ERIC ED489535: The National Reading Panel Report. Practical Advice for Teachers

2005·0.64 MB·English

by  ERIC

THE NATIONAL
READING
PANEL REPORT:
Practical Advice for Teachers
Timothy Shanahan
University of Illinois at Chicago
Timothy Shanahan
University of Illinois at Chicago
1120 East Diehl Road, Suite 200
Naperville, IL 60563-1486
800-252-0283 > 630-649-6500
www.learningpt.org
Copyright © 2005 Learning Point Associates, sponsored under government contract number ED-01-CO-0011. All rights reserved.
This work was originally produced in whole or in part by the North Central Regional Educational Laboratory® (NCREL®) with funds from the Institute
of Education Sciences (IES), U.S. Department of Education, under contract number ED-01-CO-0011. The content does not necessarily reflect the
position or policy of IES or the Department of Education, nor does mention or visual representation of trade names, commercial products, or
organizations imply endorsement by the federal government.
NCREL remains one of the 10 regional educational laboratories funded by the U.S. Department of Education and its work is conducted by
Learning Point Associates.
Learning Point Associates, North Central Regional Educational Laboratory, and NCREL are trademarks or registered trademarks of
Learning Point Associates.
Contents
The National Reading
Oral Reading Fluency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Panel Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
Some Definitions and Distinctions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Should We Even Care What the Report Says? . . . . . . . .1
Does Fluency Instruction Make a Difference? . . . . . . . . .18

Why Research? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
How Do We Teach Fluency? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

How the Panel Worked . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
Advice for Teachers on

What Has Happened Since the
Teaching Oral Reading Fluency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

National Reading Panel? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
Oral Reading Fluency Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

Phonemic Awareness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Vocabulary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

Some Definitions and Distinctions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Some Definitions and Distinctions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

Developmental Sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
Does Vocabulary Instruction Improve Reading? . . . . . . .24

Does Phonemic Awareness
Advice for Teachers on Teaching Vocabulary . . . . . . . . .25

Instruction Improve Reading? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Vocabulary Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

How Much Phonemic Awareness

Instruction Do Children Need? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
Comprehension Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . .28

What Kinds of Phonemic Awareness
Some Definitions and Distinctions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

Instruction Are Best? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Can Reading Comprehension

More Advice for Teachers on
Be Taught Directly? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

Teaching Phonemic Awareness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Advice for Teachers on

Phonemic Awareness Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10
Teaching Reading Comprehension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30

Reading Comprehension Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

Phonics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Some Definitions and Distinctions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
Final Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34

Does Phonics Instruction Improve Reading? . . . . . . . . .12

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36

Advice for Teachers on Teaching Phonics . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Phonics Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
Appendixes
Appendix A. Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40

Appendix B. Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44
The
forth opinions or even strive for consensus—
but was to understand the actual research
National Reading
findings so schools could proceed to do
Panel Report what was best for children.
Since it first appeared, the National Reading
Panel Report (National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development [NICHD],
Context: It is the 1990s and dark shadows 2000) has been translated into various
lie across the land of reading education. Time summary documents, educational policies,
and other news magazines begin referring and designs for curriculum materials. Even
to “reading wars,” war being an apt metaphor so, the report is still not accessible to many
for the bitter debates over how to teach teachers and principals, and the various
reading that were raging in the nation. On summaries have been criticized for their
one side are those who view the hallmark inadequacy and inaccuracy (Allington, 2002;
of sound literacy education as a sufficiently Shanahan, 2003, 2004). The report itself is
supportive environment: If classrooms more than 500 pages and was written by
provided books that were compelling, if a committee of scientists; the multiple
classroom routines were not so routine, if it authorship resulted in some inconsistency
could be possible for children to love reading of style, voice, and accessibility of the writing.
enough, then reading would happen. On the The purpose of this monograph is to try
other side are those more focused on explicit to summarize, explain, and provide advice
teaching: If we could provide all children with for teachers about how to use the findings
the skills needed, if we could teach reading of the National Reading Panel Report. But,
well enough, if we could teach reading early first, some preliminaries:
enough, then all children would be able to read.
Response: When this war of words between Should We Even Care
whole-language and basic-skills philosophies
What the Report Says?
became so intense that it disrupted schooling
and threatened to undermine confidence in
Of course, there are many books on reading
public education, something unprecedented
education and thousands of vendors,
took place. For the first time in history, the
consultants, professors, and other experts on
federal government, under President Bill
the subject. There are even a large number of
Clinton and the U.S. Congress, required that
authoritative reports written with the idea of
a group of scientists, teachers, administrators,
shaping reading education. There are so many
and teacher educators determine what
alternative sources of information, why should
research had to say about reading. This panel,
anyone listen to the National Reading Panel?
the National Reading Panel, was not to put
What gives this report any special legitimacy?
1 Learning Point Associates
First, the panel was composed of a group of panel issued extensive plans for how
14 outstanding scholars who had been selected to identify questions, search the research
by NICHD Director Duane Alexander and literature, select studies, and combine the
Secretary of Education Richard Riley from studies into findings. These procedures were
a list of 300 nominees offered by educational made public early in the process. This means
organizations and agencies such as the the panel could not begin with predetermined
International Reading Association and results; that is, simply selecting studies that
the National Reading Conference. fit a previously chosen set of conclusions.
Second, the panelists were prohibited from Fifth, the panel drew evidence only from
having financial ties to commercial publishers; the types of research that permit a high
they were required to provide financial degree of certainty in determining what
disclosure statements and sign affidavits instructional actions cause higher achievement.
attesting to their independence from financial Because the goal was to identify instructional
conflicts of interest. Someone who might practices that confer a learning benefit, it was
have profited from the work may have been deemed essential the studies be ones in which
able to do it without bias, but teachers and instructional practices were tested by teachers
parents should not have to worry about the in classrooms under conditions that allowed
role of financial influence in such decisions, the learning benefits— or lack of benefits—
and with the National Reading Panel that to be measured. Although other kinds of
is not a concern. research are valuable, they cannot provide
direct answers to the panel’s questions,
Third, the panel proceeded based on input
and so such research was not used.
from five public hearings at which more
than 400 teachers and others gave testimony. Sixth, the panel only drew conclusions
All panel meetings were open to the public when there was a high degree of certainty
and its deliberations and discussions took the findings were correct. Due to small
place in plain sight—each meeting was even sample sizes and design differences, research
audiotaped and transcribed. No other findings studies can produce results that seem to
on reading education have ever been so be in conflict. All major determinations
publicly determined. made by the National Reading Panel were
made based on a synthesis of a large number
Fourth, the panel did not offer opinions about
of studies. Results that are repeated across
research findings, nor were the members
many independent investigations are the
of the panel allowed to arbitrarily select or
most trustworthy, and the panel limited its
omit any studies. Instead, the panel had to
use of research to often-replicated findings.
establish research and synthesis procedures
first and then follow them consistently. Prior
to beginning the synthesis of research, the
The National Reading Panel Report: Practical Advice for Teachers 2
Why Research? situation in which the National Reading
Panel Report is useful. It is intended to
Teachers, principals, and parents are working provide an unbiased and careful review of
hard to improve their children’s reading the research findings on various issues and
achievement; most are doing everything they topics, so schools was be able to depend
know to help children succeed in learning on trustworthy and accurate information
to read and write. Nevertheless, estimates on how to improve reading achievement.
of national reading achievement reveal the
insufficiency of current efforts. According
to the National Assessment of Educational How the Panel Worked
Progress (Grigg, Daane, Jin, & Campbell, 2003),
far too many American children cannot read The National Reading Panel began deliberations
well enough to do their schoolwork, and it is in April 1998 and issued a report two years
doubtful they will eventually receive the full later. Originally, Congress asked the panel
economic, social, and civic benefits of society. to complete its work in less than a year,
but acceded to the panel’s request for an
Many sources of information can be used additional year of study.
as the starting point for school improvement.
For example, teachers can draw on their The panel met often during those two years,
own experiences of what works, and they can and many decisions were made at those
share these experiences among themselves. meetings. The most difficult choices were about
Unfortunately, relying on experience alone in which questions about reading instruction
this way has not led to wide gains in reading would be answered. At the time, panelists
achievement. One reason for this is that any searched for the terms reading, writing, and
person has a limited amount of experience. literacy in the Education Resources Information
A teacher might recognize that a current Center (ERIC) database and found more than
instructional approach works better than 100,000 documents. Though these would not
some earlier practices, but he or she could all be research articles, the large number of
not know whether the students could perform documents made it imperative that the panel
better with another approach. Research studies be selective in identifying topics to explore.
help to resolve this kind of problem better
Fortunately, the first meeting of the panel
than practitioners can on their own.
coincided with the publication of Preventing
Unfortunately, teachers rarely have easy Reading Difficulties in Young Children, a report
access to the research literature and when issued by the National Research Council
they do, they may have found the research (Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998). This report was
through someone with the wrong reasons or developed through a consensus-building
a very limited awareness and understanding process—not a formal synthesis of research—
of all the research on an issue. That is a among an outstanding, yet diverse, group of
3 Learning Point Associates
scholars. It provided an excellent starting point government has emphasized the relevance
for the panel, as it included valuable insights of the findings in the primary grades, these
into how the scholarly community was begin­ findings are applicable to older students too.
ning to view effective reading instruction.
When the panel issued its report, the chapters
The panel conducted five public hearings were presented in the following order: phonemic
and these led to many recommendations for awareness, phonics, oral reading fluency,
additional topics. Finally, panelists—who also vocabulary, and comprehension. Some
were noted experts in the field—offered their observers interpreted that to imply a sequence
own views. A total of approximately 30 topics of instruction, which is not the case. In fact,
were considered (Shanahan, 2003). In order the National Reading Panel did not provide,
to shorten such a long list of topics, the panel either explicitly or implicitly, any information
took a series of votes, and eventually chose eight about the order or organization of instruction.
topics to explore: phonemic awareness, phonics, The research showed the value of each of these
oral reading fluency, encouraging children to components but not of specific instructional
read, vocabulary, comprehension strategies, programs. Usually, the components were studied
professional development, and technology. within the context of typical instruction. For
example, a study would examine the impact
On two topics—technology and encouraging
of vocabulary by giving one of two groups
children to read—there were not enough studies
some kind of enhanced vocabulary teaching.
from which to draw conclusions. More research
In such studies, other additional reading
is needed to decide whether technology can
instruction would be the same for both groups.
be used effectively to improve reading and
how best to encourage children to read in The National Reading Panel did not study
ways that will improve their reading ability. every aspect of an issue. Many worthwhile
topics were not addressed. The panel did
Results were provided by the panel for each of
not examine preschool reading instruction
the other six topics. Five of these topics were
or the best ways to teach English language
about issues of how teachers should teach
learners. It did not analyze writing instruction
reading, and one was about teacher preparation
or the effectiveness of particular commercial
for reading instruction. This mono-graph will
programs. If the panel had examined some
explain the findings only on the five reading
of these issues, it is possible there would
instruction topics, but it should be noted that
have been sufficient evidence on which to
the panel concluded that the professional
sustain additional findings. In other cases,
development of teachers had a significant
it is likely the panel would have concluded
positive impact on children’s learning.
that there was not enough evidence to amend
the findings. Regardless, the fact that any
The National Reading Panel examined research
particular approach was not reviewed by the
studies that focused on children in Grades
National Reading Panel should not cause any
K–12. This means that although the federal
The National Reading Panel Report: Practical Advice for Teachers 4
assumption about whether the approach the same U.S. Congress that approved the
works; such determinations can only be made Reading First program, which provides money
based on a review of the relevant studies. to low-achieving schools to improve reading
instruction for primary-grade children. States
An example of an important issue that are encouraging school districts, even those
was not pursued in the report is whether ineligible for Reading First funding, to upgrade
racial differences modify the effectiveness their reading programs to reflect the National
of instructional interventions. Are any Reading Panel findings. Many publishers,
instructional approaches especially useful likewise, are altering their books and materials
for teaching African-American children or to ensure they reflect these research findings.
children from other minority groups? This Due to the strong emphasis on trying to
is important to understand because African- improve instruction through the application
American children tend to read at levels of research, it is important that teachers
below national averages (Grigg et al., 2003). understand the findings and how to deliver
Unfortunately, although the original studies the instruction that benefits children.
often included a diversity of children, they
rarely reported their data in a way that would Of course, as has been noted, the National
allow any differences in effectiveness to Reading Panel left many questions unanswered.
be discovered. Barring the discovery of proof Consequently, the federal government has
that these approaches work better with some followed up with the appointment of additional
children than others, it is most prudent to research review panels. Currently, two such
assume them to be beneficial for all because panels are conducting reviews of preschool
few studies have ever been able to identify literacy (the National Early Literacy Panel)
such treatment variations in education and second language literacy (the National
(Cronbach & Snow, 1977). Future research Panel on Language Minority Children and
studies will be needed in order to decide Youth). In future years, the findings of the
whether some adjustments should be made National Reading Panel will be adjusted
for various groups of students. and extended based upon the work of
these and other panels that will follow it.
What Has Happened Since
the National Reading Panel?
The National Reading Panel Report continues to
be the cornerstone of the federal literacy policy.
It was completed during the presidency of Bill
Clinton, and became the basis of educational
law during the presidency of George W. Bush.
This position was overwhelmingly affirmed by
5 Learning Point Associates
sounds within words would be better equipped
to learn how these sounds match the letters.
Phonemic
English is an “alphabetic language,” meaning
Awareness that the letters in the written language refer
to or correspond to the sounds in the spoken
language. A child who cannot perceive the
separable sounds within words is at a
disadvantage when it is time to match these
sounds with letters while learning to read.
Some Definitions

Phonemic awareness is not the same as
and Distinctions

phonics. Phonics refers to instruction in how
letters and sounds correspond to each other
Phonemic awareness is the ability to hear
and how these sound-letter correspondences
and manipulate the individual sounds within
can be used to decode or pronounce words in
words. (The sounds within words are called
text. Decoding means the analysis of the letters
phonemes, so awareness of these sounds is
in a word to determine its pronunciation;
phonemic awareness.) Spoken words are
to translate from one form of message to
composed of sounds. For instance, the word
another, such as from printed text to
cat has three sounds or phonemes: /c/ /a/ /t/
pronunciation. Phonemic awareness is
(conventional linguistic notation separates
not about how sounds and letters match
individual sounds or phonemes with slash
or how to sound out letters to form words;
marks). The word bike also has three
it is only about hearing and thinking about
phonemes: /b/ /I/ /k/; phonemic awareness
or manipulating the individual sounds
is of awareness of sounds, not letters. The
within words.
word bike has four letters, but we hear only
three phonemes when the word is spoken. Many parents and teachers know about the
For most adults, dividing words like cat or bike teaching of phonics, but phonemic awareness
into constituent sounds is easy, but for young instruction is a newer idea. Without phonemic
children the task can be formidable: Words awareness, phonics is harder to learn. In other
seem to “explode out” as one big sound—cat— words, phonemic awareness is something
rather than as collections of smaller sounds. that should be taught before phonics—or
at least early in the phonics sequence—so
Young children vary greatly in the ability
children receive maximum benefit from
to hear the individual sounds within words,
their phonics instruction. Some phonics
and this variation led some scientists to
programs include phonemic awareness
hypothesize that phonemic awareness might
instruction and some do not, so it is
be an essential early reading skill (Stanovich,
important to understand the distinction.
1986). The question was whether children
with a well-developed ability to hear the
The National Reading Panel Report: Practical Advice for Teachers <#6>
It also is useful to distinguish phonemic such as Chinese (Hu & Catts, 1998) or even
awareness from another related term, if written language and reading had never
phonological awareness. Phonological awareness developed in human history.
is actually a broader concept, and phonemic
It also is clear that the more global aspects
awareness is part of this larger idea. Phonological
of phonological awareness, such as syllable
awareness refers to the sensitivity to the
awareness, appear earlier in childhood than
phonological or sound structure of words.
the more demanding skills of phonemic
It includes phonemic awareness, but also
awareness (Lonigan, Burgess, Anthony, &
encompasses many earlier developing skills
Barker, 1998). This means that kindergartners
such as the awareness of syllables or rhyme.
may profit from some early attention—prior
Awareness of syllables within words is an to the teaching of phonemic awareness—
important aspect of phonological awareness. to rhyming and syllable awareness if these
A child who has mastered this aspect of abilities are not yet in place.
phonology will be able to perform tasks
Another fact about development that is
such as dividing the pronunciation of names
important to know is that very few 3- and
into syllables: Bob–by; Tom–my; Gwen–do–lyn;
4-year-olds have much phonemic awareness,
Shei–la; Ma–ri–o; or to blend these syllables
but most—though not all—8-year-olds do
back into proper pronunciations of the
(Bryant, MacLean, Bradley, & Crossland, 1990).
names. Rhyming ability is another aspect
This means this aspect of language develops
of phonological awareness, and it includes
during the same years when children are
the ability to recognize that words rhyme,
trying to learn to read. The importance of
to identify which words rhyme, and to
phonemic awareness in reading has been
provide rhymes.
shown in studies that have revealed the
close connection between phonemic awareness
Developmental Sequence and reading achievement (Torgesen & Mathes,
2000): Young children with well-developed
Scientists have not yet arrived at a clear phonemic awareness skills tend to be
description of the sequence of how phonological successful readers, while children without
awareness—including phonemic awareness— these skills usually are not.
develops in young children (Torgesen & Mathes,
This raises the question, can phonemic
2000), though some things are known about
awareness be taught? Can instruction
this development. For example, it is evident
accelerate the pace of this part of language
that these phonological skills are part of
development so that children can learn
normal oral language development and
to read more easily? That, in fact, was
that these skills would unfold to a great
the question the National Reading Panel
extent for most children even in the
attempted to answer.
context of nonalphabetic languages
7 Learning Point Associates