Models of Teaching Reading - Report Example

Running Head: Models of Teaching Reading Your name Course name Professors’ name Date Outline Introduction Models of teaching reading bottom-up model top down model interactive model An effective model to use in a classroom environment justification of the effective model Choice from First Step Map of Development despicability rating Conclusion Table of Content Introduction 2 Models of Teaching Reading 3 Top-down model 3 The Bottom-Up (Serial) Approach 5 Interactive Model 7 An effective model to use in classroom 8 First Step Map of Development 10 Despicability Rating 10 Conclusion 12 Reference 12 Introduction Briefly, reading is classified as an integral process of acknowledging, understanding, and perceiving written or printed material. It is an experience that an individual undergoes while communicating with the writer. The emphasis of reading is on language form. Moreover, reading is a complex psychological process, which takes into consideration linguistic factors such as morphological, syntactic, and semantic elements. Furthermore, cognitive and emotional factors are part of the reading process. The first part of this paper focuses on three distinct models of teaching reading. These models are top-down model, bottom-up model, and interactive model. The essay then progresses to elaborate on the best model that can be utilized in a classroom environment. This will not only entail a vivid description of such model but also a justification of an effective model. The last stage captures demonstration of a chosen model while using an activity in the First Steps Map of Development. Models of Teaching Reading Top-down model According to Goodman (1970), top down model holds a view that readers bring knowledge, expectation, assumptions, and questions to the text. Goodman further argues that reader would continue to read if the material or rather text confirms their anticipation. In this case, readers utilize their experiential background to bring meaning to a text. Equally, they interpret text based on their previous knowledge. In the model, “top” simply imply higher order mental concepts including knowledge and expectations of the reader. Conversely, “bottom” means the physical text found on a specific page of a reading material. The model therefore places emphasis on what a reader contributes to a reading process. To arrive at a meaning of any text, a reader deduces information from a text and subsequently contrasts it with world knowledge (Brunner, 1978). From the brief highlights, it is now very clear that while reading, a reader goes through an interactive session with a text. The model can be represented diagrammatical as shown below. The model begins by stating the hypotheses and predictions then proceeds to confirm them by going down to the printed stimuli. This approach of reading is often termed as the psycholinguistic guessing game. In such a situation, a teacher is obliged to teach background knowledge first so that students gain knowledge that will be used to guess meaning from a printed material. Goodman (1970) upholds five specific processes employed by readers while reading. These processes comprise of recognition, prediction, confirmation, correction, and termination. In addition to aforementioned processes, Goodman draws attention to important foundations of top-down model. The first foundation is that reading or rather language in general ought to be seen in its social context. Secondly, competence must be distinguished from performance. In this case, competences address what readers are proficient in doing. The resultant is reader’s control of reading process and subsequent flexibility. On the contrary, performance is what is observed when a learner is doing a reading task. Thirdly, the study of language should be procedural. Finally, any study of language should be done in a human context. Goodman (1970) concisely discusses the impact of top-down model. The model has significant impact on conceptions about native and second language reading instructions (p.126). Goodman contends that it made the reader an active player in a reading process, a divergence from earlier observations of second language reading as a passive linguistic decoding process. Second language reading is now understood as an active predictive process. Nonetheless, the model is faced with a problem where a reader has little knowledge of the topic thus unable to generate predictions. Correspondingly, it would take a reader much more time to recognize words even if such a reader is in a position to generate predictions. Apart from the problems mentioned above, the model faces numerous limitations. The first one is its emphasis on higher-level skills at the expenses of lower skills. Top-down model uses clues and background experiences to make predictions as opposed to utilizing rapid and accurate identification of lexical and grammatical forms. In recognition of the fact that fluent reading is based on cognitive process, the model disagrees with perceptual and decoding dimensions of such a process. This therefore confirms that top-down model is not appropriate for less proficient and growing reader but for expert, fluent reader whose perception and decoding process is automatic. This fact is supported by Wallen (1972) who agrees that top down model is meant for fluent reader and misses to satisfy all needs of students who are acquiring reading skills. The Bottom-Up (Serial) Approach This model has its basis on reading as a decoding process i.e. moving from the printed stimuli to higher level. Students are actually reading when they can sound out words or rather put words into sound otherwise called phonics (Leech, 1981). Initially, a teacher introduces vocabulary and new words then proceeds with each sentence. Subsequently, questions and answers are administered along with reading loud practices. Problems related with this model have been identified and the first one include a tendency by the model to depict information flow as a sequence of disconnected stages with individual stage changing the input and subsequently passing them to higher stages. Moreover, this model has a difficult of accounting for sentence-context effects in addition to role played by prior knowledge in creating word recognition and comprehension. Furthermore, the model is seen to be inadequate since it underestimates ability of the reader to make predictions and process information. In the same vein, the model misses to note that students employ their expectation of a text basing it on language and its operation. This model is more often applied in teaching new vocabulary, and grammar e.g. while teaching various cohesive devices (Leech, 1981). For a teacher to be effective there should be divergence from pre-teaching vocabulary for single reading passages then focus on teaching vocabulary and background knowledge at the same time. Interactive Model The theory, also known as the schema theory model, emphasizes reading as an interactive process. At the time when an individual is reading, the brain captures visual information and concurrently constructs a meaning that the initial writer had in mind when drafting the text. It is imperative to note that reader’s knowledge of the language in general, of the world and of the types of texts is utilized by the model. This is represented in a diagram below. By using the interactive approach to teach reading, it divides reading activities into three stages where bottom-up and top-bottom approaches are put together. These stages are pre-reading, while reading and post-reading (Dechant, 1991). At the pre-reading stage, activities play a role of facilitating the while-reading activities. Some of the activities at pre-reading stage are predicting, setting the scene, skimming, and scanning. Predicting draws the mind of a reader closer to theme of the text. It can be based on title, vocabulary or on the question. Setting the stage is familiarizing the students with cultural and social background knowledge that is pertinent to the reading material. As a pre-reading activity, skimming entails reading quickly to get the general idea of the text. This can be done by asking general questions or requiring students to place subtitles for different parts. Scanning is part of pre-reading activity and means to locate specific information from a reading material. While-reading activities make up the second stage of interactive process. It focuses on understanding as opposed to the result of the reading. Information transfer activities and understanding comprehension questions contributes to while-reading activities. The last stage of interactive stages is post-reading activities, which should provide students with opportunities to relate what they have read with their own experiences. Additionally, post-reading task enables a student to produce language based on content learnt. Some tools utilized at the post reading stage comprise of role play, gap-filling, false summary, and writing based on what student have learnt. An effective model to use in classroom The model to adopt when teaching reading depends on such factors as learner’s cognitive ability, and their proficiency level in languages. An example is university students who possess well-developed cognitive knowledge. This means that they are able to bring schematic knowledge to the material they read. In a few words, schematic knowledge refers to knowledge about the world that is realized from years of study during which cognitive ability matures. As Nunan (1999) points out, knowledge affects capacity of a reader to understand new information given that it presents a framework under which the innovative information fits. Top-down model therefore is appropriate for college student whose cognitive knowledge is well developed. On the other hand, a bottom-up strategy is effective for students who are beginning their reading. These groups of students are taught sound symbol correspondence, and phonics. For those who have certain levels of proficiency, pre-reading and schema building tasks act as great asset in reading comprehension. After conducting a complete review of the three models of teaching reading, it is quite clear that an interactive model is most effective in a classroom environment. Interactive model is an amalgamation of the reader and the text. The model combines textual information with information brought by the reader. Reliance on either top-down or bottom-up model ultimately causes reading problems to learners. This is evident where top-down processing has been found to be easier for the poor reader who may not be fast in recognizing words but possesses knowledge of the text topic. Likewise, bottom-up processing has been found to be easier for a learner who has skills in word recognition but lack knowledge of text topic. Interactive model works to meet the needs of both categories of students. It is apparent from interactive model that skills at all levels are interactively accessible for the purpose of processing and interpreting the text. This confirms the fact that a good reading comes from an interaction between top-down and bottom-up approach. Carell (1988) classifies reading as a receptive exercise, which starts with encoding and ends with meaning construction. Kern (2000) further defined reading as an “interactive process producing meaning and derived discourse from texts.” These facts authenticate the use of interactive in a classroom of mixed student abilities. Interactive model for teaching reading demonstrates relationship between bottom-up and top-down, decoding and interpretation, and between text and reader consequently confirming the value of using the model while teaching literary work. This is because interpretation and the process of meaning construction are attained without necessarily excluding the learner from text or the learning process. The investigations of the three models further disclose that bottom-up approach do not enable students to attain word-bound or exercise further thinking activity. Similarly, top-down model do not trap students in linguistic activities but leaves a venue for interpretation and guessing game. An educator should, for this reason, resort to interactive model. First Step Map of Development This is designed to illustrate procedures or activity that can lead to development of reading ability. The choice of activity depends on model utilized when teaching reading. Despicability rating is appropriate when using interactive model given that both the text and learner’s prior knowledge are employed. The various stages of interactive model can be employed when executing the despicability rating. During despicability rating, it is possible for students to practice aspects of pre-reading, while-reading, and post-reading exercises. The overall effect is a development of reading proficiency. Despicability Rating This activity requires students to utilize information from the text and personal experience to rate characters with respect to despicability. The activity is therefore appropriate when applying interactive model of teaching reading. According to the model, when a person is reading, brain is the receptor and interpreter of visual information. The interactive process does not only involve printed material but also reader’s general knowledge (Dechant, 1991). The approach of despicability rating is that learners are introduced to instruments that authors and instructors use to construct meaning. Subsequently, they are encouraged to investigate versions of events and actions in a written material. Despicability rating activity starts with an instructor carrying out a selection of three characters in a text. This is seconded by individual student ranking the characters starting with most despicable to least despicable. The third step in despicability rating requires a teacher to direct students into a process of searching for and recording evidence that confirms ranking of each character. The activity is concluded by inviting students to share and draw a comparison with the entire classroom. It is evident from despicability rating that students ought to possess previously acquired knowledge in order to participate satisfactorily in despicability rating. These are the characteristics of a top-down model where background knowledge is involved in reading. Moreover, bottom-up model is employed where decoding is applied when a teacher covers the text, sentence by sentence then goes ahead to ask students about ranks of each character in terms of their levels of despicability. As an activity, despicability rating may begin with pre-reading activity by taking students through a process of scanning the text. A student who scans a text is in a position to locate specific information in a text. The second phase of while-reading would necessitate learners to utilise information transfer activities. Lastly, role-play, a post reading activity, is applicable in the context of despicability rating. Students would be able to display their understanding of different characters by comparing roles played by different students in classroom environment. There is doubt that despicability rating is an activity that can be performed when teaching reading using interactive model. Conclusion In summary, this paper discusses top-down, bottom-up and interactive strategies as the three major models employed when teaching reading. The second part is an analysis of the most effective model among the three. It is fundamental for any reading to focus on reading skills and strategies instead of testing student’s ability to read a comprehension. Reading should therefore be an interactive exercise with pre-reading, while-reading and post-reading exercise conducted successively. The paper explicitly discussed interactive model for teaching reading as being able to relate bottom-up and top-down, decoding and interpretation, and text and reader thus verifying its applicability in literary work. Lastly, despicability rating has been highlighted as an appropriate activity when utilizing interactive model of teaching reading. This is where a student is in a position to use previously acquired knowledge with textual information to perfect the art of reading. Reference Brunner, J. F., & Campbell, J.J. (1978). Participating in secondary reading: A practical approach. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Carrell, P. L. (1988). “Interactive Text Processing: Implications for ESL/second Language reading classrooms.” In P. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. Eskey (Eds.) Interactive Approaches to Second Language Reading. (PP. 239-259). NY:Cambridge UP. Dechant, E. V. (1991). Understanding and Teaching Reading: an Interactive Model. Boston, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Goodman, K. S. (1970). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist, 6(4), 126-135. Kern, R. (2000). Literacy and Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford UP. Leech, G. (1981). Semantics, the study of meaning. 2nd ed. London: Penguin Books. Nunan, D. 1999. Second language teaching & learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers. Wallen, C. J. 1972. Competency in teaching reading. Chicago, IL: Science Research Associates. Read More

On the contrary, performance is what is observed when a learner is doing a reading task. Thirdly, the study of language should be procedural. Finally, any study of language should be done in a human context. Goodman (1970) concisely discusses the impact of top-down model. The model has significant impact on conceptions about native and second language reading instructions (p.126). Goodman contends that it made the reader an active player in a reading process, a divergence from earlier observations of second language reading as a passive linguistic decoding process.

Second language reading is now understood as an active predictive process. Nonetheless, the model is faced with a problem where a reader has little knowledge of the topic thus unable to generate predictions. Correspondingly, it would take a reader much more time to recognize words even if such a reader is in a position to generate predictions. Apart from the problems mentioned above, the model faces numerous limitations. The first one is its emphasis on higher-level skills at the expenses of lower skills.

Top-down model uses clues and background experiences to make predictions as opposed to utilizing rapid and accurate identification of lexical and grammatical forms. In recognition of the fact that fluent reading is based on cognitive process, the model disagrees with perceptual and decoding dimensions of such a process. This therefore confirms that top-down model is not appropriate for less proficient and growing reader but for expert, fluent reader whose perception and decoding process is automatic.

This fact is supported by Wallen (1972) who agrees that top down model is meant for fluent reader and misses to satisfy all needs of students who are acquiring reading skills. The Bottom-Up (Serial) Approach This model has its basis on reading as a decoding process i.e. moving from the printed stimuli to higher level. Students are actually reading when they can sound out words or rather put words into sound otherwise called phonics (Leech, 1981). Initially, a teacher introduces vocabulary and new words then proceeds with each sentence.

Subsequently, questions and answers are administered along with reading loud practices. Problems related with this model have been identified and the first one include a tendency by the model to depict information flow as a sequence of disconnected stages with individual stage changing the input and subsequently passing them to higher stages. Moreover, this model has a difficult of accounting for sentence-context effects in addition to role played by prior knowledge in creating word recognition and comprehension.

Furthermore, the model is seen to be inadequate since it underestimates ability of the reader to make predictions and process information. In the same vein, the model misses to note that students employ their expectation of a text basing it on language and its operation. This model is more often applied in teaching new vocabulary, and grammar e.g. while teaching various cohesive devices (Leech, 1981). For a teacher to be effective there should be divergence from pre-teaching vocabulary for single reading passages then focus on teaching vocabulary and background knowledge at the same time.

Interactive Model The theory, also known as the schema theory model, emphasizes reading as an interactive process. At the time when an individual is reading, the brain captures visual information and concurrently constructs a meaning that the initial writer had in mind when drafting the text. It is imperative to note that reader’s knowledge of the language in general, of the world and of the types of texts is utilized by the model. This is represented in a diagram below. By using the interactive approach to teach reading, it divides reading activities into three stages where bottom-up and top-bottom approaches are put together.

These stages are pre-reading, while reading and post-reading (Dechant, 1991). At the pre-reading stage, activities play a role of facilitating the while-reading activities.

Read More