Avila Posted June 20, 2010 Share Posted June 20, 2010 I have been spending my summer reading the CM original series. Some of it really resonates with me, some of it not so much. And some of it is just perplexing. Is the CM method of teaching reading one of the first look-say methods? Is she really not advocating the use of phonics at all? She seems to be all about memorizing the words whole and not sounding out or learning spelling rules. I never learned phonics, but I read and spell well. So do two of my DDs. One of them was already reading when she left school, and the other is doing a phonics program currently (but I don't think that is WHY she is able to spell). The third is reading fine but cannot spell. She finished a phonics program. I am debating on whether to go back to another phonics program like Writing Road to Reading and start over with her (again), or whether to try out the CM method, which is intriguing but which seems to go against all traditional homeschool thought on phonics and spelling. Am I misunderstanding CM? Does what she say about it really work? Is there anybody out there who can give me a good rundown on this or who just wants to convince me to go back to phonics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MamaNurse Posted June 20, 2010 Share Posted June 20, 2010 Great question. :lurk5: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spock Posted June 20, 2010 Share Posted June 20, 2010 I am debating on whether to go back to another phonics program like Writing Road to Reading and start over with her (again), or whether to try out the CM method, which is intriguing but which seems to go against all traditional homeschool thought on phonics and spelling. Am I misunderstanding CM? Does what she say about it really work? Is there anybody out there who can give me a good rundown on this or who just wants to convince me to go back to phonics? If you read the section BEFORE the section on teaching how to read, the child is expected to already know basic phonics (CVC words, silent "e" words, common spelling patterns) from playing with letters before the sight word reading is introduced. CM considered this normal preschool aged play, with guidance from parents and older siblings, and didn't think of it as part of reading instruction. Also, after introducing the sight word reading the student alternated one day with sight word reading and one day working with the phonics patterns found in the sight words from the passage being studied. So, although CM doesn't call the introductory phonics (and continuing phonics) part of reading, she does include phonics. However, I only tried the CM method with one of my children, and she is the only one who had trouble learning to read. (On the other hand, she already had trouble learning before I tried using the CM method, and that is part of why I tried it--she was struggling using phonics alone. She eventually learned to read with a mix of Reading Reflex and lots of reading whatever books she wanted--an hour or more a day. This is the same daughter who used to complain that the letters moved around on the page and were thus hard to see, so she would have had trouble with any reading method.) I have read of many people in my CM yahoo group who have successfully used this method. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stripe Posted June 20, 2010 Share Posted June 20, 2010 I can't say that I am a CM authority, but she seems to me to be an advocate of at least partial look-say/whole word instruction. Ambleside does discuss this on their page at " / Phonics.shtml " , but in a somewhat roundabout way (they seem to think she combined both methods and refer to Volume 1 [Home Education] p 199-222). You may be interested in this book: Teach a Child To Read with Children's Books. Combining Story Reading, Phonics, and Writing To Promote Reading Success. Third Edition. by Mark Thogmartin. Full text available online via ERIC. (It looks OOP.) Otherwise, I think you'd have to break with CM. I personally found Reading Reflex to be a useful book, especially in the author's emphasis that the written word is a representation of what we speak, not the reverse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avila Posted June 20, 2010 Author Share Posted June 20, 2010 Thanks for the replies. What you are saying explains the phonics issue a little further. Anybody else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dina in Oklahoma Posted June 20, 2010 Share Posted June 20, 2010 Hello ~ You might try posting your question on http://simplycharlottemason.com/basics/started/cmedphil/ HTH!:001_smile: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.