Yr1 child - top phonics group but slow reader - how can this be?

[sugarhoops]

Was told today by another mum that my year 1 DD is in the top group in the class for phonics, but is a little behind others for reading (this mum has a DD who, apparently, is 2nd highest reader in class, but is in a phonics group below my DD).

Putting aside for a moment how on earth this mother knows all this info - to be fair she helps out in class sometimes, I just wondered how this can be re: the top phonics group but lower reader level?

I had no idea where my daughter was at against others in the class - parents eve last week the teacher told me she's doing fine academically, which is good enough for me. But with this new info, I just wondered, purely out of interest, how she can be in top group for phonics, but apparently 'behind' for reading?

I can see this debate has serious history.

As to giving advice on the teaching of reading and spelling, the majority of teachers don't buy into your 'nothing but phonics' approach either.
Actually I think that's true, every school I've come across does some variety of HFW or tricky words list which the 'nothing but phonics' crowd here clearly think is incorrect. I think but can't quote offhand that I've heard some of you saying the majority of schools don't teach phonics properly, for example objecting to banded reading books which I don't think you'd deny the vast majority of schools do use.

I also find the lists very annoying though, sorry masha. And there's no need to discuss spelling reform every time a phonics thread comes up. Or to pretend that phonics doesn't teach alternative correspondences which clearly it does.

Have I annoyed everyone now? Right, off out.

I don't object to banded reading books. I don't know any schools locally which send home HF words.

Have you asked every teacher what they believe catkind? If not how did you discover the "majority" ?

I did, for example, say that two thirds of the 300 most used English words have regular spellings and can be taught to read and write with phonics in the normal sense of that word.

Indeed you did, marsha. And that is the first time in several years of reading your posts that I have known you say anything like that. I had hoped that you were listening to and reflecting on what the phonics experts were saying. But perhaps not...

Maybe it's just locally where we are then.

Maybe - anecdotally, we might either of us be wrong. Which is why Masha's sweeping statement is daft.

I may be guilty of taking an insufficiently random sample, but you don't have to check every member of a population to make claims about "the majority". That's what statistics is for. Perhaps you need to ask masha what her sample size was.

If you wish to make wild ace rations without evidence that of course is your prerogative catkind.i could of course state that of the staff of the many dozen schools I've worked with the majority recognise that mixed methods have failed .... I don't anyone will accept either of our views as the full picture nationally.

the day you attacked my son
That is an outrageous distortion of the truth, Mrz.

U used to go on endlessly about him being superlexic and reading the FT around age 3, but never learning to spell, because he was not taught phonics. So last summer i asked if he still had problems and if as a child he perhaps had other problems as well.

U actually responded in a quite normal, non-aggressive way and told us quite a bit about the personal hardships u went through when your children were little and about your son too. Perhaps u are now ashamed of having done so?

I have never, ever once attacked your son.

So you didn't make a personal attack against my son masha?

I've never said my son us "super lexic" ( did you make that up?) m

Dear Catkind

I am sorry that u find my lists annoying, but why not just ignore them then?
Nowadays i try very hard to do so in moderation, and only in response to specific questions, and the OPs usually thank me for them.

In the past i may have occasionally posted some in anger, in the sense of, "If what u claim about English spelling is true, what about this little lot?"

Because the phonics evangelists are constantly on the lookout for ways of shutting me up, they call them 'spam' without looking at them and report me. They did the same over and over again on the tes forums when those had a different format, with lots of lively debates. They often succeeded temporarily to get me suspended, until i alerted the moderators to take a closer look at the concerted trolling they were doing.

And I am never the one to bring up
spelling reform every time a phonics thread comes up.
It's invariably Mrz and co who suggest that i should be taken no notice of, because i am merely trying to push reform. It's their way of trying to prevent people from reading what i actually say, or taking a closer look at the words i have posted.

And i most certainly have never, ever claimed
that phonics doesn't teach alternative correspondences.
Quite the opposite, what i regularly say is that, despite of claiming that they teach the relationships between sounds and letters in a very different way, they are going over the alternative correspondences just like other teachers - that in practice they are not doing anything very different from other teachers: practise, practise, practise and practice a little more.

Which leaves the big question,
DOES ALL THE PRACTICE NOT ENSURE THAT CHILDREN SIMPLY LEARN THE TRICKY WORDS AS WHOLES?

Maizie, U clearly never really read my posts.

I must have said at least 100 times, probably many more, that English spelling is a mixture of phonic and non-phonic, and that words with phonics spellings are best taught by the phonics method, but that the big problem for teachers, parents and pupils is how to deal with the non-phonic spellings.

No Mrz, I have never, ever made any attack on your son.
but i think i misremembered the term u used to describe him.

I think u described as 'hyperlexic' rather than 'superlexic.
What i do remember very clearly is u often claiming that he used to read the FT to his grandfather at around age 3, or even 2 and half.

Catkind
PS U haven't annoyed me at all.

Interesting ... Masha the copy I kept of your post says othwise

Here you go masha www.autism.org.uk/about-autism/related-conditions/hyperlexia.aspx perhaps before self proclaiming yourself as an expert you need to check out what you are saying

One of the lessons I would like my children to learn at school is to listen to other people's opinions and not to gang up and attack them because they think differently to oneself. I always find Mrz's attitude to anyone who disagrees with her very disturbing and am endlessly thankful when I read her posts that she doesn't teach my children, because, reading or not, there's nothing more likely to turn a child off education than having an atmosphere of bullying and intolerance in the classroom.

You most certainly did make a despicable attack against mrz's ds in the worst way possible, Masha, and every person on that thread was rightly appalled before it was deleted.

I would be appalled that she said anything about your daughter's reading, she helps out as a volunteer as should not have repeated anything she saw or knows from that work. I do not think it right that a parent should help out in their own child's class as this type of thing can happen, and can influence how they deal with other parents and children.

@lostintoys

You are completely wrong in your judgement of mrz. I am acquainted with her and know of her school by repute. She is a very experienced, intelligent, caring and innovative teacher. A former colleague of mine had a dc who attended her school and was taught by her. She had nothing but praise for the school and for mrz.

She may have a terse writing style but it in no way reflects her teaching style.

Hi maizie. You asked about how I decoded new words. I have a few memories that may cast light. I definitely learned by sight reading. My mum has told me I learned longer words before short ones as they had more memorable shapes. I remember being six and writing a poem with the word "nite" and getting a star for making a sensible attempt. I recall being seven and the one word I got wrong on a reading test was colonel, as I pronounced it as written. I also remember my mum asking if I had cheated on a crossword because when she asked me the answer, I said yacht, to rhyme with latch. I remember being adamant I hadn't cheated, but that I had only ever read the word and not actually heard it.
I'm pretty certain I was hyperlexic myself, but that I worked out the rules shortly after learning to read. I never at any point actually required being taught phonics, nor had any of the issues associated with not doing so. I may not have perfect grammar or spelling, but it is above average for someone who has never studied anything requiring essay writing.
This definitely colors my perspective. I believe phonics its the method least likely to fail, but I am less convinced it is the method every child will learn most effectively. I do not like it when parents say, my child learns best this way, and are told by total strangers that they are wrong.

Good evening all
We understand that there have been some issues on this thread but would remind you that Mumsnet's raison d'être is to make lives easier.

If there is anything that MNHQ need to know about, please do report it. Referring back to previously deleted posts from previous threads is not terribly helpful.

Peace and love
MNHQ

www.gov.uk/government/collections/phonics-choosing-a-programme

Two of the criteria for government-approved phonics schemes here concern the way high frequency words are taught. Last I looked none of the schemes had answered by saying "we don't use HFWs". So no, I don't think it's particularly radical or unfounded to suggest that the majority of schools use some form of HFWs.

Mixed methods the way I was taught where we learned basic single letter correspondences and th/ch/sh/ee/oo and muddled our way to the rest with repetition and using the pictures and decode the bits you know and guess the rest - that has been discredited no doubt. I've yet to find evidence that HFW within the context of a systematic synthetic phonics programme is discredited. I hope not given that the government appear to be approving schemes that do exactly that.

I would imagine all schools use HFW (it's pretty difficult to write a sentence that doesn't include at least one),
What they don't do is confuse High Frequency Words with "sight words" and teach them as wholes ... Unless of course they don't know the difference