Article Abstract

Phonemic Awareness: A Natural Step Toward Reading and Writing

Maryann Manning and Tsuguhiko Kato
Introduction:

The article I choose to review has a strong message about the connections of phonemes and

the amount of success that students have with reading and writing fluently. The article is by

Maryann Manning and Tsuguhiko Kato and is entitled “Phonemic Awareness: A Natural Step

Toward Reading and Writing”. The article was published in the Journal of Research in Childhood

Education in the summer of 2006.

Summary:

Manning starts the article by providing the reader with some background information on

ahonemic awareness and addresses what phonemic awareness is at the basic level. Today PA

or phonemic awareness is mentioned in legislation, although that has not always been the case.

In the 1960’s PA was not a topic of discussion in reading courses. It was not until 1990 that it

began to creep into popularity and now some primary teachers even have mandates for how

many minutes they should focus their instruction on it. To understand why phonemic

awareness is so vital to reading fluently you must know what it is. Phonemic awareness is when

you hear a word and can divide it into the smallest parts. Phonics is when you are looking at

the letters in a word and you make sound-symbol correspondence (Manning 2006). Throughout

the years Manning and her colleague Constance Kamii have conducted much research on the

subject of PA. Their studies provided information on the importance of PA when learning to
read and write. From these studies, we have learned that when we teach reading and writing,

we can observe children’s PA development simultaneously. For example, we ca see PA growth

from students’ invented spelling. As we analyze students’ writing, students move along the

path from not isolating phonemes to becoming competent spellers (Manning 2006). Along with

their own independent research they also wanted to verify the validity of the PA section of the

DIBELS test. Their study was composed of 1st grade students who had already taken the PSF

portion of the DIBELS test as well as other well know literacy tests. They then had the children

write words on blank pieces of paper such as ham and hamster, butter and butterfly and berry

and strawberry. Then their writings were categorized into 4 levels based on the relationship

between letters and invented spelling that can be read. What they found was 87 percent were

writing with at lease some invented spelling and the higher levels of writing ability were found

to be scattered in a range on the PSF scores of the DIBELS test and vice versa as many of the

lower level writers-some were on the high end of the PSF scores. Their studies prove that it is

possibly to write words at a high level without being able to segmenting words phonemically on

the DIBELS PSF.

Their findings left them with the worry that PA is being viewed as something you teach rather

than and ability the child will develop as they become literate. Manning’s studies have lead her

to view Phonemic awareness as something the happens simultaneously and gradually as the

student begins to read and write. She then shares ways to assess students PA and tips and

tricks on how to help students become more aware of individual phonemes. Some assessment

techniques she shares are very simple, such as asking them to break down a one syllable word

and then continuing onto two syllables. Also observing their invented spelling is a great teller
of their phonemic awareness. There are many activities educators can use to promote PA skills

and Manning leaves the reader with a few of them.

Critique:

The article over all is an interesting read and almost leaves me with more questions about

phonemic awareness and the relationship it has to reading and writing. I think that it is a bold

move to question the validity of such a widely known test and I commend her for seeing a

discrepancy and acting on it. I would have like to know more of their findings related to the

Slosson Oral Reading Test and the Pearson r. which they touched slightly on but not much

information was given on them. Another thing that I would have like to have seen is a visual

representation of the data they gathered, a little chart or graph would have been a nice touch.

Reflection:

I do believe there is a connection to being phonetically aware and being successful at reading

and writing. What I was left with thinking about is the benefits of the tests that are being

administered. I believe there are certainly good things that come out of these tests but I also

think that sometimes their validity needs to be tested. The findings were interesting and I

would love to hear what the creators of DIBELS says about their studies.

There is no question that when a student is phonetically aware it helps them with reading and

writing, and Manning suggested that they happen simultaneously. I believe that strategies and

activities that help students to break down the phonemes of a word are beneficial because it
helps them to slow down and listen for the sound and also become aware of how it feels to say

that sound. While they are learning to read and write these activities can become less and less

as they are improving.

References:

Maryann Manning, T. K. (2006). Phonemic Awareness: A NAtural Step Toward Reading and Writing.
Childhood Education, 241-243.