High frequency words, reading in Y1

[Minimaxkids]

My DD has a word book where new words are added weekly to learn by sight.
It's an old list of words which I have seen linked to on here before. There were 44 words in YR and another 113 words Y1&2

She gets 6 or so words a week to learn. But she doesn't need to learn them, she is just reading them. It all seems a bit pointless and the word book, if it is a sight book (clearly defined by teacher in front), shouldn't it contain words to learn not read? (I know that sounds all muddled up).

My question is, what sort of words follow on in years 3 and 4 as she has now 'read' all the YR, 1 & 2 words?

Some people don't seem to understand that the children can read them. I'll tell you something else even more silly. My daughter's teacher knows that my daughter can already read the words for Reception but she's still going to get them anyway. It's a bit like not only shutting the door after the horse has bolted but giving it a fresh coat of paint too.

Sending home lists of words to learn by sight is a pretty pointless exercise IMHO.

OP there are 300 HFW on the Reception Y1 Y2 list ... so not only are they using an ineffective teaching method they are using lists that were replaced in 2007!

Oh!
Oh again.
Have you a link to the current words mrz?

www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/Letters%20and%20Sounds-7.pdf

Thanks!
Which leads to another question

There are only a couple of words in that list I think she would struggle with, through and mouse sprang out. But everything else she has read.

So should her teacher be stretching her reading further than this? Her scheme books are easy, but erratic (ORT 6 and Ginn 360 5).

All of a sudden I am feeling uncertain.

Silly as it sounds Ginn 360 stage 5 are higher that ORT stage 6 (both are whole word schemes so might explain wht teacher is sending home sight words).

Yes I figured the Ginn was harder.
I've had books 30+ years old sent home (with pages missing).

So are children now meant to cover Letters and Sounds Phases 1-4 in reception (or the equivalent)?

DS1 is in reception and can read all reception high frequency words and most year 1 and 2 words. He still brings them home but after discussion with his teacher the plan is not for him to learn to read them because the teacher already knows he knows them but to learn to spell the words instead so it is an exercise in improving his writing skills instead.

I am working on spelling of course.
It just seems that reading therefore isn't being targeted for improvement.

Is that normal for a good reader?

Among the 300 most used English words, 190 are perfectly decodable, although some of tricky ones (there, where, were) undermine some of them (even, these, here).

In the first 100 most HF words, 42 are not entirely decodable:
the, he, be, we, me, she,
of, to, was, want, all, call, one, said,
you, by, my, only, come, could, do, down, into, look, now, other, right, some, there, two, when, what, where, which, who, why, your,
are, have, before, more, were,

In next 200, 55 are clearly tricky:
another, any, many, saw, water, small, laughed,

bear, great, head, ready,

ever, never, every, eyes,

find, friends, giant, I?ll, I?m, key, live, river,

people, pulled, put, thought, through, were, work, would,

coming, everyone, gone,

most, mother, oh, once,

grow, how, know, snow, town, window,

book, food, good, room, school, soon, too, took, door,

Mr Mrs

Another 13 are slightly so (partly depending on accent):
after, asked, can?t, fast, last, plants
animals, dragon, magic,
clothes, cold, old, told

The other 190 are regular for reading (but many, such as 'they' not for spelling) and can all be used for teaching decoding:
a, am, an, and, as, at, back, bad, can, cat, dad, gran, grandad, had, has, hat, man, rabbit, ran, sat, than, that, that?s,

came, gave, made, make, place, take, same, name, baby,
away, day, may, play, say, way,

car, dark, garden, hard, park,

bed, best, better, eggs, end, fell, get, help, let, let?s, next, red, tell, them, then, very, well, went, yes, her,

been, feet, green, keep, need, queen, see, sleep, three, tree, trees,

each, eat, sea, tea, please, even, here, these,

big, children, did, didn?t, different, fish, him, his, if, in, is, it, it?s, its, king, little, miss, still, thing, things, think, this, will, wind, wish, with,

birds, first, girl,

inside, like, liked, time, I, I?ve, cried, night, right, by, fly, my,

box, dog, fox, from, got, hot, long, lots, no, not, of, off, on, so, stop, stopped, top, floppy, across, along,

cold, old, told,
go, going, home, over, clothes,
or, for, horse, morning,

found, house, mouse, our, out, round, around, shouted, about, boy,

but, duck, fun, just, much, mum, must, run, sun, under, up, us, jumped, suddenly,

use,

their, they, new, again, air, because, began, boat, window.

PS
The split long e (even, these, here) is tricky not only because of 'there, where, were'.
The habit of generally not doubling a 'v' (ever, never) is unhelpful too.

Masha Bell

there isn't a split e in even

There is in mashaworld, mrz

is there as split e in never, there, here, were and where in mashaworld too?

never, there, were, where
look as if they should have the same sound as words which spell the /ee/ sound with the split digraph (even, these, here, sphere, merely, Peter, fever, lever).

They are troublesome until children have learnt to recognise them as whole words.

All spellings which undermine the main English spelling patterns are troublesome.

'merely, Peter, fever and lever' are not split vowel word, masha. They are polysyllabic and so are 'read' quite differently from monosyllabic words. As any well phonics taught child will know. They will also know that in monosyllabic words the 'ere' spelling can represent /air/ or /eer/.

They will also have had sufficient practice at spelling these words for the recall of them to become automatised by the muscle memory of the unique 'feel' of the written word.

It strikes me that the real problem with with learning to spell is ignorance of the English alphabetic code. An ignorance which you consistently demonstrate.

Listen, just chill.

Focus on your child's understanding of the stories/books/non-fiction text.

Good readers, which both my children are, includes enjoyment of reading and understanding and remembering what they are reading. Not just being able to tell 'read' lists of words.

Many children learn to read very quickly but struggle a little bit at a later stage (like DS2) because they are sight reading and struggle to read words such as 'suddenly', 'organising', 'colourful' etc whilst others (such as DS1) who are much more confident at phonics will be able to decode even very difficult words. In my experience, just support their enjoyment of reading, encourage independent reading for pleasure, get some good, exciting books for them at the library. Let them choose what they want to read.

My daughter could probably read a good deal of those. If there weren't so damn many of them I'd ask her. I don't think she know how to read "thought"
. She's never seen the word ought I don't think she's heard it either. I don't know what she'd make of the word narrator. In fact, if I didn't know the word myself I don't know what I'd make of it either.

www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/Letters%20and%20Sounds-7.pdf

Why do we say narrator, but narratives?

masha!

Why do we say narrator, but narratives?

I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that in some dialetics/accents people do say 'narraytives'. After all, I say 'leeverage', Yanks say 'leverage' (and change the meaning of the word)

People across the globe pronounce English words in lots of different ways. However, thanks to the magic of phonics, they can all read the same words and ascribe (roughly) the same meaning to them

I'm not going to show that word to my daughter. I don't think she's likely to come across it for a couple of years unless someone makes a point of showing it to her. But if she sounded out n-a-r-a-t-o-r instead of naraytor, (at the age of four) I'd be inclined to leave her to it. If she did it when she was older I'd probably tell her that's not how it's pronounced.