In addition, it seems to us that failure to consider factors articulated in the developmental model has focused an inordinate amount of research and development on the decoding phase of learning to read, at the expense of attention to the oracy, languaging, and conceptualizing (cognitive) competencies required for comprehending language by reading. We will comment further on this problem in the next section. For the present, we conclude that, for the above reasons, the prolonged analysis of the "common sense" notion that children first are endowed with basic adaptive processes, then they acquire oracy competency in language, and then reading is added to this hierarchy, performs a useful service in showing how many common practices do not reflect "common sense". Why this is so is due, we believe, to the lack of attention to the implications of the very general developmental sequence described in this report. We will discuss more general and specific implications for research and development later in this chapter.

SOME ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND LlMITATIONS
OF THE MODELING EFFORT

In this work we are attempting to develop a model of the development of reading ability which serves at least some of the purposes Gephart (p. 8 of this report) says a model should serve:

  1. A model should explain what a complex phenomenon consists of. In the present case we have argued that reading consists of conceptual and language content and processes, as well as certain decoding-to-speech processes in the learning-to-read stage, and information-processing skills involved in looking, such as the parallel processing of information from the focus and margin of visual attention. The major significance of this analysis is that the process called reading is seen to represent simply an alternative method of processing information from a language display, and that the major factors which may limit an individual level of achievement in comprehending graphic language are to be found in limitations in languaging and conceptualizing. Thus, for instance, we may expect that major problems experienced by high school graduates who are reading at the sixth-grade level or so are more likely to be due to limitations in language and conceptual competencies, rather than to reading decoding skills, although the latter may also be less than optimally developed.

    Obviously our description of reading as a languaging process is a very molar level of description. We have not presented a detailed account of the "reading process"-what the stages of information-processing are when the eye falls upon the printed page. Nor have we detailed what language consists of as a foundation for reading. Explicit formulations of the conceptual base and the processes involved in conceptualizing and languaging have been ignored. Thus the model is limited to the "surface" level of description of a developmental sequence.

  2. A model should describe how such a phenomenon works. The phenomenon we have been concerned with is a developmental sequence. To adequately describe how it works, one would have to state the necessary and sufficient conditions by which BAP and environmental factors interact to produce language, and how oral language competency becomes written language competency. While we have not attempted this complete description of how the phenomenon works, we have tried to indicate how various information-processing activities-conceptualizing, languaging, looking, and listening-act to provide the basis for the acquisition of reading. Furthermore, we expressed our belief (and supported this belief with literature review regarding four hypotheses) that reading "works" by utilizing the same languaging and conceptualizing processes involved in auding, plus the processes involved in decoding print-to-speech and in accurately guiding the eye from one point of fixation to the next. Thus our explanation of how the developmental mcdel "works" to produce reading has been in terms of the emerging interrelations among a variety of general information-processing activities.
  3. A model should provide the basis for predictions about changes which will occur in one element of the phenomenon when changes are made in another element. In the present case, we have emphasized relationships among language and auding and reading, and have indicated how changes in reading comprehension should change when language competency is changed via auding training (Hypothesis 4, Chapter V). We have also indicated that such training should not be expected to improve the acquisition of reading decoding skills, and hence the effectiveness of oral language training in pre-school and primary grades should not be assessed in terms of proficiency in learning to read (decode).

    On the negative side, we have not dealt with the problem of individual differences in transfer of language competency acquired via oracy training to reading comprehension. It is not known to what extent such transfer does not occur automatically, nor to what extent such training may facilitate the learning of the language or comprehension skill by reading, if it does not transfer automatically. Conditions for facilitating transfer are not dealt with, nor have we considered what types of oracy training might be most appropriate for transfer to reading when that skill is acquired. We have likewise found little to say about the effects of training in listening or looking on auding and reading. Nor have we dealt with the cognitive processes which underlie looking and listening, such as the person's implicit (or explicit) plans for pursuing a given looking or listening task-plans for scanning and remembering information, plans for problem solving,and so forth.1