Your free reading eggs trial awaits

The science behind reading

 

Reading is often seen as a skill that requires particularly two abilities – identifying words (decoding) and interpreting their meaning correctly (comprehension). However, developing these broad capabilities requires the acquisition of more specific competences. As an extensive body of research has shown there are five essential skills for mastering reading. A high-quality literacy education should include all five components. This is where Reading Eggs steps in – the online resource covers the development and improvement of all five competencies.

Phonemic Awareness¹

Component 1

The ability to hear, identify, and manipulate the individual sounds, known as phonemes, in spoken words.  

Reading Eggs teaches phonemic awareness using a sequential series of skill-building activities designed to increase sound awareness. Students will also become familiar with the placement of individual phonemes as the initial, medial and final sound.

Phonics²

Component 2

Correlating sounds with letters or groups of letters. 

Reading Eggs follows a method of teaching students to read by correlating sounds with written letters. Recognising this connection is an essential foundational reading skill. With an engaging set of characters taking your students on a journey, readers will learn how to decode words into sounds and encode sounds into words.

Vocabulary³

Component 3

Understanding the meaning of words, their definitions and their context.

With both Reading Eggs and Eggspress, learners will be able to increase the amount of words they understand and use as part of their working vocabulary. Within lessons, activities, games and eBooks, students will be provided with visual support to provide context and boost retention levels. 

Fluency

Component 4

Ability to read with speed, understanding and accuracy.  

A variety of skills work together to build reading fluency. We understand that students need to have access to books at an appropriate reading level to improve their reading endurance that will help increase their reading fluency. Reading Eggs and Eggspress provide instructional activities that build a learner’s reading stamina at any level.

Comprehension

Component 5

Understanding the meaning of written text. 

With built-in pre-reading and post-reading activities, the programs ignite students’ thinking and build active reading comprehension skills. Incorporating fiction and non-fiction texts, the program will help readers imagine the characters and their adventures as well as gain new information and deepen their levels of understanding of new topics and concepts.

Students will enjoy reading in a learning environment built to meet the needs of all students

 

Reading Eggs & Reading Eggspress Curriculum Content

Lessons are aligned to curriculum outcomes and designed for all learning styles. Adaptive technology is integrated within lesson activities to ensure mastery. Embedded throughout the lessons are personalised activities that cater to all different learning styles. With concept videos, guided practice, engaging games and competitions, interactives, various text types, multiple rewards and more – these two resources have it all.

Students and teachers have access to 2500+ eBooks covering all subject areas. With built-in support and practice resources, teachers have what they need to teach and students have everything they need to learn.

Reading Eggs offers a variety of different reading games
Reading Eggs offers a variety of different reading games
Reading Eggs offers a variety of different reading games
Reading Eggs offers a variety of different reading games

Meaningful Reports

With an easy to follow map format, teachers and students have visibility over progress as they complete lessons.

The Reports provide student stats to demonstrate progress, usage, books read and achievement. Within Reading Eggspress, admin and teachers can view graphic snapshots of all areas and drill drown for detailed reports of individual students in table and chart views. With one click, you can easily identify strengths and weaknesses, student improvement and so much more.

These powerful reporting tools are designed for you to quickly take action where it is needed most.

Teachers! Stop searching all over for resources to supplement literacy instruction. Find all you need in one place, with Teacher Toolkit.

The report section in Reading Eggs provides teachers with detailed information on their students' reading progress

References

¹Phonemic Awareness

 

Adams, M. J. (1990).
Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print.
Cambridge, MA MIT Press.

Ball, E. W., & Blachman, B. A. (1991).
Does phoneme awareness training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling?
Reading Research Quarterly, 25, 49-66.

Bradley, L., & Bryant, P. (1983).
Categorizing sounds and learning to read: A causal connection.
Nature, 301, 419-421.

Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1989).
Phonemic awareness and letter knowledge in the child’s acquisition of the alphabetic principle.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 313-321.

Byrne, B., Fielding-Barnsley, R, & Ashley, L. (2000).
Effects of preschool phoneme identity training after six years: Outcome level distinguished from rate of response.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 659-667.

Carroll, J.M., Bowyer-Crane, C., Duff, F.J., Hulme, C. & Snowling, M.J. (2011).
Developing Language and Literacy.
Wiley-Blackwell, West Sussex.

Juel, C. (1988).
Learning to read & write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437-447.

McNamara, J.K., Scissons, M., & Gutknecth, N. (2011).
A longitudinal study of kindergarten children at risk for reading disabilities: The poor really are getting poorer.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(4), 21-430.

Moats, L.C. (2010).
Speech to Print: Language Essentials for Teachers (2nd edition).
Paul H Brookes, Baltimore, MD.

National Early Literacy Panel. (2009).
Developing Early Literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel, Executive Summary.
Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.

Ouellette, G. & Haley, A. (2013).
One complicated extended family: The influence of alphabetic knowledge and vocabulary on phonemic awareness.
Journal of Research in Reading, 36(1), 29-41.

Smith, S.B., Simmons, D.C., & Kameenui, E.J. (1995).
Synthesis of research on phonological awareness: Principles and implications for reading acquisition.
National Center To Improve the Tools of Educators, Eugene, OR.

²Phonics

 

Adams, MJ (1990).
Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print.
Cambridge, MA MIT Press.

Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training (2005).
Teaching Reading: National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy.
Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Moats, L. (1999).
Teaching Reading is Rocket Science: What Expert Teachers of Reading Should Know and Be Able To Do.
American Federation of Teachers.

Moats, L.C. (2010).
Speech to Print.
Language Essentials for Teachers (2nd edition), Paul H. Brookes Publishing, Baltimore.

National Reading Panel (2000).
Teaching children to read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and its Implications for Reading Instruction.

Rose, J. (2006).
Independent Review of the Teaching of Early Reading.
UK Department for Education and Skills.

Sonnenschein, S., Stapleton, L.M. & Benson, A. (2010).
The relation between the type and amount of instruction and growth in children’s reading competencies.
American Educational Research Journal, 47(2), pp. 358-389.

³Vocabulary

 

Clarke, P., Snowling, M.J., Truelove, E. & Hulme, C. (2010).
Ameliorating children’s reading comprehension difficulties: A randomised controlled trial.
Psychological Science, 21, 1106-1116.

Hay, I. & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (2009).
Competencies that underpin children’s transition into early literacy.
Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 32(2), 148-162.

Hirsch, E.D. (2013).
Primer on success: Character and knowledge make the difference.
Education Next, 13(1).

Lenfest, A. & Reed, D.K. (2015).
Enhancing basal vocabulary instruction in kindergarten.
Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 30(1), pp. 43–50. DOI: 10.1111/ldrp.12050

Loftus, S.M. & Coyne, M.D. (2013).
Vocabulary instruction within a multi-tier approach.
Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 29(1), 4-19.
Doi: 10.1080/10573569.2013.741942

National Assessment of Educational Practice (2012).
The nation’s report card: Vocabulary results from the 2009 and 2011 NAEP Reading Assessments.
Institute of Educational Sciences, Washington, DC.

National Reading Panel (2000).
Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.
Department of Health and Human Services, Jessup, MD.

Reilly, S, Wake, M, Ukoumunne, O, Bavin, E, Prior, M, Cini, E, Conway, L, Eadie, P, & Bretherton, L 2010.
Predicting language outcomes at 4 years of age: findings from Early Language in Victoria study.
Pediatrics, 126(6), 1530-1537. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2010- 0254

Sinatra, R., Zygouris-Coe, V. & Dasinger, S. (2011).
Preventing a vocabulary lag: What lessons are learned from research.
Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28(4), pp. 333-357.

Snow, PC 2016.
Elizabeth Usher Memorial Lecture: Language is literacy is language – Positioning speech-language pathology in education policy, practice, paradigms and polemics.
International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology.
DOI: 10.3109/17549507.2015.1112837

Taylor, C.L., Christensen, D., Lawrence, D., Mitrou, F. & Zubrick, S.R. (2013).
Risk factors for children’s receptive vocabulary development from four to eight years in the longitudinal study of Australian children.
PLoS ONE, 8(11), 11-20.

⁴Fluency

 

Griffiths, Y. & Stuart, M. (2013).
Reviewing evidence-based practice for pupils with dyslexia and literacy difficulties.
Journal of Research in Reading, 36(1), pp. 96-116.

National Reading Panel (2000).
Teaching Children to Read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.

Park, P., Chaparro, E.A., Preciado, J. & Cummings, K.D. (2015).
Is earlier better? Mastery of reading fluency in early schooling.
Early Education and Development, DOI: 10.1080/10409289.2015.1015855.

Rasinski, T., Homan, S. & Biggs, M. (2009).
Teaching reading fluency to struggling readers: Method, materials, and evidence.
Reading & Writing Quarterly, 25(2), pp. 192-204.

Rasinski, T., Rikli, A. & Johnston, S. (2009).
Reading fluency: More than automaticity? More than a concern for the primary grades?
Literacy Research and Instruction, 48, 350-361.

Richards, T.L., Corina, D., Serafini, S., Steury, K., Echelard, D.R., Dager, S.R., Marro, K., Abbott, R.D., Maravilla, K.R. & Berninger, V.W. (2000).
The effects of a phonologically-driven treatment for dyslexia on lactate levels as measured by Proton MRSI.
American Journal of Neuroradiology, 21, 916-922.

⁵Comprehension

 

Compton, D.l., Miller, A.C., Elleman, A.M. & Steacy, L.M. (2014).
Have we forsaken reading theory in the name of “quick fix” interventions for children with reading disability?
Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 55-73.

De Lemos, M. (2013).
How children learn to read: A position statement.
Learning Difficulties Australia Bulletin, 45(2), August.

Garcia, J.R. & Cain, K. (2014).
Decoding and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis to identify which reader and assessment characteristics influence the strength of the relationship in English.
Review of Educational Research, 84(1), 74–111.

Hairrell, A., Rupley, W.H., Edmonds, M., Larsen, R., Simmons, D., Willson, V., Byrns, G. & Vaughn, S. (2011).
Examining the impact of teacher quality on fourth-grade students’ comprehension and content-area achievement.
Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 27(3), 239-260.

Sabatini, J.P., O’Reilly, T., Halderman, L.K. & Bruce, K. (2014).
Integrating scenario-based and component reading skill measures to understand the reading behavior of struggling readers.
Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(1), 36–43.

Solis, M., Ciullo, S., Vaughn, S., Pyle, N., Hassaram, B. & Leroux, A. (2012).
Reading comprehension interventions for middle school students with learning disabilities: A synthesis of 30 years of research.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 327- 340.

Spencer, M., Quinn, J.M. & Wagner, R.K. (2014).
Specific reading comprehension disability: Major problem, myth, or misnomer?
Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(1), 3-8.

Wagner, R.K. & Meros, D. (2010).
Vocabulary and reading comprehension: Direct, indirect, and reciprocal influences.
Focus on Exceptional Children, 43, 1-12.

Willingham, D.T. (2006).
The usefulness of brief instruction in reading comprehension strategies.
American Educator, Winter, 39-50.