Reading Whisperer Approach

[Korrale4kq]

Anecdotal I know, but I asked 37 of my friends and relatives. Mostly rural queenslanders if they knew a single personal personally that could not read or write. They could not think of any living person. I would assume if half of Australians were illeterate we would almost certainly know someone.

Here are some excepts from the study I found interesting.

"People who had completed a qualification generally had higher literacy scores. For both the prose and document literacy scales, 64% of persons who had completed a qualification achieved Level 3 or above, compared to 41% for those who had not completed such a qualification."

And

"Looking at formal learning, of the 6.7 million people who undertook a course leading to an educational qualification in the previous 12 months, 69% achieved scores at Level 3 or above for both prose and document literacy, 61% for numeracy and 42% for problem solving. In contrast, of the people who did not undertake such a course in the previous 12 months, 42% achieved scores at Level 3 or above for prose literacy, 41% for document literacy, 37% for numeracy and 20% for problem solving (table 11)."

So that is to say that 31% of post graduates are "illeterate". Now it is making me question the difficulty of the initially literacy test.

There is much more in the study. I will post the link at the bottom. I also found interesting that Norway (a country with One of the highest literacy ratings in the world) ranked at over 60% for all age groups. . Which is still remarkably low.


http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Latestproducts/4228.0Main%20Features22006%20(Reissue)?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=4228.0&issue=2006%20(Reissue)&num=&view=

[Korrale4kq]

This will help interperate the scores also.

Approximately 7 million (46%) Australians aged 15 to 74 years had scores at Level 1 or 2 on the prose scale, a further 5.6 million (37%) at Level 3 and 2.5 million (16%) at Level 4/5. Results for document literacy were similar to prose. There were 7 million (47%) Australians at Level 1 or 2 on the document scale, 5.4 million (36%) at Level 3 and 2.7 million (18%) at Level 4/5. On the numeracy scale, approximately 7.9 million (53%) Australians were assessed at Level 1 or 2, 4.7 million (31%) at Level 3 and 2.4 million (16%) at Level 4/5. On the problem solving scale, approximately 10.6 million (70%) Australians were assessed at Level 1 or 2, 3.7 million (25%) at Level 3 and 800,000 (5%) at Level 4 (table 1).


To each individual, and for each of the domains mentioned in section 2.c, a score from zero to 500 is assigned. Zero indicates extremely low proficiency, and 500 extremely high. In addition, based on this score, one of five ‘cognitive levels’ is assigned. These cognitive levels are used in national and international comparison, essentially as a benchmark. The following list provides descriptions of typical tasks associated with each cognitive level.

Level 1 (Scores 0–225):
Tasks at this level require the ability to read simple documents, accomplish literal information-matching with no distractions, and perform simple one-step calculations.

Level 2 (Scores 226–275):
This level includes tasks that demand the capacity to search a document and filter out some simple distracting information, achieve low-level inferences, and execute one- or two-step calculations and estimations.

Level 3 (Scores 276–325):
Typical tasks at level 3 involve more complex information-filtering, sometimes requiring inferences and the facility to manipulate mathematical symbols, perhaps in several stages.

Level 4 (Scores 326–375):
A level 4 task might demand the integration of information from a long passage, the use of more complex inferences and the completion of multiple-step calculations requiring some reasoning.

Level 5 (Scores 376–500):
Level 5 tasks incorporate the capability to make high-level inferences or syntheses, use specialised knowledge, filter out multiple distractors, and to understand and use abstract mathematical ideas with justification.
Note that the description of these cognitive levels is slightly different for the problem- solving domain.
Results are generally presented with levels 4 and 5 amalgamated under ‘higher levels of proficiency’.

[Korrale4kq]

Sorry I forgot to include my second source. I know how much those are appreciated.

http://edcounts.squiz.net.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/13105/ALL_Introduction_07.pdf

[Korrale4kq]

Ok Kimba- if you really are speaking out for parents on this forum- and none have children with speech delay, special needs, - who who basically arent interested or 'getting it' - and they want new strategies Ill stop posting. And I have no idea how your 'preverbal children' are reading. How did you know they were reading if they couldnt speak? 

I know this was directed at Kimba, but I feel I need to answer. My son is speech delayed, or rather was, he catching up rapidly now. And he has been red flagged for autism (potential Aspergers) albeit very high functioning and he has hypoactive SPD.  There are several  other parents with children on the spectrum in this forum that have been able to teach their children to read. There is also one incredibly precocious reader with down syndome. As well as other children with the extra chromosome.

There are also hundreds of typical children that are precocious readers that have used a variety of methods to learn reading. To say their approach is wrong and to belittle their success can be deemed as insulting.
I like your program. It has a lot of merit and is something that I have done myself when teaching certain children to read. But it did not work with ALL kids. Some just did better with different approaches. Whole language works better with my 2.5 year old son right now.

As to answer your question as how a child who is non verbal can indicate their reading ability. We used sign language.

[ReadingWhisperer]

This might explain it more effectively - Im obviously doing a very poor job of getting the message across.

http://youtu.be/QsSUamFekwI

[ReadingWhisperer]

Ariel, I am also assuming that your daughter is already past the begginning sounding out stage.  I also agree that deep phonological awareness is important, but assumed this was not an issue you are seeking help with.  I did understand your question as asking about attention span or getting through a lesson that you believe your daughter is capable of.  A 3 year old not maintaining focus for a short span of time on something an involved parent thinks they are capable of does not always equate to your child not actually being developmentally ready for the task at hand.  You are the parent there, who knows the situation best.

I did hear something recently that may a useful tool for what to expect regarding attention span.  You should expect 1-3 minutes per year of life in attention span, which will increase when the activity is particularly engaging.  So, on average, a 3 year old will have a 3-9 minute attention span.  I've personally seen classes of children with longer attention spans, but it's something that needs to be cultivated...with special attention paid to increase intrinsic motivation (and yes, the research I read does tend to point to rewards and punishments as being detrimental to intrinsic motivation).  I can recommend further reading to you if that is something that piques your interest.

ReadingWhisperer,  I am fearful for you.  I feel like you genuinely have a lot of valid points that could be really helpful for a lot of parents here that may go unheard.  You have given me some new ideas to integrate phonological awareness in our daily lives that I was not already doing.  I am afraid less people will hear your message because it seems to always be mixed in with a battle of some kind. And I'm sure that's frustrating for you as well.

Im not sure any of us really ever get past the sounding out stage.

Read this aloud -


This gallimaufry is multitudinously gargantuan, puissantly capacious sand ineffably Junoesque and in consequence of such Protean tribulations and in such psychotic contravention of stereotypical consuetudinary hygiene, there exists the infinitesimal exiguity of a satisfactory resolution to this cataclysmic dilemma

I get so frustrated - and sometimes my frustration with other parents or educators filters into posts to others. I often have to work with teenagers who are banned from school and would be in jail if 18 - and I know that had they had parents and educators who understood the brain (and child psychology) 'better' these children would often not be living the lives they are living. Sometimes I think knowing too much and being so consumed with social injustic is harmful for me when trying to help. So thank you for your suggestion.

I also write too much and Im sure many have other things to be doing rather than trying to wade through it- like playing with their children:-)

This may be useful- http://youtu.be/QsSUamFekwI

Within our approach - when using direct, intentional teaching - we spend no more than 1- 3 minutes per year of their life - at any one time.

Yes- I agree completely- a 3 year old not maintaining focus for a short span of time on something an involved parent thinks they are capable of does not always equate to your child not actually being developmentally ready for the task at hand. I had said that there could be many reasons. And regarding this one the issue really- for me - is 'why'. Not focusing on how to make/ encourage her to focus for longer? If that makes sense. I couldnt give an effective suggestion in this case without watching the parent and child interct.   

And yes, 'Punished by Rewards' and other similar books are great reading- I did a Dissertation for my Masters on punishments - and why teachers with a belief that corporal punishment is 'ok' - even if not actually using it (because illegal) shouldnt be teaching. Im a big believer in developing intrinsic motivation...

Again, I sincerely appreciate your feedback regarding being instrumental in stopping myself from getting my message across! Its very true.

I will try to focus on more practical ways to help parents- suggestions of activities etc- as this forum is really for parents helping their own children rather than to change society?

I apologise if I have been lecturing - 'must do better'. :-)

[Mandabplus3]

Oh yes that is why I love this forum no one here just takes anything at face value. Stats have to be able to be backed up and validated. The 49 % literacy rate is NOT a true reflection of literacy standards in Australia. It is an overall snapshot of a standard set by Canada. Not at all relevant to the needs of the Australian population. That is why no one is particulalrly upset about the results. They just aren't relevant.
Yes Norway ( with the best education in the world) scored only 67%! based on that alone our 49% looks pretty good. We beat the US and Italy, and came on par with Canada.
To further twist the results in Australia 16% of our population were born in a country that doesn't Speak English. That 16% are probably fully literate in their own countries language. No one asked them!
25% of our population are between 55 and 65 and guess what, they scored the lowest othe test at only 44% literacy. They have nothing to do with how our children are being taught. And yet they represent 25% of the scores used to decide our country is illiterate! Take them out of the study and let's see the scores. The younger people are the mums and dads teaching kids to read. I have worked in very low socio economic areas too. Places where prep kids get sent to school without breakfast or lunch. ( yep that IS hard to deal with) I met a total of 2 parents who couldnt read the notes I sent home, in any language. I translated about 5 a year into other languages to help the parents feel involved and welcome.
Of our 22 000 000 people only 15 581 333 speak ONLY English. That's a pretty diverse pool of people! No wonder our ENGLISH literacy rate is low. Our multicultural rate is awesome though

As to the stats on teachers being prepared to teach reading...well throw the blame on those students! What were they doing when they were being taught that in class! Don't tell me it wasn't included in the course. Its all their in the readings and lectures. These kids didn't understand what was being taught and didn't ask enough questions. English is one of many things kids learn at school. As important as it is it should only be a small percentage of a degree. We have annual PD requirements for a reason. To learn skills to improve our teaching. When i left my course I knew I still needed to study more on the teaching of reading. I knew I would manage though.  I also knew that my education didn't stop with the piece of paper and fancy hat! I found studies saying 62% felt well prepared to teach reading. There is usually a stat to suit every need. Even now ( knowing I have already successfully taught many children to read) I wouldn't say I know everything. I still can learn more.
I would like to learn from you reading whisperer but you still don't seem to get the tone of this forum. Just tone down the self promotion and give the mums here specific examples of what they can do at home. How about a list of 20 examples to increase phonemic awareness while your kids are playing. Now that would be something we could use more than randomly sprouted statistics.

[ReadingWhisperer]

You want more helpful tips for your own children...hopefully this will get you started

Please watch this for ideas about developing phonological (especially phonemic awareness)

http://youtu.be/w8sXFKXg1b4 - its not on the usual channel- we are developing a new one...

You can see - in this one- clips of pre-schoolers listening for speech sounds in words, blending, and spelling etc on it- and I talk about what to focus on.

Initially start with 6 speech sounds- understanding that it is the speech sound you are focusing on - not the letter sound- and certainly not the letter name.
eg s,a,t,p,i,n (the clip explains this) Spend alot of time on the listening part - and speaking part (if ready) - if you have a young child and are just starting out on this. 

Create speech sound tables/ scrap books etc- and collect things that have those speech sounds in them when spoken - eg for 'sss' you could have 'Santa, scent, science coats, grass etc. The focus is the speech sound- not the letter sound (watch clip)

Get a 'Speech Sound' teddy- he only speaks in speech sounds- and you tell the child what the speech sound teddy is saying and the child has to work out the word
Your child has to tell the teddy the speech sounds in a word so he understands.

When saying things regularly use the speech sounds - as well as the whole word- again shown in the clip - with pre-schoolers (whats under the h/a/t )

Play games where you have the 6 sound pics on the wall- you say a word and they have to run to the sound pic if they hear that speech sound. So if you said psychology they would run to 's' - if you said sand' they would run to s,a and n !

Collect things with those speech sounds (and after the initial 6 you keep progressing onto more- the speech sound clouds are a great way of building these up and can be used to refer to speech sound and their corresponding sound pics when reading as well)

Ask them to hear how many speech sounds in words that are created using those speech sounds - count them on their fingers (sat - s/a/t) and then get out your white board and magnetic letters - and he or she draws that many lines- with the numbers underneath. She then listens for the speech sounds again and puts the sound pics on the right line. Then start playing with it. Suppose I take off the 's' what will the new word be? eg. use nonsense words as well.
You can make lots of words using these souns pics- tan, tin, ant, sit, pin etc
Put the magnetic letters on the fridge and ask her to spell these words- I often also have number cards with a line above- so she can do the same as on white board- the numbers help with placement and segmenting.

Start introducing speech sound clouds- just have the s, a, t, p, i and n ones to start off with. Watch clip- as to how to personalise these as the child learns more. 

Look at words and figure out the speech sound pics- so for example you might look at the work 'kick'- she listens for how many speech sounds - so you know that there must be 3 sound pics. Which are they? The first sound you hear is 'k' so underline the 'k and the second is 'i' - this leads nicely on to ck being another sound pic for the 'k' sound. The go and look at the 'k' speech sound cloud- to see all of them. (see graphic attached)

Spend time looking and words and figuring out how they relate to the speech sounds. sight - how many speech sounds? 3. She can hear s - underline it- she can hear 't' at the end- underline it- so igh must be another sound pic for the 'iy' sound. Go look at the speech sound cloud for that speech sound- there it is!   

So if learning the 'rr' speech sound and starting off with the sound pic 'r' its more logical for the child when they see other versions - or are trying to spell words with that speech sound- because of the work you are doing with the 'rrr' speech sound cloud.

You can download all for free on www.facebook.com/readaustralia - here I think ?
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.361710097224195.82649.160717717323435&type=3

You can also find links to download free readers that are based purely on those 6 sound pics. Clip also shows these.   

Hopefully a few things to be getting on with!!

Have fun with it !

Em

[Kimba15]

Yes reading whiperer, you might be an old coach and with all due respect no one asked you for your help. You have come on here ranting and raving and virtually saying that we are doing everything wrong. I don't think you have understood the parents on this forum at all or what we are all about.

The things that you have written have been bounced around on Brillkids for years. MAke it fun, make it light, keep it to short burst and follow the child. We already do that. This is alo a forum for teaching babies and young pre-verbal toddlers to read.So I urge you to do a search or ask us how we taught our preverbal children to read.

So please instead of jumping up and down and saying listen to me ! Listen to me ! Please make an effort


???? No - fun, keep it light, keep it to short bursts and teach to the child is NOT all that is needed. 

Some parents wont have children who find it easy- however fun they make it.

Ok Kimba- if you really are speaking out for parents on this forum- and none have children with speech delay, special needs, - who who basically arent interested or 'getting it' - and they want new strategies Ill stop posting. And I have no idea how your 'preverbal children' are reading. How did you know they were reading if they couldnt speak? 

Until youve taught children with severe learning difficulties - with respect- you shouldnt be trying to turn people like me away. No-one asked me for help? Sometimes people dont know they need help- or that there is a different kind of help- until others 'show up' and offer. I showed up. You turned me away. If you really want the best for your forum parents ask yourelf why that would be.

And any parents who do want to at least watch something different then you know where I am. I know that is an old coach turned up Id welcome him and pick his brains!!! Doesnt mean Id necessarily do everything he suggested- but Id certainly want to consider it, for the sake of my own development- and also (more importantly) for those little athletes! 

Emma
http://www.facebook.com/readaustralia
http://www.youtube.com/readaustralia

 

Reading whisperer There is a whole thread on this forum dedicated to children with special needs I sugget you take the time to read it here is the link http://forum.brillkids.com/parents-with-special-needs-children/

As for how I knew that Miss S was reading I taught her to sign since she was a baby she had 300 signs under her belt by 13months. So I knew she could read becaue she signed many words she saw. A she became more verbal by 18months she could decode words by herself.

You say she i one of the lucky ones I say she is lucky because  I found this forum in 2008.

If you are upset because we have questioned your 46% statistic of Australians who 'can't' read Mandabplus3 and I and the other on this forum take nothing at face value. Show me a statistic on parents who are  25-45 on their reading levels people who were schooled here and people who are now teaching their own children to read and I might sit up and listen.

[TeachingMyToddlers]

In the effort of keeping an open mind, I am currently attempting to look at your youtube video you posted. At minute 4:35 you declare that "Babies can't read" and the "creator should be shot." A bit harsh, no? At any rate, I can see there is a preexisting prejudice against screens, which is fine. Babies can be taught to read using books and flashcards, no screen required. I wanted to direct your attention to a gentleman by the name of Timothy Kailing who wrote the book about "Native Reading." Basically, the only thing he did was consistently point under the text while reading aloud to his children at a natural pace. It worked for both of his children, although it takes quite a bit longer than a more direct method of instruction like introducing flashcards. Babies can read if exposed to the right materials, and this father proved it's possible to teach a child to read practically unintentionally through exposure to print, which you stated in your video that you are very against introducing right off the bat.

I am certainly not discounting your method, I don't know enough about it to make that judgement call and I firmly believe there is "more than one way to skin a cat." But really, after seeing this community of parents and hearing about countless babies reading, special needs and nuero-typical alike, do you really believe that teaching a baby to read is impossible?

There's an entire school in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, founded by Glenn Doman, dedicated to early learning, baby reading, and beyond. I think they would have long since gone out of business if baby reading is truly "impossible," along with all of the Right Brain Education schools in Asia who are also teaching babies to read (Tweedlewink, Henguru, Shichida, Little Nuero Tree, to name a few), not to mention all of the other at-home infant literacy programs in existence.  Regardless of if you think we're all severely misguided parents, as you have urged us to look over your materials and keep an open mind, I urge you to read through www.BrillBaby.com and read Glen Doman's book. I found his experience, descriptions, and respect for tiny babies to be absolutely eye-opening. His respect for "Professional Mothers is quite endearing as well, although my view is biased on that one. You can even download a free e-book on infant literacy from the BrillBaby website to gain an overview of infant literacy, why wait when babies can be taught to read before they can even talk? http://www.brillkids.com/ext/little-reader/e-book.php.  Reading more on the subject may change your perspective on the real potential of tiny infants. http://www.brillbaby.com/early-learning/experts/glenn-doman-1.php

Edited to add: In your video you stress the importance of speech FIRST. My daughter was a chatterbox from early on. But in my experience with my son, he was able to read more than he could spontaneously speak and all of his first spoken words were words that he first learned to read. I think even at 2.5 he may be a better speller than my daughter because he loves these spelling app's and games that he plays on my iphone, which have come long after he learned to read. Now that he is *finally* starting to speak more, it is not totally clear BUT amazingly, he is using proper grammar and correctly structured sentences, although a stranger would not be able to understand him 100% of the time. What I love about teaching him early is that he never struggled through the tedious sounding it out, he can easily read words like Champion, Discover, Vacation, and words with silent e's and various digraphs without any challenge at all. He learned it all by example and application of seeing it in print.

[ReadingWhisperer]

Not really sure why you would think that the statistics somehow shouldnt be taken very seriously- how about looking at our current students?
I think according to NAPLAN results about 20% of children arent reading to their expected level by the time they leave primary school? This has some info.
http://www.rch.org.au/emplibrary/ccch/PB13_Literacy_EarlyChildhood.pdf
Also look through NAPLAN results.
Even 1 child in 100 is too many for me though- whatever the reason.
And 46% of Australians being unable to comprehend what they are reading to be able to even follow cooking recipe is appalling to me, I dont care why. These people deserve more. We dont offer this to them- and its why we are doing what we are doing at Read Australia™. We dont just work with children! We want all of Australia to be able to read. And this approach also applies to them. Its never too late! 

You might find this useful
http://www.childrenofthecode.org/interviews/shaywitz.htm
Dr. Sally Shaywitz: We're not hardwired for written language. Many societies on earth indeed rely solely on an oral language. So whereas spoken language is instinctive and natural - you don't have to teach a baby to speak, you just expose that baby to a spoken language and that baby will learn, eventually, to speak - reading has to be taught. It's artificial, it's acquired.
 
Dr. Sally E. Shaywitz is a professor of Pediatric Neurology at Yale University. She is the author of "Overcoming Dyslexia" and has published articles in many scientific and popular journals, including Nature, Journal of the American Medical Association, Scientific American and Child. She is a member of the Institute of Medicine at the National Academy of Sciences and the National Reading Panel. Additional bio info
Dr. Sally Shaywitz is a neuroscientist who is passionately dedicated to helping children and families overcome the pain and strain of reading difficulties.

I have amended the clip to try to make myself clearer. http://youtu.be/Lxs-RazOU8U

It is phonological awareness that is our starting point - I tend to say 'speech sounds' as many dont really understand what phonological awareness is, and get it confused with phonics (print).
At least 35% of children entering Kindergarten have poor phonological awareness and this is the biggest predictor of reading difficulties. This must be taught. Children who are very bright, have supportive parents who read to them every day etc are not immunue- its how their brains are 'wired'. But it can be changed. Teaching these children to memorise whole words can be detrimental to their development other than high frequency difficult to decode words in the initial stages. But in reality when you teach children the code well there are only about 55 words in the English language that cant be decoded- so there is no need to teach whole words.
If taught well there is no 'tedious sounding out' of words :-) Far from it- our approach enables children to move far more quickly to fluency and comprehension.

Phonological awareness, or phonological sensitivity, is the ability to listen to the sounds in spoken language without concentrating on the meaning of what is being said. It is an auditory skill that focuses on understanding how the sounds of spoken language can be segmented, combined, and manipulated. Since phonological awareness deals with sounds in language and does not involve print, it is important to think about how it is easiest for children to develop this sensitivity to sound. Phonological awareness progresses along a continuum and begins BEFORE children have learned a set of letter-sound correspondences. This is my point- we start with this first. Regardless of whether the actual child is able to speak yet.
 
Why is phonological awareness important?
 •Phonological awareness is the strongest predictor of success in early reading.
 •35% of the children who enter kindergarten have not naturally acquired phonological awareness and need to be taught these skills.
 •Phonological awareness allows children to play with blending, segmenting and manipulating sounds prior to having to do this with the additional knowledge required to blend, segment and manipulate letters into words in isolation or text.
 
A useful clip - especially as it emphasises understanding/ comprehension.
http://www.lindamoodbell.com/video.aspx

I am trying to bridge the gap between what parents know - and what reading researchers and educators know. For every child that you will consider a success because you used flashcards, there will be more than dont. These parents unfortunately dont speak out - they often think they arent doing it properly- or that their child isnt ready- or interested etc. The children you talk about who are apparently reading and spelling confidently would have learnt however you taught them- I am speaking out for the others.

No, babies cant read. Of course they cant. And to try to sell a product to parents using this claim is scandalous- also why the Your Baby Can Read program is under review for false advertising. We are sick of the public being told untruths. Its not harsh at all. Do you know how much money this man has made preying on parents who only want the best for their children? Yes, of course we should stimulate young minds as much as possible- but our focus should be on helping that individual child thrive- and develop- and develop their own autonomy.
Do I think anyone selling 'your baby can read, jump, run the Olympics in 2 years' would go out of business? No- parents desperately want to buy into it! If Weight watchers worked for even the majority would it be a multi-billion dollar industry? No- people would get slim and leave. It makes so much money because it doesnt work! If eating right and exercising was the answer everyone would be healthy and trim. But at least Weight watchers is based on what would work- if people stuck to it. Babies cant read. Babies cant run. Usain Bolt couldnt run when he was a baby however much someone couldve moved his legs promising glory. And when he became a star what would they say? It worked!

Our focus isnt creating mini Einsteins - its creating happy children who love to learn. Also to prevent difficulties. Difficulties that affect at least 20 - 30% of children in any class in any English speaking country. And Im sure that is your aim also?     

Babies are developmentally unable to read. Some toddlers can read- of course- but not a baby- and not the majority. Even then however we need to consider what we mean by 'reading'. To 'read' they have to understand what they are reading. If a child has never seen a mountain and you ask him to 'read' a sentence about this, the fact that he says 'mountain' when he sees the flashcard, or word in a book, doesnt mean he is 'reading'. Reading and spelling include not only phonological awareness, phonemics, phonics etc but also comprehension. And this comes with knowledge. But if he doesnt have the skills to decode and encode this knowledge wont do him any good either - as he wont be able to read the print in the first place. Chicken and egg. But nowhere do memorising flashcards come into it. They arent necessary. As youll see if you watch clips of me teaching 2 - 5 year olds next month, and also 5 and 6 year olds in school. I teach as if all are going to have those 'non reading' brains- because the others will read whatever I do.     
 
Proficient young readers are phonemically aware, understand how print represents the sounds of speech, can apply phonemics and phonics rapidly and fluently, and connect their reading to their background knowledge. Poor readers enter kindergarten lacking phonological awareness and word-reading skills. Their text reading is laborious, impeding their comprehension and robbing them of the enjoyment of learning. Frustration and loss of interest in reading follow, as do mounting weakness in vocabulary and trouble in other academic subjects. And the cycle goes on.
 
Therefore, we must intervene as early as possible in a child’s school career to avoid the reading failure that will otherwise occur. Since the causes of most early reading difficulties are similar regardless of whether a poor reader meets the aptitude/achievement-discrepancy definition of LD (learning difficulties), it makes no sense to wait for a discrepancy to reveal itself.
 
The tragic likelihood of failure, in the absence of very early intervention, is confirmed in numerous studies. Children identified as reading disabled after 2nd grade rarely catch up to their peers. Figure 2 in the following page shows the development of reading skills from the Connecticut Longitudinal Study directed by Yale University pediatrician Sally E. Shaywitz, which followed children from kindergarten through grade 12. Three groups were traced: 1) unimpaired children; 2) children defined in 3rd grade as RD due to an aptitude/achievement discrepancy; and 3) those so defined simply by low achievement. The pattern is growth from age 6 to age 12, then a near plateau from age 12 to 18. Children in the two RD groups show similar growth; neither group catches up to the skilled readers, even though half the children were pegged for special education. More than 70 percent of children identified as RD in 3rd grade remain RD in 12th grade. This longitudinal study shows that children fall behind in reading long before 3rd grade. Fortunately, other studies show that such children can be reliably identified well before 2nd grade. Researchers have found a strong relationship between phonological awareness and word recognition in kindergarten and 1st grade on the one hand and reading proficiency at the end of 4th and 5th grades on the other."
 
http://educationnext.org/early-warning-system/
 
I am simply asking you to review the actual research and not just base what you think is going to be the most useful strategies based on a handful of children. Children deserve us to take a wider view and see what is happening- even if it seems alien to us.

Research shows that phonological and phonemic awareness can be taught and learned-and that when these skills are developed, the result is that children have a much easier time learning to read and write (Adler, 2003)

So even though some children may learn to 'read' using flashcards - Id rather do the things that will help then have an easier time of it.

Im sure many on here are doing this- its just those posting who would prefer to argue the case for teaching whole word- however developing phonological awareness and then teaching phonics is free, any parent can do it, and it will meet the needs of those children- before they have it as 'remedial work' when failing.

Ultimately parents need to do what they feel is right for their children. We do know however that we can tell from brains scans, of children as young as 4, which are doing to struggle if they are not taught phonics systematically, along with phonological awareness. No amount of love, support, sharing books and memorising flashcards will help them. As a parent would you really want to take that risk, of hoping your child is one of the lucky ones who dont need that strong foundation in the early years?

Hopefully something to think about at least. Im simply asking that you dont put all your eggs in one basket- ie with flashcards - and that you at least consider that phonological awareness and phonics could be more beneficial long term. I gave some suggestions on another thread- or it could have been this one? Its so easy. Most people just dont realise how important it is. And without even realising they didnt have that 'reading brain' to begin with, they will develop it. All because their parents found out how to develop it.     


Emma Hartnell-Baker BEd Hons MA Special Educational Needs
Shaping Reading Brains- Sharing Early Literacy Interventions
http://www.facebook.com/readaustralia

[baz]

reading whisperer,

have a look!
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/MaJ4OvDCqkI&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/MaJ4OvDCqkI&rel=1</a>

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/NzQ9f60_e6E&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/NzQ9f60_e6E&rel=1</a>

[Korrale4kq]

Not the same issue but of course babies can run! My son took his first steps at 7 months and started toddling by 8 months. By 9 months he was running. Way before his first birthday he was cross pattern running up and down small hills.

[ReadingWhisperer]

What a cutie. But this isnt reading Baz. You can also teach her to smile as you hold up the flashcard for frown. What she is doing is looking at the shape, colour etc of the word and linking it with what you are teaching her to do or say (or both) Its really sweet - and she'll love the attention- but this isnt reading. If you write the word in another colour and use a different font she'll not know what to do- because she isnt understanding how your speech is linked to the print- shes memorising. And its lovely to watch! But do also teach her phonological awareness incase she doesnt have that 'reading brain' that finds it all easy. 

There are masses of Your Baby Can Read videos on youtube showing the same thing. Of course toddlers can memorise whole words by their shape and length - it isnt reading. But because most dont understand the brain processes they think it will help their child. For some it will- but reading and spelling is so much more than memorising words.

My point is that teaching them this way is fine for a small percentage who will learn whatever method you choose. Their brains are wired to take in the information you give them and work it out- lucky them. However there are at least 35% of all children entering Kindergarten with poor phonological awareness- including those being taught flashcards. Recognising flashcards has nothing to do with phonological awarenesss. But what happens is that you mask this. Children with poor phonological awareness can also be incredibly bright, with great memories. So learning those flashcards is easy for them. You read them a book and then point to the words and they say them. Its not reading. What happens is that you think they are doing fine- because they seem to remember the words - until they get to around the end of first grade. Thats when they cant retain so many words (the brain can only retain a few thousand by 'memory') and also cant actually spell unfamiliar words. Again, their parents or school have been sending home 'spelling words' to memorise. They do brilliantly! And then it all falls apart. Because you arent seeing whats happening in the brain. You arent seeing which parts are being used and which arent. For a child to be a good reader there are all sorts firing in the brain.

I use high frequency words that difficult to decode for a beginning reader so that we quickly get to the reading for meaning stage. However there is a difference between using a few to do this- than the whole language aporoach which asks children to learn all words in this way. So I am not saying dont use sight words at all- Im saying use them when you need to to create early sentences- eg the ant was in the tin - teaching was and the as sight words.

So dont allow what looks like reading (and isnt) - as in these clips- to mask difficulties. If you are set on asking your child to memorise whole words then at least make sure you are developing their phonological awareness and teaching the alphabetic code (phonics) - and teach high frequency words (I, the, was, there etc ) Because if you have a child who will be one of the 2 in 5 who do have poor phonological awareness- then this is what they need from birth. This is much more important to them- but dont wait until they struggle to have to then go back. Look at the previous info about struggling readers- read about it - worldwide research and info- because the problems are the same. They are based in poor phonological awareness. Why do you think so many struggle to read and spell? Even teachers have little training in phonological awareness and phonics (properly) - or understand what happens in the brains of good and poor readers. We know this from government inquiries- they do not just look at what is working- and isnt- but at the quality of teacher education- and of the teachers own literacy skills. Its a real worry. 

It is difficult to teach a child to listen to speech sounds and know how they 'work' in words- and how they relate to print- and then ignore that and look at a whole word. But if you have to, then at least do the phonological stuff too. You cant see inside your child's brain. We cant do brain imaging and see if they have a brain that will read and spell easily until around 4. But we do know how to prevent it. Im telling you how to prevent it . Videos of a child memorising flashcards isnt reading. Its wonderful that you are spending time with your child and want the best for them- but just consider if they dont have the right kind of brain to learn that way.

This is a site- I was told- about sharing info. Just consider it. Even if just to expand on what you are doing. The info I am sharing is free. I am sharing it so that more parents know how to prevent difficulties. Many assume their child wont- but teaching flashcards and focusing on print masks these difficulties- and the longer you wait the more difficult it will be to then teach it. Teaching children from birth is the best way! But you need to help them develop reading brains- help them process the information as good readers do. These are specific skills that need to be taught. And if you are lucky and have a child who will learn if you use flashcards then it will help their spelling (and also the speed in which they can process information and read text) . 

Read this aloud- not to yourself- as I asked before- and think about what you do.

This gallimaufry is multitudinously gargantuan, puissantly capacious and ineffably Junoesque and in consequence of such Protean tribulations and in such psychotic contravention of stereotypical consuetudinary hygiene, there exists the infinitesimal exiguity of a satisfactory resolution to this cataclysmic dilemma

If you did read it aloud you will see what is really happening as you are slowing down on the processes you use when reading and having to use more of the underlying processes you dont realise are happening in your brain. It should highlight what those processes are. You wont know all of the words by memory - so you go back to what reading really is. This is what we need to be teaching children from birth. How to do this. And why not teach in a way that will prevent reading and spelling difficulties?

Also note that even if you read it fairly easy did you understand it? As I said before- you need to understand what you are reading- or what will you gain from 'reading' it?
There are lots of stages and layers.



Em
ps Korrale4kq
 when you said 'started toddling' - there you go- he wasnt a baby anymore. Yes, many toddlers make a good effort at running- of course! Running at 9 months I would have to see - but youre missing the point. If your child is ready ro run he'll run- but you having wiggled his legs when 2 months wasnt the reason.
However if your child doesnt run when they could be running- because you tied his legs and held him back- who should we blame? Im asking you to untie his brain incase he doesnt have a natural reading brain. This is not based on intelligence.And constantly giving me karma points wont change how much we know know about what you cant see - whats actually happening in the brain when people are trying to encode or decode and then make sense of it.         

[Mandabplus3]

Reading whisperer, you just keep contradicting yourself!
First children cant learn to read using whole words, then some of them can learn to read using whatever method.
First it's only reading if they are developmentally ready and therefor understand what the word means then suddenly yes they can read a word if they can sound it out but don't know what it means. My own son didn't know what a pin was, but he can sound it out! Obviously he can't read! 
Flash cards don't teach reading but  it's reading if they memorize sight words using whole word flashcards.
Babies can't read whole words using different fonts but the baby in the video is clearly reading dads handwriting which is variable. But next sentence the can memorize word shapes.
Babies don't know what the words mean but are memorizing and action! Oh that's just baloney! Walk up to these kids and ask them to touch their toes without the word card! Of course they can.
My kids ALL had a cross pattern run at 1 year old and ran happily by 9 months, surely with all your years in childcare centers you saw kids running at that age! My kids werent the only ones doing it at that age. Yes they DO learn to run by encouraging movement when young. Just like they learn to catch a ball through practice and ride a bike through practice and crawl through tummy time!
You spend half of every post telling us we are all wrong, then the next half telling us it will work for most of our kids.
You have knowledge and skills but you obviously don't know everything. Please stick to discussing what you are good at and don't bother telling us we are wrong. Your negative Karma points are coming from your inability to provide useful information without trying to prove us wrong. You say you don't want to be here doing a whole words debate..well stop debating it and provide some more useful tips like you did last time I directly asked you to.  Plenty of parents here know the value of phonological awareness. I am afraid you have already lost the ones who dont, they gave up reading your posts long ago, because you made their efforts and intentons seem inconsequential. If you really want to get throughout o those 30% of kids who need more than whole words then just post something useful we AS PARENTS can actually use, now, today!
If you want to advertise research then post a link to it with a short intro, so we can see for ourselves.
I just think you have a lot to offer but are going about it all wrong. Your message is getting lost in the endless arguments.
For the record I gave you a positive Karma last time you posted useful info and the speech clouds link. I think other will too if you can provide something they can use, without the politics.
 

document.getElementById('recent_loading').style.display = 'none';document.getElementById('recent_page_box').style.display = '';

Page: 1/4  

Loading...

Members

• Total Members: 214795
• Latest: Becky_ri

Stats

• Total Posts: 110526
• Total Topics: 19136
• Online Today: 303
• Online Ever: 826
• (January 22, 2020, 12:09:49 AM)

Users Online

• Users: 0
• Guests: 218
• Total: 218