Why Not Teach Intensive Phonics? James A. Chapman's Grammar and Composition series and vocabulary books are used by Christian schools across the country: over 1. Grammar and Composition worktexts. Besides writing textbooks, he also taught English and Literature at Pensacola Christian College for 2. Chapman. Is the teaching of beginning reading so mysterious and complicated that we still do not know for sure how to proceed? Such is the conclusion of Robert C. A STUDY OF PHONICS INSTRUCTION: TEACHING PHONICS DANCE TO AT-RISK ELEMENTARY LEARNERS TO IMPROVE DECODING SKILLS A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Education By BRITTANY. The National Reading Panel reviewed the findings of 38 published studies on phonics instruction. The effect size of synthetic phonics programs that teach letter-phoneme correspondences. From Sounds to Spelling: A teaching sequence. There have been several different studies done to show that the phonics reading programs work better than the old memorization method. The phonics method teaches children the sounds of the different letters and then shows them. Phonics: Theory and Practice Ching Kang Liu. Systematic Synthetic Phonics Programs What is the Best Phonics Program? Many government organizations around the word have published reports citing the various benefits of using systematic synthetic phonics. Aukerman after he reviewed 1. He says that he suspects that some of the 1. He says that until we can understand and apply the psychology of learning to the methods of research, we must be content with our “primitive means” and go ahead and do “the best we can”. He gives one note of optimism: “We certainly can do better than we are doing at present.”1. That we “can do better than we are doing at present” seems to be an understatement, considering the growing numbers of Americans who cannot read or write properly. An additional 3. 0 million are only marginally capable of being productive workers. Demographers say the number of illiterates is steadily mounting, swelled by 1 million school dropouts a year.”2 The National Assessment of Education Progress survey published in 1. The Adult Performance Level study of 1. As you can see, the illiterates plus the slow readers are now a majority of the U. S. But Professor Aukerman’s conclusions about what one must do in order to try to do better must be extremely disheartening to those who do not know the “secret” of teaching reading. He says that a “surprising number of . He thinks that it is necessary that we have knowledge of all of the new approaches, and that “each new approach deserves a chance to prove itself under reasonable research conditions and in normal classroom environments.” We must make “every effort to explore the good in each approach and give each a chance to prove itself in our own hands.” If we do otherwise, we “may be rejecting the very messiah for whom we have so long been watching and waiting.”5 Earlier, in his introduction, Professor Aukerman set the stage for his reviews by saying that any findings presented in his book “as evidence that one approach to beginning reading is superior to another, or that any approach is effectual as a means of helping children learn to read are, at best, educated guesses.”6 These are discouraging words, if true. Aukerman’s conclusions indicate that even if one were able to personally experiment with all known approaches to reading and listen to the ideas of experts from every field imaginable, one still would be able only to guess at how to go about teaching reading. But is this pessimism justified? Let us first point out that although Aukerman refers to 1. Within these two systems there are, of course, variations which may be difficult to evaluate, but the central elements of these two approaches not only can be evaluated but already have been. It is unconscionable and silly to pretend that we still do not know which of these two basic approaches is superior. The earlier whole- word (look- and- say or sight- reading) method has been thoroughly discredited and shown to be the major cause of the reading problems in America today (see the overwhelming evidence in the books by Blumenfeld, Chall, Flesch, and Terman and Walcutt listed at the end of this article). But now we have a modified whole- word approach that came into being after Rudolph Flesch and others made such a strong case for phonics. The whole- word establishment decided to camouflage their old approach to make it appear that they are now teaching phonics. In reality they are not. According to Aukerman, they are including some strands of phonics, but the phonics elements are only casually related to the whole- word approach which they still use. Flesch says, “In contrast to the phonics- first texts, which teach all of phonics; look- and- say materials teach only a small part. By now I estimate that on the average they offer 2. True phonics, in contrast, has been called “intensive phonics” because it teaches all of the main sound- symbol relationships intensively from the very beginning of reading instruction. Because of the “slick” promotion of this new method, many people may not realize that the method is still the whole- word (look- and- say or sight- reading) method. They may believe that since it has some phonics in it, it may now be all right. The intent of this article is to show why the whole- word (gradual- phonics) method should be scrapped, and intensive phonics put in its place. This method is predicated on the belief that a reader perceives new words as wholes (i. The devotees of this method assume that because adult readers see words as wholes and do not always have to analyze the parts, a beginning reader must learn new words as wholes. Walcutt, Lamport, and Mc. Cracken dispute that assumption. But the adult reader sees all the letters (never a mere shape or outline) because he has learned the words as left- to- right sequences of letters, and he understands them that way. Now he sees them as “whole- word units.” But he did not learn them that way. In 1. 84. 4, Samuel Stillman Greene wrote an excellent essay refuting the whole- word approach, which at that time was being vigorously advocated by Horace Mann. Mann, attempting to prove that printed words should be learned as whole objects, gave this example: “When we wish to give to a child the idea of a new animal, we do not present successively the different parts of it—an eye, an ear, the nose, the mouth, the body, or a leg; but we present the whole animal, as one object.”1. Professor Greene showed the flaws in Mann’s thinking with this reply. Grant, that he does not, in learning to distinguish a tree from a rock, or any other dissimilar object, form his idea of it by inspecting the parts separately, and then by combining trunk, bark, branches, twigs, leaves, and blossoms. In learning to read, however, he is to distinguish between objects which resemble each other, and in many instances, very closely, as in the case of the words, hand, band; now, mow; form, from; and scores of others. To make the illustration good, it would be necessary to place the child in a forest, containing some seventy thousand trees, made up of various genera, species, and varieties, among which were found many to be distinguished only by the slightest differences. Or, if it will suit the case any better, let him be placed in a grove, containing seven hundred trees, having, as before, strong resemblances; if, then, this general survey of each of them, as a whole object, will enable him to distinguish them rapidly from each other, whatever may be their size, or the order in which he may cast his eyes upon them, we will acknowledge the aptness of the illustration. The reader can easily see how Greene’s analogy applies to the perception of words. One can tell the difference between a word written on a page and a fly walking across the page without examining the parts of either one: he can perceive each of them as wholes. But one can reliably and consistently distinguish one word from another only by being able to recognize the parts that make up each word. Now, here is one final proof that we do not perceive words as wholes when learning to read. Everyone knows that our language is an alphabetic language; that is, the written words are made up of symbols that represent the sounds of audible words. If we can determine how we perceive audible words (whether as wholes or as individual sounds), we should be able to infer that we perceive written words (which represent the audible words) in the same way. After all, in both instances the brain is doing the same work of translation: in the first instance through the ear; in the second, through the eye. Recent scientific studies give conclusive answers to this question. Experimental results confirm that in the perception of speech we are ordinarily aware of discrete phonemic categories rather than of the continuous variation in each acoustic parameter: we perceive speech categorically. These mechanisms yield the forerunners of the phonemic categories that later will enable the child unthinkingly to convert the variable signal of speech into a series of phonemes and thence into words and meanings. There you have it. A human being perceives speech signals as separate sounds, and then converts the series of sounds into words. He does not perceive audible words as wholes. It should be clear that it would indeed be strange and unnatural if we do not perceive the written symbols of words in the same way that we perceive the audible sounds. Thus a system that makes children try to read by perceiving words as wholes must be viewed as grossly unnatural and pernicious. The intensive- phonics method has been proved successful everywhere it has been used. Many experienced teachers and administrators testify to its effectiveness. Burkhardt, director of the Department of Reading (K- 1. City School District Rochester, New York, tells about the tremendous results achieved when she got rid of the look- say and eclectic (combination phonics and sight- reading) programs and replaced them with intensive phonics programs. Now it is 3. 5,0. I am sure that you have often heard it said that the percentage of children who are minority influences the degree of reading failure in a given school or district. Reality is that whether children are “advantaged” or “disadvantaged,” black or white, rich or poor, does not have anything to do with how successfully children learn to read. Based on my professional experiences, such statements are only excuses for not teaching children to read. In spite of the teachers’ hard work and the children’s readiness and willingness to learn, children were having trouble learning to read. In fact, remedial readers were being generated in my school faster than I could remediate them. Phonics and Word Recognition Instruction in Early Reading Programs. Guidelines for Accessibility. Phonics and Word Recognition Instruction in Early Reading. Programs: Guidelines for Accessibility. David J. Chard University of Texas at Austin Jean Osborn Center for the Study of Reading University of Illinois. Learning Disabilities Research. Practice. A Publication of the Division for Learning Disabilities, Council for. Exceptional Children. Copyright 1. 99. 9, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Reprinted with permission. Many teachers will be using supplemental phonics and. This article examines the content and instructional. Information is provided about the content of effective word- . Guidelines are included based on this information as. These guidelines. The goals of reading instruction are many, but certainly. For example. children take part in oral language activities that concentrate on concept and. Other experiences focus on word recognition of printed. Children take part in phonics lessons and word- recognition. They learn that the sounds in spoken words relate to the. As they read books and other print materials, children learn to combine. It is evident that no one aspect of a beginning. WORD- RECOGNITION INSTRUCTIONMany publishers - both large and small - have developed. Some of the phonics and. Many teachers teach phonics and word recognition by using the. These programs often contain phonics and. These commercially published basal reading programs are. Recent. reviews of the major commercial programs (Smith et al., in press; Stein. Johnson, & Gutlohn, 1. These. programs are commonly used with students identified as having reading. Many parents seek out such programs to use at home if they are. There are literally hundreds of supplementary programs on the market. These programs take many forms. Many appear. in traditional print form that feature board and card games, flash cards, word. Some combine traditional instructional. The purpose of the article, however. Rather, the purpose of the article is to help. Such an examination can provide information about the content of. THE CONTENT OF PHONICS AND WORD- RECOGNITION. INSTRUCTIONAlthough the relation of systematic phonics and. Snow, Bums, &. Griffin, 1. 99. 8). The main goal of such instruction is to help children figure. English and become comfortable with that. Lyon, 1. 99. 8). The authors of Becoming a Nation of. Readers (Anderson, Hiebert, Scott, & Wilkinson, 1. The goal of phonics is not that children be able to state. Rather, the purpose. Phonics ought to be conceived as a technique for getting. It follows that phonics instruction should aim to teach only the most. Once. the basic relationships have been taught, the best way to get children to. Phonics then is the system of instruction used to teach. Snow et al., 1. 99. We do. want to warn the reader, however, that this term is entirely abused and has. A generally agreed on definition. THE ALPHABETIC PRINCIPLEAn important part of helping children with reading. Adams, 1. 99. 0; Ehri & Mc. Cormick. 1. 99. 8; Liberman, Shankweiler, & Liberman, 1. This means, to understand. English, words are composed of patterns of letters that. English words. Some children seem to figure out. They. also benefit from word - recognition instruction that offers practice with, for. Additionally. children with reading disabilities benefit from opportunities to apply what. Such. texts contain a high proportion of words that reflect the letters, sounds, and. Elements of Phonics and Word- Recognition Instruction. To help children map the relations between letters and. Each of these elements of phonics and word- recognition. Each discussion is followed by a set. We. relied on the following sources for determining what is most important to. The National Academy of Sciences. Preventing. Reading Difficulties in Young Children (Snow et al., 1. Beginning. to Read: Thinking and Learning About Print (Adams, 1. At this point, it is important to note that, although many of these. ALPHABETIC KNOWLEDGEChildren must become expert users of the letters they will. Lyon, 1. 99. 8). Children's. Adams, 1. 99. 0). That is, children who begin first grade able to quickly and. Children whose knowledge of letters is not well. Guidelines for Alphabetic Knowledge Instruction. A beginning reading program should include the following. A variety of alphabetic knowledge activities in which children learn. Games, songs, and other activities that help children learn to name. Writing activities that encourage children to practice writing the. A sensible sequence of letter introduction that can be adjusted to. PHONEMIC AWARENESSChildren's ability to think about individual words as. Liberman & Shankweiler, 1. Snow et al., 1. 99. Toward that. understanding, children learn to identify rhyming words and to create their own. They also learn that sentences are made up of separate words, words are. Finally, they learn that sounds. Some children have a great deal of difficulty learning to. O'Connor, Notari- Syverson, & Vadasy, 1. However, it is this very aspect. Smith, Simmons. & Karneenui, 1. It is important to make some clear distinctions: Phonemes. They are the smallest units of. The onset is the initial single phoneme or initial consonant cluster in. Rimes are. larger than phonemes, but smaller than syllables. For example, take bat and. In contrast: bat contains three phonemes - /b/. Most sequencing of phonemic awareness instruction begins. Not all programs include the same content. For example. some programs introduce onsets and rimes before requiring students to identify. Some. programs do not include onset and rime activities. In many programs. After practicing with initial sounds, the. Still other programs have children learn to segment and then. Phonemic awareness activities usually involve oral tasks. In some programs, however, the instruction directs the. Elkonin boxes, blocks) to. At the. more advanced levels of instruction (segmenting and blending), the relations of. Guidelines for Phonemic Awareness Instruction. A beginning reading program should include the following. Activities that follow a sequence of instruction that progresses. Rhyming words. Auditory (e. Activities to teach the relationship of letters to sounds in more. For children who are having difficulty, a sequence of instruction. Starts with continuous sounds (for example, m, s, i, f) that. SOUND- LETTER RELATIONSChildren's early reading development is dependent on their. English. Many. children with reading disabilities benefit from explicit and systematic. Children with reading disabilities benefit from a sequence of. Carnine, Silbert, & Kameenui, 1. Chard, Simmons, & Kameenui, 1. Phonics instruction is usually categorized as explicit or. In explicit phonics instruction, the sounds associated with the. For example, students. I. and /p/ can utilize a blending strategy. Typically, students are asked to. For example, in teaching the sound for m. Write man on the. Have the students say man. Elicit from the students that the letter m makes the sound /m/. In implicit phonics, children are often encouraged to. Most supplementary programs employ explicit. Rate and Sequence of Introduction. There is no set rule about how quickly or how slowly to. Obviously, it is important to gauge the rate. Furthermore, there is no agreed on order in which to. The advice most often given is to avoid. Rather, the sound- letter relations should be selected so that. That is, the initial. For. are of high utility, whereas gh as in through, ey. It should be noted that programs that present all of. An effective program may start with two or more single. The children can read words that are. Then, more single consonants and more short vowels. As each new sound- letter relation. For example. if the relationships for a, f, n, s, and t. Then if the relations for m. Stop sounds at the beginning. Consonant blends or clusters may be harder for some children to learn. For some children, being presented with consonant. The number of possible variations is enormous. The point. is that the order of introduction should be logical and consistent with the. Furthermore, the sound- letter relations. Guidelines for Examining Sound- Letter Relations. Instruction. Plan of instruction. A beginning reading program. I. Common sound- letter relations taught directly and explicitly. Advanced phonemic awareness activities combined with the presentation. Opportunities for children to practice sound- letter relations in. Practice opportunities that include new sound- letter relations as. Opportunities early and often for children to apply their expanding. A suggestion that the teacher or students point to the letters as. Rate of instruction. A beginning reading program. Recognize that children learn sound- letter relations at different. Introduce sound- letter relations at a reasonable pace (e. Encourage teachers to informally assess children's application of. Sequence of instruction. A beginning reading program. Introduce consonants and vowels in a sequence that permits the. Choose consonants and vowels that can be combined to make words for. Teach a number of high- utility sound- letter relations first and add. Introduce consonant blends or clusters in sepa- rate lessons. Provide blending instruction with words that contain the sound- letter. WORD- RECOGNITION STRATEGIESEffective word- recognition strategies permit children to. Vandervelden & Siegel, 1. Children must learn to. Stanovich, 1. 98. As children learn to read more and. Children should also have opportunities to work. More advanced word- identification strategies focus on structural. Children need to recognize some common words. The program should introduce some. These words should be. Presenting some words as sight words should not overshadow the importance. Guidelines for Addressing Word- ldentif ! Strategies. A beginning reading program should include. Opportunities to practice word recognition, including words with. Opportunities for children to learn to use word order (syntax) and. Adams, 1. 99. 8).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
December 2016
Categories |