Dear Elsa,

You seem to think that "synthetic phonics" is a product.  It is not.  It is 
a method.  I happen to think it is a good method.  When there is over 20% 
illiteracy in the adult population (in UK as well as in US), with 
immeasurable social consequences, it is important to research a method that 
promises to reduce that figure to near zero.

Yours sincerely,

John


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Elsa Auerbach" <elsa.auerbach at umb.edu>
To: "The English Language Learners Discussion List" 
<englishlanguage at nifl.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: [EnglishLanguage] [FocusOnBasics] [Technology] New Issueof 
"Focus on Basics"



> Could you clarify the policy on promoting commercial products? I notice 

> that

> the writer of this letter is also the producer of the product being

> promoted.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Elsa Auerbach

>

> On 12/20/05 7:12 AM, "John Nissen" <jn at cloudworld.co.uk> wrote:

>

>>

>> Hello Kathy,

>>

>> I am interested to hear of your new ESOL lab school in Oregon, and so the

>> application of synthetic phonics for ESL needs to be discussed.  I have 

>> just

>> subscribed to the English Language list (on ESL/ESOL) so as to allow 

>> people

>> on that list to join in the discussion.

>>

>> Looking up research on the synthetic phonics for children with English as 

>> a

>> second or other language, I found a marvellous paper, called "The End of

>> Illiteracy", full of useful information:

>> http://www.cps.org.uk/pdf/pub/52.pdf

>>

>> In this paper, Jolly Phonics is often quoted, as one of the first 

>> programmes

>> to support synthetic phonics.

>>

>> Some schools that have been studied have significant proportions of ESL

>> pupils.  For example, there was research at the University of Toronto:

>> -------

>> K. Sumbler and D. Willows (1996) "Phonological Awareness and Alphabetic

>> Coding Instruction within Balanced Senior Kindergartens", Paper presented 

>> at

>> the National Reading Conference, S. C.; December, 1996

>>

>>

>>

>> In this study, kindergarten pupils from eight suburban Toronto primary

>> schools (N=281) were divided into ten experimental (Jolly Phonics) and 

>> ten

>> control groups. The Jolly Phonics group (N=151) had 33% of ESL pupils, 

>> and

>> the controls (N=130) 18%.  The post-test results near the end of senior

>> kindergarten showed the Jolly Phonics pupils with a very substantial

>> advantage on every measure. On the WRAT-3 reading test, their average 

>> score

>> was 107.5, compared to 101.3 for the controls. The advantage on the 

>> WRAT-3

>> Spelling test was 104.8 to 98.1.  The data were also analysed to 

>> determine

>> what happened to pupils who were adjudged "at-risk" from low pre-test 

>> scores

>> in letter-naming. Post-test scores showed that between 1/4 and 2/3

>> (depending upon the measure) of the Jolly Phonics at-risk pupils were

>> performing at acceptable levels; by contrast, "...the distribution of

>> control at-risk children changed little"

>>

>> -------

>>

>> I believe that good results can be obtained also with adult ESL learners.

>> In fact synthetic phonics appears to be wholly inclusive, covering people

>> with dyslexia and ethnic minorities, from children to adults, in whatever

>> context.  Does anybody have any evidence to the contrary?

>>

>> Cheers from Chiswick,

>>

>> John

>>

>> John Nissen

>> Cloudworld Ltd - http://www.cloudworld.co.uk

>> maker of the assistive reader, WordAloud.

>> Try WordAloud with synthetic phonics:

>> http://www.cloudworld.co.uk/teaching-synthetic-phonics.htm

>> Tel: +44 208 742 3170  Fax: +44 208 742 0202

>> Email: info at cloudworld.co.uk

>>

>>

>>

>> ----- Original Message -----

>> From: "K Olson" <kolson2 at columbus.rr.com>

>> To: "'The Focus on Basics Discussion List'" <focusonbasics at nifl.gov>; 

>> "'The

>> Technology and Literacy Discussion List'" <technology at nifl.gov>

>> Cc: <familyliteracy at dev.nifl.gov>; "'Debbie Hepplewhite'"

>> <debbie at syntheticphonics.com>

>> Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 6:02 PM

>> Subject: Re: [FocusOnBasics] [Technology] New Issue of "Focus on Basics"

>>

>>

>>> John,

>>>

>>> The lack of research on evidence-based adult education is a major reason

>>> why

>>> the ESOL lab school in Oregon was established. It provides documentation

>>> through video and audio for teachers/researchers to observe what happens

>>> in the classroom and which particular teaching approaches are more

>>> successful.

>>> This issue of Focus on Basics describes some of the research that has 

>>> been

>>> carried on to date. It is my hope that we will someday (soon, I hope!)

>>> have research which shows or at least hints at which reading methods

>>> produce the best results.  Having said that, though, I am well aware 

>>> that

>>> the answer is not so simple as our students come with varying degrees of

>>> reading abilities

>>> in their native languages and thus are not starting out from the same

>>> minimal reading abilities that entering school children are. In 

>>> addition,

>>> while primary teachers have their students for six or more hours a day,

>>> adult education teachers do not. We have no way to determine whether our

>>> students actually learned their reading outside of class, through

>>> self-study, from their children, etc. In other words, there are so many

>>> variables to control for that it does make scientifically-based research

>>> very, very difficult.

>>>

>>> Kathy Olson

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> -----Original Message-----

>>> From: focusonbasics-bounces at nifl.gov

>>> [mailto:focusonbasics-bounces at nifl.gov]

>>> On Behalf Of John Nissen

>>> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 5:52 PM

>>> To: The Technology and Literacy Discussion List

>>> Cc: familyliteracy at dev.nifl.gov; Debbie Hepplewhite;

>>> focusonbasics at nifl.gov

>>> Subject: Re: [FocusOnBasics] [Technology] New Issue of "Focus on Basics"

>>>

>>>

>>> Hello all,

>>>

>>> I am trying to find out how one should teach literacy skills to adults. 

>>> It

>>> has been suggested on several lists to visit the NCSALL web site, and 

>>> look

>>> at research.

>>>

>>> So I looked at the site and found the EBAEP model (draft for comment),

>>> http://www.ncsall.net/fileadmin/resources/research/ebaep_model_monograph.pdf

>>> which is about Evidence-Based Adult Education, to find out what evidence

>>> there was to support particular approaches to literacy, such as

>>> systematic/synthetic phonics versus whole language.  There was almost

>>> nothing there.  Worse, the teachers are expected to evaluate the 

>>> research

>>> themselves, to decide how best to teach!  But no sources were given as 

>>> to

>>> where there is good evidence for one method or another.

>>>

>>> In particular I looked at pages 77-78, the section 27 on "Instructional

>>> approaches".  Quoting from this:

>>> "Teachers need to understand why to use a particular technique, not

>>> just how to use it; they need the underlying foundational theory of

>>> teaching and learning that will allow them to integrate new thinking

>>> with new actions."

>>>

>>> Now I know for children about the foundational theory, and evidence in

>>> practice, that systematic phonics works.  On the other hand, there is no

>>> scientific theory, or evidence, that the whole language approach works -

>>> because it doesn't.  See Scientific American, March 2002.  (And mixing

>>> methods doesn't work either.)

>>>

>>> The March 2002 Scientific American put it well: "Because the controversy

>>> [between phonics and whole-language] is enmeshed in the philosophical

>>> differences between traditional and progressive approaches. The

>>> progressives challenge the results of laboratory tests and classroom

>>> studies on the basis

>>> of a broad philosophical scepticism about the value of such research." 

>>> In

>>> other words, they are willing to ignore solid research that contradicts

>>> their beloved theories, theories that keep kids from reading.

>>>

>>> So I am trying to find if anybody has used systematic/synthetic phonics 

>>> on

>>> adults, because if it works on children I see no reason why it should 

>>> not

>>> work on adults, given suitable initial teaching material (so as not to

>>> appear "childish").  The phonics approach must:

>>>

>>> 1.   establish that the alphabetic principle is fully understood by the

>>> student;

>>> 2.   work on phonemic awareness, so that all 44 phonemes can be 

>>> recognised

>>> within words;

>>> 3.  make sure common letter-sound (grapheme-phoneme) correspondences

>>> are known;

>>> 4.  work on the basic skill of segmentation (for spelling);

>>> 5.  work on the basic skill of blending (for decoding and reading).

>>>

>>> After a basic reading skill level has been reached, with simple reading

>>> material:

>>>

>>> 6.  add vocabulary to allow comprehension of increasingly advanced 

>>> reading

>>> material.

>>>

>>> It seems to me, as a scientist by training, that the above approach is

>>> sound.  The evidence of the Clackmannanshire study, shows that the

>>> approach

>>> works for everybody, including 'dyslexics' and childen with special 

>>> needs.

>>> In this study of 300 children in a deprived area of Scotland there were 

>>> no

>>> non-readers after synthetic phonics had been introduced!

>>>

>>> Anyway, the UK government is now convinced, and is going to adopt

>>> synthetic phonics for schools.  See

>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4485062.stm.

>>> Should we adopt it for adults?

>>>

>>> Cheers from Chiswick,

>>>

>>> John

>>>

>>>

>>> John Nissen

>>> Cloudworld Ltd - http://www.cloudworld.co.uk

>>> maker of the assistive reader, WordAloud.

>>> Try WordAloud with synthetic phonics:

>>> http://www.cloudworld.co.uk/teaching-synthetic-phonics.htm

>>> Tel: +44 208 742 3170  Fax: +44 208 742 0202

>>> Email: info at cloudworld.co.uk

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> ----- Original Message -----

>>> From: "Mariann Fedele" <mariannf at lacnyc.org>

>>> To: "The Technology and Literacy Discussion List" <technology at nifl.gov>

>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 9:04 PM

>>> Subject: [Technology] New Issue of "Focus on Basics"

>>>

>>>

>>> Hello All,

>>> The following message is from Barb Garner.

>>> Best,

>>> Mariann

>>>

>>> ***************

>>> The newest issue of "Focus on Basics" is now on NCSALL's web site,

>>> http://www.ncsall.net. It's on ESOL and features research from NCSALL's

>>> ESOL Lab School.

>>>

>>> ----------------------------------------------------

>>> National Institute for Literacy

>>> Focus on Basics mailing list

>>> FocusOnBasics at nifl.gov

>>> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to

>>> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/focusonbasics