International Literacy Association | 2018
Reading Fluently Does
Not Mean Reading Fast
LITERACY LEADERSHIP BRIEF
2
R
eading can be an effortless pleasure and a life-
changing gift, and for many lucky people, this is ex-
actly their personal experience with the act of reading.
Unfortunately, for millions of others, reading is not a
positive experience.
What we have learned from decades of research is that read-
ing is a highly complex task that involves many interconnected
and codependent linguistic processes that draw upon a variety
of separate skills. When these various mechanics are well estab-
lished, reading happens automatically and effortlessly. One of
the essential skills that must be in place for efficient reading to
occur is fluency. Unfortunately, many students strugle with flu-
ency. In addition, there is a widespread misunderstanding about
both what fluency is and the role it plays in skillful reading.
Defining Fluency
What is reading fluency? Many questions surround the defini-
tion of fluency as a concept, in part because fluency has many
subtle mechanics that are interdependent and therefore diffi-
cult to separate. These mechanics, or skills, work together to
enable fluent reading. Most definitions of reading fluency in-
clude three observable and measurable components: accuracy,
rate, and expression (sometimes referred to as prosody).
Fluency may be defined as “reasonably accurate reading,
at an appropriate rate, with suitable expression, that leads to
accurate and deep comprehension and motivation to read”
(Hasbrouck & Glaser, , p. ). In this definition, three ele-
ments are critical: accuracy, rate, and expression. Each of these
elements, therefore, must be understood in turn.
Accuracy
Accuracy is the essential foundation of reading fluency. To be
considered a fluent reader, reading must be accurate, first and
foremost. The ultimate purpose of reading is always to com-
prehend what is being read. For a reader to understand what
a text means, that text first must be read with a certain level
of accuracy. This may sound simplistic. However, to read text
accurately, a reader must be able to identify individual words
accurately, which requires learning the alphabetic principle:
that letters (graphemes) have associated sounds (phonemes)
that need to be accurately identified and skillfully processed
Fluency may be defined
as “reasonably accurate
reading, at an appropriate
rate, with suitable
expression, that leads
to accurate and deep
comprehension and
motivation to read.”
3
(decoding). Irregular words that cannot be decoded must also
be read accurately. The recognition of common letter patterns
as well as the correct spellings of words play crucial roles in ac-
curate word reading. Then, once the word has been identified,
its correct meaning must be accessed. For a truly fluent reader,
accurate word identification and meaning happen simultane-
ously and instantaneously. Reading has become automatic.
Rate
Rate is often used mistakenly as a synonym for fluency.
However, rate technically refers only to the speed with which
students read text. Fluency is far more complex than rate alone.
Another common fallacy about rate is that “faster is better,” al-
though most teachers likely know from experience that this is
not true. Most teachers have had experiences with students who
read quickly but still may not have good comprehension. Speed
alone does not facilitate comprehension, and a fast reader is not
necessarily a fluent reader. In fact, fast readers may be reading
inaccurately or simply reading too quickly to be able to think
about what they are reading. The rate, or speed, at which text
is decoded and recognized represents an important aspect of
fluency and is linked to overall reading proficiency. However,
reading fast is not the same as reading fluently.
Expression
Expression is a component of oral reading that includes the
pitch, tone, volume, emphasis, and rhythm in speech or oral
reading. Another aspect of expression is a skillful reader’s abil-
ity to “chunk” words together into appropriate phrases. In some
research on reading fluency, expression is referred to as prosody.
There is only minimal evidence that expressive reading influ-
ences or mediates reading comprehension. Good expression may
be an outcome of, rather than a contributor to, comprehension.
Further Qualifications
When fluency is defined as accurate reading, at an appropriate
rate, with suitable expression that leads to accurate and deep
comprehension and motivation to read, it is obvious that the
italicized terms are rather vague. They imply that standards for
accuracy, rate, and expression may, in fact, change from time to
time or in different situations, which is exactly the point.
Fluency is far more complex
than rate alone.
4
For example, when reading the directions on the label of pre-
scription medication, we certainly need to read as accurately
as possible. We would strive to be accurate. We are likely
going to slow down and even reread the directions more than
once. If there is a word used in the directions that we do not un-
derstand, we will seek guidance and clarification. In this case,
only highly accurate reading is reasonable, and slower reading
is appropriate. Similarly, if we are studying challenging mate-
rial for an important exam, we will want our accuracy to be as
high as possible, and therefore our rate will likely be slower
than when comprehension requirements are less demanding.
On the other hand, if we are simply skimming through a fa-
vorite magazine or perusing the newspaper, our accuracy levels
may be significantly lower, and our reading rate may be higher
than optimal levels, and both approaches are reasonable and
appropriate. By the same token, in some situation, readers’ ex-
pression might be exagerated if they are reading a humorous
piece of literature aloud to an audience or a group of friends.
Clearly, different situations demand different emphases of the
three components of fluency.
Reasonably Accurate
How accurate should we expect our students to be? What is
“reasonable”? Precisely defined standards for reading accuracy
have not been scientifically established. Comprehension of text
is compromised when the percentage of accurately read words
falls below . When students’ accuracy rates fall below ,
additional diagnostic assessment may reveal underlying causes
such as weak language skills, lack of vocabulary knowledge, or
poor decoding and spelling ability.
Diagnostic processes help identify reasons for the errors be-
ing made and provide guidance for instruction to help improve
reading accuracy. Research sugests that for younger emerging
readers, acceptable levels for accuracy should be even higher
(perhaps to ) in monitored instruction or practice set-
tings. In fact, in the early grades, accurate decoding is highly
correlated with comprehension.
Appropriate Rate
Norms for oral reading fluency (ORF) as measured in words
correct per minute (wcpm) have been established in research
conducted over a -year period, the newest having been
When students’ accuracy
rates fall below 95%,
additional diagnostic
assessment may reveal
underlying causes such as
weak language skills, lack
of vocabulary knowledge,
or poor decoding and
spelling ability.
5
published in (www.brtprojects.org/publications/technical
-reports/). Researchers generally agree that performance at
the th percentile of these compiled ORF norms can serve as a
reasonable benchmark for determining an appropriate reading
rate. Unfortunately, some states and districts across the United
States have used these norms to set their standards for reading
fluency at the th percentile or even higher. Many school ad-
ministrators also mistakenly believe that a higher ORF score is
somehow “better.” Although that might sound like a good idea,
in the case of reading rate, it isn’t.
Setting high standards for student achievement is usually an
excellent thing to do. In many areas, higher or biger or faster
is definitely better. For example, having a higher IQ or being
able to run, jump, or swim faster, higher, or longer is certainly
better than lower scores in these areas. However, in the case of
reading fluency, this notion is not correct.
Although there is no research or evidence from real-world
practice to support the idea that reading faster has any long-
term benefits, there is ample empirical evidence that it is im-
portant for students to maintain wcpm rates minimally at
the th to th percentiles. Very few students will be able to
achieve those highest rates; they and their teachers would likely
become frustrated in the attempt. More important, there is no
reason to believe that students’ reading success or enjoyment
will substantially benefit if they do achieve this higher level. In
other words, students do not need to read as fast as possible to
become good readers. Students who read in the average range of
ORF norms are on target to become effective readers; they are
doing just fine. Fast reading is not the same as fluent reading.
Thinking about ORF scores like we think about blood pres-
sure, body temperature, or cholesterol levels is preferable and
more accurate. All three of these measures have established
“norms,” and there are significant findings from medical re-
search to indicate that is it important for healthy people to
maintain their blood pressure, body temperature, and cho-
lesterol at “average” or expected normative levels. Unlike IQ
or athletic prowess, there is no benefit to having significantly
higher (or lower) scores in these three areas.
Like blood pressure, body temperature, and cholesterol,
ORF scores can serve as “indicators” of health and wellness,
and scores at the “average” level are, in fact, optimal. As pro-
fessional educators, we need to understand this correlation
Students who read in the
average range of ORF
norms are on target to
become effective readers;
they are doing just fine.
Fast reading is not the same
as fluent reading.
6
and challenge those who promote the incorrect notion that we
should push students to read ever faster.
Suitable Expression
As with the other two components, there is no “one size fits all”
tool for measuring optimal expression. There are times when,
especially reading silently, expression is of little or no help to our
understanding and enjoyment of the text. In silent reading, we
simply want a reader to understand and attend to the diacritical
markings of periods, commas, exclamation points, and quotation
marks provided by the author to assist in the text interpretation.
In oral reading, expression is more evident. When oral read-
ing sounds as effortless as speech, and mirrors the melodic
features of spoken language, we can say that the reader is us-
ing suitable prosody or expression. However, as we mentioned
previously, there may also be times when exagerated prosody
would be suitable. In theatrical performances or other enter-
tainment venues, a reader might embellish a presentation with
variations of pitch, intonation, phrasing, and pauses that would
certainly not sound like normal speech but might be entirely
appropriate for that occasion.
The Purpose of Fluency
Reading fluency is necessary for comprehension and motivated
reading, having been described as a bridge between early and
later reading phases. In early phases of learning to read, stu-
dents develop oral language and phonemic awareness, learn to
apply the alphabetic principle to increasingly complex words,
and become familiar with more and more high-frequency
words and build a large number of words that can be recog-
nized instantaneously (sight words). Later reading phases
are characterized by increased reading skills and deepening
comprehension.
If readers do not develop adequate levels of fluency, they can
become stuck in the middle of the bridge, able to decode words
but with insufficient automaticity to adequately facilitate com-
prehension or enjoy the process of reading. These students typi-
cally become our reluctant readers, often with dire consequences
for themselves, their future families, and society as a whole.
Another metaphor to describe the role of fluency is that of a
doorway that leads to comprehension and increased motivation.
Reading fluency
is necessary for
comprehension and
motivated reading, having
been described as a bridge
between early and later
reading phases.
7
If that “fluency door” is closed, then access to the meaning of
print and the joy of reading remains effectively blocked. When
the fluency door opens—that is, when a reader has developed
sufficient fluency skills to read with appropriate accuracy and
at a reasonable rate—then the reader can enter into understand-
ing and motivation. Once that doorway has been opened, stu-
dents can begin to access meaning even though they must also
be taught vocabulary and comprehension strategies. However, if
that fluency doorway is not open (because of inadequate levels of
accuracy and rate), providing students with vocabulary and com-
prehension instruction will prove ineffective in helping them
fully benefit from and enjoy the reading process.
Weak fluency skills can impede vocabulary development and
comprehension in a process that has been referred to as the
Matthew effect. The term is taken from a Biblical passage de-
scribing the phenomenon that “the rich get richer and the poor
get poorer.” This dynamic readily applies to strugling readers
who, early in the process of learning to read, begin to lag behind
their peers.
In subsequent years, these students often fall even further
behind because they simply read far less text. The good readers
get “richer” because they are reading significantly more text
than their less capable peers and thus deepening their decod-
ing and word recognition skills, strengthening their automatic-
ity, and increasing their vocabulary.
Students’ ability to become fluent readers depends signifi-
cantly on learning to identify accurately large numbers of words
by sight. Because words do not become sight words until they are
read correctly many times, both inaccurate reading and mini-
mal reading practice slow the development of fluency in begin-
ning readers, often initiating a devastating cycle of failure.
Being a reading teacher is an exciting and demanding pro-
fession. There is so much to know about reading, how our stu-
dents learn to read, and how best to teach the skills that will
enable our students to become the readers we dream they will
be. There is always something new to learn as ongoing advance-
ments deepen our understanding and improve our teaching.
Fluency is one of those reading skills that requires a deep un-
derstanding. The more we understand about reading fluency,
the more our instruction can find a meaningful purpose: We
become stronger teachers, and our students become skillful
and motivated readers.
8
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Baer, J., Kutner, M., & Sabatini, J. (). Basic read-
ing skills and the literacy of America’s least literate
adults: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of
Adult Literacy (NAAL) Supplemental Studies (NCES
–). Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences,
U.S. Department of Education.
Dehaene, S. (). Reading in the brain: The new sci-
ence of how we read. New York, NY: Penguin.
Hasbrouck, J., & Glaser, D.R. (). Reading fluency:
Understanding and teaching this complex skill. Austin,
TX: Gibson Hasbrouck & Associates.
Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. (). An update to com-
piled ORF norms (Tech. Rep. No. ). Eugene, OR:
Behavioral Research and Teaching, University of
Oregon. Retrieved from www.brtprojects.org/wp-
co nt ent /up lo ads / //Tec hR pt_ ORFNo r ms
.pdf
Hosp, J.L., & Suchey, N. (). Reading assessment:
Reading fluency, reading fluently, and comprehen-
sion. School Psychology Review, 43(), –.
Kilpatrick, D.A. (). Essentials of assessing, prevent-
ing, and overcoming reading difficulties. Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley.
Kuhn, M.R., & Stahl, S.A. (). Fluency: A review of
developmental and remedial practices. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 95(), –.
Pikulski, J.J., & Chard, D.J. (). Fluency: Bridge be-
tween decoding and comprehension. The Reading
Teacher, 58(), –.
Schwanenflugel, P.J., Hamilton, A.M., Wisenbaker,
J.M., Kuhn, M.R., & Stahl, S.A. (). Becoming a flu-
ent reader: Reading skill and prosodic features in the
oral reading of young readers. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 96(), –.
Stanovich, K.E. (). Matthew effects in reading:
Some consequences of individual differences in the
acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly,
21(), –.
Stevens, E.A., Walker, M.A., & Vaughn, S. (). The ef-
fects of reading fluency interventions on the reading
fluency and reading comprehension performance of
elementary students with learning disabilities: A syn-
thesis of the research from to . Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 50(), –.
MOVING FORWARD
• Set reasonable expectations for students’ reading accuracy, rate, and expression, taking reading level, words correct per minute,
and type of text (e.g., expository, narrative, poetry) into consideration.
• Aim for students to read grade-level text aloud at around the 50th–75th percentiles, with accuracy and expression.
• Move toward having students be able to read aloud in a manner that mirrors spoken language.
• Practice reading text—carefully selected for at least 95% accuracy—through multiple reads. Pose a specific comprehension-
focused purpose for each reading.
• Preview vocabulary through explicit decoding and discuss meaning. Model the reading of several sentences that use the
vocabulary terms as a preview for the text, then have students practice reading the same sentences.
• Use partner reading or teacher-monitored oral reading in small groups.
9
International Literacy Association: Literacy Research Panel 2017–2018
Principal Authors
Jan Hasbrouck, University of Oregon
Deborah R. Glaser, Boise State University
Panel Chair
Diane Lapp, San Diego State University
Panel Members
Donna Alvermann, University of Georgia
Dorit Aram, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Nancy Frey, San Diego State University
Andy Goodwyn, University of Bedfordshire, England
Robert Jiménez, Peabody College, Vanderbilt University
David E. Kirkland, New York University, Steinhardt
Melanie Kuhn, Purdue University College of Education
Heidi Anne E. Mesmer, Virginia Tech
Ernest Morrell, University of Notre Dame
Donna Ogle, National Louis University
Deborah Rowe, Peabody College, Vanderbilt University
Misty Sailors, University of Texas at San Antonio
Allison Skerrett, University of Texas, Austin
Amy Wilson-Lopez, Utah State University
Jo Worthy, University of Texas, Austin
Douglas Fisher, San Diego State University, President and Board Liaison, International Literacy Association
William Teale, University of Illinois at Chicago, Immediate Past President, International Literacy Association
Bernadette Dwyer, Dublin City University, Ireland, Vice President, International Literacy Association
Marcie Craig Post, Executive Director, International Literacy Association
© 2018 International Literacy Association | No. 9436
This literacy leadership brief is available in PDF form for free download through the International Literacy Association’s website:
literacyworldwide.org/statements.
Media Contact: For all media inquiries, please contact press@readi ng.org.
Suggested APA Reference
International Literacy Association. (2018). Reading fluently does not mean reading fast [Literacy leadership brief]. Newark, DE:
Author.
About the International Literacy Association
The International Literacy Association (ILA) is a global advocacy and membership organization dedicated to advancing literacy
for all through its network of more than 300,000 literacy educators, researchers, and experts across 78 countries. With over
60years of experience, ILA has set the standard for how literacy is defined, taught, and evaluated. ILA collaborates with
partners across the world to develop, gather, and disseminate high-quality resources, best practices, and cutting-edge research
to empower educators, inspire students, and inform policymakers. ILA publishes The Reading Teacher, Journal of Adolescent
& Adult Literacy, and Reading Research Quarterly, which are peer reviewed and edited by leaders in the field. For more
information, visit literacyworldwide.org.
@IL AToday
/InternationalLiteracyAssociation
/IL AToday
literacyworldwide.org
