sign in sign up
<<
Home , Literacy, Literacy (journal), Phonemic awareness, Phonological awareness, Readability

and By Dr. Timothy Shanahan Professor, Urban Director, UIC Center for University of Illinois at Chicago

Phonemic Awareness research (most notably the and Phonics landmark reviews conducted by Marilyn Adams [1990] and Jeanne The role of phonics in learning Chall [1967]). Something that to read has been a matter of makes the NRP phonics fi ndings some controversy. Phonics even more convincing is the fact proponents have argued that that a rereview of the evidence success depends by critics of the report resulted in on the early mastery of the similar outcomes (Camilli, Vargas, (the & Yurecko, 2003). idea that letters and letter combinations represent the The sounds of ), while examined 38 studies on the opponents have challenged teaching of phonics and found that it provided this idea, claiming English patterns young children with a clear benefi t in learning are too complex and inconsistent to support to read— who were taught phonics successful learning. But what does the made faster early and ended up with research say? Does phonics instruction higher reading achievement. Additionally, improve children’s reading development or NRP looked at studies of phonemic awareness not? instruction (instruction that teaches children to hear the sounds within —an National Reading Panel Findings important prerequisite to developing phonics The National Reading Panel (NRP) examined skills). NRP found, on the basis of 52 studies, the research on phonics instruction for the that phonemic awareness instruction U.S. Congress (NICHD, 2000). NRP was also conferred a clear learning benefi t to required to determine what the research children. The panel concluded that phonemic fi ndings were in an objective and systematic awareness and phonics both should be way, and its summary is the best and most taught and that it was important to carefully current review of phonics published. The coordinate the teaching of these skills to fi ndings of the NRP phonics report are ensure that students made maximum progress consistent with earlier examinations of the in reading.

Macmillan/McGraw-Hill • SRA • Wright Group • Glencoe • Grow Network P HONEMI C A WARENES S AN D P HONIC S

Applications phonics instruction should be systematic; that Phonemic awareness instruction should begin means it should be based on a well-planned, in and fi rst grade and should sequential phonics curriculum that supports continue until children develop the ability daily teaching. As with phonemic awareness, to hear the sounds (or ) within it is best to teach simpler concepts (such as words. A like cat has three phonemes the sounds of individual letters, the b sound (three distinct language sounds), and a word or the s sound) prior to introducing more like ship has three as well (it is the number complicated ones (e.g., when the letter c of distinct speech sounds, not the number sounds like a k or an s). Similarly, it is best of letters). For beginning readers the goal is to teach patterns that have a high frequency to develop full segmentation ability, which in written English prior to focusing attention means children must learn to divide words on those patterns that are less useful (the or nonsense words into all of their sounds: --consonant pattern in sh-i-p. With this degree of phonemic words like mat, bed, sip, top, cup is more awareness profi ciency, students can hear common than the-tion pattern used in words the sounds suffi ciently to be able to make like nation). Phonics instruction should have clear connections between sounds and letter clearly specifi ed learning goals and suffi cient patterns. Studies indicated that children numbers of lessons to ensure those goals can learn phonemic awareness be accomplished successfully. best in small groups and that knowledge of letter names It should be obvious that a should be taught simultaneously sound program of phonemic with phonemic awareness. It should be obvious awareness and phonics Phonemic awareness programs that a sound program of instruction is an essential were most effective when they phonemic awareness and ingredient in early reading were kept simple—not trying phonics instruction is an success. This instruction needs to be systematic and well to teach too many skills at one essential ingredient in coordinated, ensuring that —and when objects (such early reading success. as counters or letter cards) were children can hear the language used to help students think sounds within words prior to about the sounds. Most children trying to match those sounds can develop suffi cient phonemic with letters. awareness skills in kindergarten and fi rst grade, but if they fail to do so, later instruction was still found benefi cial. Timothy Shanahan is Professor of Urban Education at the University of Illinois at The teaching of phonics is most important Chicago where he is Director of the UIC Center in grades K–2, the years when phonics for Literacy. He recently returned from a leave instruction was found to improve all aspects of absence that allowed him to work as the of reading and spelling ability. In the upper Executive Director of the Chicago Reading grades, phonics can still help students with Initiative for the Chicago Public Schools, . Phonics instruction includes a school improvement initiative serving the teaching of letter-sound correspondences, 437,000 children. His research focuses on the the pronunciations of spelling patterns, relationship of reading and , school and decoding skills (that is how to apply improvement, the assessment of reading this phonics knowledge to the reading and ability, and . spelling of unknown words, including how Dr. Shanahan is currently Vice President of to blend the sounds together). Effective the International Reading Association and P HONEMI C A WARENES S AN D P HONIC S is on the Board of Advisors of the National National Institute of and Human Family Literacy Center. He has published Development (NICHD). (2000). Report of the more than 100 , chapters and articles National Reading Panel. Teaching children to on reading and writing. He served on the read: An evidence-based assessment of the White House Assembly on Reading, and the scientifi c research on reading and its National Reading Panel, a group convened implications for reading instruction. Reports of by the National Institute of Child Health and the subgroups. [NIH Publication No. 00-4754]. Development at the request of Congress to Washington, DC: U.S. Government evaluate research on successful methods of Offi ce. Also available online: http://www. teaching reading. He currently chairs two nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/report.htm other federal panels: one that is reviewing literacy research on language minority children Torgesen, J. K., & Mathes, P. G. (2000). A and one on and family literacy. He basic guide to understanding, assessing, and is co-editor of the Illinois Reading Council teaching . Austin, TX: Journal. Pro-Ed.

A former primary grade , Dr. Shanahan Publications by Timothy Shanahan earned his M.A. at Oakland University and Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Willows, D. M., his Ph.D. at the University of Delaware in Schuster, B. V., Yaghoub-Zadeh, Z., & Reading Education. He received the Albert Shanahan, T. (2001). Phonemic awareness J. Harris Award for outstanding research on instruction helps children learn to read: and the Milton D. Jacobson Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s Research Award, both from the meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, International Reading Association. He earned 36, 250–287. the Amoco Award for Outstanding Teaching and the University of Delaware Presidential Pikulski, J. J., & Shanahan, T. (1980). A Citation for Outstanding Achievement. He comparison of various approaches to was inducted into the Illinois Council Hall of evaluating phonics. Reading Teacher, 33, Fame in 2002. 692–702.

References Shanahan, T. (1980). Three explanations of Adams, M. (1990). Beginning to read. reading disability. In M. L. Kamil & A. J. Moe Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Eds.), Perspectives on reading research and instruc tion. (Twenty-ninth Yearbook Camilli, G., Vargas, S., & Yurecko, M. (2003). of the National Reading Conference, pp. Teaching children to read: The fragile link 301–308). Washington, DC: National Reading between science and federal policy. Education Conference. Policy Analysis Archives, 11, 1–52. Shanahan, T. (In press). The National Reading Chall, J. (1967). Learning to read: The great Panel Report: Practical advice for . debate. New York: McGraw-Hill. Naperville, IL: Learning .