Research Notes (Shannon)

Overview of Phonics/Word Wall

Chew, J. (1997). Traditional phonics: What it is and what it is not. Journal ofResearch in Reading, 20(3), 171-183. Retrieved from Academic SearchComplete database. (10452842)
-
Stahl, S. A., Duffy-Hester, A. M., & Dougherty Stahl, K. A. (1998). Theory and research into practice: Everything you wanted to know about phonics (but were afraid to ask). Reading Research Quarterly, 33(3), 338-355. Retrievedfrom JSTOR database. (748309)

• The authors put the Phonics/Whole Language debate into perspective by explaining that phonics has always been an element in the whole language design, but the meaning making that is at the core of whole language is not built into the explicit, systematic nature of phonics. Phonics is essential to reading, but it shouldn't exist alone.
  • Since sounds are not separated in spoken words, kids think about the MEANING of a word, but not the sounds. They need to be taught to think about both so that can solve unknown words.
  • k
  • k

• How people define "reading" informs where we fall on the phonics/whole language debate. If reading is simply about recognizing words, than all you need is phonics. If making meaning of words is the nature of reading, then you need to look at a bigger picture.
  • 
    
  • gb

• Good Phonics Instruction:

  • It should only be ONE part of the reading curriculum. Boring rules and worksheets should definitely NOT be the only thing kids are exposed to.
    • "It is, however, important to see phonics instruction not as an end but as a means to help children read words automatically" (343)
    • "What seems to wrok in phonics instruction is direct teacher instruction, not practice on worksheets." (342)
    • "Effective phonics instruction should not take a great deal of classroom time "(342)



• Provide a strong foundation of letters to develop the ALPHABETIC PRINCIPLE (letters are symbols that represent sounds) so that students can eventually develop strong phonemic awareness recognize words automatically
  • (what) The Alphabetic Principle
    • Children usually notice these 4 achievements in order BEFORE they can automatically recognize words:(The authors categorize everything in stages, which feels very Piagetan. I think the stages MUST be addressed explicity in our presentation, so teacher candidates have an idea about what to expect)



• The sound the word starts with
• Consonants and vowels can blend together to create a sound (st, ea)
• two vowel sound can exist in one syllable (dipthongs)
  • multiple letters combine to create sounds (ough)
• ASSESSMENT for alphabetic principle: can be accomplished in READING and INVENTED SPELLING
  • Reading (easier, with 3 stages)
    • Pre-Alphabetic- kids look at visual cues like double letters
    • Phonetic Cue-Reading- Sound out the beginning and end of words
      • Full-Alphabetic- sound out all the letters in a word, recognizing the characteristic listed above
  • Invented Spelling (trickier...5 stages)
    • scribble words that don't even look like writing (think pictograms)
    • Pre-phonemic- use random letters that aren't connected to sounds
    • Begin using letters that match the initial sound, and sometime the ending sound as well
    • Letter-Name Stage- Make the connection that the name for "S" makes a "sss" sound, so kids start using the right consonants but leave out vowels
    • Transistional Stage- start adding vowels and are getting the phonetic connetions right, but haven't learned the rules of English spelling. (vakashun instead of vacation)
• (how) develop the alphabetic principle by providing a strong foundation of letters and phonological awareness
  • Phonologocial awareness helps children solve wrods to read and spell them, but also helps them HEAR words and figure out how to spell them. This is the ultimate goal(Leads to PHENOME IDENTITY, or recognizing the same sound in different words)
    • Help kids HEAR SOUNDS by using at least one of the following:
      • rhyming
      • categorize words with similar caharacteristics
      • Lisrtening for specific sounds in words
      • Segmenting spoken words into separate sounds is so difficult that it requires a manipulative (important to inform the class about! Can anyone think of examples?)
      • Blending spoken sounds into a word
      • Aurully removing a sounf in a word. (say "coat" without the first sound. it becomes "oat")
      • Read alphabet books EVERY DAY
      • encourage invented spellings
      • (more strategy variety and more repetition is necessary for struggling readers)
  • [spoken] Phonological awareness is the intro to teaching LETTERS, the other key to the ALPHABETICAL PRINCIPLE
    • Before kids can automatically recognize words, they have to be able to automatically recognize what individual upper AND lowercase letters look like (but not letter names)
      • Alphabet song confuses children, because the letter names get strung together
      • Teaching in alphabetical order, or starting with the easiest sounds (m, n, s)???
• (GOAL) Phonological Awareness + Letter Recognition --> Alphabetical Principle --> AUTOMATIC WORD RECOGNITION
  • reading (in isolation and in stories) and writing helps children build a bank of high frequency words with similar patternsg
• 
  
• df



Who Phonics Does/Doesn't Work For

Ivey, G., & Baker, M. I. (2004). Phonics instruction for older students? Just
say no. Educational Leadership, 61(6), 35-39. Retrieved from
http://67.217.224.14/file/
Phonics%20Instruction%20for%20Older%20Students%20-%20Just%20Say%20No.pdf

• The authors cite the 2000 National Reading Panel's findings that "phonics instruction does not significantly boost the reading performance of students with reading difficulties beyond first grade." going on to explain that "A student who read well enough to negotiate 3rd and 4th grade materials, or even 1st and 2nd grade materials will not benefit from from practice in manipulating sounds with words.
• The authors argue that their own experience as researchers and teachers has shown phonics immersion to be detrimental to struggling older readers. Phonics may help "break the code" for emerging readers, but as students progress to 2nd grade and beyond, they need help with meaning-making strategies that are not "so far removed from real reading." Later on, I'll add my hypothesis as to how this lines up with developmental theory."

Jones, M. L. (1996, March). Phonics in ESL literacy instruction: Functional or
not? (Department of Education, Ed.). In 1996 World Conference on Literacy.
Literacy online (ed 436 104). Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/
ED436104.pdf


Krashen, S. (2002). Defending whole language: The limits of phonics instruction
and the efficacy of whole language instruction. Reading Improvement, 39(1),
32-42. Retrieved from http://www.sdkrashen.com/articles/
defending_whole_language/defending_whole_language.pdf

• I'll be transferring data from this article to slides, namely the fact that the "two vowels walking" rule works for five vowel combinations, but not for the other 14
• This also lends more support that to idea that phonics can be learned from reading as well as from explicit instruction. I relate to this take because of my music background: everything I've ever been taught has centered on starting with a rich piece of repertoire to teach skills.

Scholes, R. J. (1998). The case against phonemic awareness. Journal of Research
in Reading, 21(3), 177-188. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete
database. (10452867)

• The author's main argument is that phonological awareness, is NOT a required precursor to reading (or as Shaywitz said: "Before words can be identified, understood...they must be broken down into their phonemic units"). The author cites many of his own studies with adults, as well bits of studies from others, to elaborate on his belief that phonological awareness may facilitate learning to read, but is not required in order to learn how to read.
• The evidence regarding his argument that Phonological Segment Awareness is not something that is innate to our understanding of language, but rather something that is recognized only when it is explicity taught, is very convincing. So too, is his enlightening description of how reading is often defined as decoding, when it should be defined as understanding the meaning of words. After all, being able to sound out strings of one-to-one letter sound correspondance (like his example of AKEADDOBEN) does not mean that a learner can acutally use phonics to understand text. (Most convincing is the statement on page 185 that aruges, "The fact of the matter is that pronunciation rules apply to words not to letters or letter groups.) Yet I can't agree whole-heartedly that this is enough to make a case against phonemic awareness. While I can see how phonological awareness does not have to precede word study, and firmly believe in using phonics in authentic and meaningful ways, I think it's silly to argue that there is no place for it in a curriculum.

Stahl, S. A. (1999, Fall). Different strokes for different folks? A critique of
learning styles. American Educator, 1-5. Retrieved from
http://linksprogram.gmu.edu/tutorcorner/NCLC495Readings/
Stahl_DifferentStrokes.pdf

Strategies

Moustafa, M., & Maldonado-Colon, E. (1999). Whole-to-parts phonics instruction:
Building on what children know to help them know more. The Reading Teacher,
52(5), 448-458. Retreived from Academic Search Complete database. (1587137)

Eyraud, K, Giles, G, Koenig, S, Stoller, F. The Word Wall Approach: Promoting L2 Vocabulary Learning

• This article by Eyraud et al is about adopting word walls for english language learners, but the 3 research-based principles for instruction and 8 guidelines for word wall use should inform our investigation as well
• The 3 principles
  • multiple exposure to new words in a variety of contexts
  • making semantic connections between known words and new words
  • encountering the words in rich contexts (like authentic texts) and NOT word lists
• The 8 Guidelines
  • Don't clutter the word wall with too many words
    • This surprised me, because the word walls I've seen and read about are cumulative across the year. However, the authors bring up a good point. If too many words are on the board, students don't get to revisit or use the words nearly enough.
  • Word wall words should be USEFUL, USABLE, and FREQUENTLY USED by students. Sounds like common sense, but kids often choose bizarre words that have little value in reading, while teachers can unknowingly choose archaic words that have little value to students.
  • Phrases, idioms, and expressions can be included
  • Use CREATIVE PLACEMENT, rather than orderly columns and rows.
    • This is yet another guideline that came as a shock to me, since the only word walls I've ever seen have been in neat, alphabetical columns. The authors point out that creative placement invties students to interact with the word wall and find connections (either semantic or phonetic) between words
  • Word wall should be "a regular and predictable part of classroom activities
  • Word wall words should be incorporated into other classroom activities ("speaking, listening, reading, writing, and grammar")
• 
  

Gaskins, I. W., Ehri, L. C., Cress, C., O'Hara, C., & Donnelly, K. (1997).
Procedures for word learning: Making discoveries about words. The Reading
Teacher, 50(4), 312-326. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
(9704162785)


Juel, C., & Minden-Cupp, C. (2000). Learning to read words: Linguistic units and
instructional strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(4), 458-492.
Retrieved from JSTOR database. (748094)


Wagstaff, J. M. (1998). Building practical knowledge of letter-sound
correspondences: A beginner's Word Wall and beyond. The Reading Teacher,
51(4), 298-304. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
(9712152201)

Phonics in Context

Baumann, J. F., Hoffman, J. V., Moon, J., & Duffy-Hester, A. M. (1998). Where
are teachers' voices in the phonics/whole language debate? Results from a
survey of U.S. elementary classroom teachers. The Reading Teacher, 51(8),
636-650. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database. (551554)


Dahl, K. L., Scharer, P. L., Lawson, L. L., & Grogan, P. R. (1999). Phonics
instruction and student achievement in whole-language first-grade
classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 34(3), 312-341. Retrieved from
JSTOR database. (748066)

Formal and Informal Assessment