This article describes a strategic approach for reading and comprehending scientific information from a middle school science textbook. First, the word-reading skills of children with and without reading difficulties are compared. Second, studies investigating the effectiveness of a syllable-based reading approach on the word-reading skills of middle school children with reading difficulties are reviewed. Finally, the use of a syllable-based approach for reading and comprehending information from a middle school science textbook is described, with specific emphasis on learning words presented within and outside the context of text passages.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Archer, A.L., Gleason, M.M., & Vachon, V.L. (2000). REWARDS: Reading excellence: Word attack and rate development strategies. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
2.
Archer, A.L., Gleason, M.M., & Vachon, V.L. (2003). Decoding and fluency: Foundation skills for struggling older readers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26, 89—101.
3.
Bhattacharya, A., & Ehri, L.C. (2004). Graphosyllabic analysis helps adolescent struggling readers read and spell words. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 37, 331—348.
4.
Biggs, A., Daniel, L., Ortleb, E., Rillero, P., & Zike, D. (2002). Life science. New York: GlencoeMcGraw-Hill.
5.
Carnine, L., & Carnine, D. (2004). The interaction of reading skills and science content knowledge when teaching struggling secondary students. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 20, 203—218.
6.
Casalis, S., Colé, P., & Sopo, D. (2004). Morphological awareness in developmental dyslexia . Annals of Dyslexia, 54, 114—138.
7.
Duncan, L.G., & Seymour, P.H.K. (2003). How do children read multisyllabic words? Some preliminary observations. Journal of Research in Reading, 26, 101—120.
Engelmann, S., Meyer, L., Johnson, G., & Carnine, L. (1999). Corrective reading decoding skill applications C. Columbus, OH: SRA.
10.
Greene, J.F. (1995). LANGUAGE!: The effects of an individualized structured language curriculum for middle and high school students. Annals of Dyslexia, 38, 258—275.
11.
Lorsbach, A.W., Jinks, J., & Templeton, R.A. (2004). Communication in assessing student learning: A critique of assessment tasks used in middle school science . Clearing House (Menasha, Wis.), 77, 253—259.
12.
Mann, V.A. (2000). Introduction to special issue on morphology and the acquisition of alphabetic writing systems. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 12, 191—218.
13.
Marmurek, H.H.C. (1988). Reading ability and attention to words and letters in words. Journal of Reading Behavior, 20, 119—129.
14.
Mewhort, D.J.K., & Beal, A.L. (1977). Mechanisms of word identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 629—640.
15.
Moats, L.C. (2001). When older students can't read. Educational Leadership, 58, 36—39.
16.
Moats, L.C. (2004a). Relevance of neuroscience to effective education for students with reading and other learning disabilities. Journal ofChild Neurology, 19, 840—845.
17.
Moats, L.C. (2004b). Efficacy of a structured, systematic language curriculum for adolescent poor readers. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 20, 145—159.
18.
Scheerer-Neumann, G. (1981). The utilization of intraword structure in poor readers: Experimental evidence and training program. Psychological Research, 43, 155—178.
Shefelbine, J. (1990). A syllabic-unit approach to teaching decoding of polysyllabic words to fourth- and sixth-grade disabled readers. In J. Zutell & S. McCormick (Eds.), Literacy theory and research: Analysis from multiple paradigms (pp. 223—230). Chicago: National Reading Conference.
21.
Shefelbine, J., & Calhoun, J. (1991). Variability in approaches to identifying polysyllabic words: A descriptive study of sixth graders with highly, moderately, and poorly developed syllabication strategies. National Reading Conference Yearbook, 40, 169—177.
22.
Shefelbine, J., Lipscomb, L., & Hern, A. (1989). Variables associated with second, fourth, and sixth grade students' ability to identify polysyllabic words. In S. McCormick & J. Zutell (Eds.), Cognitive and social perspectives for literacy research and instruction (pp. 145—149). Chicago: National Reading Conference.
23.
Shippen, M.E., Houchins, D.E., Steventon, C., & Sarton, D. (2005). A comparison of two direct instruction reading programs for urban middle school students. Remedial and Special Education, 26, 175—182.
24.
Snow, M.A., Met, M., & Genesee, F. (1989). A conceptual framework for the integration of language and content in second/foreign language instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 201—217.
25.
Stanovich, K.E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360—406.
26.
Taft, M. (2002). Orthographic processing of polysyllabic words by native and nonnative English speakers. Brain andLanguage , 81, 532—544.
27.
Torgesen, J.K., Wagner, R.K., & Rashotte, C.A. (1999). Test of word reading e ficiency. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
28.
Treiman, R., Bowey, J.A., & Bourassa, D. (2002). Segmentation of spoken words into syllables by English-speaking children as compared to adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 83, 213—238.
29.
University of the State of New York. (1996 ). Learning standards for mathematics, science, and technology . Retrieved September 21, 2004, from http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/ciaimst/mstls.html
30.
University of the State of New York. (2000 ). Intermediate-level science examination: Test sampler draft . Retrieved September 21, 2004, from http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/ciaimst/pub/1interscisam.pdf
31.
V.H.P. Van Daal, , & Reitsma, P. (1990). Effects of independent word practice with segmented and whole-word sound feedback in disabled readers. Journal of Research in Reading, 13, 133—148.
