Our Proud Heritage. Making Reading Meaningful: Sylvia Ashton-Warner and the Language Experience Approach
You are here
Language is a foundation for learning and development, including learning to read and write. Educators have long been focused on promoting early literacy skills as well as children鈥檚 motivation, meaning making, and joy while reading and writing. Influenced by social, political, and historical factors over the decades, educators have thought about and debated how to effectively do so for each and every child.
Sylvia Ashton-Warner (1908鈥�1984) was among the educators who advocated for children, especially those marginalized socially and culturally, to learn to read in meaningful, responsive ways. She wrote and taught about connecting children鈥檚 voices to their literacy learning. She exemplified using children鈥檚 key vocabulary, tapping into children鈥檚 funds of knowledge, linking spoken words to print, and co-constructing text to build a repertoire of words. Her thinking and work went against the educational protocols of her time. Yet her intuition and her positive results with children encouraged her to persevere in developing the Language Experience Approach (LEA), a strategy that continues to be successfully and widely used in literacy education. Ashton-Warner was an unconventional pioneer whose legacy remains relevant and applicable to today鈥檚 early听childhood classrooms.
This column introduces the historical context surrounding Ashton-Warner鈥檚 life and her teaching in New Zealand. It highlights how she conceived of and implemented the LEA, its evolution and use over time, and the enduring principles that current and future early childhood educators can apply in their听own settings.
Sylvia Ashton-Warner: A Rule Breaker and Innovator
Photograph of Sylvia Ashton-Warner, Ref: PAColl-2522-7-01-01, courtesy of the Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand
While building meaningful relationships with students in order to teach effectively may not seem radical now, Sylvia Ashton-Warner, who was born near the turn of the twentieth century, was a rule breaker in many ways (Hood 1988; White 2014). She was a gifted artist, pianist, singer, and writer, and she is perhaps best known in the education field for creating the original LEA with the Indigenous people of New Zealand (Ashton-Warner 1963; Hood 1988; White 2014). Although situated in this field鈥檚 history and coming from a family of educators, Ashton-Warner initially resisted following in her parents鈥� footsteps to become a teacher. Yet she needed a way to support herself and her family, so she eventually took up the call, beginning in a teaching position considered low status in 1938 and continuing to teach听until 1955.
Although Ashton-Warner wrote a book titled听Teacher听in 1963, in 1978, she explained in the New Zealand documentary听Three New Zealanders听(Broadcasting Council of New Zealand Television) that she was 鈥渘ot a teacher鈥� and that she would 鈥渕erely supply the conditions.鈥� Ashton-Warner (1963) recognized and wrote about the significance of facilitating learning through student-centered pedagogy and the social nature of learning (interactions with others can prompt new learning and development for individuals). When she began her teaching career, Ashton-Warner took an early childhood position at a state-run school at what was perceived as the lowest level in New Zealand, teaching the youngest Indigenous children, comparable to ages associated with kindergarten and first grade in the US. Much like the inhumane and inequitable treatment experienced by Native Americans in the US, the Indigenous peoples of New Zealand were relegated to segregated state schools with far fewer resources and lower expectations. Historically, teachers in New Zealand who worked with the M膩ori people were thought of as second-class teachers, whose work led to little academic progress, who deserved lower pay, and who were considered unqualified to work with White children, thought by many at that time to be more capable (Ashton-Warner听1963, 1974).
Teaching M膩ori Children听to Read
Early on, Ashton-Warner knew literacy learning had to be personally meaningful. While teaching M膩ori schoolchildren, she boldly ignored the government鈥檚 required reading methods and materials; she did not see the benefits of them for her students. So when her New Zealand superiors insisted that their workbooks were required, she succinctly and simply stated her strong opposition: 鈥淚 do not believe in them鈥澨�(Broadcasting Council of New Zealand听Television 1978).
Instead, Ashton-Warner observed that her students responded positively to learning to read in English by using their own words, when elicited by her and linked to their lives and experiences. She discovered the power of connecting meaningful words from children鈥檚 own voices with learning to read and write. Like other thinkers and writers who went against the tide of the times, she also understood the necessity and benefits of living in, experiencing, and serving the communities in which one teaches. In defying the policies and practices of the day and in an attempt to bring literacy equity to Indigenous people denied a high-quality education, Ashton-Warner (1963) realized that her students鈥� inner words were key to unlocking the puzzle of the printed word and to being fully responsive to the literacy needs of her young M膩ori emerging readers and writers. Thus, her foundational technique of eliciting key vocabulary and the Language Experience Approach (LEA)听was born.
Sylvia Ashton-Warner discovered the power of connecting meaningful words from children鈥檚 own voices with learning to read听and write.
Initially, the LEA began with the organic, intentional daily practice of asking each child what word they would like written on a card (Ashton-Warner 1963). Ashton-Warner then developed more specific steps for capturing children鈥檚 experiences, beginning with their home spoken language and then writing it in English print. (See 鈥淲hat Is the Language Experience Approach?鈥� for more details.) At the heart of this strategy is听key vocabulary, which are words elicited from the children that are of 鈥渋ntense, personal meaning, instantly recognized, which caption the native imagery and provide a proper foundation for reading鈥� (Ashton-Warner 1963, 33). These words from within hold deep meaning for a young child and can be used to help them learn to read their听own words.
Ashton-Warner (1974) further elaborated on the importance of the inside-out nature of key vocabulary, echoing connections between the children鈥檚 lives and their motivation to read听and write:
As the pattern of any physical movement is from the body outward, so is the flow of the [key vocabulary] from the mind outward, from the inside out. The words start often with our child鈥檚 own name, but not necessarily, or Mommy or Daddy, then his brothers and sisters . . . [then moving] . . . to people outside the family, things outside, animals, pets, his bike. . . . [Each child] is unique and variable; besides, big emotional explosions can take place in the course of it, but it鈥檚 a natural guideline (33).
In these ways, children鈥檚 own words offer a link from oral to听written language.
What Is the Language听Experience Approach?
Sylvia Ashton-Warner explained that the intent of the Language Experience Approach (LEA) was to 鈥渞elease the native imagery of our child and use it for working material鈥� (1974, 17); in other words, to replace the reading material of the state workbooks. When Ashton-Warner (1974) shared her definition of the LEA with teachers in the US, she emphasized that a child鈥檚 spoken word reflects their inner eye (1963). She viewed these words and phrases as 鈥渢he captions of the mind pictures that have the power and the light鈥� (14) and as 鈥渟entence length and story length of the captions within鈥� (30). Ashton-Warner illustrated the importance of these first words for understanding the reading process by comparing them to the complexity of Egyptian hieroglyphics and the power of Helen Keller鈥檚 recognition of her first word,听water; these first written words hold worlds of meaning from within. Ashton-Warner stated, 鈥淚 reach a hand into the mind of a child, bring out a handful of the stuff I find there, and use that as our first working material鈥� (1963, 15).
What began as a simple daily practice turned into the following specific steps that Ashton-Warner implemented and later taught other educators to implement.
Step 1:听Provide a memorable, shared experience for children.
Step 2:听Ask children to describe their experience, and transcribe children鈥檚 exact words, including key vocabulary. This vocabulary is often focused on their senses (what they saw, heard, smelled, tasted, and/or touched) and what they want to remember about the experience. Words are transcribed on chart paper, a whiteboard, or other paper or electronic display. According to Ashton-Warner (1963, 1974), Stauffer (1970), and Van Allen and Halvorsen (1961), teachers should spell correctly as the children鈥檚 words are transcribed exactly, which may mean spelling a child鈥檚 idiomorphic word (like 鈥渂lerg鈥�) or transcribing incorrect grammar (like 鈥淲e goed to the farm鈥�) to show that what we say can be written and then read.
Step 3:听Read and reread the transcription. Children see and hear their own words in print. This third step may include revising words for meaning. Subsequently, students and teachers read and reread their creation, even on subsequent days. It is helpful to keep all electronic or physical charts for revisiting children鈥檚 archive of experience, to provide continued practice in reading more words, thereby adding to the children鈥檚 repertoire of words.
The Evolution and Legacy of Ashton-Warner鈥檚 Approach
Word spread about Ashton-Warner鈥檚 beliefs and practices, including the LEA. Educators from around the world wanted to know more. For a while after leaving the classroom, Ashton-Warner provided for her family by working with universities, giving workshops, writing books, and even traveling to the US to teach educators there about the LEA. After teaching for several decades, with always shifting life priorities and interests, she found more and more delight in artistic, creative endeavors in music, painting, and writing novels for adults. She published five award-winning novels, many translated into multiple languages and some, like听Spinster, made into quite popular movies. Although Ashton-Warner鈥檚 focus and passions shifted, the LEA persisted in educational circles. To this day, this strategy remains popular for use with emerging readers听and writers.
Many have built upon and from Ashton-Warner鈥檚 concepts and implementation of the LEA, maintaining the focus on creating texts that are based on children鈥檚 own experiences, that are transcriptions of children鈥檚 spoken words, and that are used for literacy instruction. Other literacy approaches and philosophies were coming into prominence, some of which aligned well with the LEA. From more holistic approaches to more skills-based ones, some of these approaches or philosophies were complementary to the LEA, and some were contradictory. With these ebbs and flows, the LEA has remained a feasible strategy for supporting literacy learning, perhaps because it can be implemented with limited resources and across varying social and听cultural contexts.
Related to the evolution of the LEA in the 1960s and 1970s, Stauffer (1970) and Van Allen and Halvorsen (1961), who learned from Ashton-Warner directly, wrote about her seminal work and expanded on the LEA to make it applicable to US contexts. They underscored the connections between spoken words and written language, especially for emerging readers. Van Allen鈥檚 thinking was translated by many classroom teachers into the following oft-chanted mantra:听鈥淲hat I can think about, I can talk about. What I say, I can write.听What I can write, I can read鈥� (Spache & Spache听1973, 243).
Alongside its growing use in the US by early childhood practitioners, literacy researchers have studied and written more about the LEA as a literacy strategy. For example, Cloer, Aldridge, and Dean (1981) wrote about the ways that it impacts the levels of print awareness to ignite children鈥檚 literacy motivation and skills. Dorr reminded reading educators in 2006 that 鈥渨hat was old is new again鈥� and provided a sample modified LEA lesson plan showing how to use key vocabulary with early elementary students composing sentences to demonstrate learning during a field trip. Others, like Cliett (2014), have focused more specifically on key vocabulary and how current and future teachers can use it as authentic material to build and extend young readers鈥� repertoire听of words.
These shared experiences and the co-construction of texts about them remain essential to LEA proponents. The shared experience is considered the yeast that invigorates children to have something meaningful to say. Almost anything can serve as the catalyst experience: experimenting with ice, mixing colors while finger painting, or peeling a fresh orange, to name just a few. Teachers elicit and transcribe children鈥檚 responses to these听firsthand experiences.
Though Ashton-Warner鈥檚 body of pedagogical work is relatively small in comparison to her other endeavors throughout her life, her literacy strategy has made its mark and is recognized in literacy education (Tierney, Readence & Dishner 1995; Vacca et al 2003; McGee & Richgels 2012; Tompkins 2013). Additionally, the LEA has been used by educators serving English learners from birth to adulthood (Mohr 1999; Nelson & Linek 1999; Dorr 2006; Nessel & Dixon 2008)听and those working with students with disabilities (Gomwalk 2018; Jozwik & Mustian 2020; Polloway, Patton, & Serna 2001) to foster听literacy development.
Supporting Today鈥檚 Diverse Classrooms and听English Learners
Mohr (1999) captured the positive possibilities of applying the LEA through a case study of a Latina first grader learning English. Mohr contrasted using a typical word list provided to English learners (with words like听peach,听nail, and听ladder) to the LEA method of using words, and then contextualized sentences, after a read aloud of a highly predictable picture book. In this instance, the LEA led to an increase in the child鈥檚听reading scores.
In 2002, the work of Labbo, Eakle, and Montero showed how the LEA evolved in modern times, updating the old LEA approach of using chart paper to a new approach using digital photography with kindergartners. Likewise, Pappamihiel and Knight (2016) provide a case study of how a second-grade teacher helped dual language learners and refugees from Burma engage in a museum field trip with a digital LEA and follow-up literacy activities. In small heterogeneous groups, the teacher encouraged the use of children鈥檚 own images and words to document the field trip in their digital LEA portfolios. The digital images, cooperatively labeled and captioned by the groups, led to an increased repertoire of English words, more conversation and words spoken in English, and strengthened听organizational skills.
Supporting the Literacy Development of Children听with Disabilities
Educators and researchers have also effectively used the LEA with students with disabilities. Special education professionals Polloway, Patton, and Serna (2001) first outlined the use of the LEA as an alternative to basal readers (leveled reading textbooks). They proposed the LEA as a means to capitalize on students鈥� verbalization and as a key component to boost literacy in terms of word recognition, comprehension, and spelling for students with disabilities. Gomwalk (2018) studied 20 Primary One nonreaders with intellectual disabilities (IQ scores ranging between 10 and 70) in Nigeria. He used pretests and posttests to compare two randomly assigned groups, one with 鈥渂usiness as usual鈥� and one using the LEA. The results indicated that using the LEA led to a statistically significant difference, with students in the LEA group showing improvements in sight word vocabulary and literal reading comprehension according to informal reading听inventory scores.
Echoing Labbo and colleagues鈥� digital twist to the LEA (2002), another recent study added a modern literacy layer by using technological tools to support English learners who also had special needs in terms of delayed language development. Jozwik and Mustian (2020) studied learner-dictated passages using voice to text, word prediction, and screen reading tools with English learners with disabilities. Their data showed that the addition of the LEA was linked to increases in the number of words read correctly and decreases in the number of miscues during oral reading for this group听of learners.
Implications for Today鈥檚 Classrooms
Similar to the times which led Sylvia Ashton-Warner to create the LEA and advocate for children鈥檚 voices, social, political, and historical factors influence current literacy practices. Decades of research and theory have added to the conversation about how to use children鈥檚 interests, experiences, and language to ignite children鈥檚 literacy skills. Among the ideas and practices advocated, Ashton-Warner鈥檚 work in developing the LEA reminds today鈥檚 educators of these guiding principles听for practice:
- Embrace high expectations of all children,听including those with disabilities and those whose home language is not English. With appropriate supports and personal contexts, all children can become readers and writers.
- Encourage and support children鈥檚 oral language development,听asking and listening for words and phrases that connect to children鈥檚 real lives.
- Document children鈥檚 words and phrases in print,听and use these co-constructed texts for effective instruction and future planning.
- Build upon children鈥檚 funds of knowledge,听including their home languages, connecting their life experiences to new ideas, school experiences, and important literacy skills.
- Offer ongoing, authentic language and literacy experiences,听including lots of opportunities to speak, listen, read, write, and think about their own and others鈥� words.
At a time when the boundaries, autonomies, and reach of teachers鈥� instructional decisions may seem tied to required curriculum and standards, the LEA lives on. Reflecting on Ashton-Warner鈥檚 literacy strategy and its legacy, then and now, early childhood educators can leverage the power of children鈥檚 own words to honor children鈥檚 home languages and experiences and to use these meaningful words in literacy lessons to听grow readers.
Photograph: courtesy of Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand
Copyright 漏 2023 by the 51吃瓜网. See Permissions and Reprints online at .
References
Ashton-Warner, S. 1963. Teacher. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster. .
Ashton-Warner, S. 1974. 鈥淭eacher鈥� in America. London, UK: Cassell and Company.
Broadcasting Council of New Zealand Television. 1978. Three New Zealanders: Sylvia Ashton-Warner. .
Cliett, B.C. 2014. Sylvia Ashton-Warner鈥檚 Key Vocabulary: The Right Way to Teach Your Child to Read.听Seattle, WA: Kindle Direct Publishing.
Cloer, T., J. Aldridge, & R. Dean. 1981. 鈥淓xamining Different Levels of Print Awareness.鈥� Journal of Language Experience 4 (1): 25鈥�33.
Dorr, R.E. 2006. 鈥淪omething Old is New Again: Revisiting Language Experience.鈥� The Reading Teacher 60 (2): 138鈥�146.
Gomwalk, N.V. 2018. Effects of Language Experience Approach on Literacy Skills of Learners with Intellectual Disabilities. PhD diss., University of Jos, Nigeria. .
Hood, L. 1988. Sylvia!: The Biography of Sylvia Ashton-Warner. New York, NY: Viking Penguin Books.
Jozwik, S., & A.L. Mustian. 2020. 鈥淓ffects of Technology-Supported Language Experience Approach for English Learners with Special Needs.鈥� Reading & Writing Quarterly 36 (5): 418鈥�437.
Labbo, L.D., A.J. Eakle, & M.K. Montero. 2002. 鈥淒igital Language Experience Approach: Using Digital Photographs and Software as a Language Experience Approach Innovation.鈥� Reading Online 5 (8). .
McGee, L.M., & D.J. Richgels. 2012. Literacy's Beginnings: Supporting Young Readers and Writers. 6th ed. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Mohr, K.A.J. 1999. 鈥淰ariations on a Theme: Using Thematically Framed Language Experience Activities for English as a Second Language (ESL) Instruction.鈥� In Practical Classroom Applications of Language Experience: Looking Back, Looking Forward, eds. O. G. Nelson & W. M. Linek, 48鈥�52. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Nelson, O.G., & W.M. Linek. 1999. Practical Classroom Applications of Language Experience: Looking Back, Looking Forward. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Nessel, D., & C.N. Dixon, eds. 2008. Using the Language Experience Approach with English Language Learners: Strategies for Engaging Students and Developing Literacy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Pappamihiel, N.E., & J.H. Knight. 2016. 鈥淯sing Digital Storytelling as a Language Experience Approach Activity: Integrating English Language Learners into a Museum Field Trip.鈥� Childhood Education 92 (4): 276鈥�280.
Polloway, E.A., J. Patton, & L. Serna. 2001. Strategies for Teaching Learners with Special Needs. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
听Spache, G.D., & E.B. Spache. 1973. Reading in the Elementary School. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Stauffer, R.G. 1970. The Language-Experience Approach to the Teaching of Reading. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.听
Tierney, R.J., J. Readence, & E. Dishner. 1995. Reading Strategies and Practices. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Tompkins, G. 2013. 50 Literacy Strategies: Step by Step. 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Prentice-Hall/Pearson.
Vacca, J.L., R.T. Vacca, M.K. Gove, L. Burkey, L.A. Lenhart, & C. McKeon. 2003. Reading and Learning to Read. 5th ed. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Van Allen, R., & G.C. Halvorsen. 1961. The Language-Experience Approach to Reading Instruction. Oxford, UK: Ginn.
White, S. 2014. 鈥淭he Intensities and High Sensitivity of a Gifted Creative Genius: Sylvia Ashton-Warner.鈥� Gifted Education International 30 (2): 106鈥�116.