Running head:  Implications from Phonology for Teaching Reading and Teaching a Second Language  1

Implications from Phonology for Teaching Reading

and Teaching a Second Language

Cynthia Czerwonka

Harmony Elementary School

Gwinnett County Public Schools

January 4, 2013

Implications from Phonology for Teaching Reading and Teaching a Second Language                             2

Review

            Undoubtedly, phonemic awareness, or the ability to hear “that words in oral language are made up of individual sounds” (Freeman &Freeman, 2004, p. 74) is a critical precursor to readiness for reading. Similarly, phonological awareness, or “the ability to distinguish larger units of speech, such as words and syllables” (Freeman &Freeman, 2004, p. 76) is also discussed in the chapter.  In one of the two models of reading instruction mentioned in chapter 2, called the word recognition view “sounds play a central role because identifying words involves recoding written marks into the sounds of oral language” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, pg. 74).  Children take already familiar sounds called phonemes and learn the written marks or letters that match those known sounds.  The second model is the sociopsycholinguistic model.   “Sounds play a lesser role in a sociopsycholinguistic model of reading. Readers use graphophonic cues, a combination of visual and sound information as they sample texts and make and confirm predictions” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, pg. 75).  These models, though philosophically different both value phonemic awareness and phonology; however, they are central to the word recognition model of reading.  The sociopsycholinguistic view values phonemic awareness and phonology as tools students use as readers to make sense of text.

            “Researchers have tried to break reading down into its component parts and to determine factors that can help predict reading success for failure in young children.  Stanovich (1986), in a review of reading research “identified phonemic awareness as the key factor that differentiated good from poor readers” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p. 75).  Good readers were found to have good phonemic awareness, but it is unclear whether good phonemic awareness was the cause or

Implications from Phonology for Teaching Reading and Teaching a Second Language                             3

the effect of the ability to read well.  “Stanovich used the term reciprocal causation to account for a bidirectional relationship.  According to Stanovich, phonemic awareness appears to help children learn to read, and reading helps build phonemic awareness” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p. 76).

Reflect

            I found the information on phonemic awareness and phonology informative.  I had not really known the distinction between the two. It became clear to me that phonological awareness follows phonemic awareness since the child needs to know the individual phonemes and to use them to distinguish larger phonological units of meaning such as syllables and words.   I appreciated the information on five levels of phonemic awareness identified by Adams (1990).  I see that two of them, the ability to hear rhyme and alliteration and to blend or split syllables deal with phonology “because they involve students in manipulating parts of language” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p. 76).  I know that some students in my class lack adequate exposure to literature such as nursery rhymes and to books read aloud.  I believe that reading to young children along with speaking to them is invaluable in their development as speakers, readers, and later as writers. I want to provide read aloud experiences for my students lacking in those areas. I will use partner reading, small group reading, and books on tape to help provide this needed exposure to reading.

            In the sociopsycholinguistic view, researchers believe that phonemic awareness is acquired subconsciously and that “it is a natural part of language development” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p.78). Similarly, in acquisition of a second language, using what is called The

Implications from Phonology for Teaching Reading and Teaching a Second Language                             4

Natural Approach, “the teacher uses a variety of techniques to make the language input comprehensible.  Students focus on constructing meaning as they use the language” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p.84).  Grammar is not directly taught, but The Natural Approach holds that a student will develop the phonology, morphology, and the syntax of the language “in a natural order as long as he receives messages he understands” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p.84) much as a baby acquiring his first language would. 

Refine

            My beliefs as a teacher of reading more closely align with the sociopsycholinguistic view of teaching reading.  I believe that the main reason for reading is to understand or make sense of the text.  However, I will use information mentioned in the chapter from the word recognition model.  “Proponents of this model claim that reading is primarily a process of identifying words and that this ability can be taught and learned” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p. 77).  Now with my children who are ELLs or who are struggling at mid-year with reading, I will make interventions in the five areas mentioned, in this order:  phonemic awareness skills, names and sounds of letters, phonics rules, sight words, and structural analysis skills. I will keep in mind that these students will benefit from use of words already in their oral vocabularies.  “All of these abilities help students identify marks on paper as words they know in their oral vocabulary” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p.78).  In taking the language sample from my student for the language analysis case study, I will be able to note more closely her oral vocabulary and use that to help build her phonemic and phonetic skills. 

Implications from Phonology for Teaching Reading and Teaching a Second Language                             5

In their report Put Reading First, Armbruster and Osborn, (2001) “claim that phonemic awareness can be taught and learned” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p. 77) and list specific phoneme activities.  These activities are among the ones used in word work activities in my kindergarten classroom and are reflected in the Georgia Kindergarten Inventory of Developing skills standardized test.  I plan to increase emphasis on these phonemic activities as center activities within my Reader’s Workshop in my kindergarten classroom.  I will not allow them to take an inordinate amount of time away from authentic reading, because I believe students learn best to read by actually reading books of choice and by and using phonemic knowledge as a tool to help them make sense of text.  “Those who hold a sociopsycholinguistic view of reading claim that phonology plays a more limited role” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p. 82) in reading.  “They argue that hearing children acquire phonemic awareness naturally as part of their oral language development, and then children can use this subconscious knowledge as part of one cueing system to help them construct meaning as they read” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p.82).

As Freeman & Freeman (2004) mention in the text, “an important part of acquiring a language is developing this ability to differentiate the speech stream into its component parts” (p. 79).  Whole phrases are first heard, then individual words, and finally parts of words.  This knowledge makes me realize how my ELL students could feel very confused as to the messages they hear, not yet knowing the phonemes and phonetics that help them to distinguish the units of meaning in the whole phrase or sentence.  Meaning once again seems to me to be the key point to keep in mind.  “Children acquiring their first language and people acquiring a second language develop the ability to perceive differences in meaning that are signaled by variations in

Implications from Phonology for Teaching Reading and Teaching a Second Language                             6

phonemes.  They do this by attending to the meaning, not to the sounds themselves” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p. 79).

            In order to assist students in attending to the meaning of language, I will make a conscious effort to integrate oral language, reading and writing.  Pally (2000) discussed a method called sustained content language teaching in which “teachers teach language through academic content and organize curriculum around themes” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p.85).  “Students learn language as they read, write, and talk about content and become involved in investigations and studies of interest to them” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p. 85).    As a kindergarten teacher, I believe this type of integration works well for all students and can flow naturally from discussions about content areas such as science and social studies.  Phoneme differences occur among different languages that may be represented in the classroom.  As Freeman and Freeman (2004) suggest, “the potential problems caused by differences between languages are minimized when the focus of instruction is on meaning construction” (p. 92).  I find this information encouraging and directive for me in planning instruction.  In keeping meaning primary, I am hopeful, as Freeman and Freeman (2004) mention, that “students can acquire both oral and written English in classes in which language is learned through content area study” (p. 92).    In keeping with a sociopsycholinguistic view of phonemic and phonetic abilities, children who are read to are naturally focusing on the meaning of what they hear, not consciously aware of the sounds that produce those words.  “Then, as children begin to write, their spellings reflect their acquired knowledge of the relationship between sounds and spellings. It is not until children attempt to produce conventional spellings that they become consciously aware of the relationships between sounds and spellings” (Freeman & Freeman, 2004, p. 81).  I feel that these

Implications from Phonology for Teaching Reading and Teaching a Second Language                             7

ideas closely match the progression from oral language, to reading, to writing that I normally see in my kindergarten students and are worthy of use with all my students, particularly my English language learners.   

           

Implications from Phonology for Teaching Reading and Teaching a Second Language                             8

References

Adams, M. (1990).  Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print.  Cambridge, MA:     

            MIT Press.

Freeman, D. E., and Y. S. Freeman. (2004). Essential linguistics, what you need to know to teach reading, esl, spelling, phonics, and grammar. Portsmouth: Heinemann Educational         Books.

Pally, M. (Ed.). (2000). Sustained content teaching in academic esl/efl: A practical

      approach.  Boston:  Houghton Mifflin.

Stanovich, K. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences

            in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, (21), 360-407.

.