Well, much of "Balanced Literacy" is based on the assumption we are not rule appliers, but pattern makers. Following this assumption is we do not put letter and letter together (decoding) but construct patterns - onsets and rhymes (beginning and endings).
If we follow this logic and take the sentence, “Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy" and assume they are distinct words with meaning instead of "misspellings" it is very similar to what early readers go through.
The better readers look for patterns - onsets and rimes, beginning and ending sounds, blends etc. There is also an activity called "Guess my Word' that aims at facilitating strategies to look for patterns.
It would look like, ________ to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy. There are 3 types of miscues this activity focuses on visual - length of word or how it looks visually, meaning - we all know what that is, and structural - bushspeak or language structure.
Well, "according" had 9 letters, so the visual cue would be rather strong. If we took letters out but kept the beginning and ending sounds would it have the same effect.
"Acdng to a rsch at Cmbrg Unvrst"
At least for me, the visual cue would be pretty strong. I'd look more closely at the word and try to put the word into patterns - similar to reading those dinosaur names.
"Cunningham, Donald James" <cunningh@indiana.edu> wrote:
Has anyone ever come across the actual research on this?
“Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer
in what oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is
that the first and last ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be
a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. This is
bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the
wrod as a wlohe.”
Don Cunningham
Indiana University
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 01 2003 - 01:00:07 PDT