human development

Required Readings:

· Tracey & Morrow (2017): chapters 1-3 (pp. 3-54)

(Citation)

Tracey, D. H., & Morrow, L. M. (2017). Lenses on Reading (3rd ed.). Guilford Publications, Inc.. https://mbsdirect.vitalsource.com/books/9781462530663

· Statistics How To. (2016).  Quantitative Research vs. Qualitative .

C HA P T E R 1 Introduction to Theories and Models Questions to Consider before reading • What is the general definition of a theory? • Are people aware of the theories that they possess? • How is the term “theory” used in the field of education? • Why are theories important to educational practice? • Why are theories important to educational research? • How do theories compare and contrast with models? • What are the advantages of being able to consider life experiences, including those related to the field of reading, from multiple theoretical perspectives? Sara, a quiet, pretty 8-year-old, squirms uncomfortably in her chair, aware that all eyes are upon her. She stares at the words on the page, unable to utter a sound. At first, her classmates are courteous as they wait for her to respond, but then they grow impatient as her silence persists. The students themselves begin to squirm as they exchange knowing glances with each other: “Here we go again, waiting for Sara to read.” Ms. Brown, the classroom teacher, grows uncomfortable too. Was she wrong to call on Sara to read? Why hasn’t this child been able to keep up with her peers in reading? How can she, Ms. Brown, help Sara learn to read? This scene, all too common in the United States and throughout the world, depicts a fundamental concern of reading educators: how to help a child experiencing reading difficulties in the classroom. Even teachers of students not experiencing difficulties struggle with how best to promote their students’ literacy growth. Most classroom teachers use all of the materials and strategies at their disposal to help their students achieve. These include reading programs purchased by the school dis-trict, supplemental materials they personally collect, ideas adapted from conferences and workshops, approaches borrowed from professional development books, projects downloaded from the Internet, suggestions from their colleagues, and the like. As most educators will attest, a good classroom teacher will try almost anything to help a student succeed in reading. If, after all of a teacher’s best efforts, a student is still making insufficient progress, the teacher will turn to a reading specialist or a child study team in his or her school for help. At this point, increased diagnosis and a wider range of interventions are implemented. So goes the approach to most reading instruction in this country. The link between typical approaches to reading instruction and the content of this text lies in the ways in which classroom teachers, read-ing specialists, child study team professionals, and reading researchers think about which instructional approaches and assessments should be used in helping students progress in reading. What may not be immedi-ately apparent to these professionals, however, is that the ways in which they approach reading instruction and research are, to a large degree, driven by the theories that they hold regarding the ways in which chil-dren learn to read. Many educators are not consciously aware of the theories that drive their practices. Few classroom teachers can tell you which theories contribute to their instruction; even fewer would tell you that they care. For decades, the term “theory” has been associated with something only scholars who live and work in “ivory towers” need to know. This text seeks to convince educators that understanding the theo-ries that are related to reading instruction, and learning to link these theories to classroom practice, will strengthen both classroom instruc-tion and research. As a result of reading this text, we hope that educa-tors will better understand a full range of theoretical perspectives from which the reading process and reading development can be understood. Subsequently, we hope that deeper understanding of the reading process and reading development will enable educators to use a wider range of approaches when working with students and help teachers to more selectively decide which approaches should be used. Collectively, it is believed that this knowledge can lead to a greater ability to help stu-dents learn to read. Introduction to Theories and Models 3 WHAT IS A THEORY?: A GENERAL DEFINITION According to the American Heritage Dictionary (2007), a theory is “a set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted” (p. 1429). Theories are explanations that are grounded in belief systems usually supported by extensive research and databases, and often held by large groups of people. Competing theories are often studied, tested, and debated over long periods of time. Mertens (2010) wrote that “theories provide frameworks for thinking about the inter-relationships of constructs, and are more limited in scope than para-digms” (p. 8). There are theories to describe almost every phenomenon in life. One example of a phenomenon that can be examined theoretically is the question of life’s very beginning. A theory of the beginning of human life is the biblical version that God created humans in an instant in the form of Adam and Eve. This theory is known as creationism. A con-trasting theory for explaining the beginning of human life is evolution, which posits that humans evolved biologically in a gradual process over a very long period of time from lower ordered species. Large numbers of people subscribe to one or the other of these theories. With regard to daily life, theories are explanations that people turn to when they are trying to understand what has happened to them in the present or the past, or what might happen to them in the future. When individuals become ill, for example, some attribute the event to a spiri-tual theory (“it was meant to happen” or “it happened for a reason”), while others attribute it to a biological occurrence such as genetic pre-disposition, exposure to a particular germ, relationship with nutrition, or a mind–body connection. In general, people adopt particular theories and use them repeatedly throughout their lives to explain a wide variety of experiences. The theories then become the “lenses” through which individuals view the world. ARE PEOPLE AWARE OF THE THEORIES THAT THEY POSSESS? People may be conscious or unconscious of the theories that they use in daily living. When individuals are conscious of their theories, or belief systems, they are able to label them, think about them, talk about them with others, and compare their own theories with alternative ones. For example, a psychologist who applies a treatment based on a specific theory, such as Behaviorism, should be able to explain why he or she is using that treatment and theory instead of others. In contrast, when individuals are unconscious of their theories, they are unable to reflect on or talk about them. A mother who gives her child a treat when the child is well behaved but punishes the child when the child is poorly behaved is applying Behaviorism, even though she may be unaware of it. Importantly, regardless of whether or not individuals are conscious of the theories they use, the theories still operate and affect the ways in which all human beings see, think about, and respond to the world. In short, in all areas of life, people perceive the world through their theo-retical lenses, whether or not they are aware that these lenses exist. WHAT IS A THEORY?: A DEFINITION FOR EDUCATION In many scientific fields, including that of education, the concept of theory is frequently used. When the term “theory” is used in the field of education, it refers to a well-documented explanation for a phenom-enon related to teaching and/or learning. This explanation (i.e., theory) then becomes part of the body of content knowledge that constitutes the field. Educators have a multitude of theories that they can use to explain a wide variety of learning and teaching phenomena. In the field of education, theories are used to explain learning, motivation, memory, achievement, and intelligence, among other things. When a child has difficulty learning to read, for example, one theory (i.e., explanation) is that the cause is related to a cognitive problem. Other theories that might be used to explain the reading problem include theories of moti-vation, language, behavior, and/or social differences. THE IMPORTANCE OF THEORIES TO EDUCATIONAL PRACTICE As explained above, one of the most important reasons for understand-ing theories is that individuals’ theories are closely linked to their behav-iors and practices. Let’s return to the example above regarding ill health. An individual with a nutritional theory of health and illness would most likely seek healing differently than would an individual with a spiritual theory regarding health and illness. Similarly, in the opening example of ara, the child with a reading difficulty, a teacher who theorizes that the child’s reading problem is caused by auditory-and or visual-processing deficits would create different educational interventions for Sara than would a teacher whose theory of reading is centered in the concept of motivation. Thus, the link between theory and behavior is the central reason that knowledge of theories is essential for optimal classroom instruction. When teachers become aware of the full range of theories from which their educational practices can radiate, their repertoire of teaching skills can greatly expand. Similarly, when teachers understand the full range of theories from which instructional strategies stem, they can select those interventions that best suit the particular teaching situ-ation, thus optimizing the effectiveness of their instruction. A broad understanding of theories also allows educators to coordinate and pro-vide complementary instructional interventions from a wide variety of theoretical orientations. Hayes (1997), who conducts research with teachers, confirms that thinking related to educational theories does affect teachers’ practices. During instruction, teachers continually interpret the events surrounding their interactions with learners. . . . Their thinking concerns several vari-ables always present during instruction: learners, subject matter, materi-als, procedures, and time. . . . How teachers think about and deal with these matters ultimately depends on their overall orientation to teaching, as well as the structures of thinking and acting suggested for achieving their goals. . . . Thus, . . . classroom practice is never entirely neutral, but carries with it its own implicit theory of instruction. (p. 50) In short, “Teachers bring in their theories and beliefs when they plan for teaching and when they attempt to understand and interpret classroom events” (Hayes, p. 51). Coker and White (1993) reiterated this thought: “A generally accepted assumption is that whatever we do in the classroom results from our understanding regarding the nature of children and how they learn. Formally, this assumption is referred to as a theory of learning” (p. 77). ARE TEACHERS AWARE OF THE THEORIES THAT THEY POSSESS? Although the link between theory and behavior is always present, edu-cators, like members of the general public, are not always consciously L E N S E S ON R E A D I NG aware of the theories that guide their behaviors (Constas & Sternberg, 2006). While all teachers possess theories that drive their teaching, they may or may not be able to explicitly describe them. Constas and Stern-berg (2006) wrote, “All efforts to enhance learning are based, either implicitly or explicitly, on a theory of how the mind works and on how intellectual skills and abilities may be most effectively developed” (p. xi). Teachers with a firm grasp of educational and psychological theories have a clear basis for making instructional decisions. Their understand-ing of educational theory provides them with a foundation for under-standing why they are choosing the instructional practices that they use. Such theoretically based instructional decisions are linked to exemplary literacy instruction and improved literacy learning (Pressley, Allington, Wharton-McDonald, Block, & Morrow, 2001). Indeed, as Pressley et al. (2001) have found, highly effective, exemplary educators are able to articulate the relationships between what they do in the classroom and their theoretical reasons for doing so. In other words, highly effective teachers align their educational practices with their theoretical beliefs. Additionally, when teachers such as Pressley et al.’s exemplary educa-tors are able to make their instructional theories conscious, they can then discuss and reflect upon them. These discussions and reflections provide avenues for greater understanding of the relationships between educational theory and practice, and thus further facilitate instructional effectiveness. In contrast, teachers who are unaware of the theories that drive their instruction are often unable to provide a coherent explana-tion for why they choose one set of instructional procedures or mate-rials over another. Psychological and educational theories are not all complementary, and problems may arise when teachers use incompat-ible theoretically based practices. THE IMPORTANCE OF THEORIES TO EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Knowledge of educational theories is central to the work of educational researchers as well as to the work of educational practitioners. Ideally, all research studies have theoretical foundations. Eisenhart and Towne (2003) reported that linking research to relevant theory is one of the principals used to define high-quality, scientifically based research. The-ories are used as the basis for creating a research hypothesis, to generate research variables, to discuss research findings, and to link one study with another. Theories are then supported or not supported, proven or disproven, by the findings of research projects. The use of theories and models is also necessary for research publication. Theories are used to develop a research hypothesis. When research-ers are designing a research project, they consider a topic of interest to them to determine their research question or questions. Once the research question, or questions, has been determined, the researchers often make a prediction about what they think the outcome, or out-comes, of the study will be. For example, if a researcher is studying the relationship between preschool children’s television viewing and the use of subtitles, the researcher might predict that pairing subtitles with tele-vision viewing would be associated with improved rates of early literacy achievement. This prediction is the researcher’s hypothesis. However, the researcher also needs to state why he or she thinks that preschool-ers’ television viewing with subtitles will be associated with improved rates of early literacy achievement; this explanation is the researcher’s theory. In this particular example, the researcher might choose Emer-gent Literacy Theory as his or her theoretical framework to explain his or her hypothesis. In addition to providing a basis for hypotheses, theories allow research variables to be generated. Variables are “the conditions or char-acteristics that the experimenter manipulates, controls, or observes” (Best & Kahn, 2003, p. 162). Creswell (2002) noted that researchers often turn to theories to identify variables to be investigated and the possible relationships between them: “a theory explains and predicts the relationship between independent and dependent variables. . . . You might think about a theory as a bridge that connects the independent and dependent variables. Theories are no more than broad explanations for what we would expect to find when we relate variables” (p. 137). One example of the use of a theory to generate variables, and pos-sible relationships between them, is documented in the work of Tracey and Young (2002). These authors were interested in studying the ways in which mothers assist their children during their children’s oral read-ing practice at home. They knew that their research should be framed in a theoretical context. They decided to choose the theory of Social Con-structivism to frame their work. In this theoretical perspective, learn-ing is viewed as a result of social interactions between individuals, and oral language patterns are often studied as a way of illustrating these interactions. Tracey and Young then examined other studies that used a social constructivist perspective to see which specific variables had been previously found to be significant in similar parent–child research projects. The search yielded the identification of a number of variables, including a mother’s educational level, the sex of the child, and the child’s reading ability. Tracey and Young proceeded to use these variables to study mothers and children during children’s at-home oral reading prac-tice. When their study was finished, their research not only extended the current knowledge base regarding mothers’ helping behaviors during children’s reading, it helped affirm that the social constructivist theo-retical perspective, and variables generated from it, were useful tools in understanding parent–child dynamics in this specific reading situation. Theories are used to discuss the findings of research studies in the Discussion section of research papers. There authors reflect back on their research question or questions, their hypothesis or hypotheses, their findings, and whether or not their predictions, based on their chosen theory, were supported by their data. In evidence of the essen-tial role of theory throughout a manuscript, Anders, Yaden, Iddings, Katz, and Rogers (2014), editors of the prestigious Journal of Literacy Research, stated: The editorial board will be directed to look in particular for potential manuscripts that have a strong, coherent theory base that underlies the research topic presented and how that theory or conceptual framework is revisited throughout the manuscript to undergird the study or argument in focus with an intellectually satisfying, logically plausible and integrated flow of thought and explication. (p. 6) Theories also provide the frameworks through which various research studies can be linked both within and between fields of study. As stated previously, by definition, theories provide explanations that can be used to describe a variety of phenomena. Therefore, if a theory can be used to explain the research findings in study “A,” it may also be used to explain the findings in study “B,” thus linking the two stud-ies. Research that is theoretically linked to other research makes a more substantial contribution toward extending a knowledge base in any field than that which is not linked (Creswell, 2002). The development, support, or refutation of theories are the end goals of scientific research. To this point, Gay, Geoffrey, and Airasian (2006) commented that “[i]n its purest form, basic research is research conducted solely for the purpose of developing or refining a theory. The-ory development is a conceptual process that requires many research studies conducted over time”(p. 6). In recognition of the importance of theories to educational research, theoretical frameworks are required for the publication of articles in high-quality research journals and for most doctoral dissertations and master’s theses. Theories are central to educational publication because they are the concepts by which scholars explain their research. Research-ers use theories as explanations for why they expect something will happen in their studies (their hypotheses) as well as why they believe something did happen (their Discussion). Anders, Yaden, Iddings, Katz, and Rogers (2016) emphasized the central role of theory in research publication: If we as Journal of Literacy Research (JLR) editors were to summarize the number one concern of our review board regarding the nearly 600 manuscripts, which have been submitted during our term, it would be the need for literacy researchers to more clearly explicate the conceptual foundations of the theories invoked and subsequent impact of those theo-retical frameworks upon design, analysis, and interpretation of the studies conducted. (p. 3) Just as there is no single correct theory or model for practitioners to use when engaging in classroom practice, there is no correct single the-ory or model for a researcher to use when framing his or her research. Researchers can choose from a wide variety of theoretical perspectives when situating their studies, and in fact, though this is rarely done, they can simultaneously present their research from multiple theoreti-cal viewpoints. The important point here is that, like practitioners, researchers benefit from an awareness of the broad and diverse choice of theories that are available to them. Just as theories provide orienting frameworks for teachers’ practices, theories provide orienting frame-works for researchers’ investigations. The more aware researchers are of the value of theoretical orientations to high-quality research, the more likely they will be to learn about and use theories in their work. IS A MODEL DIFFERENT FROM A THEORY? Although both theories and models strive to provide explanations for phenomena, there appears to be disagreement in the field of education with regard to whether or not the terms “theory” and “model” can be used interchangeably (Kezar, 2001). “Model and theory,” Kezar stated, “are not necessarily interchangeable words, although many scholars use them as such. In fact, theory suggests abstract contemplation or insight, whereas model connotes a set of plans or procedures” (p. 26). Tracey, Storer, and Kazerounian (2010) contrasted theories with two kinds of models. They begin by presenting theories as “narrative descriptions” that “do not attempt to create graphic depictions, com-puter simulations, or hypotheses of neural correlates of cognition” (p. 109). They noted that, historically, the earliest and most predomi-nant theories of traditional literacy have been narrative in nature. The primary reason for the historic popularity of narrative models is that only in the past few decades have researchers had the technological capabilities to begin to consider the process of reading from computa-tional and neuroimaging perspectives. Tracey et al. added that narrative theories are popular because there is no expectation that theo-rists will create computer simulations or neuroimaging data to support their hypotheses. The absence of the constraints to produce computational simulations or neural evidence to support hypotheses frees theorists to contemplate the cognitive processing of literacy in an almost unbounded manner, a highly appealing position from which to work. (p. 110) Tracey et al. then contrasted the concepts of theories with “box and pointer” models. In contrast to narrative descriptions of cognition processing, box and pointer models present diagrams or flowcharts designed to differenti-ate between types of processing and/or processors within the brain and are therefore valuable for visualizing cognitive processing. Like narrative descriptions, box and pointer models share the unbounded advantage of not requiring computer architecture or neuroimaging data to support their positions, and are further strengthened by the addition of a graphic organizer. Also like narrative theories, these perspectives can yield infer-ential explanations for biological phenomena. (pp. 112–113) Next, Tracey et al. (2010) contrasted box and pointer models with computational models: Computational models strive to quantitatively reflect cognitive process-ing. Details of computational frameworks may be inspired by, or designed to mimic, actual biological systems. The importance of computational models of cognitive processing is that they begin to specify what sorts of predictions can be made regarding human performance on any particular task. A correct computational model of cognitive processes can provide a process, reading development, reading disability, and reading instruc-tion) observed in our field. Rather, he suggested that “the search for a single model of reading has been supplanted by recognition of the worth of multiple models of different reading and writing experiences” (p. 1163). Many authors concur with this perspective. Woolfolk (1998) wrote: “Few theories explain and predict perfectly. . . . Because no one theory offers all the answers, it makes sense to consider what each has to offer” (p. 16). Schoenfeld (2006) added: There is a tendency in the field toward grand (and almost always unsub-stantiated) theories and claims for them. This happens consistently at the “big theory” level. The behaviorists, constructivists, cognitive scientists, and sociocultural theorists all claim to explain everything . . . the fact is that most of the theories have “applicability conditions”; they only apply some of the time and the trick is to figure out when. . . . The serious job of theory refinement is to say how well a theory works in which conditions. (p. 22) M. Siegel (personal communication, February 1, 2011) noted the importance of recognizing the shift of valuing multiple perspectives as recent. I think it would be helpful to point out that approaching educational problems from multiple theoretic lenses is a rather recent idea. When I entered the profession in the late 1970s, theories were regarded as a way to account for a particular phenomenon and although there were categories of theories (e.g., information processing, psycholinguistic), it was gener-ally believed that putting forth a new theory was an attempt to supplant an existing theory. In other words, this was a value-laden undertaking, and not one in which all theories were considered equal in their explana-tory power. In fact, I believe the so-called “reading wars” were debates over which theory was the “correct” one to guide decisions about how to teach reading. . . . I would argue that the recent shift toward “multiple perspectives” reflects the postmodern turn the social sciences took in the late 20th century. Authors who believe in the importance of multiple lenses argue that each theory makes a unique and valuable contribution to understanding the phenomena under examination. A metaphor of a group of artists all painting the same scene can be used to explain the benefit of multiple perspectives. In the painting metaphor, each piece of artwork will be different—for example, some painted in a realistic style, whereas others adopted an impressionist or an abstract style. Yet each artist will pro-vide a unique way of viewing the scene at hand. The same is true regard-ing educational theories and models that aim to explain an educational issue: each of the theories and models provides a unique and valuable view on the topic. It is important to note that the value of multiple lenses has different implications for classroom practitioners versus educational researchers. As stated above, a wide array of theories and models is available to classroom practitioners. Good practice can be grounded in multiple the-oretical frameworks. For example, an effective teacher may sometimes use practices grounded in a behavioral perspective and other times may use practices based on constructivist, cognitive, or motivational frame-works. For classroom teachers, multiple lenses often coexist and comple-ment each other in their teaching. In contrast, researchers who need to situate their study in a theoretical framework typically choose a single perspective from the many perspectives that are available. Although it is possible for researchers to use multiple theoretical perspectives in their work, most often they do not. As Brumbaugh and Lawrence (1985) wrote, researchers typically choose the theory or model “that is most relevant to the problems and aims at hand” (p. 22). Additionally, many researchers have a particular affinity for one theory as an explanation of their work rather than another. Indeed, as Thomas (1996) stated, “data can assume quite different meanings when different theories are used for organizing the facts” (p. 11). The use of multiple lenses is also seen in classroom application activities and teaching anecdotes illustrating each of the theories in this book. Importantly, many of these teaching ideas can be used to reflect multiple theories. For example, the popular practice of brainstorming a web with students prior to reading can be used to illustrate a classroom application activity reflective of Associationism, Connectionism, and/ or Schema Theory. Thus, the reader is urged to maintain an open and flexible stance when reading this volume. The ability to see the ways in which classroom practices are reflective of many theories strengthens the mind of the reader and underscores the primary premise of this text: the value of multiple perspectives in improving literacy education. THEORIES AND MODELS INCLUDED IN THIS TEXT Adding to the already described complexity of reading theories and models is the diversity of the fields that have generated information related to this topic. As described in this book’s Preface, theories and models with implications for reading instruction and research do not have their own unique history. Rather, the theories and models that have impacted our field originated in diverse content areas, including general education, psychology, sociology, linguistics, and neuroscience, to name a few. Additionally, there are many variations to basic theories that then yield new theories (Thomas, 1996). In this text we have sought to identify the theories and models that have great significance for the field of reading. Using some of the criteria listed above, we have included theories and models that have attracted much scholarly attention throughout time, those that have most impacted instruction and/or research, and those that have steered the field in a new direction. As stated in the Preface, a great deal of thought has been given to which theories and models to include in the text and how they should be organized. The result of this is a text that is semi-historically organized according to the authors, editors, and reviewers’ perceptions. Following a great deal of deliberation, the authors, edi-tors, and reviewers of this volume have concluded that there is no single correct or incorrect way to organize the theories that have impacted the study of reading, nor is there a black-and-white line dividing those theories that should be included in a volume such as this and those that should be omitted. Even the dates attached to the emergence of the theories in this work are approximate. Despite the chapter titles and accompanying time frames used to organize this text, readers should be aware that the emergence and development of the actual theories and models that have influenced the field of reading have been greatly affected by each other. Ultimately, the lines drawn between the chapters of this text are primarily abstract and are presented to illuminate the differences between each theoretical perspective. In reality, all the theo-ries are influenced by those theories that preceded them and with which they coexist. The lines of separation and distinction are not nearly as clear as the organization of this text suggests. As the Buddhists would say, in reality all is one. SUMMARY A theory is an explanation for a phenomenon that is widely held by a large group of people. In the field of education, the term “theory” refers to explanations of learning and teaching phenomena that have been developed over long periods of time, following intensive research and writing efforts. While some writers use the terms “theories” and “mod-els” interchangeably, others suggest that models serve as a metaphor to explain and represent theories. Theories and models are held con-sciously and unconsciously by all individuals. Whether held consciously or unconsciously, theories shape individuals’ behavior in all areas of life, including teaching and research. Knowledge of theories and models provides a necessary foundation for coordinated and cohesive instructional activities. In the absence of a strong theoretical basis, educators use teaching techniques without a clear understanding of how or why they may be effective. With a con-scious knowledge of theories, teachers can make more clearly informed decisions regarding how and why their literacy instruction is choreo-graphed. The better that educators understand the variety of theories and models that can be applied to literacy learning situations, the more effectively they can design and implement high-quality literacy instruc-tion. For researchers, theories and models provide explanations for research hypotheses, a guide for selecting research variables, and a framework for discussing research findings. Furthermore, theories pro-vide the link for understanding connections between research studies. Research studies are used to support, refute, prove, and disprove theo-ries. Theories are essential for research publication. Just as there is no single correct theory or model for practitioners, there is no single correct theory or model for a researcher. The use of multiple theoretical lenses for examining the reading process, reading instruction, and reading research is presented as historically recent and ideal. IDEAS FOR DISCUSSION • What is the general definition of a theory? • Are people aware of the theories that they possess? • How is the term “theory” used in the field of education? • Why are theories important to educational practice? • Why are theories important to educational research? • How do theories compare with models? • What are the advantages of being able to consider life experiences, including those related to the field of reading, from multiple theoretical perspectives? Alpha Boxes. Alpha Boxes is a postreading strategy that can be used to enhance readers’ comprehension of text. As presented by L’Allier and Elish-Piper (2007), readers are asked to create a list of concepts, examples, strate-gies, and/or connections from the assigned reading (e.g., the present chap-ter) that correspond to each letter of the alphabet. L’Allier and Elish-Piper write: “Because learners must identify at least one idea related to each letter of the alphabet, they are required to move beyond the first few thoughts that pop into their heads to those that require deeper thinking, revisiting the text, and connecting to prior knowledge and experience to the text” (p. 339). Readers’ responses to the Alpha Boxes exercise for Chapter 1 can be shared in small groups or with the whole class. Alpha Boxes. Alpha Boxes is a postreading strategy that can be used to enhance readers’ comprehension of text. As presented by L’Allier and Elish-Piper (2007), readers are asked to create a list of concepts, examples, strate-gies, and/or connections from the assigned reading (e.g., the present chap-ter) that correspond to each letter of the alphabet. L’Allier and Elish-Piper write: “Because learners must identify at least one idea related to each letter of the alphabet, they are required to move beyond the first few thoughts that pop into their heads to those that require deeper thinking, revisiting the text, and connecting to prior knowledge and experience to the text” (p. 339). Readers’ responses to the Alpha Boxes exercise for Chapter 1 can be shared in small groups or with the whole class.

Chpt 2

Early Lenses (400 B.C.E.–Present) Questions to Consider before reading • What were the earliest historical theories to affect the field of reading? • How do the earliest historical theories related to reading affect current classroom instruction? • How do the earliest historical theories related to reading affect current research in reading? The history of theories and models related to reading is entwined with the history of general theories that have affected education and psychol-ogy. Multiple sources on the topic suggest that the following theories and models have been central in providing the earliest foundation (prior to the 20th century) for current thinking in education: Mental Disci-pline Theory, Associationism, Unfoldment Theory, and Structuralism (Buckingham & Finger, 1997; Schwartz & Robbins, 1995; Sternberg, 1996). The present chapter provides information regarding the earliest theoretical foundations related to education and examines the role of these theories in modern-day literacy instruction and research. In this chapter, as in all other chapters of this book, the theories are illustrated by discussions of current literacy instructional practices associated with them. Additionally, the theories are linked to classroom anecdotes writ-ten by practicing teachers. The purpose of the anecdotes is to apply the use of the theory to teachers’ real-life classroom experiences. Finally, each theory is discussed in relation to current literacy research topics and studies. GENERAL HISTORY OF READING AND WRITING (20,000 B.C.E.–400 B.C.E.) The history of theories and models related to reading is embedded within the history of reading and writing in general. Cobb and Kallus (2011) and Kallus and Ratliff (2011) provided a synopsis and timeline. The earliest known logographic communication is cave writing from approximately 20,000 B.C.E. found in France. Cuneiform was used in record keeping in Mesopotamia between 3600 and 3100 B.C.E. In approximately 2000 B.C.E. the Phoenician alphabet emerged, and in approximately 1000 B.C.E. the Egyptians began to use papyrus, an early form of paper. The first significant works of literature in Greek cul-ture, Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, were written around 850 B.C.E., and in approximately 750 B.C.E. the Greeks revised the Phoenician alphabet to include both consonants and vowels. The earliest significant theories affecting education and psychology emerged around 400 B.C.E. MENTAL DISCIPLINE THEORY Mental Discipline Theory was the first major historical theory to pro-vide a foundation for the field of education. The roots of this theory can be traced to the writings of Plato (ca. 428–347 B.C.E.) and Aristo-tle (384–322 B.C.E.). Both Plato and Aristotle lived in ancient Greece, usually considered by historians to be “the birthplace of Western civi-lization.” Although Homer and many other early thinkers of ancient Greece used myths to understand the universe, philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle (as well as Socrates and Isocrates) sought to explain the universe in rational terms (Gutek, 1972). Among his many writings on a variety of subjects, Plato developed a theory, later elaborated by Aristotle, that the mind is like a muscle—its various parts, or faculties, need to be exercised regularly (e.g., through the repetitive reciting of texts) in order to become strong and function optimally. This idea finds a modern form in Mental Discipline Theory. Bigge and Shermis (1992) summarize the highlights of this learning theory: The central idea in mental discipline is that the mind, envisioned as a nonphysical substance, lies dormant until it is exercised. Faculties of the mind such as memory, will, reason, and perseverance are the “muscles of the mind”; like physiological muscles, they are strengthened only through exercise, and subsequent to their adequate exercise they operate Early Lenses 19 automatically. Thus, learning is a matter of strengthening, or disciplining, the faculties of the mind, which combine to produce intelligent behavior. (p. 21) Historically, adherence to Mental Discipline Theory results in instruction grounded in practice, drill, and rote memorization (Coker & White, 1993). Advocates of this theory also view the curriculum as a series of skills that can be sequentially organized from the easiest to the most complex (Coker & White, 1993). Brumbaugh and Lawrence (1963), historians of educational theory, wrote that “Plato’s dialogues, because of their extraordinary quality of raising the right questions and identifying the important ideas rel-evant to their answers, have had more impact and influence on West-ern philosophy and Western educational theory than any other writings in these fields” (p. 10). As Brumbaugh and Lawrence suggested, Men-tal Discipline Theory is an example of Plato and Aristotle’s work that has widely permeated the educational and psychological literature for approximately 2,500 years. Most educators will readily agree with the notion that students’ minds are like muscles that need to be exercised and strengthened in order to develop and grow. Below, one classroom teacher describes how she relates Mental Discipline Theory to her cur-rent classroom teaching. Plato (ca. 429–347 B.C.E.). Copyright © Marie-Lan Nguyen/Wikimedia Commons. Teacher’s Anecdote: Mental Discipline Theory In listening in class and writing this paper, I began to think of how some of these theories relate to my classroom experiences. Mental Dis-cipline, the theory of exercising the mind, jumped right out at me. I was immediately brought back to the first day of school in September. I teach first grade, but those first few weeks of school in September are like teaching kindergarten again! I have to reteach many of the chil-dren how to write their letters and names again. It is as if their minds have been asleep, or have not exercised at all, during the two months of summer vacation. Probably for the same reason, I find myself having to reteach other concepts after long vacations such as Christmas and Easter. It is amazing to think that an educational theory from more than 2,000 years ago can still be applicable in my classroom. —Johannah RogeRs, first-grade teacher ASSOCIATIONISM A second educational and psychological theory that dates back to ancient times but that is still reflected in current educational practice is Associationism. Associationism is a theory of psychology and edu-cation devoted to the study of how learning occurs. Sternberg (1996) wrote: “Associationism examines how events or ideas can become asso-ciated with one another in the mind, to result in a form of learning” (p. 9). Horowitz (2000, p. 275) added: “From an associationist view-point, knowledge itself is believed to be acquired mainly through the establishment of associational connections.” In a seminal writing on the topic, Warren (1916, p. 208) observed that “[t]he notion that one idea or memory image follows another according to certain, definite principles was the first step toward a general theory of associationism among men-tal states. This fundamental notion is found first, and in quite definitive form, in the writings of Aristotle (B.C.E. 384–322).” Aristotle speculated about three kinds of connections that aid mem-ory and learning (Sternberg, 1996). His first type of association that Aristotle identified as increasing learning is contiguity, the idea that things that occur together in time or space tend to become associated in the mind. For example, brushing one’s teeth, taking a shower, get-ting dressed, and having breakfast are all ideas that are associated with things we do early in the morning. Aristotle’s second type is similarity, the idea that people tend to associate things that have similar features and properties. For example, if a person were trying to remember a list of grocery items, one good approach would be to organize the items according to similar categories, such as dairy, produce, breads, and meats. The third type is contrast. Contrast is association by opposition, such as the associations that exist between the words light–dark, high–low, and happy–sad. Warren (1916) continued: Aristotle’s systematic investigation of the whole realm of things knowable led him to examine mental facts quite as thoroughly as physical phenom-ena, and to employ for this purpose considerable self-observation. In the course of his study he noticed that the links in chains of thought which end in the recollection of particular facts succeed one another more or less systematically and he believed that he had discovered the principles of their connection. Only three sorts of relationship, he affirms, are involved in the succession of thoughts: similarity, contrast, and contiguity. (p. 209) Summarizing these concepts and underscoring the importance of Aristotle’s contributions to modern Associationism, Buckingham and Finger (1997) stated: All of the basic ingredients of modern associationism can be found in Aristotle’s ‘De memoria et reminiscentia’: (1) knowledge derived from experiences; (2) the importance of custom, habit, or frequency of presen-tation; (3) associative links forged by similarity; and (4) associative links forged by opposition. (p. 24) Mental Discipline Theory and Associationism retained their promi-nence in educational thought for an unprecedented, and still unequaled, period of time. These were the reigning educational theories throughout the Hellenistic Age, the Age of the Roman Empire, and the Middle Ages (Gutek, 1972). They retained their prominence throughout the period of the European Renaissance, an historical era often called the beginning of modern thought, and the period of the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century (Bigge & Shermis, 1992; Gutek, 1972; Sternberg, 1996). Although alternative philosophies regarding general living were put forth during these times (for additional information on this topic, see Gutek, 1972), Mental Discipline Theory and Associationism remained premier regarding education and learning. In retrospect, these two the-ories persisted as the predominant theories of education and learning for approximately 2,000 years, from the time of Plato (ca. 428 B.C.E.) and Aristotle (384–322 B.C.E.) until the 17th century. One of the most well-known, and relatively modern, associationists was John Locke (1632–1704), who wrote An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Locke directly challenged Mental Discipline Theory with his Tabula Rasa—“Blank Tablet”—Theory. This theory suggests that people are born without any internal, innate knowledge. In Tabula Rasa Theory, all learning is a consequence of the individual’s interac-tions with the environment, especially sensory interactions. Locke also advocated that “humans can expand upon their experiences by the active process of ‘reflection’—sensations and reflections being ‘the only originals from whence all our ideas take their beginnings’ ” Bucking-ham and Finger (1997) also pointed out the importance of sensations and the reflection process for Locke. Locke’s work has been credited as a turning point in professional thinking about learning in that, as a result of his theory, attention was turned away from an emphasis on innate knowledge (e.g., the faculties of the mind that needed to be strengthened) and toward external influences on learning (Brumbaugh & Lawrence, 1985). Although Aristotle focused on internal connec-tions needed for learning to occur and Locke stressed the importance of external information in learning, both philosophers are considered associationists because their primary interest was in how knowledge is constructed through connections in the mind. In emphasizing Locke’s contributions to Associationism, Brumbaugh and Lawrence (1985) wrote that “Locke’s work may be fairly regarded as a foundation block, if not the cornerstone, of associationist psychology” (p. 16). Comment-ing on the importance of Associationism in general, Sternberg (1996) wrote: “traveling forward in time, Associationism laid the groundwork for behaviorism and for models of cognition based on mental connec-tions” (p. 9). Similarly, Shanks (2007) noted that Associationism is still “the dominant framework for understanding many basic learning pro-cesses” (p. 295). Teachers’ Anecdotes: Associationism Building on or retrieving prior knowledge is very important in many of my classes because so many students do not have many real-life experiences they can connect to in order to understand the texts we read. For example, several years ago I was going to read a story about a family that was involved in an avalanche on a skiing trip. I first asked students if anyone had ever been skiing. No one had. I then asked if they knew anything about avalanches; they did not. I proceeded to photocopy some newspaper articles about skiing and avalanches to share with the class. We also talked about being stuck in the house during a snowstorm. Although being stuck in one’s house during a snowstorm is not the same as being caught in a house at a ski resort during an avalanche, I felt they could make the connection because in both instances the house is surrounded by snow and the same items are needed to survive. . . . I believe that making connections is one of the most important concepts in reading because a text is meaningful only when students can relate to it. —Melissa a. hudanish, high school English teacher My students are severely cognitively delayed with visual impairment and rely on input from their environment to give them information so that they can learn. One example of how I apply both Associationism and the Tabula Rasa—“Blank Tablet”—Theory in my classroom is during our daily language activity. At this time, I introduce each story by using a book box. This book box is filled with artifacts that relate to the story on a multitude of levels. For example, I recently intro-duced the book Charlotte’s Web, by E. B. White. I wanted to give my students the opportunity to relate to the barn, what it smells like, and what noises are present inside. I provided the students with the sounds of specific animals mentioned in the story along with many tactile props such as hay and grass so that the children could use multiple senses to enhance their comprehension. I also provided them with dif-ferent animal figurines so they could use their sense of touch to “see” the animals. —ChRistine KoReCKi-diaz, special education teacher UNFOLDMENT THEORY In the realm of educational theory, the first serious challenge to Mental Discipline Theory and Associationism came with Unfoldment Theory (Dupuis, 1985; Gutek, 1972). In contrast to Mental Discipline Theory, in which the attributes of the mind must be strengthened through dis-ciplined efforts, and to Associationism, which attempts to explain how learning occurs through connections, beginning in the 18th century sev-eral theorists suggested that learning was most facilitated through a nat-ural unfolding of the mind based on individual curiosity and interest. This shift in educational philosophy mirrored the shift in social philoso-phy occurring at the same time (Gutek, 1972). Although the dominant approach in the Age of the Enlightenment continued to be the cultiva-tion of rational thought through mental discipline, some thinkers in this period began to advocate cultivating feeling and passion through the development of a natural unfolding of personal interests. This pointed the way to a new period now called Romanticism (Gutek, 1972). Rousseau (1712–1778), one of the earliest educational theorists to hold the Unfoldment perspective, postulated that children’s learn-ing would evolve naturally as a result of their innate curiosity. He was very critical of the educational system of his time that did not recognize the importance of interest and passion in learning (Jonas, 2010). Rous-seau is best known for his educational novel Emile (1762). In this book, Emile, a young boy, is raised in nature, away from the evils of society, and allowed to follow his own curiosities and interests. Emile develops into an adult of high moral character and goodness as a result of his unique upbringing. Rousseau was also an advocate of self-mastery, and viewed per-sonal challenges and suffering as opportunities for personal growth. Jonas (2010), in describing Rousseau’s position, states: The goal is not to see the end of suffering but to see the increase of self-mastery, which necessarily includes hardship and difficulty. This is essential to the students’ growth as moral individuals. As the tutor says to Emile: “my child, there is no happiness without courage nor virtue without struggle.” The word virtue comes from strength. Strength is the foundation of all virtue. (p. 52) Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778). Rousseau argued in Emile, in accordance with Unfoldment The-ory, that educators should follow children’s leads regarding what and when they want to learn. If, Rousseau insisted, children are forced to learn information that is of no interested to them, their learning will be impeded. He also stated that adults should intervene as little as possible in children’s education and instead just let children “unfold” (Morrow, Tracey, & Del Nero, 2011). He firmly believed that children’s verbal abilities would be developed as a result of extended and enriched expe-riences with manipulatives (Brumbaugh & Lawrence, 1963). Shannon (1990) noted that Rousseau recommended postponing reading and writ-ing instruction until children were 10–15 years old because he believed so strongly in the idea that nature should be at the center of children’s learning. With regard to Rousseau’s ultimate influence on modern-day edu-cation, Gutek (1972) wrote that “it is no exaggeration to state that Rousseau had an impact on some of the twentieth-century progressive educators who asserted that educations should be based on the inter-ests and inclinations of the child” (p. 146). Similarly, Douglass (2011) described Rousseau as “one of the most written about figures in the history of ideas” (p. 210). Johan Pestalozzi (1746–1827), a Swiss educational reformer, was greatly influenced by Rousseau’s beliefs concerning natural learning but felt that in addition to “natural unfolding” children needed informal instruction from adults to facilitate their learning. Using these ideas, Pestalozzi created a philosophy of child-centered learning and built two schools to implement his ideas. At the core of his version of Unfoldment Theory was the belief that, for an educational environment to be effec-tive, it must also be warm and nurturing. In Pestalozzi’s school, the positive affective climate and the engaging physical environment were designed to stimulate children’s natural curiosity for learning. In addi-tion, teachers provided instruction based on children’s learning inter-ests. Pestalozzi’s schools were also recognized for their heavy emphasis on sensory manipulative experiences as foundational for educational growth (McKenna, 2010). McKenna wrote that Pestalozzi believed that children learn “through the head, the hand, and the heart” (p. 123). Furthermore, Pestalozzi believed that “appreciation and love of those we educate is critical” (McKenna, 2010, p. 123). According to McK-enna (2010), “Pestalozzi also insisted on no violence in schooling which, at the time, was an incredibly novel concept. Corporeal punishment was not tolerated and children learned to resolve issues with dialogue and empathy rather than physical force” (p. 124). According to Smith (1986), author of the seminal text American Reading Instruction, which traces the historical development of reading instruction in the United States, Pestalozzi’s influence most likely contributed to the use of familiar objects, pictures, and storylines in early reading materials. As McKenna (2010) summarized, “Johann Pestalozzi’s philosophies and writing on child rearing and educational practice constitute a major influence on modern educational thought throughout the western world” (p. 121). After Pestalozzi’s death in 1827, his ideas and methods were car-ried on and developed by disciples in both North America and Europe. Friedrich Froebel (1782–1852), one of these disciples, emphasized the importance of play in the development of young children’s learning (Morrow et al., 2011). Froebel’s version of Unfoldment Theory both evolved from, and differed from, those of his predecessors Rousseau and Pestalozzi. Like Rousseau, Froebel believed that the adult responsible for the edu-cation of a child needs to be concerned with the child’s natural unfold-ing. He also followed Pestalozzi’s ideas and provided plans for instructing young children. But he is best known for emphasizing the importance of play in learning. He specified, however, that realizing the fullest benefits of playing-to-learn required adult guidance and direction and a planned environment. Froebel saw the teacher as a designer of activities and expe-riences that facilitate learning. . . . It was Froebel who coined the word kindergarten which means children’s garden. (Morrow, 2001, p. 4) The major Unfoldment theorists (Rousseau, Pestalozzi, and Froe-bel) laid the groundwork for John Dewey’s work (see Chapter 4) that came to the forefront of U.S. education in the early 1900s. This theo-retical orientation also influenced many U.S. schools during the early 1900s to build their reading instruction programs based on children’s interests and the use of activities and problem solving as instruments for learning (Smith, 1986). Teacher’s Anecdote: Unfoldment Theory Rousseau, Pestalozzi, and Froebel developed the Unfoldment Theory in the 1700s and early 1800s. I strongly agree with their beliefs of hav-ing children be interested in what they are learning as well as having a stimulating environment. As a special education teacher, my first year of teaching was very difficult for me. I had students with three to four levels of abilities in my classroom, and some of my students had severe behavior problems. I quickly found out that one of the things that my students loved to do was to eat. I then created an environment that built on this interest. One weekend I went to 10 different restaurants in the neighborhood and gathered menus. With the help of my students, I used the back of the classroom to create a restaurant atmosphere including a table, chairs, plastic silverware, and paper products. Dur-ing class, we learned to read the menus including appetizers, entrees, sandwiches, and desserts. At center time, the students were able to “play” in the restaurant area using all of the props. They would read the menus and take orders on small pads. Monopoly money was used to pay for meals. On special occasions, I would bring some of the items from the menus to class. I found that my students were engaged while working/playing in this environment. I think it is because of the com-ponents of the Unfoldment Theory—creating an exciting environment and focusing on play and natural development—that my students were happy and well behaved during this time of the day. I am quite sure that they were learning during this time as well. —aMy sMith, seventh-grade special education teacher STRUCTURALISM AND EARLY SCIENTIFIC FOUNDATIONS OF READING Mental Discipline Theory, Associationism, and Unfoldment Theory were developed as nonexperimental, general philosophies that would apply to all areas of education. In contrast, the historical roots of the specific study of reading were embedded within the early history of cog-nitive psychology, which was situated within an experimental, structur-alist theoretical framework. Structuralism, which is usually thought of as the first major school in psychology, sought to explain the structure of the mind through the study of perception (Jones & Elcock, 2001). Thus, reading was first studied through perception research designed to explain general psychological functioning rather than to explain read-ing in and of itself (Venezky, 1984). Venezky (1984) summarized the early history of reading research. Early studies of reading took place within the world’s first experimental psychology laboratory, established in the late 1870s in Leipzig, Ger-many, by Wilhelm Wundt (1832–1920), a German psychologist asso-ciated with the structuralist perspective. J. M. Cattell, an American student and Wundt’s assistant (Richards, 2009), pursued the study of perceptual processes by investigating aspects of the reading process such as letter and word recognition, legibility of print, and span of attention. According to Venezky, two seminal research findings, based on work conducted in Wundt’s laboratory, were reported by Cattell (1886, 1890). In his research, Cattell demonstrated that subjects’ speed for reading words connected in sentences was faster than their speed for reading disconnected words and that, similarly, subjects’ speed for read-ing letters connected in words was faster than their speed for reading disconnected letters. Unfortunately, these findings were not investigated or fully understood until the 1950s. At the same time that Wundt and Cattell were investigating per-ceptual processes in Germany in the late 1870s and early 1880s, Louis Èmile Javal was conducting early reading research by studying eye movements at the University of Paris (Roper-Hall, 2007). Javal, a pro-lific researcher in orthoptics, is known as the “father of orthoptics” (Roper-Hall, 2007, p. 131). One of his major research contributions was identifying and naming the “saccade,” the phenomenon that eye move-ments during reading occur in small jumps that are often not completely smooth, progressive, or linear. Prior to this research, eye movements were presumed to be steady, continuous, and flowing during the reading process. Ironically, Javal lost his sight later in life as a result of glaucoma (Roper-Hall, 2007). Early contributions to the beginnings of a cognitive processing theoretical orientation to reading continued in the late 1800s and early 1900s. According to Venezky (1984), three major summaries in cogni-tive processing theory, often referred to as psychology of reading, were published during this period. Johan Quantz (1897) was the first to iden-tify the concept of “eye–voice span,” the time lapse between the eyes’ exposure to print and the subjects’ enunciation of what he or she is read-ing. Dearborn’s (1906) doctoral dissertation examined eye movements during reading. Huey’s (1908/1968) book The Psychology and Peda-gogy of Reading examined perception, reading rate, subvocalization, the nature of meaning, and the history of reading and reading instruc-tion. Hiebert and Raphael (1996) summarized the advances made dur-ing the Structuralist period of reading research: From the late 1800s through the early 1900s, psychologists focused on reading as a perceptual process, primarily measuring perception of print (i.e., single letters, words) through reaction time studies, or focused on areas such as eye–voice span, speed of reading, and lip movements during silent reading (see Venezky, 1984, for a review of this research). Within these lines of research, virtually no attention was paid to whether or not the readers had comprehended the text—either because connected text was not used or because meaning construction was beyond the purview of the study. Thus, despite research reflecting what Venezky termed “the golden years” (1984, p. 7), in hindsight, psychology had little to say about the complex processes of literacy that must be understood to influence the development of literate youngsters through formal education. (p. 553) Teacher’s Anecdote: Structuralism Structuralism, the theory that focuses on print perception as a critical component of the reading process, is evident in the special arrange-ments I make for one of my fourth-grade students. Michael is a main-streamed, learning-disabled reader whose listening comprehension is much better than his decoding skills. I often scan the text that the class is reading into a computer equipped with the software Intelli-talk. Using this software, I am able to enlarge the size of the text for Michael, which seems to help him with his speed of decoding. Addi-tionally, Michael is able to click on any words that he doesn’t know, and the computer will read and/or define them for him. If the text is especially hard, Michael or I can adjust the software so that the com-puter actually reads the text. This software, which uses many of the concepts inherent in Structuralism, has given Michael much support in helping him to keep up with his peers. —heatheR Cannon, fourth-grade teacher CLASSROOM APPLICATIONS Whether or not educators are aware of it, many of the teaching practices they currently use are grounded in educational and psychological theo-ries that were originally created more than 2,000 years ago. For exam-ple, Mental Discipline Theory is still a foundational theoretical orien-tation of many current classroom instructional practices. Every time teachers engage in activities in which their intention is to strengthen students’ skills through the use of practice, Mental Discipline Theory is present. Thus, this theory permeates almost every aspect of literacy instructional practices from the earliest skills of letter and sound iden-tification to the advanced skills of metacognitive control. Mental Dis-cipline Theory is highly visible in spelling and vocabulary instruction, sight-word identification, and the use of context clues. One current practice in literacy instruction that is highly reflec-tive of Mental Discipline Theory is repeated reading. During repeated reading, students read passages aloud to their teachers multiple times. Throughout each reading, teachers provide feedback to the students and guidance for further improvement. Teachers’ feedback and guidance are directed to such areas as pronunciation, expression, and pace. Repeated reading has been linked to improvements in word recognition, speed, accuracy, and fluency (Armbruster, Lehr, & Osborn, 2001). Repeated reading is reflective of Mental Discipline Theory because it is built on the basic premise that reading skill, like a muscle, needs to be exercised to be strengthened. Mental Discipline Theory is also widely apparent in instruction designed especially for English language learners (ELLs). Brisk and Harrington (2007), authors of Literacy and Bilingualism: A Handbook for All Teachers, emphasized that rehearsing and repetition help stu-dents build and retain language skills. They note that games, songs, and poems are useful techniques for practicing language. In one teacher-constructed game, the teacher created a game board consisting of a winding trail of pictures. Each student was then asked to take a turn reading a word card. If the student correctly read the word, he or she could advance to the matching picture on the board. In this way, the students who knew the most words advanced through the trail most rapidly. Associationism has also spawned instructional practices that can be seen in modern-day literacy classrooms. For example, learning expe-riences that build and activate students’ background knowledge are reflective of Associationism because of their emphasis on using con-nections as a foundation of learning. In literacy education, teachers build students’ background knowledge in particular subject areas prior to reading because it is believed that increased background informa-tion is positively correlated with increased reading comprehension. For example, if students will be reading a story about going to the beach, the teacher can build their knowledge by showing them beach pictures; asking children to think about times they have gone to the beach; shar-ing audio, video, and/or virtual renditions of the beach; and even shar-ing other beach stories with the students. Specific activities designed to increase students’ awareness of these types of connections are usually referred to as “brainstorming” or “webbing activities.” These activities are further discussed in Chapter 4 because they are most reflective of Schema Theory. A software package related to Associationism is Kidspiration (Inspi-ration, Inc.). This software, designed for students in grades K–5, allows students to create electronic, graphic representations such as webs, out-lines, and Venn diagrams. The experience of creating such graphic rep-resentations engages students in reflective thinking about the concepts with which they are working, ultimately increasing comprehension. When these graphic representations are completed in an electronic envi-ronment, student motivation is also enhanced. Associationism is also widely used in the instruction of ELLs. The use of brainstorming webs and charts is highly recommended as a strat-egy for building ELLs’ background knowledge, especially in the content areas (Brisk & Harrington, 2007): Graphic organizers help students arrange information by utilizing the most important aspects and concepts of a topic into a visual representa-tion. In addition to Semantic Mapping, there are many other types of Graphic Organizers, such as Venn Diagrams, story maps, main idea—supporting details, and sense matrices. Semantic Mapping stimulates vocabulary development and activates background knowledge. The maps display words, ideas, or concepts in categories and show how words relate to each other. Mapping helps students to visually organize information and can be an alternative to note taking and outlining. It is a very help-ful pre-reading–prewriting practice. The organizers can also be beneficial as a post-reading activity through which the students demonstrate and increase their comprehension of a topic. . . . For second language learn-ers, they are a tool for scaffolding knowledge and increasing vocabulary. (pp. 159–160) Unfoldment Theory, which arose in the 18th century, is also the basis for several of our contemporary practices in literacy education. One of the most effective approaches to promoting children’s literacy development in the classroom is the use of literacy centers (Morrow, 2012). A literacy center is an area of the classroom designed to facilitate children’s authentic engagement with a wide variety of literacy materials and activities. In addition to promoting engagement with reading activi-ties, literacy centers are designed to increase children’s social collabora-tion during these experiences, which subsequently leads to increased motivation for literacy learning (Morrow, 2012). The use of literacy centers in the classroom is consistent with Unfoldment Theory because literacy centers are designed to capture and build on children’s natural curiosity about their surroundings. The use of literacy centers in the classroom is also consistent with Social Learning Theories, Emergent Literacy Theory, and Motivation Theory, all of which are discussed in later chapters. Establishing a classroom literacy center requires both materials and plans for children’s activities. In the second edition of The Literacy Cen-ter: Contexts for Reading and Writing, Morrow (2002) describes all of the aspects necessary for implementing literacy centers in the classroom. Although an in-depth description of the entirety of this information is beyond the scope of the present text, a brief description based on Mor-row’s guidelines is presented here. The creation of the classroom literacy center begins with construc-tion of the physical environment. The literacy center is most often located in a corner of the classroom, set off by bookshelves and a col-orful rug to establish its boundaries. In addition to an abundance of meaningfully organized books (five to eight per child), other materials frequently found in the reading center include a rocking chair; throw pillows; beanbag chairs; stuffed animals; a spot for private reading (such as a large cardboard box); a check-out/check-in system for bor-rowing books; tape recorders, headsets, and audio-taped stories; and story retelling materials (see Morrow, 2002). Frequently, the writing center, or author’s spot, is located within or next to the classroom lit-eracy center. Materials used for this area include a table with chairs, an assortment of writing implements (pencils, pens, markers, crayons), various paper items (different sizes and colors of paper, notebooks, and pads), and folders for each child’s writing. Additional items for the lit-eracy center include bulletin boards for sharing students’ work, posters for sharing messages such as ideas for completing literacy center activi-ties, rules for engaging in literacy center work, and information related to reading, writing, thematic units, and authors. In short, and consistent with Unfoldment Theory, the physical environment of the literacy center is designed to stimulate children’s curiosity to engage with its materials. In addition to preparing the physical classroom environment, teach-ers need the classroom management skills to enable literacy center time to be both productive and enjoyable for the students. Morrow (2012) recommended that literacy center time be used at least two to three times a week for 30–45 minutes per session. Literacy center time should begin with teachers modeling a new activity that is being added to the literacy center, such as a new flannel board story, a new word game, or a new writing activity. Following the teacher’s demonstration, students should choose the peers they want to work with that day (or decide to work alone) and the activity in which they are going to engage. Students can also decide what their jobs within their groups will be that day. For example, if students are going to retell a story with a set of flannel board materials, they will need to determine which student will assume the role of which character. Additionally, one student should be the group leader and another the recorder of everyone’s accomplishments. Students may also choose to just observe other students during literacy center time. Providing students with all of these choices is a cornerstone of the literacy center experience and is positively related to increasing students’ motivation for literacy learning (Morrow, 2012). During lit-eracy center time, the teacher is a facilitator and an observer in the classroom. He or she can take anecdotal notes on students’ activities and interact with students on a small-group or an individual basis as is needed. Additional information on designing and managing classroom literacy centers can be found in Morrow (2002). Unfoldment Theory can be seen in students’ exploration of edu-cational websites such as Starfall (www.starfall.com). Starfall opened in 2002 as a free public service to support the literacy development of young learners. It offers online, interactive learning activities in such areas as letter and word identification, and read-along stories. The site is appropriate for children who are functioning between the preschool and grade 2 levels of reading ability. Students’ free exploration of edu-cational websites such as Starfall is reflective of Unfoldment Theory because students can choose to engage in the activities they are most interested in, thereby increasing motivation and learning. Morrow (2012) wrote that by 2030 it is estimated that 40% of the school-age population in the United States will be students for whom English is a second language. Like all students, students for whom Eng-lish is a second language are supported and motivated by stimulating environments in which they have choices regarding their activities. Pre-sented in Morrow (2012), Ng, a first-grade teacher, reported the fol-lowing activity, consistent with Unfoldment Theory, to help facilitate the language development and integration of her students from diverse backgrounds: To make multiculturalism a part of my class in coordination with a unit on community helpers, I set up a bakery in the dramatic-play area with the children. Materials included a baker’s hat and apron, cookie cutter, roll-ing pin, mixing bowls, measuring spoons, and trays and boxes with labels for baked goods, such as donuts, cookies, cakes, and pies. Some classroom recipes that had already been made were hung in the area, and pens, pen-cils, and books with recipes for baking were also placed in the area. I also had digital copies of the recipes for students to access on the computer. The Internet was consulted for new recipes. Children were encouraged to bring recipes from home, especially those from their cultural background, such as strudel from Germany, biscotti from Italy, or Jewish challah bread. For buying and selling baked goods, either brought to school or made in the classroom, there was an ordering pad, a cash register, receipts for purchases, number tickets for standing in line, and name tags for the baker and salesperson. To guide the children in their play, I modeled the behavior for a salesperson, a customer, and the baker. This was a pop-ular play area in which a great deal of literacy behavior occurred. For example, the salesperson took orders and wrote them down, the bakers followed recipes from the cookbook and those on the wall, and the cus-tomers counted out money and read the labels naming the baked goods. A lot of discussions occurred about the origins of the baked items as well as comparisons of the various treats. (pp. 79–80) Structuralism is also reflected in current literacy instructional prac-tices. Classroom instructional practices that support students’ increased accuracy regarding print perception are consistent with this theory. Many techniques are available to support students’ reading in this way. When teachers are working with whole-class instruction, they may use a pointer to help students follow the print as they read. A fancier and fun version of the pointer is a wand with a star at its end. Some teach-ers use a version of this activity with a flashlight and a word wall. In this educational experience, teachers turn off the lights in the classroom and then use a flashlight to point to words on the wall. Students read the words aloud as the flashlight illuminates them. Other approaches to facilitating print perception include using sentence strips for class instruction and using different colors to draw students’ attention to varying aspects of print. Teachers working with students individually and in small groups can also teach them to use line markers and their own fingers as pointers, which may also improve print perception. Much educational software is available to enhance students’ print perception. Software easily changes print size, font, and color. Students with special needs can sometimes read words more easily when these features of print are altered. Software that contains print-talking fea-tures, such as Intellitalk, highlights words on a computer screen for stu-dents and uses computerized technology to “read” the words to students as they are identified. Another way for students to use the software is to read the text independently and then have the computer “read” any word they have identified as difficult. Gyorfy (2011), a high school teacher, stated that when she integrates the use of a smartboard into her lessons, her students are much more inclined to participate: “I have students come up to the board to note features of the essay. They use the highlighting function to point out the thesis statement, topic sentences, transitions, etc. The smartboard’s presentation of print captivates most students; they become more involved with the lesson” (p. 5). All of these teaching techniques that focus on improving text perception are consis-tent with Structuralism and have their roots in work completed in the late 1800s and early 1900s in Europe and the United States. RESEARCH APPLICATIONS Just as the early historical theories of Mental Discipline Theory, Asso-ciationism, Unfoldment Theory, and Structuralism are still reflected in current classroom practices, so too are they seen in current literacy research. Researchers and graduate students conducting studies in the areas of practice and repetition effects on students’ achievement may want to link the theoretical context of their work back to the ideas of Plato, Aristotle, and Mental Discipline Theory. Practice effects are seen in research studies in a wide variety of areas affecting children’s reading achievement such as oral language development, phonemic awareness, exposure to print, and experience with storybook reading. Any research study that includes skill practice as a research component is using a theoretical frame that was originally grounded in Mental Discipline Theory. Reflecting Mental Discipline Theory, Almus and Dogan (2016) studied implementation of a summer school enrichment program designed to mitigate the achievement losses typically associated with summer breaks from school. A total of 226 students from two high-poverty school districts in Kansas City, Missouri, participated in the summer program, including pre-and posttesting using the STAR Read-ing Assessment. In addition, a sampling of the students, 35 teachers, and 14 parents were interviewed regarding their perceptions of the program. Results revealed significant reading achievement gains between the summer students’ pre-and posttests. In addition, the students, teachers, and parents indicated that they believed the program was helpful. This study is illustrative of Mental Discipline Theory because it is built on the premise that increased practice of academic skills over the summer would be associated with increased reading achievement. Associationism provides the foundation for two branches of psy-chology that eventually emerged in the 1950s: cognitive psychology and Behaviorism. As a result, any educational or psychological research con-ducted within these two very broad areas could ultimately link its theo-retical framework back to that of Associationism. Among many areas of study in reading that could conceivably be situated in an associationist theoretical context are those of comprehension activities such as Venn diagrams, KWL charts, and story mapping. Associationism maintains that connections aid memory and learn-ing. Mason, Pluchino, and Tornatora (2013) published an article in Reading Research Quarterly regarding the making of connections between print and illustrations in learning. In their study, 56 sixth-grade students were given texts regarding atmospheric pressure. Students were randomly assigned to one of three groups: a group that had texts with labeled illustrations, a group that had texts with nonlabeled illustra-tions, or a group that had texts with no illustrations. All students were given a pretest and two posttests (one immediate and one delayed). The results revealed that, at both posttests, students using illustrations with the labeled pictures performed significantly better than those in the nonlabeled group and in the nonillustration group. The performances of students in the nonlabeled picture group versus the no-picture group did not significantly differ from each other. The results of the study were consistent with Associationism, showing that the associations between texts and illustrations enhanced performance. Researchers and graduate students who are conducting studies in the areas of interest, curiosity, and play may want to situate their work in an Unfoldment theoretical frame and the work of Rousseau, Pestalozzi, and Froebel. Unfoldment Theory would also be a suitable context for studies of motivation linked to children’s natural interests. Studies regarding the effects of classroom literacy centers on students’ learning have often used Unfoldment Theory as well (Morrow, 2001). Illustrating one application of Unfoldment Theory, Alduraby and Liu (2014) investigated the use of branching stories as a method of increasing students’ interest in reading. Branching stories are interactive electronic texts in which readers have the opportunity to choose the next path of the text they are reading. Twenty-four fourth-grade students were assigned to one of four groups based on their academic abilities: high readers, average readers, low readers, and highly active low read-ers. The students were then observed in a computer lab for five after-school sessions using branching stories. Data included the researchers’ observation notes, a measure of students’ time on task, students’ written responses to comprehension questions, students’ verbal responses fol-lowing the branching activities, and a unit-end survey about the stu-dents’ experiences. All of the data sources consistently revealed that stu-dents were much more engaged using the branching texts than reading traditional texts. In addition, the greatest area of increased engagement was for the highly active low readers. This study is reflective of Unfold-ment Theory because its primary focus was related to students’ interest. Researchers and graduate students interested in framing a con-temporary research study with the theoretical frame of Structuralism would most likely be working in the perceptual processing area of read-ing. One example of a current research study to which a structuralist theoretical orientation is applicable is the work of Neumann, Acosta, and Neumann (2013). These researchers used eye-tracking technology to study the visual fixations of 39 prereaders aged 3 to 5. The children were showed nine photographs of environmental print items (items con-taining both print and pictures, e.g., the Sea World logo) and their stan-dard print equivalents (e.g., the typed words “Sea World”), and asked to read the card. Results revealed that the children had longer fixations for the standard print equivalents than for the environmental print ver-sions of the items. However, when the children’s fixations on the word component of the environmental print were compared to the standard print equivalents, children’s fixations were longer on the environmental print items. This was particularly true when the word portion of the environmental print item contained larger print, was bolder, and was centrally positioned within the environmental print item. The authors concluded that environmental print is a useful material for developing children’s early literacy skills. This study reflects the theoretical frame of Structuralism because of its focus on perceptual processing. SUMMARY Before the 20th century, the educational theories that held implications for understanding reading stemmed from four theoretical roots: Men-tal Discipline Theory, Associationism, Unfoldment Theory, and Struc-turalism. Mental Discipline Theory suggests that the mind is akin to a muscle and needs to be exercised and strengthened for learning to occur. Associationism emphasizes the ways in which learning occurs in the mind through thought processes that make connections between things. Unfoldment Theory focuses on the natural emergence of the intellect through fostering a child’s curiosity and interest, creating a stimulating environment for the child, and using play. Structuralism seeks to explain learning through the study of perceptual processes. Mental Discipline Theory, Associationism, and Unfoldment Theory are nonexperimen-tal philosophies applicable to all areas of general education. Research related specifically to the field of reading began with experimental, per-ceptual studies of cognitive processing that fall under the theoretical umbrella of Structuralism. The theories presented in this chapter are pri-marily linked to each other by their emergence in chronological history. Although they are all rooted in antiquity, examples of their application can still be found in modern-day classrooms. Furthermore, each of the theories can still be used as a theoretical framework for current research. IDEAS FOR DISCUSSION • Historically, what were the earliest theories to affect the field of reading? • How do the earliest historical theories related to reading affect current classroom instruction? • How do the earliest historical theories related to reading affect current research in reading? ACTIVITIES Making Connections. As described by L’Allier and Elish-Piper (2007), this strategy asks readers to make three types of connections to the assigned text: text-to-self connections, text-to-text connections, and text-to-world connections. In text-to-self connections, readers relate the assigned mate-rial to their personal lives, experiences, and feelings. In text-to-text con-nections, readers relate the assigned material to other written information (paper and electronic) they have read on the topic. In text-to-world con-nections, readers relate the assigned material to “issues, events, and people in the world beyond the lived experiences of the reader” (L’Allier & Elish-Piper, 2007, p. 343). Readers’ connections can be recorded on a sheet in which they identify the specific text to which they are referring, the connec-tion being made, and the kind of connection found. Connections can then be shared in a whole-class group or in small groups. Class-to-Life Writing Assignment. Write a three-to five-page paper sum-marizing the major historical theories: Mental Discipline Theory, Associa-tionism, Unfoldment, and Structuralism. Provide one or more examples of the ways in which each theory is reflected in a current classroom setting.

CHPT 3

Behavioral Lenses (1900–Present) Questions to Consider before reading • What is Behaviorism? • What is Classical Conditioning Theory, and how is it reflected in reading instruction and reading research? • What is Connectionism, and how is it reflected in reading instruction and reading research? • What is Operant Conditioning, and how is it reflected in reading instruction and reading research? WHAT IS BEHAVIORISM? Behaviorism is a theoretical perspective of learning that focuses on observable changes in behavior. According to Richards (2009), Behav-iorism arose as a theoretical response to theories of Mentalism, such as the Psychoanalytic Theory advocated by Freud (1933). In Mentalism, actions and behaviors are seen as being driven by unobservable, and in some cases even unconscious, feelings, drives, impulses, and wishes. Behavioral theorists such as Watson (1913) doubted the existence of many of the mental elements proposed by Freud and suggested instead that human behaviors needed to be studied and explained through observable actions. Watson and other early behaviorists believed that the documentation of observable actions related to learning would be the key to making the field of psychology a true science. Watson asserted this view in his 1913 publication, “Psychology as a Behaviorist Views It,” and with it he launched the behaviorist movement (Richards, 2009). Behaviorism was the predominant educational and psychological theo-retical perspective for 50 years thereafter (Richards, 2009). Behaviorism changed the depiction of reading from one of perceptual processing to one of reading as a behavior composed of isolated skills, each of which could be reinforced to increase student achievement. Behaviorism con-tinues to be significant today as the theoretical underpinning associated with direct instruction (Carnine, Silbert, Kame’enui, & Tarver, 2004). From a behavioral perspective, the outcome of learning is an observable change in behavior. Two underlying assumptions are pres-ent in all theoretical versions of Behaviorism. The first is the belief that behavior is the result of an organism’s, or person’s, response to stimuli. The second is the belief that external stimuli can be manipulated to strengthen or reduce an organism’s or an individual’s behavior (Fetsco & McClure, 2005). There are three major behavioral theories: Classical Conditioning Theory, created by Ivan Pavlov; Connectionism, put forth by Edward Thorndike; and Operant Conditioning Theory, established by B. F. Skinner. All three theories are built on the early foundation of Associationism, as discussed in Chapter 2. CLASSICAL CONDITIONING THEORY Classical conditioning has four components: an unconditioned stimulus, an unconditioned response, a conditioned stimulus, and a conditioned response. An example of an unconditioned stimulus is a loud noise, and an example of an unconditioned response to the loud noise is a person’s flinch. These constructs are considered unconditioned because loud noises typically evoke flinch responses; no particular learning, training, or pairing needs to take place for an individual to flinch in response to a loud noise. In contrast, when a picture of a flower is repeatedly paired with the onset of a loud noise, eventually, just the picture of the flower alone will evoke a flinch response. Because a picture of a flower doesn’t typically cause a flinch response, after it is repeatedly paired with a loud noise and then does cause a flinch response, we call it the conditioned stimulus. A person’s flinch response to the picture of the flower alone, after repeated pairings with a loud noise, is then called the conditioned response. The flinch response to a picture of a flower is considered to be a conditioned response because, typically, pictures of flowers do not evoke flinch responses. The key component in classical conditioning is the occurrence of a transfer between the unconditioned stimulus (i.e., the loud noise) and the conditioned stimulus (i.e., the picture of a flower) such that, after repeated pairings, the previously neutral picture of the flower produces the same response as the loud noise. Pavlov (1849–1936) created Classical Conditioning Theory as a result of his research on dogs’ digestion in the 1920s. During his research, Pavlov noted that his dogs began to salivate at the sight of their food bowls, even when the bowls were empty. Pavlov postulated that the dogs were salivating because they associated the presence of their dishes with the arrival of their dinners. In other words, the dogs had learned through association to connect their food bowls with their din-ners. Intrigued with the concept, Pavlov continued to experiment with other forms of associational learning. Eventually, he was able to pro-duce salivation in his dogs by simply ringing a bell. This conditioning was achieved by the repeated pairing of bell ringing with the delivery of food to the dogs. Thus, the ringing of the bell, even in the absence of the food dishes, was enough of a stimulus to elicit the salivation response in the dogs. This form of associational learning became known as classical conditioning. While Pavlov’s research focused primarily on the exploration of Behaviorism in the biological sciences, John B. Watson (1878–1958), an American, was the first behaviorist to apply the concepts inherent in Classical Conditioning Theory to the realm of human behavior (Rich-ards, 2009). As a result, Watson is acknowledged as the father of Behav-iorism. Fetsco and McClure (2005) suggested that classical conditioning can be used to understand students’ emotional responses in the class-room. They presented the following examples (pp. 30–31): John feels nervous if he does poorly in front of others. In the past he has done poorly on a number of math assignments and tests. Now when any math teacher says take out a piece of paper for a test, his palms sweat and he starts to feel ill. Sarah was in two plays in elementary school, and in both cases she forgot her lines on stage. This made her feel anxious and embarrassed. Now a request that she participate in a play makes her feel anxious. When Mr. Joseph was in high school he got into a lot of trouble and did poorly. Eventually, he felt so uncomfortable in school that he quit coming. Today as a parent coming back for a parent conference, just the sight of the school building makes him feel uncomfortable. These examples illustrate that, through classical conditioning, students, and even parents, often develop strong feelings related to learning and other school-based matters. Students’ and adults’ positive and nega-tive emotional states become connected to stimuli such as books, tests, teachers, and classrooms. When teachers understand the ways in which these connections are formed, they are often able to create new situa-tions to correct previously developed negative associations. For exam-ple, Fetsco and McClure (2005) suggested that, through classical condi-tioning, students’ learning anxiety can be reduced when teachers stress improvement rather than perfection during instruction. Classical Conditioning Theory exemplifies Behaviorism because it focuses on observable changes in behavior and responses to stimuli as demonstrative of learning. Teachers’ Anecdotes: Classical Conditioning An example of Classical Conditioning in my classroom is the use of a zynergy chime to alert my students to clean up materials they are using. At the start of the school year, I wanted to set up a nonverbal signal to let my students know when it is time to clean up and transi-tion to the next activity, whether they are engaged in SSR (silent sus-tained reading), independent work, or workstations. On the first day of school, when I wanted to transition the children out of independent work, I rang the chime. Surprised by the sound, the students looked up at me, confused, not sure what to do. I explained that it was time to clean up and move on to something else. Every time I wanted my students to clean up, I rang the zynergy chime first, and then explained that I needed them to clean up. After doing this several times, I no longer needed to follow the zynergy chime with an explanation; the children knew upon hearing the chime that it was time to clean up. Now whenever I ring it, they automatically put their materials away and prepare for the next activity. —Melissa RiCCa, first-grade teacher An example of classical conditioning in my classroom is when I simply say the words, “Okay, who is ready?” and my entire class sits straight up with their hands folded facing forward. My students have been conditioned to do this since the first day of school. On the first day of school, I introduced a poster of a boy who sits correctly in his desk and we call him “Bob.” In the beginning of the school year I would say, “Let’s see who is sitting like Bob.” Then, in October, I would point to the poster and say, “Ok, who is ready?.” By January, when I would just say that phase, “Okay, who is ready?” the students sat like Bob. —CaMille santaMaRia, first-grade inclusion teacher CONNECTIONISM While Pavlov and Watson were primarily interested in events that pre-ceded actions, Edward Thorndike (1874–1949) extended the study of Behaviorism by showing that, “stimuli that occurred after a behavior [also] had an influence on future behaviors” (Slavin, 2003, p. 140). Thorndike created the theory of Connectionism and proposed its four laws: the Law of Effect, the Law of Readiness, the Law of Identical Elements, and the Law of Exercise. Slavin (2003) explained the Law of Effect: Thorndike’s Law of Effect states that if an act is followed by a satisfying change in the environment, the likelihood that the act will be repeated in similar situations increases. However, if a behavior is followed by an unsatisfying change in the environment, the chances that the behavior will be repeated decreases. Thus, the consequences of one’s present behavior were shown to play a crucial role in determining one’s future behavior. (pp. 141–142) Thorndike’s Law of Effect is also known as the Principle of Rein-forcement. His three other laws made the following assertions. • The Law of Readiness states that learning is facilitated when easier tasks precede those that are related but more difficult. • The Law of Identical Elements states that the more elements (i.e., con-tent and procedure) of one situation are identical to the elements of a second situation, the greater the transfer, and thus the easier the learn-ing in the second situation. • The Law of Exercise states that the more stimulus–response connec-tions are practiced, the stronger the bonds become. The less the connec-tions are used, the weaker the bonds. Hiebert and Raphael (1996) commented on the implications of Thorndike’s laws for classroom instruction in the early 1900s: The same laws of learning—effect, exercise, readiness, and identical ele-ments (Thorndike, 1903)—were applied across subject areas but, because of the place of reading and writing in the 3 Rs, considerable attention was paid to the pedagogy of reading and writing. The law of readiness meant that the critical behaviors of reading, which were viewed as recognizing the most frequently used words, needed to be sequenced. The laws of iden-tical elements and exercise dictated that students practice repeatedly on specific sets of target words (or, prior to that, letters) to ensure a connec-tion between stimulus and response. The law of effect meant that correct responses such as the reading of a story made up of the target words or filling in a target word within a workbook exercise should be praised. (p. 554) Thorndike’s Connectionism is considered a behavioral theory because, like Pavlov and Watson, Thorndike equated learning with observable changes in behavior. In contrast to Pavlov and Watson, however, Thorndike concentrated on the effects of varying stimuli that occurred after a behavior rather than the consequences of varying stim-uli that occurred simultaneously to, or before, a behavior. Teacher’s Anecdote: Connectionism All of Thorndike’s laws from Connectionism are observable in my classroom. The Law of Effect, also known as the Principle of Rein-forcement, is clear because my students respond very well to positive reinforcement. I try to “catch my students doing something well” and Edward Thorndike (1874–1949). praise them for it. I’ll say something like, “Look at how well Samantha is focused on her work,” and most of the other students will look up at her and then go back to their work with increased attention. The Law of Readiness is apparent in the way that I structure my lessons throughout the week. On Mondays I try to start with an introductory lesson on a concept. As the week progresses, my subsequent lessons on the concept get harder. Not all of my students get through all of the harder lessons on every topic, but that is how I individualize in my classroom. I am reminded of the Law of Identical Elements when I think about my students’ abilities in the areas of reading and writing. I find that my better readers are also my better writers. Since reading and writing share the elements of both being language processes, the better my students are at one, the better they will likely be at the other. The Law of Exercise makes me think of my students who do, and do not, read at home. The students who do read at home tend to be much better readers than those who don’t. —staCi Klein, fourth-grade teacher OPERANT CONDITIONING THEORY Skinner (1904–1990) continued Pavlov and Watson’s work on the importance of association in learning. He also advanced Thorndike’s work regarding the relationships between behavior and its consequences by conducting research on the use of reinforcement and punishment in changing behavior. Skinner is especially known for his work on the effects of variations of schedules of reinforcements and punishments. Skinner called his classroom application of Operant Conditioning Theory “programmed learning,” also known as “programmed instruc-tion.” In programmed learning, instruction is carefully broken down into small steps that are carefully sequenced to maximize the likelihood of students’ success and to minimize the likelihood of students’ frustra-tion and failure. As students successfully accomplish each step, they are rewarded (Fetsco & McClure, 2005). Teaching from a strict behavioral position, therefore, requires the arrangement of the instructional situa-tion, inasmuch as it is possible, to produce errorless learning. Programmed instruction is usually implemented through the use of behavioral objectives. A behavioral objective is a statement that is cre-ated to identify a target behavior in need of change, as well as to identify what behavioral change will constitute success. For example, a teacher might create the following classroom management behavioral objective: Students will independently rotate through the classroom centers. Suc-cess will be achieved when students are able to complete their center rotations for 1 month with three or less teacher assists per day. After identifying a behavioral objective, teachers will then employ Operant Conditioning Theory methods to achieve their objective. As stated ear-lier, these methods include the use of positive and negative consequences to shape behavior. With regard to the example above, on the first day of addressing her behavioral objective, a teacher might positively reinforce her students after just 3 minutes of independent center work. On the second day, reinforcement would occur after 5 minutes, and so on, until longer and longer periods of independent work were attained. In this case, the schedule of reinforcement, that is, how often the reinforcement is delivered, is being manipulated to achieve the behavioral objective. Another common technique used in behavior management to achieve behavioral objectives is called shaping. In the process of shap-ing, gross approximations of a behavior are initially reinforced with the use of positive reinforcement. Thereafter, however, only more and more refined approximations of the desired behavior are reinforced.

For example, when children are very young, we may reinforce them for looking at a book and telling the story in their own words. As chil-dren mature, however, our expectations of their ability to read begins to increase, and gradually we reinforce them only as their reading becomes more and more conventional. Chaining is an additional behavioral man-agement technique. Chaining enables a person to sequence small, indi-vidually conditioned acts into a complex skill. It is a central element of Skinner’s application of operant theory to the classroom. Teacher’s Anecdote: Operant Conditioning Theory In my third-grade classroom, a great amount of time is spent on devel-oping critical thinkers through intense comprehension instruction. I am able to use my interactive whiteboard technology to provide my students with the basic skills needed in order to comprehend text. The interactive whiteboard is a strong tool for facilitating this type of direct instruction because it allows students to learn by doing, receive feedback from the teacher, build new knowledge, access literacy mate-rials easily, and visualize difficult concepts. Students gather around the board at the front of the classroom as the steps of the learning process are broken down so that students can feel successful. There are also strong elements of operant conditioning because students are rewarded with classroom tickets for successfully completing tasks. Students can then use these tickets to buy books from the class store or cash in on a free-choice activity during literacy center time. —Kenneth Kunz, third-grade teacher CLASSROOM APPLICATIONS Behaviorism has affected the field of reading in multiple ways, including the way the task of reading is understood, perceptions of how reading instruction should proceed, the creation of reading materials, and the assessment of reading progress. Behaviorism created a new perception of the task of reading as a complex act consisting of component parts. The component parts of reading were viewed as visual discrimination (the ability to discriminate shapes and letters), auditory discrimination (the ability to discriminate the sounds of the alphabet), left-to-right progression during reading, vocabulary (word knowledge), and comprehension (understanding what you have read). This understanding of reading led to a subskills approach to reading. In the subskills approach, the complex task of reading is broken down into its many component elements, and the emphasis of reading instruction becomes mastery of these components. Hiebert and Raphael (1996) commented on the way in which reading and reading instruction were viewed after the advent of Behaviorism: Skinner’s (1954, 1965) view of operant conditioning gave behaviorism new life in the middle of the 20th century, especially as it pertained to school reading instruction. With this view of learning, a content area such as reading could be broken into steps, each of which could be the basis for exercises in text or on a machine. Each element of an exercise required an overt response, which was followed by immediate feedback. When a student’s response was correct, the feedback was reinforcing. When the student responded incorrectly, the student was told to give another response until he or she got it right. Learning to read became the center of activity, as researchers devised hierarchies of seemingly endless skills that were made up of sub-skills that themselves had sub-skills, and so forth. (p. 554) Behaviorism has also affected educators’ views on how reading instruction should proceed. Direct instruction is one form of reading instruction that is clearly linked to a behavioral theoretical perspective. In direct instruction, teachers explicitly focus children’s attention on specific reading concepts, such as phonics, vocabulary, and comprehen-sion skills, and provide information to students about those skills. Often direct instruction emphasizes discrete skills and subskills perceived as necessary for students’ reading success. Kame’enui, Simmons, Chard, and Dickson (1997) acknowledged that “direct instruction is made distinctive, pedagogically and philosophically, by its originator, Sieg-fried Engelmann, and the 40 or so curriculum programs that he and his colleagues have authored over the past 25 years” (p. 61). In direct instruction, reading teachers have a clear understanding of those skills that are necessary for successful reading and know how to assess their students’ abilities in these areas. Teachers then proceed to teach those skills directly. Kame’enui et al. (1997) reported on the foundational principles of direct instruction: (1) the teacher is responsible for children’s learning; (2) the key to successful instruction is to find out what the student has not been able to learn; (3) teachers need to find ways to respond to chil-dren’s individual differences; (4) “the more carefully that the skills are taught, the greater the possibility that the child will learn them” (p. 62); and (5) one should “teach children in a way that provides maximum feedback on what they are learning and where they are having diffi-culty” (p. 62). According to Kame’enui et al. (1997), in direct instruc-tion “children’s failure to learn is unacceptable and unnecessary if we understand what we want to teach and design the teaching carefully, strategically, and with full consideration of the learner” (p. 62). Direct instruction is currently a prominent approach to teach-ing reading. According to Carnine et al., (2004), direct instruction is the most effective and efficient approach to reading instruction. It is based on the teaching of six steps: (1) specifying objectives, (2) devising instructional strategies, (3) developing teaching procedures, (4) selecting examples, (5) sequencing skills, and (6) providing practice and review. As stated above, objectives must be very specific and based on observ-able behaviors. The use of strategies in direct instruction means that students need to be taught methods and approaches that they can inde-pendently apply during reading, rather than just taught to memorize information. The teaching procedures used in direct instruction are very explicit. Carnine et al. (2004) explained the steps involved in the direct instruction teaching procedure: Formats often contain two stages: introduction and guided practice. In the introduction stage of a format, the teacher demonstrates the steps in a strategy and then provides structured practice in using the strategy. In the guided-practice stage, the teacher gradually reduces help and prompt-ing, and eventually the students apply the steps in the strategy indepen-dently. Including teacher guidance from prompted application to indepen-dent application of a strategy is referred to as scaffolded instruction. A final step in the guided practice stage, called discrimination, includes the teacher presenting a set of examples that provide practice on items appli-cable to the new strategy and items from similar previously taught strate-gies. (p. 26) Selecting examples and sequencing skills are also critical compo-nents of effective direct instruction (Carnine et al., 2004). Examples that the teacher uses in the early phases of the direct instruction les-son should be ones that are easy for students to apply what they have learned. Examples that are used later in the lesson can be more com-plex and require students to use discriminatory skills. Similarly, careful sequencing of skills is another critical element of a well-designed direct instruction lesson. Carnine et al. (2004, p. 27) described the five steps to be taken in teaching a skill: 1. Preskills of a strategy are taught before the strategy itself is pre-sented. 2. Instances that are consistent with a strategy are introduced before exceptions. 3. High utility skills are introduced before less useful ones. 4. Easy skills are taught before more difficult ones. 5. Strategies and information likely to be confused are not intro-duced at the same time. Finally, the direct instruction lesson is concluded with independent practice, repeated practice, and review. Like direct instruction, reading readiness is a form of reading instruction that reflects a behavioral theoretical orientation. In reading readiness instruction, educators focus on facilitating reading develop-ment through instruction in skills and subskills identified as prerequi-sites for reading. Traditionally, in the reading readiness approach these skills have been taught through direct instruction. Skills associated with reading readiness include auditory discrimination (the ability to identify and differentiate familiar sounds, similar sounds, rhyming words, and the sounds of letters); visual discrimination (including color recognition, shape identification, and letter identification); left-to-right progression; visual–motor skills (such as cutting on a line with scissors and coloring within the lines of a picture); and large-motor abilities such as skipping, hopping, and walking on a line. Typically, instruction of the desired subskills takes place through the use of worksheets. Early childhood literacy instruction based on the reading readiness model implies that one prepares for literacy by acquiring a set of spe-cific skills. These skills are taught directly and systematically, consistent with a behavioral approach to learning and teaching. In today’s literacy classrooms for young learners, many readiness activities are still rel-evant, but additional experiences are also used to teach children about the comprehensive act of reading. This perspective, Emergent Literacy Theory, is explained in Chapter 5. Shannon (1990) wrote that Behaviorism also affects the assessment of students’ progress in reading and the creation of reading materials. These practices include dividing literacy into discrete skills, focusing on the attainment of objectives, and relying heavily on the use of testing to monitor reading achievement. Behaviorism has also had a significant impact on the construction of educational software products. Many of these products are built on the behavioral principles of breaking complex tasks down into simpler tasks that can then be mastered and sequenc-ing tasks in order of difficulty to ensure learners’ success. Another ele-ment of Behaviorism seen in educational software programs is the deliv-ery of immediate feedback to students regarding the accuracy of their responses to a learning task. RESEARCH APPLICATIONS Researchers and students whose studies focus on observable changes in behavior may be interested in using Classical Conditioning Theory as a theoretical framework for their research. In the field of reading, stud-ies linked to classroom behavior, time on task, and frequency of inde-pendent reading can be conducive to a Classical Conditioning Theory context. Montare (1988) published the first research article demonstrating that Classical Conditioning Theory could be applied to the subject area of reading. In his study, 4-year-old nonreaders were shown 22 pictures of known objects (e.g., a dog, a cat, a chair), followed by the printed word for that object (dog, cat, chair). The pictures and words were shown to the children via a tachistoscope. No reinforcement of any kind was provided. Following 10 conditioning trials for each word–picture pair, retention was measured by presenting each child with the printed word prompt. Results revealed a 95% retention rate, indicating that in 95% of the cases children were able to correctly read the printed word in the absence of the paired picture. In Montare’s words, “The printed word was classically conditioned to become a signal of the picture which itself had been a previously learned signal” (p. 619). In his writing, Montare noted that while classical conditioning could be demonstrated in single-word identification, it was unlikely to be applicable to the reading of connected text that requires higher levels of cognition. Researchers and graduate students conducting studies in any of the areas related to Thorndike’s laws may choose to situate their stud-ies in Connectionism. Studies related to the effectiveness of sequencing instruction according to difficulty, as well as studies of transfer and practice effects, could be appropriately placed in this theoretical frame-work as long as the effects being assessed were observable behaviors. As stated earlier, Thorndike’s Law of Identical Elements states that the more elements (content and procedure) of one situation are identical to the elements in a second situation, the greater the transfer, and thus the easier the learning in the second situation. This theoretical belief can be seen as underlying research in the realm of the reading–writing connec-tion. Research in the area of the reading–writing connection emphasizes the similarities between the two cognitive processes, including the view-point that both reading and writing are acts of composing. Implicit in this research line is the belief that since reading and writing both rely on similar cognitive processes, strengthening writing skills will have a beneficial effect on reading ability and vice versa. One study (Shen, 2009) evaluated the impact of a reading–writing connection project on first-year English as a foreign language (EFL) college students. Shen created a classroom environment supportive of reading–writing connections, including explicit instruction of text structures and story elements, use of reading logs, and creative writ-ing in response to storybooks. Data sources evaluated included reading log entries, creative writing samples, and follow-up interviews with the students. Results indicated that the learners’ literacy developed not only in lin-guistic progress but also in critical thinking as well as personal growth. Reading helped the EFL learners’ development of their writing with the stimulus, structures, vocabulary, and prior experience (schema). The reading–writing connection also had a positive impact on the EFL college students’ reading meta-cognitive awareness. . . . Evidence arising out of these findings suggests that reading and writing should be integrated in teaching (p. 87) These research findings are consistent with Thorndike’s Law of Identi-cal Elements and Connectionism. Research studies that can be situated within an Operant Condition-ing Theory context are those that focus on the effects of consequences (reinforcements and punishments), shaping, extinction, schedules of reinforcement, maintenance, and the role of antecedents on students’ learning. As in all behavioral research, the use of this theoretical frame-work is limited to studies examining observable behavior and behav-ioral changes. Researchers Marion, Martin, Yu, Buhler, and Kerr (2012) used ideas from B. F. Skinner to help get children with autism to mand, “Where?” According to the researchers, “One type of verbal behav-ior identified by Skinner is a mand which, in everyday language, is a request for something that a person ‘wants.’ Manding is typically rein-forced by providing whatever is requested. Manding for information is a skill that is often lacking in children with autism” (p. 274). Three boys between the ages of 3 and 5 were selected from an early intensive intervention program for children with autism. To get the children to mand “Where?” the researchers used rewards and consequences dur-ing activities designed to foster the manding of “Where?” Parents and other family members conducted similar practice outside of the school setting. At the end of the study, all of the children were successful at this task, although the authors acknowledged that it took varying amounts of time for the students to achieve mastery. SUMMARY Behaviorism is a theoretical perspective of learning that focuses on observable changes in behavior. Two underlying beliefs of Behaviorism are that behavior is the result of an organism’s, or person’s, response to stimuli, and that external stimuli can be manipulated to strengthen or reduce an individual’s behavior. Behaviorism was the predominant psychological and educational perspective in the United States from approximately 1910 to the end of the 1950s. This chapter examined three prominent behavioral theories: Pav-lov’s Classical Conditioning Theory, Thorndike’s theory of Connection-ism, and Skinner’s Operant Conditioning Theory. Built on the foun-dation of Associationism (discussed in Chapter 2), Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning Theory articulates the concept of conditioning in which learning is observed through the repeated pairings of unconditioned and conditioned stimuli and the transfer of the unconditioned response to the conditioned response. While Pavlov and his disciple Watson were primarily interested in events that preceded actions, Thorndike extended the study of Behaviorism with his theory of Connectionism, demonstrating that stimuli that follow behavior also have an effect on learning. Thorndike is most famous for his Laws of Effect, Readiness, Identical Elements, and Exercise. Skinner further expanded the find-ings of the earlier behavioral theorists with his explanations of operant behaviors—the ways in which people learn to operate on their envi-ronments based on the antecedents and consequences of their behav-iors. All three behavioral theories presented in this chapter have current classroom implications and are viable theoretical contexts for research-ers studying observable behaviors related to reading. The popularity of direct instruction for teaching reading underscores the applicability of Behaviorism in today’s classrooms. IDEAS FOR DISCUSSION • What is Behaviorism? • What is Classical Conditioning Theory, and how is it reflected in educational settings and reading research? • What is Connectionism, and how is it reflected in educational settings and reading research? • What is Operant Conditioning, and how is it reflected in educational settings and reading research? ACTIVITIES Text Coding. Readers can “text code” this chapter. According to L’Allier and Elish-Piper (2007): In the Text Coding strategy, students make notes on the text during and after they read it. . . . Codes can be written in the margins of the text or on small sticky notes placed on the pages. . . . Categories and codes we commonly use for this strategy include the following: Interesting (I), Connection (C), Important (!), Question (?), Agree (A), and Disagree (D). (pp. 346–348) Coded texts can be shared in large or small groups. Class-to-Life Writing Assignment. Write a three-to five-page paper sum-marizing the major behavioral perspectives: Classical Conditioning The-ory, Connectionism, and Operant Conditioning. In the paper, provide one or more examples of the ways in which each theory is reflected in current classroom settings.