The Reading Mind: A Cognitive Approach to Understanding How the Mind Reads
5/5
()
About this ebook
A Map to the Magic of Reading
Stop for a moment and wonder: what's happening in your brain right now—as you read this paragraph? How much do you know about the innumerable and amazing connections that your mind is making as you, in a flash, make sense of this request? Why does it matter?
The Reading Mind is a brilliant, beautifully crafted, and accessible exploration of arguably life's most important skill: reading. Daniel T. Willingham, the bestselling author of Why Don't Students Like School?, offers a perspective that is rooted in contemporary cognitive research. He deftly describes the incredibly complex and nearly instantaneous series of events that occur from the moment a child sees a single letter to the time they finish reading. The Reading Mind explains the fascinating journey from seeing letters, then words, sentences, and so on, with the author highlighting each step along the way. This resource covers every aspect of reading, starting with two fundamental processes: reading by sight and reading by sound. It also addresses reading comprehension at all levels, from reading for understanding at early levels to inferring deeper meaning from texts and novels in high school. The author also considers the undeniable connection between reading and writing, as well as the important role of motivation as it relates to reading. Finally, as a cutting-edge researcher, Willingham tackles the intersection of our rapidly changing technology and its effects on learning to read and reading.
Every teacher, reading specialist, literacy coach, and school administrator will find this book invaluable. Understanding the fascinating science behind the magic of reading is essential for every educator. Indeed, every "reader" will be captivated by the dynamic but invisible workings of their own minds.
Daniel T. Willingham
Dan Willingham received his PhD from Harvard University in cognitive psychology and is now a professor of psychology at the University of Virginia. He is the author of several books, including Outsmart Your Brain and Raising Kids Who Read. A fellow of the American Psychological Association and the Association for Psychological Science, you can follow him on Twitter @DTWillingham.
Read more from Daniel T. Willingham
Why Don't Students Like School?: A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions About How the Mind Works and What It Means for the Classroom Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Raising Kids Who Read: What Parents and Teachers Can Do Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5
Related to The Reading Mind
Related ebooks
Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Reader, Come Home: The Reading Brain in a Digital World Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Science of Reading: Information, Media, and Mind in Modern America Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Learning How to Learn: ‘A Guide to Effective Teaching and Learning Strategies’ Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5When Can You Trust the Experts?: How to Tell Good Science from Bad in Education Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Limitless Mind: Learn, Lead, and Live Without Barriers Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Science of Reading: A Handbook Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Why Read? Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Learn Like a Pro: Science-Based Tools to Become Better at Anything Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Making Thinking Visible: How to Promote Engagement, Understanding, and Independence for All Learners Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Teaching How to Learn: The Teacher's Guide to Student Success Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe End of Average: How We Succeed in a World That Values Sameness Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Teaching Brain: An Evolutionary Trait at the Heart of Education Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsHow to Teach Kids Anything: Create Hungry Learners Who Can Remember, Synthesize, and Apply Knowledge Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsSticky Learning: How Neuroscience Supports Teaching That's Remembered Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsSummary of Natalie Wexler's The Knowledge Gap Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPowerful Teaching: Unleash the Science of Learning Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Cultures of Thinking in Action: 10 Mindsets to Transform our Teaching and Students' Learning Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Superlearner Myth - The Organic, Long-Term Approach to Effective Learning Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Phonics Playbook: How to Differentiate Instruction So Students Succeed Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsImagination in Teaching and Learning: The Middle School Years Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Book Whisperer: Awakening the Inner Reader in Every Child Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5How to Explain Absolutely Anything to Absolutely Anyone: The art and science of teacher explanation Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsTeaching Outside the Box: How to Grab Your Students By Their Brains Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Learning Game: Teaching Kids to Think for Themselves, Embrace Challenge, and Love Learning Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Smartest Kids in the World: And How They Got That Way Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5
Teaching Reading & Phonics For You
Honey for a Child's Heart Updated and Expanded: The Imaginative Use of Books in Family Life Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Maniac Magee - Literature Kit Gr. 5-6 Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5How to Read Poetry Like a Professor: A Quippy and Sonorous Guide to Verse Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Because of Winn-Dixie - Literature Kit Gr. 3-4 Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Elements of Style, Fourth Edition Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Speed Reading: Learn to Read a 200+ Page Book in 1 Hour: Mind Hack, #1 Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Read-Aloud Family: Making Meaningful and Lasting Connections with Your Kids Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Outsiders - Literature Kit Gr. 9-12 Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Westing Game - Literature Kit Gr. 7-8 Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry: Exploring Literature Teaching Unit Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Charlotte's Web - Literature Kit Gr. 3-4 Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5To Kill A Mockingbird - Literature Kit Gr. 9-12 Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Fahrenheit 451: The Teacher's Companion Rating: 1 out of 5 stars1/5James and the Giant Peach - Literature Kit Gr. 3-4 Rating: 1 out of 5 stars1/5The Phantom Tollbooth - Literature Kit Gr. 5-6 Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsGregor the Overlander - Literature Kit Gr. 5-6 Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Improve Memory in 5 Steps Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Boy in the Striped Pajamas - Literature Kit Gr. 7-8 Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Uncovering the Logic of English: A Common-Sense Approach to Reading, Spelling, and Literacy Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation: An Easy-to-Use Guide with Clear Rules, Real-World Examples, and Reproducible Quizzes Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsTo Kill A Mockingbird: The Teacher's Companion Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsLord of the Flies - Literature Kit Gr. 9-12 Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Spelling Through Phonics Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Reading Teacher's Book of Lists Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Book Whisperer: Awakening the Inner Reader in Every Child Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Poetry Comprehension, Grades 6 - 8 Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Giver - Literature Kit Gr. 5-6 Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5
Reviews for The Reading Mind
2 ratings0 reviews
Book preview
The Reading Mind - Daniel T. Willingham
Introduction
The Chicken Milanese Problem
Agenda for the Introduction
To consider the question how does the mind read?
More specifically, to understand why it is a terrible scientific question, and why we pose it anyway.
Picture this commonplace scene. I was on an airplane, reading E. L. Doctorow's Billy Bathgate on my Kindle. The following passage is found near the end of the book, and when I read it, I softly gasped.
Before he got through it I was hearing the distant sound of police sirens, and it was so arduous for him to speak it that he died of the effort: Right,
he said. Three three. Left twice. Two seven. Right twice. Three three.
¹
My goal in this book is to account for what happened in the few moments it took me to read those 43 words.
The environment held nothing more remarkable than black marks on a white screen, yet somehow I was mentally transported to another world, indeed, to a world quite alien to me: New York City some 30 years before my birth, populated by gangsters. How does the mind create a mental world from black marks? And why would I care enough about Otto Abbadabba
Berman—a real‐life gangster portrayed sympathetically in this novel—to gasp when he's murdered?
The approach I'll take to answering these questions is cognitive. I'll describe what the mind is doing as we read, but I'll seldom consider what the brain is doing. That may sound shortsighted (the mind is, after all, what the brain does), but it's a common scientific approach taken over the last fifty years. Computer science offers an analogy. You can describe the steps of a calculation—say, figuring out the date of the next lunar eclipse viewable in Toronto—without describing what's happening in the electronic guts of the computer during this calculation. In the same way, I'm going to describe the steps by which your mind reads without specifying how the brain carries out those steps.
Cognitive psychologists commonly tackle large, daunting questions by breaking them down into smaller, more manageable questions. We do that by thinking through what had to happen in order for some bit of mental work to get done.
What had to happen between my seeing the letters on the screen and my emotional reaction to the events in an imagined world? I had to see the letters and identify them. I had to assemble the letters into words, and then the words into sentences, which I comprehended by applying grammatical rules. My emotional reaction entails not just comprehension, but memory. He died of the effort
prompts pity only if you feel like you know Berman. So over the course of the novel I must have built and updated a sort of personality picture of this character. And of course memory is needed to organize the sequence of events into a coherent sense of the plot.
So, will this skeletal outline of what happened as I read Billy Bathgate serve as a starting point for a theory of reading?
How Do You Make Chicken Milanese?
Even my crude analysis shows that what happens when we read?
is a bad scientific question, the type of question psychologists usually don't pose. Why? Think of all the millions of activities your mind can direct: you can guess the cost of a paperweight you see in an antique store, ride a child's tricycle for comic effect, make Chicken Milanese, invent a plausible excuse for missing your neighbor's son's middle school play, and so on. For each of these we might pose the question What's happening in the mind when you do that?
But scientists don't. The reasons that scientists don't ask how you cook Chicken Milanese inform what I've included and excluded in this book, so it's worth describing these reasons in some detail.
The first reason is that task descriptions are not quite as simple as I've made out. I said let's consider what had to happen
as I read that passage from Billy Bathgate, and then I said something like you have to perceive the letters, and understand the words,
and so on. The history of psychology shows that it's easy to be fooled when you try to describe a task.
Here's a simple example. When we read it feels as if we move our eyes smoothly—we sweep from the start of a line to the end, and then snap back to the far left of the page for the next line. That impression is easily disconfirmed by watching the eyes of another person as she reads. Her eyes don't move smoothly, but instead jump from one spot to the next, usually a distance of seven to nine letters.² That's so easily observed it's probably been known for centuries. But even that observation—jumping movements, not smooth tracking—is an incomplete description. In fact, your eyes are not always pointing at the same letter when you read.³ About half the time each eye looks at a different letter. They may even be slightly crossed.
The implications of this fact for an understanding of reading are not obvious. I raise the issue to point out that researchers have been working at an account of reading for over a century, and they are still finding ways of improving their description of what's actually happening when someone reads—not how they do it, but what they are doing. That's one reason psychologists usually don't try to explain really complicated behaviors. They figure that they probably shouldn't be confident they can adequately describe what they are explaining.
Suppose we give up on the idea that we'll have a perfect description of what people actually do during a complicated task, and we decide to settle for a provisional description. That's not a bad strategy—as we learn more, our description of the task will improve. One thing we're pretty confident about is that a complex task will require many different cognitive processes. My off‐the‐top‐of‐the‐head analysis of reading called for vision, memory, grammatical analysis, language comprehension, and emotion. Any one of these mental processes is known to be terribly complicated.
Consider seeing letters. One challenge is that letters can take on quite different appearances, varying in size, typeface, and typographical emphasis (bold, italic, etc.) (Figure I.1). How does my visual system treat these very different‐looking objects as equivalent?
Figure I.1. One letter, different fonts. These letters must all be interpreted as equivalent, even though they look different.
© Daniel Willingham
Worse yet, the very same shape might be interpreted as representing different letters, depending on the surrounding context (Figure I.2). So we need to do more than define what makes an A
an A
; we need to specify the context in which it will be seen as an A.
Figure I.2. Ambiguous letters. Although I'm sure you read this sentence easily, if you look closely you'll notice the e
s in the word need
are the same shape as the c
in clean.
And the same shape is interpreted as a v
and as a u
in the word volunteer.
© Daniel Willingham
Finally, note that we've taken for granted that we're looking at black characters on a white background. How could it be otherwise? But what dictates that the black bits define the objects, whereas the white is background
? Differentiating objects from their background is so embedded in our visual system that we seldom notice that it's an issue, unless we're looking at one of those clever images where the object and background are ambiguous (Figure I.3).
Figure I.3. Reversible figures. At left, the black area can be seen as an object (vase) and the white area as background, or the white area seen as the object (dog profiles) and the black as background. At right, the mirror is seen as background when we focus on the woman and her reflection, but it may also been seen as the foreground object—a skull.
Vase © Tasha Volkova via Shutterstock; All is Vanity
by C. Allan Gilbert. Public Domain http://bit.ly/2a2Nddd
Now suppose the complicated work of identifying letters is complete, and I've assembled the letters into words. My mind is trying to sort out the meaning of what I've read. One problem is that some words have multiple meanings. In the Billy Bathgate passage, Berman starts his brief speech with the word Right.
What did I think he meant when I read that word? Morally correct, as in the right thing to do
? Or perhaps agreeing with the facts of the matter, as in You got that right.
Or appropriate, as in the right tool for the job.
A few words later Berman uses the word left
and so it becomes clearer that when he said right
he was probably signifying a direction. But before I read left,
what did I suppose right
meant? Did I suspend judgment, hoping for clarifying information later? It doesn't feel like we do that. For example, if you read, Later that afternoon, he went to the bank,
you probably don't think to yourself, he might have gone to a financial institution or he might have gone to the edge of a river bed, but I don't know which.
You pick one meaning and go with it. But how do you pick? And what about sentences that require you to keep more than one sense of the word in mind simultaneously? For example, in Chapter 1 of The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, Twain says that two fighting boys covered themselves in dust and glory.
So a single instance of the word covered
is simultaneously literal (for dust) and figurative (for glory). How does that work?
I could go on and describe how reading depends on memory, on your powers of inference and problem solving, even on your ability to time movements with great precision—eye movements must be perfectly synchronized with ongoing reading—but you get the idea. Reading—or cooking Chicken Milanese, or any moderately complex task—calls on so many mental processes that an agenda to provide a cognitive explanation comes perilously close to the goal I'm gonna explain the mind.
There's too much.
Let's Do It Anyway
I've discussed two reasons psychologists don't pose questions like how do people cook Chicken Milanese?
or how do people read?
First, because the task is complex we suspect we'd botch our description of what people are doing as they attempt it, so our theory of the mental events underlying the task would be wrong from the start. Second, the complexity of the task suggests it calls on many mental processes, and a theory of how the mind achieves the task may be too ambitious.
But reading differs from cooking Chicken Milanese in an important way: it matters. Reading matters in our day‐to‐day affairs, in our culture, in our economy, in our civic lives, in the arts, and so on. There are stakes attached to people reading well or poorly (Figure I.4). It's true that psychologists seldom try to account for really complex tasks, but they make an exception for reading, as well as a handful of other consequential tasks, like driving a car.
Figure I.4. Medicine packaging. Literate people likely do not notice how frequently they rely on the ability to read. Here I've blurred the print on medicine packaging to help you imagine being unable to read, and trying to select a medicine for your child's sore throat, perhaps by attempting to match packaging with your memory of television commercials.
Still, the Chicken Milanese problems are real, so we need to deal with them as best we can. What can we do about the task description problem? What if we're trying to account for how people read but we're getting wrong what reading really means, just as people used to get wrong the bit about eye movements during reading? The brute truth is that there's no solution. That's the nature of science, and the best we can do is keep the possibility in mind, and try to be clear‐eyed when we describe the process of reading. Thus, in this book I'll devote a lot of energy to analyzing the task of reading.
How about the complexity problem, the fact that there are so many processes required to read? Here, we must accept that our account of reading will be incomplete. We can't fully describe how people identify letters, how they separate objects from background, and all the rest. So the question is, what will we try to explain, and what will we disregard?
We might say to ourselves well, we don't need to explain how people separate letters from background because that's not really a reading process. It's a process for all of vision, and you happen to use it when you read. So let's set the goal of accounting for the reading stuff, and we'll leave the more general‐purpose thinking processes for someone else to figure out.
That won't work, because all of the mental machinery that supports reading is borrowed. Reading is less than 6,000 years old; that's precious little time for any reading‐specific thinking processes to have evolved, and there's not much evidence that any have. The mental processes that contribute to reading evolved for another purpose, and we co‐opt them for the act of reading.
A better principle will be for us to ignore the mental processes that don't vary much from person to person. Separating objects from background is a good example. Yes, it's a complicated, mysterious process, but somehow anyone with typical vision does it. Crucial to our purposes, when people struggle to read it's not due to a failure of this process. And strong readers are no better than average readers in separating objects from background. So although this process is indispensable for reading it's not the first thing we want to explain.
Researchers do know something about the mental differences between strong and weak readers. A strong reader has a broad vocabulary, and would know the meaning of the word arduous
in the Billy Bathgate passage. A strong reader would comprehend that Berman is telling Billy the combination to a safe, even though the safe goes unmentioned in the passage. Come to that, we'd guess that a strong reader would be reading in the first place, on a plane, when he could be playing a game on his phone, watching a movie, or sleeping. These factors—broad vocabulary, good comprehension skills, motivation—are quite commonsensical. Accounting for them will get more interesting when we start to engage in task analysis, as I promised we would. What are the differences in personality or attitudes between the people on an airplane who choose to read and those who don't? Is reading from a Kindle different than reading from paper? How can you make sense of a passage that depends on your knowledge of combination safes, but doesn't mention a combination safe?
The Plan of the Book
I've emphasized the complexity of reading. We will therefore take it one step at a time, starting from the ground floor, so to speak: how readers see letters, then moving on to how they see words, then sentences, and so on, with one chapter devoted to each topic. In keeping with the emphasis on close analysis of the task, each chapter frames an aspect of reading as a problem: how is this bit of mental work accomplished?
That emphasis on task analysis will also prompt us to begin not with reading, but with writing (Chapter 1). Considering its purpose will help us better appreciate what readers actually do when they read letters and words (Chapters 2 and 3). From there we can consider word meaning (Chapter 4), and the comprehension of sentences and paragraphs (Chapter 5). Having this understanding of the process of reading will prepare us to consider why people might be motivated to read—or not (Chapter 6). Finally, we'll consider the possibility that digital technologies should prompt us to rethink everything we know about reading, as they have so radically changed other aspects of our lives (Chapter 7).
Before we plunge into this content, let me draw your attention to two limitations of the topics covered. First, this book is offered as a summary of one scientific approach to the study of reading—namely, the cognitive approach. That's not the only scientific perspective on reading. Another scientific literature employs the sociocultural view, which emphasizes the role of the social environment in reading; what you read, how often you read, your interpretation of what you read, and your thoughts and beliefs about reading are all influenced by the people around you and your relationship to them. The cognitive approach is not in opposition to this view; it's just different. As you'll see over the course of the book, it is more concerned with picking apart the mind of the reading individual. It's no accident that I titled the book The Reading Mind, and not The Science of Reading.
The second limitation of this book is that it's not about how people learn to read. I aim to describe how an experienced reader reads, not how a novice learns. That said, a great deal of reading research has been conducted with novice readers, and some it will be relevant to our purpose. I'll flag these studies when I refer to them, to help keep clear in your mind the difference between the mind of the expert reader and the mind of the learner.
Although this book is not offered as a summary of the learning‐to‐read research, some of the conclusions drawn may be applicable to education. However, these implications must be drawn with caution. This book is based on basic science, and basic science seeks to describe the world as it is; in this case, to describe the mind of a reader. Education is not a basic science, but an applied science. Applied sciences do not seek to describe the world as it is, but rather to change the world, to make it more like some ideal vision of what the world ought to be like. In the case of reading education the change
is the transformation of people who cannot read into readers.
Applying findings from basic science to that effort is not straightforward.⁴ For example, many of the studies I'll cite were conducted with experienced readers, and their reading may be different than that of those learning to read. In addition, many studies deal with one, isolated aspect of reading—how we know the meaning of a word, for example, or how we read a misspelled word in the middle of a text. But when we consider reading education, we can't think about aspects of reading in isolation. Doing so entails the risk that we'll change instruction to improve one aspect of reading and unwittingly worsen another aspect. To provide an obvious example, long practice sessions studying letter‐sound relationships may help improve decoding, but it may also prompt a decline in reading motivation. With these cautions in mind, I will offer some thoughts at the end of each chapter as to conclusions that scientists can offer that might be useful to practitioners.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. Before we contemplate how the science of reading can be useful to educators, let's review some of the science of reading. True to our commitment to examine carefully what a task really entails, we will begin our analysis not with the reading mind, but with the