Reading reversals and developmental dyslexia: a further study.

The pattern of errors in reading isolated words was studied in two groups of children with respect, particularly, to reversals of letter sequence and letter orientation. One group (the Institute group) consisted of children 8 to 10 years old who had been diagnosed "dyslexic" according to medical and psychoeducational criteria. The other (the School group) included all the children in a second-year elementary school class (see Liberman, Shankweiler, Orlando, Harris and Berti, 1971) who fell into the lowest third on a standard test of reading achievement. Although the Institute children were somewhat poorer in word recognition than the backward readers selected purely on psychometric grounds, the groups did not differ significantly in the incidence of reversal errors. Also, for both groups, reversals represented a small proportion of the total number of reading errors. The performance of the two groups differed in two respects: in relation to directional bias in letter reversals and in the presence or absence of a significant correlation between letter-reversing and word-reversing tendencies. It was concluded from this that directional problems do not loom large in importance in most cases of reading backwardness, but may provide an additional source of difficulty for some dyslexic children. Other aspects of the error pattern were remarkably the same for both groups. The bulk of reading errors made by both groups reflect their common difficulties in phonemic segmentation of words in the lexicon, in phonetic recoding, and in mastery of the orthography--difficulties, in short, with linguistic characteristics of words rather than with their properties as visual patterns.

Children's memory for recurring linguistic and nonlinguistic material in relation to reading ability.

Good beginning readers typically surpass poor beginning readers in memory for linguistic material such as syllables, words, and sentences. Here we present evidence that this interaction between reading ability and memory performance does not extend to memory for nonlinguistic material like faces and nonsense designs. Using an adaptation of the continuous recognition memory paradigm of Kimura (1963) we assessed the ability of good and poor readers in the second grade to remember three different types of material: photographs of unfamiliar faces, nonsense designs, and printed nonsense syllables. For both faces and designs, the performance of the two reading groups was comparable; only when remembering the nonsense syllables did the good readers perform at a significantly superior level. These results support other evidence that distinctions between good and poor beginning readers do not turn on memory, per se, but rather on memory for linguistic material. Thus they extend our previous finding that poor readers encounter specific difficulty with the use of linguistic coding in short-term memory.

Whole Language vs. Code Emphasis: Underlying assumptions and their implications for reading instruction.

Promoters of Whole Language hew to the belief that learning to read and write can be as natural and effortless as learning to perceive and produce speech. From this it follows that there is no special key to reading and writing, no explicit principle to be taught that, once learned, makes the written language transparent to a child who can speak. Lacking such a principle, Whole Language falls back on a method that encourages children to get from print just enough information to provide a basis for guessing at the gist. A very different method, called Code Emphasis, presupposes that learning the spoken language is, indeed, perfectly natural and seemingly effortless, but only because speech is managed, as reading and writing are not, by a biological specialization that automatically spells or parses all the words the child commands. Hence, a child normally learns to use words without ever becoming explicitly aware that each one is formed by the consonants and vowels that an alphabet represents. Yet it is exactly this awareness that must be taught if the child is to grasp the alphabetic principle and so understand how the artifacts of an alphabet transcribe the natural units of language. There is evidene that preliterate children do not, in fact, have much of this awareness; that the amount they do have predicts their reading achievement; that the awareness can be taught; and that the relative difficulty of learning it that some childen have may be a reflection of a weakness in the phonological component of their natural capacity for language.

Linguistic coding by deaf children in relation to beginning reading success.

The coding of printed letters in a task of consonant recall was examined in relation to the level of success of prelingually and profoundly deaf children (median age 8.75 years) in beginning reading. As determined by recall errors, the deaf children who were classified as good readers appeared to use both speech and fingerspelling (manual) codes in short-term retention of printed letters. In contrast, deaf children classified as poor readers did not show influence of either of these linguistically based codes in recall. Thus, the success of deaf children in beginning reading, like that of hearing children, appears to be related to the ability to establish and make use of linguistically recoded representations of the language. Neither group showed evidence of dependence on visual cues for recall.

Syntactic competence and reading ability in children.

The effect of syntactic context on auditory word identification and on the ability to detect and correct syntactic errors in speech was examined in severely reading disabled children and in good and poor readers selected from the normal distribution of fourth graders. The poor readers were handicapped when correct reading required analysis of the sentence context. However, their phonological decoding ability was intact. Identification of words was less affected by syntactic context in the severely disabled readers than in either the good or poor readers. Moreover, the disabled readers were inferior to good readers in judging the syntactical integrity of spoken sentences and in their ability to correct the syntactically aberrant sentences. Poor readers were similar to good readers in the identification and judgment tasks, but inferior in the correction task. The results suggest that the severely disabled readers were inferior to both good and poor readers in syntactic awareness, and in ability to use syntactic rules, while poor readers were equal to good readers in syntactic awareness but were relatively impaired in using syntactic knowledge productively.

Phonetic recoding and reading difficulty in beginning readers.

The results of a recent study (Liberman, Shankweiler, Liberman, Fowler, & Fischer, 1977) suggest that good beginning readers are more affected than poor readers by the phonetic characteristics of visually presented items in a recall task. The good readers made significantly more recall errors on strings of letters with rhyming letter names than on nonrhyming sequences; in contrast, the poor readers made roughly equal numbers of errors on the rhyming and nonrhyming letter strings. The purpose of the present study was to determine whether the interaction between reading ability and phonetic similarity is solely determined by different rehearsal strategies of the two groups. Accordingly, good and poor readers were tested on rhyming and nonrhyming words using a recognition memory paradigm that minimized the opportunity for rehearsal. Performance of the good readers was more affected by phonetic similarity than that of the poor readers, in agreement with the earlier study. The present findings support the hypothesis that good and poor readers do differ in their ability to access a phonetic representation.