Children's Opinions About Learning To Read

This article was downloaded by: [b-on: Biblioteca do conhecimento online UL]
On: 04 November 2013, At: 11:50

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Early Child Development and Care

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gecd20
Children's opinions about learning to

read
a
Kaisa Kiiveri & Kaarina Mtt
Faculty of Education , University of Lapland , Rovaniemi ,

Finland
Published online: 09 Jun 2011.
To cite this article: Kaisa Kiiveri & Kaarina Mtt (2012) Children's opinions about learning to
read, Early Child Development and Care, 182:6, 755-769, DOI: 10.1080/03004430.2011.579737
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2011.579737
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions

Vol. 182, No. 6, June 2012, 755 769
Childrens opinions about learning to read

Kaisa Kiiveri and Kaarina Maatta
Faculty of Education, University of Lapland, Rovaniemi, Finland
Early Child Development and Care 2012.182:755-769.
(Received 3 April 2011; final version received 6 April 2011)

There is plenty of research on teaching reading skills as well as on the prerequisites
of literacy, but not so much on childrens opinions on learning to read. Few know
what a child thinks itself of his/her learning to read and ability to learn to read. The
aim of this article is to reveal the childrens (n 43) opinions on learning to read at
the time they start school. A total of 43 children (23 girls and 20 boys), aged six and
a half years, were interviewed and their level of literacy was measured before
interviews. Children were divided into three groups: the literate ones (n 8), the
ones who recognise words (n 16) and the illiterate ones (n 19). Data were
analysed with the phenomenographic method. Learning to read appeared as a
surprising and pleasant experience, but also demanding. School entrants showed
strong belief and trust in their own abilities to learn to read and were careful and
realistic when evaluating them. The conclusion of this article is that children
with their skills and learning perceptions should be taken into careful
consideration when instructing them with new methods and means in order to
secure every individuals learning to read.
Keywords: literacy; reading; reading comprehension; learning to read; opinions on
learning to read
Introduction
According to the Finnish Education Act (628/1998), all children in Finland have to go
to school at the age of seven. School starts at the beginning of the autumn semester at
primary school. Preschool for six-year-old children is voluntary. However, almost
every child wants to go to preschool (96% of the six-year-olds; see Eurydice, 2009).
In Finland, children go to day care before going to school and they attend actual preschool education for one year, which consists of the social skills and the basics of
reading and writing.
In this article, reading is defined as a learnable and teachable skill and process.
Reading consists of two functions: the lexical, for example, technical reading and
reading comprehension. During the learning process, children learn different concepts
of learning to read, as well (Riley, 1996). Besides childrens opinions on reading and
skill learning, we introduce childrens meta-cognitions in this article (Schneider &
Lockl, 2002).
We can take a closer look at reading from different viewpoints. A reader reads in
many ways and for many purposes depending on the range and quality of the skill
Corresponding author. Email: Kaarina.Maatta@ulapland.fi
ISSN 0300-4430 print/ISSN 1476-8275 online

# 2012 Taylor & Francis
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2011.579737
http://www.tandfonline.com
756
K. Kiiveri and K. Maatta
learnt, his/her activity, attitudes and thinking processes as well as on the meaningfulness and effectiveness of the text (Fisher, 1990; Lehtonen, 1993; Merisuo-Storm, 2002;
Wolf & Katzir-Cohen, 2001).
The two areas of reading process have tight links: on the one hand, there is lexical
reading, which is based on the recognition of letters and words, and on the other hand,
there is text comprehension. Lexical reading and understanding are connected closely
with learning. Defined this way, reading is a skill used by a skilled reader for many
purposes on many occasions according to the demands of reading tasks (Berninger,
2000; Kiiveri, 2006; Linnakyla, Malin, & Taube, 2004).
According to the National Curriculum in Finland (2004), one target of preschool is
to make children know what reading is and what the alphabets are. Later on, the main
target, during the first and second grades at primary school, is learning to read; that is,
learning lexical reading skills and the basics skills of comprehension.
The teachers in Finland are free to choose their teaching methods. Mainly, they
use alphabetic or mixed methods (e.g. Lerkkanen, 2003; Tivnan & Hemphill, 2005).
The book with pictures, letters, and short texts they choose for their pupils has a
very important role in the teaching programme.
There is plenty of research on teaching reading skills (Aro, 2004; Kiiveri, 2006;
Linnakyla, 1993; Snow & Juvel, 2007) as well as on the prerequisites of literacy
(Adams, 1990; Julkunen, 1984; Taube, 2004) but not so much on childrens opinions
on learning to read (Harter, 1996; Vauras, Rauhanummi, & Kinnunen, 1994). The latter
is discussed in this article.
Theoretical framework: learning to read and write
Nowadays, the concept of literacy includes not only listening and talking, but also both
the latest skills that are learnt at schools; namely, reading and writing skills. These skills
have so much in common that it is relevant to analyse them in a holistic manner (Riley,
1996; Wray & Medwell, 1991). However, in this article, we concentrate mainly on
learning to read and the opinions that mould school entrants learning.
For instance, Chall (1970) regards learning to read as decoding the code, in other
words re-constructing speaking. Written text is transformed into speech. The ability
to analyse words enables producing spoken words. A reader has to be able to
connect a meaning with what he/she has read. Thus, one has to learn to move from
a graphic code to meaning, that is reading comprehension.
Graphic symbols form the notation in reading and a child has to be able to connect a
letter and a sound. A visual or auditory stimulus a letter, sound, and word transmitted by sense organs is interpreted in the part of the brain involving comprehension.
A perception process is considered dependent on a readers qualifications (Ahvenainen
& Holopainen, 2005; Berninger, 2000; Garton & Pratt, 1998; Julkunen, 1984).
In writing however, phonemes are transformed into graphemes. Usually, the starting point is that heard words are perceived as a series of sounds and one comprehends
the soundletter correspondence. A stimulus can also be audio-visual. An output progresses a letter by a letter. This sequence exists all the way to motor performance
(Ahvenainen & Holopainen, 2005; Garton & Pratt, 1998; Uusitalo-Malmivaara, 2009).
When dissected closer, the practice of learning to read shows that at first a child has
to master the language which he/she uses for learning to read. A child has to be able to
separate spoken words as sounds and notice the soundletter correspondences. In
addition, he/she has to know the direction of reading. The one who is learning to
757
read has to become aware that written words symbolise spoken words and that the same
word has the same meaning when spoken and written. Furthermore, a child has to learn
to understand what he/she has read (Garton & Pratt, 1998; Julkunen, 1984; Lerkkanen,
2003).
Furthermore, Chall (1979) connected learning to read with Piagets description of
the stages of intellectual development. At the phase of pre-reading, from birth to
school, a child learns to recognise some words or names but does not yet understand
the correspondence between a letter and a sound. This stage lasts approximately until
the age of six. Everything that a child has experienced and perceived in his/her
environment, develops him/her towards actual reading. In the first actual phase of
acquiring literacy, a child reads various signs, reads, and writes his/her own name.
When a child is able to separate the sounds of spoken language, he/she will also
figure out the soundletter correspondence. A written text can be transformed into
speech and a child can move on from realising the sounds and groups of sounds
into perceiving words. In the second phase, the fluency of reading improves and
the reading speed increases. A child has to find the texts interesting and they have
to cover familiar issues. In the third phase, reading becomes a tool for learning. Nonetheless, learning takes place from just one perspective: one learns new words, concepts, and facts. In the fourth phase, comprehension expands. A child learns to
contemplate the content of a text even from several points of view and assess what
he/she has read. In the fifth phase, a child is already capable of critical and creative
reading (see also Ahvenainen & Holopainen, 2005; Julkunen, 1984; Linnakyla,
1993).
Smith (1994) has illustrated the progress of a reading process with four phases: the
phases of readiness, beginning to read, rapid growth, and mastery of reading. Regarding
the phase of readiness, Smith emphasises a learners experiential background and right
kind of attitude towards reading, like Vygotsky (1962) did. In the phase of beginning to
read, a child learns the basic reading technique and understands what he/she has read.
In the phase of rapid growth, the concept of reading has become clear for a child and
he/she uses his/her skill for many purposes. In the phase of mastery of reading, the
skill has become a readers tool both for acquiring information and his/her entertainment of reading.
Reading is reasoning activity including its meta-cognitions (Fisher, 1990; Smith,
1994). This viewpoint supports our perception of a child who is learning to read as
thinking and acting individual.
During the various phases of linguistic development, a child learns those codes for
information processing that will later constitute the elements of literacy (see Goswami,
2002). First, a child learns to understand speech when the first phonological and
semantic codes develop. Then, a child starts to produce speech by itself. Then also
the articulatory codes emerge. Thirdly, the visual code of comprehending the connection between speech and writing develops. A child reaches linguistic awareness. After
that when a child learns to read and write little by little, the codes have integrated. That
phase can be referred to as the initial phase of literacy where one is able to decode
words (Ahvenainen & Holopainen, 2005; Ehri, Nunes, Willows, Schuster, YaghoubZadeh, & Shanahan, 2001; Merisuo-Storm, 2002).
Nowadays, the elements of linguistic awareness orthographic, phonological, and
phonemic awareness are considered the key factors for learning to read (Ahvenainen
& Holopainen, 2005; Julkunen, 1984; Riley, 1996; Seymour, Aro, & Erskine, 2003).
Deficiencies that occur in the development of the mentioned elements often precede
758
difficulties that take place when learning to read and write (Hatcher, Hulme, &
Snowling, 2004; Schneider, Roth, & Ennemoser, 2000).
Todays researchers (e.g. Ahvenainen & Holopainen, 2005; Garton & Pratt, 1998;
Poskiparta, Niemi, Lepola, Ahtola, & Laine, 2003) emphasise the significance of
environment for learning as the awareness of written language develops implicitly if
and when someone reads to a child and a child follows reading. Knowing letters is a
typical learning outcome. Being aware of sounds means, according to the researchers,
in practice, that a child has the ability to hear the length of a word, its syllables, the first
or the last sound of a word, take off these sounds and replace them with some other
sounds or combine sounds into a word. A child who masters these tasks is ready to
read. This linguistic awareness is regarded as the basic skill for a beginning reader,
as a bridge from speech to reading and writing.
The aim of this research
We are interested in childrens opinions on learning to read when they start school.
Learning to read is a sum of several factors. Adults who support and teach a child to
read see the development but only a few know what a child thinks of his/her learning
to read and ability to learn. Our assumption is that when starting school children have
already considered the functioning of school and various learning tasks they might have
there and are able to express their opinions on them.
This article concentrates on the following questions:
(1) What kinds of opinions do the children have on their own literacy?
(2) How do the children evaluate their own learning to read?
Method
Data
The data in this research were collected by interviewing school entrants at the beginning of their first school year. Before carrying out the research, we interviewed
several six-year-old children and thus built the basis for the content of the actual interviews. Eventually 43 children were interviewed. The children studied in small countryside schools in northern Finland. The childrens teachers and parents gave permission
for interviews but also the children themselves wanted to tell about their opinions
and experiences.
Before doing the interviews, the pupils were informed of the research. The schools
were already familiar to the first author of this article due to her teacher training work.
Before implementing the actual research interviews, the researchers did some preliminary interviews in order to specify the questions and becoming familiar with childrens
world.
Twenty-three of the children were girls and 20 were boys. On average, they were
aged six and a half years.
The interview was a discussion-like theme interview. Every child was asked the
same questions, but in a slightly different order following the nature of each
conversation.
The interviews lasted between 10 and 15 minutes and were carried out in familiar
school environment during the first school days either in an available classroom or
759
teachers work premises. As a transcript, the interviews constituted about 350 pages
altogether.
Measuring the childrens level of literacy preceded interviews (reading test for a
school entrant, University of Oulu 1970, Finland). In addition, the childrens teachers
evaluated the childrens ability to read. Based on the results of the literacy test and teachers evaluations, the children were divided into three groups: the literate ones (n 8,
19%) who were able to read easy texts, the ones who recognised words (n 16, 37%),
those who recognised letters or some words but were not exactly able to read, and the
illiterate ones (n 19, 44%) who recognised some letters but were not able to read
words. The literate children consisted of six girls and two boys. Of those 16 who
recognised words, nine were girls and seven boys. The 19 illiterate children consisted
of eight girls and 11 boys. Thus, there were more boys than girls among illiterate
school entrants.
The participants were encoded so that every child had a serial number (143), a
marking of gender (g/b), and finally the information whether a participant at the
beginning of school year was literate (A) had recognised words or learnt some sorts
of basics of literacy (B), or was illiterate (C). For example, g1A means a girl whose
number among the participants was 1 and who was literate when starting school.
In order to have some kind of picture about the childrens ability in linguistic development in relation with the level of literacy, the children were tested with the LARR test
(A test for linguistic comprehension, University of Oulu, 1980). The overall results of
the test supported the level of literacy so that the illiterate school entrants performed
extremely poorly in the test, while the ones who knew the basics of reading and the
literate ones almost had maximum scores.
Phenomenographic research method
The interview data were analysed with the qualitative methods, especially the phenomenographic method (Marton, 1981; Marton & Pong, 2005; Svensson, 1997).
We consider it important to find out childrens opinions on the phenomena of the
environment, reading in general and their own reading, the factors related to learning
when they move from the context of home to the context of school (see Marton,
1981; Uljens, 1993, 1997). Therefore, we analyse childrens qualitative perceptions
from the second-level perspective and regard them as experience based, subjective
knowledge, belief, and experience about the studied phenomenon. Additionally, we
can analyse them not only as intellectual conceptions, information, and beliefs, but
also as appreciation-like opinions, in other words, assessments or normative views.
We understand childrens opinions on reading, learning and teaching reading as
developing information structures. We think that these opinions reveal learners knowledge, skills, and motivation towards the task. In addition, they bring out learners
consciousness, awareness of their own learning and goals set for learning or the
meta-cognitive factors (Garton & Pratt, 1998; Silven, Poskiparta, & Niemi, 2004).
Cognitive factors affect learners feelings as well. With this kind of holistic basis, we
pursue understanding childrens opinions (Poskiparta et al., 2003; Ramus, 2006).
We analyse the opinions both horizontally and hierarchically in relation to the
context of learning (Uljens, 1991, 1993); in other words, we analyse them based on
learning to read and theoretical views on it. Finally, we evaluate based on the results
of childrens ability to tell about their opinions as well as the importance of the acquired
information both for learning and teaching.
760
Results
The childrens opinions on their own level of literacy
Most of the children considered themselves illiterate when they came to school. Their
hopes for learning appeared in their opinions. Many of them said that they could read a
little bit (e.g. g1A) or I cant properly yet but somehow. . . (e.g. b16A). In practice,
these children already recognised letters and assessed that they could read a little bit.
Only one girl considered herself totally illiterate, but she also said that she knew
some letters. Based on the initial reading test, she was, however, already at the level
of recognising words (g5B).
Most of the children who recognised words when starting school were in the same
way as realistic as the illiterate ones when evaluating their own abilities: I can already
read a little bit. Here, Ill learn to read even better (e.g. g30B). One girl described her
skill in more detail: I can already read familiar words. . . (g3B). Three boys
expressed their opinion on their skills almost with the same words: I can read. . .
only small sections (b14B), I can already read a little bit (b29B) and I cant
read very well. . . (b38B). One girl evaluated her own learning and teaching: We
were taught at the preschool but I only learnt to write there (g5B). The assessments
of these children were merely experience based and opinions that included correct
information.
The literate children said quite correctly that they could already read. Many of them
remembered the time when they had learnt to read: I learnt already a long time ago
(b20C), I learnt to read at home already when I was five (g8C) and I learnt to read
with Liisa before the school started (g37C). Some of them also paid attention to
their future learning: I learn to read more and better at school (g12C, g26C).
Learning to read appeared as a surprising and pleasant experience in the opinions of
literate children:
I was really surprised when I noticed that now I read. I was interested in reading and when
I recognised the letters I thought that now I learnt to read. When you read for the first time,
it is like. . .. like you would go for the first time to a roller coaster; I got so madly excited
then too! (g31B). One girl said: When I learnt, I liked to read everything! (g37C)
Their opinions parallel deciphering the reading code with an insight and realisation,
a surprise that reveals what reading really is. The experience has been very positive for
these children and it can be expected to lead to a permanent interest in reading.
The childrens opinions on their own ability to learn to read
When asking about the childrens opinions on whether they learn to read, even the
answers of the illiterate school entrants showed strong belief and trust in their own
learning: I trust that Ill learn! (g4A) and Theres no doubt that I will learn to
read (b17A). On the other hand, some children were careful in their estimations: I
think that Ill learn to read (e.g. g1A). Some children were doubtful of the difficulties
in learning to read: It is quite hard, I think (g1A, b40A).
Uncertainty of the forthcoming learning task and its challenge made them hesitate.
However, they had some trust in their own learning.
Those children who already recognised words had some grounds for evaluating
their own learning: Im sure that Ill learn to read! (g22B) and Im sure that Ill
learn to read properly! (b28B, b38B). They even waited for the joy of learning: I
761
guess its quite fun (g5B). On the other hand, even the basics of the learnt skills did not
convince all of them: It wont be easy (g7B).
Knowing the basics of reading and writing skills calmed some children down when
it came to the difficulty of the task: I can already read. I guess, theres nothing
anymore. . . (g30B, g31B). A literate girl stated calmly: It wasnt hard. She also
thought of learning better reading and writing skills as a communication tool: I
dont know penmanship yet myself but I can understand it quite well when my
friend writes me letters (g8C). Another literate girl assessed her progress: I guess I
can learn to read faster (g37C).
The results can be interpreted so that every child, both boys and girls, were
certain that they would learn to read. Those children who recognised words or were literate said that they would learn to read better than before. Learning was considered
joyful.
The childrens opinions on school as the place for learning to read
Two illiterate boys said that they just wanted to learn to read at school (b35A, b36A).
Many girls and boys told about their hopes a little bit more: We will learn to read,
write, and count (e.g. g2A, b17A,) and We will learn all kinds of things; reading
and a bit of math (e.g. g46A). Some boys expressed the same thing in a different
ranking order: . . .that I learn to count and read (e.g. b27A). The tasks were not completely clear for all the illiterate because they were not always able to distinguish
reading and drawing: We read and draw here (g10A). Some of those children who
could read a few words already placed writing as a learning goal as well: Well
learn to count, read, and write (b28B, b32B) and one boy thought that his vocabulary
also would improve at school: And we learn. . . words (b28B).
The tasks of school and learning to read were also assessed based on their own
abilities. Because they already knew something about reading, they evaluated: I
want to learn to read properly, thats all (g5B). They expressed their goal with slightly
other words as well: . . .that I learn to read better and . . .that I learn to read for real
(e.g. g22B). As an answer to the question What does it mean to learn to read properly
the substitutive expressions better or clearer were brought out.
Learning the central and important skills in society, reading, and writing, was therefore clearly in many illiterate school entrants minds the task of the school. All of them
did not, however, know why they were at school: Im not quite sure. . . (b18A, g43A).
Obviously, they did not or could not consider learning to read as a salient skill that
would be learnt at school.
Some other children did not know the reason for going to school either: I dont
really know because I have already learnt to read (g8C) and I have already learnt
to count, write, and knit (g37C). The reason can be found in the skill they have
already learnt. They were literate and apparently considered their skills as so remarkable that the school could not teach them particularly any longer.
Regardless of the level of reading skill, most of the girls (91%, 21/23) said at the
beginning of school year that school going and learning to read were nice, fun, or
cool. Similarly, most of the boys (85%, 17/20) considered starting school and
learning to read ok or just nice. Many of the children thought that besides other
skills, starting school and learning to read were important as well: Well, exactly
these important things; reading and writing and even counting (b32B) and One
thing is important: Its important to learn important things, such as reading (b34B).
762
Some girls who came to school illiterate said that starting school and learning to
read were quite exciting or even frightening. One girl was afraid of the expectations
that learning would set on her writing skill: Then it wont be cool because I cant
write an A properly (g4A).
All the others mostly the illiterate children considered starting school unpleasant:
I dont know. . . (g4A). One of the reasons could be the annoying fuss at school: Look
how those friends yell! I hardly can hear anything. The girl continued seriously: It feels
like nothing! I didnt anticipate for the school start. I would have preferred staying at
home with little siblings and mom (g36A). Five schooldays a week seemed much for
some children. One girl who already recognised words wished that there would be less
schooldays in order to have more time to play . . . so that there would be only three
schooldays a week so that I would have enough time to play (g22B).
The children expected the school to provide them with doings and action that most
of them appreciated: You can do a lot of tasks at school. Im sure Ill like reading
lessons and those assignments (b28B) and We can do assignments even during
reading lessons. I am surely really good at sums (b34A).
The childrens opinions on the process of learning to read
Who taught?
When asking the children who had taught themselves to read, some of their answers
revealed that a teacher was not needed: No one has taught or I learnt by myself
(e.g. b9A). Based on their reading skill level, there were various learners among the
participants. Either these children had not perceived the meaning of teaching in learning
or they just thought that learning was their own achievement. Perhaps the parents had,
however, guided them unnoticed or there really were such children who were not
taught. One explanation could be that some parents may not have wanted to teach
their children to read because they thought that teaching would take place at school.
Furthermore, there are such preschool teachers who advise parents not to teach children
and thus think that they can avoid those learning difficulties that could possibly result
from the wrong kind of teaching.
One illiterate child had, however, an idea of teaching as a necessary factor in learning when she answered: Maija [the girls sister] has taught me (g1A). The girls who
recognised words noted for their part: They taught us at preschool (g5B) and They
taught me at preschool but I didnt learn (g7B). The expressions of the four children
who either recognised some words or could already read included the same kind of
opinion as the previous ones with almost the same words: I learnt by myself; my
mom taught me a little but then I learnt by myself (e.g. b29B). The boys who recognised words already started to have quite a structured idea of the functions of learning
and teaching to read and write as one of them said: My mom wrote down words on
pieces of paper and asked what it says (g32B) and the other that: Mom looked at
home whether it said anything when I put all the words together (b28B). Similarly,
two girls who recognised words said that their mothers had written words on pieces
of paper, that they learnt to read (g30B, g31B). For these children, the mothers had
been valuable advisors for learning.
The mother was brought out as a help in learning also in the opinions of a girl who
started school literate: I cant really remember how I learnt. I think when my mom read
to my little brother and I learnt from it (g6C). Three other literate girls thoughts had
the emphasis on their own learning instead of teaching: I learnt to read or so I
763
remember already when I was five (g8C, g26C, g37C). One of their opinions
showed the mothers influence also as appreciating reading: Previously, my mom
read to me; she self likes to read too (g8C).
Other kinds of reading moments were brought out: Dad reads. . . or Mom reads
some other times for me too (e.g. b9A, g4A) and Mom reads to me and sometimes
my big brother too (g2A, g26C). And furthermore: Saara, my big sister, reads to
me sometimes (b14B). Some other members within the family or friends can do the
reading: Granny and even grandpa read sometimes (b32B, b40A). If I cant read,
Pekka [a friend] reads to me (b4A) and Friends read a book to me and dad and
mom too (g4A).
How to learn to read?
One illiterate girl briskly answered the question What happens when someone reads?:
You have to be able to read! (g10A). Another, already literate girl said somewhat the
same thing: You need reading skill and light (g6C). When the former girl was asked to
specify, she added: You have to have text and eyes. One illiterate boy stated the same:
Nothing else but eyes and reading skill! (b34A). Two girls gave reasons to their
opinions: You cant read in the dark because you cant see anything then (g1A,
g3B). One illiterate girl distinguished reading aloud and mute: You need voice
when reading but you can also read silently alone (g4A). One boy who recognised
words specified reading more carefully:
First you have to know the letters, for example a and aa and then t and ta. You have to
learn to read and write. Something happens in your head too. When you read the
moon, you may be a little bit of afraid too (b28B).
The question what reading is was difficult for all of the participants regardless of
the level of their reading skill. They brought out the concrete matters concerning
reading in their answers, primarily concerning the reading situation of a book or a
written text: . . .books and stuff (g1A, P20C). Some children completed their
answers: We read words (g1A, b24C) or We read stories (g6C, g8C). One girl
told: We read tales. . . they can include pictures too (g22B). Also another girl
expressed her perception of reading pictures: You can also read a picture; there are
that hedgehog and a butterfly in the picture in the ABC book has (g5B). They did
have other kinds of opinions as well. Two girls pointed out: You have to have text
because you cant read pictures (g1A, g3B).
Nonetheless, some children were able to present quite clear perceptions of the actual
reading event. A girl who started school illiterate said: Then you are reading when you
know the right letter (g13A). Whereas the boys who recognised words said:
I just put lower case letters and words together and wondered and then I just learnt to read.
I looked at the book. You can read a word so that you learn letters, know how to write, and
then you can read (b28B) and I look at the word and stay and think. . . letters. I look. . .
there is nothing that difficult (b29B).
A third already literate boy stated: I have just looked at the books and my bigbrothers books too; no one has taught me (b20C). Thus, one looks for letters from
words and when thinking of them and recognising them, one discovers the skill of
reading and even writing the word.
764
The children were able to analyse the event of learning to read quite well when they
had already learnt something about the ability to read. According to one boy who recognised words, his reading started from letters that were combined together. After this
process he was able to understand what he had read. He also mentioned that the task
required reasoning (b28B).
A literate girls opinion showed the connection between the content of text and
experiences and even some kind of categorisation of perceptions when she described:
If I read to myself I think about the things what it says. If I read a lizard, I would think of
that word and where a lizard is. There are many lizards on one of our doorsteps. On the
other doorstep, there are spiders (g37C).
All things considered, the children were quite diversely aware of what reading is:
reading is using your eyes in favourable reading conditions. Reading can be performed
aloud or mutely. A reader reads letters, words, and text understanding and even puts
his/her soul into what he/she has read.
Conclusions
Everyone who participated in the research was almost certain that they will learn to
read. Still, the requirements of learning made the illiterate children hesitate: I think
Ill learn. Those children who knew the basics of reading aimed at learning to read
properly or to write properly, in other words, strengthening their skills.
The illiterate school entrants considered learning to read fun but demanding
whereas those children who had learnt the basics of reading did not think learning
would be very difficult. This can be interpreted so that after solving the problem of
learning to read or discovering the skill of decoding, it did not arouse such strong affections any longer (Niemi, Poskiparta, & Hyona, 1986; Smith, 1994; Vauras et al., 1994).
Early experience of learning to read was described as a realisation, an event that
appealed strongly to ones emotions, and that had clearly stuck in mind. The perceptions emphasised the thought of I learnt by myself. Yet, someone had taught most of
the children to read; usually, their mothers, who had directly taught their children to
read and write in a variety of ways. Also, the childrens fathers had read to their children
(Garton & Pratt, 1998).
Concerning the school entrants meta-cognitions, the results show that the children
were able to analyse their knowledge and emotions verbally and could already observe
and evaluate their own learning (Schneider & Lockl, 2002; Vauras et al., 1994).
In addition, the results describe the school entrants opinions on their reading skills
as the whole. The children were able to tell about their skill by specifying it on the one
hand as technical features such as letters and the combinations of letters and understanding a word constructed like that and on the other hand, by words that were the
most frequently considered as the starting point for reading.
Therefore, according to the results, children addressed texts in various ways. Many
of them looked at books and pictures in them. Some of them looked at and read words,
whereas the others listed letters and constructed words from them. Then, the aim was
to figure out what was written (Chapman, 1987; Lehtonen, 1993; Linnakyla, 1993;
Tompkins & Hoskisson, 1995; Wray & Medwell, 1991).
Those childrens literacy, who looked at and read words, was either at the level of
pre-reading (Chall, 1979) or logographic reading (Perfetti & Curtis, 1986), where
765
words or names are recognised but the correspondence between a letter and a sound is
not yet understood. Those ones who read letters and created words from them
had already realised that correspondence (Julkunen, 1984; Lerkkanen, 2003; Silven,
Poskiparta, & Niemi, 2004; Waern, 1982). Their skill was also close to reading that
typifies recognising some words. In both cases, the word word was in the childrens
opinions the first unit that had to be comprehended, which as a concept seemed quite
distinct for the children (Ahvenainen & Holopainen, 2005; Perfetti & Curtis, 1986).
According to the results, we agree with Smiths (1994) view, among others, that
reading does not start from a letter but from a word.
We can also conclude that the children had observed the movements of their own
mind both as the realisation of learning, surprisingly decoding the code of reading,
and as memories elicited by already arising reading skill. While reading, something
happened in their thoughts as well; feelings and memories of familiar events and
places were aroused. It can be stated that these school entrants already interpreted
what they had read based on their previous experiences (Smith, 1994). Furthermore,
the results suggest that the event of learning to read that is strongly connected with
emotions and affections related to emerging reading skill make both a child who has
learnt to read early and a school entrant observe their own learning. Based on this
ground, the majority of school entrants can be considered as competent for observing
their own learning and interpreting their own experiences.
The meta-cognitive knowledge and skill as well as linguistic awareness concerning
learning to read and reading are thus developing (Garton & Pratt, 1998; Schneider &
Lockl, 2002).
The school entrants reading skills were perceived based on both the childrens own
opinions and the initial evaluation as multilevel and manifold. The majoritys reading
skill can be described as emergent literacy like many researchers do including
those concepts that relate to reading and writing, skills and dispositions that lead to conventional literacy (Merisuo-Storm, 2002; Sarmavuori, 1998; Smith, 1994; Sulzby &
Teale, 1996). The literate children had noticed the existence of letters, words, and
text in books, learnt to recognise them and to find out what was written in books
that were primarily aimed at them. They could also assess their literacy quite widely
starting from the realisation of the goal of learning. In addition, many school entrants
were able to evaluate the meaning and use of reading and writing skills within various
contexts. They had learnt to read, and the goal was the interest and pleasure related to
learning and reading.
Literacy and interest in reading had emerged along with learning in an environment
where reading was appreciated, mostly at home where the family members read books
often to children and where parents used to read as well (Aunola, Nurmi, Niemi,
Lerkkanen, & Rasku-Puttonen, 2002; Darling, 2005). The phase when a child moves
on from emerging literacy to conventional literacy can be situated in the moment
when a child learns the lettersound correspondence and the concept of word, and
understands the connection between them (Riley, 1996). Many of the school entrants
in this research had already advanced to this level.
Discussion
Defining reading is an extremely multidimensional and complex task. As we reviewed
the childrens opinions on reading and learning to read, we leaned mostly on Hamalainens
and Niemis (1995) definition of reading as a skill that includes the recognition of
766
words, comprehension, motivation, and meta-cognitions. Besides knowledge of

reading and learning to read, it involves childrens meta-cognitions, in other words,
their ability to observe their own cognitive and emotional processes.
There are not many researchers on childrens opinions on reading. Korpinen,
Jokiaho, and Tikkanen (2003) have examined childrens ability to evaluate themselves
and their learning. According to the researchers, children who start school already have
the conception of themselves. Along with the expanding world of experiences and
school going, their self-conception develops. Children find the feedback, attention,
and help from others important. A typical learning path that emerged in the childrens
opinions was that someone important to them teaches something. The childrens
answers to the question How do you know you are good? often referred to the feedback received from a teacher, parents, or friends as well as comparing themselves with
friends. A central result in the research concerning the childrens experiences regarding
themselves was that preschool and elementary school children, aged between six and
seven, could analyse their feelings and evaluate themselves and their learning. The
childrens multidimensional self-esteem consisted of a group of self-images that the
children constructed in various situations when assessing their own learning and
acceptance of their close ones. The children also recognised factors that affect their
learning and could fairly set goals for themselves. Succeeding in doing pleasant
things and intimate people were considered as material for building childrens good
self-esteem (see Rantala & Maatta, 2011).
Several other research results have shown childrens strategic and meta-cognitive
competence. In their minds, children have created theories about learning and comprehending. These theories affect how children take the situations where they have to
consciously struggle to learn something new. Still, it is constantly pointed out that
not all the children come to school ready to learn in the exactly same manner (National
Research Council, 2004).
Can children tell about reading, their learning, and teaching, then? What kind of
opinions do they have on these issues? Based on this research, we decided to trust in
the perception as well as in our experience that school entrants were capable of expressing their opinions and feelings (Vauras et al., 1994). They are able to compare
phenomenon at least based on one feature and their thoughts include knowledge
about space, past, and future (Fisher, 1990). School entrants have already adapted considerable amount of information about their learning and remembering that can be
expressed verbally. Their ability to talk about their learning and think of it develops
all the time and their ideas are specified (e.g. Kyronlampi-Kylmanen & Maatta,
2011). Awareness and knowledge about themselves develop at the same time as children learn to observe their own functions. When succeeding in regulating his/her own
functions, a child will be able to define a meaning and goal for his/her actions (National
Research Council, 2004; Vauras et al., 1994.)
Although the school entrants opinions on reading seemed partly flimsy, they gave
reasons to conclude that the event of reading had already been quite diverse as a target
of the childrens perceptions. Their opinions were connected to the level of their skill
and its contents. Many school entrants said that reading was something where one uses
eyes, and light is needed; sometimes one uses ones mouth and voice but mostly one
uses a book or something that can be read. Some of them thought that pictures also
could be read perfectly well. The observations had focused on the typical features of
the childrens developmental level: mostly on the factors of reading that can be perceived concretely. In the childrens opinions, reading resembled visual action that
767
requires adequate lightning conditions to be successful, it could be done aloud or mute,

and first and foremost it was when interpreting the childrens opinions through the
theoretical background observing, recognising words, and understanding them. It
also included observing ones own learning (Hamalainen & Niemi, 1995).
Furthermore, it can be considered as meaningful interpretation or written symbols, a
process through which one understands (Ahvenainen & Holopainen, 2005; Vauras
et al., 1994).
Learning to read and its mastery is an important skill for an active member of a
social community. It is more important than we literate people usually reflect. The significance of reading skills is increasingly emphasised in modern society as the demands
for it have diversified. At the same time, it has been noticed that weak reading skills,
even the imprints of illiteracy, often lead to exclusion (Kiiveri, 2006). Therefore,
children, with their skills and learning perceptions should be taken into consideration
when instructing them. Furthermore, new means and methods should be developed
to secure every individuals learning to read.
Notes on contributor
Kaisa Kiiveri graduated from Faculty of Education, University in Lapland, in 2006. She has
worked as university lecturer of early education (emerita from 2005). She is interested in
researching the experiences of literacy and the methods of teaching reading. She has defined
the idea in her dissertation Towards Literacy: Two descriptions of Reading Literacy in School.
Kaarina Maatta is professor of educational psychology at the Faculty of Education, University of
Lapland, and vice-rector, University of Lapland. Her latest personal research interests have
focused on love, attachment and social relationships during human beings lifespan, on guidance
of doctoral thesis and process of that (as she has supervised 42 doctoral theses between 2002 and
2010) as well as on positive psychology, human strengths and early education. Her next book,
which will be published in English in 2011, deals with the pedagogy of supervising doctoral
theses from various perspectives.
References
Adams, M. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge: The MIT
Press.
Ahvenainen, O., & Holopainen, E. (2005). Lukemis-ja kirjoittamisvaikeudet. Teoreettista
taustaa ja opetuksen perusteita [Reading and writing difficulties. Theoretical background
and basics for teaching]. Jyvaskyla: Kirjapaino Oma Oy.
Aunola, K., Nurmi, J.-E., Niemi, P., Lerkkanen, M.-K., & Rasku-Puttonen, H. (2002).
Developmental dynamics of achievement strategies, reading performance, and parental
beliefs. Reading Research Quarterly, 37(3), 310327.
Berninger, V.W. (2000). Development of language by hand and its connections with language
by ear, mouth, and eye. Topics in Language Disorders, 20(4), 6584.
Chall, J. (1970). Learning to read: The great debate. New York: Mc Graw Hill, Inc.
Chall, J. (1979). The great debate ten years later with a modest proposal for reading stages. In L.
Resnick & P.P. Weaver (Eds.), Theory and practice of early reading (pp. 2955). Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
Chapman, L. (1987). Reading: From 5 11 years. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Darling, S. (2005). Strategies for engaging parents in home support of reading acquisition. The
Reading Teacher, 58(5), 476479.
Ehri, L., Nunes, S.R., Willows, D.M., Schuster, B.V., Yaghoub-Zadeh, Z., & Shanahan, T.
(2001). Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read: Evidence from the
national reading panels meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(3), 250287.
Eurydice. (2009). National summary sheets on education systems in Europe and ongoing
reforms. Finland: European Commission.
Fisher, R. (1990). Teaching children to think. London: Stanley Thornes Publishers Ltd.
768
Garton, A., & Pratt, C. (1998). Learning to be literate. The development of spoken & written
language. London: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Goswami, U. (2002). Phonology, reading development, and dyslexia: A cross-linguistic perspective. Annuals of Dyslexia, 52, 141163.
Harter, S. (1996). Developmental changes in understanding across the 5 to 7 shift. In A.
Sameroff & M.M. Haith (Eds.), From five to seven year shift: The age of reaction and
responsibility (pp. 207236). Chicago: The Chicago University Press.
Hatcher, P.J., Hulme, C., & Snowling, M. (2004). Explicit phoneme training combined with
phonic reading instruction helps young children at risk of reading failure. Journal of
Child Psychology & Psychiatry, 45(2), 338358.
Hamalainen, S., & Niemi, P. (1995). Onko ennen koulua opitusta lukutaidosta hyotya [Does
reading skill learnt before school have its use?]? In J. Hyona, H. Lang, & M. Vauras
(Eds.), Kirjoitetun kielen prosessointi [Processing written language] (pp. 89103). Turku:
University of Turku.
Julkunen, M.-L. (1984). Lukemaan oppiminen ja opettaminen [Learning and teaching to read]
(Publications in Education No. 1). Joensuu: University of Joensuu.
Kiiveri, K. (2006). Matkalla lukutaitoon. Kaksi kuvausta lukemaan oppimisesta koulussa
[Towards literacy. Two descriptions of reaching literacy in school] (Acta Universitatis
Lapponiensis No. 95). Rovaniemi: University of Lapland.
Korpinen, E., Jokiaho, E., & Tikkanen, P. (2003). Miten esi-ja alkuopetusikaiset lapset arvioivat
itseaan ja oppimistaan [How do preschool and primary school age children assess themselves and their learning?]. Kasvatus [The Finnish Journal of Education], 34(1), 6678.
Kyronlampi-Kylmanen, T., & Maatta, K. (2011). What is it like to be at home: The experiences of
five- to seven-year-old Finnish children. Early Child Development and Care, 116. doi:
10.1080/03004430.2010.540013.
Lehtonen, H. (1993). Lukutaidon kehittyminen ja sen yhteydet nimeamiseen, motivaatioon ja
koulumenestykseen [The development of literacy and its connections with naming, motivation, and success at school] (Acta Universitatis Tamperensis. Ser A vol 380). Tampere:
University of Tampere.
Lerkkanen, M.-K. (2003). Learning to read. Reciprocal processes and individual pathways
(Jyvaskyla Studies in Education, Psychology and Social Research No. 233). Jyvaskyla:
University of Jyvaskyla.
Linnakyla, P. (1993). Exploring the secrets of Finnish reading literature achievement.
Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 37(1), 6374.
Linnakyla, P., Malin, A., & Taube, K. (2004). Factors behind low reading literacy achievement.
Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 48(3), 231249.
Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography Describing conceptions of the world around us.
International Science, 10(2), 177200.
Marton, F., & Pong, W.Y. (2005). On the unit of description in phenomenography. Higher
Education Research & Development, 24(4), 335348.
Merisuo-Storm, T. (2002). Oppilaan aidinkielen lukemisen ja kirjoittamisen taitojen kehittyminen kaksikielisessa alkuopetuksessa [The development of a pupils reading and writing skills
in native language in bilingual primary education] (Annales universitatis Turkuensis, ser. C,
185). Turku: University of Turku.
National Research Council. (2004). Miten opimme. Aivot, mieli, kokemus ja koulu [How do
people learn. Brains, mind, experience, and school] (Committee on Developments in the
Science of Learning). Porvoo: WSOY.
Niemi, P., Poskiparta, E., & Hyona, J. (1986). Lukemishairion kognitiivinen tutkimus ja diagnoosi [Cognitive research and diagnosis of dyslexia] (Research Reports No. 78). Turku:
University of Turku.
Perfetti, C., & Curtis, M. (1986). Reading. In R. Dillon & R. Sternberg (Eds.), Cognition and
instruction (pp. 1358). London: Academic Press.
Poskiparta, E., Niemi, P., Lepola, J., Ahtola, A., & Laine, P. (2003). Motivational-emotional
vulnerability and difficulties in learning to read and spell. British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 73(2), 187206.
Ramus, F. (2006). Genesis, brain, and cognition: A roadmap for the cognitive scientist.
Cognition, 101(2), 247269.
769
Rantala, T., & Maatta, K. (2011). Ten theses of the joy of learning at primary schools. Early
Child Development and Care, 19. doi: 10.1080/03004430.2010.545124.
Riley, J. (1996). The teaching of reading. The development of literacy in the early years of
school. London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
Schneider, W., & Lockl, K. (2002). The development of metacognitive knowledge in children
and adolescents. In T. Perfect & B. Schwartz (Eds.), Applied metacognition (pp. 224257).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schneider, W., Roth, E., & Ennemoser, M. (2000). Training phonological skills and letter
knowledge in children at risk for dyslexia: A comparison of three kindergarten intervention
programs. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 284295.
Seymour, P.H.K., Aro, M., & Erskine, J.M. (2003). Foundation literacy acquisition in European
orthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94(2), 143174.
Silven, M., Poskiparta, E., & Niemi, P. (2004). The odds of becoming a precocious reader of
Finnish. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 152164.
Snow, C.E., & Juel, C. (2007). Teaching children to read: What do we know about how to do it?
In M.J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading (pp. 501520). Cornwall:
Blackwell.
Smith, F. (1994). Understanding reading. A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to
read. New Yersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sulzby, E., & Teale, W. (1996). Emergent literacy. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, &
P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 727757). Mahway, NH: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Svensson, L. (1997). Theoretical foundations of phenomenography. Higher Education Research
and Development, 16(2), 159171.
Taube, K. (2004). Factors behind low reading literacy achievement. Scandinavian Journal of
Educational Research, 48(3), 231249.
Tivnan, T., & Hemphill, L. (2005). Comparing four literacy reform models in high-poverty
schools: Patterns of first-grade achievement. The Elementary School Journal, 105(5),
419441.
Tompkins, G., & Hoskisson, K. (1995). Language arts. Content and teaching strategies.
New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Uljens, M. (1991). Phenomenography A qualitative approach in educational research. In L.
Syrjala & J. Merenheimo (Eds.), Kasvatustutkimuksen laadullisia lahestymistapoja
[Qualitative approaches of educational research] (Faculty of Education Research Reports
No. 39) (pp. 80107). Oulu: University of Oulu.
Uljens, M. (1993). The essence and existence of phenemenography. Nordisk Peadagogik, 3,
134147.
Uljens, M. (1997). School didactics and learning: A school didactic model framing an analysis
of pedagogical implications of learning theory. Hove, East Sussex: Psychology Press.
Uusitalo-Malmivaara, U. (2009). Lukemisen vaikeuden kuntoutus ensiluokkalaisilla. Kolme
pedagogista interventiota [Remediation of reading difficulties in grade 1. Three pedagogical
interventions] (Research Report No. 303). Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Faculty of
Behavioural Sciences.
Vauras, M., Rauhanummi, T., & Kinnunen, R. (1994). Metakognitiivisen tiedon arviointi
[Evaluation of metacognitive knowledge]. In M. Vauras, E. Poskiparta, & P.P. Niemi
(Eds.), Kognitiivisten taitojen ja motivaation arviointi koulutulokkailla ja 1. luokan oppilailla [Evaluating cognitive skills and motivation among school entrants and first-graders]
(Research Reports No. 3) (pp. 37 52). Turku: University of Turku.
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Wolf, M., & Katzir-Cohen, T. (2001). Reading fluency and its intervention. Scientific Studies of
Reading, 5(3), 211239.
Wray, D., & Medwell, J. (1991). Literacy and language in the primary years. London and
New York: Routledge.

Children's Opinions About Learning To Read

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Children's Opinions About Learning To Read

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

This article was downloaded by: [b-on: Biblioteca do conhecimento online UL]

On: 04 November 2013, At: 11:50

Early Child Development and Care