Embassy
-
Posts
3,394 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Classifieds
Store
Posts posted by Embassy
-
-
Thanks so much!
-
for your homeschooling materials?
-
So to me, a gifted learner is not about what a child knows. It's about how they learn it and the repetition required. . We choose to homeschool because my child is gifted, but I don't think HS *MAKES* your child gifted. I think you can accommodate children individually which can increase achievement. Which is a wonderful thing! Many of the children in my son's class looked GT in K by being early readers, but are generally at grade level now as 3rd-4th graders.
So the differentiation you find is that a gifted child is intense about learning and will learn without direct instruction?
-
I am in search of affordable prepared microscope slides with human tissue. I am also looking for a set that compares normal tissue with pathological tissue. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
-
Not too long ago I was reading about the prevalence of gifted students among the homeschool population. It was suggested that there is a greater percentage of gifted students who are homeschooled than in public schools because public schools aren't meeting their needs. But someone suggested that perhaps many of these high achieving homeschooled children were not gifted at all, but advanced because of one on one instruction. Don't gifted children have unique learning needs that are different from students who are advanced?
What has been your experience? Do you have a gifted student or know of some? Do you find that the student's learning needs go beyond learning at an advanced rate?
-
I think fluency comes from making the act of decoding 2nd nature, and not memorizing sight words. Obviously, as children practice reading the most common words will become known by sight...but it's the act of decoding, done without effort, that makes a good reader. This is why kids reach a slump at 4th grade...decoding isn't 2nd nature and it's humiliating to admit you can't read unfamiliar words at that point. If all those "sight words" had been taught through phonics, the SKILL would be there for him....plus those words would be recognized at sight from mere repetition.
I think a lot of the push for sight words 'round these parts are more for the benefit of standardized testing, and not long-term learning. Afterall, what does the 1st grade teacher care if Johnny fails the 4th grade??? :glare:jmho.
I agree. But sight word teaching is not whole language teaching. They are different things. Whole language is all about teaching language arts through meaningful context. Sight word teaching is typically devoid of meaningful context. I think many who use good books and literature have elements of whole language in their approach.
-
I'm not sure what you mean.
If you want to be technical about the word "prove", science never proves anything. It provides evidence. There is plenty of evidence that trying to teach using learning styles theory doesn't improve educational outcomes.
Where would I find that information?
-
As homeschooling parents we need to continually keep an eye on how our children are doing and change things if necessary.I agree with you. But how do you know if your child is in the small group who won't have difficulty at any point? What is the benefit that makes taking that risk worth it?I don't see a risk to phonics. It isn't uninteresting or objectionable here and research doesn't support the idea it reduces enjoyment. I'm not seeing the upside to the risk that whole language/embedded phonics won't be enough for my own non-sequential child or any child for that matter. But beyond our particular children (since what I'm doing is working here and what you're doing is working there) is the idea that this is a good approach for the average child so a good educational approach. That is my concern.This is a valid concern which is why so few people use whole language alone. I utilize phonics or spelling with my kids. But whole language has a role in our homeschool too. I mix the 2 methods so I get the best of both worlds.
-
It's not an assumption actually. Research has borne out that some children will learn to read to a high degree of fluency and accuracy w/o systematic phonics, but most will not. This isn't about opinion. The data is quite clear.
It is an assumption when data shows some children will read with a high degree of fluency and accuracy without systemic phonics.
-
There has been plenty of research on learning styles, and there is no good evidence that there is any benefit to using them.
Concepts and Evidence
Harold Pashler,1 Mark McDaniel,2 Doug Rohrer,3 and Robert Bjork4
Hmm. because there is no way to prove scientifically that learning styles can be impacted differently with different instruction, learning styles don't exist? Because people are so different and figuring out your learning style is difficult means that we should not seek out a better fit for our child? That doesn't make sense to me.
-
My first thought when I read your OP was "are you crazy, or just a troll?". I know you are pretty new around here but it doesn't take long to realize that most of us feel pretty passionately that kids should be taught how to actually spell and read, not guess. A quick scan of WTM might be a good idea for you.
Nope, not a troll. I've read through WTM, but I disagree with the part against whole language. I don't think everyone here agrees with everything in the WTM 100%
Seriously "reading it doesn't require a child to read exactly what is on the page". really? What exactly is the point if the child sin't reading what is on the page? How would you feel if your dr. was just sort of getting the basic idea of your lab results? If kids are allowed to guess at words and it counts if they come up with a synonym, well, who is going to correct them when you aren't there beside them?
But I am there beside them on the journey to fluency. Guessing (at least in my experience) grows infrequent. I would be concerned if a doctor was guessing because it would mean he wasn't a fluent reader.
I don't remember the last time my 8 year old guessed. My 6 year old does guess at some words still, but he can decode the words if I stop him and have him read the incorrectly guessed word.Your oldest is 8 yo and many kids at that age are reading beautifully with memorizing. Some kids can even internalize the rules from exposure (I hope that yours do). But far too many children are functionally illiterate and can't tackle new material because they are hobbled by a guessing habit.
I do think it is incorrect to assume a child will have difficulty reading without a systematic phonics program. Some will. Some won't.
-
Seems to me that a child who is "successfully" reading by guessing a whole lot is on a fast train to frustration when those tactics no longer work.
How does that jump from guessing to exact comprehension happen? I would guess that for many many children it simply doesn't.
I'm okay with a child who "dislikes reading" when he is 7 if it means he'll have the tools to read well when he's 12. Or 17. Or 41.
I personally think the guessing is beneficial for an early reader. In my opinion it is just a step on the journey to fluency and not a tactic to hang your hat on. You need some decoding skills in order to guess. As those decoding skills develop further the guessing grows infrequent.
-
A Synthesis of Research on Reading from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
by Bonita Grossen
University of Oregon
November, 1997
Thanks for that. It is interesting. I wonder if they have done any studies that compare the teaching method with the child's learning style. I would think whole language and embedded phonics would only work well with some kids. I'm surprised they are as high as they are.
-
I just want to specify that the only study I've seen about reading attitudes and enjoyment showed no difference between whole language and phonics approaches. http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a917757336 We may feel it should matter but I've not seen it in my own children and I don't think research supports the idea either. I do think there is possible research merit to the idea of being given reading instruction before a child is developmentally ready to learn could affect reading for pleasure later in life. I think caution is warranted in that area. But I think it's important to state that those taught with phonics don't dislike reading nor do those taught whole language like it more or whatever the fear is in that respect.
I also want to say that there probably is a subset (a small subset) of kids that aren't getting enough/much out of phonics. But I think they are smaller than what you suspect.
I think so much of it is dependent on the child's learning style. It is too general to state that those who are taught phonics don't like reading and those who learn through whole language do. Some children need phonics and some children need to approach phonics through contextually relevant text. Children forced into a method that does not mesh with their natural bent may dislike reading.
-
How do they learn how to decode rather than guess? Are you sure this happens in the average child taught to read this way initially?
Quote from Wikipedia on whole language instruction:
Interestingly, whole language advocates state that they do teach, and believe in, phonics, especially a type of phonics known as embedded phonics. In embedded phonics, letters are taught during other lessons focused on meaning and the phonics component is considered a "minilesson". Instruction in embedded phonics typically emphasizes the consonants and the short vowels, as well as letter combinations called rimes or phonograms. The use of this embedded phonics model is called a "whole-part-whole" approach because, consistent with holistic thinking, students read the text for meaning first (whole), then examine features of the phonics system (part) and finally use their new knowledge while reading the text again (whole).I don't think the average child would fit with whole language. I think most children are sequential learners.
-
Sure some kids will internalize those patterns without any explicit instruction or with partial phonics or combination phonics. I tried to acknowledge that in the post I made initially. Some will. However, not all will at all and others will but not to the level that they need in order to successfully navigate things like spelling and more complex decoding/comprehension later. One of my kids was memorizing words. He was good at that so that I didn't even realize it at first. But 20 weeks into a seemingly successful "phonics" program that was just not explicit enough he could instantly "decode" anything he'd seen even once in the program but couldn't handle even simple novel cvc words. He was certainly not internalizing the patterns in language and this wasn't a pure whole language approach. I did everything I could to discourage that look at the first word or picture and guess pattern in him. He loves reading and we're using a very explicit phonics approach. So does my other son. Phonics doesn't mean disliking reading? I'm not sure where you got that idea?
I think whole language used exclusively is rare. It is definitely not for everyone. I think most kids would benefit from a mixed approach and many whole-to-part learners would do well with an emphasis on whole language.
Phonics can be disliked or frustrating for whole to part learners. I gave up on phonics over a year ago after my son was in tears over not being able to understand the difference between long and short vowels. At that same time he was able to read and comprehend 5th grade level chapter books. He gets exposure to phonics patterns through spelling now. He hates it, but I think it will help him. I'm not entirely sure he is a natural speller yet although he seems to be. At least he isn't associating it with reading.
Some kids might internalize it all-yes. I think there are kids who will learn despite the instruction method. I think a larger group will struggle at some level even if they read well in the early grades and a portion of those will struggle at a debilitating level. That first group won't suffer with phonics instruction and the larger group will suffer at some level if they aren't given explicit phonics instruction. You can do that explicit instruction with phonics based spelling by the way. On the other hand I would put an adult who struggles to decode new words at a less than functional level and you said that you didn't feel that was a problem in your own life. The adults I've talked to with that in my family didn't see it as completely functionable though the all read fine. They all struggle with spelling at some level. Your spelling is good? That's unusual I think especially given you aren't completely able to decode new words. You must have a highly visual learning style/visualize words very well!
A focus on phonics can hurt some kids. Most it will not. Most if not all need some phonics. But some may need more of a focus on the meaningful process and enjoyment of reading. My spelling is fine although I wouldn't qualify for any national spelling bee. I'm pretty equal with auditory and visual learning abilities, but I am a whole to part learner. Whole language instruction makes more sense to whole to part learners. When I said that I can have trouble decoding new words it is usually only words unknown to me in the English language. If the word is in my vocabulary it isn't a problem.
-
Uhm . . . how does a child get the correct meaning if he doesn't read exactly what is on the page?
I mean, I get how using picture clues and context can help with very easy readers but I think that's a false sense of accomplishment. At some point the child needs to read exactly what is on the page in order to get the author's meaning.
No?
Yes, as the the child grows the importance of reading exactly what is on the page grows. The guessing isn't forever. It is more in the learning to read stage than the reading to learn stage. It helps the child learn the joy of reading without getting bogged down in the exactness that can slow some children up and cause them to dislike reading.
-
SWB talks about this is one of her lectures. Smart kids, kids who have a lot of books at home, kids who are read to a lot, etc are better at decoding and guessing. However, they often start to falter when they get to fourth or fifth grade and the reading level steps up. Phonics intervention is often needed at that time to help them push through.
I've heard this before. Where are those kids having difficulty? Reading new words? Comprehension?
-
This is important to emphasize.
I don't speak about memorizing sight words either. I do think, though, that a lot of opponents of the whole language method oppose the method because a fairly common side-effect might be "guessing", if we're talking about first language learners.
Yes, guessing is encouraged in whole language instruction. Guessing incorrectly or correctly shows comprehension. Usually my son will look at the first letter of the word and make a guess based on what word he thinks will come next in the flow of the sentence. Many times he is correct and when he is not I stop him and have him look closer at the word and sound it out if necessary.
-
Good for you, but I think that whole language has been a catastrophic crime against the school children of this country. Early success in memorizing words does not mean that a child has the skills to decode unfamiliar words later on. Certainly some kids will instinctively pick up on the phonics patterns but the vast majority don't and end up functionally illiterate by the middle grades.
Have you ever tried to get a 12 yo to stop guessing at words after he has been exposed to all of this guessing nonsense for years on end? It is a terrible, sad thing to watch and frustrating to correct, for everyone involved.
Some kids will learn to read no matter how you teach them and the majority will be harmed by whole language. Why risk it? There is a small fraction of children who need Whole language due to disabilities, but phonics won't hurt them. It will hurt those children who need phonics and seems like a silly risk to take.
For many hundreds of years children learned to read via phonics instruction and it worked well. Then, someone decided that it was all too much work to require of children so they decided to teach reading to all kids by way of whole language, which had been developed for teaching deaf children to read because they can not hear the various sounds of the letter combinations.
It has been a travesty and given us a far lower level of literacy than this country has ever known.
And yes, kids need to finish phonics instruction. Without that you run the risk of the child running into problems as they get older and get into more technical material, usually 5th - 8th grade. How a child is doing in K is not an indication of how they will do in Jr. High. At some point that ability to memorize words caps out.
Whole language isn't for everyone. Phonics isn't for everyone. Most will learn well with a combination of both. But whole language isn't about memorizing words. I pretty much learned to read by whole language. I don't always know how to sound out words brand new to me, but honestly I had no functional problems in college or graduate school. My two boys are whole to part learners just like me. I don't neglect phonics, but I don't hold it up with the importance that many do. Phonics tended to get my boys started reading and then they must have internalized patterns in English because their reading took off. I know some say it will level off, but this is for kids who rely on memorizing words. That isn't what whole language is all about. It is pretty much opposite for me - memorizing phonics rules versus learning in natural contexts. I dropped phonics with my older son because it frustrated my whole-to-part learner. He doesn't need it either. He reads far above grade level and spells well. He may pronounce new words a little funny, but hearing it correctly a couple of times fixes that.
-
I think there is more balance today in instruction but I think a portion of kids are still going to falter, even initially, with too many sight words.
I think there is far more to it that sight words. Memorizing words by sight is limiting for sure. But I think the concept that we internalize the patterns in language by exposure has merit.
Whole language for writing encourages inventive spelling. It encourages a child to write the sounds he hears in the word. In reading it doesn't require a child to read exactly what is on the page. It focuses more on a child getting the correct meaning.
Whole language is about approaching learning through natural contexts of reading and writing. It is more whole to part. Whole word is an instruction method of teaching sight words. It is not the same thing as whole language.
-
Do you mind sharing some of your resource choices? Seems like there are tons of videos, music CDs, books, & games for little ones in Spanish, but not much for any other languages!
Yes, there is so much available for Spanish. I started out with Muzzy Mandarin, but would not recommend it. We have used Rosetta Stone Mandarin too, but are switching to Chinese Made Easy for Kids. It should be a better fit. You can also find lots of Mandarin resources at asianparents.com. Arabic choices were limited for me because most of the resources I found for kids were incorporated with Islamic studies. I ended up using Alif Baa. It is not for kids, but I read it and teach from there. I also use Arabic Instant Immersion. For French I have been more relaxed and have mostly used DVDs in French and French TV. I did use Ecoutez Parlez this school year, but my boys didn't like it. I'll be moving into a different program next school year.
-
Don't you kind of understand where people might be coming from, though? If a woman doesn't have to work for pay in America, she is pretty lucky, don't you think?
Maybe blessed is a better word. We are so rich in America. Sure many make tough choices and in most cases in the USA it is possible for a women to stay home. Some would have to really sacrifice their lifestyle. I think one major hindrance though is husbands. I hear it often. The husband wants the wife to work. Having a husband who supports the stay at home mom idea seems to be becoming more rare these days.
In other countries there may be no option to sacrifice lifestyle. If the wife doesn't work no one can eat. We are blessed in the western world. While we have made tough choices we have never been without food and shelter because I stay home with my kids.
-
I keep my dc in the grade with their age-mates, regardless of ability.
:iagree: But if you do decide to have him repeat I would refer to the 2 Kindergarten years as Junior Kindergarten and Senior Kindergarten and not a repeat of Kindergarten.
Learning Sinhala
in Bilingual Education Board
Posted
Anyone here know the Sinhala language or is in the process of learning it and can recommend a program? It is for myself and my kids. It doesn't have to be kid friendly. We will likely be living in Sri Lanka in the next couple years and would like to know basic conversation and reading when we get there.