how to use phonograms to pronounce these words?

[poetic license]

I'm a little confused as to how to pronounce these words using phonograms--

 

one

 

two

 

suite (the "ui")

 

For "family" and "baby" Spalding lists the "y" as a short "i" sound....am I understanding this correctly? We just end up pronouncing it as a long "e"?

 

Using a strictly phonogram-only system (like Spalding) are there any words that are truly "sight words?" My daughter is in first grade and so she's getting all of the sight-word lists sent home. I'm wondering if there are any true exceptions. 

[FO4UR]

One and two are exceptions.

 

One is taught with lone, alone, lonely.  Even though we don't pronounce it properly, it makes sense in terms of morpheme.

 

Two is taught with twice and twin.

 

There are more exceptions (of), but they are few.

 

 

I teach 4 sounds of Y.

 

yes  (at the beginning of a word)

 

gym  (in the middle of a word)

 

cry  (at the end of short words)

 

happy  (at the end of long words)

 

 

 

There are places where Spalding just stops making sense to me. I don't fight it. I just teach what helps my kids read and spell.

 

 

 

[Ellie]

I'm a little confused as to how to pronounce these words using phonograms--

 

one

 

two

 

suite (the "ui")

 

For "family" and "baby" Spalding lists the "y" as a short "i" sound....am I understanding this correctly? We just end up pronouncing it as a long "e"?

 

Using a strictly phonogram-only system (like Spalding) are there any words that are truly "sight words?" My daughter is in first grade and so she's getting all of the sight-word lists sent home. I'm wondering if there are any true exceptions. 

 

Spalding teaches "one" and "two" as sight words. "one" is spelled out--o n e, "two" is pronounced for spelling: t-w-oo, with the "w" underlined twice to show that it is not its normal sound (it has none at all in this word).

 

Yes, historically, "y" has been interchangeable with "i." For spelling purposes, Spalding teaches the "i" sound so that children will write "y", not "e." In the spelling lesson, we can pronounce it both ways: once for spelling, with the "i" sound, and once for speaking, with the "ee" sound. Children have way less trouble with this concept than we parents do, lol.

 

There are very few words with are truly sight words.

[Ellie]

'of' follows rules (English words cannot end in a v, so the f is used), and one and two are actual sight words as mentioned above. There are almost none, which make remembering them easier for the kiddos.

 

As for suite, it has two pronunciations, and the technical vowel sounds available would allow for the correct pronunciation, even though we don't cleanly pronounce it in day to day usage. I just pronounce things correctly or phonetically and my kids have picked up things like the schwa and regional peculiarities in our pronunciation quite easily on their own.

 

Alas, I must disagree with you. :-)

 

"Of" does not follow the rule that English words do not end with "v." It is a sight word; We underline the "f" twice to show that it does not have its usual pronunciation. We say "of" for spelling, and "ov" for reading. 

 

If I were teaching the word "suite," which does not appear in the Extended Ayres List, I would have the dc underline "ui" twice, since it does not say either of its most common sounds, and underline the "e" with a subscript 5 as a no-job e. We would have the discussion about its being a French word, not an English word, so that its phonics and spelling are different. And I would point out to the dc that it is properly pronounced "sweet," not the same as "suit." :-)                                                                                                                                                                                    

[Rod Everson]

I'm a little confused as to how to pronounce these words using phonograms--

 

one

 

two

 

suite (the "ui")

 

For "family" and "baby" Spalding lists the "y" as a short "i" sound....am I understanding this correctly? We just end up pronouncing it as a long "e"?

 

Using a strictly phonogram-only system (like Spalding) are there any words that are truly "sight words?" My daughter is in first grade and so she's getting all of the sight-word lists sent home. I'm wondering if there are any true exceptions. 

 

Some suggestions that you can take or leave:

 

1. As you can see there's a debate about the letter "y". I've covered in in depth at The Easiest Change if you want to read it.

 

2. There are no true sight words. Virtually every word has some phonics content. However, as your examples illustrate, some words also include some letters that add nothing to the phonic content, or more likely, confuse the phonics. My suggestion is to use the double-underline to mark the confusing content and to add, under the double-underline, any explanation that might be useful.

 

Thus, "two" has the "w" double-underlined with nothing under the lines, indicating that it is not pronounced and that it's also not part of a phonogram that is pronounced. The words "sword" and "answer" are treated similarly, by the way. incidentally, any letter double-underlined with nothing noted under the lines has to be remembered for spelling because there's no phonics cue present.

 

The word "of" has the "f" double-underlined, but in addition it has a "v" written under the "f" indicating that it's a letter that represents an unusual sound for that letter, i.e., a sound that should not normally be associated with that letter (or digraph.) Another example would be a word like "height" where the "eigh" is double-underlined and an "ie" written under it to show that it's pronounced with an /ie/ sound instead of the normal /ae/ sound for that phonogram. 

 

3. Some of the trickier ones:

 

"one": I treat the "ne" in none and done (and a lot of longer words, like "vaccine" for example, as a digraph (phonogram) for the /n/ sound at the end of words. Ditto for the "me" in some and come, etc., and the "te" in waste and suite.

 

Now, "one" is composed of /w/o/n/, so what about the /w/ sound. My approach is to draw a double-underline under the space before the word and put a "w" under the double-underline. Ditto for "once". Having done that, you can compare "one" with "none" and "done". "One" and "once" are the only words I'm aware of where we pronounce a sound in a word, but there is no phonogram appearing there.

 

"suite": If you pronounce it "suit" as some do, it's easy because "ui" is the /oo/ sound in other words (fruit juice) and the "te" is the /t/ sound in many words as well. So just underline "ui" as a phonogram for /oo/ and "te" as an ending phonogram for /t/. However, if you pronounce it "sweet" it's more complicated. I can't come up with more examples at the moment, but the letter "u" has, as one pronunciation, the /oo/ sound. This happens to also be the pronunciation of the letter "w" if you try it out. Read "sweet" out loud and you'll be saying /s/oo/ee/t/, but you're saying the /oo/ quickly as a consonant, rather than loudly as a vowel (compare "suet" where you say two syllables, accenting the /oo/.) My choice is to double-underline the "u" in "suite" and place a "w" under it, then wait until much later (if at all) to explain the similarity between /w/ and /oo/, maybe after the situation has come up a couple of times in multisyllable words.

 

This is getting way too long because it's an area of interest of mine. The main point is to be consistent and to figure out an easy way to indicate the phonograms that are not pronounced normally in a particular word. I reserve the double-underline exclusively for that purpose and the single underline exclusively for phonograms with more than one letter. If I find I've double underlined the same phonogram more than two or three times, placing the same correction under it each time, I then reconsider whether it should be taught as an accepted sound for that phonogram instead of an exception.

[ElizabethB]

Here is how to teach all but 5 of the 220 Dolch words phonetically:

 

http://www.thephonicspage.org/On%20Reading/sightwords.html

[Korrale]

Some suggestions that you can take or leave:

 

1. As you can see there's a debate about the letter "y". I've covered in in depth at The Easiest Change if you want to read it.

 

2. There are no true sight words. Virtually every word has some phonics content. However, as your examples illustrate, some words also include some letters that add nothing to the phonic content, or more likely, confuse the phonics. My suggestion is to use the double-underline to mark the confusing content and to add, under the double-underline, any explanation that might be useful.

 

Thus, "two" has the "w" double-underlined with nothing under the lines, indicating that it is not pronounced and that it's also not part of a phonogram that is pronounced. The words "sword" and "answer" are treated similarly, by the way. incidentally, any letter double-underlined with nothing noted under the lines has to be remembered for spelling because there's no phonics cue present.

 

The word "of" has the "f" double-underlined, but in addition it has a "v" written under the "f" indicating that it's a letter that represents an unusual sound for that letter, i.e., a sound that should not normally be associated with that letter (or digraph.) Another example would be a word like "height" where the "eigh" is double-underlined and an "ie" written under it to show that it's pronounced with an /ie/ sound instead of the normal /ae/ sound for that phonogram.

 

3. Some of the trickier ones:

 

"one": I treat the "ne" in none and done (and a lot of longer words, like "vaccine" for example, as a digraph (phonogram) for the /n/ sound at the end of words. Ditto for the "me" in some and come, etc., and the "te" in waste and suite.

 

Now, "one" is composed of /w/o/n/, so what about the /w/ sound. My approach is to draw a double-underline under the space before the word and put a "w" under the double-underline. Ditto for "once". Having done that, you can compare "one" with "none" and "done". "One" and "once" are the only words I'm aware of where we pronounce a sound in a word, but there is no phonogram appearing there.

 

"suite": If you pronounce it "suit" as some do, it's easy because "ui" is the /oo/ sound in other words (fruit juice) and the "te" is the /t/ sound in many words as well. So just underline "ui" as a phonogram for /oo/ and "te" as an ending phonogram for /t/. However, if you pronounce it "sweet" it's more complicated. I can't come up with more examples at the moment, but the letter "u" has, as one pronunciation, the /oo/ sound. This happens to also be the pronunciation of the letter "w" if you try it out. Read "sweet" out loud and you'll be saying /s/oo/ee/t/, but you're saying the /oo/ quickly as a consonant, rather than loudly as a vowel (compare "suet" where you say two syllables, accenting the /oo/.) My choice is to double-underline the "u" in "suite" and place a "w" under it, then wait until much later (if at all) to explain the similarity between /w/ and /oo/, maybe after the situation has come up a couple of times in multisyllable words.

 

This is getting way too long because it's an area of interest of mine. The main point is to be consistent and to figure out an easy way to indicate the phonograms that are not pronounced normally in a particular word. I reserve the double-underline exclusively for that purpose and the single underline exclusively for phonograms with more than one letter. If I find I've double underlined the same phonogram more than two or three times, placing the same correction under it each time, I then reconsider whether it should be taught as an accepted sound for that phonogram instead of an exception.

Maybe I am wrong but isn't suite a recently borrowed French word that didn't alter much? I don't speak French so I am not sure how it is pronounced in French.

[Rod Everson]

Maybe I am wrong but isn't suite a recently borrowed French word that didn't alter much? I don't speak French so I am not sure how it is pronounced in French.

 

I'm pretty sure it's pronounced sweet in French. 

 

But in some parts of the U.S. people pronounce it like our "suit." I've always heard it pronounced "sweet" in the north and used in terms of furniture, like a bedroom suite, for example. 

 

As for it being recently borrowed, it's been used in English for decades at least, and probably much longer. It's true though that a lot of the words where the letter "i" represents the /ee/ sound were borrowed from other languages, like confetti and spaghetti.

[Ellie]

I'm pretty sure it's pronounced sweet in French. 

 

But in some parts of the U.S. people pronounce it like our "suit." I've always heard it pronounced "sweet" in the north and used in terms of furniture, like a bedroom suite, for example. 

 

As for it being recently borrowed, it's been used in English for decades at least, and probably much longer. It's true though that a lot of the words where the letter "i" represents the /ee/ sound were borrowed from other languages, like confetti and spaghetti.

 

Yes, people mispronounce it, I guess because they are unaware of how it *should* be said. It is a bedroom "sweet," not a bedroom "suit."

[Chris in VA]

Yes, people mispronounce it, I guess because they are unaware of how it *should* be said. It is a bedroom "sweet," not a bedroom "suit."

 

Thank you. Pet peeve of mine.

 

Of course, now we need a poll... :laugh:

[Matryoshka]

I'm a little confused as to how to pronounce these words using phonograms--

 

one

 

two

 

suite (the "ui")

 

For "family" and "baby" Spalding lists the "y" as a short "i" sound....am I understanding this correctly? We just end up pronouncing it as a long "e"?

 

Using a strictly phonogram-only system (like Spalding) are there any words that are truly "sight words?" My daughter is in first grade and so she's getting all of the sight-word lists sent home. I'm wondering if there are any true exceptions. 

 

"one" and "once" are two words I really have a hard time coming up with any excuse for!

 

For the other two, I'd break out the etymology.  Etymology explains tons of 'weird' spelling in English, and I just told my kids that from the start.

 

"Two" probably used to be pronounced "Tvoo" or "Tw-oo".  (See related German 'zwei', Dutch 'twee', Swedish tvÃ¥, for example).  I find it easier to remember when I know where the 'extra' letters come from.

 

"Suite" is a French word, still spelled and pronounced like the French original.  It's completely phonetic in French.

 

[poetic license]

Thanks for all the input--this is really helpful. Also, those adjustments to the Spalding phonograms from the link above make a lot of sense--i was having trouble justifying the short "i" sound in some of those cases.

 

[poetic license]

What about the word "there"? Is it a short "e" sound? I pronounce the "e" as "ay" but is it just sounded with the short e? Also the silent e here--it's a no job e, right?

[Ellie]

What about the word "there"? Is it a short "e" sound? I pronounce the "e" as "ay" but is it just sounded with the short e? Also the silent e here--it's a no job e, right?

 

Spalding underlines the "th," does not underline "e" and "r," and underlines the no-job-e twice with a subscript 5 to indicate its job. There's also a 1 over the "e" to show that it is not the phonogram "er." It isn't really pronounced "ay," but that might be your accent. :-)

[Rod Everson]

What about the word "there"? Is it a short "e" sound? I pronounce the "e" as "ay" but is it just sounded with the short e? Also the silent e here--it's a no job e, right?

 

Here's my personal test for whether or not to include an /err/ sound in a local curriculum: "Marry merry Mary."

 

If your local dialect clearly differentiates all three words (by using a short-a for "marry", a short-e for "merry" and a long-a for "Mary" then those spellings are unlikely to cause a lot of confusion. In that case, "where" and "there" are likely to be sounded with a short-e sound.

 

However, you're claiming there has a long-a sound, so I suspect that you, like in my case, hear "marry merry Mary" as homonyms, all sounding the same. If that's the case, I recommend teaching an /err/ sound (pronounced "air") for the following spellings:

 

ere, there, where, and derivatives of the last two like somewhere, therefore, etc. 

 

Words with "err" like cherry, merry, terrible, etc. 

 

Words with the digraph "er" like very, merit, and perish (the /err/ sound becomes the second sound for the digraph "er" as in her, very)

 

Words with the digraph "ar" like vary, Mary, and parent (the /err/ sound becomes the fourth sound for the digraph "ar" as in car, war, collar, parent) 

 

Words with "arr" like marry, Larry, and arrow.

 

Thus, ere, err, and arr are all pronounced /err/ on the first attempt and the digraphs "er" and "ar" have the /err/ options added to them.

 

However, I found it unnecessary to teach ear (bear), air (chair), eir (their) and are (share) as spellings of the /err/ sound because I've never had a child who couldn't decode these by trying the long-a sound for ea, ai, ei, and a_e respectively, as they are taught to do. In the case of "ea" it's the 3rd option after trying /ee/ (teach) and /e/ (head) first and second respectively. Similarly, "ei" is taught as having a 1st option of /ee/ (receive) and a 2nd option of /ae/ (vein).

 

I would add that the /err/ sound is the last sound that is covered in my workbook. It's there for use where it works, as in our area.

[Matryoshka]

Here's my personal test for whether or not to include an /err/ sound in a local curriculum: "Marry merry Mary."

 

If your local dialect clearly differentiates all three words (by using a short-a for "marry", a short-e for "merry" and a long-a for "Mary" then those spellings are unlikely to cause a lot of confusion. In that case, "where" and "there" are likely to be sounded with a short-e sound.

 

However, you're claiming there has a long-a sound, so I suspect that you, like in my case, hear "marry merry Mary" as homonyms, all sounding the same. If that's the case, I recommend teaching an /err/ sound (pronounced "air") for the following spellings:

 

 

I happen to live in what is apparently the very tiny slice of America where marry/merry/Mary are all pronounced completely differently (in just the way you explain).  But there/where is indeed pronounced with a long A here - they both rhyme with air and bear and mare (like Mary, which is long A mare-ee, not with short-e merry.).

 

I can't imagine how I could even get my mouth to pronounce them with a short-e?  I can pronounce merry with a short e because the accent is on the first syllable - meh-ree - and the short e is separated from the 'r'.  There's only one syllable in 'there', so I just can't do it...  and I've never heard anyone else here pronounce it any other way than with long A...? :confused1:

 

Aren't 'there' and 'they're' homonyms?  They is pronounced with long A for the 'ey', no?

 

The only other regional pronunciation of there I can think of is when I think of some Southern dialects saying 'thar' for there?  But that's not short-e either, it would rhyme with 'car', no? 

[Matryoshka]

Words with "err" like cherry, merry, terrible, etc. 

 

Words with the digraph "er" like very, merit, and perish (the /err/ sound becomes the second sound for the digraph "er" as in her, very)

 

Just have to comment further, as I find this fascinating... ;)  All of those rhyme to me (with short-e berry), except for 'her'.  Again, can't say a short -e followed by an r without separate syllables.  So her rhymes with burr.

 

Words with the digraph "ar" like vary, Mary, and parent (the /err/ sound becomes the fourth sound for the digraph "ar" as in car, war, collar, parent) 

 

Gah, wait - those are mostly different sounds to me!  Mary has a long-A, car rhymes with pirate "Arr!", war rhymes with wore, the 'ar' in 'collar' again is more like 'ur' ('cause unstressed syllable schwa??), and parent has a short-a - pah-rent

 

Words with "arr" like marry, Larry, and arrow.

 

These are short-a.  Like parent.

 

:)

 

[boscopup]

And this discussion is exactly why I've left Spalding and its spinoffs for my just turned 8 year old. It's confusing enough for an adult brain. :lol: I just tell my kid what it says, he begins to recognize the pattern in whatever way works for his brain and what he hears, and it's all good. I can't imagine trying to explain the origins of various words to the average 6 year old. This stuff way overcomplicates things for my slower to learn reader (I usually call him struggling, but since I abandoned overcomplicated methods, he has improved by leaps and bounds, so while he's slower than his brothers, he's reading pretty well now).

[kiwik]

It seems an awfully.complicated process.

[OneStepAtATime]

For some kids breaking things down into this much detail is an overly confusing nightmare.  And completely unnecessary.  For others it is the only way to truly unlock accurate decoding and fluency in reading, (such as with many children with dyslexia) but it can be a hard slog forward in the early years.  Just depends on the kid.

 

Good luck OP.

[poetic license]

And this discussion is exactly why I've left Spalding and its spinoffs for my just turned 8 year old. It's confusing enough for an adult brain. :lol: I just tell my kid what it says, he begins to recognize the pattern in whatever way works for his brain and what he hears, and it's all good. I can't imagine trying to explain the origins of various words to the average 6 year old. This stuff way overcomplicates things for my slower to learn reader (I usually call him struggling, but since I abandoned overcomplicated methods, he has improved by leaps and bounds, so while he's slower than his brothers, he's reading pretty well now).

 

That's how I'm feeling like right now. We got to a great start with the phonograms, but there are definitely times where I feel like it's a bit of a stretch with some words. What do you use for reading and spelling for your 6 year old? 

 

For some kids breaking things down into this much detail is an overly confusing nightmare.  And completely unnecessary.  For others it is the only way to truly unlock accurate decoding and fluency in reading, (such as with many children with dyslexia) but it can be a hard slog forward in the early years.  Just depends on the kid.

 

Good luck OP.

 

{nods furiously} yep, and I think my daughter fits somewhere between the two extremes, with me leaning more towards her needing some of the extra detail. Because she has some articulation issues, I think the preciseness of using phonograms is helpful (except when it's NOT, like in the cases above LOL).

[OneStepAtATime]

What worked here was Barton Reading and Spelling, going slowly, a piece at a time.  It went far enough back and breaks things down small enough that all the pieces are now being mastered and internalized.  The other programs we tried just didn't go far enough back or break things down small enough but it took me a long time to realize that was what we needed.  On the flip side, I never had any issues with learning to read without a phonics based program.  Reading was easy for me.  Really depends on the person.

 

poetic license, if your child is having trouble with articulation, you might hop on the Barton site and give the student screening.  It is testing for sound discrimination, among other things, and is free.  You do not have to buy Barton or even be interested in something like Barton.  If there are sound discrimination issues there then ANY reading program may be a slog until that is dealt with.  DD passed with flying colors.  

 

DS did not, which was a bit of a shock.  He actually needed additional help and was struggling in ways we didn't even know about.  We used LiPS first, before moving him into a reading program.  It was a huge help.  

 

I recommend this test to anyone who's child is having a bit of trouble with reading, just to see if there are some other things going on that need to be dealt with.  But do it when you are both rested and you won't be interrupted or distracted.  You need to pass the tutor screening first but it is fairly quick (5 minutes), easy, and free.  :)  Again, it is not testing for knowledge but sound discrimination.

 

http://www.bartonreading.com/tutors.html#screen

http://www.bartonreading.com/students_long.html#screen

 

 

[Ellie]

Here's my personal test for whether or not to include an /err/ sound in a local curriculum: "Marry merry Mary."

 

If your local dialect clearly differentiates all three words (by using a short-a for "marry", a short-e for "merry" and a long-a for "Mary" then those spellings are unlikely to cause a lot of confusion. In that case, "where" and "there" are likely to be sounded with a short-e sound.

 

However, you're claiming there has a long-a sound, so I suspect that you, like in my case, hear "marry merry Mary" as homonyms, all sounding the same. If that's the case, I recommend teaching an /err/ sound (pronounced "air") for the following spellings:

 

ere, there, where, and derivatives of the last two like somewhere, therefore, etc. 

 

Words with "err" like cherry, merry, terrible, etc. 

 

Words with the digraph "er" like very, merit, and perish (the /err/ sound becomes the second sound for the digraph "er" as in her, very)

 

Words with the digraph "ar" like vary, Mary, and parent (the /err/ sound becomes the fourth sound for the digraph "ar" as in car, war, collar, parent) 

 

Words with "arr" like marry, Larry, and arrow.

 

Thus, ere, err, and arr are all pronounced /err/ on the first attempt and the digraphs "er" and "ar" have the /err/ options added to them.

 

However, I found it unnecessary to teach ear (bear), air (chair), eir (their) and are (share) as spellings of the /err/ sound because I've never had a child who couldn't decode these by trying the long-a sound for ea, ai, ei, and a_e respectively, as they are taught to do. In the case of "ea" it's the 3rd option after trying /ee/ (teach) and /e/ (head) first and second respectively. Similarly, "ei" is taught as having a 1st option of /ee/ (receive) and a 2nd option of /ae/ (vein).

 

I would add that the /err/ sound is the last sound that is covered in my workbook. It's there for use where it works, as in our area.

 

:blink:

 

Ok...this is way more complicated than Spalding, lol.

[Rod Everson]

I happen to live in what is apparently the very tiny slice of America where marry/merry/Mary are all pronounced completely differently (in just the way you explain).  But there/where is indeed pronounced with a long A here - they both rhyme with air and bear and mare (like Mary, which is long A mare-ee, not with short-e merry.).

 

I can't imagine how I could even get my mouth to pronounce them with a short-e?  I can pronounce merry with a short e because the accent is on the first syllable - meh-ree - and the short e is separated from the 'r'.  There's only one syllable in 'there', so I just can't do it...  and I've never heard anyone else here pronounce it any other way than with long A...? :confused1:

 

Aren't 'there' and 'they're' homonyms?  They is pronounced with long A for the 'ey', no?

 

 

I agree with you. Around here "there" and "they're" are homonyms. The person raising the question initially raised the short-e possibility. I just accepted it as what they do. Again, around here, "marry," "marry," and "Mary" all sound the same, so I find it useful to teach an /err/ sound (sounds like "air").

[Rod Everson]

Words with "err" like cherry, merry, terrible, etc. 

 

Words with the digraph "er" like very, merit, and perish (the /err/ sound becomes the second sound for the digraph "er" as in her, very)

 

Just have to comment further, as I find this fascinating...  ;)  All of those rhyme to me (with short-e berry), except for 'her'.  Again, can't say a short -e followed by an r without separate syllables.  So her rhymes with burr.

 

Words with the digraph "ar" like vary, Mary, and parent (the /err/ sound becomes the fourth sound for the digraph "ar" as in car, war, collar, parent) 

 

Gah, wait - those are mostly different sounds to me!  Mary has a long-A, car rhymes with pirate "Arr!", war rhymes with wore, the 'ar' in 'collar' again is more like 'ur' ('cause unstressed syllable schwa??), and parent has a short-a - pah-rent

 

Words with "arr" like marry, Larry, and arrow.

 

These are short-a.  Like parent.

 

Yes, you're right. I was trying to indicate the two sounds I teach for the digraph "er", those being /er/ (her) and /err/ very. Sorry for the confusion.

 

The same thing applies to the discussion of "ar" that you questioned. Those are the four different sounds I teach for the digraph "ar" /ar/, /or/, /er/ and /err/.

[Rod Everson]

And this discussion is exactly why I've left Spalding and its spinoffs for my just turned 8 year old. It's confusing enough for an adult brain. :lol: I just tell my kid what it says, he begins to recognize the pattern in whatever way works for his brain and what he hears, and it's all good. I can't imagine trying to explain the origins of various words to the average 6 year old. This stuff way overcomplicates things for my slower to learn reader (I usually call him struggling, but since I abandoned overcomplicated methods, he has improved by leaps and bounds, so while he's slower than his brothers, he's reading pretty well now).

 

The reason it's confusing for the adult brain is because we're discussing curriculum design, a process entirely different than curriculum instruction.

 

All the child ends up with is the knowledge that, in my area at least, there are several ways to spell the /err/ sound. He has to learn them and he usually easily does. But he doesn't have to know all the ins and outs as to why various decisions were made.

[Rod Everson]

:blink:

 

Ok...this is way more complicated than Spalding, lol.

 

Actually, Ellie, it's much simpler and I never had a parent, or child for that matter, who couldn't easily follow the /err/ lesson in the workbook. Now, I'll admit that the discussion as to why something is done can get both complicated and contentious, but the end result, once decided upon, is quite straightforward. If you had been sitting in with Spalding as she was making decisions how to encode various words before she'd come up with her system, you'd have witnessed some pretty complex discussions going on, I suspect. After all, it's English we're dealing with here, with it's very complicated orthography.

 

Besides, it's Spalding that generates all the debate among parents as to how to encode certain words, because she unfortunately used the single-underline for multiple purposes, and numbering for multiple purposes as well, plus trying to explain five different ending-e situations.

 

The only time I use a single underline is to indicate a phonogram of two letters or more, and the only time a number appears is when it's used to indicate a second, third, or fourth sound for a phonogram. And the ending-e issue doesn't occur at all because most of them can be incorporated into phonograms instead. As a result, it's quite easy to understand the coding process I use.

 

I'm quite familiar with Spalding. I'm not sure if you've acquainted yourself with my workbook, but it would seem that you should do so before drawing any conclusion as to which is simpler to implement. 

[boscopup]

That's how I'm feeling like right now. We got to a great start with the phonograms, but there are definitely times where I feel like it's a bit of a stretch with some words. What do you use for reading and spelling for your 6 year old?

 

I was talking about my just-turned-8 year old, but I started using Rod & Staff Phonics and Reading when he was 7 or maybe late 6, and that clicked with him. There are a few times that it goes a bit fast (I don't think he could have done it at early 6 - thankfully, he's a November birthday, so old for his grade), but mostly it's just the right speed for him. We're still in the grade 1 books, so I'm not doing spelling yet, except the little bit that is in there (which he is doing well with). Next year in 3rd grade, I'll have him do the 2nd grade Phonics, Reading, and Spelling. We may start them toward the end of 2nd grade. We'll see.

 

He just really could not wrap his mind around applying the fact that 'a' has 3 sounds (/a/, /ay/, /ah/). He could memorize the sounds, but application didn't happen at all. He does better learning that 'a' says /a/ in lots of words, then learning when it says /ay/, then eventually a few words where it says /ah/. All of that is taught over a long period of time, mastering one sound at a time. "Father" was introduced in reading pretty early as a "sight word", but I kind of sounded it out as I introduced it. He just did not understand, "Write 'father'... /f/-/a-ay-ah/-/th-TH/-/er of her/." That was horribly confusing to him. His brain doesn't work that way.

 

My other two kids taught themselves to read, and they can understand the Spalding type stuff, but it's overkill for them. They don't need all that information. They intuit most of what they need, and I explicitly teach what they don't intuit. My older one has needed more explicit phonics teaching in spelling. My youngest really doesn't. So I go deeper with the oldest, but when it starts to get super complicated, I just let him figure out his own method of remembering it. Much of spelling IS memorization, even if you do Spalding or a spinoff.

[poetic license]

Let me double-check my pronunciation here because this just seems overly complicated: I say "there" rhyming with bear & hare. Isn't this a fairly common way to say it? I grew up in Philadelphia and Washington DC for what it's worth.

 

So given this pronunciation, is it a sight word or one of those words that has a "spelling

pronunciation" separate from its common pronunciation?

[Ellie]

Let me double-check my pronunciation here because this just seems overly complicated: I say "there" rhyming with bear & hare. Isn't this a fairly common way to say it? I grew up in Philadelphia and Washington DC for what it's worth.

 

So given this pronunciation, is it a sight word or one of those words that has a "spelling pronunciation" separate from its common pronunciation?

 

No, it is not a sight word. You just teach it and move on without making a big deal about the exact pronunciation of the "e." The lack of markings indicate that "e" and "r" are not the phonogram "er."

[ElizabethB]

It is slightly irregular, but should not be taught as a sight word, it should be taught as ere with the sound of -are as in hare. The regular sound for ere is as in here or mere. I teach it as a pattern, teaching both there and where.

 

My sight word page which I linked above has all the Dolch words listed and explained and grouped by rule and pattern.

[poetic license]

Popping back in here to say that after my frustration with Spalding, I was ready to just work on OPGTR and HTTS workbooks for spellling. Then my daughter came over, squealing with excitement. She had come across the word "neither" and said, "I couldn't read it then I remembered that 'ei' can say 'e'!"

 

Sooo...I guess we're sticking with Spalding for now. She has also got the silent e rules down pat, so I think we've got a keeper with WRTR.

[Ellie]

Popping back in here to say that after my frustration with Spalding, I was ready to just work on OPGTR and HTTS workbooks for spellling. Then my daughter came over, squealing with excitement. She had come across the word "neither" and said, "I couldn't read it then I remembered that 'ei' can say 'e'!"

 

Sooo...I guess we're sticking with Spalding for now. She has also got the silent e rules down pat, so I think we've got a keeper with WRTR.

 

Awesome. ;-)

[poetic license]

and the funny thing my 8 year old says about those silent e rules is when it comes to the "no job e": "That's probably left over from Chaucer's English."   :lol:

[RootAnn]

My kids refer to the odd job e as SORE -- Some Other Reason E.  :lol: