Reading - does anyone have a 7 year old who can read

[Carla]

• almost most things, and if she can't she has a really good try, but whose spelling doesn't cut the mustard? She has her class divided into 4, but is only in the second stream on her spelling.

my 7yr old daughter can read almost anything but cannot spell at all! i asked her to write the sentence:"I LAUGHED WHEN I SAW THE PICKLE".(simply because she didn't seem able to get words like "pickle,tickle" etc.right when spelling them and words like "laugh" were continuously baffling her when reading.Of course, what did I get...?"I LAFT WEN I SORE THE PICKEL".....!What I don't get is when teachers say she can spell but she can't read very well....!

spelling is a function of memory (in the absence of other problems like dyslexia). the better the memory, the better the spelling.

reading is a separate issue - it is about familiarity and decoding etc. memory doesn't really come into it

this is very interesting.
Ds1 is the other side of the coin funnily enough, his reading is OK but he?s a bit unwilling and certainly not up there on the Harry Potter! but he is really keen on spelling and very good at it too.
So is this a good thing? does it mean he is learning to read in the ?right? way????? (and thus I shouldn?t worry about his slower-ness, not that I do really.
I do notice he is slower than dd (who is 4) at ?guessing? what the word is, eg if he is hesitating over a word dd will often pipe up with what it should be, guessing from the context or the picture (she can?t read yet of corurse) whereas he seems to need to spell it out.

Cutekids - my daughter would spell that sentence in exactly the same way. Even if you hadn't indicated what you had asked her to write I would have understood it. This is what I meant in my earlier post.

my ds has been reading since 5 he is very good reader and a very good speller his teacher said he is a good speller because he reads so much he is now 8,but his handwriting is awful.

Re: janh "Spelling is a knack IMO, some people pick it up straight away and some people never quite get it. English spelling is so eccentric it's hardly surprising!"

I'm sure for many people it is a knack, but you have to have some grasp of how the aplhabetic code works to develop that knack. Some people are able to pick it up from their reading and from the limited teaching they may receive - others fail to pick it up at all. The thing is, all children need to be taught this in the first place to at least they can all have a damn good go at developing the knack. Many never receive effective enough teaching and so are at a disadvantage from the start.

and also re: "English spelling is so eccentric...."

English is a lot more regular than people believe. With limited phonics understanding, it can appear highly irregular and generally bizarre, but it isn't so. Only words like 'eye' and 'one' are so weirdly spelled for the sounds that exist in them. Most 'odd' words only have one peculiar part to them that can be learnt easily e.g. in 'people' the 'eo' spelling for the 'ee' sound is only present in that word, but the rest is quite 'regular' and the 'e' part is used in 'ee' sounds so it's not that hard to remember with the right reminders. Also, 'ie' spelling for 'e' sound in 'friend' is the only occasion it does that, but there is a link I use with Freya being the goddess of friends and that's what Friday is named after so when wanting to spell 'friend' think of the goddess and beging the word like 'friday' starts... Obviously this gets explained a little more clearly than I just rattled it off here...

Re LIZS - you have answered your own question! Jolly Phonics is exactly the sort of thing that would sort it out - and I would absolutley recommend that approach if littler sis is using it right now.

Carla - the more able pupils just have all the right auditory and visual skills as well as strong memories to put all the knowledge together for themselves. I was a whole word learner but was able to remember all the intricate details in a word to spell based on memory but for each letter and sound.

re: spelling tests - many schools scrap them these days in favour of assessing spellings within the context of work, exactly because many children can emorise words long enough for the test, but can't remember them for any longer, or in the context of writing lengthier texts.

yoyo - your dd might have been taught a wider variety of spellings, but perhaps still not given the strategies to choose which ones. For example, when I had only taught the 'ie' spelling for the 'ie' sound, I would expect to see 'pie' and 'tie' spelt correctly, but similarly, would accept speelings like 'liet' (light) and 'hie' (high) and 'biek' (bike) until I had taught alternative spellings and how to choose to use them. I can go into moe detail about this method if anyone wants, but perhaps will leave it out now to keep the message as short as possible!

THRASS is a phonics scheme that teaches all the sounds and all the spelling alternatives, but does it, in my opinion, in a very confusing 'throw it all at them at once' kind of approach which I think is too hard for very little ones, or varying ability.

princesspeahead - I am intrigued by your post "spelling is a function of memory (in the absence of other problems like dyslexia). the better the memory, the better the spelling.

reading is a separate issue - it is about familiarity and decoding etc. memory doesn't really come into it"

Reading has to involve memory! You have to remember what sounds all those letters stand for when you see them! And you have to have them really ingrained in your memory for rapid recall to eventually be familiar with how the words looks and words as a whole or you would be sounding out every word mechanically forever. And if you weren't using phonics or sounding out, and it didnt' involve memory, you could never learn them as wholes, sohow would you learn to read at all? Familiarity and decoding can only occur effectively with memory.

Catflap - are you a literacy specialist by any chance? You may be right with THRASS in DD's school - when she was in nursery I was concerned about how it would be taught in reception and beyond. I had used the phonics approach with DD1 with no problems. I bought the Superphonics books but found that trying to do one at home while school did another was way too confusing for her. So where to from here? Back to basics or hope it clicks as I mentioned earlier?

Sadly I will never get to be a Literacy Specialist all the while everything I know and believe and practice are hated by the Government and all its minions. I know of a Literacy Consultant who also believed in this method of phonics that I speak about and she had such a battle trying to get it understood in Government circles, she quit. Sounds defeatist here - I have obviously left out most of the story. Suffice to say, I think she is doing a better job where she is now.

I would consider anyone knowledgeable about synthetic phonics and anyone who practices it to be a literacy specialsit, however - it takes a lot of knowlegde and a lot of skill: something the Government do not seem keen to recognise, let alone pass on to everyone else

Hmm, where from here. You can hope it clicks - often it does. However, if you wish ti take a more pro-active role, I have always favoured Jolly Phonics because, apart from many other positives, I have found that it makes so much sense to children that even if the method conflicts with what is done at school, it helps makes sense of the chaos and often puts more into place for them. There are also loads of great resources available that I think are more suitable to work done at home.

Ds reads really well and falls asleep with encyclopedias most nights but his spelling is really bad and writes like a spider on drugs unless challenged and watched. He writes it as it sounds most of the time but when he thinks about it he can spell it fine.

hmm, thinking later today about my post, it was not helpful to say "oh, my child is not like that".
Didn't mean to post in an unhelpful way to those whose children read well but don't spell well.
Just interested in the whole subject and I guess putting the different PoV.
Anyway, sympathy for all those dealing, as I feel I am, with any kind of literacy difficulty.

My dd is 9 now but her spelling is still poor when measured alongside other things. However she is so creative - something I believe can't be learnt.
Spelling's about to be my new hobby because I've started a dyslexia course. Dh is very afraid!

Catflap - is it possible to go back to the start from this point though? She reads very well and is able to break down unfamiliar words into the componenet sounds (she tries out the sounds until the word makes sense within the context in which it is written). I'm not sure it would be that easy to go back to the beginning and yet I know she will gain little from repetitive spelling "tests".

This is an interesting thread. My ds is 5 - in P2 - and I feel his reading is not going as well as I would expect. I put this down to the "whole word" approach used. He has a very good memory and will use picture clues etc to work out words - and then quickly memorises what's on the page. He therefore gives the impression of reading quite well when in actual fact he is reciting what is remembered. The school uses "Jolly Phonics" as a resource - but does not use it to teach reading which I don't agree with. Think I might use some of this thread as ammunition when I next speak to the tecaher!

Have to come in on this thread to support Catflap and the whole synthetic phonics approach. I've taught DS2 to read this way and, while he's still not fluent (he's only just 4), he can tackle words he's never seen before like "basilisk lizard", because he knows the rules. A child with 6 months of whole word teaching would probably not manage that unless they were familiar with lizard species!
As far as spelling goes, I too think spelling tests are not necessarily useful. Not sure DS1 has remembered any of the words he just learned for tests, though he's remembered many that he's used in writing.

dd is 5 &, much to my delight, read "I love you" on a note I'd given her. Very haltingly but she did it! I thought my heart would burst. she is being taught synthetic phonics approach at school but in French!

At DSs school they seem to teach the children how to read rather than to read iyswim. They teach them the sounds, letter blends, phonics etc and not just to read the 50 words they're meant to know before they leave reception. DS is now 6.5 and in 6 months during Y1, he went from reading very very little to reading the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe to himself. I freely confess that I worried that he couldn't read and was stunned that when that switch in his brain clicked, his reading took off.

However his spelling is terrible although if you approach it phonetically, it's spot on.

I agree with PPH about spelling being more about memory. With reading you work out what "knight" says but unless you remember how to spell it, then "nite" is how you would write it. Eventually the two become second nature. My reading is infinitely better than my spelling although now I can generally spot (ie remember) if I've spelt a word incorrectly.

yoyo - with the correct approach - in anything, I believe - it is always possible to go back to the beginning, although 'unlearnng' mis-information can be a challenge.

However, in reading, the ability to discriminate sounds lessens with age and lack of practice, so remedial work really is better done sooner than later.

Soupdragon - but when reading the word 'knight' you've still got to remember that the letters 'kn' are together for the 'n' sound and not to say them separately and you've got to remember that 'igh' are together for the 'ie' sound. You've also got to remember that more quickly the next time you see it, so you are not sounding out laboriously each time.

As far as I can see, memory works the same for spelling, but the other way around - you've got to be ablet o remember what speling alternatives to choose for the sounds you can hear.

Nice post, singersgirl

Dd1 is 7 and an excellent reader (about 5 years ahead according to her teacher), but spelling can be a bit hit and miss. I think part of the problem is that the teacher's don't correct spellings in school work (well maybe one or two, but certainly not all).

When I queried this at last parent's evening I was told it was because if they corrected every spelling it would be too de-motivating! . No wonder kids can't spell these days.

Another post of support for Catflap, synthetic phonics in general and Jolly Phonics in particular! Catflap pointed me in the right direction about six months ago when I was worried about ds and his reading (he was in Reception at the time). He is now in Year 1 and one of the best readers in the class! I can't thank her enough! I would urge anyone to use Jolly Phonics - my boys love it - and the 12 Steps (which tell you what to teach and in what order) can be found on www.jollylearning.co.uk. Go the oldest-but-one post on the message board (2003) and they are there. Ruth Miskin Literacy books have also been useful for reading practice.

You really don't need to know anything about teaching reading - I didn't. I just followed the 12 Steps and cannot believe the difference in my son's reading.

I have heard children older than him reading and he is at a higher level than lots of them. He has a decoding strategy and can tackle new words with confidence. He is not dependent on context or picture clues and doesn't guess a word merely from its first letter - he sounds all the sounds and then blends them to get the right word. Most of this is now done silently and rapidly and six months ago I would never have believed this was possible.

Found this thread now, very useful.

Just a quick question, Scotlou's post got me thinking, my DS1's School uses Jolly Phonics but it hadn't occurred to me that the books he brings home may be a different scheme, just assumed they were the correct books. Does anyone know if the books with the characters, Tilak, Mo, Lizzie, Mrs Hall, Bobby etc are the Jolly Phonics books or are they some other scheme?

If they are another scheme I wonder if it would be worth me trying to get a hold of some of the Jolly Phonics reading books as a bit of an extra?

missed this thread before (didn't like to sound boastful by saying mine could ) but saw it mentioned elsewhere....Neither of mine could/can spell. Both had a lot of ear infections when younger. The turning point for my eldest was getting a copy of Reader Rabbit software which had syllables, she hadn't understood them before. My son's spelling is better than his sister's at the same age but he was using the software at a younger age.

The oldest is now having trouble spelling in French

DS1 has a Reader Rabbit CD but I think it must be the more basic one. Think I'll look it out again.

The whole point of a synthetic phonics approach is that the letters and sounds are learnt systematically and words are only read which contain those sounds and letters already learnt. This reinforces those, shows how they can be used - but above all, what's the point of teaching sounds and letters and then expecting children to read something alien? It's like showing a new driver how to do left turns and then expecting them to reverse park...

Jolly Phonics books compliment the scheme in that they are matched to the letter groups to be introduced. So, after the first week of 6 letters, there is a set of books with simple stories containing words made up of those sounds. Then, after the second week of 6 more letters, the books contain stories made up of all these 12 sounds and letters and so on. They are not scheme books like others where the same characters are followed through plots through each level - they are discrete stories about all sorts of things in their own right.

And whereas 'traditional' phonics (e.g. 26 letters of the alphabet = 26 sounds) means that stories were terribly limited to 'cat sat on the mat' sort of tedium, because with SP and JP the letter/soudn introduction is fast and thorough, words like 'flash' and 'bang' and 'party' and 'mushroom' are used from quite an early level and these can be easily read.

They are called 'Jolly Readers' and each level of the Jolly Readers has three series (each with 6 different books):

Inky Mouse and Friends. (Stories about Inky, Snake and Bee and the world of the characters in Jolly Phonics)

General Fiction. (Both new and classic stories)

Nonfiction. (Factual information and stories)

They are generally available in ELC and Formative Fun stores as well as some WHSmith shops now - visit the Jolly Learning Site for more info.

Too often schools just use Jolly Phonics as a phonics resource for their poorly taught phonics amongst the whole range of strategies the National Literacy Strategy promotes. This is a tragedy.

At my DS's (he is P2) school, i dont't konw what system they use for teaching. The books we're using for reading are Ginn, with the same characters that MrsSpoon mentioned. However, i have to say that my DS will have a go at unfamiliar words, by saying the sounds of each letter first - and then making it into a word. Suppose i should find out what the school are doing.