Articles from Literacy Today

• Morphological awareness improves spelling and vocabulary - Evidence from a University of Oxford study (March 2004)
• Focus on spelling Practical suggestions using an investigative approach (September 2002)

Summary of past news on spelling

2006
In December 2006, the TES reported on how morphemes build on phonics to help pupils learn the meaning and spelling of new words. To read this article in full visit www.tes.co.uk/search/story/?story_id=2316491

In January 2006, John Bald, literacy and language consultant, discussed with the TES how before readers have formed a notion of the patterns of English they encounter baffling spelling anomalies. To read this article in full, visit
www.tes.co.uk/search/story/?story_id=2184060

2005
In 2005, the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority confirmed that it had asked its examiners not to deduct marks for incorrect spelling in one of the two writing papers that made up a test taken by 600,000 14-year-olds. Across the entire test, which included two reading papers as well as the two writing papers, spelling accounted for just four marks out of 100, of which 50 were allocated to writing. A QCA spokesman said: "Spelling remains important and we believe that poor spelling is penalised with the weighting given to marks in this format."

2003
What is the Primary National Strategy's view on giving children lists of words to take home to learn?

In September 2003, Dr Maureen Lewis and Primary National Strategy colleagues told Junior Education what the Primary National Strategy's view was on giving children lists of words to take home to learn: "This practice is fine as long as it is part of a broader systematic approach to teaching and learning spelling. Children need a range of strategies to help them learn spellings so that they are not dependent on memory alone. These include:

• understanding why a word is spelt as it is, such as recognising the similarities in words that are etymologically related - for example, 'sign' and 'signal'
• applying phonic strategies (segmentation, knowledge of phonemes, digraphs and trigraphs which sounds the same but are spelt differently and so on)
• identifying which is the 'tricky' part of a word and using a range of ways to recall the correct spelling, such as memorising the order of letters; identifying letter strings, patterns and words within words; using mnemonics, using visual images; knowing spelling conventions such as doubling letters; knowing the meaning of homophones, such as 'been' and 'bean', so the correct spelling is used; using look, cover, write, check (which combines visual, kinaesthetic and cognitive aspects of learning spelling).

In March 2003, The Times reported that spelling mistakes and poor grammar cost UK businesses more than £700 million a year, according to research by the Royal Mail. Nearly a third of consumers had ended their relationship with a company because of shoddy communications, over-familiarity, and random emails, cold calls and letters, the Royal Mail found. The total cost of communication gaffes was £4 billion a year.

2002
In September 2002 a spelling survey by Oxford University Press hit the tabloids with headlines like "Spelling is full of Mis-teeqs" (Daily Mirror) because four out of five 10 to 12-year-olds could spell David Beckham while only one in 12 can spell Jane Austen. The Guardian commented in its editorial on that day that "it should come as no surprise to anyone that children can most easily spell words that are familiar to them." The survey shows how difficult it is for 10 to 12-year-olds to deal with language that lies outside of their cultural sphere. 

The Guardian commented: "Just how language is an index of identity and culture is demonstrated by children correctly spelling metatarsal, aired extensively when David Beckham broke his...  English's success lies partly in its capacity to absorb words quickly. This has helped English become the default language on the internet. Children, who generally have an insatiable appetite for new ideas, flourish in such a medium. The tricky bit is to get them interested in more difficult, inevitably older, prose than that offered by teenspeak. But this is much better than misreading English's evolution as its death."

The annual review of 2001's exams by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority found that children were still starting secondary school unable to spell everyday words.  Eleven and 14-year-olds made more spelling mistakes in the 2001 national tests than they did in 2000, an analysis of the scripts revealed. In the key stage 2 spelling test, half of 20 words in a list caused problems for children achieving level 4, the expected level, including the words individual, surprise, serious and  technique. In the English writing test, 9% of words were wrongly spelt compared to 5% in 2000. The most common mistakes were missing letters and incorrect endings to words. Pupils had difficulty using the right vowels.

2001
In September 2001, the Financial Times reported on an international study of 700 primary school children in 15 European countries which showed that children take much longer to establish basic reading and writing skills in English than in any other European language. Most of the children in the study had "mastered the basic foundations of literacy" within a year or less of starting school. But the English speaking sample, from Dundee, took 2.5 years.

Philip Seymour, psychology professor at Dundee University, said: "It seems likely that the main cause of the slow rate of progress in English is linguistic and derives from difficulties created by the complex syllable structure and inconsistent spelling systems."

The groups of children within the study were matched for general educational ability and social background. The results were unlikely to be influenced significantly by different teaching methods across Europe or by the fact that children start school at the age of five in Britain but at six or seven in most continental countries. The survey showed that the Dundee children had mastered only 30% of the basic elements of literacy within a year and 70% within two years of starting school.

The Qualification and Curriculum Authority's analysis of the May 2000 primary tests found that significant numbers of 11-year-olds were struggling with everyday words. The analysis showed that key stage 2 pupils spelled 93% of words correctly. However two out of five of the 600,000 children had significant problems with the spelling section of the test, including a quarter of those who overall achieved the expected standard for English. The report found that of the 20 words the children were asked to spell, those where the letter patterns had to be remembered caused the most problems.

2000
On 24 November 2000, the TES reported that schools had been told to teach children American spellings for common scientific terms. Guidance from the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority said 2001's national curriculum tests for 11 and 14-year-olds would conform to "international agreements on scientific nomenclature". Thus foetus and sulphate would be spelt fetus and sulfate. By the evening, however, the Government had intervened and declared that only traditional English spelling should be taught.

In Spetember 2000, the TES reported that young children were more likely to become accurate spellers if teaching about words was linked to their writing, according to Understanding Spelling published by the Centre for Language in Primary Education. A study of children in three London primary schools suggested those who picked up spelling at an early age tended to have a particular interest in both the shape and sound of words.

Learning lists of words by rote and spelling exercises appeared to be the least effective ways of improving children's spelling. Teachers who intervened in children's writing and discussed with them the points they could develop, produced greater improvements. The study suggested that fluent readers who spelt badly benefited from direct teaching of spelling patterns. The children needing most help are those who had difficulty in reading.

In January 2000, the TES reported that researchers at Hull University's Institute for Learning had found that English children have an extra four years of learning because of the complexities of mastering English. They estimated that around one quarter of the school population needs the extra years to learn to write common words that have irregular spellings. Children in other European countries with regular writing systems are not handicapped in this way, according to the university. Researchers at Hull have developed a model for predicting spelling success, based on the length of words, their regularity and how frequently they are used. 

They tested the model against national spelling data for primary children, and were able to predict quite accurately how many pupils could spell a word from its make-up. Further trials of primary children of different ages showed they found the same words difficult throughout their early years at school. Within each year group the Hull model predicted between 70 and 80% of the variability in spelling particular words. 

"We have been able to estimate the deficit in less able children's spelling in terms of the time taken for pupils to reach the same level of proficiency with difficult words as they have attained at Year 2 (age seven) with the easy words. The time that is needed for these children to catch up is four years," said the researchers. 

1999
In December 1999 the Government announced that all primary school pupils would be required to spell dozens of words on lists specified by the Government in regular tests as part of a package designed to improve writing and spelling skills in the eight to 11 age group. The recommended level of ability depended on the term as well as the school year. Year 3 pupils were encouraged to investigate words with silent letters and would be able to spell words such as knee, wrinkle and gnome. Year 6 pupils would be able to spell words such as claustrophobia, archaeology and supernova.