Bit conused about this whole ' reading' thing. reception year.

[redderthanred]

DD cant read. I know this. She doesnt even know all of her letters.

Shes had two reading books last week. One which she could ' read' cover to cover. In any page order.
She was not ' reading' it. She had memorised it.
It was things like ' dad is frustrated' 'kipper is hungry'

So i know she was not reading that. Tachers comments in reading record said ' superb reading'

Today, shes come home with two books and a comment that shes read one already with the teacher. The comment was ' excellent reading, very fleunt and fantastic sounding out when stuck'

This is the book:
Chip wanted some sugar
He went to the supermarket
He got some crisps
he went to the shop
He got a comic
He went to the market
He got a ball
he forgot the sugar.

Ive sat down with her to ' read' it quickly. and yes, she ' read' it. But she didnt really.

Please somone tell me the teacher doesnt actually think shes reading this?

Or, what do i do if she does?

She only started 10 days ago???!?!?!?

I disagree - you were talking about formulaic and prescribed reading recovery and intervention as set out by 'experts'. I was talking about one teacher teaching one child to read using whatever methods work best for that learner. Teaching reading 1-to-1 is a very natural process for an experienced teacher - no programme devised by academics will be as good as an adaptable teacher with a range of methods up his/her sleeve who is responding to the strengths and weaknesses of each child. I wouldn't give you tuppence for most of your theories!

Feenie - I wouldn't for a moment suggest that proven 'methods' are abandoned. I happen to think a good teacher should know and use ALL of the best bits of many methods. All the theories come around in a never ending cycle when you are in teaching. A good teacher uses all the bits that work from all the fashionable educational theories that arise in government and other documents every year! As she/he moves on you keep what has worked and dump what doesn't. Of course teaching can be taught as a whole class activity - it must be taught that way. BUT practise with the teacher is crucial and should be individual and regular.

First response was to ymeyer btw.

Bonsoir -

"To cover the same ground, my English book budget was well over £200 while my French book budget was EUR 22 . The English books are a lot more attractive, but in some ways are a lot less complete than the French..."

Yes, this is such a scandal; UK schools are expected to waste millions on glossy pics to accompany their - often rushed, underdeveloped - decodable readers.. It's the ability to have sufficient appropriate practice in decoding, to engage with stories, to become confident, to gain fluency, and to take on board punctuation, through very careful structuring - but don't add the gloss, and don't lose the power of narrative!

I followed the controversy over introducing synthetic phonics in France a bit and was very taken with the little I saw of the Leo et Lea programme. It's good to hear that phonics teaching is established in your DC's

MickeyMixer,

I don't know if you realise how closely you follow the current Whole Language ideology?

It's a shame that you have not read Louisa Moats, "Whole Language Lives On..." since it speaks almost directly to you.

Below is a quote and the link again.

Louisa Moats:

"... Equation of teacher empowerment with freedom from structured curricula.

Professions are generally defined by the knowledge and skill that their members share. The public interest depends on such definition and the ability of the professional community to regulate itself accordingly.

Whole language, however, promotes the ideas of teacher independence and self-sufficiency. Instead of encouraging the development or dissemination of better instructional programs, or encouraging teachers to apply best practices validated by others, whole-language educators encouraged teachers to invent their own individual curricula and to rely primarily on their own experience to make instructional decisions.

Even now, reading education professors in the U.S. continue to rail against education policies that impose constraints or directives (?mandates?) about curriculum or methods, complaining that the loss of control by classroom teachers over what they do in their classes is a threat to both democracy and professionalism. In the climate perpetuated by such rhetoric, teachers? incentives to collaborate, to replicate best practices, or to study research are diminished.

www.usu.edu/teachall/text/reading/Wholelang.htm#introduction

For anyone interested in more information, Louisa Moats wrote a follow-up paper;

Whole Language High Jinks
How To Tell When "Scientifically Based Reading Instruction" Isn't.

www.usu.edu/teachall/text/reading/Wholelang.htm#introduction

Ferguson, if you are still on this thread, you sound like a wonderful TA to me.

allchildrenreading - another issue I was very interested in, and looking out for, with my own DD was the point at which she no longer wanted there to be pictures in the books I was reading to her - when listening to the words/story alone was what grabbed her. It was very easy to identify as, instead of sitting up in bed and looking at the illustrations when I was reading her a picture book at bed time, she started lying down and turning over instead. From there, she very quickly moved on to choosing of her volition from her bookcase story books with very few illustrations at all.

Since this point occurred quite soon after she started getting to grips with reading, I really wonder what the whole point is with English decodable readers having such complex coloured illustrations? Especially when she seems to get on just fine with the French barely illustrated fully decodable reading book.

FWIW, I chose the Jelly & Bean series of fully decodable readers and have been very happy with them, though we are almost at the end of them.