Teaching Spelling

After reading an older post at Barlow Farms, (8/27/07 "Educational Question") I was prompted to record my thoughts about teaching spelling. There are many who argue that it is a waste of time to teach spelling in our day. Afterall, we have spellcheck and as a general rule, you're either a speller or you're not.

It may shock you to know that I disagree! Teaching students how to spell, when done correctly, isn't ONLY about the spelling...it is one of the basic components of language acquisition and mastery. That statement is not couched in a "Polyanna" ideology that all you have to do is give a spelling list and kids will be consistently accurate spellers and wordsmiths.

I have just enough experience as a Mom and Teacher to know 2 things:

1) There exists a sharp distinction between natural spellers and everyone else.

2) Both natural and non-natural spellers benefit from formal spelling instruction.

Successful spelling instruction will incorporate a combination of strategies which must include:

1) Reading - not just ANY reading, but good literature. Over time, exposure to a wide variety of words in context influences one's ability to spell.

2) Systematic study and application of spelling rules

3) Systematic study and application of prefixes & suffixes

4) Systematic vocabulary study, application and immersion in Latin, Greek and German roots

I have repeatedly witnessed the positive results of this combination. If any one of these are absent, the rate of success diminishes significantly.

Think about #2-4...it's not that hard to imagine how familiarity with "the system" would actually prove beneficial in increasing one's skill. Noah Webster is largely responsible for establishing consistency and many of the "rules" by which our system operates. Before his work, spelling in America was very haphazard and varied widely, according to one's ethnic background. The rules make a great deal of sense, once you memorize and learn how to apply them. Some argue that these rules remain impotent because of numerous exceptions; but these exceptions occur primarily in words whose origin is German, Greek or Latin...thus the necessity of studying these roots.

This combination must be sustained over a period of years (at least 1st-8th grades), and increase in complexity over time for maximum benefit. I have observed its success in the classroom, but most markedly with my youngest son. The elder one is a natural who has misspelled fewer than a dozen words in his whole life, while the younger butchered the language with his horrific distortions! The elder didn't necessarily require the study of rules, yet the study of roots combined with his "extreme" reading habits, have resulted in a mastery of words well beyond his 13 years. The younger, however, has needed the constant reinforcement of every aspect outlined above, and the result of its implementation in 4th and 5th grades, has been dramatic! He's still not a "perfect" speller, but is very much on the right track.

So, are spelling lists and tests necessary? I am open to the possibility that they may not be, however, it is often the case that students won't memorize material unless they know they'll be tested on it, so at the very least the rules ought to be memorized and tested. Practice and proficiency in applying the rules can, and probably should, be accomplished apart from testing. I might eliminate the memorization of a weekly list of words (except commonly used "sight words" which must be known!), but would require memorization and testing on the definitions of prefixes, suffixes and roots.