Is one better than the other?  

“Speech to print” and “print to speech” are two methods for achieving the same thing: rewiring students’ brains through the practice of direct literacy instruction, profoundly altering their relationship with the written word, and, thereby, changing their lives. Both approaches achieve this vital purpose. Both research and our own work at Redwood demonstrate this: we have print-to-speech instructors and we have speech-to-print instructors, and our students are learning to read, learning to spell, and growing in confidence across the board.

The Appeal of Comparison in Education

When we hear of two different ways of doing something, our brains like to pit the approaches against each other, crowning one as the finest and assuming the other to be a little inferior. This happens a lot in education, and it’s not super helpful. My goal here is simply to introduce some clarity by describing both approaches – how they’re unique and how they’re similar. Will the struggling reader in your life benefit more from one than the other? Likely so, but not because one approach is superior. The best mode of instruction is the one that works, and no single method will be successful for every student. One size does not fit all.

What does “Print to Speech” mean?

“Print to speech” refers to the Orton-Gillingham method that began in the 1920s. There are many literacy programs based on this model. At Redwood, we use the Wilson Reading System®, a multisensory step-based approach that moves students through concepts with an emphasis on mastery. In Step 3, for instance, students will learn to decode (read) and encode (spell) a variety of two-syllable words – but first, in Step 1, they’ll work on simple words with three sounds (nut, map, wish), and then in Step 2 the instructor will introduce words with “welded sounds” (wing, sink, long) and two-letter consonant blends (still, drop, went). Students must master Book 1 concepts before moving on to Step 2, and won’t practice those longer Step 3 words until they’ve demonstrated proficiency with two-letter blends.

Emphasis on mastery

This emphasis on mastery is a trademark of the print-to-speech method. It means students are only learning one new concept at a time (with frequent review of previously taught concepts), working with that type of word until it’s comfortable. This narrow focus on individual concepts is attractive because it gives students a lot of practice with one type of word before moving on to another type of word, but it also means it may take a while for a student to be exposed to new material, like long vowel sounds in Steps 4 and 5 (gave, bite, moment) and the suffixes in Step 6 (factor, careful, kindness).

Focus on syllables

The print-to-speech model teaches students to divide words into syllables, and then identify the syllable types. Certain syllable types have certain rules – and exceptions to those rules. (“Vital” is divided into the syllables vi-tal, and the i makes its long sound because vi is an open syllable. However, the a in a-dult is also an open syllable, but it’s an “open syllable exception” because the a doesn’t make its long sound.) In a print-to-speech lesson, an instructor points to the letter b and asks, “What does this letter say?” Students respond by naming the letter and the keyword, then saying the sound it makes: “b – bat – /b/.” The beginning of the lesson focuses on drilling individual sounds like this. Next, students read individual words and sentences that highlight the concept they’re currently learning, often segmenting the word into its individual sounds before reading the whole word: “/f/ /r/ /e/ /sh/, fresh.”

Lesson Organization

The lesson is organized into two distinct blocks: a reading block and a spelling block. In the spelling block, teachers dictate sounds, words, phrases, and sentences for the students to write. In both the reading and the spelling block, there’s an emphasis on “high frequency words” or “sight words” – the difficult words that diverge from learned concepts because they don’t sound the way they look: of, would, where. Instructors provide ample practice for students to ensure that these words become very familiar. This is achieved through a process in the brain called orthographic mapping.

Orthographic Mapping

Orthographic mapping is the process that occurs in the brain that cements the spelling of a word with its pronunciation for automatic retrieval. Students repeatedly write and say aloud each sound in the word, noting which spelling pattern is unexpected: w - oul - d. At the end of the lesson, the instructor focuses on fluency and comprehension as students read longer passages that contain the current concepts.

“Print to Speech” Summary

To summarize, these are the features that are unique to the print-to-speech approach:

• Instruction starts with learning letters and their associated sounds, matching the letters to the sound
• Students progress through concepts one at a time, advancing once mastery is achieved
• Sounds can be spelled several different ways (/ae/ in clay, take, great, rain, eight) – each way is taught one at a time
• There’s an emphasis on syllable types, rules, and exceptions to the rules
• Irregular words are taught with repeated practice analyzing, reading, and spelling the words, with a heightened focus on the irregular components

How is “Speech to Print” different?

Like print-to-speech, there are many different speech-to-print approaches. At Redwood we use SPELL-Links™. While younger than Orton-Gillingham, speech-to-print programs have been in use for 20+ years. This method of instruction taps into the brain’s innate capacity for oral language by emphasizing sounds. Students are directed to say the sound a letter makes, not the letter's name. While a print-to-speech instructor asks, “What digraph says /ch/? What letters say the welded sound /unk/? What letter says /i/?” the speech-to-print instructor begins with prompts such as, "We are learning about the /ae/ sound," focusing on the sound rather than any letter's name. Throughout that day’s work, students will be exposed to the different ways the /ae/ sound is spelled: they may encounter “clay,” “take,” “great,” “rain,” and “eight” within the same lesson because these words share a sound, though the spelling of that sound varies.

Flex the vowel

Rather than being taught to remember and apply a spelling rule, students are instructed to "flex the vowel" when they come to challenging vowel sounds they are unsure of. They are taught to try the most common pronunciation of the vowel(s) first. If this does not yield the correct word, they learn to flex a vowel sound, for example from a short vowel e sound to a long vowel e sound, to test and see if flexibility in applying various common vowel sounds yields the correct word. (In contrast, a print-to-speech instructor wouldn’t teach rain/pain/train until the students have mastered take/bake/lake.) A speech-to-print instructor also won’t use a term like “welded sound.”

Pacing

The speech-to-print approach uses a variety of teaching methods that can facilitate faster progress in spelling and reading skills. This includes, for example, less time spent memorizing and marking words for letter patterns and more time spent engaging in the spelling and reading of meaningful words and learning different problem-solving strategies to use when they don’t know how to read or spell a word. Students will be exposed to new sounds and spellings before they’ve perfected the ones they have already been exposed to. As a result, the pace tends to be faster, with more sounds and spellings covered in less time.

Four key concepts

Students are taught four key concepts: first, the individual sounds they hear in the words they say are represented by symbols (letters). Second, sounds can be spelled with one, two, three, or four letters. Third, there are various ways a sound can be spelled. Fourth, one spelling often represents multiple sounds. There are no flashcards or auditory sound/symbol drills, which are common in print-to-speech lessons. In speech-to-print, there is more focus on procedural learning through doing.

Reading & Spelling INtegration

While print-to-speech focuses on reading and spelling during different parts of the lesson, a speech-to-print lesson will fully integrate both reading and spelling throughout the lesson to leverage the two-way benefit each has on the other and will begin with spelling to leverage the greater benefit that spelling has on reading than reading has on spelling. Unlike print-to-speech, students in a speech-to-print class are not required to articulate memorized spelling rules when reading and spelling – the theory being that learning to read and spell requires internalization of multiple processes when reading and writing words.

Continuous Blending

While a print-to-speech sound encourages students to “tap” and segment sounds as a decoding strategy, a speech-to-print approach more often employs a strategy called “continuous blending.” Using the continuous blending strategy, students are told to say each sound in a word and hold onto that sound until they pronounce the next sound. This smooth blending of sounds can assist students who struggle with recalling what an initial sound is in a word by the time they reach the end of the word. To see what these blending strategies look and sound like, check out this quick video.

“Speech to Print” Summary

In summary, here’s what’s unique about the speech-to-print approach:

• Sound is the principle focus because the brain is innately wired for oral language, not for interpreting text on a page
• Several different ways of spelling a sound are taught within the same lesson
• Sounds and letters of a word are always connected with word meaning
• With the multiple methods of instruction used in a speech-to-print approach pace of progress tends to be faster
• Spelling and reading are intertwined

What do they have in common?

Despite their differences, these two approaches do share significant commonalities. Both are explicit, systematic, and sequential, teaching both encoding and decoding. They both have a strong research base, are aligned with the science of reading, and can be utilized in Tier 1, 2, and 3 instruction. Though they do it in different ways, they both integrate listening, speaking, reading, and writing. While speech-to-print and print-to-speech approaches have distinct starting points and methods, they share fundamental principles and can complement each other in comprehensive literacy instruction.

Both approaches are equally dependent on the determination of the student and the empathy, compassion, and consistency of the instructor. If the instructor uses a speech-to-print approach with fidelity, students will make progress; if the instructor uses a print-to-speech approach with fidelity, students will make progress.

Seriously, though, which one is better?

The literacy world has a reputation for contention and squabbling. The “reading wars,” a pedagogical battle between the science of reading and balanced literacy, have carried on for over 50 years. Let’s be careful not to continue this narrative, but instead work together, connect in conversation, and join forces in win-win collaborations. Let’s be wary of saying one method is better than another, especially when evidence is still preliminary.

Here’s a “better than” statement I can confidently make: becoming deeply aware of two (or three? Or four?) methods of instruction is better than knowing only one, better than digging in our heels within our chosen camp and limiting our ability to provide needed remediation for a broader, more diverse group of learners. As long as both instructional approaches are proven to be effective, both should be implemented. If we declare one method better than the other, we imply that there is only one type of struggling reader, and that’s not the truth.

Redwood’s PRogramming

In Redwood’s programming, we’re seeing a huge benefit in adding a tool – speech to print – to our toolbelt. When students are stagnant within a primarily print-to-speech approach, we have the ability now to try something really different that’s still aligned with best practices. We’ve seen kids skyrocket using a speech-to-print approach when it’s implemented with fidelity, creativity, and flexibility. We’ve also seen students get completely overwhelmed by a speech-to-print approach and thrive with the more explicit parameters of a print-to-speech method.

We can create a system where every child has access to evidence-based, fruitful literacy instruction for however long they need it. Effective instruction will involve a mix of things. Let’s embrace the mix of things.

Learn more about our virtual print-to-speech and speech-to-print options.

Learn more about our in-person print-to-speech and speech-to-print options.

Learn more about our summer print-to-speech and speech-to-print options.