Phonological awareness deficit (Re-visit)

 

Now, let us look at Timothy Shanahan's blog in 2015 – that is 5 years after my emails to all the experts who echoed what one guy told the world more than 35 years ago.

He said that phonological awareness deficit is the cause of dyslexia.

We had a procedure for sounding it out that would reach virtually 100 percent of the kids (Siegfried Engelmann)

                                                      

More than 20 years ago the researchers of the Children of the Code were aware that unvoiced sounds should be unvoiced.

The following is an extract from an interview of Siegfried Engelmann conducted by David Boulton.

Siegfried Engelmann:

The mistakes the kids made guided us to see that we had something missing. For instance, at first, we had them sound out words traditionally. We never permitted "ch-aa-tah” for chat. Unvoiced sounds were unvoiced -- "ch-a-t."

So now we had precise corrections related to what they had learned earlier. We had a procedure for sounding it out that would reach virtually 100 percent of the kids. So, we could teach even really low performers now to take the first step on the ladder. Then they can follow the entire sequence and they can learn at a rate far faster than would have been anticipated.

See what Dr. Richard Selznick and Dr. David Kilpatrick said on this matter. LINK

What is the percentage of neurodivergent - Dr. Martin Bloomfield (Part 3)

 

Dr. Richard Selznick in our email discussions in 2010 said:

“I agree with you that many of these kids are instructional casualties and if they had been taught differently, many would not have shut down.”

Please keep in mind that what I say and how I respond are based on my experiences and understanding of the research.  I am not a scientist or researcher, but I respond from my decades of clinical experience.

 

Brain Science and Reading

                                                            

Here are extracts from a blog post by Timothy Shanahan dated 13 January 2024 and my comments.

Timothy Shanahan:

It may be hard to believe given news media reports and the numerous books that now purport to translate neuroscience into pedagogy, but there are not any new and effective instructional methods, approaches, techniques, or materials that have been developed based on “brain science.”

Invest in something more certain to help your school – like buying lottery tickets.

So far, no instructional method has resulted from the study of the brain.

I advocate phonics because so many studies show that kids do better in learning to read when that is part of their instruction.

Behind & Beyond Sold a Story with Emily Hanford - Part 3

                                                                 

The following are questions I have for Emily Hanford and APM Reports.

Is there even one study that says that teaching letter sounds wrongly/ teaching consonants with extraneous sounds, is not the cause of kids shutting down/ disengaging from learning to read?

Is there any one study showing schools teach sounds represented by letters wrongly and that this is one of the causes of kids shutting down/ disengaging from learning to read?

Behind & Beyond Sold a Story with Emily Hanford - Part 2

                                                                    

The podcast host asked Emily:

Do you read criticisms and have a strategy for that?

Here is Emily’s response:

I don’t have a strategy to articulate. I have developed a thick skin over the years. I have never muted anyone or blocked anyone on Twitter. People can criticise you and you don’t have to respond.

I believe she has not muted anyone or blocked anyone as she has not blocked me despite many comments I have made about her. Neither have I blocked or muted anyone unlike many who have muted and blocked me.

Anna Stokke's podcast with Matthew Burns - Final Part

                                                     

Here is the fourth and final part of Anna Stokke's podcast with Matther Burns.

Anna Stokke:

About some of the education thought leaders, sometimes you could even call them education celebrities, I think. And we see this in both reading and math. Do you think maybe they get caught up in the positive attention that they're receiving and that this may be why they don't step back on the claims they've made, even when it comes to light that there are problems with some of the ideas they promote?

Matthew Burns:

And I think because of that, people telling you that your stuff is so great and people tell you what you say is true, that you sort of start to believe it.

And you get to the point where you can say, “Well, I think it's true. Therefore, it must be.” So I think we researchers need to be more self-critical and self-reflective. We need to recognize “What I'm thinking based on evidence, or is it something I think is true because I think it's true?” So I really challenge other researchers to engage in that level of self-reflection because you can get caught up in it really easily.

My comment:

Wow! Matthew has put it very well. Do read his excellent response above, again.

Are Dr. Sam Bommarito and the other educators that naive? Part 2

 

If anything is deemed offensive in my post yesterday on Dr.Sam Bommarito, it is intended.

He and many so-called educators have been stating things that are obviously misleading.

Sam mentioned David Boulton in his blog post. I commented on David Boulton’s LinkedIn post back in 2015 and stated that one of the main reasons why kids disengage from learning to read is due to the fact that teachers teach the sounds represented by letters wrongly as in the 2 videos that David recommended for viewing. He disagreed with me and blocked me and yet removed the 2 videos immediately thereafter.

In 2015, Andrew Johnson and I had several email discussions where I told him that phonological awareness deficit is not the cause of kids being unable to read. He asked me for evidence and research reports and cut me off saying that I don’t have the credentials to talk with him on this subject.

This was the same with Timothy Shanahan who ignored my comments in 2015 and made an about-turn in 2017.

I have been blocked by many so-called educators for no reason at all since 2010 when I started being active on social media. 

Are Dr. Sam Bommarito and the other educators that naive? Part 1

 

I don't believe that Dr. Sam is that naive not to be able to think for himself.

Here are tweets by Dr. Sam Bommarito and my responses.

And Andy Johnson has started a respectful conversation with someone from the "other side". They are doing a series of YouTube posts on this. That's the way science should operate- both sides respectfully listen to each other and then talk about the issue. Hope Andy's example is the start of a trend. This one is the third in the series.  So even though they disagree with each other they are both talking and listening to each other.

Luqman Michel

Did you actually listen to their dialogue? Andrew thinks there is no reading crisis because the graph shows a flat line from 1972 to 2022. David says that NAEP shows that about 60% read below proficiency level.

To me, it appears absurd that one can say there is no reading crisis.

Most Twitters have a herd mentality and wear blinkers

 

Here is a tweet I commented on and was questioned and my replies:

Evan Robb @ERobbPrincipal Aug 15

To have a great team you must surround yourself with like-minded people!

@MichelLuqman

Where do I find people who can think?

Most of the educators on Twitter have a herd mentality and wear blinkers. They base everything on research reports and rarely think. Read what Daniel Kahneman said about research reports. LINK 

Note:

Since 2010, I have been questioned on my credentials and asked for research reports when common sense should prevail. This over-reliance on research reports as if they are the gospel truth is one of the main problems facing education. 

Tim Rasinski - his tweets and my response

 

Firstly, Tim Rasinski need to learn the art of reading before talking about teaching reading. He has to learn that before replying tweets he must read the tweets he intends to reply. Secondly he needs to listen to what others have to say with an intention to understand what others, who may know the science of decoding, have to say.

Here are tweets between Tim and me on 11.8.2023.

Luqman Michel @luqmanmichel

 

Children whether taught phonics or not will be able to read nonsense words. The brain has an innate ability to read.

 

Tim Rasinski then tweeted something from the Children of the Code. LINK

‘Stupid and uneducated’ people preferred' - Tunku Ismail

 

Here is a Tweet and comments I read this morning which started me pondering.

Prof. Feynman @ProfFeynman (9.8.23)

When you're stupid, you think you know everything, without questioning and when you're intelligent, you question everything you think you know.

The wisest people are often those who are open to new ideas and perspectives, even if they challenge their own beliefs. @ravisama5

Ignorance boasts unwarranted confidence; intelligence thrives on relentless questioning. @FindTimK

Maybe I'm just smart enough to know that I am not smart enough to understand how one can be both stupid and intelligent simultaneously! @Naveen_Srini_

Paradigm Inertia – Part 2

We were told in the previous post that the biggest block to a paradigm shift is personal, emotional, and thoroughly unscientific reasons.

Let us examine some of the blocks and non-replies I have personally encountered.

i.                    Automatic reply: Dr.Charles Perfetti - Children of the Code Perfetti, Charles A perfetti@pitt.edu To:luqmanm2002@yahoo.co.uk Sat, 8 Aug 2015 at 14:08

 

I am out of the country. I will not be able to reply to all emails in a timely manner until Dec 21.

 

ii.                  Diane Lyon <dianellyon@gmail.com>

To:luqmanm2002@yahoo.co.uk Wed, 5 Aug 2015 at 21:05

My name is Diane Lyon, I'm Dr. Lyon's wife.

Reading4all@tx.rr.com is the mail we use.  Please don't hesitate to send your questions and if Dr. Lyon would be happy to answer your questions or send you to others who may have more current information.

Diane Lyon

iii.               Diane Lyon dianellyon@gmail.com To:luqmanm2002@yahoo.co.uk

Mon, 10 Aug 2015 at 21:28

Dear LUQMAN MICHEL,

We received your emails.  We are on travel and cannot commit the time needed at this time to a thorough response.  As you can imagine we receive hundreds, if not thousands, of emails and feel it only fair to respond thoughtfully when time allows.

Sounds represented by letters – A revisit

 

Many of the educators on Twitter imagine things instead of trying to understand things as they are.

I have written many blogs stating that one of the main reasons why kids disengage/shut down from learning to read is confusion as a result of teachers teaching the wrong sounds of letters. This is supported in both of Dr. David Kilpatrick’s books. Refer to page 107 of Equipped for Reading Success - How to teach the letter sounds. Also refer to page 171 of Essentials of Assessing, Preventing, and Overcoming Reading Difficulties - Keys to blending: T does not say /Tuh/.

This was also discovered more than 15 years ago by Children of the Code in which Timothy Shanahan was also interviewed.

The following is an extract from one of the interviews in Children of the Code:

And the mistakes that the kids made guided us to see that we had something missing. For instance, at first, we had them sound out words traditionally. We never permitted "ch-aa-tah” for chat. Unvoiced sounds were unvoiced -- "ch-a-t." Well, they showed us through their responses that, that stop sound beginning was really hard for them. So now we had precise corrections that related to what they had learned earlier. We had a procedure for sounding it out that would reach virtually 100 percent of the kids. So we could teach even really low performers now to take the first step on the ladder. Then they can follow the entire sequence and they can learn at a rate far faster than would have been anticipated. (Siegfried Engelmann)

Research suppressed

This is a continuation of my post yesterday on my comments on Dr. Sam Bommarito’s post which said:

I think a more useful use of our time would be to explore ideas from all sides and to find practical research-based ideas that all teachers can use regardless of whose “side” it comes from.

Research if not suppressed is not publicised. The powers that be ensure that the research material is not disseminated to schools and to the public/ parents.

Language at the Speed of Sight – Mark Seidenberg - and my comments

The first sentence in the image above says little was known in the old days.

But, many matters discovered and explained in the old days have not entered the brains of many of our present-day educators including Mark Seidenberg.

One of the most important theories proposed by Thorndike in 1913 (more than 100 years ago) is that what is learnt in the initial stage is important. New ideas that do not reconcile with old ideas will be rejected by the minds of a majority of people.

There is another quote from even much earlier as follows:

It is what we know already that often prevents us from learning. (Claude Bernard 1813 - 1878)

A kid’s prior knowledge can help or hinder learning. Prior knowledge influences how kids interpret what they are learning. When the knowledge a kid has from previous learning is inaccurate it will interfere or impede new learning. 

Different perspectives – Part 5 – Research

 

Evidence-based practices have been gaining ground since the formal introduction of evidence-based medicine in 1992 and have spread to the allied health professions, education, and other fields.

Many educators continue asking for research reports for everything. Daniel Kahneman in his book –Thinking fast and slow - said, ‘We are far too willing to believe research findings based on inadequate evidence and prone to collect too few observations in our own research.' LINK.

Once a researcher says something everyone jumps on the bandwagon and repeats what he says without the slightest bit of thought. This is exactly what happened about 45 years ago when one researcher said that it was Phonological Awareness Deficit (PAD) that was the cause of dyslexia. More than a hundred so-called educators repeated what he had said.

I disagreed with the above theory and explained why it cannot be PAD which is the cause of dyslexia. Timothy Shanahan said that there were no research reports to support what I said.

Common sense will tell that if a kid can read in Malay and Hanyu Pinyin but not in English then the cause of that kid being unable to read in English cannot be because of phonological awareness deficit. 

Can a deaf person learn to read

 

How does a deaf person learn to read just as well as one who can hear?

Read the comment section of my post on ‘How the brain learns to read' – Dehaene Stanislas.

Here is another account by another deaf person who is able to read. This should put paid to Dehaene’s theory which says the following:

Reading requires specializing the visual system for the shapes of the letters, and connecting them to speech sounds.

Teaching letter-sound correspondences is therefore essential.

I have repeated several time for you to think rather than accepting whatever is said by so called experts such as Sally Shaywitz, Dehaene Stanislas, Andy Johnson, Timothy Shanahan, David Boulton, Sharon Vaughn and many others. 

Has Lucy Calkins hoodwinked anyone?

 

I tweeted the following and received a tweet in response from Karen Vaites.

Luqman Michel @luqmanmichel May 23

'She is only now embracing reading research that is >20 years old.'

Some say 50 years.

Where were the teachers and educators during these past 20 to 50 years?

Karen Vaites @karenvaites Replying to @luqmanmichel and @DanaGoldstein

It’s a fair question, but when a woman at @Columbia @TeachersCollege tells you her program is evidence-based, I can understand people getting hoodwinked.

Heading North to go south - chinese proverb

Dr. Sam:

I’ll start by stating my position about using research. We absolutely should use research to inform our decisions about teaching. LINK