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?

I've met a few children who have begun to work it out for themselves and some who have been taught mixed methods who are very confused and believe that they look at the first letter then play "I Spy" using the illustrations in order to read words ...

International evidence suggests children taught using mixed methods are more likely to experience the Y3 dip or even hit the wall as far as reading is concerned.

I would never expect a Yr 1 child to read 'gymnastics'

Wouldn't you? You see, I would , and have seen a whole of Y1 children -do just that - and not by using the painfully long process one child you went through to be amazed one child in your school guessed it. They read it - as soon as they were taught that 'g' could make a /j/ sound.

whole class

I agree feenie gymnastics is pretty easy for a Y1 child - 3 syllables - straightforward

Do I expect her to be able to read that word again next week on a 'flashcard'? NO but by the time she is in Yr 2/3 then she will, by seeing it frequently and by associating this pattern of letters with the picture of Biff doing gymnastics!

Year 2 or 3? God almighty, low expectations indeed.

MIgsy1 my point exactly!

It takes up to 2 years of flashcards to learn to read ONE word

By the way I work with SEN.

Panzee, Feenie, I am deadly serious. In 3/4 of my DC's , phonics worked or is working, in the case of 3yo DS3, perfectly. Fir my DD, she would NEVER have learnt to read using phonics. We tried, from age 3 to age 8. Five years, and she still couldn't read her name using phonics, let alone a book. Look and say was the ONLY thing that worked for her.

And before that, I had been of the opinion that phonics worked for everyone - I'd taught my DBro to read at 3yo using phonics.

It may be because DD is partially deaf, she found the slight differences in the phonics sounds very difficult to distinguish. But it still proves that phonics isn't going to work for everyone!

If you read my previous posts I stated that I used a variety of methods based on each child I work with. I use phonics as part of my toolkit and don't have a problem with it but what I do have a problem with is people saying I am wrong to employ a variety of methods and that phonics is the only way!

I wonder what happens when it's not Biff doing the gymnastics?

Where was an interesting experiments done years ago where children were taught to read 'whole words' by being exposed to them by flashcards. One of the cards had a thumb print on it. When they went through the flashcards all the children could read the word on the thumbprinted card perfectly. When they were shown the same word without a thumbprint hardly any of them could 'read' it.

I would very strongly recommend that posters read this essay on 'Whole Language'. WL being a source of the ideas about guessing words from pictures etc. and a strong influence on reading instruction even now.

tinyurl.com/oy7g9ro

It is very long but does set out the evidence.

It may be because DD is partially deaf, she found the slight differences in the phonics sounds very difficult to distinguish.

In which case the correspondences can be taught by attention to how the sounds are physically produced and through cued articulation.

Not even the most fervent phonics fan would assert that phonics will absolutely work for every single child; Sue Lloyd (Jolly Phonics) once told me that in all her years of teaching phonics she did have one child who just never 'got it'. Dr Jonathon Solity estimates that some 3 - 5% of children may struggle, even with good phonics instruction. I probably worked with about 3 children (KS3 'struggling readers') in 10 years who couldn't potentially improve with phonics instruction. Other phonics practioners could tell you similar (feenie & mrz already have).

The point is that with the 'mixed methods' which so many are supporting on this thread we have a nationwide failure rate of at least 20% of children struggling with reading at the end of KS2. Compared with the 3 -5% for phonics which method looks more effective?

and I'm a SENCO tinytalker what's your point?

I've got a profoundly deaf child in my class and he's doing fine with phonics CouthyMow although his speech is obviously delayed

"I use phonics as part of my toolkit and don't have a problem with it" that's very generous of you but the facts are that having phonics as part of your toolkid dilutes the effectiveness.

My school was teaching by phonics alone 18months ago. We have now been instructed by the Literacy Advisor to bring in a specific sight reading programme to pick up the children falling behind only using phonics. I haven't had the training yet but I gather they learn to recognise and write 200 sight words as an intervention.

We are RI (but rapidly progressing to good) and have the authorities all over us so I am guessing this is 'current' advice.

We also use the PM scheme, again new since the school went RI and the 'help' arrived.

No CharlesRyder it isn't current advice - have you read the 2014 curriculum?

PM is basically RR and mixed methods won't match new curric I'm afraid.

Can I ask what phonics prog you followed previously

Letters and Sounds

Maybe you need to write to the Director of Education in my LEA then, because all the schools are doing the same and the children, in my school anyway, are progressing faster.

Perhaps they would have been better served investing in an effective (cheaper than PM ) phonics programme rather than going for the freebie version.

Is the sight word prog Action Words by any chance?

It's one of the arguments against private Ed I guess that there isn't the same need to keep up to date with teaching practices.

I read quite a few of these threads prior to daughter starting school as I wanted to support and get it right. Im so grateful to mrz et al. And she's flying by.

It's all the "little" things too. Like sendinghome a book that corresponds to the sounds they've learnt and increasing confidence etc.

I have used RWI before and liked that.

I teach an UKS2 SEN class (behaviour) so what goes on in EYFS/KS1 is slightly off my radar. Apparently this sight reading programme would be useful for one of mine who is still only 1b after 2 years of intensive phonics intervention, hence I will be doing the training.

I can't remember what it's called but Action Words does ring a bell.

L&S is still being used but all the school's existing reading books and the new PM ones have been levelled according to PM levels and they are using PM benchmarking. Definitely mixed.

As I say though, none of this was off the school's own bat. We are basically being told by County that the 'phonics only' message is now outmoded. I'm not surprised as it has been around for at least 5 minutes.

The problem with L&S is that teachers are given the book and expected to get on with it regardless of own phonic knowledge, there are no resources and it's quite slow.

Many advisors know far less than those at the chalkface and grasp at straws to justify their own role.

and were probably the people handing out the L&S document with no guidance on how to teach it effectively.

Maybe.

I feel pretty jaded with the politics of what gets taught and how. I think if the kids are learning to read well and enjoying it, which ours are, then it works.

Shame the same can't be said for the writing.