Why Are Good Spellers Struggling?

Rethinking the Pace of Phonics

The day my good speller wrote "s-ch"

My son is a good speller. He always has been. He loves language, and loves reading. So when he wrote stomach as "schomic" recently, I stopped and looked again.

It wasn't a careless error. When I asked him to talk me through it, I realised what was happening. He was so worried about choosing the "right" letters for each sound that he had stopped actually sounding out the word. He was hunting through a mental list of letter-sound options instead of listening to the word and drawing on what he already knew.

And he isn't alone.

As I visit classrooms around NSW and Australia, I'm seeing students second-guess words that should be written without hesitation or confusion. In this post I want to unpack why I think that's happening, and what we can do about it.

What the data actually tells us

The national picture is more nuanced than the headlines suggest. NAPLAN primary spelling results have been broadly stable, and in NSW some cohorts have shown growth between Year 3 and Year 5.

But look a little closer and a pattern emerges that matches what many teachers see every day:

• Students know the code but don't always apply it. Dr Tessa Daffern's analysis of 2,436 NSW Year 1 and 2 students found that strong spellers of one-syllable words made notably more errors in the middle of two-syllable words, such as monster and hundred. Many of these errors were missed or swapped sounds.

• The gap persists into upper primary. Students in Years 3 to 6 spelled sounds in short words with high accuracy, but accuracy dropped sharply in the medial parts of longer words. Daffern links this to increased demand on phonological working memory.

• Students are leaving primary without mastery. Students performing at the average were finishing primary school without having mastered the phonological, orthographic and morphological components of spelling. This is causing big issues for our secondary teachers, who are now required to adopt primary teaching curriculum to try and catch students up.

• The secondary drop is consistent. Across every state and territory, the proportion of students meeting the minimum spelling benchmark fell between Year 7 and Year 9.

In other words, the problem isn't simply that students don't know their letter-sound combinations. It's that knowledge isn't becoming secure, automatic and transferable. That is exactly what happened with stomach.

Quantity over quality: the box-ticking problem

The shift to explicit, systematic synthetic phonics has been a positive one. I want to be clear about that. The problem I'm seeing isn't the approach. It's the pace.

When the new curriculum in NSW was introduced, I, like many, realised how tightly packed it was. The scope and sequence outlined a new grapheme or spelling pattern every day or two, a weekly spelling check, then on to the next unit - regardless of the whether students had mastered that grapheme or spelling pattern. On paper, it appears that the content has been "covered". But in reality, coverage and learning are not the same thing.

When the timetable drives the pace, a few things happen:

• Review gets squeezed out to make room for new content

• Students meet a pattern, practise it briefly, and move on before it's secure

• Weekly tests measure short-term recall, not long-term retention

• Students who need more repetition fall further behind each week

We end up with students who can tell you that "ch" can say /k/, but who can't reliably pull the right spelling for stomach when they're writing a story about lunch.

How phonics knowledge is meant to progress

Learning to spell isn't a list of codes to collect. It's a progression where each layer depends on the one beneath it being secure.

1. Phonemic awareness. Hearing, segmenting and blending the individual sounds in spoken words, without any letters at all.

2. Core grapheme-phoneme correspondences. The most common, most useful spelling for each sound, taught to automaticity.

3. Blending and segmenting with print. Applying that code fluently in short words, then in longer, multisyllabic words.

4. Alternative spellings and positional patterns. Learning that one sound can be spelled several ways, and that position in a word often signals the best bet (for example, "ay" at the end of a word, "ai" in the middle).

5. Morphology. Understanding meaningful word parts, such as prefixes, suffixes and roots, and how they affect spelling.

6. Word-specific memory. Securing the exact spelling of individual words so they can be retrieved without effort.

These layers overlap, and Daffern's research shows students can learn phonological, orthographic and morphological skills alongside each other from the early years. But overlapping is not the same as rushing. If step 3 isn't automatic, adding more and more options at step 4 creates confusion, not capability.

That's what I saw in my son. He had plenty of step 4 knowledge. What broke down was step 3: listening carefully to the word and segmenting it from start to finish.

How we got here: 50 years of spelling teaching

Ask most grandparents how they learned to spell and you'll hear the same story: a weekly list, copying, dictation and a Friday test. Today's students are asked to do something very different.

In a single generation, Australian classrooms have swung from memory-heavy word lists, to whole language, and now to systematic synthetic phonics.

Each era fixed a real weakness in the one before it. The current one has brought the code back, but lost much of the repetition.

Then and now: what we ask students to do

Older generations were rarely taught the full code explicitly. Some phonics was usually part of early reading, but spelling relied heavily on remembering specific words. They weren't asked to hold a chart of six ways to spell /ay/ in their heads while writing.

That approach had real limits. Students who struggled to memorise were often left behind, and few were taught why a word was spelled the way it was. The shift to explicit phonics was needed.

But in correcting one problem, we may have created another. We've added a great deal of code knowledge, and quietly removed much of the repetition that made words stick.

What a Year 2 student is expected to know now

By the end of Year 2, the NSW English syllabus expects students to use a large part of the English spelling code, and to explain some of it. That is a big step up from what most Year 2 students were asked to do 50 years ago.

The current expectations sit under two Stage 1 outcomes in the NSW English K–10 Syllabus (2022): Phonic knowledge (EN1-PHOKW-01) and Spelling (EN1-SPELL-01).

Year 2 then and now

What the comparison shows

• More code, earlier. Today's Year 2 students are expected to know several ways to spell many vowel sounds. For example, /ay/ can be a, ai, ay, a_e, eigh or ey.

• More reasoning, less remembering. The syllabus asks students to apply and explain patterns. Fifty years ago, students were mostly asked to remember specific words.

• Two-syllable words have arrived in Year 2. That's exactly where Daffern's research found accuracy dropping, even for strong spellers.

None of these expectations are wrong in themselves. But each one adds to the load a 7-year-old carries while writing. Without time to consolidate, more code doesn't produce better spelling. It produces more options to second-guess.

Overload: too many options, too soon

English has around 44 sounds and many more ways to spell them. Literacy specialist Lyn Stone has cautioned against relying on massive grapheme charts because they tax students' cognitive load rather than support it - I know I was overwhelmed when I was given those posters! (I ended up creating simplified versions that we rotated through, and that students could access when needed).

Working memory is small. When a student is holding a word in mind, breaking it into sounds and then searching through five or six possible spellings for each sound, there is very little capacity left for the actual task.

This is what over-analysis looks like in practice:

• The student stops saying the word aloud or in their head

• They fixate on one tricky sound and lose track of the rest of the word

• They insert spellings that are "possible" but not plausible

• They become anxious, slower and less willing to attempt words

That last point matters.

A student who freezes before every word is not a student who is "careless" or "not trying".

Hesitation is communication.

It's telling us the load is too high.

Slowing down the introduction of alternatives, and teaching them in context of the most frequent and useful patterns first, protects working memory for the thinking that matters.

The forgotten piece: memory

Phonics gives students the tools to work words out. But good spellers don't work out every word, every time. They retrieve it.

Professor Linnea Ehri's research on orthographic mapping explains how this happens. When students connect the sounds in a spoken word to the letters that represent them, the spelling is bonded to the word's pronunciation and meaning in long-term memory. Repeated, accurate encounters strengthen that bond until the word can be read and spelled without effort.

Two things are worth highlighting here:

• Mapping relies on phonics, not visual memory. Most of us don't store words as pictures. The letter-sound connections are what make a spelling "stick", including for irregular words.

• Mapping needs repetition. One lesson on "ch" as /k/ will not secure stomach, school and echo. Multiple, spaced opportunities to say, segment, write and check those words will.

This is where I think we've swung too far. In moving away from old-style "learn your list" approaches, many classrooms have also moved away from deliberate repetition and retrieval.

But repetition was never the problem.

Repetition without understanding was.

The research on learning is clear - retrieval practice (recalling from memory rather than re-reading) and spaced practice (revisiting over days and weeks) build durable learning. These belong in our spelling routines, alongside explicit phonics, not instead of it.

What special education taught me

In special education settings, we follow what our mainstream colleagues are doing, but we adjust it. We use explicit teaching and synthetic phonics. We also:

• Slow the pace so each pattern has time to become secure

• Introduce fewer new elements at once

• Build in daily repetition and review of what's already been taught

• Use rote learning deliberately for students whose learning profiles mean that working out every word from scratch isn't realistic or sustainable

Here's what struck me. Many of the students I taught were better spellers of familiar, high-use words than their same-age peers in mainstream classes.

I fully acknowledge there is a ceiling for some students, and the goals in a support class are individualised. But that observation has stayed with me. Students with significant learning needs, given time, repetition and a manageable load, were securing words in long-term memory. Meanwhile, capable students moving at full speed were not.

To me, that says the issue isn't the students' ability. It's the conditions we're asking them to learn in.

This is Universal Design for Learning in action. What is essential for some students (slower pace, repetition, reduced load) is often beneficial for all of them.

What we can do: quality over quantity

You don't need a new program. These Tier 1 adjustments work within the scope and sequence you already use.

1. Pace by mastery, not by calendar

• Check last week's pattern before introducing a new one. If most students can't spell those words in a quick dictation, pause and consolidate.

• Treat the scope and sequence as an order to follow, not a deadline to meet. If you need to slow up, meet with your team/stage leader and discuss your concerns. Student mastery should be the focus of any learning.

2. Lead with the "best bet"

• Teach the most common spelling of a sound first, and make it automatic. This also allows your to differentiate for the different abilities in your class - students needing more practice can keep repeating, while those who have grasped it at the basic level can progress with more complex uses of the spelling.

• Introduce alternatives gradually, with the words students actually use and need.

• Keep reference charts small and targeted to what's been taught, rather than displaying every option at once.

3. Protect the say-it, segment-it step

• Before writing, have students do the following:

• Say It: say the word aloud

• Map It: tap or count the sounds

• Write It: write the word using sound boxes

• Say It: say the word aloud again

• Check It: check with a known source to ensure accuracy

This method engages the brain through auditory, visual and kinesthetic methods, giving more opportunities for knowledge to stick.

• For longer words, chunk into syllables first (stom-ach), then segment each syllable. This directly targets the multisyllabic gap the research identifies.

4. Build in retrieval and spacing

• Start each lesson with 3 to 5 minutes of mixed review from previous weeks.

• Use short dictation sentences that recycle older patterns alongside new ones.

• Revisit words a day later, a week later and a month later, not just on Friday's test.

5. Make repetition purposeful

• Use repetition to secure high-use and personally important words.

• Always pair it with the sound-letter connection ("say it, map it, write it, check it"), so students understand what they're memorising.

6. Support the anxious speller

• Normalise mistakes as information. "That's a plausible choice. Let's check which one this word uses."

• Model your own thinking aloud when you're unsure of a spelling.

• Reduce the stakes: separate spelling practice from assessment, and give feedback on the parts of the word they got right first.

Differentiation at a glance

Slowing down is not falling behind

We have the right ingredients: explicit teaching, synthetic phonics and a clear sequence. What's missing is the time for learning to settle.

When we rush, we get students who know a lot about spelling but can't reliably spell. When we slow down, review often and use what we know about memory, we get students who spell with confidence, and who have the mental space left over to think about what they're writing.

My son doesn't need more letter-sound options. He needs to trust his ear and memory again, and to have enough practice that stomach is simply a word he knows.

So do many of our students.

References and further reading

• Daffern, T. (2021). Exploring Australian Students' Spelling Skills: Spelling Skills Report 2021. Oxford Children's Language Australia.

• Ehri, L. C. (2014). Orthographic mapping in the acquisition of sight word reading, spelling memory, and vocabulary learning. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 5–21.

• Ehri, L. C. (2022). What teachers need to know and do to teach letter–sounds, phonemic awareness, word reading, and phonics. The Reading Teacher.

• Stone, L. Spelling in a complex orthography: Can knowing better really help do better? OnLit webinar.

• ACARA. NAPLAN National Report 2022: media release.

• NSW Department of Education. NAPLAN results in NSW reveal promising signs.