Why is MN so obsessed with reception reading?

[skiphopskidaddle]

It's a marathon, not a sprint. It doesn't matter if Johnny is on red and Amy is on lilac as (a) different schools go at different paces and (b) children develop different skills in different order.

I can't quite believe the number of reception reading threads I've seen this week along the lines of "what colour book is yours on?". I'm going over to the behaviour/development board now to check for obsessive posting about when children learn to walk. Cos it doesn't matter either, in general.

magdalene - in those 6-7 years 'proper play' they also learn a huge amount in Kindergarten, probably in a similar way as described by mrz. I just wish they would leave the reading alone for a bit longer.

This ties into another thread, which mrz has linked to, but I'm really not sure later starting systems do avoid formal education, so much as leave it to the parents.

I have close friends in Holland and Denmark with children who are yet to start 'formal' reading but, having grown up in houses full of books with the sorts of parents who bounce up and down every time they grab one and ask about it and what it means, have learnt to read. They will be hugely ahead of their less lucky compatriots when reading starts formally.

And many kids do want to learn to what written words mean, and reconciling that with learning to 'read' is hard. My eldest (3.6) is now constantly pointing out signs and asking what they mean, had 'Tesco' as his second word and first read one, and is as a result of this and some fairly obvious (verbalised) memorising gaining a sight vocabulary. And the educational dilemma for him is the same as for many kids-they might not want to learn to 'read', but it is not especially helpful to have them half read by adopting some sort of 'whole word' approach (we've opted to sounding out words and encouraging blending, but it is deeply non-systemic because it is NOT an attempt to teach reading).

On my son's very first day in reception, he learnt a skill he'll use for the rest of his life: how to peel a banana. He has also learned about waiting his turn in a discussion, why it's important to shut gates in the countryside, how to skip, the patterns in Islamic art, that America is bigger than the UK, and dozens of songs. And he comes home with his phonics book and his reading books and little by little he has become a reader. I wouldn't want any different start to school for him, and think that the curriculum he is exposed to is entirely appropriate for a 4yo.

Mrz - a lot of what you mention can be done at home. We do tend to just hear about reading and writing from teachers and governors (and mumsnet). If teachers actually COMMUNICATED what they were doing in class it might help us as parents. Yes, I am sure you are an excellent teacher but the NC and the 'creative curriculum' are more interested in skills than knowledge and that's where the problem lies. You have to look at the hard facts too - Britain has plummeted down the tables going from fourth in the world for Science to 16th, from seventh for literacy to 25th and from eighth for maths to 28th. Science departments in universities are closing down, studying a foreign language is no longer compulsory, employers are complaining about 'woefully low school standards' and parents are using personal tutors more and more. I would say something is not quite right, wouldn't you? And that by starting reading and writing at 4 has not raised standards. Also what about talking about artists' techniques while you're doing art or is that too 'elitist' or will the children find that too boring? I am sorry but I have had to hear a year 4 teacher tell me that some of her pupils are INCAPABLE of sitting and listening to a teacher for ten minutes TEACH. I would say there is a real problem there. Why are some teachers' standards so low for their pupils? And why do teachers think their pupils won't want to learn? My child has a thirst for knowledge and asks questions all the time. Of course there are BRILLIANT teachers out there and I always say that the system is at fault. But some just blindly follow anything Ofsted has to recommend. There are so many new gimmicks and targets when really all you need are teachers with excellent subject knowledge, enthusiasm and the ability to discipline a class. I am sorry if I caused offence mrz but I am seriously concerned about what is going on in my child's school.

I don't think the issue with the UKs standing is down to primary and pre school education or even secondary education more to our risk adverse society. Where is the point/fun in learning chemistry or physics if you can't conduct real experiments because of imagined H&S fears?

I started school at age 4 in the 60s and the teacher taught those children who could not read how to and tested them using the Schonell reading test so falling standards have nothing to do with learning earlier ... could it instead be due to the last 20 years of Searchlight methods taught in schools?

As I said in my previous post visiting a beach and creating art from environmental materials - then looking at the work of Andy Goldsworthy or printing with a fish and comparing it to Paul Klees Goldfish. Or looking at ethnic fabrics and creating our own ... it's happening in hundreds of classrooms around the country
Yes we teach skills because they are a tool for children to use to explore and create.

and no the NC isn't more skills based than knowledge it clearly sets out what children need to know in all subjects. The so called "creative curriculum" is merely the method of delivering that knowledge in a meaningful and child friendly manner.

or, why risk teaching children physics and chemistry when they can get a 'C' in single-cert science, and won't qualify for the E-bac unless they also do biology?

But what does that mean : in a 'meaningful and child friendly manner'??? NC has been greatly watered down in the last ten to twenty years, I'm afraid. What are 'searchlight' methods? Yes, health and safety regulations have become silly over the years but that is only one small aspect. My husband still conducts science experiments though. Interestingly some of his pupils said they prefrerred his lessons to other teachers because he TAUGHT them instead of letting them work it out for themselves! I think, as a society, we are easily distracted (by all the technology, television etc) and have not be taught to think or concentrate or perserve with things (probably because teachers were concerned they weren't perceived as 'laugh a minute' teachers!!).

The NC hasn't changed in the last 22 years magdalene.

In a meaningful and child friendly way for primary aged children means learning about life cycles by hatching chicks/ducklings or watch caterpillars or tadpoles grow into adults not from a book or video. Learning about magnets by using them not looking at a diagram. By learning about electricity by building a circuit.

When the National Literacy Strategy was introduced they promoted the Searchlight method of reading instruction ... If you can't read the word look at the pictures and guess/look at the initial letter and guess ...in fact don't read just guess.

Mrz
"Searchlight method of reading instruction ... If you can't read the word look at the pictures and guess/look at the initial letter and guess ...in fact don't read just guess.

Making ridiculous claims like that about other professionals is what makes it difficult to take the evangelical advocates of SP seriously.

With words that are not completely decodable, (soup, move, touch, read) children have to try and work them out, with the help of whatever they can use: context, other letters of the words, pictures.

It would be easier to take SP seriously (beyond the first year of literacy teaching) if its advocates bothered to explain clearly how they teach all the tricky words at englishspellingproblems.co.uk/html/sight_words.html

I know you claim English is too difficult for children to learn but I didn't think you mean you were struggling. Where in what I said did I make claims about other professionals? I was criticising a method that has now been discounted in case you hadn't been informed Masha ...looking on the bright side at least it gives you the chance to pedal your snake oil
As to your claim no one has told you how they teach tricky words that is almost as ridiculous as your lists and labelling me a SP advocate ...

Mashabell - were you to attend a synthetic/linguistic phonics course - either Sound Reading System or Sounds~Write - you would find out exactly how 'soup', 'move', 'touch', 'read' are introduced - GUARANTEED! It would save you, literally, thousands of hours of your time.

You don't teach children about minor keys in music before making sure that mapping of musical notes,the names they represent, the correct fingering and basic skills and basic understanding of the keyboard is secure. Nor do you begin by teaching them about soft-pedaling, dynamics, broken chords,phrasing and all the other subtleties of the art.

In ten years of teaching synthetic phonics to struggling readers, I've never come across a child who has difficulty once they have understood that English is an alphabetic code. I have come across dozens of children who have been unable to benefit from 'mixed strategies', Whole Language, Look and Say, and who have been profoundly damaged by the lack of logic in the teaching of reading since the abandonment of phonics teaching or, since itsy-bitsy phonics was thrown into the extraordinary mix that developed in parallel with defective readers.

Unlike you, I don't normally tout something I'm involved with, but if you read the Case Studies and testimonies on www.piperbooks.co.uk you may begin to have some understanding of why synthetic phonics proponents feel so strongly about what they do. But for in-depth understanding of encoding, SRS or Sounds~Write would be just the ticket for you!

I am imagining Masha's face - as in ' - do I get to make lists?'

you claim English is too difficult for children to learn
Not the English language, Mrz. I claim only that English spelling prevents 1 in 5 speakers of English from ever becoming proficient readers and nearly half from ever learning to write competently. There is now more than 100 years of evidence for this, from the time when schools used nothing but phonics, as much as from more recent surveys (e.g. Moser 1999).

Where in what I said did I make claims about other professionals? In the post which I quoted above.

it gives you the chance to pedal your snake oil
I am not peddling anything. I am merely showing and explaining what makes learning to read and write English exceptionally difficult.

were you to attend a synthetic/linguistic phonics course ....you would find out exactly how 'soup', 'move', 'touch', 'read' are introduced
Why can't u explain it on here? Or in a blog?
Because u run such courses and make money from them? Perhaps u are the author of phonics course?

I would find it easier to take u, and everyone else who claims to be an SP expert, seriously if u did not hide behind the anonymity of a pseudonym, and it was possible find out a little more about u, as everyone can about me by googling Masha Bell.

Testimonies for SP are irrelevant, because every teacher believes that their chosen method is the best one, but there is no objective evidence for the superiority of SP. RR teachers claim just as much success with struggling readers as u do.

And as I've already said to Mrz, I am not touting anything. I am merely showing and explaining what makes learning to read and write English exceptionally difficult - see www.EnglishSpellingProblems.co.uk . And lots of parents and teachers have thanked me for doing so.

SP, or any other phonic method, is a good way of introducing children to English literacy learning, but it cannot make the irregularities of English spelling, which make learning to read and write English much harder and slower than other languages, disappear.

Mrz that sounds lovely, can my son be in your class? :)

The system is different here (US), we have preschool but no nursery or reception. DS is three now and goes Tuesday and Thursday for a few hours in the morning, then next year he will go Monday, Wednesday, Friday for the same amount of time. He could go to kindergarten the year after that, when he's 5, but most parents here are holding their children back til six, especially when (as in the case of my DS) they have late summer birthdays. Kindergarten here is all day every day, and the standards are a lot different now than they have been before because of No Child Left Behind. I don't know if that's made the news there at all, but it's an act put in place by Bush that attempts and fails to measure student's achievements.

Masha I made no such claims against my fellow professionals ... you really must learn to read. I was describing a system imposed on my fellow professionals that they disliked.

As for running courses or selling a product Masha I am a primary school teacher who has taught hundreds of young children to read no courses no products no profit simply doing my job using the most effective methods with much much lower failure rate than the 1-5 you quote (something closer to 2- 500)

CheerfulYank I don't know a great deal about No Child Left Behind but I will do some reading.

It's one of those things that sounds good, but when it's actually implemented...

What they're finding is that a lot of teachers are having to "teach to the test" and ignore art, music, physical ed, etc, because it's so important to get those scores. I just read an interview with a teacher who talked about having to drop her Helen Keller unit. She said she used to teach about Helen Keller and Annie Sullivan and teach the kids the sign language alphabet. They learned a lot about disabilities, what life was like back then, perseverance...but because it's not something that can be measured in hard statistics, it's gone. And a lot of teachers are choosing not to work in low performing schools, and those are the children who really need it. Also, the teachers are much less inclined to let children "figure things out" because knowing the right answer immediately has become so important, and I'm seeing a real lack of creative thinking skills and independent thought at the school I work in. Sigh...

Anyway! Not to thread hijack

masha says: I am not touting anything.

Oh, sold all your 'little books' have you then, masha?

Like mrz, I have no commercial interest whatsoever in SP. I work in a secondary school with children who have not been taught to read effectively. I have used 'other methods' and SP. I stick with the one which works. It works so well that I think it right that all interested parties should know about it and how it works.

MashaBell - you are totally focused on the problem of English spelling whereas other posters on this thread are focused on the solutions to that problem.

You want to make the problem go away by changing English spelling but English spelling is part of our culture and heritage and native English speakers like it . It is not for non-native speakers of English to tell native speakers to discard their culture and heritage.

I think the fact this thread has now got 1000 posts proves that MN is definitely obsessed with reception reading. But in a good way :)

No Masha, I'm not involved in any training or developing training materials. Good synthetic phonics programmes have been developed after years and years of classroom or remedial teaching, trialling, adjusting, observation, intensive reading and understanding of how best to teach early readers. Most of all they are the result of the developers seeing children who have been appalling ill-served by multi-strategy teaching and by being labelled as dim,dumb,thick or having some sort of brain glitch. For most programme makers I have nothing but the greatest respect. They perform a magnificent service and if some become very successful, that is appropriate in our capitalist society. Or maybe you're running a Trabant car and have found a computer-system with all profits owned by the state. Many programme makers initiate charity work in countries that have no resources at all. But I suppose you will sneer at that as well.

I am not a classroom teacher, therefore my 'nickname' is merely an expression of an abiding interest. You can find my name and the information you think is lacking under 'About Us' in the link I provided for you in my previous thread.