One of the most surprising things I've discovered during recent discussions on Substack is how much confusion still exists about memorization in reading.
When I say that children should memorize high-frequency words, many people assume I mean visual memorization. Some still imagine that skilled readers recognize words by their shape, as though the brain stores a photograph of each word and retrieves it when needed.
That is not what I mean.
Nor do I believe that words are stored in memory as visual shapes.
In fact, I've written extensively about why the visual-memory explanation does not adequately explain reading:
https://www.dyslexiafriend.com/2020/12/visual-memory-revisited.html
and
https://www.dyslexiafriend.com/2020/04/visual-memorising-my-twitter.html
My position is much simpler.
When children learn their multiplication tables, they do not memorise the visual appearance of "7 × 8 = 56". They memorise a sequence that can be recalled automatically.
The same principle applies to high-frequency words.
In my reading program, I introduce the word 'with' in Lesson Two. Most children already know this word in spoken language.
I ask them to say:
W-I-T-H, with
Then repeat it.
W-I-T-H, with
Five times.
That's all.
No discussion of word shape.
No guessing from context.
No elaborate theories.
The child memorizes the sequence of letters and connects that spelling to a word they already know. Before long, they can immediately identify the word when they encounter it in print.
That is rote memorisation.
And there is nothing mysterious or controversial about it.
The irony is that every fluent reader has thousands of such word representations stored in memory. Whether those memories developed through explicit practice or repeated exposure, they exist.
The real question is not whether memorisation occurs.
The real question is why we are so reluctant to acknowledge its importance.
Many phonics advocates argue that high-frequency words will eventually become automatic through decoding and repeated reading. I agree that this often happens.
But why wait?
If a word like 'with' occurs repeatedly in children's books, why not help children memorise it early and free up mental energy for reading the words that actually need decoding?
My own experience teaching struggling readers suggests that a combination of phonics and memorisation is far more effective than treating them as competing approaches.
Phonics enables children to decode unfamiliar words.
Memorisation enables children to instantly recognize frequently encountered words.
Together they produce fluent reading.
Separately, each is incomplete.
This idea is hardly radical. Even highly accomplished learners in other fields often rely on memorisation as a foundation. Catherine Drennan, a professor at MIT, has spoken about the value of memorisation in her own educational journey:
https://www.dyslexiafriend.com/2025/01/mit-professor-catherine-drennan-on-her.html#more
Nobody accuses a mathematician of cheating because they memorised the times table.
Nobody accuses a musician of cheating because they memorised scales.
Yet when memorisation is suggested as part of reading instruction, some react as though it is a return to educational darkness.
Perhaps we need to stop treating phonics and memorisation as rivals.
The successful reader uses both.
The struggling reader often needs both.
And the sooner we acknowledge that reality, the sooner we can help children read with confidence rather than confusion.
No comments:
Post a Comment