chapter three: - bowling green state universitypersonal.bgsu.edu/~richaro/page3/files/sls...

Small Leap Spelling -- page 1 of 30

Running Head: Small Leap Spelling

This article was originally published in the March/April issue of TEACHING Exceptional

Children. Since its publication, I’ve received close to 200 letters and e-mails from around the

world asking for more information. This article is an updated version that contains the

information that teachers and researchers were requesting, and is currently under submission to

The Reading Teacher. The teaching technique of Small Leap Spelling was also the subject of my

dissertation research.

Small Leap Spelling: Linking Phonemic Awareness, Spelling, and Reading

to Develop the Alphabetic Principle

Richard M. Oldrieve, Ph.D.

Bowling Green State University

529 Education Building

Bowling Green, Ohio 43403

28359 Center Ridge Rd.

Westlake, OH 44145

[email protected]

cell phone: 440-463-4031

home phone and FAX: 440-892-1409


Abstract

This article will describe how to conduct a Small Leap Spelling lesson. It will also

include a scope and sequence for when to teach particular phonemic/orthographic patterns. Small

Leap Spelling was originally developed as an intervention for remediating urban students with

learning disabilities. In a small randomized study, Small Leap Spelling was shown to help low

performing at-risk urban kindergartners develop the alphabetic principle (Author, 2005). Each 30

minute lesson incorporates three key components of Hatcher, Hulme, and Ellis (1994)

phonological linkage hypothesis: phonemic awareness, spelling, and reading.

Support for linking reading and phonemic awareness comes from a study by Morais,

Cary, Alegria, & Bertelson (1979) which found that phonemic awareness develops in reciprocal

relationship to early reading development. Similarly, support for the importance of early spelling

comes from C. Chomsky (1971), and Read (1971) who have reported that spelling often

develops before reading, while Ehri (2000) has noted reading and spelling are two sides of the

same coin. Most recently, the Early Literacy Panel (Shanahan & Westberg, 2004) has presented

preliminary results of a meta-analysis which has indicated that spelling in pre-school and

kindergarten is the best predictor of success in later high stakes assessments.


Small Leap Spelling: Linking Phonemic Awareness, Spelling, and Reading

to Develop the Alphabetic Principle

In 1984, I began my career by teaching reading to seventh and eighth grade students with

learning disabilities in the Cleveland Municipal School District. Using the techniques I had been

taught in my class for diagnosing and remediating reading difficulties, I kept assessing my

students to find what they knew and didn’t know. After trying not to embarrass the students by

making it obvious how low I was going to find something they all could do, six weeks into the

grading period I finally wrote the word cat on a piece of newsprint mounted on a homemade

easel. I really don’t remember how many of the students could read the word; instead what I

remember was my mixture of shock and relief when I discovered that most of the students

couldn’t name a word that rhymed with cat. Although, I was horrified that they couldn’t perform

such a simple task, I felt a sense of relief that I finally knew what I needed to teach my students.

Along with reading researchers such as Blachman, 1994, Torgesen (1988), Torgesen,

Wagner, & Rashotte, (1994) and Torgesen, Wagner, Simmons, & Laughon, (1990), I had just

“discovered” the phenomenon of phonological processing disorders. Several of these researchers

began documenting their efforts to develop programs for helping these students to become

phonemically aware and begin to link letter sounds with written letters (Griffith & Olson, 1992;

Haskell, Foorman, & Swank, 1992; Helfgott, 1976; Wylie & Durrell, 1970). In an article

published in the Journal of Learning Disabilities Torgesen, Wagner, & Rashotte (1994, p. 236)

declared that the emerging consensus about the importance of phonological processing abilities

in the acquisition of early reading skills is one of the most exciting developments in reading

research.


Yet before the almost single-minded focus on phonemic awareness and phonological

processing disorders, Read (1971) and C. Chomsky (1971) had documented that pre-schoolers

often were able to spell before they could read. Furthermore, a decade later, Morais, Cary,

Alegria, and Bertelson (1979) found that Portuguese peasants who were illiterate did poorly on

phonemic awareness assessments. Yet after taking adult literacy classes, these students could

segment words into phonemes and blend phonemes into words. Thus, Morais, et al. had

demonstrated that phonemic awareness develops in reciprocal relationship with real reading.

Then Hatcher, Hulme, and Ellis (1994) proposed a phonological linkage hypothesis which states

that phonemic awareness, reading, and spelling lessons are most effective if they are linked.

More recently, Ehri (2000) has suggested that reading and spelling are two sides of the same

coin.

Without being aware of most of the studies and/or theories, I began developing a

systematic invented spelling method that I now call Small Leap Spelling. I found the program

was quite successful with my students with learning disabilities, and in 1997 I described Small

Leap Spelling in a journal targeting special education teaching techniques and began presenting

the technique at various conferences (Author, 1997, 1998, 1999a, 1999b, 2001).

Nonetheless, I always felt that SLS would help many general education kindergartners

and first graders from at-risk socio-economic backgrounds develop the alphabetic principle

before they left first grade, and thereby prevent them from needlessly being labeled learning

disabled in second, third, or fourth grade. Consequently, in the true spirit of the No Child Left

Behind Act (Paige, 2002), I’m pleased to report that in a small randomized sample study

focusing on two contrast teachers who were using their regular curriculum, two experimental

teachers who supplemented the regular curriculum with Small Leap Spelling, and all of their at-


risk urban students (Author, 2005), I found that compared to matching contrast students,

experimental students who scored below the pre-test mean for a given assessment made 50%

greater gains on post-tests of lower case letter identification, school district mandated sight

words, CVC decoding, and CVC spelling.

Description of a Small Leap Spelling Lesson

A Small Leap Spelling lesson typically takes about thirty minutes to complete. In a small

group setting it can take substantially less time. Each Small Leap Spelling lesson fits Hatcher et

al. (1994) phonological linkage hypothesis by containing linked components of phonemic

awareness, spelling, and reading. Furthermore, all students are required to become involved in

constructing an understanding of the alphabetic principle during each of the three components of

a typical lesson.

Phonemic Awareness Component

The first component of a typical SLS lesson begins with the teacher introducing two

target words and/or sound patterns. Then each student contributes to the class effort to construct

a verbal spelling list of words. Each student names one word that contains the same phonological

feature of the first target word and then each student names one word that contains the same

phonological feature of the second target word. If a student can’t name a new word that fits the

target sound/letter pattern, then the student should be asked to name three words that have

already been named.

Early in the scope and sequence found in Appendix A, students are asked to develop one

spelling list of words that contain the rime at and another list of words that contains the rime am.

Several months later, students will be comparing and contrasting a short vowel CVC word such

as cap with its long vowel CVCe counterpart such as cape. Still later, students will have


progressed to creating lists of words that contain the beginning digraphs ch, th, and sh, and the

beginning blends such as sl, st, br, and fl.

Invented Spelling Component

For the second component of an SLS lesson, the teacher asks students to invent spell

words from the orally generated spelling lists. For example, in a lesson featuring the rimes of at

and am, the teacher might begin by asking students to spell cat. As students spell cat on their

papers, the teacher should roam the room and ensure that students had spelled cat correctly.

After everyone is done spelling cat, the teacher should call upon a student who has

correctly spelled cat and ask the student to spell it orally while the teacher writes the student’s

spelling onto the board. The teacher and students will then discuss why the spelling written on

the board is correct or incorrect, and after the class settles on a correct spelling of cat, students

who missed the word on their papers are given an opportunity to correct them. (Although I must

admit that one reason why I begin with cat is that I’ve never met an older LD student who

couldn’t spell cat correctly).

The purpose of having students orally spell the words is to help students match the names

of letters with the sounds of words in a semi-natural context. Most students will know the names

of their letters before a teacher begins teaching SLS lessons. Nonetheless, the students who need

SLS lessons the most also tend to be students who are struggling with letter reversals and

inversions, and thus calling on these struggling students to orally spell words, gives these

students the opportunity to orally spell words in the context of known words that they may have

intuitively spelled correctly during the test. Consequently, in my dissertation study (Author,

2005), the students who scored below the mean on lower case letters improved from knowing an

average of 17 letters to 23 letters, while the contrast students merely improved from knowing an


average of 17 letters to 20 letters. And even though the vast majority of experimental and

contrast students knew all of their upper case letters on the pre-test, there was one student who

received Small Leap Spelling instruction who didn’t make many gains on CVC Decoding or

CVC Spelling, but he did master all of his upper case letters.

After having students invent spell, orally spell, and discuss the correct spelling of several

words that rhyme with cat, the teacher should switch and have students invent spell words that

rhyme with ham. The teacher should expect that some students will struggle, and the teacher

should discuss why ham ends with an m, while hat ends with t. The teacher should then

randomly alternate between contrasting ram with rat, Sam with sat, and Pat with Pam. Each time

the teacher should put little emphasis on correcting capitalization errors and instead should focus

on seizing the teachable moment to help students hear the differences between final consonants

and match them to written letters. Later in the test, the teacher should repeat misspelled words to

give students an opportunity to try to spell the word correctly. If students are writing on

chalkboard slates, or dry erase boards, then bringing back missed words is even easier.

As students become more familiar with the SLS procedures, and the teacher feels more

comfortable with having students discuss why a word might be spelled one way versus another,

the teacher may deliberately call on one student who has spelled the word incorrectly and

another who has spelled it correctly. Then the teacher can lead a discussion as to why both

versions are plausible, but only one is correct.

The design of any given SLS spelling test is emergent (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998). During

each daily lesson and during the course of daily SLS lessons, the teacher should begin with easier

words and build towards harder ones. As already explained, the teacher can begin the tests on

Monday and Tuesday by alternating between words from each word family that have the same


initial consonant such as hat versus ham, pat versus Pam, and sat versus Sam. Then later in the

week the teacher can immediately begin to randomly present any word from the at and am

families, especially those words such as jam, yam, and dam that cannot be paired with a word

from the at family.

Once the students have spelled 12 words, several students should be called upon to

compose a spoken sentence that contains at least two words from that day’s test. For example, a

student might say: “The fat cat sat on Sam and Pam.” After several students have recited their

sentences, the teacher should select and/or edit a sentence for the students to spell on their

papers. This sentence should be comprised of a.) words that come from that day’s word list, b.)

words the students had spelled in previous weeks, and c.) common sight words that can already

be found on the class word wall or that are worthy of being added to the word wall. Admittedly,

word family trade books and basal readers have been almost universally derided for containing

no meaning or aesthetic beauty, nonetheless, students enjoy competing to compose the longest

silly sentence and having it chosen for everyone to spell.

It is important to note that if a teacher is truly using an emergent approach, and therefore

is repeating words that students miss early in the test, then it will be extremely rare that on any

given 12-word spelling test students will spell every possible word that contains the same rime or

the same contrasting feature as the two target words. Consequently, teachers should use the same

two target words all week and try to ensure that over the course of the week all of the potential

words but one have been spelled. The purpose in holding back one word is to save it for Friday’s

standard spelling test, so that the teacher can discern whether students are generalizing that

week’s phonological pattern or rule. Furthermore, as students become more proficient late in the


week, teachers may want to ask students to spell pseudowords that fit one of the two

phonological patterns.

It is also important to point out that because the design of SLS lessons is systematic

invented spelling (Au, 1997), teachers should not assign students to study words for seatwork or

for homework. The goal of Small Leap Spelling is to encourage students to concentrate on how

spoken phonemes are matched to written graphemes. And if word lists are sent home, many

students will mindlessly memorize the spellings without making any phonological linkages.

Therefore, a better homework assignment would be to assign students to make up sentences,

paragraphs, and/or stories which are comprised of from LAST week’s end of the week spelling

test.

Word Wall Component

For the third component of the Small Leap lesson, the students and teacher should

chorally read the list of words from the board several times, and then each day several

individuals should be taken aside to read the list by themselves. In both the choral and

individualized list reading, students should first read the words in the order they are found on the

board, and then the teacher should take out a meter stick and point at words in random order to

ensure that students didn’t just memorize the list of words in order.

End of the week closed-book tests

Every Friday (or the last day of a shortened week), students should be given a standard

20-word closed book spelling test. In contrast to the student constructed lists on the open-book

versions, the teacher should (a) come to class with a prepared list of the hardest words that match

the two target words, (b) skip the phonemic awareness portion of the open-book version, (c)


establish a formal spelling test “this means business” atmosphere, and (d) then go straight

through the word list without any breaks to discuss how the words should be spelled.

The closed book spelling test provides a score to put into the grade book and a chance to

determine if students should move on or should study the same phonological/orthographic

pattern for another week. For the first few weeks, the test will be shorter than 20 words, but after

the “at” and “am” family of onset-rimes, several review words can be mixed in fill out the 20

word test and to ensure students are remembering previously learned phonological patterns.

Instead of scoring each word in an all or nothing fashion, students should be given on a

sliding partial credit scale:

5 points for a correctly spelled word

1 point deduction for each:

letter reversal such as b for d

letter inversion such as w for m

similar sound letter such as g for j, d for t, or c for k

2 point deduction for each completely wrong letter

Before graduating the class to the next target letter pattern, the student with the lowest skills

should score at least 85 points out of 100 on the Friday exam. And even though time constraints

would make it difficult to formally assess an entire class on the phonemic awareness and reading

components of the word list, each Friday, the teacher should take several students aside to

ascertain whether these selected students are capable of (a) naming at least 3 words that match

each target word pattern and (b) reading the 20-word list while making no more than 3 mistakes

(85% accuracy). If a several students are consistently scoring below 80% on the phonemic


awareness, spelling or reading components of the SLS lesson, while their classmates are scoring

far above 90%, then the low scoring students should be formed into their own separate group.

Scope and Sequence

Appendix A contains the Scope and Sequence chart for when to teach particular

phonological patterns. My experience is that even students with severe phonological processing

disorders can complete the sequence within 2 to 2 ½ years. This timeframe fits into Stahl’s

(1992) recommendations for good phonics instruction.

A cursory reading of the scope and sequence chart might lead you to conclude that the

analogy approach is how students learn to spell and read the patterns on the daily tests.

Nonetheless, by holding two letters constant in rime analogies, and then other types of analogy

described by Treiman and Zukowski (1996), the student can progress through several stages:

1) Comparing and contrasting between initial consonant sounds.

2) Comparing and contrasting between final consonants.

3) Comparing and contrasting between different vowel sounds.

4) Differentiating between the beginning and final blends and digraphs.

5) Differentiating between the rules for adding morphemes to words.

For example, in the first lesson it appears that the focus is on the rime at. But the purpose

holding the at constant is to allow students to hear the differences in the initial consonants and

thus students are actually learning that cat begins with a c sound, rat begins with an r sound, and

sat begins with an s sound.

Similarly, once two rime patterns are contrasted at the same time, there will be some

focus on learning new initial consonant sounds, but the main focus will be on comparing and

contrasting the final consonant sound. For example, as explained earlier, when you ask the


students to spell words from the at and am families, you should be emphasizing the comparing

and contrasting between the final consonants by having the students spell hat followed

immediately by ham. And then you could have the students spell Sam followed by sat; pat

followed by Pam and of course at followed by am.

As noted on the scope and sequence chart, going through all of short a rimes will take

several months. In fact with students with hard core phonological processing disorders, I have

found that students might take five weeks to learn how to spell the nine words within the at

family. Students take so long because they are learning to “hear” consonants in beginning and

final positions and they are constructing a knowledge base of how the initial and final consonant

sounds in a word relate to its spelling. And finally they are learning how a word’s spelling relates

to its pronunciation. Each subsequent letter/sound pattern takes a bit less time to learn.

Once all the phonetically consistent CVC words containing short a are learned, then the

focus will shift to the medial vowels. For example, by comparing the at and it family words

judiciously, the teacher can ensure that the initial and final consonants are held constant and the

student focuses on differentiating between short a and short i, by comparing and contrasting bat

with bit; fat with fit, and most importantly at with it. Then, the following week students can

compare jam with Jim; ram, with rim; and ham with him.

To the teacher, each step will seem like a baby step and the whole process might seem all

too easy and all too obvious, and thus the temptation will be to consolidate all the rimes that

contain a short i and teach them in only a week or two. But the whole point of the Small Leap

Spelling approach is to break the scope and sequence of learning letter sounds down into small

enough steps that students will be making the small leaps between steps on their own. Even at

the beginning of the week, students should only be missing 3 or 4 words out of the 12 possible


words. Then, by Wednesday and Thursday of each week there should be little discussion as to

the correct spelling of words since students should be correctly spelling almost all of them.

If the scope and sequence is taught too quickly, then only some of the students will truly

be inventing the connections for themselves, while the other students will be mimicking the good

students to get through the each day’s test. Then you’ll discover these students might know this

week’s words, but they can’t remember how to spell words from three weeks ago. Thus, it is

important to remember that if taught at the deliberate pace set in the scope and sequence chart—

which includes bringing back comparisons to early rime patterns throughout—even students with

phonological processing disorders will learn the alphabetic principle within two years.

Remember, the intent of Small Leap Spelling is to ensure that NO students reach the third

grade guarantee of the NCLB Act, let alone seventh and eighth grade, unable to name a word

that rhymes with cat. If ALL of your students are scoring above 90% on the end of the week

tests, then some steps on the scope and sequence chart can probably be consolidated.

Initial Consonant, Final Consonant, Medial Vowel.

To help make it easier to remember and reconstruct the scope and sequence chart, I’ll re-

emphasize that forty years ago Bruce (1964) documented that the first sound kindergarten

students can distinguish is the Initial Consonant within words. Then once they learn how to

distinguish between initial consonants, kindergartners begin to “hear” Final Consonants. Next,

once they have learned to distinguish between final consonants, they begin to “hear” medial

vowels.

The scope and sequence chart in Appendix A is designed to help students make this slow

progression because it is structured around how easily speech sounds can distinguished and

formed by students. And thus when you are selecting phonemic awareness activities to use


during other parts of the school day, please remember to select activities that match the

developmental level of the spelling lessons. For example, if students are focusing on the initial

consonants and rimes within the at and am families during Small Leap Spelling lessons, then

they probably won’t be able to segment the words down to the medial vowel on the Yopp-Singer

(Yopp, 1995) or on DIBELS (Kamii &Manning, 2004). Nor will they be able to blend all three

letters together in CVC words (Chall, Roswell, & Blumenthal, 1963). As noted by Smith (1999),

some phonemic awareness activities can only be done if the student knows how to read and spell

the word.

Consequently, when working with the early short a rimes, teach phonemic awareness

activities such as blending and segmenting initial consonants with various rimes, finding the

rhyming words in poems and Dr. Suess books, and verbally composing alliterative tongue

twisters such as “She sells sea shells by sea shore.”

Contrast in Consonant Sounds

The order in which the rimes are introduced on the scope and sequence chart is also

important. On the chart, students are first asked to differentiate between sounds with two

different linguistic features such as the hard stop of the t found in the at rime, and then the nasal

sound of the m. While phonemes that are only off by one linguistic feature (Edwards, 1974; N.

Chomsky & Halle, 1968) are separated by several other rimes in the scope and sequence chart.

One example of an off by one feature is the comparison of hard stops of d and t that vary only by

how the tongue presses against the mouth. Another example would be the fricatives f and v that

vary only by the fact that v is voiced, while f is unvoiced. Similarly, even though m and n are

actually off by two features, they seem similar to students because both letter sounds are nasals.


Thus, with a couple of other features mixed in between, the scope and sequence of Appendix A

has students first learn to spell pat, then Pam, then pad, and finally pan.

In fact, teachers should always be aware and introduce extremely dissimilar features

when students are learning a concept and then focus on similar sounds near the end of the week.

For example, just like Bradley and Bryant (1983) used in their seminal study of phonemic

awareness, the first four initial letters when teaching the at rime should be the c in cat, the m in

mat, the f in fat, and the s in sat. The second advantage of introducing m, f, and s are that they

can all be held in the mouth and can be emphasized as in ffffffat, ssssssat, and mmmmmat.

Please note, that unless teachers specifically confuse students by introducing the rule of

hard and soft c, beginning spellers won’t even notice that an alternative spelling for cat is kat,

and that an alternative spelling for sat is the soft c cat.

No Short “e”

Compared to the tradition of introducing vowel sounds in the alphabetical order of a, e, i,

o, and u, the scope and sequence of Appendix A is different because short “e” words isn’t

introduced until after all of the other vowel sounds have been learned. One reason for making

this switch is that the short e in many U.S. dialects several short e words such as get are

pronounced as a short i. A second reason that is related to the first is that Calfee, Gilman,

Norman, 1998) reported that short a, i, o, and u are pronounced in the mouth with the spacing of

white keys on the piano, while short e is spaced like a black key located halfway between short a

and short i. Thus, short e is not only pronounced inconsistently, it is tough to “hear” and “speak”

correctly.

Pure Vowel Sounds First and then R-controlled and L-controlled Vowels Later


Similar to the reasoning of skipping the short e sound, the scope and sequence in

Appendix A moves through the pure short vowel words that are formed in CVC spelling

patterns, then the pure long vowels words that can be spelled using CVCe, before coming back

later to pick up the semi-pure r-controlled and l-controlled “short” vowels found in CVC words

such as car, for, and pal. In essence, Small Leap Spelling systematicizes the invented spelling of

Read (1971) and C. Chomsky (1971) so that students can learn the alphabetic principle without

ambiguity, while complex letter patterns and the 8-different ways to spell the long a sound, and

other variations on the irregularities of English are generally left to later spelling programs.

Breaking the Developmental Sequence

Admittedly, in their strategy of Making Words, Patricia M. Cunningham and James W.

Cunningham (1992) advocate mixing in digraphs, blends, and complex letter patterns early in

their scope and sequence in order to keep all members of a class engaged in the lesson. In

contrast, the scope and sequence I’ve outlined pays more attention to the developmental

sequence that students learn speech sounds. More importantly, because Small Leap Spelling

doesn’t use a limited number of tiles, but requires students to write out answers, it forces students

to choose between all 26 available letters and their available sounds. In particular, SLS forces

students to choose between letters with off by one features, while there are few opportunities in

the Cunninghams’s typical 7-letter secret word to choose between the tiles m and n, d and t, f and

v, s and z, or the hardest triumvirate of b, d, and p. Further research will be needed to determine

which method is best in which circumstances, but I tend to think that the Cunninghams’s Making

Words strategy will work best with older higher SES students where the danger is boring

students, while my strategy is better for younger students in situations where the school is

providing the only academic support for many students.


Teachable Moments

Another advantage of the systematic invented spelling of Small Leap Spelling is that

teachers don’t have to wait for students to make a spelling error in their written work for the

teacher to address the student’s misconception. Furthermore, many errors made by students in

their written work are far outside their Zone of Proximal Development, and therefore either the

student won’t understand the mini-lesson of the teacher, or the student will use a synonym he or

she already knows how to spell.

Important Concept Number 1: Draw out sounds

Researchers (Begley, 1994; Helenius, Uutela, & Hari, 1999; McPherson & Ackerman

(1999; Nagarajan, Mahncke, Salz, Tallal, Roberts, & Merzenich, 1999; Pihko, Leppanen,

Eklund, Cheour, Guttorm, & Lyytinen, 1999; Travis, 1996) have found that students with

phonological processing deficits have difficulties hearing sounds that take less than

approximately a ¼ second to pronounce. Consequently, many of these researchers suggest that

students more easily learn how to hear the sounds of words, if they are “held” and extended for

over a ¼ second. As noted earlier, f, m, and s are good consonants to work with because they can

be held for several seconds without distorting how they are formed in the mouth. Similarly, when

comparing and contrasting various vowel sounds, because they can also be held without

distortion, I will ask the students to stretch out the words to emphasize the vowel in the rhyming

process, in the spelling process, and in the reading the list of words process. For example when

the student is comparing and contrasting “hat” with “hit”, I will have the students say,

“haaaaaaaaaat” and “hiiiiiiiiiiiiit.” In particular, I will have the students stretch and pay attention

to the vowel sound when we are working on two letter VC words that don’t have an initial

consonant such as “at” and “it”.


Important Rule 2: Refer to vowel sounds themselves

When working with students, do not refer to words as short and long vowel words,

because this adds a level of unnecessary thinking. When students hear the word cap in an Small

Leap Spelling lesson, they only need to identify the a sound found in the word cap or cape with

and then write down a in the middle of the appropriate CVC or CVCe word construction.

Similarly, when you ask students to identify the vowel sound in cap or cape, they should give

you the appropriate a sound.

To me, there is something humorous and yet tragic about observing a student first

identify the sound in cap as “long a,” look at her teacher’s facial expression, see a grimace, and

then change her response to “short a.” There is no way anyone can know for sure whether the

student knows the appropriate sound but doesn’t know its name, or whether the student is merely

wildly guessing in hopes of seeing a smile. And let’s be honest, how is the student supposed to

know what a short a sound is if a teacher believes pat, par, pal, and paw all contain short a

sounds just because they are all CVC words?

Importance of Student Dialect and Vocabulary

Teachers should always be aware that what seems to be a perfect rhyme in their own

dialect might not be the same rhyme in their students’ dialect. Thus, the teacher should listen to

what students are saying, and if a particular word doesn’t seem to rhyme with other words in the

same word family, then it should not be used on the daily or Friday spelling test.

For example, even though I suspect Kenneth Goodman would probably dislike the

systematic phonics instruction found in Small Leap Spelling, on page 44 of Phonics Pfacts

(1993), Goodman states that in his Midwestern dialect: bog, cog, grog, jog, smog and tog have a

short o that sounds different than the short o in dog, fog, frog, hog, and log. In contrast, in my


North East Ohio suburban dialect, all the words with the og rime do rhyme. Yet, none of the og

family words are pronounced with the same short o sound as in hot, hop, lock. Consequently,

when working with students who have my dialect, it would be appropriate for me to compare and

contrast hog with jog, but it would NOT be appropriate for me to compare and contrast hog with

hot. Similarly, I suspect unless they are teaching in an English prep school, most teachers

shouldn’t try to compare and contrast the word the with he, she, be, we, and me.

Focus on Known Words

Similarly, teachers should not try to teach new vocabulary words at the same time

students are learning to spell. For example, even though vat rhymes with cat, since most

kindergarten, first grade, and/or struggling readers wouldn’t know its meaning, vat should be

treated as a pseudoword and only be taught once students feel comfortable spelling the real

words that fit a given pattern.

Don’t Worry Too Much about Capitalization Errors

In my teaching, I never worried too much about the capitalization errors students made.

My point in developing Small Leap Spelling was to help students learn how each sound in a

word is represented by a letter. In my dissertation research, I found that every single student

made at least one capitalization error on their post-test.

Remember to Repeat Words that Students Miss

If students misspell a word early on the daily spelling test, remember to repeat this word

several times during the same spelling lesson and then throughout the rest of the week. One

reason that going through the cat family might take up to five weeks for students with severe

phonological processing errors is that they are essentially learning the words by rote association,

while also trying to focus on why the words fit the pattern. Probably, this learning process could


be shortened for this particular word family by teaching the pattern more explicitly, but the point

is that students eventually begin to focus on the patterns and each week’s set of words takes less

and less time to learn.

In future research, I hope to find the exact amount of time general education kindergarten

and first grade students typically take to learn the patterns. Teachers who want to participate in

this research may contact me via e-mail.

Other Benefits of Small Leap Spelling

Using structured lesson plans, spelling tests, oral reading, student self-correction, and

other aspects of the Small Leap Spelling program can benefit students in many ways:

By concentrating on words that follow strict rules, students are less likely to seem

to know a word today only to have forgotten it by tomorrow. Also, they are less apt to treat

words as if they were Chinese Ideographs or Egyptian Hieroglyphics by being able to sight

read Sam, am, and ram without being able to decode jam and ham.

The lesson format can be carried forward to teach more complicated spelling rules

such as doubling the final consonant in short-vowel words and dropping the final “e” in long

vowel words.

Students not only learn how to spell words; they also learn how to pronounce

them. At the beginning of the 1993-94 academic year, one of my students with a speech

disability pronounced all words that rhymed with cat as tat. Amazingly, he seemed to think

he was pronouncing them differently. Within two weeks it was obvious he was spelling them

differently. Then two weeks later the student was pronouncing them differently. Shortly

thereafter the student’s general education teacher came by and asked me what I was doing to


help her student’s speech difficulty. All of which makes sense within Hatcher et al’s (1994)

phonological linkage hypothesis.

Many teachers complain that students with learning disabilities don’t transfer

isolated skills back to their comprehensive reading or their story-writing. Small Leap Spelling

can alleviate much of this transference problem, because during reading group all students

can be encouraged to use the compare-and-contrast method (P. M. Cunningham, Arthur, J.

W. Cunningham, 1977) to decode new words. Students who know about comparing onset-

rimes, but who haven’t even learned final blends or irregular vowel sounds, can still be

shown a guide word such as arm, and when told the pronunciation, be able to decode harm or

charm.

Importantly, even without prompting, both teachers involved in my dissertation

study noted how their students were writing longer paragraphs after using Small Leap

Spelling.

Small Leap Spelling can make open houses and parent conferences more

meaningful, because a teacher can demonstrate each student’s progress by showing his or her

parents a beginning of the year placement test and a recent closed-book spelling test.

Most importantly, students know they are making progress, which fosters self-

esteem based on achievement instead of mere encouragement.

Conclusion

On the surface, there are many aspects about Small Leap Spelling that don’t seem

particularly new. For instance, teachers have focused on word families for decades. Nonetheless,

as is suggested by (Hatcher et al, 1994) Small Leap Spelling’s three component lesson structure

explicitly links phonemic awareness, spelling, and reading. Additionally, the scope and sequence


of SLS explicitly helps students isolate individual letter sounds in the initial, final, or medial

position by holding the other sounds constant. Also, the invented spelling aspect of SLS helps

students link sounds to letters, and doesn’t let students off the hook by allowing them to

memorize a spelling and move on. Similarly, the recursive nature of the scope and sequence

found in Appendix A should ensure that students don’t just learn a word family, and forget it

three weeks later. For example, seven months down the road, students are still using the cat

family words when comparing hat, hit, hot, and hut, eight months later when students are

learning how to distinguish hat from hate, and ten months later when students are learning how

to double the final consonant when spelling batter, matter and shatter, but leaving the final

consonant single when spelling dating, rating, and skating.

Ultimately, the most important aspect is that teachers and students know that every

student is accountable for spelling every word correctly. The written spelling requires the student

to commit not only to the letter but the correct representation of CVC for short vowels and CVCe

for long vowels.

Certainly, Small leap Spelling is not the most exciting lesson format for kindergarten and

first grade students. It doesn’t promise that with a few short nursery rhymes per day and/or

twenty minutes on the computer playing phonemic awareness games, most students might learn

the alphabetic principle. Instead, for the “cost” of a short 30 to 40 minute lesson per day that is

moderately boring, ALL students should be able to complete second grade by correctly spelling

and decoding words such as chasing, traded, sharks, and slippery.


References:

Au, K. H. (1997). Constructivist approaches, phonics, and the literacy learning of students of

diverse backgrounds. National Reading Conference Yearbook, 47, 1-21.

Author (1997).

Author (1998).

Author (1999a).

Author (1999b).

Author (2001).

Author (2005).

Begley, S. (1994, August 29). Dyslexics just can’t “Sound it out”. Newsweek, 142, 52.

Blachman, B.A. (1994). What we have learned from longitudinal studies of phonological

processing and reading, and some unanswered questions: A response to Torgesen,

Wagner, and Rashotte. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 287-291.

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to

theory and methods (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Bradley, L., & Bryant, P. E. (1983). Categorizing sound and learning to read—a causal

connection. Nature, 301, 419-421.

Bruce, D. J. (1964). The analysis of word sounds by young children. British Journal of

Educational Psychology, 34, 158-170.

Calfee, R. C., Gilman, H., & Norman, K., (1998). Word building basics. A microworkshop

presented at the annual convention of the International Reading Association, Orlando,

Florida.


Chall, J. S., Roswell, F. G., & Blumenthal, S. H. (1963). Auditory blending ability: A factor in

success in beginning reading. Reading Teacher, 17, 113-118.

Chomsky, C. (1971). Write first, read later. Childhood Education, 47, 296-299.

Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.

Cunningham, P.M., Arthur, S.V., Cunningham, J.W. (1977). Classroom reading instruction.

Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Company.

Cunningham, P.M., & Cunningham, J.W. (1992). Making words: Enhancing the invented

spelling- decoding connection. The Reading Teacher, 46, 106-115.

Ehri, L. C. (2000). Learning to read and learning to spell: Two sides of a coin. Topics in

Language Disorders, 20, 19-36.

Goodman, K. S., (1993). Phonics Phacts. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Griffith, P.L., & Olson, M.W. (1992). Phonemic awareness helps beginning readers break the

code. The Reading Teacher, 45, 516-523.

Haskell, D.W., Foorman, B.R., & Swank, P.R. (1992). Effects of three

orthographic/phonological units on first-grade reading. Remedial and Special Education,

13, 40-49.

Hatcher, P. J., Hulme, C., & Ellis, A. W. (1994). Ameliorating early reading failure by

integrating the teaching of reading and phonological skills: The phonological linkage

hypothesis. Child Development, 65, 41-57.

Helfgott, J.A. (1976). Phonemic segmentation and blending skills of kindergarten children:

Implications for beginning reading acquisition. Contemporary Educational Psychology,

1, 157-169.


Helenius, P., Uutela, K. & Hari, R. (1999). Auditory stream segregation in dyslexic adults.

Brain, 122, 907-913.

Kamii, C. & Manning, M. (October 30th, 2004). Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Skills (DIBELS): A tool for evaluating student learning. Paper presented at the 48th

conference of the College Reading Association.

McPherson, B. W. & Ackerman P. T. (1999). A study of reading disability using event-related

brain potentials elicited during auditory alliteration judgements. Developmental

Neuropsychology, 15, 359-378

Morais, J., Cary, L., Alegria, J., & Bertelson, P. (1979). Does awareness of speech as a sequence

of phones arise spontaneously? Cognition, 7, 323-331.

Nagarajan, S., Mahncke, H., Salz, T., Tallal, P., Roberts, T., & Merzenich, M. M. (1999).

Cortical auditory signal processing in poor readers. Proceedings of the National Academy

of Sciences of the United States of America, 96 (11), 6483-6488.

Paige, R. (2002). The Secretary of the U. S. Department of Education’s Dear Colleague letter

outlining to state and local leaders the adequate yearly progress (AYP) provisions of the

No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Retrieved January 10, 2005, from

http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/secletter/020724.html

Pihko, E., Leppanen, P. H. T., Eklund, K. H., Cheour, M., Guttorm, T.K., & Lyytinen, H. (1999).

Cortical responses of infants with and without a genetic risk for dyslexia: I. Age effects.

Neuroreport, 10, 901-905.

Read, C. (1971). Pre-school children’s knowledge of English phonology. Harvard Educational

Review, 41, 1-34.

http://olc3.ohiolink.edu:20080/bin/gate.exe?f=toc&state=2eiquv.3.12&expr=ALL&p_s_ALL=(%22Harvard-Educational-Review%22).JNBR.&p_op_ALL=ADJ&a_search=Search

http://olc3.ohiolink.edu:20080/bin/gate.exe?f=toc&state=2eiquv.3.12&expr=ALL&p_s_ALL=(%22Harvard-Educational-Review%22).JNBR.&p_op_ALL=ADJ&a_search=Search


Smith, F. (1999). Why systematic phonics and phonemic awareness instruction constitute an

educational hazard. Language Arts, 77, 150-155.

Stahl, S.A. (1992). Saying the “p” word: Nine guidelines for exemplary phonics instruction. The

Reading Teacher, 45, 618-625.

Torgesen, J. K. (1988). Studies of children with learning disabilities who perform poorly on

memory span tasks. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 605-612.

Torgesen, J.K., Wagner, R.K., & Rashotte, C.A. (1994). Longitudinal studies of phonological

processing and reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 276-286.

Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., Simmons, K., & Laughon, P. (1990). Identifying phonological

coding problems in disabled readers: Naming, counting, or span measures? Learning

Disability Quarterly, 13, 236-243.

Travis, J. (1996). Let the games begin: Brain-training video games and stretched speech may

help language-impaired kids and dyslexics. Science News, 149, 104-106.

Treiman, R., & Zukowski, A. (1996). Children’s sensitivity to syllables, onsets, rimes, and

phonemes. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 61, 193-215.

Wylie, R., & Durrell, D.D. (1970). Teaching vowels through phonograms. Elementary English,

47, 787-791.

Yopp, H. K. (1995). A test for assessing phonemic awareness in young children. Reading

Teacher, 49, 20-29.

http://olc3.ohiolink.edu:20080/bin/gate.exe?f=toc&state=35841l.2.12&expr=ALL&p_s_ALL=(%22Reading-Teacher%22).JNBR.&p_op_ALL=ADJ&a_search=Search

http://olc3.ohiolink.edu:20080/bin/gate.exe?f=toc&state=35841l.2.12&expr=ALL&p_s_ALL=(%22Reading-Teacher%22).JNBR.&p_op_ALL=ADJ&a_search=Search

http://olc3.ohiolink.edu:20080/bin/gate.exe?f=toc&state=35841l.2.12&expr=ALL&p_s_ALL=(Yopp,-Hallie-Kay).AU.&p_op_ALL=ADJ&a_search=Search


Appendix A. Scope and Sequence Chart

Key: cvc -- stands for “consonant - vowel - consonant”.

vc -- stands for “consonant -vowel - consonant”.

A. Common cvc onset-rimes with short a. Week 1&2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8Bat bam Cap Bag Bad ban tan ban tanCat dam Gap Gag Dad Can van can vanFat ham Lap Nag Had Dan Danhat jam Map Rag Mad Fan fanmat mam Nap Sag Pad Jan Janpat Pam Rap Tag sad man manrat ram Tap Wag pan pansat Sam Zap Ran ran

(Please note that some uncommon words are not included--spelling is not vocabulary.)

B. Common cvc onset-rimes with short i. Week 1&2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7bit dip big Dim bid bin winfit hip dig Him did Finhit Kip fig Kim hid ginkit lip jig Jim kid kinlit rip pig Rim lid Linpit sip rig Tim rid pinsit tip wig Sid Sin

zip zig-zag Tin(Remember that short a onset-rime words should be mixed into actual tests.)

C. Common vc onset-rimes with short a, i, u, and o. Week 1 & 2 ad if up on am in us Oddasat

isit

. Oz

(A major point of these vc words is to emphasize the short vowel in isolation, and to have students draw out the short vowel as in “aaaaaat”, and “uuuuuup”.)

D. Common cvc onset-rimes with short u.

Week 1&2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7but bum cup Bug bud buncut gum pup Dug mud Funetc. etc. yup etc. etc. Etc.


E. Common cvc onset-rimes with short o. Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6dot mom cop Dog rod congot Tom pop Fog Tod Ronetc. pompom etc. etc. etc. etc.

F. Mix of all short vowels with final ck endingWeek 1 Week 2 sack back Rick ck words sick kick pack mixed with cvc wordssocksuck

lockluck

etc. etc.etc. etc.

(Students should be able to learn ALL the ck words within two weeks, if they can’t, they still aren’t phonologically processing the short vowel sounds and should be moved back to the appropriate spot on the scope and sequence chart.)

G. Compare contrast short a with Magic “e” long a words. Week 1&2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7at ate fat fate hat hatemat materat ratebat latecat datesat gate

am gamebam lamedam nameham samejam tamemamPam ram Sam

cap apegap capelap rapemap tapenap raptapzap

bag agegag cagenag pagerag ragesag wagetag wag

ad fadebad jadedad madehad wademadpadsad

ban canecan JaneDan lanefan maneJan saneman vanepan rantanvan

(When eliciting rhyming long vowel words, it is important to praise rhyming words that don’t follow the magic e rule--such as wait, gain, and paid--and explain that they will be taught in the future.)

H. Compare contrast short i, u, o with Magic “e” long i, u, o words. Week 1-3 Week 4&5 Week 5&6 Week 7&8 Week 9&10 Week 11-14bit bitekit kite lit dimehim limerip ripezip widewin winepig lineetc. etc.

us usebus fusegum fumemud rudegum tuberub lubegun tune hug hugeetc. etc.

hop hopetop ropemop nope on bonegot votelot doverob robeTom homeetc. etc.

Comparecontrastall short vowel words witheach other.

Comparecontrast allmagic elong vowelwords witheach other.

Compare &contrast allmagic elong vowelsand all short vowelswith eachother.

(At this point the onset-rime should be an increasingly small part of the lesson, and students should be increasingly encouraged to hear actual phonemes. Also note, now is the time to add in relatively uncommon final consonants such as b, v, and s.


I.) Initial s blends -- st, sl, sm, sp, sn, sk, sw. (i.e. stick, slam, smoke, spot, snack, swim.)EACH blend will take about a week.

J.) Initial r blends -- br, cr, dr, fr, gr, pr, tr. (i.e. brick, cram, drove, frame, grape, prize, trip.)Probably two or three weeks for them all with "dr" being the most difficult.

K.) Initial l blends -- bl, cl, fl, gl, pl, sl. (i.e. block, clam, flame, globe, plate, slam.)Probably two of three weeks for them all.

L.) Initial digraphs of ch, sh, and th -- (i.e. chop, shape, thick.)Probably one week for each.

M.) Three letter words that end with y -- (i.e. shy, try, cry.)Probably one or two weeks.

N.) Words ending with ght -- (i.e. light, bright, flight, weight, freight, and eight.)Probably two weeks.

O.) Four letter words that end with ay -- (i.e. pray, gray, stay.)Probably one or two weeks total.

P.) Final double letters of ll, ff, and ss -- (i.e. small, spell, stuff, grass.)Probably two total.

Q.) Final r-controlled words of ar, scare, and or.Probably a week for each.

R.) Final digraphs of ch, sh, and th -- (i.e. math, with, much, rich, flash, swish.)Probably two weeks total.

S.) Words that begin with qu -- (i.e. quick, quit, quite, and quiz.)Probably one week.

T.) Words that end in ng -- (i.e. bang, wing, song, hung, and bring). Probably two weeks total.

U.) Final s blends of , sk, sp, and st -- (i.e. brisk, husk, crisp, grasp, fast, lost, chest, and rust.)Probably two weeks total.

V.) Final r-controlled blends of rb, rd, rk, rm, rn, rp, and rt -- (i.e. carb, card, cork, arm, born, harp, and fort.) Probably two or three weeks for entire set.

W.) Final m-controlled blends of mp -- (i.e. camp, ramp, limp, lump, clump, and chomp.)Probably a week .

X.) Final l-controlled blends of lb, ld, lk, lm, ln, lp, and lt -- (i.e. bulb, hold, folk, calm, kiln, help, and melt.)Probably two weeks total.


Y.) Final n-controlled blends of nd, nk, np, and nt -- (i.e. hand, grand, honk, chunk, kil, help, and melt.)Probably one or two weeks total.

Z.) Initial three letter blends and digraphs -- spr, str, spl, shrand thr -- (i.e. sprint, strike, splash, shrink,string,and throne.) Probably two weeks total.

XX.) Adding the plural s. (i.e. dogs, cats, springs).Probably a week.

YY.) Doubled final consonant by adding er, ing, ed, and y -- (i.e. hopping, zipped, happy, and slipper.)Probably a week for each, and another two to combine them all.

ZZ.) Dropped final e when adding er and ing -- (i.e. hoping compared to hopping.)Probably two weeks to get dropping 'e' by itself, and then another two weeks to

combine with doubling rule. beyond 2nd grade) Compare and contrast other spelling rules and patterns such as ai, ee, ea, and ies.

Probably a week on each.

chapter three: - bowling green state universitypersonal.bgsu.edu/~richaro/page3/files/sls...

Documents