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

ou

Discussion in 'Early Years' started by Zebrahead, Jul 12, 2013.

  1. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    Perhaps thumbie thinks parents and other adults would say crips

    One of my class, who has weekly sessions with SaLT, reading comprehension age increased from 5:4 to 9:1 in 9 months and Reading age increased from 5:3 to 7:5 in the same period
     
  2. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    a little aside from another blog

    "Causes and Remedies

    In 2006 I became aware of the government recommendation to use synthetic phonics in reading. I followed this back to the researchers who did the original study and asked whether removing the requirement for analysis in reading could have led to a decline in maths standards. This was not proven – but maths standards did improve after the use of synthetic phonics in teaching."

    interesting ... being able to read accurately helps [​IMG]

     
  3. Your thinking is lacking a bit of sophistication here.

    Yes, you may be right about Stanovich's sample. I don't think we are told in the article. I think the whole sample were all taught in the same way, it being a scientific study and all. But if the children became good readers via using context and phonological decoding, in whatever configuration, why conclude that they should not use context? You need more than this scrap of a thought.

    I don't know anything about msz's readers, so I cannot comment on that except to say that as with your blogger's daughter, the sample is too small and the background information too slight to draw conclusions.

    Now, a little sophistication with the crisps example. Ask yourself who will be saying the word 'crisps' when it is decoded, and whose voice will be heard. Not mum's. I also note that you put it into the context of a sentence the child might hear her mum say, but perhaps she is reading 'crisps' out of context or in an unusual context. If that is too difficult for you to get your head around imagine an easier example such as 'thing', normally uttered by the child's whole family + in broad cockney. And I'm sure you could supply many other examples yourself where a word decoded after careful teaching of correspondences may not click for the child as a known word which is pronounced differently in her environment.

    I'm going to be forthright and make myself even more unpopular now. I don't think either your reasoning or your reading are quite up to the job of understanding the distinctions I am making. You and Msz keep saying how bemused you are etc etc after multiple explanations, examples, arguments etc.

    I know well that you will say that all that is because I am talking nonsense. So tell yourselves that if you like.

    I am spending far too much time and energy on here so I'm leaving the floor open for you both, and Debbie.

    Inky, if you're there, I hope it was enough of a spat for you.

    So long, and thanks for all the fish.

    [​IMG]
     
  4. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    now a little bit of sophistication for you ... a child reading the words crisps (in or out of context unusual or not) will read the word and think that's what my mum says ... I know what those are ...even if they themselves pronounce it crips normally.
     
  5. Not in thumbie land.

    In thumbie land the poor child goes through life in a fog of incomprehension because they can't make any connection between the words they say and the words that the people around them say.
     
  6. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    is that your intention thumbie because you haven't succeeded.
    have you considered that it could be your thinking that is the issue. You have read Rose and made an erroneous conclusion based on incomplete information which you are determined to promote as the whole picture ... sadly we are back full circle to the need for training [​IMG]
     
  7. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

Share This Page