![]() 1 Studies directly comparing different approaches have found that students taught using systematic synthetic phonics outperform those taught using other phonic approaches on measures of both reading and spelling. Of the two approaches, the one that is most consistently backed by evidence-based research is systematic synthetic phonics. Advocates for this approach consider the discrete teaching of phonics skills as detached from ‘meaningful’ and ‘authentic’ contexts. Students are encouraged to make discoveries about phoneme–grapheme relationships as opportunities arise in reading and writing tasks. What is embedded phonics?Įmbedded phonics, also referred to as ‘phonics in context’ or ‘literature-based phonics’, takes a more incidental approach to instruction. The approach is closely tied to instruction in phonological awareness that includes syllables, rhyme and phonemic awareness. Instruction is intentionally pre-planned so that students progress from learning simple, broadly applicable phoneme–grapheme relationships to those that are more complex and unusual. Systematic synthetic phonics is the explicit teaching of how speech sounds (phonemes) are represented by letters and letter combinations (graphemes). Most educators are aware of this consensus, but debate continues to linger regarding the effectiveness of two specific phonic approaches – systematic synthetic phonics and embedded phonics. When it comes to spelling, a large body of evidence identifies phonics as a vital component of instruction in the primary years. Back to articles & videos Which approach works best: Systematic synthetic phonics or embedded phonics?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |