Reading Fluency as a Diagnostic and

Pedagogical Index

Jack S. Damico, Ph. D.

The University of Louisiana at Lafayette

FLUENCY

• “The ability to read a text quickly, accurately, and with proper expression” (NRP, 2000)

• “The ability to read expressively, meaningfully, with appropriate phrasing, and with appropriate speed” (Rasinski & Padak, 2001)

FLUENCY

Parameters often cited for Fluency• Speed (words per minute, reading rate)

• Accuracy (word recognition, decoding)

• Phrasing (words per phrase group, intonation, reading with punctuation)

• Smoothness (hesitations, false starts, repetitions)

• Pace (even rate, conversational, degree of labor)

Demonstration One

FLUENCY

• Considered either a component or a dimension of literacy

• The terms tend to refer to different conceptualizations of literacy

• Component Skill or Emergent Dimension

Component Skill

• Separate from other components• One of the component categories often

cited • phonemic awareness• Phonics• Word recognition• Fluency• Comprehension

Component Skill

• Bridge between word recognition/comprehension– Achieve accuracy in word recognition

– Achieve automaticity in word recognition

– Achieve syntactic awareness

• “As students become more fluent, their word recognition improves and so does their comprehension” (Rasinski, 2003)

• The neglected Goal of the reading program (Allington)

Emergent Dimension

• Fluency is an epiphenomenal result of the comprehensibility derived from the process of reading.

• It is an indication of the degree of comprehension during reading.

• Comprehension itself is a product of an interaction between the incoming data received from the text(s), the background information brought to the task by the reader, and the readers meaning making capacities.

• Fluency is an emergent product of the reader’s ongoing comprehension of the text.

Emergent Dimension

As an emergent property of comprehensibility…• Fluency is not a separate component skill but, rather, a

dimension of the meaningfulness of reading

• It serves as an index of the degree of ongoing comprehension present

• Perkins (2002) has discussed this phenomenon in terms of many different “pragmatic behaviors” in other forms of meaning making like speech, conversation, learning, and various compensatory behaviors in struggling meaning

Questions:

• What conceptualization of Fluency works best for our Struggling Readers

• What are some of the implications of the obtained response?

• Based on research from our authentic working laboratory at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette

The University of Louisiana at Lafayette Summer Language and Literacy Project

In our previous research, on literacy in struggling readers

• Efficacy of Meaning-based intervention with Dyslexic and Language Disordered Students

• Patterns of Literacy Development in LD Students (Nelson)

• Impact of Mixed Literacy Instruction• Occurrence of Avoidance Strategies During Reading• Lack of Efficacy of Phonemic Awareness Instruction• Impact of Literacy Problems on Students and their

Families

Undertook Several Qualitative Projects/Studies

• Collected Data across 19 LD/Dyslexic Students• Collected data over three summer sessions• Employed videotape analyses• Employed participant observation• Employed various reading recording analyses• Used Several specific treatment paradigms• Analyzed both pedagogical and assessment

data

Overall Current Result

Based upon our Work, Fluency operates more as an Emergent Dimension than a Component Skill

This has very specific Implications

Our Recent Data with Struggling Readers

• High correlation with familiar text• High correlation with high Quality miscue production • High correlation with effective retellings • High correlation with Plausible prediction Consistent

(average) increase in fluency just after intervention effect – 18/19 participants– increase (counted parameters)– increase (rating scale increase by “blind” raters)

Our Recent Data with Struggling Readers

• Greater consistent increase in fluency after “weaving in meaning” rather than “non-meaningful content.

• The actual parameters focused on are crucial– Phrasing in terms of number of words and

smoothness in beginning readers– Intonation and reading with punctuation in

later readers

Demonstration Two

Fluency as an Emergent Dimension

• Excellent consistency with those who see it as an emergent dimension– Clay– Pinnell– Routman– Smith – Goodman– Weaver

Fluency as an Emergent Dimension

• Fluency Associated with overall proficiency

• Lack of Fluency a significant factor among struggling readers

• A generally reliable predictor of reading comprehension in early grades

• A focus on meaningfulness is the best way to achieve fluency

Practical Implications

• Fluency should be viewed as an emergent phenomenon not as a component skill

• It has diagnostic value in discerning comprehension

• It has pedagogical value in employing an intervention at sites of fluency reduction

• Increases the efficiency and effectiveness of intervention efforts

Literacy Assessment and Performance Monitoring

• Only Assess Authentic Literacy data

• All Cueing systems are available during the reading or writing

• The reading or writing is for real purposes.

OBSERVING ACTUAL READING

• Level of Continuous Phrasing• Smoothness• Appropriate Intonation• Reading with Punctuation• Check for Change in Fluency• Check for “Shadowing”• Check for Low Quality Miscues

Literacy Pedagogy and Intervention

• Focus should be on authentic reading of meaningful texts for authentic purposes

• Focus on the change in fluency as an index of when to intervene during authentic reading

Literacy Pedagogy and Intervention

• When using documented strategies to increase fluency, recognize the force of meaningfulness – Model Fluency– Repeated Readings– Practice with familiar Texts– Poetry rereads– Readers Theater– Repertory Groups– Paired Reading– Fluency Development Lesson

Literacy Pedagogy and Intervention

• Recognize that meaning and comprehension is the crucial variable

• Keep this in mind with – Materials

– Activities

– Motivations

– Techniques

• Beware the Pedagogical or Curricular Fallacy

SHARED READING

• Any rewarding reading experience in which the learner – or group of learners:– Sees the text– Observes a more competent reader

reading it with fluency and expression

– and is invited to read along.

SHARED READING

• This is the mediational frame where most of the real “action” in working on literacy occurs.

SHARED READING: General Points

• Children are not risk-takers so you should mediate to make the task safer.

• Materials make a great difference– Familiar v. Unfamiliar– Genres– Narrative v. Expository

If Meaningfulness is so crucial, how do we Weave it in?

• Through engaging Read Alouds

• There are a number of excellent strategies during Shared Reading

SHARED READING: Weaving in Meaning

• MODELING

• Read or re-read yourself

• Intermediate Synopsis

• Intermittent Summaries

SHARED READING: Weaving in Meaning

• Foreshadowing

• Overt Predication

• Imagery or Visualization

• Suggest the child “read it like the character”

SHARED READING: Weaving in Meaning

• Meta-literacy statements

• Have the child re-read what has just been read (for authentic reasons)

• Use restatement

Demonstration Three

Summary

• Fluency should be viewed as an Emergent Dimension

• There are specific Diagnostic and Pedagogical Implications

• Systematic Observation and Qualitative Research can provide some illumination on these matters

Contact Information

Jack S. Damico

Doris B. Hawthorne Center

The University of Louisiana at Lafayette

337-482-6721

jsdamico@louisiana.edu