Girls reading at New York Institute for the
Blind, 1926
-
-
Abstract | Literacy skills enhance our opportunities in life. This is no less true for
individuals who are blind and fluent in braille. Those who attain proficiency in
braille enjoy greater independence, success, and personal well-being.
Unfortunately, braille readers are at increased risk of reading failure and its
devastating consequences due to struggles with developing reading fluency—the
ability to read with speed, accuracy, and proper expression. When readers are
fluent, they can concentrate less on decoding individual words and focus more on
comprehending the text.
-
-
This article explores the importance of reading fluency and its relationship to
comprehension for braille readers. We describe how evidenced-based strategies
shown to enhance fluency for print readers can be adapted to improve braille
reading fluency. In addition, the value of early and consistent braille
instruction provided by a Teacher of the Visually Impaired is discussed and
recommendations for families are offered.
Introduction
For individuals who are blind or visually impaired, the value of literacy skills
is as significant as it is for those without visual impairments. It has been
suggested that children with visual impairments who learn braille have an
advantage compared to those who rely solely on print. Ryles (1996) found that
children with visual impairments who learned braille were more likely to be
employed and obtain a college degree than those who did not learn braille.
Moreover, the braille readers in Ryles’ study exhibited stronger reading habits,
including spending more hours per week reading, reading more books, and
subscribing to more magazines. This phenomenon mirrors the positive effects of
literacy skills demonstrated for sighted readers. Higher levels of literacy are
associated with better employment outcomes for both braille and print readers
(Koenig & Holbrook, 2000; Kutner et al., 2007; Ryles, 1996; Wolffe & Kelly,
2011). In addition, reading proficiency contributes to the emotional well-being
of students with visual impairments (Ferrell, Mason, Young, & Cooney, 2006).
Braille literacy is associated with higher levels of independence, confidence,
and self-esteem (National Federation of the Blind Jernigan Institute, 2009;
Schroeder, 1996; Wells-Jensen, 2003).
Children with significant vision loss and blindness are at an increased risk of
literacy problems relating to reading speed and accuracy (Coppins &
Barlow-Brown, 2006; Steinman, LeJeune, & Kimbrough, 2006). Many of these
students read below grade level, with delays similar to those of struggling
readers who are sighted (Dodd & Conn, 2000; Gillon & Young, 2002). Further,
significant delays in text comprehension parallel the slower rate of reading
development exhibited by braille readers (Edmonds & Pring, 2006; Wall Emerson,
Holbrook, & D’Andrea, 2009). The poor reading achievement of students with
visual impairments and the life-long consequences of low literacy make it
imperative that Teachers of the Visually Impaired (TVIs) use braille teaching
practices that have a demonstrated record of success.
New technologies are changing the way individuals with visual impairments access
and share information, but braille remains a fundamental tool for independence
in the 21st Century. Audio devices are useful sources of information; however,
for individuals with profound or total loss of sight, braille alone offers
complete command of written language. Given the relationship between low
literacy, school failure, and poor adult outcomes, identifying the most
effective methods of braille reading instruction is critical.
Many braille readers can read words accurately but do so at very slow rates
(Trent & Truan, 1997; Wetzel & Knowlton, 2000). These students have not yet
developed fluency, which is a strong predictor of comprehension for sighted
readers (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp, & Jenkins, 2001; Jenkins, Fuchs, van den Broek,
Espin, & Deno, 2003; Klauda & Guthrie, 2008; Wolf & Katzir-Cohen, 2001). The
National Reading Panel defines fluency as reading text with “speed, accuracy and
proper expression” (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
[NICHD], 2000, p. 3). Students are observed to read fluently when their oral
reading sounds like conversational speech (Hudson, Lane, & Pullen, 2005).
Although there are a variety of reasons braille readers may have difficulty
achieving reading comprehension commensurate with their sighted peers,
print-based reading research has consistently linked dysfluency with poor
reading outcomes (Chard, Vaughn, & Tyler, 2002; Fuchs et al., 2001). When
readers are not able to decode words fluently, they may not be able to process
the meaning of the text adequately. Recent research offers emerging evidence
that practices shown to increase fluency for print readers may offer benefits
for users of braille, improving their reading achievement and, ultimately, their
long-term academic success (Munro & Munro, 2013; Pattillo, Heller, & Smith,
2004; Savaiano & Hatton, 2013).
Why Fluency Matters
Over 30 years ago, Allington (1983) referred to reading fluency as the
“neglected” goal of reading; this has changed dramatically in the last three
decades. Fluency is now considered a critical component of skilled reading and
was recognized by the highly influential National Reading Panel Report as one of
the five “big ideas” of early reading instruction (NICHD, 2000). Today, most
literacy educators believe fluency is essential to successful reading
development (e.g., Rasinski, Blachowicz, & Lems, 2006; Samuels, 2006).
Furthermore, significant correlations between reading fluency and a host of
other positive reading outcomes have also been shown. For example, Oakley (2005)
found that fluent readers tend to enjoy reading more, have more positive
attitudes toward reading and a more positive concept of themselves as readers
than do less fluent readers.
The correlation between fluency and reading comprehension is robust and well
documented (Allington, 1983; Fuchs et al., 2001; Levy, Abello, & Lysynchuk,
1997; Pikulski & Chard, 2005). However, the precise nature of the relationship
between fluency and comprehension is far from understood (Meyer & Felton, 1999;
Pikulski & Chard, 2005). As Stecker, Roser, and Martinez (1998) argue, “The
issue of whether fluency is an outgrowth [of] or a contributor to comprehension
is unresolved. There is empirical evidence to support both positions” (p. 300).
Ultimately, Stecker et al. state that, “fluency has been shown to have a
‘reciprocal relationship’ with comprehension, with each fostering the other” (p.
306). Teachers can think of fluency as a bridge between the two major components
of reading: decoding of individual words and comprehension of text meaning. It
has been argued that fluency may be related to comprehension for braille readers
in similar ways (Harley, Truan, & Sanford, 1987; Koenig & Holbrook, 1989).
The Role of Fluency in Braille Reading
Our definition of fluency is based on that proposed by the National Reading
Panel for print readers and combines accuracy, rate, and oral reading prosody,
which taken together facilitate a reader’s comprehension of text. Characterized
by quick and effortless reading, fluency is complex and multifaceted, requiring
accurate reading of connected text at a conversational rate with appropriate
expression, or prosody. Fluency is believed to follow a developmental
trajectory: as students increase their automatic word recognition skills in the
elementary grades, they no longer struggle to identify words and can devote more
mental resources to understanding the text (Chall, 1979; LaBerge & Samuels,
1974). As such, oral reading fluency performance is frequently used as a proxy
for overall reading competence in print readers, promoted as the “single best
indicator of reading proficiency” (Daly, Chafouleas, & Skinner, 2005, p. 10).
Oral reading fluency has been conceptualized in a similar way for braille
readers. An easily observable measure of reading ability, oral reading speed and
accuracy are frequently reported outcome measures in braille reading
intervention studies (e.g., Bickford & Falco, 2012; Day, McDonnell, & O’Neill,
2008; Pattillo et al., 2004).
Fluency is a goal for all beginning readers, whether they read print or braille.
Several variables can influence a student’s fluent reading of a given text: the
proportion of words read correctly, the speed at which words are decoded, as
well as the student’s comprehension and vocabulary knowledge. The braille code
adds an extra layer of complexity to the reading process. As such, some braille
readers may take longer to achieve fluency than readers of print. However,
research suggests that this gap is temporary and, given appropriate instruction,
children who read braille can become fluent (Wall Emerson, Holbrook, & D’Andrea,
2009). It is essential that teachers maintain high expectations for their
braille students.
What is an appropriate reading rate in braille? This question is difficult to
answer. The earliest measures of braille reading rates were conducted in the
latter half of the 20th century. Foulke, in his 1979 review of research on
braille reading, concluded that the serial nature of braille reading,
necessitated by the limitations of tactile perception, prevent braille readers
from achieving rates equal to their sighted peers. It is generally accepted that
a good braille reader reads at approximately 1/3–1/2 the speed of a print reader
of the same age (Pring, 1994).
For adults who read braille, averages of 70-100
words per minute are often reported compared to print readers’ 200-300 words per
minute. But braille reading speed is a controversial topic. Knowlton and Wetzel
(1996) measured speeds of experienced braille readers and found a mean of 136
words per minute and a range of 65 to 185 words per minute. Others have reported
much higher rates (cf. Legge, Madison, & Mansfield, 1999). Indeed, efforts to
determine optimal reading rates and to identify the most efficient hand
movements required to improve reading speed dominated braille research for much
of the 20th century. While it is likely that the reading rates of young braille
readers are indeed slower than print reading rates in same-age peers, at least
one study of experienced adult braille readers found that less than one third of
braille readers read slower than print readers (Wetzel & Knowlton, 2000).
Teachers can review average oral reading rates for sighted readers and estimate
minimum benchmarks for braille readers at specific grade levels. However, these
are only guides, as each student is unique.
Factors that Facilitate Effective Fluency Instruction
Identifying the most effective instructional factors and intervention strategies
for enhancing braille reading fluency is important for several reasons. Many
children with visual impairments demonstrate poor fluency with correspondingly
low levels of comprehension skill (Corn, et al., 2002; Trent & Truan, 1997;
Wormsley, 1996). Without appropriate interventions, young struggling braille
readers may develop chronic problems with reading fluency which, in turn, may
discourage these children from reading because it is laborious, resulting in
reduced reading practice and a cycle of ongoing underachievement (Barlow-Brown &
Connelly, 2002; Forster, 2009). Given the relationship between reading
difficulties and fluency, TVIs need effective practices that will support the
braille user’s development of reading fluency. Several factors identified in the
literature appear to benefit braille readers as they develop fluency. Among
these are: the use of evidence-based practices adapted from print literacy
instruction (Pattillo et al, 2004; Savaiano & Hatton, 2013); the importance of
early intervention and daily instruction in braille reading (Koenig & Holbrook,
2000; Wall Emerson, Holbrook, & D’Andrea, 2009; Wormsley, 2004); and the
critical need for trained TVIs to deliver literacy instruction (Bickford &
Falco, 2012; Day et al, 2008).
Evidence-based fluency interventions
Fluency interventions are purposeful instructional activities that facilitate
fluency development. Since the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis found
strong support for explicit fluency instruction (NICHD, 2000), a large body of
experimental evidence has accumulated that explores fluency interventions for
struggling print readers. The instructional strategies with the strongest
empirical base include guided oral reading with feedback and multiple
re-readings of appropriate-leveled text (Kuhn & Stahl, 2003; NICHD, 2000).
The National Reading Panel concluded that guided oral reading procedures that
incorporated feedback from teachers, peers, or parents had a significant and
positive impact on fluency and comprehension (NICHD, 2000). There are a number
of effective procedures that can be used in providing guided oral reading. For
example, teacher-led guided oral reading can be provided as part of
individualized or small group instruction. This would begin with the teacher
modeling fluent reading of an appropriately leveled text, followed by a period
of assisted practice where the student re-reads the text with teacher support,
and finally concludes as responsibility is shifted to the student to read the
text independently until a desired level of fluency is achieved (Osborn, Lehr, &
Hiebert, 2003). Other methods might include partner reading of a text—with a
more fluent reader paired with a less fluent reader (Fuchs, Fuchs, Mathes, &
Simmons, 1997); or, tape-assisted reading, where a student first listens to a
recording of a fluent reader and then practices reading along (Carbo, 1981;
Shany & Biemiller, 1995).
Day and colleagues (2008) examined the effects of using a research-based print
reading program modified to accommodate five beginning braille readers. The
Early Steps Alphabet Braille Reading Program contains several features of guided
oral reading to enhance fluency. Each intervention session began with a segment
where students re-read texts from earlier lessons. A guided oral reading of a
new book based on the child’s instructional level concluded the intervention
session. Because the participants in this study were young children, shared
reading of text and a language experience approach are also integrated into
fluency-building activities. Children author sentences in braille and re-read
their sentences multiple times as part of the intervention program. Similarly,
children engage in multiple readings of target words. Word identification
fluency, a component skill of and pre-requisite to reading fluency, was a
central outcome measured in this study and improved for all five beginning
braille readers.
Re-reading of text is a key feature of fluency intervention for struggling
readers of traditional print. One of the most widely supported methods of
increasing print reading fluency is the repeated reading process first proposed
by Samuels (1979). The repeated reading method consists of having a student
re-read a short text several times until a satisfactory level of fluency is
achieved. When a student meets the fluency criterion set, a new passage is
introduced and the process repeats. Since this method was introduced in 1979,
researchers have investigated numerous variations, including the effects of
modeling fluent reading, text difficulty, and student participation in goal
setting and contingent rewards for meeting the criterion (see Hasbrouck, Ihnot,
& Rogers, 1999, for a review of this research).
Recent research offers promising support for the use of repeated reading methods
with braille readers. Pattillo et al. (2004) found gains in fluency after a
repeated reading intervention with five students with visual impairments, one of
who used braille as the primary learning medium. These results replicate the
findings of Layton and Koenig (1998) who studied the effects of repeated
readings on fluency with four students with low vision. Pattillo and colleagues
(2004) used a modified repeated reading strategy in conjunction with
computer-assisted voice-reading software. All participants in this study
demonstrated improvements in oral reading fluency.
Early Intervention
Early instruction in braille plays a crucial role for children who are blind to
be able to fully participate with their peers (Bickford & Falco, 2012; Mangold,
2003; Wormsley, 2004). Olson (1981) recommends encouraging efficiency in braille
skills during the early years because early literacy skills have a direct impact
on a child’s later literacy development. Young children with visual impairments
not only have to learn the braille code, but must also develop mechanical skills
in order to be efficient and fluent braille readers. These mechanical skills
include finger dexterity/wrist flexibility, hand movement skills/finger
positions, light finger touch, and tactile perception/discrimination skills
(Olson, 1981). These skills should be introduced early and refined throughout
the elementary years so that children, as they grow, can focus on accurate and
fluent braille reading.
This early braille instruction should be delivered by a qualified teacher of
students with visual impairments. However, schools in the United States face a
chronic shortage of teachers qualified to teach braille. Spungin (2003) reported
that there were only about 6,700 fulltime TVIs serving approximately 93,600
students. Some students with visual impairments may not have access to a TVI on
a regular basis. Districts often find it difficult to provide a TVI in rural
areas, where an itinerant TVI can be expected to teach sixteen or more students
on a caseload spread over large geographic areas (Caton, 1991). When students do
not have access to a TVI all areas of education are affected, but particularly
literacy acquisition. It is imperative that schools ensure children with visual
impairments are provided a quality education that includes instruction from a
qualified TVI.
Implications for Practitioners and Families
We know that for sighted readers, students who do not develop reading fluency
are much more likely to remain poor readers throughout their lives (Snow, Burns,
& Griffin, 1998). Whether the same is true for readers of braille is not as
clear, though preliminary indications and anecdotal evidence would suggest the
consequences for dysfluent braille readers are similar (Coppins & Barlow-Brown,
2006). We know that for most readers of print, fluency develops gradually over
time and through extensive reading practice (NICHD, 2000).
What can be done to help braille readers become fluent readers? The simple
answer would seem to be to give them more practice. What types of practice are
most effective? Repeated oral reading has been widely researched and
demonstrated to improve reading fluency for print readers (see Kuhn & Stahl,
2003 for a review). Preliminary support suggests these methods are also
effective for braille readers as well (Pattillo et al., 2004). Integrated
fluency instruction as described by Day et al. (2008) and Wall Emerson,
Holbrook, and D’Andrea (2009) that includes teacher-led guided reading, repeated
oral readings, and wide independent reading also appears to be beneficial.
TVIs should, whenever possible, select evidence-based interventions for their
braille readers who exhibit fluency deficits. To effectively support fluency
development for struggling braille readers, the TVI will likely require the
assistance of the school’s literacy specialists in order to successfully
implement new instructional strategies into the daily braille instruction.
Literacy coaches, reading specialists, and general special educators are often
their building’s best resources on the use of evidence-based literacy
instruction.
Firstly, teachers should encourage students to re-read books until they achieve
fluency. As children re-read familiar texts, they can devote more effort to
efficient hand and finger movements, further enhancing reading speed. Secondly,
variations of repeated reading methods can include taped readings, paired
readings, and the self-charting of fluency gains by the student. Each of these
methods, though not validated for use with users of braille, has been
demonstrated to build fluency in print readers (see Kuhn & Stahl, 2003, for a
review of the literature supporting these instructional strategies). Teachers
should monitor their student’s fluency development, and, when a child’s reading
progress stalls, teachers may need to alter the intervention, increase the
instructional intensity, or both.
Parents and caregivers can also support children’s fluency development. Several
easy strategies for guiding the braille reader toward fluency can be used. For
example, an adult or older sibling can read aloud to the child and provide an
example of how fluent reading sounds. Or, books on tape can be used and the
child asked to follow along in the text. Having the child practice reading the
same list of words, sentences, or short passages several times also builds
fluency. Another activity that can be used at home is echo reading. Here, the
adult reads a phrase, sentence, or paragraph aloud. The child reads the same
phrase, sentence, or paragraph afterwards, like an echo. It is important to set
aside time for reading practice every day; even a few minutes a day can help
develop fluency (Elish-Piper, 2010). Finally, keep books around that the child
enjoys for re-reading. He or she can practice reading a simple book to share
with a younger sibling or another young child.
Our understanding of fluency for braille readers is only beginning to take
shape. The need for well-designed, rigorous research in this area is urgent.
Only then can those who provide braille instruction be assured access to a body
of best practices, giving students with visual impairments the opportunity to
reach their potential as readers.
References
-
Allington, R. L. (1983). Fluency: The slighted goal. The reading teacher, 36,
556-561.
-
Barlow-Brown, F., & Connelly, V. (2002). The role of letter knowledge and
phonological awareness in young braille readers. Journal of Research in Reading,
25(3), 259-270. doi: 10.1111/1467-9817.00174
-
Bickford, J., & Falco, R. (2012). Technology for early braille literacy:
comparison of traditional braille instruction and instruction with an electronic
note taker. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 106(10), 697-693.
-
Carbo, M. (1981). Making books talk to children. The reading teacher, 35(2),
186-189.
-
Caton, H. (Ed.). (1991). Print and braille literacy: Selecting appropriate
learning media. Louisville, KY: American Printing House for the Blind.
-
Chall, J. S. (1979). The great debate: Ten years later, with a modest proposal
for reading stages. In L.B. Resnick & P.A. Weaver (Eds.), Theory and practice of
early reading (Vol.1, pp. 29-56). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
-
Chard D. J., Vaughn S., & Tyler B. (2002). A synthesis of research on effective
interventions for building reading fluency with elementary students with
learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(5), 386–406. doi:
10.1177/00222194020350050101
-
Coppins, N., & Barlow-Brown, F. (2006). Reading difficulties in blind,
braille-reading children. The British Journal of Visual Impairment, 24(1),
37-39.
-
Corn, A. L., Wall, R. S., Jose, R. T., Bell, J. K., Wilcox, K., & Perez, A.
(2002). An initial study of reading and comprehension rates for students who
received optical devices. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 96(5),
322-334.
-
Daly, E. J., III, Chafouleas, S., & Skinner, C. H. (2005). Interventions for
reading problems: Designing and evaluating effective strategies. New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
-
Day, N. J., McDonnell, A., & O’Neill, R. (2008) Teaching beginning braille
reading using an alphabet or uncontracted braille approach. Journal of
Behavioral Education, 17(3), 253-277. doi: 10.1007/s10864-008-9067-0
-
Dodd, B., & Conn, L. (2000). The effect of braille orthography on blind
children’s phonological awareness. Journal of Research in Reading, 23(1), 1-11.
doi: 10.1111/1467-9817.00098
-
Edmonds, C. J., & Pring, L. (2006). Generating inferences from written and
spoken language. A comparison of children with visual impairment and children
with sight. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 24(2), 337-351. doi:
10.1348/026151005X35994
-
Elish-Piper L. (2010). Parental involvement in reading: Information and ideas
for parents about fluency and vocabulary. Illinois Reading Council Journal,
38(2), 48-49.
-
Ferrell, K. A., Mason, L., Young, J., & Cooney, J. (2006). Forty years of
literacy research in blindness and visual impairment: Technical Report. Greeley,
CO: University of Northern Colorado, National Center on Low-Incidence
Disabilities. Retrieved from
http://www.unco.edu/ncssd/resources/Literacy%20Meta-Analysis%20Technical%20Report.pdf
-
Foulke, E. (1979). Investigative approaches to the study of braille-reading.
Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 73(8), 298-308.
-
Forster, E. M. (2009). Investigating the effects of a repeated reading
intervention for increasing oral reading fluency with primary, braille-reading
students using curriculum-based measurement within a response to intervention
framework. (Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver,
Canada). Retrieved from
https://circle.ubc.ca/bitstream/handle/2429/7715/ubc_2009_spring_forster_erika_m.pdf?sequence=1
-
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading
fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and
historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 239-256.
-
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Mathes, P. G., & Simmons, D C. (1997). Peer-assisted
learning strategies: Making classrooms more responsive to diversity. American
Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 174–206. doi: 10.3102/00028312034001174
-
Gillon, G. T., & Young, A. A. (2002). The phonological-awareness skills of
children who are blind. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 96(1),
38-49.
-
Hasbrouck, J. E., Ihnot, C., & Rogers, G. H. (1999). “Read Naturally”: A
strategy to increase oral reading fluency. Reading Research and Instruction,
39(1), 27-37. doi: 10.1080/19388079909558310
-
Harley, R. K., Traun, M. B., & Sanford, L.D. (1987). Communication skills for
visually impaired learners. Springfield, IL: C. Charles Thomas Publisher.
-
Hudson, R. F., Lane, H. B., & Pullen, P. C. (2005). Reading fluency assessment
and instruction: What, why, and how? The Reading Teacher, 58(8), 702-714. doi:
10.1598/RT.58.8.1
-
Jenkins, J. R., Fuchs, L. S., van den Broek, P., Espin, C., & Deno, S. L.
(20003). Sources of individual differences in reading comprehension and reading
fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 719–729.
-
Klauda, S. L., & Guthrie, J. T. (2008). Relationships of three components of
reading fluency to reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology,
100(2), 310–321. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.310
-
Knowlton, M., & Wetzel, R. (1996). Braille reading rates as a function of
reading tasks. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 90(3), 227-236.
-
Koenig, A. J., & Holbrook, M. C. (1989). Determining the reading medium for
students with visual impairments: A diagnostic teaching approach. Journal of
Visual Impairment and Blindness, 83, 296-302.
-
Koenig, A. J., & Holbrook, M. C. (2000). Ensuring high-quality instruction for
students in Braille literacy programs. Journal of Visual Impairment and
Blindness, 94(11), 677-694.
-
Kuhn, M. R., & Stahl, S. A. (2003). Fluency: A review of developmental and
remedial practices. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 3-21. doi:
10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.3
-
Kutner, M., Greenberg, E., Jin, Y., Boyle, B., Hsu, Y., & Dunleavy, E. (2007).
Literacy in everyday life: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult
Literacy (NCES 2007-480). Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Statistics, US Department of Education.
-
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information
processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 293-323. doi:
10.1016/0010-0285(74)90015-2
-
Layton, C. A., & Koenig, A. J. (1998). Increasing fluency in elementary students
with low vision through repeated readings. Journal of Visual Impairment and
Blindness, 92(5), 276-292.
-
Legge, G. E., Madison, C., & Mansfield, J. S. (1999). Measuring Braille reading
speed with the MNREAD test. Vision Impairment Research, 1(3), 131-145. doi: 10.1076/vimr.1.3.131.4438
-
Levy, B. A., Abello, B., & Lysynchuk, L. (1997). Transfer from word training to
reading in context: Gains in reading fluency and comprehension. Learning
Disability Quarterly, 20(3), 173-188. doi: 10.2307/1511307
-
Mangold, S. S. (2003). Speech-assisted learning provides unique braille
instruction. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 97(10), 256-261.
-
Meyer, M. S., & Felton, R. H. (1999). Repeated reading to enhance fluency: Old
approaches and new directions. Annals of Dyslexia, 49(1), 283-306. doi:
10.1007/s11881-999-0027-8
-
Munro, M. P., & Munro, H. R. (2013). Infusion of print literacy methodology into
braille instruction for students with visual impairments. Journal of Blindness
Innovation and Research, 3(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.5241/2F3-36
-
National Federation of the Blind Jernigan Institute. (2009). The braille
literacy crisis in American: Facing the truth, reversing the trend, empowering
the blind. Retrieved from the National Federation of the Blind website
http://nfb.org/images/nfb/documents/pdf/Braille_literacy_report_web.pdf
-
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHD]. (2000). Report
of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based
assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications
for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: US
Government Printing Office.
-
Oakley, G. (2005). Reading fluency as an outcome of a repertoire of interactive
reading competencies: How to teach it to different types of dysfluent readers
(and how ICT can help). New England Reading Association Journal, 41(1), 12-21.
-
Olson, M. R. (1981). Guidelines and games for teaching efficient braille
reading. New York, NY: American Foundation for the Blind.
-
Osborn, J., Lehr, F., & Hiebert, E. H. (2003). A focus on fluency. Honolulu, HI:
Pacific Resources for Education and Learning.
-
Pattillo, S. T., Heller, K. W., & Smith, M. (2004). The impact of a modified
repeated-reading strategy paired with optical character recognition on the
reading rates of students with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment
and Blindness, 98(1), 28-46.
-
Pikulski, J. J., & Chard, D. J. (2005). Fluency: Bridge between decoding and
reading comprehension. International Reading Association, 58(6), 510-519. doi:
10.1598/RT.58.6.2
-
Pring, L. (1994). Touch and go: Learning to read braille. Reading Research
Quarterly, 29(1), 67-74. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/747738
-
Rasinski, T., Blachowicz, C., & Lems, K. (2006). Fluency instruction:
Research-based best practices. New York, NY: Guilford.
-
Ryles, R. (1996). The impact of braille-reading skills on employment, income,
education, and reading habits. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness,
90(3), 219-226.
-
Samuels, S. J. (1979). The method of repeated readings. The Reading Teacher,
50(5), 376-381.
-
Samuels, S. J. (2006). Toward a model of reading fluency. In S. J. Samuels & A.
E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about fluency instruction (pp.
24-46). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
-
Savaiano, M., & Hatton, D. (2013). Using repeated reading to improve reading
speed and comprehension in students with visual impairments. Journal of Visual
Impairments and Blindness, 107(2), 93-106.
-
Schroeder, F. K. (1989). Literacy: The key to opportunity. Journal of Visual
Impairment and Blindness, 83(6), 290-293.
-
Shany, M. T., & Biemiller, A. (1995). Assisted reading practice: Effects on
performance for poor readers in grades 3 and 4. Reading Research Quarterly,
50(3), 382-395
-
Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties
in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
-
Stecker, S. K., Roser, N. L., & Martinez, M. G. (1998). Understanding oral
reading fluency. In T. Shanahan & F.V. Rodriguez-Brown (Eds.), 47th yearbook of
the National Reading Conference (pp. 295-310). Chicago, IL: National Reading
Conference.
-
Steinman, B. A., LeJeune, B. J., & Kimbrough, B. T. (2006). Developmental stages
of reading processes in children who are blind and sighted. Journal of Visual
Impairment and Blindness, 100(1), 36-46
-
Spungin, S. J. (2003). Cannibalism is alive and well in the blindness field.
Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness 97(2), 69-71.
-
Trent, S. D., & Truan, M. B. (1997). Speed, accuracy and comprehension of
adolescent Braille readers in a specialized school. Journal of Visual
Impairments and Blindness, 91(5), 494-500.
-
Wall Emerson, R., Holbrook, M. C., & D’Andrea, F. M. (2009). Acquisition of
literacy skills by young children who are blind: Results from the ABC braille
study. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 103(10), 610-624.
-
Wells-Jensen, S. (2003). Just say no to reading braille: Part II. Braille
Monitor, 46(3), 192-199.
-
Wetzel, R., & Knowlton, M. (2000). A comparison of print and braille reading
rates on three reading tasks. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 94(3),
1-18.
-
Wolf, M., & Katzir-Cohen, T. (2001). Reading fluency and its intervention.
Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 211–239.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S1532799XSSR0503_2
-
Wolffe, K. E., & Kelly, S. M. (2011). Instruction in areas of the expanded core
curriculum linked to transition outcomes fore students with visual impairments.
Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 105(6), 340-349.
-
Wormsley, D. P. (1996). Reading rates of young braille-reading children. Journal
of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 90(3), 278-282.
-
Wormsley, D. P. (2004). Braille literacy: A functional approach. New York, NY:
AFB Press.
ϟ
Improving Braille Reading Fluency
by
Kathleen Stanfa & Nicole Johnson
[Kathleen Stanfa &
Nicole Johnson are Assistant Professors in the Special Education Department at
Kutztown University of Pennsylvania]
Δ
15.Set.2016
publicado
por
MJA
|