School teaching "sight memorisation" rather than teaching phonics...what to do?

[Greythorne]

We live in France and are a bilingual family (English - French).

DD1 is 5.9 and in Year 1 in a French school. Last year, in what would have been her Reception year had we been in the UK, I taught her to read using phonics. Thanks to lots of advice on here (waves to mrz and others) it worked really well. It seems to me like DD made the two big leaps in learning to read: she has "got" the concept of sounding out sounds (not letter names) then blending them AND she has learnt a lot of the sounds, so she is reading pretty well. Still a long way to go and we have not covered all sounds yet, but we are getting there very surely.

So, in French school, this is the year they start to teach reading. They are supposed to use phonics, according to government guidelines, but I have heard that many teachers are wedded to older methods, esp the sight reading / "méthode globale" / look and say approach.

It is only day 3 and DD has already been given three lists of words to memorise, not read, just memorise. She has memorised them, but as soon as they are in a different context or even a different font, she is struggling, as she has obviously just memorised the shape.

I keep suggesting that she sounds and blends, but she has never been taught the French sounds, only letter names so far. I have avoided teaching her much in French as I am not French and to be honest, I have got enough on my plate teaching her to read in English! I really thought I could rely on the school to teach her to read in French, esp as she already has the concept of reading down pat.

Any advice?

Maybe you should tell Dictionary.com that their definition is "nonsense":

Phonetic spelling... is a system of spelling in which each letter represents invariably the same spoken sound.

Like Turkish. Not like English. Which is what I was saying.

I didn't actually specifically quote from dictionary.com I took a consensus from a number of online definitions. Perhaps it's your dictionary (which is what?) that is nonsense out of line...

Hi Greythorne,

This is a scandal in France. According to government guidelines teachers are supposed to use Syllabique and not Globale (Hear and Say method). Many French kids cannot read or write due the Globale. I have spent the last two years in France and taught my DD how to read!! This will help with her English reading too if you use the Synthetic Phonics

Many French parents go their local Centre Commercial and buy 'Boscher' or 'Daniel & Valerie- Syllabique- and teach their own children to read if teachers use the 'Hear and Say Method' in their schools'.
Try to get a French person to go through the Boscher (or similar) and your child will read in no time ..

For example: pipe
P+i makes pi, p+e makes pe, then blend and you have pipe

I send you a link which go through the scandal of teachers who still practice the Hear and Say method in schools and fail children. Some charities have been created to teach reading to those who were failed by some self-righteous teachers hell-bent on using the Globale-

www.dossiersdunet.com/spip.php?article869

If you need help-send me a private message.

Good Luck!!

Y

Enclose Ministry of Education report and guidelines

media.education.gouv.fr/file/96/0/5960.pdf

In short in CP/

• should learn alphabet principle *correspondence between grapheme/phoneme *being able to decode words and blend them *being able to read easily short easy books and being able to decode words when necessary

Good luck

Y

Thanks, Yvette.

I am not optimistic. We are now a week in, and the lists of words to 'learn' keep coming. We have had words like:
C'est
Maîtresse
Rentrée
Je suis
Je m'appelle

With no explanation of sound - grapheme correspondences.

I am hoping this is just the beginning, and that in a week or so we will start learning phonemes. One parent at the school gate laughed off my concerns by saying the teacher kicks off with some words using la méthode globale just because the kids are so keen to read and that la méthode syllabique is too slow at first but will come later. [Hmmm]

I thought you were being deliberately obtuse before, but now suspect that you weren't doing it on purpose.

Was it not clear to you that I was quoting from Dictionary.com?

Do you have a problem with their definition of phonetic spelling?

English is a phonetic language.
English has a complex phonemic orthography because there are 44ish sounds in the spoken language which are represented by the alphabet (26 letters). However speech sounds are represented by letters and they follow an established code.

So I guess I'm saying that Dictionary.com's definition is fine as far as it goes but over simplified.

Greythorne - my DD's school most definitely didn't send home random lists of non-decodable words. The method she was taught to read by was rigorously decodable - dull and slow, too (there isn't the wide range of progressive decodable reading schemes in French that there is in English). But it followed the phonic principles. I'm very shocked to read what you write about the teaching of reading in your DD's school.

I don't disagree with the idea of phonetic rendition of the spoken word. But it cannot be done - for any language - unless you use IPA or similar transcription language. It woud the be possible to record on paper the exact phonetic rendition - reflecting accent, assimilation etc. It's a fascinating area, and surprisingly difficult when you move from phonemic spealling (the norm for written languages) to the truly phonetic.

I thought you were being deliberately obtuse before, but now suspect that you weren't doing it on purpose.
^Was it not clear to you that I was quoting from Dictionary.com?^

No, it wasn't. I completely misread your post and thought that you were being snidey about the source of my definition. Sorry.

Do you have a problem with their definition of phonetic spelling?

Yes, I do. I think they are getting their terms confused. They seem to be talking about phonic 'regularity' (i.e 1 symbol always represents 1 phoneme) which is not the same as the transcription of the language being based on the representation of discrete phonemes by a symbol or symbols.

Evening ggo gardeners-only got back an hour ago , after errands and vagaries of bus route... DH coping , thanks , pain horrible but managed to do some work online

Brilliant to hear there are different outlets for you to deal with voices, Upward - very positive that you don't have to rely only on own hard-won
strategies . Hope You sound so proactive -as ever- hope time will go past as
quickly as ppossible

Amazingly work with pc problem ,Showtime- glad DBspoke with uou too. Will ask DMwhich shop she got relativeely inexpensive service from in case was a national chain

Hope had a good day , Nilgiri , & joining Showtime's hopes that DP is well.
Tests were good , electrodes on head measuring responses to visual , audio
signals and some giant conductors to make your feet jump ! s

"I don't disagree with the idea of phonetic rendition of the spoken word. But it cannot be done - for any language - unless you use IPA or similar transcription language."

I have repeatedly said that there is such a language, and that I am fluent in it. What exactly is it that you have trouble understanding? Its alphabet has 29 letters, each of which are pronounced in only one way.

Seriously, just give it up

Greythorne,

This is scandalous!! It flies in the face of the French Ministry's guidelines and government's reports ! The parent on the school gate does not have a clue and is a complete ignorant person.
I would get a Boscher and do it yourself otherwise your kid will struggle to read and write. It is very painful to see 10 years old looking at a book as though it were hieroglyphs; I have seen 4 or 5 children in a small town in France who could not read at all and who were trying to guess the words.
They were crying their eyes at the sheer frustration; totally unfair.
It really got me and I really wanted to slap their 'Globale' teachers...
As Bonsoir writes, it has to be the decodable method...

Good luck

Y.

CotedAzur - you must be Stephen Hawking then. For it is physically impossible for anything other than a machine to speak in a phonetically regular fashion, and no natural language is phonetically regular.

You appear to mean instead is language in which the grapheme/phoneme correspondence is regular. This is not phonetic regularity. I will keep correcting misused linguistic terms.

I haven't referred at all to talking 100% regularly like a machine, so can't be sure what you are trying to say here.

I haven't said "phonetically regular". I have said "phonetic spelling". In case you have already forgotten what that means, here is the definition again: A system of spelling in which each letter represents invariably the same spoken sound.

If you think this is impossible, you are very wrong and clearly not as knowledgeable about languages as you seem to think you are.

In any case, I am more interested in the subject of this thread than bickering on definitions of linguistic terms, so let's leave this discussion here. Alternatively, if you will really insist that there is no such language as my mother tongue, create another thread and we will continue your education at your leisure

The terms phonetic and phonemic are not interchangeable.

You are describing a regular correspondence between phonemes and graphemes. Phonetic regularity is impossible, and that is why the term should not be used as it causes confusion to use technical terms wrongly.

Dum di dum...in between the discussion about what is a phonetic language....

DD's homework tonight consists of "reading" the days of the week. Still not so much as a sniff of a grapheme - phoneme correspondance. No sounds to learn. just more whole words.

Roll on the class meeting (when the teacher explains what's happening this year to the parents), should be next week some time.

Pretty disheartening Greythorne. Roll on the meeting indeed. Ask lots of questions about how they think their technique will advance DD's reading. You might not be able to change their minds, but a bit of healthy questioning might help them question it too.

Greythorne,

Am sure that she/he will be convincing; some parents are very gullible and accept whatever teachers tell them (especially in France).
French teachers don't like to be questioned-much less open than in the UK.

I would just ignore this 'Globale' and do my own things. In short, ensure that your kid learns to read according to the official guidelines;syllabique/grapheme/phoneme/decoding etc..
'Boscher'; 'Daniel & Valerie'; 'Pas a Pas' are the staple books which will ensure that your kids can read. Do it yourself if you must; your French will improve!!!!

Good luck
Y.

Just an aside

Perhaps you could ask her/him why she/he is going against the Minister of Education who mandated in 2005 that CP teachers use a phonetic methodology (syllabique) rather than a 'Globale' methodology. This mandate followed the shocking level of illiteracy found among French children..

This would not go down very well with a French teacher in France... Change school...
Y.

pho·net·ic
   
adjective
1.Also, pho·net·i·cal. of or pertaining to speech sounds, their production, or their transcription in written symbols.
2.corresponding to pronunciation: phonetic transcription.
3.agreeing with pronunciation: phonetic spelling.
4.concerning or involving the discrimination of nondistinctive elements of a language. In English, certain phonological features, as length and aspiration, are phonetic but not phonemic.

dictionary.reference.com/browse/phonetic?s=b

Even Dictionary.com doesn't seem to agree with you, Cote

Where did you say you got your definiton from?

I don't think that Edith W is saying there is no language where the phoneme/grapheme correspondence is one to one with no 'irregularities'. I think she is pointing out that even phonemes change the way they sound according to where they are articulated in a word, so absolute accuracy in transcribing any language is not possible. If the words 'ship' and 'pit' were recorded and the two 'p's isolated I am told that they would not sound exactly the same.

Phonetics is a precise science; phonics deals in approximations of phonemes. Which is one reason why the terms should not be misapplied or confused.

yvette
thanks so much

I have been online to look at your recommended titles:

According to a reviewer on Amazon, "Valerie et Daniel" starts with some globale and then moves onto syllabique?

That same reviewer recommends Lire avec LÉo et Léa....any thoughts on that one?

Boscher looks good but gets sone negative reviews (on amazon) for being quite slow going and: "J'ai découvert un nouveau livre sur l'apprentissage de la lecture, 'Apprendre à lire en famille', de Marlène Martin, il vient de sortir et je l'ai dévoré. Il est à base syllabique mais sans faire les erreurs des autres méthodes syllabiques comme Boscher, notamment sans montrer les sons qui se ressemblent au même moment (ça entraine des confusions pour un enfant en train de les apprendre), sans montrer lu puis ul à une époque où l'enfant voit encore souvent en miroir (c'est Stanislas Dehaene qui raconte ça dans les Neurones de la lecture, l'auteur s'appuie sur ses recherches en neurosciences)."

I can't find anything called Pas à Pas.....

I am sorely temoted to write a nite in the homework diary along the lines of:

DD cannot read the days of the week as she has not yet learnt the syllabique code but she has, in the meantime, memorised them.

Sorry, sorely tempted to write in the homework diary, something along the lines of

Hi Greythorne,

No, Daniel et Valerie does not start with the Globale; it is pure syllabique.
Chapter one introduces the book's characters; Chapter two 'i'; Chapter 3 'o' etc..
Leo et Lea is fine too.
The book I meant is 'Methode de lecture syllabique-Pas a Pas-C.Delile

Boscher is the safe and tried method but dry; it has worked for millions of French people before the advent of the Globale... it has also some small books which children can read on their own according to their progress in the book.

My advice would be for you to get Boscher and another Syllabique book of your choice. You can then alternate with Boscher in order to complement or relieve boredom as you go along. It is best for you to go in a bookshop and see which one you like best provided that it is syllabique.

For my DD I used Boscher, Daniel et Valerie and Pas a Pas. Boscher has a good collection for cursive writing too and maths.

They did a combination of Globale and 'Sign Language' methodology at her school!!!! I decided to teach her and she was a very fluent reader by the age of five and a half. The school decided to move her up one year because she could decode and read small books whilst the rest of the class was still trying to recall their list of words !!!

You will find that having done the syllabique, your child will pick up the synthetic phonics in a flash and will read English even quicker..

Y>

There is a huge difference between learning to read French and learning to read English. English uses 205 letters or letter strings (graphemes) for its 44 sounds, while French makes do with only about 50. This makes learning to write English much harder.

The difference is even greater for learning to read. French graphemes have, with very few exceptions, a regular pronunciation. Children have to learn grapheme-to sound rules and about liaison, not to pronounce the last consonant, unless the next word begins with a vowel . But once u have learnt such rules, u can decode pretty much any French word.

Not so in English, because 69 English graphemes can have more than one pronunciation, especially the letter and all graphemes with . That's why learning to read English takes longer, and why parental help makes a big difference. Ten minutes one-to-one each day helps enormously, but it is much easier for parents to deliver that than for teachers at school. The children of parents who administer such help do vastly better at school than those who have to make do without it.

The need for daily support in the early stages of learning to read English is due to the variable sounds of the following graphemes. The worst is and all graphemes with . I have put them first, followed by the other vowels, because English vowel graphemes are much trickier than the consonant ones.
The very worst are shown between < >.

: (on - only, once, won, woman, women
go - to)
: (shout -should, touch, soul, soup)
: (home - come, move)
: (food -good, flood)
: (road - broad)

-oes: toes ? does, shoes
-oll: roll - doll
omb: tombola - bomb, comb, tomb
-ot: despot - depot
ough: bough - rough, through, trough, though
ought: bought - drought
oul: should - shoulder, mould
our: sour - four, journey
ow: how - low

a: and ? apron, any, father
a-e: to deliberate ? a deliberate act
ai: wait ? said, plait
al: always ? algebra
-all: tall - shall
are: care - are
au: autumn - laugh, mauve
-ate: to deliberate - a deliberate act
ay: stays - says

: (treat - great, threat, theatre, create
(ear: ear ? early, heart, bear)

surplus endings
which do not lengthen vowels
(have, delicate, engine -
cf. gave, dedicate, divine)

e: end ? English
-e: he - the
-ee: tree - matinee
e-e: even ? seven, fete
ei: veil - ceiling, eider, their, leisure
eigh: weight - height
eo: people - leopard, leotard
ere: here ? there, were
-et: tablet - chalet
eau: beauty ? beau

• ew: few - sew
• ey: they - monkey

i: wind ? wind down ski hi-fi

• ine: define ?engine, machine

ie: field - friend, sieve imb: limb ? climb ign: signature - sign

u: cup ? push
ui: build ? fruit, ruin

(camel)
which make short vowels look long
(same, camel - cf. hammer)

The other phonically unreliable graphemes are:

cc: success - soccer
ce: centre - celtic
ch: chop ?chorus, choir, chute
cqu: acquire - lacquer 19

ge: gem - get
gi: ginger - girl
gy: gym ? gynaecologist
ho: house - hour
mn: amnesia - mnemonic

qu: queen ? bouquet
s: sun ? sure
sc: scent - luscious, molusc
-se: rose - dose
ss: possible - possession
th: this - thing
-ture: picture - mature

wa: was ? wag
wh: what - who
wo: won - woman, women, womb
wor: word ? worn
x: box - xylophone, anxious

• y-: type - typical
• -y: daddy - apply

z: zip ? azure