Can someone PLEASE tell me how many high frequency words there are??????

[propercheesed]

DS is currently KS1 at school, I have requested a copy of any high frequency words he should be learning(along side his reading) but surprise surprise access denied!!. Anyone would think I wanted to help my son .

I have googled and googled and I keep getting different answers, please could any teachers or up to speed parents tell me where to find the answer?

'Kid learns 'and' and 'said' as sight words. They have lots of practice at recognising those words with flash cards and bingo and whatever.
The next day they see, in a book, 'ant' and 'sand'. They will straight away think they say 'and' and 'said', because they haven't memorised every letter in those sight words. They don't need to. They have only learnt one starts with an 'a' and one with a 's'
When they see 'and' or 'ant' how are they meant to know if it's a word they're meant to blend, or a word they're meant to retrieve from their memory ?
So, if you did really want to teach words as wholes, you should teach 'and' and 'ant' at the same time - but that's not how high frequency words teaching does it......(nor does it solve all the other problems with sight words - ie the slow pace of learning and the limits of memory)'

Is this how you imagine an average child approaches reading?

(You are still confusing whole word and whole language afaics.)

They have to retrieve what they remember of blending from their memory, right??

Here is some research from the US that took place in high school remedial English classrooms in West Virginia (so children aged at least 14).

West Virginia is a place where 'there are many factors involved in reading problems' could be the state motto.

'Analysis of the data indicated that an experimental group of high school remedial reading students who received whole language instruction using the novel and a control group that received traditional, skills-based instruction [that would be phonics] scored equally on a standardized reading comprehension test. Since no significant difference was shown in the two methods of reading instruction, the conclusion is that individualization and a balance between whole language and skills-based instruction is most beneficial to high school remedial reading students.'

This is from the abstract. I have no idea if any of the students improved their skills or if neither method made an impression, just that their scores were similar.

I seem to remember the same conclusion from the Stranmillis study (i.e. individualisation of instruction is necessary)

mathanxiety,

I posted this on a previous page. Just to be absolutely clear about how you are using the term 'sight word' can you say which of the 'definitions' you are talking about

Perhaps it would be useful to point out that there are two 'understandings' of the term 'sight words'

Firstly, that these are words which have to be learned as 'wholes'; in the mistaken belief that they 'cannot be decoded'. This is the meaning which has prevailed for many years, since the practically wholesale adoption of 'look & say' methods of teaching reading.

Secondly, that these are words which have been decoded and blended a few times and have become so familiar that they no longer need to be consciously decoded.

The essential difference between the two 'understandings' of the words is the method by which the words get into long term memory.

Ok... In daughters reading book today she had the word measured.

HOW do I explain that one? I go the "m" and the "ea" covered She can read the word "turn" so I am guessing that the "ur" sound is the same but what about the "s"?

I must admit I just told he what it said because I just couldn't work out how to explain it.

m -e -(spelt ea) zh (spelt s) ure-d

www.sounds-write.co.uk/docs/sounds_write_common_spellings_of_the_consonants_and_vowels.pdf

MaizieD, it is extremely difficult to pinpoint exactly how words make their way into long term memory when children are constantly exposed to the written and spoken word except when they are sleeping.

Plus the exact process by which memories are formed and retrieved are not yet fully understood.

'can you say which of the 'definitions' you are talking about?'
The answer to your question is 'neither'.
Neither 'words which have to be learned as 'wholes' in the mistaken belief that they cannot be decoded'
nor 'words which have been decoded and blended a few times and have become so familiar that they no longer need to be consciously decoded.'

Words that are learned as wholes are not primarily taught in the mistaken belief that they cannot be decoded, though there are some that are difficult to decode or decoding involves an exception to a rule so it might end up confusing a child.
They are taught as wholes in order to allow children speedy access to texts that will in turn expose them to more words that they can practice their decoding on while simultaneously interesting them and allowing them to focus on meaning, developing several different skills all at once.

They may have been 'decoded and blended a few times'; they may have been simply committed to memory; seeing a word in print may have made a child recall having heard it and recognition may have been somehow instantaneous. There is no way of knowing in each individual child what specific mechanism has allowed that child's brain to read a word correctly. Among the various ways, there is no blind alley for the vast majority of children.

You can assume that every child uses 'mixed methods' no matter what method is used in the classroom.

Math can I just ask are you in the UK?

Zh? That made me laugh.

I am comming round to the idea that even tho my child has learned some words by sight she should still know the reason why they are spelt that way, as this will go a long way to helping her read others and spell them.

But I think I must also agree with math a bit too when she says that children do pick up words no matter what is taught. (just automatically) We live in Wales and although my daughter doesn't go to a welsh medium school (where they don't learn English reading until 7) she does learn a lot of welsh in school which can be phonetically different from English, there is bilingual labels on a lot of things around the classroom and she does pick up welsh books in the library and read some of it.

Zh? That made me laugh.

Why? /zh/ is how that phoneme is written.
It's in measure, treasure, usual, casual, vision, seizure, pleasure, genre, mirage, corsage, beige, prestige, lesion and version. Among others.

Just found it funny. :)

If you didn't say what words it was in I wouldn't know how to say it.

Although on the list that mrz linked to "ge" isn't listed at making the "zh" sound just "s" and "z" and I wouldn't pronounce prestige that way.

I wouldn't pronounce prestige that way.

Phonics is descriptive, not prescriptive.
Regional accents change most pronunciation.

Yeah, me too Housework. Well, now I know .

Why do I feel like I have just been told off by the teacher for giggling in class! :)

Well phonics is a very serious subject girl at the back .

But I think I must also agree with math a bit too when she says that children do pick up words no matter what is taught.

I don't think that anyone is saying that that shouldn't happen, or, that it doesn't happen. Just that children should not be deliberately taught words as 'wholes'. That there is actually no need to teach words as 'wholes'.

How does Oxford Reading Tree fit in to the synthetic phonic approach? DD has been doing brilliantly with her reading books lately until today when she got 'wh-' 'all' and '-ue' in one book.

The old ORT doesn't fit in at all LaBelleDameSansPatience but there are newer phonics based ORT books available

Like Songbirds? I have bought these for home but the ORT books from school can be a struggle.

Well Songbirds are published by OUP but I meant the Floppy phonics which keep Biff Chip et al but are phonic

DS1's school do not teach high frequency words, they go through the phonics programme. DS taught himself his basic phonics very young on a kids laptop which in turn meant he could sound out any phonetically built word. He then found it easy to learn the more difficult phonics as they taught him at pre-school and school that way rather than memorising high frequency words.

I found it very strange that at DN's school (outstanding) they taught high frequency words and sent them home to 'learn' but at the end of YR she still didn't fully understand how to blend and build words.

Ah-ha. I had wondered what Floppy Phonics are. With the cuts as they are, DD's school will never be able to buy any, so I will never see them.

maizieD

Thank you for that Phonics International link. I finally have something with all of the various options for the sounds. Could have done with it a few weeks ago, but it'll still be useful.

When dd (5.8, YR) is reading a word she doesn't know, if she struggles with the correct sound I do the JP action as a prompt, I only tell her the sound if I don't know the action as she hasn't brought it home in her phonics book yet. :)

FWIW, dd brings home tricky word cards to learn to sight read, but as far as I know isn't expected to learn them the look and say way. It's more that they are words she practices sounding out and blending and then progresses in fluency until she can sight read them.