Worrying about use of ORT and HF words in reception

[Kerryblue]

Actually, I am feeling really tearful right now

I have dt's, just started reception. This morning their teacher told me she is going to send home some 'tricky' words for them to learn and start them on reading books. When I asked which ones, I got the answer I so didn't want - Biff and bloody Chip!!

Bit of background... my Year 4 dd is still on reading schemes, is having masses of extra help (for example a 'wheel' of sounds such as 'gr' 'st' 'cl' etc that she has to read every night), and has just really struggled with her reading. She learnt (or not as the case may be) with Biff and Chip. That scheme totally failed her. She is one of the 1:5 who needs synthetic phonics, it's just we didn't realise this at Key Stage 1. Long story.

My Year 7 ds, who although reads well now, was a late reader and also learnt with this scheme.

Both of them were very much 'I will only do what the teacher asks me to do, you mummy, know nothing!' type of children. The dt's are going the same way. If I want them to read to me at home with Songbird books for eg, I bet they will fuss about it because it's not what the teacher wants them to do.

I am probably being over emotional about this, but I really, really want them to learn with synthetic phonics. I have learnt so much about different types of learning to read - mainly from mumsnet actually - for me to believe that this is the best way. How do we know they are going to be OK with Biff and Chip until it's too late.

At the moment, they know all their letter sounds, some digraphs and long vowel sounds (using the Letters and Sounds DVD and poster) but are struggling with blending a bit. So they are at the very start of their learning to read journey and I so don't want it to go wrong for them.

What should I do next with them? How do I help them?

There was once a time when I was quite guarded about what people said was going on in some schools. But some of this is just toe-curling. YOU CANNOT LEARN TO READ BY GUESSING WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE PICTURES. Sorry. If the school does not have decodable readers, then the children will not make links between the phonics teaching (if it is happening) and the skill of reading. OP you are right that mixed methods teaching can cause harm. Posters saying "well I'm OK and I didn't learn through SP" doesn't really cut the mustard, as you have most likley worked out the code for yourself even if you were not taught it explicitly. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to read the word sesquipedalianist.

DilysPrice, what evidence is there that a "substantial majority" will struggle if not taught pure phonics?

The evidence that year upon year 20% of children leave our schools unable to read to an adequate standard, in an age which has taught mixed methods since the Literacy Strategy was introduced in 1997.

I'm guessing that most teachers find a middle ground - the fact that my daughter is reading Biff and Chip books suggests to me she isn't doing pure phonics. If pure phonics was THE answer wouldn't more teachers be doing this?

God, you would think so, wouldn't you? Instead they are the teachers whom have never tried teaching phonics first and only, don't bother to find out how good schools teach reading, and instead appear here saying 'some children will always struggle'. Read Reading by Six - how the best schools do it.

I'd be interested to see actual statistics of how many children cannot read at age 7/8, and of those how many do not have significant social problems and/or SEN. I can't believe that there would be any and that's why I don't worry about my DC and I found the OP's posts a bit OTT.

The kind of child who will fall into the one in five category is not predictable either - in fact it's impossible to predict. Certainly my child was read to every day from when he was born until now, is as bright as your proverbial button and was still confused, and very upset, when mixed methods and mere lip service to phonics confused the hell out of him.

Wait to see if your child falls into that 20% - and then let's see if you still think the OP is OTT fatfinger. And if your child is older and one of the 80%, well, bully for you!

I'm aftraid that I get a little upset by sweeping statements such as:

Children who don't have SEN will learn to read however they are taught if they have support st home.

This is just not true. I have worked with many KS3 children over the years who do not have SEN but have not learned to read competently. Learning to read, for most children is not difficult unless it is made so by the confusion of methods implicit in 'mixed methods'. The assumption that difficulty in learning to read is the 'fault' of the child, rather than of the methods used to teach reading, results in many perfectly able children being labeled 'SEN' unnecessarily and enables teachers to continue to use faulty methods, as, instead of considering that their teaching methods can be in any way to blame, the teachers can sit back and say 'Oh well, the child can't learn to read because they have SEN.'.

I have also worked with 'SEN' children who have learned the basic skills of reading very easily. Whatever other barriers to learning they may have poor basic reading skills are not an issue.

The 'substantial minority' of children who don't learn to read effectively is, in fact, at least one child in five. (Though as this figure is taken from the percentage of children who don't reach L4 in English at the end of KS2 and doesn't include many very flaky L4s, the true figure is probably more like one in four) Extrapolated to the population at large this is a 'very' large number of children. Taken over time this also represents a very large number of illiterate adults.

There are also many parents shelling out money for 'dyslexia' testing which wouldn't be needed if their children had been taught properly from the start...

I don't know where my 'whom' came from in my last post. who

OP I do not at all mean to be offensive, my original post was a convoluted way of saying that perhaps the best way of helping your kids with reading is by chilling out they will undoubtably follow suit. Concentrate on what they ARE achieving, they're from a loving and supportive home, what's the worst that can happen?

Sorry again if you were offended.

Concentrate on what they ARE achieving, they're from a loving and supportive home, what's the worst that can happen?

That they are one of the confused 20%, their reading esteem hits the floor, and it takes months and months and intensive phonic teaching at home to pick them back up again?

Is that all?

The worst that can happen is that they'll go into year 4/5/6 being unable to read fluently and thus having the rest of the curriculum and large amounts of the wider world inaccessible to them fatfinger. I'd call that a big deal.

This is a genuine question -I now know that 1 in 5 can't read at 7-8 from the more recent posts. Feenie, I don't understand where the causal link is between that and teaching mixed methods? And the other thing I don't understand is why isn't there data so those at risk of being in this 20% CAN be predicted?

Who knows where my daughter is at, I think she is at best average in terms of literacy but she's a maths genius like me!!!

1-5 can't read at age 16 either fatfinger and in countries where Look & SAy and mixed methods are more widely used the illiteracy levels are even higher.

I don't understand what you don't understand. The main method of teaching reading in England is a mixture of Look and Say/phonics. The number of children unable to read when they leave school is 20%.

In schools where only phonics is taught, most children learn to read - did you read the 'Reading by Six' document I linked to?

And the other thing I don't understand is why isn't there data so those at risk of being in this 20% CAN be predicted?

Because there is no way of telling who will fall into that 20% - it can be children of any background/intelligence/gender/ethnicity.

Not yet, still on mobile on way home from work but utterly fascinated by this. Saying that a) mixed methods are taught and b) illiteracy rates are 20% does not prove a causal relationship, ie that a caused b. MRZ's Argument does give some weight to the theory that mixed methods cause illiteracy but you cannot compare different countries populations as there are also going to be too many confounding factors to make a true comparison.

I am genuinely not being argumentative for the hell of it - I have a vested interest in all this but I'm a scientist and am interested in good quality evidence.

fatfinger

I don't think you appreciate where the OP is coming from. She has TWO older children with reading dificulites/ possible dyslexia. The chances of the twins being dyslexic is high which is why the OP wants pure synethic phonics.

Most parents want the best education possible for their children.

Sorry Feenie, we keep cross posting. My point is that you don't know you can't predict at risk groups until you have gathered the evidence - surely with such high stakes the department for education must collect data on those in the 20% to look for a pattern?

I work with cardiovascular disease risk and while I can't say for sure that someone is going to have a heart attack, I know what social, demographic, and clinical factors will put him at risk in order that their GP can intervene. Surely something similar exists in education and if it doesn't, there's a gap in the market!

Really Tired of course I appreciate where the original poster is coming from, I am a parent.

And I want the best education for my children too but I'm not just going to accept that pure phonics is THE way without good quality evidence. I will read the document

My point is that you don't know you can't predict at risk groups until you have gathered the evidence - surely with such high stakes the department for education must collect data on those in the 20% to look for a pattern?

Oh dear, fatfinger. The Dfes collect data on the 20%? That is a joke. Education is driven by fad and fashion, not data.

The big obstacle to meaningful data is that schools claim to use one teaching method when in fact they only pay lip service at best.

There was a research study in Clackmanshire that compared different approaches to teaching reading

www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/02/20682/52383

The <a class="break-all" href="//hwww.teachingexpertise.com/articles/rose-supports-synthetic-phonics-early-intervention-376" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Rose Report where a royal commision looked at the primary school curriulum and recommended synethic phonics teaching. Jim Rose has looked at the available research when he made his recommendations.

In particular he advocates ditching the "searchlights" method of teaching reading in the early stages of learning to read.

www.rrf.org.uk/archive.php?n_ID=23&n_issueNumber=45

fatfinger how much proof do you need? Education is a soft science at best.

Learning to read is complex process. It can't be mastered over night. Having books which a child has to guess can put some children off. Decodable books are wonderful for confidence building. On a simple level, a beginner needs to learn how to bark at print accuracy. Ie. if they see the word "home" they do not guess at it and think its "house". The words "home" and "house" are sutlely different.

Comprehension is a far bigger challenge and takes up the next ten or so years of a child's schooling. To develop good comprehension skills a child needs a language rich enviromnent. This best done by being read to and having plenty of interesting life experiences during the childhood.

fatfinger - thanks for the apology.

I have been chilled out. I have been the least 'pushy' mother, really I have.

But dd is now in year 4. FOUR!! Other children in her class (not all) have been reading Roald Dahl, Jacqueline Wilson, Enid Blyton etc for ages now. She, however, struggles with words such as 'noise', 'area', 'blushed'. Yes, she can get them eventually, but eventually means that she can, for the moment, never read fluently. For enjoyment. For pleasure. She guesses at a lot of longer words, using the first letter to help her guess. Nine times out of ten, she guesses wrong.

For her, reading is like a chore. I liken it to ski-ing. If you can ski well, a week in the Alps is brilliant fun. If you can't, it is scary and definitely NOT fun.

And actually it is hard for her to achieve her true potential in, let's say history, geography or even maths. Because she can't read about it or can't read the questions. It affects every subject.

Yes, she comes from a loving home . That makes no difference.

I have calmed down now. I know I probably come across as OTT. But it really, really pisses me off when I am accused of being neurotic by other mothers - those mothers with dc who have either been fine, and learnt to read without a problem, or whose dc are at the learning stage and so they don't know the outcome. Like Feenie said upthread, well bully for you! How lucky your dc are not in the 20%.

Whereas I am not accused of being neurotic by experts who have experience in this type of thing.

I have learnt so much from these people, on mumsnet, and for that I thank you.

Boooooooo! Not happy reading. I hope you get your DC sorted. A change of school springs to mind. Not the easiest but it seems the school is failing your children with reading. Or if that's just not an option then I hope you can get your Y4 daughter support and can you teach your younger DD through phonics yourself? Good luck.

Most schools have Biff & Chip, and the cost involved in replacing ALL the reading books is prohibitive. You can teach what you want at home - they're your kids. Then use those skills for the Biff & Chip books. I intend to teach my DS to read before he goes to school, so all his reading/phonics is done 1:1.

Although all schools received match funding up to £3000 this year to purchase decodable books, so that isn't really an excuse.

OP from experience my best advice is to teach them at home. I know it's hard when books come from school but you can ignore them, basically read them to the child and mark them in the record as read, read one a week and appear to be a slack parent... Lots of options that avoid pointless confrontation with the school.
That is what I did with dd2 and it actually took the most enormous load off my mind as I didn't really care anymore what the school did as I was getting on with the real job myself at home. Tbh most schools don't do that much practice at school and you have the holidays to instill good habits as well.
The biggest drawback was having to get hold of my own books.

Some schools have had Biff Chip et al since Adam & Eve started reception and haven't bothered to spend any money since. Oddly enough I've never taught in a school that used ORT.