Posts
I have in my possession my uncle's spelling book. The book is titled, "Modern-Life Speller--Book Two" and was published by the State of Kansas in 1938. The authors were a professor of Educational Administration at the University of Texas, the Superintendent of Schools of Houston, Texas, and the Director of Educational Reference and Research at the University of Michigan. Here's an excerpt from page vi of the Introduction:
"The disadvantages attached to poor spelling are everywhere apparent. There is, moreover, a significant connection between spelling ability and the general use of English. Correct spelling and improved pronunciation go hand in hand. A knowledge of the correct spelling of words is closely associated with a knowledge of the correct meaning of words. There is a tendency to restrict the use of words in writing to those which the writer has become habituated to spelling correctly. Thus, a limited spelling vocabulary tends to induce a limited writing vocabulary."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
Here's my question: if the educational gods deemed years ago that spelling matters, what changed? That is, is there somehow new research out there that suggest that spelling no longer matters? Or, that learning to spell is somehow a magical process?
Interesting.
First of all, I'm sure that kids limit themselves to words they can spell.
That's true across the board; I've had more than one parent here (in Irvington) tell me she limits himself to grammatical usages she's sure are correct. (I do the same thing on occasion.)
I'm intrigued by the observation about pronunciation.
As I mentioned, C. is just NOW starting to be able to "sound out" a multisyllabic word.
I believe this is at least partially attributable to the fact that he's been using Megawords, which teaches proper spelling of common syllables in the English language, and of polysyllabic words.
Don't know what to make of the assertion about meaning and spelling being connected, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Just going on common sense, it never strikes me as a good idea to jettison one whole element of what we now call "literacy."
Spelling is part of reading and writing; no one denies this.
And yet educators have decided that spelling is superfluous, an unnecessary skill.
What is their evidence for this?
As far as I know, they've offered none.
To my knowledge they've jettisoned spelling on the same grounds they jettisoned long division: technology can do it.
(This is not to say that spelling is to writing what long division is to math --- not at all. It is to say that I strongly suspect spelling has some kind of necessary role in good reading and writing, as opposed to being merely decorative.)
Correct spelling and improved pronunciation go hand in hand. A knowledge of the correct spelling of words is closely associated with a knowledge of the correct meaning of words. There is a tendency to restrict the use of words in writing to those which the writer has become habituated to spelling correctly. Thus, a limited spelling vocabulary tends to induce a limited writing vocabulary."
Spelling is not fun to teach.
There are no good projects for kids to learn, hands on, in a real world context how to spell.
Plus, there's no shortcut. Spelling is sheer memorization, and you know how much that is frowned upon.
Toss in spell check and schools no longer feel the need to struggle with it.
Apart from the question of what role spelling plays in literacy, there is the simple political question of what taxpayers want.
I'm not going to spend time Googling survey data; I'm positive the public wants kids taught to spell --- and expects schools to perform this function.
Plus, there's no shortcut. Spelling is sheer memorization, and you know how much that is frowned upon.
This is the thing.
Our schools are now so non-conversant in research on learning that they assume that learning = memorization.
(Remember when you daughter suddenly had the massive test-prep pack???)
I'm not at all clear on the question of when "direct memorization" is useful and when it's not.
Megawords doesn't have kids memorize spelling.
Instead, Megawords has kids practice spelling until they remember it. (Can't describe it better than this, but I'm sure everyone knows what I mean....)
Saxon uses the same principle.
You do very little memorization in Saxon Math -- so little that, when he DOES want you to memorize something he says so.
He will say, "Memorize this."
The rest of the time you "memorize" -- commit material to long-term memory -- by practicing a procedure.
As you practice you're free to look back at worked examples.
In time you stop needing to look back, because you have now moved the procedure or concept into long-term memory.
This is why we have a nation of "Friday spellers."
Schools don't teach spelling systematically, but, rather, thematically.
Thematic teaching means they hand the kids a list of unrelated words linked to the theme of that week's instruction on Monday; then, on Friday, the kids have to be able to spell them.
How do the kids achieve this?
By memorizing the list.
Instead of teaching spelling, schools are having kids memorize lists of words.
I think the teaching of spelling went to the wayside because of the whole language reading movement. Whole language emphasized that learning to read was as natural as learning to talk. Writer's workshop, the writing version of whole language reading instruction, believed that children were hampered by any "restrictions" placed upon their natural ability to write. Hence, invented spelling, zero attention to mechanics etc. My school district uses a "whole language" version of a spelling program called Rebecca Sitton Spelling. It doesn't work, but the district proudly states how it teaches spelling and has 8th graders working on learning things that should have been learned in k-5 to the neglect of vocabulary study.
<<< Writer's workshop, the writing version of whole language reading instruction >>>
Speaking of which, our kids are becoming a community of writers!
yay!!!
"Thus, a limited spelling vocabulary tends to induce a limited writing vocabulary."
My son now has vocabulary = spelling.
In other words, his vocabulary lists (10 words per week in sixth grade) are based on spelling rules, like double consonants. For example, this week he had words like "beginning". Well, he knew what "begin" meant when he was 4 years old. It's meant to be more than spelling because they have to write sentences that show they know the meaning of the word.
Another technique they use sometimes is to pull vocabulary words from the books they are reading. This is a random approach to vocabulary.
I apologize if I missed it, but does anyone have any advice on vocabulary? I think the school's idea is just to get kids to read a lot. I don't really like the idea of vocabulary in-context. I know that I never looked up words when I was young. I could figure out a general meaning to get me by. This lack of exact understanding failed me on synonym and analogy tests, and it failed me later on when I started writing more.
Even though I have a pretty good vocabulary, I had trouble on many tests. They required proper understandings of words. If you only have an in-context understanding of a word, you will do poorly.
Why is it that schools never seem to want to dive right in and tackle a subject directly? Why do they always want to have kids learn indirectly? Having fun while you learn may be nice, but what's the trade-off? They know that kids have to take these tests. Why don't they give kids exactly what they need?
Does anyone have any recommendations on a direct approach to vocabulary? There must be standard (minimal) lists of words that kids should know. Tests like the SSAT and SAT should not be games. There should be standard lists of words that you can study to guarantee almost perfect success on the tests.
How about books that tackle vocabulary from root meanings? Thankfully, spelling has never been a problem for my son. He sees the word in his head. [My wife has to spell difficult words out in the air with her finger, and I have to pronounce them in my head.]
"Does anyone have any recommendations on a direct approach to vocabulary?"
Study Latin and try a program called Wordly Wise. We study Latin through a DVD program and we do a lesson a day in Wordly Wise.
Steve,
Carolyn, Catherine and I did the Vocabulary Workshop by Sadlier-Oxford. Jerome Shostak is the author. It fits very neatly into an afterschooler's schedule. I did Level A with my 6th grade.
That's the best direct one I've found, but there might be others.
We're using Vocabulit in which each lesson has 10 words used in the context of literature (20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Through the Looking Glass, The Diary of Anne Frank, etc.). Assignment consist of looking up the words, doing antonym/synonym exercises, analogies, and complete the sentence type exercises. Spelling test consists of reading the definition-- student spells words (hopefully correctly).
We also use the Vocabulary from the Classical Roots workbooks. Latin and Greek roots are learned in context (modern vocabulary)with exercises to reinforce.
We cover the rules of spelling in the Hake Grammar and Writing Program. I think Hake does a good job of reinforcing the "rules" of spelling that should become second nature.
This seems to be working well and I like that it's not just memorizing a list of random words.
Thank you for the recommendations. The "Vocabulary from the Classical Roots" workbooks sound interesting. Now I have to figure out how to get my son to do more work without having a fit. Doing it in school would be nice, but I guess that wouldn't go over very well.
The great part for afterschooling is that the lesson doesn't really take long.
Here's a sample of the new edition for 5th grade (I have an older edition):
http://www.epsbooks.com/downloads/rtus/2252M/vcr_5_lesson10.pdf
It's kind of "cool" learning some Greek and Latin. He might actually find he enjoys it.
This page gives a good overview of the series:
http://www.epsbooks.com/downloads/rtus/2252M/vcr_6_word_list.pdf
Sorry... wrong link:
Right link: http://www.epsbooks.com/dynamic/pop-ups/rtu_pop-up.asp?series=2252M&seriesdescription=Vocabulary%20from%20Classical%20Roots
ConcernedCTParent,
That Vocabulit book looks very interesting. Is that an EPS book?
I hear you, Steve. I'm sitting here wondering how I can slip in another little thing without my son noticing.
"It's kind of "cool" learning some Greek and Latin. He might actually find he enjoys it."
I think that angle might work. He can absorb a lot very quickly if he wants to. Short periods of intense study seem to work better than a daily ritual.
My daughter enjoys the passages in the Vocabulit. The exercises are challenging and she learns so much more than how to spell.
The publisher is Perfection Learning. Here's a link:
http://www.perfectionlearning.com/browse.php?categoryID=1492
Sample Vocabulit lessons (Book H)
http://www.perfectionlearning.com/images/products/pdfs/vlit/vlit.tg.pdf
We've got Book G.
"Poor spelling is one of the most common academic difficulties students experience today. Many middle and upper grade students experience serious difficulties in spelling. People just don't seem to grow out of spelling problems.
For some children, the introduction of "invented spelling", which became the instructional rule with the whole language approach, has had a negative effect. When writing in the early grades, students are often encouraged to spell the words the best they can. This is done to prevent children from rejecting writing because of a fear of mispelling words. Although writing fluency is a positive outcome, the use of invented spelling can cause problems for students with poor sequential memory who continue to spell words this way long after it is considered appropriate."
From Helping Children Spell
by Helen and Martin Weiss
http://www.epsbooks.com/downloads/articles/HelpingChildrenSpell.pdf
Post a Comment