Phonological analysis with young children

Phonological analysis: a journey of accuracy! 

From my experience young children love to express their ideas and thoughts in the written form...

...just like this student: who loves to write; is confident using the writing process; rereads her written thoughts with clarity and understanding and is willing to share her thoughts in the written form...BUT

 

...when first analysing these pieces of writing, and other examples, you might ascertain that this child has some learning issues...However, I wonder if this student's misspellings and inaccurately formed letters could be a misunderstanding of how the English system works?  Is this student doing exactly what she has been taught to do?
                      

It's our responsibility as educators to ensure we teach accurate information about how the English spelling system works so learners can make informed and meaningful spelling choices.

This child's spelling attempts led to an incredibly rich investigation of a variety of significant graphemes and phonemes used in English spelling. 

• I want this student to begin to understand that English spelling is primarily concerned with meaning and structure.

• I want her to know that spelling accuracy is not always the most important aspect in the learning process, but making meaningful and thoughtful spelling choices based on this understanding is what is important.

• I want this child to know that only some of what we pronounce is important for the spelling of the word.

• I want this child to know how to execute the starting point when scripting the lower case alphabet letters.

• I want this child to learn how to track phonemes and represent graphemes accurately...

                                ...some, but not all of the goals to begin the journey.

As a whole class we embarked on a phonological journey;

a journey embedded in orthographic understanding.

Where did I source the words?

From the children's own writing! Each day as the children arrive they respond in the written form to a question such as this:

The children's written responses provide rich 'fuel' for assessment 

and ongoing investigation and inquiry.

To begin the journey...
As the starting point or 'meeting place' for this phonological journey I presented a significant selection of the misspellings to the children:

*kan    (can)                   *kort      (caught)                      *kold, *kood (could)

Why are they not correct?

Why can't we spell these words with an initial <k> to represent the first phoneme /k/?

We embarked on a phonological journey investigating how to accurately 
(L. 'to take care of') represent the phoneme /k/ to cure all previous misunderstandings!

We started with a basic phoneme chart showing how the phoneme /k/ can be represented by the single letter graphemes <c> or <k>.
Mostly, the children knew this information (but did not understand why) and were able  to provide lots of evidence  with known words. At this stage they couldn't justify why some words were spelled with the  single letter grapheme<c> or <k>. Currently, for many, it was a random choice, generally choosing <k> to represent the initial phoneme /k/.

...and so our journey begins.

I explicitly told the children that we will try to use the single letter grapheme <c>  to represent /k/ in the initial position, unless we have a good reason for using the single letter grapheme <k>. We would investigate 'why?' at a later time so as to not overload children with too much information at any given time.

Also, I began to explicitly embed  <grapheme> <phoneme> <digraph> <trigraph> <initial> <medial> <final> in my own language as I modelled and clarified the children's thinking. The slash brackets / / and angle brackets < > were also introduced and consistently reinforced throughout the learning process.

As I predicted, the children suggested that the digraph <ck> could also represent /k/, providing some examples for evidence. This phonological piece was then added to the chart.

As a learning reflection I added an additional arrow to the chart and asked the children to think about another grapheme that we can use to represent /k/. I now wanted the children to have independent time to conduct their own investigation and begin to collect words for evidence.

Continuing the journey...
I provided a large blank chart for the children to record their words as evidence of the different graphemes for the phoneme /k/.
In the subsequent days we did a variety of activities. The children were 'word detectives' hunting for words that contained a grapheme to represent the phoneme /k/. As the children identified the words, they recorded them on a post it note, which I transcribed onto the larger chart. I wanted all the words spelled accurately and it gave me the perfect opportunity to model accurate terminology; as well as to model how to track the phonemes and discuss the circumstances of the grapheme as each word was added.
Through this activity they eventually discovered the fourth digraph <ch> (a surprise to many, even though they knew the spelling of <school>!)

This provided an excellent study in terms of helping and guiding the children to understand:

• the sequence of phonemes that matter in the word;
• that graphemes can represent other phonemes;
• the circumstances of the intended grapheme in the word.

The children discovered independently the circumstances in which the graphemes may be used in a word, drawing conclusions about the specific placement of the different graphemes:

From their discoveries the children hypothesised that:

• <c> was the most common way to represent /k/ in the initial position;
• <k> was used medial and often in the final position;
• <ck> could be used in the final position;
• not many words used the digraph <ch> to represent /k/.

I wondered with the children... why the digraph <ch> was not a common grapheme to represent the phoneme /k/. This led to an investigation about the origin of <school> using the Word Origin dictionary, (Greek origin). We also studied the words <magic>, <construct>, <koala> and I guided the children through an initial understanding of these words. Some of the words they collected were complex words (not bases) like <construct>; and others provided an etymological investigation like  <koala> which is an Australian word from an extinct Aboriginal language, hence the spelling of the initial <k>.
With all this information the children can now begin to make more informed decisions about grapheme choice.

There are many words such as <caught>, from this rich list that I could have chosen for us to study further but it is important to focus on what is relevant for the learners now. Other words can be extracted for deeper exploration in the future.

An important side trip!

As a result of the children's word detective investigations, we were led on another, but connected, phonological journey.

Some children had chosen these words  <city> <circus> and <cycle>  to place on the phoneme /k/ chart. An excellent misunderstanding to investigate.
I modelled tracking the initial phoneme in these words and they discovered that <c> can also represent /s/.
We constructed another basic chart; this time starting with a grapheme <c>.

Due to their findings we were able to hypothesise that <c> can represent two phonemes /k/ and /s/.

As I recorded these two phonemes with the children I continued to discuss the meaning of the slash and angle brackets; and the symbols enclosed. This concept needed revisiting in many ways as possible throughout the learning process.

We identified words, as evidence for each phoneme, adding these to the grapheme chart. We would continue to build on this initial list of words leading to a further understanding of the convention of when <c> represents the phoneme /s/. There is an engaging practical task in the Real Spelling Toolbox that helps children develop an understanding of this phonological convention. <c> followed by <e> <i> or <y> will represent the phoneme /s/.

Another side trip!
I love that the initial investigation naturally led to many others, often initiated by the children.

As a result of discovering that the digraph <ch> can represent the phoneme /k/ the children started to question and discuss their own understanding of this digraph. For many of the children <ch> only represented /tʃ/, so it was time to lead them further into the 'woods'.

Once again a phonological chart was constructed and this provided a perfect opportunity to demonstrate some new IPA symbols. With a growing understanding of phonemes and graphemes, I ascertained the children were now prepared to be exposed to this new information. I  showed them the phonetic symbol for /tʃ/ and added another arrow (without the symbol) ready for when they discovered the third phoneme /ʃ/. This phoneme was added when the children discovered it independently with the word <chef>.

Word detectives in action again!

To embed this learning in a meaningful context I constructed a paragraph, through modelled writing, based on our current PYP unit of inquiry. I deliberately added words that contained the <ch> digraph.
The children's task was to identify the words with this particular grapheme.

We always read the words in context, discussed their meaning BEFORE identifying and circling the digraph <ch>.

The words were then added to a grapheme chart I had prepared (with the children), again modelling important terminology and orthographic concepts, including the morphemic structure of the words.

The children recorded the words in the appropriate phoneme column. We discussed the circumstances of the grapheme, hypothesising how the grapheme was used in terms of position,etymology and phonemic information. Our next step will be to investigate more deeply the etymology of these words to build an understanding of the importance of this information. For example; words where <ch> represents /ʃ/ generally means French origin.

Another important side journey during this learning process was to demosntrate how to script the letters more accurately. We used the graphemes, under investigation, to demonstrate how to execute the correct pathways for each letter. First we practised the pathways of the letter on the palm of our hands, taking special note of the entry and exit points and size.

The children  had many opportunities to practice how to accurately scribe the digraph and others.
We are currently working intensively with the children in order to improve their script.
This also involves developing a comfortable pen hold that allows for clear movement through the pathways.

If you have the opportunity in your school I highly recommend implementing Real Script (Real Spelling), using pens as the preferable writing tool. 

And our journey continues...

The children have now discovered that /tʃ / can be represented in spelling by either the digraph <ch> or the trigraph <tch> by identifying the word <watch>. We look forward to discovering 'why?' as we head further down the pathway of orthographic learning.

A reflection of our journey...
...starting with one very common phoneme /k/, the children have now discovered and investigated:

• a wide range of graphemes and phonemes that are connected
• graphemes can represent different phonemes
• phonemes can be represented by different graphemes
• digraphs are teams of two letters representing a phoneme
• trigraphs are teams of three letters representing a phoneme
• the IPA symbols
• the circumstances of the chosen graphemes

...quite an impressive feat for a small group of 6 and 7 year olds!

As the children are writing, for different purposes, we are frequently referring to our new phonological learning in the hope that they begin to use this important knoweldge independently.

To deepen your understanding of Orthographic Phonology study the:

• Real Spelling Albums: Orthographic Phonology
• Real Spelling Albums: Alphabet and Letter Studies
• Real Spelling Tool Box 2: Kit 1 Theme F-The Phonology of the Graphemes <c> <k> and <ck>
• Pete Bowers,Word Works 'Spelling Out Word Structure'

Give me a shout! 

If you happen to be using my blog please drop me a line and let me know 
what you think, what you would like to see, what you enjoyed! 

inquiry.beyondtheword@gmail.com

Teaching Orthography in the Early Years: word webs for young children

The primary function of English spelling is to represent MEANING. 

Implementing orthography, 
through scientific inquiry, in the early years. 

As I continue on my learning journey, and work with young children in a variety of learning settings, it is consistently validated that teaching morphology to the youngest is not only essential but critical to their success as proficient language users.  

As we know and understand from research, morphology is the building block, the solid foundation, for understanding how the English spelling system works. It provides a meaningful structure for teaching and learning phonology in an effective and authentic way.

In this post, I would like to share a wonderful learning story of a group of young children who are currently embarking on a journey of orthographic understanding.

This structured word inquiry was explicitly embedded in an authentic literacy learning experience, integrating all forms of language.

Throughout the learning experience the children clearly demonstrated their deep understanding of how words are connected in meaning and structure. 

We started this particular learning journey by rereading a well loved story, Mrs Wishy Washy by Joy Cowley.The children were delighted to read the story to me, which they did with great enthusiasm and understanding.They clearly viewed themselves as proficient readers, by explaining and discussing the underlying ideas and meaning of the story. 

I shared my favourite part of the story, by writing a sentence to demonstrate and model my thought processes, emphasising the word <jumped>. Hence, the starter base for this investigation is <jump>.

The cow jumped in the mud. 

I have also observed  a teacher of another prep class require the children to draw their thinking about the starter base before embarking on the word family activity. A very valuable, authentic assessment of children's understanding and learning!

Concept attainment:

We then dived into the 'bag of words' and pulled out the word    <jumped>, written on a large chart. 

             jumped

"Jumped," shouted the children with glee. 

By ensuring the children had meaningfully encountered this word in a reading and writing context all the children were able to make true sense of the word. 

I modelled how to announce the spelling of <j-u-m-p-ed> by spelling aloud the single letter graphemes and the suffix. This word was placed inside a hoop. The children orally shared their understanding of the meaning of the word through their own life experiences. 

The bag of words also contained <jumped> <jumping> <jumper> <jumps> as well as two others <rolled> and <paddled>.

We then proceeded to pull out further words making decisions together if the word belonged inside the hoop or outside the hoop. Each time we viewed a word I announced the morphemes and graphemes. 

In pairs, the children discussed the words inside the hoop and then shared their hypotheses of why <jumped> <jumping> <jumps> and <jumper> belonged to the same morphological word family but <rolled> and <paddled> did not. The children did this with exceptional focus and interest.

The children recorded their thinking by illustrating the meaning of the words in the hoop. As the children were writing their chosen word, this created further opportunities to model the spelling out strategy.

After recording their thinking the children created a word web to record how the words are linked in meaning and structure. 

 

Again I announced the morphemes and graphemes, reinforcing new terminology and concepts. The children decided they needed to construct additional word webs for <rolled> and <paddled> and I have no doubt that they could accomplish this effectively through a similar inquiry investigation.

Every time I share this activity with children it confirms, consolidates and ratifies the utmost importance of implementing morphology in the early years. Right from the very beginning young children need to fully understand that the primary function of English spelling is meaning.

Now, let's think about the phonological connections 

that are explicitly embedded in this activity.

During this particular SWI lesson the children are consistently revisiting and consolidating the names of 4 alphabet letters 

<j> <u> <m> and <p> 

They are implicitly introduced to four single letter graphemes 

<j-u-m-p>

and the phonemes these graphemes are representing in the base word <jump>

/dʒ/ /u/ /m/ /p/

In the following weeks you could choose another starter base, like <play> and highlight the circumstances of the single letter grapheme <p> in this base word and compare it to the circumstance of the single letter grapheme <p> in <jump>.

The children can investigate and discuss if <p> represents the same or a different phoneme when the <p> is in the initial and final positions of these two base words.

<play> presents a meaningful introduction to the digraph <ay>, a team of letters working together to represent the phoneme long /a/, in the final position.

Additionally, this would naturally lead into an introduction of the six vowel letters, and an investigation, of the importance of these letters in understanding the spelling of a base. Please refer to the blog post The Power of Kinaesthetic Learning for further information regarding the teaching of vowels.

In just one lesson the children have been meaningfully introduced to a variety of important morphological and phonological 

concepts and terminology. 

A Phonology Lesson: Analysing the Phoneme /f/

 Morphology, Etymology, Phonology

Although this lesson is focused on developing phonological understanding; 

as with all word building, morphology must provide the structural framework for any phonological learning.

The focal point of the phonological learning continues to be based on meaning: the structure of words; how words are related in meaning and then finally the sounds that make sense to the spelling.

Understanding how English phonemes can be 

represented by different graphemes.

This phonological learning journey started with the phoneme /f/. 
Our inquiry initially focused on investigating the three different graphemes 
that represent /f/ in spelling.

• the single letter grapheme <f>
• the digraph <ph>
• the trigraph <ugh>

Setting the Scene: Where are we Headed?
This lesson began with a review of the meaning of the slash brackets / / and the angle < > brackets. 

(I have regularly introduced these brackets to young children to indicate whether we are starting our inquiry with a grapheme < > or a phoneme / /.)

Indicating that our word building inquiry was

focused on the phoneme /f/ the students were 

given additional information that this phoneme 
can be represented in writing in 3 different 
forms;hence the three arrows.

After demonstrating the written form of the phoneme /f/ on the chart, we reviewed the pronunciation of /f/ by focusing on the 'taste and feel' of this phoneme. We discussed what part of the mouth/throat we were using. The students described the feeling in different ways.

"It's like blowing out your breath."
"It's like a small wind."

Added note: Changing to 'feeling and tasting' phonemes, rather than asking my young students to listen to sounds in a word, had a profound effect on my own teaching and learning. I have found it to be one of the most powerful and successful ways to help young children, and older, to experience and fully understand the sequence of phonemes in a word. To learn further about this please refer to the Real Spelling Manual or Toolkit. 

 Our word building inquiry:

What graphemes can we use to represent the phoneme/f/ in spelling?
How do we decide which grapheme to use when spelling?

A Learning 'Hook': A Bag of Words!

We began the learning journey by revealing a bank of bases, handwritten on cards. These bases were chosen specifically for this particular group of children...some familiar; some unfamiliar. As with all activities, the bases or words you choose need to be applicable to the age group and needs of your learners.

       

Our first task was to focus on meaning and build an understanding of the vocabulary before investigating the phoneme. Although this may take additional time with younger children it is considered a critical part of the initial learning process. 
The base cards were covered so that each base could be revealed and discussed one at a time. Each student reveals a base card to read, spell aloud and orally discuss the meaning; with teacher guidance and support when necessary. I frequently model the correct spelling, by verbally emphasising the correct graphemes: <f-r-igh-t>. 
This discussion also provides insightful opportunities for the students to reflect on how they would clearly express the meaning of the base, to their ESL classmates. 

       

How you determine the length and timing of this initial lesson will greatly depend on the age and needs of the children you are working with.

Here the term <phoneme> has been introduced and added to the phoneme chart.

This term was used and reviewed consistently throughout the inquiry;at different times during the learning process.Gradually introduce precise linguistic terminology,so young learners can value the importance, develop understanding and express themselves with greater accuracy.

A note about linguistic vocabulary: Currently in my teaching I am very careful not to refer to <sound> as this seems to give an indication to the children that they must 'listen' rather than more accurately 'feel and taste' the phonemes. As an educator on this learning journey, I require myself to use linguistically correct vocabulary, just as we do in all other areas of learning, so we are all very clear about our actions/goals. This is evident with the vocabulary used for PYP Units of Inquiry. Consistently the linguistic terminology <grapheme> <digraph> <trigraph> <phoneme> <matrix> <base> <suffix> etc are consistently modelled verbally and in the written form. Every time the students hear or see this new vocabulary, their understanding deepens. I often discuss with the children that graphemes are like 'teams of letters' that we write to spell a base and phonemes are what we pronounce and identify by 'tasting/feeling'.  

_____________________________________________________

Deepening Understanding: What is the Meaning?

During the same learning session or a subsequent lesson the students illustrate the base cards to identify the meaning. This is an additional opportunity to reinforce new vocabulary and assess understanding. Additionally, students can write sentences to demonstrate the meaning. With younger students we primarily use the words in oral sentences for discussion and elaboration.  

During this early collaborative, oral discussion time, the children usually begin to provide some initial theories about the graphemes representing /f/ in their particular base.

 

Reviewing Learning: The Trading Game
To revisit and review the vocabulary and meaning the students play the Trading Game. The students move around freely trading their base card with a partner, after explaining the meaning. The very nature of this game provides the opportunity for the students to be exposed to all the base cards; not just their own. I often play this game to review learning from previous experiences; one, because it engages purposeful thinking through movement; two, it ensures all children are actively participating; three, it gives quick, valuable feedback to the teacher about the children's understandings or misunderstandings.

Throughout the learning journey the children are reminded to say the base or word naturally, without stretching or distorting the pronunciation.

Identifying and Sharing Grapheme Theories: How can you give proof?

At this stage on the learning journey the students circle the team/s of letter/s they think is/are representing the phoneme /f/. 

This is conducted as a collaborative activity, where the children are supporting and helping each other to identify the grapheme. The age group of the learners, will determine how much teacher guidance and intervention is required. With very young children I usually guide the children, together as a group, by modelling the process for identification. All theories are accepted, investigated, reviewed and changed throughout the learning process. 

Often, an interesting assumption is that <gh> is the grapheme, not <ugh>. This can be added to the Wonder Wall for further investigation. I was thrilled when working with this particular group, that one child had identified <ugh> as the grapheme, not <gh>. She had previously discussed this with me when we were having a reading conference and had encountered the word <laugh> in the text.

An ESL student is recording her initial

theory about the three graphemes.

You will notice she has written

<gh> as one of the graphemes.

Although this grapheme is not fully accurate,

 it is still accepted as a hypothsis for investigation.

Along her learning journey she was able to identify that

the trigraph <ugh> was the more accurate grapheme.

Making Connections: through Concept Attainment.
After completing the Trading Game and identifying grapheme hypotheses; the base cards are returned, shuffled ready for the concept attainment activity.

As stated in previous posts, the concept attainment

strategy guides children through an inquiry process, to their own understanding of a learning concept. This strategy ensures all the students are critically thinking and actively involved by taking ownership of their proposals and hypotheses; it allows all learners a critical thinking 'voice' and a deeper understanding of the concept introduced or revisited. 

You will notice at this stage in
the learning journey that we
haven't recorded the
three graphemes; only added
the words for consideration.

The students place their base cards on the chart as directed by the teacher, developing a understanding about the three graphemes.

The phoneme/grapheme chart is displayed for the next few days. The students are required to reflect on their learning and to do some word detective work. Their task is to search for words that contained the phoneme /f/ or find words that contained the graphemes they have considered so far. 

All morphology and phonology charts created are considered 'works in progress' to be added to, changed, and questioned.

The students are spending time looking through different types of text to identify words containing the graphemes they had identified. The students recorded the words and added them to the chart. 

The Final Stage: Are We Nearly There Yet?

The students have added other words to the phoneme/grapheme chart and we have now identified the three graphemes. It was at this stage of the learning journey that I introduced the term <grapheme>. We discussed the meaning of the base <graph>, which had been previously discussed as one of the base words used for the chart. The students discussed the  similarities and differences between the two terms phoneme and grapheme and ways to differentiate between them. In regards to the double <ff>, I informed the students that sometimes the single letter grapheme <f> is doubled and would be an investigation for the future.

 As the students shared the additional words, I asked them to explain where in the word the grapheme was located. We discovered that <ugh>, so far, could only be used in the final position and that it seemed the single letter grapheme <f> was the most common in the initial position.

The students then reviewed the whole process by sharing their understanding and new knowledge with their classmates.

Collaboratively, we investigated the etymology of the words and identified the digraph <ph> was of Greek origin and <ugh> was generally of Old English origin. The students used etymonline as their main resource, with John Ayto's Word Origins as an endorsement. Both valuable and useful resource tools.

Our Phoneme/Grapheme Chart: A working documentation of our learning journey demonstrating new knowledge and understanding. 

As with all learning journeys, they continue, so new learning can be reviewed, revived and utilised, providing many opportunities to explore new pathways and learning. 

Continuing the learning journey:

• fully investigate the circumstances of the three graphemes.
• build word webs and matrices with the words from the chart.
• identify the pattern for doubling the single letter grapheme <f> in the final position.

For the full story of the orthographic principles of the the phoneme /f/ please refer to the Real Spelling Toolkit Kit 2 Theme E: The trigraph <ugh> and other graphemes for the phoneme /f/; Kit 3 Theme H: The orthographic Phonology of /f/.

As Pete Bowers often states: “What is the most generative principle about the spelling system available in this word to teach this audience at this time?” 

For young students, I believe the focus should be on developing the essential understanding that phonemes can be represented in writing in different ways and graphemes can represent different phonemes. If this is the essential understanding then we don’t need to necessarily overload young children with lots of linear lists of different phonemes and graphemes, just ones (or parts) that are relevant to their at the time and which addresses the essential understanding. 

Explore this article, Starting the Learning Journey, to understand how phonology fits within the bigger picture of orthography.

NB Please note, I have  used the incorrect IPA symbol for the phoneme /f/ in the phoneme/grapheme chart created with the children. It should be /f/ not /f/.