Visualizing Necessary for Reading Comprehension?

[sbgrace]

I've been looking at materials on reading comprehension. I'm seeing a lot about the necessity of visualizing (picture type) for comprehension. I've got a son who is extremely auditory. He loves to be read to--including chapter books without pictures--and listening to audio stories. He seems to comprehend well in that he is reacting to what he's hearing, can retell a story, can narrate, etc. I wasn't worried about him (his twin is another story). But he told me he just listens to words--he doesn't see pictures. I had him watch a video about visualizing while reading and he insisted that he doesn't do that but he listens to the words.

 

Is this a concern?

[Ellie]

Sounds like something that whole language/sight-reading proponents would say.:glare:

 

A child who is taught with a good phonics method doesn't need to visualize anything.

[LizzyBee]

I hear words rather than making pictures, and I have good reading comprehension.

 

I have read that auditory learners hear the words while visual learners make vivid pictures. My extremely VSL dd says that she makes a movie that she can rewind and watch any time she wants to. Neither method is better than the other, just a reflection of different learning styles and preferences.

[forty-two]

For me personally, I *do* have to visualize what I'm reading to truly comprehend it. I've always had the "movie in my head" thing going automatically, so it took me a while to realize that I *need* that mind's eye visualization to make heads or tails of a text (whether I'm reading it or listening to it).

 

I first noticed it with action scenes - sometimes I have to re-read confusing bits slowly and repeatedly, carefully mapping out the action step-by-step in my head, in order to understand it; without doing that, it's not just that I'm not sure exactly what occurred, but that I can't retain *any* of it - it's like the sentence/paragraph is just a bunch of random words on the page.

 

But it was really brought home to me by Lingua Latina. No matter how easy the text, I simply could. not. comprehend it without mentally translating :glare: - which is completely negating the LL approach. Finally I realized it was due to the visualizing thing - while it was automatic in English, it wasn't automatically transferring over to Latin. So I started consciously visualizing what I read in Latin (straight to a mental picture, with no English interference), very slowly and painfully. While the first few times required a LOT of mental effort, it started to click and happen more automatically. I still have to be very mindful of the text, and sometimes I have to go back and re-read something while consciously visualizing, but I saw quick progress once I had pinpointed the problem.

 

However, if your ds can show good comprehension without visualizing, I wouldn't worry about it.

Edited July 16, 2010 by forty-two

[Dobela]

Not all children need to visualize. It is gaining popularity though as a teaching techinique since visualization is an important step for some children with autism while learning to read.

[TravelingChris]

I am sure that all people don't need to visualize since blind people read books or hear books and if they have been blind from birth or infancy, can't visualize.

[abreakfromlife]

if he is an auditory learner who is comprehending without visualizing, then he's fine. He doesn't need to be forced to visualize if he's not a visual person. I have a dd who is a visual learner and wasn't actively visualizing, so she had no comprehension, so there are some kids who can and should learn to visualize while they read. And, a lot of visual kids don't do well with the phonics method, either ;)