Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

How do you teach a child to read?

108 replies

littlemissbossy · 22/11/2004 16:48

ok, this may be an obvious question, but how do you teach a child to read? my ds, aged 4, started reception in September and only knows a few letters of the alphabet but is expected to read (and I mean read the words himself!) at least two books a week (Oxford Reading Tree). When I spoke to the teacher about this at parents evening, she explained that they have no time to do individual reading in class so it must be done at home(which I understand) but I'm not a teacher ... and I'm not thick but I really don't know where to start and he's really struggling. So are there any mumsnet teachers who can give me some lessons on how to teach my son to read ... please??
TIA

OP posts:
Mo2 · 24/11/2004 13:26

Jude - I guess that was sort of my question too! And I've decided myelf from reading this thread that the answer is a 'resounding no'!
Actually our school does ORT for reading books, but also sends phonics worksheets home for discussion/ completion.

I think as someone said - many schools use a combination of schemes. Probably the most important element is to keep it fun and interesting, and see what your child seems to like best?

Gingerbear · 24/11/2004 14:14

I cannot believe that teachers are not taught how to teach children to read!!

Catflap, thank you for sharing your thoughts with us. You are a valuable new member of mumsnet.

LIZS · 24/11/2004 14:43

Mo2, I think you have hit on an important point. Schools use a variety of methods - phonics, whole word and so on - precisely because individual children respond differently to different methods. MIL used to be a Reception teacher and said it was hard to gauge which was the best approach as for many children a combination worked best and they would suddenly be able to read without it being particularly clear what had worked for them.

Jude105, I don't think it does any harm to practice phonics at home and use ORT at school since many schools use a combination of methods anyway and at some point your child will need to decode unfamiliar words. Perhaps have a word with the teacher just to check this isn't going to contradict what is being done in the classroom.

tamum · 24/11/2004 14:54

Our school starts with Jolly Phonics and ORT simultaneously, which I think works well. Another point about word recognition is that it does have to happen at some point anyway- there are far too many English words that simply can't be sounded out phonetically.

I was testing dd (6) on her spelling at the weekend and she had just got "done" (d-u-n) and "write" (r-i-t-e) wrong by the end of the list. We went back to it the next day and she got "done" wrong again, so I said no, it's not like that, do you remember? She replied "oh yes, I do, it's W-d-u-n!"

velcrobott · 24/11/2004 15:04

Catflap did post this though : It has been proved - adn I've seen this in my classrooms - that learning the sounds AND names can be very confusing for children and it's the soudns that helps us read so that is what should be taught first.

So I would have thought combining the 2 is confusing.... or do you know otherwise ?
I am shocked to see how early we teach kids to read.... (unless they show a keen interest)

LIZS · 24/11/2004 15:32

Not sure I understand your point velcrobott. The phonic sounds are more important to reading than the letter names but for spelling purposes, such as the examples from tamum, there are so many exceptions to the phonetic approach that these have to be read and recognised as whole words. Whilst you could focus on one method sooner or later the child will come across a problem and need a different tactic. Unfortunately that is the nature of the English language !

btw ds learned letter names and sound happily together at aged 2 and never confused them but dd (3) only really knows the sounds apart from in the ABC song.

tamum · 24/11/2004 15:33

Well, I can't really prove it, obviously! My children were fine with doing both simultaneously but I'm sure it would be child-dependent. My mother taught reception for years and years and was a big advocate of phonics at a time when it was deeply unfashionable, but even she says that it is crucial to introduce the concept of word recognition at some early stage (for "the" for example!)

tamum · 24/11/2004 15:36

Oh hang on velcrobott, I've just realised that maybe you were talking about letter sounds and letter names as opposed to phnoics and word recognition, in which case I agree that it makes sense to learn sounds first. Even so there are bound to be plenty of children like LIZS's who cope fine with both though.

aloha · 24/11/2004 15:50

But phonics is - as I understand it - not really just about letter sounds - it's about learning the combinations that make the different sounds that make up words. Hence our ability to read the bizarre little story in Catflap's post, despite the fact that none of us could possibly recognise the words as they are all made up (yet still, because we understand phonics, totally readable). Of course we come to recognise familiar words, but I think catflap's point is that recognition comes after we learn to read, not as a step towards learning to read. Of course some kids will learn to read almost by osmosis it seems, but if we are talking about teaching reading, then phonics seems to have by far the greatest success.

Mo2 · 24/11/2004 16:17

I have to say, that I think I would find a 'Phonics only' approach as much of a concern as an 'ORT only' approach. The Phonics 'stories' seem much less engaging, as they of necessity have been constructed around repetition of certain sounds (e.g. Oliver has an Octopus in his Office)

At least ORT stories are a bit more 'real life' and engaging... (that said, we've only had half a term of them... I'm sure by Stage 4 I'll be wanting to throw Floppy out of the window. DH already has a self-confessed 'vortex hatred' ! )

tamum · 24/11/2004 16:24

Don't worry Mo2, they do get better, honest! There are even some where I read on because I want to know what happens . Dd started with some purely phonics ones and was bored witless, but ORT engaged her from the start, so I agree.

Catflap · 25/11/2004 10:30

Ooh my word, so many things to add - and I really don't want to go on for as long as I did in the first message!

(Wallace, I did start responding to you but had to save it before my power supply ran out and I now have a broken lead SO I am now on another PC with no access to my mesage so far so will retrieve asap.)

Mo2 - children don't have to be challenged all teh time by reading, I feel. DO we only read books that are demanding to our reading skills? Your DS is obviously a very capable reader and so I wold just encourage him to enjopy his abilitities and explore all the wonderful books out there. I wouldn't limit him by trying to follow a complimentary scheme. WHilst I think it's a bit cheeky for your school to say they don't like ORT being used at home - how can they dictate to you? YOu can do what you like!! - I can see their point if the children have already read everything they try them with in school. ALthough it might give them the hint of how good he is, schools do have legitimate resourcing issues, so I can see where they are coming from....

I also beleive you can confuse kids by teaching them the wrong stuff the wrong way, but it seems like ds doesn't actually need to be taught much - he has the natural skill to be able to pick it up pretty much on his own.

enid - it would seem as if your ds doesn't have the skills or the confidence to work out unknown words which is why she looks at you rather than them. Children who know that it is just the letters that tell them the word and who know they have the skills to decipher them will be quite engaged int he word until they have worked it out. Sonds like you are doing just the right thing, though, alongside whatever method they are using at school.

lockets - sorry, never answered before; I teach in Kent, although am on maternity leave at the moment. Never made it to Lit co-ord; and I don't thnk I ever would have. There's too much pressure from the Government to do it their way and I was a bit of a rebel in the reading stakes!!

ghosty - thanks for the welcome! I do hope to visit other forums here but there is so much and I haven't left this one yet! I think you are right - it doesn't matter when you are taught to read, but how. It is being taught accurately adn effectively that is important, but it has eben proved time and time again that most chldren are ready at 4 and are very keen. Of course, this is never all chidlren - particularly those with poor speech and language development.

Jude - Mo2 answered for me - because phonics, taught properly, makes sense of everything, it can only complement any other method being used to teach reading and will make much more sense to children.

However, I would add that fun and interesting doesn't necessarily impart the right skills and knowlegde to children - although, of course, I am not suggesting my teaching of reading was ever not fun and interesting! I just think it's important to make the right stuff fun and interesting, rather than present inaccessible fun and interesting lessons to children. However, most children find the ability to understand adn read text independently so fun and interesting, it's all you need!

tamum - it is a common held misconception that so many words are not phonically regular. Once you understand all the 40+ speech sounds and their spellings, there are far more regular ones than you would think. Howerver, in traditional phonics teaching, they would seem irregular. 'done' and 'write' are quite regular. 'done' has three sounds - d, u and n. the d and n are represented by their most common spellings. The u sound is prepresented by oe - what is known as a 'split digraph.' A digraph is a sound spelling a 2 letters = a trigraph is a sound spelling of 3 letters e.g. igh in night. In many, many words, digraphs are split with the e at the end. In done, the oe represents u as it also is in come, some, love, glove etc etc so it's quite regular according to that group of words.

'write' has 3 sounds also - r, igh, t. The 'r' sound is spelt by 'wr' as in wriggle, wrong, wrestle - you know many others, so that is quite regular. the 'igh' is spelt with split digraph i_e and the t is spelt with its most common letter.

I hope this sheds a bit more light on how our written code works. It means that with the right sound/letter knowlegde, so many more words are accessible without being tricky, irregular of having to learn them in an alternative way because they are deemed too difficult.

LIZS. you make interesting points when you say " Schools use a variety of methods - phonics, whole word and so on - precisely because individual children respond differently to different methods. MIL used to be a Reception teacher and said it was hard to gauge which was the best approach as for many children a combination worked best and they would suddenly be able to read without it being particularly clear what had worked for them."

Learning styles are a big think in education at the moment, but there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that a) you can even begin to identify in young children what their preferred style is and b) that trying to match these reaps any majorly improved rewards.

SO many subject areas demand different skills adn I think it's important that children learn to explore all sorts of areas - visual, auditory and kinaesthetic. Plus, so many areas demand one or two particular skills and children need to develop their strengths in these areas. Music is largely auditory - visual once you start reading music. Children need to employ both these skills to experience music. Art is visual. It is important to develop children's visual skills, even if they aren't very strong. Reading is an auditory and visual skills. Both areas need to be developed. ANd I think we've all heard the saying - I hear and I forget, I see and I remember, I do and I understand." Kinaesthetic activities are always important, even to those who purport to be other kinds of learners. I think as we become adults we are more aware of what sort of learning works best for us - I am very visual and need to se things - hearing things only really makes me forget. But we still have to use other areas - the world can't be tailored to each of our specific needs!

aloha - thank you for summarising my point re: word recognition - can I quote you here just to reinforce it: "recognition comes after we learn to read, not as a step towards learning to read".

This is it exactly. Some children do go through this phase very quickly - they have a strong memory for word recognition but also to understand how the ewords are made up so it seems as if they are whole word learners but this can't be done without understanding the component parts. Trying to teach words as a whole first just blows the memory eventually! - there are just to many to learn! (analytic phonics, incidentally, teaches words as whole first and then looks at why the letters are there; for what sounds.)

Mo2 - must also comment on your thoughts that "The Phonics 'stories' seem much less engaging, as they of necessity have been constructed around repetition of certain sounds (e.g. Oliver has an Octopus in his Office)" as this is a very commonly held view.

First of all, 'phonics stories' do seem less engaging to us adults but really, what is important and the most engaging for children is that they can do it themselves. YOu can have the most exciting and engaging story in the world, which will be nothinig more than frustrating for the child that can't access it. I have used some books which seemed really dire in presentation and language to me, but I tried them as I had a limited resource issue. The kids loved them - because they could read them themselves! As long as you are still experiencing exciting stories, beautiful illustrations, realistic characters etc elsewherem what matetrs in the teaching of reading is that the children practice the knowlegde they have and see success through whatever material is necessary to aid this.

More later - dd crying for lunch! - and she has been so patient so far...!

Catflap · 25/11/2004 11:05

Right - she's full - just a quick finish off of the last point before we go into town, then I'm sure I'll be back!

Oliver had an Octopus in his office etc aren't really phonic stories. SOmewhere along the line, a long time ago, people seemed to think that the best way of introducing letters was via words that all began with the same letter. This has many flaws, not least because a) not all children can discriminate initial sounds and b) there are stioll a lot of other letters in the words that are not necessarily known. They key with successful phonics is that the sounds, letetrs and blending should occur all through the words using only sounds and letters learnt so far. So, admittedly, yes, after the Jolly Phonics first week introduction of s,a,t,i,p and n, ther stories are pretty much limited to patting ants in tins, but the kids love it because it's silly but most of all - they can read it! Letetrs can be introduced quickly and because they are all used to blend words all the time, they are learnt really quickly and reinforced all the time. SO, it's only after a couple of weeks that stories like 'bang' went the monsters, 'crash' went the monsters etc etc or stories about ducks and frogs in ponds etc can be quite exciting to read.

All for now. Can I say, thoguh, it is so lovely to hear all your thoughts and experiences - because of all the pressure and educational dogma in teaching over the year, you guys have actually more common sense and perspective than most of the teachers out there. Ever considered a career change, anyone???

albert · 25/11/2004 11:11

Must admit to not having had time to read all the posts yet but was just wondering how to tackle reading if the child is multilingual. DS is 4.5 and trilingual - English (me), Portugues (DH) and Italian (School) and I really don't know where to begin. Will also put this post on the bilingual thread and see if anyone can advise there. does anyone have any experience of this?

aloha · 26/11/2004 10:37

Catflap - have just started reading Why Children Can't Read and it's absolutely fascinating - and very good exercise for the brain! I certainly never knew so much about the Sumarian language. It makes a very convincing case, I have to say.

tamum · 26/11/2004 11:01

I don't want to split hairs, you're obviously hugely expert on the theory of phonics catflap, but I don't actually buy this idea of "done" being perfectly regular and obvious once you know the rules. Spilt digraphs or no, I still think that faced with "done" and "bone", for example, it is much easier for the child just to accept that they are pronouced differently and learn to recognise them.

aloha · 26/11/2004 11:06

Tamum, I'm less than a hundred pages in, but I do recommend the book! It points out very clearly that if we relied on our children recognising words as wholes, we should remember that the limit of human memory for pictograms (or other abstract symbols for speech sounds) is about 2,000 and the number of words that are in everyday use is a minimum of about 50,000. so memorising whole words as abstracts is always going to fall down somewhere. As I say, I am finding the book absolutely fascinating!

aloha · 26/11/2004 11:06

Feel a bit like religous convert zealot-type person

tamum · 26/11/2004 11:10

I'm finding this so weird aloha- I've always been such a huge advocate of phonics. I just found when push came to shove that both my children found basic phonics dead easy but found it really tough when it came to less obvious words. Once I suggested that they just accept that there are some words it's easier to recognise they found life so much easier. I'm glad you're enjoying the book though

tamum · 26/11/2004 11:11

Oh, and I should add I would never suggest using word recognition in place of phonics, I just feel it has its uses occasionally.

LIZS · 26/11/2004 11:59

I agree tamum. I think ds would have found it hugely frustrating if he'd had to wait to read words such as "done", and other less conventionally phonic words, until he'd covered all the alternative phonic sound/letter combinations although I think I understand the point Catflap is making. A friend taught her ds by a stricly phonetic method. He has a particularly mathematical style of learning and was able to assimilate the combinations quickly enough to be a fluent reader at 5.

Your book sounds interesting, Aloha

tortoiseshell · 26/11/2004 12:06

I really don't think phonics would work with ds - he is very impatient to learn, but I don't think he is ready to use a phonics style learning - I've tried sounding the words out with him, but he prefers to remember the 'look' of the word. Having said that, he has worked out some words because of their similarity to other words - e.g. Diccon and Dillon who are friends at playgroup/nursery - he was able to distinguish them and work them out. I learned entirely by 'look and say' method. Ds has started on the key words books by ladybird, and these seem to suit his style of learning - I think he is a very 'visual' learner, and has a real eye for detail in pictures - he will often surprise us with things he's noticed.

tortoiseshell · 26/11/2004 12:07

Just read back, and I mean 'at the moment I don't think phonics would work'. The only reason we're doing reading at all is because ds demanded to!

marialuisa · 26/11/2004 12:14

will state that I'm a McGuiness fan in advance but whilst I agree taht some words just have to be learnt (e.g. yacht) I would caution against introducing too many words if a child isn't interested in phonics. My dbro was considered "advanced" in his reading etc. until halfway through Y1 when his brain reached saturation point and couldn't learn any new "whole words". Although dbro had some phonics teaching he had preferred to memorise whole words so he could read, unfortunately trying to put things right is a struggle.

Interesting to hear the way other kids learn though. DD spontaneously started to blend basic alphabet sounds and we have gradually built on that as she is keen to learn. Had a really proud mummy moment when she read out some graffitti to my mum recently-it said pss off bi*h

GeorginaA · 26/11/2004 12:36

Thank you for starting this thread - it's confirmed to me that I want to be able to teach my ds1 to read rather than leave it to the school. Already he's coming back from nursery using "uh" sounds at the end of letter sounds which I've painstakingly tried to avoid.

Thanks for the book recommendation, ernest. Have purchased a copy and done the first lesson today! Ds1 enjoyed the "Say-it-fast" game in particular, but not particularly interested in the writing exercise. Nice and short lesson which ended just at the point where he was getting bored with it. Will let you know how we get on