literacy Flashcards
reading is not innate..
basic model of what reading is
needs formal teaching (Anderson, 2014)
Reading = decoding + comprehension
brain areas in literacy
(Shaywitz & Shaywitz, 2011)
- Broca’s area - articulation & analysis
- parieto-temporal region - analysis
- occipito temporal region (word form area) - rapid/automatic identification of words
Arguments against modularity & brain areas in literacy
- word form area connects to other lobes in the brain (Dehaene et al. 2005) - areas for phonological retrieval & semantic access
- word form area not present at birth but by 8 it is developed (Trafton, 2016) (but not at 5 before learning to read) - neuroimaging study
BUT - there are still connections from this region to other areas of the brain at birth - just not specialised (Dahene & cohen, 2011) – neuronal recycling: education develops this area without changing genetic make up
Ehri (1992)
reading progression theory
1) pre alphabetic phase: use context to ‘’'’read’’’
2) partial alphabetic phase: reading some letters om words - use these to best guess at pronunciation
3) full alphabetic phase: make connections - match phonemes to graphemes - sigh reading
4) consolidated alphabetic phase: reoccuring letter patterns become consolidated - memory load reduced
probs with Ehri
1) Beech (2005): didnt say the child could be at multiple stages at once - they can
2) Ignores cognitive structures (Okhill et al. 2003) - guesstimations & inferences
Triangle model of word reading
Seidenberg & Mccelland (1989)
- 3 components: Semantics, orthography & phonology
- semantic component shows that word recognition relies on a combination of phonological and semantic information.
- interactions in this CONNECTIONIST model = pronunciation
- they are not “ units” they are specific patterns of activities across units && strength of connections improves accuracy (Rayner & Reichle, 2010)
cognitive processes in reading: attention
- deficits in attention can cause reading problems (Adams & Snowling, 2001)
BUT
used digit span task (DF + DB) – DF = auditory memory & DB = working memory – they should be separate (Hale et al. 2002) SO not accurate
BUT
welsh et al. (2010): longitudinal study - attention control and WM predicited growth in emergent literacy skills pre kindergarten - make unqiue preds of later acheivement (when growth accounted for)
cognitive processes in reading: working memory
2) working memory: WM difficulties in comprehension (pimperton & nation, 2010) - modularity
- verbal and non verbal versions of proactive interference task
- results: domain specific suppression deficits - only verbal version was affected
BUTTT
Welsh et al. (2010): longitudinal study - attention control and WM predicited growth in emergent literacy skills pre kindergarten - make unqiue preds of later acheivement (when growth accounted for)
cognitive processes in reading: phonological awareness
- associated with word decoding (better decoding better awareness)
- deficits in dyslexic children: phonological deficit model (snowling, 1998)
Written text production - approaches
Ecological systems theory & scaffolding
- stages of literacy (Cabell et al. 2013)
- scaffolding in teaching literacy at school (teacher led talk —> student discussion) - scaffolding helped develop skills (Kong, 2002)
EG:
- Play influences literacy (learn to read words in the play enviro (Neuman & Roskos 1993) && Pelligrini (1983) play skills can predict emergent writing
BUT
“play as progress” tendency - only looks at positive play NOT a study that looks at negative play & literacy development - no clear connection (Roskos & Christie, 2001)
cognitive differences between writers and non writers
Bourke & adams (2010) - 4-5 year olds
non writers were worse on:
vocab, word reading, listening span & reading performance are crucial to determine whether the children are where they should be
~~
Harrison et al. (2016) - 8 year olds
phonological awareness, verbal & STM, reading fluency all predicted writing quality
STM memory differences explained by age differences 4 vs 8 (Pathman et al. 2013)
links between reading & writing - good readers as good writers) (2)
1) better vocab skills - Zimmerman (1997) does improve but its time consuming
BUT (pigada & schmitt 2006) - improved it in a month
2) better syntatic awareness (cain, 2007)
3) orthograpgical awareness (rubin, 1988)
good readers but not good writers?
different processes underlying them (Hillis & Rapp, 2004)
working memory in poor comprehenders
Caretti et al. (2005): less accurate recall performance & more intrusion errors
BUT
Oakhill et al.(2005):
- not the case bc
1) difficulties when memory demands = low
2) brief training in comp imporved comp in reading - WM didnt cause the improv
neurobio mechs in poor comprehnders
Cutting et al. (2013)
-abnormalities with connectivity between speech areas & hippocampus (i.e. lang & memory)
ALSO
- occipito temporal region (also reduced in dyslexics - typical word level processing
