to object to this reading book

[Itscurtainsforyou]

My 5 year old brought home a reading book about "man on the moon". It talked about the 12 MEN (not people, men) who have walked on the moon. I could let that one go as it was talking about past events and they were all men.

However at the end of the book it says something along the lines of "maybe men will walk on the moon again" - IABU to think that they should have used non-gender words (such as "people") or worded it differently? I felt the need to explain to my 5 year old that in the 1960-70s most astronauts were men and of course these days women were equally likely to walk on the moon/go into space.

Maybe I'm just easily wound up but this just seems like subtle sexism and there should be no place for it in schools.

I can see where the confusion arises with the EYFS document though, Feenie.

The NC is clear and is a legal requirement so there's no room for argument there, but the EYFS document actually leaves itself open to teachers interpreting it in the way owlinatree has. And the L&S guidance could have been lot clearer to, given that it was mostly just handed to teachers. It would have been more helpful if it had given the explicit instruction not to teach lists of words as wholes, avoiding the argument over interpretation.

Indeed, seen it many times. Am baffled re which bit of KS1 assessment could have been misinterpreted though

Did you actually say "feminazi"? Twice?
Wow.

I didn't get that bit either. The new NC is really clear about this IMO.

I can't actually think of any official government publication from the last 10 years that uses the term 'sight words' or suggests that words should be taught as sight words or wholes.

There were female cosmonauts n soace from the early 60s. DS was more interested in the dog-monauts.

I don't teach lists of words! Each phase had a set of tricky words which are not decodable. I teach those alongside the phonics.

They're all decodable, owlinatree. Letters and Sounds told you how to teach them in exactly the way Rafa explained, drawing attention to each phoneme and explaining the tricky bit.

Ffs that's what I do! Did you read my previous posts?

It doesn't need to be in lists, really.

If you are teaching them as wholes or sight words it's the same thing wether you teach them in lists or not.

But that's phonics, and they are decodable - they're not alongside anything.

Yes, I did read your previous posts - I am quite concerned that you think learning sight words is all over the place and an important strategy, when it isn't.

Actually I might have misinterpreted owl's previous post.

I assumed that when she said that she got them to read the word after pointing out the tricky parts that she just got them to read it as 'was', until they knew it rather than /w/, /o/, /z/, 'was' every time. That might not be the case.

BertrandRussell

Did you actually say "feminazi"? Twice? Wow

I think three times. According to its definition, it's precisely the type of feminism I dislike. Nearly everything, when taken to its extreme, becomes unpleasant.

"Feminazi is a term used pejoratively to describe feminists who are perceived as extreme or radical, women who are perceived as seeking superiority over men, rather than equality. The online version of the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines the term as used in a "usually disparaging" manner, to describe "an extreme or militant feminist""

Garlic

When I said fear of upsetting them, I meant the way on MN when anyone who goes against the bandwagon's opinion is roundly criticised and bullied.

I think I said I found the use of mansplaining hypocritical. It takes a lot to offend me.

but I agree with your complainant that you are not very good at feminism.

Thank you. There I was thinking you didn't especially like me.

My complainant was laughed out the door by HR who suggested that she not use us as referees. She was expecting special treatment by a woman because she was a woman. I realise I go against the grain but that isn't what feminism is to me.

Equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome, remember.

"She was expecting special treatment by a woman because she was a woman. I realise I go against the grain but that isn't what feminism is to me." And you think that's what feminism to other people? How very strange of you!

It's a classic technique though-tell people what feminism is then say that's why you don't agree with it. Completely disregarding the fact that neither does anyone else. You've done loads of those.

Surely if children have books at home and are read to from an early age (I read to mine while I was breastfeeding them and not necessarily baby stories either - they both got the Iliad and the Odyssey. If parents buy some alphabet shape sorters based on stories they like (we had Thomas and Alice in W) and spend time sounding out the letters "a" for Apple, "F" for fat controller and you can make up a little story about what the fat controller did that day, then children, providing there's no underlying learning difficulty, will learn to read pretty easily. Both mine were ready Harry Potter at 6, on their own and making quite acute observations, ie, "I've thought about this mummy, Harry ended up in Knock Turn Alley because he pronounced Diagon Alley as diagonally".

Personally I don't think teachers need a national curriculum to teach children; society needs to take a few deep breaths and tell many, many adults a few home truths about taking the time to support their children. When I used to go in and help with reading when mine were at school guess which ones were reading easily, the ones whose parents read with them and supported them and generally showed an interest. What was so sad was that some of the children who were behind with their reading were clearly very bright and would tell me amazing things from the pictures we were looking at. I was quite flattered when the head phoned me up and asked if I'd do a regular weekly session with the children who were struggling but I couldn't persuade her that it would be a good idea if she also called in their parents and explained they had a role to play too because that was a step too far in telling parents what to do. But she was happy to tell us what to feed our children, how much sleep they should have, that we should walk to school with them, etc., etc;. I just don't get why as a society we can't stand up and say if you want your children to succeed then you as parents must take their education seriously and support them to learn because if you don't they will be at a disadvantage. If I wrote in their reading books specific things like: "please read with Jack twice this weekend for 5-10 minutes" mostly they did so some of it was an expectation issue.

So many clever children with potential out there who aren't able to fulfil it.

bertrandrussel

I'll be honest. The petty sniping and inability to show any form of intelligent discussion is wearing pretty thin. The extent of your posts has been,

How very strange of you!

Wow. [sarcastically]

Eh?

Do tell me more! [more sarcasm, I assume]

"When the intensity of emotional conviction subsides, a man who is in the habit of reasoning will search for logical grounds in favour of the belief which he finds in himself."

I assume you recognise the quote.It would stand you in good stead. Although you'll be offended no doubt by the use of 'man'.

The online version of the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines the term as used in a "usually disparaging" manner, to describe "an extreme or militant feminist""

Earlier on etymology was your big point. You may have a dictionary definition of 'feminazi' but doesn't the etymology of the word (likening feminists to Nazis!) have a certain impact? If you meant extreme or militant feminists why didn't you say that, rather than using a deliberately insulting term?

Yes we would talk about which sounds are 'tricky' and still 'sound' it out. I put the tricky sounds into red.

What you are trying to move towards is fluency. You don't want children sounding out and blending forever. You are moving towards them recognising words as they read. You are teaching them to use phonics as a skill towards decoding text. They are going to be recognising was after a while, seeing that pattern of letters and knowing how to say those sounds to make that word.

then children, providing there's no underlying learning difficulty, will learn to read pretty easily

A common misconception, but the evidence shows this doesn't happen. Or where it does it is a gap that can be caused by schools. Which is part of the reason why some schools that have intakes where you might not expect them to do well outperform schools with more involved parents when it comes to reading.

Where reading daily does give an advantage is in acquiring a receptive and expressive vocabulary, which is important for writing and comprehension at the higher levels (think old level 5 or 6). Of course if the school don't teach children to decode accurately and fluently, then children read to themselves less as well, which is a bit of a double whammy for them.

Which I think was what I said last night, so we are actually on the same page.

Apologies for my post. Just looked at the OP again. No, it wouldn't particularly have bothered me because one book in school is a very small part of the overall tapestry and one I can weave over pretty easily. There will be much bigger issues to face at school over the 13 years a child attends and I think I'd keep my reserves in place for those. For example: the year when child has a teacher who really can't teach (yes, you will have patch in bits at home and bolster your child's enthusiasm because it can't be put be put right in a hurry), bullying issues, social networking issues, child with an underlying issue who goes off the rails and you need the school's support, older child who genuinely has an interpersonal issue with a teacher later on, key A'Level subject teacher who is inspirational but who leaves half way through, or is diagnosed with cancer and your child's confidence is rocked because the new one doesn't seem as good.

Being a parent is full of challenges and surprises. I always thought the DCs primary head was a megalomaniac twit but found out different when the chips were down and dd really needed support in Y5. Saw a different side of her then and I know what her response to various parents was over issues similar to the OPs because they were upset in the playground over her perceived unresponsiveness. Yes because she had bigger more immediate issues to deal with like finding cover for the member of staff who had been diagnosed with breast cancer, how close to the line a family were vis a vis a safeguarding referral and whether the evidence was anecdotal, supporting the family whose child had leukaemia, liaising with the LA when three 11 year olds didn't have a secondary place and were crying themselves to sleep. Yes, I got to know her quite well after 10 years and still keep in touch 20 years on. I think this sort of irksome issue in one ORT reading book has be kept in context to be perfectly honest. Yes it is an issue and yes it does still need to be dealt with but I also think some perspective is needed.

All I know is that I wouldn't be a teacher for all the tea in china. I'd never be able to keep my irritations at bay - it used to be hard enough when the dc brought home a friend who was frankly a brat and whose parents made me understand just why they were a brat. Hard enough to smile and nod on a one to one basis - impossible with 30.

And on that note, I really must go and get the hoover out and have a quick tidy before DH comes home from work and wonders what I've been doing all morning .

Sorry, that last post was to owl wrt phonics being a route to fluency.

Hovis

Do you mean etymology? I don't think you do.

The meaning of the portmanteau certainly does have a certain impact. 'Disparaging' and 'insulting' term aren't synonymous. I'd take 'disparaging' to mean critical [of the subject] and view it of little worth and that is exactly how I view extreme and militant feminists.

You may have a dictionary definition...

I know, right! Bloody dictionaries and their definitions, examples of usage and explanations! Grrr!

I didn't really understand that *Rafals". Are you saying that at schools with an intake that is not as supported at reception as one that is have better reading outcomes for the children at the younger end? You make me feel as though what we did at home was all wrong. I don't see how it can have been though when one is at Oxford and one hoping to go.

herecomethepotatoes I am greatly enjoying your posts

carry on