Phonemic Awareness

1. Incidental Factors of the Learning
Process in the Phonetics Class
By Jonathan Mora
Last day of class, the students` faces tell it all. They seem fulfilled. After a 4- month
process, they had been able to successfully transcribe a whole paragraph from the
phonetic language into English and vice versa. They have accomplished the task:
decoding the symbols of the phonetic alphabet in both written and oral forms. What
makes a pronunciation class effective, though? By the end of this article, this question
will be hopefully answered …
There are several factors that incide in the high or low achievement of the students
in the phonetics class. Cultural, psychological, emotional and pedagogic elements will
affect internally and externally, the performance of learners in a positive or negative
form. All together, they represent the variables students will or may encounter as they
undergo the process of learning, and in this specific context, the pronunciation skills.
Moreover, by identifying these obstacles, the instructor will be able to “categorize” his or
her pupils based on their linguistic abilities and therefore, have a sort of personal profile
of the learners
This will ultimately benefit the basis of the weaknesses and / or strengths of every
student and consequently the application of remedial plans to be used in groups or
individually.
For a long time, listening and pronunciation remained underestimated. Nonetheless
, recent studies have demonstrated the outmost importance of these abilities as several
researchers such as Morley , Prator , Terrell , Krashen , Bowen and Stevick , just to
mention a few , have realized with their research in this subject matter . Thus, more and
more teachers are now trying to incorporate these findings in the ESL / ESP courses.
However, it has not always been this way. It was thought that pronunciation was

2. irrelevant and it did not help in the language acquisition process whatsoever. In their
article Teaching Pronunciation the authors Celce- Murcia and Goodwin state that for
instructors that use the grammar – translation and reading – based approaches,
pronunciation has no impact at all. On the contrary, in direct approaches, such as the
audio- lingual, it becomes extremely important since it serves as the pre stage for the
speaking skill. Hence, communicative approaches have recently experienced the urge
to implement the teaching of pronunciation. The article also mentions the authors`own
interpretation of Kenworthy`s variables that seem to impede or enhance the acquisition
of reasonable pronunciation:
1- Native language of the learner
2- Age
3- Exposure to the L2
4- Innate phonetic ability
5- Attitude and sense of identity ( personality )
6- Motivation and desire for good pronunciation
In the case of this particular investigation, the students presented some positive
features. Enthusiasm for learning new concepts was one of them. When introduced to
the phonetic symbols, the majority of the group reacted positively. Transcribing words
became both fascinating and intriguing for them as it was their first encounter with
phonetics and the IPA. They acquired a sense of accomplishment for being able to
successfully understand or decode the phonetic symbols into their corresponding
sounds and English words. This latter aspect instead of becoming a negative, brought
about the desire to overcome challenges ( in this case , the transcription drills as well as
the correct pronunciation ). Moreover, the students engaged actively in participative
activities within the classroom. They also reported a substantial improvement on their
pronunciation and fluency. Motivation was of great help in this regard.
There were negative aspects to consider, nevertheless. First, the linguistic
interference. There was a significant amount of bad transferring, especially when asked
to read a paragraph in order to evaluate suprasegmentals . Many of them transferred
their L1 `s intonation or word stress; hence, affecting intelligibility. They either

3. pronounced all the sounds (letters / graphemes) in a word or they omitted important
sounds as final consonants or vowels that needed no pronunciation . There are some
possible reasons to explain this. Most of the students are exposed to the language only
when they come to class. The phonological knowledge or awareness was none.
Another major result determined that some sounds were particularly difficult or almost
impossible for some of them to reproduce .This became very perceptible with the short /
long vowels but mostly with the schwas (4 of them to be specific; the two stressed ones
and the other two unstressed ones) . Students made no distinction whatsoever in very
punctual cases such as the lax versus the tense iota or the short u versus the long uw.
In the case of consonants, the voiced and voiceless counterpart of the “ th “ sound
presented some difficulty for some pupils as they ended pronouncing / d / or / t / or even
/ f / instead of the intended sound . E.g” thanks” sounded like “ tanks” or” they” came
across as “ day “.Finally , the issue of coming from different educational backgrounds
became evident as a determiner of linguistic advantage from students that came from
private schools as opposed to those who graduated from public high schools . In
addition, there were three different types of majors in the same course: 1st and 2nd cycle
, English Teaching and Bilingual Pre schooling .
Much of the information was gathered from the Phonetics 1 Course at Universidad
Hispanoamericana. The course is taught once a week with a duration of three class
hours and the approach is theoretical / practical. It basically focuses on vowels and
diphthongs primarily , as well as some common phonological concepts such as voicing ,
articulators , points and manners of articulation , elongation , devoicing , occlusion ,
homophones , homographs , blending , pitch, flapping, intonation and word stress (
suprasegmentals ). 14 students enrolled the class . The methodology is based on
extensive listening exercises from the audio program ( CD ) the instructor ( dicto –
listening ) and other sources TAEO ( Take Away English On line digital platform ) with
the corresponding pronunciation drills to be performed in class or assigned by the
professor as out of class work . As part of the evaluation, students were required to
perform 2 oral quizzes . One of the quizzes consisting on them pronouncing a set of
common English words in isolation ( 25 ) with the purpose of discriminating the sounds
seen in the class . The other one consisted on the student reading a paragraph to the

4. instructor loudly and as well pronounced and fluent as possible. This with sole intention
of evaluating suprasegmentals . Two in- class projects were also performed; one
individually and the other one in groups in which the students had to apply the concepts
and techniques learned throughout the lessons . At the end of the course, students
were asked by the professor to perform a type of poll consisting on writing on a
separate sheet of paper, divided in two halves, one for the negative and the other one
for the positive, as a means to compile feedback from the class. They could write about
anything: the course itself, the teacher, the evaluation, methodology, activities they
enjoyed or the ones they did not like and / or anything that they considered influenced
them in a positive or negative form. It was anonymous and they reacted positively
towards this instrument. Despite being a rather simple form of feedback, the data
obtained was significantly relevant for the instructor, since it provided information on
different levels, but most importantly, it assessed the learning process of the 14
students that participated on the activity at the same time they were active participants
of the course. Out of 14 subjects, only 2 had negative comments. 12 had no negative
comments at all and the complete group showed positive reactions towards the class
and the teacher. This clearly indicated a great level of satisfaction from them. As an
interesting fact, the entire group referred to the course as difficult or very difficult, but at
the same time,it was precisely the degree of difficulty that proved to be a determinant
factor in the students´ attitude towards the course. Thus, it triggered them to strive for
passing the class but most importantly, they had to try harder. It was an extra effort as
they saw it as a challenge. The quality of the sound ( device / CD ) and some specific
drills from the text book , as well as the professor being very strict , were pointed out as
a negative . The majority stated that they enjoyed the class, their pronunciation
improved and that they would willingly take another course with the same instructor.
The professor`s pronunciation, the promptness to clarify doubts and his expertise on the
subject matter, were also brought up as positive features that influenced in the general
outcome of their performance. The teacher`s role then became pivotal. “ The teacher
should be familiar with the articulatory phonetics, English phonology contrastive
analysis, techniques for presenting and modifying pronunciation and a full range of
exercises and drills” ( Parish1977 ) Both the teacher and the activities he / she uses in

5. his classroom , will have a great impact on the way the pupils are going to learn in the
class. “The selection of methods and materials to be used in class must be based on
the defined goal of that class and those goals must be based on an assessment of the
students ` needs” ( Terrel 1983 ) . Those needs were precisely the ones which
prompted a careful evaluation of the focus, the exercises, the most difficult sounds and
the selection of the best methods to teach the concepts effectively in the phonetics
course. Additionally, this also allowed the instructor to create his own categorization of
the students in his course, based on their linguistic abilities as will be described ahead.
Types of Students in the Phonetics Class
Every class is different and so are the students that make it up. Knowing the kind of
student the teacher will have in his / her classroom becomes extremely pivotal. Meador
( 2014 ) in his article Personality Types of Students in a Typical Classroom , presents
the kinds of pupils that might be found in any class and labels them as : class clown,
smart aleck, motivated , unmotivated, clueless, bully, nerd, quiet as a mouse, and the
natural leader , to mention the most common ones . This would represent the whole
array of personalities and / or learning styles put together in a single course. If the
professor is able to recognize these “types”, he/she will become more prepared to cope
with the possible difficulties that may rise in the development of the course. Evidently, it
is unattainable to speak about a homogeneous group, regarding their skills in any area
;therefore , the importance of focusing on these differences so that they will not affect
the management or the performance of the learners.
Types of students based on their linguistic abilities.
Based on the instructor`s experience in teaching the phonetics course ( 7 years ) and
the results compiled by the students data , he was capable of coming up with his own
system of categorization of students in his phonetics class. Nonetheless, this
classification can be applied to rather any course due to the fact that it is most likely to
find the kind of subjects represented in this analogy in any course whatsoever. The
analogy per se consists in comparing the learners with the fast –food concept of
“combos” consequently having four : The Value Pack , the Happy Meal , the Super Size

6. Me Me Me and the Full Combo. Each one will be described thoroughly, providing the
main features of each one.
The Value Pack – as the name suggests, this student has only the basics. He / she
uses lots of fragments, they have no phonological awareness, the constructions are full
of bad transfer. He or she will pronounce all the sounds ( letters ) in a word , e.g :
comfortable , vegetables , friends , or omit some sounds , specially final sounds . The
pronunciation affects the intelligibility. Interdentals will be substituted by / d / / t / or
even / f /, the Open O will sound like the diphthong / ow / bought will sound like boat .
The schwa is likely to be confused with a short u or a Latin a as in bus . Finally, there is
no distinction between lax / tense vowels as in / I / / IY/. He will make up words with a
very focalized influence of the L1 as in “ubicated” or “multiplicate”. Overall, the grammar
skills are extremely basic “ Where you live ? “ “No is like that” and so are the phonetic
skills, if any. If it were a combo, he / she will leave you hungry, very hungry.
The Happy Meal – This student is able to communicate in spite of his or her
pronunciation/ grammar errors, which do not affect their performance. However, they
are in a “comfort zone” thus the name Happy Mealers. The errors do not get on their
way and they do not seem to mind either. The message gets across with no major
problems. They are transitioning from an intermediate to a higher intermediate. Some
ways of recognizing a learner here are expressions such as “do” mistakes,
“take”decisions, “wash” the clothes or the dishes. They can structure grammatically
correct questions like: How do you say…? but at the same time ask something such as
“What means … ? . They need polishing and lots of practice.
The Super Size Me Me Me – This student would be considered the “linguistic bully”. He
or she will use his/her very well- articulated pronunciation as his/her proficiency of the
language to intimidate the peers. Normally, owners of very strong personalities,
egocentric and manipulative. In short, a “show off”. This student does not take criticism
in a good way since they are almost “error free”. They think of themselves better than
anybody else and would even dare to confront the teacher. By trying to speak extremely
fast, they think they are super fluent, nevertheless, often times they are barely

7. understood and they end up all tangled up in their own speech. He / she could be a
major problem for the class and the teacher.
The Full Combo – This is the perfect student for any classroom or teacher. He / she is
capable of achieving highly accurate pronunciation. They make almost no grammar
mistakes or none at all. They are extremely fluent, cohesive, and manage structures
correctly. They can decode rules deductively or inductively, due to their self –awareness
and proficiency of the language. They are very competent in pretty much all the areas
and they do not get frustrated when they make a mistake. Instead, they take it
constructively. He or she is very humble ( as opposed to the Super Size Me ones ) . In
short, brilliant students. This student has it all. If they were a combo, you would be more
than pleased, actually, very satisfied.
As it has been pinpointed all throughout this paper, pronunciation has not been given
the importance it deserves .
Motivation as both intrinsic and extrinsic factor must be encouraged in the students.
Wong states: “Even the least motivated student in the classroom will respond if the
experience is enjoyable. Once the student`s interest has been piqued, sustaining that
interest will depend on the teacher`s ability to demonstrate the relevance of
pronunciation work to the student`s personal objectives”. The role of the teacher is once
again brought to central attention. The class environment plays a fundamental role in
the acquisition of the language. Therefore, it has to provide the level of comfort and
confidence between teacher – student so that information runs freely and that there will
not be any barriers affecting the learning process. “ A student in a constant state of fear
or one that is bored is not going to make much progress with pronunciation”.(Wong )
In Moh – Kim – Tam`s article Building Fluency, A Course for Non-native Speakers of
English , the author offers an overview of the most important areas when teaching
pronunciation: it should be interactive, not isolated, it should teach suprasegmentals
and it should combine these two latter elements with specific voice quality and voice
setting drills. Practice is stressed , specially repetition : it has been shown that repetition
has a positive effect on building fluency ( Nation 1989 ) for it increases the rate of

8. speaking , the number of hesitations falls and hesitation markers such as ah and um are
substantially reduced as the number of repeats and false starts . Repetition as a form of
oral practice benefits the learner in the sense that brings about efficiency as she / he
focuses on more important points and eliminates redundant words and phrases in their
speech.
However, neither students nor many teachers have really understood the relevance of
pronunciation. Students are being taught on how to teach a class ( TESOL ) on how to
apply methodologies / approaches ( didactics ), in grammar , reading , writing but not in
pronunciation nor how to teach it. This is most likely where the problem lies. Some
professors may feel unprepared to teach a phonetics course; moreover, a phonology or
linguistics one because they may lack the expertise or the means of teaching a course
per se.
On the other hand, students do not appear to have realized the importance of
pronunciation. They are focusing on other skills of the language such as grammar or
writing, but not on listening / speaking, which are directly linked to pronunciation.
Awareness must be created in this regard. An introspection is urged in both sides:
teachers and students. What is being done? What is not being achieved? Are the
students really learning?
Even though it is not possible to really assess how much our students are learning in
our courses, we have to make sure they learn something; even if is just a little, or a lot
.We need to make sure our pupils leave the class with a smile on their face, wanting to
come back for the next session. At the end, we want the best for our learners; hence,
we as their role models must give them the essential tools for developing their skills at
their own pace. A great deal of work needs to be done. However, in order to have better
students, we must first become better teachers.