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?

Chosen

Maizie: completely irrelevant to what I was actually saying

How was your sarky comment on p.7 relevant to anything i had been saying? How was that helpful in any way to anyone?
Don't you all think it is terribly confusing that a word should have more than one meaning? It makes English much more difficult to learn than other languages where one word has only one meaning. I think we should take every opportunity to highlight the severe problems caused by multi-meaning words and campaign vigorously to bring some rationality into the English language by insisting that every word should have only one meaning...

As to whether i have absolutely no comprehension of the English language, i let others judge, but would like to point out that i taught both English language and literature very successfully to O level and GCSE for 20 years. U seem to make the common assumption that not starting to learn English until age 14 made me incapable of learning it properly. I doubt Exeter would have accepted me for a BA in Philosophy and Psychology back in 1968 if my English had not been deemed pretty good, even though i had only lived in England for a few years back then.

Having studied philosophy and psychology, and how people abuse language to befuddle others, is probably the main reason why i don't buy into the uncritical, hook-line-and-sinker, FANATICAL PROMOTION OF THE NOTHING BUT PHONICS doctrine.

Please stick to the subject and stop resorting to insults, as requested by an MN moderator again recently.

Actually, the request was no to refer back to your previously deleted posts, Masha.

Feenie, U referring back to a previously deleted post led to the moderator's comment, but it also pointed out

I .....would remind you that Mumsnet's raison d'être is to make lives easier
i.e. to be helpful.

See page 5.

And you believe your lists are helpful?

The lists i post are now always
either in response to a direct request (e.g. Which common words have a short /oo/ sound in them?)
or relevant to a reading or spelling issue being discussed. - I don't think that u can have a sensible discussion about decoding or spelling problems without looking at words with them.

Sometimes posters on here have actually said that they find them helpful.

In the past i may have sometimes posted a little more profligately when u, Maizie, Feenie and other phonics evangelists have ganged up to ridicule me. I apologise for that, but wish that u would still not so readily digress from the topic under discussion when i post something, to attack me rather than what i say.

either in response to a direct request (e.g. Which common words have a short /oo/ sound in them?)
or relevant to a reading or spelling issue being discussed. - I don't think that u can have a sensible discussion about decoding or spelling problems without looking at words with them.

And/or are deleted.

Sorry, marsha, I can't begin to discuss this with you as you, despite your impressive looking credentials, are incapable of understanding what I am saying.

P.S. It has nothing to do with the age at which you learned English. Unlike numerous TES posters (with whom, I think, you are confusing me) I have never been particularly bothered about you being EAL.

How was your sarky comment on p.7 relevant to anything i had been saying?

We English have a long tradition of satire....

Who says it had anything to do with you? If the cap fits, wear it?

Maizie
U must have accused me of being incapable of understanding what I am saying at least 100 times over the past few years.
That's what u, Feenie and Mrz constantly accuse of the people who disagree with u.

I never have trouble understanding what u are saying.
But knowing as much as i do about English spelling and its learning and teaching problems, I just don't agree with it. I usually have plenty of evidence to the contrary at my finger tips, in the form of word lists. Because u can't argue with those, u call them 'spam' and report me for posting them.

U like to sell your phonic piggies in a poke.

I never have trouble understanding what u are saying.

Two of your 'responses' on the previous page tell me that you have completely failed to understand my meaning.

Because u can't argue with those, u call them 'spam' and report me for posting them.

I have never reported you for your lists. I reported you once for a libellous post about a colleague.

You are beginning to sound a bit hysterical, marsha.

You've made unfounded accusations before masha ... Time for a new ploy?