Syllabary versus Phonograms - HUH?

[abrightmom]

:D Can you explain the differences between the two? I think I understand WHAT they ARE but I don't quite get how to apply them or why I'd choose to learn/teach one or the other? Actually, I'm still not sure I get what the syllabary is and how it would be helpful.

 

Are these two different options or tools to apply to spelling and/or reading . . . ? I'm not even sure how to ask my question! I might want to teach the syllabary to my kids but would this be in addition to the phonograms? I know that I am going to teach those now . . .

 

:001_huh: Thanks!

[momofabcd]

From what I gathered by browsing Webster's Speller, you teach all the sounds of the phonograms OG/Spalding way, and teach the syllabary.

Actually, Webster's has a lot more sounds for some of them. "A" has something like 6 different sounds. So, yes, you teach both.

[ElizabethB]

Yes, you need to teach both.

 

The syllabary is the foundation of later divided words that teach words to a 12th grade reading level, so you are teaching to a much higher level than modern phonics programs.

 

It is very powerful, and any child can benefit, I have successfully used it with inner city Little Rock children and disadvantaged children who had spotty attendance in the Los Angeles schools. (Actually, those with the worst attendance actually did better--they had less sight word guessing to overcome!)

[abrightmom]

:001_smile: Thanks so much!! . . . Does it matter which one I teach first? Can they be taught simultaneously? I'll keep reading on my own but it might be fun to start with one while I am learning about them and fleshing out my "plan" . . .

 

Also, when pronouncing the sounds within the syllabary I ran across two different ways to say the "u". I was under the impression that the vowels should make their long sound/say their name (ca, ce, ci, co, cu - that's the part I was looking at). If one says the long sound it would sound like "cue". Another pronunciation I heard for that syllable was "coo". Are both correct or is the "cue" correct because the "u" would be saying its name?

 

This is fun!!!!! I am excited to learn with my kids! :001_smile:

[ElizabethB]

You can start teaching the syllabary any time--the 2 letter syllables are actually easier to learn to blend than a CVC word.

 

The long u sound is not really possible after certain consonants, the sound is y + oo, the y part is dropped naturally after certain consonants, there is a list in my spelling rules if you are interested, the last page of my spelling rules. It comes naturally to a native English speaker, but ESL students or native English speakers with speech/hearing difficulties need to be explicitly taught when to use each sound. The spelling rules are linked at the end of my how to tutor page. That page also has instructions for adding syllables into Blend Phonics, in my guide to using Blend Phonics.

 

http://www.thephonicspage.org/On%20Reading/howtotutor.html

 

I learned a lot when I started using it, I had not realized how accent dependent English was until I started using it.

[abrightmom]

:001_smile: Elizabeth,

 

I am amazed at these websites and the resources there. Why, oh why, did I not know about this two years ago (or even one!)!? :001_smile: What a tremendous blessing . . .

 

I could ask 100 questions but I won't :D. I'll keep reading and trying to wrap my mind around all that is there. Between your site and Don's there is so much to look at!!

 

For phonics instruction from the ground up I see 3 possible resources: Word Mastery (doesn't Memoria Press publish this?), Blend Phonics, and Webster's. Are these equally valid choices and a matter of preference or is there a reason to choose one over the other? Perhaps Webster's follows one of the phonics options. Where does the syllabary fit in with phonics instruction?

 

What is your course of study for your kiddos?

 

Elizabeth, thank-you for all that you've done and for this ministry! I'm truly blown away! May God bless your efforts! :001_smile:

[nansk]

Yes, you need to teach both.

 

Hi Elizabeth,

 

Now I am confused. Why would we need to teach both?

 

Take for example, the word 'flake'.

In Word Mastery (which teaches phonograms - ake, ape, etc), the word would be taught as f + l + ake

 

In Webster's speller (which teaches the syllabary - fla, fle, fli, flo, etc) the word would be taught as fla + ke

 

As I see it, both are different approaches. While both roads lead to Rome, why would a child need to take both roads?

 

TIA

~ Nandini

 

EDIT: I do use both resources, but in different ways and independent of each other. Dd has already learnt to read using Blend Phonics. We use the Webster's Speller for multi-syllabic words and Word Mastery as a follow-on to Blend Phonics.

Edited June 8, 2010 by nansk

[nansk]

For phonics instruction from the ground up I see 3 possible resources: Word Mastery (doesn't Memoria Press publish this?), Blend Phonics, and Webster's. Are these equally valid choices and a matter of preference or is there a reason to choose one over the other? Perhaps Webster's follows one of the phonics options. Where does the syllabary fit in with phonics instruction?

 

Hi,

 

Here is my earlier post reg. these three reading programs. I think Webster's Speller makes a good follow-on to either Blend Phonics or Word Mastery.

[Amber in AUS]

Hi Elizabeth,

 

Now I am confused. Why would we need to teach both?

 

Take for example, the word 'flake'.

In Word Mastery (which teaches phonograms - ake, ape, etc), the word would be taught as f + l + ake

 

In Webster's speller (which teaches the syllabary - fla, fle, fli, flo, etc) the word would be taught as fla + ke

 

As I see it, both are different approaches. While both roads lead to Rome, why would a child need to take both roads?

.

 

Not Elizabeth but i think you have made a poor choice for an example there. Flake is a 1 syllable word therefore you would use the phonograms via Websters to get the word too remembering to add the silent e to make the long a vowel sound. The syllabary as i understand it wouldn't apply to this one syllable word the way you have shown. Just my 0.02c.

[ElizabethB]

Blend Phonics, Word Mastery, and Webster's Speller are all good beginning programs. Webster's, however, is also a good ending program! And, for anyone having a hard time learning to blend, it is actually a superior beginning program, it is far easier to learn to blend 2 letters than 3.

 

With my daughter, I just used Webster's Speller for K, but I had already taught her a bit of phonics from various other programs, I didn't find Webster's Speller until right before her K year.

 

With my son, I plan to start with the syllabary in Webster's Speller, then work through some of the words in Blend Phonics while also doing a few easy 2 syllable words like de-ny. This is actually easier for most beginning students than a word with a 2 letter vowel team like boil or main. In fact, Webster teaches "easy words of 4 syllables" like an-te-ce-dent and sci-en-tif-ic before teaching ay, ai, ea, ee, oe, etc.

 

With my remedial students, I use Webster's Speller combined with Blend Phonics because it is easier to use Blend Phonics for the other sounds, it is set up by sound, so if they are doing well with something, you can do less, if they need extra help, you can do more.

 

Webster's Speller actually teaches everything you need to know to sound out any word (since Webster wrote our first American dictionary and he taught school, he knew how and what to teach!) But, I think the layout for most people for the non syllabary words is easier in Blend Phonics than Webster's Speller.

 

Webster's does teach long vowels like flake when teaching one syllable words, but a 2 syllable word like taken would be divided up ta-ken to help the student figure out that the first syllable is long.

 

You can use it as a follow on if you need time to study it and figure it out, it works well as a follow on, too, then you just teach the syllabary and move to the 2+ syllable words directly from there.

 

The reason there are so few instructions in this and other old books is that if you saw something taught 6 or 8 times in your one room school experience, you did not need instructions to teach it.

Edited June 8, 2010 by ElizabethB

[ElizabethB]

:001_smile: Elizabeth,

 

Elizabeth, thank-you for all that you've done and for this ministry! I'm truly blown away! May God bless your efforts! :001_smile:

 

You're welcome!

 

Hi Elizabeth,

 

Now I am confused. Why would we need to teach both?

 

As I see it, both are different approaches. While both roads lead to Rome, why would a child need to take both roads?

 

TIA

~ Nandini

 

 

 

All the phonograms are taught in Webster's Speller, but in a slightly different format. And, they are scattered about a bit throughout the book.

 

I find that the more ways you can explain something to someone, for any subject, the better. This is especially important in reading and math since they are building blocks for many other subjects.

[thowell]

When looking through the first few lessons of Webster's the problem I have is when do you know to pronounce with a long or short sound. Example on page 15 the first table shown has no numbers over the sounds marking which vowel sound to teach?? Which way do I teach them? I hope this makes sense.

[abrightmom]

http://www.thephonicspage.org/On%20Reading/webstersway.html

 

If you read through this page Elizabeth explains (a little ways down the page) how she teaches Webster's. She includes how to pronounce the syllables. There is a video or an audio file somewhere that she does explaining how to use Webster's and how to pronounce the syllabary. I can't find it but I'll keep looking when I have time!!!! :001_smile:

 

ETA: http://www.thephonicspage.org/On%20Reading/usingwebstermovi.html There is the link for the audio file on how to use Webster's. See if this is helpful to you! I am going to start teaching the syllabary this week, just for fun!

Edited June 8, 2010 by abrightmom
Adding some info.

[ElizabethB]

When looking through the first few lessons of Webster's the problem I have is when do you know to pronounce with a long or short sound. Example on page 15 the first table shown has no numbers over the sounds marking which vowel sound to teach?? Which way do I teach them? I hope this makes sense.

 

Don's 1908 version has more markings, and they are diacrital markings, which I find easier to use.

 

http://www.donpotter.net/pdf_files/websterspellingbookmethod.pdf

[thowell]

Thanks!!

[ElizabethB]

Thanks!!

 

You're welcome!

[Terabith]

Elizabeth, how fluent does a child need to be before moving on?

 

My five year old can sound out CVC words, and words that have a couple consonants in there. So words like "glad" she can handle. She knows the "sh" phonogram, and can read words with it. She knows the th, but it is not automatic. She knows ing, old, and out in words, and is learning "ar." She's pretty solid on the simple CVC, or CCVC, or CVCC type words, BUT she still "says the sound to read the word." Quite frankly, I've encouraged that, because she wants to guess. But I'm wondering at what point we move on to more words. Does she need to be able to read a word more or less by sight (though NOT being taught by sight) or is it okay to move on if she is still reading words phonogram by phonogram?

[ElizabethB]

Elizabeth, how fluent does a child need to be before moving on?

 

My five year old can sound out CVC words, and words that have a couple consonants in there. So words like "glad" she can handle. She knows the "sh" phonogram, and can read words with it. She knows the th, but it is not automatic. She knows ing, old, and out in words, and is learning "ar." She's pretty solid on the simple CVC, or CCVC, or CVCC type words, BUT she still "says the sound to read the word." Quite frankly, I've encouraged that, because she wants to guess. But I'm wondering at what point we move on to more words. Does she need to be able to read a word more or less by sight (though NOT being taught by sight) or is it okay to move on if she is still reading words phonogram by phonogram?

 

That's good enough to move on.

 

It takes hundreds to thousands of repetitions to get fluent, by all means move on but keep reviewing to get those repetitions numbers up!

 

And, yes, you do want them sounding it out painfully and not just guessing, it is a bit of a painful stage to work through but worth it in the end.

 

Edit: Adding in a bit of spelling cuts down on the number of repetitions needed, one word spelled is worth 10 to 20 readings. And, my game or other games make the repetitions more fun.

[nansk]

All the phonograms are taught in Webster's Speller, but in a slightly different format. And, they are scattered about a bit throughout the book.

 

I find that the more ways you can explain something to someone, for any subject, the better. This is especially important in reading and math since they are building blocks for many other subjects.

 

Hi Elizabeth,

 

Thank you for the reply. I do agree that over-teaching in multiple ways will help to cement the knowledge well.

 

Thank you for guiding us to be teach correctly and make the most of these wonderful resources. :-)

[nansk]

http://www.thephonicspage.org/On%20Reading/webstersway.html

 

If you read through this page Elizabeth explains (a little ways down the page) how she teaches Webster's. She includes how to pronounce the syllables. There is a video or an audio file somewhere that she does explaining how to use Webster's and how to pronounce the syllabary.

 

ETA: http://www.thephonicspage.org/On%20Reading/usingwebstermovi.html There is the link for the audio file on how to use Webster's. See if this is helpful to you! I am going to start teaching the syllabary this week, just for fun!

 

And if these are not enough (:)) Don Potter has a video on youtube in which he reads out the syllabary.