Learning to read books- 4yo

[LilaGrace]

My DD (who'll be 4 in May) is showing great interest in learning to read. Can anyone recommend a great series of books which have simple words for her to read herself (with my help) along with a story? Ideally ones where the books in the series gradually get harder. I remember the Peter and Jane ladybird books from when I was a child and was hoping for something like those (but more modern!)

I had a child last year in my nursery who had been taught to 'read' by his mum
The trouble was he had a very good photographic memory and was good at remembering words but he was guessing unfamiliar words based on the words he could remember
He couldn't use his knowledge of the phonic sounds we were teaching to decode the words because he was looking at the whole word and not blending or segmenting
He could do the initial sound, which is fine, it's what we expect in nursery
I did feel sad for him as his mum thought he was much better at reading than he actually was

Songbirds provide a reasonably priced top up scheme if the school is sending home old ORT Biff et all books but starting from scratch they don't offer enough opportunities to practise each set of sounds. I use them in school for children who aren't ready to move on.

If you want to use what school uses regardless of recommendation from great teachers, it maybe better just wait for dd to start school, imo.
If you are lucky, she is one of those who can learn by any method. If not, she may have a bit of disadvantage due to the case like insancerre's.

That's a very common experience insancerre unfortunately.

Lila, what I want to say is that if your dd wants to learn to read, it's best time for her to learn to read.
Don't worry about how your future school teach reading. She isn't at school yet.
There are so many reading thread on MN, and many teachers recommend some, and say no to some methods. Check it out.
If everything goes well, she will be reading by the time she starts school. And then, methods doesn't really matter anymore, because she must have got basics already.

I'm afraid that isn't true Irvine the evidence is that learning words as wholes can have a lasting detrimental impact on some children. Unfortunately until the child begins to fail it's impossible to know who is at risk from these mixed methods.

The sight words even in 1+ can be a bit of a bear. DS is in reception and has been taught the first set of phonics but still would struggle with some of the words in these books.
Early on (in October, when he started phonics) there are some words that can't be decoded with the earliest phonics like come, blues, they, who. Also other words like flour and sugar.

I think some people are just determined to teach the way they learned even if it's been proven that it's not the best. Why not just teach phonics? Sure sight reading might turn out OK but it might not and it is likely to confuse her when she starts school. My friend is a YR teacher and says the kids with pushy parents are often the worst to teach as they've been put off reading and taught to recognise entire words and can't read unfamiliar or more complicated words.

No harm in doing some phonics at home though.

I recommend joining Reading chest.

Mrz, I never encourage anyone to learn words as whole!
That is totally against my understanding of how to teach your child to read. I am totally against mixed methods.

Sorry, my English wasn't good enough sometimes.
What I wanted to say is, check out comments from reputable teachers(mrz, feenie, rafa, mazieD, MrsCastle, etc, sorry I can't think of names of other great teachers now), and listen to them and follow their advice.

So Mrz, I'm sorry if you've already said but which is the best phonic scheme you know? It sounds like dds school may be doing it all wrong, we have a mix of very old, non-decodable (in most instances) books - mainly stamped by other schools and clearly passed on to dd's. Alongside flash cards to do at home and Jolly Phonics songs and actions to work on. Sounds from what you've said upthread that none of this is right so I'm panicking a little and thinking I need to do some work with dd at home outside the school prescribed work (of which there is loads so not sure how we'll fit it in!)

I know you wouldn't Irvine but some people hear what they want to hear and if you're determined to use flash cards you'll interpret it as ok.

I used Jolly Phonics for over a decade as a reception teacher and it worked but then it peters out and leaves KS1 teachers hanging. OK if the teacher knows what they are doing unfortunately many have had no training ...still!

WhyNot have a look at the Letters and Sounds guidelines. My DS is in Reception and I'm using that alongside Jolly Phonics.

Thee are quite a few reading schemes that you can start using once they're confident with the sounds s a t p i n. Alphablocks and Songbirds are my current favourites. I really dislike the Biff, Chip & Kipper books (ORT). The Floppy's Phonics ones are better but still annoy me. Lucky my DS's school doesn't seem to have many of them!

I'd also recommend getting some magnetic letters to construct words and simple sentences together. I've got some that link to the different phases outlined in Letters and Sounds.

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

I also like the look of these:

www.phonicbooks.co.uk/advice-and-resources/interactive-ibooks/

I use Floppy's Phonics at my school - I'm a big fan of Debbie Hepplewhite. The children like them and they work really well.

You won't confuse her. Just use ordinary children's story books like Each peach pear plum and bear hunt. She won't need teaching she'll do it by herself from just sharing books a lot. Mine all did and were never confused. Irritated by suggesting they needed phonics perhaps but not confused.

The vast majority of children won't learn to read like that though. Research has very clearly shown that initial teaching using a synthetic phonics approach is the most successful method.

Feenie the thing I don't like about Floppy's Phonics is the names - I know that's a hangover from the original ORT books but it still annoyed me as my DS can't read them yet (other than Biff which confused him anyway because it's not a proper name!).

You won't confuse her. Just use ordinary children's story books like Each peach pear plum and bear hunt. She won't need teaching she'll do it by herself from just sharing books a lot. Mine all did and were never confused

Some children do learn to read like this. Some don't.

Exactly - those that need 'teaching' to read shouldn't be forced pre school. If they are ready then ordinary story books are a good thing. Actually ordinary story books are a good thing anyway.

Pretty much for the whole of reception our school used the Dandelion Launcher books which my Son really enjoyed and really enforced the sounds. In year one they then went onto book bands using lots of books from different schemes in each band. There is such a variety in each level

I'm a fan of Debbie Hepplewhite too but really wish she hadn't collaborated with ORT over Floppy's Phonics her own Phonics International programme is so much better. Oxford has long been a bastion of whole language and their influence seems detrimental IMHO.

The majority of children don't learn to read no matter how many books you read to them unfortunately. Yes they'll happily recite whole books but are unable to transfer that information from one context to another.

Grumpbum the Dandelion books are the most systematic comprehensive programme I've found. Lots of reinforcement for every step.

crumbs the thing is that 80% of kids learn to read fine whatever method. It's the 20% who struggle who really benefit from phonics. You have no way of knowing in advance whether your child will be in the 20%. They also tend to accelerate their reading once at school faster if they use phonics.

Yes, we use Phonics International too, it's excellent. I do know what you mean - the whole ORT thing has negative connatations. I did some reading moderation with a school recently with appalling reading results - they use ORT's Decode and Develop and were convinced it was decodable. Well, 60% of it is . What a crappy, misleading name - and if it hoodwinks schools, what hope do parents have?