Relationships between Oral Reading Rates for Letters, Words, and Simple Text in the Development of Reading Achievement

Neuroscience and education: prime time to build the bridge

“…First, eye movements during fluent reading are made mostly by making saccades from one word to the next 65 . Second, the reading time of a single word is relatively independent of the number of letters 66 . Third, a single letter may be more easily detected in brief presentations when embedded in a word 67 .…”

“…The development of literacy is a case of pop-out learning, a process by which, after extensive practice, one can identify a specific set of shapes in cluttered fields very rapidly and with a subjective feeling of automaticity and lack of effort. For nonreaders, reading is a slow, effortful and serial process that becomes automatic after many hours of training 66 . What sort of transformation elicits this type of learning in the brain and what material is optimal for this learning process?…”

Differences in Mean Number of Consonant-Vowel-Consonant Words Decoded between Letter-Sound Readers and Non Letter-Sound Readers

“…For instance a child looks at the word hen and orally says, "hen". A single letter can be decoded by looking at the letter and orally responding with the basic sound translation [39]. In this study, decoding a single letter is termed letter-sound reading.…”

“…Decoding is defined as the ability to look at print and respond with the proper sound translation, a print-to-sound process [1] [12] [38]. A single letter can be decoded by looking at the letter and orally responding with the basic sound translation [39]. Decoding ability can be fast or slow [1] [12] [36].…”

Ethnic Minority Children Acquiring Literacy

“…Monitoring manifests itself primarily as self-repetition and/or selfcorrection. On the basis of studies by Weber (1970), Biemiller (1970Biemiller ( , 1978, Cohen ( 1975 ) and Francis ( 1977),a developmental sequence of reading strategies was uncovered which moves from the predominant use of context, to graphiccontextual conflict (no response), to the predominant use of graphic cues (nonsense errors), to the integrated use of graphic and contextual cues (see Donald, 1980) . With regard to monitoring it was concluded that an efficient use…”