Teacher Talk: Rethinking "Letter of the Week"

As I sat down to plan the curriculum for my first year of teaching preschool, I just assumed that I would be introducing or focusing on only one alphabet letter at a time. When I taught Kindergarten in a public school, the literacy program that I was provided with isolated 1-2 letters each week, so I was already very familiar with using that approach.  I also knew that many preschool programs use a "Letter of the Week" curriculum, planning most of their activities and themes around one letter and its sounds, so there would be a lot of  resources out there to draw upon.

But then I changed my mind.

I had some concerns about how long it takes to cover the whole alphabet and how that sequence doesn't consider the individual needs or abilities of the students. I also thought about how our class time in preschool is so short that spending a large portion on only one letter really limits the amount of time spent on other integrated concepts.

So I decided to do some additional research in order to evaluate this approach.

As I researched, I found that many of my concerns about this approach were valid. For example: 

• Students who may be struggling with alphabet knowledge and pre-reading skills may find this approach to be too fast and too abstract for their readiness, while other students will be held back by the slow pace. 
• If focusing on one letter takes up the majority of your literacy instruction time, then it neglects other crucial aspects of learning to read such as phonological awareness, concepts of print, and writing.
• Treating each letter as equal does not account for variations in difficulty and usage in print.

But the most striking point is that learning letters in isolation disconnects them from a meaningful context, and that "meaning, not sounds or letters, drives children's earliest experiences with print" (Neuman & Roskos, 2008). 

This makes a lot of sense to me, because it is in line with how young children learn in general. Yes, there is a level of learning that can take place through memorization and drilling a concept in isolation. But learning is more engaging and lasting for students when they are able to make connections to the things that they are learning- when it is meaningful to them. And that is what reading is all about- making meaning from the text. 

So, my next question was then how do I teach the alphabet in a meaningful way? I realized that many of my current practices were already integrating alphabet knowledge. I also found resources from other preschool teachers who are striving to create a more meaningful approach to literacy instruction, such as this one. Many of the articles I examined also contained information on more effective and developmentally-appropriate strategies. In my next Teacher Talk post, I will write about the strategies I am implementing in my classroom to encourage alphabet knowledge within a meaningful context. 

References:

Bell, Donna, & Jarvis, Donna. (2002). Letting Go of "Letter of the Week." Primary Voices K-6, 11:2, 10-24.

Elliott, Elizabeth M., & Olliff, Charleen B. (2008). Developmentally Appropriate Emergent Literacy Activities for Young Children: Adapting the Early Literacy and Learning Model. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35, 551-556.

Fischer, Bobbi. (1996). Moving Beyond "Letter of the Week." Teaching PreK-8, 26:4, 74-76. 

Jones, Cindy D., Clark, Sarah K., & Reutzel, D. Ray. (2012). Enhancing Alphabet Instruction: Research Implications and Practical Strategies for Early Childhood Educators. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41, 81-89.

Neuman, Susan B., & Roskos, Kathleen. (July 2005). Whatever Happened to Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Literacy? Young Children on the Web, 1-6.