Cna yuo raed tihs?

I find the connection between print & sound really interesting.
It is as though you hear the (mis)spelled words.

Isn't it?

I can read it fluently. Hnh.

So why are we teachers wasting our time teaching spelling then?

Yeah, I could read it just fine, and very close to the speed in which I read anything else.

Context

Frankly, spelling is one worry that is pretty low on my priority list. Spelling mostly counts only in written work where students have the opportunity to edit. So, in test situations, unless writing itself is being assessed, spelling doesn't get you points off. It does count (but not much) in the standardized long composition testing. I think that moving into the modern world of spell-check and even spell-check-in-context, this will become less of an issue. I'm not sure how I feel about that.

But it is nice when students (say nothing of their teachers! ) spell properly, yes?

I think of those hours & hours spent trying to figure out what students are actually trying to say in written exam responses. Almost driven me to drink, on the odd occasion.

Oh it is absolutely nice when they have spelled correctly. But, working with special ed kids I just want them to get a full sentence or a proper paragraph out. What I can't stand is when they type using a program with automatic spell check and proceed to go through and click ignore at all the red squiggly lines.

That I can understand!

It seems obvious to me that we can only decipher the the mixed up version because we are familiar with the correct version . Theoretical speculation about spelling and reading appears to be misguided.

Yes, you're probably right about that, fresco.

Now you're asking! Grrrrrr ....

You're complaining, Thomas!

That's nothing.

I've wasted my whole teaching career! <sob>

Awwww. Don't be sad. I'm sure you're one of the nicer teachers, the kind that is openminded about creative spelling philosophies.

I'll fanult you!

I am not going to respond to this piece of mischief, Thomas!

Provocation, I ever I saw it!

I will not!

When one is learning to type (i refuse to use the phony verb "keyboarding"), one learns "phrases," which is to say, one learns to type groups of letters, and that without reference to the "sense" or logic of the group. In fact, the old method included speed building drills, in which one would type five letter groups which were intentionally not words or parts of words, in order to build the habit of repeating what one sees without reference to the sense or logic of the groups of letters one was learning to master. I achieved my fastest speed after doing speed building drills (not that i can still do that, but i still type pretty damned fast).

It's silly, though, to claim that spelling doesn't matter. It becomes even more crucial when one its attempting to understand someone who doesn't express ideas well. They're, their and there are words for which the spelling is crucial to understanding the meaning. One might allege that the strict insistence upon spelling might be relaxed, and that's not unreasonable--Noah Webster demonstrated that. But to abandon spelling standards altogether would be foolish.

I don't think anyone was seriously suggesting that, Setanta.
Yes, agreed on your second point.

while i was able to read the sentence about as fast as i normally do, it's because i know the words

i doubt you could teach a child to read using this method, if the theory that the letters order don't matter as long as the first and last are correct, how could a child have any basis for establishing the word, engineer could be spelled eigenenr or egeniner, you could never form a constant that the word would be based on