Phonic sounds in because

[maydaychild]

Could one of you wonderful MNetters help me with 'because' as Dd has it in her high freq this week

What is making the or sound and is the e magic
Thanks

ti represents the sh sound

and as a northerner I say grass to rhyme with ass too

so I teach a says a in grass not ah

WT, I think in the phonics test they are supposed to accept anything that 'could' work. So, you-t would be just as right as yowt or even yawt (ou in 'ought'). She shouldn't have said your dd got it wrong.

Maizie, I am quite a fast learner, and also visual (as is my ds), but I would have thought anyone's brain (brains are efficient) would accept that learning 'was' by sight (however it is explained by the teacher) is easier than decoding 3 sounds, remembering 2 have been 'changed' - and then blending them together. I think phonic programmes have to 'pretend' that kids do this, to fit in with all the rest of it, but it's not actually the way most kids will learn those 'tricky' words. I don't think phonics is bad, but I'm starting to think total dependence on it is wrong.

-stands up and enthusiastically applauds marrigold---

My daughter got yout wrong on a reading test as she said you-t, and her teacher said no its yowt.

Perhaps the teachers need to be supplied with lists of acceptable alternatives before this test is rolled out.

I wouldn't have expected your DH to find reading 'put' remotely tricky, regardless of where he is from. The idea is that complete beginners having been taught 'u' as in but will find reading 'u' in put more difficult. I have no idea if this is the case though.

He doesnt find it tricky lol, he just doest sound it like its pronounced in the single phoneme or w/e it's called.

The you-t thing was a reading assessment they do termly, does anyone know who will carry out the phonic screen? In school staff?

The school has the choice of who does the screening. They can use their staff of employ someone just for the test. I would imagine most will use their own staff.

The word put is pronounced differently depending on accent there is a definite north south divide.

MerryMarigold yawt wouldn't be acceptable because the ough make the aw sound in ought not the ou.

Teacher was wrong! (Unless your child said 'you tee) 'yut' ('ou' as in 'double' would have been fine, too.)

Besides maizie...he who asks the most learns the most, perhaps you could engage in some sustained shared thinking with us?

I'm feeling very dim today and cannot extract any meaning from this statement.

Where I am from, grass rhymes with arse. Doesn't mean that we can't both read the word and understand it to refer to a fine leaved green plant used for animal food or lawns.

It also doesn't mean that we have to start a punch up about the 'correct' way to pronounce 'grass'; as I have frequently seen happen on 'another forum'

There is a lot of current research using brain imaging MerryMarigold that shows that the brain in good readers processes words sound by sound not as a whole word but obviously at incredible speed. Most of the research is coming from the USA ..Yale, University of New Mexico and Stanford but there is also research from the University of Maastricht and the University and Hong Kong and here in the UK at Cambridge.

I would have thought anyone's brain (brains are efficient) would accept that learning 'was' by sight (however it is explained by the teacher) is easier than decoding 3 sounds,

Unfortunately, learning 'was' as a whole word doesn't help children when they encounter what, or want or wash or swap or swashbuckle. Whereas telling them that it is a correspondence that they will learn more about later alerts them to the fact that other words that have a 'w' followed by an 'a' might also have the 'a' pronounced as 'o'. Some might not even have to wait until the time for learning 'a' affected by 'w' comes around; they might well remember and use that knowledge to generalise to other words they encounter in daily life.

Another drawback of learning 'was' as a 'whole' is that the weaker children don't 'get' the significance of the letter order and will happily read 'saw' as 'was' (or even vice versa, as 'saw' is another of those words taught, in my opinion, too early.)

Don't forget that teachers have to teach all their children to read. Not just the quick learners. What looks like a faff to you has a sound pedagogical base.

I surrender!

I have to say (again) though that I think it depends on the brain. My brain does what mrz describes. I was taught by my Mum (home ed), as was my sister, exactly the same way (I don't know the method but prob not pure phonics in the early 70's). Her brain just doesn't do it like that and she sees whole words. Obviously she CAN force herself to break a new word down, but she doesn't do it naturally and only does it when it's important. Why were we both taught the same way, but process it so differently?

Wants a link to arsey grassy forum

MerryMarigold according to the research the brain does it subconsciously and the reader isn't even aware they are breaking the words into sounds. It isn't about the active process of sounding out letter by letter it is looking at the word and the brain doing the work.

Only if you are already a good reader

But they only work because a) the words are easy and b) the people who can do it are skilled readers. It is not a technique anyone would want to use when teaching beginning readers.

but if you are 4 and faced with ct or tp can you work out the word without looking at all the letters ?

"but if you are 4 and faced with ct or tp can you work out the word without looking at all the letters ?"

But if 40+ and a MNetter, we all know which two sounds can go in the first example...

that's why I only used 3 letter words Edith!

I saw the ct in my room. - context does it help?
Put it on the tp! - context?

It does rather prove that context is a snare, doesn't it. Not only can one misfire completely, but even with the context you've added so far, there are several possibilities which give meaningful sentences.

Context can help with meaning but sometimes it can hinder word recognition because we read what we think will fit rather than what is actually there and so alter the whole meaning.