Through the widespread media coverage of the science of reading, much has been reported on the role of phonological skills in reading development. Language skills have played a less outspoken role in the discussion despite widespread acknowledgement of the fundamental relationship between word reading and language skills that fuels reading comprehension (Gough & Tunmer, 1986; Scarborough, 2001).  

The development of language skills begins before a child forms their first words and well before a child learns to read. From the pre-language skills of coos and gestures, children develop receptive oral language skills to understand what others are saying and expressive oral language skills to communicate their needs, wants, and ideas. Oral language skills evolve throughout childhood, and even adults continue to expand and refine their use of language.  

Spoken language consists of three systems: a sound system (phonology), meaning system (semantics), and structural system (grammar: morphology and syntax) (Aaron et al.,2008; Bloom & Lahey, 1978). Deficiency in any of these components can adversely affect a child’s reading development and performance (Aaron et al., 2008).  

(Adapted from Aaron et al., 2008)

Given that reading is a language-based skill, it is not surprising that research has shown that receptive and expressive oral language abilities contribute to reading achievement in both reading comprehension and word recognition (Catts et al.,1999; Hulme & Snowling, 2013). Facilitating oral language development requires frequent and varied opportunities for oral communication. From conversations between parent and child to robust classroom discussions, opportunities abound to support oral language skills across all age groups. 

Early Childhood: Dialogic Reading  

One powerful technique for facilitating oral language development and literacy skills in young children is dialogic reading. Dialogic reading is an interactive reading experience shared by the child and adult. It involves specific routines and prompts, such as PEER, which sets it apart from other shared reading experiences (U.S. Department of Education, 2007).  PEER includes the following steps:  

• P: Prompt the child to comment about the book 
• E: Evaluate the child’s response 
• E: Expand and elaborate on the child’s response 
• R: Repeat the prompt for reinforcement  

Within this model, the acronym CROWD is a reminder of the varied prompts that can be provided (U.S. Department of Education, 2007):  

• Completion: Child completes sentences or lines from the story 
• Recall: Child recalls information  
• Open-ended: Child explains an illustration or other aspect of the book 
• W: Child responds to “wh” questions 
• Distancing: Child connects information to experiences beyond the book 

Integrating Oral Language and Literacy Skills in Elementary and Middle School 

Explicit Vocabulary Instruction 

Vocabulary knowledge is strongly associated with reading comprehension, and direct vocabulary instruction is an important conduit for vocabulary acquisition and knowledge. When selecting words for explicit instruction, the emphasis should be on tier-two words. Such words are rich, high-frequency terms that enhance language and reading skills. While a number of extension activities can be employed in the classroom, explicit instruction of tier-two vocabulary involves four major steps: introduction of the word, a student-friendly definition of the word, varied examples of the word in context, and multiple checks for understanding. Within this model, oral rehearsal of the word is embedded as well as opportunities to practice and reinforce the word’s meaning (Beck et al., 2002). 

Facilitating Discussion and Deep Comprehension: Questioning the Author 

Questioning the Author (QtA) (Beck & McKeown, 2006) is an evidence-based technique that emphasizes classroom discussion and deep understanding over simple recall. Through interspersed discussion while reading, students respond to open-ended queries to consider, analyze, and reflect upon the information just read. Follow-up queries by the teacher encourage elaboration on one’s own responses and the responses of others, with student-to-student interactions playing a significant role, going well beyond the IRE (initiate, respond, evaluate) discourse pattern found so frequently in classrooms (Cazden, 1988). 

When planning for rich discussions, the first step is to identify major understandings to ensure that queries keep classroom discourse focused on the text’s most important ideas and themes. The next step is to carefully segment the text to ensure that stopping points yield the greatest impact regarding main ideas and/or potential areas of comprehension breakdown. Once the text has been segmented, teachers can craft open-ended initiating and follow-up queries that will maximize text engagement, classroom discourse, and comprehension building (Beck & McKeown, 2006). 

As the communication engine that powers literacy development, oral language skills play a critical role in student learning. Dialogic reading, explicit vocabulary instruction, and intentional classroom discussion with QtA are just a sampling of techniques to facilitate oral language development and literacy skills within the classroom. By planning a mix of questions to elicit elaborated responses, modeling complex oral language with pre-planned instructional language and comments, and identifying opportunities for vocabulary and knowledge building, teachers in all content areas and grades can help students improve their language skills. 

---

References

Aaron, P.G., Joshi, R.M., Quatroche, D. (2008). Becoming a professional reading teacher. Brookes
     Publishing.   

Beck, I.L., McKeown, M.G. & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing Words to Life: Robust Vocabulary Instruction.
     The Guilford Press.   

Beck, I.L. & McKeown, M.G. (2006). Improving comprehension with questioning the    author: A fresh
     and expanded view of a powerful approach. Scholastic.    

Bloom, L., & Lahey, M. (1978). Language development and language disorders. Wiley.  

Catts, H.W., Fey, M.E., Zhang, X. & Tomblin, B. (1999). Language basis of reading and  reading
     disabilities: Evidence from a longitudinal investigation. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3:4, 331-361.
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0304_2  

Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Heinemann.  

Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special
     Education, 7(1), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258600700104  

Hulme C. & Snowling, M.J. (2013). The interface between spoken and written language:
     Developmental disorders. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 369(1634), 20120395.
     https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rstb.2012.0395 

Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities:
     Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. Neuman & D. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook for Research in
     Early Literacy. Guilford Press.  

U.S. Department of Education (2007). Dialogic reading. What Works Clearinghouse.   Institute of
     Education Sciences. Retrieved from: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/EvidenceSnapshot/135  

---