CHAPTER

THEORIES OF READING: INTERACTIVE MODEL

LEARNING OUTCOME Upon completion of this chapter, you should be able to: 1. 2. 3. 4. describe the interactive model from the point of view of four different researchers; apply the suitable interactive model to second language reading students; discuss how the interactive model integrates the bottom-up and top-down models of reading; and explain how the interactive model overcomes the limitations of the bottom-up and top-down models of reading.

ERC411 READING IN SECOND LANGUAGE CONTEXTS

Theories of Reading: Interactive Model CHAPTER 3

INTRODUCTION
In Chapter 2, you have been introduced to two contrasting models of reading namely; bottomup and top-down models of reading. In this chapter, you will learn about the interactive model which seeks to integrate these two contrasting earlier models. Different views of the interactive models will be discussed, compared and contrasted for a comprehensive understanding of the interactive processes in reading. A discussion on how this model overcomes the strengths and limitations of the earlier models of reading is also provided.

3.0

INTERACTIVE MODELS OF READING

In the last chapter, you have read about two different models of reading. One is the bottom-up model which is text driven where the main emphasis is placed on identification skills. Reading is perceived as a decoding process, beginning the print before it will be passed to the higher levels of processing. Each level is carried out as a linear and discrete process involving the precise, sequential identification of letters, words, phrases, clauses, sentences and their pronunciation. On the other hand, the top-down model is reader driven or concept driven because meaning is derived from the conceptual information of the readers instead of the text. For meaning to be derived, readers are engaged in a cycle of forming a hypothesis, sampling the input, testing it, either re-hypothising or confirming the hypothesis, and sampling again.

In your opinion, what should be the main factors that need to be addressed by a more comprehensive model of reading?

Therefore, there need to be a model, which combines these contrasting views so that a more comprehensive understanding on the reading processes can be achieved. Such a model will need to recognize the contributions of both the text and the reader. It needs to recognize the role of identification and interpretation and perceive reading as an active, interactive process. This is fulfilled by the third model of reading, namely, the interactive model of reading. The nature of the different kinds interactions involved in reading has been defined differently by different researchers.

CHAPTER 3 Theories of Reading: Interactive Model

..........................

Hence, this chapter discusses the interactive model from the point of views of different researchers. Proponents of the interactive model are: 1. Rumelhart (1977) 2. Stanovich (1980,1981) 3. Eskey (1986) 4. Grabe (1991)

Discuss the interactive model or reading generally. How is this model differ or similar to the reading models before it?

3.0.1

RUMELHARTS (1977) INTERACTIVE MODEL OF READING

According to Rumelhart (1977:573), reading is at once a perceptual and a cognitive process which begins with a flutter of patterns on the retina and ends (when successful) with a definite idea about the authors intended message.

From the sentence above, what skill or knowledge can be inferred that the interactive model place emphasis upon?

Rumelharts statement is similar to the view of Gough (1972) who asserts that reading begins with the eyes identifying visual information from the text. For Rumelhart (1977) (refer to Figure 3.1) visual information in the form of graphemes is taken in during a fixation and is placed at the visual information store. Then, a feature extraction device will extract the critical features from the grapheme input and pass these features as sensory input to the pattern synthesiser. The pattern synthesiser comprises various types of nonsensory information such as knowledge about orthographic, lexical, syntactical, semantic and pragmatic features. Here, the most important meaning construction process takes place where all of the various sources of knowledge, both sensory and non-sensory, come together at one place and the reading process is the product of the simultaneous joint application of all the knowledge sources (Rumelhart 1977:588).
2

Theories of Reading: Interactive Model CHAPTER 3

Figure 3.1: Rumelhart (1977:588) interactive model To coordinate the simultaneous interaction of these different types of knowledge, there is a mechanism referred to as the message centre which will retain the information in a temporary store. This is necessary so that each individual type of knowledge source can deal with the information through the process of hypothesis testing. Each knowledge source contains specialized knowledge of the reading process and it will test the information in the pattern synthesizer according to its own area of specialization. Each hypothesis will be constructed, tested, and confirmed before moving on to the next hypothesis, or disconfirmed and re-hypothesized.

Can you recall, which researcher, in the last chapter, who also view reading as a process of hypothesis testing?

The process of hypothesis testing will go on until the most probable interpretation of the text is achieved. At any time, a specific type of knowledge may also use the information provided by the other sources of knowledge. The reading process is neither a purely bottom-up process nor a purely top-down analysis.Rather, the hypothesis can be generated at any level (Rumelhart 1977:591). Rumelharts model allows for simultaneous processing of all sources of knowledge both data driven and concept driven instead of lower level processes proceeding in a discrete lock-step nature, not allowing higher level processing to influence lower level processes. The multi stages
3

CHAPTER 3 Theories of Reading: Interactive Model

..........................

of processing are interrelated and interact in a parallel nature at the message centre to produce comprehension. 3.0.2 STANOVICH (1980,1981) INTERACTIVE MODEL OF READING

Similar to Rumelhart (1977), Stanovich (1980,1981) asserts that several types of knowledge are simultaneously processed for an interpretation to be achieved. Stanovich (1980:63) states that interactive models assume that pattern is synthesised based on information provided simultaneously from several knowledge sources. Stanovich (1980, 1981), however, elaborates the interactive model and integrates it with what is referred to as the compensatory assumption which states that a deficit in any knowledge source results in a heavier reliance on other knowledge sources, regardless of their level in the processing hierarchy (1980:63). This means any type of knowledge may interact with any other type of knowledge at any stage simultaneously when processing a text. But more importantly, a weak knowledge source may rely on better-developed knowledge sources to compensate for its weakness. For example, readers who are struggling to identify the words in the reading text but who have some knowledge of the chapter may rely on higher stages of processing to compensate for their decoding weakness.

In your opinion, do advanced readers also face challenges in reading where they need to rely on a better developed language source to compensate for this weakness?

On the other hand, skilled readers who may be reading a text on a subject they are unfamiliar with may rely on their decoding skills to identify the written materials. Good readers, however, are thought to have a wider range of compensatory strategies compared to poor readers. Interactive models of reading appear to provide a more accurate conceptualization of reading performance than do strictly top-down or bottom-up models. When combined with an assumption of compensatory processing (that a deficit in any particular process will result in greater reliance on other knowledge sources, regardless of their level of processing hierarchy), interactive models provide a better account of the existing data on the use of orthographic structure and sentence context by good and poor readers.(Stanovich 1980:32).

Make comparison between Rumelhart and Stanovich views of Interactive model. Are there any differences or similarities?

Theories of Reading: Interactive Model CHAPTER 3

3.0.3

ESKEYS (1986) INTERACTIVE MODEL OF READING

According to Eskey (1986), reading is a cognitive process. The cognitive structure or the brain comprises two kinds of knowledge which is relevant to reading, they are, the knowledge of form and knowledge of substance (refer to Figure 3.2).

Figure 3.2: Two kinds of knowledge relevant to reading Knowledge of form refers to the readers knowledge of language such as graphohonic, lexis, syntax, semantics, and knowledge of the rhetorical structure. Knowledge of form helps readers with the process of identifying the print. Knowledge of substance refers to the content or the conceptual structure of the text. It comprises cultural, pragmatic and subject specific knowledge.

What kind of readers will rely more on knowledge of forms compared to knowledge of substance? What kind of readers will rely more on knowledge of substance compared to knowledge of forms?

If the readers are fluent, they may be able to identify the print automatically and rapidly. Poor or beginner readers on the other hand, may need to rely more on their identification skills i.e. knowledge of forms. Knowledge of substance helps readers in forming and revising predictions as interpretation of the text is constructed. Based on the information received through the eyes, the brain will process these two knowledge interactively and provide a personal reconstruction of the text. The term interactive refers to the interaction of several types of knowledge (refer to figure 3.3). Readers will employ both the skill to identify and the skill to interpret the text during the act of reading simultaneously. The only difference is beginner readers may rely more on knowledge of
5

CHAPTER 3 Theories of Reading: Interactive Model

..........................

form as their identification skills are not automatic. Since more energy is spent on identification skills, beginner readers may not focus as much on the process of interpretation. Nevertheless, the process of identifying the print or decoding will be done within the framework of what they know of the larger conceptual structure of the text, or top down. This means they will be identifying the print using their prior knowledge, that is, the knowledge of the world as discussed in the last chapter. In the case of fluent readers, since their identification skills are efficient and automatic, they are able to employ more interpretative skills. At all times, they will still identify the written stimulus. According to Carrell, Devine and Eskey (1992:59) interactive models of reading assume that skills at all levels are interactively available to process and interpret the text instead of giving any directional bias, such as, bottom up or top down.

Figure 3.3: Categories of Knowledge Crucial to Reading Source: Dubin, Eskey and Grabe (1986:18)

Theories of Reading: Interactive Model CHAPTER 3

3.0.4

GRABES (1991) INTERACTIVE MODEL OF READING

According to Grabe (1991), the term interactive refers to two concepts: 1. reader-text interaction; and 2. simultaneous processing of many component skills. First, the concept refers to reader-text interaction where readers reconstruct meaning based on the printed text and their prior knowledge. Prior knowledge provides readers with certain expectations that help in making predictions regarding the meaning of the text. This prior knowledge is what Eskey (1986) refers to as knowledge of substance and knowledge of forms as in Figure 3.3. Second, the term interactive refers to the simultaneous processing of many component skills (refer to Figure 3.4).

Can you name any component skill that may be included in Grabes (1991) model of reading?

Both the knowledge of substance and the knowledge of forms will interact simultaneously when processing the printed text during the course of reconstructing the message. In other words, reading involves the interaction of lower level rapid, automatic identification skills and an array of higher-level comprehension/interpretation skills (Grabe 1991:383). Instead of a certain predetermined direction of processing such as bottom-up or top-down, the interactive view perceives reading as a selective, simultaneous processing of different types of information visual, orthographic, lexical, semantical, syntactical and pragmatic.

CHAPTER 3 Theories of Reading: Interactive Model

..........................

Figure 3.4: Grabe (1988:59) interactive model Source: Adaptation from Grabe (1988 : 59) interactive model

3.1

THE STRENGTHS OF THE INTERACTIVE MODEL OF READING

Overall, the interactive models seem now preferred to the two more extreme models of reading. According to Bernhardt (1986), there is a paradigm shift from the top-down to the interactive view in the world of reading. The interactive model recognizes the importance of lower-level processing skills and, at the same time, takes into account the crucial contribution of higher-level processing skills.

Can you think of the strengths of interactive model of reading?

Theories of Reading: Interactive Model CHAPTER 3

Reading is now perceived not as a linear, discrete, sequential series of processes, but as a nondirectional process where knowledge from different sources interacts to produce the most appropriate interpretation of a message.

Figure 3.5: The emphases of interactive model OVERCOMING THE LIMITATIONS OF BOTTOM-UP MODEL AND TOP-DOWN MODEL

3.1.1

The interactive model managed to overcome many of the limitations of the earlier bottom-up and top-down models of reading. The bottom-up model perceives reading as a serial process beginning from the print to the lower levels of processing before it will be passed on to the higher levels of processing. Each level of processing is a linear, sequential and discrete process. Such sequential reading process like the bottom-up model does not allow for the processes that occur later to influence the processes that occurred earlier. The lack of interaction does not explain how factors such as prior knowledge of the subject matter or culture might influence comprehension. Readers are also not perceived as active and interactive information processors who are able to reconstruct meaning according to their purpose of reading and prior knowledge. As mentioned before, the top-down models over-emphasise higher level skills so much so that little attention is given to the development of lower level skills. Top-down theorists such as Kolers (1966 in Smith 1982) asserts that reading is only incidentally visual. This suggests readers do not attend to words. They attend to meaning, which is highly determined by their purpose for reading and their predictions. However, previous research has provided evidence that better readers are not only better at interpreting texts, they are also better decoders (Adams 1990). They do not just rely on their predictive skills to interpret the texts, they do in fact read most words on a printed page in a very precise and rapid manner. This means identification or decoding is an important reading skill. Better readers are found to be better decoders in that they are able to identify the orthographic information automatically (Stanovich 1981). Since their identification skills are automatic, they have more energy to concentrate on the message and predict the content. To assume that efficient readers do not attend to visual information is misguided.

CHAPTER 3 Theories of Reading: Interactive Model

..........................

Figure 3.6: What better readers can do The interactive model manages to overcome such limitation because it recognizes the contribution of the text and the importance of identification process. This allows readers to be more accurate at reading the message that is actually written. Such accuracy is vital when readers read texts which they are over familiar with. By focusing on the forms in the text, readers will be able to construct the intended message rather than the message that they think should be there in a situation that was referred to over reading in the last chapter. Such a situation tends to be faced by advanced readers. Stanovichs (1980, 1981), model can also be employed to explain a shortcoming of the top -down model regarding readers over-reading a text which they are very familiar with. In this situation, knowledge of substance may have induced the reader to extensively predict the text and have impeded them from checking their hypothesis with the printed information. According to Hedge (1991:162), Readers who make extensive use of intelligent guessing strategies may well do so at the expense of evaluating upcoming text data which does not conform to their guesses. At the other end of the spectrum, Eskey (1988:93) stresses that top-down models de-emphasise the perceptual and decoding of the language of the text and do not provide a true picture of the problems faced by less skilled readers. Poor readers, L1 or L2, may not be able to generate accurate predictions or accurate hypotheses. Even fluent readers, if faced with unfamiliar texts, may not be able to form accurate hypotheses. According to Stanovich (1980), readers are able to rely on other knowledge sources to compensate for their weaker ones in constructing the intended meaning. They may rely on one stronger aspect of the model to compensate for weakness in another. Stanovich asserts that a process at any level can compensate for deficiencies at any other level (1981:32). For L2 reading, Hedge (1991:158) asserts that interactive models can account for the cultural and experiential variety and significance therein of NNS (Non-native Speaker) readers and it stresses the interaction, be that interaction simultaneous or deferred, of top-down and bottomup processes. Background knowledge such as cultural knowledge plays a major role in reading comprehension. A deficit in background knowledge may make comprehension very difficult, if not impossible. In contrast, its availability may facilitate comprehension. The contribution of prior knowledge to reading comprehension brings our discussion to schema theory.

10

Theories of Reading: Interactive Model CHAPTER 3

Assume you are teaching a text on Thanksgiving Celebrations. Do you anticipate your students to face any problems if you let them read on their own? Give your reasons. In your opinion, which interactive model do you think is most applicable to second language (L2) reading? Explain. In what way does the interactive model provide a better explanatory power compared to the bottom-up and top-down model? Discuss.

SUMMARY
This chapter introduces you to the interactive models of reading. These models are particularly useful because of their flexibility that allows them to compensate and overcome problems faced by exclusively top-down and bottom-up models of reading. There chapter introduces the student to the different interactive models in chronological progression to show how the idea has developed over the space of three decades. Exposure to these models should allow the students a degree of freedom to be eclectic in forming their own opinions about reading.

1. Briefly describe Rumelharts (1977) interactive model. (a) What does he mean by simultaneous processing of knowledge? (b) What is meaning construction in Rumelharts model? 2. What does Grabe (1991) mean by interactive? (a) How is this term important to reading? (b) How do the component skills contribute to reading?

11

CHAPTER 3 Theories of Reading: Interactive Model

..........................

GLOSSARY
Cognitive Hypothesis Perceptual Simultaneous Interaction Synthesiser constructed in the mind. an idea of how something will happen. engaged though the senses. contact or exchanges that happen at the same time. machine or thing that produces an imitation of something, e.g. sound, sight et cetera.

12