When did your child know the alphabet?

[TeaDr1nker]

I am curious to know really.

I was speaking to a friend of mine today who said that her DD (who will be 5 next week, so just started reception) does not know all her alphabet. She is concerned that her child will not make a good start with reading because of this.

At the moment, we are getting picture books back from school, with a sheet to talk to DC through the story.

I was a little surprised, as she felt that nursary had let her down by not teaching her DD the alphabet, but i thought her DD will catch up, and after all the school starts all children off on the same level.

Should she be concerned?

DD is almost 4 now, she recognises and writes her name, knows 4 or 5 letter sounds, she points them out in story books and writes them everywhere. Other than that I will follow her lead.

DS was 4 and 4 months when he started R and didn't recognise his name (a long one) didn't write or draw and know no letter sounds. He is doing just fine aged 7.

I don't see the point of knowing the alphabet before knowing letter sounds (phonics). It just confuses learning to read. My DSs knew the songs in reception (but just as a song), but probably didn't know the letter names fully til yr1.

She she not be concerned. The little blighter has only just started school. children are vastly different.

My eldest didn't know the alphabet till end of reception. Now at 11 is two years ahead with his reading. He still couldn't sing you that blasted alphabet song if he tried.

My middle knew alphabet at 3 -

She shouldn't stress - but maybe make alphabet biscuits - get alphabet spaghetti - concentrate on letters in name - there are many fun ways to learn it.

The kid knew the alphabet to say a month or so before she was 2. She could recognise most letters in upper and lower case by then too - we didn't teach her, she just asked; she had those foam jigsaw things to make the floor soft hat had letters on and foam letters in the bath which helped I guess.

gabsid At 3.2 she's now showing an interest in starting to read properly (certain words like her name she's known for ages) and it definitely helps that she knows all the letters - when she comes to a word she doesn't know she'll repeat the first letter over and over until you guide her finger onto the next letter - just knowing what the letter is, it's name and some of it's phonics without having to break off from blending it all together is a great help. I'm not sure how you'd teach someone to read if they didn't know which letter was which?

Alphablocks! TheJoyfulPuddleJumper mentioned this already but it's great. It gives you the letter sounds, which is what's important, in a fun way. DS loves it and so lately we've been watching it on tv, playing the games and watching on the CBeebies website, and getting the magazine (monthly - I am not on commission, honest..) I would encourage your friend to get her daughter watching and make it all fun and enjoyable.

There are people who feel that the pre school years should be a time for interesting life experiences. Ie. feeding the ducks, singng, going for a walk in the wood, listen to stories, draw and how to play and get along with other children.

Varied and fun experiences do help with reading. Unless a child is dyslexic, its very easy to teach a child to bark at print with phonics. Its much harder to teach comprehension to a child who has no experience of the wider world. Unlike reading there is a window of oppotunity to teach social skills that closes after four or five,

I think its pointless teaching letter names to childen who cannot yet blend. It only confuses them. I am sure that your friends dd will pick up her letter sounds and learn to blend very quickly. The gap between the hot housed children who can read and those who haven't been taught closes up very quickly. Many countries like Finland or Germany don't even attempt to teach reading before the age of seven, but their children do better than ours.

Reallytired - just to say that it is of course possible for one's child to experience life and to answer them when they ask you what things are, even if that think is letters. I did try to tell her that if she lived in Finland she wouldn't be told for another 5 and a half years, but she really wanted to know.

She goes out to the park, or somewhere, almost every day. She knows the names of the birds, she had a Coot family she fed and followed from the start of the nest to the second brood growing up, she loves pond-dipping and climbing, she sings songs almost constantly, most of which she has made up herself, she sees her cousins regularly, she can and does share and chat with other children, we quite often go for a walk in 'the deep dark wood', she loves swimming ... she has a very full life and awide variety of interests.

She just used to ask about letters all the time, until she learned them. Kids are all different: some are hot housed, and others just ask and ask and ask until they find out what they want to know.

I doult that know letter sounds or later names at the age of three harms a child, however if a child learns these things at five year olds they are not at a major disadvantage.

It is a fact that many children who learn later catch up and even over take.

Reallytired what you say about children developing at different rates is of course correct, which is why I objected to your implicit assumption that knowing letter names at an age earlier than you approve of is a sign of hot-housing rather than the child's curiosity.

You say you "doubt that know letter sounds or later names at the age of three harms a child" This leaves open the possibility that it could harm a child. How do you think it could?

DS2 was 3. I used a lot of Letterland stuff and he really seemed to enjoy it . DS3 who is 21 months younger was about 2 and 2 months because we had all the stuff in the house and he liked copying his brother. They both have summer birthdays and it definitely helped when they started school and in infants. By juniors lots of children had caught up with them. They both got level 5 in their SATs which was in the top third for their school. With DS1 I left it to the school and he picked it up by the October half term but had an early birthday so was just 5.

DS is 2.6. He can sing the abc song like he can sing twinkle twinkle, ie a lot of wrong words and little idea of the meaning. He can identify a b c d m and a couple of other letters less reliably, and what they are for. This is from watching the phonics song video on YouTube. Pretty much accidental, and we are not encouraging anything further, apart from recognising his name written down so he can find his peg etc at kindergarten.

DD was 2.
We loved looking at books together.
Now, aged 16 she doesn't read for pleasure at all. English is her weakest school subject.

I think that pushing academics at three years olds harms a child if it switches them off learning. Ie. if a child is pushed to learn something before they are ready then it can make the all experience very negative. Sometimes children who have been taught to read at home can be very bored in reception, although this should not happen if they have a good teacher.

Possibly learning letter sounds could be confusing if they are learnt incorrectly ie the parent adds a -uh (Ie saying suh instead of ssss)

Personally I think that learning a few letter sounds or number work at home is harmless, provided the parents are sensible. Children are pretty robust even if you do make mistakes.

I don't particularly like the idea that children being bored in reception is a problem which it is the parent's responsibility to avoid by simply not teaching their child things they ask about.

If a child was good at, and enjoyed painting people would say encourage it, or at least wouldn't object if the parent let them paint when they asked to.

Somehow though a kid being interested in letters and the parents answering questions about it is sometimes seen as "pushing academics"

If a kid is bored in school, it's the fault of the school. It wouldn't happen that a child who was excellent at playing the piano would be given music that was too easy. The kid, as it happens, asked for a red owl toy that does letters and letter sounds for her birthday when she was 2 - she'd found one in ELC, having walked past the 'toys' I believe because she could see the letters. Within a few months she'd got bored of it and starting making up her own questions for it and answering in the voice of the owl - "What is the first letter for 'Sofa'? and so on. She even got them 'wrong' sometimes so she could make the 'try again' noise.

Should I have hidden the owl or discouraged her?

(I know I get defensive of her; I'm noticing more and more that people look at her as 'weird' for knowing so much and people don't really know how to take her, and assume we have hot housed her. She's just a kid who likes to know things, and if she was good at anything else people wouldn't question it - am taking this OT now though so will end here - but remember that all kids are different.)

Children arrive at R with a variety of skills and abilities.

There are some just turned 4, especially boys (e.g. my DS) who have no interest at all in reading, writing or the like and just want to run around and be boisterous. DS didn't have a very good attention span either.

And then there are the almost 5 year olds, e.g. my DD (4 next week), she will sit and listen to quite long stories, she sits for a good hour and colours in neatly, writes her name and other letters, points out the letters she knows in books - just a completely different child.

I think R teachers need to be able to cope with both ends of the spectrum as well as children who already read and if I found DD was bored next year I would discuss it with the teacher. R is still Foundation Curriculum, just like nursery.

In regard to the OP's question, I think it's totally irrelevant and many posters were talking about the Alphabet Song which can be recited by the smallest children but it doesn't mean that they are any more advanced in their literacy than a child how doesn't know it. In any case, there are much nicer and fun songs I can think of teaching my small child. The ABC song only makes sense when children have learned letter sounds, are starting to blend, and then I think it makes sense to teach them that the letters have names too, e.g. with the ABC song.

ReallyTired - for my DS starting R at 4 and a bit was way too early and it did put him off, he refused to read until the middle of Y1 and now in Y3 he is average but wouldn't read for pleasure - so a lot of damage can be done with formally teaching too early - and for my DS 4/5 was way too early!

On the other hand, DD seems to be a lot more interested and by the time she starts R next Sept she might read with my support or it will just fall in place for her when she starts to learn - but I will not hold her back, neither will I systematically teach her, I just follow her lead.

No idea when DD knew the alphabet tbh. Probably not when she first started school. Didn't hold her back though.

FWIW many schools do not use the alphabet song - well, not the "now I know my alphabet, this time won't you..." one as it doesn't do its ob very well. The letters in the middle all blend in together and are not discrete individual letters - lmnop - elemenohpee appears as one letter to many children. It takes a good while to get that resorted out for them.

There are other songs about which are much better though I believe.

My daughter learned the abc song in nursery years ago. No, it's not particularly helpful. The letter sounds are much more use. The only time the letter names help her/us is when she's talking and we can't hear what she's saying and she shouts no, mummy, I said c for cat not b for baby. And that's about it. Once she spelled a word out in another language because I didn't know what it meant. That was helpful. But clearly it doesn't happen very often!

Both before school, however, I was eight before I quite got the hang of it!

Do people consider being able to sing the alphabet song as knowing the alphabet?

mrz I don't!

My son learnt the letter names when he was 2-ish, from Countdown. :o I was a bit worried he wouldn't get the sounds, but we found songs on YouTube that sing them together, so he gets they have different " names". He's not ready to blend yet though. I guess I'll see then if it's harmed him!

I just wondered what people meant by "knowing the alphabet". I often get told that a child knows ...the alphabet or can count when what people mean is they can recite

I would say "He knows the alphabet song", "letter sounds" and "letter names" (the latter if he knows the name of each letter consistently when he sees them out of order. )
I would say he knows the alphabet if he knows the letter names in order (and can also identify them out of order).

I don't think my daughter knew the alphabet much before she was 8 or 9. She learnt the song when she was younger, but sometimes got it out of order if not v careful. Still in year 4 she was spelling words using the sounds of the letters and not their names.
She's in y7 now and can say the alphabet in French and Spanish as well! She also spells and reads well and can use non fiction books, so I dont think it's done her any harm. Even now if I say which letter comes after 's' she'd probably have to say the alphabet through until she got to s. Maybe I'd better do some practice with her!