DEBUNKING SPELLING MYTHS

Have you heard that spelling is psuedo-science? That spelling has been debunked?

When agencies or institutions claim that spelling methods are not “evidence-based,” what they often mean is that these methods have not been “empirically validated” through double-blind research studies. However, this exposes a fundamental issue: nothing in education can truly be empirically validated because every student is inherently unique. At the same time, spelling and typing to communicate are considered evidence-based because this designation relies on three essential components: 1) research (links below), 2) the clinician’s professional expertise and judgment, and 3) the client’s preference. While this brief FAQ section cannot address all the potential flaws in methods used to “debunk” spelling as communication, we recognize some critical recurring issues. Those testing nonspeakers often: (1) Begin with a presumption of incompetence, (2) Design tests that measure motor skills, believing they are assessing cognitive or language abilities and (3) Create conditions that are biased toward failure, especially when testing marginalized individuals tasked with disproving stereotypes about themselves. By understanding these nuances, we can more clearly advocate for the validity and effectiveness of spelling as a communication method. (Source: SPELLERS.COM)