Abstract
The science of reading has long focused on how children learn to decode text, at the expense of listening and speaking skills. Yet research shows that proficient listening and speaking abilities, collectively known as oracy, form the critical foundation for reading comprehension and academic success. This paper reviews evidence on the vital role of oracy in literacy development and synthesizes best practices for systematically cultivating listening and speaking skills from an early age. It argues that restoring oracy as the cornerstone of language arts curricula can significantly improve reading outcomes and reduce achievement gaps. The paper concludes by proposing specific policy and pedagogical changes to reintegrate the lost arts of listening and speaking into primary education.
Introduction
The science of reading has advanced tremendously over the past 50 years, yielding robust insights into how children learn to read. Drawing from cognitive psychology, linguistics and education research, we now have a detailed picture of the component skills involved in proficient reading, and strong evidence for instructional methods that effectively teach these skills (Rayner et al., 2001; Snow & Juel, 2005). However, amid the focus on decoding, phonics and comprehension strategies, a critical aspect of literacy development has been relatively overlooked in reading research and instruction: listening and speaking abilities, known collectively as oracy.
Oracy provides the fundamental language basis for literacy development. To read proficiently, children must first possess solid oral language skills, including a rich vocabulary, grasp of syntax and grammar, and verbal reasoning ability (Sticht, 2016). Yet, while research has firmly established the importance of oracy to reading achievement, policies and curricula seldom reflect this connection. The emphasis remains heavily skewed toward reading skills, while presuming students have adequate listening and speaking abilities. This imbalance reflects a lost art of oracy in modern education.
The marginalization of oracy in literacy curricula is concerning for several reasons. First, declining oracy skills may be contributing to stagnant reading achievement, particularly for disadvantaged students. Second, diminished emphasis on speaking robs students of opportunities to think critically and develop ideas collaboratively. Finally, lack of listening instruction forfeits a proven means of improving comprehension. This paper synthesizes research on the role of oracy in literacy development and proposes changes to restore listening and speaking as cornerstones of reading instruction.
The Vital Role of Oracy in Literacy Development
The Simple View of Reading conceptualizes reading comprehension as the product of decoding skills and linguistic comprehension, which depends heavily on oral language (Gough & Tunmer, 1986; Hoover & Gough, 1990). Specifically, oral language provides the foundation for vocabulary knowledge, listening comprehension, syntactical skills, verbal reasoning and knowledge of pragmatics that enable understanding of text (Language and Reading Research Consortium, 2015).
Evidence for the critical role of oral language in reading comes from studies showing strong associations between preschool oral language abilities and later literacy achievement. Language skills like vocabulary size, grammatical knowledge and narrative abilities in preschool predict growth in reading comprehension and writing skills years later (Dickinson & McCabe, 2001; Roth, Speece & Cooper, 2002). Longitudinal studies also reveal that difficulties in oral language foreshadow future reading problems. Children with language delays or disabilities in preschool are far more likely to develop reading disabilities compared to peers (Snowling, Bishop & Stothard, 2000).
Oral language influences reading development because listening comprehension provides the scaffolding for understanding text. Strong listening skills enable children to utilize contextual and syntactic cues to decipher meaning from language. This linguistic comprehension then transfers to making sense of print when formal reading instruction begins. Students with language weaknesses struggle to use context to infer meaning when listening, and in turn have difficulty generating inferences critical for text comprehension. Moreover, deficits in vocabulary and background knowledge resulting from impoverished language environments further hinder reading progress (Walker, Greenwood, Hart & Carta, 1994).
In summary, oral language constitutes a vital foundation for building literacy skills. Well-developed listening and speaking abilities provide the bedrock for vocabulary growth, syntactic knowledge, verbal reasoning and grasping meaning from language that allow written words to make sense. Given the centrality of oracy to reading proficiency, you would expect curricula to devote substantial time to intentionally cultivating listening and speaking skills. Unfortunately, this is often not the case.
The Lost Art of Oracy in Modern Classrooms
Walk into many elementary classrooms today and you will see students spending the bulk of their day engaged in reading and writing activities. Time devoted explicitly to listening and speaking is strikingly minimal by comparison. The marginalization of oracy is also reflected in literacy curricula and assessments. The thrust of standards and tests is decoding skills, strategies for comprehending written passages, and writing mechanics. Speaking and listening are relegated to an afterthought, if addressed at all.
How did oracy become a lost art in reading instruction? The roots trace back to the influence of behaviorism in education, focus on discrete reading skills in response to literacy crises, and continued academic stratification by socioeconomic status (Mercer, Warwick & Ahmed, 2017). Teaching the mechanics of reading eclipsed concern for holistic language development. The persisting inequities in literacy outcomes, particularly along racial/ethnic lines, further concentrated remediation efforts on basic skills instruction. This entrenched a fragmented view of literacy as simply the sum of parts like phonics and comprehension techniques, rather than a complex process rooted in language.
Another contributor is an underappreciation of how much foundational language development occurs at home before children enter school. Families with abundant economic and educational resources engage young children in rich conversational interactions that build essential language skills. They read aloud to children, use advanced vocabulary, and model syntactically-complex language. These early experiences scaffold literacy learning long before formal schooling begins (Rowe, 2012). Children raised in disadvantaged environments often lack these early language interactions, and thus begin school at a substantial oral language deficit. Yet education policies focus narrowly on school-based reading instruction starting in kindergarten, rather than systemic language development from infancy.
Finally, increased use of digital devices has radically altered how children engage with language, further crowding out opportunities for rich interpersonal talk. Screen media expose children to far more passive as opposed to interactive language. Even when caregivers co-view with children, televisions shows elicit less adult-child verbal engagement compared to book reading (Mendelsohn et al., 2001). Passive screen viewing surpassing social interaction from an early age impedes language development essential for literacy.
In summary, the diminished role of oral language instruction in modern classrooms reflects a confluence of factors: legacy of behaviorist approaches to literacy, inequitable early language exposure, and effects of pervasive screen media. The upshot is an imbalanced curriculum that focuses intensely on reading mechanics while failing to lay the oral language foundation needed to make sense of text. The overlooked importance of oracy helps explain a central dilemma in literacy education - why intensive reading remediation frequently fails to yield lasting comprehension gains, particularly for disadvantaged students.
Evidence-Based Practices for Developing Oracy
Given the vital role of oral language in literacy development, what specific listening and speaking skills should schools intentionally cultivate? Research points to key interrelated components of oracy that provide a scaffold for reading comprehension: vocabulary knowledge, narrative abilities, grammatical skills, and verbal reasoning aptitudes (Hulit, Howard & Fahey, 2010). Here we review evidence-based practices for systematically building these foundational oracy skills.
Vocabulary: Robust vocabulary knowledge is one of the strongest predictors of reading achievement because it facilitates making meaning from text (Cain & Oakhill, 2011). Effective methods for expanding students' vocabulary include: frequent read alouds exposing children to new words in context; direct instruction of word meanings; requiring students to use new words in context; and teaching word-learning strategies like using contextual cues, morphology and etymology (Senechal, Oulette & Rodney, 2006; Wright & Neuman, 2013). Educators must also be mindful of pervasive vocabulary gaps along socioeconomic lines, using methods to identify and mitigate these inequities early (Gilkerson et al., 2017).
Narrative Skills: Learning to comprehend and construct meaningful narratives provides a bridge between oral language and understanding text (Clarke et al., 2010). Strong narrators learn to sequence events coherently, convey causal connections between plot points, and integrate complex syntax and vocabulary to build meaning. Effective approaches include modeling story grammar and complex language through read alouds; eliciting personal stories from students focused on temporal ordering; and teaching text structure strategies that strengthen reading comprehension (Spencer & Slocum, 2010).
Grammar: Knowing the syntactic rules of language facilitates both expression and comprehension. Yet grammatical instruction has declined, contributing to deficits in students' language knowledge (NCEE, 1983). Renewed explicit emphasis on grammar is needed, including morphologic analysis of word parts, the functions of phrases and clauses, and conventions for complex sentence formation (Bardovi-Harlig, 1992; NIPD, 2008). Syntax should be taught using engaging texts that illustrate grammatical principles in action.
Verbal Reasoning: Higher-order language skills like making inferences, understanding metaphors, and grasping intent and purpose underlie the transition from basic language comprehension to interpreting written text (Van Kleeck, 2008). Methods like asking open-ended questions, modeling think-alouds, and engaging students in collaborative dialogue build verbal reasoning essential for academically-oriented language use (Mercer & Dawes, 2014).
In addition to targeting these specific components, certain instructional principles maximally support oracy development: student-centered dialogue emphasizing conceptual language rather than display questions; cognitively-challenging talk requiring reasoning and analysis; scaffolding complex language through modeling; and building on students' cultural/linguistic backgrounds (Cazden, 2001; Flynn, 2016). Integrating these evidence-based practices systematically into curriculum from preschool onward can significantly strengthen oral language abilities that scaffold reading comprehension.
Conclusion: Restoring Oracy in Literacy Instruction
The science of reading has revealed much about how children develop skills to decipher text. However, unraveling the written code is only half the equation. Proficient reading equally depends on the language foundation that allows decoded words to have meaning. This linguistic bedrock is built through the lost arts of listening and speaking that ought to be pillars of primary literacy education.
Several policy and pedagogical changes could restore oracy to its essential place in reading instruction:
1) Literacy curricula need to be rebalanced to devote comparable time to intentionally building speaking and listening skills. Language arts standards must also dedicate equal emphasis to oracy.
2) Teacher training and professional development must include best practices for developing oral language across domains like vocabulary, narrative discourse, grammar and verbal reasoning.
3) Schools need to screen for oral language skills starting in preschool and provide additional language intervention for at-risk children.
4) Family involvement initiatives should educate parents, starting prenatally, on the importance of rich adult-child oral interaction for literacy success.
5) Given that language gaps manifest early, we need to rethink the late onset of formal reading instruction in kindergarten. Earlier cultivation of speech, vocabulary and comprehension in preschool may level the playing field.
The science of language leaves no doubt that listening and speaking provide the developmental soil from which literacy blooms. Reading is not a culture-free skill that can be installed in children simply by drilling phonics and activating prior knowledge. Rather, learning to read and write depends on a foundation of oral language experience that too many children lack. Restoring oracy as an essential cornerstone of literacy education can help remedy skill gaps and realize the promise of universal reading proficiency. But first, we must rediscover and revitalize the lost arts of listening and speaking.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you!