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

Please respond - who knows if their local authority is promoting interventions of the Reading Recovery and Catch Up type which are not in line with th

Discussion in 'Early Years' started by debbiehep, Oct 3, 2007.

  1. http://www.syntheticphonics.com/teachingmodel.html

    I don't know if this teaching model will help to clarify the elements of communication, language and literacy and where the synthetic phonics fits into the picture.

    I designed this model precisely because of this issue about what type of reading books children get to access.

    I have updated this model for my forthcoming programme but the essence of it is the same.

     
  2. 000

    000

    I am not confused. The children in my class enjoy being able to decode words. However, they are going to encounter words that they cannot decode one day surely?

    And us many 'insufficiently informed' teachers have taught children how to read. Because we don't roll over and let go of everything we have done before without question doesn't mean we are confused.

    In the state of changing education today, do you really think this is it? Do you really think that given a few more years changes won't yet again be made. SP is how my mother learnt to read, until that became unfashionable and wrong, and here we are again.
     
  3. Pictures are to be enjoyed. Not as a prop to read the text.

    Until about 7 years ago I was teaching reading as I had been taught to teach reading. I was devastated to learn of declining reading levels among older children across the board. Professionally I felt betrayed when I started to investigate the "theory" behind the various approaches. I say "theory" as I was quite horrified to realise the lack of solid research behind the 'mixed method' approach.

    I tried SP - it worked. I have no reason to believe the progress made by that group of children will be continued as they get older.
     
  4. "However, they are going to encounter words that they cannot decode one day surely?"

    Errmm... I think the point of teaching the alphabetic code, thoroughly and to automaticity, is to ensure that they never DO encounter a word they can't decode! I never have during a 'reading career' of over 50 years!

    I take your point about using pictures to *confirm*, but think it's a bit of a dangerous strategy to teach children when they could so easily start, off their own bat, using pictures as a clue to what the word *is*, rather than what it means.

    As to changes in methods; it is as well to remember that phonics had been the foremost method of teaching reading for *hundreds* of years, before Whole language & Look & Say became fashionable. Whole language has been more of a deviation from the extremely long established norm, rather than part of cyclical changes in pedagogical fashion.
     
  5. 000

    000

    Encountering a word they cannot decode: i meant that through children choosing their own reading material they may come across a word that they cannot entirely decode. I am talking about 4 year olds here and I am talking about CI sessions, NOT teaching.
     
  6. Won't they encounter words in material of their own choosing that you haven't taught them to read by sight?
     
  7. You said in your iniyial posts you taught different strategies, 000.
     
  8. 000

    000

    aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.
     
  9. Afraid you've been had, 000 - it's a spoof!
     
  10. ...and a dangerous, sick spoof at that.

    And I have a personal story to mention. One of my daughters, looking over my shoulder at the computer screen, saw this Cambridge writing.

    It generated some discussion between my husband and me.

    My daughter said, "But mummy, when I looked at that writing, I didn't see at first that it was mixed up."

    I was horrified. What does this show?

    The fog her reading is in. The whole language/mixed methods way that she has been taught - and struggled with over the years.

    She was about 17 or 18 at the time - not a young child.

    I was more than horrified. I was upset for her. No wonder at the age of about 15 she said to me, "Mummy, I'm finding that I can read books more easily now."

    I hadn't appreciated that she was struggling in the first place. She got straight level 5s for her end of Key Stage 2 tests. I was oblivious of the reading wars whilst she was growing up and attending primary school and early secondary school.

    Ask me, as a parent, what type of reading instruction I would have chosen for my daughter (and other children) had I been informed and given a choice.

    I am sorry to say, 000, it would not have been your mixed methods. My daughter's later experience in education was significantly affected by the way that she had been taught basic skills literacy in her early years - of that I have not the slightest doubt.
     
  11. 000

    000

    Post was to illustrate mixed messages out there.

    In MY reception class, where the children are only 3 weeks in, i am unable to teach them for any longer than 10 minutes at a time. They are not yet capable of taking on board a lot of new info. Learning to read and write is an important part of education, but by no means the only part. Giving them a 'reading' book when they are still pre-readers is to encourage them to enjoy stories, hold the book up the right way, turn pages, and understand that we read words not pictures.

    If I was sharing a book with a pre-reader i would not discourage them from using pictures as a strategy to access story. But they are PRE-READERS. If a READER was relying on pictures i would be concerned. I would be drawing their attention back to PHONICS teaching. (Picture used only as confirmation)

    Either you are not a reception teacher, or your class come into school with a much broader experience of books and are ready to read.

    Just as scibble isn't writing, but we acknowlegde that the child is communicating through it, using a picture as a cue isn't reading the word but we acknowlegde that as a PRE READER they are PRETENDING to read.
     
  12. I didn't get that that was the case from your earlier posts, 000. You seemed to be quite clear you were teaching a mixed strategies approach.
    Yes I was a reception teacher and no, my children didn't come in with a broad experience of reading and writing. My expectations of what my children could acheive were far higher than yours, OOO, and to a great extent I was not disappointed by the progress made.
     
  13. 000

    000

    In EYFS we are not supposed to deliver things that are too formal and not appropriate for the children in our class. It has nothing to do with expectation, it has to do with young children only, as yet, able to engage meaningfully for short periods of time. I teach sp, and taught sp before Rose Report was published. But i do not believe that it is the ONLY method required to teach children to read. It may be the primary method, but not the only method.
    Surely you have to acknowledge that one size can never fit all. If this means i teach mixed methods so be it. I believe that i am responding to the individuals in my class.
     
  14. This 'one size fits all' is so misleading. It is NOT about learning styles, it is about teaching a body of knowledge, the alphabetic code, which is necessary to become a competent reader.

    I believe that end EYFS children are developmentally ready for SP and that this can be delivered within an appropriate curriculum.
     
  15. 000

    000

    I also believe they are ready once they settle into learning. What do you do with a child who cannot hear initial sounds yet, but has a good knowledge of 'sight' words. Would you start them reading or wait?

     
  16. I'd be quite surprised that a child had a good knowledge of sight words without hearing initial sounds.....I consider that to be quite rare and I might muse on the emphasis of previous teaching methods.
    I would embark them upon a SP programme and would be very confident they would make swift progress.
    No, I wouldn't give them a reading book until I was confident they could read simple words using phonic strategies.
    This would, of course, take place within a literacy-rich environment with an emphasis on sharing and enjoying a range of stories.
     
  17. 000

    000

    I have a couple of children in my class at moment who have started school with an incredibly large sight vocabulary. one has responded to sp, one is still not quite ready/tuned in.

    Always interesting to hear what others would do.
     
  18. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    I had a child last year who could read any word put in front of him when he arrived aged 4 (no previous teaching) but was still struggling with phonics at the end of the year (just beginning to discriminate initial sounds).
     
  19. I would worry that the child lacked strategies for reading unfamiliar words. And yes, you say he read every word put in front of him at aged 4, but I bet he wasn't being asked to read words that would enable him to access KS2 science, maths and literacy activities, for instance. And while an able child might be able to learn every word there is by sight, the fact that he finds phonics problematic suggests to me this doesn't apply to him.

    I would suggest that a child who is finding phonics problematic at aged 4 is swiftly going to exhaust his bank of sight words. And if he has no phonic strategies to fall back on, then he will have problems accessing the curriculum when he is older.
     
  20. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    No actually he was capable of reading words needed for KS2 this was demonstrated when he picked up a KS2 SATs paper and began reading the questions to the Head in his office.
     

Share This Page