How are spellings actually learned?

[squashpie]

By which I mean, is it through learning all the graphemes (if that's the right word?) and then just getting a lot of writing practice, that the words finally embed in one's brain. Or does a child usually reach a certain age and then spelling just clicks?

Also, is there a resource anywhere which tells you all the 'rules' for spelling (even, perhaps, the origins of words to explain why some words use a "ur", like in 'curb', say, and other words use an "ir", like in 'bird'?) and also lists the frequently-used exceptions?

Personally I think that the most important factor (but not the only one) for me was doing masses and masses of reading.

Lots of reading and lots of writing, ime.

Lots of reading is what helps most people, but lots of writing is essential too - to establish the automatic link between fingers and brain.

Children are usually taught to use most of the main spelling patterns as parts of their phonics, but the main part of learning to spell English properly is memorising the irregular letters in 3695 common words (said, build, friend, some, soup). Children have to be trained out of writing just phonically for at least 3695 common words (e.g. havE tU bE oV Writing wOrds).

In most cases they are exceptions from the main patterns or rules, e.g. 'bed, fed, led ...said, head'.

But the spellings for some sounds, like 'hear her bird turn' or 'be, see, sea, key, ski', are simply random. I have listed all the main English spelling patterns and exceptions to them at
englishspellingproblems.blogspot.com/2010/11/english-spelling-rules.html

There are quite a lot of "rules" for spelling that I never knew about until I started teaching dyslexic students. I get a lot from the Nessy programme that I use with my students but it is very expensive. No doubt someone else will be along soon to tell you of a cheaper source!

Lots of schools teach high frequency words. Some schools invest a bit of time teaching phonic patterns and some schools (like my dd's last one) don't believe in ever teaching spelling formally.
Lots of reading definitely helped dd's spelling. However I used a phonics spelling workbook suggested by dd's new school after they highlighted that her spelling was significantly behind her reading. It is absolutely fabulous. Its called 'Apples and Pears' and is bought from the 'Promethean Trust' website. Her spelling is enormously better and I am struck by the fact that she can look at a new word and be aware of what pattern it is that she has to notice, to remember how to spell it in future.
Her spelling wasn't bad before but I also am surprised by how quickly she has learnt to spell once there was some focus on it.

In answer to the OP these 'Apples and Pears' books do systematically cover all the main spelling patterns and introduce rules.

Apples and Pears from the Promethean Trust certainly does need more recognition. It's particularly useful for struggling spellers.
High frequency words, taught as sight words, have been an enormous step backwards and any teacher who understands synthetic phonics and how the alphabetic code works, should ban this practice! The children who need the most help, often find learning high frequency words by sight to be incredibly difficult.

Yes indeed, I fully agree with posts recommending Apples and Pears. It is brilliant and I use it with all the children I tutor once we have got them reading beyond basics.

Ooh thanks for that recommendation - I have just ordered a full set of Apples and Pears as it looks like just the sort of thing DD needs!

But the spellings for some sounds, like 'hear her bird turn' or 'be, see, sea, key, ski', are simply random.

No they aren't, Masha, and we would never teach them as such. What do you mean - simply random? Makes no sense!

Her, bird and turn are alternative spellings for the 'er' phonoeme, all with many, many examples which follow exactly the same pattern. That's not 'random'. I have no idea why you included 'hear' in that list, since the sound is different, but it also follows a pattern found in several words.

Likewise be, see, sea and key. I may give you 'ski'.

Are you just hitting cut and paste on your lists without thinking at all now?

I did not paste, Feenie. That's why I accidentally left off the d on 'heard'.
Thanks for pointing that out.

Heard her bird turn are random. There is no way of working out when to use 'ear, er, ur' or 'ir'. Children simply have to learn them for each word.
They can be grouped according to pattern and taught a few at a time, but in the end it's still a matter of knowing in which word to use which.
So here are all the common ones grouped by pattern:

^Berth, fern, her, herb, herd, jerk, nerve, perch, serve, stern, swerve, term, verb, verge, verse, were.

Longer words:
Advertisement, alert, anniversary, assert, certain, commercial, concern, confer, conserve, convert, deserve, dessert, detergent, determine, emerge, eternal, exert, external, fertile, germinate, hermit, impertinent, insert, interpret, jersey, kernel, merchant, mercury, mercy, observe, perfect, perfume, permanent, permit, person, pertinent, preserve, refer, reserve, reverse, sermon, serpent, terminate, termite, thermal, transfer, universal, university, verdict, vermin, version, versus, vertical.

Blur, burden, burglar, burgle, burly, burn, burr, burst, church, churn, curfew, curl, curlew, curse, curt, curve, disturb, excursion, fur, furnish, furry, further, gurgle, hurdle, hurl, hurt, hurtle, incursion, lurch, lurk, murder, murmur, nasturtium, nurse, nursery, occur, purchase, purple, purpose, purr, purse, return, slur, spur, spurn, spurt, sturdy, suburb, surf, surface, surge, surgeon, surgery, surname, surplus, survey, Thursday, topsy-turvy, turban, turbine, turf, turkey, turmoil, turn, turnip, turquoise, turtle, urban, urchin, urge, urn, yurt.

Birch, bird, birth, chirp, circle, circuit, circular, circumstances, circus, confirm, dirt, encircle, fir, firm, first, flirt, girder, girdle, girl, mirth, shirk, shirt, sir, skirmish, skirt, smirk, squirm, squirt, stir, swirl, third, thirst, thirteen, thirty, twirl, virtually, virtue, whirl, whirring.

Earl, early, earn, earnest, earth, heard, learn, pearl, rehearse, search, yearn.

Word, work, world, worm, worse, worship, worst, worth. Attorney.

Courtesy, journal, journey.^

Learning all of them takes many years.

So here are all the common ones grouped by pattern

Why?! Why do you imagine I want them?

Happy Easter, Masha [bugrin]

"Learning all of them takes many years." No it doesn't, not if you read a reasonable amount in English in the early years of primary.

I happy Easter to u too, Feenie.

"Why do you imagine I want them? "

Many people find it interesting to see exactly what learning to spell the English er/ear/ir/ur/or/our sound involves.

The OP asked for them.

But you were answering me - and I have mentioned to you several times that I'm a teacher. In fact, in that post you were answering my point that of course those words should be taught as patterns - you answered by posting said patterns at me!

I don't know if he's well regarded in professional circles (perhaps some teachers could tell me) but I really enjoyed a book by Dominic Wyse - I think it was this one

It mentioned the phases of spelling IIRC, and a very important part, sort of transitional, is where children experiment with different spellings in their writing. So they may write 'while' as 'wighl' which when you think about it does make sense ('igh' as in 'night') - they are playing around with the different ways of writing the same sound.

It is really important not to criticise wrong spellings like that, or to become over zealous in correcting them, while they are in this phase. They will gradually learn which way to make the sound in each word, by getting lots of exposure to the words - by reading lots.

Sorry FEAS, but Dominic Wyse is a whole language guru. He's one of those education academics who hasn't a clue about teaching reading, or spelling for that matter and pontificates from on high about the evils of synthetic phonics. AFAIK, he's never taught anyone to read apart from his own children.

'It has been assumed, wrongly, that spelling follows biologically determined developmental stages (e.g. Gentry), a typical given sequence: precommunicative-> semiphonetic-> phonetic-> transitional, and, finally, correct. However, spelling, like reading, is a human invention, not part of our biological development, and therefore cannot be properly acquired except through teaching. Whole-language philosophy compels children to discover how to spell for themselves.This is called invented or emergent spelling. Mistakes are not corrected as the assumption is that children will learn, naturally, to make closer and closer approximations to accurate spelling. Children are unlikely to learn to spell accurately with this method. Instead, they will practice and reproduce their spelling errors again and again, and produce unreadable writing with confidence-sapping results'.

www.dyslexics.org.uk/spelling.htm

Oh ok.

So is what I said about not correcting spelling too early rubbish then? Surely whatever method they are using to learn spelling, it's still important to feel able to experiment with it without getting criticised?

(I have read it somewhere else as well as Wyse btw)

Oh sorry just read your reply again. That is quite counterintuitive (to me anyway)

Really though if a 5yo wrote wighl instead of while would you correct him? Even if he were the sensitive type who might get put off trying?

(btw - I am totally pro phonics - I just didn't realise that advice went against synthetic phonics teaching)

I don't know how it would be described in terms of educational theory, but my dd1 (6 and in yr1) seems to sometimes be able to look at what she's written and know that a word doesn't look quite right. She'll then write a couple of feasible alternatives and choose the one she things looks correct - which more often than not, it is. I put this down to the fact that she reads a lot and has started to realise how a word should look. This seems to be a different skill from phonics, but a useful one. I wouldn't know how to teach a child to do this though if it didn't come naturally to them.

I'm quite intrigued by how this works. I just asked dd to write down "bird", "work" and "church" and she spelled them all correctly without seeming to realise that the middle sound was the same. When I asked her how she knew which "ur" sound to use she just said "I don't know - my brain thought it was like that!"

FriedEggy - I never correct her spelling unless she actively asks me if something is right (which she quite often does). I tend to come out with something along the lines of "it is a good try, and I can see why you think it should be like that, but actually the right way to spell it is like this". She tends to just say "ok " - although we did have a few tears and tantrums when she was in reception with comments like "stupid words are naughty for tricking me"!!

Tom Burkard, the author of the spelling programme Apples and Pears mentioned earlier on this thread, wrote this article about invented spelling:

www.rrf.org.uk/archive.php?n_ID=52&n_issueNumber=53

maverick - I loved that article. My DD is learning to read and write in two languages simultaneously, and creative/spontaneous writing is most definitely the last stage of the process. In fact, her French school ensured she had (beautiful) cursive handwriting almost before she learned to read. I keep wondering whether she shouldn't be doing a greater volume of creative writing and whether she isn't "behind" versus her English peers. But now I know not to worry and to carry on ensuring the reading and spelling are OK!

Masha, I am a regular lurker in the education section, for want of a better word, of mumsnet and it never ceases to amaze me how often, and completely, you list the tricky words that exist in the English language. Respect. Now go get a large glass of red!!!