tag:theconversation.com,2011:/fr/topics/spelling-8077/articlesSpelling – The Conversation2023-03-29T02:54:33Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2027142023-03-29T02:54:33Z2023-03-29T02:54:33ZTeaching the ‘basics’ is critical – but what teachers really want are clear guidelines and expectations<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518052/original/file-20230328-24-s4t4vt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=12%2C0%2C8230%2C5495&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Getty Images</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Anyone watching the debate over the National Party’s recent curriculum policy announcement could be forgiven for thinking there is a deep divide in education philosophy and best practice in New Zealand. The truth isn’t quite that simple.</p>
<p>In fact, most (if not all) interested parties would agree that teaching and learning the basics of literacy and numeracy are vital. As one <a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2018883129/literacy-expert-dissects-new-literacy-numeracy-model-and-national-s-education-policy">expert observer noted</a>, the policies of the major political parties actually have much in common. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.national.org.nz/teaching_the_basics_brilliantly">National Party policy</a> promises a curriculum focused on “teaching the basics brilliantly”. The government says much of this work is already under way with its current curriculum “refresh”. So where exactly is the issue?</p>
<p>The idea of mandated testing checkpoints clearly has some worried that the National Party’s policy is a return to a “<a href="https://www.aare.edu.au/blog/?p=7020">back to basics</a>” mentality that ignores or minimises other vital areas of teaching. As <a href="https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/24-03-2023/kpis-are-for-businesses-and-boardrooms-not-children-and-schools">one headline</a> had it, “KPIs are for businesses and boardrooms, not children and schools”.</p>
<p>While the basics are important, the argument goes, there are other things schools should focus on. That may be true, but it need not be so binary. Basic early literacy and numeracy skills are the foundation on which much other success is built. </p>
<p>Perhaps a better way to frame the discussion might be: a wider view of learning is important – <em>and</em> the basics are necessary.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518053/original/file-20230328-14-50spm0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518053/original/file-20230328-14-50spm0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518053/original/file-20230328-14-50spm0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518053/original/file-20230328-14-50spm0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518053/original/file-20230328-14-50spm0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518053/original/file-20230328-14-50spm0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518053/original/file-20230328-14-50spm0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Learning literacy is a complex process: handwriting skill is the best predictor of writing success.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Getty Images</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Learning to read and write is hard</h2>
<p>Foundations take time to put in place, however. With reading and writing, for example, it’s common for capable adults to assume that many of the foundational skills are easily achieved. </p>
<p>In fact, <a href="https://blog.learnfasthq.com/how-the-brain-learns-to-read-professor-stanislaus-dehaene">neuroscience shows</a> literacy learning is a remarkably complex process. Learning to identify letters and the sounds associated with them, and learning to read and retain words, involves a kind of repurposing of the brain’s architecture.</p>
<p>Learning to correctly spell words is even more complex than reading them. Successful teaching of spelling requires clear and systematic guidelines. Mastery cannot be left to chance or done through rote learning lists of words.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/has-a-gap-in-old-school-handwriting-and-spelling-tuition-contributed-to-nzs-declining-literacy-scores-155371">Has a gap in old-school handwriting and spelling tuition contributed to NZ's declining literacy scores?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Another often undervalued basic skill is handwriting. It can be seen as purely a presentation technique and simply about neatness. But research shows handwriting skill contributes directly to writing achievement and is the <a href="https://www.ldatschool.ca/literacy-skills-handwriting/#:%7E:text=Studies%20have%20shown%20that%20handwriting,et%20al.%2C%202000">best predictor of writing success</a> in younger students.</p>
<p>Reading and writing also rely on a foundation of oral language skill, including understanding sentence structure and having a strong vocabulary. Being proficient with sentences is the building block for paragraph formation, essential to more advanced writing tasks. Vocabulary knowledge is a <a href="https://theeducationhub.org.nz/effective-vocabulary-instruction/#:%7E:text=Vocabulary%20knowledge%20is%20a%20strong,to%20support%20accurate%20word%20recognition">strong predictor of academic achievement</a>, connected to both reading and writing success.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518056/original/file-20230328-16-3koz90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518056/original/file-20230328-16-3koz90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518056/original/file-20230328-16-3koz90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518056/original/file-20230328-16-3koz90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518056/original/file-20230328-16-3koz90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518056/original/file-20230328-16-3koz90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518056/original/file-20230328-16-3koz90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Clear guidelines and specifics: teachers want to know what denotes progress, and when they should be concerned.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Getty Images</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What teachers want</h2>
<p>None of these skills develop by chance. So the question becomes, how can a curriculum best support teachers to teach literacy from its foundations upwards, with as many students as possible succeeding?</p>
<p>In my work as a literacy facilitator, I find teachers want specifics. They want to know what to teach at each stage. They want to know what the children in their classes should be able to do within that year. They want to know what denotes progress, and when they should be concerned.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/teachers-need-a-lot-of-things-right-now-but-another-curriculum-rewrite-isnt-one-of-them-202438">Teachers need a lot of things right now, but another curriculum 'rewrite' isn't one of them</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But the curriculum as a whole is necessarily broad and all-encompassing, to reflect the complex needs of society. The <a href="https://curriculumrefresh.education.govt.nz/why-new-zealand-curriculum-changing">curriculum refresh</a> groups learning in broad bands – and this presents problems for specific guidance and benchmarks.</p>
<p>In the <a href="https://curriculumrefresh-live-assetstorages3bucket-l5w0dsj7zmbm.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/2023-03/CO3101_MOE_English-A3_008-DRAFT.pdf?VersionId=chGkn5jpuCHH7wQVHHD17VnDR1X.5Q.I">English curriculum</a>, one of the literacy goals for learners in the year 1-3 band is to “use decoding strategies with texts to make meaning”. This is far too broad to be helpful in teaching or assessment in any specific way.</p>
<p>More nuanced progress indicators are still being developed, but the draft examples suggest there will be more guidance in more specific age bands.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/education-expert-john-hatties-new-book-draws-on-more-than-130-000-studies-to-find-out-what-helps-students-learn-201952">Education expert John Hattie's new book draws on more than 130,000 studies to find out what helps students learn</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Guidelines and benchmarks</h2>
<p>As well as through the curriculum, teaching will be supported by the <a href="https://www.education.govt.nz/our-work/changes-in-education/curriculum-and-assessment-changes/literacy-and-communication-and-maths-strategy/">Literacy & Communication and Maths Strategy</a> and the <a href="https://www.education.govt.nz/our-work/changes-in-education/curriculum-and-assessment-changes/common-practice-model/">Common Practice Model</a>. As an educator, I hope the final versions of these documents will offer clear guidelines for both teaching and assessment.</p>
<p>And there are new resources recently provided to schools that contribute usefully to a systematic and successful approach to literacy teaching. These are based on current evidence of how reading is best taught. They include a <a href="https://literacyonline.tki.org.nz/Literacy-Online/Planning-for-my-students-needs/Instructional-Series/Ready-to-Read/Ready-to-Read-Phonics-Plus">progression of word learning</a> framework, and <a href="https://instructionalseries.tki.org.nz/content/search/(offset)/10?SearchText=&SubTreeArray%5b%5d=29181&Scope=all&Phase=K%C4%81kano%20%7C%20Seed">decodable readers with lesson plans</a>.</p>
<p>All of these resources should provide useful direction for schools in their literacy teaching. While we can never make the task of teaching literacy simple, specific guidelines can make the pathway for teaching more straightforward. </p>
<p>More focus on the basics need not be boring for learners, either. I recently observed a lesson where the children were learning to decode new words. At the end, a six-year-old said “that was fun, can we do more?” The act of laying foundations for literacy is anything but dull.</p>
<p>The National Party’s call for guidelines around “teaching the basics brilliantly” speaks to a vital part of a rounded education. More detail is now needed about what “brilliance” will mean in practice, just as we need more detail on the current curriculum refresh. Making foundation skills a key component of the curriculum may not be the whole answer, but it is absolutely necessary for overall success.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/202714/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christine Braid has been involved with the MoE NZC refresh as an advisor on the literacy indicators; and had worked on the scope and sequence, and decodable text resources for the MoE.</span></em></p>The ‘back to basics’ debate over curriculum policy obscures what teachers say they really need: clear guidelines and benchmarks of progress.Christine Braid, Professional Learning and Development Facilitator in Literacy Education, Massey UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1862162022-07-11T20:03:39Z2022-07-11T20:03:39ZFrom shopping lists to jokes on the fridge – 6 ways parents can help their primary kids learn to write well<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/473285/original/file-20220711-18-sf9pkj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=17%2C0%2C5818%2C3820&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Learning how to be a confident and communicative writer is one of the most important skills students learn at school. </p>
<p>But NAPLAN results show a <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13384-019-00366-8">significant decline</a> in Australian students’ writing performance. Research for the period to 2018, shows year nine students performed nearly 1.5 years behind the average student in 2011. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/writing-needs-to-be-taught-and-practised-australian-schools-are-dropping-the-focus-too-early-148104">Writing needs to be taught and practised. Australian schools are dropping the focus too early</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>International studies <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/0091732X18821125">have also</a> raised concerns about students’ writing performance, stressing the need to learn more about how writing is taught in primary schools.</p>
<p>So, what is happening in Australian primary classrooms? And what can parents do to help their children learn to write at home? </p>
<h2>Our new research</h2>
<p>In 2020, <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11145-022-10294-2">we surveyed</a> 310 primary teachers around Australia. Through an online questionnaire, we asked teachers about the time children spent writing in their classrooms and what types of activities they did to teach writing. </p>
<p>While this has been studied at the state level, this is the first national survey in Australia about the teaching of writing to primary students.</p>
<p>While no classroom is the same, the Australian Education Research Organisation <a href="https://www.edresearch.edu.au/resources/writing-and-writing-instruction">recommends</a> primary students should spend at least one hour per day – or 300 minutes (five hours) a week – doing writing activities and being taught writing. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="School students share their work." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/472935/original/file-20220707-14-ns8jtp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/472935/original/file-20220707-14-ns8jtp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/472935/original/file-20220707-14-ns8jtp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/472935/original/file-20220707-14-ns8jtp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/472935/original/file-20220707-14-ns8jtp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/472935/original/file-20220707-14-ns8jtp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/472935/original/file-20220707-14-ns8jtp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Students need to learn how to spell, but also write clearly, plan and revise their work.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">www.shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Most teachers in our survey said their students usually spent about three hours a week on writing activities in their classrooms. But responses varied considerably, with some teachers reporting only 15 minutes of writing practice per week and others reporting 7.5 hours per week. </p>
<p>Most teachers spent more time teaching spelling (about 88 minutes) than any other writing skill. They spent an average of 34 minutes teaching handwriting, 11 minutes teaching typing, 35 minutes teaching planning strategies, and 42 minutes teaching children strategies to revise their texts.</p>
<p>While the development of spelling skills is obviously important, the lack of attention given to planning and reviewing a piece of writing is concerning. </p>
<p>Research <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?hl=pt-PT&lr=&id=2C_y5Wx7x-8C&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Best+practices+for+writing+instruction&ots=flblrKM8do&sig=CYorq7ycvNnGfHZ4xigIyu4MKwY&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Best%20practices%20for%20writing%20instruction&f=false">shows</a> children who plan and revise their texts end up writing much higher quality pieces of writing. However, studies <a href="https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/bjep.12251">also show</a> that unless children are taught how to do this, they rarely do it. </p>
<h2>How much are families asked to help?</h2>
<p>In our survey, we asked teachers about the use of 20 different strategies for teaching writing. But strategies to promote writing at home with parental support were the least reported.</p>
<p>Almost 65% of teachers we surveyed never asked students to write at home with the support of a family member. Meanwhile about 77% said they rarely (once a year) or never asked parents or carers to read their children’s written work. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Teacher writing on a whiteboard." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/472936/original/file-20220707-23-ps5fvy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C22%2C4910%2C3255&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/472936/original/file-20220707-23-ps5fvy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/472936/original/file-20220707-23-ps5fvy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/472936/original/file-20220707-23-ps5fvy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/472936/original/file-20220707-23-ps5fvy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/472936/original/file-20220707-23-ps5fvy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/472936/original/file-20220707-23-ps5fvy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Almost 80% of surveyed teachers said their rarely or never asked parents to read a students’ written work.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">www.shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This is concerning as <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11145-016-9672-6">research shows</a> parental involvement helps children build their writing skills. </p>
<p>So, our findings show a need for teachers and families to work together more. As well as the need to provide families with more guidance about what they can do to support children as developing writers.</p>
<h2>What can families do?</h2>
<p>If you want to do more to help your child learn to write and write well, there are <a href="https://petaa.edu.au//imis_prod/w/Teaching_Resources/w/Teaching_Resources/Parents_guide.aspx">many things you can do</a> in your every day life at home. Here are some recommendations to consider: </p>
<p><strong>1. Get your kids to write for a reason</strong></p>
<p>It doesn’t matter how small the task is. Encouraging children to write for a clear purpose is key. It can be a simple reminder note, a message to go in someone’s lunch box, a shopping list or a birthday card. </p>
<p><strong>2. Write together for fun</strong> </p>
<p>Encourage family activities that make writing fun. Create jokes, riddles, stories, rhyming lists, and anything else you can think of!</p>
<p><strong>3. Display writing done in the family</strong></p>
<p>Use the fridge, family noticeboard or calendar. This shows children how writing works in our lives and how important it is and how it is valued. </p>
<p><strong>4. Get your kids to read you their writing</strong></p>
<p>Ask children to read their writing aloud. This shows your kids you are interested in what they are doing. Also, when children read their written work aloud, they will inevitably notice some mistakes (so it’s like revising their work). </p>
<p><strong>5. Be encouraging</strong> </p>
<p>When working on writing skills with your child, make sure you are positive. You could say things such as, “I noticed that you really focused on your writing” or “I really like how you used [that word]”. Also recognise any progress in their writing efforts, “I noticed that you checked your capital letters”. </p>
<p><strong>6. Take the initiative at school</strong> </p>
<p>Talk to your child’s teacher about what you are doing at home and ask for suggestions about what your child needs to further develop their writing skills. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/im-in-another-world-writing-without-rules-lets-kids-find-their-voice-just-like-professional-authors-124976">'I'm in another world': writing without rules lets kids find their voice, just like professional authors</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/186216/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anabela Malpique receives funding from Collier Charitable Foundation (ID1749)</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Debora Valcan, Deborah Pino Pasternak, and Susan Ledger do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A new survey of Australian primary teachers found almost 65% of teachers never asked students to write at home with the support of a family member.Anabela Malpique, Senior Lecturer, Edith Cowan UniversityDeborah Pino Pasternak, Associate Professor in early Childhood Education and Community, University of CanberraDebora Valcan, Murdoch UniversitySusan Ledger, Professor Susan Ledger, Head of School - Dean of Education, University of Newcastle, NSW., University of NewcastleLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1553712021-03-17T18:25:30Z2021-03-17T18:25:30ZHas a gap in old-school handwriting and spelling tuition contributed to NZ’s declining literacy scores?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/388944/original/file-20210311-18-j3emj9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C6%2C4235%2C2806&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The recently reported decline in student performance in international tests for literacy, science and maths confirmed a view in some quarters that New Zealand’s curriculum is in need of an overhaul. </p>
<p>Notably, the New Zealand Principals’ Federation <a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/435607/principals-challenge-education-ministry-over-student-failure">called for</a> increased leadership and direction from the Ministry of Education. Federation president Perry Rush said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We need more clarity when it comes to the knowledge that teachers and principals use when they’re engaged in teaching and learning, so that’s about what is in the curriculum.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is a complex debate, but one area where greater direction might help is the teaching of the seemingly basic but vital skills of handwriting and spelling. </p>
<p>Children require time to develop the necessary capability in these complex foundation skills. Without them, they will struggle with the higher-order skills of constructing paragraphs and composing texts.</p>
<p>But teaching handwriting and spelling is often marginalised. Many schools question the value of spending time on the formal teaching of these skills. Compared with other areas of literacy, teachers have <a href="https://literacyonline.tki.org.nz/Literacy-Online/Planning-for-my-students-needs/Writing-hub">struggled to find</a> direction.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1357076015542013952"}"></div></p>
<h2>The importance of handwriting</h2>
<p>It is common these days to hear handwriting will soon be unnecessary; digital technology is rendering it redundant and most people rarely put pen to paper anymore. </p>
<p>But handwriting is still used for many everyday tasks, as well as in most test and exam situations. More importantly, <a href="https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/new-study-suggests-handwriting-engages-the-brain-more-than-typing-1.5132542">studies show</a> the brain activates differently when writing by hand than when writing on a keyboard. </p>
<p>The importance of this brain activity is seen in the way learning correct letter formation is involved in <a href="https://www.readingrockets.org/article/importance-teaching-handwriting">embedding</a> letter knowledge. Teachers notice older children who struggle with writing composition often also have a problem with handwriting. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/test-or-invest-nzs-sliding-international-student-assessment-rankings-are-all-about-choices-154729">Test or invest? NZ's sliding international student assessment rankings are all about choices</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Efficient letter formation affects the amount and quality of writing output. One study of beginning writers <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232535985_Examining_the_contribution_of_handwriting_and_spelling_to_written_expression_in_kindergarten_children">reported</a> up to 30% of the difference in writing achievement was attributed to capability in handwriting and spelling. </p>
<p>Mastering handwriting involves learning <a href="https://theinspiredtreehouse.com/handwriting-development-sizing-spacing-alignment-and-more/">various techniques</a> and needs focus over a number of years. However, it can be difficult for teachers to justify a place for teaching letter formation in the busy school day. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Young girl using laptop computer" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/388977/original/file-20210311-18-112hg9u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/388977/original/file-20210311-18-112hg9u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/388977/original/file-20210311-18-112hg9u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/388977/original/file-20210311-18-112hg9u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/388977/original/file-20210311-18-112hg9u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/388977/original/file-20210311-18-112hg9u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/388977/original/file-20210311-18-112hg9u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Studies show the brain activates differently when writing by hand than when writing on a keyboard.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">www.shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Spelling is the basis of writing</h2>
<p>The teaching of spelling has been undervalued, too. Teachers have been guided to help children <a href="https://literacyonline.tki.org.nz/Literacy-Online/Planning-for-my-students-needs/Effective-Literacy-Practice-Years-1-4/What-we-know-about-teaching-reading-and-writing-in-Y1-4/Spelling">work out spelling rules</a> but the complex code of English spellings needs explicit teaching.</p>
<p>As with handwriting, spelling may seem unimportant in an age of digital spellcheckers. But spelling ability reflects what children know about words, including word meanings. Children I speak to report that difficulty with spelling puts them off wanting to write at all. </p>
<p>This is a real problem. The easier it is to put words on a page, the more it frees the writer to compose ideas into sentences and paragraphs. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/in-an-age-of-digital-disinformation-dropping-level-1-media-studies-in-nz-high-schools-is-a-big-mistake-151475">In an age of digital disinformation, dropping level 1 media studies in NZ high schools is a big mistake</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It is easy to undervalue the foundation skills of handwriting and spelling — they can seem less important than producing a complete written composition. The focus of assessment is on the written “product” rather than progress in the foundation skills. </p>
<p>But mastering those skills is big and important work for beginning readers and writers. Any decline in their ability could be a canary in the education coal mine.</p>
<h2>Teachers and learners deserve better</h2>
<p>There are, however, some hopeful signs. A more explicit approach to teaching spelling, in part derived from strategies for <a href="https://www.inclusive.tki.org.nz/guides/dyslexia-and-learning/teach-spelling-strategies-explicitly">helping with literacy difficulties</a>, is gaining ground. </p>
<p>New early reading books that follow a clear <a href="https://literacyonline.tki.org.nz/Literacy-Online/News/Scope-and-Sequence-for-levelling-the-new-Ready-to-Read-Phonics-Plus">sequence of word patterns</a> are due to arrive in schools at the end of March. These resources have been eagerly awaited by schools keen to make a difference to their students’ learning.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/young-new-zealanders-are-turning-off-reading-in-record-numbers-we-need-a-new-approach-to-teaching-literacy-141527">Young New Zealanders are turning off reading in record numbers – we need a new approach to teaching literacy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>At the same time, teacher training will need to include the tools required for such systematic teaching. As <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11881-018-00168-0">one New Zealand study</a> has shown, teacher knowledge about important literacy concepts has generally been lacking.</p>
<p>The fact there is a lack of consistent training for teachers in such an important area should be cause for real concern. While many schools are making important teaching and system changes to ensure success for all their learners, they cannot do it alone. </p>
<p>Guidelines for teacher training, school curriculums and professional development need to be clear and consistent. We can liken this to a GPS system, but for teaching. Good directions in education are vital to ensure all children arrive at the right destination at the right time. </p>
<p>Learners and teachers deserve nothing less. They need much more.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/155371/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christine Braid works for Massey university. Christine was part of a Ministry funded research project in 2015-2017.</span></em></p>Kiwi school kids are not consistently taught letter formation or spelling the way they once were. But these simple skills are part of the foundations of higher learning.Christine Braid, Professional Learning and Development Facilitator in Literacy Education, Massey UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1044102018-10-15T19:03:54Z2018-10-15T19:03:54ZDoes your child struggle with spelling? This might help<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/239265/original/file-20181004-52672-lu64t9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">English spelling is not an illogical burden there to make life difficult for our children.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>English spelling has a reputation for being illogical and chaotic. What’s going on with <em>yacht</em>, and why the W in <em>two</em>? There are a thousand other “but why?” questions our children ask about English spelling.</p>
<p>“English is crazy/confusing/tricky,” we say. “There are some words you just have to learn by heart,” we advise young children. “It’s a special word.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-why-does-english-have-so-many-different-spelling-rules-98831">Curious Kids: Why does English have so many different spelling rules?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Those responses aren’t accurate or helpful to a child learning how to spell. English spelling isn’t random. There is a system to English spelling, and <a href="https://pages.wustl.edu/files/pages/imce/readingandlanguagelab/kessler_treiman_2003-_is_english_spelling_chaotic.pdf">there are reasons</a> words are spelled the way they are. </p>
<h2>How do words work?</h2>
<p>Morphology (the meaning components of words), phonology (the sound components of words), orthography (the multiple ways the same sound may be written), and etymology (the origin of words) are the threads that work together to explain the spellings of words. </p>
<p>An effective spelling program will teach <a href="http://newlearningonline.com/literacies/chapter-10/adoniou-on-what-teachers-should-know-about-spelling">all these threads together</a>. </p>
<h2>Words are packets of meaning</h2>
<p>English is a morpho-phonemic language. This means words are spelled according to their meaning parts (morphemes) as well as their sounds (phonemes). Morphemes are base words, prefixes and suffixes. </p>
<p>Phonemes and morphemes <a href="http://www.education.ox.ac.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Morphemes-research-briefing.pdf">work together</a>, so to teach English spelling <a href="http://www.wordworkskingston.com/WordWorks/Pete_Bowers_Research_files/Goodwin%20meta-analysis.pdf">it’s important to teach the two together</a>.</p>
<p>For example, the word <em>magician</em> is not spelled <em>majishun</em>, even though it sounds like it should be. So before asking “what sounds can I hear?” when we spell a word, we need to ask “what does this word mean?”.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/239266/original/file-20181004-52660-iimktd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/239266/original/file-20181004-52660-iimktd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/239266/original/file-20181004-52660-iimktd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/239266/original/file-20181004-52660-iimktd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/239266/original/file-20181004-52660-iimktd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/239266/original/file-20181004-52660-iimktd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/239266/original/file-20181004-52660-iimktd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Breaking words into their meaningful parts is very helpful for students because it also improves their vocabulary and reading comprehension.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A magician is a person who does magic – and all of that meaning can be found within the spelling of the word. <em>Magic</em> is the base word, and “ian” is the suffix that means “the person who does”. </p>
<p>We see this suffix at work with lots of base words that end in “ic”, such as musician, politician, clinician, physician, electrician and technician.</p>
<h2>Building vocabulary</h2>
<p>Breaking words into their meaningful parts is very helpful for students because it also improves their vocabulary and reading comprehension. They can use these skills to tackle the longer words that often trip them up when reading. </p>
<p>This skill is particularly crucial as they move through school and must read and spell increasingly complex words such as collaborate (col = prefix meaning together, labor = work, ate = suffix that makes verbs). </p>
<p>It also helps them learn the concepts embedded within the words, such as perimeter (peri = around, meter = measure).</p>
<h2>Finding links</h2>
<p>Even single morpheme words are part of a larger family that are worth studying. The silent W in <em>two</em> becomes audible and more memorable when we look at its family. <em>Two</em> is the base word in <em>twelve</em>, <em>twenty</em>, <em>between</em>, and <em>twin</em>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/239268/original/file-20181004-52691-kue8q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/239268/original/file-20181004-52691-kue8q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/239268/original/file-20181004-52691-kue8q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/239268/original/file-20181004-52691-kue8q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/239268/original/file-20181004-52691-kue8q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/239268/original/file-20181004-52691-kue8q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/239268/original/file-20181004-52691-kue8q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">I before E, except after C.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This is well within <a href="https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ881137">the learning capacity</a> of very young children. For example, I watched a five-year-old volunteer <em>Twix</em> to his teacher as she was explaining the <em>two</em> word family to her class. He explained a Twix was <em>two</em> sticks of biscuits.</p>
<h2>Learning rules</h2>
<p>Of course, the C sound in <em>magic</em> could potentially have been written as a K, “ck”, “ch” or “que”. In English, for the vast majority of words there will be more than one way to spell the sounds you can hear. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-absurdity-of-english-spelling-and-why-were-stuck-with-it-44905">The absurdity of English spelling and why we're stuck with it</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>There are patterns we can teach children to make this easier (orthography). That’s why we teach children things like I before E except after C. It doesn’t work all the time, but it reduces the odds.</p>
<p>Very often, making the correct choice comes down to the word’s origin – and that brings us to etymology. </p>
<h2>A multilingual language</h2>
<p>As a language, English is no snob. It began as a German language but it hasn’t had a history of protectionism. Instead, it has opened its arms and its dictionary to tens of thousands of words from dozens of other languages – <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02648260">most notably French, Greek and Latin</a>. </p>
<p>But while English has been a keen adopter of words from other languages, we English speakers have not always managed to get our tongues around their foreign pronunciation. So we’ve often kept the original spelling, but applied our own English sounds. That’s how we end up with words spelled like <em>yacht</em> but said like <em>yot</em>. </p>
<p>Interestingly <em>yacht</em> meant <em>hunter</em> <a href="https://www.etymonline.com/word/yacht">in Dutch</a>, which is what they invented the yacht for, to hunt down pirate ships to protect Dutch trading ships.</p>
<h2>Helping struggling spellers</h2>
<p>This etymological work, and indeed the work on morphemes, should not just be extension work for high achievers. It’s core work for understanding how words work in English and so must be done with every student. All children must be shown how the English language works, and none need this more than <a href="https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1003988">those who struggle with the language</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/trying-to-change-englishs-complex-spelling-is-a-waste-of-time-38027">Trying to change English's complex spelling is a waste of time</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>English spelling is not an illogical burden there to make life difficult for our children. If we are not simultaneously teaching students the phonology, orthography, morphology and etymology of words, then we are not giving them all the pieces of the spelling puzzle – and their struggles will be our failure.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/104410/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Misty Adoniou is a Principal Fellow at the University of Melbourne and an adjunct Associate Professor at the University of Canberra. She is the author of the Cambridge University Press book 'Spelling it out: how words work and how to teach them'.</span></em></p>Teaching children how to break down words into their meaning and origin can help them be better spellers.Misty Adoniou, Associate Professor in Language, Literacy and TESL, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/988312018-09-20T20:15:36Z2018-09-20T20:15:36ZCurious Kids: Why does English have so many different spelling rules?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/224570/original/file-20180624-152140-112kqg9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">More spelling problems came in when French scribes introduced new spelling conventions — their own of course, and not always helpful.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>This is an article from <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/curious-kids-36782">Curious Kids</a>, a series for children. The Conversation is asking kids to send in questions they’d like an expert to answer. All questions are welcome – serious, weird or wacky! You might also like the podcast <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/kidslisten/imagine-this/">Imagine This</a>, a co-production between ABC KIDS listen and The Conversation, based on Curious Kids.</em> </p>
<hr>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Why does English have so many different spelling rules? – Melania P, age 12, Strathfield.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>English spelling has been evolving for over a thousand years and the muddle we’re in today is the fall-out of many different events that have taken place over this time. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-why-do-aussies-have-a-different-accent-to-canadians-americans-british-people-and-new-zealanders-94725">Curious Kids: Why do Aussies have a different accent to Canadians, Americans, British people and New Zealanders?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>A bad start</h2>
<p>It was a rocky beginning for English spelling. Quite simply, the 23-letter Roman alphabet has never been adequate — even Old English (spoken 450-1150) had 35 or so sounds, and our sound system is now even bigger.</p>
<p>More spelling problems came in when French scribes introduced new spelling conventions — their own of course, and not always helpful. Using “c” instead of “s” for words like <em>city</em> was messy because “c” also represented the “k” sound in words like <em>cat</em>.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=914&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=914&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=914&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1148&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1148&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1148&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">William Caxton set up the first printing presses.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/62/William_caxton.jpg">Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>And then printing arrived in the 15th century — and with it more mess. William Caxton (who set up the presses in the first place) liked Dutch spellings and so established the “gh” in <em>ghost</em> and <em>ghastly</em>. Some printers were European and they introduced favourite spellings too from their own languages. Not terribly helpful either! </p>
<h2>Those pesky silent letters</h2>
<p>One of the biggest problems for English spelling has always been changes in pronunciation. Printing helped to stablise the spelling of words, but then some sounds changed their shape, and others even disappeared altogether. Think of those silent letters in words such as <em>walk, through, write, right, sword, know, gnat</em> — these were once pronounced. </p>
<p>If only the printer Caxton had been born a couple of centuries later, or if these sound changes had occurred a couple of centuries earlier, our spelling would be much truer to pronunciation.</p>
<p>And now comes another little wrinkle in this story – there’s a bunch of silent letters that were never actually pronounced. They appeared because of linguistic busybodies who wanted to make the language look more respectable. This caused some serious mess. </p>
<p>Take how we spell the word <em>rhyme</em>. When we swiped the word from French, it had a much more sensible look — <em>rime</em>. But this was changed to <em>rhyme</em> to give it a more classy classical look (like <em>rhythm</em>) – an interesting idea, but hardly helpful for someone trying to spell the word!</p>
<p>The 16th and 17th centuries saw many extra letters introduced in this way. Think of the “b” added to <em>debt</em> to make a link to Latin <em>debitum</em>. Now, the “b” might be justified in the word <em>debit</em> that we stole directly from Latin, but it was the French who gave us <em>dette</em>. </p>
<p>The “b” consonant was a mistake, and now we accuse poor old <em>debt</em> of having lost it through sloppy pronunciation! </p>
<h2>Let’s make spelling more sensible</h2>
<p>And so it is from this haphazard evolution that we end up with the spelling system we have. </p>
<p>But you know, there are in fact over 80% of words spelled according to regular patterns. So wholesale change is not what we want. However simple improvements could certainly be made without any major upheaval. </p>
<p>We could iron out inconsistencies such as <em>humOUr</em> versus <em>humOrous</em>. To introduce uniform <em>-or</em> spellings would be a painless reform (well, perhaps not painless, since many people are quite attached to the <em>-our</em> in words like <em>humour</em>)</p>
<p>We could also restore earlier spellings like <em>rime</em> and <em>dette</em>, and while we’re at it give <em>psychology</em> and <em>philosophy</em> a sensible look by spelling them <em>sykology</em> and <em>filosofy</em>. </p>
<p>So now, you can see the problem. No matter how silly spellings are, people get attached to them, and new spellings – even sensible ones – never seem to get a foot in the door.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-who-made-the-alphabet-song-77297">Curious Kids: Who made the alphabet song?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Hello, curious kids! Have you got a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to us. You can:</em></p>
<p><em>* Email your question to curiouskids@theconversation.edu.au
<br>
* Tell us on <a href="https://twitter.com/ConversationEDU">Twitter</a> by tagging <a href="https://twitter.com/ConversationEDU">@ConversationEDU</a> with the hashtag #curiouskids, or
<br>
* Tell us on <a href="http://www.facebook.com/conversationEDU">Facebook</a></em></p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>Please tell us your name, age and which city you live in. You can send an audio recording of your question too, if you want. Send as many questions as you like! We won’t be able to answer every question but we will do our best.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/98831/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kate Burridge does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It was a rocky beginning for English spelling. Then things got worse.Kate Burridge, Professor of Linguistics, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/829932017-09-12T07:53:19Z2017-09-12T07:53:19ZDoes poor spelling really mean Donald Trump isn’t fit to be president?<p>In the aftermath of a controversial clash of protests in Boston, Donald Trump sent out a tweet about the need to heal the nation – managing in the process to <a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2017/08/19/oops-trump-mocked-online-for-misspelling-heal-tweet/c2qeEpNz2mx9rcB9br9hlO/story.html">misspell</a> the word “heal”. He then quickly deleted the tweet, resent it with the same mistake, deleted the second attempt, until finally getting it right the third time around. </p>
<p>The response across social media was predictably caustic. As one tweeter <a href="https://twitter.com/davidmputnam/status/899015614752329729">put it</a>: “If you don’t know the difference between #heel and heal, you shouldn’t have the nuclear codes and you sure as heck shouldn’t be POTUS.” Similar mockery has greeted his previous linguistic fumbles, not least the notorious “unpresidented”, which was picked by some as 2016’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/19/unpresidented-trump-word-definition">word of the year</a>.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"810123682710437888"}"></div></p>
<p>It’s easy to mock this sort of thing, especially in such dark times. But is Trump’s poor spelling really another sign that he’s unfit to be president, or just an indication that language and communication practices are continually changing? And what does debate around this tell us about the importance that’s accorded to spelling in society in general?</p>
<p>Since the standardisation of the English language in the 18th century, and particularly since Samuel Johnson’s dictionary was published in 1755, incorrect spelling has carried a particular social stigma. Being able to spell is often seen as an emblem of a good education and solid moral character, and in the case of political leaders, an indication of due attention to detail and decorum.</p>
<p>This norm is so embedded that over the years, rogue spelling errors have inflicted serious damage on a number of political careers. The most well-known of these is probably George HW Bush’s <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW2K0-VItAk">famously inept</a> vice-president, Dan Quayle: visiting a school in 1992, he “corrected” a student’s spelling of the word “potato” to “potatoe”. This simple error became one of the lasting images of his career, and was interpreted not simply as a sign that he couldn’t spell one of the more common root vegetables, but that he was of impoverished intelligence generally.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Wdqbi66oNuI?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Then there was the furore over a mistake Gordon Brown made towards the end of his tenure as prime minister of the UK, when he was accused by the mother of a soldier killed in Afghanistan of disrespecting her son’s memory by <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/nov/09/gordon-brown-misspelled-name">incorrectly spelling his name</a>. But Brown’s handwriting is famously bad due an to eye injury sustained in his youth, and for many commentators, the way this incident was promoted by The Sun newspaper was a <a href="http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/sympathy-for-gordon-brown-in-row-over-1041776">personal attack</a>, manipulating the sentiments around the tragic death of a member of the armed forces for political ends.</p>
<h2>Far from unpresidented [sic]</h2>
<p>One reason these issues provoke such controversy, and why spelling is so venerated in society generally, is because of the relationship it has with literacy, which is such a cornerstone of modern civilisation. Yet English spelling is, to say the least, notoriously idiosyncratic. <a href="http://humanities.wisc.edu/assets/misc/Rousseau_Origin_of_Languages.pdf">As Rousseau wrote</a>: “To know English one must learn it twice: first, to read it, and second to speak it.” And many eminent writers over the years, from Mark Twain to H.G Wells and C.S Lewis, have promoted wholesale reformation (and simplification) of our spelling system.</p>
<p>Poor spelling isn’t even, to paraphrase, unpresidented. In fact, Trump shares the trait with his political hero, <a href="https://theconversation.com/andrew-jackson-donald-trumps-presidential-forefather-55775">Andrew Jackson</a>. In 1833, Harvard University decided to give Jackson an honorary doctorate; one of their alumni, John Quincy Adams (who happened to have lost the presidency to Jackson five years earlier) boycotted the ceremony, saying that it was a disgrace to give such an honour to “a barbarian who could not write a sentence of grammar and hardly could spell his own name”. To which Jackson pithily <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/1985/05/19/opinion/l-jackson-on-spelling-kennedy-on-yale-249694.html">remarked</a> that “it is a damn poor mind indeed which can’t think of at least two ways to spell any word”.</p>
<p>Trump has, of course, received a barrage of derision for his assorted mistakes – as another tweeter <a href="https://twitter.com/tusk81/status/899009900990185472">remarked</a>, “how does a man who wants to limit immigration to only English-speakers [as announced in the <a href="https://www.bustle.com/p/what-is-the-raise-act-trumps-new-immigration-bill-would-favor-english-speakers-74094">RAISE Act</a>] manage to misspell ‘heal’ twice in one tweet?” – but the incidents have done little to change anyone’s opinion of him one way or the other. And that says a lot about what the rules of language are really for.</p>
<p>As Claire Fallon <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-administration-spelling_us_598b87ace4b0449ed507be19">wrote in the Huffington Post</a>, the fact that Trump can ride out something like this is nevertheless a sign of the privilege he enjoys as a wealthy white man. Conservative commentators would surely have pounced on Barack Obama for any similarly slapdash use of language, given how regularly they <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-administration-spelling_us_598b87ace4b0449ed507be19">called his qualifications into question</a>.</p>
<p>This is the problem with spelling hawkery: it often has little to do with clarity of communication, and everything to do with class and social positioning. Everyone makes mistakes, after all; and so Trump’s dismissive attitude to linguistic proprieties and pedantry may in fact bolster his powerful anti-elitist brand.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/82993/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Philip Seargeant does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In a language as idiosyncratic as English, linguistic pedantry is futile and misguided.Philip Seargeant, Senior Lecturer in Applied Linguistics, The Open UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/827562017-08-27T20:08:13Z2017-08-27T20:08:13ZResearch shows the importance of parents reading with children – even after children can read<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/183227/original/file-20170823-6579-1raouj8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Research has typically found that shared reading experiences are highly beneficial for young people.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock/Alfira</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Many of us will be able to recall the enjoyment of shared reading: being read to and sharing reading with our parents. However, <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/eprint/Wm6JKfkqU9FfTNhgRQ7z/full">my research</a> has found that of the 997 Year 4 and Year 6 respondents at 24 schools who took part in the 2016 Western Australian Study in Children’s Book Reading, nearly three-fifths reported that they were not being read to at home. </p>
<p>A sample of these children also participated in interviews, where I asked them how they felt about shared reading. While a few children did not mind no longer being read to, others were disappointed when it stopped. For example, when I asked Jason about his experience of being read to by his parents, he explained:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… they kind of stopped when I knew how to read. I knew how to read, but I just still liked my mum reading it to me. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>His experience is common, with other recent research suggesting that more than one-third of Australian respondents <a href="http://www.scholastic.com.au/readingreport">aged six to 11</a> whose parents had stopped reading to them wanted it to continue.</p>
<p>But why is it so important for us to keep reading with our children for as long as possible? </p>
<p>Research has typically found that shared reading experiences are highly beneficial for young people. Benefits of shared reading include facilitating enriched language exposure, fostering the development of <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8624.00417/full">listening skills</a>, <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Suzanne_Mol/publication/49740676_To_Read_or_Not_to_Read_A_Meta-Analysis_of_Print_Exposure_From_Infancy_to_Early_Adulthood/links/574eb19208aefc38ba1119bc.pdf">spelling</a>, <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Suzanne_Mol/publication/49740676_To_Read_or_Not_to_Read_A_Meta-Analysis_of_Print_Exposure_From_Infancy_to_Early_Adulthood/links/574eb19208aefc38ba1119bc.pdf">reading comprehension</a> and <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0142723711422626">vocabulary</a>, and establishing <a href="http://adc.bmj.com/content/93/7/554.short">essential foundational literacy skills</a>. They are also valued as a shared social opportunity between parents and their children to foster <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19388071003731554">positive attitudes</a> toward reading. </p>
<p>When we read aloud to children it is also beneficial for their <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272775714000156">cognitive development</a>, with parent-child reading activating brain areas related to <a href="http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2015/08/05/peds.2015-0359">narrative comprehension and mental imagery</a>. While most of the research in this area focuses on young children, this does not mean that these benefits somehow disappear as children age.</p>
<p>As young people’s attitudes towards reading reflect their experiences of reading at home and at school in <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15326985ep3202_2">childhood</a> and <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eie.12043/full">beyond</a>, providing an enjoyable shared reading experience at home can help to turn our children into life-long readers.</p>
<p>However, not all shared reading experiences are enjoyable. Some children described having poor quality experiences of being read to, and children did not typically enjoy reading to distracted or overly critical parents. In some cases, parents attempted to outsource this responsibility to older siblings, with mixed results. </p>
<p>While many children really enjoyed the social aspects of reading and being read to as valuable time with their parents, they also felt that they learned from these experiences. For example, listening was felt to provide an opportunity to extend vocabulary, and improve pronunciation. Gina recalled the advantage she lost when her parents stopped reading to her, as:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… when they did read to me when I was younger, I learnt the words; I would like to learn more words in the bigger books and know what they are so I could talk more about them. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Similarly, Craig explained how being read to enabled his academic advantage in literacy, as “they were teaching me how to say more words”, and “that’s why I’m ahead of everyone in spelling and reading and English”. When this stopped “just because my mum thought I was smart enough to read on my own and started to read chapter books”, Craig was disappointed.</p>
<p>In addition, children were sometimes terrified of reading aloud in the classroom, and this fear could potentially be alleviated through greater opportunities to practice at home. </p>
<p>Hayden’s anxiety around reading aloud at school related to his lack of confidence, and his tendency to compare his skills with those of his peers. He described himself as “always standing up there shivering, my hands are shivering, I just don’t want to read, so I just start reading. And I sound pretty weird”. No-one read with him at home, so he had limited opportunity to build his confidence and skills.</p>
<p>This research suggests that we should not stop reading with our children just because they have learned to read independently. </p>
<p>We should continue reading with our children until they no longer wish to share reading with us, ensuring that these experiences are enjoyable, as they can influence children’s future attitudes toward reading, as well as building their confidence and competence as readers. It is worth the effort to find time to share this experience with our children in the early years and beyond.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/82756/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Margaret Kristin Merga receives funding from the Ian Potter Foundation and the Collier Charitable Foundation.</span></em></p>There are benefits to shared reading long after children can read to themselves, so how long should you read to your children?Margaret Kristin Merga, Senior Lecturer in Education, Murdoch UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/705222017-01-16T19:03:42Z2017-01-16T19:03:42ZExplainer: what is phonics and why is it important?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/152591/original/image-20170113-8701-mb6ut2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Phonics helps teach children how to merge separate sounds together to make it one word.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The efficacy of phonics as a method of teaching has been debated for several decades, and has recently come back to <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-way-we-teach-most-children-to-read-sets-them-up-to-fail-36946">the forefront of public debate</a>.</p>
<p>This time, the focus is on the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-australia-should-trial-the-new-phonics-screening-check-69717">phonics check</a> – a screening tool designed to identify early readers who may be in need of intervention, and provide some indication of how successful current phonics teaching methods are. The UK has been using the Phonics Screening Check (PSC) since 2012, and now there is a push to implement a trial of <a href="https://www.cis.org.au/publications/research-reports/focus-on-phonics-why-australia-should-adopt-the-year-1-phonics-screening-check">the same check in Australia</a>. This has raised some <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-new-phonics-test-is-pointless-we-shouldnt-waste-precious-money-buying-it-from-england-69355">concerns</a>.</p>
<p>So what’s the fuss about phonics? </p>
<h2>What is phonics?</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.gov.scot/Resource/Doc/36496/0023582.pdf">Scientific</a> studies have repeatedly found that explicit systematic phonics instruction is the most effective way to teach children how to read. Without it, some children will end up having <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD009115.pub2/pdf">serious reading difficulties</a>. But what is explicit systematic phonics? Let’s break this term down.</p>
<p><strong>Phonics</strong> – teaching children the sounds made by individual letter or letter groups (for example, the letter “c” makes a <em>k</em> sound), and teaching children how to merge separate sounds together to make it one word (for example, blending the sounds <em>k</em>, <em>a</em>, <em>t</em> makes CAT). This type of phonics teaching is often referred to as “synthetic phonics”.</p>
<p><strong>Explicit</strong> – directly teaching children the specific associations between letters and sounds, rather than expecting them to gain this knowledge indirectly.</p>
<p><strong>Systematic</strong> – English has a complicated spelling system. It is important to teach letter sound mappings in a systematic way, beginning with simple letter sound rules and then moving onto more complex associations. </p>
<p>The term “phonics” has been used quite loosely by several reading programs, with some straying from these fundamental principles. </p>
<p>For example, some programs, such as Embedded Phonics, teach phonics by asking children to guess unfamiliar words using cues, such as the meaning of a word gleaned from sentence context.</p>
<p>Other programs ask children to look at words (for example, <em>pig</em>, <em>page</em>, <em>pen</em> all start with the same sound) and learn letter-sound rules by analysing or making comparisons between those words (analogy or analytical phonics). </p>
<p>These programs are <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/00346543071003393">not as effective</a> as those focusing on letter-sound knowledge taught in an explicit and systematic fashion.</p>
<h2>Why is it important?</h2>
<p>Phonics instruction teaches children how to decode letters into their respective sounds, a skill that is essential for them to read unfamiliar words by themselves. </p>
<p>Keep in mind that most words are in fact unfamiliar to early readers in print, even if they have spoken knowledge of the word. Having letter-sound knowledge will allow children to make the link between the <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10888438.2016.1231686">unfamiliar print words to their spoken knowledge</a>. </p>
<p>Another aspect that is rarely discussed is that the letter-sound decoding process itself is a <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002209659892481X">learning mechanism</a>. For example, make a mental note of how you feel when reading the following words:</p>
<p><em>Wingardium Leviosa</em></p>
<p>When you first read these words, you probably used your letter-sound knowledge, which involved two important processing stages:</p>
<p>1) It helped you produce the correct sound of an unfamiliar print word. If you’re a Harry Potter fan, the pronunciation also probably lit up connections to the meaning of the word. </p>
<p>2) It drew your attention to the details and the combination of the letters of the word.</p>
<p>These two steps then function as a learning mechanism, allowing you to recognise the previously unfamiliar word quicker the next time around (go back to read the words again and see how you feel about them now). </p>
<p>This transition from slowly sounding out a word, to rapidly recognising it, is what we call “learning to read by sight”. Every reader must make this transition to read fluently. </p>
<p>It is true that there are many English words, such as <em>yacht</em> and <em>isle</em> that do not follow typical letter-sound rules. Even then, <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10888438.2012.749879">research</a> has shown that children can still learn these words successfully by decoding some parts of the word (<em>y</em> … <em>t</em> for <em>yacht</em>), with help from spoken vocabulary knowledge to facilitate the learning.</p>
<p>Phonics is important not only because this knowledge allows children to read on their own, but it is also a learning mechanism that builds up a good print word dictionary that can be quickly accessed.</p>
<h2>Will it really improve reading?</h2>
<p>Recent National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) <a href="https://theconversation.com/naplan-results-reveal-little-change-in-literacy-and-numeracy-performance-here-are-some-key-takeaway-findings-70208">results</a> have shown no improvement in reading and writing skills despite much government funding. </p>
<p>The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) <a href="https://theconversation.com/pisa-results-dont-look-good-but-before-we-panic-lets-look-at-what-we-can-learn-from-the-latest-test-69470">results</a> demonstrated a steady decline in children’s reading ability in Australia since 2000. </p>
<p>So will more effective phonics instruction really help to improve these results?</p>
<p>Of course, reading effectively (whether to learn or for pleasure) is not just about phonics or having a decent store of single words. </p>
<p>Functional reading requires several other skills such as good vocabulary, the ability to extract inferences, and synthesise and hold information in memory across several sentences. But if your single word reading is not efficient, comprehension is going to be dramatically affected.</p>
<p>If we use building a house as an analogy, understanding text is the complete home; single word reading ability is the structural frame of the house, and phonics is the foundation of that frame. </p>
<p>Effective phonics instruction is important because letter-sound knowledge is the foundation needed to build up reading and writing abilities. </p>
<p>The phonics screening check will indicate whether children have gained the necessary skills. If not, schools need to review current methods of teaching and implement methods that stick with evidence-based principles of explicit, systematic phonics teaching.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70522/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Hua-Chen Wang does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Phonics instruction gives children letter-sound knowledge, a skill that is essential for them to read unfamiliar words by themselves.Hua-Chen Wang, Postdoctoral research fellow, Macquarie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/702082016-12-12T19:01:25Z2016-12-12T19:01:25ZNAPLAN results reveal little change in literacy and numeracy performance – here are some key takeaway findings<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/149613/original/image-20161212-31405-9nr607.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">On average year 3 girls perform higher than boys in reading, writing, grammar and punctuation, and spelling. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="http://www.nap.edu.au/results-and-reports/national-reports">national report</a> on National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) outcomes has been released today, showing the test results of Australian students in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9. </p>
<p>The report outlines student achievement in reading, numeracy, spelling, and grammar and punctuation, and shows performance has stagnated.</p>
<p>Around 95% percent of students are included in NAPLAN results, meaning they provide a reasonable guide to how well Australian students are learning core skills.</p>
<p>Other than Year 9 writing, over the last few years, overall Australian achievement has flatlined – it hasn’t gone backwards but nor has it improved. </p>
<p>Here is a breakdown of the findings for each year group that’s assessed:</p>
<h2>Year 3</h2>
<p>Student performance in Year 3 reading and spelling, grammar and punctuation has improved since 2008. </p>
<p>Boys are on average doing better than girls in numeracy, but girls on average do better in reading, writing, grammar and punctuation, and spelling. </p>
<p>Since 2008, reading scores in Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Northern Territory, Victoria, Queensland, and West Australia have improved. </p>
<h2>Year 5</h2>
<p>Student performance in reading and numeracy is significantly better in 2016 than it was in 2008. Average reading scores rose from 484.4 in 2008 to 501.5 in 2016. Numeracy scores rose from 475.9 in 2008 to 493.1 in 2016.</p>
<p>Reading scores in Tasmania, Victoria, West Australia and Queensland improved between 2008 and 2016. Girls on average scored higher than boys in writing, spelling, and grammar and punctuation, but not in reading.</p>
<h2>Year 7</h2>
<p>Overall, there has been little change in any area for Year 7 students since 2008. Girls on average scored higher than boys in some of the literacy domains.</p>
<h2>Year 9</h2>
<p>Numeracy and reading achievement has remained the same for Year 9 students since 2008. </p>
<p>Writing achievement has decreased since 2011, however, there have been changes in the genre examined over this time – from narrative writing to persuasive writing – so this may be influencing the results. From 2016 the genre returned to narrative writing. </p>
<hr>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-189" class="tc-infographic" height="700" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/189/1d1706ada55138d77ba1fcf94ab4725c64b4923b/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<hr>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-222" class="tc-infographic" height="400px" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/222/f98394d56770559119e1446009b10fc7dd170cb4/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<hr>
<h2>Students from non-English speaking backgrounds:</h2>
<p>In a number of cases the achievement of students from non-English speaking backgrounds tends to have a bigger spread than that of students whose parents’ first language is English. Our strongest students from non-English speaking backgrounds are doing very well, but there is a long achievement tail. </p>
<h2>Indigenous students</h2>
<p>Indigenous students are still achieving well below non-Indigenous students. </p>
<p>Over the past 9 years, there has been some improvement for Indigenous students in Years 3 and 5 in reading, and in Year 5 numeracy. But as with the national data, the improvements appeared in the first few years of NAPLAN and there has not been much progress recently. </p>
<h2>Impact of parents’ education</h2>
<p>Student achievement analysed by their parents’ education and employment makes familiar reading. </p>
<p>The report shows that the higher the parents’ levels of qualifications, and the higher their level of employment, the better their children do in school. </p>
<p>In most cases, the biggest gap is between the achievement of students whose parents completed Year 12, and those whose parents finished school in Year 11. </p>
<h2>Does location make a difference?</h2>
<p>On average, students based at schools in major cities perform the best. This is followed by those in inner regional locations, then outer regional locations. In remote and very remote areas, average achievement is lowest. </p>
<p>These results tell us that as a country we are not doing particularly well at neutralising the effects of disadvantage, whether this is through location or as reflected in levels of parental education and occupation. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/pisa-results-dont-look-good-but-before-we-panic-lets-look-at-what-we-can-learn-from-the-latest-test-69470">recent PISA</a> results already showed us that Australian education does not do well on equity compared to similar countries like Canada. </p>
<p>Our school systems are not good at reducing the influence of students’ home backgrounds on their achievement. We need to try harder here. </p>
<p>This is likely to require a range of government actions that include a more equitable school funding regime, quality targeted teacher professional learning, and actions to <a href="http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/low-performing-students/a-policy-framework-for-tackling-low-student-performance_9789264250246-9-en">reduce the class divisions</a> that riddle our education systems. </p>
<h2>What doesn’t it tell us?</h2>
<p>While the report tells us a lot about the impact of broad factors such as student background, it can’t provide information on what is happening at a school level, or the reasons behind the general lack of improvement over the last few years.</p>
<p>Establishing why student achievement has flatlined is a complex business and is not covered by the data collected or the analyses.</p>
<h2>Where to?</h2>
<p>There are two important responses to the report that governments can take. </p>
<p>First, we could apply what we know is likely to improve student achievement across the board: supporting quality teacher professional learning based on our knowledge about improving student learning from the work of people like <a href="http://visible-learning.org/hattie-ranking-influences-effect-sizes-learning-achievement/">education expert John Hattie</a>.</p>
<p>Second, we can and must do more to reduce the impact students’ home backgrounds has on their achievement. </p>
<p>A funding system that <a href="https://theconversation.com/does-more-money-for-schools-improve-educational-outcomes-57656">targets funding much more strongly</a> to high-needs students and schools is important.</p>
<p><a href="http://intranet.niacc.edu/pres_copy%281%29/ILC/Does%20Segregation%20Still%20Matter%20-The%20Impact%20of%20Student%20Composition%20on%20Academic%20Achievement%20in%20High%20School.pdf">Research shows</a> that individual student background has an impact on achievement, but so does the mix of students in a school. Australia’s education system has become <a href="http://research.acer.edu.au/aje/vol54/iss1/6/">increasingly stratified</a>.</p>
<p>So policies promoting a mix of student backgrounds in our schools, for example, by requiring that all schools enrol a percentage of students from more disadvantaged backgrounds to receive funding, would be another place to start.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70208/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Suzanne Rice receives funding from the Australian Research Council. </span></em></p>The latest round of NAPLAN results show Australia’s school systems are not good at reducing the influence of a student’s background on their academic achievement.Suzanne Rice, Senior Lecturer, Education Policy and Leadership, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/576062016-05-06T10:02:19Z2016-05-06T10:02:19ZThe grammar police belong in the 18th century – let’s not inflict their rules on today’s children<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121040/original/image-20160503-19847-d9uba2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Hard for primary school children – what about you?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">TungCheung/www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Parents and teachers in England are angry about a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2016-key-stage-2-english-grammar-punctuation-and-spelling-sample-test-materials-mark-scheme-and-test-administration-instructions">spelling, punctuation and grammar test</a> that school children must sit at the end of primary school. First introduced in 2013, all 11-year-olds at local-authority-maintained schools will take the test on May 10. This year the difficulty level has increased significantly, in line with the new national curriculum, leading to <a href="https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/122038">calls for all key stage tests to be cancelled</a>. </p>
<p>In an interview on <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b078y2fy#play">BBC Radio 4’s The World At One on May 3</a>, schools minister Nick Gibb answered a typical question from the test incorrectly. He was presented with the sentence: “I went to the cinema after I’d eaten my dinner.” Asked whether the word “after” in the sentence was a subordinating conjunction or a preposition, Gibb said preposition. According to the terminology used in the tests this is the wrong answer, although the British-American linguist Geoff Pullum has argued that this terminology is based on an “<a href="http://chronicle.com/blogs/linguafranca/2015/11/08/prepositions-as-conjunctions-whales-as-fish/">ancient but incorrect analysis</a>”. </p>
<p>There are many aspects of the debate around these tests, and the wider culture of testing they are a part of, but a significant issue remains the purpose of learning grammar. </p>
<p>Grammar as a subject is distinct from the spelling and punctuation that it sits alongside in the test. Spelling and punctuation are artificial functions of the written language and can only be acquired explicitly. Grammar, by contrast, is an innate part of natural language which children acquire from birth – although the Standard English required for formal writing may differ in key aspects from their naturally acquired English.</p>
<p>At its best, learning about grammar is the process of enabling children to understand the structures of English. This <a href="https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/handle/10871/16506">can help them to improve their own writing</a> in a range of styles, and provides a foundation from which they can understand how the grammars of other languages differ from their own. At its worst, learning about grammar is about acquiring abstract terminology and <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-grammar-pedants-and-fashion-victims-have-in-common-55248">a set of nit-picking</a> (and occasionally outdated or simply invented) rules about “correct” grammar. This can result in children losing all interest in their own language, as well as any faith in their own ability to write well. </p>
<p>These two poles of grammar teaching – the “descriptive” (learning to describe structure) and the “prescriptive” (learning a set of prescriptions about language) – have been evident in the teaching of grammar from the outset.</p>
<p>The government’s own aims are sometimes nakedly prescriptive. The fact that “children will be expected to understand how to use the subjunctive” was trumpeted as a key feature of the higher standards in English introduced when the revised <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-primary-curriculum-to-bring-higher-standards-in-english-maths-and-science">National Curriculum</a> was announced in 2012. This decision makes little sense given that the use of the subjunctive is <a href="https://grammarianism.wordpress.com/2015/05/21/does-english-have-a-subjunctive/">rapidly dropping out of even the most formal English</a>. </p>
<h2>Grammar obsessions</h2>
<p>Before the 18th century, English grammar was rarely taught explicitly. If you learned grammar, you learned it via grammars of other languages, most notably Latin. The original purpose of grammar schools, first set up during the medieval period, was to teach Latin.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=579&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=579&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=579&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=728&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=728&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=728&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Grammar obsessive: Robert Lowth.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ARobertLowthBishop.jpg">Engraving by LE Pine</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The 18th century saw an explosion in the publication of books about English grammar. The most influential grammarian of his day was Robert Lowth, whose 1762 <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=tqgifS7RsAkC&redir_esc=y">Short Introduction to English Grammar</a> went through over 40 editions before 1800. Lowth has often been held responsible for all later prescriptive rules, including the split infinitive. As <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/The_Bishop_s_Grammar.html?id=n5_fQaPvXGYC&redir_esc=y">Ingrid Tieken Boon van Ostade</a> has shown, however, Lowth’s prescriptivism is less evident than has generally been assumed. He certainly had nothing to say about the split infinitive.</p>
<p>Still, the success of Lowth’s Grammar prompted others to emulate him and brought about a surge of linguistic consciousness quite unlike anything before. Grammar books became one of the publishing phenomena of the day. The result was a circular process. </p>
<p>The idea that incorrect grammar was a terrible social stigma meant that there was a lucrative market for self-improving grammar books. <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=sPXpnvI44gwC&dq=ian+michael+teaching+of+english&source=gbs_navlinks_s">Many authors</a> hastened to supply this market by writing grammar books, which reinforced the idea that bad grammar was a terrible social stigma. Along the way, many new “rules” were formulated by grammarians keen to fill their pages, and there was a proliferation of exercises in bad grammar designed to test students’ mastery of these rules.</p>
<h2>What the Romans didn’t</h2>
<p>In his preface, Lowth writes that: “The principal design of a grammar of any language is to teach us to express ourselves with propriety in that language.” This line of reasoning led one of his imitators, <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=tfVeAAAAcAAJ&dq=william+milns+the+well+bred+scholar&source=gbs_navlinks_s">William Milns</a>, to make claims such as: “<em>Latiné loqui</em>, the speaking of correct Latin was an accomplishment which even the natives of ancient Rome could not attain but by long and assiduous study.” </p>
<p>No linguist today believes that Roman school children had to be drilled in <em>amo, amas, amat</em> in order to speak their native language fluently. Yet, pressures towards a prescriptive teaching of grammar remain, particularly in the context of the new nationally administered test. </p>
<p>The need to reduce grammar to something that can easily be tested through multiple choice questions gives the impression that grammar is a subject for which there are always simple right and wrong answers. It also confuses the ability to understand language structure with the ability to obey arbitrary, prescriptive rules.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/57606/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jane Hodson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>New, harder tests for primary school children have raised questions about the purpose of learning grammar.Jane Hodson, Senior Lecturer in English Language and Literature, University of SheffieldLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/455872015-08-03T23:55:32Z2015-08-03T23:55:32ZWhat spelling bees can tell us about learning to spell – and what they get wrong<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/90671/original/image-20150803-15124-zsbkt6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Spelling isn't about memorising, it's about meaning.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Courtesy of Network Ten</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The world is divided into three types of people. Those who can spell – and know it. Those who can’t spell – and are ashamed of it. Those who can’t spell – and pretend they don’t care.</p>
<p>Spelling bees are full of the first type. They are usually <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com.au/where-are-they-now-scripps-national-spelling-bee-champions-2015-5#1992-winner-amanda-goad-went-to-harvard-law-school-and-became-a-staff-lawyer-on-the-aclus-lgbt-and-hiv-rights-project-">clever kids who can do much more than spell</a>. </p>
<p>Spelling bees don’t do much for the self esteem of the rest of the population that struggles with spelling. However, we CAN all be good spellers and if we are not, it is because we <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-some-kids-cant-spell-and-why-spelling-tests-wont-help-20497">haven’t been taught how words work</a>.</p>
<h2>How do we learn to spell?</h2>
<p>We don’t learn to spell words simply by being surrounded by them. There are many avid readers who can’t spell. Educated adults know around 60,000 words and they didn’t learn to spell those words just by remembering the look of each one. Spelling isn’t about “<strong>looking</strong>”. </p>
<p>We don’t learn our words by their sounds. Not only can hearing impaired students spell – and spell very well, as evidenced by one of the contestants on <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/the-great-australian-spelling-bee-gets-the-nation-buzzing-over-spelling-20150803-giqqjp.html">the Great Australian Spelling Bee</a> – but most words simply cannot be sounded out.
Spelling isn’t about “<strong>hearing</strong>”.</p>
<p>Spelling is about “<strong>meaning</strong>”. </p>
<p>When we know what the word means but can’t remember how to spell it, thinking about the meaning can help us spell it. When we read a word and don’t know what it means, unravelling its spelling can help us understand the word.</p>
<h2>How DO words make their meaning?</h2>
<p>The two questions we should ask when trying to spell a word are:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>What does this word mean?</p>
<p>How does this word make its meaning?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Children usually spell <em>magician</em> as they hear it – “majishun”. If we ask them to think about what the word means, they will tell us it is a person who does magic. That gives us the base word <em>magic</em>, and now we can hear the “ic” ending that disappears in <em>magician</em>.</p>
<p>Knowing the word is from French helps us choose a “g” to make the middle sound in “magic”.</p>
<p><em>Magician</em> makes its meaning by adding the suffix “ian” to the end of <em>magic</em>. This turns the base word <em>magic</em> into the person who does that word. It is a suffix that does this work in many other words that end in “ic”, e.g. electrician, physician and mathematician.</p>
<p>Understanding how <em>magician</em> makes its meaning uncovers the logic of its spelling. English spelling is not random and chaotic but neither is it natural and innate. English spelling is a human invention that has evolved over 1500 years of invasions, explorations, innovations, exchanges and egos. It needs to be taught.</p>
<h2>Spelling improves learning in all areas of schooling</h2>
<p>When spelling is focused on meaning, and how words make their meaning, spelling improves and <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20799003">so does reading comprehension, writing and vocabulary</a> across all subjects. </p>
<p>For example, when teaching the concept of <em>perimeter</em> in mathematics the teacher can unpack the two meaningful parts of the word, “peri” – meaning <em>around</em>, and “meter” – meaning <em>to measure</em>.</p>
<p>This helps students spell the word, but it also teaches them that <em>perimeter</em> means they must measure <em>around</em> the shape. This clearly differentiates the mathematical concept of <em>perimeter</em> from <em>area</em> – two concepts students often confuse. </p>
<p>It also turns a long word of nine letters into two much more manageable chunks to learn to spell.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Knowing what the word means makes it easier to spell.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Courtesy of Network Ten</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What can we learn from spelling bees?</h2>
<p>Watching contestants in spelling bees can show us how good spellers spell. In the big US spelling bees, which have been captivating that nation for decades, the contestants are allowed to ask a number of questions as they attempt to spell their words. </p>
<p>They can ask for the meaning of the word and this helps unpack any of the meaningful parts of the word. For example, <em>magic</em> and <em>ian</em>. </p>
<p>They can ask to hear the word in a sentence so they know what kind of word it is, and this may help them decide how to spell some of the sounds they can hear. For example, choosing <em>ian</em> rather than <em>ion</em>.</p>
<p>They can ask for the word’s origin and this can help them decide which letters are most likely to represent the sounds they can hear. For example, choosing <em>g</em> rather than <em>j</em>, and <em>c</em> rather than <em>k</em> in a French origin word. </p>
<p>Before giving their answer they often write the word to visually check their spelling.</p>
<p>Each of these questions gives an insight into how good spellers tackle spelling. They don’t just memorise a dictionary. </p>
<h2>What do spelling bees get wrong?</h2>
<p>We learn to spell words best while they are doing their day job – communicating. Spelling bees take words away from their day job, and place them in some sort of party game. </p>
<p>Words do nothing and mean nothing when they sit by themselves in long lists - randomly selected and disconnected from context. When spelling words are learned from isolated lists, they are learned as a discrete skill and quickly forgotten. This explains why the words learned for the Friday spelling test <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-some-kids-cant-spell-and-why-spelling-tests-wont-help-20497">are often forgotten</a> by the time Monday comes around again. </p>
<h2>An opportunity lost?</h2>
<p>The only question some contestants asked in the Australian version of the Spelling Bee was “Can I have the definition of the word?”. Perhaps the other questions which feature in US spelling bees were not allowed.</p>
<p>That would be a shame, because having the children simply bark letters back at the judge just reinforces the misconception that good spelling is the freakish talent of a lucky few, and robs us all of an opportunity to improve our own spelling.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Further reading: <a href="https://theconversation.com/spelling-bees-dont-teach-kids-literacy-or-much-else-39692">Spelling bees don’t teach kids literacy, or much else</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/45587/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<h4 class="border">Disclosure</h4><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Misty Adoniou has received recent government funding to investigate the needs of refugee learners, and to evaluate the implementation of Professional Standards for Teachers. She is affiliated with ACT association for Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL), and sits on the Board of Directors for TESOL International. She has provided professional learning on spelling to teachers in many jurisdictions across Australia.</span></em></p>Spelling bees don’t do much for the self esteem of the rest of the population that struggles with spelling. However, we CAN all be good spellers and if we are not, it is because we haven’t been taught how words work.Misty Adoniou, Senior Lecturer in Language, Literacy and TESL, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/396922015-04-05T22:49:51Z2015-04-05T22:49:51ZSpelling bees don’t teach kids literacy, or much else<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/76866/original/image-20150402-31292-8npw0x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Pressuring kids to memorise obscure, low frequency words does not promote good learning.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com.au</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Channel Ten’s newly announced show, <a href="http://www.shineaustralia.com.au/news/spellingbee">The Great Australian Spelling Bee</a>, may seem like a great platform for promoting literacy skills. Ten promises to inspire and excite audiences, while celebrating a love for words, spelling, and grammar.</p>
<p>The show will be a competition between precocious 8- to 13-year-olds spelling increasingly difficult words out-loud in a high-pressure, high-anxiety environment. If the US National Spelling Bee is anything to go by, the difference between winners and losers will be spelling words we wouldn’t dream of attempting.</p>
<p>How would you go spelling feuilleton, stichomythia, cymotrichous, or appoggiatura? More importantly, do you know the meaning of these words, and could you use them in a sentence?</p>
<p>Challenging and insightful, or obscure and essentially pointless? Spelling bees encourage endless memorisation of complex but low-frequency words – and are a distraction from the core of literacy education.</p>
<h2>An American tradition</h2>
<p>America has a strong tradition of spelling bees, starting in 1925 when a group of newspapers sponsored the competition. Since then, the <a href="http://spellingbee.com/about-the-bee>">Scripps National Spelling Bee</a> has held increasingly cut-throat competitions every year.</p>
<p>With ESPN covering the <a href="http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/05/27/espn-and-espn3-release-2014-scripps-national-spelling-bee-television-schedule/267717/>">last 21 spelling bees</a>, Americans can watch the brightest young spellers every year.</p>
<p>Holding a televised bee may spark a similar hype for literacy and the English language in Australia. But what does this style of competition say about literacy?</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/76873/original/image-20150402-32448-10ny3k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/76873/original/image-20150402-32448-10ny3k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/76873/original/image-20150402-32448-10ny3k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/76873/original/image-20150402-32448-10ny3k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/76873/original/image-20150402-32448-10ny3k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/76873/original/image-20150402-32448-10ny3k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/76873/original/image-20150402-32448-10ny3k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/76873/original/image-20150402-32448-10ny3k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Don’t mind all the pressure…</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/ctjonline/15647644428/in/photolist-pQJgwU-pbnS5M-pbnSe4-pQGhua-pQMgvC-pbk7jq-pbk7u5-q62rc5-q87AfT-pQKGdK-pbk7Jy-pbnSiT-pQMg5N-q8fB5E-q8fAVS-q8fAYs-pbk7mu-MzJy-87qFAU-9NZobX-9NZmVp-cgsKPb-87nc7W-87iZpR-9NZoxa-isodiN-9P2zsm-9NYJXc-87nugD-9NYJeZ-cJUQws-87nut8-kSDBQV-9NVPrn-9NYBYH-9NYh3D-9NYmoi-9NYhMe-9NZk1i-9P2Ap1-9NYyde-9P2taW-9P2x9W-9NZkqc-9NYkvV-9NYvGD-9NYYzP-9P2tUw-9P2rvG-9NYE6D">Flickr/Casa Thomas Jefferson</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Promoting the wrong literacy skills</h2>
<p>The Scripps National Spelling Bee involves some vocabulary questions in the earlier rounds, but the focus remains on the oral spelling of increasingly obscure words. Successful competitors learn strategies like using common root words, word origins, and their likely spelling patterns. However, they <a href="http://spp.sagepub.com/content/2/2/174.short">need repetitive and deliberate practice</a> to win. Essentially, the kids have to memorise hundreds if not thousands of words.</p>
<p>Providing the spelling of words, like matching words to their meanings in multiple choice questions, are <a href="http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=xUO0BQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=SOLO+taxonomy+&ots=aolyk_KtLf&sig=A0iawvbpvmUpk2xOOIcC-L0JKO8#v=onepage&q=SOLO%20taxonomy&f=false">low-order learning outcomes</a>. These are known as uni-structural, and require only the connection of one piece of information with another. This contrasts with learning outcomes that require describing or sequencing information, explaining ideas, and problem solving.</p>
<p>Being able to spell difficult words is only one element needed to become a literate learner. Australia’s <a href="http://research.acer.edu.au/tll_misc/5/">National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy</a> found that phonics (teaching the sound-letter patterns needed to read and spell) is an important component of literacy instruction. However, effective instruction should also include phonemic awareness (knowledge of how sounds make up words), fluency (the ability to read smoothly, quickly, and accurately), vocabulary knowledge, and text comprehension.</p>
<p>Literacy teaching does involve repetitive practice to master the code, but this is merely a means to an end. In later years, <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12109383">students learn much</a> of their advanced vocabulary from reading. Teachers may also provide explicit instruction in vocabulary around particular topics. At more advanced levels, students should learn words according to their meaning and function, as well as their spelling.</p>
<p>Spelling bees are as useful as speed reading races. What is the point of speed if you haven’t understood what you’ve read?</p>
<h2>Education is more than memorisation</h2>
<p>Just like the repetitive practice needed for spelling bees, some products claim that their daily “brain exercises” will improve cognitive function. The growing market of brain training games and apps reflects the proliferation of <a href="http://gerontologist.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/05/14/geront.gnr042.short">pseudoscience to create and exploit</a> new markets. </p>
<p>Lumosity uses the analogy of physical exercise to explain how practising daily “neuropsychological tasks” can improve your “mental fitness”. <a href="http://gazzaleylab.ucsf.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Anguera_Nature_2013-Video-game-training-enhances-cognitive-control-in-older-adults.pdf">Some studies</a> do show that repeated practice on brain training will improve performance on those particular tasks. But there is <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/dev/49/2/270/>">no evidence that this makes changes to brain function</a> in the real world, so what is the point?</p>
<p>Teachers do not drill students to regurgitate rote-learnt information. Education is a process that involves the exchange and negotiation of meaning. While practice is important for mastering underlying skills, learning should not be promoted as a form of fitness, because education is not like working out.</p>
<h2>What about kids with learning difficulties?</h2>
<p>Spelling bees can dishearten kids who struggle with spelling. Students with specific learning difficulties, like language impairment and dyslexia, struggle to master the spelling and reading of words at a much more fundamental level.</p>
<p>However, if a student’s only difficulty is poor spelling that is hardly a barrier to their academic or professional success. <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1471-3802.12013/abstract">Recent research has shown</a> the potential for technology to compensate for such difficulties. We all use spellcheck on a daily basis to help us spell low frequency words. </p>
<p>Difficulty reading or spelling certainly hasn’t impeded the success of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpvF5xCQ7s8">Richard Branson</a> or <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWGINKlhst4">Whoopi Goldberg</a>, who both have dyslexia.</p>
<h2>Spend more time reading and writing stories</h2>
<p>If the show lives up to its <a href="http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/the-great-australian-spelling-bee-is-tens-new-secret-weapon-to-boost-its-ratings-and-chrissie-swan-is-a-potential-host/story-e6frfmyi-1227275332613">promise</a> to: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>… supersize spelling into a hyper-stylised, entertainment family event</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Ten’s The Great Australian Spelling Bee will attempt to make education entertaining, by missing the point altogether.</p>
<p>The purpose of literacy and education is to access and create meaning, not to endlessly memorise spellings or facts. Studying for spelling bees wastes time better spent on real-world tasks like reading literature, writing stories, or debating ideas.</p>
<p>After all, what is the point of me spelling the word “insouciant”, if I don’t know what it means and thus can’t use it to express my indifference to these competitions?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/39692/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nathaniel Swain receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council.</span></em></p>Channel Ten’s newly announced show, The Great Australian Spelling Bee, may seem like a great platform for promoting literacy skills. But it is promoting the memorisation of pointless, low-frequency words rather than anything helpful.Dr Nathaniel Swain, PhD Candidate in Speech Pathology, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/360172015-01-11T19:27:11Z2015-01-11T19:27:11ZA teacher’s spelling doesn’t necessarily affect their teaching<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/68537/original/image-20150109-23792-5vkdyg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Teachers don't have to have perfect spelling to teach kids how to spell</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>According to recent <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/lament-over-standards-as-aspiring-teachers-flop-literacy/story-fni0fiyv-1227172148339">media</a> reports, a new <a href="http://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2558&context=ajte">study</a> shows an alarming number of aspiring teachers have lower literacy levels than the school students they will be teaching. </p>
<p>This coincides with a series of articles in <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/teacher-training-fails-on-literacy/story-fn59nlz9-1227174319349">The Australian</a> last week on a <a href="http://nswteachers.nsw.edu.au/DownloadDocument.ashx?DocumentID=1225">report</a> by the NSW government into universities preparing teachers for the teaching of reading.</p>
<p>The argument is compelling: kids (allegedly) can’t read or write, so it’s the teachers’ fault. Teachers themselves have poor literacy skills, so it must be the universities’ fault. The argument is followed by a call for a <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-we-should-never-return-to-the-three-rs-13179">return to the basics</a>, which will supposedly take education back to some fabled time when everything was better. </p>
<p>This tired old argument has been recycled for <a href="http://her.hepg.org/content/27263381g038222w/">decades</a>. Bronwyn Williams, a Professor of English, wryly <a href="http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/40021846">notes</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Every generation, upon reaching middle age, finds itself compelled to look at the literacy practices of young people and lament at how poor the work produced today is compared to that of idyllic days gone by.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Despite the best endeavours of conservative <a href="http://www.cis.org.au/media-information/opinion-pieces/article/4936-bad-teaching-kills-reading-skills">think tanks</a> and tabloid <a href="http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/mirandadevine/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/literacy_read_this_and_weep">commentators</a> to create a moral panic, there is no <a href="https://theconversation.com/my-first-ideology-teaching-reading-falls-victim-to-the-culture-wars-18741">literacy crisis</a> in Australia. </p>
<p>The argument that beginning teachers’ literacy levels has any meaningful impact on their own students’ literacy is not supported by <a href="http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED509656.pdf">evidence</a>. </p>
<p>Of course that doesn’t mean there isn’t <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9345.2006.00440.x/abstract">room for improvement</a>, particularly for students from marginalised and disadvantaged backgrounds and those for whom English is a further language. However, buying into the rhetoric of crisis and moral panic is unhelpful and will not improve outcomes.</p>
<h2>Teaching literacy is rocket science</h2>
<p>Teaching children to read and write is complex work. Any attempt to narrow the focus to a one-size-fits-all approach is not going to work.</p>
<p>A mix of <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/comment/teaching-literacy-a-complex-mix-of-methods-20150106-12itx0.html">methods</a> is needed to assist children in tackling the demands of literacy, which includes developing: grapho-phonic knowledge (understanding the relationship between print and sounds); phonemic awareness (being able to identify sounds that make meaning); the semantics and pragmatics of reading comprehension; fluency; vocabulary development; as well as controlling the syntactic and grammatical conventions of language.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/68543/original/image-20150109-23795-fbulia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/68543/original/image-20150109-23795-fbulia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/68543/original/image-20150109-23795-fbulia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/68543/original/image-20150109-23795-fbulia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/68543/original/image-20150109-23795-fbulia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/68543/original/image-20150109-23795-fbulia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/68543/original/image-20150109-23795-fbulia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/68543/original/image-20150109-23795-fbulia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Teaching reading is like rocket science, actually.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Four Resources Model, which brought together the very best in <a href="http://research.acer.edu.au/aer/1/">literacy research</a> is widely used as a literacy framework in schools and teacher education courses. </p>
<p>Learning the alphabet and how to put these letters together to make words is necessary, but <a href="http://research.acer.edu.au/tll_misc/5/">insufficient</a>. Students also need to engage meaningfully in text production and making meaning from the text, along with learning to appreciate and understand the social and cultural practices that are undertaken through reading and writing.</p>
<p>The complexity of literacy needs to be reflected in the training that teachers undertake, and highlights the importance of making connections between <a href="http://www.scootle.edu.au/ec/viewing/S7361/index.html">theory and practice</a>. </p>
<h2>Reading between the lines</h2>
<p>One of the things we teach students when learning to read is inferential comprehension - reading between the lines. It is interesting to apply this technique to the treatment of literacy research and education policy in the media.</p>
<p>The research <a href="http://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2558&context=ajte">study</a> in question presents a rather different picture from how it has been portrayed in the media. First, it deals specifically with secondary teachers. Second, it deals with one university and a narrowly defined literacy test. It would be like getting one school to sit the NAPLAN tests and then claiming it is representative of everywhere. </p>
<p>Dr Brian Moon, who conducted the study, explains:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>No representation is made here as to the general validity of the results in relation to students at other Australian universities.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Interestingly, the paper also refers to earlier studies from the 1980s on low literacy levels of student teachers and comments on how little has changed over the intervening decades.</p>
<p>Literacy and numeracy <a href="http://www.aitsl.edu.au/initial-teacher-education/literacy-and-numeracy-standards">testing</a> of teaching graduates is on the cards, with <a href="http://www.nswteachers.nsw.edu.au/great-teaching-inspired-learning/media/literacy-and-numeracy-tests-for-ite-questions-and-answers/">NSW</a> committed to a test program by 2016. What effect this may have is anyone’s guess. </p>
<p>It is assumed that teaching graduates who are better spellers will be better teachers, but there is little evidence to suggest this is actually the case.</p>
<p>Having a firm grasp of the basics is important, but it is only the very beginning of what a teacher needs to be able to do.</p>
<p>We know that <a href="http://theconversation.com/expert-panel-what-makes-a-good-teacher-25696">good teachers</a> need to be many things and have <a href="http://education.qld.gov.au/hr/recruitment/teaching/qualities-good-teacher.html0">qualities</a> well beyond those of proficient language use.</p>
<p>I was a teacher for seven years and do you know what I did when I didn’t know how to spell a word or what it meant? I grabbed a dictionary and used the opportunity to build it into the lesson. </p>
<p>Teaching is not about knowing everything but rather how to provide meaningful, contextualised and appropriate learning experiences for young people. And yes, sometimes not knowing can actually be useful.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/36017/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stewart Riddle does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>According to recent media reports, a new study shows an alarming number of aspiring teachers have lower literacy levels than the school students they will be teaching. This coincides with a series of articles…Stewart Riddle, Senior Lecturer, University of Southern QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/354182014-12-25T19:40:20Z2014-12-25T19:40:20Z2014, the year that was: Education<p>While 2013 was all about schools and their funding (remember <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/gonski-review">Gonski</a>, anyone?), 2014 was the year of <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/fee-deregulation">higher education reform</a>. Or, at least, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/senate-torpedoes-pynes-university-deregulation-34926">proposed</a></em> higher education “reform”.</p>
<p>With cuts to higher education funding and the <a href="https://theconversation.com/higher-ed-bill-explainer-what-will-pass-and-what-will-be-blocked-31019">prospect of fee deregulation</a> being some of the most maligned aspects of the May <a href="https://theconversation.com/federal-budget-2014-education-experts-react-26649">federal budget</a>, it was surprising that as much attention was being paid to Australia’s institutes of higher learning as is usually paid to our schools, hospitals and transport.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/facing-the-hard-questions-on-university-funding-25915">Most vice-chancellors</a>, albeit a few <a href="https://theconversation.com/stephen-parker-higher-education-changes-a-fraud-on-the-electorate-34909">glaring exceptions</a>, were in support of fee deregulation. They argued that the current funding system of unlimited student places (which was <a href="https://theconversation.com/demand-driven-system-review-experts-respond-23023">reviewed in April</a> and found to <a href="https://theconversation.com/demand-driven-university-funding-system-should-stay-25574">be a keeper</a>) and decreasing government support was unsustainable and universities needed to be set free.</p>
<p>However, many of <a href="https://theconversation.com/higher-education-the-age-of-pyne-the-destroyer-begins-26483">our experts</a> feared Australia’s politicians were unaware of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/three-misguided-beliefs-of-the-group-of-eight-universities-31334">drastic effect</a> this could have on our <a href="https://theconversation.com/more-expensive-more-elite-higher-education-in-five-years-26641">world-class system of higher education</a>, and especially <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-not-just-about-student-fees-its-about-institutionalised-inequity-27178">access to it</a> for all groups of Australian society.</p>
<p>After months of debate, negotiation and much hand-wringing, the Senate <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-tumultuous-year-in-higher-education-comes-to-a-close-another-soon-to-follow-34982">finally voted down</a> the bill in parliament’s last sitting week, only to have the bill’s champion, Education Minister Christopher Pyne, reintroduce it the very next day. </p>
<p>So, is another tumultuous year on the horizon in higher education? We’ll have to wait and see.</p>
<p>The debate separated <a href="https://theconversation.com/vice-chancellors-vs-the-collegiate-who-is-right-on-deregulation-33461">university staff from their leaders</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/regional-students-will-be-poorly-served-if-universities-compete-solely-on-price-29533">prestigious universities from middle-tier ones</a>. There was never a question that the prestigious Group of Eight would have more <a href="https://theconversation.com/trickle-up-only-the-elite-will-benefit-from-fee-deregulation-30218">pricing power</a> in a market system. One of our most-read pieces of 2014 outlined the worth of attending an elite university, which research found results in a <a href="https://theconversation.com/graduates-from-prestigious-universities-earn-more-over-their-lifetime-32832">slight salary increase</a> across a lifetime.</p>
<p>Paying for education was an important focus this year. We closely examined private schooling and whether the cost pays off. We found public school kids <a href="https://theconversation.com/state-school-kids-do-better-at-uni-29155">do better at university</a> than private school kids with the same tertiary entrance score, and post-university employment prospects and wages were <a href="https://theconversation.com/private-schooling-has-little-long-term-pay-off-30303">much the same</a>.</p>
<p>We didn’t only look at public and private schools, though. There’s been an increased interest in <a href="https://theconversation.com/principal-school-doesnt-work-for-most-kids-32733">doing education differently</a>, so we looked at alternative forms of education and options outside of public, private and Catholic schools.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/for-creativity-capability-and-resilience-steiner-schools-work-24763">Steiner</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/kids-choose-their-own-work-in-a-montessori-classroom-26452">Montessori</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/democratic-schooling-teachers-leave-them-kids-alone-24669">Democratic</a> schools are on the rise, and we looked at how these work in our <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/alternative-schooling">alternative schooling series</a>.</p>
<p>While thinking about different ways of doing things, our authors challenged what we thought we knew works in education. Misty Adoniou asked if we should <a href="https://theconversation.com/homework-whats-the-point-of-it-24123">scrap homework altogether</a>, and Rebecca English asked if parents should <a href="https://theconversation.com/gentle-parenting-explainer-no-rewards-no-punishments-no-misbehaving-kids-31678">stop punishing and rewarding</a> their kids, and instead teach them to be good just for the sake of it.</p>
<p>The biggest news in schools this year was the government-commissioned review into the <a href="https://theconversation.com/national-curriculum-review-experts-respond-26913">national curriculum</a>. The review was just as controversial in its recommendations to have more of a focus on Australia’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/pyne-curriculum-review-prefers-analysis-free-myth-to-history-32956">“Judeo-Christian” heritage</a> as it was for its <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-spurr-to-abandoning-the-literary-canon-33529">appointments</a>. However, we’re yet to see changes actually reach our classrooms, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/will-the-curriculum-review-make-it-in-to-schools-its-a-political-waiting-game-33878">could be waiting for a while</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67063/original/image-20141212-6057-wat5fo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67063/original/image-20141212-6057-wat5fo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67063/original/image-20141212-6057-wat5fo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=535&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67063/original/image-20141212-6057-wat5fo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=535&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67063/original/image-20141212-6057-wat5fo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=535&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67063/original/image-20141212-6057-wat5fo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=672&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67063/original/image-20141212-6057-wat5fo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=672&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67063/original/image-20141212-6057-wat5fo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=672&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">You guys sure do like spelling, or at least reading about it.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>What you seemed to enjoy the most though was looking at language: <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-some-kids-cant-spell-and-why-spelling-tests-wont-help-20497">spelling</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/grammar-matters-and-should-be-taught-differently-25604">grammar</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/aussie-slang-is-as-diverse-as-australia-itself-27973">Aussie slang</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/hopefully-literally-begs-the-question-the-three-most-annoying-misuses-in-english-26595">annoying misuses in English</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/are-those-damned-americanisms-really-american-32566">Americanisms</a>, and whether your kids were using language in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-most-important-thing-for-a-stutter-is-to-get-in-early-33402">way they should</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-tell-if-your-child-has-a-speech-or-language-impairment-31768">at the right ages</a>.</p>
<p>You also enjoyed our series on <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/bullying-in-schools">bullying in schools</a>, including <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-difference-between-bullying-and-everyday-life-27861">what is actually bullying</a> and what is just the argy bargy of everyday life. Our <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/exam-guide">exam guide</a>, which led up to end of year final exams, let you know <a href="https://theconversation.com/hsc-exam-guide-top-5-tips-on-how-to-blitz-your-humanities-exam-31789">how to study</a>, what to <a href="https://theconversation.com/hsc-exam-guide-what-to-eat-to-help-your-brain-31959">eat</a>, and how to <a href="https://theconversation.com/hsc-exam-guide-how-to-help-your-kids-through-this-stressful-time-31553">support loved ones</a> during this stressful time.</p>
<p><strong>But in case you missed them, here were our top five education stories for the year:</strong></p>
<ol>
<li><p><a href="https://theconversation.com/why-some-kids-cant-spell-and-why-spelling-tests-wont-help-20497">Why some kids can’t spell and why spelling tests won’t help</a></p></li>
<li><p><a href="https://theconversation.com/state-school-kids-do-better-at-uni-29155">State school kids do better at uni</a></p></li>
<li><p><a href="https://theconversation.com/private-schooling-has-little-long-term-pay-off-30303">Private schooling has little long term pay off</a></p></li>
<li><p><a href="https://theconversation.com/gentle-parenting-explainer-no-rewards-no-punishments-no-misbehaving-kids-31678">‘Gentle parenting’ explainer: no rewards, no punishments, no misbehaving kids</a></p></li>
<li><p><a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-tell-if-your-child-has-a-speech-or-language-impairment-31768">How to tell if your child has a speech or language impairment</a></p></li>
</ol>
<p>And finally, we realise the education section has bombarded you with close-ups of this man all year. So here we pay homage to that with a few of our favourites. We’ve called it “The Many Faces of Pyne”:</p>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/35418/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
While 2013 was all about schools and their funding (remember Gonski, anyone?), 2014 was the year of higher education reform. Or, at least, proposed higher education “reform”. With cuts to higher education…Alexandra Hansen, Deputy Editor and Chief of Staff, The Conversation AUNZLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/354772014-12-17T03:49:20Z2014-12-17T03:49:20ZTime for a New Year’s resolution? Definately? Defiantly? Definitely!<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Looking for a New Year’s resolution? Forget losing weight, exercising more and quitting the bad stuff. How about we all resolve to spell “definitely” correctly … and “separate” … and “lose” … and “you’re” …</p>
<h2>Spelling is a treasure hunt</h2>
<p>We all have words that trip us up and it is tempting to blame the apparent randomness of English spelling for our errors, and absolve ourselves of any responsibility for getting them right. After all, spell-check will fix them for us. </p>
<p>But when we rely on spell-check we miss out on some great learning. Contrary to popular opinion, English spelling is not random and chaotic. The spelling of a word is the story of its meaning and history. Spelling is a fascinating treasure hunt - a genealogy of the English language.</p>
<p>There are five ways into a word:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Think about the meaning of the word </p></li>
<li><p>Unpack the way the word is making that meaning by looking for the base word and prefixes and suffixes</p></li>
<li><p>Find out where the word has come from</p></li>
<li><p>Listen to the sounds in the word</p></li>
<li><p>Check if any spelling rules apply</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Good spellers use all of these strategies. Poor spellers rely on sounds - so it is odd that we focus almost exclusively on sounds with poor spellers in schools, denying them the very tools that could help them most.</p>
<h2>Getting spelling right</h2>
<p>Rather than provide an accusatory list of the “most annoying” spelling errors of 2014, I’m offering a “genealogical” approach to getting them right in 2015. </p>
<p>Definitley, definately, defiantly. </p>
<p>This is <em>definitely</em> the most commonly misspelled word I see in my work with undergraduates. It’s also the first response to all questions asked of athletes - “Yeah, definitely”. So it is must be a word worth investigating!</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=178&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=178&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=178&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=224&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=224&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=224&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Damian Du Toit</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Let’s take the word back to its roots - <em>definite</em>. <em>Definite</em> is an adjective that we can use to describe nouns - a <em>definite</em> advantage. </p>
<p>We add the suffix ‘ly’ to turn the adjective into an adverb - <em>definite</em> + ly. An adverb gives us more information about verbs and adjectives. For example,</p>
<p>Interviewer: “You must be relieved to have the win”. </p>
<p>Sportsperson: “Yeah, definitely [relieved]”. </p>
<p>Interviewer: “It was a great match”. </p>
<p>Sportsperson: “Yeah, definitely [was]”.</p>
<p>So “<em>definite</em>” + “ly” won’t be “<em>definit</em>” + “ley”. </p>
<p>You can use this understanding of how suffixes work to get all those “ly” endings right - truly, madly, deeply right. </p>
<p>It works for “ty” as well. So next time you are stuck on safety (or is it saftey?) and ninety (or is it nintey?), strip them back to their base and suffix - safe + ty, nine + ty.</p>
<p>It will also help with accidentally (not accidently) and publicly (not publically).</p>
<p>Remember, we put the suffix “ly” on the end of adjectives to turn them into adverbs. Accident is a noun, so we can’t write accident + ly. To turn accident into an adjective we add the suffix “al” to make “accidental”. Now we have an adjective to which we can add “ly” - accidental + ly.</p>
<p>“Public” is a noun as in “the general public”. But it can also be an adjective as in “a public statement”. So we can put the “ly” on the end of “public” - “public” + “ly”. </p>
<h2>Sounds right?</h2>
<p>But what about “definately” - why is that such a common error? And if it is one of your errors how can you fix it? </p>
<p>The reason for this error accounts for about 50% of our spelling errors as adults. When we get to that second “i” in <em>definitely</em> we hit a very special sound in English called the schwa. The schwa is that caveman sounding grunt - “uh”. In Australian English it seems to be everywhere - on the end of mother and tractor, and in the middle of words like “defin_i_te” and “separate”. In Kiwi English it’s there in words like “f_i_sh” and “ch_i_ps”. </p>
<p>It is a sound we can write in any number of ways and in “<em>definitely</em>” many of us opt for an “a”. So when sounding out lets us down (and it so often does in English spelling) go back to meaning and look at the base word - “<em>definite</em>”. </p>
<p>This is where a little family history comes in handy. “<em>Definite</em>” shares the same Latin root as “<em>finite</em>”. It means to be bound by something, to have limits. And in “<em>finite</em>” that pesky schwa sounds disappears and we can hear the second “i” making a much less ambiguous sound that leads us more directly to choosing the letter “i”.</p>
<h2>First rule of spelling - what does it mean?</h2>
<p>And as for “defiantly” - well that it is a different word altogether, from the root word “defy”. This is an important reminder that correct spelling is pointless if you don’t know the meaning of the word. And I’ve written before on <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-some-kids-cant-spell-and-why-spelling-tests-wont-help-20497">the pointlessness of spelling tests</a> and spelling lists for this very reason.</p>
<h2>How do we learn?</h2>
<p>We learn new information by making connections to existing information. Stories about words give us context, and a logic we can connect to next time we need to spell the word. And when we look at words this way, not only do we improve our spelling but we build our vocabulary as well. </p>
<p>Spelling reformists who’d like to change English so it is written the way it sounds would be destroying the language’s DNA and wiping out the family history of every word. Advocates of “phonics first” approaches are doing the same thing. Spelling is reduced to abstract sounds and letters, rather than the fascinating exploration of word meaning, language history and vocabulary building it should be. </p>
<h2>Make your resolution now</h2>
<p>So what is your spelling Achilles heel? Occasionally, independent, accommodation, recommend, relevant, embarrass, February? Tackle it head on in the new year by investigating its family history. </p>
<p>And if you are inspired to share your most annoying spelling error in the comments section, give us your strategies for getting it right too. </p>
<p>This is one New Year’s resolution that is easy to keep, and with benefits well beyond January 31st.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/35477/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Looking for a New Year’s resolution? Forget losing weight, exercising more and quitting the bad stuff. How about we all resolve to spell “definitely” correctly … and “separate” … and “lose” … and “you’re…Misty Adoniou, Senior Lecturer in Language, Literacy and TESL, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/273532014-06-02T04:55:44Z2014-06-02T04:55:44ZHow to be a whizz at spelling<p>Children who compete in spelling bees often dazzle with their ability to spell complex words. In this year’s televised Scripps National Spelling Bee, two American teenagers were so good they were <a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/05/30/us-usa-spellingbee-winners-idUKKBN0EA06H20140530">crowned joint champions</a>, correctly spelling the words “stichomythia” and “feuilleton” to clinch the title. </p>
<p>Contestants in a spelling bee are allowed to ask about the pronunciation, the meaning, and the language of origin of a word. All these are key to a good grasp of spelling.</p>
<p>English is a chaotic and highly irregular writing system, according to some observers. In this view, we can’t do much more than memorise the spellings of words.</p>
<p>But studies of the English writing system itself and of spellers paint a more encouraging picture. English isn’t totally chaotic. There are things that spellers can do to increase their chances of spelling a word correctly.</p>
<h2>Break it down</h2>
<p>Breaking a word up into individual phonemes (units of sound) and selecting a letter or letter group for each unit is a good strategy for spelling many words. In some languages, such as Finnish, almost all phonemes have just one possible spelling and this strategy works very well. In English, however, many phonemes have more than one possible spelling. </p>
<p>What children are taught at school are usually context-free rules that link phonemes and letters. For example, children are taught that the “f” sound is spelled with <em>f</em>, as in <em>fish</em>, or that the “short o” sound is spelled with <em>o</em>, as in <em>pond</em>. </p>
<h2>Put it into context</h2>
<p>If spellers relied only on such context-free links between phonemes and letters, they would misspell many sounds, including the “f” of <em>staff</em> and the “o” of <em>wand</em>. Taking the neighbouring sounds and letters into account can often improve performance in such cases.</p>
<p>In English, there is a general rule that the “f” sound has a special two-letter spelling, <em>ff</em>, when it comes after a single-letter vowel. Similarly, “l” has the <em>ll</em> spelling in such cases and “k” has the <em>ck</em> spelling. Even when this rule is not explicitly taught, my <a href="http://pages.wustl.edu/files/pages/imce/readingandlanguagelab/Hayes%20et%20al.%20%282006%29%20-%20Children%20use%20vowels%20to%20help%20them%20spell%20consonants.pdf">research has shown</a> that people pick it up through their exposure to written words. They use the context in which a sound like “f” occurs when deciding how to spell it, favouring <em>f</em> in some environments and <em>ff</em> in others. </p>
<p>As another example, people become sensitive to the fact that “o” tends to be spelled differently when it comes after the “w” sound, as in <em>wand</em>, than when it comes after other sounds, as in <em>pond</em>. Children with higher levels of spelling skill <a href="http://pages.wustl.edu/files/pages/imce/readingandlanguagelab/treiman_kessler_2006_-_spelling_as_statistical_learning.pdf">take better advantage</a> of the context of consonants than children with lower levels of spelling skill.</p>
<h2>Meaning matters</h2>
<p>Spelling in English is not just a matter of attending to sounds. It also requires attention to meaning. For example, the “t” as the end of words is usually spelled as <em>ed</em> when it is a word ending that conveys the past tense. In other cases, it is usually spelled as <em>t</em>. There can be added confusion due to the differences between American and British spelling. </p>
<p>A six-year-old who writes <em>Jak jumpt</em> for <em>Jack jumped</em> doesn’t yet know this. Within a year or two, however, children have begun to learn about the meaning units within words and how these sometimes influence spelling. That knowledge can help them to spell a word like <em>health</em> correctly, with the <em>ea</em> that is found in <em>heal</em> rather than the <em>e</em> that would be expected purely on the basis of sound. </p>
<p>English has borrowed words from many languages, and knowing the origin of a word can sometimes help in choosing among possible spellings of its sounds. The “k” at the end of words is normally spelled as <em>ck</em> when it is preceded by a single vowel, as in <em>chick</em>. When the word is French in origin, however, this sound is more likely to be spelled as <em>c</em>, as in <em>chic</em>. </p>
<p>Not everyone can be a spelling bee champion, but these techniques can help everyone to become a better speller. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/27353/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rebecca Treiman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Children who compete in spelling bees often dazzle with their ability to spell complex words. In this year’s televised Scripps National Spelling Bee, two American teenagers were so good they were crowned…Rebecca Treiman, Burke and Elizabeth High Baker Professor of Child Developmental Psychology, Washington University in St. LouisLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/198282013-12-04T02:26:02Z2013-12-04T02:26:02ZIt’s time to recognize and internalize the US suffix ‘ize’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/36718/original/d5w6rkpt-1386023385.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Language isn't meant to be uniform and globalised.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">erin m</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Here’s the truth, and if you’re British or Australian, you may not like it: when it comes to the suffix <em>ize</em>, as opposed to <em>ise</em>, the American standard is correct.</p>
<p>I have no idea what cultural forces made America more sensitive to English spelling than Australia and even Britain, or how the British English spell-check software on your computer got it so wrong, when the British used to know better.</p>
<p>The global spread of word-processing splits the world into an informed mob (Americans, who understand when to use <em>ize</em> and when to use <em>ise</em>) and an uninformed mob (the pink parts on the map) who have no idea but who consider anything other than <em>ise</em> to be dangerously radical.</p>
<p>Many now believe <em>ise</em> to be correct, conservative, consistent. By contrast, <em>ize</em> is seen by these people as new-fangled and brash.</p>
<p>Craving the firm foundations of the establishment, Australians have standardised <em>ise</em> as the correct national form. Proselytising for <em>ize</em> is to no avail. Text editing changes <em>ize</em> to <em>ise</em> by default.</p>
<p>(The Conversation’s style guide, bound perhaps by the view that sees <em>ize</em> as a radical US invention, requires me to use the <em>ise</em> suffix throughout this article except in examples given to illustrate my point.)</p>
<h2>Crossing out the <em>ise</em></h2>
<p>A simple method, which is now only understood in America, determines when to use <em>ise</em> and when to use <em>ize</em>. Both are correct but only for certain types of word; and it is incorrect to consider either to be universal.</p>
<p>For anyone brought up on Greek and Latin, there is scarcely a moment of doubt as to which suffix applies. But it isn’t necessary to know classical languages to understand the distinction.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/36722/original/qg7ykmxh-1386026107.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/36722/original/qg7ykmxh-1386026107.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=554&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36722/original/qg7ykmxh-1386026107.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=554&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36722/original/qg7ykmxh-1386026107.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=554&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36722/original/qg7ykmxh-1386026107.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=696&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36722/original/qg7ykmxh-1386026107.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=696&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36722/original/qg7ykmxh-1386026107.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=696&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Michael Summers</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The suffix <em>ize</em> should be used for verbs that connote transformation; when something is turned into something else or grows or becomes something. Usually, you can recognise the form whenever there is a simpler version of the word that pre-exists.</p>
<p>So we say theorise (or I would write “theorize”):</p>
<p>(a) because we turn something into a theoretical condition<br>
(b) because a simpler word already exists: theory. According to the US convention, it would be theorize.</p>
<p>The same with other Greek words such as harmonize, systematize, stigmatize, categorize, canonize, apologize and so on. Indeed, this form takes its <em>z</em> unchanged from the zeta used in present tense conjugations in Greek.</p>
<p>Romans similarly respected this convention, which can still be seen in Italian and Spanish infinitives of the form <em>izar(e)</em>.</p>
<p>So for English words derived from Latin, we can authorize, civilize, familiarize, fertilize, formalize, fossilize, humanize, immortalize, legalize, memorize, nationalize, naturalize, neutralize, patronize, pulverize, realize, satirize, scrutinize, secularize and so on.</p>
<p>In each of these cases, a simpler word lies behind it: author, civil, familiar and so on. Also, any abstract nouns based on these verbs should take a <em>z</em>, such as authorization, civilization, legalization, nationalization, pulverization, realization.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/36723/original/cs9ns6d5-1386027420.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/36723/original/cs9ns6d5-1386027420.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36723/original/cs9ns6d5-1386027420.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36723/original/cs9ns6d5-1386027420.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36723/original/cs9ns6d5-1386027420.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36723/original/cs9ns6d5-1386027420.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36723/original/cs9ns6d5-1386027420.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">jpstanley</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>If you cannot see either (a) the process of transformation or becoming or (b) a simpler word inside the longer form, the correct suffix is <em>ise</em>. It is the reason we must always write advise, comprise, demise, despise, devise, disguise, excise, improvise, incise, merchandise, revise, surmise, surprise.</p>
<p>Such Latin words take their <em>s</em> from a kind of past participle of verbs for “take” or “see” or “cut”. We also have to use an <em>s</em> for some Greek words, such as analyse, for which the derivation isn’t a verb but is based on the motif of dissolution (<a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lysis">lysis</a>) that already has a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigma">sigma</a> in it. Americans often get that one wrong.</p>
<h2>It’s what you know, not where you are</h2>
<p>For centuries, the use of <em>ize</em> and <em>ise</em> suffixes has had less to do with geography than knowledge or the kind and degree of education. In the past, if you were well educated you knew which to use in any circumstance.</p>
<p>Today, however, we think it’s posh and extra proper to standardise everything and homogenise spelling, in ignorant denial of the history of language and its correct use.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/36726/original/y9b9zcz6-1386028214.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/36726/original/y9b9zcz6-1386028214.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36726/original/y9b9zcz6-1386028214.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36726/original/y9b9zcz6-1386028214.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36726/original/y9b9zcz6-1386028214.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36726/original/y9b9zcz6-1386028214.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/36726/original/y9b9zcz6-1386028214.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Language and spelling are great repositories of history.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Bill Walsh</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In a world that has big things to worry about, such as global warming, you might ask: does it really matter? And sure, on a scale of crimes against heritage, the demise of the <em>z</em> is a minor concern. If I hypothesize rather than hypothesise (yuck), you still know what I mean.</p>
<p>Also, going against classical conventions, the French have long standardised verbs to <em>iser</em>, and we can hardly call them dunderheads.</p>
<p>But it doesn’t mean that the issue doesn’t matter at all.</p>
<p>It’s a bit like a decision to paint a Federation church uniformly white, bricks and all. True, this vandalism doesn’t go so far as to demolish the building. Gratefully, the damage is somewhat reversible, but it’s still a silly, somewhat uneducated and ugly facelift.</p>
<p>Language is a great repository of history and its quirks all tell wonderful stories. But more than that, language isn’t meant to be uniform and globalised. We shouldn’t feel that a text with <em>ize</em> mixed with <em>ise</em> is somehow inferior, inconsistent or flawed.</p>
<p>The zeal to iron out a logical diversity and to impose a single suffix indicates insecurity. It’s a failure to understand the marvellous organic treasury of semantic traditions that language represents.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/19828/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert Nelson receives funding from the OLT.</span></em></p>Here’s the truth, and if you’re British or Australian, you may not like it: when it comes to the suffix ize, as opposed to ise, the American standard is correct. I have no idea what cultural forces made…Robert Nelson, Associate Director Student Experience, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/204972013-11-24T19:03:50Z2013-11-24T19:03:50ZWhy some kids can’t spell and why spelling tests won’t help<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/35857/original/fv7m6gpm-1385082224.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=14%2C630%2C3249%2C2882&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Spelling tests aren't teaching kids to spell. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Test image from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A couple of years ago, early one morning, <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/national/toxic-smoke-fears-as-industrial-fire-burns-in-canberra-20110916-1kccu.html">I received an SMS</a> advising “resadents to stay indoors because of a nearby insadent”. I was shocked by the spelling, as much as the message. Surely, I thought, if it was a real message then the spelling would be correct. </p>
<p>Spelling matters. In a text message from a friend teeing up a night out “c u at 8” is fine - but in an emergency warning text from a government agency, I expect the spelling to be standard. But why is it that some people struggle with standard spelling? </p>
<p>Spelling remains the most relentlessly tested of all the literacy skills, but it is the least taught. </p>
<p>Sending a list of words home on Monday to be tested on Friday is not teaching. Nor is getting children to write their spelling words out 10 times, even if they have to do it in rainbow colours.</p>
<p>Looking, covering, writing and checking does not teach spelling. Looking for little words inside other words, and doing word searches are just time fillers. And writing your “spelling” words in spirals or backwards is just plain stupid. </p>
<p>And yet, this is a good summary of most of the current spelling programs in schools today.</p>
<p>So, what should spelling teaching look like? </p>
<h2>Finding meaning</h2>
<p>Children should know the meanings of the words they spell, and as logical as that sounds - ask a child in your life what this week’s spelling words mean, and you might be surprised by their answers. </p>
<p>If spelling words are simply strings of letters to be learnt by heart with no meaning attached and no investigation of how those words are constructed, then we are simply assigning our children a task equivalent to learning ten random seven-digit PINs each week. </p>
<p>That is not only very very hard, it’s pointless.</p>
<h2>More than sounds</h2>
<p>English is an alphabetic language; we use letters to write words. But it is not a phonetic language: there is no simple match between sounds and letters. </p>
<p>We have 26 letters, but we have around 44 sounds (it’s not easy to be precise as different accents produce different sounds) and several hundred ways to write those sounds. </p>
<p>So, while sounds - or phonics - are important in learning to spell, they are insufficient. When the only tool we give young children for spelling is to “sound it out”, we are making a phonological promise to them that English simply cannot keep.</p>
<h2>How words make their meanings</h2>
<p>Sounds are important in learning to spell, but just as important are the morphemes in words. Morphemes are the meaningful parts of words. For example, “jumped” has two morphemes - “jump” and “ed”. “Jump” is easily recognised as meaningful, but “ed” is also meaningful because it tells us that the jump happened in the past. </p>
<p>Young spellers who are relying on the phonological promise given to them in their early years of schooling typically spell “jumped” as “jumt”. </p>
<p>When attempting to spell a word, the first question we should teach children to ask is not “what sounds can I hear?” but “what does this word mean?”. This gives important information, which helps enormously with the spelling of the word. </p>
<p>In the example of “jumt” it brings us back to the base word “jump”; where the sound of “p” can now be heard, and the past marker “ed” , rather than the sound “t” which we hear when we say the word. </p>
<p>Consider the author of the emergency text message at the beginning of this article as they pondered which of the many plausible letters they could use for the sound they could hear in “res - uh - dent”. </p>
<p>If they had asked themselves first, “What does this word mean?” the answer would have been people who “reside”, and then they would have heard the answer to their phonological dilemma.</p>
<h2>Where words come from</h2>
<p>English has a fascinating and constantly evolving history. Our words, and their spellings, come from many languages. Often we have kept the spellings from the original languages, while applying our own pronunciation. </p>
<p>As a result, only about 12% of words in English are spelt the way they sound. But that doesn’t mean that spelling is inexplicable, and therefore only learned by rote - it means that teaching spelling becomes a fascinating exploration of the remarkable history of the language - etymology. </p>
<p>Some may think that etymology is the sole province of older and experienced learners, but it’s not. </p>
<p>Young children are incredibly responsive to stories about words, and these understandings about words are key to building their spelling skills, but also building their vocabulary. </p>
<p>Yet poor spellers and young spellers are rarely given these additional tools to understand how words work and too often poor spellers are relegated to simply doing more phonics work. </p>
<h2>Teaching - not testing</h2>
<p>The only people who benefit from spelling tests are those who do well on them - and the benefit is to their self-esteem rather than their spelling ability. They were already good spellers. </p>
<p>The people who don’t benefit from spelling tests are those who are poor at spelling. They struggled with spelling before the test, and they still struggle after the test. Testing is not teaching.</p>
<p>Parents and teachers should consider these questions as they reflect on the ways in which spelling is approached in their school.</p>
<p>Are all children learning to love words from their very first years at school? Are they being fascinated by stories about where words come from and what those stories tell us about the spelling of those words? </p>
<p>Are they being excited by breaking the code, figuring how words are making their meanings and thrilled to find that what they’ve learned about one word helps them solve another word? </p>
<p>Put simply - is spelling your child’s favourite subject?</p>
<p>If the answer is no, then something needs to be done about the teaching.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/20497/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Misty Adoniou is a Senior Lecturer in Language, Literacy and Teaching English as a Second Language at the University of Canberra. She occasionally presents workshops in schools on the teaching of spelling.</span></em></p>A couple of years ago, early one morning, I received an SMS advising “resadents to stay indoors because of a nearby insadent”. I was shocked by the spelling, as much as the message. Surely, I thought…Misty Adoniou, Senior Lecturer in Language, Literacy and TESL, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.