Why are people so anti ORT?

[seeker]

They are often funny, they are often anarchic, they show children lots of different ways of living, the pictures have lots of interest and detail, the vocabulary is lively - you can usually find one that has something to interest an individual child, they are proper stories - what's not to like?

When I think about the Janet and John type of books people of my generation had - ORT is in a different universe!

[Anna8888]

Very interesting. Will think about this and will try to get information about many reading schemes the school uses. Thank you.

[emkana]

I bought some
Ruth Miskin phonics reading books for my dd and she finds them incredibly dull, and so do I. In the early stages it is incredibly difficult to write engaging stories solely with words that they can decipher phonetically. At dd's school they learn to memorize some tricky words like everyone and then they love reading the ORT books.

[mrz]

Not a fan of Ruth Miskin either ...

[StripeyKnickersSpottySocks]

DD likes ORT books now she's onto ones with more of a story to them.

However when I was looking at all the dyslexia websites (found out recently she's dyslexic) one of the websites said that many schools used mixed methods of teaching kids to read which does kids no favours and some people reckon can trigger dyslexia. It said if your school uses the ORT scheme then the school is using mixed methods.

I really don't know enough about different reading schemes to know if this is true. I probably should know more but thankfully even though dd is dyslexic her reading is good for her age.

[mrz]

ORT uses a variety of methods ... look & Say, some phonics, picture clues et

[misdee]

so mrz what would you say to this little lot

started on getreadingright

moved to songbirds

now on ORT level 5.

[mrz]

misdee I would say that is a good introduction to becoming a reader.

[misdee]

its different to how dd1 was taught to read at a different school. am very happy with the progress made.

they lso do sound sheets as well, with stuff like 'poo at the zoo' on them which makes dd2 crack up.

[madness]

well, bit late in replying but anyway..
For dc who were just starting to realise that letters can be made into words I think ORT was/is crap.
Books which have words in it like bough and rough I would also say are useless.
Yes, later on that's fine guessing some words (dd is now on level 3 ORT and I don't mind them so much now). Still think it is a bit silly to have words like dinosours "monsters" and astronout "spaceman"
flour "sugar". I just don't think that has much to do with reading.
I got some "proper phonics" books and dd was so proud when she finally realised she could read a book.

[ReallyTired]

I think that ORT is great once you get to stage 4, but the earlier stages are not compatible with how English schools are expected to teach reading.

I like Jelly and Bean as they are completely decodable and give the child sucess in the early stages. Yes, its is true that not all of English is phonetic, but I think children need to throughly master the stragery of decoding before getting words like "fence" or "spaceman".

Children like Madness' dd need to feel a sense of achievement and build confidence. She can learn to read words like "bough" or "rough" in year 1.

[misdee]

someone mentioned songbirds, which are part of ORT, but not the main scheme. songbirds works well, once dd2 finished that she went to ORT level 5 to start at the magic key stories.

[KaSo]

I think they're boring in the extreme and do nothing to foster a love of literature. I've never made my kids read them and if the school sends them home they've read it once and then shoved it back in their book bags.
The stupid names are enough to make me gnash my teeth!

[AllBuggiedOut]

We're only on ORT stage 4 as DS started reception in January, but he finds the stories engaging and amusing. And I really don't see the problem with including words like "spaceman" and "cowboy" as they are completely guessable from the pictures which is part of the point. We use all sorts of strategies when we're reading, including guessing and, as adults, almost exclusively memorising what the words look like rather than building them phonetically.

[seeker]

KaSo - but they aren't meant for adults - of course you find them boring! I have yet to find a child who didn't find the swing one, or the one where they bury Dad on the beach, for example, really funny. And you can't say that about any other reading scheme I can think of. ANd anything which makes them want to get to the end of a book ti find out what happens is fostering a love of literature.

[seeker]

And if you stick strictly to words that can be decoded aren't you back to "See Sam run. See the dog."

[ReallyTired]

seeker, the stage of only having decodable books is very short. Decodable books are not for life, its just a matter of making sure that children experience success when they read a book for the first time.

Many children are over the moon the first time they read a book sucessfully. It almost doesn't matter how boring it is. The thrill of sucess makes up for the boredom.

As for fostering a love of literature there is nothing to stop parents reading books to their children.

If they only books that children come into contact with are school reading scheme books then they will never foster a love of literature. However there is a difference between enjoying a story read by a parent and forcing a child to read a book they cannot cope with.

[Anna8888]

It is misguided to think that reading schemes should be fostering a love of literature.

Reading schemes are text books for acquiring the basic skill that is reading.

Literature and stories are something else entirely.

[AllBuggiedOut]

But Anna, the child will learn far better if s/he can see the purposes of reading - one of which is to enjoy it! My DS is much more keen to read to us when it's a story he particularly likes.

And Really Tired, I'm not sure if you're saying that the only way children read those very early books is with decoding. The visual clues can give equal satisfaction with a correct guess.

[Anna8888]

AllBuggiedOut - the reading schemes (text books) do their best to be enjoyable. But you can't do everything in one go.

Never stop reading stories to your children that are beyond their own reading ability until they are fully confident readers. That will give them the will to persevere with the reading scheme.

[GooseyLoosey]

Our school does not let children up a level until they have read the lot. Consequently, no one in ds's class is above level 4 (as far as I know). There is nothing wrong with the books, but they are boring - ds finds them dull as dishwater and skips over them as fast as he can. If I give him other books, he is more interested and engages much more.

[AllBuggiedOut]

but if kids don't seem them as having any relevance to the books we read to them, there's a danger they'll switch off. Reading to them AND the reading schemes should be working together to foster the "love of literature" you refer to.

[nooka]

ORT are uterly tedious and very dated IMO. They were also part of what ds decide he was stupid and couldn't read (he is dyslexic). So we didn't read them. I would much rather have them pick their way through something they can decode and then read them interesting funny and informative books myself. Having a huge fight and meltdown and snivveling little boy isn't how I want to spend my evenings after work! I really can't see the point of guessing/figuring out from context how to say every few words, and it makes the whole thing so take so long. dd on the other hand enjoyed reading them to me, but then she finds reading easy. Once ds figured out how to read using sythetic phonics (hey reading has rules!) he was so much happier, and now reads (slowly) books he is interested in. I think all early readers should be sythetic phonics only, at least for the first few years of primary.

[nooka]

I've yet to meet a reading scheme book that I felt could be described in any way as literature! Very few of them even have good rhythm IMO, let alone a good story.

[mrz]

AllBuggiedOut I think you and Anna8888 are saying the same thing aren't you?

[AllBuggiedOut]

I don't think we're a million miles apart, no.