," argue somepeople. They point to decreases in scores on theScholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) and other tests

Da

841,

(Harnischfeger and Wiley, 1975). The "newmath" is said to have had an adverse effect onthe learning of computational skills text-books and new instructional techniques areviewed as ineffective.

Other persons 'point to fallacies in ,theseclaims. They notethat,an investigationinto pos-sible causes for declines on the SAT and othertests indicated that no single cause could beIdentified. The contributing factors are closelybound to a number of societal changes, and "thenational picture is far more varied and complexthan either proponents or critics of recent cur-ricular innovation suggest (NACOME, 1975, p.199). They also call attention to data from thetwo mathematics assessments conducted by the -National Assessment of Educational Progress(NAEP). On both the first assessment in 1972-73(Carpenter et al., 1978) and the second assess-ment in 19Z7-78 (NAEP, 1979), the data showedthat student performance was generally high forwhole-number computation (and some oftopics), but that performaRceAtkfmtipnsan.with applications of computational skills inproblem solving was very weak. Carpenter et al.(1975) noted:

kat

etrratics-movement-of-the-1960s-has been accused by_its critics of destroyingpupils' computational skills. These NAEP mathe-matics data argue that whole-number computa-tion is not a lost art and, in fact, 13-year-oldsperform at about the same level as adults [and17-year-olds perform better]. (pp. 449-450)

Bright (1978) compared data from a numberof assessments for which data were reported onan item -by -item basis for computational exam-ples. His analysis indicated that (1)sperformanceimproved as grade level increased; (2) perfor,mance decreased as test items became morecomplex; (3) performance tended to stabilizeduring the junior high school years, with 80-90percent of the students reaching mastery; and(4) performance on computation with wholenumbers stabilized earlier, and at a higher level,than on computation with fractions. Bright con-cluded that

computational skills are not acquired on the basisof initial instruction. Instruction over severalyears is needed to reach stability, and in everyarea examined there is still room for improve-/

ment. [T]he data presented refute the notionthat students generally do not acquire basic com-putation skills. In fact, some skiils (e.g., additionand subtraction without regrouping) are almostuniversally acquired, whereas otheis (e.g., divi-sion of decimal fractions) are not. Any meaningfuldiscussion of the performance of students in basiccomputational skills must be a discussion of spe-cific skills rather than skills in general. (p. 160)

Notions about the extent to which computa-tional goals have been attained vary. It isapparent from the evidence, however, that par-ticular computational skills need greater em-phasis, rather then all computational skills.

Availability of Calculators

In several studies (for example, Osborne etal., 1980); ti0 percent of those surveyed indicat-ed that they believe that children must continueto learn paper-and-pencil computational skills,along with the use of calculators if not beforecalculators are used. Several other studies have

Few people believe that paper-and-pencilprocedures should be eliminated, but ,

some do advocate placing less stress onthem-while-placing far more emphasis on

mental Computation andestimation. Theyargue that such skills seem vitally needed

-In-everyday life, while paper-and-pencilcomputation is actually used very little.

had similariindings, There is distrust on. thepart of many persons that computational ikillicannot and will not be properly learned unlessthe written procedures are used.

Few people believe that paper-and-pencilprocedures should be eliminated, but some doadvocate placing less stresThi -them, -while--placing far more emphasis on mental computa-tion and estimation. They argue that such skillsseem. vitally needed in everyday life, whilepaper-and-pencil computation is actually usedvery little. Moreolier, calculators remove thedrudgery from tedious calculations, lessen theneed for memorization, and place emphasis opwhen and what operation to use rather thanmerely on how to perform the paper-and-pencilalgorithm correctly (Suydam, 1976, pp. 13-16).

100

85

The extent to which paper-and-pencil com-putation should be mastered needs to be re-examined. Recommending the use of calcula-tors at all levels, the NCTM Agenda states:-

Common sense,,should dictate a reasonable bal-ance among mental facility with simple basiccomputations, paper-and-pencil algorithms forsimple problems done easily and rapidly, and theuse of a calculator for,more complex problems orthose where problem analysis is the goal andcumbersome calculating is a limiting distraction.(p. 6)

In connection with a recommendation on effec-tiveness and efficiency, note iF made that

There are certain algorithmic skills (e.g., longdivision with multi-digit divisors) that require agreat expenditure of classroom time. A strict stan-dard of time-effectiveness and cost-effectivenessshould be applied to determine whether actualuse of that technique in life outside school justi.fies this much expenditure of effort and time. Theuse of calculators has radically reduced thedemand for some paper-and-pencil techniques.

ZrThe research evidence indicates that paper -

and-penbil skills are not lost when calculatorsare used. In virtually all of apprOximately 100studies, dents who used calculators for in-struction achieved at least as high or higher

scores than students not using calculators, even_though the calculators were not used on the test(Suydam, 1980). The decrease in time spent onpaper- and - pencil praCtice did not appear toharm the achievement of those students whoused calculators. Moreover, calculators canfacilitate the learning of basic facts and othermathematical ideas.

Capabilities of Teachers

Finally, some people fear that, given the lowlevel of-mathematical background of many ele-mentary teachers, no mathematics will betaught if the role of computation in the curricu-lum is downgraded or, perhaps worse, thatinstruction on other mathematics skills will bepoor, misleading, or just plain incorrect.

Opponents of this view argue that elementaryteachers can teach other content if given encour-agement and approval for doing so by parents,school boards, and administrators. Teachers are

capable of learning new content and new meth-ods of teaching. But the rationale for changemust be clear, and the support network must bewell developed.

Implications of Current EducationalPractice

What are the implications' of the six factorsconsidered in the previous section? To answerthat question, consideration must be given tothe current curriculum and to current instruc:tional practices.,

Curriculum Content

Several recent studies (NACOME, 1975; Stakeand Easley, 1978; Suydam and Osborne, 1977;Weiss, 1978) have provided evidence-Confirm-ing the belief that the elementary school mathe-patios program is devoted primarily to helpingchildren learn to compute. Indeed, computa-tional skills are the focuS' of most programsthrough grade 8 and of many general mathemat-ics-programsthrough_grade_9 and sometimesbeyond. Despite the variety of content in text-books and curriculum guides, pther topics "aremost often skipped in favor 'of more time todevelop computational skills that are comfort-able to and valued by elementary teachers"(NACOME, 1975, p. 111

The div-otion 'to computational skills pre--vailed throughout the "new math" era. Muchpublicity and a few surface changes in curricu-lum occurred, yet the evidence indicates thatmost teachers continued 'to focus on compqta-tional skills despite pressures for change. Callsnow for a "return to the basics" in mathqmaticsraise the question of whether, we can return towhat we possibly never left.

To effect a change in the elementary schoolcurriculum requires a long-term assimilationprocess, one that ismore likely to occur by evo-lution than by revolution. Two elements mustbe present to facilitate that process: (1) a strongcommitment by all ,:oncerned in the educa-tional process, especially by teachers andparents; and (2) major effort's to aid the teacherin effecting change. Clearly, such efforts mustfocus, at both the preservice and inservicelevels, not only on the development-of a cur-riculum in tune with a broader thrust, but also

86

on how that curpicul&n is to be taught. Instruc-tional methods must undergo change in muchthe same manner as the curriculum must evolve.

' Instructional Methods

For the past SO to 40 years, including theperiod in which "new math" was developed,teaching methods have revolved around theidea of developing meaning-or understanding.Currently, there. is pressure to return to themechanistic drill procedures common' prior to1940. Recently published textbooks contain farmore drill-and-practice pages than they have forsome years. The accountability movement hasresulted in a, high level of teacher concern abouthaving students master computational skills.

To effect a change-in-the elementaryschool curriculum requires a long-term°assimilation process, one that is morelikely to occur by evolution than byrevolution.

Moreover, drill is simpler for teachers to ,ad-minister. than meaningful instruction (for in-stance, using manipulative materials to developmeaning is particularly difficult for manyteachers to manage). It seems apparent thatmany persons do not realize that there weresound reasons for the 'change from drill-oriented methods to meaningful methods, notthe least of which was lack of success, as mea-sured by achievement tests.

Even though massive effort was devoted to itduring the heyday of drill. in the 1,920s and1930s; 100 percent mastery by drill °methodsproved an impossible goal to attain, even by itsstrongest proponents (e.g., Guy Wilson, 1930).There is evidence from research that drillMethods have a short-term payoff: studentstaught by drill can pass immediate tests withhigher scores than those taught by meaningfulmethods. But those taught by meaningfulmethods will probably score higher than drill-taught students on tests of transfer and retention(Weaver and Suydam, 1972). Are these twomajor goals of instruction, the-goals of helpingstudents apply knowledge in new situationsand retain knowledge over a long period oftime, worth foregoing in order to attain mastery

of content more amenable to drill methods?Similar concern about instructional methods

was indicated in the NACOME Report (1975):

Conceptual thought in mathematics must biiildon a base of factuancnowledgeand skills. Buttraditional school instruction far over- empha-sized the facts and skills and far too frequentlytried to teach them by methods stressing rotememory and drill. These methods contributenothing to a confused child's understanding, re-tention, or ability to apply specific mathematicalknowledge. Furthermore, such instruction has astultifying effect on student interest in mathemat-ics, in school, and in learning itself. (p. 24)

The balance that is needed between meaning-ful instruction and practice has not yet beenrealized. A survey of teachers conducted by anNCTM committee (Denmark and Kepner, 1980)indicated that just over half of those respondingbelieve that basic skill mastery should precedethe development of concepts and applications;an equivalent number indicated 'that masteryshould be attained while teaching concepts andapplications. Only 14 percent thought that ram-,tery of basic skills should follow the develop-ment of concepts and applications. Yet the pointmade by research studies is that drill shouldfollow meaningful instruction (Weaver and Suy-dam, 1972).

The point made about children's attitudes inthe last quotation should also be considered..Studies that have considered how children reactto the way in which they are taught m_ athemal-ics provide discouraging reading. Erlwanger

_(1_97_4) _described misconceptions of six childrenusing an individualized mathematics program,while Lankford (1972) presented interview dataon the errors made by 176 seventh-grade stu-dents doing whole-number and fraction compu-tation. It appears that, all too frequently, th,clarity of computational procedures is lost; Thechildren focus instead on getting the answer theteacher or printed materials says is right orsimply getting some answer. Even answers thatmake no sense seem to children to be better thanno answers or than answers that disagree withwhat teacher or text says_is rightit is obviousfrom such evidence that a change in instruc-tional methods is needed, not merely a shiftaway from "too much drill."

10'2

4

87

It is also clear from the research evidence thatthere is no one instructional method that.is mosteffective (Suydam and Weaver, 1975). TheNCTM Agenda also recommends that

Teachers should use diverse instructional strate-gies, materials, and resources, such as individualor small-group work as well as large-group work;well-planned use of media , ..; the provision ofsituations that provide- discovery and inquiry aswell as basic drill; the use of manipulatives,where suited, to illustrate or develop a concept orskill; the inclusion of cyclic review of past topics(contents, skills, and ideas previously taught);and the use of materials and references outsidethe classroom. (pp. 12-13)

To effebt a change in instructional methodsdemands the same type of commitment fromteachers that a change in curriculum content de-mands. It also demands.a change in the way inwhich preservice teacher education- programsare focused and a change in the type of inservicehelp given to teachers. Thachers need to build arepertoire of methods that can be applied as par-ticular content is taught to particular children,considering the needs of the content in relationto the needs of the children and selecting themethod that is best suited to reaching each goal.Drill has a place in this repertoire of strategies,just as computational skills have a place in thecurriculum: to make drill the sole focus of thecurriculum is to deprive children of the meansto attain goats other than those that. aredrill-related. Thus, children need drill on basicfacts after they have developed some under-standing of the numerical ideas from which thefacts were derived. But they also need lessons inwhich they search for ideas and clarify theirunderstanding of the operations and thealgorithms, and lessons in which they applythe algorithmic learning in problem-solvingsituations.

Conclusion

.Several years ago, a set of, ten "Tenets onthe Teaching of Computation" was developed(Trafton and Suydam, 1975). The first 'fourtenets address curricular concerns, while thefollowing six are related to instructional con-cerns. Each tenet has been consideted in thispaper, either directly or indirectly.

1. Computational °skill is one of the important,primary goals of a school mathematicsprogram..

2. All children need proficiency in recallingbasic number facts, in using standard algo-rithms with reasonable speed and accuracyand in estimating results and performing men=tal calculations, a5 well as an ,understandingof computational procedures.

3. Computation should be recognized as just oneelement of a comprehensive mathematicsprogram.

4. The study of computation should .promotebroad, long-range goals of learning.

5. Computation needs to be-continually relatedto the concept-i of the operations and both con-cepts and skills should be developed in thecontext of real-world applications.

6. Instruction on computational skills needs tobe meaningful to the learner.

7. Drill-and-practice plays an important role inthe mastery of computational skills, but strongreliance on drill-and-practice alone is not aneffective approach to learning.

8. The nature of learning computational proces-ses and skills requires purposeful, systematic,andsensitive instruction.

9. CompUtationatskills need to be analysed care-fully in terms of effective sequencing of thework and difficulties posed by different typesof examples.

10. Certain practices in teaching computationneed thoughtful reexamination. (p. 528)

Obviously, instruction on computationalskills can be improed. It must be improved.But let us not forget that some children doobtain excellent instruction in computation andother basic mathematical skills. The ten tenetson the teaching of computation can provideguidance in improving computation instructionfor all children. o

The words of Shirley Hill, as President of theNational Council of Teachers of Mathematics,should also be carefully considered:

It struck me as supremely ironic that at the veprtime we are on the threshold of "teach*machines to reason" we are spending an inoreii-nate amount of our education energies teaching_our children mechanistic skills. (1979, p. 3)

1O3

88

ReferencesBright, George W. "Assessing the Development of

Computation Skills." In Developing Computa-tional 'Skills, edited by Marilyn N. Suydam andRobert E. Reys. 1978 NCTM Yearbook. Reston,

o Virginia: National Council of Teachers of Mathe-mmatics (NCTM), 1978.

Carpenter, Thomas; Coburn, Terrence G.; Reys,Robert E.; and Wilson, James W Results from theFirst Mathematics Assessment of the National

,Assessment of Educational Progress. Reston, Vir-ginia: NCTM, 1978.

Carpenter, Thomas; Coburn, Terrence G.; Reys,Robert E.; and Wilson, James W "Results and Im-plications of the NAEP Mathematics Assessment:Elementary School." Arithmetic Teacher 22(October 1975): 438450.

Denmark, Torn, and Kepner, Henry S., Jr. "BasicSkills in Mathematics: A Survey." Journal for Re-search in Mathematics Education 11 (March1980): 104 -123.

Erlwanger, Stanley H. "Case Studies of Children'sConceptions of Mathematics." Ph.D. dissertation,University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 19Z.4.

Harnischfeger, Annegret, and Wiley, DavidAchievement Test Scores Decline: Do 'We Need toWorry? Chicago, Illinois: CEMREL, Inc., 1975.

Hill, Shirley. "The Basics in Mathematics: Morethan the Third R." NCTM Newsletter (March1979). 4

Lankford, Francis G., Jr. Some COmputational Strate-gies of Seventh Grade Pupils. Final Report, Officeof Education Grant No. OEG -3 -72 -0035. Char-lottesville, 'Virginia: University of Virginia, 1972.ED 069 496.

National , Advisory Committee on Mathematical*Education (NACOME). Overview and Analysis ofSchool Mathematics, Grades K-12. Washington,D.C.: Conference Board of the Matheinatical Sci-ences, 1975. ED 115 512.

National Assessment of Educational Progress(NAEP). Changes in Mathemptical Achievement,1973-78. Report No. 09-MA-01. Denver, Colorado:Education Commission of the States, 1979.ED177 011.

National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics(NCSM). "Position Paper on Basic MathematicalSkills." January 1977. ED 139 654. See also: Arith-metic Teacher 25 (October 1977): 18-22; Mathe-matics Teacher 71 (February 1978): 147-152.

Naticinal Council of Teachers of Mathematics(NCTM). An Agenda for Action: Ilecommenda-tions for School Mathematics in the 1980s.Reston, Virginia: NCTM, 1980.

Osborne, Alan, et al. Priorities in School Ma the-matics. Final Report, National Science Founda-tion Grant No. SED75-20145 A01, April 1980. ED184 891.

Stake, Robert E., and Easley, Jack: Case Studies inScience Education. Final Report, National Sci-ence Foundation Contract No. C76..41134. Urbana,Illinois: University of Illinois, 1978. ED 156 498 -ED 156 513.

Suydam, Marilyn N. Electronic Hand Calculators:The Implications for Pre-College Education. FinalReport, National ,Science Foundation Grant. No.EPP75-16157, 1976. ED 127 205.

Suydam, Marilyn N. Using Calculators in, Pre-College Educatiov: Third Annual State-of-the-ArtReview. Columbus, Ohio: Calculator InforinationCenter, 1980.

Suydam, Marilyn N., and Osborne, Alan. The Statusof Pre-College Science, Mathematics, and SocialScience Education: 1955-1975. Volume II: Mathe-matics Education. Final Report, National ScienceFoundation Grant No. NSF-C76-20627. Columbus,Ohio: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathemat-ics, and Environmental Education (ERIC/SMEAC),1977. ED 153=878.

Suydam, Marilyn N., and Weaver, 3. Fred. Using Re-search: A Key to Elementary School Mathematics.Columbus, Ohio: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science,Mathematics, and Environmental Education,1975. ED 120 013.

Trafton, Paul R., and Suydam, Marilyn N. "Com-putational Skills: A Point of.View." ArithmeticTeacher 22 (November 1975): 528-537.

Weaver, J. Fred, and Suydam, Marilyn N. MeaningfulInstruction in Mathematics Education. Columbus,Ohio: ERIC/SMEAC, 1972. ED 068 329.

Weiss, Iris. Report of the 1977 National Survey ofScience, Mathematics,. and Social Sciences Edu-cation. Final Report, National Science Founda-tion Grant No. C76-19848. Research Triangle Park,North Carolina: Research Triangle Institute, 1978.ED 152 565.,

Wilson, Guy M. "New Standards in Arithmetic:A Controlled Experiment in Supervision." Jour-nal of Educational Research 22 (December 1930):351-360.

ti

.

The Mathematics Edaction Professidn's Viewof Basic Mathematicg Skills

Ross TaylorConsultant in Mathematics K-6

Minneapolis Public Schools

Editors' Note: Se Veral professional associations of mathematics educators have worked intensively with theirmembers to prepare "three statements dealing with mathematics curriculum 'content, instructional methods, andprogram design. In this paper Ross Taylor, who was involved in the preparation of two of those statements'describes how they were prepared, summarizes their content, and discusses their implications for testing,instruction, and general improvement of mathematics instruction programs. In his discussion of implications hehas given several examples from his own school district. The NCSM "Position Paper on Basic MathematicalSkills" accompanies his paper.

IntroductionThere is remarkable agreement within the

mathematics education profession about majorissues concerning basic mathematical skills.This point becomes vividly clear when one re-views positions taken by professional mathe-matics education organizations- during 'the pastseveral years. Three of these positions will besummarized in this paper. The first is the, Na-tional' Council of SuperviSors of Mathematics(NCSM) Position Paper on Basic MathematicalSkills. The second is the Report of the KansasCity Coordinating Conference, which had rep-resentation from NCSM, the National Council ofTeachers c Mathematics (NCTM), and theAssociatio f State Supervisors of Mathematics(ASSM). The third statement is the NCTMpublication, An Agenda for Action: Recommen-dations for Schobl 'Mathematics of the 1980s.(The NCSM position paper is inclUded at theend of this chapter. The,other documents can be.obtained from addresses given in the list of

references.) The major part of this paper will bedevoted to suggestions for implementing 'therecommendations on basic skills contained inthese three 'statements.

NCSM Position Paper

By the middle of the 1970s, mathematicseducators became concerned about the public __pressure to go "back to the basics." There was afear that this pressure could result in a narrowconcentration on computation to the''exclusionof the other important skill areas. Such a focuswould be particularly inappropriate at a timewhen uses of calculators and computers wererapidly expanding. To deal with important basicinattiematical skill issues, the National Instituteof Euincation (NIE) sponsored a Conference on,Basic Mathematical Skills and Learning, held inEuclid, Ohio, in October 1975. (The two-volumereport ,on the conference contains over thirtypapers contributed by leaders in mathematicseducation, as well as recommendations from __

1 %,)u

90

working groups- at the conference.) In April1976, during the annual meeting of the NationalCouncil of Supervisors of Mathematics, over100 supervisors met to discuss the Euclid Con:ference Report. At that meeting, the supervisors

. called for the creation of a position paper on- basic" maithematicil skills. With the help of

funding from NIE, the paper was developed andpublished in January 1977 NCSM prepared asummary of the paper, which is-included here.

Matheniatics supervisors are concerned that, as aresult of the "back-to-the-basics" movement, to-day in many school; there is too much emphasison computation and not enough stress on otherimportant Mathematical skills. To 'respond to thistrend, the National Council of Supervisors ofMathematics (NCSM) set up a twelve-membertask force to write a position paper on basicmathematical skills. The position was first writtenin July, 1976, and later revised on the basis ofideas from supervisors throughout the "country.The position paper urges that we move forward,not "back" to4 the basics. The skills of yesterdayare not the oagS that today's students will1needwhen they are adults. They will face -a .world ofchange in which they_must be able to solve manydifferent kinds of problems. The NCSM positionpaper lists ten important skill areas that studentswill need.

Problem Solving: Students should be able tosolve problems in situations which are new tothem. ,3

Applying Mathematics to Everyday Situations:r Students should be able to use mathematics to

deal with situations they face daily in an ever-changing world.

Alertness to Reasonableness of Results:. Stu-dents' should learn to check to sen that theiranswers to problems are "in the ball park."

Estimation and Approximation: Studentsshould learn to estimate quantity, length, dis-tance, weight, etc.

Appropriate Computation Skills: Studentsshould be able to use the fcur basic operationswith whole numbers and decimals and theyshould be able to do computations with siiiiplefractions and percents,

.GeOrmeiry: Students should know basic proper-ties of simple geometric figures.

Measuremint: Students should be able to mea-sure in both the metric and customary systems,

t

Tables, Charts and Graphs: Students should beable to read and make simple tables, charts andgraphs.

Using Mathematics to Predict: Students shouldknow how mathematics is used to find thelikelihood of future events. .

Coniputer Literacy: Students should knowabout the many uses of computers in societyand they should be aware of what computerscan do and what they cannot do.

The role of computation is put into its properplace. Long computations will usually be donewith a calculator, but computation is stil -im-portant. Mental arithmetic is a valuable kill.Computational skills by themselves are. of ittleuse, but when used with other skill areas theygive the learner basic mathematical ability. Schoolsystems which try to set the same requirementsfor 'all students should beware of requirementswhich either are toe difficult or which stress only

..o low- 'level skills.giRather than using only a single' method such asdrill and practice for learning basic mathematicalskills, many different methods should be used.Hands:on experiences with physical objects canprovide a basis for learning basic mathematicalskills. Standardized tests are usually not suitablefor meapuring individual student progress. In-stead, the tests used should be made especially.tomeasure the mathematical skills being taught.The NCSM position paper -sets forth a basis foridentifying, which basic mathematical skills areimportant an for determining if stunt havelearned these'skills. ;

In her paper on computational skills, whichprecedes this paper, Marilyn Suydam notes thatthe NCSM position is frequently cited and thatit was endorsed by tirf National Council ofleachers of Mathematics. The position hasbeen widely diSseminated and has receivedbroad support from the mathematics educationprofession.

Kansas City Coordinating ConferenceIn the fall of 1978, the Office of Education

Right to Read Program was in a period of transi-tion. New legislation was replacing it with theBasic Skills Improvement Program, which

andmathematics, writing, speaking, andlistening in addition to reading. To seek inputfrom the mathematics education profession, the

6

t-10

91

Office of Education sponsored the Kansas CityCoordinating Conference. This October 1978meeting included representatives of the na-tior--1 organizations of mathematics teachersand supervisors.

At the conference, papticipants expressedconcerns of mathematics 'educators about theprocess of developing state plans fOr basic skips

, and identified issues and problems in tho4each-ing and learning of basic mathematical skills.They were in unanimous agreement that basicskills instruction should emphasize all tenNCSM, skill areas rather than focus narrowly oncomputation.

Participants were concerned that ,mathemat-ics teachers, mathematics supervisors, and col-lege piathematios_educators_shoulcLbeinvolved_in the planning process. Plannin-c should alsoinvolve state and local mathematics educationorganizations affiliated with the Natiorfol Coun-cil of Teachers of Mathematics: Teachers shouldhave the benefit of services of mathematicsspecialists at the locOl, state, and national levels.

. skills plans should stress 'coordilvtionof resources and avoid conflicting or ovellay-ping programs funded from., various sources,PrOgrams should build upon existing supportstructures and avoid infusing another layer ofbureaucracy with a-possible counterproductiveresult. Teachers should not be faced with anextra management burden. The emphasis onbasic skills should not limit opportunities forlearning in the rest of the curriculum. The plan-ning process should provide a means for estab-lishing priorities and determining which pro-grams should receive funding. In light of thepast -emphasisonreading,---mathematics-willneed special extra attention -in the immediatefuture.

There was agreement that mathematics con-cept development should proceed from phys-ical -model to representational to abstract. Therelationship of language and mathematicsshould be emphasized. Parents,should be effec-tively involved in the process of helping theirchildren learn mathematics.

The key role'of the teacher in successful in-struction must be recognized. Funding must befound to provide levels of staffing necessary foreffective instruction. Inservice should be-pro-

vided to increase mathematical knowledge,eliminate mathematics anxiety, and provide in-structional skills necessary to teach studentswho have not previously been successful inmathematics.

Participants agreed that there is a need for asystematic approach to skill development that(1) identifies goals and objectives;. (2) develops,an evaluation strategy that measures studentachievement of these objectives; (3) developsand implements an instructional program; and(4) makes changes in the program and in indi-vidual instruction as found necessary fromevaluation, They .nofeethat existing coAmer-cially developed norm-referenced tests are notappropriate for these processes! They also ex-pressed a need for a national clearinghouse tofacilitate an exchange of information about localand state mathematics basic skills programs.

An Agenda far Action_ .

The National Council of 'leachers, of Mathe-.

matiy'spept several years in the' developmentof t of eight major recommendations forschool mathematics of the 1980s. These recom-mendations are realistic in their attention toshard data from studies funded, by the NationalScience Foundation (NSF) and from two mathe-

. matics assessments of the National Assessmentof Educational Progws. In addition, carefulattention was given in -their development to theresults of an extensive survey of opinions ofmany sectors of society, both lay and pirofes-ssignal. The survey, entitled '`Prioritiesin SchoolMathematics" (PRISM) was funded by theNational Soience_Foundation.,

The recommendations, as detailed in ADAgenda for Action; *Recommendations" foi'School MathematicsOf the 1980s, are '

1. That problem solving be the focus of school. mathematics in the 1980s;

2. That basic skills in mathematics be defined toencompass more ,than .computational faCility;

3. That mathepatics programs take full advantageof the power of calculators and computers at allgrade levels;

4. That stringent standards of both effectivenessand efficiency be applied to the teaching ofmathematics; :

f.

92As_

I

5. That the success of mathematics programs and,student learning be evaluated by a wider rangeof.measures than conventional testing;

6. That more mathematics study be required forall students and a flexible curriculum with agreater range of options be designed toiaccom-modate the diverse needs of the studentpopulation; . ,

7. That mathematics ,teachers demand of them-selves and their colleagues a high level of pro-fessionalism; and:

8. That public support for mathematics instructionbe-raised to a level commensurate with the im-portance of mathematiCal understanding to in- -dividuuls and society.

These recommendations have widespread sup-port within the mathematics education 'corn-munity.

An Agenda for Action also expands uponeach recommendation. For example, tilt: discus-sion of the first recommendation on problemsolving implies the need for a concentration ofresearch and development in that area. The ex-pansion of the second recommendation statesthat the full scope of what is tesic.should con-tain at least the ten basic skill areas defined bythe NCSM position paper. Rapidly emergingtechnology implies the need for implementa-tion of the third recommendation on use ofcalculators and computers. Recent research hasindicated that u4rof calculators 'does not hurtstudent achievement. On the contrary, calcula-'tors can help (Suydam, 1979; Suydam, 1980).

Students need to recognize the impor---tance of mathematics-to th#r futures.

In particular, females and minorities needto be given special encouragement totake more mathematics in order to keeptheir options open for careers and highereducation.

Recommendation six. calls for a flexible cur-riculum to meet the diverse needs of the student_population. This is in contrast to.a narrow focuson minimum competency. Students need to rec-ognize the impnrtance of mathematics to theirfutures. In particular. females and minorities

0

" need to be given special encouragement to takemore mathematics in order to keep their optionsopen.for careers and higher education.

;

Basic Skills, the Profession andPreseht Practice

In his summary of three recent NationalScience Foundation studies, lames Fey (1980)points Out a :disparity between the position ofthe profession and classroom practices:

:The most discouraging *feature of the three NSFstudies is the consistent pattern of great differ-ences between apparent reality of ,mathematicseducation -in mast School§ and the recommenda-tions or practices of may prominent teachers.supervisors and professional organizatiOns. Forinstance: it appears that a large majority of ele-mentary teacheis believe that their sole responsi-bility in mathematics teaching is to Lievelop stu-dent facility in arithmetic computation this,* atime when availability of calculators has madesuch goals.widelY questioned. (p. 31.)

It is true that, in spite of the broad support foran expanded definition of basic skills by profes- .iional mathematics educators, there are manyschools and classrooms where there is still anarrow concentration on computation to the ex-clusion of the other skills. In some cases, this isdue to a" routine repetition of what has beendone in the past, without direful considerationof which mathematical skills are needed byato-day's students. In other. cases, teachers whohave, not received appropriate training or cur-riculum materials cling to computation like asecurity blanket. Both of these forces towarda narrow currictil'arn can be overcome by arational reevaluation of which skills are impor-tant, followed by appropriate curriculum revi-sion and staff development.

The broad concept of basic skills supportedby the mathematics education profession hasbehind it the force of compefling *lc and com-mon sense. Rational consideration of whichmathematical skills are basic inevitably leads tothe expanded concept of basic skills. Usually,when educators, legislators, ur the lay publicargue for proficiency in computation and im-.plicitly neglect the other mathematical skills, itis because they haven't given the issue carefulconsideration.

93

One of the problems is that "mathematics" isnot a verb. When persons other than mathemat-ics educators make statements about basicskillsthey'often talk about the ability to read,write, speak,vlisten, and compute. They use"coippute"because it is a verb and because theyhaven't seriously thought about the issue. Whenthe narrowness of the term "compute" ispointed out, they usually agree with the broaderconcept of basic mathematical skills..

In Minneapolis,, we have had no difficultycOnvincing teachers that students should learnbasic Ina thema t mil -ten-areas...listedin the NCSM .position paper. Whenever wediscuss the issue with parent or communitygroups, they are supportive. The public is muchmore willing to rely on our "expert" advicathanwe had expeeted:The overwhelming sensibilityof our,position is a factor that gives us added

Objedives and Testing

dures for developing the objectives and the test-.ing program is to have the initial developmentor selection done by a small task force. This taskforce should consist of teachers who haveshown leadership in mathematics educationand specialists in mathematics education.These specialists can come from within theschool system or from outside sources such asthe state department of education or higher edu-cation. All teachers of mathematics should havethe 'opportunity to review the objectives andtesting program and to provide suggestions for.modification. Lay community membetS, includ-

---ing-parents and_ possibly students, should alsohave the opportunity ir) 'dilate -in the-ptcess. Support of the process by' school admin-istrators and the school board is important.Persons involved in the process of determiningobjectives will feel some ownership, and theircommitment will contribute greatly to the in-structional program. Groups such as ,thapath-ematics educators who gatheted.alEuclid; Ohio,in the fall of 1975 or mathematics superviSors_.who developed the NCSM position paper canpropose guidelines for the determination ofwhich skills are basic for all citizens. They have:done that job very well. However, the final de-termination_should involve the teachers whoteach the skills, the administrators of the -pro, _

grams, and ,the community that is served.

Students; teachers, parents, administrators,,and thacoinmunity should all'have a clear ideaof which basic skills students are 'expected toI earn .4{a s i c skills5bject ives:shou ldstand thiPtestof.putIic scrutiny. Changes in objectiVei can bemade when the changes are found to be desir-able or necessary. Students .will know what tostudy, teachers will know what, to teach', andparents All be better able to help their children.We have found that precisely stated behavioralobjectives are not an effective means of com-municating with students, teachers, and parentsunless the objectives are accompanied bysample test items. In many cases, sample testsare more effective in communicating objectivesthan lists of behavioral objectives.

While the NCSM position outlines the scopeof basic skills, it does not precisely define exactskills. In keeping with the tradition of local con-trol, of education, specific skills should be de-termined attlie local level on the basis of inputfrom the staff and the community being served.If skills are determined at the' state level, pro-fessional educators and lay citizens should bE.inVelved-.---In- either case, assistance should besought from leaders mathematics education.

It is essential thil the testing pi6grarn:.m'atchthe objectives. One of the most efficient Piece-

,{

At this time, there is a major problem in thearea of matching tests to objectives. This can beaccomplished by developing the tests locally tomatch the objectives selected. If this is 'done,great care must be taken to insure that the testsare of high quality. Locally developed,tests havethe disadvantage of not yielding comparisons ofachievement of local students with other stu-sdents. One way to get comparative' data is to usereleased items from national assessment tests orstate assessment tests and then compare perfor-,mance on an item-by-item basis.

In-this day of accountability, there is greatpressure- to raise test scores, and often the"bottom line" is studenkperformance on What-ever testing system is used, If commerciallyavailable standardized tests are used, scores anbe increased by adjusting the objectives of thecurriculum to match the objectives measured bythe teat. Unforthnately, the standardized tests

1 uri3

94 .

available today .generally do not adequafelycover the full range of basic skills recommendedby the NCSM position. The process of develop-ing test items, field testing them, assemblingthem into tests, and thennorming the tests takesa period of years. Most of the currently availablestandardized tests were well into the develop-ment cycle before the NCSM position waspublished. The situtatioR is not likely to correctitself in the; near future''-- most of the majorpublishers have just completed revisions,and the next revision won't take place for see-eral years.

In Minneapolis we are currently reviewingavailable standardized tests, and -the only one

we-have -found that specifically used the NCSMposition for its guideline is the-basie-skills_te31published by the Educational Testing Service.The availability of more tests which measurethe full range of basic skills would be helpful.However, the pressure to increase performanceon nationally published tests can become pres-sure for a national curriculum, contrary to ourtradition of local control of education.

In Minneapolis we have decided to use abasic mathematical knowledge testing programto define the basic mathematical skills that highschool students are expected to learn. Thislocally enveloped testing program is keyed tothe ten NCSM basic skill areas. Each time thetest is administered, a new form IS developed sothat previous forms may be used for communi-cating objectives and for practice. The test itemson the Minneapolis Basic Mathematical Knowl-edge Test do not fall into ten distinct categoriescorresponding to the ten skill areas. Most of thequestions that students should be able to answerare concerned with several of the basic skillareas. The list of ten- skill areas is valuable forchecking to see that our testing program coversthe range of basic skills needed by students.However, an attgoeTht to completely isolate theskills into these areas would be counterproduc-tive. Students must be able to interrelate theskills from all ten skill areas.

Systematic Instruction in "Basic Skills

Basic skills instruction should use a sys-tematic approach in Wrii-Ch- tlie- objectives areclearly communicated to the students, the

teachers, the parents, and other interested per-sons. Learning materials and strategies shouldbe organized to address specific objectives. Atthe same time, the program should have theflexibility to address objectives which have notbeen determined in advance. Test results, teacherobservation, and other sources should be usedto improve instruction. For example, teachersand students should have immediate feedbackinformation in order to direct learning towardstudent needs. Item analysis information fromtesting should be used by faculty,. to focus.cur-riculum and staff development efforts on cur-riculum areas where there are specific needs.The instructional program should include asystematic procedure for maintaining skills thathave been learned earlier.

. . . the major focus of school mathematicsshould be on helping students acquire theability to solve problems.

There is no single prescription for a best wayto teach basic mathematical skills. However,there are some things that we do know fromresearch and experience. For example, we knowthat the amount of time spent on a task is animportant factor. We also know that manipula-tive materials can be used effectively in de-veloping mathematical concepts. Learning is avery complex process, and an attempt to sim-plify it by treating the various skills in isolationfrom one another would be counterproductive. ,

The basic mathematical skills are useful onlywhen they are interrelated with one another andwith skills from other disciplines. The mistakennotion that computation should be learnedbefore other mathematical skills must beovercome. The interrelation of skills shouldbegin in kindergarten and continue throughoutedubalion.

In keeping with the first of the NCTM recom-mendations 'for the 1980s, the major focus ofschool mathematics should be on helping stu-dents to acquire the ability to solve problems.To do this, they will need to be able to inter-relate skills from all ten NCSM skill areas. They

11 0

95

will also need to develop proficiency with spe-cific skills. For example, a student who wants todetermine how long a particular trip will takemay have to begin by using a map or a table todetermine the distance. Then, after estimatingthe average rate of speed, the student will haveto know how to divide the distance by the speedto arrive atithe time. The student will also needto know enough about units of measure to real-ize that if the distance is measured in mile's andthe rate in miles per hour, then the resultingtime after dividing will be the number of hoursthe trip will take. Finally, the student shouldcheck to -See if the time is reasonable for the-particular trip.

Students should learn a variety of problem-solving techniques, such as organizing infOrma-tion into tables, guessing, and checking. Theyshould be presented with practical'ractical and interest-,

--mg problem situations. To help them determineif answers are-reasonable; they should' developapproximation skills. For example, they shouldlearn rounding and other approximation tech-niques 'in order to quickly estimate if a billis correct.

In today's society, with ready access to cal-culators and computers, the role of computationis changing. The ability to do rapid mentalcalculation with one-digit numbers is a skillthat is vital to problem solving and to estima-tion and approximation. Calculators are toocumbersome and slow for this type of activity.On the other_hand, today complicated calcula-tions such as diviSibri by three- or four-digitnumbers are accomplished more accurately andrapidly by electronic means. Therefore, weshould not require students to rapidly performlarge numbers of long computation- exercises.

Computation should be taught in a way thatwill enable students to apply it to problem situ-ations they will face in everyday life. For exam-ple, a student who has only learned the--"takeaway" concept of subtraction may not be able toapply subtraction to a situation where the ques-tion is one of how much more one quantity isthan another.

With the emergence of electronic technologyand the forthcoming conversion to the metricsystem, computation with decimals is becomingmore _important. Computation with fractions

is still important, but students should not berequired to do complicated fraction exercisesinvolving large denominators. Because of themany uses of percent in society today, under-standing of percent and ability to do computa-tion involving percent are vital.

Students will need to acquire geometry andmeasurement skills so that they will be able tohandle situations like fencing a yard or tiling afloor. They will need to be able to use tables,charts, and graphs to organize and present infor-mation or to gain information. They shouldlearn how past experience is used to predict fu-ture events. For example, they can make esti-mates on the outcomes of athletic contests onthe basis of past performances of teams or indi-viduals. They should recognize that there aresituations like the flipping of a coin whereimmediate past experience is not helpful in de-teimining future outcomes.

Finally, students should become sufficientlyinformed about computer technology so thatthey will be wary of statements like "the com--puter made a mistake" or "you can let a compu-ter do your thinking for you."

Professional LeadershipThe National Advisory Committee on Math-

ematics Education states that teachers shouldselect methods and materials which seem towork best at particular times for particular stu-dents (NACOME, 1975, p. 50). To accomplishthis, teachers need training and support fromprofessional mathematics education specialists.

School systems should look within theirfaculties for individuals with leadershippotential and with particular interest andexpertise in mathematics education .

and should encourage them to partici;pate in inservice activities . . . and tokeep abreast of the rapid developments inevolving areas . . .

Professional mathematics education leader-ship within school systems is a key factor in theidentification of basic skills and the develop-

96

ment and implementation of basic skills in-structional programs designed to have studentslearn these skills. Curriculum development andstaff development needs can best be met if thereis professional leadership at both the school dis-trict level and the building level. School sys-tems should loo_ k within their faculties,for indi-viduals with leadership potential and withparticular interest and expertise in mathematicseducation. Leaders identified should be encour-aged to participate in inservice activities offeredby the school district, state and regional agen-ciek,,higher education, and mathematics educa-fibi professional organizations. These leadersmust. keep abreast of the rapid developments inareas.such as evolving basic skills programs andnew applications of computers and calculatorsin mathematics education. The best way to re-main current is through the meetings and publi-cations of the National Council of Teachers ofMathematics and its many affiliated organiza-tions. Fer example, in 1978 the Virginia Councilof Teachers of Mathematics published a mono-graph,entitled Practical Ways to Teach the Basic

a ttrernqticcrl Skills. Each of the publication'sten chapters addresses One of the -ten -NCSbasic skills areas. In April 1979 the Associationof Teachers of Mathematics of New York Citypublished A Look at Standardized MathematicsTesting in New York City, which reports on asurvey of the extent to whiCh the ten NCSMbasic skills areas are evaluated by five widelyused national standardized tests. Leaders at thedistrict level can benefit greatly from participa-tion in the National Council of Supervisors ofMathematics.

Support for Basic-Skills InstructionThe decline in problem-solving ability, :par-

ticularly among 17-year-olds, from 1973 to1978, on National Assessment of Edubational _Progress tests is a matter of major concern(NAEP, p. 25). This decline comes at a timewhen the public is demanding competence inmathematics and when profeSsionals are assert-

ing the importance of problem solving as a basicmathematical skill. In the past, instruction inbasic .mathematical.skills at the secondary levelhas not received the attention it deserves. At thenational level, there have been virtually noprograms dealing with basic mathematicalskills at the secondary level. For example, thereare no nationally validated programs for basicmathematical skills in grades nine throughtwelve (U.S. Department of Education, 1980).Demands for competence are being made at thestate level, but the state competency testing inFlorida (where about a third of the studentsfailed the mathematics competency componentof the state competency test) illustrated the in-adequacy of secondary programs and the needfor changes in instruction if testing is to helpstudents. At the local level, many schools don't,require any mathematics beyond ninth grade.The gap between what the students need andwhat the schools are providing must be closed.

Student achievement in basic mathematicalskills can, be improved if there is commitmentand systematic planning. There should be anaffirmation by the administration and agree-

nt by the staff that the goal of helping stu-dents ac Jeve competen basic mathemat-ical skills is a priority. This commitmencompanied by a priority allocation of humanand financial resources, will receive communitysupport. The establishment of the Basic SkillsImprovement Program is a response to this con-cern at the federal level. State-level response hasbeen reflected in the establishment of compe-tency. programs in 36 states. Evidence for sup-port at the local level can be found in the resultsof the 1979 Gallup Poll on Education, where 97percent of :the respondents indicated thatmathematics should be a top priority.

We can do a better job of having our students__leap the basic mathematical skills they will

need as adults. We can do this through , aforward-looking approach to basic skills backedby commitment, leadership, and high, expecta-tions for students and staff.

1 7

97

ReferencesAssociation of Teachers of Mathematics of New York

City. A Look at Standardized Mathematics Testingin New York City. New York: AT'MNC, 1979. (Maybe obtained!? tom Dr. James V. Bruni, Herbert H.Lehman' College, Bedford Park Boulevard West,BrdriX; NY 10468.)

Basic Skills Improvement Program, "Report of TheKansas City Coordinating Conference." In WhatDo .We Know about Effective Basic Skills Pro-grams? Washington, D.C.: Office of EducatiOn,1979. (May be obtained from Basic Skills Im-provement Program, Department of Education,DOrrohoeBuilding, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,Washington, D.C. 20202.) .

Center for Instructional Research and CurriculumEvaluation and Committee on Culture and Cogni-tion.- Case Studies in Science *Education. Urbana-Champaign, Illinois: CIRCE and CCC, 1978.

Fey, James T., "Mathematics Teaching -Today: Per-spectives from Three National Surveys." In WhatAre the Needs in Precollege Science, Mathematicsand Social Science Education? Views from theField. National Science Foundation Report SE80-9. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government PrintingOffice, 1980. (This report appeared ,originally inThe Mathematics Teacher, Volume 72, October'1979, and in The Arithmetic Teacher, Volume 27,October 1979.)

Gallup,.George H. "The Eleventh Annual Gallup Pollof the Public's Attitudes toward the Public

' Schools." Phi Delta Kappan, 01. (September 1979):

National Advisory Committee on Mathema lascation (NACONLE). OverView and Analysis ofSchool Mathematics-, Grades K-12. Washington,D.C.: Conference Board of the MathematicalSciences, 1975.

National Assessment of, Educational Progress.Changes in Mathematical Achievement, 1973-78.Denver, Colorado: Education Commission Of theStates, 1979.

National. Council of Supervisors of Mathematics."Position Paper on Basic Mathematical Skills."The Mathematics Teacher, 71 (Febniary .1978):147-152.

lational Council of Teachert ofMathematics(NCTM). An Agenda fot Action: Recommenda-tions for School Mathematics of the 1980s. Res-ton, Virgin iac:NCTM, 1980. (May be obtained fromNCTM, 1906 Association Drive, Reston, VA22091, at $1.00 per copy.)

National Institute of Education. Conference on BasicMathematical Skills and Learning, Euclid, Ohio.Volume I: Contributed Position Papers; Volume II:

Working Group Reports. Washington, D.C.: NIE,1975.

Stiydam, Marilyn N. The Use of Calculators in Pre-College Education: A State -of the -Art Review.Columbus, Ohio: Calculator Information Center,1979.

Suydam, Marilyn N. The Use of Calculators in pre-College Education: Third Annual State-of-the-ArtReview. Columbus, Ohio: Calculator InformationCenter, 1980.

United States Department of Education. EducationalPrograms That Work. San Francisco: Far WestLaboratory for Educational Research and Develop-

- ment, 1980.

Virginia Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Prac-tical Ways to Teach the Basic MathematicalSkills. Richmond, Virginia: VCI'M, 1978. (May beobtained from VCTM, 23321Scarsborough'Drive,Richmond, VA 23235.)

11.

-re

99

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF SUPERVISORS OF MATHEMATICSPOSITION PAPER ON

BASIC MATHEMATICAL SKILLS

INTRODUCTION

The currently popular slogan "Back to the Basics"has become a rallying cry of many who perceive a needfor certain changes in education. The result is a trendthat has gained considerable momentum and hasinitiated demands for programs and evaluations whichemphasiziEnarrowly defined skills.

Mathematics educators find themselves underconsiderable pressure from boards of education,legislatures, and citizens' groups who are demandinginstructional programs which will guarantee acquisi-tion of computational skills. Leaders in mathematicseducation have expressed a need for clarifying what arethe basic skills needed. by studen <nvho hope toparticipate successfully in adult soc

The narrow definition of basic dk s'Which equatesmathematical competence with computational abilityhas evolved as a result of several forces:

1. Declining scores on standardized achievementtests and college entrance examinations;

2. Reactions to the results of the National Assess-ment of Educational Progress;

3. Rising costd'of education and increasing de-mands for accountability;

4. Shifting emphasis in mathematics educationfrom curriculum content to instructional methodsand alternatives;

5. Increased awareness of the need to prOvide- remedial and compensatory prograths;

6. The Widespread publicity given to each of theabove liv the media.

This widespread publicity, in particUlar, has gen'erated a calfor action from governmental agencies,educational-organizations; and community groups. Inresponding to these calls, the National Institute ofEducation adopted the area of basic skills as a majorpriority. This resulted in a Conference on ,BasicMathematical Skills and Learning, held in Euclid, Ohio,in 'October. 1975. -.

e National Council of Supervisors ofMathematics CSfvqrdtiring_theAnnual Meetingin Atlanta, Georgia, met in a special siMit-to-disct,the Euclid Conference Report. More than 100 membersparticipating in that session expressed the need for aunified position on basic mathematical skills whichwould enable them to provide more effective leadershipwithin their respective school systems, to give adequaterationale and direction in their tasks of implementingoasic mathematici programs, and to -appropriatelyexpand the definition .of basic skills. Hence, by anoverwhelming majority, they mandated the NCSM toestablish a task force to formulate a position on basiilmathematical skills. This statement is the result of that

RATIONALE FOR THE EXPANDED DEFINITION

There- are many reasons why -basic skills mustinclude more than computation. The presenttechnological society requires daily. use of such skills asestimating, problem solving, interpreting data,organizing data, measuring, predicting; and applyingmathematics to everyday situations. The changingneeds of society, the explosion of the amount ofquantitative data, and.the availability of computers andcalculators demand a\redefining of the priorities forbasic mathematics, *Us. In recognition of theinadequacy of computation alone, NCSM is going onrecord -as-providing-both -a general list of basicmathematical skills and a clarification of the need forsuch an expanded definition of basic skills.

Any list of basic skills must include computation.However, the role of computational skills inmathematics must be seen in the light of thecontributions they make to one's ability to usemathematics in everyday, living. In isolation,computational skills contribute little to one's ability toparticipate in mainstream society. Combined effectivelywith the other skill areas, they provide the learner withthe basic mathematical ability-,needed by adults.

DEFINING BASIC SKILLS

The NCSM views basic mathematical skills asfalling under ten Vital areas. The ten skill areas areinterrelated and many overlap with each other and withother disciplines. All are basic to pupils' development ofthe ability to reason effectively in varied situations.

This expanded list is presented with the convictionthat mathematics education must not emphasizecomputational skills to the neglect of other critical areas

matTiathematics. The ten components of basicma e 'cai-skills_arejtsted below, but the order oftheir listing should not tiFilittrpreted-as-initti ineither a priority of importance or a sequence forteaching and learning.

Furthermore, as society changes our ideas aboutwhich skills are basic also -dhange. For example, todayour students should learn to measure in both thecustomary and metric systems, but in the future thesignificance of the customary system will be mostlyhistorical. There will also be increasing emphasis onwhen and how to use hand-held calculators and other

effort. electronic devices in mathematics.

100

TEN BASIC SKILL AREAS

r.

Problem Solving

Learning to solve problems is.the principal reason'for studying mathematics. Problem solving is theprocess of applying previously acquired knowledge tonew and unfamiliar situations. Solving word problems intexts is one form of problem solving, but students alsoshould be faced with non-textbook problems. Prob-lem-solving strategies involve posing questions, analyz-ing situations, translating results, illustrating results,drawing diagrams, and using trial and error. In solvingproblems, students need to be able to apply the rules oflogic necessary to arrive at valid conclusions.They mustbe able to determine which facts are relevant. Theyshould be unfearful of arriving at tentative conclusionsand they must be willing to subject these conclusions toscrutiny.

Applying Mathematics to Everyday Situations

The use of mathematics is interrelated with allcomputation activities. Students should be encouragedto take everyday situations, translate them . intomathematical expressions, solve the mathematics, andinterpret the results in light of the initial situation.

Alertness!? the Reasonableness of Results "

Due to arithmetic errors or other mistakes, results ofmathematical work are sometimes wrong. Studentsshould- learn to inspect all results and to check, forreasonableness in terms of the original problem. Withthe increase in the use 'of calculating devices in society,this skill is essential.

,

Estimation and Approximation

Students should be able to" carry out rapidapproximate calculations by first rounding off numbers:They should acquire some simple techniques forestimating quantity, length, distance, weight, etc. It isalso necessary to decide when a particular result isprecise enough for the purpose at hand.

late - Computational Skills

Students should gain facility with addition, sub-,4ction, multiplication, and division with whole num-Mrs and decimals. Today it must be recognized thatlong, complicated computations will usually be donewith a calculator. Knowledge of single-digit numberfacts is essential and mental 'arithmetic is a valuableskill. Moreover, there are everyday situations whichdemand recognition of, and simple computation with,common fractions.

Because consumers continually deal with manysituations that involve percentage, the ability torecognize and use percents should be developed andmaintained.

Geometry

Students should learn the geometric concepts theywill need to function effectively in the 3-dimensionalworld. They should have knowledgeof concepts such aspoint, line, plane, parallel, and perpendicular. Theyshould know basic properties of simple geometricfigures, particularly those properties which relate tocieasurement and problem-solving skills. They alsomust be able to recognize similarities and differencesamong objects.

Measurement

As a minimum skill, students should be able tomeasure distance: weight, time, capacity, andtemperature. Measurement of angles and calculationsof simple areas and volumes are also essential. Studentsshould be able to perform measurement in both metricand customary systems using the appropriate tools.

Reading, Interpreting, and ConstructingTables,tharts,and Graphs -

Students should know hoW to read and drawconclusions from simple tables, maps, charts. andgraphs. They should be able to condense numericalinformation into more manageable or meaningful termsby-setting up simple tables, charts, and graphs.

4

Using Mathematics to Predict

Students should learn how elementary notionsprobability are used to determine the likelihood of futureevents. They should learn to identify situations whereImmediate past experience does not affect the like-lihood of future events. They should become familiarwith how mathematics is used to help make predictionssuch as election forecasts.

Computer Literacy

, It is important for &II citizens to understand what----computers_c.rd cannot do. Students should be

aware of the many is-of-computersigsociety. such astheir use in teaching/learning, financiVItansactions._and information storage and retrieval. The "mystique"surrounding computers is disturbing and can putpersons with no understanding of computers at ,adisadvantage The increasing use of computers bygovernment, industry, and business demands anawareness of computer uses and limitations.

101

BASIC SKILLS AND THE STUDENTS FUTURE

Anyone adopting a definition of basic skills shouldconsider the "door- opening /poor- closing" implicationsof the list. The following diagram illustrates expectedoutcomes associated with various amou s of skilldevelopment. . It

Scope ofSkill Development

EXPANDED SKILLSMatherriatical skillsbeyond those describ-ed here plus a desire tolearn more.

BASIC SKILLSThe skills describedhere.

MINIMAL SKILLSLimited skills, primarilycomputation. Littleexposure to the otherskill areas describedhere.

Expected Outcomes

POTENTIALLEADERS

Employment and edu-cational opportunitieswill continue toincrease as mathe-matical skills continueto grow.

EMPLOYMENT. VERYLIKELY

Employment oppor-tunities are predict-able. Doors to furthereducation opportuni-ties are open.

LIMITED -OPPORTUNITIES

Unemployment likely.Potential generallylimited to low-leveljobs.-

MINIMUM ESSENTIALS FOR HIGH 'SCHOOLGRADUATION

Today some school boards- ancrstate legislaturesare starting to mandate mastery of minimum essentialskills in reading andmathematics as a requirement forhigh-school graduation. In the process, they shouldconsider the potential pitfalls of doing this without anappropriate definition of "basis skills." If themathematics requirements are set inordinately high,then a significant number of students may not be able tograduate. 04 the other hand, if the mathematicsrequirements are set too low and mathematical skills aretoo narrowly defined,' he result could be a sterilemathematics program concentrating exclusively onlea(ning of low-level mathematical skills. Thispositionpaper neither recommends nor ...condemns minimalcompetencies for high-school graduation. However, theen- components of basic skills stated here can serve as

guidelines for s ale-and-locaLschool systems that areconsidering the establishment o rr-ninimum-esse ialgraduation.requiremenfs.

DEVELOPING THE BASIC SKILLS

One individual difference among students isstyle orway of learning In offerirg opportunities to learn thebasic skills, options must be provided to meet thesevarying learning styles. The present "back-to-basics"movement may lead to an emphasis on drill and practice,as a way to learn.

Certainly drill and practice is a viable option, but it isonly one of many possible ways to bring about learningand to create interest and motivation in students.Learning centers, contracts, tutorial sessions, individualand small- group projects, games, si

sourulations and

community-based activities are so of the otheroptions that can provide the opportunit to learn basic

skills. Furthermore, to help students fully understandbasic mathematical concepts, teachers should utilizethe full range of activities and materials available,including objects the students can actually handle.

The learning of basic mathematical skills is acontinuing process which extends through all of theyears a student is in school. In particular, a tendency toemphasize computation while neglecting the other nineskill areas at the elemerilary level must be avoided.

EVALUATING AND REPORTING STUDENTPROGRESS

Any systematic attempt to,develop basic skills mustnecessarily be concerned with evaluating and reportingpupil progress.

In evaluation, test results are used to judge theeffectiveness of the instructional,process and to makeneeded adjustments in the curriculum and instructionfor the individual student. In general, both educatorsand the public have accepted and emphasized an,overuse of and overconfidence in the- results ofstandardized tests. Standardized tests yieldcomparisons between students and can provide a rankordering of individuals, schools, or districts. However,standardized tests have several limitations including thefollowing:

a. 'Items are not necessarily generated to measurea specific objective or instructional aim.

b. The tests measure only a sample of the contentthat makes up a program; certain outcomes arenot measured at all.

- Because they do not supply sufficient information.about how much mathematics a student knows.standardized tests are not the best instruments availablefor reporting individual pupil growth. Other alternativessuch as criterion tests or competency tests must beconsidered. In criterion tests. items are generated whichmeasure the specific objectives of- the program andwhich establish the student's level of mastery of theseobjectives. Competency tests are designed to determineif the individual has mastered the skills necessary for acertain purpose SuCtras entry into the job market. Thereis also need for open-ended assessments such asobservations, interviews, and manipulative tasks toassess skills which paper and pencil tests do not

' measure adequately.Reports of pupil progress will surely be made. But,

while standardized tests will probably, continue todominate the testing scene for several years. there is anurgent need to begin reporting pupil progress in othererms.such as criterion tests and competency

-%.

a

102

measures. This will_also demand an immediate anzlextensive program of inservice education to instruct thegeneral public on the meaning and interpretation ofsuch data and to enable teachers to use testing as a vitalpart of the instructional process.

Large scale testing, whether involving alt studentsor a random sample, can result in interpretations whichhave great influence on curriculum revisions anddevelopment. Test results can indicate, for example.that a particular mathematical topic is being taught atthe wrong time in the student's development and that itMight better be introduced later or earlier in thecurriculum. Or. the results might indicate that studentsare confused about some topic as a result ofinappropriate teaching procedures. In any case, testresults should be carefully examined by educators withspecial skills in the area of curriculum development.

CONCLUSION

The, present paper represents a preliminaryattempt by the National Council of Supervisors ofMathematics to clarify and communicate its positionon basic mathematical skills. The NCSM positionestablishes a framework within which decisions onprogram planning and implementation can be made.It %Is° sets forth the underlying rationale foridentifying and developing basic skills and forevaluating pupils' acquisition of these competencies.The NCSM position underscores the fundamentalbelief of the National- Council of Supervisors ofMath anatics that any effective program of basicmathematical skills must be ditected not "back" butforward,, to the essential needs of adults in thepresent and' future.

You are encouraged to make anddistribute copies of this paper.

The NCSM position paper was preparedpursuant to a contract with the National

* Institute of Education, U.S. Departmentof Health, Education and Welfare.,_Contractors undertaking. such projectsunder government sponsorship areencouraged to express freely theirjudgment in professional and technicalmatters. Points of view or opinions donot, therefore, necessarily represent

* official National Institute of Educationposition or policy.

January, 1977

-NATIONAL COUNCIL OF SUPERVISORS OF MATHEMATICSc/o Ross TaylorMinneapolis Public Schools807 Broadwa9 N. E.Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413

MEMBERS OF NCSM TASId FORCE ON BASIC MATHEMATICAL SKILLS

Mildred Daniels

David Dye

Jane Donnelly Gawronski

William J. Geppert'

Pe gy,A. House

Elgin Shilhab

Glyn Sharpe

Albert P. Schulte

Detroit Public Schoo s,Detroit, MI

Minnesota Department ofEducation, St. Paul, MN

San Diego CountyDepartment of Education,San Diego, CA

Delaware Department ofPublic Instruction,Dover, DE

University of Minnesota,Minneapolis, MN

Austin IndependentSchool District,Austin, TX

Jefferson CountyPublic Schools,Lakewood, CO

Oakland Public Schools,Pontiac. MI

Dorothy Strong

B. Ross Taylor

Alex Tobin'

Kay Tobin

Edward Eaty'

*.Chicago Board ofEducation, Chicago, IL

Minneapolis PublicSchools, Minneapolis, MN

School District ofPhiladelphia.Philadelphia, PA

Lexington Public Schools,Lexington, MA

National Institute ofEducation,Washington. D. C.

'President, Association of State Supervisors ofMathematics

'NCSM Basic Skills Task Force Chairperson'President, NCSM'Resource Person, National Institute of Education

A ChildiliNiore than-a-Machine

Alan R. HofferUniversity of Oregon

Editors' Note: The two preceding papers discuss-research and professional support for expanding, our view ofmathematics beyond computation. The finding of the National Assessment of Educational Progress in recent yearsis that students do well on simple computation but poorly on problem solving. In this paper Alan Hoffer discussesthe need toleach children to see and understand problem situations. Dr. Hoffer is involved in research on problemsolving and on how to help people do problem solving. Although we have much more to learn about thesecomplex tasks, he shares whatis knownabout the role of insight in problem solving and suggests approaches thathelp students learn to use insight.

.Introduction

.Children are born with the capacity tomemorize, to understand, to see problems, andto solve problems. By the time they are ready toenter school, most children have an intuitiveability to solve simple problems in mathemat-ics. If that ability is nurtured throughout theirschool years, they can become confident, com-petent users of problem-solving skills in allaspects of their lives. If, however, the emphasisin mathematics instruction is on memorizing,on computation, on drill, and on solving onlyvery simple word problems, these students willbe stifled in their growth; many may evendevelop a dislike of mathematics, and perhaps a.fear of it, that will remain with them and influ-ence the direction their lives take.

This paper discusses how "students learn toput skills together so they can be used to solveday-to-day problems and how teachers andadministrators can contribute to this process.The emphasis here is on insight, a special skillofseeing,and understanding problems and theirsolutions. This skill, like any other, can be

taught, but it requires creativity and risk takingon the part of the student The teacher must notork provide appropriate learning experie -icesbut must also be supportive and encouragingwhen the child is not successful. Both teacherand student need to view "mistakes" positively,as opportunities to learn.

Learning of insight requires that the studentand teacher participate in experiences that areparticularly human. The author is not suggest-ing that teaching° mechanical skills is wrong,but that there is a danger that both student andteacher will get caught up with the mechanicsand that time will not be spent on learning tosee the applications on putting the skills to:gether so they work:

Definitions of Skills

Nine-year-old Tia wants to become a musician.When she proudly takes her flute to her first les-son, she discovers that she cannot make a sound.It takes the entire lesson to learn how to play onote every time she tries.As she learns to pray the

404

flute, Tia must learn to press certain keys to makecertain sounds, to blow in certain ways, and toread music. She will never become a flutist byseparately practicing her fingering, then blowing,and then reading.notes. In these early lessons shemusrgo-- vejslowly, learning individual .skillsand, at very nearly-the same time, learning tointegrate these skills..Tia is-a -long way frombeing

-a musician.

Philip wants to be a baSketbalLplayer. He needs tolearn how to shoot, to Pass:to dribble;-and to runplays. In addition to learning all of theseskills;hehas to improve his overall physical condition.Philip cannot spend an hour each on shootingbaskets, passing, dribbling, and running plays tobecome a good player. He must learn to combinethese skills in a smooth fashion.

What is a skill? Typical dictionary definitionsuse phrases like "a learned power- of doingsomething competently." So a skill involves theability to perform; a skill can be viewed in anarrow sense (the ability to hammer a nail into apiece of wood) or in a broad sense (the ability tobuild, a house). In' each human activity theseparate skills and competencies must work to-gether to form a phenomenon greater than anyof the individual skills. The learner must weavetogethei the separate skills to form higher levelskills. Of course, people are not limited robotfashion to a single activity or focus. Theyare involved continually in numerous and var-ied activities all of which involve skills ofsome sort.

In mathematics, as in every human endeavor,there are many stages in the learning process. Inthe early stages the learner must master skillsupon which later stages will be built. The goalfor educators, ideally, is to develop students'abilities to apply high-level problem-solvingskills in day-to-day situations. Over the years,however, mathematics has been (un)popular-ized to form a verylimited and shallow view ofthe subject. Indeed, today many people thinkthat mathematics consists of little more thanarithmetic, algebraic formulas, and geometricvocabulary.

If the'narrow definition of "skill" is allowedto dominate mathematics education, studentswill, of course, develop an ability to perform,but they will become "skillful" in the same

a

sense that modern calculators and computersare "skillful" they will develop machineskills at the expense of human skills. Considerthis example;

Teacher:

Dan:Teacher:Dan:Teacher:Dan:Teacher:

Dan:

Dan, if an airplane can travel 1200 kilo-meters in 3 hours, how far can it fly in 5hears at.the same rate?I don't know.How much is 1200 divided by 3?400.How much is 5 times 400?2000.If an airplane can fly 1200 kilometers in3 hours, how far can it fly in 5 hoursatthe same, rate?I don't know. is it 2000?

Dan was able to perform the division. (1200 ÷ 3)and multiplication x 400) calculations, andyet he 'was unable to solve the problem. If Weaccept the fact that a machine skill is a task thata machine can do, then Dan possessed sufficientmachine skills to solve the problem. However,he lacked the human skills needed to interpretthe problem and to know which machine skillsto use.

There is a danger that the basic skills are be-ing interpreted by schools and communities asmachine skills. When these limitations areimposed on children, the mulls are devastat-ing. The children may be able to performmachine skills, but they are unable to apply theskills to the problems they encounter in schooland in daily life.

So, whatever 'definitions we use for basicskills, we must include basic abilities to use andapply lower-level skills at higher levels and inproblem-solving situations. Several excellentlists of the important mathematical skills havebeen developed and are discussed .in the paperby Ross Taylor in this handbook. Of particularimportance is the position' paper developedby the National Council of Supervisors ofMathematics.

Mechanistic Mathematics Skillsand Teaching

Heidi is now an experienced driver. When shegets into the car, she locks the door, fastens her

119

4105

seatbelt, 'starts the engine, releases the emergencybrake, puts the car in gear, and ;oaks in the rearsview mirror before she takes her foot off the brakeand begins to back out of the driveway. At thesame time she is going over in her mind the articleshe read in the paper last night about how to im-prove her tennis game.

The human mind has an amazing capacity toblock from consciousness vast , numbers ofactions thatilwe perform daily. In using mathe-matical skills, children must arrive at the pointwhere many of the steps they go through tosolve a problem are subconscious. This is neces-sary to that thoughts will not be clutteredwith admittedly important, yet highly distract-ing, actions.

There is certainly a need for reflex behavior. Itis likely that, for the sake of efficient thought:children in the fourthgrade should automati-cally kdow that 7 x 8 is equal to 56. But 'theattainment of such behavior should not domi-nate the teaching of mathematics, whetherchildren are learning arithmetic facts in gradefour' or algebraic manipulations in grade eightor nine. If they don't know the facts; students ,S'horlid be encouraged to use their calculators.Eventually, they may internalize the facts, andthe calculator just might help them do that.

It could be the case that too much mechanicalpractice, especially without careful supervisionand evaluation, is counterproductive. Considerthe following examples, taken from Ashlock(1972), of children practicing some arithmeticskills.

Harold's class is learning how to add decimals.On the practice exercises Harold worked likesthis:

In adding decimals Harold learned how to "lineup" the decimal points and then add. Hemechaniqally brought the decimal point downto the answer. That "skill" worked for exercise C

-but not for the other exercises. Barbara, on theother hand, is probably not ready to practiceborrowing with three-digit numbers. ExercisesC and D indicate that she "loans" a huridred tothe units 'or ones column. She probably needs,more work with place value, even at the con-crete level, before she continues to practice onsuch problems as these.

We see 'error patterns -occur in several sub-jects. Algebra teachers, for example, report, thatstudents consistently misapply distributivethinking to associative instances. In such cases,5(xy) might become (5x) (5y) or even 5x + 5y.Misapplied rules also cause students to change6x + 2 into 6x or 3x.

2

There is indeed a place foi practice in mathe-matics instruction. But the practice should bemeaningful, not mechanical. The learning* en-vironment should not allow error patterns to

°develop and continue.

Using Skills Requires Insighta

We have assumed that a skill is an ability todo something competently. Competence mustgo beyond simply being able to perform a skill,however. Students must develop the ability toassess a situation to determine which skills arenecessary in the situation and to apply thoseskills in an efficient, competent manner.'Whenthey develop this ability, they will have insight.Three qualities work together in the person whohas insight:

A. .8+.4

B.+.9

C. .4+.3

D. .5+.8 1. The' ability to perform in a possibly un-

familiar situation;.12' .15 .7 .13

Find Harold's errors. What "skill" was heapplying?

Lately Bdrbara has been making errors in her sub-traction practice. Here is her work. What "skill"was she applying?

8 2A. 693 B. 11'25

-248 -151

5 2C. 1126 D. ii34

0 -349 . -275

2. The ability to perform competently (cor-rectly and adequately) the acts required bythe situation; and

3. The ability to perform intentionally (delib-erately and consciously) a method that re-solves the situation.

Van Hiele (1973) and van Dormolen (1976) haveeach described insight. in this manner.

445 174 287 68 The three qualities are interdependent to

120

106

have insight a student must have all three qual-ities. Harold and Barbara intentionally applied,their methods to the arithmetic practice, butthey performed incorrectly Dan was able to cor-rectly perform the arithmetic calculations in theairplane question, but he did not understandwhy those operations were Used. Compare Dan'sresponses with Erin's in the following problem:

Teacher: Suppose Mark's diesel car can travel100 kilometers (kin) on 5 liters (I) of-fuel. If his tank holds 38 liters, how farcould he travel on ainll tank?

F:rin: Oh, I know, 760 kilometers.Teacher: How did you get that answer?Erin: 4. He* traveled 100 km on 5 liters, so he

uses 1 liter for each 20 km. I divided100 by 5. So for 38 liters, Mark couldtraverno km because 20 times 38 is(equal to) 760.

The teacher was very pleased with Erin's re-sponses. She had not seen the problem before. Itwas a new situation for her and she was able tointerpret the que. tion. Not only was she able toapply the rote skills,competcntly, but she dem-onstrated in her explanation that she had a fullunderstanding of the problem. She knew whatshe was doing and why. It is, likely that shecould solve any problem similar to the onestated. Frin has insight.

`i

To say that a person has skills in mathe-matics requires that she or he have insight.This means that the person will be able toexhibit the human factor in skill per-formance. Insight distinguishes humansfrom machines.

To say that a person has skills in mathematicrequires that she or he have insight. This meansthat the person will be able to exhibit the humanfactor performance. Insight disguishes humani-frornAachines. A mat maticsprogram which concentrates on-machine skillsand neglects develop insight cheats the con-sumers (the children). It baincates their intel-lectual growth. Dan, for example, could have

-I

used insight in the airplane problem if he hadbeen taught the basic skill of using a mathemati-cal model representation of a phenomenonthat uses mathematical concepts. For example,the 1200- kilometer distance and the three-hourtime could have been modeled (represented) bya segment. The problem could be solved visu-ally as follows:1200 km - as a segment

3 hr - the same segment400km compares to 1 hr

So 2000 km comparesto 5 hr

1200 km3 hr

400 km 400 kmihr ihr ihr

400 400 400 400 400.1!II11'111Ways to Develop Insightand Understanding

In order to learn skills, to integrate them, andto be able to apply them to daily problenis andin unfamilar situations, it is essential that chil-dren develop confidence in themselves, in theschool environment, in mathematics, and intheir ability to apply, or use,* mathematics.Teachers can help students develop positiveself-concepts by respecting their students andmaking them feel respected; by establishing areceptive attitude in the classroom so studentsare willing to express themselves and to learn;by providing fair challenges; by maximizingfreedom from threat; and by providing successexperiences. It. is only in such an atmospherethat students will learn to be creative problemsolvers and will feel comfortable taking risks.(See Mathematics Resource Project, 1978.)

A critical part of this positive' classroomatmosphere is the view by both teacher andstudents that making mistakes is an impor-tant part of the growth experience in mathemat-ics education. Red marks *indicating errors or'students' tests and homework papers are givenmore in mathematics than in any other subjectarea. They do not belong in any child's life.They can lead to self-doubt, to loss of interest inmathematics, and to' loss of confidence in theteacher (Tobias, 1978).

Some superb teachers have the skill of pro-viding their students with a loom (see Andersonand Greenwood, 1976). The loom helps stu-dents weave together the_skills they possess to

1

107

produce skills at a higher level. These teachershelp students acquire understanding. They be-lieve that their students should become aware of

variety of problem situations and-should un-derstand why they study certain. topics. Theyde'irelop acquisition activities which give stu- ,dents opportunities to practice and extend pastlearning& They provide these through labora-tory investigations and ,through explorationthat arise from daily problems.

There is an interesting analogy betweenteaching and coaching.-"Coach Brooks workedvery hard to "learn" football. He knows variousdefense formations and offense plans. He under-stands his players well and knoWs theirstrengths and weaknesses. He organized train-ing programs for them that include calisthenicsand weight lifting. The players practice block-ing, tackling, and catching passes. They rimplays and scrimmage. The players are aware ofwhat they need to practice; through practicethey acquire the skills needed to perform well;and they internalize these skills so that during agame they can adjust to new situations. Theyare using insight.

`Helping student's develop insight intomathematics requires a good deal of work. Thechildren must be presented with opportunitiesand activities that are structured 'by the teacher.The development'of such activities might fol-low this sequence:

1. Inquiry. In class discussion the teacherpresents a problem .z.,r describes a certainsituation, for example, something relatedto.,cubes. The children make or are givenmodels of cubes which they examine andtalk about. They are encou.dged to makeol.serVations anit.to begin using the vocab-ulary rIlated.to.cubes.

2. DirectedpOrientation. The teacher asks thestudents specific questions or assigns themvery definite tasks. The tasks are such thatthere are ,definite answers which the stu-dents all agree on eventually.

3. Explanation. Now the students, with theteacher's help, describe the various rela-tionships that they observed. This acts as aseimmar?of earlier observations for the stu-dents and helps to make the ideas explicitin the students' minds.

4. Free orientation. The students are- nowfamiliar with the vocabulary and elemen-tary ideas of the topic, and they are asked'to explore and look for more relationshipson their own.

5. Integration. Finally, the students have acomfortable understanding of the topic.They see how the ideas are related and, ifpresented with a problem that is related t.acubes,they could find their own way to a .solution. The Students have developed in-sight into the topic.

The inquiry and directed orientation phasesform an awareness of the topic for the stucnts;acquisition of the ideas is developer' eur 7.gthe explana on and free orientation phases;internalization occurs in the integration phase

..

Other Essential Ingredientsefor Success,Teacher: What number makes this' sentence

truert x = 3?Mike: Three sixths.Teacher: No. (Mike was surprised. He (nought he

was right.)Cathy: One half. -Teacher: Correct. Verx good.Mike (in- But if you put 3/6 in the hox, 6 x 3/6 =

sisting): 3. So 3/6 makes it true..Teacher: Class, why is 3/6 not the correct

answer?'Cathy: Because 3/6 is not reduced.Teacher: Yes. Now let's do the next problem.Mike

(inter- But didn't you tell us that 3/6 is equalrupting): to 1/2? So why isn't 3/6 the answer?

Teacher: You are just being stubborn. The an,swer is 1/2. Class, open your books to,page 165 and work exercises 1 to 30.

It is possible that the teacher wanted to end thelesson and get the children to work, but it is alsopossible that she did not have enough under-standing of mathematics to deal with Mike in apositive way. (Mike, by, the way, Was discour-aged by this.He said nothing for the rest of thelesson.) ,

Certainly, teacheri,should not be-the weaklink in the educational process. Universitiesand colleges of e ducation have the primary re-sponsibility for educating prospective teachersand for ensuring :that the teacheis are knowl-edgeable in the subject in, Which, they are certi-

124 :$

1

fc'

fied-to-teach.-Universities have not lived _up tothis responsibility, nor have state legislaturesand certification boards who set minimum re:quirements been strict enough either in settingstandards or in enforcing_them. Also,_principals, personnel directors, and local schoolboards have not insisted that incoming teachershave a strong preparation in mathematics. Howcan skills and insight be taught by people wholack these abilities themselves?

Lately there has been an 'increasing numberof proposals to test teachers. Some states arediscussing laws to implement such testing pro-granis. In the National Institute of EducationConference on Basic. Mathematical Skills andLeartiing (NIE, 1975) several papers alluded'to the weak preparation and performance ofteachers.'

School administrators should hire not justadequate teachers, but great teachers! Highschool principals should insure that their math-.

ematics teachers have not just minimum certifi-cation (there are numerous violations of eventhese lower bounds) but that the teachers havea contagious enthusiasm for mathematics thatis conveyed to their students. Every elementaryschool should have at leait one teacher who is anvithematics specialist, a person who possessesknowledge of and an enthusiasm for mathe-matics, a <person' who can help other teachers inthe building on their mathematics lessons andwho can assist With students who are havingdifficulties in learning mathematics when theneed arises: --,

Once the team is t in place, the membersmay need additional help, even encouragement.They may need_materials to conduct laboratoryexplorations. bi- time' off to attend_professionalmeetings, participate in inserviie activities,learn dew diagnostic techniques, or develop anew unit for next year's program

SummaryChildren are cheated when the mathematicS

program that they experience has an emphasison skills. In such a program, there can beA

little assurance that students who master theselow-level skills will be able to transfer them today-to-day situations in which they must solveproblems.

12

Devoting anyexcessive amount of school timeto learning computational skills is also waste-ful, since calculators can perform the skills, but,more importantly, precious time is taken away

--from- developing insight in-students-arrd-hlp--ing them learn how to use insight to apply skillsto problem-solving situations. -

Teachers should' more actively help students-develop insight to increase the students' levelof skill performance. To do this, teachers musthave a deep knowledge of and enthusiasm -formathematics and its applications. They mustpossess the skills and insight themselves.

By their support and encouragement, schooladministrators-should more actively help teach-ers develop a functional mathematics program,_one in which the students have confidence,-grow intellectually, and experience success.

ReferericesAnderson, Robert, and Greenwood, Jay. "A Position'

Paper on Teaching and Learning." Portland,Oregon: Multnomah County Educational Services,.District, 1976. -

Ashlock, Robert B. Error Patterns in Computation.Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill; 1972.

Axline, Virginia M. Dibs, In Search of Self. New"York: Ballantine, 1964.

Hoffer, Alan R. GeoMetry, A Model of4W/niverse.MenlePark, California; AddisohNeilgyi

"1979.

4A A,'Mathematics Resource Project. Dioncticsond Mathe-

matics. Palo Alto, California: Creative Publica-tions, 1978.

National Assessment of Educational Pr-ogress."NAEP Newsletter." Volume 2, Auguit 1979.

National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics."Position Paper on Basic Mathematical Skills."The Mathematics Teacher, 71 (February 1978):

147-152.National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. An

Agenda for Action: Recommendations for Sc ,00lMathematics of the 1980s. Reston, Virginiti;NCTM; 1980. .

National Institute of Education. Conference on BasicMathematical 'Skills and Learning. Volume 1:Washington, D.C.: NIE, 1975.

Tobias, Sheila. Overcoming Math Anxiety. NewYork: Norton, 1978.

van Dormolen, Joop..MathematiCal Skills. Gron-ingen, The Netherlands: Wolters-Noordhoff, 1976.

van Hiele, P.M. Begrip en inzicht. The Netherlands:&Misses Purmerend, 19731

Overview: The first two papers in this section provide descriptions of the two majorapproaches to beginning reading instruction. Ken and Yetta Goodman describe theirmeaning-focused program, and Doug Carmine argues for reading instruction whichemphasizes the development of decoding skills through use of a subskills approach. In hispaper Harry Singer suggests one way the two approaches can be brought together, and inthe fourth paper Flab Tierney and David Pearson review recent research on Comprehensionand suggest directions for improving instruction in comprehension. Lauren Resnick drawson thirty studies on the implications of research for reading instruction, as she reviews thehistory of the controversy between meaning-emphasis and decoding-emphasis proponents.Like Singer, she suggests ways that the different approaches can be effectively linked. In thelast paper in this section, Penelope Peterson reports on an analysis of research outcomes ofdifferent approaches to basic skills instruction.

cs0

O

Theories and Prescriptionsfor Early Reading Instruction*

Lauren B. ResnickUniversity of ,Pittsburgh

Editors' Note: This paper was prepared as part of a synthesis project funded by NlE several years ago. Thatproject involved the preparation and discussion of approximately thirty papers by outstanding researchers, eachexploring implications of their work for practice and for further research. Lauren Resnick has drawn on thosepapers and on her own 'ex perience in schools in preparing this chapter, which was originally published as asummary of the implications of that collection of papers for practitioners. The author describes the two majororientations to reading instruction, reviews research on their effects, and suggests ways' that elements of bothapproaches might be integrated without losing the strengths of either.

Are some ways of teaching beginning readingmore effective than'others, especially for chil-dren. in compensatory educational programs?What does the research say? Do the researchfindings agree with what experts in the field sayabout the theory of reading? These are the ques-,Lions addressed in these volumgs. The aim of-the volumes is to clarify points of agreementand .disagreement -as a basis for advising- edu-cators and the public on the approaches to in-struction most likely to be effective for hard-to-teach children. I attempt in this chapter tosummarize the major points of view expressedhere and to relate these positions to outcomes of

*Reprinted with the permission of the author andpublishers from Theory and Practice of Early Read-ing, Vol. 2, edited by Lauren E. Resnick and PhyllisA. Weaver, 1979: Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence ErlbaumAssociate's, Publishers.

evaluation studies comparing various reading'approaches. On the ,basis of these twin sourcesof evidence, I draw implications for currentpractice in compensatory education and for newapproaches to instruction that need systematicdevelopment and trial.

There is little doubt that those closely in-volved in questions of reading instruction,either as researchers or practitioners believethat what is taught, and how it is taught, mat-ters. The intensity of discussion, over tife courseof decades, is enough to convince us of thii. Butare these advocates of one or another approachright? Is there any basis at all for deciding'among programs? Or is it the case, .as somepeople continue to claim, that it doesn't matterhow reading is taught as long as there is corn-mitment to learning on the part of the teacherand the school; or that different children learnin such different ways that there is simply noway of choosing among competing programs ona general basis?

112

To respond-to- these-questionsi-l-begin-by--characterizing what I perceive as the two mainstrands of theory concerning the nature of read-ing and learning to read. I then consider suchempirical evidence as is available on the rela-tive effects of programs that appear to embody,these two vie n thp hacievidence, I (a) recommend an aspect of currentpractice in early reading, and (b)ouggest newkinds of program development that hold prom-ise for improving other important aspects ofreading instruction.

Conipeting Positions on the Nature ofReading

Twci main strands of theory concerning thenature of reading can be identified, both in thevarious chapters of these volumes and in aperusal of' as much as a century of researchliterature on teaching reading., For the sake ofsimplicity, I call these the reading as translationand the reading 'as language positions.

Reading as 11.anslation

--One view considers reading to be essentiallya, process of translating printed symbols intosome approximation 'of oral language and thenletting already developed oral language abilitiestake over. In this view, reading is largely "para-sitic" on speech. The most important thing that,

must be done in learning to readis to learn whatthe printed symbols "say" (i.e., what soundsthey correspond to). No other activity is uniqueto reading; everything else is shared withspeech. In addition, because the 'ability to com-prehend speech is already present in any indi-vidual who is learning to read, only word ,rec-ognition needs to be taught directly. Once wordscan be recognized, practice in this new (visual)mode of receiving language symbols will pro-duce the fluency and response to meaning thatcharacterizes skilled readers.

The reading as translation view generallyleads to a predominant, or even exclusive, pre-occupation with mastery of the alphabetic code.It suggests that whatever else is done early ininstruction, the code must be taught. From thisderives the notion that instructional materialsshould be organized so as to highlight predict-able aspects of _the print-sound -code. In re--

search,the_ translation position is associatedwith a concern for word recognition processes,with the role of the alphabetic code in recogni-tion, and with the role .of fast or "automatic"word recognition in facilitating reading 'com-prehension. (See, for example, Perfetti & Les-

plewho_characterize_reading in terms of print-sound translation free-ly admit that many people learn to read -- thatis, master the code so that they can use it auto-matically without much direct instruction.But they often express special concern for the"hard-to-teach," including children in compen-satory programs. They assume that the dif-ficulty .these individuals have in becomingcompetent readers is primarily a difficulty inmastering the code. They look for and dem-onstrate difficulties in skills they considerprerequisites to learning the alphabetic code,such as segmenting the speech stream (Liber-man & Shankweiler, Vol, 2; Rozin & Gleitman,1976). They tend to advocate prereading activi-ties that teach these prerequisites or methods ofreading instruction that teach them in thecourse of teaching the code (see also chapters byRosner, Vol, 2; and Wallach & Wallach, Vol. 3).

Reading as Language

The second strand of theory holds that read-ing is a separate, autonomous language process.Understanding the written word is in certainimportant wags different from understaddingspoken language:Written language is organizeddifferently from spoken language. It also fulfillsdifferent social functions. Although written ma-,terial can be read aloud, it is not primarilyintended for this use. Furthermore, there are im-portant differences in the ways in which speechand print are mentally processed. Because it isan autonomous language process, reading can-not be taught as if it were parasitic on speech.That is, we cannot assume that because peopleknow how to translate print into sound (recog-nize words), they will be able to understand anduse written language in functional ways. In-stead, reading instruction must focus quite di-rectly on the functional use of written language,.preferably from the onset of instruction.

II

The instructional views of people who inter-pret reading_as.an autonomous language systemare varied. None deny, for example, that the

1:"7ti

113

alphabetic code must be learned, but they varywidely in their view of the amount and timingof direct instruction that should be devoted to it.All agree that reading instruction, essentiallyfrom the-outset, must-focus on deriving mean-ing from written language and on functional useof Britten wor . kor is, they are prepareto sacrifice, if necessary, some rigor and speed inacquiring knowledge of the code. In general,.people with this view of the nature of readingdo not believe that learning the code is verydifficult or that not knowing it is the majorcause of reading failure. But a problem in char-acterizing this group dreading theorists is thatthey agree more on what learning to read is not

that is, it is not simply mastering the codethan on what it is.

A variety of approaches to reading instruc-tion have been advocated by people who viewreading as an autonomous language process.Probably the oldest and still most widely used isthe "look-Say" approach to word recognition,generally embodied in basal reading instruc-tional programs prior to the late 1960s. "Looksay" or "whole-word" teaching methods arosein. the first half of this century as a reactionagainst the dry, dull, and not very successfulmethods of reading that had predominated ear-lier and that focused on oral ,reading and onlearning the alphabetic code. (See Resnick &Resnick, 1977, for a characterization of theseearlier methods and of the success rates associ-ated with them.) The essence of the philosophyunderlying basal reading approaches was thatreading should, from the oufset, focus on ex-tracting meaning rather than on "mechanics,"the latter to be acquired later and with as littleinstruction as possible.

This basic view is shared by proponents ofvarious "language-experience" approaches toreading instruction, although these people (e.g.,Goodman & Goodman, Vol. 1) believe that forreading to become a functional communicationsystem, it is necessary for it to be rooted in thecommunication needs S and processes of thelearrfer. For this reason, the basic "material" ofreading ought to be, text actually produced bythe learners or their peers. Special variants Oflanguage-experience approaches have been pro-posed by those immersed in work with people

from illiterate communities and from culturalbackgrounds sharply divergent from dominantWestern ones for example, Ashton-Warner(1963) working with Maori children. in NewZealand, and Freire (1970) working with-illit-------erate adults in Brazil. In each of these cases, aey o servation was at to make the effort to

become literate, people of any age needed torecognize that their own concerns not onlythose of an outside, and perhaps oppressive,culture could be expressed in Writing.

A similar argument is made by those whopropose variants of language experience forcompensatory education populations in Ameri-ca today. People who are concerned with thesegroups and who espouse the autonomous lan-guage system view of reading argue that failureto learn to read stems primarily from learners'not recognizing the relevance of school-related

"eading to intrinsically important events out-side of school. The problem is a failure to recog-nize reading and writing as functional toolswithin their own culture, not an inability to per-form the c..imponent skills such as decoding.Two prescriptions for instruction follow: for be-ginners, immediate and continuing focus onmeaning through the medium of written mate-rials produced (directly or through dictation) bythe learners; and for those in need of remedialhelp, a locus on the reading and discussion ofintrinsically interesting material rather than on"skill building." With respect to basic research,the autonomous communication system defini-tion of reading leads to a concern with the waysin which meaningful written language is pro-cessed. Sentences are the smallest units of con-cern, and recently longer texts have beenstudied. The study of discourse processing is arelatively new area of study for psychology, andparticularly for the psychology of reading, 'andtherefore is developed much less thoroughlythan is word recognition research. (See Just &Carpenter, 1977, for a collection of current workin this field.)

The Empirical Evidence ConcerningReading Instruction

Evidence dearly favoring one reading in-structional approach over another in, school set-tings is difficult to find. Most studies fail to

1 ('

14,show...significant differences, and those-thankshow differences are .often attacked on one oranother fine point of research methodology.Nevertheless, a consistent pattern of findings

_ _can-be detected concerning both program effectsand general. style of instructioTr.-This patterncan be summarized briefly in the following way.Concerning programs, when skill in word rec-ognition is the primary dependent, variable,code-oriented programs tend to be advan-tageous over language-oriented programs. Thisis especially true for children from low-socio-economic-status (SES) groups and for lowachievers in general. However, when compre-hension beyond. the very simplest levels is thecrittrion, there is no clear advantage for eithercode- or language-oriented programs. Concern-ing instructional style, direct instruction andwell-structured curricula used under directteacher control have a clear advantage, againespecially for low-achieving or low-SES groups.I draw these conclusions.on the basis of the evi-dence ditcussed in the following paragraphs.

Evidence clearly favoring one readingInstructional approach over another inschool settings is difficult to find.

Follow Through. Follow Through is a na-tional experiment in primary education that hasallowed comparisons of several different in-structional approaches for poor children ofvarying cultural backgrounds. We now havedata from several cohorts of Follow Throughstudents (Stebbins, St. Pierre, Proper, Anderson,&, Cervi, 1977). In none of the evaluations arethe different instructional programs comparedwith each other in a strict experimental design.

',Instead, each program is compared with its owncontrol group, which received the "standard"program of the school district. This means thatthe program to which the control group is ex-posed is not strictly specified. Nevertheless,patterns can be detected in which groupsinstructed with certain programs, used in anumber of different school districts and over anumber, of years, often show reading achieve-

-ment 7-fist scores superioz to their -controlgroups, and groups exposed to other programsrarely show such an advantage. These patternssuggest that the most structured Follow,Through model the University of Oregon's,which, uses Distar, a program- developed ex-plicitly for Follow Through and other compen-satory use more regularly shows advantagesover its control group than do the less struc-tured models.' This pattern is strongest in firstand second grades; it is present but weaker inthird grade. By fourth grade, the advantage has,disappeared. This summary is based primarilyon data from the reading subtest of the Metro-politan Achievement Tests. From fourth gradeon, this test stresses comprehension tasks. Datacollected by the Oregon model sponsors ontheir own school suggest that when a test isused that stresses word recognition (such as theWRAT, the Wide Range Achievement Test), theadvantage of the program is maintained eveninto the upper elementary grades.

To interpret this pattern, it is necessary toknow that the Oregon and other structuredFollow Through models use direct Instructionapproaches to reading and that their programsare code oriented rather than language oriented.Furthermore, these programs tend to includecareful and individualized record keeping and afocus on a mastery of identifiable and mea-surable "components" of reading. competence.The child-centered or less structured FollowThrough models tend to use language-orientedinstructional strategies. There is considerablevariety with respect to specific program. andinstructional styles, but there is in keepingwith the child-centered philosophy that gov-erns most of these programs -- substantialemphasis on embedding reading in naturallyoccurring language settings and relatively littleemphasis on structured, direct instruction. Therange of activities that might be considered"reading" or "reading related" in these pro-.grams is very wide; by co ltrast, only formal

IDistar stresses systematic code learning. Instructionin the program is teacher -led, and children aretaught in small groups. Activities for both theteachers and the students are prescribed in detail bythe program.

1 r';)aft.

115

reading-and--writingractivities_wouldle.so_con-sidered in the structured programs. Thus, chil-ren--instructured programs probably spend

more time actually engagedirrractivitierevoly-ing 'written Materials.

up to the beginning of the fourth grade, afterwhich point there is practically.no evidence. ...The experimental research provides no evidencethat either a code or a meaning emphasis fosters

star love of reading or is more interesting tochildren. There is some experimental evi-dence that children of below-average and averageintelligence and children of lower socioeconomicbackground do better with an early code emphEi-sis. Brighter children and those from middle andhigh socioeconomic backgrounds also gain fromsuch an approach, but probably not as much. In-telligence, help at home, and greater facility with'language probably allow these children to, dis-cover much of the code on their'own, even if theyfollow a meaning program in school. [pp. 83-84)

-

Why is the-advantage for the structured pro-grams strongest at the lowest grade levels? Itcould be because the prOgrams have been in uselonger at those levels,' and therefore both thematerials and their implementatinn are more re-fined. However, the difference might also reflecta gradual shift in characteristics of the readingtests over grade levels. Although texts must beread and- questions .answered at all levels, thecomplexity of the texts and the inferential de-

. mands of the questions become progressivelygreater in higher grades. Children who werevery good (for their age and grade) at word rec-ognition could excel on the lower-grade testsbecause the linguistic complexity is low. Athigher grades, more sophisticated languagecompetence is required to FlO well, although theability to recognize words is dill needed. There-fore, the drop-off in advantage for the structuredFollow Through models at higher grade levelsprobably reflects the structured programs' rela-tive strengths. They are especially good atteaching word recognition but not especiallygood at teaching comprehension. The con-tinued high performance of Oregon's childrenon the WRAT lends strength to this interpre-tation. Notice, however, that the structured,code-oriented programs are not worse at teach-ing comprehension than are the child-centered,language-oriented models; they are just notany better.

Chall's "Great Debate" Book. The FollowThrough findings, based on national samplesand a common set of measurements for various,programs, mirror an older finding based on areview of research literature on reading instruc-tion conducted up to about 1965. Jeanne Chall'sbook, Learning to' Read: The Great Debate; pub-lished in 1967, reviewed a very large collectionof studies comparing code, basal, and language-experience models. She concluded the following:

Early stress On code learning, these studies indi-cate, not only produces better word recognitionand spelling, but also makes it easier for the childeventually to read with understanding at least

Chall 'concluded that code emphases fosterreading with understanding, but her evidence isvirtually only for the(rimary grades. We do notknow, on the basis of the older literature,whether the early gain with code-oriented pro-grams is maintained later. Chall.herself specu-lated that whether the advantage would bemaintained would depend on whether readingin the higher grades contained enough stress onlanguage, and vocabulary growth and providedsufficiently challenging materials for reading.She apparently believed, although she did notdirectly state it at that time, that reading pro-grams needed to shift from a code to a languageemphasis after a certain level of code compe-tence had been reached.

Guthrie's Study of Reading Problems. Guthrieand .his colleagues (Guthrie, Samuels, Martuza,Seifert, Tyler, & Edwall, 1976) reviewed researchon the nature and locus of reading programs.They report comparisons of good and poor read-ers, as measured'by a standardized reading com-prehension, test, that show: (a) no difference inthe grammatical or semantic acceptability ofwords substituted in the course of "misreading"a text; but (b) a greater tendency on the part of.good readers to make errors based on graphicsimiraTity,These findings are contrary to whatproponents o anguage approaches to readingoften predict namely; that emphasis on learn-ing the code will produce a tendency to attendtoo much to the spelling and not enough to themeaning of words and therefore will interferewith comprehension. Guthrie et al.'s summaryalso shows that poor readers in the intermediate

1 30

116

- _grades tend to be about as deficient in wordknowledge as they are in Coni*eliensiiiii, againcontrary to what language proponents predict.Poor comprehenders are both poor decoders(i.e., they make more errors) and slow decoders(even when they do decode accurately). Theyare also weaker in using semantic and syntacticcues of language (e.g., they are- less bothered bysyntactic variations) both when reading andwhen listening. The general pattern seems to beone in which good' decoding skills are quiteclearly associated with good comprehensionand in which syntactic and semantic difficultiesare associated with oral as well as written lan-guage. This evidence, although correlational,seems to support those who view reading astranslation to speech and to suggest that code-oriented early instruction is likely to be themost successful in overcoming difficulties inlearning to reaa.

Guthrie's group also reanalyzed data fromtwo major 'earlier investigations to determinewhether instructional practices make a differ-ence along the lines that I have suggested in thischapter. The fist reanalysis was of the Bond andDykstra (1967) firit-grade studies. Using aword-reading subtest as a measure of knowl-edge of the code, this reanalysis showed a skills-oriented method (eiler linguistics or phonics)to be superior to a language-oriented method.The addition of a_ phonics program to a basal,reading program also increased the basal's ap-parent effectiveness. On a. paragraph-meaningtest, no clear difference between skill-based andlanguage-based approaches could be detected.The authors concluded that comprehension isnot a problem in first grade and that it is there-

, fore not surprising that instruction oriented pri-marily toward language comprehension has nostrong effect. On the other hand, direct instruc-tion in the code does seem, to have positiveeffects on the aspect of reading that requires in-

,struction at this stage.

The second reanalysis was done on the Edu-cational Testing Service study of compensatoryreading programs. The programs were classifiedas either high or low in instructional time andhigh or low in skill (code) emphasis. In addi-tion, sex and three levels of SES were distin-guished. Analyses of covariance (controlling for

differences in autumn achievement test scores) .

on various dependent variableswere then calcu,-late& Clear patterns with respect to instruc-tional emphasis are difficult to detect; however,more instructional time, especially for low-SESand compensatory instructional groups at bothsecond- and sixth-grade levels, was found to bea clear benefit.

The California Teacher Study. The import oftime and its relation to type of instructional pro-gram can be understood best by considering thework of Berliner and others on the CaliforniaTeacher Study (Berliner & Rosenshine, 1977;Fisher, Filby, & Marliave, 1977; Rosenshine,1976). According to these studies and literaturereviews associated with diem, increased timeand direct teaching produce the strongest learn-ing results. Most observable "direct teaching"tends to be focused on code aspects of reading.This may be partly because observers can easilyagree on when "reading instruction" is takingplace in the case of word recognition 'but areless certain of what constitutes "instruction" incomprehension. Whether a result of observa-tional methodology or a real effect, this findingconfirms a frequently noted correlation betweena code orientation in reading and direct instruc-tional strategies. The correlation is evident tooin some chapters in these volumes (e.g., Bate-man, Vol. 1 or Wallach & Wallach, Vol. 3; asagainst Goodman & Goodman, Vol. 1), althoughthere are some exceptions (e.g., Chomsky, Vol. 2,on a child-centered approach to early apprecia-tion of the code). The correlation raises somequestions for us: Is the apparent effectiveness ofcode approaches to teaching due to their directinstruction characteristics or to the content ofwhat is taught? If the former, might a language-oriented program using direct instruction beequally or molt effective? I return to these quer,tions as I address the question of what newinstructional approaches warrant developmentand trial in the schools.

A Recommendation for Current PracticeI have distinguished, on the basis of thee

volufnes and related literature, between twobroadly defined approaches to reading instruc-tion: a code orientation and a language orienta-lion. The review of field research in reading has

suggested an advantage for code-oriented teach-ing roughly _through the primary school years,the period during which tests demand relativelyunsophisticated language processing and give aclear edge to those who can recognize printedwords accurately and quickly. This advantage isespecially marked for children in compensatoryprograms. After the primary grades, there is no

1----clear,_evidence supporting either code or lan-guage approaches to instruction. What does thissuggest for formulating policy regarding read-ing in compenSatory education programs?

As a matter of routine practice, we need toinclude systematic, code-oriented instruction inthe primary grades, no matter .what else is alsodone. ,This is the only place in which we haveany clear evidence for any particular practice.We cannot afford to ignore that evidence or theseveral instructional programs already in exis-tence that do a good job of teaching the code.The charge made by some who espouselanguage-oriented approaches arid who viewreading as an autonomous communication sys-tem that too early or too much emphasis onthe code depresses comprehension finds nosupport in the empirical data. On the otherhand, neither is there support for a radical claimthat once the code is well learned, other readingproblems will disappear. Thus, there is no evi-dence that code-emphasis programs alone will"solve" the reading problem.

What appears to be needed is systematic codeteaching together with attention to language-processing (i.e., comprehension) aspects\ ofreading. But to say this is hardly to have com-pleted a prescription for compensatory reading,instruction. Virtually 'every reading program to-day claims to be providing just such a combina-tion yet we lack many smashing successes.Where does the difficulty lie?

It lies in part in a fundamental competitionbetween code and language demands in earlyreading. Learning the code requires a controlledvocabulaly but language processing requiresa rich language with which to work. This con-flict cannot be wished away. Beck and Block(Vol. 1), in their Comparative program analysis,pointed out how an "add-on" phonics programmight lose its power when the spelling patternstaught are not given extensive practice in the

.117

reading materials that immediately follow. Andno one has yet demonstrated empkically, with acompensatory education population, a success--ful way of teaching the code entirely on thebasis of student-generated stories or wordsdrawn from the students' natural environments.The strongest claims for success along theselines come from certain proponents of "alternative education." Despite the absence of formalevidence, I have seen enough of these programsto believe that many students who would resist

The problem facing those who would de-sign reading instruction for compensatoryeducation, then, lies in great part in findinga balance of emphasis and timing betweencode and language aspects of reading.

reading in conventional programs become goodreaders in them. But in most cases, there is somelargely "unsung" systematic code teaching, atleast for a while, for most students. (For a sys-tematic "alternative teaching" approach, com-plete with a diagnostic procedure and ratherclear instructional plans, see Kohl's [1973]Reading. How To.)

The problem facing those who would designreading instruc:ion for compensatory educa-tion, then, lies in great part in finding a balanceof emphaiis and timing between code and lan-guage aspects of reading. At the same time,substantial attention to how to address the

Welan7ge-processing aspect of reading is need-ed. have a number of good code-orientedprograms available, but we have no strong suc-cess, to report for a language-oriented. program,This does n\ot argue for teaching the code andletting langua\ge take care of itself. It argues,instead, for using what we have in the wayof successful code-teaching approaches andmeanwhile focusing intensively on developinglangnage-teaching approaches that are as effec-tive in their own domain. In the next section, Iconsider some of the possibilities for language

13

instruction and for combining si)--de'alidguage training.

Toward Solving the Rest of theReading Problem: New Approachesthat Should be Tried

In this section I consider two issues: (a) howto teach language ,aspects of reading, and(b) how to combine language and code teaching.

Teaching Language Pro..03a

Oral Versus firs que cosidering how to teach language-processingskills is whether it will be most effective toteach them in an oral mode or in a writtenmode. A not infrequently made proposal bythose who favor a strong code orientation forearly reading is to focus beginning readinginstruction largely or exclusively on the codewhile providing separate instruction in oral Ian-,guage comprehension. This approach assumesthat those who do not comprehend what theyread, even though they know the code, are defi-cient in general language-processing skills andfurther, that reading comprehension is not a sig-nificantly different process from listening com-prehension. It adopts, in other'words, a "transla-tion" definition of reading. A proposal of thiskind has been made most explicitly by Sticht,but no serious empiric.?i, test has been made.Sticht himself; in his chapter (Vol. 1), describesa program of reading instruction in which con-siderable oral work takes place; but the writtenand oral activities are not clearly separated. Asystematic effort to test Sticht's model ought tobe made.

An important aspect of such a test should beattention to the possibility that separate instruc-tion in oral comprehension may be effective inimproving reading for certain kinds of materialsor up to a certain level of complexity, but thatbeyond that point, the oral ,approach may be-come cumbersome ,or even totally ineffective,The existence of such a point would be stronglypredicted by anyone espousing the notion ofreading ,as an autonomous communication sys-tem. Arguments supporting this position can bemade on the basis of skilled readers' ability toprocess written material far faster than peoplecan speak. There is also evidence that skilledreaders reading complex materials engage in a

fair-amount _otfchecking back" to earlier twit,-somethinknot possiblewi Thiarpresentations,_Thesebehaviorssuggest different processes forreading than listeningLeit least in Part.lrfaddi-tion, analyses by Olson (1977) and others of dif-ferences in the structure of written texts and oralcommunications suggest that written messagesmay be-different enough in structure to requiredifferent processes than speech messages. If dif-,ferent procesges are involved, then instructionin comprehending written material would becalled for; transfer froth oral comprehensioncould iroThe-deperrded-upon consideia-tions suggest that w_ e also ought to develop antest strategies for teaching written language-processing skills.

Direct Versus Informal Teaching. This bringsus to our second question what role directinstruction should play in teaching languageskills. As already mentioned, there appears inthese volumes a correlation of opinions: Thosewho advocate a focus on the code tend to advo-cate direct instruction; those who advocate alanguage-processing emphasis advocate looser,learner-directed instructional approaches. Sowidespread is this correlation of beliefs that werarely question its appropriateness. Yet there isnothing inherent in a language-processing em-phasis that requires informal teaching styles. lbbreak free of the current, rather unproductive,confrontation between language and code ad-vocat4s, one of the things we have to do ismentally "uncouple" informal ,teaching andlanguage orientation. It may be that onlylearner-directed, informal teaching styles. canbring about the functional uses of reading thatlanguage-oriented people stress. But it may bethe case that direct instruction will work as wellor better, especially if the processes.involved inlanguage comprehension, whether oral or writ-ten, can be better specified than they are cur-rently. What we need to do, in the tradition ofAmerican pragmatism, is to "try it and see:"

There arc,-then, two approaches to instruc-tion in language processes to.be explored: infor-mal and direct. Consider the informal or child-centered method first. It might appear that thisapproach has had its chance and failed. Ourlook at' the evidence from field research sug-gests no outstanding reading successes among

13

child-centered programs or language-experi-ence methods except for the quickest learnersand high-SES groups. These data provide no

_recommendation for informal teaching styleswith children in-Compensatory-programs. 'Yeti-think it is the case that we have not yet seen areal trial of learner-centered methods. Such atrial would require using the best aspects of in-formal teaching systematically enough and inenough classrooms that we could find out bothwhether the approach is usable by a significantnumber of .teacliers ind whether, when used,children learn to read well. The current state ofinformal education ideology and methodologypre-cliib-s-such-a-te rd. rams and teachingstrategies are described in the omrst-terms;__relatively, few opportunities for extended ap-prenticeships exist; and teachers are thus forcedto invent for themselves a good deal of whatthey do. Not all teachers are good inventors; fewhave enough years on the job to permit them togrope toward success. A first requirement thenis that proponents of informal language-teach-ing approaches make their methods more acces-sible by specification, systematic training, andthe like.

A serious test of the power of an informal,language-oriented approach to reading will alsorequire sustaining the program over relativelylong period,. at least several years. This may hedifficult, especially in communities jhat havebecome used to watching teat score data as inai-catora of the success of, their schools, because-the growth in language competence broughtabout by informal approaches may not be re-flected in scores on tests now in use. A trial ofinformal approaches, therefore, may require useof achievement tests that are more scn4itive togrowth in language competence than our cur-

.\ rent ones appear to be; In other words, I amsuggesting that child-centered, language-expe-`iance approaches to reading have not yet had areal trial in this country To have such a trial, wewould need both sustained commitment to itand attempts by those whu believe in the powerof these teaching approaches ,to develop moreexplicit ways of helping teachers implementthem and measure their effectiveness.

The alternative approach is to develop sys-tematic, direct instruction approaches to teach-

ing comprehension and language-skill aspectsof reading. Once we disengage the language-processing orientation from informal teachingmethods, this becomes a prospect that can atleast be considered: Such direct instruction incomprehension was- the aim of the early basalreading systems. But the basal reading sys-terns we inherited from the 1930s did not meettheir originators' aspirations. Today's series re-flect the successive waves of disenchantmentwith the basals in the variety of "add-on" ac-tivities that they incorporate phonics units,language-experience activities, and so on. Thepossibility of direct instruction in comprehen-sion apparently needs rethinking. Proposals fordeveloping direct instruction approaches, to -

teachinrcomprehensi_a_i and writing deserveserious consideration at tliii-timeT-as doni.o-posals for expanding the knowledge base thatmight guide this development along profitablenew lines.

Combining Language and Code Teaching

I have stated here that both code and lan-guage teaching will be required in successfulreading instruction. How are they to be com-bined? The basic choice is whether to teachcode and language simultaneously or succes-sively. That is, both code and language aspectsof reading can be the focus of instruction fromthe outset, or one can be emphasized first andthen the other.

Successive Teaching. Successive strategieshave been the most popular in the past and stilldominate most thinking about teaching reading.Which should come first, in a given theorist's orpractitioner's opinion, is very much a functionof that'individual's preferred definition of read-ing. Translation proponents even when theyrecognize the need for some instruction andpractice in language aspects of reading wantto emphasiv, the code at the outset and for aslong as it takes for fluency to develops Auton-omous language system proponents want to be-gin with a meaning emphasis and let the codecome later if instruction in it is needed at all.EMpirical evidence appears to support the code-first position. Initial emphasis on the code in adirect instruction program produces initialadvantages and no long-term disadvantages. Alanguage-first emphasis, at least in the versions

120

.tried up; to no has not showda clear.advantageat either stage. Therefore, if a successive timingstrategy is to be chosen, the current evidehceargues for focusing first on the code..This se-quence is in agreement with the stage theory ofreading development outlined by Chall (Vol. 1),in which the first two stages of reading are con-

-cernedlargely with learning the code and de-,veloping confidence in word rec-ognition. (These stages followC-perioddeveloping readiness, which includes attention

Proposals for developing direct instructionapproaches to teaching comprehensionand writing deserve sirious considerationat this time, as do proposals expanding -the knowledge base that might guide this0-yelopment along profitable new lines.

to the function and meaning aspects of Writtenlanguage.)' A code-first sequence also agreeswith Adams, Anderson, and Durkin's (1978) re-cent position paper on cognitive processes inearly reading. The authors argue that word rec-ognition, word meaning, grammatical interpre-tation, and interpretation of logical interrela-tions among parts of the text are all active at allstages of, reading hit that at the beginning ofreading, the' new 'and most difficult task andtherefore the preoccupying one -7- is wordrecognition. Focusing instruction on the code,then, is a way of helping 'children at the begin-ning stages with theirmost difficult. task. '

,Simultaneous Teaching. Is simultaneousattention to code and language-processing as-pects of reading possible? Might it alter thecourse of reading acquisition? We don't'knowthe answer to either question, since a carefullydocumented simultaneous teaching strategydoes not exist. Nevertheless, we can considersome possibilities and assess the likelihood oftheir being successful. I have already discussedthe inherent difficulty of combining languageand code emphases that derives from the codeteacher's need for a carefully controlled vocab-ulary. But most code programs develop large

recognition vocabularies relatively quickly, and,ti4.3 "conflict" might not have to last more than afew months. Elsa Bartlett (Vol. 2) suggests thatone code-oriented program, Open Court,maybean example of successful early introductiqn of arich variety of Written materials. If materials ofthis kind can be used as the basis for direct in-struction in language processing, then a veryminimal delay between code and language foci

_can be, envisaged. Bartlett's analysis of the pro-gram does not-suggesthoy! systematically or ef-fectively the materials are used; hitthisis-a case---worth investigating, particularly because theprogram involved is coming into increasinglywider use with hard-to-teach populations (Bate-.

man, 1977): According to Bartlett's analysis,Opein Court_ is able to intruduce richer-than-usual reading -Selections in part because it intro-duces elements of the code'quickly and relies onchildrento be able to handle variabilitY:in print-to-sound translations. Many contributorS' tothese volumes believe that a slower, more delib-erate pace is needed for the hard-to-teach chil.dren in a compensatory education population. Ifthey are right, then a long delay in language'instruction might be required for these chil-dren. But a recent report (Bateman, 1977) sug-gests that Open Court is being used successfullywith many hard-to-teach groups (compensatory,learning disabled; etc.). Certainly this trendshould be monitored closely over the; next fewyears.

Another alternative for simultaneous lan-guage and code emphases is to use informal,language-experience methods for language de-velopment simultaneously with a structured,code-oriented program. Strict code advocatesare likely to claim that this will c9nfuse chil-dren, who will encounter irregularly spelledwords in the course of their informal work andwho will be encouraged to guess and otherwisedepend 9n cues other than orthography in theirearly reading attempts. We have no firm data onthis, but informal observation suggests thatmost children are quite good at recognizing thedifferent demands of different situations ancl-

would attend to the code during the formal in-struction. A greater impediment, in my opinion,lies in the difficulty of school and classroomorganization that the simultaneous use of directand informal teaching seems to imply. Observa-

121,

tions of classrooms in which a combination ofdirect and informal teaching is being tried sug-gest that one or the other aspect tends to be ig-nored, or at least givek short shrift. leacherscomplain about competkng demands on theirtime, although they usually recognize that thechildren have plenty of tiine in the school dayfor both. My personal obsrvation is that indi-vidual teachers, by tem ent or training,seem to be good at one or e other kind of in-struction and attendant classroom management,but rarely at both.

These observations leadinstructional approach wotrial in the schools, a'school program so that infodirect instruction both takseparated times and placestion of different teachers.this separation are possib

e to propose, as andevelopment and

rganization of the1 instruction and

place but in clearlyand under the direc-Various models fore. For example, the

school day. might be divided into two halvesone for formal instruction, the other for infor-mal. Or the "home" clasisroom could be orga-nized along. informal lines, with children as-signed on a rotating basis to a skill center staffedby teachers who are proficient at teaching codeand thOse language skill's that seem to improvemost through direct instruction. Whatever the

,particular arrangement, -it is Clear that seriouslycombining formal and informal teaching mayrequire extensive reorganization of staff, time,and space allocations within schools. The effortmay have some surprising side .benefits, how-ever, because it may solve problems of hoipoge-

. neous versus heterogeneous grouping, "main-streaming," cost-effective use of special readingteachers, and other problemis that are difficult tocontend with in the context of self-containedclassroom Organizations. ,

Summary and Conclusions ,

On the basis of the chapters included in these...volumes, it is possible to identify two mainstrands of theory about the nature of reading.Theseare: (1) reading as translation, a view thatholds reading to be essentially the translation ofprinted, symbols intoan approximatidn of orallanguage, so that already developed capabilitiesfor understanding and using speech can be ap-plied to written language; and (2) reading as

an autonomous language priicess,. a,view thatunderstanding the written word is in certain im-portant ways different and separate from under-standing spoken language. The two views ofreading lead to different kinds of prescriptionsfor early reading instruction. Readihg as transla-tion suggests predominant attention to helpingchildren master the alphabetic code. Reading asautonomous language suggests that reading.in-struction must focus quite directly on the func-tional and meaningful use of wr; ten languageright from the outset of ins . Both basal"look-say" methods and info . "language-experience" methods of teaching are attempts tomeet this requirement in instruction.

Evidence clearly favoring one instructionalapproach over another in field settings is dif-ficult to find. Nevertheless, a repeating patternof findings concerning both what is taught and -=

how it is taught can be detected if we examineseveral decades of applied research. This pat-tern can be summarized roughly as follows:When skill in word recognition is the outcomebeing studied, code-oriented programs tendto show up better than language-oriented Pro-grams. This is especially true for low-socioeco-nomic groups and ior low achievers in general.However, when comprehension beyond the verysimplest leVels is the criterion, there is no clearadvantage for either code- or language-orientedprograms. Concerning instructional- style --direct instruction, teacher-controlled use oftime, and well-structured curricula have a clearedge again especially for low-achieving orlow-SES groups. These conclusions are drawnon the basis of evidence from: (a) several cohortsof Follow Through children; (b) Jeanne Chall'sbook, Learning- to Read: The Great Debate,which reviewed studies conducted tup to about1964; (c) research reviews conducted by Guthrie'and his colleagues for the National, Institute ofEducation's compensatory educatiOn evaluationstudies; (d) reanalyses of data from the Bondand Dykstra first-grade studies and e Educa-tional Testing Service study of compensatoryreading programs; and (e) the California TeacherStudy.

These finding's suggest several 'cites of actionfor national reading policy and for furtherdevelopment and study of reading instruction.

3

122

First, as a matter of routine practice, we needto include systematic code-oriented instructionin the primary grades, at least for hard-to-teachchildres, no matter what else is also, done. Thisis the only place in which we have au.clearevidence for ,a -particular practice. We cannotafford to ignore, that evidence or tie severalinstructional programs already available; ornearly ready for use that do a,good job of teach-ing the code. There is no empirical .evidencethat too early or too much emphasis on the codedepresses later comprehension. On the otherhand, there is no evidence that code-emphasisprograms alone will "solve" the reading prob-lem. Such programs succeed well in teachingword recognition skills. They show no advan-tage, however, ;once comprehinSion becomesthe main criterion of success (starting at aboutthird or fourth grade): For this reason, we needto work on developing programs that do a goodjob of teaching the meaning and functionalaspects,of reading.

Two "possibilities for such programs shouldbe pursued, The language-experience approach,,Which builds on children's own writing anddictation, should be specified by its propo-nents precisely enough, that it can be given aserious try in scools. Despite.wides4ead in-terest in learner: centered, language-experienceapproaches, 'these methods have not been ade-quately described. Much is left to teacher inven-tion, but not all teachers are well prepared forthis task. Areal trial of the language-experienceapproach will require a precise specificationof the approach, its sustained use over severalyearsr and quite probably, tests that are moresensitive to students' ability. to use writtenlanguage than our current ones appear to be.The second possibility for language-orientedreading instruction that should be investigatedis direct instruction. For a decade or more,language-oriented approaches and informal,learner-centered methods of teaching have tend-ed to be linked in educators' minds. This is not a...

O

necessary relationship, however. Just as we needto further deVelop and test language-experienceapproaches, we also need to explore directinstruction in comprehension. Such Listructionmay begin with oral comprehension skills, as isadvocated by several of the experts who contrib-uted to these volumes, or it may work directlyon the comprehension of written material, asothers adyocate. In either case, success willpiobably depend on the emergence nowmore than a vague promise, given new psycho-logical resarolr,on language processing of adetailed theory of the mental activities that takeplace during language comprehension. Vas,investment. in "basic" research on how peopleunderstand "written language can be expectedto/yield practical results for reading instruc-tion within some reasonable,,if not immediate,//period of time.

Finally, attention will have to be paid tohow to combine code and language aspects ofinstruction. A successive strategy in which codeis emphasized first and language folloWs, orvice versa, is the most common today. The prac-tical successes of code progranis at the earliestgrade levels, especially with compensatory edu-cation children, suggest that code should pre-cede language if a successive strategy is used.However, simultaneous teaching of code andlanguage aspects of reading may be even moreeffective, and several possibilities for suchsimultaneous teaching are suggested.

AcknowledgmentsThis 'paper was supported by a grant to

the Learning Research and Development Centerfrom the National Institute of Education (NIE),United States Department of Health, Education,and Welfare, for a series of conferences onthe Theory and Practice of Beginning ReadingInstruction, Contract #400-75-0049. This paperwas presented at the fall meeting of the NationalAcademy of Education, New York, October1977.

123

References

Adams, M.JI, Anderson, R.C., & Durkin,- D. Begin-ning ;fading: Theory and practice. Language Aris,1978, 55(1), 19-25.

AshtOn-Warner, S. Teacher, New York: Simon &Schuster, 1963.

Bateman, B. Personal communication, May 1977.

Berliner, D.C., & Rosenshine, B. The acquisition ofknowledge in the classroom. In R.C. Anderson,R.J. Spiro, & WE. Montague (Eds.), Schoolingand the acquisition of knowledge. Hillsdale, N.J.:Lawrence Eribaum Associates, 1977.

Bond, G.L., & Dykstra, R. The cooperative researchprogram in first-grade reading. Reading ResearchQuarterl , 1967, 2 (entire issue).

Chall, J . Learning to read: The great debate. NewYor : McGraw-Hill, 1967.

C.W., Filby, N.N., & Marliave, R.S. Instruc-/ tional time and student achievement in second/ grade reading and mathematics. Paper presented

at the meeting of the American Educational Re-search Association, New York, April 1977.

Freire, P. Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York:Seab'ury Press, 1970.

Guthrie, J.T., Samuels, S.J., Martuza, V., Seifert, M.,Tyler, S.J., & Edwall, G. A study of the locus andnature of reading problems in the elementaryschool (Final report, 2 sections). Newark, Del.:International Reading Association, 1976.

Just, M.A., & Carpenter, P.A. (Eds.), CognitiVeprocesses in comprehension. Hillsdale, N.J.:Lawrence Eribaum Associates, 1977.

Kohl, H. Reading, how to. New York: Bantam Books,1973.

Olson, D.R. From utterance to text: The bias oflanguage in speech and writing. Harvard tduca-tional Review, 1977, 47(3), 257-281.

Resnick, D.P., & Resnick, L.B. The nature of literacy:An historical exploration. Harvard EducationalReview, 1977, 47(3), 370-385.

Rosenshine, B. Classroom instruction. In N.L. Gage(Ed.), The psychology of teaching methods:' The75th Yearbook of the National Society for the .

Study of Education. Chicago: National Society forthe Study of Education, 1976.

Rozin, P., & Gleitman, L.R. The structure and acquisi-tion of reading. In A.S. Reber & D. Scarborough(Eds.), Reading: Theory and practice. Hillsdale,N.J.: Lawrence Eribaum Associates, 1976.

Stebbins, L.B., St. Pierre, R.G.,-Proper, E.C., Ander- .

son, R.B., & Cerva, T.R. Education as experi-mentation: A planned variation model (Vol. IV-A:An evaluation of Follow Through). Washington,D.C.: U.S. DepartMent of Health, Education andWelfare, 1977.

A Whole-Language Comprehension-Centered Viewof Reading Development

Kenneth S. Goodman and Yetta M. GoodmanProfessors of Education

Co-Directors, Program in Language and LiteracyUniversity of Arizona-

1

Editors' Note: In this paper Kenneth Goodman and Yetta Goodman describe a whole-language comprehension-centered reading program and suggest ways to implement such a program in the classroom, including Ways tomodify a basal reader program. They list major assumptions related to the reading process, teaching and learning,and instructional materials. The emphases in this approadh are on meaningful reading in which reading is itsownreward, the student's janguade and experiences as a place to begin learning more about language, and theteacher's role as guide, facilitator, and "kid-watcher." Although the Goodmans' emphasis here is on the absence,ofstructures, such as a controlled vocabulary, the reader should keep in mind that, in functioning as a guide and"kid-watcher," the teacher may use complex and less obvious structures which enable monitoring and respondingto the needs and interests of each child.

IntrodiictionJohn Dewey said education must start where

the learner is, 'and help the learner to ex-pand from there. His view of education placedthe child at the center of problem-solvingexperiences.

A whOle-language comprehension-centeredapproach to developing,reading ability andto all learning for that matter . is rooted inthe child-centered, functional view that canbe traced to such theorists .AS Dewey (1902).It builds on strength and minimizes preoccupa-tion with deficiency. Research has demonstratedthe tremendous language learning strength uni-versally present among people of all baCk-grounds, including those who already speaktwo languages when they come to school andthose whose home dialect is different from theteacher's.(Goodman, Y., 1980).

In the whole-language, comprehension-cen-tered method, literacy the ability to read andwrite is regarded as a natural extension ofhuman language development. It is based on acognitive psychology view of learning and therelationships among language, thinking, andlearning, including views of perception, cogni-tion

' scheTa theory, and concept development.involves a psycho-socio-linguistic view of

language functioning and learning relating theindiVidual to' a socio-cultural view of languagedevelopment and function.

We use this research base to support aview which is positive, building on existingstrengths of the learner; relevant, expanding onexisting experiences-of children within theirown cultures; transactional, treating the learn-_ers as active participants; personalized; dynam-ic; and process oriented.

3 9

126

Key Principles of a Whole-Language ViewThe holisttc approaCh is based on the follow-

ing key principles drawn from our scientificand humanistic bases.

The Reading Process

1. Meaning is constructed during listeningand reading. The reader Wilda meaningdrawing on. prior learning and experiencewhile interacting with the text.

2. Reading is a process of prediction, selec-tion, confirmation, and self-correction.Effective reading produces coherent mean-,ing. Efficient reading uses the least amountof energy and input necessary.

_ _3. Three_ sy_stems_ interact in language:grapho-phonic, syntactic, and semantic.These cannot usefully be separated for in-struction without creating non-linguisticabstractions and nonsense. _

4. Comprehension of meaning is always thegoal of reading and listening.

5. Expression of meaning is always the goal.. of .writing and speaking.

6. What' the reader or listener understandsbeforehand strongly influences what iscomprehended during reading or listening.

reaching,and Learning

1. Learning in school and out of schoolare not different. School programs must ex-pand on existing learning and use intrinsicMotivations. This means learning must befunctional; it means literacy is an extensionof natural language learning.

2. Ddvelopment of function precedes andmotivates development of form.

3. Language development builds expressionand comprehension strategies during func-tional, meaningful, relevant language use.This means, among other things, that thereis nq sequence ih which "skills" develop,and there is no hierarchy of language skills.

4. Children develop abilities in' response topersonal-social needs. They have alreadymade strong beginnings in developing lit-eracy before they have any contact withschools.

5. There is no one-to-one correspondence be-tween teaching and learning. The teachermotivates, arranges the environment, mon-itors development, provides relevant ap-propriate materials, and provides timelyexperiences to facilitate learning. Thelearner extracts from that environmentthose PIPTIWNS which are most meaningful.

6. Though teachers may monitor develop-ment of strategies, learners need to foduson communication of meaning. That meansthere is a double agenda in the classroom:the learners focus on use and the teachersfocus on use and development.

7. Risk taking is a necessary partof all lan-guage learning. Developing readers mustbe encouraged to predict and guess as_theymove toward meaning. An atmospheremust be created in whith mistakes are seenas a necessary part of development.

Instructional Materials

1. Materials to be read in school must, fromthe very beginning, have all the Character-istics of real functional language. Theymust be whole texts that are meaningfuland relevant.

2. Fragmented exercises which turn real lai4-guage into abstract bits and pieces have noplace in this program.

3. Materials will be hard or easy in relatian-ship to how predictable they are.

4. During instruction attention must shiftaway from words and toward comprehen-sion of meaning.

Some of the major implications these princi-ples hold for instruction follow:

Focus is alWays on meaning. The most im-portant question is, How is this contributing tocomprehension? Learners at all stages are urgedto ask themselves continually, "Does this makesense to me?" 'They learn to judge their ownsuccess by what makes sense and to reject read-,ing nonsense.

Motivation is intrinsic. No M & M's to rewardeffort or success are needed or permitted. Suchreward distorts the purpose for reading. Rele-vant meaning is reading's own reward and the

140

127

only appropriate one. When language is func-tional, motivation to learn is high, and childrenknow when,they are successful Since they havemet their own needs. Extrinsic rewards cansugarcoat dysfunctional learning. At best thelearner comes to rely on someone else's judg-ment that what has been learned is good.

readers to use reading to extend and 'acquireconcepts.

The whole-language method does not requirea controlled vocabulary a concept based on aview of language as a set of words and of learn-ing to read as learning words. A controlled vo-

_____cahnlary tends to 1Parl to materials which arpThe language of the bilingual child or. the

child whose dialeCt is of a different variety thanthe teacher's is acdepted and expanded upon todevelop flexibility in language use. The schoolexpands upon whatever base of language orlanguages.a given learner brings to school. Inthe case of the bilingual learner, the objectivebecomes !illiteracy the ability to ,read andwrite in both languages.

In this method there are no pre-reading skills,no.formalized reading readiness. Instead, learn-ing is expected to progress from whole to part,from general to specific, from familiar to un-familiar, from vague to precise, from grossto fine, from highly contextualized to more ab-stract. Children are expected to read, first, famil-iar, meaningful wholes easily predictablematerials that draw on 'concepts and experi-ences they already have. These may be signs,cereal boxes, or books. From this perspectivereadiness is Anstrinsia when language is real.Children are ready when they see need and haveconfidence in themselves: By carefully buildingon what children already know, we assure theirreadiness.

In this method there is no sequence of skillsor language units and no hierarchy for theordering of instruction in skills or languageunits. Beginners must' use the same informationas proficient readers to make sense of print.Development is a matter of getting the processtogether: learning, in the context of reading reallanguage, to use just enough print, languagestructure, and meaning and to keep. it all inproper perspective. Development involves thebuilding of comprehension strategies ways ofusing information to construct meaning -- thatwill help students become both efficient and ef-fective in using this process. Readers, as theydevelop their strategies, must become moreflexible as they move through broader rangesof materials with content further removed fromtheir own direct experiences. The goal is to help

not realistic or meaningful. From a whole -lan-guage perspective, language self-controls vo-cabulary. In any text, of the 25 mist commonwords, half will be function words (a, the, is,was, in, it, etc.) but the other half swill be wordsclosely related to story content. Furthermore, ittakes three' kinds of vocabulary to tell a story: alarge number of incidental words, a small num-ber of concept-carrying words, and very few cru-cial-or plot-carrying words. Learning to read isnot learning to,recognize words; it is learning tomake sense of texts.

The language of the bilingual child or thechild whose dialect is of a different varietythan the teacher's is accepted and ex-panded upon to develop flexibility inlanguage use..

In this whole-language program there is noseparate phonics instruction, in which childrenrecode letters to sounds (such instruction as-sumes that the children can then "blend"the sounds and produce meaningful language).Reading doesn't work that way the reader isseeking meaning, not sounds or words. Readersmust be selective and use only as much of theprint as is necessary to predict the meaning andconfirm their predictions. Readers in a whole-language program do form, rules for relatingprint to speech as they are reading meaningfultexts. But these self-developed rules are notoverlearned and artificial as they would beif they were-imposed by a structured phonics

,. program.

"Mastery learning" in readiqg is too oftenseen as breaking up the whole into small pieces,arranging them in a linear sequence, and mak-ing sure that each piece is thoroughly learnedbefore the learners are permitted to go on to the

1 411

128

next. The simplicity of this idea is seductive.But chopping language into pieces turns it intoabstractions which must then be re-assembledby the learners into a meaningful whole. Fur-thermore, the sequence in which the skills arepresented is arbitrary and artificial.

pens a piece at a time. Reading, like talking, islearned in the process of using language. Thereis no isolation of skills for instruction in this

. whole-language approach, and there is no iso-lation of processes from their use: The centralprinciple is that language is learned best whenthe leamer'socus is on its communicative use.

Most crucial in this whole-language methodis the teacher, whO serves as guide, facilitator,and "kid watcher." The teacher capitalizes onthe language competence and language-learn-ing ability of children and helps make literacyan extension of their natural language learning.

ImpleMentation in a School Program.

Children do not confine their learning toschool. Much of their development occurs be-fore they enter school and outside of school.The essential element's of an in-school programwhich is consistent with the principles outlinedabove and which draws on the learning takingplace out of school are described below.

For the purpose of discussion, we willdiscuss this whole-language, comprehension-

centered program under four headings: Readingin the Preschool, Beginning Reading, Develop-mental Reading, and Revaluing: An Alternativeto Remediation. It will become obvious that thisis a continuum with principles, objectives, ac-tivities, and materials common for all stages...

Reading in the Preschool

Among the' literacy objectives of preschoolsare (1) to encourage what's already happening,that is, to build on children's developing aware-ness of functions of print, environmental read-ing, and informational reading; (2) to create aliterate environment in the classroom -2- one inwhich functional print is -everywhere; (a) toexpand the learners' awareness of books andknoWledge of how to handle them; and (4) toexpand children's sense of the style and formof language by reading to them. The, focus

is on experience, awareness, and intrinsicmotivation.

An important aspect of any preschool pro-gram is communication with parents to make,them aware of opportunities they have fordevelopi literacy in their children. Some'spe-GiEig *ndufkilsingAnsLefaag-attention to written language; telling children whatthings say, encouraging them to say what theythink something says; and increasing children'sawareness of ptint.

At their preschool, children take walksaround the neighborhood and school lookingfor environmental print and trying to decidewhat ft says; they learn their name and thenames of other children; charts and topical bul-.letin boards are created 'by the children and theteacher; teachers, aides, older students, andparents read to and with preschool children insmall groups and one-to-one.

The preschool room has lots of books re-sponse books and wordless picture books. Thereare centers for listening, where children followbooks while listening to records or tapes, andfor writing, where they create grocery lists,notes, and picture captions. The value of liter-acy is highlighted during role-playing experi-ences as children cook, go to store corners, ordress up in clothes centers.

Beginning Reading

Since we believe children have, made a strong,beginning in developing awareness of print andof its functions well before they enter the firstgrade, the term "beginning reading" refers onlyto the fact that children will be beginning a con-certed program to help them become fully func-tibnal readers.

Everything we have said about attention toliteracy in the preschool still applies but is amatter of more explicit concern at this stage.The program encourages children to be proud oftheir language, to ,be self-confident and self-reliant risk takers. Instruction is directed athelping children. develop strategies to makesense of print. The teacher is a monitor and fa:cilitator encouraging children to seek mean-ing, to predict, to sample, to confirm, and tocorrect themselves. Children are encouraged touse all clues, not just words, to predict meaning

/ 4 0A.

129

from language. The teacher of beginning read-ers monitors their development through closeobservation. . ,

In a beginning reading program, the class-room is an environment in which. functional,meaningful, relevant written language is every-

te Thep int is createdteacher as they label their centers and the ob-jects they contain: charts for rules, attendance,and jobs; bulletin boards for autobiographiesof the chilcivn in the class; stores with boxes,cartons,and signs; and a classroom post office,where each child has a box for receiving "mail"and messages.

Learning to read is not something thathappens apietie at a time. Reading, liketalking, is learned in the process of usinglanguage. . . . The central principle isthat language is learned best when thelearner's focus is on its communka-five use.

A variety of whole-language techniques isused in the beginning reading program. Thereare language experiences in which pupils dic-tate individually or in groups or write storiesthemselves -based on their own experiences.These are recorded on charts min books boundby pupils at a publishing center in the room.There are read-along activities where pupils fol-low a text while they listen to a record of some-one reading. There are shared -book' experiences,in which teacher and pupils read together anenlarged version ofe favorite book or children'ssong or rhyme. The is assisted reading, wherechildren read along With a teacher or aide whoprovides just enough support to keep the readergoing.

There are also many predictable books in theclassroom. These books are called predictablebecause they deal with familiar content in fa-

language. They have simple, sometimesrepetitious structures, making it easy for chil-dren to get a sense of where the book is goingand to predict what will happen next.

The children are growing into literacy underthe guidance of their teachers. They are not

-carefully taken into it skill by skill. fk

r.Developmental Reading

The part -of a reading program which takesinadesome-beginning at read-

ing and helps them to grow as readers is calleda "developmental reading program." The pro-gram adheres closely to the principle that at allstages pupils must be reading comprehensibletexts. No materials with artificial language areacceptable. The teacher builds. pupils' level.of confidence and encourages risk taking by en-couraging them to choose materials they will'want to read and want to comprehend. We ex-pand their flexibility, help them develop and

_broaden their taste, and work with them to buildstrong comprehension strategies.

There are three focal points in developing aholistic program: (1) stimulating lots of reading;(2) creating a climate which accepts and encour-ages risk taking; and (3) keeping the focus onmeaning = the teacher's and the students'.These points are the absolute minimum for theprogram. If they are not present, the programwill not be successful, no matter how many spe-cific activities that we've mentioned, are used.

Since the major means of building profi-ciency is reading itself, plenty of time is pro-vided for reading. Since language is learnedbest when it is self-motivated, self-selection isencouraged. Self-selection also helps in devel-oping taste and flexibility. Children are helpedto brdaden the scope and range of their readingand to build specific strategies which will, behelpful with different kinds of texts. They areencouraged to be active, rather than passive,in their own learning and to be interactive withthe texts .they read. Pupils do work hard andextend themselves to understand texts whichare important to them.

Materials for the developmental readingprogram should be written with conscious con-sideration of the experiences, concepts, and in-terests of the intended audience. Subject areatextbooks are limited resources to be used ,

as one part of a total curriculum. In a holisticprogram teachers do not abuie and misuse textsby equating kthem with the curriculum and ma-

-0

1 11 3

130

'nig pupils totally dependent on textbooks forlearning.

The program offers patience, and progres,stoward development of comprehension strate-gies, instead of drill on skills. Comprehensionstrategies focus on useok graphic, syniiktic, andmeaning cues in the context of real whole lan-guage. Strategy lessons expand on strengthsand help pupils build strategies of sampling,predicting, confirming, and correcting by usingmeaningful passages that offer many unambig-uous opportunities to use the strategies.

Here is an example. We have noted thatpupils in reading sometimes substitute what forthat and that for what. As we pay closer atten-tion, we find they also do this with when/thenand where/there. Rather than isolate these fordrill or assume they indicate a phonics problem,.we determine that these substitutions tend tooccur where either word could make some senseand fit grammatically. So we find or write ameaningful passage in which each time one ofthese words is used it is the only one that canfit. Our purpose in having the pupils read thepassage is to help them use and strengthen self-correction strategies. But we will also be help-ing them to make better predictions. At no timedo we explicitly call their attention to thesewords in isolation. That would strengthen anassociation between the words.

Specifics of a developmental reading pro-gram include lots of time spent reading, timefor periods of sustained silent reading of bookschildren select themselves. Books with a widerange of topics and difficulty are available to thechildren. In addition to trade books and schooltextbooks, the program also uses TV guides,newspapers, environmental -reading (signs,boxes, ads), and paperbacks of all kinds. Theprogram employs reading materials from librar-ies, homes, the community, hobbies, crafts, andinformational sources. It cultivates reading inthe pursuit of personal interests. Students arehelped to understand their own cultural back-ground by having available many materials thatrepresent the multi-lingual, multi-dialectal, andmulti-cultural natureof our society.

Particular concern is given to the reading ofcontent materials in math, science, and social

studies. Students work at the development ofspecial strategies for reading these materials.

For example, a general` strategy for readingmath problems encourages pupils to read themthree times once to decide what informationis being sought, a second time to lay out equa-tions and computations, and again to get specif-ic information and check against the problem.Each successive reading employs different strat-egies for different purposes.

In planning for reading development in each,content field, teachers are encouraged to use thef011owing general approach. First, they reviewthe general and special uses. of reading in thearea. Then they consider what new kinds oftexts pupils will encounter for example,maps, charts, recipeg, directions, or scripts.Next, they decide what strategies, backgroundknowledge, and resources are needed. Defer-mining where the pupils are with respect to thenecessary strategies, background knowledge,and resources comes next. Such careful plan-ning, organizing, and evaluating makes it possi-ble to facilitate the pupils' interaction with thetexts so that strategies are built and comprehen-sion strengthened.

Revaluing: An Alternative to Remediation

In our experience troubled readers thosewho are considered by themselves or others tobe not effective are in conflict with them-selves. In a true sense, they are their own worstenemies. They try to make sense out of whatthey read, but they also try to do it by the num-bers, to remember and use every skill they'vebeen taught. They are so busy attacking words-that they lose confidence in themselves as lan-guage users. They mistrust their' own languagestrategies and become dependent on teachers totell them what to do as they read. They are veryreluctant to take risks, and their confidencelevel is low.

Troubled readers believe that there aretwo kinds of readers good and bad. And theybelieve they are bad readers. Good readers,in their view, never have problems. Troubledreaders believe that the subskills work for goodreaders, so these pupils suffer from the "next-word" syndrome. Every time they come to aword that is unfamiliar, they take it as proof that

1 1 k

131

they are bad readers. Good readers, they think,always know the next word. 11.oubled readerstreat. all words as equally important; so theyspend as much time trying to sound out a nameas they do an important concept - carrying word.They give up on meaning, they don't .expectthings to make sense, and reading becomes the-tedious task of getting as near to as many wordsas possible. They believe that if they get tomeaning without systematic use of skills,they've somehow been cheating. Remedial pro-grams thlt concentrate on areas of weaknessonly serve to aggravate the problems.

These pupils must be patiently helped torevalue the reading process and revalue them-selves as learners and readers. The focus in aholistic program on revaluing helps pupils tobuild risk taking, to build confidence, and tobecome aware that they have ,personal choicesand alternatives. We build toward the readers'sense of their own strengths. We help them tovalue what they can do and not be defeated bywhat they can't do, to trust themselves and theirlinguistic intuitions.

Instruction for troubled readers seeks to movethem away from the next-word syndrome andtotal reliance on phonics and to help them buildmeaning-seeking strategies. They have to learnto accept their own miscues as legitimate and tofind satisfaction in getting sense from what theyare reading.

Specifics of a revaluing program include agreat deal of whole-language, meaningful read-ing and of non-pressuring support. Patience is akey ingredient in working with troubled read-ers. e expect some setbacks and considerabletraum as the pupils get control of their conflictwith hemseives. But we continually demon-

e to pupils that understanding the meaningof what they are reading is the primary goal.

It is particularly important that troubled read-ers ye the support at all times of a full, mean-ingful, real-langurige text. Almost invariably,they have been subjected to an increasinglymeaningless set of skill drills which haveturned reading, for them, into disconnected ab-stractions. The goal of the revaluing programis to help troubled readers put themselves andreading back. together.

Moving to a Whole-Language Approachfrom a Basal ReaderCentered Program

The most likely common denominator incontemporary classrooms is, one or more basalreaders. Teachers and schools wanting to shifttoward a whole-language, comprehension-cen-tered approach may find that the most practicalmeans of doing so is to modify their use ofthe available basal readers. This can be aboom,plished, except in those cases where the basal istoo tightly structured and skill based. Here aresome steps.

The teacher must modify his or her use kgfthe manual. The teacher should develop a setof comprehension--centered criteria for decidingwhich advice in the manual is worth following,which activities are worth including, and whichselections are useful. Control shifts in this pro-cess frrim the manual to the teacher.

The basal becomes on-e resource among manyin the classroom. In most cases, the stories andother selections beyond the primers and pre-priin,-3rs in basals are reasonably good. Theydraw on well-written children's literature, andthey have lost some artificiality and incorporatemore ethnic and cultural diversity than ,earlierbasal.,readers.

Here are criteria which can be used in select-ing stories from the basals: (1) language must benatural and not fragmentary or artificially con-trolleda4predictability of language forms andcontent should be reasonably high; (3) contentshould be relevant and interesting to the pupils;and (4) illustrations should support but not re-place the language of the text.

In a holistic program all pupils don't, have toread the same stories in the same order. Someselections may be of little interest to somepupils, some may be irrelevant to some popu-lations, some may be better used earlier thanothers. Pupils may read some stories and dis-cuss them with others, or, they may read them asthey become interested in them.

The key is to retain only those parts of thebasals which are compatible with the criteriaof the whole-language, meaning-centered pro-gram. Only a few selected skill lessons and partsof the workbooks screened through the criteriawill prove useful. An occasional item that con-

1 5

132

tains a meaningful passage of some length, thatfocuses on comprehending, or that involvescontent relevant to the pupils may be adaptableas a strategy lesson.

Some commercial programs have been de-signed with more focus on whole, language andmeaning than others. Bill Maitin's Sounds ofLanguage (Holt), Reading Unlimited (Scott,Foresman),. Breakthrough to Literacy (Bowmar,Longmans), and Van Allen's Language Experi-ence in Reading (Encyclopedia Britannica) areexamples. In addition, there are a number ofpublishers, who offer paperback book packages,read-aloni libraries with records or tapes, top-ical newspapers (Scholastic, Weekly Reader),and other materials compatible with a whole-language approach. Scholastic now providespacks of paperback books keyed to extending-themes in ,peLific basal readers. Resourcefulteachers can even take discarded basals and cutthem apart to- place in folders or binders thestories that they know children like and thatmeet the criteria of being whole, ;gal. meaning-.ful language.,

There is little useful information to begained from the results of a published testadministered in half an hour that a teachercan't obtain from directly monitoring thereading of pupils and Interacting withthem daily.

We accept the reality that teachers need toaccommochte new ideas gradually and to planfor a transition from what they have done inthe past to a new program consistent with newcriteria. In this transition, the teacher can keepthe best of the old, eliminate strategies and materials that conflict with the new criteria, andintegrate new concepts with the old in a newperspective. What makes this process work is abelief in the strengths of pupils and a concertedattempt on the part of the teacher to shift from adeficiency, vieWTh-to avositive view that acceptsand builds on pupil strengths.

A willingness to take risks is essential forpupili to become literate. It is also essential for

teachers. Nothing is more important in this pro-gram than informed teachers who understandlanguage and who care about their pupils.Theyknow_how to observe arid monitor the progresspupils are making in developing literacy. Theyobserve pupils using, language speaking,reading, and writing and informally applytheir knowledge of language development toachieve an 'understanding of the pupils'strengths and needs.

Teachers evaluate this pr. -am on the basis ofevidence that pupils use ct. Aprehension strate-gies. They watch for signs of effective, efficientuse of sampling, predicting, confirming, andself-correcting. They watch for evidence that

' readers are trying to make sense of writtenlanguage.

Evaluation of reading development must in-clude self-evaluation. Teachers involve.childrenthrough individual conferencing in self-evalua-tion and planning for continued reading devel-opment: The readers should lie continuouslyasking themseNes, "Does this make sense?"The most importaniquestion a teacher can askto assist in this process is, "Did that make senseto. you?" The corrections pupils make of theiroral, reading miscues are strong indications oftheir self-monitoring for meaning. If pupils arecorrecting miscues which reflect meaning lossand not correcting miscues which don't, thenthey are showing concern for meaning.

There is little useful information to be gainedfrom the results of a published group test ad-ministered in half an hour that a teacher can'tobtain from directly monitoring the reading ofpupils and interacting with them daily. But thisrequires that teachers knoW a great deal abouttheir pupils, about how reading works, andabout how it is learned.

In some instances, teachers use miscue analy-sis to get a full profile of a pupil. It is a win-dow on each pupil's use of the reading process,and it reveals developing strengths as well asplateaus and hang-ups. But in most cases, theteachers use the analysis informally to gain asense of pupils' progress. What is important isthat teachers, as skilled professional observers,are continually engaged in evaluation whilethey interact with pupils (Goodman and Burke,1980).

I4 f...`

School districts will not find this an easyprogram to put into effect if the focus of theirteachers, reading programs, and administratorsis on lubskill teaching to raise test scores. Ithas been proved often that what is taught byrote can be retrieved for short-term specific pur-poses. Certainly- teaching for ,the word attackskills that will appear on a standardized testwill raise the scores .on that fest, at leak inprimary grades. However, these test scores donot really show the 'development 'of effectivereading proficiency. Some students learn to readdespite, low test scores. Some-overcome skill in-struction and learn to read but also learn to hatereading because it is a tedious process. Othersever catch on, to what reading is really all

ut. They keep applying skills and getting nome ning 'from what they read. Reading remainsan instructional activity for the latter group andnever \eu pleasurable, useful, personal experi-ence. The.group of people who do learn to readand to it have high and low reading testscores. The develop reading strategies on their,own often\withOut benefit of instruction tliatcould help them develop flexibility in reading..

If administrators and teachers can accept theview of learning to read as a natural processwhich occurs in environments where reading isa meaningful and functional part of all thelearning experiences.in and out of school, thendeveloping a whole-language, comprehension-centered program will be \easy. These teachersbuild on what they know about jengUage and-learning to read. They organize an environmentin which reading is used by students to learnabout significant aspects of the total human ex-perience. Such a program requires that princi-pals and parents respect teachers as profession-als and children as learners and expect both tobe responsible and productive.

In a whole-language, comprehension-cen-tered program, reading is not separate fromother learning. It becomes an integral part of allthe learning experiences students, have duringtheir school day. Reading becomes a tool to gainknowledge, to participate vicariously in the ex-periences of others, to question the views andstatements of others. Students must see readingas significant to their own lives. This can be

133

accomplished when reading is a means to moresignificant experiences. It is in such a settingthat reading is developed naturally. As the focusof teaching reading shifts from a highly directedstructural program to a program where readingis always a means to an end always one partof a whole-language, comprehension-centeredcurriculum reading takes its proper place.

ReferencesBritton, James. Language Learning. Miami, Florida:

University of Miami Press, 1970.Dewey, John. The Child and the Curriculum. Chi-. cago: University of Chicago Press, 1902.

Goodman,. Kenneth S., and Goodman, Yetta M."Learning to Read is Natural." In Theory andPractice of Early Reading Vol. 1, edited by LaurenB. Resnik and Phyllis A. Weaver. Hillsdale, NewJersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1979.

Goodman, Kenneth; Goodman, Yetta; and Flores,Barbara. Reading in the Bilingual Classroom: Lit-eracy and Biliteracy. Rosslyn, Virginia: NationalClearinghouse for Bilingual Education, 1979.

Goodman, Yetta, and Burke, Carolyn. 'Reading Strat-egies: Focus on Comprehension. New York: Holt,Rinehart and Winston, 1980.

Goodman, Yetta M. "The Roots of Litericy.." In Clare-mont Reading Conference; Forty-fourth Yearbook,edited by Malcolm P. Douglass. Claremont, Cali-fornia: The Claremont Reading Conference, 1980.

Goodman, Yetta. "Kid-Watching: An Alternative toTesting." National Elementary Principal, 57 (June1978): 41-45.

Goodman, Yetta, and Watson, Dorothy J. "A ReadingProgram to Live With: Focus on Comprehension."Language Arts, 54 (NovemberDecember 1977);868-879.

Hittleman, Daniel F. Developmental Reading: A Psy-cholinguistic P,,rspective. Skokie, Illinois: RandMcNally, 1978.

Holdaway, Der,. The Foundations of Literacy. Syd-ney, Austrersia: Ashton Scholastic, 1979.

Huck, Charlotte, Children's Literature in the Ele-mentary School. New York: Holt, Rinehart andWinston, 1968.

Lee, Dorris. M., and Rubin, Joseph B. Children andLanguage. Belmont, California: Wadsworth, 1979.

,Martin, Bill. Teacher's Editions: Sounds of LanguageReaders. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,1972, 1974.

134

Moffett, ,James.> A Student-Centered Language ArtsCurriculum, Grades K-13: A Handbook for Teach-ers. Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin,1973.

Smith, E. Brooks; Goodman, Kenneth S.; and Mere-dith, Robert. Language and Thinking in School,/'Second edition. New York: Holt, Rinehar andWinston, 1976.

Smith, Frank. Reading Without Noniense. NewYork: Teachers College Press, Columbia Univer-sity, 1979.

Taylor, Joy. Organizing the Open' Classroom: ATeacher's Guide to the Integrated Day. New York:Schocken, 1972.

.

Tierney, Robert J.i.Readance, John E.; and Dishnei,Enrest K. Reading Strategies and Practices: AGuide for Ithproving Instruction. Boston, Massa-chusetts: Allyn & Bacon, Inc., 1980.

Tway, Eihrep (Ed.).- Reading Ladders for Hyman_ Relations. Urbana, Illinois: ERIC Clearinghouse

on Reeding and Communication Skills and theNational Council of Teachers of English, in press.

Van Allen, Roach, and Allen, Ciaryce. LanguageExperience Activities. Boston, Massachusetts:Houghton Mifflin, 1976.

Weaver, Constance. Psycholinguistics and Reading:From Process to Practice. Cambridge, Massachu-setts: Winthrop Publishers; 1980.

William, Frederick; Yapper, 'Robert; and Natalicio,Diana S. The Sounds of Children. EnglewoodCliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1977.

O

V

Direct Ipstruction: A Bottom Up Skills Approachto Elementary Readihg Instrucfion*

Douglas W CamineUniversity of'Oregon

Editors' Note: Douglas damine describes a direct, highly structured reading program with a subskills or dedodingemphasis. The paper presents a rationale for taking that position and gives details about how such a programoperates. Although the author's experience and most of his references relate to a specific program, many of theseideas are relevant to other highly structured approaches to instruction. Dr. Gamine organizes his paper aroundsix aspects of teaching basis skills: a sequential scope and sequdnce of readigg skills; proceoUres for evaluatingand modifying a reading programto meet the needs of different students; presentation,techniques; the focus ontime spent in reading instruction; and the orchestration of instruction so that students' individual needs are met.

-74

Success in reading is very important to stu-dents for a variety of reasons for academicand vocational advancement, for enjoyment ofliterature and many other kinds of printed mate-rials, and fOr general psychological well-being,It is impo,rtant for schools to demonstrate thatthey can help all students achieve success inreading. Although problems such as poverty, adisruptive home life, and physiological impair-ments can make this task difficult, these prob-lems must not be used as excuses for the poorperformance of students. With the support ofthe administration, teachers can bring about sig-nificant improvements in reading achievementwithout changes in children's economic and so-cial environments.

While most reading educators would agreethat schools can and must provide studentswitksuccessful school experiences, these sameeducators would not ,necessarily s agree abouthow to define reading or how to teach it. ThefollOwing discussion of what'is meant by read-ing and how students learn to toad reflects aparticular viewpoint a viewpoint in support

of a direct instruction approach to subskillsteaching. Other, ,viewpoints are presented elde-where in this handbook.

From a subskills 'perspective, the readiprocess is best understood as part of a languaarts continuum. While the continuum belowdoes not reflect the complex interactions thatexist it does provide a developmental frame-work for viewing the 'language de\relopmentand reading process.

Receptive

Expressivewhat

Decoding

Language

express

Comprehension

,

(Chil ren learn the meVring ofother people ay)

Language Children use language tomeanin

(Children translate print int lan-guage forms) . .

of Narritive Material (Chil-dren understand sequentialstories)

Comprehension bf Expository Materiel

r.

(Children understand texts (leafingwith large amounts of new infor:\mation from science, socialstudies, -

health, etc.) 11

119

Time

I

136

As educators know, students do not progressalong the continuum at equal rates. Same stu-dents progress quite rapidly, others slOWly. Thechallenge facing educators is to help each.stu-dent experience as much success as possible. Tomeet this challenge, professionals must makesome new, rather different assumptions abouthow children learn. The first is that children areconstructionists, which, in part, means theycontinually strive to create meaning from theenvironment. A second, often overlooked, as-sumption is that students havell limited amountof capacity for processing information. Childrenwith backgrounds where they have had fre-quent, academically oriented verbal interactionswith adults tend to be betterat creating meaning.(at least in a verbal sense) and at processinginformation. Children from other backgroundsoften require instruction that fosters meaningfullearning without making unreasonable informa-tion processing deniands. A subskills orienta-tioh attempts to provide that type of instruction.

One of the major premises of the subskill ap-proach is that reading .is not a natural languageprocess and that learning to read requires specificinstruction. Another assumption is that reading,as a complex skill, is comprised of subordinateunits that must be mastered and integrated toform higher order skills. Consequently, to accom-plish this developmental task, a variety of sub-skills thought to be essential are taught routinelyto student.§: The order of progression in theseskills is from prerbquisite smaller units to largerunits. (Samuels, 1980, p. 207)

The subskills orientation makes meaningfullearning more likely foie students by reducingthe information load, simplifying the learningact, and allowing for niastery learning. Teachingsmaller units is one way to simplify lean:iing,and probably the most sensible. LaBerge andSamuels (1974).suggested that the sequence inlearning to decode (word attack skills) is fromdistinctive features to sounding out letters, thenletter clusters, and, finally, words. Identifyingletters according to distinctive features 'issimpler than recognizing words according tosentence context cues, picture cues, initial lettercues, word configuration cues, and so on.

*This paper is adapted from Direct Instruction Read-ins, by Douglas Camille and Jerry Silbert with4thepermission of the publisher, Charles E. Merrill,1300 Alum Creek Drive, Columbus, Ohio, 43216.

00

A recent metastudy (a study of studies) basedon research reported in the Reading Research,Quarterly (Pflaum et al., 1980) suggested theimportance of leaching ,letter sounds,. The onlysignificant finding concerned the effectivenessof one aspect of phonics teaching letter -sound correspondences and blending as ameans of introducing word reading. None °Valeother classes of studies dealing with decodingor comprehension showed significant effects.Although 10ming letter-sound correspon-dences is not in itself particularly meaningful, itdoes contriblite to accuracy (andsuCcess) in ini-tial decoding'. Though this pattern of teaching isinitially less "meaningful" to the child, it en-ables him or her to gain confidence, build skills,and develop skills rapidly.

The subskills orientation Makesmeaningful learning more likely forstudents by redu ing the information load,simplifying the let ring act, and allowingfor mastery learning. Teaching smallerunits is one way to simplify learning, andprobably the most sensible.

Prior teaching of subskills also makes laterlearning of more complek skills 'easier. This is,in part, because of the reduced informationioad.Teaching students word attack skills basedon the letter composition of wards usuallymakes sentence reading easier for students. Asstudents become proficient at sentence reading,the Word attack skills become automatic, with-out the 'reader being aware of their application.However, for the beginning reader, the skill4 arenot automatic and the ing-ormation load is great.In the 1971 edition of Understanding Readihg,Frank Smith noted 'that I

tie mere fact that a child cannot read very fastputs a heivy burden on memory and attentionalsystems that are both inexperienced and over-loaded with all kinds of instructions and rules. Bythe time the novice has built up enough speed to,take some of the strain off' his memory, many ofthe earlier rules have become unnecessary oroverlearned and automatic, and the memory loadis reduced in any case. (p. 3) 'Another advantage of the subskills orienta-

tion is that it is suitable for applying a mastery

t5o

137

- k.

learning system. Subskills can be practiceduntil they are mastered and then they can beintegrated to form more complex components.Ultimately, the students will use all of thesecomponents in unison, but not all compor...mtsneed to be learned simultaneously (Case,1975).When some Components are learned earlier, lessinformation processing capacity is required inlearning the more comple skill. Thus, masterylearning of components makes learning a com-plex Skill-easier. (See Sanniels, 1980.)

As students become beat analyzing wordsbased on letter composition, they also` increasetheir use of context cues. An awareness of theletters that make up a word~ and pf the contextwithin which the word oecurs contributes toaccurate decoding and 'comprehension. For be-ginning readers, letter composition is more im-portant because students have difficulty takingadvantage of the few context cues available inearly readers (Samuels, 1980).

Subskills are not, of course, an end in them-selves, but a means. Decoding or word attackskills could be considered a very large subskillof comprehension. Reading requires accuratelytranslating printed words into some languageform (decoding) to produce ineaninglcompre-heniion). Students must translate a messagewith some accuracy before they can 'compre-hend it. Otherwise, fragmentary guessing Proce-dures deVelop.

Researclon Comprehensive SubskillInterventions

Since detailed research reviews of skills-based orientations toward reading instructionare available elsewhere '(e.g., Carnine andSilbert, 1979), only brief mention 'of selectedstudies 'will be made here. After conducting anextensive review of the ,research literature onteacher effectiveness, Rosenshine (1979) sum-

., marized the variables that were associated withstudent academic success as "direct instruction":

To give an overview of the results, direct instruc-tion refers to high levels -off' student engagementwithin academically focused, teacher-directedclassrooms using sequenced, structured mate-rials? As developed below, direct, instructionrefers to teaching activities focused on academicmatters where goals are clear to students; timeallocated for instruction is sufficient and continu-

ous; content coverage is extensive; student per-formance is monitored; questions are at a low cog-nitive level and produce many correct responses;and feedback to students is immediate and acEi-

t. CleMically oriented. In -direbt instruction, theteacher controls instructional goals, choosesmaterial appropriate for the student's ability level,and paces the instructional episode. Interaction ischaracterized as structured, but not authoritarian;rather, learning takes place in a convivial aca-demic atmosphere: (p. 38)

Although the research. Rosenshine recqewedfocuses on the achievement of low-income, pri-mary-grade students, other researchers reportsimilar results with other types of students.

A federally funded ten-year "study calledFollow Through evaluated several major ap-proaches to educating low-income, primary-grade students. Direct approaches were com-pared with a language experience approach,-Piaget's stages of learning, child developmenttheory, discovery learning, and open education.Only students in a direct instruction approachconsistently outperformed control students onbasic, cognitive, and affective measures. Guthrie(1977) summarized the Follow Through resultsin this way:

Final answers about teaching are not availablefrom this study (Follow Through) nor will theyever be no more than final answers about medi-cine, engineering, or poetry. A fully complete ex-planation of education is not likely, since valuesof the public and research methods are constantlyshifting. However, the results of the FollowThrough experiment endow us with evidenceabout the effects, of teaching programs at an un-precedented level of certainty. The edge that themore successful programs have over the lesssuccessful programs is wide enough to serve as afoothold in the climb to improved, intended edu-cation. (p. 244)

Ingredients for a Succeaul ProgramIf teachers are to effectively and efficiently

teach reading fallowing a direct instruction sub-skills approach, they must be knowledgeable inseveral areas, which comprise the major topicsof discussion in the remainder of this paper:

1. Scope and sequence of reading instruc-tion knowing the essential skills or objec-tives that make up the reading process andwhen to teach them. While knowledge of a

5i

0

138

scope and sequence r reading instructionis far from complet ducators can im-prove student performance by applyingavailable knowledge. Theothousands of stu-dents who are now failing in school cannotwait for more kriowledge to be gathered.

2. Program design knowing procedures forevaluating, selecting, and modifying read-ing programs to meet the needs of all stu-dents in their classroom's.

3. Presentation techniques knowing tech-niques-for effectively presenting lessons oractivities, including techniques for moti-vating students, diagnosing and correctingtheir errors, and pacingltasks:

4..Academic engaged time knowing howorganize classrooms so that thU amount

of time students spend engaged in reading, instruction is maximized.5. Classroom orchestration knowing how

to individualize instruction by properly( placing students in a program and then

moving them at an optimal rate throughthe program, based on frequent evaluationof their learning.

Teaching can be defined 'as the intentionalarrangement of both the physical and the inter-personal environment to ensure student successand growth. The ways in which administratorsand parents can contribute to this optimal en-vironment must be considered and will betouched upon here. Textbook publishers andcolleges of education also play important roles,many of which can be inferred from the discus-sidn of how to teach reading which follows. Afinal note: The effectiveness of a skills-approachto reading instruction depends not only on theteacher's knowledge but also on his or her dedi-cation to excellence. A teacher's commitment isessential for the success of many students.

Scope and SequenceThe scope and sequence of reading instruc-

tion can be conceived of as three developmentalstages: beginning, primary, and inte'rmediate. Inthe beginning stage, emphasis is placed on de-coding and oral language. In the primary stage,equal emphasis is placed on decoding and com-prehension. In the intermediate_stage, theemphasis is on comprehensidri of narrative and

content area material. A more detailed discus-sion of scope and sequence appears in DirectInstruction Reading (Carnine and Silbert, 1979).

Program DesignTeachers must be able to evaluate reading

programs so they can select those that will bestmeet their students' needs. In addition, theymust be able to design lessons for teaching spe-cific skills, which often requires modifying orsupplementing certain aspects of a oommeicialprogram. Six aspects of direct instruction pro-gram design are relevant when selecting a read-ing program, writing lesson plans, modifyingreading programs, and writing IEPs (Individual-ized-Education Plans): (1) specifying objectives;(2) devising problem-solving strategies; (3) de-veloping teaching procedures; (4) selecting ex-amples; (5) providing practice; and (6.sequenc-ing 'skills and examples.

Specifying objectives. Objectives must° bestated as specific, observable behaviors. Sayingthat students will be decoding at first-gradelevel by the end of first grade is not specific. Thetype of words the students will be expected toread must be specified, along with accuracy andrate The way in which the wordspresented must also be described, for example,in lists or in passages. For passage reading, thereadability (complexity of sentence lengtILorstructure) should also be specified.

Objectives of a program should be carefullyevaluated according to their usefulness. Sinceteaching time is limited, skills should be listedin order of importance, with those skills defined .by the school as essential being taught first. Iftime allows, less essential skills can also betaught. Setting priorities for skill developmentis important, since most programs contain moreobjectives than students,can reach.

Devising problem- solving strategies. When-ever possible, programs should teach students'problem-solving strategies rather than requirethem to memorize information. A strategy istaught using a limited set of examples andthen applied to new examples.Forinikance,dents who kriow the soundifor the letters m,

_s, f, d, a,1 and can be taught a sounding- utstrategy to deco e regular words like mat, id,fat, and mom, nce the students master the

1 v 04,

139

sounding-out strategy with these words, theycan use the sa e strategy to read words like sitmad, rum, it, am, Sam, rod, and rid. Althoughsome student learn strategies without their be-ing explicitly taught, many students do needexplicit instruction.

Developing teaching procedures. After objec-tives are specified and a strategy has beendevised, the strategy must be translated into aformat that specifies how the teacher will pre-sent the strategy. Providing detailed formats isvery helpful because teaching involves veryspecific behaviors. Teachers do not teach stu-dents to decode words in some abstract fashion.They point to particular words, give informa-tion, ask questionS, and so on.

Formats often contain two stages. In_theintro-__

duction- stage' of -a format, the teacher demon-strates the steps in a strategy and then providesstructured practice in using the strategy. Theteacher makes the steps in the problem-solvingstrategy overt so that the students can see howto approach similar examples. In the dis-crimination stage, the student operates with lit-tle or no teacher help and is given exampleswhich do and do not call for use of the newlytaught strategy. The student internalizes thestrategy, learning to apply it without guidancefrom the teacher.

Selecting examples. Selecting appropriate.examples is a critical part of format construc-tion. Examples at the introduction stage are ap-propriate only if the student can use the newstrategy to come up with the correct answer. Forexample, when teaching students to decode reg-Ular words, the examples would be limited towords that contain only the letters for whichstudents have been taught the letter-sound cor-respondences. If the students know the letter-sound correspondences only for the letters m, s,a, d, f, r, t, and i, the teacher should not presentmet since it has an unknown letter (e).

__ --Selecting-appropriate examples for the dis-

crimination stage is more complex. In additionto examples of the new strategy, other examplesmust also be included. These other examplesreview previously taught strategies and are insome cases similar to the new examples. Arange of examples is necessary so that studentsare required to differentiate when to use the new

1 5

strategy and when to use previously taughtstrategies. For example, after glossaries are in-troduced, students must learn when to apply acontextual analysis strategy to determine themeaning of an unknown word and when to usethe glossary.

Providing practice. Learning to read requireslots of practice. Hundreds of repetitions of thesame skills may be necessary for some studentsto become mature readers. Therefore, sufficientpractice must be provided within each lessonand across lessons. When a new strategy is in-troduced, practice must include a concentratedor massed presentation of examples, if the stu-dent is to master the strategy. Review across sev-eral lessons is needed to ensure that students-retain the strategiesaridin- orfinaii-On, taught ina reading program. A pattern of massed prac.tice in the first several lessons and systematicreview later is critical for retention.

When reading programs do not supply suffi-cient practice, teachers must insert supplemen=tary exercises. Game activities, for example, canbe used to provide practice on reading skillswhile still maintaining a higi: degree of studentinterest.

Sequencing skills. Sequencing involves de-termining an optimal order for introducing newinformation and strategies. Sequencing signif-icantly affects the difficulty students have inlearning some skills. Five sequencing guide-lines tend to reduce student error rates:

1. Preskills of a strategy are taught before thestrategy itself is presented.

2. Instances that are consistent with a strategyare introduced before exceptions.

3. High utility skills are introduced beforeless useful ones.

4. Easy skills are taught before more difficultones.

5. Strategies and information that are likely tobe confused are not introduced at the sametime.

Presentation TechniquesEven when teachers have well-designed ma-

terials, they still need presentation skills thatwill result in an optimal communication of thematerial. Different presentation techniques are

140

appropriate for different stages of reading in-struction. During beginning reading, for exam-ple, direct instruction involves small-groupleaching with little independent work; later, the,amount of small-group instruction decreases,and the amount of independent work increases.Similarly, for young children, feedback on prac-tice activities should be immediate; for olderchildren, it can be delayed.

OVerall, a primary-grade teacher must be pro-ficient in the variety of presentation techniquesneeded to maintain student participate= inquestion-answer exchanges between teacherand students. Intermediate-grade teachers mustbe more skilled in managing students who areworking independently. In both cases, teachersmust convey warmth and active demanding-ness, two aspects of effective teaching identifiedby Kleinfeld (1975):

The first .and most important characteristic isthe effective teacher's ability to create a climate ofemotional warmth that dissipates students' fearsin the classroom and fulfills their expectationsof highly personalized relationships. The secondcharacteristic is the teacher's 3bility to resolve hisown ambivalent feelings about the legitimacy ofhis,\educational goals and express his concern forthe students, not4by passive sympathy, butby demanding a high quality of academic work.(p. 318)

The remainder of this section explains someof the teaching techniques that characterize di-rect instruction. Although most of the exam-ples used involve situations in which youngerstudents are being taught, teachers of older stu-dents-,-especially remedial students, should findmuch of the discussion relevant.

Small-group instruction. Small groups arerecommended for beginning reading instruc-tion because instruction requires frequent oralresponding, which in turn calls for teacher feed-back. This feedback can be most economicallyprovided through small-group instruction. Al-though students would benefit from extendedperiods of individual attention from a' teacherevery day, most schools cannot afford one-to-one teaching for more than a small number ofspecial students.

In small-group instruction, while the teacherworks with one group, the others work indepen-dently. By working with groups of 5 to 10 stu-

dents at a time for half an hour, the teachercan provide students with much more teacherinstruction in reading every day than would beavailable if the leacher worked with individ-uals. Whenever possible, the teacher shouldmake t e group with higher performing stu-dents th largest and the group with lower per-forming stU\dents the smallest. This ensures thatthe lower performing children have the greatestopportunity for\ direct teacher evaluation.

A critical ask of small-group instructionis the building of homogeneous groups of stu-dents with similar skills. Such groups allow formore individualization because students withadvanced skills can progitss quickly through aprogram while less advanced students receivethe extra practice they need. 'l'o form homoge-neous groups, the teacher divides the studentsinto groups according to pretest performance.Although pretests indicate the skill level of astudent at the beginning of a program, they can-not predict how quickly the student will'lemnew skills. Consequently, teachers should exs,pect to do some regrouping throughout the year.Groups should be treated as flexible and fluid,with group membership changing to best meeteach student's needs. .. .

Unison oral responding. Another. criticalfeature of efficient small-group teaching in theearly primary grades is active student involve-ment. Unison responding, in which all the stu-dents respond at the same time, is one wayto facilitate a high degree of active student in-volvement. With younger students, the ratio ofteacher talk to student response should be low.That is, teachers should not talk for long with-out calling for a response to ensure that studentsunderstand what has been said. .,

Pacing. Appropriate pacing contributes."to student attentiveness and reduces errors.Younger students are usually more attentive tovaried, fast-paced presentations (as in "SesameStreet") than to slow ones. However, providinga fast-paced presentation does not mean that ateacher rushes students, requiring them to an-swer before they have had time to determine theanswer. The key to providing a fast-paced pre-sentation is to begin the directions for the nextquestion (or for the correction to the currentanswer) immediately after the students make aresponse.

I 5" 4

141

O

Monitoring. Monitoring student performancein the late primary and intermediate grades isrelatively simple (although time consuming) be-cause assignments are written. In contrast, mon-itoring the performance of early primary-gradestudents who are responding in unison orally isnot easy. When several students respond at thesame time it can be very difficult for the teachertdhear mistakes made by only one or two of thestudents, especially when an error sounds simi-lar to the correct response.

Individual tests are an important monitoringtool because they provide a more accurate indi-cation of mastery than a unison response. If thestudent makes a mistake when responding indi-vidually, the teacher provides more group prac-tice and tests individually again later.

Diagnosis and correction. In diagnosing thecause of a student's error during small-groupinstruction, the teacher must first decide wheth-er tit.), error resulted from a lack of knowledge orfrom inattentiveness, since the cause of an errordetermines which correction procedure is ap-propriate. The teacher corrects errors caused byinattentiveness by working on increasing thestudent's motivation to attend.

When errors result from a lack of knowledge,the teacher must try to deterthine the specificskill deficit that caused the error. This process,called diagnosis, involves identifying deficitsbased on recurrent error patterns, not on ran-dom errors. The diagnosis procedure is basi-cally the same whether the response is oral orwritten. If, Tar example, in, a critical readingexercise a student labeled items "a" and "b"below, which illustrate false attribution, asexamples of the testimonial propaganda tech-nique, the diagnosis would be a confusion of thetestimonial and false attribution propagandatechniques. After making the diagnosis, theteacher would correct the errors, pointing outthat a testimonial involves famous persons en-dorsing ideas or products outside their area ofexpertise. In contrast, in false attribution a claimbased on a single attribute leads to a claim con-cerning the entire product.

a. The IRA brand car has the loudest stereo ofany car in its price range. The IRA car is thebest car in its price range to buy.

b. The XYZ brand pacemaker is the cheapest

one on the market. If you'need a pacemaker,buy XYZ brand.

The correction procedure used in small-group instruction consists of as many as sixsteps: praise,model, lead, test, alternate, and de-layed test. For example, in a beginning readingtask the teacher 'points to o and asks, "Whatsound?" A student responds, "/uf." 'First theteacher praises other students who respondedcorrectly. (The purpose of this praise commentis to prevent students from making errors in or-der to gain teacher attention and also to main-tain a positive atmosphere during instruction.)Second, the teacher models the correct answersaying, "00000." Third, the teacher may lead(respond with them). A lead provides a modelas the students respond, ensuring that they heara correct response. Leading is needed onlywhen students have difficulty making the re-sponse (saying the sound). Fourth, the teachertests, asking the students to respond correctly.The teacher continues the test by alternating be-tween the missed example and other examples.The last step is the delayed test, in which theteacher tests the student individually on themissed example at a later time in the lesson.

The correction procedure is somewhat differ-ent for more advanced items the teacher sim-ply models a strategy for answering an item andthen tests. For example, let's say the studentshave read a science passage containing the rule,"when objects are heated, they expand." Theythen work on written exercises of this form: "Ametal ball was left outside. It was 40° n themorning. In the afternoon it was 95°. What doyou know about the size of the metal ball in theafternoon?" A student responds, "It gets small-er." The teacher would first test to determine thespecific cause of the error. Does the student un-derstand critical vocabulary terms (expand, inthis case), and does she know how to apply therule? If the student does not know haw to applythe rule, the teacher models by asking a series ofquestions. "What's the rule that tells about tem-perature and size? What was the temperature ofthe ball in the morning? What was the tempera-ture of the ball in the afternoon? Did the ball gethotter? Then what happened to its size?" A bal-loon could be deflated or inflated to illustratestudent responses. The teacher continues test-ing until student makes three or four correct

15'-/

142

responses in a row to ensure that she is not justguessing. Later in the lesson the teacher wouldpresent a delayed test._

Motivation. Some students come to schooleager to 'learn and eager to please the teacher.They respond well to simple praise. They workhard and have pride in their work. With suchstudents, motivation is not a concern. Other stu-dents have little interest in learning and are notas eager to please. The teacher must accept thesestudents regardless of their attitudes and usetechniques to develop an interest in learning.A first step in motivating these students is de-monstrating to them that they can succeed inreading. This is done by carefully:designing andeffectively presenting lesson plans. A secondstep is showing students that there is a rewardin learning to read. At first, the teacher mayuse extrinsic rewards like physical contact, tick-les, pats, and handshakes, eventually, workingtoward developing intrinsic motivation in thestudents. This is a critical step in enablingstudents to make their school experience suc-cessful and satisfying.

Academic - Engaged Time

Rosenshine and Berliner (1978) discuss thenecessity of adequate academic-engaged time ifstudents are to succeed in school. Reading-en-gaged time refers to the time students actuallyspend on reading exercises and activities. Theypoint out that in several studies, time spentin reading yielded higher correlations withachievement in reading than any other teacheror student behavior studied. Note that engagedtime does not refer to scheduled time, but onlyto the time students spend engaged in readingactivities. Rosenshine (in press) reviewed stud-ies that 'found only about 80 percent of the 85minutes allocated to reading per day in secondgrade were academic-engaged minutes, and infifth grade, aboUt 75 percent of the 113 minuteswere engaged minutes: In classrooms with littlestudent improvement ,in reading over a year,only a few minutes were spent on fundainentalreading skills each day.

Engaged time must be put to good use. First,if students are expected to learn to read, theymust be engaged in reading-related activities.Stallings (1975) found positive and usuallysignificant correlations between standardized

15f

reading achievement test scores and engage-ment in reading activities. On the other hand,time spent-on stories, arts and crafts, active plaY,or child selection. of activities always produceda negative correlation.

A second way of putting engaged time tgood use is placing students in a reading seriesat a point appropriate to their skill level. Theyshould not use materials that are too easy, where

Nor should they use materials for which eythey just review previously learned mateal.

lack essential preskills and, thus, make frequentMistakes. /

Third, independent reading exercises' mustbe instructionally appropriate. Theyprovide practice for new skills and f r pre-viously introduced skills that require co tinuedpractice.

Engaged time must be put to good(use.First, if students are expected to 1 am toread, they must be engaged in re ding-related activities. . . .A second w4 ofputting engaged tine to good use isplacing students in a.reading series at apoint appropriate to their skill level. Third,independent reading exercises must beinstructionally appropriate.

Classroom OrchestrationOrchestration occurs in two phases at

the beginning of the year and on a daily basis.Initial orchestration includes allocating instruc-tipnal time, providing for the needs of remedialstudents, initial testing, to determine groupassigriments and placement in the reading pro-gram, and ongoing evaluation to monitor stu-dent mastery. Day-to-day orchestration involveslesson planning, presentation, and follow-up.

Initial Orchestration

Allocating instructional time. A total readingprogram includes adequate provision for decod-ing, comprehension, study skills, recreationalreading, writing, and spelling. The amount oftime devoted to these activities should dependon the skill levels of the students. Teachers

143

working with students whose home environ-ments provide a great deal of informal instruc-tion in basic skills need not spend as much timeon these skills as teachers working with stu-dents from homes in which informal instructionis limited. Students performing below gradelevel should spend more time on basic skillssince they must acquire more than a year'sworth of skills if they are to progress at a ratethat will enable them to catch up to their peers.

Furthermore, the teacher must take 'responsi-bility for providing adequate time for reading.For example, if students are unlikely to readoutside of school, yet their fluency indicatesthey need more reading practice, the teachermust provide extra time for practice. In theupper grades, a teacher might do this by incor-porating reading activities into all content areainstruction (mathematics, 'social studies, sci-ence, and so on) and by scheduling time into theday for recreational reading. Another methodfor increasing the amount of reading instructionis to train paraprofessionals and peer tutorsto teach from scripted programs that specify in-structional procedures in great detail.

Remedial, reading instruction. Students un-able to read'books at their grade level are oftenpre-empted from success in school, since theirlimited reading ability handicaps their perfor-mance in nearly all other subject areas. Below-grade-level reading can result from a decodingdeficit, a comprehension deficit, or a combina-tion of the two. Regarflless of the cause of thedeficit, six guidelines are relevant to teachingremedial readers: provide extra instruction, startextra instruction as soon as any deficit appears,use additional personnel who are skilled inteaching reading, select a program that teachesessential skills and teaches them well, move re-medial students through the instructional pro-gram as rapidly as possible, and motivate thestudents to achieve.

Initial testing. Tests given at the beginningof the school year should be designed to helpteachers (1) place students of similar ability andknowledge in homogeneous groups, (2) havethe groups begin with lessons appropriate fortheir ability and knowledge in the materials be-ing used in the classroom, and (3) identify skillsand/or information the students lack whichmight keep them from succeeding in reading.

Carnine and Silbert (1979) recommend testingprocedures that teachers at various grade levels,who are faced with testing 25 to, 30 students,might use at, the beginning of the year. Theirprocedures are designed to take relatively littletime per student (5 to 10 minutes) and to beadministered by a volunteer or teacher aide withminimal supervision.

Two basic types of tests are used to place stu-dents in reading instruction: norm-referencedtests and criterion-referenced tests. The, majoradvantage of norm-referenced tests is that theyallow for comparisons of different programs.Students from different programs can, withsome precautions, be given the same test to de-termine if some programs seem to result in bet-ter student performance than other programs.But norm2referenced tests provide little infor-

_ mation about how to instruct.a student. That is,a percentile rank or grade equivalent score doesnot really indicate.where to place a student in acommercial program or what a student's skilldeficits are.

Criterion-referenced tests focus on specificskills, providing the teacher with informationabout what skills the student has and has notmastered. Criterion-referenced tests either focuson the skills from a commercial program (in-struction-referenced test) or on importqnt skillsindependent of any programs (objective-refer-enced test). We recommend two instruction-ref-erenced tests and one objective-referenced test.

The first type of instruction-referenced testis an informal reading inventory (IRI), whichis used to place students at their instructionallevel in a graded series of books, that is, at thelevel at which it would be appropriate to begininstruction. In general, an instructional levelin a reading book is one at which a studentcan decode at about a 95 percent accuracy leveland can comprehend the majOr theme of thematerial. The informal reading inventory is Con-structed by selecting sample passages. from

luential levels of the reading series. Infor-mal reading inventories should be used as theprime tool in-placing students in basal readingprograms.

A second type of instruction-referenced test'is designed to test comprehension skills. Stu-dents should be grouped according to their abil-ity to comprehend as well as their ability to

157

:144

decode. For example, a student who can decodeat a sixth-grade level but is unable to do com-prehension exercises appropriate for that gradelevel may be placed, depending on the severityof the comprehension deficit, in a lower group.If placed in a higher group, the student ,:houldreceive instruction geared toward specific defi-cits. Since the number of comprehension skillsis much greater than the number of decodingskill's, a beginning-of-the-year comprehensiontest can test only a small sample 'of the totalnumber of skills. More thorough comprehen-sion testing can be done during the school year.

One type of objective-referenced test focuseson various word attack skills. Diagnostic tests ofwork attack skills can be used (1) to help theteacher group beginning readers who do notknow enough words to read a selection in eninformal reading inventory and (2) to help theteacher identify specific deficits in word attackskills. Sample tests and directions for adminis-tering the tests on each reading level begin-ning, primary, and intermediate can be foundin Direct Instruction Reading (Carnine andSilbert, 1979).

Ongoing evaluation. In addition to individ-ual tests during a group instructional session, ateacher might set up a system to make periodiccomprehensive checks on skills introduced todate. By regularly taking data on errors, readingrate, and exercises completed, teachers can keepclose track of students' progress or lack of prog-ress. Teachers need to know which studentsare performing well and which are performingpoorly. Such information is critical in providingeffective remediation and feedback to students.Often, graphs of student performance that showimprovement motivate students to do better ontheir assignments.

Daily OrchestrationAfter students are grouped and placed in

a commercial or teacher-made program, theteacher conducts individual reading lessons.The components of an ongoing implementationare planning, presentation, and follow-up.

Planning. The teacher must plan daily activi-ties for the instructional session and for inde-pendent work. The plan must be realistic. Often,teacher guides from commercial programs sug-gest a variety of tasks that would take many

hours to present or are too difficult. The teachermust decide yhich of these tasks are necessaryand modify any that are too difficult. The teach-er must also plan seatwork assignments appro-priate for the amount of time available.

,Presenting a lesson. A lesson consists of two

major' sections: (1) a teacher presentation and(2) passage reading and written exercises.

The teacher presentation usually involvesdecoding and comprehension activities (andpossibly handwriting and spelling activities).For eicample, the decoding exercises during asecond-grade lessommight include sound iden-tification exercises, several introductory wordsthat illustrate a new decoding skill, and a list ofdiscrimination words that provide practice onthe new skill and on skills introduced earlierwhich have been causing students difficulty.The exercises on identifying sounds and read-ing words prepare students not only for the pas-sage and the written items for that lesson butalso for upcoming lessons.

Comprehension activities during teacher pre-Sentation usually include instruction on criticalwords, that is, words that students probably donot know and that are inadequately explainedin .the passage; introduction of or pracf ice onvarious strategies, such as how to draw infer-ences, how to paraphrase sentences with com-plex structures, how to summarize, and so on;and going over directions for independent seat-work assignments.

St-edents usually read passages and completewritten exercises independently, unless theteache- is monitoring oral reading performance(which is often the case during the beginningand primary stages) or i ' troducing a compre-hension strategy that app ies to an entire pas-sage. For example, if the tudents are learningto paraphrase sentences with clauses or passivevoice constructions, the teacher might ask themto paraphrase a sentence with a clause after theyread it in the passage. When passage readingand written exercises are clrie independently,students should already have the decoding andcomprehension skills needed to complete theassignment successfully. ,

Follow-up. Follow-up exercises are intendedtd deal with major problems that occur duringpassage reading or while the students are com-

145

pleting the written exercises. If students havedecoding problems with a particular sound orword type, the teacher presents word lists or apaSsage that contains several examples of thetroublesome skill during follow-up. If studentshave difficulty with a certain type of compre-hension exercise, the teacher might reviewit with the students and then give them morepractice on the same type of exercise, but withdifferent items.

Admihistrative Involvement

Administrators are responsible for encourag-ing excellence in teaching where it occurs andfostering excellence where it is lackirig.Excel-.lence is fostered by attention to the five areasof teacher knowledge discussed earlier: scopeand sequence, program design, presentationskills, engaged time, and classroom orches-tration.

Principals should be familiar with the char-acteristics of programs that can work with allstudents, particularly educationally high-riskstudents. With this knowledge, principals canbe meaningfully involved in material selectionand discussions with teachers about the mate-rials they are using with' their students.

Administrators are responsible forencouraging excellence in teaching whereit occurs and fostering excellence whereit is lacking.

Principals must also be aware of the numer-ous teacher presentation techniques and moni-tor teachers' use of them. Teachers with a highlevel of skills should be acknowledged. Teach-ers with skill deficits should receive assistancethrough group inservice and through classroomobservations and feedback. The most importantmonitoring activity focuses on student, acquisi-tion. Principals must be informed on a continu-ing basis of the level of mastery and amount ofcontent covered for the students in each class-room. When achievement is atalow level oncriterion-referenced tests or when progress istoo 'slow, administrative action is needed toresolve the problem.

Allocated time is influenced by the degree to

which principals encourage cross-room group-ing (in which two or more teachers pool theirstudents in order to form more homogeneousreading instruction groups), schedule theschool day to maximize instruction and mini-mize interruptions, hire qualified paraprofes-sionals and provide training for them, assist inresolving discipline problems, and so on. Prin-cipals should also monitor classrooms, throughbrief visits, to insure that allocated time is beingused for instruction.

Parent InvolvementParents can contribute to student success

in at least three ways: they can convey to,theirchildren'the importance of schooling, they canprovide for academic-engaged time at home(homework or leisure reading), and they canconvey to the school their concern about thequality of instruction.

Parents should encourage children to read athome to show that reading is important in itsown right (the example parents set is critical totheir children's developing reading habits); theyshould require that their children completetheir homework, thus conveying the importancethat they place on schooling. In a single year,Follow Through students, who were taught bydirect instruction, recorded over 30,000 hoursin which they read to their parents or their par-ents read to them (Carnine, 1981). Parents canalso ask their children to tell them what theylearned in school and can cooperate with teach-ers in resolving specific problems:

Parents can demonstrate their concern aboutquality education by visiting schools and askingabout the materials used to teach reading andthe time devoted to reading instruction. Theyshould ask to see specific measures of progressand, when progress is inadequate, they shouldask what is being done to correct the situation.In addition to hearing about how reading istaught, parents should see reading being taught,observe how much time is spent on reading in-struction, and note whether special help is pro-vided to students with special needs.

SummaryThe thesis of this paper is that direct instruc-

tion with a skills emphasis can significantly im-

146

prove students' reading achievethent. However,improving schooling is neither simple nor easy.Teachers must be competent in designing oreAluatirig programs, in presenting reading les-sons and activities, in providing academic-en-gaged time, and in orchestrating instruction.Teachers must also be familiar with a scope and.sequence of reading instruction appropriate forthe grade level they teach.

Teachers are not alone in their efforts. Admin-istratorg, parents, colleges of education, andpublishers must share the responsibility forimproving schooling.

ReferencesCarnine, L. A Home Reading Program That Works.

Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1981.

Carnine, D. ., and Silbert, J. Direct InstructionReading,/Columbus, Ohio: Charles Merrill, 1979.

Case, R. 'Gearing the Demands of Instruction to theDevelopmental Capacities of the Learner. Rgviewof Educational Research, 45, 1 (1975): 59-87.

Guthrie, J.T. "Follow Through: A CompensatoryEducatiOn Experiment." The Reading Teacher, 31(November 1977): 240-244.

Kleinfeld, J. "Effective TeLhers of Eskimo andIndian Students." School Review, 83 (February1975): 301-344.

LaBerge, D., and.Samueg, S.J. "Toward a Theory ofAutomatic Information Processing in Reading."Cognitive Psychology, 6, 2 (1974): 293-323.

Hawn, S.W.; Walberg, H.J.; Kareyianes; M.L.; andRasher, S.P. "Reading Instruction: A Quantita-tive Analysis." Educational Researcher, 9 (July/August 1980): 12-18.

Rosenshine, B. "The Third Cycle of Research onTeacher Effects: Content Covered, Academic En-gaged Time, and Quality of, Instruction." InResearch on Teaching, edited by P. Petersonand H. Walberg. Berkeley, California: McCutchan,1979.

Rosenshine, B.V., and Berliner, D.C. "Academic -

Engaged Time." British Journal of Teacher Educa-tion, 4 (1978): 3-16.

Samuels, S.J. "The Age-Old Controversy betweenHolistic and Subskill Approaches to BeginningReading Instruction Revisited." In Inchworm,Inchworm: Persistent Problems in Reading Educa-tion, edited by C. McCullough. Newark, Delaware:International Reading Association, 1980.

Smith, Frank. Understanding Reading: A Psycholin-guistic Analysis of Reading and Learning to Read.New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1971,1978.

Stallings, J.A. "Implementation and Child Effectsof Teaching Practices hi Follow Through Class-rooms." Monographs of the Society for Researchin Child Development, 40 (1975). Serial No. 163.

An Integration of Instructional Approaches forTeaching Reading and Learning from Text*

Harry SingerUniversity of California, Riverside

Editors' Note: Harry Singer describes one approach to integrating the reading instructional strategies described inthe two preceding papers. He provides twelve assumptions which underlie his approach and then maps out insome detail approaches to reading instruction in four phases from three years to ten years. The phases are initialreading instruction, transition to formal reading instruction, formal reading instruction, and learning from text. Sincemost teachers use a basal reader in some way, Dr. Singer discusses the use of basal readers at some length.

The curriculum sequence for teaching read-ing that appears in this paper represents thewriter's thoughts on how to integrate readinginstruction over time, selectively using differentapproaches, including those presented in thepreceding two papers. It contains informal andtransitional methods, the natural languagemethod (experience charts or language expe-rience approach) as a lead-in to a skill-basedapproach (basal reader), and recreational andenrichment (individualized; reference, or li-brary) reading. It suggests provision for aspectsof the language experience approach to con-tinue by alloCating instructional time for cre-ative writing to a separate period from thatin which spelling, grammar, and compositionare taught. An overview of this instructionalsequence appears in Figure 1.

*A lengthier version of this paper appears in Per-ception of Print, edited by Ovid Tzeng and HarrySinger. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates, in press.

This instructional sequence is based on thefollowing twelve assumptions: (1) All studentsin the normal range of intelligence, which ex-tends down to a level of IQ 55 to 65, the level atwhich pathology begins (Zigler, 1967), can learnto read, but they do so at different rates (Singer,1977a). Hence, instruction in reading acquisi-tion needs to be continuous, lasting for somestudents at least until grade 9. Provision shouldbe made throughout the instructional sequencefor individual differences in rates of learning toread. Under these conditions, the correlation be-tween IQ and reading,acquisition decreases as agroup of students progresses through the grades(Singer, 1977a). (2) The teaching of readingshould capitalize on a student's language back-ground. (3) Instruction should progress fromwhat a student knows to what a student needsto know, taught in small increments in orderto maximize cumulative success in learningto read.' (4) Meaning should be emphasizedthroughout instruction. (5) Systematic devel-opment of subskills is necessary and shouldbe accomplished in a consistent, coherent, and

1 61

148

Initiating Reading Instruction

Reading to Children

Tiransition to Formal ReadingInstruction

Exposure Coliversationak., Picture- Rebus Language-Method Method ,.->Story Method' Experience

Method ApproachO

Formal Reading Instruction

The READ Program(Recreational. EnrichmentApplication, Developmental)

Basal ReaderDevelopmental SkillsApplication of Skills

Literature (individualizedRecreationalEnrichmentApplication

Creative Wetni

ContentAreaInstruction

Three to Four_ --

Five to SixChronological Age

Six to Ten Ten and Up

Figure 1. Time line for a sequence of reading instruction

cumulative manner (Singer, 1977c). (6) Stu-dents should learn a variety of ways of identi-fying printed words, including use of context,sound-symbol correspondences, structural anal-ysis, and sight words, and these ways shouldbe practiced in connected, discourse (Singer,1977b). (7) Instruction should be paced in sucha way that students move toward independencein reading, greater self-confidence, and a grow-ing feeling of mastery over printed materials.(8) Students should have opportunities to en-gage in recreational, enrichment, and applica-tion types of reading in addition to receivingdevelopmental, skill-based reading instruction.(9) Students and teachers, as well as parents,need to be aware of students' progress towardmastery in learning to read and of how studentscompare with one another in their ability tolearn from text (Singer, 1973). (10) Evaluation ofa reading program should be based on the com-:.prehensiveneis of its scope, the appropriateness!of its sequence of instruction, and the degiveto which it helps students achieve in readingcomprehension over the long haul (Ruddell,1968). (11) While the correlation between IQand reading acquisition decreases, the corre-lation between IQ and ability to learn fromtext increases as a group of students progressesthrough school (Singer, 477a). Since childrenvary widely in their intellectual capacity and

reading achievement, and since this range in-creases as students progr3ss through the grades,it is necessary to provide a correspondingly.wide range of instruction so that all studentshave an equal opportunity to learn. (12) Readingdevelopment should consist of two overlappingphases learning how to read and using read-ing to learn from text (Singe; and Donlan, 1980).

The initial phase of instructional emphasisin reading development is on teaching studentshow to read, that is, on teaching students toidentify printed words, apply their languageabi; ities and knowledge to anticipate words, in-tegrate both of these components, and use this,integration to construct meaning and compre-hend printed materials.

When formal reading instruction begins atabout age six, children in general have sophis-ticated control over. syntax, a vocabulary ofapproximately 5,000 words, and pronunciationability that is adequate for communicating theirneeds to their peers and to adults (Singer,1973a). They, also have acquired some knowl-edge of the world and have developed the abil:ity to reason at a concrete stage of development.As they acquire the ability to respond to printand to integrate their language, knowledge, turdreasoning abilities with responses to print, theylearn to comprehend reading materials that are

0

149

Q

within their experiential and conceptual level ofdevelopment. Such integration does not occuruntil the third or fourth grade (Guthrie, 1973).

As students reach this mastery or,criterionlevel of development in learning ho* to read,Instruction gradually shifts to the next phase ofreading development, teaching students to com-prehend or learn from texts in all content areas.Learning from text involves development of theability to interact with texts and constructmeaning for them through (1) acquisition, oftechnical terms, information, concepts, andgeneralizations; (2) development of knowledgestructures; and (3) use. of general reasoning'abilities for inferring, interpreting, and evaluat:ing printed materials. Thus, instruction in read-,ing and learning from text shifts in emphasisfrom learning to read to learning from text but iscontinuous throughout the grades.

Initiating Reading.InstructionAlthough formal instruction can be initiated

at the preschool level, most,children start theirreading, instruction in an informal way, through.their experiences with parents, peers, and tele-

- vision The two informal method's described be-low often happen as a natural part of the child'sinteractions with parents, other adults, or Oldersiblings.

Exposure method. The exposure Methodconsists of parents reading stories to children athome,or teachers reading stories to children atthe, preschools, nursery school, or kindergarten.. ..level (Durkin, 1962). Sitting next to the reader,children can begin to learn that print communi-cates meaning, is read in left to right ordei, andconsists of words, sentences, and larger units.They also learn that stories have a structure,although at this stage of development, they per-haps learn only that, a story has a beginning,middle, and end. They might also develop somesense that a story elicits not only thoughts butalso affective reactions (Guthrie, 1978) .,,Laterthey acquire a more differentiated structure:they understand that a story consists of a time,place, characters, plot, problem, and resolution(Rumelhart, 1977), or that a story has a prob-,lem, goal, and one or more attempts to solvetheproblem and reach the goal (Adams and Collins,1977). By first grade, children already appear to 1.have knowledge of story grammar (handler and

Johnson, 1977). We know they have definitely-achieved such knowledge prior to sixth grade(Dreher and Singer, 1980).. \Conversational .method. The conversational '=method is a slightly advanced version of the ex-posure method (Hildreth, 1960). At the child'sinitiation, the teacher or parent converses withthe child about any aspect of the print; story, or_book. At this time the child may also pick upsome language. of instruction: that letters makeup words, words (groups Of printed.letters withwhite space on each side) make Up'sentences (agroup of words that with a' capital letterand ends with a period, question mark, or excla-mation mark), and that sentences accumulate totell a story (Downing, 1970). After hearing thesame story read many times,some children cancomplete gentences by filling in the final word-or phrase whenever the reader pauses towardthe end of sentences, an, ability which demon-strates not only memory at work but also, per-haps, contextual identification of words.-

Transition .to Formal Reading InstructionMost children make a transition to formal

reading instruction. They learn that print repre-sents another way of communicating ideas thatthey have expressed in oral language. The tran-sition starts with the picture-story method.

Picture-story method. m the picture-storymethod, a child draws a picture and then tellsthe teacher a story about the picture, frequentlya single,sentence, which the teacher prints un-der the story. The child begins td learn that theprinting represents another way of communi-cating ideas that he or she has expressed in orallanguage. The child might accumulate thesestories but is not expected to read them at thisstage of reading development. This ,method,useful in kindergarten classes, is a precursor tothe rebus and the language-experience method.

Rebus Method. In the rebus method, theteacher reads the printed words in the sentencew,hile the students read the pictured word. Themethod can use as few as 10 or 11 words, con-sisting of content words (I, you, me, and chil-dren's names), functional words for relating thecontent words to one another (to, for), two noundeterminprs (a, the); action-type verbs (go, see),and a stative verb (is). With this small group ofwords and pictured nouns on cards, the teacher

('±)V t.) 0

1504

can construct an infinite number of sentences.For example, the teacher places three of thecards.in a sequence, re-ads-the words on them ("Isee a ..."), and then places a picture of a ball atthe end of the sentence. The students say "ball."The teacher then turns over each card witha picture on it .td reveal the correspondingprinted word for the pictured object. Eventually,students will he able to *identify the contextwords that have been used in this method, per-,hips at first 'recognizing them as though theywere ideographs but later beginning to build a'sight Word docabulary. They can 'then use alltheir .acquired words phis pictures to gerier-.ate and read their own sentences (Singer andBeasley, 1970). , Thus, the teacher can buildtip a repertoire of sight words that can be usedinhe experience -chart method or the language-.

experiei,ice approach. (For more detail on therebus methcid, see Woodcock, 1967.)

The experiencdchart method or the Ian:guage-experience approach. The experience-chart method, first devised in the 1920s ,(Smith,1965) was expanded in the 1960s into a com-plete reading program known as the language-expeience approach. The technique beginswith children haVing'a common experience and'sub'sequently relating what has happened to theteacher. The teacher writes the children's storyon the blackboard onietimes editing itand then has the children read it. They first readtheir own sentences, then other sentences, andfinally the whole story. The teacher then usesthe story in a variety of ways; by having chil-dren pick out identical words and sounds, forexample, the teacher will teach them some sightwords and some symbol-sound corresponden-ces. Eventually, students will be able to dictateand even write their ow -1 stories. The language-experience approach can continue on into theprimary grades, merging with creative writingand with instruction in grammar and spelling(Lee and Van Allen, 1963).\.

Formal Reading InstructionAfter students have acquired some sight

words, the teacher can shift to a basal reader orto individualized instruction, or both.

Basal readers. The advantage of the basalreader is that the teacher can use this tool to

provide systematic instruction in the subskillsunderlying reading ' coniprehension, furnishpractice for these.skillsin a meaningful context,and economize on teacher time.

The construction of a comprehensive scopeand sequence of subskills for developing read-ing in grades one through six is almost impossi-ble considering the already tight schedules thatdaily confront teachers, Basal readers *ate de-signed to provide such- a scope and sequence.

The advantage of the basal reader is thatthe teacher can arse this tool to providesystematic instruction in the subskills ,

underlying.reading comprehension,furnish practice for these skills in ameaningful context, and economize onteacher time.

Use of basal readers assists teachers in devel-oping a number of subskills in their students,including symbol-sound correspondence, di-viding words into their components and thenusing symbol-sound correspondence to identifythe words (shop- herd), syntactic relationships,and acquisition of sight words. With practice,these skills will eventually become automatic,enabling students to concentrate on con; prehen-sion (LaBerge and Samuels, 1976).

If teachers had to locate materials for devel-oping these skills or for providing practice inusing these skills in connected discourse, thissearch would be an uneconomical use of teachertime. Hence, it is not surprising to find thatteachers and using basal readers as much now asthey.did prior to the explosion of methods andmaterials in the 1960s.

A basal reader may use a general process toteach any aspect of print-to-sound correspon-

. dence, such as identification of initial and final .

consonants, vowels, syliables, and morphemes(minimal, meaning units, such as prefixes,suffixes, and roots). The process consists of

. grouping familiar words that have a commongrapheme component (hat, bat, mat), then

. teaching students to abstract and generalizeboth the grapheme component (/at/) ,-.11c1 the

. print-to-sound correspondence by having stu-

1

"or

151

dents volunteer words,that contain examples ofthese relationships, and, finally, letting studentspractice this word identification process whilereading connected discourse.

The transfer of word identification and wordmeaning 'processes to the reading of connected

discourse will tend to integrate these processesWith the use of context clues (McCullough,1972). IA more direct way( of teaching context'clues is through a deletion process in which theword or word part is omitted; the cloze tech-

, nique, in which every fifth or tenth word isomitted, is aft example (Taylor, 1953). This tech-niquerequires that students rely on the syntax

..,and semantics of the sentence in order to inferthe missing ,word or word part.] Students willlearn to be versatile in identifying printedwords, riclud;ng using clues in words and con-text, and:they will learn to mobilize their re-sponses to printed words in sTarious ways ac-

-; cording to the demands of the task and theirpurposes in reading (Singer, 1977b).

Students can progress through basal readersat their own pace, but presumably enough stu-dents will be in the same basal reader at the'same time that they can be grouped for directedreading instruction.

Directed reading instruction is used in most, > basal readers. The lesson for a story includes the

new vocabulary, development of background in-formation assumed by the basal reader story tobepart of the students' knowledge of the world(Winograd, 1972), and establishment of pur-poses and a perspective for reading the story(Pichert and Anderson, 1970. Id most lessons,the teacher reads the introductory part of thestory, offers guidance- to students by askingthem questions to Etmulate their reading, has

. the students .read the...remainder of the story, si-lently, calls upon them to answer teacher-posedquestions that are listed on the blackboard orprovided by the teachdr after the students haveread the story, and, finally, leads a discussionof the story .and the Students' answers to the-questions-

Spsal readers assume that reading corn-. prellon'sionis an interactive process in which

(1), text stimulates the reader to construct re-s onses by drawing on systemS at the letter (lit;erai),:wQrd .(lexical), word order (syntactic),

meaning (semantic), knowledge, inferential,interpretive, and evaluative levels and (2) expo-sure to these systems in turn causes the readerto develop expectations about the systemsthemselves and about the text. It is the respon-sibility of the teacher to develop these sys-tems within the reader and teach the re...ier touse them as an interactive process (Adams andCollins, 1977).

Directed reading instruction has been de-scribed here as it typically occurs in the class-room. Some changes do need to take place,however. The teacher initially should model thekinds of questions to be asked about the type ofmaterials being read, but the goal should be toteach students to formulate their own questionsand search for answers as they read. TQ achievethis goal, the teacher should gradually phaseout teacher-posed questions and shift to stu-dent-formulated questions (Singer, 1979). Forexample, after the teacher has posed some ques-tions and aroused curiosity about a particularstory, the students can be asked, "What wouldyou like to know next about the story?" Thisteacher-posed question is likely to get a student-form ulated question in return.'As students learnto ask their own questions, the number of teach-

- er-posed questions can be reduced; eventually,only student-formulated questions will be used.The students will, over time, learn to satisfytheir own purposes in reading and will acquirethe process of active comprehension, a continu-ous process of asking and searching for answersto self-posed questions.

".Knowledge of progress. When students have

learned to ,read, they can:give up the basal read-er. Differentiated testing -should be used todetermine whether students have reached thislevel of reading development. The purpose ofthis type of testing ,is to separate progress hrlearning to read from ability to learn from text.

Progress in learning to read. For assessingreading acquisition after each level of instruc-tion, say at the end of each, semester in theprimary grades, use the same test, such as aparagraph comprehension test standardized ona sample of children in grade one. Administerthis test repeatedly until children demorfstratemastery over learning to read. Mastery can bedefined as attainment of a score on the test that

152 /

is equivalent to the 85th-95th percentile. Stu-dents who have reached this criterion havelearned (1) appropriate responses to printedwords such as symbol-sound correspondence,structural analysis, and blending of sounds toproduce whole words; (2) the ability to applytheir knowledge, reasoning; and language abil-ities,' such as their knowledge of syntax andsemantics, to anticipate printed words in sen-tences; and (3) the ability to integrate the firsttwo skills to identify printed words, to selectcontextually determined meanings for them,and to comprehend text at . a relatively easyleyel.

While students are learning to read, they arealso using their reading ability to learn fromtext. After they have attained mastery in thpinitial phase of learnirig to read, they continuetheir reading development as they shift to usingreading for learning how to learn from texts iinall content areas.

Ability to learn from 'text. To assess a s1

tu-dent's ability to learn from text and to obtain ascore that will provide information on how atstudent's reading achievement compares w thhis or her peer group on a national level, us astandardized test that is norm-referenced for tiestudent's grade level (Singer, 1973b). The diffeentiated results from both types of testing arshown in Figure 2.

However, students need more frequentknowledge of progress to motivate their learn-ing. For this purpose, we recommend "cumula-tive progress charts" (Singer and Beasley, 1970).An example of a cumulative progress chart forsight word recognition is shown in Figure 3.

The chart in Figure 3 indicates that a studentlearned ten words in the first session, no addi-tional words in the second session,.another tenwords in the third session, and five more wordsby the end of the fifth session., Since wordslearned are added cumulatively, the graphedline either goes up or remains at the same level;it cannot go down.

If students use the words they have learned,they will remember them. Students can usetheir words in various reading activities or in"sentence generators." For example, studentscan substitute their words which have beencolor-coded for parts of speech in the appropri-

ate slots of, say, a Noun-Verb-Adjective sentencegenerator to produce such a sen pence as "Candyis sweet." The other basic sentence generatorsare Noun-Verb-Noun determi or-Noun (He hitthe ball.); Noun-Verb-Noun- oun determiner-Noun (He gave Mary a gift. ; and Noun-Verb-Noun determiner-Noun (She is a girl.). Throughthe use of these four basic entence generators,students can use their words to produce anynumber of sentences ( Singer and Beasley, 1970;Singer, 1979).

Percentile

,Reading Acquisition(le4rning to read ascompared with norms onaest standardized for firstg acle)

...-80 ...-41

40 1/ /20

...- i....-60 ..-./

0 i

1 2 3 4 /15 6Grade

Ability to learn fromtext (comprehension)Compared with a peergroup on a test standard-ized and normed for eachgrade level

Figure 2. Hypoth tical results for a particularstudent showing s hdent's development in readingacquisition and agility to interact with text. TheReading Acquisitibn or learning to read curve wasconstructed by adninistering the same test standard-ized and normed iat the first-grade level to the samestudent at the end of grades 1, 2, 3, and 4. The curvefor ability to leain from text was based on differenttests, each standardized and normed for successivegrade levels. I this figure, the student's rate oflearning from t xt is the same relative to his or herpeer group. If t e student's rate increased relative tohis or her peer roup, the solid line would go up; if itdecreased. the, olid line would go down.

1

emulative, umber of 1

Sght WordsLearned i

\I

i

30

20

10

0

as

1 1 2 3 '4 5

I

FigUre 3. pumulative number of sight wordslearned over five sessions

153

Similar charts can also be constructed forother objectives in the instructional program,such as cumulative acquisition of symbol-soundcorrespondences, knowledge of prefixes, suffix-es, and roots, or number of pages read eitherfrom a basal reader or in a book selected duringindividualized reading instruction. Studentswill be able to watch their piogress on theirword charts, and they will also begin to seea cause-and-effect relationship between theireffort and their achievement:

Individualized reading instruction. A pro-gram in individualized reading instruction isbased upon a classroom library of children's lit-erature and upon individual conference periodsbetween teacher and students to discuss the stu-dents' selection of books and ways of learningto read from them (Veatch, 1954). Students can

- also use the classroom library for recreationalreading.

A disadvantage of individualized readinginstruction is that when a 240-minute teach-ing day is divided among 30 students, teachershave only 8 minutes per day per child for in-struction! Hence, teachers cannot give any stu-derit much individual attention. To economizeon time and to maximize the effect of instruc-tion, teachers need to group students for in-struction. Since students are not homogeneousin reading achievement or in the subskillsunderlying their achievement (Below, 1962,,teachers have to group and regroup students forinstruction that'students specifically need. Thegrouping should be determined by test resultsand teacher observations of students' perfor-mance during instruction.

Another disadvantage. of the individualizedreading program is that teachers are likely tobe less than systematic in developing subskillsnecessary for learning to read. A possible solu-tion is to use a combination of a basal readingprogram three or four days a week and an indi-vidualized reading program the other one ortwo days.

Of cours e, it is also possible to teach readingtwo periods per day. Then the basal reader andindividualized reading instruction can each beused daily. For example, an elementary schoolin Las Vegas, Nevada, teaches a basal programin the morning and individualized or reference,

reading in the afternoon. In this school, all thestudents read at grade level or above as shownby a standardized achievement test. The lowestachiever in each grade reads at least at gradelevel or above. There is still a range of individ-ual differences in reading achievement at eachgrade level, but the range extends upward fromthe grade level (Singer, 1977c).

The range of individual differences inreading achievement increases' from a four-year range in grade 1 to a twelve-year span ingrade 12 (Goodlad, 1966). Hence, teachers whoare committed to the principle of providingequality of educational opportunity for all stu-dents can do so by adopting strategies, detailedin the next section, that will enable them toteach all students academic content withoutstigmatizing any student (Singer and Donlan,1980). These strategies, combined with teach-ers' _knowledge of their content areas, will en-able students to go beyond the acquisitionphase of reading development to the next phase,learning from text.

Learning from Text. Phaseof Reading instruction

In students to learn from text, teach-ers' can use single- and multiple-text strategies.Single-text strategies consist of

1. The directed reading activity with activecomprehension, which was decribed in thediscussion of the basal reader;

2. Marginal glosses that contain explanatorynotes;*

3. Reading and learning from text guideswhich emphasize instruction in acquisi-tion and levels of comprehension infor-inational, interpretive, generalized, evalua-tive, and applied; and

4. The SQ3R study method (survey, question,read, recite, and review).

Multiple-text strategies include

1. The concept technique, which consists oftexts on various levels of difficulty but allrelated to the same concept;

2. Inquiry, which requires that students use alibrary to answer a particular question aris-ing from study of texts in a content area;and

167

154

3. The project method, in which studentspursue answers to their own questionsabout a particular content area unit.

For a more detailed explanation of these strate-gies for teaching students to read and learn fromtexts in the content areas, see the text by Singerand Donlan (1980). Other books for teachingstudents to learn from texts in the content areasare by Burmeister (1974) and Shepherd (1978).

ConclusionAn integration of instructional approaches

for teaching reading and learning from textis necessary to satisfy all the assumptions weposed at the beginning of this position state:ment. Instead of championing a particularmethod which may emphasize students' lan-guage abilities and background knowledge asthp language-experience approach does or amethod which stresses .learning of responses toprinted words as coding emphasis programs do,the integrated approach draws upon both meth-ods because each contributes a necessary com-ponent, to reading acquisition.

The integrated approach also tries to cover alltypes of reading, such as recreational, enrich-ment, applied, as well as the developmentalskills which occur in basal readers. We use theacronym READ to remember these four compo-nents. Recreational, enrichment, and appliedtypes of reading represent the goals of the read-ing program. If we were teaching swimming,they would be the swimming pools for our pro-gram. The acquisition and developmental skillsare the means to these goals. But the goals donot come at the end of the prOgram. They start,the program with parents or teachers readingto children in the exposure and conversationalmethods, and they occur at the end of each skilllesson. We want students to practice the skillsin reading books for pleasure, to solve prob-lems, and to extend their knowledge.

The integrated approach does not stop withelementary instruction but continues on to nighschool. At this level students must learn how toread and learn from texts in, mathematics, sci-ence, literature;and'social sciences, such as his-tory, geography, government, and so on. Ele-mentary instruction can only begin to preparestudents for this advanced level of instruction.

To teach them how to learn from text, teachersneed to use single- and multiple-text strategies.These strategies will also help teachers handlethe wide range of individual differences in read-ing achievement found in each classroom.Thus, the integrated approach uses a multiplic-ity of methods to provide equality of education-al opportunity and help each student developability to read and learn from text.

ReferencesAdams, M.J., and Collins, A. "A Schema-Theoretic

View of Reading." Technical Report No. 32.*Urbana, Illinois: Center for the Study of Reading,

University of Illinois, 1977.

Balow, I.H. "Does Homogeneous Grouping GiveHomogeneous Groups?" Elementary School jour-nal, 63 (October 1962): 28-32.

Burmeister, L.E. Reading Strategies for Second-ary School Teachers. Reading, Massachusetts:Addison-Wesley, 1974.

Downing, J. "Children's Concepts of Language inLearning to Read." Educational Research, 12(February 1970): 106-112.

Dreher, M.J., and Singer, H. "Story Grammar Instruc-tion Unnecessary for Intermediate Grade Stu-dents." The Reading Teacher, 34 (December1980): 261-268.

Durkin, D. "Reading Instruction and the Five-Year-Old Child." In Challenge and Experiment in Edu-cation, Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Con-vention of the International Reading Association,edited by J.A. Figurel. New York: Scholastic BookServices, 1962.

Goodlad, J.I. School, Curriculuni, and the Indi-vidual. Waltham, Massachusetts: Blaisdell (Ginn),1966. °

Guthrie, J. "Models of Reading and Reading Dis-ability." Journal of Educational Psychology, 65(August 1973): 9-18.

Guthrie, J. "Research Views: Fables." The ReadingTeacher, 31 (March 1978): 724-726.

Hildreth, G. Teaching Reading. New York: Holt,Rinehart, and Winston, 1960.

LaBerge, D., and Samuels, S.J. "Toward a Theory ofAutomatic Information Processing in Reading."In Theordical Models and Processes of Reading,Second Edition, edited by H. Singer and R. Rud-dell. Newark, Delaware: International ReadingAssociation, 1976.

Lee, D.M., and `.7an Allen, R. Learning to Readthrough Experience. Second Edition. New York:Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1963.

b

155

Mandler, J.M., and Johnson, N.S. "Remembranceof Things Parsed: Story Structure and Recall."Cognitive Psychology, 9 (January 1977): 111-151.

McCullough, C. "What Should the Reading TeacherKnow about Language and Thinking." In Lan-guage and Learning to Read, edited by R.E.Hodges and E. Hugh Rudorf. New York: Hough-ton-Mifflin, 1972.

Pichert, J.W., and Anderson, R.C. "Taking DifferentPerspectives on a Story." Technical Report No. 14.Urbana, Illinois: Center for the Study of Reading,University of Illinois, 1976.

Ruddell, R.B. "A Longitudinal Study of Four Pro-gram's of Reading Instruction Varying in Emphasis'on Regularity of Grapheme-Phoneme Correspon-dence and Language Structure on ReadingAchievement in Grades Two and Three." Berke-ley: University of Cal. fomia, 1968. (Multilith)

Rumelhart, D. "Understanding and Summariz-ing Brief Stories." In Basic Processes in Reading:Perception and Comprehension, edited by D. La--Berge and S.J. Samuels. Hillsdale, New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1977.

Shepherd, D.L. Comprehensive High Scho'ol Meth-ods. Second Edition. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill,1978.

Singer, H. "Language, Linguistics, and Learningto Read." In Language Development for the Class-room and Remedial Reading, edited by M. Kling.New-Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers UniversityPress, 1973. (a)

Singer, H. "Measurement of Early Reading Ability:Norm-Referenced Standardized Tests for Differen-tial Assessment of Progress in Learning How toRead and in Using Reading for Gaining Informa-tion." In Proceedings of the National ReadingConference, edited by,13. Nacke. Clemson, SouthCarolina: National Reading Conference, 1973.(Abstract) (b)

Singer, H. "IQ Is and Is Not Related to Reading." InIssues in Evaluating Reading, edited by S. Wanat.Arlington, Virginia: Center for Applied Linguis-tics, 1977. (a)

Singer, H. "Teaching Word Recognition." In Teach-ing Word Recognition Bias, edited by M. Daw-son. Newark, Delaware: International ReadingAssociation, 1977. (b)

Singer, H. "Resolving Curricula: Conflicts in the970s: Modifying the Hypothesis, It's the Teacher

. Who Makes the Difference in Reading Achieve-ment." Language Arts, 54 (February 1977): 158 -163.`(c)

Singer, H. "Active Comprehension: From Answeringto Asking Questions." In Inchworm, Inchworm:Persistent Questions in Reading Education, edit-ed by C. McCullough. Newark, Delaware: Interna-tional Reading Association, 1979.

Singer, H., and Beasley, S. "Motivating a DisabledReader." In Claremont Reading Conference Year-book, edited by M.P. Douglas. Claremont, Cali-fornia: The Clareinont Reading Conference, 1970.

Singer, H:, and Donlan, D. Reading and Lehmingfrom Text. Boston, Massachusetts: Little, Brownand Co., 1980.

Smith, N.B. History of American Reading Instruc-tion. Newark, Delaware: International ReadingAssociation, 1965.

Taylor, W. L. "Cloze Procedure: A New Tool forMeasuring Readability." Journalism Quarterly, 30(Fall 1953): 415-433.

Veatch, J. Individualized Reading for SuccesS inClassrooms. New London, Connecticut: Apple-ton-Century-Crofts, 1954. ,

Winograd, T. "Understanding, Natural Language."Cognitive Psychology, 3 (January 1972) (Wholeissue).

Woodcock, R.W. "A Comparative Study of SixApproaches to Teaching Reading to the MentallyRetarded:" In Vistas in Reading, Proceedingsof the Eleventh Annual Convention of the Inter-national Reading Association, Part I, edited byJ.A. Figurel. Newark, Delaware: InternationalReading Association; 1967.

Zigler, E. "Familial Mental Retardation: A Con-tinuing Dilemma." Science, 155 (January 1967):292-298.

Lemming to Learn from Text:A Framework for Improving Classroom Practice*

Robert J. Tierney and P. David PearsonCenter for the Study of Reading

University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign

Editors' Note: Recent research on comprehension emphasizes that the student's prior knowledge influences whathe or she understands and remembers in reading or listening. The theory behind much of this research is referredto as schema theory schema being the structures in which people organize knowledge in their minds. Afterreviewing research related to schema theory and comprehension, Robert Tiemey and David Pearson exploresome of the implications of the research for practice. They examine schema-related factors which influencereadability of text and provide more specific guidance for helping students who are having trouble withcomprehension. Many experts in reading believe that the research related to comprehension will have a majorinfluence on how reading is taught in the next ten years. These are ideas educators need to be thinking about,recognizing that much is yet to be learned about their implications for practice.

We believe that if teachers understand thenature of reading comprehension and learningfrom text, they will have the basis for evaluatingand improving learning environments. Duringthe past decade many advances have been madein the psychology and pedagogy of readingcomprehension that provide exciting possibili-ties for changing our approaches to helping stu-dents learn how to learn from text. For example,research findings suggest that less relianceshould be piked on traditional readability pro-cedures involved in text selection and use, andmore 'credence given to teachers' impression-istic determinations of the extent to which atext fits with and might be used by selectedstudents.

*The authors hold the copyright for this paper.

...,

Other research evidence suggests that teach-ers must recognize that a reader has a right to aninterpretation and that reading comprehensionis an interactive process involving more than aregurgitation of an author's explicit ideas. Read-ers should be encouraged to actively engagetheir background knowledge prior to, during,and after reading. They should be given oppor-tunities to appreciate and evaluate the adequacyof their own perspective and other interpreta-tions, to monitor their own progress through atext, and to discriminate new iearnings from oldknowledge.

Curriculum objectives should address theimportance, nature, and influence of a reader'sbackground knowledge; the need for a variablebalance between reader-based and text-basedprocessing; and the importance of selectedmonitoring strategies which students can man-age independently. Widely practiced notions

1 7o

158

that compartmentalize comprehension into sim-ple question types on a tontinuum from.literalto inferreno evaluative should be rethought.Teaching prescriptions for how to process a textwhich disregard the ever changing interplay oftext, purpose, and reader should be distarded.In their stead, we advocate the adoption ofteaching procedures that encourage students tomonitor their own processing strategies: howthey allocate attention to text versus priorknowledge, how they can tell what and thatthey know, and how to apply fix-up strategieswhen comprehension is difficult.

In this paper, we will discuss each of thepreceding notions about reading comprehen-sion and classroom practice and suggest theirimplications for teaching. Our suggestions toteachers are not intended to be exhaustive,exemplary, or very specific. Instead, they are.intended to provide teachers with guidelinesand examples of ways they might proceed todevelop their own teaching procedures.

Some pasic NotiOns aboutReading Comprehension and Learning

Consider for a moment what is involved incomprehending the following passage:

The Dust Bowl

During World War I, prices had tempted farmersto grow wheat and cotton in the former grazinglands of the Plains .region. Plows and harrowsbroke up the deep, t6ugh sod that had previouslyprevented erosion and conserved moisture in thissemi-arid region. 'When the years 1933-1935Proved unusually dry, there was danger that theregion would become a desert. Terrible duststorms carried away topsoil in such quantitiesthat even on the Atlantic seaboard the sun wasobscured by a yellow haze. The water table ofparts of the Plains region sank so low that wellsran dry. Between 1934 and 1939 an estimated350,000 farmers emigrated from the "dust bowl."To take care of immediate distress, Congress pro-vided funds so that dust bowl farmers could getnew seed and livestock. On a long-term basis, theDepartment of Agriculture dealt with the dustbowl by helping farmers to plant 190 million treesin shelter beds, which cut wind velocity and re-tained moisture. Farmers were also encouraged torestore the Plains to what they had been in thedays of the cattle kingdom and earlier a grazingregion. (Bragdon and McCutchan, 1976, p. 625)

Readers familiar with farming and the Plainsarea of the United States will likely recognizehow the drought, forces of supply and demand,and soil changes interacted to contribute to de-teriorating condition's during the Dust Bowl era.They might be able to visualize the changingconditions of the topography and sense the frus-tration and anguish experienced by the farmers.Readers unfamiliar with farming but possessingfirsthand experience with economic hardshipsmight focus on the personal hardships and fam-ily upheaval associated with periods of depres-sion. Readers who have experienced both farmlife and economic hardship might even be ableto go beyond visualizing the drought conditionsto experiencing a dryness in their mouth or alump in their throat as their interpretation of thetext triggers recall of specific experiences fromtheir past.

The point of this example is that compre-hension never occurs in a vacuum. It cannotproceed indlPendently of all of the related ex-periences that make up the reader's backgroundknowledge, or schemata (schema: singular), touse the recently rediscovered terminology ofcognitive scientists. There have been literallydozens of experimental demonstrations of therole that differences in background knowledgeplay in determining how students understandand retrieve information encountered in texts.Yet current teaching and assessment proce-dures, with their emphasis on correct answersand preferred interpretations, seem to operateon the assumption that comprehension occursindependent of individual differences in back-ground knowledge (a point to which we will

-return later in more detail). .

How does comprehension proceed? If com-prehension is not simply a matter of mappingthe author's message into a reader's memory,how then does it occur? Let us begin with anexample, taken from Collins, Brown, and Larkin(1977):

WindoW Text

He plunked down $5.00 at the window. She triedto give him $2.50, but he refused to take it. Sowhen they got inside, she bought him a large bagof popcorn. (p. 3)

With the initial statement, "He plunked down$5.00 at the window," the readers begin a search

1 I# .4.

159

to build a model of the meaning of the text. Onereader may invoke a racetrack scenario as amodel; a second, a bank; a third, a movie theater.Each of these scenarios or models may bethought of as different schemata that differentreaders would invoke because of different levelsof experience they have had with such scenariosin the past. Once evoked, each schema providesa framework for continuing the search to build amodel for what the text means. For example, theracetrack schema creates expectations that bets,odds, horses, or jockeys will be mentioned soon,whereas the movie theater schema creates ex-pectations that might include a film title, pop-corn, previews, or a movie star's name.

Cognitive scientists like David Rumelhart(1977; 1981) say that schemata have certain slotsthat must be filled and that comprehension con-sists of recognizing specific items in a text thatfill those slots. For example, "he" in the firstsentence is a candidate for the "bettor" slot in aracetrack schema, the "depositor" slot in a bank

schema, or the "moviegoer" slot in the movietheater scenario. As depicted in Figure 1, theymay have constructed an initial model of thetext involving, for example, a bank windowwith some bound slots (concepts enclosed byboxes) and some slots awaiting binding (con-cepts enclosed by circles). As readers proceed,they progressively refine their models. In thisexample, "she" is usually defined as the recip-ient of the money; "$2.50" is usually identifiedas change. Then with the statement, "so whenthey got inside, she bought him a large bag ofpopcorn," readers who have not envisioned amovie theater usually recognize a conflict. Theyrealize their models no longer match the ,textand are implausible, disconnected, and incom -.plete. To restructure their model, they mightquestion previous interpretations (for example,that the female was a bank clerk or a bet taker)and shift to a different schema from a bank orracetrack to a theater. Eventually, it is likely thatthe readers will build a model that involves the

The man wantedto save

Antecedent Consequent

Bank window

The tellertook $5

Figure 1. An initial stage in the construction of a model or scenario for the "Window Text."

l'J()

160

purchase of two tickets and an attempt by a dateto share the expenses. At this point, readers willsense that they have accounted for the text andthat their interpretations make sense and arecomplete.

These same notions of reading comprehen-sion can be applied to the passage, "The DustBowl." With the initial statement, "DuringWorld War I, prices had tempted farmers togrow wheat and cotton in the former grazinglands of the Plains region," readers will likelyactivate their knowledge of farming and con-strain these ideas in terms of the time period(World War I) and the type of farming to whichthe author alluded (wheat and cotton). As read-ers prOceed, they are expected to relate thesechanges in farming now focused on wheatand cotton to _plowing and the effects ofplowing upon the conservation of moisture andthe potential for soil erosion. Across the nextseveral sentences, "When the years ... terribledust storms ... wells ran dry," readers need toactivate other background knowledge, maintaintheir focus, and progressively refine a model forthe text. Assuming a singular purpose and ade-quate background knowledge, it is likely thatreaders will eventually develop a model for thetext which involves an appreciation of theevents causing the dust bowl crisis and whatCongress did to alleviate the problem. Readerswill then either tacitly or consciously considerthe adequacy of their interpretation, in particu-lar, the extent to which (1) their purposes forreading the text have been met and accountedfor in relation to the text, and sometimes (2) therelevance or transfer value of their acquiredunderstanding.

A key point of schema theory, then, is thatreading comprehension proceeds and inferenc-ing occurs via the progressive refinement ofthe reader's model. Collins, Brown, and Larkin(1977) describe this refinement process:

The initial model is a partial model, constructedfrom schemas triggered by the beginning ele-ments of the text. The models are progressivelyrefined by trying to fill the unspecified slots ineach model as it is constructed ... and the searchfor relevant information is constrained more andmore. (pp. 4-5)

Within this framework, the reader's schemata

will be _involved in the progressive constructionof a scenario which is complete, interconnected,and plausible which will account for the ele-ments and relationships within the text and theworld as the reader sees it. If the reader's modelseems tenable, then the schemata that comprisethe model will be involved in further text pro-cessing. If at any point the reader's model seemsuntenable, then schemata will drive the reexam-ination, reconstruction, or restructuring of ele-ments in the text to build a new model.

To summarize, the following statements canbe made about reading comprehension: (1) areader's background knowledge and purposeshave an overriding influence on the reader'sdevelopment of meaning, and (2) reading com-prehension involves the activation, focusing,maintaining, and refining of ideas toward de-veloping interpretations (models) which areplausible, interconnected, and complete. In ad-dition, there is a sense in which the reader'scomprehension involves two other facets: thereader's knowing (either tacitly or consciously)that an interpretation for a text is plausible,interconnected, and complete and, ideally, thereader's evaluation of the transfer value of anyacquired understandings.

Implications for ClaSsroom Practice

Recent examinations of instructional prac-tices suggest that there are not many effectivepractices for developing or improving compre-heasion in schools (Durkin, 1978-79; Tierney,LaZansky, and Schallert, 1981). In most lessons,students are given passages to read. While thestudents are reading the passages or after theyhave finished, teachers assess their comprehen-sion informally by asking them questions andhaving them respond either orally or on work-sheets. The responses, if discussed at all, focus

4'1 on finding a right answer. In terms of skillacquisition, a high premium has been placedupon separated curriculum objectives unrelatedto any comprehensive model of reading com-prehension or learning. These objectives areclustered around arbitrarily defined skill cate-gories (for example, literal, inferential, andevaluative comprehension) which give littleattention to the role of a reader's backgroundknowledge and the importance of improving areader's ability to learn how to learn.

'et

161

Reading comprehension is an area of e'curriculum where there has been little progress.Moreover, the changes which have occurredhave not been ,tied to a careful analysis of thenature of reading comprehension and leaining.We suggest that if teachers understand thenature of reading comprehension and learningthen they will have the basis for determin-ing what might facilitate and what mighlim-pede the development of comprehension andlearning. We believe that a schema-theoreticperspective offers such a basis. Accordingly wesuggest the following questions as guidelinesfor implementing curriculum improvements.Our guidelines are tied to three traditional andinterrelated segments in typical lessons forreading selections: preparing for reading, guid-ing reader-text interaction, and postreadingcomprehension and learning.

Prerequisite for Reading: Does the reader haveschemata relevant for understanding a text?

Our first guideline is concerned with wheth, ra match or a mismatch exists between the pur-poses and prior knowledge of readers and theintentions and expectations of authors. That is.does the reader have the relevant schemata for atext?

Consider first the issue of match betweenan author's intentions and a reader's purposes.In our reviews of textbook materials we haveencountered numerous examples where text in-tended for one purpose is forced to fit otherpurposes. With little regard for the integrity of aselection, some publishers seem to presume textwell written for one purpose will be appropriateand well written for other purposes. For exam-ple, in a certain biology textbook, which will gounnamed, the publisher uses a text describingthe changing color of leaves to try to explain thephysical process of these changes. The ques-tions which are asked following the selectionassume the readers have been given many moredetails than the text provides; further, theytotally disregard the descriptive-aesthetic func-tions the text appears to serve. In the elementaryclassroom, simple narratives usually intendedto be read for enjoyment are often sabotaged byan excessive use of poorly fitting questions(such as detail questions dealing with trivialinformation) under the guise of skill objectives.

Before using a text for instructional purposes,a teacher should consider the functions the textis intended to serve and balance those againstthe teacher's intentions in using the text and thestudents' purposes in reading it. Fof example,text might be examined by first isolating theessential understandings students are expectedto derive from the text and then examining theextent and nature of support (usually in theform of concrete examples and analogies thatcan bind new learnings to old) for these under-standings provided within the text. If the read-er's purposes are quite unlike those intended bythe author, and if the text cannot be augmentedeven with teacher support (that is, the teacherprovides the analogues and examples), then itshould not be read to elicit those assumedunderstandings.

Before using a text for instructionalpurposes, a teacher should consider thefunctions the text is intended to serve andbalance those against the teacher'sintentions in using the text and thestudent's purposes in reading it.

Compare the obvious differences between theunderstandings readers, might be expected toglean from Stephen Crane's The Red Badge ofCourage, which uses the American Civil Waras background, and a chapter called "The CivilWar" in a history textbook. In the former, thethemes of death, fear, and cowardice evoked bythe experiences of a young man participating inwar are likely to capture the reader. In the latter,the facts and concepts that describe and definethe Civil War will be paramount. It might bereasonable to expect a reader of Crane's work toglean an appreciation of how it must feel 'o becaught up in a war; for the textbook charter, itmight be reasonable to expect the reader to de-velop an appreciation of the causes, progress,and consequences of the Civil War. Even with agreat deal of teacher support, neither text couldserve the purposes for which the other textseems intended.

Consider second the issue of mismatchbetween an author's expectations regarding

162

audience and a reader's prior background ofexperience. There are many times when a textwritten for an audience with certain backgroundknowledge is given to an audience with differ-ent or limited knowledge of the topic. For exam-ple, an American reader would have difficultytrying to udderstand the following passage,even if it 7 rere revised to a lower readabilitylevel.

Today's CricketThe batsmen were merciless against the bowlers.The bowlers placed their men in slips and covers.But to no avail. The batsmen hit one four afteranother along with an occasional six. Not oncedid a ball look like it would hit their stumps or becaught.

Revised VersionThe men were at bat against the bowlers. They didnot show any pity. The bowlers placed their menin slips. They placed their men in covers. It didnot help. The batsmen hit a lot of fours. They hitsome sixes. No ball hit the stumps. No ball wascaught.

Or consider the following segment taken from a. biology text (Gallant, 1975):

The Garbage Collectors of the Sea

The garbage collectors of the sea are the decom-posers. Day and night,,ocean plants and animalsthat die7dial the body wastes of living animals,slowly drift down to the sea floor. There is asteady rain of such material that builds up on thesea bottom. This is especially true on the conti-nental shelves, where life is rich. It is less true inthe desert regions of the deep ocean.

A; on the land, different kinds of bacteria alsolive in the sea. The' 'tack the remains of deadplant and animals ti. 1 and break it down- intonutrients. These nu' '5 are then taken up byplant and animals p. .ton alike. Among suchnutrients are nitrate, phosphate, manganese, sil-ica, and calcium (p. 395)

It does not take too much effort to identify thereaders for whom these texts, even if adapted forreadability, might be inappropriate or incom-prehensible. ,The first passage is written for anaudience knowledgeable about cricket, the sec-ond passage is intended for an American highschool student with an understanding of de-composition, continental shelves, body wastes,and bacteria. Without these understandings, wewould predict that readers will have a great deal

of difficulty reading the text and will likelydevelop incomplete or inappropriate interpreta-tions for the text.

How can teachers assess whether a mismatchis likely to occur? It is our argument that tra-ditional readability procedures (the use of aformula based upon word difficulty, wordlength, and sentence length or the use of thecloze procedure requiring the replacement ofdeleted words) will not suffice.. Instead teachersshould judge the adequacy of text for them-selves. They should pursue an impressionisticevaluation of the demands of the text in con-junction with an assessment of readers' priorknowledge. An analYlks of "The Garbage Col-lectors of the Sea," for example, could involvean examination of the support given the conceptof decomposition and an informal assessmentof what students know. "Day and night" and"steady rain" provide ample support for the no-tion that decomposition is a never-ending pro-cess, but the reference to continental shelvesa term likely to be unfamiliar to most readersand those aspects of the text which specify whatdecomposers are can be considered vague.To verify the possibility of a mismatch, teach-ers might informally-assess the students' back-ground knowledge by discussing with studentswhat they know about these key concepts priorto reading.

If mismatches are inevitable, teachers havetwo choices they can dismiss the passage asinadequate, or they can provide the studentswith the background experiences appropriate tothe text. If they choose the latter course, teacherscan support the use of the passage with otherreading material, media, activities, and expe-riences to supplement what students alreadyknow. Rumelhark and Ortony (1977) have em-phasized that "in all cases existing knowledgeis utilized and required for the acquisition ofnew knowledge". (p. 117). Similarly, Pearsonand Spiro (1981) suggest that "instead of ask-ing the question 'what does the student notknow that I have to help him or her learn?'educators should be asking 'what is it that thestudent does know that I can use as an anchorpoint a bridge to help develop the con-cepts that he or she needs?' This implies thatin those situations for which the btudents lackbackground knowledge, teachers need to build

1 *i-s t)

163

liridges from what they already know or provideexperiences or analogies (for example, a-discus-sion of baseball as a means of understanding

*cricket) by which the students can build suchbridges for themselves.

Apart from specific 'action, teachers mightoffer a general program of schema development.Such a program might include field trips as wellas films in conjunction with topics being read ofdiscussed. It might involve students in activi-ties which encourage their pursuit of or immer-sion in a topic through a variety of resc'irces, forexample, library materials and discussions withknowledgeable persons.

"vo

Guiding Reader-Text Interactions: Do readersengage their schemata?

Our second guideline-moves our discussionof pe Ilgogy from prerequisites for dealing withtext .o the issue of student engagement withtext. This guideline assumes that readers al-ready have adequate prior knowledge for deal-ing with text and asks whether they engageit. Many tkieorists and practitioners advocatestrategies which are derived either directly.or indirectly from these notions. For example,most basal reading lessons and many readingeducators ad\,,,ise teachers to begin with eitherselected questions or a discussion of a story top-ic deS1gned to activate background knowledgeprior to reading. During reading, they often in-sert questions as a means of guiding or shipinga reader's understanding.

Schema engagement relates to (1) the reader'sinitial contact with a text, (2) the reader's abilityto relate his or her own background of experi-ence to the information represented within thetext, and (3) the reader's ability to focus and,refine his or her understanding of the text ma-terial. Important questions for the teacher toask are

Was the reader's schema engaged prior to reading,during reading, and after reading?

To what extent did learning occur? Was the read-er's relevant background of experience focusedand structured during reading?

Schema engagement in some students can be aserious problem for teachers. A teacher may as-sume correctly that students have appropriate

schemata for reading a text, only to discover in apostreading discussion that they did not engagethose schemata while reading: Sometimes thisproblem manifests itself as a general lack of in-terest in reading a text or as an unwillingness toconsider a topic or purposes prior to reading.Sometimes a schema engagement problem maybe passage specific that is, it may arise forcertain texts and not for others. Sometimes read-ers fail to maintain schemata while reading.

. . . in those situations for which thestudents lack background knowledge,teachers need to build bridges fromwhat the students already know orprovide experiences or analogies . ;bywhich they can build such bridges forthemselves.

This may occur for'a number of different rea-sons. First, readers may be predisposed to plodlaboriously through any and every text theyread. For example, readers may be devoting alltheir attention and capacity to decoding, leav-ing no room for comprehension. Second, poorlywritten text sudden shifts in topics, inade-quate transitions, or poorly developed ideasmay make schema maintenance difficult, if notimpossible. Third, readers may be inattentiveor distracted by tpo many or ill-considered ad-juncts; that is,-sometimes study questibns andactivities interrupt-reading and cause a disrup--tion of schema engagement.

What can teachers do? First and foremost,teachers shouldt remain alert to whether stu-dents are engaging their schemata prior to, dur-ing, and after reading. Typically, a few well-placed and open-ended questions will generatea response from Students which can help theteacher make such an assessment. If schema en-gagement problems are apparent, then teacherscan adopt and adapt teaching procedures tomeet the specific needs of readers. Since it is notlikely that a single procedure will be appropri-ate for all students in all situations, and itis possible that teacher adjuncts may do moreharm than good, the following broad sugges-tions are presented only as examples:

i 76

sr

1644

Source of Problem

General readerinertia, lack ofinterest

.. Passsage-specificproblems

Lack of focus andan inabilityto structureinformation

Lack of focus'caused by labo-rious processingtendencies

Text-basedproblems (discon-tinuity, Poorlydeveloped ideas,and so on)

Some Possible Solutions

Use highly, motivational mate-rial and 'functional readingmaterial which 'necessitates a'student response (for' example,

-follmving directions).

UST adjuncts (inseited ques-tions and study guide activi-ties). which relate what thestudents are reading to whatthey knqW and might do.

Alert students as to whatsuccessful readers do to cope

.with text. EncoUrage the appli-cation of strategies, across avariety of text situations Jkirexample, have students relatewhat they do in successfulsituations with what they do innonsuccessful situations).

Have students develop "maps"or diagrammatic representa-tions of the text (for example,outlines or flow charts). .

Provide adjuncts which encour-age readers'to focus and struc-ture their ideas.

Encodrage students to useheuristics- (who, whaf, when,where, why):

Encodiage note taking and out-lining.Use texts which require orencourage greater student. re-sponse.,

Encourage multiple gassesthrough a text (skimming for'the gist, rereading more care-fully to check the relationshipbet,ween key points).

Highlight "reading for mean-ing."

-

Prepare adjuncts to circumventthe difficulties (e.g., includestatements which',-clarify theideas represented in the textor encourage students to skipover them).

Encourage students to be thecritics of poorly written text(for example, have studentsevaluate poorly developed text

-

and discuss how an author'or reader might address theseproblems).

Overdependency Avoid the use of any adjunctsupon teacher which will displace the ,text.support Use adjuncts sparingly 9(d, in

conjunction with encodragingthe readeMo be self-initiating.

Have students replace teacheradjuncts with their own probes.

DiAuss the purpose andte ofan)/ adjuncts used.

. I a

Guiding Reader-Text Interactions: Does' threader exhibit flexible processing across difftr-,ent text's read for different purposes?.

O,ur third guidelirl tied directly to our sec-ond guideline, addresses ,the issue of mbni-paring= readerztext interactions. As suggestedearlier, with reference to Figure 1, when readersinteract with text they will and should acquiresome information that was represented in thetext and integrate it with information from theirbackground knowledge. Certainly, there are sit-uations for which it may be reasonable to expecta reader's understanding to remain close to the'text for example, 4en following a setrections. Btit there are other situations foi whichit may be appropriate to expect a more reader-based interpretation.

Consider the situation in which a reader's in-, terpretation of the passage below is too reader

based, producing understandings that are "too ,

loose" for the text and its intended purpose.net might be the ramifications if &science stu-dent read the text too loosely?

The experiment that you are about to do dealswith a property of BOIL For this experimentyou'll need a pennY..acdp, transparent tape and apitcher of water.

To perform the experiment, tape the penny tothe bottom of the cup. Move yoUr head to a pointjust beyond where you can see the penny:

Hold your head still, then slowly pour water.into the cup. Be sure not to move your head.

Stop pouring if the penny comes into 'view.(Tierney and 1aZansky, 1980, p. 610) a

To Orform the experiment adequately, the sci-ence student cannot take liberties, lest he or sheerr in the performance. Unfortunately, readers

165

with tendencies t5Ward being too reader baseddo not know that or what they do not know.They presume they know the material betterthan they actually chi or need to. Particularlywhen the text deals with a familiar topic, read-ers assume that they Icnbw what is written. As a'result, they often fail to i.cognize what might besubtle but important text signals. They fail tomonitor, their interactions with a text. In thecontext of many classrooms, these students es-cape identification for they, might be successfulreaders in most situations and be able to "blufftheir way through" most teacher questions.

What can a teacher do to help such students?First,and foremost, teacherS should alert stu-dents to the need.to monitor their reading dif-ferently for different texts. In situations wherea more text-based understanding is requiredteachers might (1) alert the students to the needto read the material carefully, (2) provideadjuncts (inserted questions or activities) which,encourage students to monitor, their developing

-interpretation, (3)- provide students with strate-gies such as outlining and note taking for care-fully reading the text, (4) encouragestudents toconsciously consider their purposes, their level

1 of understanding, and ways to monitor that un-derstvding, and (5) have the students read thematerial in conjunction with carrying out somerelevant activity (for example, have them coin-plete an experimenlwhich cannot be performedsuccessfully without reading the instructionsvery carefully).

Alternatively, consider the situation when areader's understanding is too "text based" forthe text, @nd pijrposes for reading. Spiro (1977)has suggested tHat certain conditions of school-ing may predispose a reader to ascribe ta text anautonomy, and authority, which resultS in theseparation of textual information from relatedprior knowledge. Such students perceive thetask of reading as, detached from'their own ex-periences: For example, in oral reading situa-tions, in completing doze Activities (especiallydoze activities demanding an exact-word re-placement), and in response to a teacher'sdemand for a "more literal" interpretation, wewould expect that students may misconstruewhat reading comprehension is. They may de-cide, erroneously, that reading .means a word-perfect, rendition of a text.

'offer their associations, jot them down into cate-gories (as yet unlabelled categories). For exam-ple, for,"tree" the implicit categories might in-clude parts,of trees,, kinds of trees, processes,and products. Go. back and help the studentslabel the categories, and then ask them to readthe chapter to learn more abdut X. After the stu-dents have read the chapter, return to the set of -

categories related, to X and ask studentslto addnew terms thaethey have acquired from reading.This activity will give the teacher a .vividdemonstration of the students' pre-existingschema, new learnings from the text, kid ,the,relationship between new and old info anon,The technique also Maximizes the likeli food ofschema engagement during beading.

Postreading .Comprehension and Learning: IRthe reader's ancierstanding adequate? Are neWleaminge transferable?

What can eachers do in these situations?First, they should encourage readers to iciatetheir backgiound of experience to what theyread and alert them to the importance of theirown idep, perspective, and purpose in anycommunication. At a minimum, readers shouldbe asked to discuss their knowledge, includingtheir perspective about a topic, in conjunctionwith a- discussion of the author's perspectiveand what the author assumed the reader knewand might-learn. In addition, the teacher candevelop appropriate activities or sets of ques-tions which encourage readers to ergage theirown background of experience pribr to,.duriug,and after reading. Questions might encouragethem to discuss their perceptions of what mighthappen and, at various points during reading,what has occurred and any iniplicatiOns ofthose occurrences.

To illustrate more specifically how this mightproceed, here is a technique we have found use-ful. Begin by as ing students what they Think Ofwhan they hear he word X (Where X is the topicthat they are going to read about later). As they

Our 'fourth guideline moves us from-guidanceand monitoring of text interactions to address-ing the adequacy of readers' understandings,Central -to our discussion he first, the notionthat whet is considered acthracy of understand-ing should be, regarded as relative and, second, ..the issue of transfer. of new 'earnings.

1 78

a

11

9

-,

The notion thAt accuracy of underslandingshould be regarded as relative derives from arecognition that z.Orhprehension is doomed to

1` bAidiosynnratic. That is, accuracy ind appropri-ateness of understanding should beconsidereda function -of individual _reeder-and-indlvidual-

Ware' nteristics, as well as individual pur=poses bf reading. In Constructing an interpretaf

, tion, a reader selects,, inserts, substitutes, de-, letes, and 'connects ideas in conjunction with

what he or, she porceives-ErrnifniVing sense."Arid what "makes sense" dePends'upon the textas well as the reader's purposes and backgroundknowledge. Two. postulates, taken from Tienieyand Spiro (1979) are relevant to this notion:

1. A, reade- r's selections, Insertions, substitu-tions, omissions, and binding of ideas arenot necessarily a sign of reader error:

, 2. It shoUld not be assumed that each text hasn single interpreti3tion_

What implications does this notion hold for-. teachorsi Teachers peed to respect both author-

ihiP'and readership. Indeed, accuracy of under;standing id misleading unless it is defined in'Wigs of both-e author's. intentions and thereadbr's purposes. This ,rneans, that 'teachersmust, recognize the reader's right to interpret atext at the same time That they instill in-studenta revonsibility to address the author's inten-tions In ivrtting the test. Curriculum objectiveswhic capitalize upon this Orspective shouldinclude goals similarto the following: "The stu-dent is able to make judgments about.his or her

'own -understanding,- -the author's intentions,task aemands; and strategy Sircha goal !Avould include objectives directed athaving'the student (1) recognize alternative per-spectives, (2) engage hii or her own backgroundknowledge, (3) consider the plausibility of al-ternative interpretations, (4) dev-elop strategiesfar learning from' various texts for alternative_purposes, (5) understand the nature of task de:mends (including author's intention and plan oforganization), and (6) understand the nature.and Applications of new learnings.

in assessing the e-quality of a reader's interpre-tation, the teacher must ask-

To what extent wes the reader's u'pderstand-ing adequate for the text and purposes forreading?

When a reader's understanding diveiges fromthe author's apparent intention, can,ithe read-er's interpretation be justified?

Current practices,, with their emphasis on cor-i_TciLat,is% ,ers_alad_a_singie-appropriateinterprte a-tion, violate these principles. Teachers 'need tomove away froin. these practices and ,generatedevices which are open-ended and allow for di-vergent responses. For example, after reading aselection, teachers might-allow students to re-late their own interpretations prior to proddingtheM. with an array of questions. To move stu-dents away from "the right answer" orientation,the teacher might askdaem to rank the plausibil-ity of,. each response to a multiple-choice ques-

-. tie% In follow -up discussions different students. can compare the rationales behind their variousrankings. The acid test for student responsequality should be "Can it be justified?" ratherthan "Is it right?" Thii criterion places the em,Phasis precisely 'where it should be placed: onthe - quality of the student's reasoning abilities.Such a stance will also increase the likelihoodthat important rather than trivial aspects of textwill receive. ernphadis.

Consider, next the notion of transfer, whichrelates to whether a reader can apply what he orshe has read or learned to other situations. Twoquestions ere important here:

Is the reader able to recognize new learningsand-potential application?Is the reader able to apply skills acquired dur-ing instruction to other text situations without the support of such instruction? -

The -issue of applying, or using new knowl-elige places reading in a real-world context. Thecriterion assumes that students understand, re-member, and evaluate nel.v infdrmation morereadily when they know its relevance to otherexperiences., That is, students should be askedto consideillthe point" of what they have read,whether they have read for enjoyment, to gaininformaliorN9r to solve problems.

The issue of applying learned strategies gets,at the heart of instruction. Presumably we teachsothatstudents will become independent learn-ers, no longer needing our intervention and sup-port. Independence s the essence of transfer.Unfortunately, very few studies have addressed

..."

167

the transfer -of- strategy issue. From those fewstudies which have been re?orted, we are im-pressed that students rarely develop an abilityto transfer or apply knowledge, ,skills, orstrategies spontaneously that is, when theyare left to their own resources. Instead, theyneed to be guided toward transfer. This wouldinclude being alerted to when and how to usewhat strategies.

If teachers are to help students developindepyndent reading and learning skills, theyshould not assume that it will just happen.Tea 'hers must design situations and activitiesin hich students can try, discuss, and evaluates ,ategies, skills, and knowledge utilizationacross a variety of reading situations. Thereappear to be some general guidelines emergingfrom recent research on teaching reading com-prehension which are relevant to the .goal ofhelping students learn how to learn. One ratherconsistent finding is that students rarely acquiretransferable abilities without being providedample opportunities to develop and practicethose abilities in a variety of relevant contexts.

C

lfteachers are to help students developindependent reading and learning skills,they should not assume that it will justhappen. Tedphers must design situationsand activities in which students can try,discuss,. and evaluate strategies, skills, andknowledge utilization across a variety ofreading situations. There appear to besome general guidelines emerging fromrecent research on teaching reading com-prehension which are relevant to the goalof helping students learn how to learn.

Students need to understand the purpose andfunction of reading strategies, comprehension,or learning as well as be given appropriatesituations within which to explore their nature.

should do so within 6 variety of situations forwhich it is reasonable to find the main idea.

Independent of teacher support. Student inde-efforts and opportunities to test their skills

a strategy determining the main idea, the reader

Students should be given feedback on their

Furthermore, if a reader is being asked to apply

\-\pendence implies systematically phasing out

teacher cldependence, which, ;--I turn, impliesthat stu ents will be given learning experienceswhere they are gi en an explicit understandingof when], why, ho `andand what to do.

1Concluding Remairks1

\It ha been the pur\pose of this paper to drawupon r cent developments in the study of read-ing co prehension a a means of examiningissues of relevance to ,improving reading com-prehension and learnii?.g from text. We havesuggested that if teache-s are to develop a read-er's understanding, they should address theadeqOcy of their pedagOgy against some basicnotions about reading and, learning. The notionsthat liVe have suggested are driven by a schema-theoretic perspective a x\iew which promptedthe follovving questions as guidelines to instruc-tional decision making.

Did the reader have the relevant schematafor a text?Was the reader's schema activated (purpose,background knowledge, attention, focus, in-

130

terest) prior to, during,Was the reader's relevantperience activated durin

nd after reading?background of ex-reading?

Across reading material for different pun:.poses did the reader exhibit flexible pro-cesses in tams of activating, focusing,maintaining, and refining an interpreta-tion? Was the reader aware of the strategiesone could use to cope with -different textsand purposes for reading?To what extent was the reader's understand-ing adequate for the text aind purposes forreading? When a reader's understanding di-verges from the author's intention, did thereader justify his or her interpretation? Didthe reader recognize his or', her perspectiveand the perspective of others?Was the reader aware of his or her level ofunderstanding of a text read for differentpurposes?

Did the reader recognize new learnings andtheir i.otential applications?

168

References --Bragdon, H.W.. and McCutchan, S.P. History of a

Free'People. New York: Macmillan, 1976.Collins, A.; Brown, J.S.; and Larkin, K.M. Inference

in Text Understanding (Technical Report No. 40)..Urbana: University of Illinois, Center for theStudy of Reading, 1977.

Durkin, D. "What Classroom Observations Revealabout Reading Comprehension Instruction."Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 4 (1978-79):481-533. ,*

Gallant, R.A. "The Garbage Collectors of the Sea." InGinn Science; Program (Intermediate Level C),I. Asimov and R.A. Gallant. Lexington, Massa-chusetts: Ginn, 1975.

Pearson, P.D., and Spiro, R.J. "Toward a Theory ofReading Comprehension Instruction." Topics inLanguage Disorders, 1, 1 (1981): 71-7E.

Rumelhart, D.E. "Toward an Interactive Model ofReading." In Attention and Performance (Vol. VI),edited by S. Dornic. Hillsdale, New Jersey:Lawrence Eribaum Associates, 1977.

Rumelhart, D.E. "Schemata: The Building Blocks ofCognition." In Theoretical Issues in ReadingComprehension, edited by R.J. Spiro, B.C. Bruce,and W. F. Brewer. Hillsdale, New Jersey: LawrenceEribaum Associates, 1981.

Rumelhart, D.E., and Ortony, A. "The Representa-tion of Knowkaige in Memory." In Schooling andthe AcquiAtion of Knowledge, edited by R.C. An-derson, F.J. Spiro, and W.E. Montague: Hillsdale,New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1977.

Spiro, R.J. "Constructing a Theory of ReconstructiveMemory: The State of Schema Approach." InSchooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge,edited by R.C. Anderson, R.J. Spiro, and W.E.Montague.- Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erl-baum Associates, 1977.

Tierney, R.J., and LaZansky, J. "The Rights and Re-sponsibilities of Readers and Writers: A Contrac-tual Agreement." Language Arts, 57 (September1980): 606-613.

Tierney, R.J.; LaZansky, J.; and Schallert, D.Secondary Social Studies and Biology Students'Use of Textbooks. Champaign: University ofIllinois, 1981.

Tierney, R.J., and Spiro, R.J. "Some Basic Postulatesabout Comprehension: Implication: for Instruc-tion." In New Perspectives in Comprehension,edited by J. Harste and R. Carey. Bloomington:Indiana University, School of Education, 1979.

181

<3.

Direct Instruction Reconsidered*

Penelope 'L. PetersonWisconsin Research and-bevelopment Center for Individualized Schooling

Editors' Note: Penelope Peterson reports on her meta-analysis of forty-five studies which compered studentoutcomes from more directive and less directive approaches to basic skills instruction. Meta-analysis is a, relativelynew and promising approach to summarizing findings from many research reports. After a brief discussion ofprevious summaries, issues, and the different methods of summarizing, the author discusses her findings ontwelve different cognitive and affectke Instructional outcomes. She finds that each instructional approach leads tosomewhat better results for different outcomes and that some students do better in one or the other situation. Herfindings, consistent with those of ,Resnick and of the participants in the basic skills synthesis meeting discussed inthe foreword, further contribute to the case for a richer mix of more and less directive approaches.

Two decades ago, Richard Anderson re-viewed the research studies comparing twobasic teaching styles: teacher-centered (direc-tive) and learner-centered (nondirective). Ina summary of his research he reported that, ofthirty-two studies reviewed, eleven indicatedgreater learning when learner-centered methodswere .used, eight indicated greater learningwhen teacher-centered methods were used. andthirteen indicated that learning was the sameregardless of the method used. He concluded:

Much of the research en teaching methods in thelast twenty years seems bent on discoveringwhether "The meek shall inherit the earth,' orwhether, on the other hand, "Nice guys lose." ...Teacher-centered and learner-centered methodshave been repetitiously inveatigatad net becausethey were well conceived ideas as to how onewould lead to superior learning, but merely, to.

,11011111{,*Frani Rrjsearch on Teaching: Concepts, Findings,and Implications by Penelope L Peterson andHerbert J. W4lbers et al. Berkeley, McCutcban Pub-lishing CorPlotation, C) 1979. Peanission grantedby the pvb2isher.

find out if one style superior to the other. Wewere not fortunate enough to find that one meth-od is consistently better than or even consistentlydifferent from the other; thus, we are now forcedto explore new avenues,'

Now, nearly twenty years after Anderson'sreview, we seem to, be traversing the same oldavenue again, only this tide tte teacher-cen-.tered or directive method is called "direct in-struction" and the other method is referred toas an "open," "indirect,'' or "nontraditionA"approach.2 Also, this time there appear to besome well-conceived ideas as to how directinstruction IA ill lead to superior learning. AsBarak Rosenahine points out,3 researchers havemoved from a primary concern with teacher be-haviors a concern 'that began.i10958 withthe work of Ned Flanders and Di nald Medleyto a focus on student attention or engagementand 'content covered or "opportunity to learn."Student attention, student- engagement, andcontent covered seem to be increased by cer-tain teaching activities and settings that Rosen-shine terms "direct instruction." According to

182

170

Rosenshine, direct instruction has the follow-ing dimensions: an academic focus, a teacher-centered focus, little student choice of activity,use of large groups rather than small groups forinstruction, and use of factual questions andcontrolled practice in instruction.

Recent eviews of research on teachingstrongly suggest that direct instruction is themost effective way of teac.hing.4 The reviewsconsider only several of the many studies corn-.paring open and traditional teaching, however,and a closer and more exhaustive :,urvey of theliterature suggests that such a conclusion maybe simplistic. Direct instruction may be effec-tive for attaining some educational outcomes orobjectiveS, but not for attaining others. Also, di-rect instruction may be effective for some kindsof students, but not for others. Although Rosen-shine has allUded to the idea that differentteaching approaches may be effective for differ-ent enJs and for diffe-ent types of students, he'eaves the reader with the overriding impres-sion that direct instructiun is bests

This chapter reviews the research on theeffectiveness of direct instruction and relatedteaching variables. The intent is not to answerwhether direct instruction is more effective thanmore indirect or open wan of teaching. Rather,it is to address other questions: For what educa-tional outcomes is dircct instruction most effec-tive and for what kinds of 'udents? For whateduca.ional Jutcomes are indirect or open waysof teaching most effective and for what kinds ofstudents? I review studies that compare directinstruction witn more indirect, open, or non-traditional approaches and consider variouscognitive outcomes of instruction as well as var-ious affective outcomes. I also discuss the effectof student characteristics on outcomes fromboth approaches. Most of the research rev lowedhere IA as conducted at the elementary schoolr.e%e1,but some studies were conducted at themiddle school or junior high school

Comparisons of Direct andOpen Instruction

In a recent review, Robert Hon, itz locatednearly two hundred studies that compared educational outcomes of open-classroom teachingwith traditional teaching.6 In these studies,

open-classroom teaching was generally referredto as "a style of teaching involving flexibilityof space, student choice of activity, richnessof learning materials, integration of curriculumareas and more individual or small-group thanlarge-group instruction." This open style wascompared with traditional teaching. Althoughtraditional teaching may not be completely syn-onymous with "direct instruction" as describedby Rosenshine, it is clear that traditionalteaching is more direct than open teaching.Furthermore, the characteristics of open teach-ing described above are the opposite of thecharacteristics of direct instruction given byRosenshine.

Horwitz used a "box score" or "voting meth-od" to integrate findings across research stud-ies. For' each study he simply tallied whetherthe results favored open teaching, traditionalteaching, or indicated no significant differ-ences. If the results were ambiguous, he countedthe study as showing mixed results. After allstudies had been reviewed, he tallied the num-.,ber of studie's falling into each Of the four cate-gories and then attempted to draw conclusionsfrom the box score results. Typically, the proce-dure for drawing conclusions from box scoreresults is as follows: If there is a plurality ofstudies in any one of the categories with fewerstudies in other categories, then the catego*with the plurality is declared the winner. It is

%assumed that the winning category will providethe best estimate of the direction of the true rela-tionship between the independent and the de-pendent variable in this case, the teachingapprOarh and the educational outcome. .

One major problem with liorw kis procedureis that, by basing the tally on the statistical sig-nificance of the results rather than on the direc-tion of the result's regardless of statistical signif-icance, Horw itz maximized the risk of Type IIerrors. Gage has suggested that, in view of thesmall sam le sizes in most studies of teaching,"it seems evident that most of the single studiesshould not be expected to yield statistically sig-nificant results."9 Thus, by relying on statisticalsignificance; Horwitz increased the probabilityof concluding that no difference existed be-tween direct and open instructional approacheswhen, in fact, a true difference may haveexisted.

1 ,93 .

A second problem with Horwitz's procedureis a deficiency of the box score or voting methodin general. The box score or voting method ig-nores good descriptive information in the stud-ies. As Glass has pointed out: "To know thattelevised instruction beats traditional classroominstruction in 25 to 30 studies if, in fact, itdoes is not to know whether TV wins by anose or in a walkaway."1° Thug, Glass recom-mends calculating the strength of the experi-krtental effect in each study because it gives thereader an indication of-the importance of therelationship rather than just the significance orthe nonsignificance. He suggests <using "effect'Size" as a measure of the strength or importanceof an effect. Effect size is calculated by subtract-ing the mean on the.outcome variable in the,*control group from the' mean on the same vari-able in the experimental group and dividing theresult by ,the standard deviation of the controlgroup." This gives an indication of the size ofthe difference in effect between the two groupsin terms of the standard deviation. Effect size:.can then be averaged across studies, and onecan determine whether a particular approachmakes a greater difference (for example, onestandard deviation or more) or much less differ-ence (for example, .5 standard deviation or less).

I attempted to calculate effect size for thestudies located by' Horwitz and for several addi-tional studies that I found. I reviewed only thosestudies'that compared educational outcomes furopen approaches and traditional approaches. Effect size was calculated by subtracting the meanon the outcome in the traditional approach anddividing the result by the standard, deviation ofthe traditional approach. Thus, positive effectsizes were those that favored the open approach,and negative effect sizes were those that favoredthe traditional approach.

Unfortunately, most of the studies did notcontain enough information to permit calcu-lating effect size. Many of the studies were

. unpublished dissertations, and the dissertationabstracts contained insufficient information.Since the review does not include many unpub-lished studies, one can only speculate how theresults would differ if all unpublished studieswere included. In a comparison of the results fpublighed studies and unpublished, studies n.the field of psychotherapy, Glass reported that

°4

published studies showed a slightly larger ef-fect size than unpublished studies: "studiespublished in books showed an average effectsize of .8crx; studies from journals had a meaneffect size of .7ox; thesis studies averaged .box;and unpublished studies averaged .50-x."12 Onemight infer from the above results that, if disser-tations and other unpublished studies were 'n-cluded in the present review, the average effectsize across studies may be slightly, reduced.

A total of forty-five studies did, however, con-tain sufficient information to permit calculatingeffect size. After reviewing all of the studies,I calculated the mean and median effect sizesacross those studies for twelve different educa-tional outcomes. these results and the results ofHorwitz's review are presented in Table 1. In theremainder of the chapter, I discuss the, resultsaccording to the type of educational outcome)measured.

Cognitive Outcomes

Cognitive outcomes included cotnpositeachievement, achievement in mathematics,achievement in reading, creativity, and problemsolving. Horwitz reviewed 102 studies that in-vestigated composite achievement on standard-ized tests and found that the plurality of studiesindicated no significant difference betweenopen and traditional approaches. When effectsizes Isere calculated for twenty-five of thesestudies, they were found to average -.12, withthe lowest effect size being .78 and the highesteffect size being .41. Effect sizes were also calcu-lated for studies that provided separate data onachievement in mathematics and reading. Theaverage and range of effect size for readingachievement were. similar to those for compos-ite achievement. The data on effect size suggestthat, although on the average students tendedto achieve more with traditional teaching thanwith,open-classroom teaching, the average ef-fect size was quits smell. The difference be-tween the two approaches in .arms of students'achievement was about one -tenth of ir standarddeviation.

As for creativity, however. the results indicatethat students in open approaches tend to. bemore creative than those in traditithir ap-proaches. Creativity was typically assessed with

172 a

Table ISummary of studies comparing open and traditional teaching approaches

Educationaloutcomes

Peterson review

Size of effecttNdmber

ofstudies Mean Median Range

Horwitz review*

Percentage of studies showing -Number Open Traditional

of is is Mixed Nostudies better better results difference

CognitiveAchievement-composite 25 - -.20 -.78 to + .41 102 14 12 28 46

Achievement-mathematics 18 -.14 -.04 -1.01 to + .58

Achievement.reading 20 -.13 -.22 - .72 to + .44 - -Creativity 11 .18 .32 -.23 to .50 33 36 0 30 33Problem solving 1 .98 .93 - -

Affective"Self-concept 14 .16 .16 .14 to +1.45 61 25 3 25 47Attitude towardschool 15 .12 .21 - .43 to + .48 57 40 4 25 32

Attitude towardteachor 2 .42 .42 .29 to + .56

Curiosity 3 .14 .08 .17 to + .52 14 . 43 0 36 21Locus of control 5 .03 -.14 - .34 to + .70 24 25 4 17 54Anxiety 5 .07 .41 -.63 to + .69 17 18 29 6 47Independence 3 .30 .29 + .07 to + .55 23 78 4 9 9

*From Robert A. Horwitz, -Effects of the 'Open Classroom."' Educational Em ironments and Effects. Evalua-_Bort, Policy, and Producti% it). ed. Herbert J. Walberg (Berkeley. Calif.. McCutchan Publishing Corporation,1979). chap. 14.

to positive effect size favors the opea approach. d negative effect size favors the traditional approach.

paper-and-pencil Jests, and answers werescored for fluency, flexibility, originality, andelaboration. Horwitz found that in a plurality ofstudies (36 percent), creativity was higher inopen approaches than in traditional ones. I

found that the average effect size for creativitywas .18. In other words, students in open ap-proaches had creativity scores that were, on theaverage, a fifth of a stsndard deviation higherthan the creativity scores of students in tradi-tional classrooms. In an additional study, whichlooked at students' ability to solve-problems asmeasured by Raven's Progressive Matrices, itwas found that students in open approachesscored approximately one standard deviationhigher than students in more trade al ap-proaches. This finding should, ho% be re-garded as tentative since it is based on only onestudy.

When taken together, the findings for cog-nithe outcomes of teaching suggest that the ef-fects of open and more direct or traditional ap-proaches do depend on the type of cognitiveoutcome. Although the effeds in all cases arequite small, they suggest that, with traditionalteaching, students tend to perform slightly Bet-te; on achievement tests, but they do worse ontests of more abstract thinking, such as crea-tivity and problem solving. Conversely, withopen teaching, students may perform worse onachievement .tests, but they tend to do betterwhen it is necessary to be creativeznd to solveproblems.

Affective Outcomes

Affective outcomes included self-concept,attitude toward school, attitude toward teacher,

t.)

173

curiosity, locus of control, anxiety, and indepen-dence. Self-concept, attitude, locus of control,and anxiety were assessed using self-report,paper-and-pencil measures. In some cases curi-osityand independence were assessed withpaper-and-pencil measures and in other casesbehavioral ratings were used.

The clearest differences between open andtraditional approaches appeared for attitudetoward school, attitude toward teacher, inde-pendence, and curiosity. Horwitz reviewed fifty-seven studies that investigated attitude towardschool rand found that a plurality (40 percent)favored open instruction. I found that the aver-age effect size for attitude toward school wasshall only about .12. A stronger effect ap-peared for attitude toward teacher. Although.only two studies were reviewed, the average ef-fect size was .42. Horwitz found that of twenty-three studies that investigated. independence,the vast majority (78 percent) favored the openapproach. In other words, students where openapproaches were used were more independentthan students where traditional approacheswere used. The average effect size for threestudies was .30, or approximately one-third ofa standard deviation. When curiosity was theeducational outcome, Horwitz again found thatthe plurality of studies 143 percent) favoredopen approaches. Students were more curiousin open approaches than in traditional ap-proaches. The average'effect size was .14 acrossthree studies.

The clearest differences betweenopen and traditional approaches appearedfor attitude toward school, attitudetoward teacher, independence, andcuriosity.

The research on self-concept, locus of con-, trol, and anxiety indicated little difference on

these outcomes between open and traditionalapproaches. On all three outcomes, Horwitzfound that the plurality of the studies showedno significant difference between the approach-;'es. For locus of control and anxiety, the averageeffect size approached zero. The average effect

size was larger for self - concept. (.16), but wasstill small.

What the research suggests, therefore, is thatopen approaches surpass traditional ones in im-proving students' attitude toward school andtoward their teacher and in promoting students'independence and curiosity, but the size of theeffect is small. On the other hand, the researchon self-concept, locus of control, and anxietyindicates that there is little or no difference be-tween open and traditional approaches on theseaffective outcomes.

56

The Effect of Student Characteristics

Seven studies investigated the effect of stu-dent characteristics on educational outcome inopen and traditional approaches. The results ofthese studies suggest that the effectiveness ofthe -approach depends on the type of studentbeing taught.

Several studies examined the effect of stu-dents' ability on achievement and creativityin open and traditional approaches. Ward andBarcher found that, although the achievementof low-ability students did not differ in openand traditional approaches, the achievement ofhigh-ability students was significantly greaterin traditional approaches than in open ap-proaches.'3 Similarly, Bennett found thatstudents with high prior achieven'lent achievedmore in traditional approaches than in open ap-proaches, but boys who had low prior achieve-ment did better in open than in traditional ap-proaches." In contrast, Grapko reported thathigh-ability students did not differ in achieve-ment in open and traditional approaches, butlow-ability students did significantly better intraditional approaches.15 Similarly, Solomonand Kendall found that low-ability studentsachieved more in traditional approaches. Theyalso found that the achievement of high-ability.students 'depended on their level of Complianceor conformity. ,High-ability students who werelow on conformity did better in traditiOnal ap-proaches than in open ones. High-ability stu-dents who were moderate or high in their levelsof conformity achieved more- in open than intraditional approaclies.'6

When creativity was the educational out-come, Ward and Barcher reported that low-abil-.

174

ity students did not differ in their creativityin open and traditional classes, but high-abilitystudents were significantly more creative in tra-ditional classes than in open classes.'7 In con-trast, Solomon and Kendall found that low-abil-ity students were mofe creative in traditionalapproaches, and high-ability students weremore creative in open approaches."'

The remaining studies examined the effect ofstudent personality. and motivation on achieve-ment and attitude in open and traditional ap-proaches. Bennett_fqund that motivated, socia-ble students who had positive self-conceptsachieved more in traditional approaches thanin open approaches. Unmotivated, unsociable,nonconforming students who had negative self-concepts achieved more in approaches thatwere a combination' of open arid traditional.'9Papay and his colleagues investigated students'trait anxiety and found that low-anxious stu-dents.performed better on a mathematics testwhere a traditional teaching approach was usedthan where an open approach was used; high-anxious students performed better where anopen approach' was used than where a tradi-tional approach was used."

--Two studies investigated the effect of locusof control on outcomes in open and traditionalapproaches and reported similar findings. Theresults reported in the previous section indicat-ed that, when locus of control was considered asan outcome, students in open and traditionalapproaches did not 'differ on locus of contAfl.But Wright and DuCette found that studentswho had an internal haws of control (that is,when they felt that they had personal controlover their successes and failures) achieved morein open approaches than in traditional ones.Students who had an external locus of control(that is, when they felt that their successes andfailures were due to fate, luck, or other forcesoutside their control) achieved as well in tradi-tional as in open approaches.21 Arlin reportedsimilar findings when attitude toward schooland attitude toward teacher were the education.al outcomes. Internals had more positive atti-tudes in an open approach than in a traditionalapproach; externals did not differ in their at-titudes in open and traditional approaches."The findings can latfixplained in terms of the

type of student one would expect to do well inan open approach. Since an open approach typi-cally encourages students to take more respon-sibility for their own learning than a traditionalapproach, one would expect that a student whohas an internal locus of control would be par-ticularly suited to an open approach.

In sum, the findings ate inconsistent as to theeffect of students' ability on achievement andcreativity in open and traditional approaches,and no definitive conclusions can be drawn. Butthe findings on students' locus of control areprovocativ and suggest that the effectivenessof the open approach in promoting studentachievement and attitude may depend on theindividual student's own sense of personal con-trol over his or her actions.

ImplicationsRosenshine admits that the picture of direct

instruction seems grim: "large groups, decisionmaking by the teacher, limited choice of mate-rials and activities by students, orderliness, fac-tual questions, limited exploration of ideas,dr411, and high percentages of correct an-swers."23 To me, the picture of direct instriTtionseems not only grim but unidimensional aswell. It assumes that the only important educa-tional objective is to increase measurable stu-dent' achievement and that all students learn inthe same way and thus should be taught-in thesame way. Yet most educators agree that a broadrange of educational goals is important, includ-ing increasing students' creativity, indepen-dence, curiosity, self-concept, and attitudetoward school and learning. Furthermore, a re-cent survey indicates that taxpayers support awide variety of social and humanistic goalsnot juSI the so-called basics for public educa-tion and are willing to support higher taxes tohelp meet these goals.24

In this r view of the research, we have seenthat, althoug a more direct or traditional teach-.ing approach y be slightly better, on the aver-age, than an op approach for increasing stu-dents' achievement, an open approach appearsto be better than more direct approach forincreasing students' creativity, independence,curiosity, and favorable attitudes toward schooland learning.' In addition, the research suggests

1 0.-k..J

175

that some kinds'of students may do better in anopen approach and others may do better in amore direct approach. The implication is that,if educators- want to achieve a wide range of

the objectives and if they want to meete needs of all students, then neither direct

instruction alone nor open-classroom teachingalone is sufficient.. Educators should provide opportunities forstudents to be exposed to' .both teaching ap-proaCies. One solution would be to reserve partof the school day for direct instruction in lead-ing and mathematics and the remainder of theschool day for a more open approach to learn-ing.25 Another solution now being used in someschool 'districts is to allow parents to select thetype of school and classroom bestsuited to theirchild's needs for a particular school year. Somestud-nts might need a more open approach tobecome interested in reading while others

-Might need-a-more- structured approach to learnreading. Some students might not need to im-prove their reading skills, but, rather, they 'mayneed to learn to be more independent and curi-ous. The picture thus becomes multidimension-

. al - children learning the basic skills but alsolearning to be happy, Creative, curious, andindependent persons in the way they learn best.

Notes1. Richard C. Anderson, "Learning in Discussions:

A Resume of the Authoritirian-Democratic Stud-ies," Harvard Educational Review 29 (1959):201-215, esp. 211-212.

2. See .Barak Rosenshine, in Research on Teach-ing: Concepts, Findings, and Implications, eds.Penelope L. Peterson and Herbert J. Walberg(Berkeley, Calif.: McCutchan Publishing Corpo-ration, 1979), chap: 2.

-3. Ibid.

4. Se&, for example, Barak V. Rosenshine, "Class-room Instruction," in The Psychology of Teach-ing Methods, Seventy-fifth Yearbook of the Na-tional Society for the Study of Education, Part I,ed. N.L. Gage (Chicago: University of ChicagoPress, 1976), 335-371; see also Rosenshine, inResearch on Teaching, chap. 2; 'and N.L. Gage,The Scientific Basis of the Art of Teaching (NewYork: Teachers College Press, 1978), 31-35.

5. See Rosenshine, in Research on Teaching,chap. 2; and Barak V. Rosenshine, "Review ofTeaching Styles and Pupil Progr6s by NevilleBennett," -American Educational Research Jour-nal 15. (1978): 163-169.

6. Robert A. Horwitz, "Effects of the 'Open Class-room,' " in Educational Environments and Ef-fects: Evaluation, Policy, and Productivity, ed.Herbert J. Walberg (Berkeley, Calif.: McCutchanPublishing Corporation, 1979), chap. 14.

7. Ibid., 7.

8. Richard J. Light and Paul V. Smith, "Accumulat-ing Evidence: Procedures for Resolving Contra-dictions among Different Research Studies,"Harvard Educational Review 4 (1971): 429-471.

9. Gage, The Scientific Basis of the Art of Teaching,27.

10. Gene V Glass, "Integrating Findings: The Meta-analysis of Research," in Review of Researchin Education, Volume V, ed. Lee S. Shulman(Itasca, Ill.: F.E. Peacock Publishers, 1977), 359.

11. Ibid., 366.12. Gene V Glass, "Primary, Secondary, and Meta-

analysis of Research," presidential address pre-sented at the meeting of the Amerk:an Educa-tional Research Association, San Francisco,April 1976, p. 42.

13. William D. Ward and Peter R. Barcher, "ReadingAchievement and Creitivity as Related to OpenClassroom Experience," Journal of EducationalPsychology 67 (1975): 683-691.

14. Neville Bennett, Teaching Styles and Pupil Prog-ress (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University

Tress, 1976), 80-97.15. Michael P. Grapko, A Comparison of Open Space

and 1hiditional Classroom Structures Accordingto Indeppndence Measures in Children, Teach-ers' Awareness of Children's Personality Vari-ables, and Children's Academic Progress, FinalReport (Toronto: Ontario Department of Educa-tion, 1972). ERIC: ED 088 180.

16. Daniel Solomon and Arthur J. Kendall, "Individ=ual Characteristics and Children's Performancein 'Open' and "Raditionar Classroom Settings,"

-.journal of 'Educational Psychology 68 (1976):613-625.

17. Ward and Barcher, "Reading Achievementand Creativity as Related to Open ClassroomExperience."

18. Solomon and Kendall, "Individual 'Character-istics and Children's Performance 'Open' and'Traditional' Classroom Settings."

19. Bennett, Teaching Styles and Pupil Progress,132-140.

176

20. James P. Papay et al., "Effects of Trait and StateAnxiety on the Performance of ElementarySchool Children in Traditional and MultiageClassrooms," Journal of Educational Psychology67 (1975): 840.846.

21. Robert J. Wright and Joseph P. DuCette, Locus ofControl and Academic Achievement in Tradi-tional and Non-Traditional Educational Settings,Unpub. MS, Beaver College, Glenside, Pa., 1976.ERIC: ED 123 203.

22. Marshall Arlin, "The Interaction of Locus ofControLClassroom Structure, and Pupil Satis-faction," Psychology in the Schools 12 (1975):279-286.

23. See Rosenshine, in Research on Teaching,chap. 2.

24. Jeff Browne, "Poll Finds Public Prefers Broad'Education Goals," Milwaukee Journal, July 23,1978, p. 9.

25. Rosenshine, "Review of Teaching Styles andPupil Progress by Neville Bennett."