Annals of Dyslexia

, Volume 49, Issue 1, pp 283–306 | Cite as

Repeated reading to enhance fluency: Old approaches and new directions

Part IV Strategies For Remediation

Abstract

As phoneme awareness deficits and resulting decoding weaknesses are increasingly addressed, there is heightened awareness of the role of fluency in reading. This paper reviews the history of fluency training, discusses the theoretical bases of such training, and summarizes the current knowledge about the efficacy of training procedures. We focus on Repeated Reading (RR), the most familiar and researched approach to fluency training. Outcome data on Repeated Reading, presented in the form of questions, is meant to answer practitioners’ questions about implementation and efficacy and to provide a starting point for researchers interested in the topic. Although some answers are straightforward, others indicate the subtleties involved in answering the broad question, “Does Repeated Reading work?” In addition to a list of practical suggestions based on Repeated Readings findings, three new approaches to fluency training are introduced.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, M. J. 1990. Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learning About Print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Allington, R. L. 1980. Poor readers don’t get to read much in reading groups. Language Arts 57:872–76.Google Scholar
  3. Allington, R. L. 1983. Fluency: The neglected reading goal The Reading Teacher 36:556–60.Google Scholar
  4. Allington, R. L., and Brown, S. 1979. FACT: A MultiMedia Reading Program. Milwaukee, WI: Raintree Press.Google Scholar
  5. Beidmiller, A. 1977. Relations between oral reading rates for letters, words and simple text in the development of reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly 13:223–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bowers, P. G. 1993. Text reading and rereading: Determinants of fluency beyond word recognition. Journal of Reading Behavior 25(2):133–53.Google Scholar
  7. Campbell, K. 1995. Great Leaps Reading Program. Micanopy, FL: Diarmuid, Inc.Google Scholar
  8. Carbo, M. 1997. Continuum of Modeling Methods: Release Your Students’ Learning Power. Syosset, NY: National Reading Styles Institute.Google Scholar
  9. Carver, R. 1989. Silent reading rates in grade equivalents. Journal of Reading Behavior 21:155–66.Google Scholar
  10. Dahl, P. R. 1974. An experimental program for teaching high speed word recognition and comprehension skills. (Final report project #3-1154) Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  11. Dahl, P. R. 1979. An experimental program for teaching high speed word recognition and comprehension skills. In Communications Research in Learning Disabilities and Mental Retardation, J. E. Button, T. C. Lovitt, and T. D. Rowland, eds. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
  12. Dowhower, S. 1987. Aspects of repeated reading on second-grade transitional readers fluency and comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly 22:389–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dowhower, S. 1994. Repeated reading revisited: Research into practice Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties 10:343–58.Google Scholar
  14. Ehri, L. C., and Wilce, L. S. 1983. Development of word identification speed in skilled and less skilled beginning readers. Journal of Educational Psychology 75:3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Faulkner, H. J., and Levy, B. A. 1994. How text difficulty and reader skill interact to produce differential reliance on word and content overlap in reading transfer. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 58:1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fishco, V. V., and Hanna, G. S. 1993. Nelson-Denny Reading Test. Chicago: Riverside Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  17. Fisher, P. 1995. Speed Drills for Decoding Automaticity. Farmington, ME: Oxton House Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Fisher, P. 1999. Getting up to speed. Perspectives 25(2):12–13.Google Scholar
  19. Fleisher, L. S., Jenkins, J. R., and Pandy, D. 1979. Effects on poor readers’ comprehension of training in rapid decoding. Reading Research Quarterly 15:30–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Flynn, J., Rahbar, M., and Deering, W. 1998. Manuscript submitted. Dysphonetic and dysorthographic readers: Response to treatments using the initial teaching alphabet.Google Scholar
  21. Foorman, B. R., Francis, D. J., Beeler, T., Winikates, D., and Fletcher, J. M. 1997. Early interventions for children with reading problems: Study designs and preliminary findings. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal 8:63–72.Google Scholar
  22. Foorman, B. R., Francis, K. J., Winidates, D., Mehta, P., Schatschneider, C., and Fletcher, J. M. 1997. Early interventions for children with reading disabilities. Scientific Studies in Reading 1:255–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hasbrouck, J., and Tindal, G. 1992. Curriculum-based oral reading fluency norms for students in grades 2 through 5. Teaching Exceptional Children:41–44.Google Scholar
  24. Herman, P. 1985. The effect of repeated readings on reading rate, speech pauses and word recognition accuracy. Reading Research Quarterly 20:553–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hintze, J., Shapiro, E., Conte, K., and Basile, I. 1997. Oral reading fluency and authentic reading material: Criterion validity on the technical features of CBM survey-level assessment. School Psychology Review 26:535–53.Google Scholar
  26. Inhot, C. 1998. Read Naturally. St. Paul, MN: Read Naturally, Inc.Google Scholar
  27. Kaminski, R. A., and Good, R. H., 1998. Use of curriculum based measurement to assess early literacy: Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills. In Advances in Curriculum Based Measurement: Use in a Problem Solving Model, M. Shinn, ed. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  28. LaBerge, D., and Samuels, J. 1974. Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology 6:293–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Levy, B.A. April 1999. Learning to read: Context doesn’t matter. Paper presented at the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading, Montreal.Google Scholar
  30. Levy, B.A., Abello, B., and Lysynchuk, L. 1997. Transfer from word training to reading in context: Gains in reading fluency and comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly 20:173–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Liberman, I. Y., and Shankweiler, D. 1979. Speech, the alphabet, and teaching to read. In Theory and Practice in Early Reading (Vol. 2), L. B. Resnick and P. A. Weaver, eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  32. Lovett, M., Borden, S., DeLuca, T., Lacerenza, L., Bensen, N., and Brackstone, D. 1994. Treating the core deficits of developmental dyslexia: Evidence of transfer of learning after phonologically and strategy-based reading training programs. Developmental Psychology 30:803–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lyon, G. R., and Moats, L. C. 1997. Critical conceptual and methodological considerations in reading intervention research. Journal of Learning Disabilities 30(6):578–88.Google Scholar
  34. Lyon, G. R. 1998. Critical advances in understanding reading acquisition and reading difficulty. Paper read at North Carolina Branch of the International Dyslexia Association, November 1998, Boone, NC.Google Scholar
  35. Manis, F. R., Custodio, R., and Szeszulski, P. A. 1993. Development of phonological and orthographic skill: A 2-year longitudinal study of dyslexic children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 56:64–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mercer, C., and Campbell, K 1998. Great Leaps Reading Program. Micanopy, FL: K-2 Diarmuid, Inc.Google Scholar
  37. Meyer, M. S., Wood, F. B., Hart, L. A., and Felton, R. H. 1998. Selective predictive value of rapid automatized naming in poor readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities 31:106–17.Google Scholar
  38. O’Shea, L., Sindelar, P., and O’Shea, D. 1985. The effects of repeated readings and attentional cues on reading fluency and comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior 17:129–42.Google Scholar
  39. Perfetti, C. A. 1985. Reading Ability. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Perfetti, C. A. 1977. Language comprehension and fast decoding: Some psycholinguistic prerequisites for skilled reading comprehension. In Cognition, Curriculum and Comprehension, J. T. Guthrie, ed. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
  41. Rasinski, T. 1990. Effects of repeated reading and listening-while-reading on reading fluency. Journal of Educational Research 83:147–50.Google Scholar
  42. Rashotte, C., and Torgesen, J. 1985. Repeated reading and reading fluency in learning disabled children. Reading Research Quarterly 20:180–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Reitsma, P. 1983. Printed word learning in beginning readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 36:321–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Renick, M. J., and Harter, S. 1989. Impact of social comparisons on the developing self-perceptions of learning disabled students. Journal of Educational Psychology 81:631–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Samuels, S. J. 1979. The method of repeated readings. The Reading Teacher 32(4):403–08.Google Scholar
  46. Scanlon, D. M., and Vellutino, F. R. 1996. Prerequisite skills, early instruction, and success in first-grade reading: Selected results from a longitudinal study. Mental Retardation and Developmental Research Reviews 2:54–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schreiber, P. 1980. On the acquisition of reading fluency. Journal of Reading Behavior 12:177–86.Google Scholar
  48. Shankweiler, D., and Crain, S. 1986. Language mechanisms and reading disorder: A modular approach. Cognition 24:139–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shinn, M. R., Good, R. H., Knutson, N., Tilly, W. D., and Collins, V. L. 1992. Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency: A confirmatory analysis of its relation to reading. School Psychology Review 21:459–79.Google Scholar
  50. Simmons, D. C., Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Mathes, P. G., and Page, M. J. 1990. The effects of explicit teaching and peer-mediated instruction on low performing and mildly handicapped students’ reading achievement. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association’s Annual Meeting. Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  51. Spring, C., Bluden, D., and Gatheral, M. 1981. Effect on reading comprehension of training to automaticity in word-reading. Perceptual and Motor Skills 53:779–86.Google Scholar
  52. Stanovich, K. 1986. Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly 21:360–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stoddard, K., Valcante, G., Sindelar, P., and Algozzine, B. 1993. Increasing reading rate and comprehension: The effects of repeated readings, sentence segmentation and intonation training. Reading Research and Instruction 32:53–65.Google Scholar
  54. Tan, A., and Nicholson, T. 1997. Flashcards revisited: Training poor readers to read words faster improves their comprehension of text. Journal of Educational Psychology 59:276–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Torgesen, J., Rashotte, C., and Wagner, R. November 1997. Research on instructional interventions for children with reading disabilities. Paper delivered at International Dyslexia Association, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  56. van Bon, W. H. J., Boksebeld, L. M., Font Freide, T. A. M., and van den Hurk, A. J. M. 1991. A comparison of three methods of reading-while-listening. Journal of Learning Disabilities 24(8):471–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. van den Bosch, K., van Bon, W., and Schreuder, R. 1995. Poor readers’ decoding skills: Effects of training with limited exposure duration. Reading Research Quarterly 30:110–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Williams, J. 1998. Improving the comprehension of disabled readers. Annals of Dyslexia 48:213–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wolf, M. 1997. A provisional, integrative account of phonological and naming-speed deficits in dyslexia: Implications for diagnosis and intervention. In Cognitive and Linguistic Foundations of Reading Acquisition: Implications for Intervention Research, B. Blachman, ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  60. Wolf, M., and Bowers, P. 1999. The double deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of Educational Psychology 91:415–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Young, A., and Bowers, P. 1995. Individual differences and text difficulty determinants of reading fluency and expressiveness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 60:428–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Young, A., Bowers, P., and MacKinnon, G. 1996. Effects of prosodic modeling and repeated reading on poor readers’ fluency and comprehension. Applied Psycholinguistics 17:59–84.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Dyslexia Association 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bowman-Gray CampusWake Forest University School of MedicineUSA
  2. 2.Section of NeuropsychologyWake Forest University School of Medicine, Medical Center BoulevardWinston-Salem

Personalised recommendations