User:Sandhuman66/sandbox8
Etymology[edit]
The i.t.a. was an abbreviation of the new orthography's final name, the initial teaching alphabet. Neither the name or the abbreviation used capitalisation in respect of the fact the orthography deliberately omitted the use of capital letters in order to simplify the act of learning.[1]
It was also previously known as The Augmented Latin Alphabet and originally as the The Ehrhardt Augmented Roman Alphabet (the Monotype Corporation of Salfords, Surrey had kindly extended their Ehrhardt (typeface) to include the new i.t.a. characters and so were accredited in the original name).[2]
Technically, the i.t.a. should have been known as the initial teaching orthography but since most people would not know what an orthography was, it was simplified to the initial teaching alphabet.[3]
Background[edit]
The i.t.a. was developed in the United Kingdom in the 1950s, in the following environment: -
Literacy[edit]
World War II was at the time, the most technologically advanced conflict to-date using a wide variety of machinery and communications so it was essential the armed forces could follow written instructions, unfortunately large numbers of the military intake were found to be insufficiently literate to be effective, forcing the Army to provide remedial classes.[4] This concerning fact raised awareness of the problem so after the war, the Ministry of Education started to systematically survey the levels of literacy in children leaving school.[5] These surveys disappointingly showed that over one in four children reaching the age of fifteen were functionally illiterate. As similar results were seen throughout the English speaking world, suspicion fell on the irregularity of the English language as the cause.[6] Arguments for English spelling reform to improve literacy were made by influential thinkers such as George Bernard Shaw, Dr Montefiore Follick (MP) and Sir James Pitman (MP).
| Functionally Literate | Functionally Illiterate | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Superior | Average (+) | Average (-) | Backward | Semi-Literate | Illiterate | ||
| 1948 | 9% | 34% | 27% | 24% | 5% | 1% | |
| 1952 | 9% | 39% | 22% | 25% | 4% | 1% | |
| 1956 | 9% | 43% | 23% | 21% | 4% | 0% | |
Parliamentary agitation[edit]
Starting in 1949, Dr. Montefiore Follick (MP) with the backing of Sir James Pitman (MP), attempted to advance the cause of English orthographic reform in the UK Parliament. The first ambitious private members bill endeavoured to form a committee for spelling reform but it was defeated on 2nd reading[7]. This was followed by a more restrained second bill to trial a simplified spelling system just for the early teaching of children, this won the vote for a 2nd reading and passed through the committee stage[8], embarrassing the Winston Churchill government. Pitman subsequently negotiated with the Education minister (Miss Florence Horsbrugh MP) and it was agreed that Follick would withdraw the bill, in return the minister publicly stated the government would not stand in the way of a trial by local education authorities & research institutes, indeed the minister wished this endeavour her best wishes. This conceded blessing was the green light for the trial to take place albeit it would need to be self-funded and self-organised, which allowed Pitman rather than the government to shape the course of events because Pitman was both wealthy, influential and had ownership of the Pitman Printing Press[9] so he possessed the resources for an orthographic experiment which the government then lacked.
Citations[edit]
- ^ Pitman 1969, p. 122, Chapter (7)' It will be noted that the i.t.a. employs lower-case characters only'
- ^ Downing 1967, p. 76, Chapter III - The Initial Teaching Alphabet: Background and Description' The alphabet used in the Times Educational Supplement article "The Ehrhardt Augmented Lower-case Roman Alphabet" was converted from italic manuscript letters to printer's type letters by the Monotype Corporation as an extension of their existing Ehrhardt alphabet'
- ^ said, Luty Martinez on. "English Orthography - The English Writing System - English Spelling". My English Language. Retrieved 2022-06-07.
- ^ Pitman 1969, p. 3, Chapter I - Backward Readers; the submerged sixth' It was the need for remedial classes among the Army intake in the 1939 - 1945 war that first drew attention to the problem (of backward readers)'
- ^ Ministry of Education (1956). "Standards of Reading". Pamphlet No. 32.
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires|journal=(help) - ^ Downing 1967, p. 1 - 13, Chapter (I) - The Problem: - Is the Traditional Orthography of English an Important Cause of Difficulty in Learning to Read?' page 13 - ...traditional orthography makes learning to read more difficult than would be the case with a regularised writing-system in the following ways: - (1) The volume of items in the traditional orthography is unnecessarily large... (2) The operations in decoding the traditional orthography writing-system are unnecessarily complex...'
- ^ "Spelling Reform Bill Volume 462: defeated on 2nd reading on Friday 11 March 1949". Hansard. Retrieved 23 May 2021.
- ^ "Simplified Spelling Bill - Friday 27 February 1953 - Hansard - UK Parliament". hansard.parliament.uk. Retrieved 2021-07-08.
- ^ "Bath (aka Pitman) Printing Press". Heritage Gateway. Retrieved 8 July 2021.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
References[edit]
- Pitman, Sir James; St John, John (1969). Alphabets & Reading - The Initial Teaching Alphabet (1st ed.). Bristol: Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons Ltd. ISBN 0273433431.
- Downing, John; Latham, William (1967). Evaluating the Initial Teaching Alphabet (1st ed.). Worcester & London: Cassell.
- Ministry of Education (1957), Standards of Reading 1948 - 1956, vol. Pamphlet No. 32, Her Majesty's Stationery Office (HMSO), p. 46
- Ministry of Education (1950), Reading Ability; some suggestions for helping the backward 1948 - 1956, vol. Pamphlet No. 18, Her Majesty's Stationery Office (HMSO), p. 50