In defence of decodable reading books - but raising some thoughts about this topic
Posted: Mon May 16, 2022 12:45 pm
At the time of posting this piece by Dr Jennifer Buckingham, the topic of 'decodable phonics reading books' has developed into a truly hot topic internationally.
As more teachers are made aware about the findings of decades of research on reading instruction, this is often referred to as the 'Science of Reading' - SOR.
Contributory to this growing adoption of the SOR is the awareness of the helpfulness of cumulative, decodable reading books - different from 'predictable' or 'repetitive' reading books, or 'levelled readers'. This 'what is best to provide for children's reading diet' is particularly with reference to beginner readers.
Predictably, however, there is a backlash from those who do not uphold to reading books being designed to run alongside the systematic introduction of the letter/s-sound correspondences of the English alphabetic code. Those who challenge reading books designed to complement (or even be part of actual phonics programmes) are putting forward their arguments in papers and presentations - and then this is followed by further responses.
Jennifer provides one such response here:
As more teachers are made aware about the findings of decades of research on reading instruction, this is often referred to as the 'Science of Reading' - SOR.
Contributory to this growing adoption of the SOR is the awareness of the helpfulness of cumulative, decodable reading books - different from 'predictable' or 'repetitive' reading books, or 'levelled readers'. This 'what is best to provide for children's reading diet' is particularly with reference to beginner readers.
Predictably, however, there is a backlash from those who do not uphold to reading books being designed to run alongside the systematic introduction of the letter/s-sound correspondences of the English alphabetic code. Those who challenge reading books designed to complement (or even be part of actual phonics programmes) are putting forward their arguments in papers and presentations - and then this is followed by further responses.
Jennifer provides one such response here:
https://fivefromfive.com.au/uncategoriz ... x38gtzyNJoA defence of decodable books: Response to a recent systematic review
Do read the whole piece which includes links to more information.Well before the sparkling new Australian Curriculum 9.0 endorsed replacing predictable texts with decodable texts in early years classrooms, demand had begun to grow for decodable books. They are called ‘decodable books’ because almost all of the words are decodable for beginning readers who have just started to learn the alphabetic code. They are written specifically to provide a scaffolded way for students to practice reading words using the phonics knowledge and skills they are learning. They are closely aligned with a phonics scope and sequence so, as a child’s knowledge of phonics grows, the number and complexity of words they can decode also grows. Used properly, high quality decodable books also draw students’ attention to the meaning of what they are reading. Decodable books are best viewed as an instructional tool that is used for a limited time. Eventually, all books are decodable but not at the start of instruction.
Decodable books are never recommended as a replacement for shared reading of storybooks and picture books in all stages of learning. Shared reading means hearing the text and looking at the text as well as the pictures and other features – not just listening to it. Storybooks and picture books (and non-fiction) are important for oral language, vocabulary, comprehension, and the sheer delight of books. However, in an evidence-based approach to reading instruction, where students are always encouraged to decode unfamiliar words using phonics as a first strategy, decodable texts are recommended to replace predictable texts for reading practice. Predictable texts are designed to encourage students to use the inefficient and inaccurate ‘three-cueing method’ for reading unfamiliar words, which in practice means guessing what the word is using context and picture clues. They contain many words that beginning readers would only be able to work out by guessing.
There is a detailed comparison of decodable and predictable books, and a summary of the evidence supporting the use of decodable books, is in an earlier post that can be read here.