The ITA was a great idea far ahead of its time. No computers, so it
depended upon published material that was not always available nor as
flexible as a computer system could be. The system had special symbols so
it was not keyboard friendly. It also was not pronunciation guide quality.
Truespel has advantages in all these areas.
Good to read that it worked for you well. Two other phonetics first type
systems also report good results for initial reading/writing learners,
unifon and writing to read by IBM. However, these two also unfortunately
use special symbols, but testing shows that kids can read and write very
quickly in a phonetic system, and that transition is not a problem.
What the world needs is a simple phonetic spelling system based on English
that is pronunciation guide quality so it can be used in our dictionaries
and translation guides as well as for beginning readers. Truespel does
this. It is learnable in 15 minutes for USA English adepts. It's available
for free at truespel.com. Using the converter anyone can write lessons in
truespel so its maximumly flexible. Basically it's the first integrator of
all these areas. This has never been attempted before.
>I learned to read using ITA, kind of similar to Truespel.
> See http://www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett/ita-eval.htm
> However we were moved onto T.O. (normal spelling) within one semester. My
>mother hadn't taught me to read as my elder sister learned at home, was
>reading long books already when she began school and was bored and
>disruptive in first grade. I remember learning to read in a matter of a
>couple of weeks at age 5 and it was so exciting. I don't remember any
>difficulty in the transition period.
> It is a shame it was phased out. I can't see the value for using it in an
>ESL/EFL setting though.