Alphabet Instruction

      As we all know, teaching the alphabet - letter recognition, letter formation and letter sounds, is a major part of literacy education in the emergent years. After reading Developing Early Literacy Skills: A Meta-Analysis of Alphabet Learning and Instruction I thought back to when I was teaching Pre-K and Kindergarten. The journal looked at instructional models of teaching the alphabet and what results each yield. Through the study, the author became aware that there is a lack of data to support instructional methods for alphabet learning. It was stressed that the outcome of students mastering the information outweighs the actual method of instruction.

    This got me wondering more about what the Pre-K I was teaching prescribed for the most effective way to teach the alphabet and the difference between what I encountered when I began teaching Kindergarten. In the school where I taught Pre-K they believed in a direct and explicit instructional approach to teaching the alphabet. The teacher would introduce one letter a week, beginning with A, and the entire week would be devoted to practicing first saying the letter, then writing the letter (upper then lowercase) and finally working on the sound that the letter made. This approach was effective with the students, however, looking back I wonder if it would have been equally as effective if the children had not been in the daycare/preschool setting since the age of 2. When I moved to teaching Kindergarten, that school used the Orton-Gillingham method for teaching the alphabet. In this method the teacher is to introduce the letter O first because it is the easiest shape for young children to make and the shape that many other letters build off. Subsequent letters are introduced based on their use of the round shape in formation and only after that were other letters introduced. The Orton-Gillingham method focuses on teaching the alphabet with a kinesthetic and visual learner in mind. The students spend time forming the letter in the air or in sand while saying it and then move to the sound the letter makes followed directly by a word that begins with that same sound. I liked the Orton-Gillingham approach to teaching the alphabet because I feel that it hits a wider variety of learners. Yet, I am still left to question what is the most effective order to introduce the letters in? I learned the alphabet in the actual sequential order and I wonder does teaching the letters out of sequential order hinder their ability to then recite the alphabet? And, what is the true value of being able to recite the alphabet? Many times a child can do this but cannot identify a letter by name in isolation.


Piasta, S. B. (2010). Developing Early Literacy Skills: A Meta-Analysis of Alphabet Learning and Instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(1).

Current Cursive

      When discussing the developmental stages of young children we know that gross motor skills develop before fine motor skills. When children approach Kindergarten they begin to apply the fine motor skills that they are normally being coached on. Most of us remember learning to write cursive around the time of third grade. Some of us may have spent half an hour a day doing drills on letter formation counting down the minutes until it was over while others of us may still use cursive in their everyday writing.
       States that have adopted the Common Core Curriculum are no longer required to teach cursive in school. It is at each school's discretion whether they think that cursive holds value in today's current education system or not. I am one of the many adults who do not write in cursive at all, in fact, I can barely do it if I try. I moved to the states after third grade and missed the direct instruction of cursive and had to catch up on my own so that I could get by when it was mandatory to use cursive (on the pledge on the SATs for example). With the Common Core not including cursive in its plan it leads me to question the value of continuing to teach cursive in schools. I personally don't believe that it is necessary to know how to do it to function well in society or in a job. However, I have noticed in myself that when taking notes quickly it is more efficient to join my letters together. Many peers who use cursive state efficiency as the main reason they write in cursive. I read "The Great Cursive Debate" article (http://www.aaeteachers.org/index.php/blog/395-the-great-cursive-debate) and one thing I found interesting was the mention of special educators saying that cursive helps students with learning disabilities (dyslexia and dysgraphia especially) to get their thoughts out more clearly. I can see where the link would be made of having a flow in the formation of letters may help the flow of thought and would be interested to look into studies that support this or not.
      If schools are to continue teaching cursive, I am then pondering another question - is third grade too early or too late to begin instruction?