Dr Kerry Hempenstall: The three-cueing system in reading: Will it ever go away? Plus Marilyn Jager Adams' article.
Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2016 1:35 pm
Dr Kerry Hempenstall illustrates how the three-cueing system for reading took hold in the teaching profession. To this day, multi-cueing reading strategies remain a problem across the world in many English-teaching contexts:
First of all, Kerry's complete list of blogs:
https://www.nifdi.org/index.php?option= ... temid=2240
From which you'll find in the list:
IFERI has now produced a leaflet which is linked to multi-cueing and how children are taught, or caused by default, to apply multi-cueing to guess the words in reading scheme books designed on the basis of predictable or repetitive texts that include words beyond their alphabetic code knowledge:
First of all, Kerry's complete list of blogs:
https://www.nifdi.org/index.php?option= ... temid=2240
From which you'll find in the list:
https://www.nifdi.org/index.php?option= ... Itemid=975The three-cueing system in reading: Will it ever go away?
Do click on the link and look at the whole piece.The three-cueing system in reading: Will it ever go away?
Published: Wednesday, 06 November 2013
Kerry Hempenstall RMIT University
First published Nov 28 2012
The three-cueing system is well-known to most teachers. What is less well known is that it arose not as a result of advances in knowledge concerning reading development, but rather in response to an unfounded but passionately held belief. Despite its largely uncritical acceptance by many within the education field, it has never been shown to have utility, and in fact, it is predicated upon notions of reading development that have been demonstrated to be false. Thus, as a basis for decisions about reading instruction, it is likely to mislead teachers and hinder students’ progress. In the Primary National Strategy (2006a), the three cueing model (known in England as the Searchlight model) is finally and explicitly discredited. Instead, the Strategy has acknowledged the value of addressing decoding and comprehension separately in the initial stage of reading instruction.
“ … attention should be focused on decoding words rather than the use of unreliable strategies such as looking at the illustrations, rereading the sentence, saying the first sound or guessing what might ‘fit’. Although these strategies might result in intelligent guesses, none of them is sufficiently reliable and they can hinder the acquisition and application of phonic knowledge and skills, prolonging the word recognition process and lessening children’s overall understanding. Children who routinely adopt alternative cues for reading unknown words, instead of learning to decode them, later find themselves stranded when texts become more demanding and meanings less predictable. The best route for children to become fluent and independent readers lies in securing phonics as the prime approach to decoding unfamiliar words" (Primary National Strategy, 2006b, p.9).
"The searchlight model of reading has been superceded by the new conceptual framework - the simple view of reading. All references to the "searchlight model" therefore should be interpreted in the light of the simple view of reading” (Primary National Strategy, 2011).
IFERI has now produced a leaflet which is linked to multi-cueing and how children are taught, or caused by default, to apply multi-cueing to guess the words in reading scheme books designed on the basis of predictable or repetitive texts that include words beyond their alphabetic code knowledge:
http://www.iferi.org/wp-content/uploads ... oned-1.pdfWhy Book Bands and Levelled Reading Books Should Be Abandoned