Phonics

Phonics instruction has been a component in teaching beginning readers for more than 150 years. The long history that phonics has in reading education has made phonics the subject of much research and discussion. Phonics has long been thought of as a teaching strategy; today it is seen more as "content" within an overall teaching strategy. Phonics aims to teach letter-sound relationships as they relate to literacy and as such, is a valuable means for helping beginning readers to identify and build an internal database of known words. Phonics, however, doesn't help beginning readers with overall comprehension and meaning and therefore must only be thought of as a piece of the puzzle that also includes reading, writing and spelling. This essay discusses the history of phonics and its role in reading education programs. The phonics vs. Whole Language debate has raged in the United States and other English-speaking countries for a number of years and has given way to a more "balanced" approach to reading education. The role of phonics as part of an overall phonological awareness strategy is introduced. The impact of phonics education on teachers and teacher education is pervasive and wide-ranging. This article highlights the current impact that phonics has in many of today's classrooms. Lastly, this author investigates new approaches to developing phonics-centric curriculum for teachers in training.

Keywords Decoding; Incidental Instruction; Literacy Education; Look-Say; Literacy; National Reading Panel; No Child Left Behind; Phonics; Phonological Awareness; Reading Wars; Scripted Curriculum; Synthetic Phonics; Syntactic; Semantic; Whole Language

Teaching Methods > Phonics

Overview

Phonics is one component of the instructional method for teaching beginning reading to children. "Reading is the process of constructing meaning from written texts. Phonics is concerned with teaching letter-sound relationships as they relate to learning to read" (Jones, n.d., ¶2).

Phonics is often referred to as "cracking the code" or decoding, but actually refers to the ability of a beginning reader to master automatic word recognition, which involves more than just phonics. Proficiency at decoding words involves being able to identify words quickly and accurately. Decoding involves converting the printed word to spoken language and can be achieved through several different means. A beginning reader may use a number of methods to decode the words in a sentence. These include looking for context clues, analyzing the structure of a sentence, recognizing a known word, or sounding out the word (phonics). Phonics is the relationship between sounds and their spellings (Blevins, 1999).

In discussing beginning to read, cracking the code refers to learning letter-sound relationships via the ability to apply phonics. When a child has learned to associate all specific printed letters with specific speech sounds, the code has been mastered, or cracked. The child then can arrive at an approximation for the pronunciation of most printed word symbols. “Phonics-first,” “intensive phonics,” “systematic phonics,” “decoding,” or “code emphasis” refer to reading programs that emphasize use of phonics at the inception of reading instruction and throughout the first 1-3 years of reading instruction (Jones, n.d.).

While this essay focuses on the Learning Theory of Phonics, the topic would be incomplete without mention of Whole Language reading theory. Whole-language may also be referred to as Look-and-say, whole-word, sight-reading, linguistic, or psycholinguistic and refers to an approach to reading instruction advocated by major players in the education field such as William S. Gray during the first third of the twentieth century (Jones, n.d.). Whole language teaches children to read by emphasizing the use and understanding of words in their everyday contexts, rather than by using phonics and decoding.

Whole language proponents cite Kenneth Goodman's 1967 paper "Reading: A Psycholinguistic Guessing Game" as being responsible for starting the whole-language revolution in reading instruction. Goodman's premise is that "good readers used context clues and background knowledge to predict, confirm and guess at the identification of new words" (Kim, 2008). In addition, reading books can help children to develop literate voices, and thinking and responses from children after reading books show the importance of different ways children approach literary texts (Galda, 2013).

Since the middle of the 19th Century in the U.S., there has been a back and forth debate about which method of reading instruction is best. The debate surrounding phonics vs. Whole Language could be compared to a pendulum swinging back and forth through successive decades.

Timeline of Reading Instruction in the United States: 1850-Present

1850

By the middle of the 19th century, there were a number of factors that brought the topic of reading education into the mainstream consciousness and initiated a dialog on reading education in the U.S. Support of whole education from the masses was becoming a national movement. At the same time, published works were becoming more widely available, and Whole Language was advocated rather than phonics as the best means to create a population of eager and engaged readers.

1920-1950

Gray termed phonics instruction as "heartless drudgery" and called for an adoption of the look-say (sight or whole word) approach to reading instruction. Whole word was seen as a "top-down" approach to reading where students began with prior experiences and knowledge that helped them to read and comprehend whole words. Phonics was to be considered a last-resort method of reading instruction.

1955

Rudolph Flesch's seminal work, "Why Johnny Can't Read," was published. The tables were now turned and the look-say method of instruction was blamed for decreasing reading skills. Flesch and others called for the return to the "sensibility" of phonics. This work and the ensuing controversy surrounding the phonics vs. Whole Language debate are thought to be responsible for polarizing reading educators around these opposing instructional methods.

1967

Jeanne Chall's "Learning to Read: The Great Debate" lent support to phonics as a valuable tool for teaching early reading skills. Chall's work reported on well-documented research illustrating that the early introduction of phonics education "was more beneficial than incidental reading."

1985- Present

As with most other debates on education and instructional theory, the publication of several high-profile works ignited a further discussion around reading instruction in the mid-1980s. "Becoming a Nation of Readers: The Report of the Commission on Reading and Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learning about Print" brought the attention of researchers and educators back to the table to discuss how to best teach children to read. These works highlighted the importance of phonics as one of the "essential early ingredients for early learning instruction." Instead of phonics vs Whole Language, many educators began to advocate for a balanced and comprehensive approach to reading instruction. This new view didn't advocate for a top-down (Whole Language) or bottom up (phonics) approach but rather an interactive approach to early reading instruction that considered the following skill levels for beginning readers (Blevins, 1999):

• Prior knowledge (background experience);

• Knowledge of sound spelling;

• Sentence structure;

• Word meanings.

The Continued Debate

One might assume that the debate surrounding the role of phonics in early reading instruction has been exhausted, but that is not the case. Even today there remain educators, researchers, politicians and parents who are polarized around the early reading methods and curriculum and what methods are best for literacy education. "Even distinguished scholars are unable to agree on the scientific consensus about best practices in beginning reading instruction" (Kim, 2008, p.372). No elementary school curriculum gets more attention than reading, the undisputed foundation of all learning. There is however, considerable disagreement about how reading should be taught. The controversy surrounding reading has manifested itself in heated debates and opposing reading instruction viewpoints which have been dubbed the “reading wars" (Bryan, Tunnell, & Jacobs, 2007).

In “Learning to Read: The Great Debate,” Chall captured the essence of the reading wars. She noted that the many controversies about reading instruction in first grade boiled down to one question: “Do children learn better with a beginning method that stresses meaning or with one that stresses learning the code?” In her synthesis of experimental studies conducted during the 20th century, Chall found that an early code emphasis produced better outcomes in word recognition in the early grades and helped children read with better comprehension up to fourth grade than did instructional practices in which children were taught to read whole words and whole sentences (Kim, 2008, p.372).

The topic of phonics is complex and controversial and remains a divisive topic in education today. Phonics instruction is widely accepted in early education curriculum around the world, and research continues on this subject. Phonics curriculum is time-intensive and often requires several hours of instruction per day. Teacher education training does not adequately address the subject of phonics instruction, as is illustrated in a current research study from Australia. Many teachers have begun to rely on scripted curricula that help with phonics instruction, but there is criticism that these "scripts" are squelching creativity in the teaching profession. This essay discusses current trends in phonics education, including the relationship between phonics and standardized testing. The necessity of including more intensive phonics teaching or beginning teachers (teach the teachers) is discussed as well as the topic of phonometric awareness.

Applications

For at least the last 150 years, the U.S. has been grappling with the best way to teach children to read. Much of the discussion and supporting research has centered around an "either or" option which pitted phonics vs. Whole Language instruction. It has only been very recently that educators and researchers have conceded that there is really no black and white answer when it comes to literacy education. As cited by Kim (2008): "Virtually every major synthesis on reading rejected the simple dualism between phonics and Whole Language and encouraged instruction that focused on helping children master the alphabetic principle and acquire meaning from text."

Leading researcher and educator Chall was really instrumental in opening the dialog to discussing a more balanced approach to reading instruction. "Chall argued that neither phonics nor sight-word approaches were sufficient to help children become skilled readers. Instead, she reminded educators and the general public that an inflexible approach may fail with a child if in the long run it plays down either of these aspects of learning to read. What is important is a proper balance between them" (Kim, 2008, p.373).

Reading instruction is continually being reevaluated because each year in the U.S. and worldwide, a significant number of children fail to reach the "benchmark" of basic literacy levels. "The Nation's Report Card" states that by grade four, students "should demonstrate an understanding of the overall meaning of what they read" (Bryan, Tunnell, & Jacobs, 2007). New approaches and programs are forever being introduced as the magic bullet that will enable all children to become skilled readers. It is not just children who are affected by conflicting ideas, methods and approaches: Teachers must also master new approaches to teaching reading skills as well as to help their students meet benchmarks that are set by standardized testing.

No Child Left Behind & Governmental Requirements

"The findings of the National Reading Panel (NRP) (2000) report directly influenced the goals of the 'Reading First' portion of the No Child Left Behind Act, which requires eligible Title I schools to adopt scientifically based research practices in five areas of reading instruction: Phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. The five pillars of good reading instruction have encouraged practitioners to focus on a broad set of instructional strategies and reading outcomes. As Peggy McCardle and Vinita Chhabra noted in their 2005 'Kappan' article, the five pillars of scientifically based reading instruction should replace the 'artificial dichotomy' between phonics and Whole Language" (Kim, 2008, p.373).

The NCLB (No Child Left Behind) has placed an emphasis on standardized testing and scientifically based reading instruction which, in turn, has led to the adoption of standardized curricula. The so-called scripted curricula are failing to meet their objective of increasing literacy because though it teaches phonics and other reading practices, it largely ignores the needs of individual children (according to many critics). Scripted curricula are supported by the National Reading Panel (NRP), which supports explicit and systematic instruction in phonemic awareness and phonics as the "most effective means of reading instruction" (Milosovic, 2007). Results can be objectively measured and will show an increase in literacy rates, but many experts say that the effectiveness of such reading programs levels off after second grade. There is no shortage of critics of scientifically based curricula and its components such as phonics instruction. According to some teachers, the scripted curriculum "overwhelms" the school day, taking up to 3 hours of each day for implementation and leaving little time for the individual attention that many believe is so critical for young students to achieve success. In 2012, the administration of President Barack Obama distributed waivers to the act, which exempted states from certain aspects of the educational standards (Klein, 2013).

Research regarding the success of scripted reading is unreliable because it doesn't take into account the varying abilities of students. There's a myth that learning to read is an identical process for each child and that once a child masters basic reading skills, the student is literate. The real wildcard for successful literacy education is, according to teachers, individual teacher instruction. Teaching is improvisational and the flexibility and creativity are stifled by scripted learning (Milosovic, 2007). More important, phonics doesn't address the vocabulary building that is so critical in developing advanced levels of reading and comprehension and increasing fluency. Vocabulary development is time-intensive and requires individual attention between the teacher and the student. "Students who must decipher the meaning of a word are unable to concentrate on comprehension." As a result, they not only have a minimal understanding of what they read; they find reading laborious and unsatisfactory" (Milosovic, 2007). Not all words can be decoded using phonics; many of the high frequency words used in everyday vocabulary must be learned rather than decoded. Many educators ask rhetorically if the objective of a scripted curriculum is to meet standardized testing requirements or to teach children to read.

The debate over phonics is not relegated the United States; in the United Kingdom, the UK Secretary of State for Education requested an independent review of best practices in reading instruction as well as the role of synthetic phonics. The review, undertaken in 2005, was led by the former Deputy Chief Inspector of Schools Jim Rose. The review looked at the role and place of phonics teaching within the context of early reading, with emphasis on the development of the birth to five frameworks and the renewal of the literacy framework (Clark, 2006).

Upon its release in early 2006, the Rose Report (aka "Phonics Final Report") touched off a heated debate that was reminiscent of much of the discussion that has historically surrounded the phonics discussion. Many educators reacted to the emphasis on the implementation of "synthetic phonics" as a "one size fits all" solution to literacy education (Clark, 2006). Others stated that the "impression has been given that an injection of synthetic phonics, first, fast and only as soon as children enter school, will solve all reading problems" (Clark, 2006).

Issues

Phonics has been a component of literacy education and early reading programs for as long as the public education system has been in existence. There's no question that the role of phonics and phonetic awareness is still being debated in many classrooms around the world. The importance of phonics in early reading instruction is undisputed at this time; there is ample evidence that early use of phonics helps children develop reading skills up to grade 2, and perhaps until grade 4. A team of researchers in Australia has begun to study how well teachers are prepared to teach phonics in the classroom. While language and speech pathologists receive intensive training in phonics, elementary education teachers don't receive an adequate or commensurate level of education to support phonics instruction. A 2008 study titled: "Phonological literacy: Preparing primary teachers for the challenge of a balanced approach to literacy education" discussed the shortcomings of phonics in teacher education curriculum. The report also discusses ways that phonics and phonometric awareness can be integrated into teacher education curriculum.

Training Primary Teachers: A New Approach to Teaching Phonics

The role of phonics in literacy learning has been a controversial political issue for many years. The strategic use of phonics is determined by official approval of the "balanced approach" to literacy learning. A 2005 National Inquiry into Teaching Literacy (NITL) made the following statements (Buckland & Fraser, 2008, p.59):

• "The direct systematic instruction in phonics during the early years of schooling is an essential foundation for teaching children to read."

• "A repertoire of teaching skills (phonics) is a challenge for teacher education institutions."

According to Buckland and Fraser, neither phonics nor whole-language instruction is given adequate time and attention in current teacher education curriculum. The authors state that they find the topic of reading to be more of an adjunct to existing course materials than a central theme. Because phonics is a required component of literacy education, the authors of the study suggest that it is time to re-integrate phonics into a balanced approach to literacy. According to educators, researchers and curriculum developers, discussions must move beyond the "phonics vs Whole Language" dichotomy for literacy education to be effective. Phonics must be acknowledged as just one of several components in the development of literacy skills (Buckland & Fraser, 2008).

In a 2005 submission article to the National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy, author Valerie Rule reports the following. "Primary teacher education students themselves frequently express concern over their lack of confidence in their phonics knowledge and their frustration at having to rely on abstract chapters in textbooks that are usually quite difficult to understand. Now the issue is no longer whether or not phonics should be taught in schools, but how to ensure that teacher education students have sufficient mastery of the subject (deep knowledge) to enable them to teach well" (Yule, 2005).

The study of phonetics is of great value to the teacher of phonics. Teacher education students are not "receiving sufficient explicit and systematic knowledge of how the spelling system works in relation to phonological knowledge" (Buckland & Fraser, 2008, p.61). Equally as important may be instilling upon teachers an understanding regarding the perspective of the child (Buckland & Fraser, 2008). Most adults, including teachers, have long forgotten how difficult it really is to learn to read.

According to Buckland and Fraser, teacher education students don't have the expertise or confidence needed to teach phonics; these grads don't exhibit the "knowledge of the building blocks of language necessary for the big picture of effective literacy teaching" (Buckland & Fraser, 2008, p.62). Teachers need to develop a 'fluency' in phonometic awareness (Buckland & Fraser, 2008). Another author acknowledges the difficult nature of teaching phonics in the following quote: "Understanding phonemes and phonetic transcription is hard," and an admission of the difficult nature of this subject is required and will provide a means to overcome the problem of properly preparing teachers. Admittedly, experience has shown that "what is taught as phonics and how it is taught will make a difference" (Orton, n.d).

Because the teaching of phonics is so difficult and requires a deep understanding of both the subject matter and its application, it is necessary to examine how well teacher training texts and materials cover this challenging subject. A number of textbooks-widely used in teacher training courses were reviewed as a part of the "Phonological literacy" study. A number of shortcomings were noted with regard to phonics and phonological knowledge coverage in the popular teaching texts. Areas of concern within the texts include:

• Absence of content and information devoted to phonics.

• Condensed content that was more theoretical than applicable.

• Presentation of some material as obvious (such as phonemes), when in fact the subject matter was highly abstract.

As a result of the findings regarding available teacher training textbooks, an electronic teaching module is under development. The module, titled, "Teaching Foundation Literacy" was designed as a comprehensive guide to essential phonological knowledge (Buckland & Fraser, 2008). The module was created in an electronic format that appeals to internet and web-savvy students and allows for integration of graphics and sound as part of the instructional delivery method. The module stresses the traditional, core concepts of literacy which are reading, writing, spelling and phonics. The sequence of content introduction includes a deliberate sequence of steps that start with the student's prior knowledge and personal experience, moves to content knowledge and then covers the application of literacy teaching. The steps in the module mirror the steps that are optimal in helping a child learn to read- this approach reinforces the teacher's experience in the learning process (what it is like to be a child learning to read).

The topics of the module include (Buckland & Fraser, 2008):

• Literacy and Spelling: Emphasizing the importance of spelling in writing- encoding.

• Phonometric Awareness: Reinforces the steps of the learning process and reminds teachers of the difficulties associated with learning to read.

• Toward Phonics: Covers the stages that children go through on their way to achieving phonological awareness.

• Phonics and Beyond: Emphasizes the importance of meaning and how words are used in context.

Conclusion

Phonics is widely accepted as content for teaching children to read. Phonics is not a teaching strategy, but rather one component of an overall approach to phonological awareness. Teacher training and curriculum do not do an adequate job of training new teachers to teach this difficult material. Because teachers are ill-prepared to teach phonics, there has been an adoption of scripted curriculum for presenting phonics material to students. Critics of phonics education state that teachers are "teaching to the test" or placing too much emphasis on the metrics of standardized testing. Phonics has been recognized as a valuable component, along with reading, writing and spelling in the development of phonological awareness and literacy education. Researchers are now focusing on a balanced approach to literacy education. The balanced approach to literacy education requires that teachers understand the challenging concepts and methodologies related to phonics and phonological instruction. Revamping teacher training curriculum for reading instruction is underway and the next decade will prove to be an enlightening one as researchers look back to see how phonological awareness has impacted early reading programs.

Terms & Concepts

Incidental Instruction: An approach to reading instruction in which "the teacher does not follow a planned sequence of phonics elements to guide instruction, but highlights particular elements opportunistically when they appear in text" (Ellis, 2007, p.62).

Look-Say: Students are taught to memorize the appearance of words, or learn to identify words by looking at the first and last letter. Students taught to read by the “look-say” method are not taught to pronounce new words.

Literacy: Generally refers to the ability to read and write. The definition would likely also assume that there is comprehension of what is read or written.

National Reading Panel: A (US) national panel to analyze the effectiveness of various approaches used to teach children to read; formed by representatives of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) at the National Institutes of Health, in consultation with the Secretary of Education.

No Child Left Behind: The 2001 law which encompasses a number of re-designed federal programs that are aimed at improving the performance of primary and secondary schools and students. Standardized testing to measure reading progress is administered annually in grades 3-8.

Phonics: The system of associating letter symbols with speech sounds.

Phonological Awareness: Emphasizes that language is composed of sounds; the understanding of the relationship these sounds have with each other to create meaning (words in sentences, syllables, and rhyming).

Scripted Curriculum: Scripted curriculum is mainly concerned with teaching facts and preparing for major test; the curriculum offers generic formulas for success that treat all learners alike (NCTE).

Synthetic Phonics: An approach to teaching reading in which students are taught create words by first linking an individual letter or letter combination with its specific sound then blending the sounds together.

Syntactic: The arrangement of words and phrases to create well-formed sentences.

Semantic: The meaning of a word, phrase or sentence.

Whole Language: A way to teach children to read by emphasizing the use and understanding of words in both their usual everyday contexts as well as in books other than textbooks. Whole Language is based on teaching strategies and skills that are determined by the needs of the child, a belief that learning is a collaborative experience based upon the interests and engagement of children as individuals (Costello, 2012).

Bibliography

Barnett, J. (2004). Phonological awareness and teaching literacy. English Teachers Network. Retrieved January 23, 2008, from http://www.etni.org.il/etnirag/issue3/joe%5fbarnett.htm

Blevens, W. (1999). Phonics from A to Z: A practical guide. Jefferson City, MO: Scholastic Professional Books: Teaching Resources. Retrieved January 25, 2008, from Books.Google.com. http://books.google.com/books?id=RVNCyoeIRPIC&pg=PT12&lpg=PT12&dq=history+of+phonics+united+states&source=web&ots=BTXjSKlFFB&sig=EZsPmxXN7gHINM6d4fF9VNOwsxQ#PPT3,M1

Bryan, G., Tunnell, M., & Jacobs, J. (2007). A most valuable player: The place of books in teaching children to read. Canadian Children, 32 , 25-33. Retrieved January 22, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=27536662&site=ehost-live

Buckland, C., & Fraser, H. (2008). Phonological literacy: Preparing primary teachers for the challenge of a balanced approach to literacy education. Australian Journal of Language & Literacy, 31 , 59-73. Retrieved January 22, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=28399417&site=ehost-live

Costello, D. (2012). The impact of a school's literacy program on a primary classroom. Canadian Journal of Education, 35, 69-81. Retrieved December 9, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=76287044&site=ehost-live

Ellis, L., K. Wheldall, & R. Beaman. (2007). The research locus and conceptual basis for MULTILIT: Why we do what we do. Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12, 61-65. Retrieved 28 July 2010 from http://www.multilit.com.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=zHT81mb7Bls%3D&tabid=1237

Farrington, P. (2007). Using context cues: Children as reading detectives. Literacy Today, , 8-9. Retrieved January 22, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=25687773&site=ehost-live

Galda, L. (2013). Learning from children reading books: Transactional theory and the teaching of literature. Journal of Children's Literature, 39, 5-13. Retrieved December 16, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=91540448&site=ehost-live

Jones, J. (n.d.). Learning to read and Whole Language ideology. P.R.E.S.S. Retrieved January 25, 2008, from http://my.execpc.com/~presswis/phonics.html

Kim, J. (2008). Research and the reading wars. Phi Delta Kappan, 89 , 372-375. Retrieved January 22, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=28162687&site=ehost-live

Klein, A. (2013). As NCLB waivers take hold, revision of law remains up in air. Education Week, 32, 25. Retrieved December 14, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=85766993&site=ehost-live

Milosovic, S. (2007). Building a case against scripted reading programs. Education Digest, 73 , 27-30. Retrieved January 22, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=26929696&site=ehost-live

Narr, R. (2006). Teaching phonological awareness with deaf and hard-of-hearing students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38 , 53-58. Retrieved January 23, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=20342180&site=ehost-live

Orton, J. ( n.d.). Background of phonics. Educators Publishing Series. Retrieved January 25, 2008, from: http://www.epsbooks.com/downloads/articles/Background%5fof%5fPhonics.pdf

Phonics instruction. (2000). National Reading Panel. Retrieved January 22, 2008, from: http://www.readingrockets.org/article/254

Scientifically based reading instruction. (n.d.). Reading First. Retrieved January 22, 2008, from: http://www.readingfirstsupport.us/default.asp?article%5fid=9

Yule, V. (2005). Submission to the national inquiry into the teaching of literacy. Applied Imagination. Retrieved January 27, 2008, from: http://home.vicnet.net.au/~ozideas/DOWNLOADS%20pdfs%20for%20ozideas/govtreadingInquiry%5fsub144%5fYule.pdf

Suggested Reading

Lewis, A. (2006). Washington scene. Education Digest, 72 , 70-73. Retrieved January 23, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=22970264&site=ehost-live

Litt, D.G. (2007). 10 rules for reading. Reading Teacher, 60 , 570-574. Retrieved January 30, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=24286608&site=ehost-live

Manyak, P.C. (2007). A framework for robust literacy instruction for English learners. Reading Teacher, 61 , 197-199. Retrieved January 30, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=26901830&site=ehost-live

Neuman, S. (2007). Making reading meaningful. Early Childhood Today, 21 , 14-14. Retrieved January 22, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=24771936&site=ehost-live