Is phonics the best way to learn to read and spell?

Suzieque66

I think kids have to learn twice ? Nonsense ...

That was a reference to ITA

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initial_Teaching_Alphabet

I am an English Language examiner so I was a bit skeptical when I was told that my grandchild was learning to read and write using phonics. My grandchild is now 8 and is reading the classics and read 8 books last year none of which were abridged for her age group.

Newatthis

I am an English Language examiner so I was a bit skeptical when I was told that my grandchild was learning to read and write using phonics. My grandchild is now 8 and is reading the classics and read 8 books last year none of which were abridged for her age group.

I think some kids learn by any method. One of mine could read before school. Never had a lesson. One of my GC has dyslexia and got nowhere with phonics but once we tried look say they progressed well. All the others just did phonics at school and we're fine and I feel they'd have been fine with any method but obviously can't prove it.

One thing I find odd is if a child isn't progressing after two or three years with phonics the schools response was more phonics, missing lessons with a qualified teacher to do phonics with a TA. I thought that was poor, knew it was poor when parents agreed to me trying and with games and look say the teacher was amazed at his progress in just a few months.

theworriedwell
I’d find it odd too, if it took a school 3 years to discover that a child wasn’t progressing, whatever method was used.

Mollygo

theworriedwell
I’d find it odd too, if it took a school 3 years to discover that a child wasn’t progressing, whatever method was used.

I'd think it was a school that really wasn't teaching phonics properly, or wasn't alert early on to a child's difficulties.

If it's not teaching the phonics properly more of the same won't help, but then, the only other method is 'whole word learning' which may have initial success when their reading is restricted to books designed to teach a restricted number of words as 'wholes' but fails them when they are older and need to be able to read books containing a far wider vocabulary.

It is estimated that the human brain has a limited capacity to memorise words as wholes, about 3,000 words. There are some 250,000 + words in the English lexicon and although few people need to 'know' all of them 9,000 would be a poor reading vocabulary. so even if they manage to memorise 3,000 words as 'wholes' they'd be stuck when they encounter words they haven't 'learned' because they wouldn't know how to work out what they 'say'. when reading independently as when being taught they are told what a new word says (and there is no guarantee that they would remember it next time they encounter it).

I think that it is very easy to say that one method works for all children but this is not the case. I do think, based on my own experience of teaching music, that it is important to be methodical and go through each stage but one size does not fit all and, of course, some children learn more quickly than others. Phonics are vital for learning to decode words but look and say, or the whole word approach, has its merits, too. In other words, a combination of both methods is probably the best approach in my opinion. When taught properly, look and say works through constant repetition of new words on the lines of: "I like the dog, you like the dog, you and l like the dog." Hardly great literature and somewhat tedious for the listening adult but children get a great sense of achievement through this. Phonics comes in with its rules for decoding words. I agree that some children will learn to read however they are taught and I am sure l was one of them. I have been a voracious reader all my life. I can remember reading Peter Pan at seven and loving it as well as also loving Enid Blyton's books. The key to teaching reading is consistency. ITA was a well-meaning but not well thought out system but the worst was the short-lived fad for "real books," whereby the child was supposed to learn to read by osmosis, seemingly.

Mollygo

theworriedwell
I’d find it odd too, if it took a school 3 years to discover that a child wasn’t progressing, whatever method was used.

Where did I say it took them three years to realise he wasn't making progress. Maybe comprehension needs teaching as well.

So to clarify the school had been doing extra phonics, children behind taken out, missing other lessons with their teacher, to keep doing phonics. No progress. After two or three years, part way through year two in fact I started doing games with flash cards moving on to reading with look say. School were so pleased all their efforts suddenly started to work! Same thing happened with his friend except he got the extra help from a dyslexia specialist.

Maisie don't worry the look say or whole word system carried on working. He finished his A levels last summer and is currently on a gap year.

I find it odd that people can't accept phonics doesn't work for all children. If it was being taught badly wouldn't there be more than two children out of 30 struggling ? Both boys caught up in approximately one year.

Musicgirl

I think that it is very easy to say that one method works for all children but this is not the case. I do think, based on my own experience of teaching music, that it is important to be methodical and go through each stage but one size does not fit all and, of course, some children learn more quickly than others. Phonics are vital for learning to decode words but look and say, or the whole word approach, has its merits, too. In other words, a combination of both methods is probably the best approach in my opinion. When taught properly, look and say works through constant repetition of new words on the lines of: "I like the dog, you like the dog, you and l like the dog." Hardly great literature and somewhat tedious for the listening adult but children get a great sense of achievement through this. Phonics comes in with its rules for decoding words. I agree that some children will learn to read however they are taught and I am sure l was one of them. I have been a voracious reader all my life. I can remember reading Peter Pan at seven and loving it as well as also loving Enid Blyton's books. The key to teaching reading is consistency. ITA was a well-meaning but not well thought out system but the worst was the short-lived fad for "real books," whereby the child was supposed to learn to read by osmosis, seemingly.

Yes yes.

theworriedwell
One thing I find odd is if a child isn't progressing after two or three years with phonics the schools response was more phonics.
Sorry. Should have said 2 or 3 years, but the implication in your sentence is that the child could have been given more phonics after 2 years or after 3 years.

2 years of phonics-that puts a child in
Year 1.
Yes, with the assessments we do I’d be concerned if they showed a child was making no progress with phonics by the end of Reception, never mind Y1 unless there was an underlying problem, e.g. hearing, vision or speech delay.
By year 2 something would already be being done, not necessarily more phonics.
Maybe that is just a problem at your school.

theworriedwell

Maisie don't worry the look say or whole word system carried on working. He finished his A levels last summer and is currently on a gap year.

I find it odd that people can't accept phonics doesn't work for all children. If it was being taught badly wouldn't there be more than two children out of 30 struggling ? Both boys caught up in approximately one year.

I'm prepared to bet that if you gave him a completely unfamiliar word to read he'd work out what it 'says' with a phonics based strategy.

Some children manage to 'intuit' phonics without explicit instruction. That's no reason to assume that a method which has no scientific basis whatsoever is 'successful'.

TBH I’d thought other methods such as ‘look and say’, and the ITA (initial teaching alphabet) have now largely been discredited, or have at least fallen out of favour.

Phonics are vital for learning to decode words but look and say, or the whole word approach, has its merits, too.

Would you like to explain what the 'merits' of whole word teaching are?

As for 'children learn differently', how is it that children from countries with a language which doesn't have so many spelling variations (and so have more straightforward letter/sound correspondences in the written word) all teach phonics as a matter of course and have a very high success rate?

Witzend

TBH I’d thought other methods such as ‘look and say’, and the ITA (initial teaching alphabet) have now largely been discredited, or have at least fallen out of favour.

ITA was abandoned decades ago. 'Look and Say failed a very large number of children and, extraordinarily for such widely adopted method of teaching reading in English speaking countries in the 20th century, has no scientific basis whatsoever.

Whereas there is an extensive body of scientific research which confirms the principles underlying phonics teaching and the superiority of its results. (A great deal of which I have read)

I am not an "expert" but my feeling is that phonics has a place in teaching but other ways of learning should also be employed. If some children find phonics difficult, other methods should be explored, otherwise children become anxious and alienated and then decide they are not good readers and they don't like reading.

Mollygo

theworriedwell
One thing I find odd is if a child isn't progressing after two or three years with phonics the schools response was more phonics.
Sorry. Should have said 2 or 3 years, but the implication in your sentence is that the child could have been given more phonics after 2 years or after 3 years.

2 years of phonics-that puts a child in
Year 1.
Yes, with the assessments we do I’d be concerned if they showed a child was making no progress with phonics by the end of Reception, never mind Y1 unless there was an underlying problem, e.g. hearing, vision or speech delay.
By year 2 something would already be being done, not necessarily more phonics.
Maybe that is just a problem at your school.

Well it's not my school. I don't think I implied that at all.

Something was being done in reception year one and into year two. Bit was more phonics, slightly different scheme, same result.

MaizieD

^Phonics are vital for learning to decode words but look and say, or the whole word approach, has its merits, too.^

Would you like to explain what the 'merits' of whole word teaching are?

As for 'children learn differently', how is it that children from countries with a language which doesn't have so many spelling variations (and so have more straightforward letter/sound correspondences in the written word) all teach phonics as a matter of course and have a very high success rate?

Okay get a book and sound out every word. Not very enjoyable is it because the majority of the words you recognise as whole words normally which makes you more fluent. . Same with my GC, nearly three years of phonics and still no enjoyment of reading. He learned probably about 100 words as whole words, suddenly he was reading and enjoying it. Harder books with some words now decoding one word in ten or twenty is much more fluent and most importantly fun. It is how I learned to read nearly 70 years ago, whole words and then you learn to decode.

Phonics first, because that's what it is as we all learn whole words, works best for some kids but not for others. I find it weird that people seem to view phonics like some sort of cult which can't be disagreed with

Bad Granny here again! Why on earth is Sarnia ‘sitting doing spelling most days’ with the child, who’s finding it hard to forget’? To me, that’s piling reading related stress on her, guaranteed to make reading a chore rather than a pleasure.
Please, leave it to the teachers’ methods. Their ways may not be your ways, but it’s the way it is.
( And, incidentally, I am a wee bit obsessive about grammar and spelling)

Eloethan

I am not an "expert" but my feeling is that phonics has a place in teaching but other ways of learning should also be employed. If some children find phonics difficult, other methods should be explored, otherwise children become anxious and alienated and then decide they are not good readers and they don't like reading.

Don't you think that happens?

Daddima

Bad Granny here again! Why on earth is Sarnia ‘sitting doing spelling most days’ with the child, who’s finding it hard to forget’? To me, that’s piling reading related stress on her, guaranteed to make reading a chore rather than a pleasure.
Please, leave it to the teachers’ methods. Their ways may not be your ways, but it’s the way it is.
( And, incidentally, I am a wee bit obsessive about grammar and spelling)

Why on earth is Sarnia ‘sitting doing spelling most days’ with the child, who’s finding it hard to forget’?

I think because Sarnia's DGD will be taking SATS soon.
Some schools set spelling tests each week and sample SARS papers too,
It's really quite stressful, yes, but it's what happens in England. Whether it's a good thing or not I do not know but I have my doubts.

SARS
Autocorrect again, not my spelling!
SATS

Molly I would think a variety of teaching methods are used - at least I hope they are, but teaching seems to be more prescriptive these days as compared to when I was young. Teachers seemed to have more flexibility in the way they taught. Not always a good thing, but I remember some really good teachers - and that was in a fairly working class area in the 50's.

I am curious to know what steps all you skilled readers (and your skilled children and grandchildren) would take to work out what it 'says' if you encountered a word which you didn't 'know' and had never seen written.

Equally, how would you go about spelling a completely unfamiliar word if it were presented to you orally?

MaizieD

I am curious to know what steps all you skilled readers (and your skilled children and grandchildren) would take to work out what it 'says' if you encountered a word which you didn't 'know' and had never seen written.

Equally, how would you go about spelling a completely unfamiliar word if it were presented to you orally?

I was an avid reader when I was a child but for years when I was young mispronounced some words in my head.
Misled - mizzled.
Apricity - Apri as in April followed by city.

However, as teenagers my friends and I used to learn words such as antidisestablishmentarianism and that Welsh place name Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch

It makes us sound rather nerdy but we weren't!

My just 6yr old GS (currently being assessed for being on the spectrum) asked me if he could read the bedtime story last night.

He picked up one of the new books (I constantly buy new books for when the GC stay over) and read it, using phonics on the longer words which were new to him.

He loves reading everything, books, road signs, anything on TV phonics has opened an entire world for him.