Should children learn to read using PHONICS?
The short answer is “Yes.” But, as with most ideas, it is not that simple.
Why are we still debating this topic?
So much time has been spent over the last few decades in debating whether children should be taught phonics “rules” for decoding (reading) and encoding (spelling-writing) or should they be taught using “whole language,” which de-emphasizes rigid rules for figuring out words. Much of the turmoil rests in politicized educational movements that only serve to polarize the debate. Current research invokes the “Science of Reading,” in which studies of the brain and its language processing areas lead scientists to theorize that humans learn to read through orthographic mapping, or matching sounds to single letters or groups of letters. Phonics! Of course, children need to learn the “rules” for our written language. How can they learn new words and their meanings when they encounter them if they don’t understand the patterns connected to sounds and meaning in print? Typical development follows the same path as the origins of our written language: Sound—Pattern—Meaning. Children connect the sounds from their oral language to letters and sets of letters that represent those sounds. Some children can learn these by chance and frequent exposure, but they learn them more efficiently through systematic instruction. And some children cannot learn these skills effectively without intense, explicit instruction.
How do people learn to read?
I have observed many children as they make their way through this process of learning to encode (spell) and decode (sound out or read words). Children need this early instruction in the system of our written language so that they can access print. With slow, purposeful starts guided by a teacher using a systematic approach, they then become “self-taught:” The brain applies learned patterns to novel words encountered in text. Readers use their knowledge about letters and sounds layered with morphemic analysis (meaning tied to word parts). Reading skills advance and students can quickly gain insights into word patterns as they work with words and sentences and paragraphs. If they miss the early systematic guidance (teaching) it is a harder, more complicated process and results in slow, labor-intensive reading that becomes more frustrating as the child progresses in school and the textual demands increase. I have seen this type of frustration repeatedly as I have worked with struggling readers and writers.
How do teachers learn the skills for teaching reading?
What I have observed is that not all teachers have been trained in instructional models that include systematic phonics instruction in early childhood. When teachers enter the field, training in reading instruction is provided through professional development required by their school districts. This training can vary widely in content, scope, and sequence. Most school systems adopt a reading program or series for primary and elementary schools. A particular reading series may contain a strong component of phonics instruction, a mediocre or unstructured system, or none at all. Spelling components have been left out entirely in some reading series.
What has replaced spelling instruction?
Word Study became a popular substitute for a spelling curriculum for a time. This type of developmental assessment and instruction has its limitations. There is not enough time in the instructional day to devote the necessary allotment of attention to this type of word exploration. Many teachers created their own independent weekly spelling routines reminiscent of the old weekly spelling lists: pretest on Monday, activities involving spelling practice during the week and a spelling test on Friday using the word lists from word sorting resources. Teachers assessed the students using the Developmental Spelling Inventory (Ganske) or Words Their Way (Templeton, Bear, etc.) and grouped students by their orthographic stage of development. This felt right at the time because it was providing individualized interventions based upon assessments, but we were still trying to fit the new learning into the old mold formed by our own early learning from spelling textbooks. When the spelling books went away, teachers adapted their own new learning about orthographic development into the old framework of systematic phonics and spelling instruction. For years, the arguments about whole language v. phonics kept educators swinging back and forth between “new” and “old” ideas about reading and writing, when really, they are the same thing. The Simple View of Reading (Gough and Tunmer, 1986) is clear and indeed simple: A person cannot read without decoding and language comprehension. One of those skills without the other is not real reading. We cannot over-rely on sounding out words without understanding their context to make meaning in reading. We cannot guess unknown words based on only their context without knowing how to read the actual word, sound by sound.
What is the best method for teaching phonics?
If we agree that phonics should be taught in early reading instruction, then the argument shifts to what type of phonics instruction is best. Systematic phonics instruction gets more consistent results faster. This means that there is a plan for the order in which the “rules” for spelling and decoding are taught in a consistent sequence. Another type of phonics instruction would have students “discover” the sound patterns naturally occurring in their reading. However, we know that learning to read does not occur naturally. It is a process that one is taught. Once the basics are learned, the system of acquiring new knowledge is mostly “self-taught,” based upon application of the acquired sound patterns.
Should we rely on phonics instruction exclusively? Is there time for other types of reading instruction?
I have also had some success teaching young children to read using whole language approaches in some reading subskills, but I had to make a choice about how to spend valuable instructional time. If children start school with a lot of language experience, a lot of exposure to books and print through shared reading experiences with the family, and a lot of opportunity to practice using the tools of school (paper, crayons, scissors, pencils, markers, etc.) then they are already on the road to reading before we begin formal instruction. They have an advantage and will seem to learn to read almost as if by magic. But it is not magic. The early exposure to print and how we navigate print as humans is critical. If we must make up for lost time with print and language development when a child enters school, then we are widening the gaps among learners. It is not a race and should not be treated as such, but it is difficult to teach children on vastly different learning trajectories that were established years before teachers begin to work with early readers. In my opinion, whole language reading instruction is an attempt to make up for lost print experiences and to level the playing field among beginning readers. But it does not always allow the reading brain to develop skills fast enough. It slows down the learning. Systematic, synthetic, EARLY phonics instruction can get the job done well, faster, and with clear goals in mind. Some children can mosey along and still become strong readers. Some children without a strong foundation in early language development cannot afford the time.
Do children like learning to read through phonics instruction?
Children like to learn how to read any way in which they are successful! Many teachers may prefer to teach reading using materials that do not emphasize phonics because the repetitive word patterns seem boring. I was one of those teachers once! But my thinking has changed as I have grown in my own learning and experience. I have noticed repeatedly that children are most motivated to read when they realize they are really reading. When children “crack” the code for the first time, they want to keep going. “The. fat. cat. sat. on. the. mat,” seems boring to people who already know how to read, but to a kid who is reading that for the first time, it is the most exciting sentence ever written! When children learn to read and then use those skills to learn new and more complex things about the world, they discover their superpower. And what could be better than that?
REFERENCES
Bear, D., Invernizzi, M., Johnston, F., Templeton, S. (2020). Words their way: Word study for phonics, vocabulary, and spelling instruction, global edition. 7th edition. Pearson.
Ganske, K. (2013). Word Journeys: Assessment guided phonics, spelling, and vocabulary instruction. 2nd ed. NY: The Guilford Press. Portsmouth, NH: Stenhouse Publishers.
Gentry, J.R., & Ouellette, G.P. (2019), Brain words: How the science of reading informs teaching.
Gough, P.B., & Tunmer, W.E. (1986) Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6-10.