FrontPage

Outline

What is context?

What bearing does context have on fluency?

Considering and reconsidering

The effective use of context in reading

Summary

What is context?

Context has been defined in reading research in many ways. Sometimes it has been defined as the words around a particular word in a sentence or in a question. Recently, the definition has been expanded to be relevant to just reading an individual word. Context can include the grammar, meanings of individual words, a paragraph, a whole story or other text. Surprisingly, it also encompasses the reader's expectations and purposes for reading, along with the person's background knowledge and experiences; however, it is not limited to these issues alone. Combining these issues with proficient readers, context can affect the identification of single words as well as the reader's understanding of an entire text. The automatic use of multiple context is a critical part of the reading process (Brown and Weaver,1996).

This article will discuss the importance of context in reading including some of the key researchers on the topic.

What bearing does context have on fluency?

Jenkins and Stanovich are two researchers who believed that words are always read faster when they occur in a meaningful context than when words are in isolation. Stanovich and Stanovich in an article written in 1995 suggested that passage context plays a larger role in supporting word-reading fluency and accuracy for students with poor word-reading skills than for skilled readers. One difference in the ability of poor readers and skillful readers to use context to help to enlarge their word-reading fluency is the reader's background knowledge, vocabulary and experiences. According to Ehri, a reader's sense of context can improve word reading accuracy and fluency in two ways: first, it can improve the speed at which sight words are identified; secondly, it can be combined with phonemic clues to help readers identify unknown words within a text. (Hudson, R., and Torgesen, J.)

Considering and reconsidering

According to Stanovich, the simple observation that emergent readers who have been encouraged to rely mainly on context to "get" words do not always attend enough to the print. This position is sometimes made by people who do not understand that reading is a matter of making meaning first and skillful readers will commonly make some departures from the exact words of the text while maintaining syntax and meaning (Brown and Weaver).

Yet another point made by Stanovich is that emergent readers need to use context to help "say" words in text more often than the skillful reader. However, skillful readers may identify more words in isolation than in context according to Nicholson because they are concentrating on just identifying the word and not the meaning. This does not mean that less skilled readers make more use of context than skillful readers as they read, but less proficient readers need to use context more if the goal is to precisely identify words that they do not already know in print (Brown and Weaver).

Some researchers think that eye research studies demonstrate that readers do not use context to identify words because some readers appear to focus on a majority of the words just to identify the separate letters within words. Frank Smith, gave evidence that skillful readers draw upon some of the visual information in the letters to identify the word, and then preceive individual letters as letters. If content and vocabulary are somewhat predictable in the context, a skillful reader can usually read the text. Sometimes individual words are readable, even if parts of their visual information has been left out. In addition, Frank Smith showed that whole words can be read as fast or faster than their individual letters. Experienced readers will read real words and also strings of letters that reflect the letter/patterns in real words faster than strings of unrelated letters that don't resemble English. (Smith, F. 2004)

These are just a few arguments regarding the research of context. The next question becomes how to effectively use context in reading.

The effeictive use of context in reading

In 1960, researcher Ken Goodman chose to term "miscue" as the meaning to designate observed reading responses that differed from what was expected from the text being read. Various important inferences about the nature of reading has been taken from a body of research that has been conducted by Ken Goodman's miscue research. Researching this pattern, Frank Smith demonstrated that proficient readers naturally attend to context as they read.

After studying key research from miscue analysis of both good and poor readers (determined by standardized tests) one of the key conclusions was that good readers are more sensitive to context thean poor readers. For example, when the proficient reader did make a miscue, although not often, their mistake fit in with what came before it. Drawing the conclusion that although a miscue was made, they were unconsciously predicting or mispredicting as they read. According to Constance Weaver and Joel Brown, a more noticeable fact was that skillful readers were more likely to try and correct miscues that did not make sense to them as they read. Good readers automatically use all context to predict and try to correct their reading when something does not make sense.

Summary

Both poor and proficient readers need context, but use it in different ways. Richard Frank said, "With respect to reading, a denial of context is a denial that experience is applicable to learning." By no means is this article a complete summary of the research and other researchers out there regarding context; however, it does offer a beginning place where teachers may find information. After studying context, teachers should help their students acquire background knowledge, experiences, and vocabulary to equip them to be skillful readers who automatically employ all the aspects of fluency--including context--to gain meaning from text.

References

Brown, J., & Weaver, C. (1996). Facts on the use of context in reading. Retrieved on March 10, 2007 from http://books.heinemann.com/shared/onlineresources/08894/08894f16.html

Hudson, R., & Torgesen, J. (2006). Reading fluency: critical issues for struggling readers. In S. Jay Samuels, & Alan Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about fluency instruction (pp. 130-158). Deleware, NJ: International Reading Association

Smith, F. (2004). Understanding reading (6th ed.). Mahway, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Commentary by Clark E. Barrow

I AM BASING MANY OF MY COMMENTS ON DR. BARNES’ INSTRUCTION TO USE APA STYLE.

I LIKE HOW YOU PRESENT THE DEFINITION OF “CONTEXT” AND SHOW THE DYNAMICS IN ITS MEANING. I THINK IT BENEFITS READERS TO KNOW YOUR DEFINITION.

I BELIEVE YOUR CITATION IN PARAGRAPH 1 SHOULD READ (BROWN & WEAVER, 1996). SEE APA MANUAL SECTIONS 3.94 & 3.95. A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THIS IS SHOWN IN SECTION 3.99 WHERE IT SAYS, “(EDELINE & WEINBERGER, 1991, 1993). IN YOUR CASE, YOU WOULD ONLY HAVE ONE YEAR.

I LIKE YOUR SECOND PARAGRAPH BECAUSE IT TELLS US ABOUT THE CONTENT OF YOUR PAPER. HOWEVER, I THINK I WOULD INCLUDE THIS ONE-SENTENCE PARAGRAPH IN YOUR FIRST PARAGRAPH. BETTER YET, MAKE IT THE FIRST SENTENCE OF A SHORT INTRODUCTION PARAGRAPH PRECEDING YOUR “What is context?” PARAGRAPH. THE APA MANUAL DISCOURAGES ONE-SENTENCE PARAGRAPHS. IT SAYS, “SINGLE-SENTENCE PARAGRAPHS ARE ABRUPT” (P. 36). HOWEVER, OTHER GRAMMAR AND WRITING STRUCTURE BOOKS ARE MORE LIBERAL. STRUNK AND WHITE (2005) SAY, “THE PARAGRAPH IS A CONVENIENT UNIT; IT SERVES ALL FORMS OF LITERARY WORK. AS LONG AS IT HOLDS TOGETHER, A PARAGRAPH MAY BE OF ANY LENGTH – A SINGLE, SHORT SENTENCE OR A PASSAGE OF GREAT DURATION” (P. 31).

IN YOUR THIRD PARAGRAPH, YOU WRITE, “Jenkins and Stanovich (pictured above)are” BUT THERE IS NOT A PICTURE ABOVE. I WOULD DELETE THE “PICTURED ABOVE” OR UPLOAD THE PICTURE.

IN YOUR SENTENCE, “One difference in the ability of poor readers and skillful readers to use context to help to enlarge their word-reading fluency is the reader's background knowledge, vocabulary and experiences.” I HAVE A LITTLE TROUBLE READING YOUR MEANING. I THINK YOU MEAN, “DIFFERENCES BETWEEN POOR AND SKILLFUL READERS’ ABILITIES TO USE CONTEXT TO ENLARGE THEIR WORD-READING FLUENCY INCLUDE THEIR BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE, VOCABULARY, AND EXPERIENCES.” IS THAT WHAT YOU MEANT?

IN YOUR SENTENCE, ” According to Ehri, a reader's sense of context can improve word reading accuracy and fluency in two ways: first, it can improve the speed at which sight words are identified; secondly, it can be combined with phonemic clues to help readers identify unknown words within a text. (Hudson, R., and Torgesen, J.)” I BELIEVE “SECONDLY” SHOULD BE “SECOND” (SEE STRUNK AND WHITE, 2005, PP. 44, 86). THEY SAY, “UNLESS YOU ARE PREPARED TO BEGIN WITH FIRSTLY AND DEFEND IT (WHICH WILL BE DIFFICULT), DO NOT PRETTIFY NUMBERS WITH –LY. MODERN USAGE PREFERS SECOND, THIRD, AND SO ON (P. 86).

IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH, YOU ALSO NEED THE PERIOD AFTER THE CITATION INSTEAD OF BEFORE IT. THE CITATIONS SHOULD READ (HUDSON & TORGSEN, 2006).

CITATION NOTES APPLY TO SIMILAR OCCURRENCES THROUGHOUT THE ARTICLE.

TO BE IN APA STYLE, YOUR LEVEL 1 HEADINGS SHOULD HAVE THE BEGINNING LETTER OF ALL MAJOR WORDS CAPITALIZED. SEE APA MANUAL PAGES, 114, 115, 289, 290, & 307 FOR MORE DETAILS.

I GATHER IN YOUR “Considering and reconsidering” SECTION THAT STANOVICH AND NICHOLSON ARE BOTH CITED IN BROWN AND WEAVER. I THINK I WOULD MAKE THIS CLEAR WITH CITATIONS. THIS IS JUST MY THOUGHT. I ATTENDED AN APA WORKSHOP AT UWF AND TECHNICALLY, THE ONLY SENTENCES CITED IN THE FIRST THREE PARAGRAPHS ARE THE LAST SENTENCES OF EACH. THIS IS BECAUSE THERE ARE NO LINKS TO CLUE THE READERS THAT THE SAME CITATION CONTINUES. IN SUCH A CASE, PLACE THE CITATION AT THE END OF THE FIRST SENTENCE AND USE LINKS TO TELL READERS IT CONTINUES.

“This position is sometimes made by people who do not understand that reading is a matter of making meaning first and skillful readers will commonly make some departures from the exact words of the text while maintaining syntax and meaning.” I WOULD BREAK THIS INTO TWO SENTENCES.

“Frank Smith, gave evidence that skillful readers draw upon some of the visual information in the letters to identify the word, and then preceive individual …” I THINK “PERCEIVE” SHOULD BE “PERCEIVE.” YOU NEED A CITATION AFTER SMITH.

I REALLY LIKE THE CONTENT OF THIS SECTION.

YOUR HEADING WITHIN YOUR ARTICLE “The effeictive use of context in reading” HAS THE WORD “EFFECTIVE” MISSPELLED.

“ … readers (determined by standardized tests) one …” YOU NEED A COMMA AFTER YOUR CLOSING PARENTHESIS.

“context thean poor r|” THERE IS AN ERROR WITH “thean”

I REALLY LIKE THE INFORMATION FROM WEAVER AND BROWN ABOUT THE READERS USING THE ENTIRE CONTEXT TO PREDICT MEANING.

I LIKE YOUR SUMMARY BECAUSE YOU SUGGEST TO READERS TO READ MORE ABOUT THE SUBJECT. I ALSO LIKE HOW YOU SAY TEACHERS SHOULD HELP THEIR STUDENTS.

Strunk & White (2005). The Elements of Style. New York: The Penguin Press.

End of comments by Clark E. Barrow

Commentary by Paul Stewart

I agree with Clark that you two did a great job on this subject. About the only thing I can add to Clark's excellent comments is that in your summary you wrote, Richard Frank said, "With respect to reading, a denial of context is a denial that experience is applicable to learning." but did not give a citation for the quote. Also, I found some external links you may want to add.

Context

Context Institute

A Forum for Literary Arts and Cultures

End of comments by Paul Stewart