The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Spelling out some problems for Gonski > Comments

Spelling out some problems for Gonski : Comments

By Chris Nugent, published 10/12/2013

Since especially the early 1980s, government literacy curricula throughout Australia have been oriented towards actually eradicating correct spelling from the testing and teaching of basic English at all levels

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Candide: I was a teacher at the time of decimalization in New Zealand. I found that it reduced the time we needed to teach monetary maths, time which we devoted to other learning.

So with upgraded, sensible spelling. It is not the function of spelling to "exercise the brain". Spelling is a tool subject, not a substantiv (sic) one, just as a skilsaw is a tool, making possible the creation of beautiful furniture or buildings. Spellings function is to allow us to record and read the language.

The language is whats important. If we can all learn the spelling code in the first school year (as do Finns or Estonians) and then use it confidently to read and rite to our potential, it has achieved its purpose.

If brighter pupils with good visual memories find our current mish-mash attractiv and inspirational, good on them. But most of us dont, and yet we too deserv to be literat.
Posted by AllanJC, Tuesday, 10 December 2013 11:06:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Allan JC - it wasn't just monetary maths, it was measurements as well. Calculations in inches, feet and yard required a whole lot more mental dexterity than just shoving a decimal place to the right or left. Given that we are going backwards in maths on the PISA rankings, perhaps the extra stuff you had the time to teach wasn't all that helpful.
Posted by Candide, Tuesday, 10 December 2013 11:24:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The problem for all English-speaking countries is that English spelling inconsistencies (e.g. speak, seek, shriek, seize, cedar) make not just learning to write exceptionally difficult, but learning to read too (treat, great, threat, creative, reaction). People who suggest a reduction of these difficulties by means of spelling reform are often thoughtlessly accused of wanting 'to dumb things down', while their aim is the exact opposite. They would like to see English spelling become a bit more like the Finnish system -http://englishspellingproblems.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/finnish-and-english-spelling_22.html - which enables children to learn to read and write exceptionally fast and enables them to rank consistently high in all international educational comparisons.

Reading and writing are essential for other learning. A spelling system which makes the acquisition of those skills exceptionally difficult, as English spelling conventions do, puts its users at a great disadvantage. People who oppose modernisation of English spelling tend to be unaware of its costs - http://improvingenglishspelling.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/costs-of-english-spelling.html - and also how the system became as chaotic as it is: http://englishspellingproblems.co.uk/html/history.html.

Nothing but a modernisation of English spelling will ever extricate English-speaking countries from the educational mire they are all in. There is plenty of evidence that nothing else can do so while it remains as learner-unfriendly as it has been for the past three centuries. Thoughtless clinging on to old habits comes at a price.
Posted by MashaBell, Tuesday, 10 December 2013 4:26:44 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
government literacy curricula throughout Australia have been oriented
Chris Nugent,
So that's where they went wrong, that's why the Asian students are so far ahead of ours. Had they orientated literacy curricula towards actually eradicating correct spelling from the testing and teaching of basic English at all levels in Australia it might have turned out differently.
Posted by individual, Tuesday, 10 December 2013 6:31:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To 'orient' is a verb. To 'orientate' is to get confused with orientation, which is a noun.

Re standardised spelling - first you would need standardised pronunciation. How, for example, would you spell dance? It is pronounced either dans or darns. Would words be spelt as they are said colloquially or as they would be said with perfect enunciation? You could have international committees of language experts tied up for years. Would the British ever agree with the Americans, would the Glaswegians ever agree with the Brummies, and who would win the battle of the 'h'?
Posted by Candide, Tuesday, 10 December 2013 6:58:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Such a short article to contain so many misconceptions.

First, the Gonski plan referred to a different way of funding education from the previous method based on the socio-economic status of the parents of the enrolled child. Gonski has nothing to do with curriculum content.

Second, the internet contradicts the main point of Chris Nugent’s article. Anyone with an internet connection is welcome to type in “Australian Curriculum” and then, on the ACARA page “spelling” as I did. Up come 48 responses, covering each year from Foundation/Kindergarten/Prep to Year 10.

Third, Nugent refers to a Victorian LAP Survey in 1996 and sees something sinister in the fact that the same words were repeated, yet a bare 4 paragraphs later lauds an ACER Spelling list and test in which the same 50 words were to be learnt, and spelled, by 8 year olds to 13 year olds, although with different expectations of correctness.

Fourth, as a student who began High School in 1960, I remember very well those same awful spelling lists. Each week from 3rd class on to the end of Primary School [6th class] we were expected to memorise and learn a long list each week of words we had never met or used and whose meaning was never explained to us. They were disembodied and completely lacking in context yet they were somehow ‘important’, important enough for mums and dads to take hours each week working us through this list. I remember all too well learning not to laugh at my father’s mispronunciations and his frequent wide-of-the-mark attempts at giving a meaning. He had a hard hand, which impelled me to learn how to use a dictionary at an early age.

Fifth, as a student at a selective high school in the very early sixties, I learnt to cope with the semi-annual spelling test taken with half-yearly and yearly exams from First Year to Fifth Year and solemnly reported on each report, albeit with a mark out of 50 instead of the 100 each other subject was entitled to.

[continued in next post]
Posted by Brian of Buderim, Tuesday, 10 December 2013 8:31:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy