Is this how children learn to read these days?

[Bananaketchup]

Am genuinely asking. DD is in reception. She started late at the school and has only been in full-time since xmas, so they don't really know her too well. She loves being read to, she can sound out words when she's in the mood, but is also one for the easy life. She reads once a week 1-1 with a TA at school, and brings the book home afterwards until it's swapped a week later. The books are of the 'this is a house, this is a garden' level. In her reading record it will say 'DD read the book and enjoyed it'. But when she reads it at home she rattles off the sentence on each page and has clearly just memorised it, and isn't actually reading. If I mix the page order up, she can't read it. If I hide the picture, she can't read it. She will make wild guesses without even trying to sound out the word e.g. she will guess 'the' for 'house', just pure guesses. This weekend she got in a strop because I wouldn't let her see the picture (as she was just guessing from this and not reading the words at all). She then said 'but Mrs X (The TA she reads with) says look at the picture, then read it'. So my question is (if you've got this far without dying of boredom), is this how children are taught to read - to look at the picture to know what the words say? Because DD isn't paying any attention to the words, just gabbling off what's in the picture, and I can't really see how this is teaching her to read. I am minded to speak to school, but don't want to be 'that' mum if this is genuinely a method children learn to read by, which I'm unaware of. Can anyone advise please?

It wasn't an argument, cg.

Another of your redefinitions of word meanings?

90% of statistics are made up on the spot, which is a measure that eight out of ten cats prefer.

Pictures are part of learning to read but it's more about them giving a clue.

Try reading owl online. It's free. Lots of Oxford reading tree books on line and you can decide the level

Got to be a spectacular case of not RTFT, that.

Did you just make that up columngollum

Just as an aside, can anyone lend me a link to something which sets out the "phases" of phonics (if indeed they are usually taught in a set pathway/series of phases).

It would be really useful to know which phase my (reception) DD is up to and where she might be going next.

How long do the phases go on for? Ie are they still learning new phases of phonics in Y1 and Y2 or have they covered them all by the end of YR and then Y1 and Y2 is practice?

Cheers
Bumps xx

Try this large publication. It sets all the phases out in order etc.

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/190599/Letters_and_Sounds_-_DFES-00281-2007.pdf

Just as an aside, can anyone lend me a link to something which sets out the "phases" of phonics (if indeed they are usually taught in a set pathway/series of phases).

Only Letters and Sounds has those stupid 'phases'

Phase 1 is full of 'phonological awareness' activities which are irrelevant to learning to read. (Though it does practise some oral blending, which familiarises children with the idea of blending sounds into words)

The rest of the 'phases' systematically cover the simple code, then the advanced code. *The big problem is that teachers use them as 'differentiation'. Instead of teaching the whole class together and providing extra tuition for the slower to learn they group them according to where they are in the 'phase'. The result can be children still 'on phase 2' at the end of Y1 (simple code)

Other prgrammes just work systematically through the English alphabetic code, from 'simple' to 'complex'. So if your child isn't being taught with Letters and Sounds you don't have to worry about knowing the phases at all. Just know that your child should be taught at least 3 sounds a week, should be getting lots of practise of sounding out and blending, and writing and spelling, words containing the sounds/spellings they have been taught. And, the books they are sent home to practise with should be decodable. No 'Look & Say' ORT.

Have a look at the Phonics International website. It has loads of information and some free resources. It will give you an idea of the general order of introduction of the graphemes (different programmes vary the order, but not by a great deal)

www.phonicsinternational.com

*Having said all that about phases and differentiation I have to admit that Read Write Inc splits children into ability groups. However, if the school is properly trained they will give extra help to the slower to learn so that they can keep up.

No look and say ORT

Thanks Maizie - is the ORT "look and say", then?

A phonics taught child would automatically try to sound out and blend an unfamiliar word. If it contained and unfamiliar grapheme (and they would be very unlucky to encounter a word with more than one unfamiliar grapheme in it) they would be told it, or ask (what panzee said)

What if there is no-one around to ask? What if they are reading to themselves and the only adult in the room is working with other children? Are they just supposed to stop, or, having sounded out the letters and still being sure, would it not show more gumption if they read on and tried to work it out from the context? OK, probably not as reliable as asking someone else who can already read but if someone else is not available, surely it is better than giving up. Are you not inculcating a level of learned dependence? (Maybe my view is coloured by spending my primary school years in a class of 40 where the more able children were left to get on with it to a large extent.) It is all very well to say that phonics should be the only strategy but then you are adding second strategy, so there are now 2 strategies - phonics and ask a grown up.

Phonics taught children also read words accurately (you can't read them any other way if you sound them out and blend them) AND understand that books are full of unfamiliar words, so they don't try to force an 'unknown' word into being a word that they already 'know' (so changing the meaning of what they are reading.

Sorry, but I think they can still read them inaccurately; they can choose the wrong (perfectly valid in other words) pronunciation for a particular spelling or they can put the stress on the wrong syllable and still not get it. If they are concentrating on the meaning of what they are reading (using context) surely that will go some way to them getting it right.

I think that's right, Cecily. But the stock phonics replies are:

a) Whatever problems arise in life or literature a skilful phonics teacher will somehow deal with them.

b) Any child who fails to read a word, by definition, hasn't reached the correct stage in the phonics course yet. The course ends when every child (or 95% of them) whichever number comes first, can read everything.

c) Yes, OK, some children can't read, even after phonics instruction, but that's only due to poor teaching (and not phonics.) But anyway, 95% can read (everything, presumably) so, why worry.

Are they just supposed to stop, or, having sounded out the letters and still being sure, would it not show more gumption if they read on and tried to work it out from the context?

They will have a much better idea of what the word 'might' be if they've decoded most of it; in those circumstances they might just be able to work it out from context. That's not 'forbidden' , the thing that is 'forbidden is actively teaching guessing from context.

On the other hand, it might be a word which is neither in their receptive or expressive vocabulary, in which case nothing is going to help.

Quite honestly, you could think up all sorts of 'what if' scenarios. What if they're up in their bedroom reading War and Peace?

Whatever sort of instruction a child is having there will be situations during the learning period when they will encounter words they haven''t read before (indeed, it is a lifelong 'problem'). A phonics taught child has more chance of getting closer to what an unfamiliar word is than a child who has been taught to guess.

You are also not hearing what I am saying about context. It is known (by people who have investigated it, such as in the book I mentioned earlier) to be unreliable. Look & Say reading schemes were deliberately written to make guessing from context more reliable because Look & Say had to resort to desperate measures to try and get children reading. If a child is reading a 'normal' book the author will not have made any effort to make 'context clues' obvious.

It is all very well to say that phonics should be the only strategy but then you are adding second strategy, so there are now 2 strategies - phonics and ask a grown up.

What's wrong with asking a grown up? When you are learning a skill you are perfectly entitled to ask a skilled person for help if you're stuck. What phonics teaching doesn't produce is children who blithely ignore what is written on the page (and heaven knows, I've encountered enough of them) in favour of their own guessing or who look at you helplessly when they encounter a strange word and say blankly 'I don't know that word'.

I think they can still read them inaccurately; they can choose the wrong (perfectly valid in other words) pronunciation for a particular spelling or they can put the stress on the wrong syllable and still not get it.

I agree that they may get the pronunciation wrong if they haven't yet been taught an alternative. Otherwise, they would try the alternatives they know and if the word is in their vocabulary they are likely to get it correct. Likewise with stress. Though I never found wrong stress to be such a problem as wrong 'sound'.

But really, all this is very dependent on what stage they are at with their learning and what sort of books they are trying to read independently. I can't pronounce all the names in War & Peace correctly, nor, if I am reading research papers, do I always know how some of the technical terms are pronounced (or what they mean). I don't have an adult to ask but I have other resources to go to for help. I certainly don't blame the way I was taught to read (which I don't remember, it being so long ago) for these little shortcomings. I just accept that you can never know everything there is to know about anything in life. (this doesn't apply to cg, of course, she knows EVERYTHING)

I encountered a new word only today (well, it might have been a typo) 'noumen'. Anybody like to tell me what it means and how it is pronounced? (without googling it!)

I can only say it Seinfeld style, "Newwwwwwwwman", scowling slightly. :o

I wasn't thinking of War and Peace, (honest) more the the sort of age appropriate books aimed at young fluent-ish readers or even the higher levels of scheme books. If it's not forbidden to use context once you have worked out most of it the word, then no problem. With regard to the choosing the wrong alternative, it could still be a proper word, so even if the reader knows the correct alternative, they may not move on to it unless they use context to inform them that their original thought was wrong.

There is nothing wrong with asking a grown up if there is a grown up around who is available to be asked. I know classrooms have far more adults per child than when I was young, but that still won't always be the case.

Apologies, remembered the word wrong. Here it is in context

and assembling meaning from the noumena of immersing ourselves in such an ocean of experience.

Loved the suggestions!

Banana ketchup, are you still here? You must be fed up of all the arguments going on here!
When I am working with a group of little ones I always say have a look through the book first on your own. It gives them an opportunity to look at it, including the pictures, have a chat about what is on the front cover, what might the story be about etc. In other words, reminding them that books are enjoyable! Heaven forbid looking at the pictures should be outlawed. That might be what the TA meant when she was working with your daughter.
Of course I strongly believe that excellent phonics teaching is the way forward. But over the last 35 years I have also taught children with photographic memories who learned to read bypassing phonic training.

Stagnant, nobody mentioned outlawing pictures you did just then. They are there to enhance enjoyment.

The likelihood is that those photographic memory children worked out the code for themselves - some children do.

Sorry, no idea why the autocorrect changed your name - huge keyboard issues here.

Haha! Thought you might be inferring I am getting a bit stagnant after teaching infants, phonics, look and say, whatever phase we have gone through for 35 years!!

There are numerous myths about phonics teaching and I think most have been repeated on this thread.

Phonics teaching doesn't forbid children from looking/reading whatever they wish - but for instruction purposes the teacher would not expect a child to independently read a book beyond their present level of knowledge/skills.

Many of our 5 and 6 year olds are independently reading chapter books for pleasure which do not contain the type of illustration that would support guessing (Roald Dahl, Enid Blyton, Francesca Simon, Lovina Roe, Sue Mongredien etc etc)