Focus on Advocacy:
Alligators in the Sewers -- Responding to the Mythology of Phonemic Awareness and Phonics
by Michael P. Ford, Chair WSRA Advocacy Committee
November 1999
On this page:
There is probably no new topic that has gained more attention in recent years in the field of reading than phonemic awareness. Much like the urban legend of baby alligators being flushed into the sewers of big cities to live prosperous lives as predators, phonemic awareness has grown quickly in perceived importance and has begun to encroach on early reading programs. It is being offered as an easy answer to the difficult problem of reading disability. A recent issue of Newsweek featured a cover story on dyslexia. The article actually embraced a two-minute phonemic awareness test by Barbara Foorman given to most Texas school children, and another similar test by Marilyn Adams, as means for easily identifying trouble readers. It shouldn't be surprising then that in our own state, one legislator proposed a similar state-mandated assessment for all Wisconsin students referred to learning disabilities programs. Will the legislature soon be debating a proposal to test all beginning readers in the state?
Often confused with phonics, phonemic awareness is now used as a justification for returning to recycled programs usually focused exclusively on this single aspect of word identification. Placing phonemic awareness in the spotlight has resulted in an overemphasis on it. Some reading educators are now defending balanced programs which appropriately place phonemic awareness within more complete reading programs. Many reading educators also find themselves trying to clarify issues related to phonemic awareness and phonics in advocating best practices for all children. The Advocacy Committee created this set of materials for the WSRA Website to assist reading educators in those local efforts.
Working in conjunction with the Executive Committee , Legislative Committee and Research Committee , the Advocacy Committee sees its role as preparing materials which can be used by WSRA members to address critical reading issues which may emerge in their schools, districts, areas or at the state level. Information is power. Information about our critics is even more powerful and information to counteract our critics may be the most powerful of all. The Advocacy Committee is committed to the dissemination of that information to all members through the WSRA Website and the WSRA Journal . The mythology of phonemic awareness and phonics is the second issue that the Advocacy Committee has decided to address. Also available on the WSRA Website are materials to address recent mandates for Direct Instruction in reading programs.
TOP
Outline of Overheads
These overheads are intended for use with audiences (particularly family and other public groups) to encourage reflection on their experiences with reading instruction. They are designed to help people see from their experiences what common sense and conventional wisdom would tell them intuitively that one method of teaching reading probably will not work for all children.
These overheads are all developed from the International Reading Association position paper on Phonemic Awareness. This document includes a definition and explanation of phonemic awareness. It also provides cautions about the overemphasis of phonemic awareness. It provides a reasonable outline of other program elements which need to be present to develop phonemic awareness. This document should be reviewed by all reading educators. It contains an extensive bibliography of supporting documents. Additional locally important overheads could be developed from this document. It can also be disseminated to non-educator audiences.
These two overheads present information about the new report on reading by the National Research Council called Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children . This summary is designed to present support for a more balanced reading program. It is important to highlight the members of this council (which included voices like Barbara Foorman and Marilyn Adams) and show that this prestigious group of researchers while strongly endorsing the importance of graphophonemic information also advocate for a more balanced approached. The final quote also shows their support for good practices for all children even those with needs.
This overhead calls attention to an interesting contrast within the report. On one hand the report highlights the importance of phonemic awareness, but on the other hand the report provides ample evidence to caution overemphasis on this one aspect of reading.
These overheads summarize criticism of the report from James Gee, internationally known linguist now endowed reading professor at the University of Wisconsin Madison. Gee's basic thesis is that the report overemphasizes the importance of phonemic awareness. He reminds us that while early PA is a strong predictor of good reading; the lack of PA is a weak predictor of future poor reading. He points out that other aspects of literacy development are as powerful or more powerful as predictors than phonemic awareness. That phonemic awareness probably evolves from other aspects of language development. Most critically, Gee reminds us that correlations do not mean causation so one needs to be careful about assuming a cause and effect relationship between phonemic awareness and success in reading. Gee's entire critical review of this work is worthy of attention by reading educators who find themselves critiquing programs with an overemphasis on phonemic awareness to the exclusion of other critical aspects of literacy and language development.
These overheads summarize criticism of the report from David Pearson -- a balanced reading program advocate. Specifically, these overheads express Pearson's concerns about the report's recommendation not to encourage young children to use context as a word identification cue. Pearson points out that the report errs by not distinguishing between how proficient readers read and how novice readers read. Pearson also points out that the report privileges eye movement research and fails to account for what is known from emerging literacy and miscue research. Pearson's critique is also worthy of review by reading educators who find themselves facing programs with an overemphasis on phonemic awareness.
These overheads summarize an article by Steven Stahl and his colleagues. They provide a framework for sharing what we know about phonics instruction with other audiences. It suggests support for a more balanced approach, use of more than decodeable texts and alternatives to workbooks and worksheets.
This is an exercise which can be used with audiences to show how words can be decoded without being understood. Invite your audience to read the passage aloud. Point out that no one had difficulty decoding the passage, but then ask your audience to talk about what they have read. One reading specialist actually showed the audience that they could answer literal questions on the passage, but not inferential questions to demonstrate how decoding does not guarantee comprehension. [Note: The passage is about playing Cricket -- a popular British baseball-like game.]
These exercises can also be used with audiences to show how phonics has changed by emphasizing analogy as a strategy. These can be used to contrast recycled phonics programs of a highly synthetic phonics approach where phonemes are treated in isolation and little attention is given to word families and phonograms. It is important to talk about the distortion that happens in highly synthetic approaches. The final line reminds audiences that they can decode without understanding. Most will be able to say "sook" but few will know what it means -- a female crab.
This overhead summarizes an article by Richard Allington. It provides a framework for taking on myths about phonics instruction often offered by critics. It suggests a lack of research behind the criticisms. This strong indictment of the phonics crisis has appeared in a number of forums and is worthy of review by all reading educators. Be sure to also read critics' response to Allington which appeared in subsequent issues of Reading Today .
This is a quote from Reid Lyons -- one of the strongest advocates for phonics instruction often embraced by critics of existing reading programs. Even Lyons admits that one method may not work for all children for a number of different reasons.
This overhead summarizes the three key points of the International Reading Association's position statement on phonics instruction which has also been endorsed by the Wisconsin State Reading Association.
TOP
Resources
Phonemic Awareness and the Teaching of Reading: A Position Statement from the Board of Directors of the International Reading Association (1998) Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children by Snow, Burns and Griffin (National Academy Press, 1998) Starting Out Right: A Guide to Promoting Children's Reading Success by Snow, Burns and Griffin (National Academy Press, 1999) "Critical Issues: Reading and the New Literacy Studies: Reframing the National Academy of Sciences' Report on Reading" by James Gee in The Journal of Literacy Research (September 1999) "Essay Book Reviews: A Historically Based Review of Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children" by David Pearson in Reading Research Quarterly (1999) "Theory into Practice: Everything You Wanted to Know about Phonics (But Were Afraid to Ask)" by Stahl, Duffy-Hester & Dougherty-Stahl in Reading Research Quarterly (1998) "Overselling Phonics " by Richard Allington in Reading Today (August/September 1997) "The Current State of Science and the Future of Specific Reading Disability" by Reid Lyons & Vintita Chhabra Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews (1996) The Role of Phonics in Reading Instruction: A Position Statement of the International Reading Association (1998)
For additional related materials...
"Focus on Advocacy: Addressing Direct Instruction Mandates" by Michael Ford in WSRA Update (August 1999) and in Wisconsin State Reading Association Journal (Winter 1999)
The Advocacy Committee would remind all members that these materials are mainly intended to assist the preparation of a presentation on this topic. Members are still encourage to explore a wide range of information sources to build the knowledge base necessary to respond to questions and concerns related to this topic. The article includes a list of resources available to develop background on this topic. This article and these resources are not intended to serve as a substitute for a thorough independent investigation of this issue especially within the confines of the members' local context.
|
