The evidence

Date: 2015-10-07; view: 506.

An argument against intensive, systematic phonics is the claim that many rules are very complex and many don't work very well. As Smith (2003) notes, they are "unreliable … there are too many alternatives and exceptions … 300 ways in which letters and sounds can be related" (p. 41). In fact, Smith points out, most of the words of the English language are "spelled irregularly" and it is a real challenge to write "decodable text." (Some have claimed that the rules of phonics that appear not to work very well can be repaired and should be taught. In Krashen (2002), I argue that some recent attempts to state better sound- spelling generalizations have resulted only in more complex rules that are only slightly more efficient. )

The National Reading Panel (NICHD, 2000) concluded that the experimental research supports intensive systematic phonics. Garan (2001), in an examination of this report, noted that the impact of intensive phonics is strong on tests in which children read lists of words in isolation. But it is less evident for tests of reading comprehension, and what is most important, it is miniscule for tests of reading comprehension given after grade 1, tests which include more complex texts with more irregular words. Thus, intensive phonics instruction may only help children develop the ability to read words in isolation, an ability that will emerge anyway with more reading.

If the Basic Phonics position is correct, which rules are teachable and useful? Most likely, experienced professionals will agree that most initial consonants can be taught and learned and applied to text by small children, but some rules will be impossible for six year olds (and most adults), rules such as this one, recommended by Johnson (2001): "the a-e combination is pronounced with the long vowel and the final e silent (except when the final syllable is unaccented - then the vowel is pronounced with a short-i sound, as in "palace," or the combination is "are," with words such as "have" and "dance" as exceptions).