Synthetic phonics

Part of a series on
Reading
Language
Language Writing Writing system Orthography Braille
Types of Reading
Slow reading Speed reading Subvocalization
Learning to Read
Learning to read Comprehension Spelling Vocabulary Reading disability Dyslexia Reading for special needs
Reading Instruction
Alphabetic principle Phonics Whole language
Literacy
Literacy Functional illiteracy Family literacy English orthography
Lists
Languages by writing system Management of dyslexia

Synthetic phonics (UK) or blended phonics (US), also known as inductive phonics,^[1] is a method of teaching reading which first teaches the letter sounds and then builds up to blending these sounds together to achieve full pronunciation of whole words. This article relates to the English language only.

Methodology

Synthetic phonics teaches the phonemes (sounds) associated with the graphemes (letters) at the rate of about six sounds per week. The sounds are taught in isolation then blended together (i.e. synthesised), all-through-the-word. For example, children might be taught a short vowel sound (e.g. /a/) in addition to some consonant sounds (e.g. /s/, /t/, /p/). Then the children are taught words with these sounds (e.g. sat, pat, tap, at). They are taught to pronounce each phoneme in a word, then to blend the phonemes together to form the word (e.g. /s/ - /a/ - /t/; "sat"). Sounds are taught in all positions of the words, but the emphasis is on all-through-the-word segmenting and blending from week one. It does not teach whole words as shapes (initial sight vocabulary) prior to learning the alphabetic code.

Synthetic phonics develops phonemic awareness along with the corresponding letter shapes. It involves the children rehearsing the writing of letter shapes alongside learning the letter/s-sound correspondences preferably with the tripod pencil grip. Dictation is a frequent teaching technique from letter level to word spelling, including nonsense words (e.g. choy and feep)^[2][3] and eventually extending to text level. It does not teach letter names until the children know their letter/s-sound correspondences thoroughly and how to blend for reading and segment for spelling. Often when letter names are introduced it is through singing an alphabet song.

Synthetic phonics teaches phonics at the level of the individual phoneme from the outset; not syllables and not onset and rime. Synthetic phonics does not teach anything about reading as a meaning-focused process, raising concerns that it addresses part of the reading process only. It highlights decoding and pronunciation of words only. Teachers are to put accuracy before speed. Fluency (i.e. speed, accuracy,expression, and comprehension) will come with time, proponents argue but the research into this is equivocal.^[4][5]

Synthetic phonics involves the teaching of the transparent alphabet (e.g. /k/ as in "cat") before progressing onto the opaque alphabet (e.g. /k/ as in "school"). In other words, children are taught steps which are straightforward and 'work' before being taught the complications and variations of pronunciation and spelling of the full alphabetic code. It introduces irregular words and more tricky words (defined as words which cannot be pronounced phonically – English has a surprisingly large number of these, usually the commonest words of all such as 'to', 'of', etc.) slowly and systematically after a thorough introduction of the transparent alphabet code (learning the 44 letter/s-sound correspondences to automaticity and how to blend for reading and segment for spelling). Phonics application still works at least in part in such words, claim advocates.

Synthetic phonics involves a heavy emphasis on hearing the sounds all-through-the-word for spelling and not an emphasis on "look, cover, write, check". This latter, visual form of spelling plays a larger part with unusual spellings and spelling variations and its effectiveness as a strategy to teach spelling has been supported by research. Teachers read a full range of literature with the children and ensure that all children have a full range of experience of activities associated with literacy such as role play, drama, poetry, but they are not allowed to attempt to 'read' text which is beyond them, resulting in quite an impoverished reading diet.

Typical programme

• learning letter sounds (as distinct from the letter names);

For example, mmm not em, sss not es, fff not ef. The letter names can be taught later but should not be taught in the early stages.

• learning the 40+ sounds and their corresponding letters/letter groups;

The English Alphabet Code 'Key': 40+ phonemes with their common 'sound pattern' representations.^[6] (This is based on the British pronunciation. The number and mixture of the 40+ phonemes will vary for other English speaking countries such as Australia, Canada and the U.S.A.).

Vowels:

Consonants:

• learning to read words using sound blending;
• reading stories featuring the words the students have learned to sound out;
• demonstration exercises to show they comprehend the stories;

Systematic phonics

Systematic phonics is not one specific method of teaching phonics; rather, it is a family of phonics instruction that includes the methods of both synthetic phonics and analytical phonics. They are "systematic" because the letters, and the sounds they relate to, are taught in a specific sequence; as opposed to incidentally or on a 'when-needed' basis. However, it should be noted that, in most instances, the term systematic phonics appears to refer to synthetic phonics because of the specific instruction methods it uses. (In the United Kingdom, the term "systematic phonics" is "generally understood as synthetic phonics" according to the reading review which was conducted in 2006.^[7])

Systematic phonics does not include methods such as embedded phonics and phonics mini lessons which are found in the whole language approach and the Balanced Literacy approach. It is not clear, however, why the phonics taught in these approaches cannot be systematic.

Analytical phonics

Analytical phonics practitioners do not teach children to pronounce sounds "in isolation" as is the practice with Synthetic Phonics, but try to ensure that sounds and letters are taught in meaningful contexts. Furthermore, consonant blends (separate, adjacent consonant phonemes) are taught as units (e.g., in the word shrouds the shr would be taught as a unit). Some analytical phonics programs (referred to as analogy phonics) teach children to break-down words into their common components which are referred to as the "onset" and the "rime". In the word "ship", "sh" is the "onset" and "ip" is the "rime" (the part starting with the vowel). In other words, analytical phonics teaches the child to say /sh/ - /ip/ (ship) and /sh/ - /op/ (shop), whereas synthetic phonics, teaches the child to say /sh/ - /i/ - /p/ (ship) and /sh/ - /o/ - /p/ (shop). The approach through onsets and rimes was developed on the basis of a very rigorous and hugely influential research programme by Professor Usha Goswami, of the University of Cambridge. In analytical phonics, children are also taught to find the similarities among words (e.g. man, can, tan, fan, and ran), thus developing their analogical reasoning. Whereas synthetic phonics devotes most of its time to learning the letter/sound relationships (i.e. grapheme/phoneme) outside of any attempt to make such work meaningful to children.

Synthetic phonics

Synthetic Phonics uses the concept of 'synthesising', which means 'putting together' or 'blending'. Simply put, the sounds prompted by the letters are synthesised (put together or blended) to pronounce the word.^[1]

Common terminology

Some common terminology used within this article includes:

• alphabetic code (in synthetic phonics): The relationship between sounds (phonemes) and the letter/s (graphemes) that represent them are referred to as a "code". For example, the sound /ay/ can be represented in many ways (e.g. cake, may, they, eight, aid, break, etc.).^[8] See also: Alphabetic principle
• decoding skills (in phonics): Without the use of context, to pronounce and read words accurately by using the relationship between the letter(s) and the sounds they represent. (i.e. "cat" is /k/-/a/-/t/, "plough" is /p/-/l/-/ow/, and "school" is /s/-/k/-/oo/-/l/. "Encoding skills" (i.e. spelling) is the same process in reverse.^[9]
• Direct instruction (also known as Explicit Instruction ): A teaching style that is characterized by "carefully designed instruction" that usually includes a fast pace, small steps, demonstrations, active participation, coaching, immediate correction, and positive feedback.^[10] (Pg. 85)
• intensive instruction: teaching or tutoring that include some of the following: more time; peer-assisted strategies; and instruction in small groups or one-on-one.^[11] (Pg. 209)
• peer-assisted literacy strategies: Children work in pairs (taking turns as teacher and learner) to learn a "structured sequence" of literacy skills, such as phonemic awareness, phonics, sound blending, passage reading, and story retelling.^[12] (Pg. 33)
• supportive instruction: teaching or tutoring that supports the student both emotionally and cognitively. This includes encouragement, immediate feedback, positive reinforcement, and instructional scaffolding (i.e. clear structure, small steps, guiding with questions).^[11] (Pg. 209)

History

The teaching of reading and writing has varied over the years from spelling and phonetic methods to the fashions for look-say and whole language methods. In America in the eighteenth century, Noah Webster introduced spelling approaches with syllabaries and in England the use of James Pitman's Initial Teaching Alphabet was popular in the 1960s. Recently phonic methods have been revived.

Australia

In December 2005 the Department of Education, Science and Training of the Australian Government published a report entitled a National Inquiry into the Teaching of Reading.^[10] The report recommends direct and systematic instruction in phonics as the foundation of early reading instruction. Some of the findings (not always supported by reliable evidence) are:

• Among the successful schools visited, there were a number of key similarities. Three of those similarities are:

1. a belief that each child can learn to read and write regardless of background;
2. an early, systematic, and "explicit" (i.e. specific and clear) teaching of phonics;
3. the phonics instruction was followed by "direct teaching".

• Students learn best from an approach that includes phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary knowledge and comprehension. (Executive Summary)
• A whole-language approach, "on its own, is not in the best interests of children, particularly those experiencing reading difficulties". (Pg. 12)
• Where there is unsystematic or no phonics instruction, children do not perform as well in such areas as reading accuracy, fluency, writing, spelling and comprehension. (Pg. 12)
• A recommendation that teachers provide "systematic, direct and explicit phonics instruction".(Pg. 14)

Canada

In Canada, public education is the responsibility of the Provincial and Territorial governments. There is no evidence that systematic phonics (including synthetic phonics) has been adopted by any of these jurisdictions. However, systematic phonics and synthetic phonics receive attention in some publications.

• In 2003 the Department of Education for the government of Ontario published a report entitled Early Reading Strategy - The Report of the Expert Panel on early Reading in Ontario.^[5] The report appears to support the use of systematic and explicit phonics instruction. It suggests that instruction in phonemic awareness be followed up with "systematic and explicit instruction" on the relationship between letters and the sounds they represent. (Pg. 17)
• In 2009, the Department of Education for the province of British Columbia posted a discussion paper on their Read Now website entitled Reading: Breaking Through the Barriers.^[13] The paper states that explicit and synthetic phonics needs to be taught directly in the classroom because it works "for all students but are particularly helpful for students at risk for reading difficulty". (Pg. 8) There appears to be no evidence, however, that systematic phonics (or synthetic phonics) is a part of the teaching pedagogy.
• Dr. Robert Savage, of McGill University, concludes that, with respect to remedial programs, we should not wait for children to fail before using phonics programs. He also recommends the teaching of such skills as segmenting and blending alongside the "explicit teaching" of letter sounds.^[14] He also says there is a need for more Randomized controlled trials in order to produce more definitive conclusions. Other researchers do not agree with this approach, insisting that reading needs to be taught in a meaningful way if children are to gain long term benefit from this teaching.

United Kingdom

A review of the teaching of early reading was undertaken by Sir Jim Rose at the request of the Department for Education and Skills.^[15] While the report often uses the term "Systematic Phonic work", it appears to support "Synthetic Phonics" as evidenced in the Rose Review. In fact, to be clear, the U.K. Department of Education uses the term "systematic synthetic phonics". The following is a summary of the report's observations and recommendations concerning phonics, although, it should be noted, these were based on a very partial reading of the evidence:

1. The skills of speaking, listening, reading and writing are used by (and are supported by) what it refers to as "high quality, systematic phonics".
2. Young children should receive sufficient pre-reading instruction so they are able to start systematic phonics work "by the age of five".
3. High quality phonics work should be taught as "the prime approach" to teaching reading, writing, and spelling.
4. Phonics instruction should form a part of "a broad and rich language curriculum". Note: critics of this report point out that the report does not explain what they mean by this, nor does it offer any details on how to achieve this within the framework of synthetic phonics' instruction.

Critics of the report

• In a report dated April 2007,^[16] professors Dominic Wyse^[17][18] and Morag Styles^[19] conclude that the evidence "supports" systematic phonics; however, the Rose Report's assertion that synthetic phonics should be the "preferred method" is "not supported by research evidence". This criticism is based on the way the research was conducted and how the results were interpreted.^[16]
• In October 2011, The National Campaign for Real Nursery Education web site (U.K.) comments on the U.K. government's intent to impose a specific type of phonics teaching (i.e. systematic, synthetic phonics) in the nursery and reception years, and suggests that this decision was not supported by the "research evidence".^[20]

Developments following the Rose Review

• Following the adoption of the phonics approach in its schools, the U.K. Department of Education provided a great deal of online support for teachers wishing to learn more.
• In March 2011 the U.K. Department of Education released its White paper entitled "The Importance of Teaching". In the Executive Summary, item 12 of the curriculum section states their commitment to support "systematic synthetic phonics, as the best method for teaching reading."^[21]

United States

The United States has a long history of debate concerning the various methods used to teach reading, including Phonics. In 1999, The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) appears to conclude that systematic phonics programs are "significantly more effective" than non-phonics programs. It also concludes that they found no significant difference between the different phonics approaches, while suggesting that more evidence may be required.^[22]

The NICHD has come out in support of phonics instruction. The institute conducts and supports research on all stages of human development. The institute conducted a meta-analysis and, in 2005, it published a report entitled Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read.^[4] Some findings and determinations of this report are:

• Teaching phonemic awareness(PA) to children was "highly effective" with a variety of learners under a variety of conditions. (Note: Phonemic Awareness/PA is the ability to manipulate phonemes in spoken syllables and words. Phonemes are the smallest units composing spoken language. For example, the words "go" and "she" each consist of two sounds or phonemes, /g/-/oe/ and /sh/-/ee/.)
• Reading instruction that taught PA improved the children's reading ability significantly more than those that lacked this instruction.
• PA helped normally achieving children to spell, but was not effective in helping disabled readers to spell better.
• "Systematic synthetic phonics" instruction had a positive and significant effect on helping disabled readers, low achieving students, and students with low socioeconomic status to read words more effectively than instruction methods that lacked this approach.
• Systematic Phonics instruction improved the ability of good readers to spell. Poor readers experienced a small improvement.

It should be noted that these conclusions were not supported by ALL members of the National Reading Panel.

See also

• American English
• Auditory processing disorder
• British English
• Reading for special needs
• Whole language

Note: This article uses British Received Pronunciation.

References

Further reading

• "An Evaluation of Basic Reading Processes" (pdf). Powered by Google Docs. 
• Borowsky R, Esopenko C, Cummine J, Sarty GE (2007). "Neural representations of visual words and objects: a functional MRI study on the modularity of reading and object processing". Brain Topogr. 20 (2): 89–96. doi:10.1007/s10548-007-0034-1. PMID 17929158. 
• Heim S, Tschierse J, Amunts K, et al. (2008). "Cognitive subtypes of dyslexia". Acta Neurobiol Exp. 68 (1): 73–82. PMID 18389017. 
• Kendeou P, Savage R, van den Broek P (June 2009). "Revisiting the simple view of reading". Br J Educ Psychol. 79 (Pt 2): 353–70. doi:10.1348/978185408X369020. PMID 19091164. 
• Turkeltaub PE, Gareau L, Flowers DL, Zeffiro TA, Eden GF (July 2003). "Development of neural mechanisms for reading" (pdf). Nat. Neurosci. 6 (7): 767–73. doi:10.1038/nn1065. PMID 12754516. 

External links

• A Prototype for Teaching the English Alphabet Code
• Articles about Synthetic Phonics
• Four main methods learning to read (method 1 phonics)
• International Reading Association Position Statements
• Phonemic Chart from the BBC
• Teaching Phonics - U.K. Department of Education