Martin's recent blog about free-range spelling in the UK certainly got me thinking. Frank Furedi writes a provocative response to the original proposal in the online journal, Spiked, arguing against laissez-faire orthography:

My principal objection to ‘variant spelling’ is that it reinforces the pernicious idea that children and young people today cannot be expected to meet the difficult challenge of learning how to use language correctly. For some time now, influential educators have asked whether it is desirable to teach children correct spelling. Some pedagogues argue that teaching spelling is a waste of time that serves no positive purpose. Others claim that an insistence in the classroom on spelling everything correctly frustrates those who suffer from learning disabilities and dyslexia.

Maybe it's different in the UK, but my experience teaching writing isn't so much that students can't spell: they spell far too well, thanks to spellcheckers. Trouble is, they spell the wrong words--there for their, tree for three, write/right/rite--a pattern some copywriters call the spellcheck syndrome. And spellcheck syndrome isn't confined to students, but has become something of an epidemic among professional copyeditors.

Researchers such as Andrea Lunsford who've analysed patterns of student writing errors over the years have concluded this spellcheck syndrome is currently the most common error in student writing. And because it suggests an unfamiliarity with the written word, it's very difficult to remedy. I did a posting earlier this year on one technological fix that I'll be suggesting to students, along with the usual, (mostly-ignored) advice: read more books.