Thesis Question:
Orton Gillingham
In the Classroom and Beyond
How might incorporating a combination of
systematic and explicit spelling instructional
April 22, 2017 IDA-UMB Annual Conference
approaches along with multisensory
strategies benefit the varying levels of ability
Sharalee Marsh, MA,OG-CTT
[email protected]
in the the mainstream 4th grade classroom?
Reasons For Thesis
• I had a desire to explain how and why spelling should be
taught with approaches recommended by experts in this field
for spelling instruction in the regular education classroom.
• I had a desire to analyze how a combination of various
approaches may best benefit all students in the mainstream
classroom.
• I have a deep concern for the students in regular education
who need extra help beyond what the mainstream elementary
classrooms provide.
“Spelling is the foundation of reading
and, until the 20th century, was the
primary method of teaching
reading .”
–Venezky, 1999
“Spelling, by its nature, is a
multisensory skill, involving the
translation of auditory sounds
into visual symbols that are
reinforced with the kinesthetic
act of writing.”
A national study of randomly selected
public and private primary-grade teachers
was conducted by Graham et al (2008).
It was determined that while teachers
recognized that 27% of their students
were struggling with spelling, only 42%
of them indicated that they made
–Suzanne Carreker, in Birsh 2005, p. 247.
adaptations to their instruction.
The plan for today’s seminar:
It seems that all students would benefit if
Give a brief history of spelling instruction in America.
mainstream education classrooms were able
to use the multisensory strategies that OG
instructors use, especially for the schools
Address the 3 types of words we need to teach our
students to spell: phonetic, morphologically based, and
sight words.
where extra programs are not readily
available for students who are struggling.
Show you how I use the Orton Gillingham Method in
my school while working with individuals, small
groups, or the whole classroom.
Modern English has been quite stable since
History of Spelling Instruction in America:
the middle of the 17th century, after three
centuries of change in linguistics from Old
English to Middle English to Modern
English.
While pronunciations changed, many
spellings were preserved, but not without
effort.
In 1828, Noah Webster:
•Completed the American Dictionary of the English Language
For more than 100 hundred years:
• Standardized a spelling system that would effectively teach all
•Webster’s Blue-Backed Speller (from 1788 on, The American
children and adults to read, write, spell, and speak American
Spelling Book) was the common tool that teachers used in one-
English (Unger, 1998; Venezky, 1999).
room school houses to teach both children and adults to read
• Made some specific changes to our American spellings:
• panic was once spelled panick; the suffix is now
consistently spelled -ic.
and spell through pronunciation and grammar (Sweet, 2004;
Schlagal, 2002).
•This approach, known as a traditional alphabetic approach,
• Theatre is now theater.
was deemed sufficient in the 19th century; however, a debate
• The “u” in flavour or colour was dropped from the
over how reading and spelling should be taught was
ending -our, to become flavor and color (Venezky,
1999).
beginning.
Other educators:
• Horace Mann, John Dewey, Colonel Francis Parker, and
G. Stanley Hall believed in a new whole-word approach
By 1930:
• Publishers began producing instructional materials such as the
Dick and Jane readers.
• During the following two decades, the whole-word approach
method that relied heavily on sight word memory
was used, and students were given lists of commonly used
(Sweet, 2004; Venezky, 1980).
words to memorize each week (Sweet, 2004).
• Mann advocated rote memory as the main approach, and
the importance of spelling was reduced (Venezky, 1980).
• Lengthy word lists were created without a particular
orthographic principle being used (Schlagal, 2002).
• Frequency lists began to be developed in the 1930s; these lists
allowed for more control of difficulty, and included words that
were more often used in writing (Schlagal, 2002).
• The Orton-Gillingham approach to remedial instruction began
(Birsh & Schedler, 2005).
In 1955:
In 1966:
• Spelling experts began to respond to complaints about the
• The first computerized study into the nature of
spelling basals that were being used; the words were organized
for difficulty, but not for orthographic similarity (Schlagal, 2002).
• Dr. Rudolph Flesch wrote in his document on the state of reading
instruction, Why Johnny Can’t Read, “Teach the children the
44 sounds of English and how they are spelled. Then they can
sound out each word…and read it off the page…” (p. 5)
• The use of pretests and posttests became the predominant method
of spelling instruction (Schlagel, 2002).
phoneme-grapheme correspondence led to a
discovery that English orthography is 87%
reliable (Hanna, Hanna, Hodges, & Rudorf, 1966).
•As the Federal government began to more fully
fund education, annual reports emerged on how
millions of children could not read or were
illiterate (Sweet, 2004).
In Recent Decades:
• Various programs, such as Title I and No Child Left
behind Act of 2001 have been established to alleviate
illiteracy in America.
• The whole-language and balanced approaches have been
used to teach children to read and spell in most recent
years.
• In 1997, the National Reading Panel (NRP) set out to analyze both
experimental and quasi-experimental research to determine what
skills and methods most benefit children’s literacy (Birsh, 2005).
• Modern research is showing that specific linguistic factors
contribute to underlying spelling abilities.
• These abilities include orthographic knowledge, phonological
awareness, and morphological knowledge (Kelman & Apel,
2004; Carreker, 2005a).
• These approaches lean on the belief that students will learn
to read naturally.
• A focus has been made on teaching reading, not
necessarily spelling (Sweet, 2004).
• The Common Core standards for literacy, beginning in
Kindergarten, include phonemic awareness, phonics and word
recognition, as well as fluency under their reading standards.
(http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RF/1/).
Unfortunately, spelling instruction in many
“Spelling instruction is often
treated as an afterthought to or a
natural byproduct of reading.”
classrooms is given little importance. Often
spelling instruction is left up to a method of
memorization of word lists and testing for
– Carreker, 2005, p. 257
correct spellings (Graham et al, 2008; Nunes,
Bryant & Barros, 2012; Peters, 1985).
What if…
• Spelling instruction is a multisensory experience?
• Spelling instruction has a dominant place in education?
• Teachers become intellectual spellers themselves?
It doesn’t have to be this way.
• Classrooms move beyond spelling instruction that follows the
typical “assign-and-test-procedure” where spellings of words
are just memorized (Nunes et al, 2012)?
• Students become more skilled because their teachers are better
prepared to teach spelling?
Why do we teach our students to
spell?
How do we teach our students to spell?
We need to teach students to spell
phonetically, morphologically, and also
It makes for stronger readers and
explicitly teach students the irregularities of
spellers, and ultimately, better
our words.
writers.
We can do this explicitly, systematically,
sequentially, and with a multisensory
approach.
Start with spelling instruction.
Does your school teach spelling?
If so, what kind of spelling program does your school use?
How do I get started?
Are you able to modify the program?
Is it part of the phonics program (reading program)?
What is the spelling program like?
Scenario #1:
Is it based on patterns or word families?
Is it random in design?
Is it overwhelming, including multiple
Take an existing program and
spellings of the same sound?
modify it so that it becomes
(ai, a-e, ay, eigh, and ey)
more systematic.
1. Analyze the scope and sequence of the program.
2. Rearrange the sequence, as closely to the Language Tool Kit
order, that you can.
3. Determine the number of weeks you will be able to teach
7. Determine which sight words need to be taught in your
classroom. Divide them into equal lessons–maybe 5 per
week.
•
Dolch List
School curriculum
Rudginsky’s book, “How to Teach Spelling”
spelling during the school year.
•
4. Determine the words that are truly non-phonetic (sight)
•
words; separate them from the phonetically based words.
Examples: again, through, said, many, whose
5. Divide these “sight words” evenly.
6. Create units, or weekly lessons to encompass all you need to
teach in your class for the school year.
For example, I used my 4th grade
curriculum to make a scope and
sequence.
•
•
•
•
36 weeks of school
32 weeks of spelling instruction
1 week set aside for review at the
end of each quarter
6 units
Unit 1: Phonemes and Graphemes
Unit 2: Syllabication Patterns
Unit 3: Morphology Part 1
Unit 4: Endings Rules/Morphology Part 2
Unit 5: Morphology Part 3
Unit 6: Morphology Part 4
Unit 1: Phonemes and Graphemes
•Review of short and long vowels and all consonant sounds
•Review of all consonant digraphs
Unit 2: Syllabication Patterns
• Contractions
•CLOVER Syllable types
• Short Vowel Rules (fszl, ck, tch, dge)
•Syllable Division Patterns
•Soft c and soft g
•Vowel Pairs
•VCE Pattern
Unit 4: Endings Rules/Morphology Part 2
Unit 3: Morphology Part 1
•Doubling Rule
•Beginning Prefixes: in-, re-, a-, un-, de-, be-, ex-, e-
• E Rule
•Beginning Suffixes: -s, -es, -y, -ly, -ed- /ed/, /t/, /d/
•Y Rule Parts 1 and 2
•Suffixes: -tion, -sion and -cian
•Y Rule part 3
•2-1-1 Rule (Accent)
Unit 5: Morphology Part 3
•Roots: port, form, ject, tact/tang, tract
•Roots: spect, struct, fer, dic/dict, fac/fact
•Roots: duc/duct/duce, scrib/script/scribe, vert/vers, mit/miss, rupt
•Roots: pel/puls, flect/flex, vid/vis, vict/vinc, join/junct
•Roots: ceit/ceive/cap/cept, gram/graph, phone/phono, man/manu, cycl/
cyclo
•ie/ei patterns for long e and long a sounds; teach along with the root
ceit/ceive
Unit 6: Morphology Part 4
•Advanced Prefixes: fore-, auto-, para-, tele-, trans•Advanced Prefixes: post-, with-, poly-/multi-, over-, uni-/mono•Advanced Prefixes: photo-, astro-, therm-, bio-, geo•Advanced Prefixes: tri-, pre-, ex-, inter-, anti•Chameleon Prefix Family: com•Chameleon Prefix Family: in•Chameleon Prefix Family: ad-
Scenario #2:
Start from scratch if you are not
Examples: Sonday System, Wilson
Spelling, or Saxon Phonics.
limited to using your school’s
curriculum.
Use all multi-sensory techniques that
Purchase an existing curriculum
OG incorporates.
that more closely aligns with OG.
Scenario #3:
Possible 1st-2nd Grade Scope and Sequence
•Review all consonant sounds
•Short vowel sounds
•Long vowel sounds: ay, y, e, o at the end of words
Using the Language Tool Kit, create
your own scope and sequence, and
choose your own sight words.
•vce Pattern
•Consonant digraphs: sh, th, ch , -ng, -nk, igh
•Short Vowel Rules (fszl, ck, tch, dge)
•Soft c and soft g
•R Controlled Vowels
•Vowel Pairs: ow, ou, ai, ee, ea, oi, oy, etc.
•Beginning suffixes and prefixes: (un-, in-, pre-, de-, be-, e-, ex-, -ly, -ed,
-es, -s, -ing, -er)
•Syllable Division/Syllable Types
Questions to ask:
Who are you working with?
A. Whole class
B. Small groups within a classroom
What does Scenario 3 look like?
C. Individuals
1. Give the CRST to the whole class.
• Choose the level based on the ages/abilities of your students.
• Give additional levels to those who need it, either higher or lower.
Start the school year with pretesting,
using the same format you would
with your private OG students.
2. Listen to your students read the IOTA or the Reading Inventory.
3. Determine what your students know and don’t know, and group
them into “levels” within your class.
4. Are the students varied in their abilities?
5. Can you see some natural groups?
6. Determine how you will be able to work with these groups.
Weekly Lesson Format
Logistics:
If you have the ability to teach the whole class at once, this is
great, and the easiest way to teach.
If you feel you need to teach 2-3 separate groups, determine what
the other group(s) will do while you work with the other group.
Would you be able to ability-group your students with another
teacher(s)?
I recommend having the students read silently, read in pairs, read
to volunteers or older students, practice sight words, play specific
skill-building games, or work on independent work that reinforces
skills you have been teaching.
Monday-Thursday (30-45 minute lessons each day)
•Begin with Phonemic Awareness activities.
•Card Pack Drill--only consonants and vowels to begin with
(26); as you add new sounds, those sounds go into the card
pack.
•Dictate Sounds and have students write sounds on white
boards; choose 5-6 a day, but always include most recent
sounds.
•Review: Read lists of newest learned sound and one old sound
(use tracing while reading)
•Sight Word Card Pack drill
•Spell 20 words on white boards each day; students show teacher
•Dictate one sentence and have students write it on spelling
boards, and teacher makes sure each student is accurate.
paper. Have students use COPS to edit. Write the sentence on the
•If any error occurs, finger spell as a class and rewrite. Then, dictate
board and ask the students to edit their sentences.
a new word with the same sound immediately; think rhyming word
•Introduce new material, as needed.
when choosing additional words.
•You can introduce more than one item in a week, if you feel the
•Keep your eyes on the students you know will struggle, and if
students are ready.
possible, keep them near you at the front of the classroom.
•Students read aloud in groups (15 minutes minimum)
•If you have to pause and help a student, have the others write their
•TOTAL LESSON TIME IS 1 HOUR
sight words for the week.
Friday (30 minutes)
Student Materials Needed:
•Conduct a Spell Check. Have students write 20 regular words and
10 irregular words.
•Score Spell Check according to sounds, not whole-words being
spelled completely correct.
• Use the information gleaned to write the following week’s lesson
plans.
•
Individual White Boards
•
Dry Erase markers
•
Carpet Squares or Sand Trays
•
Notebooks
•
Pencils
•
Individual Sight Word Packs-create in class each week and add
• Allow students to correct mistakes.
• Irregular Words can be checked for correctness
• “Grade” your students as you are required
to the card pack
•
Appropriately leveled books for reading
Teacher Materials Needed:
•
Testing Material: IOTA, Reading Inventory, CRST
•
White Board or Smart Board
•
Dry Erase markers
•
Word Lists: Teacher generated, or Sonday System Word
Sample Word Lists
Books
•
Appropriately Leveled Reading Books
•
Parent volunteers?
•
Time to create your Scope and Sequence
•
A system for keeping records of your students
•
Games for students to play
-fszl
-ck
swell
doff
mess
stack
speck
pluck
fill
buff
lass
slick
jock
snack
bill
gruff
fuss
flock
luck
chuck
mell
stiff
miss
crack
track
shuck
grill
puff
bliss
deck
click
flick
doll
staff
pick
rack
frock
gull
muff
jazz
neck
pluck
jack
yell
cuff
fuzz
cluck
check
muck
frizz
black
shock
neck
buzz
truck
thick
click
Sample Sentences
Sample Lesson Plan
New sounds/rules: ____________________ Previous Lesson:
1. Phonemic Awareness Activities: __________________________________________________________________________
2. Introduce 5 sight words on Day 1. Students write each word 3 times each day.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
3. Have students read words from lists of previously learned sounds/rules. Have students write down sounds from list below.
Daily words for spelling dictation: (Dictate down)
1.The pink dress is on a stack of dark pants.
2.The pet shark would not bite me.
3.Will the black panther hide in a cave?
4.The fresh milk is very sweet!
Sound
Day 1
Day 2
Day 3
Day 4
Spell Check
1.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
2.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
3.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
4.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
5.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
6.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
7.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
8.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
9.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
10.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
11.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
12.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
13.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
14.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
15.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
16.
______
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
17.
New:
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
18.
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
19.
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
20.
__________
__________
__________
__________
__________
Scoring
Daily sentences for dictation:
1. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
2. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
3. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
4. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
5.
Grading Spell Checks:
Sample Lesson Plan 3
New sounds/rules: -ck Rule Previous Lesson: -k at the end of a word
1. Phonemic Awareness Activities: Alphabet race, Sound Isolation and Deletion
2. Introduce 5 sight words on Day 1. Students write each word 3 times each day. should, would, could, very, always
3. Have students read words from lists of previously learned sounds/rules. Have students write down sounds from list below.
Daily words for spelling dictation: (Dictate down)
Sound
Day 1
Day 2
Day 3
Day 4
Spell Check
Scoring
1.
k
bark
shark
cork
milk
spark
__/4
2.
-ing
sing
thing
bring
sling
spring
—/4
3.
-ang
hang
rang
sang
hanging
banging
—/3
4.
vce
cap/cape
strip/stripe
hop/hope
pet/Pete
grape
—/4
5.
-ong
long
song
strong
ding-dong
longing
—/3
6.
-ung
hung
lung
sung
dung
stung
7.
k
silk
bulk
pork chop
sneak
speak
—/4
8.
Sight
should/would
would/could
could/very
very/should
always/would
—/2
9.
or
short
north
sport
fort
forlorn
—/5
10.
sh
dish
shift
shell
flesh
shrimp
—/5
11.
-ink
blink
slink
drink
clink
winks
12.
-ank
yank
bank
crank
blank
thanking
—/3
13.
Sight
could/very
always
should
would/could
very/should
—/2
14.
vce
rip/ripe
slop/slope
mod/mode
hat/hate
smoke
—/4
15.
-unk
dunk
junk
chunk
bunk bed
hunk
—/2
16.
Sight
always
should/very
would/always
always
could
—/1
17.
New:
pack
black
stock
jock
block
—/4
18.
deck
fleck
pick
stick
thick
—/3
19.
rock
crock
truck
muck
track
—/4
20.
trick
yuck
neck
check
speck
—/4
Daily sentences for dictation:
1. The pink dress is on a stack of dark pants.
During a spell-check, students write words onto paper rather
than onto white boards. After the dictation, the papers are
—/3
—/3
collected and checked for accuracy. The irregular sight
words are graded for memory. The information can be used
for a grade in the grade book. Each non-sight word should
be analyzed for correct sounds; the whole word isn’t wrong
2. The pet shark would not bite me.
3. Will the black panther hide in a cave?
4. The fresh milk is very sweet!
if one sound is incorrect.
If students are learning prefixes, root words, and
Each word has a point for each separate
phoneme or grapheme.
suffixes, each word part would be worth a point. The
word unfairly would be worth 3 points: un/fair/ly.
The purpose of having spell checks is to informally
shell is worth 3 points: sh/e/ll.
clock is worth 4 points: c/l/o/ck
assess how students are able to apply what they have
learned in their daily lessons. Teachers are able to
plan the following lesson based on the results.
In some spell checks, students divide the words
It is also important to assist students in
into syllables and label the syllable types using
correcting their mistakes. The finger spelling
CLOVER. If 80% of the students in a class
technique aids students in isolating each sound,
demonstrate mastery after a spell check, new
finding their errors, and ultimately spelling the
information can be introduced in the following
word correctly.
lesson. It is best to wait until a class is at 80%
mastery before adding new information.
Extra attention should be given to the students who are
struggling. Spelling is not a memorization task. Some rules
take time for mastery to take place. It is important that
spelling be taught to mastery, so it is better to be patient and
move at a pace that aids in mastery (Gillingham & Stillman,
Orton Gillingham
In the Classroom and Beyond
1997: Sonday, 2004 & 2006).
April 22, 2017 IDA-UMB Annual Conference
For students who need a challenge, consider adding more
Sharalee Marsh, MA,OG-CTT
2017
[email protected]
sight words to their lessons, using more blends, or adding
more prefixes and suffixes to your words.
References:
Berninger, V. (1999). Coordinating transcription and text generation in working memory during composing: Automatic and constructive processes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22, 99–112.
Berninger, V.W., Abbott, R.D., Nagy, W., & Carlisle, J. (2009). Growth in phonological, orthographic, and morphological awareness in grades 1 to 6. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 39, 141-163. doi: 10.1007/210936-009-9130-6
Graham, S. (1990). The role of production factors in learning disabled students’ compositions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 781-791.
Graham, S., Harris, K., & Fink-Chorzempa, B. (2002). Contributions of spelling instruction to the spelling, writing, and reading of poor spellers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 669-686. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.94.4.669
Berninger, V.W., Lee, Y., Abbott, R.D,. & Breznitz, Z. (2013). Teaching children with dyslexia to spell in a reading-writers’ workshop. Annals of Dyslexia, 63, 1-24. doi:10.1007/s11881-011-0054-0
Graham, S., Morphy, P., Harris, K., Fink-Chorzempa, B., Saddler, S., & Mason, L. (2008). Teaching spelling in the primary grades: A national survey of instructional practices and adaptations. American Educational Research, 4 (3), 796-825.
Berninger, V.W., Vaughan, K., Abbott, R., Brooks, A., Abbott, A., Reed, E., & Graham, S. (1998). Early Intervention for spelling problems: Teaching functional spelling units of varying size with a multiple-connections framework. Journal of
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/27667151
Educational Psychology, 90, 587-605.
Hanna, P.R., Hanna, J.S., Hodges, R.E., & Rudorf, E.H. (1966). Phoneme-grapheme correspondences as cues to spelling improvement. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, U.S. Office of Education.
Berninger, V.W., Vaughan, K., Abbott, R., Brooks, A., Begay, K., Curtin, G., … Graham, S. (2000). Language-based spelling instruction: Teaching children to make multiple connections between spoken and written words. Learning Disability
Hill, H. B. (2005). Glossary. In J.R. Birsh (Ed.), Multisensory teaching of basic language skills (2nd ed.), (pp. 561-581). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes Publishing Co.
Quarterly, 23, 117-135. Retrieved from http://www.cldinternational.org/Publications/LDQ.asp
Birsh, J. R. (2005a). Multisensory teaching of basic language skills (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes Publishing Co.
Birsh, J. R. (2005b). Reading and Research Disability. In (Birsh, (Ed.), Multisensory teaching of basic language skills (2nd ed.), (pp. 1-21). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes Publishing Co.
Birsh, J. R. & Schedler, J.F. (2005). Planning multisensory language lessons and the environment. In Birsh, (Ed.), Multisensory teaching of basic language skills (2nd ed.), (pp. 187-211). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes Publishing Co.
Katzir, T., Kim, Y., Wolf, M, Kennedy, B., Lovett, M., & Morris, R. (2006). The relationship of spelling recognition, RAN, and phonological awareness to reading skills in older poor readers and younger reading-matched controls. Reading and
Writing, 19, 845-872. doi: 10.1007/s11145-006-9013-2
Kelman, M.E., & Apel, K. (2004). Effects of multiple linguistic and prescriptive approach to spelling instruction: a case study. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 2 (25), 56-66.
McCardle, P. & Chhabra, V. (2004). The voice of evidence. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Carreker, S. (2005a). Teaching reading. In J.R. Birsh (Ed.), Multisensory teaching of basic language skills (2nd ed.), (pp. 213-255). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes Publishing Co.
McCardle, P. & Chhabra, V. (2004b). The accumulation of evidence. In P., McCardle & V., Chhabra (Eds.), The Voice of Evidence. (pp. 463-478). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Carreker, S. (2005b). Teaching spelling. In J.R. Birsh (Ed.), Multisensory teaching of basic language skills (2nd ed.), (pp. 257-295). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes Publishing Co.
Moats, L.C. (2003). Measuring teachers’ content knowledge of language and reading. Annals of Dyslexia, 53, 23-45.
Chall, J. (1967). Learning to read: The great debate; An inquiry into the science, art, and ideology of old and new methods of teaching children to read. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Moats, L.C. (2009). Knowledge foundations for teaching reading and spelling. Reading and Writing, 22 (4), 379-399.
Chomsky, N. (1971). Write first, read later. Childhood Education, 47, 296-299.
Moats, L.C. (2010). Speech to print: Language essentials for teachers (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing Company.
Chomsky, N. & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row Publishers.
Common Core state standard initiatives: Preparing America’s students for state college and career. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RF/1/
Ehri, L.C. (1980). The development of orthographic images. In U. Frith (Ed.), Cognitive processes in spelling (pp. 311-338). London, UK: Academic Press.
Ehri, L.C. (1987). Learning to read and spell words. Journal of Reading Behavior, 19, 5-31.
Ehri, L.C. (2000). Learning to read and learning to spell: Two sides of a coin. Topics in Language Disorders, 20 (3), 19-36.
Moats, L.C. & Farrell, M.L. (2005). Multisensory structured language education. In J.R. Birsh (Ed.), Multisensory teaching of basic language skills (2nd ed.), (pp. 23-41). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes Publishing Co.
Nunes, T., Bryant, P., & Barros, R. (2012). The development of word recognition and its significance for comprehension and fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology,104 (4), 959-973. doi: 10.1037/a0027412
Peters, M.L. (1985). Spelling, caught or taught? London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Schlagal, B. (2002). Classroom spelling instruction: History, research, and practice. Reading Research and Instruction, 42 (1), 44-57.
Sonday, A. (2004). The Sonday system two: Learning to read. St. Paul, MN: Windsor Learning Inc.
Ehri, L.C. (2001). The development of spelling knowledge and its role in reading acquisition and reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 356-365.
Sonday, A. (2006). The Sonday system: Learning to read (2nd ed.). St. Paul, MN: Windsor Learning Inc.
Ehri, L.C. (2004). Teaching phonemic awareness and phonics. In McCardle, P. & Chhabra, V. (Eds.), The Voice of Evidence (pp. 153-186). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Sweet, R. W. Jr. (2004). The big picture: Where we are nationally on the reading front and how we got here. In P., McCardle & V., Chhabra (Eds.), The Voice of Evidence. (pp. 13-44). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Ehri, L. C. & Roberts, K. (1979). Do beginners learn printed words better in contexts or in isolation? Child Development, 50, 12-26.
Templeton, S. (2002a). Effective spelling instruction in the middle grades: It’s a lot more than memorization. Voices from the Middle, 9 (3), 8-14.
Ehri, L.C. & Wilce, L. (1987a). Cipher vs. cue reading: An experiment in decoding acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 3-13.
Treiman, R. (1998). Beginning to spell in English. In Hulme, C. & Joshi, R. M., (Eds.), Reading and spelling development and disorders (pp. 371-393). London, UK: Routledge. Retrieved from http://www.minitex.umn.edu
Ehri, L.C. and Wilce, (1987b). Does learning to spell help beginners learn to read words? Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 47-65. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/747720
Ehri, L.C. & Robbins, C. (1992). Beginners need some decoding skill to read words by analogy. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 12-26.
Ehri, L.C. (2004). Teaching phonemic awareness and phonics. In P., McCardle & V., Chhabra (Eds.), The Voice of Evidence. (pp. 153-186). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Flesch, R. (1955). Why Johnny can’t read. New York: HarperCollins
Foorman, B.R., Francis, D., Novy, D., & Liberman, D. (1991). How letter-sound instruction mediates progress in first-grade reading and spelling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 456-469.
Gillingham, A. & Stillman, B. W. (1956). Remedial training for children with specific disability in reading, spelling, and penmanship (5th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Educators Publishing Service.
Gillingham, A. & Stillman, B. W. (1997). The Gillingham manual: Remedial training for children with specific disability in reading, spelling, and penmanship (8th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Educators Publishing Service.
Unger, H.G. (1998). Noah Webster: The life and times of an American patriot. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Venezky, R. L. (1980). From Webster to Rice to Roosevelt. In U. Frith (ed.), Cognitive processes in spelling (p. 9-30). London, UK: Academic Press.
Venezky, R.L. (1999). The American way of spelling: The structure and origins of American English orthography. New York: Guilford.