1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Lists of words suitable for Y1 phonics screening practice...

Discussion in 'Primary' started by giraffe77, Mar 21, 2012.

  1. Thumbie, I am really surprised that, with all your emphasis on comprehending text, you are unable to tell the difference between a real example and fictitious one.
     
  2. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    yeh!!!! He was making wild guesses because he wanted to finish the task as quickly as possible.
     
  3. Doitforfree

    Doitforfree Star commenter

    Well, yes, that's how I feel. But how is this different from the way childen are being taught to read now? I admit complete ignorance, all of mine having learnt to read very adequately the useless old fashiond 'look and say' way. My children did NOT learn to read by spelling words out using phonics, synthetic phonics or anythign similar. They learnt words, and very much more quickly than I would have expected. I feel there's a lot more to learning to read than spelling out words in your head. Some children really do just seem to 'get' it, often very quickly and without much apparent effort. I would hazard a guess that such children are more likley to come from home where they are exposed to a lot of language. I can't help feeling that a lot of reading problems arise from a lack of vocabulary. If children arriving at school with a poor vocabulary could have that extended during their first school years then learning to read would be so much easier.
     
  4. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    Completely different
    Children are taught the skills to read words independently and to blend through unknown words but the ultimate goal is for them to read confidently, fluently, and accurately not to sounding out c a t for the rest of their life.
    Good EY practice includes lots of language work to develop vocabulary and understanding and comprehension is very much part of good phonics instruction. Lots of stories, songs and rhymes and talk.
    Remember too phonics is a tool for spelling and learning spelling patterns is an important part of the process.
     
  5. How do you know that she couldn't make sense of what she read?
    Contrary to what everyone seems to believe, slow decoding does not particularly affect understanding. I have worked with quite a few slow decoders whose understanding of what they read was absolutely spot on.
     
  6. How can comprehension be part of good phonics instruction I wonder? Phonics is phonics and comprehension is comprehension. Sounding out a word may help you decode it so that you know accurately what it sounds like, but it not going to tell you what it means. Hopefully it will be within your vocabulary so that sounding it out accurately will spark that connection but it's not guaranteed. And you may not arrive at an accurate pronunciation through phonics anyway - look at the possibles for words such as cough, read etc. Masha could give you a huge list of words where phonics could let you down. Phonics is about the sounds represented by letters, and it could be accompanied by all the other teaching you mention, but you can't claim that language work to develop vocabulary and understanding and comprehension are parts of phonic instruction. Whatever next? Are you going to copyright comprehension under the SP trade mark?
     
  7. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    Do you not check that the children understand what they are reading and know the meaning of new words thumbie? of course comprehension is all part of the package.
     
  8. Part of the package maybe, part of SP, no.
     
  9. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    Well as I've told you numerous times I don't use SP but it certainly is[​IMG] part of the phonics process.
     
  10. No, it is not part of the phonics process. Comprehension is independent of phonics, learning vocabulary is independent of phonics, reading for meaning is independent of phonics. Phonics is great, but not that great, msz.
     
  11. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    So are you saying that you wouldn't teach comprehension at the same time you teach a child how to decode text thumbie [​IMG] because if others think the same it could explain why there is a problem is with literacy levelsin the UK!!!
     
  12. When did I say that Msz? But teaching a child to decode text is not going to teach them comprehension is it? So teaching phonics is not going to teach them comprehension. For instance a child may easily decode geck, but that will not teach him/her what the word means. It is another process which will tell him what it means. Any type of decoding instruction can be accompanied by comprehension instruction, it is not part of SP. Pull the other one ;-)
     
  13. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    Do you or do you not teach what a word/caption/sentence/text means as your apply/practise part of teaching phonics thumbie?
     
  14. I would not necessarily teach the meanings of words in phonic instructions, because learning phonics is about decoding Msz. It does not matter for decoding whether the words are understood or not (gosh, you can even use nonsense words). If children did not understand captions and sentences we would talk about the meaning eventhough it was a phonics session, certainly not because it was a phonics session.
     
  15. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    Interesting because I think decoding is about extracting meaning
     
  16. Doitforfree

    Doitforfree Star commenter

    The child I'm talking about was able to read the individual words, very slowly, by decoding, but she couldn't make sense of the sentence because by the time she got to the end of it she couldn't remember what had been at the beginning. This was in the days when mums were allowed in to listen to readers, and I saw her painful progress over several years until eventually something clicked and she could read normally. I can't help feeling that this 'decoding' didn't do her any good. Part of the problem was that her mum was thrilled that she could 'read' difficult words. This seems to me like being able to decode them, but she didn't have some of the words in her vocabulary so although she could 'read' them they meant nothing to her. Over many years I've become convinced that vocabulary must come before reading and that once a child has a wide vocabulary (and this might be later for children who have to wait until they're at school to develop it, because of lack if input at home) they will learn to read much, much more easily. I've also realised that one size rarely fits all, in any walk of life. People vary wildly. It't not always easy to accept that other people learn differently from the you or from the majority, especially if one way of doing things seems logical, or obvious to you. I believe that phonics is probably as good a way to learn to read as any, for most children, that it's a better way to learn to read for some children and that for some children it must be deadly boring, if they can already read.
    I see a lot of teachers saying how much their children love doing certain things. I was an enthusiastic child who liked to get things right. Recently I went to a Maths morning at my son's secondary school where small groups of parents and students had to try and do as many exercises as possible in a given time. I felt my old school feelings coming to the fore as we worked hard to try and do the most. We did well and were pleased with ourselves and I hated the whole thing. I hated the feeling of needing to get things done and the stress of not wanting to fail. The organisers hailed the morning as a great success but for me it just reminded me how helpless you are at school and how you can appear enthusiastic about something when in fact other emotions are driving you. It really made me think about how we interpret what we see in children. Often we have no idea what they're really thinking, especially as many, like me, just wanted to get on.
     
  17. Apart from the rather misguided teachers who are going to drill their children on nonsense words ad nauseam between now and the Phonics Check, teaching phonics does not include teaching nonsense words. They are used for assessment, as Msz has described, and sometimes in a game where children have to decide whether a word is real or nonsense (which sounds dangerously like a check of 'vocabulary as well as decoding skills). Why on earth would anyone need to 'teach' nonsense words when there are thousands of unfamiliar words out there for children to practise their skills on?

     
  18. Obviously the aim of reading is to extract meaning, but decoding is not the same as reading. Decoding is about pronouncing the words as written, which can then be subject to the reader's understanding. It's a subtle difference Msz, but an important one. If you include within SP stuff about vocabulary and comprehension you are widening the meaning of 'synthetic phonics' and dumping its literal and initial meaning. It then really does have to become a commercial teaching programme known as 'Synthetic Phonics' TM. But to give you your due it looks as though things might be going that way. ;-)
     
  19. Again, Maizie, I should have put a winking smiley on that bit! Just me being facetious. Mind you, if unfamiliar words are used they might as well be nonsense, don't you think?
     
  20. You are putting two very different thing together here, Doitforfree. Slow decoding or poor vocabulary? Which was it?


     

Share This Page