Teaching reading without a program

[Oakblossoms]

Anyone teach reading without a program? I've tried several programs with all my boys. None have learned to read early. I was reading through Charlotte Mason Volume 1 and it just sounds so easy to teach reading her way.

 

My two oldest ended up in ps. They both came home in 1st grade and honestly neither could read. They had memorized a lot but couldn't really read. They both ended up teaching themselves to read.

 

My 6 year old is struggling to read. He forgets each lesson. We have tried Phonics Pathways and OPGTR. We have alway read a lot of rich literature. We play lots of games. We limit TV and games.

 

We seem to do all the right stuff and yet they have all struggled. I'm frustrated and just want to give up. My 9 year old took of in reading last year after I gave up.

 

It's frustrating because I learned to read before school started. No one had to teach me. My mom just answered my questions from time to time. I was reading High School level books in grade school with no problems.

[gardening momma]

My 6 year old is struggling to read. He forgets each lesson. We have tried Phonics Pathways and OPGTR. We have alway read a lot of rich literature.

Just curious...how far into Phonics Pathways and OPGTR did you go?

[Chris in VA]

Could just be maturational.

Can he read CVC words? I'd just let him practice a bunch and wait for his brain to catch up to his interest.

[Ester Maria]

I taught my daughters to read without a program, though it was more as in your case - I think they learned more to read on their own than they were actually taught by me. I had also learned to read that way as a child, so it wasn't new to me.

 

I can't really pinpoint what I was doing with them, they just seem to have picked it on their own. A HUGE aid, though, was that they learned to read Italian first, which is a rather phonetic language with far more logical spelling, so they started reading English already familiar with the letters/sounds, and just having to apply a somewhat different "logic" of reading (at first they intuitively read it like they'd read Italian, it was so sweet :D - then they figured out how to phonetically "adjust" the word to make it "fit" and sound like something they've heard in English, and then taking care that it "fits" the broader context; after that they mostly figured out how the English spelling works through constant exposure).

 

I honestly have no idea how I would have handled having to actually teach reading and spelling English first. I kind of admire your kids, I think it's so much easier to start to read a "regular" language first and then move onto English, than to jump into English right away. It's always easier to master a "simpler" logic first and break the ice, then a more complex one.

[JennW in SoCal]

Neither of my boys was reading until they were at least 7. I played games with magnet letters forming CVC words with short vowel sounds. I used simple CVC readers, I read aloud and pointed out simple words and sounded them out slowly. But it didn't make them early readers. Their brains simply weren't ready to make the necessary connections. But, they both became advanced readers very quickly once they got going.

 

Once they had the basics, each became fluent by reading what caught their fancy. The oldest started reading the Brady game guides for the Play Station game, Crash Bandicoot -- I kid you not! He always has preferred non-fiction. The youngest was obsessed with joke books when he first learned to read, and would study them and memorize them so he could regale us with bad knock-knock jokes.

 

Don't get me wrong -- they always have been surrounded by good literature, whether through read alouds or assigned reading in the later grades, but it was these odd things that got them over the initial reading hump!

 

So, surround them with good reading material, and with whatever catches their fancy and keep up with the gentle instruction. It will catch on when their brains are ready. And in a few months if you still have a nagging sense that there is something wrong, get them tested for eye issues or dyslexia.

[Julie in Austin]

I've done Phonics Pathways with two boys and it seemed with both that we plodded along for months with little real progress and then it was lightbulb time and . . . boom! They could read.

[Tap]

We started this way when ds was 4yo. He seemed to just 'get' reading but it quickly turned south as I didn't have a good foundation in phonics or linguistics to enlist help from. Like why does for, four and fore all sound the same but mar and mare sound different. Ds likes explanations for things. It was hard to keep a flow going reading traditional books when I couldn't say why we have through, threw and thru but also have read and read, spelled the same with different meanings, and also reed.

 

I liked the structure that reading programs offered, the selected phonetic readers, the introduction of why sounds sound like the do, and the lists of unusual words like homophones, so they could be discussed before the lesson not during.

 

I do think that with careful choosing a child could be taught using a series like BOB books and throwing in some Explode the Code, just to round out the writing part and just piecing together some things as needed.

 

Personally dd used Phonics Museum in K4 learn to read and she loved it. It is way to expensive but it was just what she needed. Ds was in ps school and finished learning to read in K, with a teacher teaching phonics aka 100 Easy Lessons style.

[Miss Peregrine]

I have not taught any of my kids to read. After watching my first DD learn by herself at 2.5 years, I tested my theory(they can teach themselves) out on the next three. It has worked every time. None of the others learned that early. They were 5, 5, and 6.

[Brindee]

My oldest taught himself at 4 with no program. My youngest we started using a reading program with, but it just frustrated her, so we let it go. She soon picked up on it on her own, and at 6 was reading from "The Bible Story" books with barely a problem. Our middle guy just wasn't interested. We always read a lot to the kids, and he was fine listening in, just not reading himself. He was 7 before the lightbulb went off and suddenly he could read very well! It was funny to see this scrawny little 7yo reading the sports statistics from the newpaper to his dad! :D

 

I wouldn't be discouraged. Sometimes they're just not ready yet. Doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the child OR you, it's just that things in their brain haven't connected yet, and that often happens later in boys! But listen, once they read, they usually really can read! My kids started reading at different ages, but none of them read any worse or any better than the others. They all read a lot and do well at it, and I think yours will to!

 

Just continue read-alouds with them, and make reading fun, not stressful!

 

(This info. is assuming you've had their eyes and the possibilities of any LD's checked out)

[Oakblossoms]

Well, everyone made me feel much better. That is how it was with the older two. They just plodded along and could only read what their teachers taught them. But, they didn't seem to comprehend anything or be able to do anything new. One day they could and they both have taken off and read well.

 

We can't get very far in Phonics Pathways (he hated OPGTR) because nothing sticks. We pick it up the next day and he doesn't remember sounds of letters. We read a Bob Book one day and he can't read it again in a few days.

 

He loves to tell me words and have me write them. He loves to copy the words I write on the white board. He notices words on signs or boxes and tries to guess what they say.

[ElizabethB]

You can't beat Talking Letter Factory DVD for teaching the sounds of the letters, there is a lot of repetition.

 

And, you need a lot of repetition before the blending and other sounds are learned, too, some students more than others.

 

I find that spelling is something many students can do easier than blending, and helps cement the blending that they're learning in their brain.

 

It's also easiest to start with 2 letter blends and really over-learn those before you move on. That's why I like Webster's Speller, that's how it works. (Designed by a genius who wrote a dictionary and taught actual students in one-room schools, so it makes sense that it works well and is designed for hos students learn and how our language is structured! I didn't realize how accent dependent English was until I started using it.)

[tdeveson]

A They both came home in 1st grade and honestly neither could read.

A lot of kids are not ready to read in first grade and there's nothing you can do about it. They invariably catch up just as soon as they're ready.

 

My oldest daughter learned to read on my mother's Bible. By the time she started school, she was very literate. My son, on the other hand, could barely read in second grade. Now, in fifth grade, he reads at 6.5 level.

 

And yes, you can teach a child to read without any program. Don't forget that only in the past 100 years or so have there been formal programs. For the other five or six thousand years people learned without.

[Reya]

I did--and I regretted it. Even though I used a phonics-based approach (very much like the one outline in TWTM), it was insufficient for DS, and I had to go back and remediate with a formal program. HOWEVER, dyslexia runs in my family.

[ElizabethB]

Don't forget that only in the past 100 years or so have there been formal programs. For the other five or six thousand years people learned without.

 

Actually, they have had formal methods for much longer than that. They generally used syllables--I've found it a method of phonics that is much more effective than those commonly used today.

 

Quintillian described how reading was taught in his Institutio Oratoria written around 50 AD,

 

For learning syllables there is no short way; they must all be learned throughout, nor are the most difficult of them, as is the general practice, to be postponed, that children may be at at a loss, forsooth, in writing words. Moreover, we must not even trust to the first learning by heart; it will be better to have syllables repeated, and to impress them long upon the memory; and in reading, too, not to hurry on, in order to make it continuous or quick, until the clear and certain connection of the letters become familiar, without at least any necessity to stop for recollection. Let the pupil then begin to form words from syllables, and to join phrases together from words. It is incredible how much retardation is caused to reading by haste; for hence arise hesitation, interruption, and repetition, as children attempt more than they can manage, and then, after making mistakes, they become distrustful even of what they know. Let reading, therefore, be at first sure, then continuous, and for a long time slow, until by exercise a correct quickness is gained.

 

Waxed Tablets, Primers, Hornbooks and Spellers are all older ways that reading was taught.

 

I'm currently using Webster's Speller to teach reading and spelling, it was first developed in 1783, although the version I use is from 1824!

Edited August 13, 2009 by ElizabethB

[gardening momma]

We can't get very far in Phonics Pathways (he hated OPGTR) because nothing sticks. We pick it up the next day and he doesn't remember sounds of letters. We read a Bob Book one day and he can't read it again in a few days.

I have never seen Phonics Pathways or OPGTR, so I have no idea how they're set up, or how many times they are given the letter sounds. In 100 EZ Lessons, we're more than 60% of the way through and it still has us review several individual letter sounds in each lesson. Almost as if they're saying, we know you'll forget this if you only go over it a few times, so we'll do it dozens of times so you'll remember.

[hsmom3tn]

I taught all 3 of my kids how to read without using any sort of program. DS learned at 4-5 years old, and the girls at 5-6 years old. First I taught them the alphabet, then taught them the individual letter sounds, then taught them how to put the sounds together (we also spent a little time on the blends and digraphs), and then we started going over sight words. There are tons of free resources on the internet for sight words, or you can go to a local teacher store and buy a few workbooks.

 

There are lots of fun games available, too. Flash cards are good, but can be boring, so mix it up by adding a few games and videos. I used to put in a video (their favorite was Richard Scarry's Best Learning Video, but the Leap Frog videos are great, too) for them as they went to sleep and it was like their brains soaked it up while they slept, LOL.

 

I read to them a lot, and we listened to a lot of audio books - still do. If you can let them listen to an audio recording (or you reading it) and look at the words in the book at the same time, that is also helpful. There are a lot of picture books available on CD now.

 

It takes lots and lots of practice and persistence.

 

Maybe you should look into the whole language approach??? There is a big debate over which is better - whole language or phonics - but I think a little of both is a good way to go. In the beginning, a lot of what we did was just memorizing, but later on they needed a little more phonics instruction to help with their spelling. I wanted them to learn to read as quickly as possible so that they could do more of their work on their own, so this worked well for us.

[Unicorn.]

Mine all learned to read w/out a program. We read to them alot, we read books w/ abc's, and at first some of it was probably memorizing words, but I taught them to sound words out- But we just did it naturally, nothing was forced or felt like learning/teaching- does that make sense? We pointed out letters/numbers on signs, and asked them what they were, etc. We just had fun! Ditch the programs and go read some Dr. Suess! :0)

[funschooler5]

I taught my first two kids with no program. I just used magnetic letters. After they knew the alphabet, I taught them the sounds of the letters (starting with the short sounds). I would just spell out short words and have them sound them out, then they would make long nonsense words for me to sound out (they thought this was hilarious). These lessons were just a few times a week, probably 15-20 minutes at a time. Eventually, it just clicked, and they started reading short words. After that I'd teach them the long sounds, the double letter sounds (ee, oo, etc) and throw in some sight words on some homemade flash cards. After that, they just took off on their own. Now, my DD started learning this way when she was 2 and was reading well at 3. She's starting 6th grade and reads at a 12.9 grade level. DS started at age 4, reading fluently at 5 and is reading at a 5th-6th grade level.

 

My youngest DD (age 4) has been learning like this for awhile. She knows most of her letter sounds, but hasn't totally made the connection yet. I checked out Phonics Pathways out of the library out of curiosity, and we did a little out of that. She seems to like it, but I don't know how far we'll go with it because she enjoys the magnetic letters a lot more.

[keptwoman]

I'm teaching DD without a program. Well I'm using bits of this and bits of that, some Jolly Phonics workbooks to learn the sounds and a basic set of readers, but it's all very casual and child-led. I wanted to make sure she learnt phonetically rather than whole word, hence I am doing bits and pieces.

Her learning comes in fits and starts which is fine by me.

[maryhob]

There are some really wonderful programs out there but it may be that for now he just needs to enjoy some simple things like say making some modeling clay letters and talk about the sounds that it symbolizes. Then play with putting the clay letters and sounds together. Try not to stress, some kids are early with reading and some are 3rd grade+ before they put it together.

 

I knew a woman years ago that was from Germany and she told our homeschool group that in Germany they did not start teaching the alphabet until 2nd grade-we were shocked! We asked her what they did in 1st grade and she replied that the read them stories and did fun art and science type projects. Apparently the philosophy was that since kids were not all ready to read at the same age and most couldn't "read to learn" even if they could read, they focused on the stuff that benefited everyone. Once they hit 3rd grade they were able to learn without much ado. Also, she said they went to school only in the morning (but also Saturdays). So it's interesting because despite the fact that Germany has out-ranked us we have been doing the complete opposite in our country.

[ElizabethB]

You might try the "I See Sam" books or Webster's Speller. Both are well designed for young children.

 

Also, my phonics concentration game:

 

http://www.thephonicspage.org/On%20Phonics/concentrationgam.html

 

Whatever you do, I would not teach too many sight words. I've found that in schools that teach the Dolch sight words, 30 to 40% of the children need to be remediated. I have not yet found a student who was taught with a good phonics method with few sight words that needs to be remediated (but, only 50 students were in that category of the hundreds total that I've assessed their reading grade levels.)

 

My informal percentages match up with what research says about teaching with good phonics methods instead of the commonly taught sight word/phonics mix.

 

Here is a quote from Sally Shaywitz's "Overcoming Dyslexia, A New and Complete Science-Based Program for Reading Problems at Any Level" p. 261:

 

"In one Tallahassee, Florida, elementary school where such a program [scientifically proven prevention and early intervention programs] was implemented, the percentage of struggling readers dropped eightfold--from 31.8 percent to 3.7 percent."

[NavyWifeandMommy]

I am at the beginning of teaching my younger two to read. When I pull out the 100 EZ lessons my youngest whines and my middle one says he knows it and won't say the sounds. So the book is on the shelf.

I am now using magnet letters on the fridge or on a mini dry erase board, flash cards from letters, phonics, rhyming and three letter words. I unpacked the board books and started reading those to them and I have boughten some level books. I have gone to enchantedlearning and homeschool share for some activities.

School is now more enjoyable and they look forward to their phonics/reading time.

My oldest came home not reading well after attending a full year of K and a month of 1st grade. I used a little bit of OPGTR and the phonic books from the library and store. I honestly couldn't tell you how they taught her in K. She use to bring home little stacks of cards with words on them to learn each week and they went with a book that the teacher read to them.

[CookieMonster]

We can't get very far in Phonics Pathways (he hated OPGTR) because nothing sticks. We pick it up the next day and he doesn't remember sounds of letters. We read a Bob Book one day and he can't read it again in a few days.

 

So have you backed up and redone lessons for overall review?

 

I have used OPGTR with my son, and I have found, just 100 lessons in to the primer, on three separate occasions that I needed to back up and redo lessons.

 

The first occasion was shortly after learning all the sounds of the letters. He knew all the sounds of the letters fairly well (he still needed help and repetition with vowels sounds - he liked to interchance i and e.). We tried moving on to sounding out consonant-vowel-consonant-words. I tried for longer than I should have because I wanted him to move on so badly. But, he just wasn't ready. So, first I took a short break. After about a week of backing off reading altogether, I started trying to casually sound out CVC words for him. I would put a word on the fridge with magnetic letters and show him how to sound it out (cccc-aaaa-tttt). We watched Word World and I pointed out when they were sounding out CVC words. And we just continued to practice the sounds of the letters.

 

After a couple of months (3 maybe?) he started to show signs of being able to sound out CVC words. Hoping I wasn't wrong, I started back in on Lesson 27. It was slow going at first. I had to help him sound out a lot of words. But I tried to remain positive. The pace gradually picked up. He got CVC words without too much trouble. But, when we moved on to the next thing, we had to again step back and review. I think I backed up about 20 lessons and just redid them like they were new for the first time. It worked.

 

Later on in the program we had to back up again. I know I backed up about 20 lessons. Doing that, and then taking a two month break is all it took. He's now doing well again with reading.

 

I guess I said all of that to encourage you to back up, review, reteach, and continue to practice.

 

You know, I know I wrote about these struggles on my blog. I'll look up the posts and get back to you.

 

Here are the links:

 

My first decision to slow down - I thought it would take a week to 'get on track'. I didn't try reading CVC words again for 3 months. Ha!

Deciding to review CVC words

Review week for CVC words

I backed up just one week's worth of lessons here

Notes on most recent review period

 

There actually were a couple more, but not as relevant. Just this list of links alone reminds me of how important it is to review when teaching reading. I think with my next child, I'll use Explode the Code in conjunction with OPGTR so that their is built in review.

Edited August 14, 2009 by CookieMonster
added links

[Guest Virginia Dawn]

When it was time to teach my 3rd son to read, we got about 1/3 of the way through 100 Easy Lessons when things came to a screeching halt. He hated the fact that he could not just pick up any book and read it. He was especially anxious to be able to read Harry Potter and the Sorceror's stone.

 

So I started the Hogwart's Reading Academy. We labored through HP one sentence at a time the first couple of months. Every day I would read one sentence the 100 Easy Lessons way: sounding each letter out, saying the word fast, then going back and reading the whole sentence. Then it would be his turn on the next sentence with me prompting for sounds that he had not learned yet.

 

It was very tedious to me, but he was so happy. In a couple of months, we were able to progress to paragraphs at a time. By the end of the year, we were each reading a whole page during reading practice.

 

To help things along I also printed out lists of sight words off the internet. We practiced with those (I called it spelling) and with phonics flash cards too.

 

I imagine this could be done with any book a child is interested in.

[Garga]

When it was time to teach my 3rd son to read, we got about 1/3 of the way through 100 Easy Lessons when things came to a screeching halt. He hated the fact that he could not just pick up any book and read it. He was especially anxious to be able to read Harry Potter and the Sorceror's stone.

 

So I started the Hogwart's Reading Academy. We labored through HP one sentence at a time the first couple of months. Every day I would read one sentence the 100 Easy Lessons way: sounding each letter out, saying the word fast, then going back and reading the whole sentence. Then it would be his turn on the next sentence with me prompting for sounds that he had not learned yet.

 

It was very tedious to me, but he was so happy. In a couple of months, we were able to progress to paragraphs at a time. By the end of the year, we were each reading a whole page during reading practice.

 

To help things along I also printed out lists of sight words off the internet. We practiced with those (I called it spelling) and with phonics flash cards too.

 

I imagine this could be done with any book a child is interested in.

 

Hmm. Maybe this will work for us.... I really like this post.

[Matryoshka]

Well, I didn't skip a program entirely, but what I used is vastly different from your standard phonics program.

 

I just read Reading Reflex. Then there are games you do orally, and with letter tiles and a white board. There is no memorizing rules or exceptions or worrying about things like "silent letters" that are lurking in the words but for some reason should be ignored. However, it is completely phonetic - there is no teaching sight words - more words can be decoded phonetically with this method than with the standard rules-and-a-million-exceptions-based phonics. Reading Reflex taught me how to teach reading. After that I could answer their questions on the fly with confidence.

 

After the "basic code", Reading Reflex has less instruction to the parent as far as what to do - ABeCeDarian uses the same methodology but has workbooks. I liked just using the white board for the basic code, but I think I would have appreciated the workbooks for the advanced code.

 

Reading Reflex costs $16 or can be gotten from many libraries. You don't need anything but the book.

[stripe]

It's even cheaper when purchased used. Many cheap copies floating around.

[skaterbabs]

Let them watch "Between the Lions" and the Leapfrog DVDs and play on www.starfall.com . That's what dot used to teach herself to read.

Edited August 16, 2009 by skaterbabs