Trying to see the positives in Biff Chip etal

[Ohgoonthenpouranother]

My DD school is teaching jolly phonics. She knows all her sounds now.
The school also uses these ORT books. They are ink stamped with the school logo which also has the date on and they are clearly over 20 years old. They do not use any other scheme.
We have now had all the purple books (there's a list on the back) and seem to be doing a second round. Yawn.
Also they are doing a word book of 45 high frequency words. They have not started with easy words, 'this' & 'away' being within first group learnt. I have found this list via mumsnet and I am bewildered to say the least. DD does not seem to be 'getting it' what ever it is! She is a bright girl, but I see no progression and this second round of kipper has finished her off!

Is it a good reading scheme? Should I trust school or do something myself to encourage her.

"but almost all kids love them" DS didn't. When he was in reception he hated them and it was an uphill struggle to get him to read them. When he started to learn using RWI his readng improved dramatically and he still hated the books as he couldn't read many many of the words and "I'm just stupid" became a popular cry in our house. It was very sad for him (and me).

School seems to have recently invested in new books and we have started getting songbirds and phonics bugs home and once again DS is whizzing along.

Our school trialed RWI for the last term of the last academic year and it had suh dramatic results particularly on teh slower readers that they now do 30 of RWI first thing across the school by ability not within class groups.

I though you didn't use phonics forever sythetic phonics is recommended for *beginner readers isn't it? Which I guess means roughly reception, yrs1 and 2.

our school doesn't teach "mmagic e" when I queried it as DS was struggling with it teacher explained split vowels digraphs (is that right?) to me and I used it with DS (he's nearly 6). It seems to be a ridiculaously complicated explanation to me but DS didn;t query it and has made a pretty good fist of getting take, like, gave etc right ever since.

DD (5) loves the familiarity of the characters HouseOfBamboo I think you have hit the point. Children who have used ORT will often choose them (familiar- they know exactly what to expect without even opening the book - safe) children who have never seen them before usually skim through and dismiss them.

I fully agree with you about stupid picture books and personally never send them home with children. They can be useful for children in class to expand vocabulary if the child has language delay.

Kewcumber yes we use phonics forever because that is how language works only we get so good at it we don't even have to think about what we are doing most of the time ... maybe when you have to spell an unfamiliar word you think about the sounds ...

in RWI, they have two huge posters as part of that pack of 'red words'. Words that actually do not fit in with spelling patterns because that is the nature of the English language. So we are telling children "this is the only method you need to make you a proficient reader.... except for this whole stack of words which you just have to know!".

That?s the nub of the problem. English looks alphabetic, because it uses letters, but because it often uses them in unphonemic /unalphabetic ways, teaching children to read and write, needs phonics and learning by sight, as I have explained on my website and blogs.

PS
Ruth Miskin, the promoter of RWI was (but I don?t think still is) the partner of Chris Woodhead, who was first an extreme advocate of modern teaching methods and then became the most right-wing, arrogant and dismissive castigator of teachers since inception of the inspectorate.

in RWI, they have two huge posters as part of that pack of 'red words'. Words that actually do not fit in with spelling patterns because that is the nature of the English language. So we are telling children "this is the only method you need to make you a proficient reader.... except for this whole stack of words which you just have to know!".

The problem with quoting this masha is you are repeating someone's misunderstanding of the facts /truth.

and what has Ruth Miskin's personal relationships got to do with Biff and Chip?

House of bamboo this familiarity is the problem.
DD likes kipper and floppy. But she can't read them so doesn't like reading.
I see such confusion and lack of confidence sounding out her phonics in these books.
Our library has reading corner and start reading. None of the ones mentioned above. I have songbirds at home so will use these.

My dd's school uses ORT which I thought were deathly dull at first. They do get a bit more exciting past about stage 5. But the school have just invested in a range of books which are also available to read online. It's called Bug Club. As well as reading the book, they do questions and activities to win points and rewards. It has really motivated my dd. This is the link www.bugclub.co.uk/#

teacher explained split vowels digraphs (is that right?) to me and I used it with DS (he's nearly 6). It seems to be a ridiculaously complicated explanation to me but DS didn;t query it and has made a pretty good fist of getting take, like, gave etc right ever since.

It is adults (and very often the adult is the child's teacher) who have the problem with phonics, not the children. Children are extremely good at learning; and implementing what they have been taught, as you have discovered.

If a child comes across furniture, naughty or curtains, and has the belief that 'phonics only' will help, then they will be sorely disappointed.

Why? All of those words are decodable when the alphabetic code is taught properly. Where I have a problem with them is when they are given very early on to a beginner reader - or worse, to a child who has never encountered a whole word reading scheme and is just stuck on it at stage 3 because 'it's the same band, it's in the box', like my own ds.

juniper904 you just go from one ill informed statement to another ... how much time did your university actually devote to teaching reading?

Perhaps you can explain why you think a child who has been taught to use phonics needs any other strategy to read furniture, naughty or curtains

I think it is a shame if schools are only using one scheme (eg old school ORT) which is out of line with phonics teaching. Much better to have a range of books and make sure they are changed very regularly so the child isn't forced to read books they don't get on with, and has the novelty of 'new books' as often as possible.

This is how DD's school did it (a mix of 5 or 6 schemes I think) and it seems to have worked well, even if some of them don't fit exactly with the phonics system. Some of the books are very old, and are not 'full sets', but there are also new ones there from the more modern schemes.

Re the familiarity thing (as long as the associations are positive of course) I still think it can be a very powerful tool to get them to read more, in the same way as they love watching their favourite TV programmes. Doesn't mean they should read ONLY those books or watch ONLY those programmes, but sometimes safe and familiar is a good motivator.

I disagree - if the mix of schemes includes whole word schemes. Following ORT from the beginning and using it properly is one thing - springing at Stage 3 onto a beginner reader who has only encountered phonics schemes and is blending beautifully is counter-productive and dents confidence badly.

When I first started teaching the school I worked in used Ginn360 (even more dire than ORT) but the parents loved it and children progressed through the levels some parents even bought or borrowed the next book/set of books to practise at home (move to the next level before anyone else ) but give these children something else to read and they were absolutely stumped about how to begin ... so familiarity can be good but it can also be a problem.

Yes, we used Reading 360 when I started too. Deathly, deathly boring!

This was not my experience with DS mrz.

He began on Ginn Reading 360 ( and even had a word tin!) and then the school changed to ORT towards the end of P1.

He had no problems at all doing this and has been a very good reader all the way through school.

He has always been very enthusiastic about reading and reads a lot at home. He is 9 now and I have still to encounter a problem in this area.

I was surprised at how quickly he learned to read TBH as he had shown no interest until he started school.

I am not posting as a teacher but as a parent and would not try to use my own experience with DS to make any statement about teaching reading! It's just an observation.

My all time low- One Two Three and Away!
Anyone remember Roger Red Hat! By the time the children progressed onto Dancing Ann and the Green-Gruff Grackle I was ready to string the characters up by their pointy little hats!

My son had the pleasure of learning with Roger Jennifer Billy and naughty Percy! he also had Gay Way - Deb, Jip, Ben and the fat pig!

We've still got some of those!

oh I missed out Meg!

Masha "Chris Woodhead, .....then became the most right-wing, arrogant and dismissive castigator of teachers since inception of the inspectorate."

Surely even Mrz will have to agree with you on that point!!

I helpwith reading at school and am by no means anything lose to an expert. But from what I have observed many children will learn to read whatever scheme you use, their brains just seem to be wired for it. Other children will always struggle withever scheme you use. The rest who I would guess are a sizable minority are slow to start but with the right reading scheme for them they gain confidence and go on to become good readers and don;tlook back.

For DS whole word schemes meant we had a miserable start to reading and he had convinced himself he was "rubbish" at it. When the school switched to RWI he has developed huge confidence and has actually leapfrogged over the majority of the bys who were ahead of him.

Of course one child is hardly a statistical sample! But I do read with the other children (which of course doesn;t make it statistically any more valid!)

The Biff and Chip books encourage too much guessing.

Some of the year 4 children that I read with, see the single word "Suddenly"

and automatically parrot "Suddenly the magic key began to glow"

However I think the actual stories are quite fun.

But what has he got to do with Biff & Chip?

Kewcumber
many children will learn to read whatever scheme you use, their brains just seem to be wired for it. Other children will always struggle withever scheme you use. The rest who I would guess are a sizable minority are slow to start but with the right reading scheme for them they gain confidence and go on to become good readers.

Well said. And for many children phonics is the right scheme for a very short while only.

But the main point I will keep making while Mrz, Maizie and their ilk try to bamboozle everyone into believing that phonics must be the only show in town is that English spelling is only partially phonic and that's why nobody learns to read or write English with phonics alone.