DOCUMENT RESUME ED 109 609 CS 002 008 AUTHOP Berdiansky, Betty; And Others TITLE Design for Sequencing Spelling-to-Sound Correspondences in Mod 2 Reading Program, Volume 1 and 11. INSTITUTION Southwest Regional Laboratory for Educational Research and Development, Los Alamitos, Calif. SPONS AGENCY Office of Education (DREW), Washington, D.C. REPORT NO SWPL-TM-2-71-03 PUB DATE Jun 71 NOTE 453p.; See CS002006 for related document EDRS PRICE MF-$0.76 HC-$23.48 PLUS POSTAGE DESCRIPTORS *Beginning Reading; *Phoneme Grapheme Correspondence; Primary Education; Program Descriptions; *Reading Instruction; *Reading Programs; Reading Skills; Research Criteria; *Pesearch Design IDENTIFIERS *Model 2 Reading Program ABSTPACT The purpose of the study contained in this repoirtis to provide research and design data for the SouthwestRegional) Laboratory (SWRL) Mod 2 Reading .Program, a four-year program (K-3) for teaching reading skills to primary-grade children. Thereport is divided into two volumes. Volume one describes sequencing and methodology, and the specific rule sequences developed for the Mod2' Reading Program; volume tvio lists all words (includingirregularly spelled words and proper names) sequenced by and within the rules. The design of the program is based on the premise thatpupil knowledge of the phoneme grapheme correspondences of English orthography and pupil ability to apply these correspondences are essential. A set of correspondence rules was developed from a 9000-word lexicon to systematically organize instruction for beginning reading. With the aid of computer sorting procedures,rules and rule exemplars were sequenced according to criteria of productivity, regularity, generalizability, and phonological equivalence. (Author/RB) ********************************************** ************************ * * Documents acquired by ERIC include many informalunpublished * materials not available from other sources. ERIC makes everyeffort * * to obtain the best copy available_, nevertheless,items of marginal * * reproducibility are often encountered and thisaffects the quality * * of the microfiche and hardoopy reproductions ERICmakes available *, * via the ERIC Document Reproduction Service (EDRS). EDRSis not * * responsible for the quality of the original document.Reproductions * * supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made fromthe original. * *********************************************************************** 1 U S DE MENT OF HEALTH EDUCATION &WELFARE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION --, DOCUMENT HA. REIN.t -' (ED EXAC,,V AS QE,F .,E; PERSON ^k Ok SAN j'Ar,DN -7 NiIPC),N,, s,,F CR CP ..TEDCO501 NE ,E SSAQ,, V Al -,, E NI OF IAL NAT ONA, 't 10 CATION P05110t,, OA PC, Ain('-'-- SOUTHWEST REGIoNAL LAlifoi Win* __.%) TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM I. 11\11 June 4, 1971 \J) SCOPE OF INTEREST NOTICE TM-2-71-03 Volurit I E r , ,tt, 1. I P If ,- 1 ,t recrst t 1 I, r 4h. JP , 11,, Or,., DESIGN FOR SEQUENC4N -C SPELLING -TO -SOUND CUPPiSP5NDENLLS IN M1J0 READING PROGRAM Betty Berdiansky, George Stanton, and brac( Lt()rinli ABSTRACT From a 9000-word lexicon,u set of --,((andL, trc --( rules was developed to systematically otu(ni:( Ir, ructiln trll reading. With the aid of cumputor sottinu piou( du,( t( h , .((i; exemplars were sequenced according to LI Ito( ( generalizability, and ptionologiLal This report isin too volumes: Vuluric I it( criteria and methodology, and thejspecitii11,1( (enn( rk_e; Volnr( lists all words (including.irreqularly-s;w1h(duot11, and wa(pt( sequenced by and within rules. I 1;bLE OF CON1 ENTS I IntrOdUCtion lientification of the lexicon Jeelopment of spelling-to-sound correspondence rules Statement of task Program implications and advantages General sequencing criteria and methodology 12 SeLtion I Development of rule sequence for Block I 12 General sequencing criteria 13 Rationale for block, unit, and year divisions 15 Computer processing of sequence, rules and exemplars 18 Within-rule sequencing criteria 20 Irregular words 21 Grapheme pronunciation variability 24 Secti:m 11 Specific rule sequence, criteria, and comments 27 Summary of rule sequence 27 Detailed discussion of rule sequence 35 First Year 35 Second Year 55 Third Year 31 ourth Year 106 ir 120 Appendices A. Key to pronunciation and symbols 123 B. Glossary Rui, C. Spelling-to-sound correspondences: descriptions, exemplars, position in sequence 126 D. Alphabetical list of rules and pronunciltions 137 140 E. Content and sequence of Block I F. WORDLIST: Computer program for sequencing rules of correspondence 154 170 G. CORRECT Computer program update H. rtegular and irregular pronunciations or graphemes 177 213 References DESIGN FUR SLUENCING SrELLING-TO-SOUND CORPESPt-NDENCE5 IN MO:-, F,LAUIN', PPOr,P,Ati--VULUME II tiitroducti,,' T:-e design id tc reading component ittLe outhwest nional Laboratory' Cummunt,:ation Skill, program i based or the pr.emise that pupil knowledge of the spelling-to-sound c.orir,nondericesof English orthography and ahilitv to apply these correspondences is essential tio successin reading words not prejouslyintroduced in instruction. To meettbe design reguiremens implied,it wa, necessary to speci'v the ,pelling-temound'correspond,nces 'or an ale-graded lexicon appro- p,idt, to hegini,ing reader., dnd te rionize tLen for useir beginning rt_od n , t r fIl ti o n . Lt- iP=11th't-ttR-siH Lori, iddenLes were spi citied in Berdiansl-';', Lionnell, and twAlr 1196)) an: further elaborated in Crornell (19/1) and in the present m port tst, 2spe,ally Volume 1, Section II), These crrrespondences were applied to an age-gradedlexicon-appropriate to heuinhing riadtrs (Berdiansl,y et al., 1969). Cii ten i a for organizing and svuencing these correspondences for i.truction -ere proposed by Desberg and Cronnell (1969). Tht propcsa)s ,ere limited in that primary vowels, secondary vowel',and consonants 'were ,e,,uenced stparately and in that the sequence was not applieddirectly to tirelexicon. The activity rrorted here resulted in a design for a LomLined ,et;uence of correspondences for primary voCtvls. secondaryvowel,, an con,nnants, applied to the Berdiansky et al. (1969)lexicon. in Voluhe I of thi, report describes the criteria and methods used ,h ,Igning Ire segusnce ofcorrespondence°rules (see especially Section 1). Thi rale -ciaenLe is des-ribeo in detailin Volume 1, Section 11, andi, summarized in appendix C. Atter the rule sequence vas established, the words in theBerdiansky et al. th)W-11 lexicron were arranged in the sequence ,such that each word oa, introduced as on exemplarof only one correspondence, all other fig their as,istance in the preparation of this plume we wish to thwil. the Product Design secretarial staff, particularlyGloria Wellman, .du) typed (and retyped) these wordlists. Richard AnguiIly of Product Int( gration prepared and executed the sequencing ofword:, by computer for ..,ection I I. II alf for convenience, however, it is simply referred to as the rule sequence'. correspondences in the word having been previously introduced. This arr-inge,ient of wr rd,. aLcording to the rule sequence was done by hand dni by computt_r:, acrd I, uescLied in greater detailin Volume 1, Section The txu,plar .cords for each rule (or affix, compound or stress pattern) ocre also sequenced for predicted ease of presentation and learning ofthe specific rule. The criteria for this within-rule II sequencing ire presented in Section I of this volume. Section contain the actual 1ords ,,equenced 6y,rule and within rules; this establishes the design for beginning reading instruction. Section III contains those words from the Berdiansky et al.(1969) lexicon which could not be sequenced because of irregular spelling -,to- sound LorresponMences. Proper names from Cronnell(1969a') are sequenced in Section IV according to the rule sequence. Other words from the Berdiansky et al.(1969) lexicon which were not provided for in the rule sequence are found in Section V. Sort_ time after thi, reRort w,ls completed, a careful check was made ( th, Leroidrsky.ct al. (1!)69) lexicon 'to determine whether all words hatbe,n ,eduenced. Some errors and A number o omissions were discovered. Mather tnan making changes in the word lists, these words are listed in the present report as Errata and Addenda. ,viipndices include a key to pronunciation and symbols, a glossary, a summary of the rule sequence, and a table listing word frequencies Ly year and by section ofthe present volume. -5- Section I Criteria for Within-Rule Sequencing The general criteria forwithin-rulelsequencing is described in Volume I, Section I at this report. The present section details the specific criteria usedin the word listsin Volume II, Section II, where exemplars of each rule are divided into a number of sections. Each section isindicated by a number or a letter or by a combination of number and letter-, which rank the exemplars (lowest number andfirst letter with highest priority) fir predicted ease of presentation and learning of a rule. J,In chi, report, several general criteria Lave teen most commonly used for ranking exemplars: I) Position of grapheme unit: initial, final, medial,in that order of gifFiculty; 2) Number of syllables: more syllables mean greater difficulty; 3) Frequency a more frequent environment offers moreexemplars for presentation; 4) Where applicable, rule exemplars, within a section can he f,urther 'subgrouped in the following order of descending preference. a. exemplars containing single consonants, o. exemplars containing geminate consonants, c. exemplars containing digraphs