Reading scheme without pictures - does it exist?

[Munashe]

Need reading scheme suitable for my 5 year old son without pictures. He is sight reading but once we cover the pictures he really struggles with the words.

Not quite, later levels are synthetic phonics, 8 onwards.

Yes sight reading for the most common 100 words, as are jolly phonics (tricky words on the back pages of the jolly readers scheme).

ORT are anylitical phonics rather than synthetic phonics for the same word set, as are Reading Eggs.

Complete synthetic phonics books are very dull as there can be no linking words - think Frog on a log.

One childs boring, is another childs quaint.

and really 12 small reading books at the age of five is not going to turn a child into a sexist.

Dull, repetitive, simplistic - yes for some children for sure - maybe for many children but maybe children benefit from lots of repetition, in a predicatble format and type face.

12 short books that are dull, which even with reading through several times is unlikely to take a child longer than six weeks isn't going to put them off reading for life.

Ploding through three years of one sound a week phonic teaching is soooo much more tiresome.

What's with the sexism argument ? - there are plenty of sexists around who have never read Peter and Jane.

Tricky words aren't taught using sight reading, Rosemary - they are taught as decodable with a tricky bit.

ORT is a sight reading scheme - unless you are referring to the newer strands, rather than the core readers.

It's sight schemes which are dull, because they have to repeat, repeat, repeat to drill the same words in.

Here is Peter", "Peter is here", "Here is Jane", "Jane is here", "I like Peter", "I like Jane

Decodable books have much, much more scope - they don't have to repeat anything.

And later Peter and Jane books were NOT synthetic phonics from 8 onwards.

And they contained fucking golliwogs, ffs. How is that at all appropriate in this day and age?

Rosemary, quite apart from the racism and the sexism , sight reading schemes DO NOT WORK for one in five children. And this little boy certainly doesn't need any more of it to discourage him.

Well the books claim on the inside cover to be phonics after the common words are covered.

Haven't reached one with a golliwog in it yet, and wouldn't have linked it to racism at all, as your post implies.

We know they are racist now - and you suggested the OP use them now.

It's not, whatever it says - it's Look and Say.

Ploding through three years of one sound a week phonic teaching is soooo much more tiresome.

Children typically learn around 5 per week in Reception.

Three children, all of whom have covered one sound a week (some weeks ie school play - no sound at all) for years R, 1 and 2 - utterly awful, very slow progress.

Am amazed and envious when I read that others cover two or three sounds a week - ours take till Feb of Year R to cover SATIPN.

I don't think it's that odd to have looked for something faster and cheap to get them reading.

Adults may focus on the books being out-of-date and dull but if the aim is to get a despondent child to feel they can confidently tackle a book, these do the job quickly - even if the children learn to read them quickly because they find them dull.

So if a book has a golliwog in it that makes the book racist ?

Yep. And offensive - now. Now we know better.

All fine and dandy if it works - isn't for this child though, or countless others.

Your school isn't teaching phonics properly.

Letter of the week went out with Peter & Jane in 1964 didn't it?

Still alive and kicking in rural Hampshire black-hole !

One letter a week and Peter and Jane delivered by libary bus - I kid you not, we've been waiting for years for Ofsted to shake it all up.

When I first started teaching it was one sound a week and lists of words sent home to learn