In 1997, Congress tasked the Director of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development as well as the Secretary of Education to create a panel that looked at research, and the effectiveness of different approaches, on teaching children how to read (National Reading Panel, 2000). After an extensive review of reading research, the National Reading Panel reported five essential components of reading instruction (National Reading Panel, 2000). These components are phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.
Phonemic Awareness
Phonemic awareness is part of phonological awareness. Phonological awareness is an umbrella term that includes word awareness, syllable awareness, onset-rime awareness, and phonemic awareness (Honig, 2008). Phonemic awareness is the understanding that words are made of individual sounds and the sounds can be manipulated (Griffith & Olson, 1992). It is the ability to hear the smallest sounds in a word when it is broken up and distinguish the individual phonemes (Lindsey, Kuehl, & Mesmer, 2020). There are different levels of phonemic awareness tasks. These tasks may begin with rhyming words, then advance to syllable splitting, and move to more difficult tasks such as segmenting and manipulating phonemes (Griffith & Olson, 1992).
Phonics
Although they share the same root word, phon, which means sound, phonics is not the same as phonemic awareness. Phonics is the orthographic representation of speech sounds in our language (Lindsey et al., 2020). To recognize words, we either know them by sight, use analogies, make a prediction based on the context, or must decode the word (Ehri, 2005, as cited in Lindsey et al., 2020). Decoding involves using phonics rules to break these unknown words into parts and blend them together to make words (Ehri, 2005; Scarborough & Brady, 2002; as cited in Lindsey et al., 2020). Effective phonics instruction is both systematic and explicit (Honig, 2008). Armbruster et al. (2001) defined systematic phonics as the teaching of letter-sound relationships in a clearly defined, logical sequence. Explicit phonics means concepts in lessons are explained and skills are modeled (Honig, 2008).
Fluency
Reading fluency is the rate, accuracy and automaticity of recognizing words along with using appropriate rate and prosody (Oakley, 2005). Accuracy is recognizing words correctly, rate is how quickly and automatically text is read, and prosody is the tonal and rhythmic of speech (Honig, 2008). Vaughn et al. (2000) discovered that many students struggle with reading fluently even after acquiring knowledge of the alphabetic principle. A lack of reading fluency is related to poor reading ability and comprehension problems (Hudson et al., 2005). When word recognition takes little cognitive capacity, the reader can focus on comprehending the text (Nathan & Stanovich, 1991). The ability to decode does not guarantee reading fluency (Vaughn et al., 2000 as cited in Oakley, 2005).
Vocabulary
Vocabulary is the understanding of words and their meanings (Honig, 2008). There are four parts of effective vocabulary programs: independent reading to increase word knowledge, specific word instruction to enhance comprehension of text, teaching independent word-learning strategies, and word consciousness to increase learning (Graves, 2000, as cited in Honig, 2008). Vocabulary is a building block for reading comprehension. According to Beck et al. (1982), unknown words in a text can create “gaps” in the meaning of a text. If there are too many gaps, students may have difficulties comprehending the text.
Comprehension
Reading comprehension is constructing meaning from a text (Honig, 2008). According to the RAND Reading Study Group, reading comprehension builds upon reading fluency, vocabulary knowledge, word knowledge, knowledge of comprehension strategies, and motivation (Perkins-Gough, 2002). Reading comprehension is not automatic, but interactive involving strategies that readers must use before, during and after reading a text (Honig, 2008). Good comprehension involves predicting, summarizing, clarifying what has been read, and asking questions to aid understanding (Lyon, 1998). Good comprehenders read for purpose and are active monitors of what they read and understand (Perkins-Gough, 2002).
Effective reading instruction does not solely rely on phonics instruction or memorizing sight words. When looking for a reading program, it is critical to make sure it consists of instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.
Sources:
Armbruster, B. B., Lehr, F., Osborn, J., National Inst. for Literacy, W. D., National Inst. of Child Health and Human Development, N. B., MD., Office of Educational Research and Improvement, E. W. D., & Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement, A. A. M. (2001). Put reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children To read. Kindergarten through grade 3.
Beck, I. L., Perfetti, C. A., & McKeown, M. G. (1982). Effects of long-term vocabulary instruction on lexical access and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(4), 506–521.
Ehri, L.C. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(2), 167–188.
Griffith, P. L., & Olson, M. W. (1992). Phonemic awareness helps beginning readers break the code. Reading Teacher, 45(7), 516-523.
Honig, B., Diamond, L., Gutlohn, L., & Cole, C. L. (2008). Teaching reading sourcebook (2nd ed.). Arena Press.
Hudson, R. F., Lane, H. B., & Pullen, P. C. (2005). Reading fluency assessment and instruction: What, why, and how? Reading Teacher, 58(8), 702–714.
Lindsey, J. B., Kuehl, R., & Mesmer, H. A. (2020). What’s hot in literacy? Phonics and phonemic awareness. Literacy Research, Practice and Evaluation.
Lyon, G. (1998). Why reading is not a natural process. Educational Leadership, 55(6), 14-18.
Nathan, R. G., & Stanovich, K. E. (1991). The causes and consequences of differences in reading fluency. Theory Into Practice, 30(3), 176.
National Reading Panel (U.S.) & National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (U.S.). (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: an evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
Oakley, G. (2005). Reading fluency as an outcome of a repertoire of interactive reading competencies: How to teach it to different types of dysfluent readers (and how ICT can help). New England Reading Association Journal, 41(1), 13–21.
Perkins-Gough, D. (2002). RAND Report on reading comprehension. Educational Leadership, 60(3), 92–N.
Vaughn, S., Chard, D. J., Pedrotty Bryant, D., Coleman, M., Tyler, B.-J., Linan-Thompson, S., & Kouzekanani, K. (2000). Fluency and comprehension interventions for third-grade students. Remedial and Special Education, 21(6), 325–335.
Comments