“Those who can’t spell, teach” « Issues With Literacy in Schools

Blog
About

“Those who can’t spell, teach”

October 21, 2008 at 4:39 pm | In Uncategorized | 6 Comments

This phrase caught my eye as I was looking through new articles for my blog. I am sure that by my title alone I have chosen to focus my blogs on literacy in schools, but I never though I would find an article like this. According to an article posted by The Times in the UK, over a quarter of trainee teachers taking a basic literacy test don’t pass on their first attempt. Words such as anxiety, unnecessary, and relieved are problem areas for incoming teachers into the professional workplace.

The literacy tests are taken online and can be taken as many times as needed to pass. According to the article the majority of all incoming trainee teachers pass the second time around. A survey done by Spelling Society showed that more than half of adults have problems spelling such words as embarrassed and millennium. These adults are the parents as well as the role models for our future generation. How can we expect anything more than basic communication skills when our society does not uphold such standards? Starting with younger generations, less and less people are reading these days and engaging in other means of communicating with an incorrect vocabulary such as: watching TV., playing games, books on tape, as well as texting, which has a lot to do with the way our language is used today.

It is very interesting to compare these results with the issues I have seen in our schools with my own eyes. Has an epidemic of illiteracy entered itself into our culture without us even noticing it? I have heard random facts that the most common television programs are written at a fourth grade level, and that we have succumbed ourselves to the “dummy” how to books, but I did not know that it was such a problem. It almost does not seem fair to hold teachers to these high standards when their education/background does not give them the tools they need, but is it fair to the following generation to not have the teachers at the standards they need to be? I know the article doesn’t exactly refer to the United States, but we have many basic skills tests that have to be passed by our incoming teachers also. If the U.S. imposed a literacy test, would we see similar results?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article4981687.ece

6 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Although, this is a disturbing fact, I would like to point out that the English language can, at times, be completely non-sensical. If we could just learn the international symbols of phonetics like in ENG 261 (I hate that class) and just use this system our lives would be so much easier. Everything spelled as it sounds…utopia. All that said, teachers need to be prepared for any competency test in their field. Any other job is going to have a similar test to find out if the degree someone received is legitimate or from a reputable institution. What makes this worse, of course, is, as you said, these people are passing on their intellect to the future of our existence. There in lies the major problem. How can we expect any improvement in education if we do not strive for improvement within ourselves. The fact is that in a world of texting and IM-ing future generations are getting more and more lazy in their spelling. Not only their spelling, but in everything. No work ethic, no drive, no “gumption.” Recipe for disaster.

Comment by coachk97 — October 23, 2008 #
I definitely see the point that you are making in this post. I agree with the comment above that the English language is really tricky. Looking at old English I just think of how much sense the English language probably used to make; For instance words didn’t have “silent” letters.

In your post you also mention television shows that are written at a much lower comprehension level. I would have to agree and disagree with this statement. I can see where lots of the tv shows are written so that the masses can enjoy them. But I also wonder what this low level is in comparison to. I feel like many tv shows can be deeper if you want it to, just as in a novel. I say this because I look at something like Heroes. It isn’t the most intelligent show, but if you put the time in to look at the plot and see the twists and turns it becomes a much more difficult story.

In regards to education, we can look at what teachers are expected to know and teach. I expect teachers to know what they are teaching well. However, I would question whether what is on the test coincides with what teachers actually implement in their classroom. Should teachers educate their students exactly as they are tested or should they have some freedom in their choice?

Comment by greenje — November 28, 2008 #
I have marveled at the difficulty adults have with spelling -especially since I began using a word processor with spellcheck. Just kidding.

I’ve always believed that the ability to spell is a skill or a knack that people either have or don’t. Obviously those who don’t can improve their ability through practice, and I’m certain that reading, constantly seeing words in print, is a tremendous advantage as well. However, I know people with terminal degrees in various disciplines who read constantly and nonetheless are “creative spellers.” I’m not sure how to account for this.

The larger question in my mind is this: should being a bad speller disqualify one from being a teacher? If so, why? You could argue that spelling is necessary to written communication. You could simultaneously argue that fine penmanship is necessary for the same reasons, but I think most people would find that absurd. (I certainly hope so; if it becomes part of the MTTC’s I’m in big trouble.) In both cases, technology has rendered these skills less critical, though not irrelevant. Yet.

Skills such as spelling, penmanship, or even superb speaking skills may be less important to being a great teacher than many of the softer skills such as empathy, communication, or the ability to motivate students. The difference is that those skills are virtually impossible to quantify via a Scantron test. And since we are all about The Test these days, it stands to reason that things like spelling are the things we will concern ourselves with, regardless of how relevant they are.

Comment by blaine62 — November 30, 2008 #
Ouch! It seems that teachers can’t catch a break. They can’t do this or that, they’re students aren’t proficient in this or that, I think it’s great. Not in the way you might be thinking, though. I believe the bar for teachers should be very high, but the characteristics of the bar need to be ones that allow Teachers to be effective. Teachers need to be able to do their job, yes, does that involve remembering how to spell every word in the english language, I would argue no. I am not giving a pass to the teachers who didn’t know how to spell relieve, but I am saying that not being able to spell does not make a teacher inadequate. I can’t execute a very proficient pick off move in baseball, but I can coach my pitchers how to get very good at it through practice. Just because I could never pick off the guy at first base does not mean the players I coach can’t do the same. I taught them in a way that allows them to have success and in the game that is all that matters. If a teacher possesses the ability to teach a student to succeed in a way the teacher may not be able to then that is all that matters.

Comment by coachk97 — December 2, 2008 #
It has become clear to me that spellcheck has eroded my ability to spell. When I was in elementary school I regularly won spelling bees, now I can barely string together a proper sentence (but you’d never know it if you weren’t looking over my shoulder).
In any case, disqualifying people from the teaching profession on the basis of poor spelling seems a bit nitpicky. Being able to spell is obviously very important but ability to communicate (along with a whole string of other characteristics) is far more important.
I think it is interesting that Coach K brought out English 261 (how I hated that class) in discussion of phonetics but did not bring out the other obvious relationship: the discussion of incorrect vocabulary. A descriptivist would have a field day with your overly presumptive prescriptivism.

Comment by hendricg — December 3, 2008 #
[...] http://vanbeckj.wordpress.com/2008/10/21/those-who-cant-spell-teach/ [...]

Pingback by Comments « Du sollst wachsen wie ein Zwiebel mit deinem Kopf in Boden — December 3, 2008 #