School sending reading books with words that DS can't decode yet - is this OK?

[choceyes]

DS is in Reception year. He keeps getting books that have words that are too hard for him to decode, using decoding methods (which even I don't know much about) that he hasn't learnt yet.
For example last weeks book had the words "headache", "guitar" among a couple of others I can't remember. He could decode the simple CVC words.
Is this totally normal?
I have other reading books from different phonis systems that are at a very basic level and they only have words that can be decoded at that level, like the Songbirds books.

It is a bit confusing as to whether he's expect to decode these words or not. I guess I will have to ask the teacher, but I thought I'd get some advice on here first. I wrote in the reading book comments section today that there were lots of words he couldn't decode as he hasn't learnt how to put he did read the simple words.

Thanks

Isawitchcackling I said appropriate text not book ... one sheet of paper hardly a huge effort. Once a bank of resources is created it's no harder than sending books.

Thanks for your replies everyone.

So, yesterday I wrote a comment in the reading record saying that there are quite a few words in the reading scheme book that DS can't decode/haven't been taught to decode, but those that he can he was reading well.
The teacher has put in a comment saying that, it's teaching word patterns too, like it said" dad had a guitar", "chip had a trumpet", "mum had a headache" - I'm not quite sure what she means by that, I mean I know there is a pattern there, but how does that help learning to read? She also says to look at the picture and show the word.
Like a previous poster, said, this really achieves nothing for DS. He has been looking at picture books for years before starting school, and he's never learnt to read that way.

I'm starting to get a bit concerned with the teaching at his school actually. We've had no workshops at all...although at the start they said they will be having workshops for literacy and numeracy. I have no idea how to decode some of the words and it would be useful if the teachers said what they are teaching every week. They do have a wall chart with each ability group and what they teach every week, but it seems so vague and I'm not sure it is updated that regularly.

DS is not a keen learner of reading anyway. He is keen to read his school reading book (because the teacher gave it, so it's OK ), but everytime I get the Songbirds book out or I try to get him to decode a word in a book he gets a bit frustrated and doesn't really want to do it. Although he loves being read to, yesterday we were in the library for 1.5hrs reading books after school and that's normal, he doesn't seem to have developed a wanting to learn to read himself. But he is much better recently and is getting more and more into it. He is not frustrated by the words in his reading scheme books not being decodable by him, he is totally fine with me reading them to him instead!

Mrsz whilst I bow to your superior knowledge, my experience still shows me that, for some children at least, there is. My sons and several other small boys I've come across (prob some girls too) find reading 'Look at the duck' said mum - type books unutterably dull, even if that is the right level for them. Not all children are motivated to practise by the rather abstract idea that one day this skill will be useful, so need the lure of a plot, or facts about dinosaurs or racing cars to make them want to pick up a book at all.

Maybe I should have snatched the Earth book of that child the other day and insisted he read something more his level but in nearly 3 months of reading with him it was the first time he'd actually showed any enthusiasm for reading at all, and the first time (ironically) that he didn't complain it was too difficult/long/someone else's turn. So we went with it - next week it will be back to Biff, Chip and Kippe.

Does there really have to be one size fits all?

There is nothing more dull than being faced with a book you can't read BarbarianMum ...stopping and starting and waiting for someone to tell you the words.

On the other hand, mrz, if you've never been able to read a book completely independently perhaps you might think that waiting to be 'told' words is reading. Who knows, you might even think it is exciting to be able to 'read' a few HFWs!

Children aren't stupid. Of course they can read their favourite books. If you give them any random book off a school shelf, then OK, maybe they can't read it, or read all of it. But then I'm sure I can locate random books that most people in this forum can't read either.

I reckon I could write a couple too.

I suggest you underline words in pencil that you think are beyond your child's phonics level. Tell your child that these words are difficult and they haven't yet been taught the rules in school. A word like guitar has one tricky letter although for a more advanced child "gu" is another way of writing the "g" sound. There are other words like "guide", "guard", "guest", "guilt"

Knowledge of the world is an important factor for developing reading comprehension. My daughter trieds to "read" her favourite books which aren't reading scheme books.

Surely knowledge of the world helps with only a certain type of comprehension. Fairy tales and fantasy stories aren't about the world that we live in but they still give rise to questions. I've been thinking about comprehension a bit lately. There is a certain kind of text processing behaviour which goes on regardless of what the passage is about. That's why it's so important to know the difference between the sentences:

he thought she was petty
and
he thought she was pretty

columngollum

Fairy tales and fantasy certainly require knowledge of the world to understand and infer meaning.

Your sentences

"he thought she was petty"

"he thought she was pretty"

require knowledge of the world to understand and infer meaning from the story. Which sentence is complementing the girl? How do you know?

I agree with you that strong decoding skills are vital and that children should use decoding skills are their first line of attack when faced with a new word. Children need to be able to decode effortlessly to be able to concentrate on the meaning of the story. Many children find learning to decode difficult and will use other strageries to avoid having to decode. I feel that the year 1 phonics check will improve reading standards in future years.

There is the simple view of reading and the complex view of reading. I feel that comprehension is best developed with high quality bed time stories and books in the early years.

It's not just new words that are the problem. Familiar words can also be problematical.

If she did not have no buttons then did she have buttons or did she not?

Many children find learning to decode difficult and will use other strageries to avoid having to decode.

Hmm. I think you'll find that is a bit of a myth!

Children will mostly use strategies that they have been taught. If you teach a child a mixture of decoding and guessing then they will generally go for guessing because it is much easier. Most children taught to decode with no guessing will decode because it wouldn't occurr to them that there is any other way to 'read' the words. I don't think that they find decoding particularly difficult (I've only taught older children) but perhaps you know better.

I've taught reception for many years and now teach KS1 and young children are the same maizieD. They don't guess or use pictures unless they have been taught to and 5 year olds will happily decode 3 & 4 syllable words effortlessly.

"Children aren't stupid. Of course they can read their favourite books. If you give them any random book off a school shelf, then OK, maybe they can't read it" I would say if they can't read any random book then they can't really read

I don't think there are many people either children or adults who could pass a truly random book reading test. I suppose you could meet me in the British Library, if you'd like to give it a go yourself.

I think you are going to have problems in life if you are only able to read familiar texts and your child will certainly struggle in exams collumngollum. See you in the British Library!

The school that scored the lowest (84%) apparently uses Jolly Phonics, Letters and Sounds, New Way, ORT and a 'phonically based spelling scheme'.

According to the report from 2009, yes (can't find anything on their website, even though reading scheme info is supposed to be a statutory requirement on websites) - but since their results have dived and they have a different Head I suspect that this may no longer be the case.

Intrigued as to what a 'random book test' would consist of.

I don't think there are many people either children or adults who could pass a truly random book reading test.

That's possibly one of the daftest things I have ever read on MN - I feel truly sorry for you if your reading skills are so poor that you really believe that, collumngollum.

I could donate a palaeontology book for a random book test if you want to try it...

I would be very happy to undertake a random book test. I think I'd do pretty well. My only caveat would be that I'd like it to be a book published in the last few hundred years and ideally the last two hundred or so.

It could have been written before then, but I'd like it to use modern standard spellings.

and preferably in English

I would be prepared to accept English or French, mrz. English preferred!

Paper, that is a bit shocking. Can you just ignore the school books and get yourselves something your daughter can read and get one with those?