Theories/history of when to start spelling instruction

[lulalu]

Can we have a discussion about the different ideas on when to start spelling instruction. There is so much out there- spelling to learn to read, waiting until after 9 years old, invented spelling.....

 

Just wondering if we can talk through these and the pros and cons.

[HomeAgain]

We don't do invented spelling.  I don't believe it has any value to it other than letting the adult know how the child hears things.

 

I know spelling to learn to read can be valid, but hard for a child with poor fine motor skills.  Separating the two components (either using a reading then spelling program or using a moveable alphabet) can work instead.

 

After 9............yes, but what about before 9?  And why that arbitrary age?

 

We follow a progression of phonics w/moveable alphabet, copywork, dictation, and then more intense spelling instruction as foreign language skills are developed.  Being able to break down a word into parts and know what each part means can help spelling skills.  The whole time, though, spelling rules are introduced in little rhymes and sayings so that there is a mental reference if he gets stuck.

[Bluegoat]

I think you'll find different people have various ideas about what counts as spelling instruction.  Especially, direct vs indirect.

 

I tend to think that early on, when kids are learning to read and do phonics and the physical act of writing, they are also learning to spell, especially if they do copywork.

 

So - I tend to think spelling as a separate subject should start when the child is reading fairly easily, and writing or copying comfortably - I don't think it makes much sense to spend time on spelling rules or memorizing words with a child who still needs reading instruction - more reading will probably be more useful at improving spelling, and at that age their attention and energy for schoolwork is limited.

 

The other advantage to this, IMO, is by that time it may be easier to see what kind of spelling help the child responds to.  Some may do best with more focused copywork, others with more rule-based instruction, some might do well with wood roots or Latin, and others with memory words, or something else.  Some may not need much at all.

[SilverMoon]

Mine started spelling when they were reading well enough they didn't need daily phonics instruction. The spelling book took over the phonics and they read real books for reading time instead.

[MinivanMom]

My children started spelling instruction when they were done with phonics instruction. At that point, they were reading somewhere between the "Frog and Toad" and "Magic Treehouse" levels.

 

I think that using writing as a component of your phonics instruction and whether you allow/encourage the use of "invented spelling" are separate issues from what most people would consider "spelling instruction". 

[Julie of KY]

I tend to do spelling after they start reading.

 

My oldest - I did spelling because you were supposed to do spelling. Not sure it made any difference.

 

My second - I corrected his spelling as he made mistakes; never did a spelling program and he's a great speller.

 

My third - horrible spelling; dyslexic - doing All About Spelling very slowly as well as picking SOME of the misspelled words out of her stories, Spelling is slowly coming along.

 

My fourth - doing very basic phonics based spelling as we try to learn to read; dyslexic

 

 

If I were to start over, I'd do a lot of copywork and correct spelling as they go along. If there are a lot of spelling mistakes, especially of common words or no retention of things corrected, then I'd do a more formal program of spelling such as All About Spelling.

[lllll]

nm

Edited December 25, 2016 by ..Kathy..

[MerryAtHope]

I generally prefer to teach reading first, and when they have a good start in that, then start a spelling program. However, there are times that spelling can unlock reading for a student. This article discusses both and some of the rationale behind each approach (it relates to AAS specifically, but can help in your thought process even if you don't use that).

[bethben]

I agree with pp about starting spelling as a separate subject when they are reading Frog and Toad or something similar fluently.  By that time, handwriting is usually a bit easier for them too.  Think about a child just learning to read and learning how to write and then through spelling at them also.  They have to figure out how to form the letter.  They have to sound out the word which means they have to think about their phonics that is a new process.  Then, if they haven't forgotten the original word they are supposed to spell, they have to use all of these brand new skills to actually write the word down.  That's a lot to expect of a little kid.  I have no problem with copy work since that's just letter formation.  But, I wait for formal spelling until around 2nd grade.

[Bluegoat]

My children started spelling instruction when they were done with phonics instruction. At that point, they were reading somewhere between the "Frog and Toad" and "Magic Treehouse" levels.

 

I think that using writing as a component of your phonics instruction and whether you allow/encourage the use of "invented spelling" are separate issues from what most people would consider "spelling instruction". 

 

Disallowing invented spelling never seemed very practical to me.  With really little kids, we used copywork more than any other sort of writing, but that was for school.  But they did sometimes write on their own - one of my daughters in particular - and it didn't seem like it would be quite right to correct their private work or treat it like school.  According to the logic of avoiding invented spelling though, that would negate a lot of the benefits of the approach.

[lulalu]

 

I think that using writing as a component of your phonics instruction and whether you allow/encourage the use of "invented spelling" are separate issues from what most people would consider "spelling instruction".

Can you explain why you see them as separate? In my mind I see them as spelling instruction.

 

Maybe I don't fully understand Splading and similar methods. I have understoid that to be spelling instruction which leads to the child reading- not teaching to read, but reading being the byproduct. Or am I mistaken on the approach?

[lulalu]

I have heard a few times that spelling is not a grammar stage skill. Any thoughts on that?

[MotherGoose]

Can you explain why you see them as separate? In my mind I see them as spelling instruction.

 

Maybe I don't fully understand Splading and similar methods. I have understoid that to be spelling instruction which leads to the child reading- not teaching to read, but reading being the byproduct. Or am I mistaken on the approach?

In my experience, children can read many more words than they can understand. The skills are separate.

[fralala]

Seeing a word or writing a word repeatedly is one of the things that helps us remember how to spell it, right?

 

I think the main issue with invented spelling is not that a child makes mistakes, but that adults are, over a period of a time, deliberately not saying, "Actually, 'Christmas' is written with an 'h' and a 't'-- let me show you before you finish the stack of 20 cards you're going to make" because they are worried such a correction might harm the child's desire to write or self-esteem or something.

 

If a 5 or 6 or 7 year old child is writing on their own, I feel like it's time to introduce some spelling-- whether it's just looking at their writing and seeing the rules or words they have trouble with (for my natural speller) or doing so more formally. A child who is writing IS practicing spelling, over and over, so I think whether or not it's a "grammar stage skill" really depends on the child.

[SporkUK]

I've found Year 3 to be a good starting point for spelling as a separate subject. The ye olde Essentials in Teaching and Testing Spelling, originally published in 1932, I have the 1985 'new' edition with extra words...like cheque and cassette I had to explain last week, that I use as our spelling spine has 'Group 1' starting at 7.  When I did it earlier, there tended to be tears and take far longer to do a lot less. I think having a strong automatic handwriting so they aren't thinking about that too much as well as phonics skills to recode the sounds really helps so to me it makes sense to come after a good deal of those first. 

 

With my eldest where I didn't start until much later because of a mix of language issues, being told since he was reading such-and-such impressive book on his own he would naturally catch up and our concentration on maths [which for a time he wanted to spend hours on and I was trying to rebuild his confidence], and he has a lot of bad spelling habits to overcome still. We're about to complete Group 3 in the spine with him and my 9 year old [which is set for 9-year-old and fits A-9's level perfectly but O-12 is struggling though they like doing it together] and we're going to take a term just to do a Spelling Essential's personal spelling journals daily as we started this term to work on personal trouble words and it's spelling rules work. I'm hoping it will help him think through it a bit more so he has skills and confidence. Adding the personal spelling practice this year for my older two has been a great lightbulb moment for all of us. I intend to do the same for my youngers when they hit Group 3/Year 5. 

Edited December 18, 2016 by SporkUK

[Bluegoat]

Seeing a word or writing a word repeatedly is one of the things that helps us remember how to spell it, right?

 

I think the main issue with invented spelling is not that a child makes mistakes, but that adults are, over a period of a time, deliberately not saying, "Actually, 'Christmas' is written with an 'h' and a 't'-- let me show you before you finish the stack of 20 cards you're going to make" because they are worried such a correction might harm the child's desire to write or self-esteem or something.

 

If a 5 or 6 or 7 year old child is writing on their own, I feel like it's time to introduce some spelling-- whether it's just looking at their writing and seeing the rules or words they have trouble with (for my natural speller) or doing so more formally. A child who is writing IS practicing spelling, over and over, so I think whether or not it's a "grammar stage skill" really depends on the child.

 

I can't really see reading my child's personal work and correcting their spelling, unless asked.  I'd feel like she would be quite justified in telling me to mind my own business.  (And if every time a child decides to write something it turns into a spelling lesson, I suspect that might very well make it a pastime to avoid.  But that's almost secondary to the fact that it isn't my project.)

 

 

For something like cards, it would be a little different, but IME most kids want to be sure things are spelled correctly for that kind of item.

Edited December 20, 2016 by Bluegoat

[Clemsondana]

We actually do a little bit of spelling starting in K, although it's very informal. As we work through phonics, I had my child spell the words that we'd worked on. It helped emphasize the repetition - CAT, BAT, RAT, etc. We'd often do it verbally while jumping, or use magnetic letters or letter flash cards, so there was no writing. The magnets really helpded emphasize the endings, since all that would need to change was the first letter. Once they can read, we sometimes use spelling books and other times take words from vocabulary lists. Every few years once they get to 4th grade, we make a pass through the 'Spelling Works' book, which teaches a lot of useful spelling rules.