Research evidence for GetFluent Reading's methodology

Our software concentrates on whole-word recognition and has been developed in conjunction with research evidence to improve specific skills associated with reading.

Reading Fluency

Reading fluency, accurate and automatic word recognition, has mostly been ignored in the teaching of reading skills. Relatively recently the National Reading Panel in the USA produced a report examining how children are taught to read (NICHD 2000). This report highlighted five areas of prime importance: alphabetics (phonics), fluency, comprehension, teacher education and computer technology. The link given above takes you to a page where summaries for each of these topics can be downloaded. You can go directly to the fluency summary here.

This report prompted a flurry of research specifically into fluency, what it is and how it affects comprehension. For example, one paper (KLAUDA and GUTHRIE, 2008, Vol. 100, No. 2, 310–321) observes "a strong relationship between word recognition and reading comprehension performance leading to the conclusion that fast, accurate word recognition frees up the brain's cognitive resources for reading comprehension". Another article ("Fluency: Bridge Between Decoding and Reading Comprehension" in The Reading Teacher 2005) gives a very readable account of the definition of fluency and how it impacts on comprehension. It states:

BUY IT NOW

Improves spelling and word recognition

The software is based on the tried and tested 'flashcard' method to reinforce word recognition by presenting a student a word historically on a card) for a limited amount of time. The student then identifies the word seen.

Computers can perform this task repeatedly, presenting single words, phrases or sentences for a preset display time.

The software adapts to the student's performance adjusting the display time up or down accordingly. Difficulty is also controlled by working with easier or harder sets of texts. Encouragement and motivation are provided by feedback (visual and spoken), progress charts and certificates.

Maia's software uses computer technology to perform this task repeatedly, using single words, phrases or sentences as appropriate for the student and using accurate timings for the display time.

The software adapts to the student's performance by comparing the success level against a preset threshold, adjusting the display time up or down accordingly. Encouragement and motivation are provided by feedback (visual and spoken) and progress charts.

"To many cognitive psychologists, good readers are clearly distinguished from poor readers by more rapid, automatic, context-free and accurate word recognition."
Harrison (1996)

According to R. T. Vacca (2000) there are four phases of reading development, all of which relate to the alphabet. These are Pre-alphabetic, Partial Alphabetic, Full Alphabetic and Consolidated Alphabetic. The software can present graded words or phrases, starting with the alphabet, in two formats: recognition (multiple-choice) and recall (look/cover/write).

Word recognition using flashcards has been shown to provide "an excellent stepping stone to further achievement" in a Literacy Acceleration project (Lingard 1997). In this Lingard describes an approach to helping low-attaining 11 to 13 year old students to read:

"Students who are non-readers are taught a sight vocabulary of about 50 words using flash cards before being given their first reading book. ... All the words in the first reading book are learned by playing games with the flash cards before the student is presented with the first reader. Thus for a student who has previously failed, being able to read every word in his or her first reading book provides an excellent stepping stone to further achievement."
(Lingard 1997)

How much better to start students with sight recognition before they fail!

The contention here is that sight recognition is one of many skills required in the process of reading and that there are various methods of presenting words. Historically these have been on paper but computers can now add a new dimension to the teacher's armoury of tools. It has also been found that reading from a computer can be motivational (Byatt, J. Davies, K. and Garner, J. (1997)).

 

BUY IT NOW

Increases the speed at which eyes scan through text

Research into how we read started in 1897 when it was noticed that when we read, we can only take in words when our eyes are stationary. So our eyes do not move smoothly across the page: they have to stop to take in a word or phrase and then move on. (Huey (1908/1968), Paulson and Goodman (1999) Please scroll down for references in full.)) These stops are called fixations.

The number of words that our eyes can focus on, or recognise, at one fixation is called the recognition span. The larger this recognition span, the faster and more efficiently we can read. Poor readers tend to read one word at a time and also stop, or fixate, more frequently than more fluent readers do:

"Advances in eye movement technology have shown that fluent readers not only fixate most words ... and do so very rapidly, but also appear to process the individual letters in each word, even when the word is highly predictable. Fluent readers are more efficient than poor readers ... they sample the text more quickly...".
Harrison (1996)

Because poor readers tend to read one word at a time it is difficult for them to grasp an overall idea because each word by itself does not convey much meaning. The most likely scenario is that, after three or four words, the reader has forgotten the first word and has to go back to the beginning. This tendency is called regression and it was recognised as early as 1922 that poor readers make more of these regressions than good readers (reported in M. Beveridge and S. Edmundson,(1989)).
Regression slows down the reading process to a speed much below that at which the brain can perform. Consequently, the brain looks for other stimuli and the reader is easily distracted.

Keith Stanovich's 'Interactive-Compensatory Model' of the reading process (1984) points out that reading involves a number of interactions with the text. One of the most important of these is the reader's allocation of 'processing capacity' to the text. Fluent readers need less processing capacity for word recognition, freeing up more capacity for comprehension...
...Stanovich ... (1986) [also] argued that there was clear evidence of a 'rich get richer while the poor get poorer' effect in beginning reading.
"Children's initial success in acquiring vocabulary knowledge and reading fluency led to further success, because reading broadens the vocabulary and increases knowledge. On the other hand, those who fail continue to fail." Harrison (1996)

 

User interface

Our software has been designed in accordance with the best of Human Computer Interface (HCI) principles. Squires (1997) lists the following as being some suggested heuristic evaluation guidelines for educational multimedia:

1. The learner should be active.
2. The content should be appropriate to the curriculum.
3. The software must be easy to use.
4. Appropriate learner feedback is provided.
5. The level of learner control

It has been acknowledged for some time that the extent to which learners can develop a sense of ownership in an educational software environment is determined by the level of control they have in their interaction with the software environment (Chandler, (1984); Wellington, (1985); Blease, (1988); McDougall and Squires, (1986); Goforth, (1994)). This implies that the use of multimedia software that provides high levels of learner control will help students feel that they are instrumental in determining the pattern and process of the learning experience, i.e. in developing a sense of ownership.

 

Provides motivation

Haring, Lovitt, et al. (1978) discovered that people are strongly motivated by being given immediate positive feedback after completing a task. Their recommended way of presenting feedback was to show the student's progress in the form of a semi-logarithmic graph of performance against time (used specifically to report data quantities that have large differences).
Progress feedback charts in our software are presented randomly, as partial reinforcement is known to be more effective than continual or no reinforcement.

 

BUY IT NOWwww.dyslexia-consultants.co.uk/Get-fluent-The-reading-subscription-that-improves-comprehension-and-fluency-/Get-Fluent-Reading-home-user-5-3-months/prod_173.html

References

M. Beveridge and S. Edmundson,(1989)
Reading strategies of good and poor readers in word and phrase presentation
Journal of Research in Reading 12(1), 1-12

Blease, D. (1988)
Evaluating Educational Software. London: Croom Helm.

Byatt, J. Davies, K. and Garner, J. (1997)
Extending Reading Skills in FE, Basic Skills, Pub. Basic Skills Agency, London

Chandler, D. (1984).
Young Learners and the Microcomputer. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Goforth, D. (1994)
Learner control = decision making + information: a model and meta-analysis.
Journal of Educational Computing Research 11(1) 1-26.

Goodman, K.S. (1976)
Reading: a psycholinguistic guessing game. In H. Singer and R.B. Ruddell (eds.)
Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.

Haring, N. G., Lovitt, T. C., Eaton, M. D., & Hansen, C. L. (1978)
The fourth R: Research in the classroom. Columbus, OH: Merrill. Harrison, C. School of Education, Nottingham University (1996)
Methods of Teaching Reading: Key Issues in Research and Implications for Practice in the report The Teaching of Reading: What teachers need to know Publ. UKRA, Unit 2, Station Road, Shepreth, Nr Royston, Herts. SG8 6PZ.

Huey, E.B. (1968)
The psychology and pedagogy of reading. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Originally published 1908)

Lingard, A. Principal teacher for learning support, Camborne School (1997)
Literacy Acceleration: An effective strategy for low-attaining secondary age students. Basic Skills June/July and Sept/Oct. Publ: The Basic Skills Agency, Commonwealth House, 1-19 New Oxford St, London WC1A 1NU.

McDougall, A. and Squires, D. (1986)
Student Control in Computer Based Learning Environments. In Salvas, A. D. and Dowling, C. (eds.) Computers in Education: On the Crest of a Wave? Melbourne: Computer Education Group of Victoria, 269-72.

Paulson, E.J. and Goodman, K.S., University of Arizona (1999)
Influential Studies in Eye-Movement Research, published by the International Reading Association, Inc. ISSN 1096-1232.

Squires, D. School of Education, King's College London (1997)
An heuristic approach to the evaluation of educational multimedia software. Paper presented at the CAL 97 Conference Superhighways, Super CAL, Super Learning? University of Exeter 23rd - 26th March 1997

Stanovich, K. (1984)
The interactive-compensatory model of reading: a confluence of developmental, experimental and educational psychology, Remedial and Special Education, 5, 11-19.

Stanovich, K.E. (1986)
Matthew effects in reading: some consequences in individual differences in reading in the acquisition of literacy, Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360-406.

Vacca, R.T. (2000)
Word study strategies at the middle grades, Professional Development Series Vol 4, Sadlier-Oxford

Wellington, J. J. (1985)
Children, Computers and the Curriculum. New York: Harper and Row.