invented spelling demonstrate partial and very limited knowledge of letter/sound relationships. Is this limited knowledge (such as “k sound is spelt k” – without the additional understanding of when to write it as c) being picked up naturally by assimilation or as someone put it, by osmosis; or is it being taught? Either way it is clear that the basic tools for handling letter/sound relationships are being drastically neglected. It is also apparent that this neglect is due largely to the fact that many younger teachers have not been satisfactorily trained for teaching literacy and are therefore unaware of how to pass on such information to their students.
Take the closed/KD case for instance – when a child learns about the letter C, what would be so difficult about teaching that C is always used at the beginning of a word unless the following sound/letter is that of i or e? Yes – that would necessitate learning to distinguish the vowel sounds. But, surely, the teaching of that vital skill should be one of the first aims of every reading, writing and spelling teachers, seeing that upon this knowledge depends the spelling of all words derived from Anglo-Saxon. These words are the more common basic words of our language and they comprise about one fifth of total vocabulary used by adults today and over 50% of the vocabulary used by young children. A handful of rules, such as that for C and K, explains their spelling forms.
This is one good reason why invented spelling is unnecessary – but more than that – its very use contradicts the philosophy that backs it! Invented spelling is a product of the so-called “analytical approach”, exemplified in pseudo-scientifically named word recognition methods. These methods work on the assumption