PROOF OF THE 3 CUEING SYSTEMS FOR IDENTIFYING WORDS

There are some who insist that reading is simply sounding out words, that the three cueing systems for identify words during reading (semantic, syntactic, and phonological) is a myth foisted upon education by ivory-tower professors bent on ruining America (I get a lot of responses like this on my LinkedIn and YouTube pages). Let me demonstrate first by asking you to examine your own eye movement. Read the sentence in Figure 1. Then look at the word below. 

Figure 1. A sentence and a word in isolation

Notice how the movement of your eyeballs differs when you see the same word (stampede) in the context of a sentence and when you see it in isolation.  Buffalos are often associated with stampedes, so this word acts as a primer. In the context of the sentence your eyes probably touch on just the beginning letter blend of this word. Now, if you notice your eyes when you look at the same word in isolation, your eyes probably start at the beginning, move all the way through the letters, then zip back again. Even though you saw the word in the previous sentences, your eyes do this. 

Why is this? Context.

Still do not believe me? The paragraph in Figure 2 contains 110 words. Read the paragraph as quickly as you can and time yourself.

             Figure 2. A paragraph with 110 words.

Do you think you can read this just as fast a second time? Read these same 110 words in Figure 3 as quickly as you can. Time yourself.

Was your reading rate the same? What about fluency? Did you go smoothly from word to word? How about your eye movement? Try it with a single sentence in Figure 4.

If reading was simply sounding out words, your rate, accuracy, and fluency should have been the same in both paragraphs.

Teacher professional development related to reading instruction offered through Minnesota State University at Lake Superior College.

\