[NIFL-AALPD:1100] teachers constraints

From: tom zurinskas (tzurinskas@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri Feb 20 2004 - 05:10:15 EST


Return-Path: <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id i1KAAFI06132; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 05:10:15 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 05:10:15 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20040220100918.64505.qmail@web14303.mail.yahoo.com>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: tom zurinskas <tzurinskas@yahoo.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1100] teachers constraints
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: O
Content-Length: 6154
Lines: 156

Are teachers under needless constraints?  See article
below.  (Apparently a future article written in
11-02-04?)  Note that the author, Chris Jolly, has put
out a dictionary that replaces the foolish
pronunciation guides that are in most dictionaries
with an easy to use one similar to present spelling. 
Unfortunately it uses a few special symbols so it's
not keyboard friendly.  Truespel pronunciation guide
spelling is the only one that's keyboard friendly.

Tom Z


Teaching phonics on the sly in the UK 

- Daily Telegraph 11/02/2004 p21 Education. 
The author is managing director of Jolly Learning Ltd,
publishers of the jolly Phonics programme; 

It's as easy as 'sh', 'th', 'ng'

Many teachers are ignoring the advice of the
Government's national literacy strategy and are
teaching children to read using phonics, writes
Christopher Jolly

David Bell, the head of Ofsted, said last week that
primary schools were spending so much time teaching
literacy and numeracy that they were failing to give
their pupils a rounded education. And yet, he added,
the national literacy strategy appeared to have
stalled, leaving one pupil in four unable to read and
write properly. 

So how has the literacy strategy - supposedly one of
the jewels in the Department for Education's crown -
resulted in a double failure across the primary
curriculum? The simple answer is that it is blind to
what works. It has tried to achieve its aims by
bluster and prescription instead of by research and
understanding. 

Failure to teach reading is not a new problem. A
recent report from the Basic Skills Unit showed that
just over a fifth of adults are functionally
illiterate. But it need not be so, for the failure is
very largely the result of the way reading is taught. 

The national literacy strategy repeatedly uses the
expression "to read on sight". But reading on sight -
memorising how words look - results in a high level of
failure. The alternative, which is infinitely more
successful, is to learn to read words by the sounds of
their letters. 

Learning to read this way is called phonics (or
synthetic phonics). It has two main elements, both of
which are relatively straightforward. First, the child
needs to be taught each of the letter sounds. The
alphabet is not enough as there are about 44 sounds in
English. Some of them, such as "sh" and "ee", can only
be described with two letters, and are called
digraphs.  By the time you include "th", "ng" and
"oo", there are quite a few digraphs, each of them a
single sound. 

The alphabet is not enough for another reason, too: it
calls each letter by its name, when what the child
needs is the letter's sound. 

The other element the child needs is to learn how to
"blend" the sounds together to read words. Just making
the sounds b-u-s run together to make the word "bus"
is quite an achievement for young children. But they
can be quick to learn and, with practice, they will
become good at it. 

A child who knows the letter sounds and can blend is
able to read new words that he or she has never seen
before. By contrast, a child taught to "read on sight"
will know only the words taught so far. Faced with new
words - even a simple one such as "hat" - the child is
likely to say that he or she has not done that one
yet. 

The difference in the achievement of those taught by
each method is stark. At the end of their first year
at school, children taught with phonics in the way I
have described typically have a reading age 12 months
ahead of those taught to memorise words by sight. More
importantly, their failure rate is far lower. Children
whose teaching is based on sight vocabulary have a one
in four chance of failing, with boys much more likely
to fail than girls. With phonics, less than one in 20
have this risk, and boys do as well as girls. 

All this is well known and has been confirmed by one
published study after another. The best start for
children is to learn all the letter sounds as soon as
they start school. 

Commercial phonics schemes are available that ensure
this happens in the first term, and they are widely
used by teachers. Sadly, the national literacy
strategy recommends taking two and a half years to
learn letter sounds. 

Yet reading with half the letter sounds is like trying
to play cards with half a pack. It is the same with
blending. Many published schemes make the blending of
sounds central to their programme. In the national
literacy strategy, the word "blending" does not appear
at all in the first year. 

The failure to understand lies with the Government and
the authors of the national literacy strategy, not
with teachers. A study my company commissions each
year shows that the majority of primary school
teachers think "learning letter sounds and blending"
rather than "learning the alphabet and using context
and meaning" is the better way to teach. 

So we need a way out of this dilemma. We need the
teaching of reading to be based on the use of phonics
- which requires no extra time from other subjects in
the curriculum - rather than on the advice of the
national literacy strategy. To an extent, it is
already beginning to happen. Fewer teachers now use
the literacy strategy, and more of them are using
commercial phonics schemes. 

Decisions about teaching methods should be made by
teachers, not by ministers. The Government and Ofsted
should limit themselves to setting objectives and
measuring results. The best guidance on teaching
methods comes from teachers who achieve excellent
results with children of all abilities - something the
teacher training institutions ought to remember. 

We need to do a lot more to reduce a level of failure
that has been with us for too long. 




=====
Read all about truespel at truespel.com. 
Read “Truespel Book One: Analysis of the Sounds (Phonemes) of USA English 
http://www.1stbooks.com/cgi-bin/1st?partner~1st|type~6|Data1~16593 
Convert text to truespel USA accent by copy/pasting it at: http://www.foreignword.com/dictionary/truespel/transpel.htm


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:45:41 EST