Interviews, discussions, and
presentations from thought
leaders, innovative educators,
and inspirational learners.

Search form


(0)

Supporting EDtalk:

Developing oral language skills

Jane Carroll, Speech language therapist and PhD candidate discusses developing the oral language skills of those just beginning school. Jane outlines a project to help teachers share a common language of learning with their students about phonological awareness and emergent literacy.

Be the first to post a comment on this video.

Supporting EDtalk:

Developing oral language skills

Jane Carroll, Speech language therapist and PhD candidate discusses developing the oral language skills of those just beginning school. Jane outlines a project to help teachers share a common language of learning with their students about phonological awareness and emergent literacy.

Be the first to post a comment on this video.

Speaker: Pam Becker

Classroom teacher Pam Becker worked with Jane Carroll, as part of research into the development of phonological awareness. Pam talks about the steps she took to improve student outcomes in their oral language development and the impact this had on her practice and her students.

Views 35,175
Date added: 14 May 2014
Duration: 6:06

The programme that I’m involved with, with Jane, is a programme about phonological awareness and about children listening to sounds and identifying those sounds.  And it has made me be more explicit about letter and sound relationships but it has also made me much more explicit about how I teach that and it has given me the confidence to actually break things down more and say well, what is the beginning sound, what is the middle sound, what is the end sound, and what letter would we write for that? As opposed to going straight for the letter which I think we have done in the past.

There is one game that we play that is based on the song Old Macdonald and you sing the song and then you segment a word for the children for them to blend back together to see if they can guess which animal it is. So obviously it’s got all the elements that children like – it’s a sing song and it’s fun and they all get to participate in it.  And so it really encourages them, the games are good fun games, and that segmenting and blending is a major skill development that I don’t think we teach, or I hadn’t taught before.

Improving my knowledge and the professional development improving my knowledge about children’s phonological awareness and breaking it down has let me teach from the big chunks of words, from being able to recognize the word, being able to recognize chunks in words, to being able to segment down to sounds in words, or even the beginning sound like onset and rime. And when the teacher is secure it is much more easy for the teacher to teach it securely and you don’t second guess yourself and confuse the children mid lesson. I think I did that quite a bit at the start.  But as I got more secure in my own knowledge about how to do this then it was much easier for the children to follow what I was doing. So being secure in teaching onset and rime and then going to segmenting was a really good step. And I do teach it cyclically because I’ve got new entrants, I go back and I start all over again and we do clapping the syllables in their name, clapping the syllables in words, and we move on again and we look at the starting sound, the onset and the rime, and then we move on and we start looking at words and the beginning sounds. At the moment we are doing ending sounds because that is harder than the beginning sound. They can always pick up the beginning sound just about straight away, but they often have trouble with the end sound.

So when we do one of the games on the board or on the matt with the children we will have some demonstration of how we would write that. So I might segment the sounds and they will tell me what sounds they are, and then they might tell me what letters go with those sounds and then I would say to them “Well if I was writing that in my writing, I would be able to do that”. So hopefully that becomes a sample of what they are going to do when they write. And when we do shared writing, the same thing again. If I was doing this as a game, what would I do if I wanted to find out what those sounds were and then write the letters for it for that word. So in my shared writing I would refer back to “If we were playing one of our games, how would we do this?” So it is pretty explicit the link between the game and a practical application.

I think from my perspective there has been lots of tears of outcomes depending on where the children are at. Some have better listening skills, some have better identification of sounds. Some children have been able to transfer those skills into reading and writing without too much explicit teaching. Other children have taken time to transfer those skills, but they do still transfer them in. And that just gives me great hope for them that they are all doing so well and we don’t seem to have the tail that we did have in reading and writing which is really encouraging.

So children who normally would be in that tail of struggling seem to be coping better and I do believe that explicit teaching is really helping.

One of the advantages of this programme for me, is whilst it is a research project its practical applications have been straight forward and easy to manage in a classroom so therefore you keep doing them because they work. So research that’s based in classroom practice, for a teacher in my position, is just more useful.

I think the biggest change for me is more confidence in my practice in teaching sound knowledge, that phoneme awareness and the confidence to take the children maybe, once before if we had got to a word that had a long ‘a’ in it, I wouldn’t have said to them about the ‘e’ operating on the ‘a’. But now I do, I stretch them out further and further because I’m more confident, and so that gives me confidence to teach them a wider base. And they may not remember it, or they may need to be exposed to it many, many, times, but at least I feel like I am taking them further all the time. 

The programme that I’m involved with, with Jane, is a programme about phonological awareness and about children listening to sounds and identifying those sounds.  And it has made me be more explicit about letter and sound relationships but it has also made me much more explicit about how I teach that and it has given me the confidence to actually break things down more and say well, what is the beginning sound, what is the middle sound, what is the end sound, and what letter would we write for that? As opposed to going straight for the letter which I think we have done in the past.

There is one game that we play that is based on the song Old Macdonald and you sing the song and then you segment a word for the children for them to blend back together to see if they can guess which animal it is. So obviously it’s got all the elements that children like – it’s a sing song and it’s fun and they all get to participate in it.  And so it really encourages them, the games are good fun games, and that segmenting and blending is a major skill development that I don’t think we teach, or I hadn’t taught before.

Improving my knowledge and the professional development improving my knowledge about children’s phonological awareness and breaking it down has let me teach from the big chunks of words, from being able to recognize the word, being able to recognize chunks in words, to being able to segment down to sounds in words, or even the beginning sound like onset and rime. And when the teacher is secure it is much more easy for the teacher to teach it securely and you don’t second guess yourself and confuse the children mid lesson. I think I did that quite a bit at the start.  But as I got more secure in my own knowledge about how to do this then it was much easier for the children to follow what I was doing. So being secure in teaching onset and rime and then going to segmenting was a really good step. And I do teach it cyclically because I’ve got new entrants, I go back and I start all over again and we do clapping the syllables in their name, clapping the syllables in words, and we move on again and we look at the starting sound, the onset and the rime, and then we move on and we start looking at words and the beginning sounds. At the moment we are doing ending sounds because that is harder than the beginning sound. They can always pick up the beginning sound just about straight away, but they often have trouble with the end sound.

So when we do one of the games on the board or on the matt with the children we will have some demonstration of how we would write that. So I might segment the sounds and they will tell me what sounds they are, and then they might tell me what letters go with those sounds and then I would say to them “Well if I was writing that in my writing, I would be able to do that”. So hopefully that becomes a sample of what they are going to do when they write. And when we do shared writing, the same thing again. If I was doing this as a game, what would I do if I wanted to find out what those sounds were and then write the letters for it for that word. So in my shared writing I would refer back to “If we were playing one of our games, how would we do this?” So it is pretty explicit the link between the game and a practical application.

I think from my perspective there has been lots of tears of outcomes depending on where the children are at. Some have better listening skills, some have better identification of sounds. Some children have been able to transfer those skills into reading and writing without too much explicit teaching. Other children have taken time to transfer those skills, but they do still transfer them in. And that just gives me great hope for them that they are all doing so well and we don’t seem to have the tail that we did have in reading and writing which is really encouraging.

So children who normally would be in that tail of struggling seem to be coping better and I do believe that explicit teaching is really helping.

One of the advantages of this programme for me, is whilst it is a research project its practical applications have been straight forward and easy to manage in a classroom so therefore you keep doing them because they work. So research that’s based in classroom practice, for a teacher in my position, is just more useful.

I think the biggest change for me is more confidence in my practice in teaching sound knowledge, that phoneme awareness and the confidence to take the children maybe, once before if we had got to a word that had a long ‘a’ in it, I wouldn’t have said to them about the ‘e’ operating on the ‘a’. But now I do, I stretch them out further and further because I’m more confident, and so that gives me confidence to teach them a wider base. And they may not remember it, or they may need to be exposed to it many, many, times, but at least I feel like I am taking them further all the time. 

Date added: 05/14/2014

Phonological awareness and classroom based research

Classroom teacher Pam Becker worked with Jane Carroll, as part of research into the development of phonological awareness. Pam talks about the steps she took to improve student outcomes in their oral language development and the impact this had on her practice and her students.

Views 35,175 Date added: 14/05/2014

Phonological awareness and classroom based research

The programme that I’m involved with, with Jane, is a programme about phonological awareness and about children listening to sounds and identifying those sounds.  And it has made me be more explicit about letter and sound relationships but it has also made me much more explicit about how I teach that and it has given me the confidence to actually break things down more and say well, what is the beginning sound, what is the middle sound, what is the end sound, and what letter would we write for that? As opposed to going straight for the letter which I think we have done in the past.

There is one game that we play that is based on the song Old Macdonald and you sing the song and then you segment a word for the children for them to blend back together to see if they can guess which animal it is. So obviously it’s got all the elements that children like – it’s a sing song and it’s fun and they all get to participate in it.  And so it really encourages them, the games are good fun games, and that segmenting and blending is a major skill development that I don’t think we teach, or I hadn’t taught before.

Improving my knowledge and the professional development improving my knowledge about children’s phonological awareness and breaking it down has let me teach from the big chunks of words, from being able to recognize the word, being able to recognize chunks in words, to being able to segment down to sounds in words, or even the beginning sound like onset and rime. And when the teacher is secure it is much more easy for the teacher to teach it securely and you don’t second guess yourself and confuse the children mid lesson. I think I did that quite a bit at the start.  But as I got more secure in my own knowledge about how to do this then it was much easier for the children to follow what I was doing. So being secure in teaching onset and rime and then going to segmenting was a really good step. And I do teach it cyclically because I’ve got new entrants, I go back and I start all over again and we do clapping the syllables in their name, clapping the syllables in words, and we move on again and we look at the starting sound, the onset and the rime, and then we move on and we start looking at words and the beginning sounds. At the moment we are doing ending sounds because that is harder than the beginning sound. They can always pick up the beginning sound just about straight away, but they often have trouble with the end sound.

So when we do one of the games on the board or on the matt with the children we will have some demonstration of how we would write that. So I might segment the sounds and they will tell me what sounds they are, and then they might tell me what letters go with those sounds and then I would say to them “Well if I was writing that in my writing, I would be able to do that”. So hopefully that becomes a sample of what they are going to do when they write. And when we do shared writing, the same thing again. If I was doing this as a game, what would I do if I wanted to find out what those sounds were and then write the letters for it for that word. So in my shared writing I would refer back to “If we were playing one of our games, how would we do this?” So it is pretty explicit the link between the game and a practical application.

I think from my perspective there has been lots of tears of outcomes depending on where the children are at. Some have better listening skills, some have better identification of sounds. Some children have been able to transfer those skills into reading and writing without too much explicit teaching. Other children have taken time to transfer those skills, but they do still transfer them in. And that just gives me great hope for them that they are all doing so well and we don’t seem to have the tail that we did have in reading and writing which is really encouraging.

So children who normally would be in that tail of struggling seem to be coping better and I do believe that explicit teaching is really helping.

One of the advantages of this programme for me, is whilst it is a research project its practical applications have been straight forward and easy to manage in a classroom so therefore you keep doing them because they work. So research that’s based in classroom practice, for a teacher in my position, is just more useful.

I think the biggest change for me is more confidence in my practice in teaching sound knowledge, that phoneme awareness and the confidence to take the children maybe, once before if we had got to a word that had a long ‘a’ in it, I wouldn’t have said to them about the ‘e’ operating on the ‘a’. But now I do, I stretch them out further and further because I’m more confident, and so that gives me confidence to teach them a wider base. And they may not remember it, or they may need to be exposed to it many, many, times, but at least I feel like I am taking them further all the time. 

The programme that I’m involved with, with Jane, is a programme about phonological awareness and about children listening to sounds and identifying those sounds.  And it has made me be more explicit about letter and sound relationships but it has also made me much more explicit about how I teach that and it has given me the confidence to actually break things down more and say well, what is the beginning sound, what is the middle sound, what is the end sound, and what letter would we write for that? As opposed to going straight for the letter which I think we have done in the past.

There is one game that we play that is based on the song Old Macdonald and you sing the song and then you segment a word for the children for them to blend back together to see if they can guess which animal it is. So obviously it’s got all the elements that children like – it’s a sing song and it’s fun and they all get to participate in it.  And so it really encourages them, the games are good fun games, and that segmenting and blending is a major skill development that I don’t think we teach, or I hadn’t taught before.

Improving my knowledge and the professional development improving my knowledge about children’s phonological awareness and breaking it down has let me teach from the big chunks of words, from being able to recognize the word, being able to recognize chunks in words, to being able to segment down to sounds in words, or even the beginning sound like onset and rime. And when the teacher is secure it is much more easy for the teacher to teach it securely and you don’t second guess yourself and confuse the children mid lesson. I think I did that quite a bit at the start.  But as I got more secure in my own knowledge about how to do this then it was much easier for the children to follow what I was doing. So being secure in teaching onset and rime and then going to segmenting was a really good step. And I do teach it cyclically because I’ve got new entrants, I go back and I start all over again and we do clapping the syllables in their name, clapping the syllables in words, and we move on again and we look at the starting sound, the onset and the rime, and then we move on and we start looking at words and the beginning sounds. At the moment we are doing ending sounds because that is harder than the beginning sound. They can always pick up the beginning sound just about straight away, but they often have trouble with the end sound.

So when we do one of the games on the board or on the matt with the children we will have some demonstration of how we would write that. So I might segment the sounds and they will tell me what sounds they are, and then they might tell me what letters go with those sounds and then I would say to them “Well if I was writing that in my writing, I would be able to do that”. So hopefully that becomes a sample of what they are going to do when they write. And when we do shared writing, the same thing again. If I was doing this as a game, what would I do if I wanted to find out what those sounds were and then write the letters for it for that word. So in my shared writing I would refer back to “If we were playing one of our games, how would we do this?” So it is pretty explicit the link between the game and a practical application.

I think from my perspective there has been lots of tears of outcomes depending on where the children are at. Some have better listening skills, some have better identification of sounds. Some children have been able to transfer those skills into reading and writing without too much explicit teaching. Other children have taken time to transfer those skills, but they do still transfer them in. And that just gives me great hope for them that they are all doing so well and we don’t seem to have the tail that we did have in reading and writing which is really encouraging.

So children who normally would be in that tail of struggling seem to be coping better and I do believe that explicit teaching is really helping.

One of the advantages of this programme for me, is whilst it is a research project its practical applications have been straight forward and easy to manage in a classroom so therefore you keep doing them because they work. So research that’s based in classroom practice, for a teacher in my position, is just more useful.

I think the biggest change for me is more confidence in my practice in teaching sound knowledge, that phoneme awareness and the confidence to take the children maybe, once before if we had got to a word that had a long ‘a’ in it, I wouldn’t have said to them about the ‘e’ operating on the ‘a’. But now I do, I stretch them out further and further because I’m more confident, and so that gives me confidence to teach them a wider base. And they may not remember it, or they may need to be exposed to it many, many, times, but at least I feel like I am taking them further all the time. 

Date added: 14/05/2014

Phonological awareness and classroom based research

Classroom teacher Pam Becker worked with Jane Carroll, as part of research into the development of phonological awareness. Pam talks about the steps she took to improve student outcomes in their oral language development and the impact this had on her practice and her students.

Views 35,175 Date added: 14/05/2014

Phonological awareness and classroom based research

The programme that I’m involved with, with Jane, is a programme about phonological awareness and about children listening to sounds and identifying those sounds.  And it has made me be more explicit about letter and sound relationships but it has also made me much more explicit about how I teach that and it has given me the confidence to actually break things down more and say well, what is the beginning sound, what is the middle sound, what is the end sound, and what letter would we write for that? As opposed to going straight for the letter which I think we have done in the past.

There is one game that we play that is based on the song Old Macdonald and you sing the song and then you segment a word for the children for them to blend back together to see if they can guess which animal it is. So obviously it’s got all the elements that children like – it’s a sing song and it’s fun and they all get to participate in it.  And so it really encourages them, the games are good fun games, and that segmenting and blending is a major skill development that I don’t think we teach, or I hadn’t taught before.

Improving my knowledge and the professional development improving my knowledge about children’s phonological awareness and breaking it down has let me teach from the big chunks of words, from being able to recognize the word, being able to recognize chunks in words, to being able to segment down to sounds in words, or even the beginning sound like onset and rime. And when the teacher is secure it is much more easy for the teacher to teach it securely and you don’t second guess yourself and confuse the children mid lesson. I think I did that quite a bit at the start.  But as I got more secure in my own knowledge about how to do this then it was much easier for the children to follow what I was doing. So being secure in teaching onset and rime and then going to segmenting was a really good step. And I do teach it cyclically because I’ve got new entrants, I go back and I start all over again and we do clapping the syllables in their name, clapping the syllables in words, and we move on again and we look at the starting sound, the onset and the rime, and then we move on and we start looking at words and the beginning sounds. At the moment we are doing ending sounds because that is harder than the beginning sound. They can always pick up the beginning sound just about straight away, but they often have trouble with the end sound.

So when we do one of the games on the board or on the matt with the children we will have some demonstration of how we would write that. So I might segment the sounds and they will tell me what sounds they are, and then they might tell me what letters go with those sounds and then I would say to them “Well if I was writing that in my writing, I would be able to do that”. So hopefully that becomes a sample of what they are going to do when they write. And when we do shared writing, the same thing again. If I was doing this as a game, what would I do if I wanted to find out what those sounds were and then write the letters for it for that word. So in my shared writing I would refer back to “If we were playing one of our games, how would we do this?” So it is pretty explicit the link between the game and a practical application.

I think from my perspective there has been lots of tears of outcomes depending on where the children are at. Some have better listening skills, some have better identification of sounds. Some children have been able to transfer those skills into reading and writing without too much explicit teaching. Other children have taken time to transfer those skills, but they do still transfer them in. And that just gives me great hope for them that they are all doing so well and we don’t seem to have the tail that we did have in reading and writing which is really encouraging.

So children who normally would be in that tail of struggling seem to be coping better and I do believe that explicit teaching is really helping.

One of the advantages of this programme for me, is whilst it is a research project its practical applications have been straight forward and easy to manage in a classroom so therefore you keep doing them because they work. So research that’s based in classroom practice, for a teacher in my position, is just more useful.

I think the biggest change for me is more confidence in my practice in teaching sound knowledge, that phoneme awareness and the confidence to take the children maybe, once before if we had got to a word that had a long ‘a’ in it, I wouldn’t have said to them about the ‘e’ operating on the ‘a’. But now I do, I stretch them out further and further because I’m more confident, and so that gives me confidence to teach them a wider base. And they may not remember it, or they may need to be exposed to it many, many, times, but at least I feel like I am taking them further all the time. 

The programme that I’m involved with, with Jane, is a programme about phonological awareness and about children listening to sounds and identifying those sounds.  And it has made me be more explicit about letter and sound relationships but it has also made me much more explicit about how I teach that and it has given me the confidence to actually break things down more and say well, what is the beginning sound, what is the middle sound, what is the end sound, and what letter would we write for that? As opposed to going straight for the letter which I think we have done in the past.

There is one game that we play that is based on the song Old Macdonald and you sing the song and then you segment a word for the children for them to blend back together to see if they can guess which animal it is. So obviously it’s got all the elements that children like – it’s a sing song and it’s fun and they all get to participate in it.  And so it really encourages them, the games are good fun games, and that segmenting and blending is a major skill development that I don’t think we teach, or I hadn’t taught before.

Improving my knowledge and the professional development improving my knowledge about children’s phonological awareness and breaking it down has let me teach from the big chunks of words, from being able to recognize the word, being able to recognize chunks in words, to being able to segment down to sounds in words, or even the beginning sound like onset and rime. And when the teacher is secure it is much more easy for the teacher to teach it securely and you don’t second guess yourself and confuse the children mid lesson. I think I did that quite a bit at the start.  But as I got more secure in my own knowledge about how to do this then it was much easier for the children to follow what I was doing. So being secure in teaching onset and rime and then going to segmenting was a really good step. And I do teach it cyclically because I’ve got new entrants, I go back and I start all over again and we do clapping the syllables in their name, clapping the syllables in words, and we move on again and we look at the starting sound, the onset and the rime, and then we move on and we start looking at words and the beginning sounds. At the moment we are doing ending sounds because that is harder than the beginning sound. They can always pick up the beginning sound just about straight away, but they often have trouble with the end sound.

So when we do one of the games on the board or on the matt with the children we will have some demonstration of how we would write that. So I might segment the sounds and they will tell me what sounds they are, and then they might tell me what letters go with those sounds and then I would say to them “Well if I was writing that in my writing, I would be able to do that”. So hopefully that becomes a sample of what they are going to do when they write. And when we do shared writing, the same thing again. If I was doing this as a game, what would I do if I wanted to find out what those sounds were and then write the letters for it for that word. So in my shared writing I would refer back to “If we were playing one of our games, how would we do this?” So it is pretty explicit the link between the game and a practical application.

I think from my perspective there has been lots of tears of outcomes depending on where the children are at. Some have better listening skills, some have better identification of sounds. Some children have been able to transfer those skills into reading and writing without too much explicit teaching. Other children have taken time to transfer those skills, but they do still transfer them in. And that just gives me great hope for them that they are all doing so well and we don’t seem to have the tail that we did have in reading and writing which is really encouraging.

So children who normally would be in that tail of struggling seem to be coping better and I do believe that explicit teaching is really helping.

One of the advantages of this programme for me, is whilst it is a research project its practical applications have been straight forward and easy to manage in a classroom so therefore you keep doing them because they work. So research that’s based in classroom practice, for a teacher in my position, is just more useful.

I think the biggest change for me is more confidence in my practice in teaching sound knowledge, that phoneme awareness and the confidence to take the children maybe, once before if we had got to a word that had a long ‘a’ in it, I wouldn’t have said to them about the ‘e’ operating on the ‘a’. But now I do, I stretch them out further and further because I’m more confident, and so that gives me confidence to teach them a wider base. And they may not remember it, or they may need to be exposed to it many, many, times, but at least I feel like I am taking them further all the time. 

Date added: 14/05/2014

Supporting EDtalk:

Developing oral language skills

Jane Carroll, Speech language therapist and PhD candidate discusses developing the oral language skills of those just beginning school. Jane outlines a project to help teachers share a common language of learning with their students about phonological awareness and emergent literacy.

Be the first to post a comment on this video.

Related talks

Content
Latest Content

Follow @edtalks to be notified as we publish videos designed to support your professional learning in 2015

The numbers
Total viewed videos: 21,289,002
Total videos: 685