Report from Mirge English Teachers' Reading Training

1 – Day Skills and Awareness Training, Mirge, 6 Poush 2072 (January 2016)

Conducted at KHSS

Attendees:

Tirtha Tamang – MLSS
Nabaraj Dhungel – Keli Devi LSS
Rajina Sharma – KHSS
Prakash Chaudhari – Lai Gurans
Sunita Tamang – Lai Gurans
Sobha Dahal – Balkalyn PS
Shiva Prasadhal – Jana Shwaman PS
Suresh Tamang Lama – KHSS and co-trainer

Apologies: Punya Dahal

Absent: Dolma Tamang, Druba Lama

Shobha leading a phoneme drill

In this training program, I tried a slightly different approach than previous sessions and as a result it would seem from feedback that participants gained a better understanding.
Previously, I had trained teachers mainly in the methodology, along with understanding the principles, of THRASS and phonics – a bottom up approach. This time I took the top down view. This meant that THRASS was placed into the context of reading comprehension as the main goal and in particular critical thinking skills. Drawing from ‘Logic of English – Critical Thinking Skills for Reading, Spelling and Literacy – Teacher in-Service’ – You Tube 7 April 2017 presentation, the training was framed in three (3) steps – Phonemic Awareness, Systematic Phonics (phoneme/grapheme relationship and spelling) and Reading Comprehension (comprehension, fluency and vocabulary). At each stage of explanation and demonstration, links were drawn to THRASS processes.

Initially, I found it quite easy explaining phonemes without reference to any written words and only using commonly known words. We agreed on an instructional term for this process – ‘glue and unglue’ or blend /synthesize and separate/analyze. When practicing this awareness, reference was made to THRASS words and then any word displayed on a classroom chart, the teachers making an immediate connection. This practice activity included trainer saying the phonemes with the teachers blending the sounds into a word and visa versa. Using basic meta-language like ‘read this word, sound out the phonemes in this word’ made the process of phonetic reading more clear when explicitly compared to the Nepalese approach of spelling out the word and remembering the pronunciation by learning it through rote with the teacher. This ‘ungluing and gluing’ phonic activity script was easy for the teachers to manage and an excellent way to improve phonemic listening.

However, in terms of teaching there are still two main teaching issues not quite resolved – teacher phonemic competency and feedback skills. There is no easy solution to teacher competency, yet their ability to sound out the word correctly is essential for student learning. If the teachers do not make use of the resources I have provided to improve pronunciation and their own awareness of each sound in a word, then little learning will occur for the students. Of course this is directly linked to effective correction as students learn new words. Teachers are not accustomed to providing immediate feedback to students, yet without correction as part of the process, then again students’ learning will be compromised. Here lies a conundrum in introducing phonics to Nepalese schools, especially rural government schools – teachers must improve their personal English skills otherwise students will not be able to learn.

Quite a bit of time was spent on this stage as each reading of a variety of words was associated to the THRASS picture chart. Teachers practiced gluing and ungluing words phonetically whilst I explicitly related phonemes to THRASS words using the “as in ….” script to demonstrate correct pronunciation and identification of phoneme to grapheme relationship. Teachers were quite awkward with the script but still tried hard whilst being supported by each other’s advice and encouragement. Clearly they will require a lot of personal practice to build confidence and competent fluency facilitating phonemic awareness activities, thus we focused on deciding upon an easy to use script.

Due to most teachers having very elementary English skills, the use of Nepali to give instructions was encouraged, especially with the lower classes where student focus is on speech sounds to begin with.

Following on, the link between the picture chart and the grapheme (spelling choice) chart was made emphasizing that the eventual goal is for the students to be able to remember the sounds and key words that are associated with each spelling choice. Physically linking the charts during ‘drilling’ activities was demonstrated and practiced later in the day using the Raps and Sequence CD.

As the first stage of the training dealt with phonemic awareness and how the THRASS charts supports developing a memory of the sounds and the associated pictures and key words for future decoding, the next stage addressed the application of this knowledge and awareness to actually reading a text. The beginner text, ‘Where’s Woolly?’, was used to demonstrate decoding phonetically and associating pronunciation to the charts and key words.

To conclude the THRASS component explanation of NPS (non-phonetic spelling) and GCA (Grapheme Catch All) and Diphones were given and teachers were shown how to integrate these into a reading lesson along with the chart references and additional resources, like the Spelling Choices Book.

The final part of the day was spent explaining and demonstrating Bloom’s six levels of critical thinking questioning that could be easily integrated into any reading of a curriculum text. The teachers practiced writing questions making reference to the guidelines set out on the CT table resources based on Power Point by Ruth Sunda, and a descriptive chart by S Beussink. Despite having limited time to workshop CT, the aim of this session was to path the way for a future training. In one year, if the teachers achieve the desired results with THRASS, then more work in CT could be scheduled.

The training concluded after setting a goal for 2016. The teachers were asked to successfully teach the charts – teach phonemes, keywords and pictures and location / association of sounds and words – to all students in classes 1 – 4. If possible also teach the grapheme chart too. The measure of their success will be the majority of students, if not all, would in one year be able to say from memory all the speech sounds correctly whilst locating them on the chart and associate each with a grapheme and key word. At the same time teachers were encouraged to begin using phonetic reading with the students and abandon spelling out the words. In other words commence teaching the students to say the words phonetically when reading and explicitly teach pronunciation and improve memory by relating to the charts.

Report on Student Assessments and School Visits

Jana Shramadan PS is set up with new charts in the new English Room 

Class 1 at Kali Devi LSS accepting new books

Overall, the results were quite mixed, even though being expected. Given that THRASS was introduced two years ago and at Majhgaun two years earlier, it was clear that most teachers had not followed the curriculum set out last year. However, school by school the results varied a little. Sample class 2 and 3 students from Jana Shramadan PS could not identify any phoneme nor any keyword on the picture chart, also they were not able to read ‘Where’s Woolly?’ independently; at Majhgaun LSS class 2 – 3 could read most keywords but could not identify any phonemes, the class 4 and 5 students could read all the keywords but no phonemes, no student could decode words phonetically, relying instead on the traditional spelling and memory from rote learning. In contrast, at Balkalyan PS all class 1 – 3 students could read all the THRASS words and identify the consonant grapheme/phoneme but had trouble with the vowels. Phoneme / Grapheme links were successfully made for consonants on the blue chart.  When the students read ‘Where’s Woolly?’, they decoded unknown words phonetically and could read the text semi-independently. WELL DONE SHOBHA! Likewise, at Yarsa PS, many selected students could identify phonemes, words and decode phonetically at a beginner level – WELL DONE KARNA! I did not test Lari Gurans English Boarding School, Kalidhunga HSS nor Kali Devi LSS.

Clearly, the earthquake had an effect on learning, but this would not explain the variation in results as all schools were affected in the same way except for Kalidhunga HSS. There are possibly many reasons for poor results such as MLSS had not returned the charts to the wall nor designated an English classroom but in the end, the blame or success has to be placed at the feet of the teachers’ motivation to use THRASS. In fact, this will always be the case, if the teachers do not put in the work, the results will not come.  Post-earthquake destruction, all schools are now in a position to re-establish an English Room and launch into THRASS and reading. All schools, except Yarsa, have new buildings either completed or on the way to completion and even Yarsa has sturdy temporary rooms that will be suitable until their new classrooms can be built. So there are no barriers to stop progress with improving phonetic literacy over the next year.

New classrooms at Kalidhunga HSS

Recommendations

From this point on, any further support to any particular school will depend on outcomes – the set goals must be reached. That is, in one year all class 1 - 4 students must be able to locate and say each phoneme on the chart, read phonetically each THRASS keyword and associate phonemes to graphemes and keywords. If this cannot be achieved then I will cease any further work with that school.

If, on the other hand, schools do meet the benchmark, then I shall progress with further literacy training in the form of helping schools develop a reading program and facilitate further skills in Critical Thinking Skills built into reading comprehension. The overall aim is to improve comprehension reading skills as well as pronunciation in English Classes that can be transferred to other areas of study delivered in English Medium.

In the meantime, Phulkaji will continue to facilitate monthly English teacher meetings that serve the purpose of supporting phonemic and teaching skill development. Also, he will monitor teacher usage of THRASS on a weekly basis. In other words, he will do as much as possible to encourage teachers to implement THRASS methodology.

Next assessment and review will be in January 2017.