Phonics experts? Diff between the methods in Alpha Phonics vs Phonics Pathways?

[Blessed with seven]

Hi,

 

I am really struggling with the reasoning behind the ba, be, bi, sa, se, si approach to phonics as in Phonics Pathways vs the word family approach as in Alpha Phonics.

 

I know SWB used to recommend Phonics Pathways until they did OPG. But..OPG is more like Alpha Phonics isn't it?

 

Someone care to enlighten me on the main difference and why the two programs seem so different in approach.

 

I have been using PP but am wondering it that is the way to go..questioning my decision, as usual.

 

Kim

[Suzanne in ABQ]

I like the PP approach better because it more closely corresponds with the way a person sounds out words -- from left to right. Plus, the practice is more like real life. With the word family method, it's easy for the child to just jump into the pattern of word families and read the first word but recite the other words in the list by rote (without really reading them). They may have trouble recognizing the same words when they see them out of the "family".

 

I have used AP, for tutoring, and I didn't like the format -- just rows and columns of drill, page after page. I didn't use the whole book, so maybe there is some variety, but my pupil and I found it very boring. (yawn, oops, tutor fell asleep again -- not good). :) I like the way PP incorporates schort columns, and sentences, and various exercises. It's still not full of bells and whistles, but it's a few notches more interesting than AP. (I haven't seen the newer edition of PP, or any AP more recently than 10 years ago. More recent editions may be different).

 

If PP is working for you and your dc, I definitely wouldn't switch. Phonics Pathways is a rigorous, purely phonetic program. If your dc masters everything in the book, he will be able to read any decodable word in the English language. I don't know if that's true for AP, but I definitely wouldn't switch if PP is working. If PP is too dry or tedious for your dc, I definitly wouldn't switch to AP, as it is even more so.

 

I haven't seen OPGTR, but I thought it was more like PP, just scripted, with daily lessons. I could be wrong about that.

[JaneGrey]

I've used both AP and PP to different degrees.

 

I don't think you have to worry about things in the long run.

 

I think Alphaphonics might be better in the beginning because beginning with the vowel seems to make blending come faster. (This isn't always the case, but it could be.) I really noticed it with my second. When I tried to start him with the consonant first, he kept sounding the letters out separately when I asked him to say the sounds faster. (So, the first time, he'd hold out "ssssssssss" and then "aaaaaaaaa" but then, he'd still say, "s(stop)a.") When I switched to starting with vowels, though, he was blending right away and we took off. From there, I just followed the phonics rules in PP (since I own PP and not Alphaphonics.) He had no problem switching over and is reading very well. He just needed that kick start in blending.

 

I actually have not liked PP for other reasons; I've preferred the layout of AP. But I paid full price for PP in my foolish old days, so I'm using it the way that works for me. So even when I had the opportunity to purchase AP for $2 used, I passed. Who needs two phonics programs? You can just incorporate the AP method in the beginning by coming up with words yourself, which is what I did. Then, go on. Experienced friends have used both with great success in turning out good readers and spellers. Again, I wouldn't worry. Continue with PP unless YOU hate it.

[Tabrett]

I am using PP with my child. I chose this because of the amount of blending exercises. My dd couldn't blend and she is now getting the hang of it. I like it better than word families. My first dd is dyslexic and we taught her phonic by word families. she would do just as described in the above post. Say the list of word fine, but couldn't recognize them in sentences.

Also, PP emphasizes that people are not born with a left to right since of direction. That different languages are read in different ways (Hebrew-right to left, Chinese- top to bottom, can't remember the name of this language, but it was read left to right first line then right to left second line). PP's reason for ba-bi-bo.... is so children are reading in the correct direction every time. If you learn /an/ then add /c/ to make /can/, you are teaching your child to read words, starting in the middle, then go to the front of the word. You might be thinking this is crazy, but kids are very young when they learn to read; eye tracking and left to right orientation doesn't exist yet. They are trying so hard to make the sound of the letters correctly that thinking they need to start in the middle of a word-move to the front of the word- do the middle again now go to the next word- skip the first letter (hopefully you get my meaning:confused:). There eyes are going back and forth trying to read the word instead of just left to right.

[Chris in VA]

I now love PP, but I had a hard time with the same thing as you. After all, you can't know what the sound of a vowel is until you see what comes after it--if your word is "came," for instance, and you start with "c-a (short sound of a)" then you have to reread it when you get to the silent e at the end.

 

But, somehow, after reading in PP, dd got it. We kept her in phonetic readers for a while, worked on blending, and did not introduce a lot of other words until she had lots of practice with the short vowel, C-V-C words (a few months on Bob books and our own stories). We did intro a few sight words, which made things go easier.

 

She figured it out, and her reading jumped up 3 grades in 3 months, approx., in the late fall of her first grade year.

 

I credit PP for giving her a sound beginning. (Get it? "Sound" beginning!:lol:)

[Ali in OR]

We also use Phonics Pathways here, and I agree with the posts by Suzanne and Tabrett. I am not a phonics expert, but I think the hardest part of learning to read is that two-letter blending--the ba, be, bi, bo, bu. Take your time through it and don't worry if it is slow going, because once your child can do that, the rest is smooth sailing. At least it has been here. Phonics Pathways is not fun--definitely not something the kids look forward to doing. But it works. My older daughter finished halfway through first grade able to read anything she wanted. My younger daughter is working through it now--we're moving beyond cvc words and it's all steady progress now. For both of my girls, once we got past the early blending, they've been able to read words without sounding out individual letters. Other kids in my Sunday School class have not been able to blend as well, and I've wondered if the difference is Phonics Pathways' approach versus a word family approach to reading. I do realize that different kids will have different learning styles and maybe PP won't fit everyone well, but it has been very successful here.

[Tabrett]

Another thought to go along with my earlier post-----

 

For people who like text/workbook type curriculum's; A Beka seem to get rated as the highest in teaching read and spelling. It also uses the ba, be, bi, ect... or "blending latter" approach. There has to be something about this approach that make it better for kid who don't read easily.

[Ummto4]

I would second the suggestion for using PP or Abeka approach for teachingbeginning blending. I was taught to read (in other language) from left to right. So when I taught my son to read in English (that's his mother tongue, by the way), naturally, I taught him blending from left to right.

 

And yes, I would agree that the hardest part of reading is reading the first blending (ba, be, etc). I used PP at first, but it didn't work well. So I used the letter cards which I got from dept.store. I put one vowel card on the right (e.g. a), and a deck of consonant cards on the left. Then he started blending ba, ta, sa, etc. It worked well. So, I proceeded with reading the CVC words and Bob books.

 

After he's better with the CVC words (that is after close to one month of instruction), we switched to Reading Made Easy. I initially worried that he's going to use short a when reading a word with the silent e in it. But RME is marked such that it's easy for him to distinguish long vs short a in a word.

 

I juts started my daughter (4.5 years) using RME, and RME approaches the beginning blending using word family. She can blend well as long as it's within the same family, but when I mix the family, she's confused. So I'm going back to ba bi bu approach.

 

Deep in my heart, I know ba bi bu approach is the logical one because that's how our eyes track the words. But I also know the concern that not all ba is read with a short a sound.

 

Just my two cents.

Dian