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!)

If you (and DD) want some additional support the Oxford Phonics Spelling Dictionary will entertain and inform:

An inexpensive and easy to use book, that can encourage children with reading, spelling and writing, and really help them to understand Phonics, is reviewed in the MN Book Reviews section. Just search ‘Phonics’ and my name.

I swear you must have shares in that dictionary, Ferguson!

Much the same is free on Debbie's website

Feenie & Mrz, I think Ferguson is one of the most genuinely helpful poster on MN.

Haven't read the whole thread but people who are anti phonics are just as unhelpful as people who are anti learning sight words. You need both to read.

You need phonics and later, spelling/pronunciation rules like 'tion' to decode previous unknown words, but you also need to sightread common non-phonetic words which cannot be decoded.

To the person who complained about 'the' being a tricky word, well it is tricky because the e doesn't make its phonic sound, as in the middle of bed. It's one of the first sight words they learn in Reception along with I, he and she. Tricky just means not phonetic.

To the OP, if no-on has mentioned them yet, Usborne Very First Readers are good as they have a few words for the child to read and some more on the opposite page for the parent to read so the story is more interesting.

Also ignore people who tell you not to teach your 4 year old to read. If she's interested then go for it. Mine could read fluently before she started school and basically learned with very little assistance from me. She has never ever complained of being bored at school. However, reading to her and maintaining a love of stories is at least as, if not more important than teaching phonics or sightwords.

And before someone comes on and tells me I'm one of those mums who thought their child could read but she probably was just memorising books, er no, she had gone through the whole of Songbirds and ORT phonics and sight word books up to about level 6 pre-school, could decode previously unknown words and answer comprehension questions about the story. She was on lime band by end of year 1. Now I'll likely be accused of boasting. I'm not, I take no credit for her ability.

I didn't say he wasn't, Irvine.

you also need to sightread common non-phonetic words which cannot be decoded

No, you don't. That notion is very outraged and completely erroneous..

Tricky just means not phonetic

No, it doesn't. Very common misconception though..

Outdated, not outraged.

So she taught herself to read, and from that you've decided that sight words are essential? How do you know she didn't just learn to decode the words you're calling sight words?

"You need phonics and later, spelling/pronunciation rules like 'tion' to decode previous unknown words,"

It isn't a rule it's Phonics is the sound /sh/ ...
"but you also need to sightread common non-phonetic words which cannot be decoded."
There aren't any non-phonetic words. all words have symbols (letters) to represent spoken sounds. That's how our writing system evolved. Yes English has a complex code rather than a simple one sound one spelling but it's still phonetic and all words can be decoded ...if you know the code.

I'm not suggesting he isn't Irvine but Debbie Hepplewhite (the author ) provides much the same information albeit in a different format free on her website rather than paying Oxford.

"Tricky just means not phonetic. "
No tricky means it contains spellings for sounds the child hasn't been taught yet so need to be taught discretely in order to read the word now.
^*
*^
"the' being a tricky word, well it is tricky because the e doesn't make its phonic sound, as in the middle of bed. It's one of the first sight words they learn in Reception along with I, he and she. "
the is two sounds /th/ and /Schwa/ (schwa is the most common vowel sound in the English language) basically a weak vowel sound unless of course you say th ee

If I was being pedantic I'd point out letters don't make sounds but I'll let it go because it's early

I'm confused mrz - should I be telling dc the is th schwa ? But where is the s sound?

In the?

You can if you want young children like interesting words but they only need to know that sometimes we don't say sounds clearly/precisely so it sounds weak and that's the sound the is in the.

The easiest way to work out what the spellings represent is to say the word and match them to the sounds we can hear. We can hear /th/ spelt so the is the final sound ...

We don't say chick e n or child r e n etc we slide over the vowel sound

So I should say it's th e (like e in eggs in a pan) but we pronounce the e funny in the? Oh dear I think I've been doing this one wrong

We teach that the spelling represents different sounds /e/ in get /ee/ in me /Schwa/ in the genre secret cinema ....etc

Except they aren't sight words
The spelling is the sound /ie/ in mind, kind find child irony icy climb giant China wild cider and I

The spelling is the sound /ee/ in me he be we she emu evil Eden reflex hero medium legal lethal

I was totally confused about /Schwa/.....thinking what are they talking about..?
I finally got it. It's the one I learned as a symbol which looks like upside down lower case e, isn't it? That's the one we encountered a lot when started learning English and many struggled since we have no equivalent sound in my native language. Tbh, I don't even know if I'm pronouncing correctly now!

I would second joining the website reading chest. They let you borrow reading scheme books for a monthly fee. My ds loved getting new books through the post and it really motivated them.

I would also say though that there is more to learning to read than just the mechanics of reading. Having an enjoyment of books and stories is so important and home is an ideal time to listen to and enjoy stories that are currently too hard for your child to read themselves. The time to listen to an extended vocabulary and the structure of stories is invaluable and something parents can do without the formal teaching of reading. Talking about what is happening in the story what might happen next playing with expression and different voices etc will help your child with comprehension and their future writing. Some children might fly through the phonics but without the opportunity to really enjoy stories end up not understanding what they are reading.

Can I just add on my method- CAVEAT - clearly anecdotal but it made logical sense to me and I hope would get the Mrz seal of approval for being pure phonics. I taught the DC the basic letter sounds, and the first tier of blended sounds (sh, th, ing etc) by reading them the old Ladybird Phonics books (not fully decidable but each book concentrated on a particular set of sounds):

Once they knew those then when I was reading them their bedtime stories I'd pick out some decodable word in the title, or picked out in bold in the text or sound effects in pictures (sound effects are almost always decodable because they're onomatopoeic) and ask them to spell it out it for me. Literally thirty seconds per story was spent doing a bit of decoding practice but always within the context of stories we were cuddled up reading anyway. And then when we were out and about, I might look for decodable words in the world around us - ideally ones without much clues to help them guess with.

The ultimate "no clue" decoding practice is "What's in The Box?" You put a small toy or photo in a shoebox, put a postit on the outside saying what it is (car/pig/dog/mum) and ask the child what's in there. The buzz when they lift the lid and find they were right really reinforces learning - though it's probably more suitable for 2/3 year olds than 4 year olds.

Loris phonics should always be taught as part of language rich experiences ...lots of books, stories talk and hugs.

Some children might fly through the phonics but without the opportunity to really enjoy stories end up not understanding what they are reading.

Whatever makes you think that? Have you any evidence?

On the matter of 'tricky words' any idea that they are somehow 'not phonetic' (which is a meaningless description in itself) is one which has come from teachers who still believe the 'Look and Say' teaching myths or who haven't read the Jolly Phonics handbook...

I know both the authors of Jolly Phonics and they would both say that 'tricky words' are words which are decodeable but with a 'tricky' bit (i.e. a sound spelling which is unusual or they haven't yet learned). As they seem to be the people who invented the term I think we should take note of them.

The OP might find Sue Lloyd's website for parents quite useful : tcrw.co.uk/

If a phonics based approach to reading were the only way to learn, nobody in New Zealand would be literate! And actually, setting aside cultural concerns around literacy, NZ doesn't look overly shabby in the PISA tables. OP, you might be interesting in getting hold of a little book called Reading Magic by Mem Fox. She talks about how she taught her own children to read and there are lots of rich engaging ideas for at-home literacy, that don't necessarily mean buying your own sets of decodable readers.