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

friend...real connections, real stories

Real Connections: MEANING, STRUCTURE, RELATIVES, PRONUNCIATION

<friend> 

... such a valuable and interesting word to investigate at the beginning of the school year...

I love that this word has a non-phonemic letter to demonstrate that not all letters in an English word will represent pronunciation. 

I love that this word explicitly demonstrates that the primary function of English spelling is to represent MEANING, not pronunciation.

I have been working with a group of young students whose previous spelling instruction has primarily been based on thinking that spelling represents sound.

"Time to change their thinking by explicitly demonstrating and investigating 

how the English spelling system really works."

I want the children to be able to spell <friend> accurately from the very beginning of the school year but  more importantly I want them to know why it is spelled this way; I want them to understand that not all letters in a word are there to represent pronunciation; I want them to know that some letters are etymological markers which give us important clues about the spelling. I want the children to be on a learning journey of discovery and understanding...

How did I choose <friend> for investigation?

This was a central word as part of the initial discussion and development of the class essential learning agreements early in the school year, in conjunction with many others like: <respect> <safety> <collaboration>. All ripe for future word investigation and inquiry!

From the beginning of the school year the children were consistently challenged to think about the how and why of words. We constructed many word families using words from the first PYP Unit of Inquiry. They were introduced to important terminology; base, suffix, prefix, meaning, structure.

After only one month the children are already  beginning  to analyse/synthesise words based on this growing understanding.

Setting the scene

We presented two questions:

 I deliberately used the terminology 'word' not 'base' in this
question so that the children would consider another
possible base.

Initially I chose to present <friend> as
the base but  I also presented this question
to provoke and challenge the children's thinking.
I wanted to see if anyone would
 hypothesise <fri> as a possible base.

1. What does it mean? Predictably the children discussed the idea of 'friendship' connected to their personal experiences.

2. What is the structure of the word? The majority of the children hypothesised  <friend> as the base. Predictably one child presented <fri> (as in <fry>)  which led to an important discussion about meaning and how <fry> has no meaning connection to <friend>. 

Consistently, I observe children needing this fundamental concept to be revisited over and over again to help them fully understand the importance of both meaning and structure as the key to the connection.

3. What are its relatives?

The first activity was a think/pair/share. Individually, the children wrote one or two (or more) words related to the word <friend> on a piece of paper. This was an initial assessment piece to ascertain the children's present understanding of how words are related in meaning and structure. The children then collected further words, to add to their original list, by sharing with each other. They moved from partner to partner until they had collected an extended list. It was incredibly exciting to watch the children actively discussing and trading each other's words. 

The children are writing a collection of words
related to <friend>

The children shared their hypotheses with each other and
added to or modified  their own list of  words.

I had the absolute joy of overhearing one student tell another student (who offered <fri> and <end> as  two related words) that they couldn't belong in the family of <friend> "because they didn't have the same meaning or the same spelling."  He then proceeded to give the other student clear evidence by providing his three words (friendly, friends and befriended) to demonstrate what he meant. No need for adult intervention here...Max had certainly provided the necessary teaching. I shared this observation later  as we revisited the fundamental concept of  how words are related in meaning and structure.

Can you see how valuable this initial activity is in terms of assessing children's understanding throughout the learning process? 

The other valuable part of this activity is the expectation that all children will actively participate, regardless of where they are on their learning pathway; and the opportunity to learn from each other, as demonstrated above, cannot be underestimated. 

A student is extending her list of
related words by trading with her
classmates.

As a whole group, we shared and recorded the words on a word web. I explicitly stated, every time, how the words were related in meaning and structure; and how new words were constructed. 

What did you do to construct this word <friendly>? 

...consistently asking the students to clarify and provide evidence...

How do you know <-ly> is a suffix?

The word bag!

A student, who currently speaks very little English, had the job of extracting words from a word bag, to check if there were others we could add to the current word web. I placed two words for provocation  in the bag: <fried> and <Friday>.  The children suggested that both <fried> and <Friday> couldn't belong in this word family because they didn't have the same meaning. We decided to leave these words off the word web until we had provided some evidence. You will notice that even though I knew, as a teacher, that <Friday> was related, that I didn't share this information at this particular time on their learning journey. My goal was to guide them to their own understanding of this relationship.

However, I did ask the question "I wonder what Friday means?" to challenge their thinking and hopefully jog their previous learning about the days of the week. One student suggested that Friday was named after Frigga! "I know her!" counteracted many of the other children.

An Etymological Study!

As I told the historical 'story" I wrote key words,
pictures and connecting arrows to demonstrate
the 'big picture'.
The children also recorded the story
on individual whiteboards.

The following day I related the historical 'story' of 'friend' by linking the word to 'Friday' and 'Frigga'.  

We studied images of the Romans and the Germanic peoples, explaining how the days of the week evolved through history. The children could clearly see the connection between Friday and Frigga.

I modelled how to use the Word Origin Dictionary to discover further important historical information about 'friend'. For many this was new.

<friend> was written on a post-it note to indicate where in the dictionary it was located. A child was selected to open to the page and locate the word <friend>. 

I summarised the relevant information highlighting the diachronic meaning; 'loving' Old English 'freond'; Proto Germanic 'frijand'.

The children were now able to ascertain a clearer connection with 'Friday' and 'Frigga'. 

The <i> is present to show its meaning connection to <Friday> and historical connection to 'Frigga', the Germanic Goddess of love.

The children are recording the history
of <friend> as we discuss it together.

Of course this is not the full etymological story of the word <friend>. You can trace its history way back from the PIE root 'pri' meaning 'to love'. One student has recently discovered that <free> is related too!

A closer investigation of the structure of words and the 'spelling out' strategy

In subsequent lessons we investigated the structure of each of the words from the word web. Beginning with a blank matrix we gradually added the appropriate affixes to construct new words. 

I explicitly modelled the construction of the word sum, demonstrating the 'spelling out' strategy, critical for internalisation. The children practised constructing the word sums on individual whiteboards.

                                   

I briefly introduced how to identify and check for any changes.  "Stop, check for changes, change the y to an i" as in this word structure: <friend> + < ly/i> + <er> --> friendlier

For now, I only needed the children to understand that there might be a change caused by a suffix. Investigation                                                                        of the <i/y> suffixing convention would happen in the                                                                            future.

During the next few days we constructed additional words, writing the word sum to demonstrate the underlying structures. You may notice that the matrix is not completed and it won't be for sometime. This 'work in progress' is an indication of the children's learning journey; an understanding that we could add, change, modify the matrix and word web as our learning deepens. 

More information is gradually
added to the matrix as we revisit
meaning, structure, history
and connections.

Throughout the process one student consistently wanted to know how could we add <Friday> to the matrix. He had developed a hypothesis that <fri> was the base, based on the structure of <Friday> Fri + day --> Friday

I had this blank matrix ready to demonstrate his hypothesis. We will revisit this matrix and discuss how it could be constructed at another time. It is there for provocation, thought and discussion. 

Time to consolidate

The following week the children  independently constructed word sums from a variety of matrices.  

I can assure you by this stage all the children are spelling <friend> accurately and they know why there is an <i>! 

You will notice that the matrices are different, varying in complexity. At times I choose the matrices for the children, other times they choose. One student added to the complexity of his matrix, demonstrating his own deep understanding of the underlying structures of words.  

The children chose words to write in sentences or illustrate to show the meaning; they constructed words at home to teach their families.

 

We have been revisiting the structure of words by constructing large word sums to identify the morphemes and graphemes in the base and the underlying changes.

In this session the children had one piece of the word sum, on a large piece of card.
Together they had to sequence themselves to form the final word sum. Collaboration in action.
This beats memorising a list of unrelated words!

What about pronunciation?

Throughout the whole learning process the children were introduced to 'tasting and feeling' phonemes. We have started to look more carefully at what is happening in our mouth and throat as we sequence the important phonemes in a word. 

Learning is a journey; a journey of discovery and connections...and so our journey continues!

You can go to Real Spelling, Toolkit2 Kit2 ThemeL Naming the Days of the Week, for the full story of <friend>.

and 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.