Are these odd words to learn in Reception

[Schnullerbacke]

Had things like: it, at, up, dog, and, I, in, am etc last week. This week its look, you, away, to, the. It just seems like an odd jump to me.

[JKSLtd]

They don't seem odd to me, DS1 has just left Reception.

The first lot are straightforward words that you can sound out, so teaches then that strategy,

The second lot are 'tricky' words that you can't sound out and have to learn to recognise as whole words.

[Schnullerbacke]

Fair doos, I just thought it would take a while until the tricky ones appear. We had great fun trying to teach her 'the' today - both of us dont have English as first language. God knows what her accent will turn into :)

[JKSLtd]

'the' is a majorly tricky one, esp as DS1 still says it 'vuh' so cannot possibly spell it!

I think the main thing is to get them to understand there are 2 types of words, those you can sound out & those you can't. It took DS all year to figure out most of them :)

[sleepy78]

There is a list of 45 words that all children have to (try to) learn to read and write in Reception - google will have them somewhere I'm sure! This week's words might seem hard but they come up a lot in their reading books so they start them early.
Hope that helps!

[Sirzy]

www.familylearning.org.uk/images/hfwordsrec.pdf

[Sirzy]

posted to soon - that list is to the high frequency words for reception

[sleepy78]

Well done sirzy - you found what I was too lazy to find couldn't find!

[IndigoBell]

There is a list of 45 words that all children have to (try to) learn to read and write in Reception - this list is old! Kids no longer have to learn these 45 words in reception.

Instead they're meant to be taught by phonics.

Unfortunately from that list you're kid is bringing home it doesn't look like they are :(

So yes the list is odd, and against govt recommendations.

What they should be doing is letters and sounds phase 1 or the equivalent :(

[sleepy78]

oops! They've changed everything since I moved abroad!
But really, these words are useful and often, you can't learn to read or write them using phonics alone, so I wouldn't worry if the list is still being used! Government recommendations aren't always perfect imo!

[maverick]

In the DfE's programme, Letters and Sounds, phase 1 is not about teaching reading -it's rather pointless, IMO, phonological awareness exercises. Teaching reading using synthetic phonics starts in Phase 2. of Letters and Sounds.

[InvaderZim]

Actually, phonics is taught alongside "sight words", common words which cannot be sounded out phonetically, or those which use more complicated phonics such as double letter sounds (digraphs) like 'th'.

[spanieleyes]

Phonics shouldn't be taught alongside "sight words", that rather defeats the object of teaching phonics!

[sleepy78]

I work in an international school where I have more freedom to choose the way I teach and we do exactly that, spanieleyes - a mixture of phonics and sight word recognition lets children learn the irregular words as well as teaching them to sound out new words. It also caters for different learning styles. If we didn't practice sight words, it would take children years to read and spell words such as through or because. The phonics involved in words such as these are very complicated.

[dikkertjedap]

Rather than just learning a list of tricky words you can read a book and point out the tricky words with your child repeating them. Makes it more interesting.

[sleepy78]

Good point dikkertjedap - there are different ways of going about it.

[maverick]

Forget 'learning styles', they have no basis in reality. Sorry.

www.dyslexics.org.uk/learning_styles.htm

[coccyx]

Maverick always manages to get her website in on a reading thread!

[maizieD]

That is because maverick is extremely knowledgable about the teaching of reading and issues attached to learning to read. Her web site is well worth reading as it is based on research findings, not opinon or beliefs. It will help to counteract some of the well meaning nonsense which gets repeated on these reading threads. (Such as the daft belief that there are words which cannot be sounded out).

[Feenie]

Hijack alert - was pleased with ds's Reception teaching, he was reading Rigby Star, and his blending was coming along nicely.

Fast forward to Year 1 and they have inexplicably switched him to ORT. He has gone from blending beautifully to reading 'furniture' and 'curtains' without looking at the page.

I am showing admirable restraint in the readng record book so far, but the first person to mention picture clues to me will be very, very sorry!

Incidentally, (and back on thread), the tricky words in Letters and Sounds are not taught as sight words, they are taught as phonetically regular with a 'tricky' bit.

[mrz]

InvaderZim learning sight words alongside phonics went out when the searchlight model was dropped although sadly some schools cling to it just as they cling to ORT and phonics fades after reception

[yellowsubmarine41]

Is it usual to be getting words home to spell with your children at this stage of reception?

[mrz]

Not if the school is still following the old NLS

[yellowsubmarine41]

What's NLS?

[mrz]

National Literacy Strategy (scrapped 2006)

[lovingthecoast]

Ive been out of infant teaching for a long time and last taught in secondary. So should they not be doing tricky words in Reception any longer?

DD1 is now in Y1 but has tricky words right from the beginning last year. She entered Reception knowing close to 40 of the sounds and able to read cvc and cvcc words so started on books straight away. Her books were phonic based linked to L&S but still had words like - the, no and said, in them.

I remember thinking it all fitted nicely as the tricky words gor trickier as her books did if that makes sense. I also remember being told they were following JP and going to a parents' evening where they showed us those coloured flowery JP tricky word things which they said ran alongside the phonic teaching. She certainly picked up the the last handful of sounds quickly and learning the tricky words didn't seem to confuse or hinder her attempting to blend or segment new words.

So do they no longer introduce books in Reception; even newer ones clearly linked to L&S? Because surely even they contain basic sight words such as, the?

Just to add I'm interested rather than critical having taught infants myself many moons ago and having DD2 due to enter Reception next year.