When decoding isn't enough: The hidden timing problem in reading

When I hear a child read aloud and notice that they can sound out simple cvc words such as ‘mat’, but lose confidence on vowel digraphs in words such as ‘could’, ‘would’ and ‘should’, or ‘hair’, ‘chair’, ‘pair’, I know we need to think less about the digraph and more about the pattern.

When we break words down we either use phonemes or onset and rime:

• the smallest parts: /-ch-/-ai-/-r-/

• the onset and rime: /-ch-/ -air-/

We then notice whether the child engages immediately or not.This shows us whether they can hear the separate sounds and perceive them as a sequence, or not. If they do engage, then continuing with the established, phonemic-based strategy is reasonable.

A compliant child who is not engaged often cannot articulate the challenges they are experiencing. All they know is that the sequence of sounds vanishes so quickly that they are unable to respond. We might notice the low voice, the lack of facial movement, the motionless hands. This is not a digraph problem, but it is a timing problem. We might ask them whether the sounds vanished too soon?

Onset and rime vs phoneme-by-phoneme blending: Reducing cognitive load

The child without the capacity to hold information in mind is doubly disadvantaged when a word is split into its smallest units: ch-ai-r, because the two gaps between the three phonemes extend the length of the word (and the cognitive load) into five units.

When the word ‘chair’ is presented as two units using the onset and rime approach: ch-air, the cognitive load is minimized and the task becomes more manageable as three units.

Having worked in special schools and mainstream, I know that this approach is effective with students identified with moderate and severe learning difficulties, as well as with neurodiverse pupils.

The main advantage of onset and rime is that the principle division of ‘chair’ into ch-air can be extended as a rhythmic pattern that rhymes: fair, hair, lair, pair and can also be practiced as a writing exercise. In this way, the ‘ai’ sound is no longer decontextualized, but anchored within a stable, memorable structure.

Sometimes, a simple change is all that is needed to help the child with the difficulties they have been facing. If you would like an onset and rime list, click here.

Why automaticity fails for some readers.

Let’s consider another example, a child who can decode words but does not read fluently. According to established accounts of reading fluency development, once children associate phonemes (sounds) with graphemes (print) and can do so with automaticity, they learn to read fluently and understand what they read. The majority of children do learn to read in this way, even though the ‘automaticity’ piece is not well-understood as it happens subcortically. Researchers believe that the printed symbols of language ‘bootstrap’ onto the brain’s highly evolved language processing areas. At this point in development, reading sounds natural, expressive and engaged.

As we see from attainment data, this does not necessarily work for all children. Even if they can confidently sound out the words, automaticity does not take hold. We notice children trying hard to move from syllable to syllable, from word to word, from sentence to sentence. No matter their level of proficiency in decoding, effort is what defines their reading. It is obvious that they are trying very hard. Purpose is visible in their determined brow, their legs might be pumping back and forth as part of a concerted attempt to work their way through an entire passage of text. Their resilience is remarkable and despite these valiant efforts, they have little if any understanding of the text.

The ‘automaticity’ subcortical mechanism did not connect for these children. These are also the children who do not follow instructions, and prefer to chat to their friends in class (for reassurance because they do not know what they are supposed to do and feel disengaged during lessons). If we notice this, we can discern that they are not listening deeply, only superficially.

Conversational rhythm, oracy and reading fluency

If we are serious about prioritizing early intervention for reading and oracy as central to inclusive classroom practice, then we need to define parameters.

Conversational turns are the ‘to-and-fro’ that involve speaking and listening, whether between two, or more people. Knowing when to listen and when to speak varies a little in every conversation and we can adapt to the rhythm of conversational turns without realising, and we can also feel the positive effects of a 'good' conversation in which we ‘connected’ with ease. Children who are not skilled conversationalists may struggle with keeping pace with what others are saying, perceiving only fragments of meaning, not knowing what to say, not knowing when to speak, unable to find their words in ‘the moment’.

All of these frustrations can be characterized as rhythm-based. When a child does not engage in conversational turns or follow the lesson, this does not always mean that they are unable to understand the content, just that they are not accessing it. The adaptation is to break the language into shorter utterances. If we notice that in the classroom, some children do not follow instructions and chat rather than get on with the task, a neat work around would be this: Rather than setting a multi-step task for everyone, offer an option to take one step at a time. This does involve checking-in with these children at each step, but this approach acts as an effective bridge between universal and targeted support.

As we notice children who lag ‘behind’ in their social development of conversational turns, and compensate socially by clowning, masking or withdrawing, we might assume we may support them by accelerating their response times, reducing overall latency, encouraging their confidence and building participation little by little.

In terms of reading development this translates into quick fixes such that reading begins to look more like fitness training: reading for speed, reading quizzes, incentives for reading more books, reading with performative expression. It is as if we hope to ignite the automaticity that failed to spark in line with expectation in years two and three. That route did not work for a reason, but the logic trap would be to behave as if 'more of the same' is going to make a difference.

The alternative approach is to apply discernment, to notice what is working, to protect the fragile gains that do appear and to allow these to consolidate. But this on its own is not going to lead to coherence.

The neuroscience of rhythm, timing and anticipation

Rhythm enhances coherence in everything that we do. Athletes talk about getting into ‘their rhythm’ and we know from everyday experience, that once we have learned a new task, repetition leads to a feeling of rhythmic flow as the task becomes ‘second nature’.

Our mastery of complex multilayered actions such as riding a bicycle, driving a car, operating machinery are encoded as procedural memories once the coordination is stable and fluent. The basal ganglia are involved in procedural memory and are also well know for their role in our rhythm-based responses to our environment. Nearly everything we do involves coordinated movement. Even silent reading involves the coordination of eye-movements - whether horizontally or vertically - depending on the writing system.

There are principles that we can apply when thinking about timing in relation to any task. To become more precise and stable, we treat timing as a constant rather than a variable. Once stability and control are assured, our precision increases and a little time can be saved. Conversely, if working under pressure of time, stability and control become unreliable.

When stability and control are secure and time is a constant, with no rushing and no dragging, rhythm begins to emerge. This is the beginning of fluency. It emerges from the coherence between the rhythmic flow of the words, in alignment with the natural patterns of syntax and guided by contextual cues of the passage. The context is key because as in conversation, meaningful language processing is an integration between top down (cues of context) and bottom up (sounds of language).

Anticipation eases integration and this too is an aspect of rhythm-based processing. When teachers say that “children now know what is coming up next in their reading”, they are referring to anticipation. In conversation, we follow the gist and anticipate the next step as a logical consequence or perhaps if there’s a cliff hanger in a storyline, we are left with our ‘predictions’ unconsummated. This shows how anticipation is a powerful driver of reading, but in addition to predicting the development of a storyline, we also predict exactly which words are most likely to come up next. Language processing in early infancy develops this way and AI language models follow the same principles. However, when a child is not reading fluently, they do not anticipate what is coming up next, they simply decode what they see and there is no rhythmic engagement at all.

At the smallest scale, we perceive phonemes. Some children have an incomplete perception of these sounds and for them, anticipation is an important coping strategy, allowing them to patch over the gaps in sensory processing. Children often say that reading 'has become clearer' and on questioning them, they explain that the sounds of the phonemes are clearer. When children’s sensitivity to rhythm improves, they are better able to perceive the front edge of a consonant. This gain in rhythmic control coincides with a gain in phonemic awareness. Children also describe being able to ‘get their head down’ in the classroom and that they no longer chat instead of working. They say that they know what they are supposed to be doing in lessons and feel happy to be fully involved.

5 Signs phonemic awareness is still developing

There are intense pressures in classrooms and schools. High expectations for all exist alongside an inclusive approach. The existing frameworks are working well for most but not all children. When children need greater sensitivity to rhythm, teachers can identify five subtle signs through disciplined noticing.

1. Children are not developing prosody and expression in reading, even if they can decode the words.

2. Under pressure of time, they guess words they do not know and are not accessing contextual cues.

3. Reading is effortful, even if it is accurate and they are not enjoying books in key stage two.

4. Gaps in phonemic awareness mean the child cannot follow instructions or infer from instructions.

5. The child may watch the teacher’s face very closely, scanning for meaning to compensate for weak phonemic awareness.

It is vital to pick up these signs, as it is possible to address insufficient sensitivity to rhythm and address this quickly. Addressing this can avoid unnecessary referral to SEND, lighten the teacher’s workload and avoid unnecessary disaffection for reading and learning.

Protecting stability in inclusive classrooms

Learning requires rhythm. Rhythm requires stability. Stability requires a calm environment. Pressure of time is the only real threat to stability of the nervous system, and therefore to rhythm and learning.

When a classroom is calm, continuity and coherence are easier to sustain in this external environment. The internal environment of the child may still feel unsettled, spacey, ungrounded because they are not steady and stable within themselves. This may be because they are recovering from noisy transitions or aggression in the playground, or an issue at home. Any of these could be interrupting learning everyday. Again, disciplined noticing can identify this child in a calm classroom. This child may withdraw socially or wear the mask of happy compliance, but the reality of their learning will be identified by taking them aside and hearing them read aloud.

These steps can strengthen universal provision in year two and year three and prevent a decline in engagement across lower key stage two. This is necessary to strengthen reading fluency for children with gaps in phonemic awareness. Also, addressing weakness in sensitivity to rhythm can achieve stability if there’s a need to put light touch support in place prior to targeting children for SEND.

In a policy landscape that emphasises inclusive mainstream education and early identification, strengthening universal fluency provision is a preventative step that deepens and strengthens early reading.

If you’re reviewing your universal literacy provision in light of SEND reform and inclusion grading, I’ve created a structured fluency lens that may help you identify fragile gains before they disappear. Details here.