To think that schools should teach reading properly

[Reallytired]

My son has been really lucky, he has had an excellent reception teacher and has been taught how to read properly by synthetic phonics. His teacher followed Jolly phonics logically with great results.

He has a little friend who is at a different school. She is 6 months younger than my son and has had only 2 terms of school. This girl has been taught to read by sight words and a reading ladder. Because she started after christmas she got taught the letter sound "ch" before being taught "s", "a", "t", "p", "i", "n".

The result is that this poor little girl is still on Oxford Reading Tree level one and hates reading. Her mother is convinced that her daughter is dyslexic because the little girl is extremely bright in other areas of the reception curriculum. I think the reason the little girl can't read is that the teaching she has recieved has been a mess.

i wouldn't have thought it was a bad thing to be on level one of ort after only 2 terms of school

and schools do teach reading properly, the vast majority do, are you sure you have the whole picture?

teaching by sight words is not teaching reading properly. if your friend wants to help her dd you can buy the JP stuff online really easily. Ds romped through it before he was four.

DH is a victim of not being taught to read properly at school. They tried to teach him Look and Say which is a sight reading scheme. He didn't learn to read until he was 12

Of course YANBU - there is so much nonsense about 'immersing children in a rich literacy environment' and not enough on the solid basics of letters and sounds.

IMHO nothing can beat the first times your dc reads something of their own violition, even if it is 'only my cat understands me' on your mug!!

When they start reading road signs and telling you off that is a different story

It amazes and appalls me how many parents leave something so important to the school even when it is clear their methods are not working. I am changing my dc's school and the way the old school taught reading ( a mix of Jolly phonics, alphabet letters only, plus sight words and guessing ) is one of the reasons - new school teaches synthetic phonics properly.

Hana - when you consider that 20% of children leave primary school not being able to read i cannot agree that most schools teach reading properly - that 20% would probably be higher were it not for those who could either read before they went to school, or whose parents taught them becasue the school were not.

I thought phonics was compulsory now...

It may well be, but how and when you teach letter sounds is important. my dd has just done the 'long' vowel sounds and 'oo' and she is at the end of yr 1. How on earth was she expected to read words if she had not been taught the long vowel sounds . She got so demorilised that i ended up teaching her JP in term 1 Reception so as a result, she can read, but has also been faily bored these last few terms in 'literacy' beasue she was not learnign anything.

I think many teachers do not beleive that children as young as 4 and 5 can actually understand phonics, especially the more complex rules, but IME they do just fine, and a lot better than being confused by a whole range of different strategies or worse still guesing from the pictures
If done properly it is fun and they do not realise they are 'learning'

This is a book I used with my DS and he was an early and confident reader.

20% is fairly high, where are you stats from?
I still think the vast majority of schools do a good job.

I have a confident reader tho -sept born reception student - and we've not bothered with any jolly phonics or letterland etc etc. It's all just clicked with her. school uses ORT.

but thinking about your 80/20 split, 80 would pretty much cover the 'vast majority' wouldn't it?

I am a sen teacher.

Eighth Report of the Parliamentary Select Committee on Education, 7th April 2005: said that "around 20% of eleven-year-olds are not reading at an age-appropriate level".

I started to teach my son to read when he was 3, using JP and some other made up methods of teaching. He's now 5 but with a reading age of 9. He is still being given Oxford Reading Tree books with about five words per page. He seems to be seen as something of an inconvenience to his class teacher who would prefer every child to be at the same level.

I totally agree that your friend's child has started learning in a weird order but as long as she eventually covers all of it she'll get better at reading. Her mother could buy the books and do them at home and make it a lot more fun than it's been for her at school. Finding books she enjoys, Little Miss and Mr Men or something perhaps might help. If she enjoys the stories she's much more likely to enjoy reading them. ORT books are incredibly dull.

My friend's daughter mother is a single mother and works full time. She is clinically depressed and does not have the energy to teach her daughter to read.

I feel that my son friend should not have to teach her child to read. The school should do the job.

My son is six months old and he goes to a school that uses 99% pure synthetic phonics. He is reading stage 5 of the Oxford Reading Tree comfortably inspite of being partially deaf. He can read virtually anything. He has been taught that pictures are for decoration.
There are lots of children in his class who have English as a second language and they are reading well.

There is even a little girl who was so developmentally delayed that she started reception in nappies! Even this little girl has learnt to blend simple c-v-c words. However she finds it hard to understand what she is reading because her speech is so severely delayed.

In comparision my friends little girl has no major developmental problems. Infact developmentally she is very advanced, She just hasn't been taught to read properly.

I think its about time that teachers stopped thinking that its acceptable to have 20% of eleven year olds unable to read.

But...she's only in reception, she's only been at school two terms, and are you sure you know everything that goes on in her school? At DS's school they did not really get started on phonics until Yr1 - he raced ahead in Yr1...that may be the case in your freinds dd's school.

I'm not saying reading shouldn't be properley and well taught, it's just that you seem to be
a) comparing your son (who sounds very ahead in reading - excellentr!) with a child who may not b getting it as quickly, is 6 months younger and in a different school - and making some big observations - and taking it in yourself!

I would disagree that pictures are soley for decoration and also that children learn to read only through synthetic phonics. Synthetic phonics are brilliant and give children the confidence to tackle unfamiliar words but some sight vocabulary is needed as well as other aids like using the pictures to help and the context.

My dd is 4 and is very good at synthetic phonics but when she tackles a book she uses the pictures to help her, if she meets an unfamiliar word she thinks about the context. All these things are unconscious but are very valuable early reading skills. Much as I love synthetic phonics they will only take you so far.

Also most teachers don't think it is acceptable that 20% of 11 year olds can't read - that is quite a sweeping generalisation.

As far it being the schools job to teach reading - yes to a certain extent that is true but children need to practice a skill and if there is no reading/looking at books going on at home then that will hold a child back. I got really fed up of hearing that from the parents of some of the poorest readers at school - the "why should I read with him, that's your job" - talk about passing the buck (not wishing to generalise myself - obviously there were some very poor readers who worked very hard with their children).

reallytired, you'd be hard pressed to find a teacher who thinks it is acceptable ( this 20% being talked about) , what a ridiculous statement to make!

and about the little girl who is 'developmentally delayed' - you don't know the story about her, or what her needs are or indeed what measures her teachers and support workers have put in place. YOu're making an awful lot of assumptions here

Yes, this little girl is younger, and hasn't been at school for long. However the children in my son's class were able to decode simple words in word boxes by the time they had spent 6 weeks in school.

If it was decided that reading should be taught until year 1 then that would be fine. A lot of countries wait until seven years old. However this school has attempted to teach her to read by methods that have been throughly discredited by research. Encouraging her to read by memorising sight words and guessing is getting her into bad habits.

The Rose Report made it clear that schools should stop teaching children to guess from pictures and context. Also it advocated phonics, first and fast.

There is no excuse for schools ignoring the Rose Report and damaging children's lives.

Yes, this little girl is younger, and hasn't been at school for long. However the children in my son's class were able to decode simple words in word boxes by the time they had spent 6 weeks in school.

If it was decided that reading should be taught until year 1 then that would be fine. A lot of countries wait until seven years old. However this school has attempted to teach her to read by methods that have been throughly discredited by research. Encouraging her to read by memorising sight words and guessing is getting her into bad habits.

The Rose Report made it clear that schools should stop teaching children to guess from pictures and context. Also it advocated phonics, first and fast.

There is no excuse for schools ignoring the Rose Report and damaging children's lives.

are you in the class room every day?

ORT is not strictly phonetic anyway.

Indeed - lots of word recognition and 'guessing in context' in ORT.

DS's school has a tow-entry reception - I wonder if those schools leave systematic phonetics until Yr1 rather than have chiuldren at two levels? i don';t know, just wondering.
I thought there wasn't that much leeway over teaching to read within the NC, anyway, and they teach to those quality assuracne schemes...

I don't think it is at all fair to presume that teachers think it 'acceptable' that 11 year-plds can't read.

Well you know neither of my children could read before Yr1 - DS#1 not before the end of Yr 1. They both read fluently in the end. Phonics and good teachers not withstanding. I really think that it is too early to worry. All children learnt at different rates.

I have yet to meet a teacher that thinks it's acceptable for an 11 yr old not be able to read and write

My DD couldn't decode simple words after 6 weeks of phonics. She didn't really read anything much in reception or the first term of Year 1. Then over the Christmas holidays something clicked literally over night and off she went. She's now one of the better readers in her year. I think some children just aren't ready to learn to read in reception, whichever method you use.

DS is nearly 4 and completely different. He won't be starting until September of next year and will be streaks ahead of where DD was at that age. However, I'm confident that when he gets to her age now (Year 3) he will be at a pretty similar level to what she is now.

And I was reading before school thanks to bllody flashcards and Janet and poxy John.

My ds was taught JP in reception. But he rarely sounds out unfamiliar words unless pressed to do so. He 'guesses' from the first letter, context etc. Short of giving him books with no pictures in I can't really stop him doing it. Especially as he really rather good at it. Now worried about the bad habits...

There are thousands of teachers out there trying their best to make sure their class can all read to the required level by the time they finish primary school. Unfortunately they sometimes come across problems like:
a) Children who just don't want to learn and cannot be induced into being interested in reading;

b) Completely disinterested parents who don't care enough to encourage their children;

c) Being unfortunate enough to work in a school where everything is a constant struggle and there is practically no help forthcoming from the LEA or headteacher.

In these situations I feel it is unfair to say that these teachers just 'find it acceptable' to allow children to leave school not knowing how to read, they really have no choice in the matter.