First, a reminder that the NCELP is the National Centre for Excellence for Language Pedagogy, the body based at York University which has as its objective to spread the word about "best practice" as defined by the TSC Review of MFL Pedagogy (2016).
Among its growing resources on phonics, vocabulary and grammar - three areas of focus from the TSC Review - there is a useful document written by Rachel Hawkes about the rationale for teaching phonics to beginners and near-beginners. I'll summarise its contents here, adding a few observations of my own, mainly to encourage a critical evaluation of the NCELP's guidance. The 13 points are in bold, with my comments added.
1. Teaching phonics develops phonological decoding (the ability to sound out accurately), and without explicit phonics teaching, decoding is limited.
I would add that many higher-achieving pupils in fact develop excellent decoding skills without much explicit phonics teaching at all. Their skill seems to develop from hearing and reading language at the same time, having opportunities to read aloud and interact frequently with written and spoken texts. My feeling is that explicit phonics instruction may be of most benefit to middle and lower-attaining pupils as long as it is rigorous, enjoyable and woven into general communicative work.
2. Decoding is positively associated with motivation and improves confidence in production (speaking and writing).
This is undoubtedly true, as evidenced by research such as Erler and Macaro (2011). This statement is not, in itself, an argument for teaching phonics, since decoding ability can emerge without much close attention to it.
3. Phonics teaching supports vocabulary learning, which is key to making progress in language learning.
Yes, it does, as pupils read and repeat words, phrases and sentences aloud. Vocabulary is of course acquired in many other ways.
4. Decoding enables learners to access new language autonomously; learners can engage with vocabulary learning more successfully in and beyond the classroom, even ahead of the lesson (flipped learning), allowing more lesson time to focus on language practice and use.
All true, although once again this is not necessarily an argument for explicit phonics teaching, since decoding can develop without it.
5. Teaching phonics teaches phonemes and each phoneme carries meaning; the function of the different sounds really matters. This links not only to vocabulary but also to grammar (je vs j’ai, aller vs allait, hablo vs habló).
Yes, phonemic decoding is one of the micro-skills required when making sense of spoken texts during listening. Most teachers make occasional use of minimal pairs and repetition to focus on awkward phonemes, notably those which have no close equivalent in the L1. So some attention to phonology (sounds) and phonics (sound-spelling relationships) should help pupils decipher meaning.
6. Without teaching the sound-writing relationship, teachers logically confine themselves to presenting vocabulary first orally to their beginner learners, and only subsequently provide the written forms, which limits variety in teaching methodology.
This takes some unpicking. It's true that there was a long tradition of not showing the written word when presenting new words. The basis of this was the fear that displaying the written word would encourage poor pronunciation as pupils imposed their L1 phonics knowledge on to the L2. (Historically this goes back to the "reformers" such as H.Palmer who argued for the primacy of the spoken word over writing.) This fear should not be ignored. There is no right answer here, but a possible compromise position is to briefly delay displaying the written form when presenting new vocabulary. Maybe teachers should try both approaches and observe if one or the other leads to better pronunciation and decoding of written forms.
7. Teaching phonics teaches the sound system; learners do not have enough exposure to become familiar with the sound system incidentally (i.e., without intentionally trying to learn it). Even an ‘all oral’ approach at primary would only give them a maximum of 120 hours (the equivalent of a few weeks in the womb in L1 acquisition!). So, explicit decoding teaching allows teachers to ‘short-cut’ to teaching the sound and writing at the same time.
Again, this probably depends on the learners. The statement seems to make sense, but from my reading there is little research evidence to support it yet. For example, Porter (2014), in a PhD thesis, saw only modest gains for primary learners following a structured course of phonics. The post-test results were especially disappointing. Porter felt that perhaps more time could have been given to reading aloud in the study. The large scale FLEUR reading project did show a (just) statistically significant advantage in word decoding for a Phonics group, versus a Strategies and Texts only group. Long term gains were uncertain. This research concluded that explicit phonics teaching is a arguably a necessity for decoding skill to develop. Perhaps more research will supply greater support for regular phonics teaching for beginners.
8. The ability to sound out words accurately on first exposure supports errorless learning, avoiding an inaccurate initial representation which, if persistent, can lead to problems later.
I agree with this entirely. Fossilisation of errors is an issue. In addition, having an accurate phonological representation of words in memory allows them to be more easily retrieved when listening, for example. Whether sounding out whole words and phrases through repetition constitutes structured phonics teaching, I am not sure. In my own experience, I only occasionally paid attention to individual phonemes and sound-letter correspondences. My students learned to decode largely through whole word and phrase repetition, listening while reading, reading aloud and general oral work.
9. Accurate decoding may allow learners to see that a written word is in fact a word that they already know orally.
True. But the skill in decoding may not have come from explicit phonics teaching.
10. Alternatively, learners’ ability to spell an unknown word they hear means that they can then find out its meaning (via a dictionary, peer, teacher, books); having the correct or nearly (possibly) correct spelling unlocks the meaning!
See above.
11. In addition, learners can ask orally about the meaning of a word that they have read; you need to be able to pronounce a word to ask about it confidently in class (What does ‘XXX’ mean?).
See above.
12. The time spent on teaching phonics does not seem to delay progress in other areas (e.g., reading comprehension).
I haven't seen evidence of this from my own reading, but it does seem unlikely. I suppose it partly depends how the phonics teaching is carried out. If it were focused on pronouncing single words while looking at highlighted letters and letter combinations, then I would argue that time could be better spent doing other activities, such as actually communicating! If the phonics practice were largely reading aloud whole sentences, then I would imagine it having less negative impact on other tasks such as interpersonal oral work, listening comprehension and simple writing tasks.
13. Decoding facilitates the recognition of cognates in the sound stream; learners are able to picture the spelling, and the spelling of cognates is easier to recognise than the sound. At GCSE, there is an expectation that learners will understand unfamiliar cognates in context, in both reading and listening. (AQA specification p.21).
Yes, all true, though yet again this is not necessarily an argument for explicit phonics teaching.
My main points to draw from this would be as follows, and you can take these with a pinch of salt!
In our soon to be published book Breaking the Sound Barrier: Teaching Language Learners How to Listen, Gianfranco Conti and I argue for including phonological awareness and phonics tasks as one way to develop listening skills, whilst emphasising that they may be best done in certain ways and mixed up with all sorts of other communicative tasks.
References
ncelp.org
The FLEUR report is available here https://pdcinmfl.com/fleur-foreign-language-educationunlocking-reading/
Baukham, I. (2016). TSC Review of MFL Pedagogy. Available at: https://tscouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/MFL-Pedagogy-Review-Report-2.pdf
Erler, L. & Macaro, E. (2011). Decoding ability in French as a foreign language and language learning motivation. The Modern Language Journal, 95 (4), 496-518. Summarised on the NCELP site.
Porter, A.M. (2014). An early start to French literacy: Teaching the spoken and written word simultaneously in English Primary School Classrooms (unpublished PhD thesis summarised on the NCELP site.
Among its growing resources on phonics, vocabulary and grammar - three areas of focus from the TSC Review - there is a useful document written by Rachel Hawkes about the rationale for teaching phonics to beginners and near-beginners. I'll summarise its contents here, adding a few observations of my own, mainly to encourage a critical evaluation of the NCELP's guidance. The 13 points are in bold, with my comments added.
1. Teaching phonics develops phonological decoding (the ability to sound out accurately), and without explicit phonics teaching, decoding is limited.
I would add that many higher-achieving pupils in fact develop excellent decoding skills without much explicit phonics teaching at all. Their skill seems to develop from hearing and reading language at the same time, having opportunities to read aloud and interact frequently with written and spoken texts. My feeling is that explicit phonics instruction may be of most benefit to middle and lower-attaining pupils as long as it is rigorous, enjoyable and woven into general communicative work.
2. Decoding is positively associated with motivation and improves confidence in production (speaking and writing).
This is undoubtedly true, as evidenced by research such as Erler and Macaro (2011). This statement is not, in itself, an argument for teaching phonics, since decoding ability can emerge without much close attention to it.
3. Phonics teaching supports vocabulary learning, which is key to making progress in language learning.
Yes, it does, as pupils read and repeat words, phrases and sentences aloud. Vocabulary is of course acquired in many other ways.
4. Decoding enables learners to access new language autonomously; learners can engage with vocabulary learning more successfully in and beyond the classroom, even ahead of the lesson (flipped learning), allowing more lesson time to focus on language practice and use.
All true, although once again this is not necessarily an argument for explicit phonics teaching, since decoding can develop without it.
5. Teaching phonics teaches phonemes and each phoneme carries meaning; the function of the different sounds really matters. This links not only to vocabulary but also to grammar (je vs j’ai, aller vs allait, hablo vs habló).
Yes, phonemic decoding is one of the micro-skills required when making sense of spoken texts during listening. Most teachers make occasional use of minimal pairs and repetition to focus on awkward phonemes, notably those which have no close equivalent in the L1. So some attention to phonology (sounds) and phonics (sound-spelling relationships) should help pupils decipher meaning.
6. Without teaching the sound-writing relationship, teachers logically confine themselves to presenting vocabulary first orally to their beginner learners, and only subsequently provide the written forms, which limits variety in teaching methodology.
This takes some unpicking. It's true that there was a long tradition of not showing the written word when presenting new words. The basis of this was the fear that displaying the written word would encourage poor pronunciation as pupils imposed their L1 phonics knowledge on to the L2. (Historically this goes back to the "reformers" such as H.Palmer who argued for the primacy of the spoken word over writing.) This fear should not be ignored. There is no right answer here, but a possible compromise position is to briefly delay displaying the written form when presenting new vocabulary. Maybe teachers should try both approaches and observe if one or the other leads to better pronunciation and decoding of written forms.
7. Teaching phonics teaches the sound system; learners do not have enough exposure to become familiar with the sound system incidentally (i.e., without intentionally trying to learn it). Even an ‘all oral’ approach at primary would only give them a maximum of 120 hours (the equivalent of a few weeks in the womb in L1 acquisition!). So, explicit decoding teaching allows teachers to ‘short-cut’ to teaching the sound and writing at the same time.
Again, this probably depends on the learners. The statement seems to make sense, but from my reading there is little research evidence to support it yet. For example, Porter (2014), in a PhD thesis, saw only modest gains for primary learners following a structured course of phonics. The post-test results were especially disappointing. Porter felt that perhaps more time could have been given to reading aloud in the study. The large scale FLEUR reading project did show a (just) statistically significant advantage in word decoding for a Phonics group, versus a Strategies and Texts only group. Long term gains were uncertain. This research concluded that explicit phonics teaching is a arguably a necessity for decoding skill to develop. Perhaps more research will supply greater support for regular phonics teaching for beginners.
8. The ability to sound out words accurately on first exposure supports errorless learning, avoiding an inaccurate initial representation which, if persistent, can lead to problems later.
I agree with this entirely. Fossilisation of errors is an issue. In addition, having an accurate phonological representation of words in memory allows them to be more easily retrieved when listening, for example. Whether sounding out whole words and phrases through repetition constitutes structured phonics teaching, I am not sure. In my own experience, I only occasionally paid attention to individual phonemes and sound-letter correspondences. My students learned to decode largely through whole word and phrase repetition, listening while reading, reading aloud and general oral work.
9. Accurate decoding may allow learners to see that a written word is in fact a word that they already know orally.
True. But the skill in decoding may not have come from explicit phonics teaching.
10. Alternatively, learners’ ability to spell an unknown word they hear means that they can then find out its meaning (via a dictionary, peer, teacher, books); having the correct or nearly (possibly) correct spelling unlocks the meaning!
See above.
11. In addition, learners can ask orally about the meaning of a word that they have read; you need to be able to pronounce a word to ask about it confidently in class (What does ‘XXX’ mean?).
See above.
12. The time spent on teaching phonics does not seem to delay progress in other areas (e.g., reading comprehension).
I haven't seen evidence of this from my own reading, but it does seem unlikely. I suppose it partly depends how the phonics teaching is carried out. If it were focused on pronouncing single words while looking at highlighted letters and letter combinations, then I would argue that time could be better spent doing other activities, such as actually communicating! If the phonics practice were largely reading aloud whole sentences, then I would imagine it having less negative impact on other tasks such as interpersonal oral work, listening comprehension and simple writing tasks.
13. Decoding facilitates the recognition of cognates in the sound stream; learners are able to picture the spelling, and the spelling of cognates is easier to recognise than the sound. At GCSE, there is an expectation that learners will understand unfamiliar cognates in context, in both reading and listening. (AQA specification p.21).
Yes, all true, though yet again this is not necessarily an argument for explicit phonics teaching.
My main points to draw from this would be as follows, and you can take these with a pinch of salt!
- When you think of teaching phonics, think of to make it most useful and enjoyable, preferably a natural part of more communicative work - highlighting tricky areas and contrasts with L1.
- Do plenty of fun, but rigorous choral repetition with pupils being able to see the words and sentences they are repeating.
- Read aloud to pupils as they follow texts.
- Expect pupils to read aloud once they have been carefully prepared for it via choral repetition and demonstration. Do this largely in pairs or even with pupils putting their fingers in their ears (thanks Barry Smith).
- Do lots of phonological awareness games and activities, interspersed with other tasks, but avoid whole lessons of phonics.
- Pupils' natural ability to mimic and relate sounds to spellings varies hugely. Very bright classes may need far less attention to specific phonics tasks.
- Use transcription tasks such as gapped dictation and 'delayed dictation'. These develop decoding skill while carrying meaning.
- Treat over-enthusiastic claims for phonics with caution. Don't expect phonics teaching to be a panacea. As yet there is scant research showing its benefits.
In our soon to be published book Breaking the Sound Barrier: Teaching Language Learners How to Listen, Gianfranco Conti and I argue for including phonological awareness and phonics tasks as one way to develop listening skills, whilst emphasising that they may be best done in certain ways and mixed up with all sorts of other communicative tasks.
References
ncelp.org
The FLEUR report is available here https://pdcinmfl.com/fleur-foreign-language-educationunlocking-reading/
Baukham, I. (2016). TSC Review of MFL Pedagogy. Available at: https://tscouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/MFL-Pedagogy-Review-Report-2.pdf
Erler, L. & Macaro, E. (2011). Decoding ability in French as a foreign language and language learning motivation. The Modern Language Journal, 95 (4), 496-518. Summarised on the NCELP site.
Porter, A.M. (2014). An early start to French literacy: Teaching the spoken and written word simultaneously in English Primary School Classrooms (unpublished PhD thesis summarised on the NCELP site.
Comments
Post a Comment