Much research has been done to explain the act and process of reading. There has yet to be one agreed upon universal theory that can explain how students’ learn to read. Roskos and Neuman stated that the National Reading Panel Report 2000, emphasized research based best practices for reading (Roskos & Neuman, 2014). The National Reading Panel states that reading is accomplished through these essential components: phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. Although these practices point on how to get students to become readers, what can explain what is taking place when students are not able to decode, comprehend, and ultimately read? This question can be answered through a cognitive-processing perspective. “A cognitive-processing perspective of reading seeks to describe the underlying mental processes inherent in the act of reading” (Tracey & Morrow, 2017). David LaBerge and S.J. Samuel’s Automatic Information Processing Model explains the act of reading through a cognitive process. The Automatic Information- Processing Model explains the process of reading through 5 major components: visual memory, phonological memory, episodic memory, semantic memory, and attention. Another major component of LaBege and Samuel’s model is the notion of automaticity (Tracey & Morrow, 2017). Laberge and Samuels’s reading model affects current literacy instruction, serves as a useful tool for diagnosis of reading problems, and serves as a framework for theoretical research.
Historical Background and Biographical Sketch of Theorists
David LaBerge was born in 1929 in St. Louis, Missouri. He received his undergraduate degree from the College of Wooster, his Masters from Claremont University and his PhD from Stanford University. LaBerge taught as a professor at Indiana University, the University of Minnesota, and the University of California. He has conducted many studies on the attention process focusing on brain imaging and cognitive psychology. Laberge was awarded several grants for his studies and has written 70 world re-known publications. He currently resides in Washington with his wife Janice Lawry ( “David LaBerge”, n. S. Jay Samuels was an elementary educator, professor and researcher. In 1965, he received his doctorate from UCLA, where he was classmates with Ken Goodman. Samuels was inducted into the Reading Hall of Fame. Samuels conducted studies on repeated reading and also worked to as a member of the National Reading Panel (Samuels, 2006). LaBerge and Samuels’s work emerged during the early 1970’s, when psychology was leaving Behaviorism and embracing Cognitive Psychology. In 1965, LaBerge and Samuels were pulled together by University of Minnesota to collaborate. Laberge had already began work on a machine that tested reading response by showing students words and detecting correct/incorrect responses. LaBerge did not know how the machine could be used in reading instruction. He came to Samuel, who had previously been a classroom teacher for 10 years for advice and the two began to discuss the reading process. The two worked together for a year, and as a result, the model of Automatic Information-Processing emerged (Samuels, 2006). This model of reading followed Gough’s Information Processing Model where reading was viewed as a decoding skill and language comprehension. Within Gough’ model, the reading process took place through a series of stages that focused on the unobservable cognitive processes of decoding. In contrast to Gough, at the heart of LaBerge and Samuels’ model of reading is attention. LaBerge and Samuels imply that reading involves the coordination of of multiple systems: visual, phonological, episodic, and semantic system ( Tracey & Morrow, 2017). According to their model, students begin by using visual memory to make letters, sounds are attached to the letters using phonological memory, and then with the support of semantic memory, meaning is given to the word.
Components of the Theory
David LaBerge and S.J. Samuels’s Automatic Information-Processing Model emerged in the 1970s. The Automatic Information Processing Model was used to explain the act of reading. Through this model, reading is explained in a series of processes where reading is processed in a series of stages from identifying letters, attaching sounds to the letters to make words, and finally giving meaning to the word. It involves a combination of automatic and controlled processes. Comprehension of a text involves 5 processes: visual memory, phonological memory, episodic memory, semantic memory, and attention. LaBerge and Samuels present a bottom- up literacy theory because readers begin with the processing of graphic stimuli and proceed to higher levels of cognitive processing. LaBerge and Samuel’s Automatic Information-Processing Model describes a process of reading in which information is transformed through a series of processing stages involving visual, phonological, and episodic memory systems until it is finally comprehended in the semantic system. The reading process begins with visual memory. Lines, curves, and angles are used to identify letters. This process eventually becomes automatic, and individual letters are recognized as words through a process called unitization. Once letter recognition becomes automatic, attention is placed on the next process of reading where information is processed, the phonological memory. It is here that sounds are attached to the visual images or letters. Following phonological memory, a text is processed in the episodic memory, and then finally the semantic memory where the word is given meaning and stored. The final component of the Automatic Information Processing Model is attention. According to LaBerge and Samuels, there are two kinds of attention, external and internal. External attention is behavior that can be observed. Internal attention is unobservable attention that takes place inside an individual’s mind. It is internal attention, according to LaBerge and Samuel that is the core of the model. Internal attention includes 3 components: alertness, selectivity, and limited capacity. When students are alert they are paying attention to what they are reading, reading with understanding, and trying to comprehend. When students are selective, they are deciding what they will attend to. Limited capacity says the human brain can only process a limited amount of information at a time. The final component of the Automatic Information Processing Model is automaticity. Automaticity refers to the ability to perform a task with little attention. Automaticity requires quick word recognition. LaBerge and Samuels believed that if a student can shift their focus from decoding, then they can place more attention on comprehending the text. Samuel explained that when beginning readers focus their attention between decoding and comprehension, comprehension of the text is compromised. However, a fluent reader can focus less of their attention on decoding and more on comprehension of the text ( Tracey & Morrow, 2017). Samuels stated that students become automatic readers through continuous practice (Samuels, 2006). The image below depicts LaBerge and Samuels’s view of the reading process.
Effect on Student Literacy Achievement
LaBerge and Samuels’s reading model has many effects on student literacy achievement. Several research studies has been conducted based on the Automatic Information-Processing Model. Roskos and Neuman stated, “The size of a student’s word knowledge is strongly related to reading proficiency both in the primary and later grades.” One study conducted by Tanja C. Roembke, Eliot Hazeltine, Deborah K. Reed, and Bob McMurray, explored the degree to which reading fluency, decoding, and comprehension of low performing middle school students are affected by automatic word recognition. This study was based on the notion that automaticity in word recognition is important to reading development. This is based on the work of of LaBerge and Samuels’s model. Participants included 58 middle students at a middle-school in grades 7 and 8. Automaticity was assessed by presenting a written word to students, and then covering it with a visual mask though a process called backward masking. When the words were covered with the visual masks, accuracy was lower. This results suggest that developing automaticity is an imperative factor in word recognition, and can be used to explain reading comprehension difficulties in middle school-aged students. “Word-reading competence (i.e., word literacy), including word-reading skills, is identified as a critical step in becoming a competent reader” (Roskos & Neuman, 2014). A second study conducted by Cody Ding, Lloyd Richardson, and Thomas Schnell (2013), examined how word recognition affects reading skills and how children’s word literacy changed over time Participants included a group of 1,503 kindergarteners. The children were followed over time from kindergarten through Grade 2. At each grade level, these children were tested three times during the academic year. The students were grouped in 3 groups, typical achievers, slow achievers, and low achievers. The study revealed that children tended to remain in the same achievement status over time, particularly after kindergarten. The growth rate in word literacy for children in the typical achieving group was generally positive over time, whereas the growth rate for children in the slow or low achieving groups was generally negative over time, particularly for children in the low achieving group at the end of Grade 2. Results also revealed that typical achievers scored higher than low and slow achievers when it came to vocabulary and reading comprehension. This study confirms the theory of LaBerge and Samuels when they said that when too much attention is placed on decoding, comprehension is compromised.
Kate Nation and Margaret Snowling (1998) studied semantic processing and word recognition in children with reading comprehension difficulties. Participants included 16 poor comprehenders and 16 normal readers. Studies showed that children with reading comprehension difficulties have poor semantic processing abilities. These students had weaker word recognition and more trouble decoding low frequency words that are read with support from semantics. This research supports LaBerge and Samuels’s idea that when too much attention is placed on decoding, comprehension is compromised. The 16 normal readers showed stronger word recognition skills and greater comprehension due to the fact that little attention was being placed on decoding.
Classroom Application and Technology Integration
LaBerge and Samuels’s reading model has several implications for classroom practice and technology The Automatic Information-Processing Model can serve as a method of diagnosis and intervention (Tracey & Morrow, 2017). The reading model bridges the gap between decoding and comprehension. The model suggests that if a student is. It comprehending then the student may be placing too much attention on decoding the words of the text. In my second grade classroom, at the beginning of the year all of my students are placed in reading groups based on the Fountas and Pinnell reading assessment. Students are first given a word test. The word test is the first step to assist in determining the students’ reading level. The word list tests the students’ automatic word recognition. This aligns with LaBerge and Samuels’s notion of automaticity. The word test allows for students to be given the appropriate text to read which will improve their comprehension. If students were not given this word test, then they would struggle with decoding words from an inappropriate text. If a student is struggling with comprehension of a text, the first step would be to look to see if the word test was administered or a second possible solution would be to find an easier text that requires less attention to decoding. In this way, the Automatic Information-Processing Model serves as a an intervention. All too often I encounter students that have been properly placed in reading groups and still struggle with comprehension. “Automaticity theory suggests that instead of focusing on deriving meaning from the text, perhaps the reader’s internal attention has wandered”( Tracey & Morrow, 2017). In this case, the Automatic Information-Processing Model serves as a diagnosis. The student may then be directed to use metacognitive strategies to assist with this problem (Tracey & Morrow, 2017). The majority of the students in my second grade class struggle with reading. For the most part, the students that struggle with decoding also struggle with comprehension. In cases such as these, heavy emphasis is placed on phonics study and sight words. This instructional practice is based on LaBerge and Samuels reading model. As students’ phonics skills grow, and their sight word knowledge increases, so does their reading comprehension. Other classroom applications include teaching students letter recognition and then moving to combine letters and build words so that students have automatic word recognition and become more fluent in their reading. If students struggle with decoding, then they will struggle with comprehension because too much attention is placed on decoding. Finally, rereading a text and leveled texts are a possible solution for struggling readers. Leveled texts are used in literacy instruction during guided reading instruction. Students are grouped based on ability. “Books in which students can correctly decode approximately 95% of all the words on a page and adequately comprehend what they are reading should be used for guided reading” (Tracey & Morrow, 2017). This idea promotes the reading model of LaBerge and Samuels. Attention should be placed on comprehension of the text. When students are grouped based on their reading ability, they are more likely to grow as readers.
Accelerated Reader program was once very popular in school systems. This technology based reading program can assist students with reading comprehension. There are also sight words apps that are designed to test students’ word recognition and phonics skills. One popular sight that we use in my classroom is mobymax.com. On this site, students can practice word recognition through sight word cards and can also learn new phonics skills.