Help with phonics

[AuntieBulgaria]

Hullo, DD is starting reception in September. She has recently started trying to read things by herself by sounding out the letters. I want to support her but am worried about giving her 'bad' info. Or not actually knowing how to explain.

She was trying to read the word 'alien' in the back of the car the other day but she is used to A making the sound 'ah' (well not ah but you know what I mean, not ay).

Forgive me for being totally dim but why is it 'ay' in alien and age? Is it what I would have called - 'the magic 'e'? Is that what's called a split diagraph?

I read the guide to phonics that DD's school issues and it says that at school they are not given books to read with phonemes they haven't learnt yet but DD is just trying to give it a go with everything she comes across.

What should I say when the word she is reading does something unfamiliar?

Some times she can work it out - she read and blended 'like' as luh i ck eh but then said 'like' because she could make it make sense in the context I suppose.

Greythorne I'm still not sure the thread has even identified a problem with magic e (other than dispelling the myth that the e is actually magic). I'm certainly going to carry on using it.

Yes Virgil

Hmmm...so can I ask what I should be doing with my nearly 4 year old then?
He doesn't start school til sept next year but is interested in letters and numbers...
I have a couple of iPad apps he uses (hairy letters etc) but as for phonics I am all adrift...
Hasn't worked very well for ds1 (dyslexic) so am nervous about introducing it to ds2.
Anything suitable for this age group I could use if he shows more interest?

Virgil

I think the magic e has limitations, as described here:

CecilyP on Mon 02-Jul-12 20:49:29
I can't see anything wrong with it, but it only allows 5 options. Which takes us neatly back to i_e pronounce ee, where the 'e' doesn't make the 'i' say its name and can only be explained by the split grapheme.

Synthetic phonics is not a new method though, phonics were always used through the 30 odd years that I was teaching reading but it was variously called ITA, Letterland, Jolly Phonics, Play with Sounds.
This has been a fascinating thread but I need to leave now, not trying to dodge the issues and I applaud your passion for synthetic phonics but doubt whether any method can be all encompassing.

I would persevere with phonics if your child has been diagnosed with dyslexia and investigate possible physical causes of his dyslexia.

Synthetic phonics is not a new method though, phonics were always used through the 30 odd years that I was teaching reading but it was variously called ITA, Letterland, Jolly Phonics, Play with Sounds.
This has been a fascinating thread but I need to leave now, not trying to dodge the issues and I applaud your passion for synthetic phonics but doubt whether any method can be all encompassing.

Most people say that - until they've seen a synthetic phonics school in action. That's exclusive phonics, not mixed methods. No one is left behind - not children with dyslexia, or boys, or EAL children. I've known 3 in 15 years - all left us at Y6 to go to special school.

It's not a new method, but has been taught in lots of schools alongside these other strategies, including guessing strategies like context/pictures. Taught exclusively, the results are totally different.

Where does that happen though greythorne . Fine nice lime slide gripe site. All make the eye sound

Magic e works with vowels

sardine, machine

^20% of children leave primary school unable to read to the required standard, and most schools have been using the methods you describe since the introduction of the Literacy strategy.

In synthetic phonics schools, no one is left unable to read.^

Is that referring to the percentage of children who do not reach level 4 in the KS2 tests? Is there evidence that all children in all synthetic phonics schools reach this level?

I think I'll take my chances with sardine and machine feenie and hope that they dont crop up for a while

Most people say that - until they've seen a synthetic phonics school in action. That's exclusive phonics, not mixed methods. No one is left behind - not children with dyslexia, or boys, or EAL children. I've known 3 in 15 years - all left us at Y6 to go to special school.

When you say no-one is left behind, what do you mean? From what I have seen on TV, some children seem to forge ahead very quickly, while others are put in groups with much younger children. Surely, that means they are behind?

There is plenty of evidence, both anecdotal (me, mrz, maizie) and here

And here

I mean that all children learn to read, with no excuses.

It means no child leaves primary unable to read and write.

I think I'll take my chances with sardine and machine feenie and hope that they dont crop up for a while

Strangely enough, 'magic e', (the approach, though I hadn't heard the term), was one of the few bits of phonics that I have any recollection of being taught. At the time, the split grapheme approach might have been more appropriate with a class full of Christines, Paulines, Jacquelines and Denises.

It means no child leaves primary unable to read and write.

But how do you define that 20% of children from other primary schools leave unable to read and write, whereas 0% of children leave synthetic phonics primary schools unable to read and write? How is that measured?

Well if 0% leave our primary unable to read and write then 40% must leave another school unable to read and write ...

The transition teachers have carried out their own reading tests on the children in our Y6 class and say not one child will need support with literacy in Sept

And neither will ours.

mrz and Feenie, what are you using to measure 100% success in learning to read and write. Is it 100% level 4 and above (and are children allowed to be exempted, so the non reader/writer will not feature in the stats.) or no child needing literacy support in Y7. How is a child assessed as needing literacy support, are there limited number of places to support children i.e. the child may not be great, but not the worst. Will different secondary schools have different criteria/support available - so no support available=no one needing support or conversely lots of support so lots of places available.

To be honest, zebedee, from someone working with struggling readers in secondary school, NCT levels can be a poor indicator of reading ability. We get a significant number of children each year with L4 in English (admittedly, usually a low L4) who have difficulty with reading. And their difficulty with reading alway turns out to be an inability to work out what unfamiliar words 'say'. In other words, poor decoding and blending skills.

And I can guarantee that every child who comes to us with a L3 or below will be a really poor reader.

The English reading 'level' only 'tests' comprehension. There has been nothing at all, until this Phonics Check, which tests children's ability to read unfamiliar words.

How is a child assessed as needing literacy support, are there limited number of places to support children i.e. the child may not be great, but not the worst.

That's about the long and short of it. Ideally a poor reader needs daily sessions and lots of reading practice. We have about 50 of the worst children to work with each year. When you also consider the fact that some are so disruptive that they will only work one to one and some are so afraid of 'failing' that they too, will only work one to one, we have a real job fitting them in for even 2 sessions a week.

Will different secondary schools have different criteria/support available - so no support available=no one needing support or conversely lots of support so lots of places available.

Yup! Practice (and the necessary expertise, and the will to pay the expert staff) varies widely from school to school.

So the children you work with aren't necessarily identified in the transition between primary and secondary? The secondary school identifies them in Y7, Y8? Would they be the ones included in this 20% of children that can't read? Or is it 20% (those that don't achieve level 4) plus the extra identified by the secondary school?

If a school's stats. indicate that 84% of children achieve Level 4 or above, it may still be that there could be an actual figure of 20% (or more) of children considered unable to read or write?

Does your experience indicate that the children lack the skills and experience of sustained reading. That they have not put the reading 'hours in'?