Latest / The Reading Instruction Show / Orton-Gillingham: Behind the Pretty Words

Transcript

Orton-Gillingham: Behind the Pretty Words · The Reading Instruction Show

• 0:00
  Greetings, this is The Reading Instruction Show.
• 0:03
  As always, I am your host, Dr. Andy Johnson.
• 0:06
  The title of today's podcast is called Orton
• 0:09
  Gillingham, full colon, Behind the Pretty Words.
• 0:15
  So let's see if we can learn something today.
• 0:19
  Unpacking Orton Gillingham. Orton Gillingham
• 0:22
  is an approach to teaching reading that is, quote,
• 0:26
  multisensory, sequential, incremental, cumulative,
• 0:30
  individualized, phonics -based, and explicit,
• 0:33
  so said Ripple 2020. A recent article in the
• 0:38
  Reading League Journal said that, quote, many
• 0:41
  of the defining features of OG approach are supported
• 0:45
  by extensive scientific research, including direct
• 0:50
  and explicit instruction with scaffolding, structured
• 0:55
  and sequential instruction, and diagnostic and
• 0:59
  prescriptive instruction, Austrian et al 2024.
• 1:05
  Also, the Orton -Gillingham website described
• 1:10
  the approach as, quote, direct, explicit, multi
• 1:15
  -century, structured, sequential, diagnostic,
• 1:19
  and prescriptive. Now if the number of superlative
• 1:25
  adjectives used to describe a thing determine
• 1:29
  its effectiveness, then by all means Orton Gillingham
• 1:34
  would be very effective. But what exactly do
• 1:40
  all these pretty, pretty words mean? Let's do
• 1:44
  a little unpacker right in here. Direct instruction.
• 1:48
  Yes, direct and explicit instruction is supported
• 1:53
  by extensive scientific research. Absolutely.
• 1:59
  Everybody in the world knows that. They would
• 2:01
  agree that direct instruction is an important
• 2:05
  part of reading instruction. Old language teachers
• 2:10
  use direct instruction. Balanced literacy teachers
• 2:14
  use direct instruction. And I'm sure if penguins
• 2:18
  could be trained to teach reading, they too would
• 2:21
  use direct instruction. Direct instruction is
• 2:26
  a pedagogical strategy consisting of a, explicit
• 2:29
  input, b, modeling or demonstration, c, guided
• 2:33
  practice with a gradual release of responsibility
• 2:36
  called scaffolding, and d, independent practice.
• 2:43
  Direct instruction. is an effective teaching
• 2:46
  strategy for the initial learning of any kind,
• 2:52
  absolutely. But it's a strategy that every teacher
• 2:57
  should have in their teaching toolbox. It's basic
• 3:02
  teaching 101. It has never been a question of
• 3:09
  if direct instruction should be used in early
• 3:12
  reading instruction. It's always been a question
• 3:16
  of how or how much direct instruction should
• 3:20
  be used. For the science of reading people, it's
• 3:24
  always been much. For balanced literacy practitioners,
• 3:29
  it's always been as much as needed. Scaffolding.
• 3:35
  Educational scaffolding is any kind of support
• 3:39
  used with initial learning. This initial support
• 3:45
  is followed by a gradual release of teacher responsibility
• 3:50
  as students become more adept with what's being
• 3:55
  learned. Scaffolding is a part of guided practice
• 4:00
  used in direct instruction. However, it's also
• 4:03
  used to provide support with any type of learning.
• 4:08
  Everybody believes that scaffolding is an important
• 4:12
  thing. This is not something new or unique. This
• 4:18
  is not something that needs extensive scientific
• 4:21
  research to determine its effectiveness. Again,
• 4:26
  basic teaching 101. What about structured and
• 4:31
  sequential instruction? Well, according to the
• 4:35
  International Dyslexia Association, structured
• 4:40
  instruction for reading includes these six elements,
• 4:45
  phonology, sound symbol association, syllable
• 4:49
  instruction, morphology, syntax, and semantics.
• 4:55
  Again, you'd get little argument from anyone
• 4:58
  in the field of literacy that these elements
• 5:01
  should not be part of initial reading instruction.
• 5:06
  But what's interesting here is that each of the
• 5:10
  three queuing systems are used here. Hmm. Hmm.
• 5:16
  Does the International Dyslexia Association support
• 5:20
  the three queuing systems? Hmm. Perhaps there's
• 5:24
  hope for this organization. And why am I dragging
• 5:29
  the International Dyslexia Association into the
• 5:33
  mix here? It's because of their strong link to
• 5:37
  Orton Gillingham. This organization was originally
• 5:41
  called the Orton Society. In 1982, it changed
• 5:46
  its name to the Orton Dyslexia Society. And in
• 5:50
  1997, it changed its name to the International
• 5:54
  Dyslexia Association. IDA. But more importantly,
• 6:02
  in 2014, they were the ones who came up with
• 6:07
  the term structured literacy, from which structured
• 6:12
  instruction is derived. And the quiet part was
• 6:17
  said out loud when they stated the purpose of
• 6:21
  the term was to, quote, unify and sell what we
• 6:25
  do, unquote. It's all about marketing, you see.
• 6:31
  Now, according to the IDA, structured instruction
• 6:34
  is, quote, systematic and cumulative. Now let's
• 6:39
  pause a minute to look at the accumulation of
• 6:44
  all the important sounding words used so far.
• 6:49
  Structured, systematic, scientific, diagnostic,
• 6:54
  prescriptive, direct. explicit, extensive, sequential,
• 6:59
  cumulative, logical order. How could anybody
• 7:05
  be against these things? But what exactly do
• 7:10
  they mean? Now if you want to have a good time,
• 7:15
  ask your Science of Reading friends or your IDA
• 7:19
  and Orton Gillingham friends. to define these
• 7:22
  11 terms and then record their responses. You'll
• 7:27
  notice quite a bit of variation in the responses
• 7:30
  as well as a lot of squirming. The IDA says,
• 7:36
  quote, systematic means that the organization
• 7:39
  of material follows the logical order of the
• 7:42
  language. More words thrown about. What is the
• 7:49
  logical order of language. Is there an illogical
• 7:54
  order? According to the IDA, the logical order,
• 7:59
  quote, must begin with the easiest and most basic
• 8:03
  concepts and progress methodically to more difficult
• 8:06
  concepts and elements, unquote. To which I say,
• 8:11
  brilliant! But again, this is Basic Teaching
• 8:15
  101. Good teachers, always start with easy or
• 8:20
  simple things and progress to more difficult
• 8:24
  or complex things as students are ready. However,
• 8:30
  what's easiest and most basic in reading is based
• 8:34
  on one's experience with language. Reading things
• 8:38
  that make sense and using words and concepts
• 8:42
  from children's experience is much easier. than
• 8:46
  decoding lists of words and nonsense words in
• 8:50
  isolation, and reading decodable books with artificial
• 8:55
  sentences like nan and pap sat on a pan. Cumulative
• 9:02
  means that each new thing builds on the last
• 9:06
  thing, and again, basic teaching 101. Good teachers
• 9:12
  always make connections to or build upon previous
• 9:16
  learning. This is basic constructivist learning
• 9:21
  theory. This also reflects Bruner's learning
• 9:26
  theory that calls for skills and concepts to
• 9:30
  be taught in their simplest form first to become
• 9:34
  a platform for more complex skills and concepts
• 9:38
  later on. But what about sequential instruction?
• 9:44
  What's the sequence? And who decided that the
• 9:49
  sequence was to be a sequence? Hence, you get
• 9:55
  things like a scope and sequence chart. Now these
• 10:01
  can be useful in providing a general sense of
• 10:06
  the kinds of things you might teach early on,
• 10:09
  as well as the types of letter patterns you might
• 10:12
  ask students to notice, However, scope and sequence
• 10:16
  charts are not reliable enough to be used in
• 10:21
  a prescriptive fashion. They should never become
• 10:25
  the roadmap to instruction. However, the giant
• 10:32
  I -thinkism behind structured instruction is
• 10:36
  that if children just put all the teeny tiny
• 10:39
  parts of a scope and sequence chart together
• 10:42
  in a logical order, they'll be able to read.
• 10:47
  And that's just playing cookie talk. Alright,
• 10:51
  diagnostic and prescriptive instruction. An effective
• 10:56
  diagnosis of any kind first determines if there
• 11:00
  is a problem and then identifies the cause of
• 11:04
  the problem. According to the IDA, International
• 11:09
  Dyslexia Association, diagnostic and prescriptive
• 11:13
  instruction uses, quote, careful and continuous
• 11:17
  assessment that is both formal and informal,
• 11:21
  unquote. Everybody agrees that careful and continuous
• 11:27
  assessment is important. Nobody wants careless
• 11:31
  and discontinuous assessment. However, a proper
• 11:36
  diagnosis of reading occurs apart from instruction
• 11:40
  and focuses on three deficit areas, word recognition,
• 11:46
  fluency, and comprehension. And I have yet to
• 11:50
  find a more effective diagnostic instrument than
• 11:54
  a diagnostic reading assessment sometimes called
• 11:57
  an informal reading inventory. But diagnostic
• 12:03
  instruction uses assessments within the context
• 12:07
  of instruction. The proper term for this is progress
• 12:14
  monitoring. Effective reading instruction of
• 12:17
  any kind has always included pragmatic measures
• 12:22
  to use for progress monitoring. Prescriptive
• 12:27
  instruction is an instructional plan based on
• 12:32
  the diagnosis. Now struggling readers are not
• 12:36
  all the same. Each has different strength and
• 12:41
  deficit areas. Since each deficit area is addressed
• 12:46
  differently, the instruction prescribed for each
• 12:50
  student should be different. This points to the
• 12:55
  importance of a valid diagnostic measure specifically
• 13:00
  addressing the three deficit areas, word recognition,
• 13:04
  fluency, and or comprehension. Now this is much
• 13:08
  different from the one -size -fits -all instruction
• 13:11
  used in Orton -Gillingham and other reading products.
• 13:16
  Here the same reading subskills are prescribed
• 13:20
  in the same order in the same way. High -ability
• 13:24
  readers go a little faster and are a little ahead.
• 13:28
  Struggling readers go a little slower and are
• 13:31
  a little behind. But the same prescription is
• 13:35
  used with everybody. This instruction could hardly
• 13:40
  be said to be prescriptive. And multi -sensory.
• 13:47
  Ah! Multisensory instruction is said to be the
• 13:52
  magic ingredient in Orton -Gillingham. Multisensory!
• 13:59
  This simply means visual, auditory, and kinesthetic
• 14:02
  modalities are used when teaching. In other words,
• 14:09
  as children are learning, they see things, they
• 14:13
  hear things, and they do things. This is nothing
• 14:18
  new or magical. It's not unique to Orton -Gillingham.
• 14:23
  It's called multimodal instruction, and elementary
• 14:27
  teachers have been using various forms of it
• 14:31
  for decades. So the research, what about the
• 14:36
  research that, quote, proves, unquote, the effectiveness
• 14:40
  of Orton -Gillingham? Well, despite the claims
• 14:45
  of being heavily research -based, it's simply
• 14:49
  not. The research used to support the use of
• 14:53
  Orton Gillingham often measures students' progress
• 14:57
  using pseudo -reading or non -reading tasks.
• 15:01
  It uses measures of questionable validity. It
• 15:06
  does not use comparison groups. It's derived
• 15:09
  from unpublished master's or doctoral theses.
• 15:13
  Is a study put out by organizations that have
• 15:17
  a vested interest in certain outcomes or makes
• 15:21
  claims of superiority without controlling for
• 15:25
  covariates such as gender, socioeconomic status,
• 15:29
  ethnicity, verbal IQ, or initial reading skills?
• 15:35
  The problem with Orton Gillingham and similar
• 15:38
  for -profit products, Lindemude, Whilson, Language
• 15:43
  Training, Barton Systems, etc., is that they
• 15:48
  try to reduce teaching to an algorithm. An algorithm
• 15:54
  is a formula for solving problems in which you
• 15:58
  follow a step -by -step set of procedures with
• 16:02
  fidelity, to achieve a specific outcome. In other
• 16:08
  words, by correctly following a prescribed set
• 16:12
  of steps in a specific order, you will be led
• 16:16
  to a predetermined solution. Algorithms are useful
• 16:21
  in mathematics and computer science for calculation,
• 16:25
  data processing, and automatic reasoning. But
• 16:28
  for teaching, not so much. However, Orton Gillingham
• 16:34
  would have you believe that if the teaching algorithm
• 16:38
  is followed explicitly, the teacher can be assured
• 16:42
  that students will learn to read. And if the
• 16:46
  algorithm doesn't work, you run them through
• 16:49
  the algorithm again and again and again. What
• 16:54
  these algorithmic programs offer is a false sense
• 16:58
  of certainty. Despite Despite all the important
• 17:07
  sounding words thrown about about the long -term
• 17:12
  effectiveness of these direct, explicit, multi
• 17:16
  -sensory, structured, sequential, diagnostic,
• 17:18
  and prescriptive instructional products, their
• 17:24
  effectiveness is simply not evident. This has
• 17:28
  been The Reading Instruction Show. I'm your host,
• 17:31
  Dr. Andy Johnson.