There is a lot of buzz these days about Linguistic Phonics Programs.
(also known as Speech-To-Print (S2P), and more recently as “Structured Linguistic Literacy”)
If you are passionate about the science of reading and you love O.G. and explicit, systematic methods for teaching phonics, you may find that linguistic phonics is a great way to streamline your teaching and get even better, faster results for your struggling students - dropping the fluff without losing any of the good stuff (as Anita Archer would say).
Before I dive in, keep in mind that this is my own interpretation of the differences between linguistic vs. traditional phonics programs.
Definitely pop over and see how structured linguistic literacy programs describe the differences themselves! Check out: Reading Simplified (see also this and this), EBLI (see also this and this), Sounds-Write (see also this), Phono-Graphix’s conceptual underpinnings, Phonics for Pupils with SEN’s linguistic phonics video, as well as this fantastic overview article by Sounds-Write’s Miriam Fein, Harriet Janetos' Rethinking Reading, and another great overview by SPELL-Links’ Jan Wasowicz.
Want to explore more? I highly recommend joining the Facebook Group:
See it In Action! You will get an even better handle on the approach if you see it in action, so check out Reading Simplified’s YouTube Channel, as well as EBLITube, and the Phono-Graphix Method series.
Just a little taste to get you going.
Feeling Skeptical? Many of us did too until we tried it. See what these practitioners had to say when they made the switch: From Skeptic to Advocate and Discovering Linguistic Literacy.
Read the Scientific Research on Reading Simplified’s earlier iteration (TRI) as well as research on other S2P programs. Also check out what Tim Shanahan has to say about it on his podcast!
Now for my version of Linguistic Phonics 101!
“Speech-To-Print”: A Program vs. an Activity
One of the first sources of confusion about linguistic phonics programs is that they are commonly called “Speech-to-Print” programs. But the term speech-to-print is also used to describe the activity of encoding (writing) from dictation. This leads to a lot of misunderstandings, because while “Speech-to-Print” programs do use a lot of encoding exercises, there is a whole lot more to these programs than encoding, and any OG or traditional phonics programs worth their salt will have encoding activities.
This common confusion is why people who use these programs are moving away from using the term “Speech-to-Print” / S2P to describe the programs. Instead, many have begun to refer to them as Structured Linguistic Literacy (SLL) programs or Linguistic Phonics programs.
What is a Linguistic Phonics Program?
Linguistic Phonics Programs (aka Speech-To-Print (S2P) Programs, or Structured Linguistic Literacy (SLL)) are similar to conventional phonics programs (aka OG, print-to-speech, P2S) in that they are explicit, systematic, synthetic, multi-sensory phonics programs with a scope and sequence.
However, as Dr. Louisa Moats wrote in 1998: “One of the most fundamental flaws found in almost all phonics programs, including traditional ones, is that they teach the code backwards. That is, they go from letter to sound instead of from sound to letter …. the print to sound (conventional phonics) approach leaves gaps, invites confusion, and creates inefficiencies.” - Moats, Teaching Decoding, 1998
Linguistic Phonics programs seek to resolve this issue. Their central general guiding principle is to start with what kids already know: SOUNDS
By the time they reach school-age, kiddos have a very robust oral language system, and the neurological connections between the sound and meaning centers of the brain are very well developed. What’s missing are the neurological pathways linking oral language to the written word. We are not wired for reading. It is these neurological pathways that need to be built, and linguistic phonics programs do this very efficiently by organizing their teaching around speech sounds, because oral language is what kids already know. We can build off that.
So how do Linguistic Phonics programs tackle this?
Linguistic phonics programs have their roots in the multi-sensory, sounds-and-writing-first Montessori method, the linguistic and phonemic awareness work of the Lindamood-Bell LiPS approach and the work of Professor Diane McGuinness. In linguistic phonics, the English Code is revealed sound-by-sound, as opposed to letter-by-letter. This may seem like a trivial difference from traditional print-to-speech phonics programs (such as OG-based ones) but in practice, the approach and overall program is really quite dramatically different, as you’ll see below.
Linguistic Phonics Programs in a Nutshell
“Structured Linguistic Literacy is an accelerated, systematic, explicit, and integrated instructional speech-first approach to spelling and reading.” - Nora Chahbazi, EBLI 2023
There is a growing body of evidence that linguistic phonics may be much faster than traditional phonics programs at getting kids proficient in phonemic awareness, letter-sound knowledge, decoding skills, word recognition, and even reading comprehension - something that researchers have dubbed “the 12 hour effect.”
( read more in my draft summary of research on SLL and
Linguistic Phonics - Quick Videos
Check out Phonics for Pupils with SEN’s linguistic phonics video for a quick intro to the concept, as well as the Measured Mom’s Structured Linguistic Literacy podcast episode, and Phonic Books S2P vs P2S What’s The Difference?
Okay. But what IS Linguistic Phonics / Speech-To-Print / SLL?
Linguistic Phonics is Based on Five Central Concepts
Linguistic phonics programs organize themselves based on the following realities of spoken English Language and its written code:
1. Oral language develops first
(therefore, we should organize our literacy programs by speech-sound)
2. Letters are symbols that can represent different speech sounds
3. Sounds can be represented by one or more letters
(e.g. b, th, igh, eigh)
4. Sounds can be spelled in multiple ways
(e.g. “Long A” spelled: ai, ay, a, a_e, eigh, etc.)
5. Letters can represent multiple sounds
(e.g. variable pronunciation of < a > in:
April, as, wash, was, luggage, many etc.)
Linguistic Phonics programs structure themselves based on these realities of the English language. Next, I’ll talk about what they look like in practice and how they differ from conventional phonics programs.
Key Differences of a Linguistic Phonics Program
What are the key differences between linguistic phonics programs (aka Speech-to-Print, aka Structured Linguistic Literacy - SLL) vs. traditional phonics programs (aka O.G., Print-to-Speech)? While SLL / linguistic phonics programs vary, these are typically the 6 key differences from traditional phonics programs:
1. Scope & Sequence Organized by Sound
Students already have language organized by sound in their brain, so it makes sense to introduce graphemes in groups based on the “sound drawer filing-cabinet system” that kiddos already have.
2. Short Intervention Period
12-24 hour target for direct, explicit instruction that covers all common GPCs (...and this is where a lot of people, including my former self, get nervous: “How could that work?” But for most kids, even struggling ones, even dyslexic ones … it just does! See: evidence base)
3. Emphasis on Speak-Write-Read Approach
Encoding (writing) words is a major focus, and students always say the sounds as they write, making for frequent multi-sensory activity.
4. One Activity, Multiple Skills
Reading skills are interwoven, not practiced in isolation. No drills.
5. Streamlined by Sound
Multiple spellings of a sound are introduced simultaneously.
6. Rule-Free
Students are not burdened by the cognitive load of memorizing & attempting to apply complex & inconsistent syllabication “rules” when reading and writing.
I’ll outline these key differences below, but don’t take my word for it …
Click through to see how various linguistic phonics programs describe these key differences themselves: Reading Simplified (see also this and this), EBLI (see also this and this), Sounds-Write (see also this), Phono-Graphix’s conceptual underpinnings.
Feeling Dubious? Before we tried it, we did too.
Read Lindsay’s Story: From Skeptic to Advocate
In More Detail:
The 6 Key Distinctions of Linguistic Phonics Programs
1. Scope & Sequence Organized by Sound
Students already come to the classroom with oral language. Their brain is wired and organized for speech sounds. Therefore, LP programs find that it makes sense to introduce graphemes in groups based on the sound-based “filing system” that kiddos already have (phonic books has lovely charts of graphemes grouped by sound and a chest of sounds visual metaphor to help understand the concept).
What this means in practice, is that in a Linguistic Phonics program, once the basic code is learned (short vowels, hard consonants, consonant digraphs), sounds that have multiple spellings are introduced in groups (more on this in point 5).
2. Short Intervention Period - (12-24 hours)
Typically, LP / linguistic phonics programs introduce the English Code over the course of 12-24 hours of phonics instruction carried out across 2-12 months or 1-2 school years (depending on the program). They often employ a guideline of 70-80% mastery threshold to progress along the scope and sequence, after which practice in these skills is interleaved or spiraled with new ones.
After 12-24 hours of direct phonics instruction, students will have mastered enough of the code to shift their focus away from phonics, PA, basic morphology, and decoding skills toward spending more time on fluency (reading faster and with good expression), reading comprehension, advanced morphology, vocabulary, spelling, and reading for knowledge/enjoyment.
Linguistic Phonics programs fast-track reading by developing phonemic-manipulation and phonics skills rapidly.
As Bart Simpson famously pointed out, there is an inherent problem with slow, laborious intervention approaches: “Let me get this straight: we're behind the rest of our class and we're going to catch up to them by going slower than they are? Cool Cool!”
Kids who are behind are the exact ones who need that fast-tracked, easy jump-start to reading where they can unlock the code quickly. Linguistic Phonics provides that.
(See my draft notes on the research base of these fast approaches, & on Reading Simplified research)
3. A Speak-Write-Read Emphasis
From the very first Structured Linguistic Literacy lesson, students of any age use multi-sensory methods (saying the sound at the same time as writing it) to construct and manipulate words at the phoneme level. The approach is speech-first; students learn how to represent the words they say by writing (or building) spoken words with letters.
For example, at the most basic level, a core word work activity might look like this:
“Let’s build the word MAT … how many sounds do we hear in the word MAT? That’s right: M-A-T … three sounds, so we’ll need three sound lines/boxes to build this word. What’s the first sound we hear in the word MAT? That’s right: MMM. Which of these tiles has the letter that represents MMM? That’s right. Let’s move the tile to the beginning of our word. Say the sound while you move the tile. Now we have MMM. We are building the word MAT. What’s the next sound we hear in the word MMMAAATTT? ….”
Then the process continues and advances in word complexity, and phonemes begin to be deleted, added, or switched to make new words in phonemic manipulation word chaining activities.
Saying the sound while writing the letter or moving the tile is critical to this approach.
See it in action at Reading Simplified (see also 3 Activities a Day to Keep Reading Difficulties Away) and in action at Sounds-Write.
4. One Activity, Multiple Skills. … And No Drills.
In a linguistic phonics approach, reading skills are not taught in isolation. Each activity is designed to develop student skills in multiple strands of Scarbourough’s Rope simultaneously.
Letter-sound relationships are not learned in isolated letter drills and phonemic awareness is not developed in the absence of letters - instead, both of these skills are learned in the context of building and manipulating words at the phoneme level from the very first lesson.
Vocabulary is introduced and discussed during both word work and guided reading. Spelling and encoding are incorporated into every word-work activity, and spelling pattern-recognition is reinforced through multi-sensory word sorts.
Re-reading for fluency, blending practice, vocabulary discussion, and reading comprehension strategies are incorporated into each guided reading session (some S2P programs will begin with primarily decodable texts, with gradual release into transition texts when the code is nearing mastery, others use authentic text earlier on).
In short, SLL programs have very efficient, multi-pronged activities. And NO DRILLS.
The importance of phoneme awareness at the phoneme level and with letters/graphemes: Phoneme Awareness with Dr. Susan Brady
5. Multiple Spellings of a Phoneme Taught Simultaneously
Once a student progresses to Long Vowels and Diphthongs (typically after just a few hours of direct instruction), the common spellings of a given phoneme will be introduced in the same lesson. Each sound will typically be focused on for a week or two.
For example, the Long A sound spellings: ay, ai, a, a_e will all be introduced in one lesson, and students will practice writing, reading, and sorting words using these spellings for a week or two until they correctly identify them in text 70-80% of the time.
This is an area where many who haven’t tried a linguistic phonics approach get nervous - “could my kids handle this?” (Heck, this is what I worried about until I tried it!) But I am here to tell you that your students CAN handle it. Decades of research shows that these programs work, and if you dip into the online communities of people who’ve taken the plunge into linguistic phonics, you will see the same shocked success stories over and over again. Learning the English code doesn’t take nearly as long as we thought it did.
A helpful analogy for wrapping my head around how this is possible is Phono-Graphix’s flower analogy. Humans are great at categorizing things. If you show a kiddo a tulip and ask them what it is, they’ll say “flower” … if you show them a rose, they’ll say “flower” … if you show them a daisy, they’ll say “flower.” No garden field-trip, no matter the age of the student, would ever feel a need to show students only tulips or only roses. No one would say “oh it’s too much for them to understand that flowers have different shapes.”
The kids get it.
(as a side note, the area of the brain that we use to process words - known as
“The Visual Word Form Area” is also used for identifying faces, and other important objects as well, so the above analogy fits better than you might assume at first glance)
It is important to note that the focus in this phase of linguistic phonics instruction is to get students reading accurately. Linguistic phonics programs do an enormous amount of encoding work, and place a great deal of importance on correcting spelling mistakes. However, spelling is always going to lag behind reading. It is much more important to level up kiddos’ reading, and reading is what many linguistic phonics programs will set as the primary goal in the early weeks of instruction.
See word sorts in action: EBLI on Dyslexia Explored
(My sidenote: Remediating spelling can be emphasized after students have solid reading skills. Linguistic Phonics approaches are great for developing orthographic mapping of base words. Bundle by GPC for max effect. For multi-morphemic words, a morphology based approach to spelling - such as SWI - can provide additional benefits).
6. Rule Free
Linguistic Phonics programs skip explicit instruction in syllable types and the complex so-called “rules” of English pronunciation.
The reason for this is two-fold: One, teaching students to memorize and apply rules increases the cognitive load required to read. This is detrimental for struggling readers. Two, the English language is full of many exceptions, so much so that these “rules” only apply some of the time. And a rule that applies only some of the time isn’t very useful.
See, for example UMich DyslexiaHelp’s summary of Devin Kearn’s study of syllable-division related phonics rules. His study of 14,000+ English words found that so-called “rules” such as the “open-syllable → long vowel rule” only work 47% of the time in two-syllable words and a measly 19% in words with 3+ syllables (see his video).
He concluded that “there is really no V | CV division pattern at all.”
The so-called phonics syllable “rules” are unreliable.
It is much more efficient and much less cognitive burden on students to help them:
1. Notice very Regular Patterns
( e.g. every syllable has a vowel, soft c & g patterns, and morphemic patterns )
2. Develop Cognitive Flexibility
to swap out a letter-sound if the first doesn’t fit (set for variability).
Students attempting to memorize and then apply inconsistent rules to the English language will have to develop this cognitive flexibility anyway when the rules inevitably fail them. Thus, linguistic phonics programs argue, it makes more sense to cut to the chase and focus on developing cognitive flexibility rather than spending classroom time memorizing inconsistent rules.
(Sidenote: once reading is getting strong, we can teach the morphology-based conventions of spelling - these have nothing to do with syllables)
Some get confused at the difference between developing “cognitive flexibility” vs. utilizing the debunked “3-cueing strategy” but the approaches are very, very different. In 3-cueing, when students make a reading error, they are asked to first consider the picture, the context and the grammar before attending to the print. Linguistic phonics does the opposite.
The error-correction approach employed in linguistic phonics for both reading and writing is immediate, print-focused, and direct. The error is pointed out as soon as it is made, and students are asked to look at the letter and try another sound that they know the letter can represent (if they have not yet learned the letter-sound correspondence, they are given the correct sound directly - “those letters represent /ee/ say /ee/“. When spelling, they are given the correct spelling directly. “Yes, that IS a way we could spell /ee/, but in this word, we spell it <ea>” ).
Multisyllabic words are tackled in “chunks.” Syllable types are not taught. Syllable division is accomplished by having students focus on their natural speech cadence and on morphemes as they learn them. They will break the word into chunks, decode and blend each chunk, then link the chunks together to say the word. There are very minimal rules or nudges, aside perhaps to remind them one vowel per syllable chunk.
The fewer barriers between the child and the page, the better.
For example: “Represent” might initially be sounded out as “Reh-preh-sehnt” with all Short E sounds. The student may be able to automatically self-correct when they realize that the word they’ve sounded out is very close to another word in their lexicon. If they can’t self-correct yet, then the error is corrected in a direct way like this:
The instructor might tap the second e in the word. If the student has practiced flexing the vowel before, they would know to try another sound that the letter can represent with no other prompt. If they needed another nudge, the instructor might ask “what other sound can that letter represent/say?” If the student still gives the incorrect answer, the answer would be directly provided: “that’s right, this letter can represent /eh/ … but here it represents /ə/ (or /ee/, depending on dialect). Say /ə/.”
Very swiftly, students will begin to catch themselves, and do the sound swapping on their own once they detect that the word they have spoken aloud almost-but-doesn’t-quite match a word in their lexicon.
See also: The 411 on the 4 Types of Reading Errors
One "rule" guide that may be mentioned is: “one vowel per chunk.” A more common nudge might be to point out a morpheme. In many cases this will be the only guidance needed, as students will have already been learning to master graphemes and simple morphemes, and will be building their cognitive flexibility. This is in alignment with the suggestions provided by Kearns in the study cited above.
In linguistic phonics programs, any lengthy discussion of complex spelling patterns, morphology or etymology is reserved until after the initial grapheme/morpheme code has been mostly mastered, and cognitive flexibility is strong. For some children extra help in these areas may or may not be needed, as they will already be “off to the races” with their reading. However, these can be incorporated as a point of interest while building vocab/context. Morphology can also be of immense help to those who struggle with spelling multimorphemic words.
More resources on “Rules” vs Set for Variability:
What Linguistic Phonics / Speech-to-Print does NOT include:
If you’re looking at a program and you still can’t decide if it is a structured linguistic literacy (aka linguistic phonics, aka speech-to-print) program or not, here is a general guide to what they (probably) DON’T look like:
If letter names are introduced alongside phonemes, it’s probably not linguistic phonics.
(However - S2P approaches are fast. Long Vowels & letter names for spelling and handwriting are typically introduced soon … as quickly as month 2 - 4 of Kindy)
If letter sounds are taught in isolation by phoneme flashcards, rather than in the context of spelling words, it’s probably not linguistic phonics.
If word work activities primarily focus on reading letters or words rather than speaking-and-writing words, it’s probably not linguistic phonics.
If substantial time is spent teaching phonemic awareness “in the dark” (without letters) or teaching letter sounds in isolation rather than integrating learning via word-building & manipulating with visual letters, it’s probably not linguistic phonics.
If syllable division is taught by “types” and/or multisyllabic word sounding-out is taught via the memorization of syllable rules, it’s probably not linguistic phonics.
If long vowel and diphthong spellings are taught just one or two per week and aren’t grouped by sound (e.g. if it looks like this: Week 32: ai, ee, Week 33: oo, igh
instead of like this: Week 6: ee, ea, e, -y, -ey, e_e Week 7: ai, ay, a, a_e )
... it’s probably not linguistic phonics.
If the program requires high levels of mastery (85-100%) to progress, it’s probably not linguistic phonics.
If the scope & sequence pacing takes more than 1 to 1.5 school years to introduce all the common English phonetic code, it’s probably not linguistic phonics.*
*The majority of the common spellings of the English Code are often introduced in
12-24 hours of direct instruction, doled out at about an hour per week, but there is some variation.
If two or more of the above list apply to the program you’re looking at, it is likely NOT a full Linguistic Phonics program.
What are the Linguistic Phonics Programs?
Most traditional phonics programs will incorporate some “speech-to-print” type activities, but will differ from true Linguistic Phonics programs in many of the ways listed above. There is growing evidence that suggests that linguistic phonics programs are faster and more efficient at teaching kids to read. Furthermore, there is growing evidence that OG print-to-speech programs are not extremely effective (Stevens et al 2021) and that these rule-based programs are not in alignment with the latest research regarding how the brain learns to read (see Seidenberg).
The History of Structured Linguistic Literacy
Structured linguistic literacy (SLL) programs largely sprang from Diane, Carmen, and Geoff McGuinness’ work, including the book Reading Reflex, and their program Phono-Graphix. See this post on Diane McGuiness’s original prototype.
A List of Structured Linguistic Literacy Programs:
On-Track Reading (combines the McGuinness model with the Spalding model)
LiPS (Note that though linguistically based, this lacks many of the elements of the Diane McGuinness model )
Structured Linguistic Literacy Practitioners, Researchers, and Resource Providers
Phonic Books (formerly - they were bought out by DK)
(this latter set are organizations that provide linguistic phonics materials or intervention rather than a full phonics program or training).
Note that this list isn’t exhaustive but these are the ones I am most familiar with.
Want to see more? Marnie Ginsberg of Reading Simplified made
A Family Tree of Linguistic Phonics Programs:
A few final thoughts & notes:
The Lindamood-Bell LIPS program has changed over the years, and now includes other add-on components (Visualizing-Verbalizing and Seeing Stars) that may be important interventions for some kiddos, but may not be as efficient or effective for other kiddos, so you’ll want to use them in a more targeted manner.
Louisa Moats wrote a book called “Speech to Print” and as educators we often talk about “speech to print” activities when referring to encoding and dictation activities. However, while Linguistic Phonics certainly incorporates some of these concepts, these are NOT the same as a full Linguistic Phonics approach, which entails much more, as I’ve outlined above.
Linguistic Phonics Programs are designed to get kids Decoding
This is a generalization that may not apply across the board, depending on which program you choose, but it is important to note that as with ALL phonics programs, linguistic phonics programs have accurate decoding/reading as their primary goal.
The ability to decode words is the foundation on which fluency and reading comprehension rely. So in a Linguistic Phonics program, as in other Phonics programs, fluency, comprehension, and spelling will be secondary goals. Once a child can accurately pull the words off the page, the educational focus can turn to these secondary goals. Solid fluency-building and comprehension-building practices will be employed in a linguistic phonics program, and spelling of base words will be incorporated, but they will not typically be the focus of a linguistic phonics program.
Further guided practice beyond the scope of a linguistic phonics program will be needed for some children to develop their fluency, comprehension, and spelling skills (though linguistic phonics programs do get many children spelling very accurately already).
Linguistic Phonics - The Theory and the Evidence
Linguistic Phonics (specifically, its de-emphasis of rules) is more in alignment with the latest understanding of how the brain learns to read (listen in on Seidenberg’s interview with Marnie Ginsberg of Reading Simplified).
There is a substantial and growing evidence base for linguistic phonics interventions. See also my summary of the scientific research on Reading Simplified - which is, as of August, 2026, the program with the strongest evidence of effectiveness of any phonics program I have reviewed.
Testamonials: Linguistic Phonics vs O.G.
Many Orton-Gillingham practitioners have switched to Linguistic Phonics and not looked back. Here are a few of their stories:
Laurel Sanders - Short Story / The Longer Version
Brandi Guilliford - O.G. to EBLI Story (halfway down the page)
Lindsay Journo - From Skeptic to Advocate
Scroll about halfway down this page to see what former-OG, current EBLI practitioners have to say about the key differences.
In the Neighborhood - Quasi-Linguistic Phonics Programs:
There are phonics programs that follow some of the Speech-to-Print Phonics techniques, but not all. Because people are often interested in the comparison, I will list a few:
UFLI:
** I need to lead with the caveat that I do not have the UFLI manual, but at one point had seriously considered trying out the program, so I looked into the approach fairly thoroughly. UFLI shares some similarities with Speech-To-Print Approaches: rather than having students memorize grapheme-phoneme correspondences (though there is some drilling), it emphasizes a lot of encoding activities; and it also only spends a brief time with PA and phonics isolated (primarily for articulation). It shares similarities with a branch of linguistic phonics that stems from LiPS, and is not closely linked to the McGuinness model **
The major differences between UFLI and a full-on Structured Linguistic Literacy approach are:
(a) The scope and sequence of UFLI is not arranged according to sound, and therefore the main spellings of Long Vowels are not introduced at once, like they would be in a linguistic phonics program,
(b) There is a more time devoted to PA without letters and phonics via flashcards than a linguistic phonics program would use
(c) While cognitive flexibility is encouraged, open/closed syllables are still taught despite the fact that this is not a reliable rule for pronunciation, and likewise does not help students spell. Per SLL, this is an unnecessary burden.
(d) The UFLI scope and sequence takes 3 years to complete, while speech-to-print programs take 3-18 months to teach their entire scope and sequence.
At one point, I seriously considered using UFLI. I think it is a great program in many ways. But I saw the mental health impact not being able to read was having on my child.
I wanted something that could get her where she needed to be faster.
I determined that it was worth it to give a full Linguistic Phonics approach a chance. I am so glad I did. Linguistic Phonics was much more efficient, and I was able to move my child from CVC to chapter books in 3 months.
Get Reading Right:
This program is an Australian one, and is used for phonics at my children’s school. I have not done the training but have seen a fair bit of the implementation. The program’s scope & sequence is organized like a Linguistic Phonics program (all common Long Vowel sound-spellings are taught in groups via word sorts), encoding work is emphasized, and spelling is taught by pattern practice. However - the pace is slower than many SLL programs, HFW are temporarily taught as sight words, and it is unclear to me how much say-as-you write is emphasized as a core strategy.
(Anecdotal Sidenote: Get Reading Right was much slower to get results for my oldest child than I would have liked (I wish I had found a true LP program sooner), but in the end, he did get there and now in his 4th Year, both his decoding and spelling are excellent for his age. However: there is a reason that I looked elsewhere for an intervention for my youngest child. I did not want her stalling out in a program that doles out phonics in years instead of months).
Jolly Phonics:
I haven’t looked into this one as thoroughly as the other programs. It may actually fit the SLL criteria. It does seem to share many similarities to SLL approaches (no syllable types/rules, fast pace, many GPCs - including diphthongs, and multisyllable strategies taught in first year), but only teaches one sound-spelling relationship initially.
Kendore Learning
This program shares some similarities to other speech-to-print programs, but not all (for example, it teaches syllable types). I am still looking into it.
CKLA
Others have mentioned that the CKLA skills strand does some things similarly to speech-to-print programs. From what I have seen, I have not found that to be the case. It does not streamline its scope and sequence by sound, and teaches syllable types / syllable division. It does seem to use word chaining, and perhaps does not rely on isolated letter drills.
Master the Code
I have only had the chance to skim the overview of this program, but from what I have read, it does sound very much like a Linguistic Phonics program (i.e. based on the Diane McGuinness model)
In Their Own Words:
Nora Chahbazi of EBLI
Ann Sullivan of Phonics for Pupils with SEN
Jan Wasowicz of SPELL-Links
Marnie Ginsberg of Reading Simplified
Phonic Books: S2P vs P2S - What’s The Difference?
Practitioners:
Podcasts about SLL:
(even better to watch it though - as there is a visual lesson)
Reading Simplified and discussion of instructional efficiency
Want to Learn More? Visit the Programs Themselves!
A List of Structured Linguistic Literacy Programs:
On-Track Reading (combines the McGuinness model with the Spalding model)
LiPS (Note that though linguistically based, this lacks many of the elements of the Diane McGuinness model )
Structured Linguistic Literacy Practitioners, Researchers, and Resource Providers
Phonic Books (formerly - they were bought out by DK)
(this latter set are organizations that provide linguistic phonics materials or intervention rather than a full phonics program or training).
Also check out the fabulous Linguistic Phonics Exploration FB Group:
Have Questions about Linguistic Phonics?
Drop them in the Comments!
No comments:
Post a Comment