Compare the OG method vs Spalding Phonics etc..

[Blessed with seven]

Hi,

 

I have The Gillingham Manual and WRTR 4th Edition. I am confused by something. Spalding created her method after the OG method correct? But aren't they quite different? In the OG manual they start w/ the short sound of the vowels, use picture cards etc... In Spalding they learn all the sounds of each letter plus use NO pictures... Also...one uses more sight words, schwa etc.. the other uses "think to spell" minimizing the number of words by sight and no schwa.

 

Am I missing something, I had always viewed Spalding and OG as completely different yet when reading Spalding's book they mention OG etc...

 

Anyone care to compare these two "methods" on phonics and on the differences, positives and negatives of each..

 

Okay..that is all for now..ha!

 

Kim (homeschooling mom of 7)

[Ellie]

No, you're not missing anything.

 

Mrs. Spalding was inspired by OG, but her own study took her in a different direction. It is why her method is the Spalding Method, not the OG method (the same way that, for example, SWR is really the Sanseri method, not Spalding).

 

What you need to do is pick one and not worry about similarities/differences. :-)

[Blessed with seven]

Thanks Ellie,

 

Well...to me, the Spalding method seems more logical, and I will go with that, probably via PR BUT..I was curious....I have not read through all the manuals completely but I find it interesting that so many things are compared to the OG method, yet they are all different. :glare:

 

Kim

[LizzyBee]

Hi,

 

I have The Gillingham Manual and WRTR 4th Edition. I am confused by something. Spalding created her method after the OG method correct? But aren't they quite different? In the OG manual they start w/ the short sound of the vowels, use picture cards etc... In Spalding they learn all the sounds of each letter plus use NO pictures... Also...one uses more sight words, schwa etc.. the other uses "think to spell" minimizing the number of words by sight and no schwa.

 

Am I missing something, I had always viewed Spalding and OG as completely different yet when reading Spalding's book they mention OG etc...

 

Anyone care to compare these two "methods" on phonics and on the differences, positives and negatives of each..

 

Okay..that is all for now..ha!

 

Kim (homeschooling mom of 7)

 

OG methodology is multisensory, structured, sequential, incremental, and cumulative. It is the research-based method for teaching kids who have dyslexia (particularly dysphonetic dyslexia) and other reading disabilities to read and spell.

 

Spalding wrote WRTR to make some of the OG principles available to neurotypical kids, but she removed the elements that are not necessary for NT kids. Therefore, WRTR and its spinoffs move much faster than OG programs, and they are not sequential and incremental.

[johnandtinagilbert]

I'm wondering how much it matters or how Really different they are. I believe Mrs. Beers refers to her program as O/G, but one of the testimonials on her website talks about the raves of someone taught by Spalding. I think Wikipedia actually does a good job of distinguishing all the phonics methods.

[LizzyBee]

I'm wondering how much it matters or how Really different they are. I believe Mrs. Beers refers to her program as O/G, but one of the testimonials on her website talks about the raves of someone taught by Spalding. I think Wikipedia actually does a good job of distinguishing all the phonics methods.

 

I think it matters if someone is trying to teach a dyslexic student and programs are labeled as OG when they are not. Making a program multisensory and labeling it as OG is not accurate or ethical.

[johnandtinagilbert]

I think it matters if someone is trying to teach a dyslexic student and programs are labeled as OG when they are not. Making a program multisensory and labeling it as OG is not accurate or ethical.

That's a good point.

[Blessed with seven]

OG methodology is multisensory, structured, sequential, incremental, and cumulative. It is the research-based method for teaching kids who have dyslexia (particularly dysphonetic dyslexia) and other reading disabilities to read and spell.

 

Spalding wrote WRTR to make some of the OG principles available to neurotypical kids, but she removed the elements that are not necessary for NT kids. Therefore, WRTR and its spinoffs move much faster than OG programs, and they are not sequential and incremental.

 

 

Very true...see...I didn't even think about that! Great explanation. Thank you...

[Blessed with seven]

I'm wondering how much it matters or how Really different they are. I believe Mrs. Beers refers to her program as O/G, but one of the testimonials on her website talks about the raves of someone taught by Spalding. I think Wikipedia actually does a good job of distinguishing all the phonics methods.

 

 

Doesn't REALLY matter a whole lot to me personally but I am very curious because it dawned on me how much I hear Spalding and OG referred to and, not having read in depth on either of them, liking both, wanted to understand the difference...just me wantin some info..

[johnandtinagilbert]

Doesn't REALLY matter a whole lot to me personally but I am very curious because it dawned on me how much I hear Spalding and OG referred to and, not having read in depth on either of them, liking both, wanted to understand the difference...just me wantin some info..

LizzyBee hit the nail on the head, huh. I'm in your boat, but her explanation made good sense. It's a keeper.

[siloam]

Kim,

 

 

I have my WRTR now, but I haven't had time to read it yet. I also know that there are a few areas where PR covers things more than SWR does, like syllable rules. WRTR I think it is left up to the teacher how much to emphasize them. Also realize that it is left up to the teacher how to organize the words, so one could organize them into an incremental sequence. This is close to what AAS does. It is a bit of a hybrid between o/g and Spalding (also called vertical phonics). Now that I have qualified things, I will generalize a lot. :D

 

Spalding starts off with a focus on learning the phonograms through multi-sensory work. Where o/g generally jumps in and begins working with a controlled group of sounds/letters.

 

Like you said, o/g generally uses pictures to help with recall problems, or rhymes. Spalding just continues to cover the phonograms with muli-sensory methods till the recall problems are not an issue. You decide with both SWR and WRTR when to start the spelling lists. I suspect with PR it has a set pace, but one you could slow down if needed.

 

Honestly I think in this area I prefer Spalding methods. I don't like using pictures to aid in recall. Barton is pretty good with how they use them, other than the short vowel rhymes I don't see the child developing a dependence on them. Some programs include flashcards with pictures on them, and the worry I have is the child will develop a need to recall the picture in order to remember the sound instead of developing that letter to sound instant recall. Basically their recall will be slowed.

 

Though Seeing Stars would be an exception to this rule. Because of the focus on being able to visualize words/phonograms and it doesn't use pictures.

 

O/G programs, from what I have seen, spends equal amount of time on reading as they do spelling or more time on reading, where Spalding works on spelling and allows reading to come in its own time. (Though I suspect PR is different in this area.)

 

O/G programs use nonsense words to break children of guessing. This is great if you have a child who is guessing and frustrating if your child does not. My ds didn't learn to guess, I have never allowed him to. But most people coming to o/g have tried other things and the child has already learned to guess so they need it. It also can aid in learning spelling rules in that the child can't use their reading ability to figure out the word then recall the rule. They have to know the rule and apply it in order to get the right sounds. Spalding would either increase a child's guessing or guessing would not be an issue, I suspect. If the child was in the habit of guessing, having words that had no rules or connection would increase their guessing. A good teacher could overcome this. If the child doesn't guess to begin with, and the teacher stays on top of it they should never start.

 

That is one area I am not worried about with you because you have done Barton and you know how to attack guessing, if needed.

 

O/G is incremental, covering one rule or sound or a group of like sounds at a time. A good o/g program introduces every word the child is going to read and directly teaches it first. Spalding covers the phonograms and directly teaches the most commonly used words first. Thus the end result is similar but not exactly the same.

 

Personally I am wired to think incremental. Give me the big picture then fill in the details one at a time from beginning to end, a-typical visual spacial learner. I can learn by other methods but it takes me longer to put the pieces together and I spend most of my time feeling overwhelmed.

 

That said the strength in Spalding's approach is that you don't use sight words at all. Dyslexic have such a tendency to take any sight word instruction and use it to start guessing based on visual distinction of the words (which they actually don't see correctly much of the time, so they get it wrong). Yet the majority of o/g programs continue to teach sight words. I personally have taken a middle of the road approach. I teach all the phonograms up front then follow an incremental sequence. Thus I don't use sight words.

 

O/g instruction is heavy on using syllable rules, where with Spalding most people hardly use it at all. Sansari says this is becuase there is so many exceptions that the rules become meaningless. They focus instead on learning the phonograms sounds in order of frequency of use, and then teaching the child to try the most common sounds first, and work to the less common till they find a sound that works, or if they are spelling they find one that looks right. The problem here for dyslexic students is they generally don't have the ability to see a word and tell if it looks right. Once more a word can be spelled correctly and they will think it looks wrong.

 

This also ties into the use of units. Spalding teaches that I and O MAY say their names when followed by two consonants in a one syllable word. O/g teaches that the units -old, -ild, -ind, etc... are special groups of words where the o and the i say their name. I suspect that the child then learns to try their long sound, and if that doesn't work, then they fall back to the short sound. They also teach -ing, -ong, -ang and such as their own units. I believe this is because they often change the sound of the vowel and because they don't follow suffix rules. Long becomes longing with the g staying /g/ instead of changing to /j/ as it should when it comes before an i. Spalding teaches that g MAY say /j/ before e, i and y, so if the /j/ doesn't work the child would try to /g/ sound.

 

I find both systems work. Spalding I would say keeps to more generalities, minimizing how much the child has to memorize. This confuses many dyslexic students who find the English language confusing in general and full of exceptions for no good reason. The more in-depth teaching of o/g gives them a reason why. There are many kids who would still learn to read despite not understanding it, but many of them would still spell poorly. Not because Spalding isn't a good method, but becuase it seems so random to the child that they feel they can never learn it and give up. Though there are some who will just accept what they learn and use it thus become good spellers despite their dyslexia. It also depends on both the teacher and the child as to where that point is where the child quits trying. The more gentle, understanding and patient the teacher the longer the student will go, and the more the student can be forgiving of their own mistakes the longer they will go. If you have a short tempered student or teacher it will be a bad combo. O/G works better for the child who has to have all the details of why, who isn't willing to just take your word for it, and doesn't want to guess or try different options (though the last they will learn to do, just not as much as in Spalding).

 

Personally I find the more I understand the more competent I feel. Now I still make a ton of spelling errors and typing errors. Half of that is habit because it is easier to type really fast and let spell check find the errors. When it dawns on me that the same word is coming up over and over again I stop and analyze why and try to figure out how it is spelled. But half of my spelling errors are actually typing errors where I transpose letters. When I type slower it does improve but it doesn't go away. I still transpose letters no matter how hard I try not to. There is a gap between the ideal and the practical. If I don't care and am not willing to try it doesn't matter how much spelling instruction you give me it probably won't improve my spelling much. Being dyslexic no matter how much I am willing to try I still make errors. You have to find a happy medium between what the child can tolerate, what you can teach and what will give the maxim benefits with the least amount of pain.

 

[siloam]

The only other thing that stands out to me at the moment is that other Seeing Stars, I don't see where most o/g programs seem to have a focus on memorizing phonograms. In fact I get the feeling that if they can apply the spelling rules they also aren't that worried about them memorizing spelling rules either. Spalding memorizes both. I personally learned to read via phonics, I can remember being called on to go through the phonograms in class (no it did not go well and I was held back in 1st grade). My point is that despite learning to read phonetically I forgot it all by High School and couldn't sound words out to save my life. Thus I am on the memorization side. Even in AAS it is designed where after you do a level you can set aside all those phonograms and spelling rules, as long as the child continues to demonstrate a knowledge of them. With dyslexic children there is too much of the do something out of habit then you wake up one day to question why you do it this way and you can't say why. That early foundation can erode away. Thus I plan to cover phonograms monthly through High School, and spelling rules too. I suspect they will continue to get them correct every time becuase they own them now (at least the older two) and by the time they graduate they will have hopefully covered them for so long that they will never forget them. :D

 

I know though that you have a mix of kids and so not all of them necessarily are dyslexic, which adds to the complexity of the issue.

 

For those who don't know me like Kim does, I am a visual and auditory dyslexic with 4 kids with varying issues (my SIL is dyslexic as well, so it runs on both sides of the family). I have used SL LA with ETC, which is based on an o/g incremental sequence, Reading Reflex (phonographic method not discussed here), SWR (for roughly 3 years), AAS, Seeing Stars, Barton Reading level 1 and part of 2 (borrowed from Kim, thank you!) and that is all I can think of right now. :D I admit I haven't used several of these in depth and sometimes I make assumptions that are not true, so feel free to correct me if you have used one of the programs more in depth and I am missing it.

 

Currently I am using SWR methods to teach phonograms modified with Seeing Stars visualization work, but using SL LA for my sequence in teaching reading and spelling. I will likely add some SWR/WRTR work on high frequency words for reading as I don't teach sight words. I also used Barton Reading movements, taps, swishes, swipes, AAS tiles, sand letters and a sand box (SWR concepts), and Barton reading checks for letter confusion. Now you know why I don't post on threads asking for recommendations for a good phonics program. :D

 

Heather

 

p.s. I do know that there is only one Spalding, but technically there is only one o/g as well. In both cases there are programs patterned after them, with which generalities can be made. I am trying to discuss big picture differences, not specific difference for the most part.

[MerryAtHope]

You crack me up (re not posting on phonics recommendation threads)! AND...I love how deeply you look into things and the wisdom you share!

 

Even in AAS it is designed where after you do a level you can set aside all those phonograms and spelling rules, as long as the child continues to demonstrate a knowledge of them. With dyslexic children there is too much of the do something out of habit then you wake up one day to question why you do it this way and you can't say why. That early foundation can erode away.

 

I'm not sure I'd say it's designed to set aside previous ones. Each level has you review previously learned cards in the first step and also when you do a mastered review--you are supposed to review all of the previously mastered sound, phonogram, and key cards. And you have to keep using those early skills in dictation because words that use them keep coming up again. So you never really stop using them (and I always bring a card back out if they miss something in dictation).

 

That may still not be enough review for some kids. But it's designed so that it's easy to customize review for each situation--a lot or a little. I review each type of card monthly, although I do retire some cards from our monthly review (Early on I retired any letter that only had one sound, and now that both of my kids are in 5 and have a LOT of cards, I have taken some of the other things they really have down solid out of our monthly review). It's a balance figuring out what is enough review and what might burn a kid out, LOL! I agree that you want to make sure that early foundation doesn't erode away.

 

Merry :-)

[siloam]

 

I'm not sure I'd say it's designed to set aside previous ones. Each level has you review previously learned cards in the first step and also when you do a mastered review--you are supposed to review all of the previously mastered sound, phonogram, and key cards. And you have to keep using those early skills in dictation because words that use them keep coming up again. So you never really stop using them (and I always bring a card back out if they miss something in dictation).

 

That may still not be enough review for some kids. But it's designed so that it's easy to customize review for each situation--a lot or a little. I review each type of card monthly, although I do retire some cards from our monthly review (Early on I retired any letter that only had one sound, and now that both of my kids are in 5 and have a LOT of cards, I have taken some of the other things they really have down solid out of our monthly review). It's a balance figuring out what is enough review and what might burn a kid out, LOL! I agree that you want to make sure that early foundation doesn't erode away.

 

Merry :-)

 

Thanks for clarifying. And I use AAS in depth! :D I didn't catch that the mastery review was supposed to go back to older books. I pulled out my level 2 and read through the card set up and see now that it does mention the phonogram and sound cards from level 1. The key cards (rule cards for those not using AAS) aren't carried forward, but the most importat topics in level 1 are reviewed and have their own level 2 key card. Looking at level 3 I do see where they carry forward the level 2 cards.

 

Thus my problem with AAS is practical. I know they sell the phonogram cards separately (though I just use my old SWR cards to save $$), but I don't see where you can get the sound and rule cards without buying the whole student packs. I don't need the whole packs because the word cards are fine for the next student but I need the sound and rule cards for review. To date I have been letting the sound cards go with each level. That has worked fine with my oldest two. I my younger two have more issues and I would prefer to continue to work with the sound cards for both, but I only have one set. With the key cards I have been making up my own to fill in with. I don't want to break copyright, but I need the cards for 3 different kids. I haven't thought to just ask if she would make them available. :blink: Can you ask her or shall I? So ideologically it is set up the way I would like, but practically it is falling apart.

 

I would love more input from those who have used Barton longer than I have and other programs. Kim, what was your feel from Wilson Foundation? Did you get a feel for Wilson Reading or PAF?

 

Heather

[MerryAtHope]

...I don't see where you can get the sound and rule cards without buying the whole student packs.

 

Yeah, I started out with just one pack for both kids, but it got to be kind of crazy with them both in the same level, but needing to review different things! So now I always get two packs. But here we needed separate word cards too.

 

I wonder if you could set up a box just for these review cards. Keep them behind tabs per level--ie, red cards level 2, 3, 4 etc... and have a daily review tab for each color card. Then do the review with your kids on a rotating basis. Week 1, Child 1 does blue, 2 does red, 3 does yellow, 4 does mastered review of green cards from the current level, or no review that week. Review up to the level they have used, put any they miss in the daily review tab for that week. You could use a sticky tab with each child's name on it to put on the daily review tab so you remember who is on what color for the week. After the week is up, put the daily reviewed cards back in the level tabs, and rotate--1 goes to red, 2 goes to yellow, and so on.

 

That's a bit involved but might keep you from having to buy separate packs. I don't know if they will offer the rest separately at some point, it does come up from time to time. They offer the phonogram cards separately only because some people want to teach all of the phonograms up front, in Level 1.

 

Merry :-)

[LizzyBee]

Honestly I think in this area I prefer Spalding methods. I don't like using pictures to aid in recall. Barton is pretty good with how they use them, other than the short vowel rhymes I don't see the child developing a dependence on them. Some programs include flashcards with pictures on them, and the worry I have is the child will develop a need to recall the picture in order to remember the sound instead of developing that letter to sound instant recall. Basically their recall will be slowed.

 

Heather, Thanks for jumping in. You are much better at explaining the differences between OG and Spalding in more detail than I can.

 

I wanted to clarify your comments about Barton, because I'm not quite sure what you're referring to in the quoted paragraph, and I'm always concerned to not leave other posters with incorrect impressions. We've finished Levels 1-3, and Barton hasn't used any pictures to aid in recall.

 

For short vowels, Barton uses key words; is that what you're referring to as rhymes? I don't think of them as rhymes, but more of a rhythmic chant (eg. apple, apple, /a/, /a/, /a/). A story is used to introduce each one to help students initially remember the key word. But the story is only told once unless the student needs to hear it more than once to remember the key word. Even at 9 yo and having been through 3 levels of Barton and the first few books of ETC, my dd still has a hard time remembering the short vowels. When she mispronounces one, I ask her what the key word is for that vowel. Once she remembers the key word and the correct sound for the vowel, she can sound out the word correctly. Personally, I really like that method because it relies on sounds rather than pictures. Like you, I don't want my dd to rely on pictures to remember words or sounds.

Edited December 25, 2010 by LizzyBee

[Ellie]

I have my WRTR now, but I haven't had time to read it yet. I also know that there are a few areas where PR covers things more than SWR does, like syllable rules. WRTR I think it is left up to the teacher how much to emphasize them.

Spalding (not WRTR, as WRTR is the manual, not the method) teaches syllables and rules, which are applied and discussed and analyzed for every word.

 

O/G programs, from what I have seen, spends equal amount of time on reading as they do spelling or more time on reading, where Spalding works on spelling and allows reading to come in its own time.

Not sure how you figure that Spalding "allows reading to come in its own time." Besides the children reading their own spelling words from the beginning, reading from good trade books begins when the dc have finished the spelling words to Section I. Mrs. Spalding goes into great detail on how to do the reading lesson with the children, and the fifth edition has many pages of directions/sample discussions/etc. for the reading lesson.

[siloam]

I wanted to clarify your comments about Barton, because I'm not quite sure what you're referring to in the quoted paragraph, and I'm always concerned to not leave other posters with incorrect impressions. We've finished Levels 1-3, and Barton hasn't used any pictures to aid in recall.

 

I am talking about in level 2 where the child makes their own reference sheet using the letter and a picture they draw that starts with that letter.

 

For short vowels, Barton uses key words; is that what you're referring to as rhymes? I don't think of them as rhymes, but more of a rhythmnic chant (eg. apple, apple, /a/, /a/, /a/). A story is used to introduce each one to help students initially remember the key word. But the story is only told once unless the student needs to hear it more than once to remember the key word. Even at 9 yo and having been through 3 levels of Barton and the first few books of ETC, my dd still has a hard time remembering the short vowels. When she mispronounces one, I ask her what the key word is for that vowel. Once she remembers the key word and the correct sound for the vowel, she can sound out the word correctly. Personally, I really like that method because it relies on sounds rather than pictures. Like you, I don't want my dd to rely on pictures to remember words or sounds.

 

Both of these issue are things that Wanda Sansari feels really strongly about. I don't know if Romalda Spalding did, and I still have yet to dive into my new WRTR. :rolleyes: It goes back to the brain stores different information in different places. Because of the rhythm and rhyme of the apple taping I suspect it is one that would get stored with the same sort of information as songs, which means in order to recall it you often half to use the tap. Sansari would argue that if your ds had learned to instead recall the sound for the letter than he wouldn't have the problems he does now.

 

Personally I think you can make arguments for each approach. Not all kids develop a dependency, and it does get most kids up and running more quickly.

 

I decided that I would rather not risk it and so I am doing the extra work to develop letter to sound recall, and I am not using the picture sheet or the apple (olive, Eddy, Itchy, can't remember the u one) taps.

 

That said I can't help but wonder about kids with low working memory, if maybe they need this in order to get there at all, KWIM? If it is between using tapping to remember and not being able to recall at all, by all means tap away. I just knew my ds didn't have a low working memory. But I stopped Barton mostly becuase it moved too fast for ds. The spelling in particular. I would give him a word, he would do the finger spelling, do a b-d or other letter check, do the vowel tap, check his sheet to see what the letter was, and by this time he had forgotten the original word 90% of the time and had to start over. Where if I just gave him the word and had him spell it cold he got it right 90% of the time and the rest of the time he had recall problems (I can spot these because he pauses like he is trying to pull it out of his brain and can't find it, often he sill just say he can't remember without writing anything).

 

I still think traditional o/g works better for dyslexic children, and that Barton is one of the best options out there. Spalding I think is stronger for children without LD's because it moves faster and o/g is slow.

 

Heather

[LizzyBee]

I am talking about in level 2 where the child makes their own reference sheet using the letter and a picture they draw that starts with that letter.

 

I don't remember that and it's not in dd's spelling notebook, so we must have skipped it for some reason.

 

Both of these issue are things that Wanda Sansari feels really strongly about. I don't know if Romalda Spalding did, and I still have yet to dive into my new WRTR. :rolleyes: It goes back to the brain stores different information in different places. Because of the rhythm and rhyme of the apple taping I suspect it is one that would get stored with the same sort of information as songs, which means in order to recall it you often half to use the tap. Sansari would argue that if your ds had learned to instead recall the sound for the letter than he wouldn't have the problems he does now.

 

She'd be wrong. :D We use the method we do because my dd has these issues. Before LiPS and Barton, I could say one letter and its sound to dd, and she couldn't repeat the sound, much less remember two or three sounds to blend them together. The whole idea of multisensory is to use multiple pathways to get the information to the brain because one pathway isn't enough.

 

Personally I think you can make arguments for each approach. Not all kids develop a dependency, and it does get most kids up and running more quickly.

 

I decided that I would rather not risk it and so I am doing the extra work to develop letter to sound recall, and I am not using the picture sheet or the apple (olive, Eddy, Itchy, can't remember the u one) taps.

 

That said I can't help but wonder about kids with low working memory, if maybe they need this in order to get there at all, KWIM? If it is between using tapping to remember and not being able to recall at all, by all means tap away. I just knew my ds didn't have a low working memory. But I stopped Barton mostly becuase it moved too fast for ds. The spelling in particular. I would give him a word, he would do the finger spelling, do a b-d or other letter check, do the vowel tap, check his sheet to see what the letter was, and by this time he had forgotten the original word 90% of the time and had to start over. Where if I just gave him the word and had him spell it cold he got it right 90% of the time and the rest of the time he had recall problems (I can spot these because he pauses like he is trying to pull it out of his brain and can't find it, often he will just say he can't remember without writing anything).

 

I still think traditional o/g works better for dyslexic children, and that Barton is one of the best options out there. Spalding I think is stronger for children without LD's because it moves faster and o/g is slow.

 

Heather

 

Have you had your son tested for working memory? Based on my descriptions of my children's struggles, our EdPsych thought that middle dd had low working memory and dd9 had slow processing speed. Testing showed the opposite; middle dd has slow processing speed and dd9 has low working memory. Our SLP also later diagnosed dd9 with low working memory.

 

My dd used to really struggle with some of the Barton exercises, too. One thing Susan said was that they aren't memory exercises, so it's okay to repeat the word as many times as necessary. She still sometimes forgets the word before she finishes spelling it, but not nearly as often as she used to.

 

My dd has recall problems, too, and sometimes the results are funny. The other day she was trying to tell me she wants to be an engineer, but every time she tried to say it, energy came out instead. We finally figured out what she was trying to say. I said engineer and had her repeat it about five times to try to get it stuck in her memory.

 

I hope you're having a good Christmas! I have to get back to the kitchen - oldest dd's bf is coming over for Christmas dinner this evening.

[RootAnn]

My dd has recall problems, too, and sometimes the results are funny. The other day she was trying to tell me she wants to be an engineer, but every time she tried to say it, energy came out instead. We finally figured out what she was trying to say. I said engineer and had her repeat it about five times to try to get it stuck in her memory.

 

I sometimes can think of a word, but when I try to say it, it comes out as a completely different word. I repeat it over & over, but can't say it correctly unless someone else does first, even though I know how to pronounce it & everything! And I am an engineer. :lol:

[Snowfall]

My dd has recall problems, too, and sometimes the results are funny. The other day she was trying to tell me she wants to be an engineer, but every time she tried to say it, energy came out instead. We finally figured out what she was trying to say. I said engineer and had her repeat it about five times to try to get it stuck in her memory.

 

My dd did almost the same thing once, but she was only 4 so I don't think it is because of a recall problem. She was trying to say 'energy', but all she could get out was 'injury' and she knew it was wrong and was SO, SO MAD that she couldn't say the right word. She was stomping her foot and yelling and of course it took us 30 minutes to figure out what she meant, because 'energy' and 'injury', while they sound alike, have nothing to do with one another, and we were guessing based on the assumption that the words had similar meanings, rather than that they sounded similar. Sorry to hijack, your story just reminded me of that and I thought it was funny that they both involved the word 'energy'. :)

[siloam]

I don't remember that and it's not in dd's spelling notebook, so we must have skipped it for some reason.

 

It was something that the child was to do if needed. If it didn't seem necessary then the child could skip it. Because Barton is mostly used for remedial purposes I doubt it gets used that much. Because ds is so young, he really needed it or more work with sound letter recall in general.

 

Have you had your son tested for working memory? Based on my descriptions of my children's struggles, our EdPsych thought that middle dd had low working memory and dd9 had slow processing speed. Testing showed the opposite; middle dd has slow processing speed and dd9 has low working memory. Our SLP also later diagnosed dd9 with low working memory.

 

No but in other areas he doesn't seem to have a problem with memory. He could play Pokemon cards by the time he was 5, and was good at it. He had to keep track of his Pokemon and mine (6 total) their type, energy, any special cards attached , weakness and resistance. In addition all these pieces are constantly changing and he didn't have problems with it even through he couldn't read the cards. If he had working memory problems I suspect he wouldn't have been able to keep up, but would have dropped pieces.

 

Overall dh is against testing. I could push it but I haven't felt to need to yet. If ds hits a wall I will and ds will give in. But so far I have been able to get the girls over all the hills and mountains we have hit so far.

 

She'd be wrong. We use the method we do because my dd has these issues. Before LiPS and Barton, I could say one letter and its sound to dd, and she couldn't repeat the sound, much less remember two or three sounds to blend them together. The whole idea of multisensory is to use multiple pathways to get the information to the brain because one pathway isn't enough.

 

SWR is multi-sensory, it just doesn't use rhyme, pictures and such as part of the multi-sensory component. Original o/g, on which the first studies are based, only used writing, saying and hearing as their multi-sensory components. I do think Barton is stronger for what she has added to that, and I do continue to use the taps, swishes, swipes and such. My ds is kinsthetic, so that was pure genius in getting him to focus on the work at hand instead of something he was holding in his hand.

 

For ds the SWR methods are working better for him. He was in tears daily with Barton, and when I took a step back to covering one letter per week using the SWR and SS work, he has shown more progress and the least amount of recall problems. He only has issues when he tries to work with more letters than we have covered thus far in this slow method. He knows most of phonogram sounds from LiPS, so he can read at a 2nd grade level, but the recall problems show up. When I stick to the SL LA one letter a week he doesn't have those problems.

 

But the sequence I use based on SWR but modified is:

 

1. Say the sound(s) and have the child repeat (this gives the child a chance to try to recall the letter without seeing it).

 

2. Show the child the card, say the sound(s) and have the child repeat (works on letter to sound recall).

 

3. Put the card down, have the child write the letter while saying the sound(s) (I use the sand box, which is another idea I got from SWR/Cursive First). (This works on sound to letter recall.)

 

4. Have the child look at what they have written and again say the sounds (reinforcement).

 

5. I add Seeing Stars: air writing, then visualizing the letter while saying the sound.

 

Barton would have gotten him there, but at a price. He would have hated it, and probably had an attitude towards reading. It didn't matter how much I tried to take the blame just the fact that we had to restart would bring him to an emotional wall.

 

I am also now basing his spelling on SWR ideas, though again I modify for ds particular issues:

 

Day 1 I dictate the sounds to him and he writes the word in sand. SWR has the teacher fingespell without saying the sounds. Also different from Barton if there is a two letter phonogram the teacher puts up two fingers but keeps them together so they can see they make one sound. This gives the child hints as to how to spell it. DS has enough auditory processing issues that I want him to see and feel it spelled correctly the first time, so I give him the sounds on the first day and help him choose the right spelling, if needed.

 

Day 2 I dictate the words as normal and he air writes them and visualizes them (SS work, SWR would just have the child write them out again, and/or do simple grammar work with them).

 

Day 3 I dictate the words again this time he uses a white board to write them on and he again visualizes them.

 

Day 4 I don't use the finger spelling, I give him the word and he spells it on lined paper and once more he visualizes it and spells it backwards (this is a SS skill).

 

Thus he works from gross motor skills to fine motor skills and from being give the spelling to having to spell it himself, visualize it and hold it in his mind to spell it backwards with. This process doesn't frustrate him.

 

I think if ds was older Barton would have worked better. I was just too fast paced for him. And yes that is as slow and tedious as it sounds. :D It is working through so we just keep crawling forward.

 

 

I hope you're having a good Christmas! I have to get back to the kitchen - oldest dd's bf is coming over for Christmas dinner this evening.

Yes we are, thanks! I hope you had a wonderful day there as well. (Not even thinking about bf yet, ugh! It all comes too fast!

 

Heather

[siloam]

Spalding (not WRTR, as WRTR is the manual, not the method) teaches syllables and rules, which are applied and discussed and analyzed for every word.

 

I know that WRTR uses syllables, but my impression was they use clapping of syllables more than syllable rules.

 

O/g programs will take a nonsense word like:

 

tafid

 

It will have the child find the vowels, then look at how many consonants are in between. If there is one they know that most of the time it will go with the second syllable:

 

ta fid

 

Thus because the a is at the end of the syllable it should say its long sound, and because the i is in a closed syllable it should make its short sound.

 

I didn't think WRTR included work with syllable rules, practicing dividing words based on the rule and not clapping.

 

Not sure how you figure that Spalding "allows reading to come in its own time." Besides the children reading their own spelling words from the beginning, reading from good trade books begins when the dc have finished the spelling words to Section I. Mrs. Spalding goes into great detail on how to do the reading lesson with the children, and the fifth edition has many pages of directions/sample discussions/etc. for the reading lesson.

 

That was poorly stated, thanks for forcing me to clarify it.

 

O/g programs with two sets of words, one for reading purposes (generally using tiles) and one for spelling purposes (generally using pencil and paper). The child does also read the spelling word after they spell it.

 

The work I have seen in SWR and by basis of the fact that Wanda Sansari worked directly with Romalda Spalding and based SWR on WRTR I assume it is the same in WRTR, is like the spelling work in o/g programs. WRTR and SWR from what I have seen do encourage reading but does not require reading of anything but the spelling words till the child shows readiness to read. O/g programs gives direct reading instruction, down to how to find and use phrases in the cadence of one's reading from the very beginning.

 

I use the term "allows reading to come in its own time." because that is how it feels and looks to me in comparison to o/g. I am not trying to imply that it is thereby lazy about it. I still believe that WRTR, SWR and PR and much stronger reading programs than much that is offered on the marked to teach reading instruction. It just isn't as aggressive about teaching it. That isn't needed with most kids. LD kids often have to be directly taught how to blend, the cadence of sentences, and other simple things that other kids just naturally know.

 

Hopefully that makes more sense.

 

Heather

[LizzyBee]

SWR is multi-sensory, it just doesn't use rhyme, pictures and such as part of the multi-sensory component. Original o/g, on which the first studies are based, only used writing, saying and hearing as their multi-sensory components. I do think Barton is stronger for what she has added to that, and I do continue to use the taps, swishes, swipes and such. My ds is kinsthetic, so that was pure genius in getting him to focus on the work at hand instead of something he was holding in his hand.

 

Heather

 

I get that SWR is multisensory, but I just meant that Barton is moreso (imo), using more pathways and methods. My dd9 has dylexic-dysgraphia and auditory processing disorder, so relying solely on writing, saying, and hearing would be an exercise in futility for her. I think you're amazing to be able to take concepts from different programs and put them together to adapt them to your children. I have to find one program that I think will work best and go with it, because I don't have the creativity to modify and adapt much. I've thought about whether we should add Seeing Stars, V/V, or IdeaChain to what we're doing, but I think I'd get overwhelmed if we did. So we're going to keep plugging away with Barton for now.

 

I used SWR for a year with my middle child. I think it traumatized her the way Barton would have traumatized your son. That was the year she pulled her hair and call herself stupid, and she made very little progress in spelling or reading while using SWR. After that experience, I sold SWR and never looked back!

 

Christmas dinner went great. You're right - the bf/gf thing happens too soon. My dd is only 16, and we're already having to share her on the holidays. Well, we don't have to, but her bf and his family are wonderful people, so we've been supportive of the relationship.

Edited December 26, 2010 by LizzyBee

[siloam]

I get that SWR is multisensory, but I just meant that Barton is moreso (imo), using more pathways and methods. My dd9 has dylexic-dysgraphia and auditory processing disorder, so relying solely on writing, saying, and hearing would be an exercise in futility for her. I think you're amazing to be able to take concepts from different programs and put them together to adapt them to your children. I have to find one program that I think will work best and go with it, because I don't have the creativity to modify and adapt much. I've thought about whether we should add Seeing Stars, V/V, or IdeaChain to what we're doing, but I think I'd get overwhelmed if we did. So we're going to keep plugging away with Barton for now.

 

I used SWR for a year with my middle child. I think it traumatized her the way Barton would have traumatized your son. That was the year she pulled her hair and call herself stupid, and she made very progress in spelling or reading while using SWR. After that experience, I sold SWR and never looked back!

 

Christmas dinner went great. You're right - the bf/gf thing happens too soon. My dd is only 16, and we're already having to share her on the holidays. Well, we don't have to, but her bf and his family are wonderful people, so we've been supportive of the relationship.

 

LOL! My 2nd dd actually cried through SWR. It is what made me seek out the incremental o/g. Honestly I think ds would too because like me they sequential thinkers, like with Barton ideas behind it do work. Now that I think about it I could use Barton as a base and just slow it down, adding phonogram work, SS work and just working with less words (he works with 8 words at a time, over a week). Long term SL works as a better base only because I know where to fit in all the little reader I already own, and with Barton I would have to buy new ones because of the unusual sequence.

 

Being able to blend programs isn't necessarily better, everything is a two edged sword. I spend a lot of time in prayer over the whole thing. It would be so much simpler to just do what it tells me to instead of picking and choosing from it all....

 

Heather