Phonological awareness
after Portuguese secondary schooling:
some results and “challenges”
Financial support: grants SFRH/BD/36669/2007 and PEst-OE/LIN/UI0214/2013.
ALA 2014 - Language Awareness: Achievements and Challenges
Hedmark University College, Hamar, NorwayJuly 1-4, 2014
Adelina Castelo#+ & Maria João Freitas +
# Polytechnic School of Education of Viseu+ Centre of Linguistics, University of Lisbon& Faculty of Letters, University of Lisbon
Overview
Introduction
Levels of linguistic knowledgeImportance of LA in the field of Educational LinguisticsPromotion of Phonological awareness in the Portuguese context
Method
SubjectsTasks
Results & Challenges
7 groups of results and challenges / didactic implicationsFinal remarks
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
Levels of linguistic knowledge
Phonological component
Linguistic
Competence1. Implicit phonological knowledge
Metalinguistic
Competence
2. Holistic phonological awareness (PA)
3. Analytic phonological awareness (PA)
4. Explicit phonological knowledge (EPK)
(see synthesis of Castelo, 2012, based on proposals by Karmiloff-Smith, 1992; Titone, 1998; Gombert, 1990; Morais, 2003; Sim-Sim & Micaelo, 2006; Ellis, 2008)
1. Research in Educational Linguistics…
Importance of promoting language awareness
>> means to achieve educational goals:
Instrumental – e.g. improvement of linguistic skills in native and
foreign languages
Cognitive – e.g. development of scientific thought
Attitudinal – e.g. respect for language diversity
(e.g. Garrett, 2006; Duarte,2008; Hudson, 2008)
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
In the Portuguese context…
2. Metaphonological competence in the context of global metalinguistic promotion
>> importance of developing phonological awareness and explicit phonological knowledge
in basic and secondary education
(e.g. Veloso & Rodrigues, 2002; Freitas, Rodrigues, Costa & Castelo, 2012)
3. Mother tongue syllabus for secondary school (2001)
>> prescription of metaphonological competence promotion
(see the study of phonological processes and prosodic propertiesin Programa de Português – 10º, 11º e 12º anos
dos Cursos Científico-Humanísticos e Cursos Tecnológicos, 2001 [Syllabus of
Portuguese – Grades 10, 11 and 12 of Science, Humanities and Technology Courses])
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
4. However…
>> studies with Portuguese college students:
low levels of metaphonological competence
(e.g. Veloso, 2005; Castelo, 2012)
>> scarce research on how to train
this competence in secondary school students
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
Goal of this presentation
Results for college students performing metaphonological tasks
Didactic implications (“challenges”) a teacher should consider
when promoting these abilities in secondary school students
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
Subjects
• Convenience sample: 36 1st-year college students
(19 male and 17 female; mean age 19;3)
• Monolingual native speakers of standard European Portuguese (EP)
• No known cognitive, linguistic, articulatory or auditory disorders
• No explicit knowledge on phonetics and/or phonology
• Individual testing (listening to recorded stimuli; oral verbal production of their responses)
(cf. Castelo, 2012)Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
(see Castelo, 2012)
Tasks
Presen-
tation
order
Task Example Level of
knowledge
Focused
aspect
1 Nucleus 1 (N1 /1st
vowel) detection[‘m�du] / [‘tudu] / [‘mudu]‘manner’, ‘everything’, ‘dumb’>> [‘m�du]
PA segment
(/phoneme)
2 N1 replacement [‘mudu] ‘dumb’ >> [‘midu] PA segment
3 Word segmentation [‘mudu] >> [m-u-d-u] PA segment
N1 segmentation [‘mudu] >> [u] PA segment
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
Tasks
Presen-
tation
order
Task ExampleLevel of
knowledge
Focused
aspect
4 Phonological process deactivation
(with pseudowords)
[‘do�b�] >> [‘dob�] PA phonological process (/rule)
5 Identification of the segmental contrast in N1
[‘bob�] / [‘bo�b�] ‘silly’, ‘bomb’ (minimal pair)>> the sound [o] becomes [o�]
PA Segment
Description of the phonological process(cause of the relevant contrast)
>> difference due to thefact that nasalization (airrelease through the noise) occurs only in V1 of W2
EPK phonological process
(see Castelo, 2012)
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
Method
7 groups of relevant results
their didactic implications / challenges
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
Tasks1st
college
N1 detection 90%
N1 replacement 50%
N1 segmentation 61%
Word segmentation 73%
Phonological process
deactivation60%
Identification of the
segmental contrast in N124%
Description of the
phonological process11%
Sucess rates for the tasks
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
1st
Tasks Grade 5 Grade 7Grade
10
1st
college
N1 detection 76% 81% 93% 90%
N1 replacement 43% 50% 52% 50%
N1 segmentation 54% 63% 69% 61%
Word segmentation 58% 65% 79% 73%
Phonological process
deactivation41% 48% 61% 60%
Identification of the
segmental contrast in N1-- -- 34% 24%
Description of he
phonological process-- -- 7% 11%
Evolution of students’ metaphonological performance
(comparison with results reported in Castelo, 2012)
>> Performance levels of college students similar to those of lower grades
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
1st
Challenge # 1
Consideration of the students’
metaphonological performance level
(instead of their schooling grade)
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
Types of response for Description of the phonological process
1st college
occur. %
NASAL-
ISATION
orthography 18 25%
word identity 1 1%
irrelevant phonological aspect (IPHA) 6 8%
relevant phonological aspect (RPHA) 6 8%
RPHA + orthography 16 22%
IPHA + orthography 2 3%
other responses 1 1%
no response 22 31%
Total 72 100%
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
>> Orthographic strategies are used to solve metaphonological tasks:
Absence of distinction between sound and writing systems causes difficulties.
(also reported in Bruck, 1992; Ehri & Wilce, 1980; Treiman & Cassar, 1997; Scarborough et al., 1998; Freitas & Vidor, 2005; Mesa, 2008; among many others)
2nd
Challenge # 2
Distinction between sound / writing systems
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
1st college
occur. %
mudo
‘dumb’
target 34 94%
grapheme(s) 0 0%
syllable 2 6%
Other response 0 0%
Total 36 100%
tema
‘theme’
target 28 78%
grapheme(s) 2 6%
syllable 1 3%
Other response 5 14%
Total 36 100%
Types of response in two stimuli of N1 Segmentation
N1 segmentation: better when letter designation or full word
Example: tema - N1 never used as a full word (14% of unsuccessful attempts to isolate [e]; some productions as [�])
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
3rd
Challenge # 3
Training the articulation
of isolated segments
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
1. Mean success rate in the identification of all sounds within the word (73%): fast learning of the task, although most students had never before performed the task.
2. Several spelling-like answers to the training items (e.g. [D-O-N-A]);correct identification of phonetic segments within the word (e.g. [d-o-n-�])after negative feedback from the researcher.
Task Mean success rate
Word segmentation 73%
Mean success rate for Word Segmentation
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
4th
Challenge # 4
Fast promotion of phonetic sensitivity
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
1st college
Nasalisation 17%
Vowel reduction 4%
V1 Gliding 6%
Mean success rate for Description of the Phonological Process
Nasalisation easier to describe:
- not due to orthographic cues (see lower success rate in items with orthographic cues)- due to changes exclusively in the feature [nasal]
>> Subjects’ performance also constrained by the properties
of the phonological processes activated in the items presented
>> Need to develop metaphonological competence
related to different phonological processes
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
5th
TasksMean success
rates
Proportion of correct
answers for the
items with VOWEL
REDUCTION
N1 detection 90% 78%
N1 replacement 50% 97%
N1 segmentation 61% 72%
Word segmentation 73% 73%
Phonological process deactivation 60% 54%
Identification of the segmental
contrast in N124% 22%
Description of the phonological
process11% 4%
>> In general, better performance in detection (identification)
and in replacement (manipulation) tasks
≠
segmentation tasks
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
5th
TasksMean success
rates
Proportion of correct
answers for the
items with VOWEL
REDUCTION
N1 detection 90% 78%
N1 replacement 50% 97%
N1 segmentation 61% 72%
Word segmentation 73% 73%
Phonological process deactivation 60% 54%
Identification of the segmental
contrast in N124% 22%
Description of the phonological
process11% 4%
>> Better performance in most tasks testing segmental awareness
≠
tasks testing awareness of phonological processes (deactivation)
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
5th
TasksMean success
rates
Proportion of correct
answers for the
items with VOWEL
REDUCTION
N1 detection 90% 78%
N1 replacement 50% 97%
N1 segmentation 61% 72%
Word segmentation 73% 73%
Phonological process deactivation 60% 54%
Identification of the segmental
contrast in N124% 22%
Description of the phonological
process11% 4%
>> Very low performance in the task testing explicit phonological knowledge
(description of the phonological process)≠
tasks testing phonological awareness
(of segments and of phonological processess)
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
5th
Challenge # 5
Need to promote
different types of metaphonological competence
in a hierarchical fashion
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
>> Low ability of autonomous analysis of linguistic data
(unlimited time + example)
Tasks Mean success rates
Phonological process deactivation 60%
Description of the phonological process 11%
Discovery-based activities
(e.g. Hudson, 1992, 2006; Duarte, 2008;
Honda, O’Neill & Pippin, 2010; Costa et al., 2011)
Metalinguistic activities Training of analytical thinking andteaching of scientific method
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
6th
Challenge # 6
Promotion of discovery-based learning
to develop autonomous language analysis
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
Qualitative analysis of the subjects’ answers
in the task of phonological process description:
- Orthographic strategy
- No mastery of basic metalanguage for the naming of linguistic structures
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
7th
Responses – some examples (translated from Portuguese):
(i) ‘there is a transformation of sound [o] into [õ] and the reason is the introductionof letter M’(response for boba / bomba; subject 1ºFI-10)
(ii) ‘what changes in the first syllable is the letter E because it has an ‘acento circunflexo’[diacritic used in Portuguese orthography] in the first word but not in the second one’(response for pera / perada; subject 1ºMI-01)
(iii) ‘[e] and [p�]; I think maybe it is because one has two beats and the other one three’(response for pera / perada; subject 1ºFI-04)
(iv) ‘[u�a] turns [�wa]; it looks like the [a] becomes stronger, it looks like the word isproduced quicker; I can’t explain why well’(response for b[u]ato / b[w]ato; subject 1ºFI-02).
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
7th
Challenge # 7
Teaching the metalanguage
that enables the description of phonological aspects
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
1. Main didactic implications:
•Level of metaphonological awareness ≠ schooling grades
•Sound system ≠ orthographic system
•Promotion of different types of metaphonological competence
in a hierarchical fashion
•Development of language workshops with discovery-based activities
•Introduction of metalanguage
2. Importance of research findings for the promotion of the
mother tongue study in the classroom
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
3. Proposal of 31 language activities (Castelo, 2012) based on the listed
didactic implications (RESEARCH / TEACHING dialogue)
>> promoting metaphonological competence on the EP non-consonantal system
Reinforcing knowledge
on metaphonological
aspects of EP
Using
metaphonological knowledge
to develop other skills
17 activities 14 activities
Introduction Method Results & challenges Final remarks
References
(2001). Programa de Português – 10.º, 11.º e 12.º anos – Cursos Científico-Humanísticos e Cursos Tecnológicos [Syllabus of Portuguese – Grades 10, 11 and 12 of Science, Humanities and Technology Courses]. Lisbon: Ministry of Education.
Bruck, M. (1992). Persistence of Dyslexics' Phonological Awareness Deficits. Developmental Psychology, 28 (5), 874-886.
Castelo, A. (2012). Competência metafonológica e sistema não consonântico no Português Europeu:
descrição, implicações e aplicações para o ensino do Português como língua materna [MetaphonologicalCompetence and Non-Consonantal System in European Portuguese: Description, Implications andApplications in the Teaching of Portuguese as Mother Tongue] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).University of Lisbon, Lisbon.
Costa, J., A. C. Cabral, A. Santiago & F. Viegas (2011). Conhecimento explícito da língua. Guião de
Implementação do Programa de Português do Ensino Básico [Explicit Knowledge of Language. Guide forthe Implementation of the Syllabus of Portuguese for Basic Education]. Lisbon: Ministry of Education.
Duarte, I. (2008). O conhecimento da língua: Desenvolver a consciência linguística [The knowledge oflanguage: Developing language awareness]. Lisbon: Ministry of Education.
Ehri, L. C. & L. S. Wilce (1980). The influence of orthography on readers’ conceptualization of the phonemicstructure of words. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1, 371–385.
Ellis, R. (2008). Explicit Form-Focused Instruction and Second Language Acquisition. In B. Spolsky & F. M.Hult (Eds.), The Handbook of Educational Linguistics (pp. 437-455). Malden/Oxford/Victoria: BlackwellPublishing.
References
Freitas, G. C. M. & D. Vidor (2005). A consciência fonológica em adultos alfabetizados [The phonological awareness in adults knowing an alphabet]. Cadernos de Pesquisas em Lingüística, 1(1), 7-23.
Freitas, M. J., Rodrigues, C., Costa, T., & Castelo, A. (2012). Os sons que estão nas palavras. Descrição e Implicações para o Ensino do Português como Língua Materna [The Sounds that are in Words: Description and Implications to the Teaching of Portuguese as Mother Tongue]. Lisbon: Colibri/APP.
Garrett, P. (2006). Language Education: Language Awareness. In E. K Brown & A. Anderson (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (pp. 480-483). Amsterdam/London: Elsevier.
Gombert, J. É. (1990). Le développement métalinguistique. Paris: PUF.Honda, M., W. O’Neil & D. Pippin (2010). On promoting linguistics literacy: bringing language science to the
English classroom. In K. Denham & A. Lobeck (Eds.). Linguistics at school: language awareness in
primary and secondary education (pp. 175-188). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Hudson, R. (1992). Teaching Grammar. A Guide for the National Curriculum. Oxford: Blackwell.Hudson, R. (2006). Language Education–Grammar. In E. K. Brown & A. Anderson (Eds.). Encyclopedia of
Language and Linguistics (pp. 477-480). Amsterdam/London: Elsevier.Hudson, R. (2008) Linguistic Theory. In B. Spolsky & F. M. Hult (Eds.) The Handbook of Educational
Linguistics (pp. 53-65). Malden, Oxford, Victoria: Blackwell Publishing.Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond Modularity. A developmental perspective on Cognitive Science.
Cambridge/London: MIT Press.
References
Morais, J. (2003). Levels of phonological representation in skilled reading and in learning to read. Readingand Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16, 123–151.
Scarborough, H., L. Ehri, R. Olson & A. Fowler (1998). The fate of phonemic awareness beyond theelementary school years. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2, 115–142.
Sim-Sim, I. & M. Micaelo (2006). Determinantes da compreensão de leitura [Determinants ofunderstanding in reading]. In I. Sim-Sim (Ed.), Ler e Ensinar a Ler (pp. 35-62). Oporto: Asa.
Titone, R. (1998). Loquor, ergo sum: from communicative competence through bilingualism tometalinguistic/ metacognitive development. Letras de Hoje, 33(4), 165-185.
Treiman, R. & M. Cassar (1997). Can children and adults focus on sound as opposed to spelling in aphoneme counting task? Developmental Psychology, 33, 771-780.
Veloso, J. (2005). Orthographic knowledge, the “Visual Identity Effect” and phonemic transcription. Preliminary results from a study with Portuguese subjects. Cadernos do CLUP, 10.
Veloso, J., & Rodrigues, A. S. (2002). A presença da fonética e da fonologia no ensino do Português (ensino básico e secundário): Algumas considerações preliminares [The Presence of Phonetics andPhonology in the teaching of Portuguese (basic and secondary schooling): Some preliminaryconsiderations]. In I. M. Duarte, J. Barbosa, S. Matos & T. Hüsgen (Eds.), Actas do Encontro Comemorativo dos 25 Anos do Centro de Linguística da Universidade do Porto (vol. 1, pp. 231-246). Oporto: Centro de Linguística da Universidade do Porto.