Advice from those who have taught SP in schools

Moderators: Debbie Hepplewhite, maizie, Lesley Drake, Susan Godsland

Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 10:23 am

Post by CuriousMum » Fri Jan 12, 2007 8:38 pm

Yes, I agree with you, Frances5 - I don't for a moment think that my 5 year old son really can read or understand like an average 12 year old, but he can decode brilliantly.

Kelly, I used Jolly Phonics to teach the basic correspondences and then used some of the later stages of Ruth Miskin to reinforce the extended code - although by then he was reading well anyway. At school they use ORT, but by the time he started he was reading Stage 7 comfortably.

Posts: 72
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 8:29 pm

Post by willow » Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:01 am

Frances, you are right of course, reading ages are only as good as the data they are based on.

I only did dd as I wanted to see where she was based on today's idiotic reading schemes as the teacher was doing the 'she must read every book on the scheme and not jump' argument. Actually you may be pleasantly surprised what your ds could do on the Burt one (see Debbie's website) as a lot of the words are easy 'phonetic' words - the main reason dd did so well. I also thought it may have some credence as the norms are based ( I think) in the 50's when children were taught to read properly!

I was really only trying to show that SP taught children can be streets ahead of others taught with 'searchlights', not saying I beleive in the reading age tests or even the concept!

The Dr Duck is ORT Stage 2, so very good for your son to be reading at this stage. The school have still got my ds on the horrible Storyworlds Stage 1 with the same repetitive keywords on every page :roll: - no wonder he sails through them! But he read Doctor Duck this weekend too, he seems to like these ORT books better than Jelly and Bean (but then there are fewer words)

Mine were taught using Jolly Phonics (dd at nursery then by me, ds taught himself by watching dd) and using all the decodable readers I could find, so Jelly and Bean, JP readers and recently the Songbirds

Posts: 72
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 8:29 pm

Post by willow » Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:57 pm

Frances - your son and his cohorts ARE lucky. My dc's school are teaching phonics of a sort but the old fashioned way - dd is doing consonant blends in Yr 1 :roll: They had some lovely magnetic letters on the board so I was going to make up different words and then found that the 's' and 'w' were linked just like a digraph !!!!

Thankfully dd does not need this but she must get a bit bored.

Unfortunatlee they do not listen to me when i try and tell them about Rose and SP but I keep plugging away slowly :wink:

Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 10:23 am

Post by CuriousMum » Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:39 pm

Willow, it sounds like my sons' school. They insist they teach synthetic phonics, when they patently don't. They use Jolly Phonics to teach the alphabet sounds (ie the first 26) but then they don't go on to teach the digraphs. I've even become a governor to see if I can make any difference - though I realise I need to tread carefully.

User avatar
Debbie Hepplewhite
Posts: 3664
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Berkshire

Post by Debbie Hepplewhite » Sun Jan 21, 2007 11:10 pm

But learning to read well is pretty important.

Those beginning stages fly by so quickly. :(

Posts: 221
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 2:43 pm
Location: Herts

Post by Anna » Wed Jan 31, 2007 1:50 pm

I just wanted to thank you all again for your replies. It has been really useful. Many thanks Maizie and Susan for those links. I printed of the Sounds-Write article and have read it all through. It is particulary relevant to me as I also use the Parallel spelling tests.

I usually just do a passage reading test - The NFER Nelson ones when I assess pupils but am going to add Burt now too.


Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 66 guests