Is There Reason in the Rhyme? - Web viewIs There Reason in the Rhyme? ... (Krashen 1989),...

Is There Reason in the Rhyme?

Is Rhyme an Effective Tool for Creating Accessible and Engaging Fiction Books for ESOL A0 Level Adult Learners?

by

Louise Shepperd

A81006883Word Count: 5,144

I confirm that this piece of work contains no plagiarised material and that I have read and understood the section on Plagiarism in

the School Style Guide

SEL 3326: Extended StudyAttached to

SEL 3012: Low-educated Language Acquisition and Literacy

081006883 Extended Study SEL 3326

Is There Reason in the Rhyme?Is Rhyme an Effective Tool for Creating Accessible and Engaging Fiction Books for ESOL

A0 Level Adult Learners?

1. Introduction

In a previous study looking at developing fiction books for low-literate immigrant adults, a

question arose about the role of rhyme (Shepperd 2011). When writing good fiction for low-

literate language learners, a tension exists between the story’s content and linguistic

accessibility (Shepperd 2011). It is important that these books are engaging and compelling

for an adult audience, to encourage the idea of reading for pleasure. Studies show that the

amount one reads influences second language proficiency (Krashen 1989), therefore when

learning a second language (L2) it is also important to read outside of class (Rodrigo et al.

2007). A problem that arises in English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) classrooms

is that the language learnt in the lesson is often not practiced at home. However, writing

better books for low-literate adults could encourage students to read outside of class and

provide such practice (Young-Scholten & Maguire 2008).

Engaging content is important and, when it comes to vocabulary, one way to offer something

different from word lists. However, such resources are needed for adult learners with low oral

proficiency and little to no literacy (A0 level), who need any text to be highly linguistically

accessible (Young-Scholten & Maguire 2008). This is where the tension starts to become

apparent, as accessibility calls for simple morpho-syntax, vocabulary and phonology. To

demonstrate the process, here is an example of text simplification from the fiction book

written for this study:

She is awakened from her brief day dream by the ringing telephone.

After simplification:

2

Pronoun Passive Pronoun Complex Vocabulary

Polysyllabic Prepositional phrase

Consonant Cluster

Prepositional Phrase


The phone rings. (See appendix 7)

When going through the process of text simplification many creative writing devices must be

sacrificed for accessibility. How can quality fiction be written at an appropriate level of

accessibility for A0 level learners?

Of prime consideration is phonological awareness, which is key in the acquisition of literacy

(e.g. Geudens & Sandra 2002; Goswami & Bryant 1990; Verhoeven et al. 2002) and

phonemic awareness is particularly important when using an alphabetic writing system (e.g.

Cardoso-Martins 1995; Elbro & Pallesen 2002; Loureiro et al. 2004). A stumbling block for

learners of the English writing system is its opaque orthography, which often displays one-to-

many phoneme-grapheme correspondences instead of one-to-one correspondence (Yoon et al.

2002). For example, the word thought is made up of seven graphemes but only three

phonemes, [Өɔːt], and when the letter t is removed from the written form the remaining word

is not pronounced as [Өɔː] but completely changes [ðoʊ].

Phonemes, onsets and rimes are all subsyllabic phonological units, but unlike phonemes,

awareness of onsets and rimes exists instinctively, that is, prior to any formal instruction

(Kirtley et al. 1989; Loureiro et al. 2004). Alliteration and rhyme are the manipulation of

onsets and rimes and are well known poetic devices, used for readers’ enjoyment language

and engagement with stories. When it comes to working with English orthography, rhyme

has also been shown to aid phonological development and literacy acquisition (Yoon et al.

2002). Can the use of rhyme in low literate fiction not only bridge the gap between pre-

literate and literate phonological awareness but also ease the tension between quality of

content and accessibility?

1.1 Aim

This essay has three aims, firstly, to find out how aware A0 learners are of rimes in written

English. Secondly, to find out whether rhyme helps them when decoding English

orthography. Thirdly, to find out whether rhyme is an effective device in ESOL fiction by

encouraging phonological awareness as well as reading for pleasure.

2. Low literate adults’ reading development

2.1 Importance of phonological awareness in literacy acquisition

3


Phonological awareness refers to the “awareness of the sounds that make up the words we

hear and speak” (Cardoso-Martins 1995: 1) and this includes phonemic awareness, which is

the ability to identify individual phonemes in a word (Verhoeven et al. 2002). There is a

strong relationship between phonological awareness and literacy acquisition, with many

studies supporting the idea that level of phonological awareness directly impacts reading

ability (Cardoso-Martins 1995; Elbro & Pallesen 2002; Geudens & Sandra 2002; Goswami &

Bryant 1990; Verhoeven et al. 2002).

Phonemic awareness is key in an alphabetic writing system because alphabetic letters

represent phonemes (Geudens & Sandra 2002). Phonemes are not always represented

perfectly, particularly in English (see above), but this sensitivity enables reading by

grapheme-phoneme correspondences (Cardoso-Martins 1995). Elbro & Pallesen (2002:19)

also show that any “experience with written language boosts the development of

phonological awareness.” Along with experience, explicit instruction in phonemic awareness

plays an in important role in successful literacy acquisition (Cardoso-Martins 1995). Loureiro

et al. (2004) study of pre-school children and illiterate adults shows both groups of

participants improve dramatically in phonemic awareness with instruction. This shows that

phonemic awareness does not arise spontaneously, unlike rime and onset awareness.

2.2 Issues surrounding LESSLA1 and English orthography

Writing systems can generally be divided into pictographic/logographic (e.g. Chinese),

syllabic (e.g. Japanese) and alphabetic (e.g. most European languages). A widely held view is

that different writing systems vary in how difficult they are to learn, but Verhoeven et al.

(2002:4) argue that “…all systems represent spoken language at one level or another and that

readers activate speech codes during the decoding process.” For example, even though

alphabetic systems have a small number of symbols to learn, when compared to the

thousands of symbols in logographic and syllabic systems, they are still difficult as phonemes

are hard to perceive (Verhoeven et al. 2002).

Alphabetic writing systems can then be divided according to the depth or transparency of

their orthography. An orthography where one phoneme maps onto one grapheme is

orthographically transparent or shallow (e.g. Italian, Finnish) (Elbro & Pallesen 2002). An

orthography where one phoneme maps onto many graphemes, or vice versa, is

orthographically opaque or deep (e.g. English). The Orthographic Depth Hypothesis (Katz & 1 Low Educated Second Language and Literacy Acquisition

4


Frost 1992) argues that words with a more shallow orthography encourage phonological

processing, whereas this is more difficult in deep orthographies, which encourage visual-

orthographic processing.

However, even though English does not have one-to-one mappings for phonemes and

graphemes, the system is not completely irregular and there are other ways to phonologically

overcome phoneme-grapheme inconsistencies (Pacton et al. 2002). Yoon et al. (2002) suggest

that because English orthography lacks transparency, the use of phonological units larger

than phonemes is encouraged in reading, for example rime units. Treiman et al. (1995) also

emphasize that fact that orthography and phonology are most consistent at the level of the

orthographic rime, making this useful for decoding. Sensitivity to linguistic structure is

therefore essential in mastering English orthography, due to its opaque nature (Burt &

Butterworth 1996).

2.3 Qualities of rhyme in literacy acquisition

As noted above, awareness of rimes (e.g. -at in hat) and onsets (e.g. h- in hat) appears to be

instinctive in both children and adults prior to literacy instruction (Young-Scholten & Strom

2006). Yoon et al.’s (2002: 159) study of subsyllabic awareness in the reading of English and

Korean (alphabetic system) children found that “children at the early stages of reading

instruction come equipped with phonological knowledge of onsets and rimes onto which

orthographic recognition units are then mapped.” They also found onset-rime structures are

particularly important in providing a structure that is accessible to children before they can

access phonemes. This is supported by Kirtley et al.’s (1989) study of preschool children,

which showed that children naturally divided syllables into onset and rimes and were only

able to isolate single phonemes when they coincided with the onset.

Not only do pre-literate children display a high awareness of rhymes, but so do illiterate

adults. Loureiro et al. (2004) studied 97 illiterate and semi-literate Brazilians and found that

many participants did well in rhyme identification tasks. This demonstrated that awareness of

rhyme was unrelated to alphabetical knowledge and word reading score. They went on to

suggest that rhyme identification is a distinct cognitive process from phonemic awareness,

which is dependent on alphabetical knowledge (e.g. Morais et al. 1979). “Rhyming is often

5


seen as a first ‘natural’ step into awareness of sub-lexical units” (Elbro & Pallesen 2002: 22)

and can ease phonemic development and thus reading development.

English readers in particular parse written language at the onset-rime boundary, using onsets

and rimes as orthographic recognition units (Geudens & Sandra 2002). This is likely to be

because “when rime units, rather than grapheme-phoneme pairing are the units of analysis,

English turns out to be highly reliable” (Yoon et al 2002: 142). However, Burt & Blackwell

(2008) point out there are inconsistencies in the pronunciation of rimes, which makes word

naming very difficult (e.g. ear in near vs. bear). In spite of this, consistency of the rime is

still important in reading patterns of English orthography.

2.4 Qualities of rhyme in reading for pleasure and language play

Rhyme is commonly found in children’s books because it provides the opportunity to ‘play’

with language (Brock & Rankin 2008) and also can provide predictable features that help

beginners make associations between spoken and written words (Linse 2007). Alongside the

benefits of rhyme in developing phonological awareness, it also has creative writing qualities.

Rhyme is widely recognised as a poetic device and has played an important role in adult

literature and oral tradition for centuries (McKie 1997). As a poetic device, it is used to

engage its audience, make a text or verse more memorable and show versatility of language

use (McKie 1997). The use of rhyme by adults is highlighted by Elbro & Pallesen (2002),

who note that rhyme is used to a high level by illiterate Brazilian street poets. So, we find

rhyme used and enjoyed by children and adults, in written and spoken language, and also in

aid of literacy acquisition.

Reading for a reason is an important concept in encouraging reading for pleasure and general

reading development; therefore high importance needs to be placed on good literature

(Sedgwick 2010).

Literacy is not something that you can teach apart from literate behaviour. You don’t

learn to read; you learn to read something, and you read something because you want

to know something, enjoy a text or participate in a group. (Delpit, 1991: 542)

6


Hill (2001) explains that stories written in language that learners can understand can be a

source of both pleasure and learning. He tells us that stories can “radically improve learners’

attitudes because they find they have an immediate and enjoyable use for the language they

are learning” (Hill 2001: 303). They also help develop reading fluency; providing a context

for language and extending grasp of lexis and syntax (see also Krashen 1989).

Together with reading for pleasure, there should also be space for language play in the

language learning environment. Again, language play is not just relevant for children, as adult

literature, poetry and satire demonstrate. In discussing L2 teaching, Cook (1997: 224) points

out that “...a good deal of authentic or natural language is playful, in the sense of being

focused upon form and fiction rather than on meaning and reality.” Language teaching aims

for students to have an authentic grasp of a language and its intricacies, and this is something

language play can facilitate. This is not in exchange for emphasis on communication and

meaning, but to go alongside it and create an environment sensitive to the complexities of

learning a second language (Cook 1997; Linse 2007).

To summarise, phonological awareness is an important element of acquiring literacy and

phonemic awareness is particularly necessary for using an alphabetic writing system. A

problem posed for ESOL A0 level learners acquiring literacy in English is the opaque nature

of English orthography and its frequent one-to-many phoneme-grapheme correspondences.

Unlike phonemes, learners are aware of rhyme prior to formal instruction and English

orthography is more reliable at the level of rimes. Another problem posed for A0 learners is

lack of sufficient engaging fiction books to encourage reading for pleasure. Rhyme is not

only a phonological unit, but also a poetic device that is effective in encouraging language

play and creating a more engaging and enjoyable use of language.

3. Hypothesis

An explicit hypothesis regarding the outcome of this study was not formulated, as the amount

of variables involved was too high. However, it was expected that participants would already

have an awareness of rimes; deep orthography would prove more difficult to decode than

shallow; and use of rhyme would aid phonological decoding and increase enjoyment of

reading.

7


4. Methodology

4.1 Participant Background Information

Table 1 shows the biographic information for the 9 participants that took part in this study.

They were all adult A0 level learners taking English classes at an ESOL centre, Action

Language, in Newcastle upon Tyne. Six of the participants were female and three were male,

and they were aged between 20 and 45. (Participants from a low-literate background would

have been preferable but I did not anticipate how difficult it would be to find ESOL centres

willing to co-operate at all, let alone ones with low-literate students.)

Table 1: Participant Background InformationName Country

of originMother Tongue

Length of Time in UK

English Classes

OG Stage

Literacy in L1

1 AG Portugal Creole 2 months Unknown 1 Unknown2 MD Romania Romanian 3 months Unknown 1-2 Unknown3 GA Turkey Turkish 9 months Unknown 1-2 Literate in L14 EB Bulgaria Bulgarian 11 months 22 hours 1 Literate in L1,

Russian & Turkish5 MB Gambia Fula 6 years Many 2-3 School until age 126 MS Iran Farsi 4 months 8 hours 1 University7 XT China Mandarin 3 years 54 hours 2 University8 SP Iran Farsi 5 months 16 hours 1-2 High school and

College9 MK Bulgaria Bulgarian 4 months 30 hours 1-2 University

Even though L1 literacy ranges considerably along with other variables, the data produced

was insightful. Diversity, as seen above, is a common situation in most ESOL classrooms, so

collecting data from such participants has ecological validity. As six out of nine are literate in

their L1, factors such as influence from L1 writing system and more developed phonological

and phonemic awareness have to be taken into account. Therefore, looking at the data from

the perspective of rhyme aiding phonemic awareness for only low-literates was not possible,

but looking at the use of rhyme in regards to acquiring literacy in English for A0 learners

more generally is possible.

In Table 1 the term OG stage is used, which refers the morpho-syntactic developmental

stages of Organic Grammar (OG) that second language learners pass through (Vainikka &

Young-Scholten 2005; Young-Scholten & Ijuin 2006). These stages are offered as a more

accurate alternative to standardised assessment of L2 learners. As well as using the tasks

8


outlined below, I also had a brief conversation with each participant to collect data to assess

their level of OG.

Table 2: Organic Grammar Criteria for stages in L2 English (Young-Scholten and Ijuin, 2006)Stage Word order in

declarativesVerb type Verbal

inflectionPronouns Complex

syntax1 Resembles L1,

then L2Main verbs only

None Absent None

2 Resembles L2 Main verbs; copula is appears

Little Begin to emerge

Formulaic or intonation- based Qs

3 Resembles L2 Main verbs, modals; copula forms beyond is

No agreement; some tense and aspect forms

More forms, but can still be missing

Conjoined clauses; Qs formulaic or w/o inversion

4 Resembles L2 Main verbs, modals, and copula forms beyond is; range of auxiliaries

Productive tense, aspect; agreement w/ be forms

Obligatory; there and existential it emerge

Simple subordination; Qs, but may be uninverted

5 Resembles L2 Complex tense, aspect forms; passives

Extension to new forms

New uses there and it

Complex subordination; Qs inverted

4.2 Data Collection

Three tasks were conducted, corresponding with the three aims mentioned earlier, but also to

observe the idea of triangulation of results. Each participant signed a consent form (see

appendix1) and is referred to by either their initials or participant number throughout the

essay, for ethical purposes. They then individually worked through each task, whilst I took

notes their progress. On a couple of occasions a task proved too difficult for the participant,

so we stopped and moved onto the next one.

The first task focused on assessing participants’ awareness of rhyme and on their responses

to shallow and deep rhymes in written English. Each participant was asked to read out loud

three words and then circle the word that did not rhyme. Most of the participants did not

understand the word ‘rhyme’ and actually circle the word they felt was different or the odd

one out. This began with an example that demonstrated the aim of the task, followed by

9


fourteen more sets of words (six words with shallow orthography and eight with deep

orthography) (see appendix 3).

The second task had two parts, which both looked at whether rhyme affects how A0 level

students deal with words with a deep or shallow orthography. The first part was made up of

seventeen short sentences, where twelve were rhyming couplets and five had rhyme adjacent

pairs (9 sentences with shallow rhymes and 8 sentences with deep rhymes) (see appendix 4).

The second part was made up of thirteen longer sentences, where eight were single sentences

containing rhyming words and five were rhyming couplets (8 sentences with shallow rhymes

and 5 with deep rhymes). Each participant read each sentence aloud whilst the interviewer

made notes on frequency of pauses and fluency; need for help or a prompt; inability to read;

use of phonemic decoding; and evidence of enjoying the rhyme (see appendix 2).

The third task investigated whether rhyme helps with phonological decoding and enjoyment

of reading a fiction book. Each participant read aloud from the book Spotty Boys (see

appendix 5), whilst the interviewer took note of problem areas, common mistakes,

replacements, phonemic decoding, use of rhyme and evidence of enjoyment. The book was

written and illustrated by me, and the process of creating the book will be described below.

Another book was also written following the same storyline, but without any rhyme. I

originally planned that participants would read both versions of the book so that results of

using rhyme could be clearly compared and participants could say which version they

enjoyed more. However, during the interviews it became clear that this was too much to ask

of the participants.

4.3 Writing the Book

The main focus of this study was to look at the use of rhyme in ESOL fiction books aimed at

A0 level adult learners. As mentioned above, rhyme is a poetic device that has been used for

many centuries by many cultures to enjoy language and storytelling (McKie 1997).

Furthermore, rhymes are phonological units that are more accessible than phonemes (Yoon et

al. 2002). So, in theory rhyme could be helpful as an educational and creative device, and

something that can be commonly appreciated in a multi-cultural classroom.

My previous essay (Shepperd 2011) gave a detailed description of the process of writing an

adult fiction book accessible to A0 learners. The book Spotty Boys was based on the same

principles but also took into account what was learnt through field-testing the previous book.

10


This included keeping content as linguistically accessible as possible, choosing material that

was relevant to everyday life and including a lot of repetition. Most pages contained two to

three short sentences with a clear illustration and characters which were chosen purposefully

to demonstrate racial and cultural diversity.

The story was written by following the stages learnt in previous creative writing workshops

and then adding rhyme to the simplified version of the story (see appendix 7). The

simplification involved reducing the prose to short simple sentences, with no embedded

clauses except a few co-ordinating clauses. The story was written in 3rd person singular

present so that proper nouns could be used instead of pronouns. Complex vocabulary was

eliminated where possible and so were adverbs; two were kept only because they rhymed.

Words and phrases that lacked semantic content, idioms and deixis were also avoided to

maintain clarity and simplicity.

All remaining words were either mono or bi-syllabic, and orthographically opaque words

were kept to a minimum. The original idea was to write the entire book in rhyming couplets

but due to the limited vocabulary learners seem to know this proved more difficult than

anticipated. Again, tension arises between content and accessibility. To maintain a logical

storyline, rhyming couplets were used on eleven out of eighteen pages; nine of these rhymes

had a deep orthography and two had a shallow orthography. Part of the motivation for the

second task was to look at rhyming couplets and the decoding of words in a way that was not

possible through the book. The aim was that the previous rhyme-based tasks and the rhyme

throughout the book would help readers decode opaque words and learn more about the

orthography and rhythm of English.

5. Results

5.1 Rhyme awareness task

The first task was not fully understood by many of the participants and some found the

concept perplexing. They did not understand the purpose of a task that was concerned purely

with phonological awareness separate from semantic content (similar issues found in Kurvers

et al. 2006). Also many did the task without reading the words out loud, which may have

made the process more difficult. Participant 6 did not participate in this task as it proved too

11


difficult. The rest of the participants all attempted the task with varying levels of

comprehension2.

Out of the other eight participants only one was able to correctly identify more than half of

the non-rhyming words. The average total of correct answers was 42.5% and, on average,

38.8% of shallow rhymes and 44.4% of deep rhymes were correctly identified. The graph

below shows which particular word sets were problematic and whether there was any

distinction between rhymes with deep or shallow orthography.

Figure 1: Results from rhyme awareness task

Word set 8 (day, tree, key) was only answered correctly by one participant, with the majority

circling tree as the odd-one-out (indicate which participants). The next highly problematic

word set was 12 (hat, rat, hot), which was only correctly answered by two participants, with

the majority circling rat as the odd-one-out, highlighting alliteration over rhyme. Word set 8

was orthographically opaque, whereas 12 was transparent, also, word lists 11,14 and 15 were

all opaque but were answered correctly by over 60% of participants. Overall, depth of

orthography did not make a difference. In many cases where rhymes were not correctly

identified matching onsets or orthographically similar words were, which still showed a

degree of phonological awareness.

2 Young-Scholten and Strom (2006) gave their tasks in the learners’ L1 first but as I had eight different L1s, compared to their two L1s, this was not replicable.

12


5.2 Reading list of rhyming sentences

The second task proved more successful as all participants were familiar and comfortable

with reading aloud short sentences. In the first half of the data set, involving shorter

sentences, most sentences were read with a relatively high level of fluency and many

participants developed a sense of rhythm as they went along. Sentences 5 (couplet: skirt,

hurt) proved the most difficult with only four able to read it relatively fluently and over half

needing prompting. Sentences 6 (couplet: best, test), 10 (adjacent: blue, shoe) and 17

(couplet: blue, shoe) proved easiest and were read fluently by all, except participant 7 who

needed help with blue and shoe. Some even showed that they enjoyed a few of the rhymes,

including: best and test; and sick chick.

In the second half of the data set, involving longer sentences and more complex vocabulary,

most sentences were again read with a relatively high level of fluency and sense of rhythm.

Sentences 11 (couplet: cough, off) were read fluently by all participants with only participant

6 sounding out phonemes and needing a prompt. In the shorter sentences cough was found

difficult by over half (exact number) of the participant but read fluently in the longer

sentences, suggesting modification from the previous set of sentences. Sentences 2 (adjacent:

dirt, hurt) and 4 (adjacent: shows, clothes, froze) were found most difficult, both with one

participant unable to read them correctly, more than half making mistakes and at least 25%

needing a prompt and sounding out of phonemes. Sentence 7 (adjacent: call, fall, wall) was

the next most problematic with only 50% reading fluently. The difficulty with opaque

sentences 2 and 4 but then also transparent sentence 7 demonstrates again that there is little

distinction between deep and shallow orthography. Finally, 25% of participants showed that

they enjoyed the rhyme jelly and belly in sentences 10.

Figure 2 demonstrates distinctions between deep and shallow orthography and also rhyming

words’ position in rhyming couplets and adjacent within the same sentence.

13


Figure 2: Results from rhyming sentences reading task

The main result shown in figure 2 is that most sentences were read fluently with few

problems, irrespective of depth of orthography or position of rhyming pair. On average,

sentences with orthographically deep rhymes did entail more prompting, short pauses and

phonemic decoding. However, again the data does not indicate rhymes with a deep

orthography are more difficult. One the other hand, these results might be demonstrating that

rhyme does help overcome difficulty with obscure orthography. Regarding position of the

rhyming words, couplets are highest for fluency and lowest for mistakes and difficulty, but

there is insufficient data to indicate a relationship between position of rhyme and participants

ability read.

5.3 Book reading task

The aim of this final task was to examine how well the book as a whole would be received by

A0 learners as well as effect of rhyme (see appendix 5). Each student read the story aloud

whilst I made notes on difficult areas and gave prompts where necessary. Every participant

was able to read the book with few difficulties and the majority clearly comprehended the

14


content of the story. There were problem areas, but these varied for each participant,

exemplifying the diversity of abilities within the A0 level classroom. The influence of rhyme

on phonological decoding was subtle but became more apparent in the more orthographically

opaque examples. Table 3 displays the results from each participant’s reading of the book.

A common problem area that was not anticipated was number symbols. A conscious decision

had been made to use number symbols (e.g. 1, 2, 3) instead of number words (e.g. one, two,

three), because they were assumed to be more accessible than opaque words, such as eight.

Even though the meaning of the symbol is clear, there are no phonological clues for the

phonetic realisation of the symbol. I decided to keep the number symbols in the final copy of

the book because they provided an opportunity to practise and improve grasp of numbers in

English. Also, the difficulties with these decreased as the students progressed through the

book, due the amount of repetition.

Difficulty with words that had opaque orthography, consonant clusters and/or digraphs was

an anticipated problem. Interestingly, only three words consistently caused problems for

participants; these were cries, irons and sighs. These were all orthographically opaque with

silent letters and consonant clusters. Cries and sighs not only stood out as problematic, but

also as examples where some participants used rhyme to overcome difficulties. Three of the

participants adjusted or corrected their reading of sighs to rhyme with cries, one of whom

adjusted to their incorrect decoding of cries, but this still shows development of phonological

decoding in spite of highly opaque orthography. Other participants showed use of rhyme by

self-correcting their reading or sore to rhyme with door or reading with a sense of rhythm.

Overall, this task gave positive and encouraging results, as the book succeeding in being

linguistically accessible and comprehensible. The illustrations proved important as a few

participants overtly referred to them to better understand the meaning of the text. Also, rhyme

did appear to positively affect the reading experience for the reader. It aided phonological

decoding in areas of difficulty, gave the text a sense of rhythm and in places participants

expressed overt enjoyment of the story.

15


Student Problem areas

Replacements Too Difficult

Drops ‘-s’

Reads letter by letter

Uses rhyme Enjoy story

General ability

1. AG starts, crisps

quick; nurse

boy(s); give(s)

‘cry’ [cri:] and ‘sigh’ [si:] rhyme; correctly guesses ‘sore’

2. MD Number symbols

irons No use rhyme to guide decoding;Corrects ‘sore’ to rhyme with ‘door’

Difficult start but competent and fluent

3. GA Number symbols; cries [cri:ɛs]

chips (crisps) uses; irons

Some rhymes picked up and used for decoding, but not all.

Competent and fluent, hardly any issues

4. EB Number symbols

baby (boy) cough ring(s) late, apples, more, irons, cries

Decoding of ‘sighs’ is not helped by ‘cries’

Quite competent, with some problem areas and mistakes

5. MB Reads with rhythm

Very competent and fluent, no problems.

6. MS irons-[i:]rons; sick; spotty

chips (crisps); cars (cries)

cream irons ‘Cry’ [craɪ] used to correctly decode ‘sigh’ [saɪ]; some self-correction, but mainly guessing

Quite competent and fluent, with some problem areas

7. XT cry [cri:] late; socks; sighs; rings; cream

give(s) sighs, worse Reads with a rhythm

yes Quite Competent and fluent, uses illustrations to clarify meaning

8. SP Number symbols; feels-f[ɛ]ls; cream-cr[ɛ]m

irons; spot; worse; sighs

Competent, medium fluency, uses illustrations

9. MK chew; Mrs.

Reads with rhythm; uses ‘Cry’ [craɪ] to correctly guess decoding of ‘Sigh’ [saɪ]

yes Competent and fluent, very few pauses

6. Discussion

16

Table 3: Book Reading Task Results


As mentioned in the hypothesis, I was expecting participants to demonstrate a high awareness

of rimes and a distinction between shallow and deep orthography. The results of the first task

could show this to be incorrect, as they indicate low rhyme awareness and a lack of

distinction between shallow and deep orthography. However, a more likely conclusion is that

lack of understanding of the task and an inappropriate data collection method is responsible

for the results.

The second task demonstrated that participants were able to read sentences involving rhyme

fluently and with little difficulty. The lack of difficulty when decoding words, and use of

rhyme to develop a rhythm, implies that the participants are more aware of rimes than the

first task would indicate. However, similarly to the previous results, little distinction is made

between rhyming words with deep and shallow orthography. A possible conclusion could be

that the rhyme is effective in aiding the decoding of opaque orthography, but it could also be

related to sight word repertoire. Another possible factor is that participants learnt from their

mistakes as they went through the reading tasks. This again could be a factor in lack of

consistent problems with opaque rhymes. To clarify this result, further testing is needed on

words with opaque orthography, without the influence of rhyme and repetition.

When discussing the tasks with the participants’ teachers, they predicted their students would

have a lot of trouble with the book and suggested I should work with the next higher level,

the A1 level group. Out of all the tasks, I found the students responded best to the book

reading and had very few problems regarding accessibility. Due to the teachers’ sceptiscm

towards the book, they may have given me students from the top of their A0 level class

instead of a selection that would represent the average level of ability. This could be a factor

in why there was a consistently high level of fluency and competence in the reading tasks.

An aspect of the reading tasks that proved particularly difficult was trying to test participants’

‘enjoyment’. Certain outward displays were noted, such as smiling after reading particular

sentences and comments made during the interview, demonstrating the participant had

engaged with the story. The fact that any of the participants overtly expressed enjoyment or

engagement with the text is a very positive outcome and could indicate that rhyme does

indeed improve content and encourage language play. However, this is far from a conclusive

finding and further investigation is needed.

Throughout the tasks, the participants demonstrated low oral ability but a relatively high level

of competence when reading. As mentioned in the literature review, any formal instruction in

17


an alphabetic script will result in increased phonemic awareness. Most of the participants

were literate in their L1’s (all of which use an alphabetic system, except Mandarin) meaning

their phonemic awareness was likely to be well developed and they were comfortable with

text and reading tasks. To further develop this study and see if rhyme could be used to bridge

the gap between pre-literate and illiterate phonological awareness L1 low-literate adults

would be needed.

7. Conclusion

The first aim of this study was to find out how aware A0 level learners were of rimes in

written English. The results from the first task proved inconclusive, but across the other two

tasks participants did show an awareness of rhyme. This was demonstrated by self-correcting

and correctly guessing opaque words in rhyming couplets and sentences, reading with rhythm

and expressing enjoyment after certain rhyming combinations. The next aim was to find out

whether rhyme helps participants to decoding English orthography. The level of consistent

fluency and competence in both reading tasks, irrespective of shallow or deep orthography,

indicates that rhyme does prove effective. Also, the evidence of participants’ correctly

guessing opaque words in rhyming couplets that they had previously decoded incorrectly

showed that rhyme helps overcome problems with English orthography.

The third and final aim was to find out whether rhyme was an effective device in ESOL A0

level fiction writing, not only encouraging students’ phonological awareness but also reading

for pleasure. There were instances in both reading task where participants expressed

enjoyment of the text, demonstrating the use of rhyme in encouraging language play. Also,

the response to the book was very positive overall, with some participants overtly engaging

with the text, not just as a reading exercise but as a story. These results show that rhyme is

accessible and effective in making a text or story more engaging for low level learners.

Overall, the findings of this study indicate that rhyme aids decoding of opaque words in

English, in a way that is accessible to A0 learners. The results also show that rhyme makes

text more engaging for this level learner by introducing rhythm and an element of language

play. Therefore, rhyme can be used to ease the tension between content and accessibility in

fiction books aimed at ESOL A0 level learners. However, there are areas of this study which

need to be investigated further, before these findings can be considered fully conclusive.

18


Bibliography

Brock, A. & C. Rankin, 2008. Communication, Language and Literacy from Birth to Five.

London: SAGE Ltd.

Burt, J. & P. Butterworth. 1996. ‘Spelling in Adults: Orthographic transparency, learning new

letter strings and reading accuracy’. The European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 8 (1): 3-

44.

Burt, J. & P. Blackwell. 2008. ‘Sound-spelling consistency in adults’ orthographic learning’.

Journal of Research Reading 31 (1): 77-96.

Cardoso-Martins, C. 1995. ‘Sensitivity to rhymes, syllables, and phonemes in literacy

acquisition in Portuguese’. Reading Research Quarterly 30 (4): 808-828.

Cook, G. 1997. ‘Language Play, Language Learning’. ELT Journal 51 (3): 224-231.

Delpit, L. 1991. ‘Interview with William H. Teale, editor of Language Arts’. Language Arts

68: 541-547.

Elbro, C., & B. Pallesen. 2002. ‘The quality of phonological representations and phonological

awareness: a causal link?’ in L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro & P. Reitsma (eds) Precursors of

Functional Literacy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Geudens, A. & D. Sandra. 2002. ‘The role of orthographic onset-rime units in Dutch

beginning readers’ in L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro & P. Reitsma (eds) Precursors of Functional

Literacy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Goswami U. & P. Bryant. 1990. Phonological Skills and Learning to Read. New Jersey:

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Hill, D. 2001. ‘Survey: Graded Readers’. ELT Journal 55 (3): 300-24.

19


Katz, L. & R.Frost. 1992. ‘The reading process is different for different orthographies: the

orthographic depth hypothesis’ in R. Frost & L. Katz (eds) Orthography, Phonology,

Morphology, and Meaning. Amsterdam: Elsevier North Holland Press: 67-84.

Kirtley, C., P. Bryant, M. MacLean & L. Bradley. 1989. ‘Rhyme, rime and the onset of

reading’. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 48: 224-245.

Krashen, S. 1989. ‘We Acquire Vocabulary and Spelling by Reading: Additional Evidence

for the Input Hypothesis’. The Modern Language Journal 73 (4): 440-460.

Kurvers, J., R. van Hout & T. Vallen. 2006. ‘Discovering features of language: metalinguistic

awareness of adult literates’ in I. van de Craats, J. Kurvers & M. Young-Scholten (eds) Low-

Educated Adult Second Language and Literacy Acquisition. Netherlands: 70 -88.

Linse, C. 2007. ‘Predictable books in the children’s EFL classroom’. ELT Journal 61 (1): 46-

54.

Loureiro, C., L. Braga, L. Souza, G. Filho, E. Queiroz & G. Dellatolas. 2004. ‘Degree of

illiteracy and phonological and meta-phonological skills in unschooled adults’. Brain and

Language 89 (3): 499-502.

McKie, M. 1997. ‘The origins and early development of rhyme in English verse’. The

Modern Language Review 92 (4): 871-831.

Morais, J., L. Cary, J. Alegria & P. Bertlson. 1979. ‘Does awareness of speech as a sequence

of phones arise spontaneously?’ Cognition 7: 323-331

Pacton, S., M. Fayol & P. Perruchet. 2002. ‘The acquisition of untaught orthographic

regularities in French’ in L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro & P. Reitsma (eds) Precursors of

Functional Literacy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Rodrigo, V., D. Greenberg, V. Burke, R. Hall, A. Berry, T. Brink, H. Joseph & M. Oby.

2007. ‘Implementing an extensive reading program and library for adult literacy learners’.

Reading in a Foreign Language 19 (2): 106-119.

20


Sedgwick, F. 2010. Inspiring Children to Read and Write for Pleasure: Using literature to

inspire literacy learning for 8-12. London: Routledge.

Shepperd, L. 2011. Phonological Awareness and Text Simplification in Fiction Books Aimed

at Low-Literate Immigrant Adults. Attached to SEL 3012: Low Educated Language and

Literacy Acquisition. Newcastle University.

Treiman, R., J. Mullennix, R. Bijeljac-Babic & E. Richmond-Welty. 1995. ‘The special role

of rimes in the description, use, and acquisition of English orthography’. Journal of

Experimental Psychology: General 124 (2): 107-136.

Vainikka, A. & M. Young-Scholten. 2005. ‘The roots of syntax and how they grow: Organic

Grammar, the Basic Variety and Processability Theory’. Language Acquisition and Language

Disorders 39: 77-106

Verhoeven, L., C. Elbro & P. Reitsma. 2002. ‘Functional literacy in a developmental

perspective’ in L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro & P. Reitsma (eds) Precursors of Functional Literacy.

Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Yoon, H., D. Bolger, O. Kwon & C. Perfetti. 2002. ‘Subsyllabic units in reading: A

difference between Korean and English’ in L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro & P. Reitsma (eds)

Precursors of Functional Literacy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Young-Scholten, M. & C. Ijuin. 2006. ‘How can we better measure adult ESL student

progress?’ AEIS Newsletter 4: 2.

Young-Scholten, M. & N. Strom. 2006. First-time adult L2 readers: Is there a critical

period? In I. van de Craats, J. Kurvers, & M. Young-Scholten (Eds.) Low-educated

adult second language and literacy acquisition Utrecht: LOT: 45-68

21


Young-Scholten, M & D. Maguire. 2008. ‘Stories for extensive reading for LESLLA

learners’ in I. van de Craats & J. Kurvers (eds) Low-Educated Second Language and Literacy

Acquisition: Proceedings of the 4th Symposium. Utrecht: LOT.

22

Date post:	30-Jan-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	buikhue
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times

Is There Reason in the Rhyme? - Web viewIs There Reason in the Rhyme? ... (Krashen 1989),...

Documents