In researching the topic of teaching reading, I was happy to come across the following statements, from two very respected and credible sources, adamantly vouching for phonics instruction:
“The topic is seemingly simple – phonics. Do children need instruction in phonics? Why is there an argument? The answer is “yes” (Fountas & Pinnelll, 2020, p. 1).
“The question of whether to include phonics instruction has been resolved. The answer is yes” (International Literacy Association, 2019, p. 2).
If you are like me, you may share your enthusiasm about phonics only with a few trusted colleagues. I picture us whispering in the back corner of the staff room, passing resources to each other under the table. Well friends, now that Fountas and Pinnell, and the ILA have shouted it from the rooftops, we can too! Phonics instruction works! Its the best! I believe in it, because I have seen it work, really work, and I L-O-O-V-E all of the programs out there that break teaching reading down into minute, sequential steps, that follow beautifully, from one to the next. It is like music to me.
In 1997, the U.S. Congress asked for a review of research on literacy, with the goal of improving reading and writing achievement (Lonigan & Shanahan, 2008, p. v). As you may know, in the 80’s and 90’s, whole language instruction was mainly used in schools, and the impact on reading scores was dismal. In fact, “a 1994 National Assessment of Educational Progress report found 56% of 4th graders in California read below a basic level after embracing Whole Language” (Betker, presentation, 2019, Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/)
The resulting report, which recommended systematic phonics instruction, was “influential in helping to guide reading-education policy and practice in the United States” (Lonigan & Shanahan, p. v). The report is called the “Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read” (NICHD, 2000). This report is very widely cited in articles about teaching reading, and has impacted how we teach reading in Canada, as well. After the report was released by the National Reading Panel in 2000, there was a dramatic increase in the use of systematic, explicit phonics instruction, in schools.
However, it is clear to me, and to many teachers who have heard the research conclusions, knowing that something is supported by science does not automatically lead to implementation in a regular classroom. The information needs to be interpreted in such a way that it is usable and practical. Also, there are important factors to consider, in ensuring that the method is applied in a way that is congruent with the research. As you can imagine, not all phonics instruction is equal – the sequence that a teacher uses is vitally important: “[T]his process is not left to accident but goes according to a superbly designed sequence” ( Fountas & Pinnell, 2020, p. 3).
In teaching reading, and incorporating phonics in one’s program, it is important to consider the following questions:
- Who is phonics instruction for? Isn’t it intended only for students who struggle to learn to read?
According to Fountas & Pinnell (2020), “[E]ven children who “crack the code” early and appear to have noticed letter-sound relationships and figured out how to use them will benefit from systematizing their knowledge and developing effective, efficient ways to use their knowledge, not only of letters and sounds, but also of patterns involving larger chunks of words” (p. 1). They go on to say that phonics instruction is “even more critical when we consider the large number of English learners in our schools. It is our responsibility as educators to ensure equity and access to language for all students” (p. 1). I would argue that the same need for equity exists among students who are first language English speakers, but whose early experiences have not enabled them to develop pre-literacy skills.
“Research has shown the power of this early instruction in phonics for young students’ reading and writing development. Government-funded documents have shown that phonics instruction is helpful for all students, harmful for none, and crucial for some” International Literacy Association, 2019, p. 2).
2. Is there a “best” way to teach phonics / decoding?
“[H]ow we translate …research into instructional practice varies widely, resulting in practices that are sometimes ineffective or unbalanced and instructional materials that too often have serious instructional design flaws. Some phonics instruction is random, incomplete, and implicit. Other instruction is overdone and isolated, devoid of the extensive application to authentic reading and writing needed for mastery. Neither is as effective as it needs to be” (International Literacy Association, 2019, p. 2).
“There is no one best way to teach phonics…That is, there is no single method that has been shown to be the most effective approach” (Cunningham, as cited in Allington, 2013, p. 522). However, some methods certainly are better than others, and some programs are more easily applied and adopted, I would argue. The main point here is that, students do need to learn to decode, and that this is an important part of becoming an effective reader (Allington, 2013, p. 522).
You may have heard the term “the science of reading”. In the last few decades, an incredible amount of research has been done, that actually looks at what happens in people’s brains, when they learn to read. In fact, we now know an astronomical amount more about teaching reading than we did only 40 years ago, according to Dr. Kilpatrick (2016, p. 46) a reading researcher and doctor of psychology. The science of reading essentially tells us how the brain changes as it learns to read. This information can help us to know which teaching methods would result in developing a reading brain.
A recent brain research study out of Stanford explained how beginning readers who focus on letter–sound relationships, or phonics, instead of trying to learn whole words, increase activity in the area of the brain best wired for reading. This has resulted in the conclusion that phonics instruction has a strong impact on students’ early reading growth” (International Literacy Association, 2019, p. 2, Retreived from https://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/ila-meeting-challenges-early-literacy-phonics-instruction.pdf).
The Orton-Gillingham approach is one example of how to teach students to read, using systematic, explicit phonics instruction. This approach is recommended for students with Dyslexia, however it has been applied to students of varied abilities, with success. If you are looking for a place to begin, I highly recommend learning as much as you can about this approach.
Some other specific phonics methods that you may be interested in looking into, especially if you are an early years teacher, are the use of word families, and teaching of onset and rimes. David Kilpatrick recommends the use of word families for Grade 1 students who can identify the first sounds and letters in words, but cannot yet decipher the middle and ending sounds (2016, p. 50). Additionally, colour-coded onset-rime phonics-based intervention has been shown to be effective with struggling readers, and is recommended as an intervention for students at Tier 2 and Tier 3 (Wall, Rafferty, Camizzi, Max & VanBlargan, 2016, p. 8).
What else is there to consider?
Teaching students to read through decoding is only part of phonics instruction. It is important to have students apply their developing phonics skills in writing. Using inventive spelling in kindergarten and first grade is an effective way to reinforce letter-sound correspondence, because children who get the chance to write suddenly become “interested in using those letter-sound relationships to read and write” (Adams, as cited in Allington, 2013, p. 522)
It is important to note that phonics instruction must not stand on its own. It must be taught “within a comprehensive literacy design that must also include reading high-quality books aloud to children, engaging them in shared reading, interactive read-aloud, small group guided reading instruction, small group book clubs, independent choice reading, and a wide range of writing contexts that support the expansive knowledge of words and how words work” (Fountas & Pinnell, 2020, p. 1).
“We must design lessons that provide the opportunities for struggling readers to actually read” (p. 526). Often lessons for struggling readers differ from lesson for good readers, in that there is less reading activity and more work on skills in isolation (p. 526). This limits the volume of reading that these students do. Additionally, they tend to read less overall, since a person who struggles at something tends to do less of it. Struggling readers may tend to choose to read less often, as a result of the difficulty they experience in reading.
It is a good idea to have explicit phonics instruction as part of a lesson, but this should be sandwiched between opportunities for the child to read connected text, at a level that they can read with success. It is best to provide an opportunity for the child to apply the phonics skills that they have been taught, in connected text immediately after. (Lourenzo, C., 2019, lecture in course “Diagnostic & Remedial Techniques in ELA, University of Manitoba).
Kilpatrick (2016) explains that we, as teachers, do not need to choose one approach to reading. Kilpatrick explains that each of the traditional approaches (from phonics, to whole words to whole language) is appropriate at specific stages in the process (p. 48). At the very beginning stages of reading instruction, he asserts that a more phonological approach is appropriate, and as students develop along the reading continuum, whole language or other approaches are suitable. Once students learn sound-symbol relationships, and are able to decode easily and automatically, using the strategy methods from whole language, would be appropriate and useful.
Most of all, what really matters, is having effective “expert” teachers working with struggling readers, according to Allington (2013, p. 523).
The expertise of the teacher is “the critical factor in the quality of reading lessons” according to research (Allington, 2013, p. 523)
The way to increase the reading abilities in students is to teach their teachers “about reading development and how to facilitate it” (Allington, 2013, p. 523). Allington recommends that each school employ a reading specialist with a graduate degree in literacy, to support teachers to this end. Additionally, he recommends that we move away from having educational assistants work with the students who struggle the most. Instead, those students should work with teachers who have the most expertise in teaching reading (p. 523).
In order to become good readers, all students need lots and lots of experience reading books that are matched to their reading level, not their grade. This is especially important for struggling readers (Allington, 2013, p. 525).
Self teaching occurs when students are engaged in reading books at their independent reading level (p. 525). For this reason, it is the “volume of reading activity” that is most important in developing strong readers (p. 526).
Allington provides teachers with the following list,that can be used to guide one’s practice. This list is for teachers to use, to check their lessons against the characteristics of research-based reading lessons (Allington, 2013, p. 528).
- “Do we expect our struggling readers to read and write more every day than our achieving readers?
- Have we ensured that every intervention for our struggling readers is taught only by our most effective and most expert teachers?
- Have we designed our reading lessons such that struggling readers spend at least two thirds of every lesson engaged in the actual reading of texts?
- Do we ensure that the texts we provide struggling readers across the full school day are texts they can read with at least 98% word recognition accuracy and 90% comprehension?
- Does every struggling reader leave the building each day with at least one book that they can read and that they also want to read?” (Allington, 2013, p. 528)
I see this as being so helpful to myself and to the teachers I work with, that I want to paint it on the sky!. I trust that you will find this as helpful as I have!
Onward we go, in developing our abilities as expert teachers! It is the teacher, not the method, that makes the difference for struggling readers! (p. 523). But don’t leave out the phonics!
I would also like to recommend the following two articles, for more information on phonics instruction:
Twelve Compelling Principles from the Research on Effective Phonics Instruction by Fountas & Pinnell, 2020
Literacy Leadership Brief: Meeting the Challenges of Early Literacy Phonics Instruction by The International Literacy Association, 2019
Thank you for being part of this contemplation on teaching reading.
What questions do you have, with regards to phonics instruction? What conclusions have you arrived at?
References
Allington, R. (2013). What Really Matters When Working with Struggling Readers. The Reading Teacher, 66 (7), 520-529.
Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (2020) Twelve Compelling Principles from the Research on Effective Phonics Instruction. Heinemann. Retrieved on June 16, 2020 from https://www.fountasandpinnell.com/resourcelibrary/resource?id=484
The International Literacy Association (2019). Literacy Leadership Brief: Meeting the Challenges of Early Literacy Phonics Instruction. Retrieved on June 16, 2020 from https://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/ila-meeting-challenges-early-literacy-phonics-instruction.pdf
Kilpatrick, D. (2016). Equipped for Reading Success: A comprehensive, step by step program for developing phoneme awareness and fluent word recognition. Casey & Kirsch Publishers.
National Institute for Literacy (2008). Developing Early Literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel. National Centre for Family Literacy.
Wall, C. A., Rafferty, L. A., Camizzi, M. A., Max, C. A., & Van Blargan, D. M. (2015). Action Research of a Color-Coded, Onset-Rime Decoding Intervention: Examining the effects with first grade students identified as at risk. Preventing School Failure: An Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 60 (1), 1-9.
Recent Comments