The Curious Case of the Initial Teaching Alphabet: When Childhood Literacy Tools Backfire
Growing up in the 1960s and 70s, many children in English-speaking countries encountered an unconventional approach to learning how to read and write: the Initial Teaching Alphabet (ITA). Designed to simplify early literacy, this system used 44 phonetic symbols instead of traditional English letters to help kids grasp sounds more intuitively. Decades later, however, some adults who learned ITA as children report an unexpected side effect: persistent struggles with spelling in standard English. What happened? Let’s unpack the legacy of this educational experiment and its lingering impact on spelling skills.
What Was the Initial Teaching Alphabet?
The ITA, developed by British linguist Sir James Pitman in 1961, aimed to bridge the gap between English spelling and pronunciation. Unlike traditional orthography, ITA assigned a unique symbol to each of the 44 sounds in spoken English. For example, the word night would be written as “niet” in ITA, reflecting its pronunciation. The logic was straightforward: by removing the irregularities of English spelling, children could focus on decoding words without confusion.
Proponents argued that ITA acted as training wheels for literacy. Once students mastered reading with the simplified system, they’d transition seamlessly to standard spelling. Schools in the UK, Australia, and parts of the U.S. adopted ITA enthusiastically, viewing it as a revolutionary tool to combat low literacy rates.
The Promise vs. The Reality
Initially, ITA seemed to deliver results. Studies from the era showed that children using the system could read earlier and more fluently than peers taught with traditional methods. The phonetic consistency eliminated guesswork—no more memorizing exceptions like through vs. tough. Parents and teachers celebrated stories of five-year-olds effortlessly reading complex words.
But cracks soon appeared in the system. The transition to standard English spelling, usually introduced in second or third grade, proved far trickier than anticipated. Students weren’t just learning new letters; they had to unlearn a system they’d internalized. Imagine being told overnight that the symbols you’d relied on for years were now “wrong.” For many, this shift caused frustration and cognitive dissonance.
Why Spelling Struggles Persist
Adults who learned ITA often describe a disconnect between how they think words should be spelled and how they’re actually written. Common issues include:
– Over-phoneticization: Writing kof instead of cough or wimmin instead of women.
– Inconsistent “Rule” Application: Applying ITA logic to standard English (e.g., using a single symbol for the “sh” sound, leading to errors like sutip for soup).
– Memory Gaps: Missing silent letters (dout for doubt) or conflating homophones (their vs. there).
Neurologically, this makes sense. Childhood learning creates deep neural pathways. When a child spends formative years associating sounds with non-standard symbols, the brain doesn’t easily overwrite those connections later. As one Reddit user put it: “ITA taught me to spell how words sound. Now I have to un-sound everything I write.”
The Debate: Was ITA Fundamentally Flawed?
Critics argue that ITA’s downfall lay in underestimating English’s complexity. While languages like Italian or Spanish have consistent spelling rules, English is a hybrid of Germanic, Latin, and French influences. By avoiding irregular spellings early on, ITA delayed exposure to the messiness learners must eventually navigate.
Dr. Diane McGuinness, a literacy expert, notes: “ITA solved a short-term problem but ignored the long-term goal. Literacy isn’t just decoding sounds—it’s understanding the history and patterns behind words.” For instance, knowing that sign relates to signature (via Latin signum) helps explain the silent g. ITA bypassed such nuances.
Coping Strategies for Former ITA Users
If you’re among those grappling with ITA’s legacy, don’t despair. The brain remains adaptable, and targeted practice can rewire spelling habits:
1. Embrace Etymology: Study word origins. Recognizing roots (Greek, Latin, Old English) clarifies why psychology starts with a silent p.
2. Visual Drills: Flashcards, word puzzles, and apps like Anki strengthen visual memory of standard spellings.
3. Mnemonic Devices: Create associations (e.g., “necessary has one c and two s’s—like a shirt with one collar and two sleeves”).
4. Proofreading Tools: Use grammar checkers mindfully—don’t just fix errors, but analyze why they occurred.
A Silver Lining?
Interestingly, some ITA alumni credit the system with fostering a love of reading despite its drawbacks. The joy of decoding stories without early frustration, they argue, outweighed later spelling hurdles. Others appreciate their heightened awareness of phonetics, which aids in learning foreign languages or tutoring struggling readers.
The ITA saga underscores a broader lesson in education: well-intentioned innovations can have unintended consequences. Yet, it also highlights our capacity to adapt. As one former ITA learner remarked: “I might need extra time to spell restaurant, but I’ll never stop devouring books.”
So, to anyone still wrestling with the ghosts of ITA: you’re not alone. Your spelling challenges aren’t a reflection of intelligence—they’re a quirk of an ambitious teaching experiment. With patience and the right strategies, standard English can become second nature. After all, language is a lifelong journey, not a race.
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » The Curious Case of the Initial Teaching Alphabet: When Childhood Literacy Tools Backfire