Day 2- Let's Talk Phonics!

Welcome to Day 2 of Let’s Talk Phonics. Please feel free to continue the great dialogue developed in Day 1 as you prepare to discuss the second video in our Let’s Talk Phonics series. 
 
Today, we will be discussing strategies in the video Decoding - Part 2: Tutoring Using Analytic Phonics. After watching the video, please reflect and comment on the following:
 
1. How do you perceive the relationship between the tutor and the student in the videos you have watched? What positive aspects of that relationship contribute to what the student is learning? 
2. What do you think the main difference is between Synthetic and Analytic Phonics? Would one work better among different populations?
 
To our Guest Expert:  Kathy St. John 
 
Thanks for your input introducing our Day 1 discussion, Kathy! Day 1 generated a lot of reflection and dialogue relating to everyone's experience watching the first video. A couple of questions were posed  which would benefit from your response.
 
Diana asked, "I was wondering if pictures of the words created would assist in the students ability to blend or does this establish the word as a sight word they memorize according to the picture.  We began with the "at" word family and then moved into the substitution of first letters.  The students struggle as they guess at the word or forget the sound of the letters all together.  Am I moving them to quickly?"
 
Carrie asked, "I had a question about the manipulatives used in the first video. I have seen bound phonics cards called, "Flipping Phonics." Tutors like them, but I noticed in the video that what is difficult with the "Flipping Phonics," is the student participation. I was wondering how difficult it is to find cards, color coded like those in the video, and if they are very expensive? I think the exposure to the different types of phonics manipulatives is useful and interesting, and I thought the video was very well done."

Let's continue to talk phonics! The Event Team

Comments

Thanks for bringing up such an interesting question, Diana. I saw it yesterday and wanted to think more deeply about it because it's a new question to me. Then I got busy responding to other questions and never got back to yours. Please accept my apologies.

I'm not actually familiar with any research that answers this question of yours. "I was wondering if pictures of the words created would assist in the students ability to blend or does this establish the word as a sight word they memorize according to the picture." Maybe others in this discussion have something to share in that regard. Anyone? I can answer from my own thinking and experiences though. Here goes!

I think I'd prefer not to use pictures when doing the kind of phonics work that you see in the synthetic and analytic phonics videos. I'd prefer learners to focus their attention on the sounds and letter/sound combinations rather than on the meaning of the words they're creating. We often work with nonsense words (except when we're doing phonics play with English language learners who would find nonsense words confusing) when we do this kind of work so we're really making sure learners are sounding out the words rather than reading them as whole units from their sight word banks. In this case, there would be no visual we could use to support learning the sounds. Also, some of the words we make during this word play lend themselves to illustrations and others don't. If you tried to limit the sound/word play to words that did have visual cues I think it would be too constrictive and burdensome. Also, some words we play with are abstract and can be challenging to represent visually in an unambiguous way.

As I envision adding visuals into the mix I think it would just become too complicated and cumbersome and the focus could easily shift from sounding out to word meaning or from decoding/phonics work to vocabulary work. If your learner makes the work "drat", you can easily say "Yes, drat is a great word that some people say when they're frustrated. For example, if someone pulls into the last parking space in a parking lot, you could say "Drat!". You might want to have that brief conversation or you might not even bother because the important thing is that your learner sounded out the letters that comprise the word drat correctly. Knowing the meaning of the word drat isn't essential here, unless your learner asks you what it means. Imagine trying to add a visual to illustrate drat or the parking example. I think would derail the sound/letter relationship work and take it off into a different direction. 

That said, you'll see that in some of the letter cards in the links I highlighted in one of yesterday's posts, there are visual cues such as an apple for the short a sound. So I guess I'd say that I'd recommend pictures as visual cues for letter sounds but not to link to words during letter/word play in the phonics work we're seeing in the videos this week. But I'm really basing that only on my own experience and opinion. I'd love to hear what other folks think. Please, everyone chime in here!

Kathy, thanks for so thoroughly addressing the questions posed both days (!).  I so agree with your views on using pictures. Pictures are great for developing vocabulary, but with phonics, as you say, we are focusing on interpreting symbols with sounds. 

I remember learning to read in Portuguese in my first-grade class when I was five and insisted that I couldn't take a third year of kindergarten! Of course, I often fell asleep in class during nap time and was often led to stand next to the wall until I learned to stay awake. On one such occasion, as the teacher was teaching the class to read "uva" (grape), she caught me dozing and called on me to read the word. Thankfully, I saw a picture of a bunch of grapes next to the word in one of our books. I hesitantly read "uva" and was rewarded mightily for my success! Interestingly, that provided good incentive for me to believe I could read! There are times when pictures can save the day! :) Leecy

Wow, Leecy! You were learning Portuguese in kindergarten?! That's really terrific! And thanks for teaching me my first word in that language. Uva. I like it!

I agree! Pictures are vital to building vocabulary, especially for English language learners and visual learners. For English language learners and learners with LD, the more realistic  the image is the better so photos work best. 

I think it can be challenging for tutors and teachers (and for some learners too) to try to isolate and separate learning tasks. If we're looking at a word while decoding it in phonics  word play, why not discuss its meaning while we're at it? But that's cognitive overload for most learners who are learning language at this level. So it's best to keep it simple. That said, if my learner asks what a word means when we're doing phonics tasks such as in analytic or synthetic phonics play, I don't withhold the information. I just tell the meaning and then move on. I make a mental note to add that word to our vocabulary word list if my learner expresses an interest in learning it as a new word. But often, the word is already in the learners' listening and speaking vocabulary and s/he just didn't recognize the word because of a lack of decoding skills. So that brings us back to our main focus which is decoding.

:) I was born and raised in Brazil with dual citizenship. I learned to speak English at home. I can't remember learning to read in English. Once I read in Portuguese, the English was just there. As we know, reading is reading. If you read in one language, you're a reader. Of course, comprehension is another matter! Leecy

I used this type of phonics instruction when teaching a class of adult refugees. We did not spend more than 15 minutes each class on phonics activities. I did not use pictures or explain the meaning of words. We also created nonsense words. I did not distinguish in the lesson what were real words. The learners quickly learned that this part of the lesson was just about sounding out words or writing what I dictated. I believe once they were accustomed to the structure of the class, they did not worry about understanding what the words meant. All that said, when the learners recognized the word they read, we would smile and acknowledged it. "b-e-d. Oh, bed!" (smile).

"We began with the "at" word family and then moved into the substitution of first letters."  The students struggle as they guess at the word or forget the sound of the letters all together.  Am I moving them to quickly?"

Thanks for this question, Diana. If your students struggle as they play with the word family "at" by adding onsets (or initial letters) to the rime (or word family "at"), I'd have to ask if they've truly mastered the sounds of the individual consonants that they're adding before "at". If they have, they shouldn't be guessing. They should be sounding out the sounds and words using their knowledge of letter/sound correspondences. I suspect that in this case they haven't truly internalized the sounds that all of the consonants make to the point of automaticity. The goal is that they learn the sounds that each consonant makes so thoroughly that the wordplay as they add initial consonants to word families is pretty rapidfire. They might struggle with the rime or word family part of the equation, but they shouldn't be forgetting the beginning, single consonant sounds. I'd go back and do some fun remediation and multi-sensory play with all of the consonant sounds to assess if that is the problem. I'm guessing that's what's going on here. Does anyone else have any alternative ideas?

 

Hi Carrie, I am so glad you liked the first video! Thanks for your great questions!

I think Flipping Phonics is so fun and well designed. Bound letter cards like this one can be great to play with and to learn new concepts and to reinforce concepts previously learned. But, as you say, there is less movement than unbound cards, even when the learner is the one doing the flipping. For the kind of phonics/decoding play you'll see in the phonics videos, we prefer letter cards or tiles that allow for bigger movements and a wider range of choice when combining letters.

In the videos, we used letter cards from the Wilson Reading System. I just checked and they're about $18. You can order them at

 https://store.wilsonlanguage.com/wrs-letter-sound-cards-4th-edition/

Other kinds of practice cards are also available. You might want to take a peek at:

https://store.wilsonlanguage.com/search.php?x=0&y=0&search_query=letter+cards

We also really like to encourage learners and tutors to use Scrabble letter tiles without the game board. They're not color coded but they are adult looking and very durable and portable.

There are so many different kinds of letters to choose from. Teacher resource stores have some wonderful options. I like to go to my local Lakeshore store to see what a particular learner might like. Here's some of what they have to offer: https://www.lakeshorelearning.com/search/products?Ntt=letters

I have a bunch of their word building tiles that I take to trainings They're small, pretty durable, color coded and cost about $5 for a packet. https://www.lakeshorelearning.com/products/language/phonics-word-building/word-building-tiles/p/GG954

Happy shopping!

Dear Kathy,

Thank you for all the great ideas and wonderful links! Some of our tutors have mentioned or used the Wilson method, but we do not keep resources from Wilson. My literacy council might even have some Lakeshore manipulatives in one of our cabinets. We definitely have Scrabble tiles!

I will be sure to share these ideas with my director. Thank you!

I believe the relationship between the tutor/teacher and student needs to provide the student an environment in which trying is more important than perfection which allows the student to practice reading while  knowing mistakes will be part of the process.  I see this type of relationship in the video.

As I think about the second question I found with the synthetic process the tutor gave the sounds and the student blended to make the word but in the analytic process requires the student to give the sounds they hear after the teacher says the word.

Thinking about my adult ESL students who are not literate in their own languages or have limited instruction I am wondering which approach would work best.  I have been using the synthetic approach but instead of giving the sounds I ask the students which sound by pointing to each letter then I ask them what word do the sounds make.  I need to try using the synthetic process as shown in the video and see if this brings a different result in my classroom.  After I reaffirm they have the letter sounds solidly in their memory recall of course. 

Movement from my very low class to the next level requires the student to be able to decode three CVC words and comprehend what they read by choosing the matching picture.   The analytic process provides the opportunity to make corrections to pronunciation of the sound.  Sometimes the pronunciation is not exact when you have students with different dialects from different countries all trying to give the sounds at the same time. 

I can see the benefit of both in my classroom.  Does one process need to happen before the student can move on to the other?

Diana

Thanks for your very thoughtful post, Diana. It sounds like you're doing really excellent work with your students.

The different approaches to phonics aren't foundational unlike so much of what we do in phonics, such as starting with single consonant sounds and moving to blends and digraphs when single sounds have been mastered. They really are just different ways of coming at learning the letter/sound correspondences. I mix and match because the approaches complement each other. Synthetic phonics and analytic phonics are the flip side of each other and they reinforce each other. I like to go back and forth between synthetic phonics play and analytic phonics play to keep things more interesting and to make sure my learner is able to do both processes nimbly and reliably. We didn't show that in the videos of course because we wanted to show each approach as a strategy on its own. But you might try that and see how it works for your learners.

The only approach I'd say that is more complex than the others and therefore might be something you'd wait on is the Phonics Through Spelling approach. It requires a four step process rather than a two step process and therefore is a more challenging task for most learners. And for learners who confuse the name of the letter with the sound of the letter, it can cause some confusion too. For that reason, I find I use that approach less than the others.

The research on different approaches to phonics doesn't tell us which approach works most effectively for which type of learner. It just tells us that synthetic phonics is the approach used most often. But it doesn't tell us why so we can make our own guesses about that. It will be interesting to see what everyone has to say about that here.

 

Good afternoon! My response is a two-part response.

First, I agree with what has been said about using pictures with the words. I have, typically, left out pictures when teaching to segment and blend sounds because I want the focus to be on the letters and their sounds vs the actual meaning of the words. After their decoding is stronger, I move into vocabulary work where I teach meaning of words. We use the decoding methods that we have been taught to break the words up and sound them out (read them) but the focus has become more about the actual meaning of the word. Here, pictures are great to help struggling readers and language learners. 

Second, as I watched the video, I found myself questioning that this is Analytic Phonics. My understanding of Analytic vs Synthetic Phonics is that the video on Day 1 was more Analytic and the video today, for Day 2, was more Synthetic. I could be wrong but maybe someone can help me see. What I have been taught, Analytic Phonics is more of a whole word approach. In the Day 1 video she worked with onsets and rimes. This is an analytic approach because we are teaching that the two ending sounds together make the same sound even if we change the beginning letter. There is more of an emphasis on the first sound but that can often lead to guessing, when not focusing on each sound in the word. A lot of times, in Analytic Phonics, I have heard the schwa sound at the end of consonant sounds (/t/ = /tuh/) which is never good for helping individuals learn to sound out words and make sense of sounds. 

My understanding of Synthetic Phonics, is more of what we saw in Day 2. I have been taught that there is a focus on each sound in this way of teaching. Individuals identify and manipulate sounds in all positions. There is more of a focus on all 44 phonemes as the student progresses through and learns that individual letters can go together and make new sounds. I have always come to the understanding that there is room for both, Analytic and Synthetic phonics, in teaching a student to read but I have always found more success in Synthetic Phonics teaching. 

Have I been taught wrong? Can you help me make sense of this?

Staci, a rose by any other name... That is a very perceptive comment and one that I hope others will jump in to discuss! Love it. What do others think?

When I try to easily distinguish the difference between the two approaches, I think of "analytic" as a process that analyzes something that is known: a word. In order to analyze, you need to work with a known concept. If you already know what a cat is, you can easily analyze it, naming its paws, a tail (or not), sharp teeth, etc... You already have terms that you can apply to analyze it.

I think of "synthetic" as something that has no meaning. Letters make sounds that are arbitrarily attributed to them by a language. So in synthetic phonics, you don't start with the cat. You start with the parts of the cat and then put them together to form meaning. Let's put the paws, the tail, the teeth and whiskers together. Aha! That's what we call a cat!

That is why I suggest that synthetic phonics is usually more useful among beginning second-language learners who haven't developed the vocabulary to analyze words. 

I wonder, would "deductive" and "inductive" apply here?

Let's keep talking phonics! Leecy

I completely agree that synthetic phonics is better suited for language learners and maybe that is why I am more familiar with it and see the value in it. I guess I was just trying to decipher the differences as I watched the video clips. 

I think Phonics is not taught enough and as the students get older, I feel like there is a misconception that they do not need phonics instruction, or that it will embarrass them. When I was a coach, I wished that my district would have seen that we had a Reading program and it wasn't a Phonics program. There was always so much concern that our K-3 kiddos were not reading well and the problem was not that we did not have a good program, rather that we did not have a program the supported learning to read. It was a program that assumed that there were already reading skills there to build upon and the Phonics instruction component was only for 15-20 minutes a day. If a teacher did not have a strong foundation in teaching students how to read, the instruction just wasn't there. It is unfortunate! I am so excited about anything related to teaching an individual, any age, to read and Phonics is not discussed enough. 

Thank you for your fun response to my questions. I am not sure that this response really makes sense

:) Staci, I train PreK-3 and K-5 teachers who want to maintain their certifications on how to help their students develop phonemic awareness and phonics. I am often amazed at what little training teachers have in early reading development although I am very happy and impressed that they want more help in that regard! I have found that very often, teachers are not encouraged to or able to help students develop reading skills after 3rd grade (and before, sometimes). Reading development should be addressed, in my opinion, in Pre-K-12, and phonics should be specifically taught to any student, no matter what the age, who has difficulty reading unless disabilities exist to prevent progress. You are right on! Leecy

I'd like to add my support for everything Staci and Leecy have been saying about the need for teachers of learners of all ages who are struggling to gain basic reading skills to include phonics instruction. I'd also like to emphasize that phonemic awareness assessment and instruction is equally important, and even more neglected. An individual needs to be phonemically aware in order to participate successfully in phonics play of any kind. I find that even when I encounter teachers who know about and use phonics instruction that they often don't know about or use the six phonemic awareness tasks for assessment and instruction. If anyone is interested in the phonic awareness videos we made you can find them at: 

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZfx1RWm8nviqoHKYu5gG0kuzXZJ367b7

We also cover phonemic awareness in Tutor Ready: Reading

https://www.learnerweb.org/LearnerWeb/LearnerWeb.html?region=tutorready&locale=en&#REGION_HOME_PAGE

Hi Stacy,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and question with us. And thanks to Leecy for her lively and lovely explanation of how she understands the difference. Just wonderful!

I have to admit that I played around with all of the different approaches to teaching phonics before I even knew the official names for them. It wasn't until I started doing trainings for LINCS on the four components of reading that I put a name with an approach. So while I know the names of the approaches are useful, I don't really focus on them but rather on the process itself when I talk about phonics to tutors, teachers and learners.

Let me share here the down and dirty content of part of the LINCS Alphabetics training that I did for years that might help answer your question here.

Synthetic Phonics:

Learners are taught the letter sound correspondences and then are taught to blend the sounds to identify words.   Tutor: “What word does /d/ /o/ /g/ make?”    Learner: dog

Analytic Phonics:

Learners do not pronounce the sounds in isolation. They analyze the sounds in a word that is already identified.   Tutor: “What sounds do you hear in the word dog?”   Learner:  /d/ /o/ /g/

 

Phonics Through Spelling:

Learners break a word into its sounds and then identify the corresponding letters to spell the word.

  Tutor: “What sounds do you hear in the word dog?”   Learner:  /d/ /o/ /g/   Tutor: “How do you spell the word dog?”   Learner:  d-o-g  

Phonics In Context:

Learners are taught to use both letter-sound correspondences and context clues to identify unfamiliar words.

The dog has a collar with a tag on it.

Learners sound out words while reading and then use the rest of the sentence to determine what the word is. For example, the learner may at first read the above sentence as 

The dog has a color with a tag on it.

But when the tutor/teacher asks the learner to think about the meaning of what s/he just read and whether it makes sense, the learner can realize that although color and collar look and sound very similar that only collar makes sense in this context. 

Phonics by Analogy:

Learners use parts of words they already know to identify unfamiliar words by analogy (word patterns or families). _og bog cog  log _og _og   This particular definition is taken from page 42 of Susan McShane's excellent publication Applying Research in Reading Instruction for Adults: First Steps for Teachers that you can find at https://lincs.ed.gov/publications/pdf/applyingresearch.pdf   I would highly recommend downloading this publication because it has wonderful, user-friendly information about all four components of reading.   Does this help?

Thank you for breaking it down that way. I can see how the videos relate and it makes a lot of sense. It is amazing to me how many ways there are to teach Phonics! I am passionate about Reading and teaching Reading, especially to language learners. They have stolen my heart and it is a world that I will always feel comfortable in. Thank you for your clarifying response!

I'm so glad that short and sweet explanation of the different approaches to phonics instruction helped. As Leecy warns, working in this area with the wonderful learners we are privileged to work with is indeed addictive. I'm delighted you've joined the team! It sounds like you're doing such fantastic work with your learners. Good for you!

How do you perceive the relationship between the tutor and the student in the videos you have watched? What positive aspects of that relationship contribute to what the student is learning? 

The student is relaxed and even takes some initiative.He is part of the experience and enjoys it because he can do it and he also understands the goal and what he may be able to achieve doing it. Repetition is the key to understand better and to reinforce the technique. It is a pleasure to watch the student going through the exercise.

 

What do you think the main difference is between Synthetic and Analytic Phonics?

Both are necessary for a good result. The student should be able to recognize the letters and the sounds and be able to the same thing with group of letters.

 

Would one work better among different populations?

ESL students whose mother tongue is based on sounds and not letters may have a hard time grasping this technique that asks to recognize letters. The same case for ESL students who are not educated at all in their native language,

 

I really enjoyed watching the 2 videos. As a foreign language teacher and ESL teacher I know that pronunciation is a serious problem for students.

 

Hi Kathy, 

How do you suggest new reading or ESL teachers begin with teaching reading? Should they start with the analytical approach, or the synthetic approach, or integrate both in short spurts? How do you see a standard lesson begin with these concepts? The examples in the videos are great, but can you share a sample of how these videos can come together in a cohesive lesson? 

Thanks, 
Kathy

Thanks for these interesting questions, Kathy. Let me see if I can answer the first one and then address the others in turn.

How do you suggest new reading or ESL teachers begin with teaching reading?

Reading is a big and pretty complex subject and it can be intimidating for new teachers to teach, especially since most of us were never trained in reading teaching. I certainly wasn't! My degrees are in Anthropology. I had to pick up as much information as I could over the course of many years and I still have lots to learn. Every chance I get I review the research, publications, online discussions and courses, webinars, workshops, and any other PD opportunities on reading (and writing and LD and.....). I've enhanced my knowledge and skills from mentors and colleagues who have always been generous about sharing their best practices in reading assessment and teaching with me. I heartily recommend lots of independent learning in the area of reading and assessing and teaching reading.

I'd suggest as a first step that new teachers familiarize themselves with the fundamentals of teaching foundational reading skills. There are so many good resources available but I find that some of the most helpful for HOW to teach reading to adults are those aimed at volunteer tutors because most adult ed and ESL teachers are focused on teaching a variety of content areas rather than reading skills. Volunteer tutors are often the ones who are asked to work with low level or emerging readers and they need user-friendly, accessible materials to teach them how to teach and to get up to speed pretty quickly. I'd recommend the following traditional tutor resource materials for review:

Tutor: A Collaborative, Learner-centered Approach to Literacy Instruction for Teens and Adults by Ruth Colvin New Readers Press

LITSTART: Strategies for Adult Literacy and ESL Tutors by Patricia Frey and Even Renner, Michigan Literacy, Inc.

Teaching Adults: A Literacy Resource Book developed by Laubach Literacy Action

Teaching Adults: An ESL Resource Book developed by Laubach Literacy Action

Tutoring ESL: A Handbook for Volunteers by Tacoma Community House Training Project

These are my go to publications that I always have within reach on my bookshelves. The first four are readily available for purchase. The last seems to have morphed into two publications: Teaching English Language Learners: A Handbook for Volunteers and Literacy in Life: A Handbook for Volunteer Tutors available to download for free as pdfs at:

http://www.tacomacommunityhouse.org/literacy-now-downloadable-materials/

In addition to becoming acquainted with the basic philosophies of and approaches to tutoring/teaching reading, I'd start my plan for teaching reading with an assessment of the learners' skill levels in each of the four components of reading. Research tells us that most programs in the U.S. assess adult learners only in silent reading comprehension so most teachers get information on only 1/4 of their learners' reading skills. When learners aren't assessed in all four components they're often placed inappropriately in classes that can't address their particular individual needs for reading instruction. This accounts for many learners not making the kind of progress they should which leads to frustration for the learner, teacher and program. So a key to good reading instruction is to assess each individual learner, especially those who really struggle with reading, in each of the four components and then to target the reading instruction based on the reading skills the learners need to build. This often is best done with one-to-one instruction, even when the learner is in a classroom setting. For some great information on the importance of assessing learners in each of the components and for good solid information on how to address those identified needs with targeted instruction, visit the Assessment Strategies and Reading Profiles website at

https://lincs.ed.gov/readingprofiles/MC_Assessment_Drives.htm 

Teachers can input their learners' scores in each of the components and the website will generate a reading profile for the reading levels with suggestions for how to address the needs of that particular reading profile.

Should new teachers start with the analytical approach, or the synthetic approach, or integrate both in short spurts? 

My short answer is that I'd recommend integrating both analytic and synthetic approaches in short spurts. And I'd add phonics by analogy and phonics in context into the mix in most lessons as well. I'm a firm believer in mixing and matching the different approaches to phonics instruction or play, as I like to call it. I think when you do that, you keep the phonics activities fun and fresh and interesting while also making sure your learner is able to practice (and hopefully master) all of the different ways to play with phonics. It's important for a learner to be able to sound out letters and words by looking at the whole word and to do just the opposite which is to identify the whole word by looking at and sounding out the letters comprising the word. Going back and forth from whole to parts reinforces different cognitive abilities and makes the learner more flexible and nimble in their phonics skills. The same is true for being able to change words and create new words by swapping out the beginning, ending and middle letters. That's what we do when we ask learners to play with word families (or word patterns) in phonics by analogy. This particular phonics activity really helps learners see the relationship between letters and words and that you don't have to learn a zillion words in isolation as sight words. Knowing that if you know that the letters o and g make the sound /og/ and if you know all of the consonant sounds that you can make the words bog, cog, dog, fog, and so on is very reassuring to learners. I've heard of learners likening this realization of the interconnectedness of words that they gain from playing with word families to FINALLY being given a key to the door that opens onto the world of reading. One learner even became quite angry and resentful because he felt that this key to reading had been purposefully withheld from him when he was a child learning to read and he wasn't ever taught phonics. When he was taught phonics his reading skills took off and he's now a much more proficient and avid reader as a result.

How do you see a standard lesson begin with these concepts?

Can you share a sample of how these videos can come together in a cohesive lesson? 

I like to start off by doing a little bit of synthetic phonics, then move to analytic phonics, then some phonics by analogy (using word families) and then end by practicing some of the same words we've played with by reading or perhaps even creating/writing a story containing them so we can practice some phonics in context too. As I said in an earlier post, I don't usually ask my learners to do phonics through spelling because I've found that can be too complex and confusing for many who struggle with a four-step process and who easily confuse the name of the letters with the sounds they make. Depending on how my student is doing and his/her level of engagement/enthusiasm/frustration, I'd do all of this phonics play for no more than 20 minutes. I'd then do some vocabulary work, some writing, some listening and speaking and whatever it is that my learner wants to work on in a learner-centered lesson, if I have the luxury of doing that. I think Miranda gave us an excellent example of how to structure a reading lesson that covers a variety of essential skills and strategies, including phonics activities. Please see her post in today's discussions entitled Phonics.

For a nice example of what a phonics lesson might look like you might want to take a peek at page 45 of Susan McShane's publication

Applying Research in Reading Instruction for Adults: First Steps for Teachers. The lesson describes a sample activity on initial R-Blends and nicely illustrates the different segments of a well-planned phonics lesson. You can download this publication for free at:

https://lincs.ed.gov/publications/pdf/applyingresearch.pdf

 

 

 

In ESL classes here, we have a designated chunk of time devoted to phonics instruction.  It's not very long - usually around 10 minutes - but very scaffolded and basic.  I have upper intermediate/advanced students in my own class, but the teacher serving our beginning/intermediate students does the same thing.  For example, we will have a phonics lesson perhaps talking about the vowel sound of short o, where the teacher is modeling the sound the letter makes and writing words that have that sound.  We focus only on that specific sound for ten minutes and try not to make it a vocabulary lesson (which can prove tricky!).  There is modeling, repetition of words and sounds by students, and then the teacher writes words with that sound and asks for students to try reading them on their own.  Finally, when we go on to more work in our workbooks/texts, the students are encouraged to find words that use that specific phonics focus.  Most get excited when they notice the words with that vowel sound in the wild, too.  I try to have my students use what they know phonics-wise when they come to a "tricky word" that they haven't seen before.  So, if they see the word "context" for example, they can think about the vowel sounds they know for the letter o and apply to see what words they get.  In the upper-level class, they are also applying syllabication rules that aren't taught in the lower levels as much, so that helps a ton, too.

The use of pictures for ESL students instead of letters in isolation makes it difficult to focus on the letter-sound correspondence, especially if reading more difficult texts is the end goal (which certainly should be).  They have to learn to manipulate the basic letter sounds to build blends before they can dive into reading for meaning - if that makes any sense.  But the bottom line is this - we want our ESL students to be able to read academic words in context for work or school and a great deal of those words are not able to be properly labeled with a picture.  It's more important to give them word attack skills that they can apply when coming to a new word alphabetically and then, for comprehension, strategies to find the meaning of unknown words.  Simply giving them a dictionary of words doesn't help with more difficult words, unfortunately.  

In our building, we have instruction 2 days a week for 4 hours in classroom instruction.  Our reading instruction block looks a lot like this: 25 minutes of vocabulary (with words that they will find in the reading practice for that day), 10 minutes of explicit phonics instruction, and 20 minutes of reading fluency (with the vocabulary words learned and application of the phonics skill).  It's helping quite a bit and the students find it interesting.  The rest of the time is spent on speaking/listening activities, writing, grammar practice, and more basic reading applications with the intention specifically on comprehension.  In my room specifically, everything is centered around the same job skill - if we are learning about cover letters, we read examples, talk about vocabulary, practice writing a cover letter, etc.

That being said, in elementary education, we first teach how to LEARN TO READ and then students can READ TO LEARN.  You need mechanics before you can truly start comprehending anything.  It's a little fuzzier in "ESL land" because everything is a learning experience when they're gathering language, but you get the idea.  It also makes a huge difference in what level of education they have in their native language.  Some students who have master's degrees in their native countries can more easliy pick up language rules for English, while students who didn't finish elementary school in their primary language will struggle in English.  It's all an amazing and wonderful process to be a part of!    

Sometimes I ramble - forgive me. 

 

Miranda, I really appreciate the approach you described among your ESL learners. I would call it a sound, research-based and engaging way of helping students, ESL or ABE, develop a broad set of language skills that include the "word attack skills" you mentioned. That way, they are "armed" to get along on their own. I also love that "everything is centered around the same job skill." I assume that those vary with different populations. What you are doing in that regard is integrating learning, a hot topic, especially among federally-funded programs, and one that I strongly support. 

I hope that others drop in to comment on your practices. You are so right that effective ESL instruction provides amazing experiences for both students and instructors. But be careful; it can be addictive. At least, it has been for me. (Keep rambling!) Leecy 

Miranda, can we possibly clone you and your program? Because you and it sound amazing! Thank you for taking the time to so thoroughly and effectively describe a perfect example of a solid lesson structure that includes phonics instruction as it is recommended for use with adult learners. You've made so many excellent points that it's hard to highlight them all so I'd just like to thank you again for providing a fantastic model of good teaching and lesson structuring.

Like your ESL students, mine struggle with vowel sounds. This is the case even for some of my intermediate and advanced level students. Short vowels are especially challenging. You describe wonderful ways of reinforcing how to internalize/practice vowel sounds in a variety of reading and writing activities. Thank you!

If this is what you sound like when you're rambling, I can't imagine what you sound like when you're articulate!

Who else has some fabulous ideas to share?