Help! Sight Words? Did I Pick the Wrong Thing?

[fruitofthewomb]

I am going to use A Beka for phonics and reading for my K dd. My MIL (who is a reading aide at a public school) asked when I would teach sight words. I looked through my teacher's manual but didn't find any instructions on it-only a blurb at the beginning that says to teach them as they come up-then in scope and sequence it says they teach sight words a, to, do, of, and you in K program. MIL said that sight words are taught early on in K at public school. I am pretty sure I have read other places to teach sight words pretty early too.

 

So-should I find another resource for sight words or just not worry about it? What is your experience with this?

 

My dd already knows most letter sounds and tries to spell words phonetically-last night she spelled tiger "TIGR". So I feel like we will move pretty quickly into reading. Maybe A Beka isn't the right program?

 

HELP! I planned to start "officially" in a week but I don't like questioning my choices. I still have time to change/alter if I need to.

[boscopup]

I think first you need to decide whether sight words are what you really want to do. Just because the public school relies on them doesn't mean they're the be all end all.

 

Most sight words can be taught phonetically. For example, "he", "she", "it"... all phonetic! The first two are open syllables, so you use a long vowel sound. the last one is a closed syllable, so you use a short vowel sound. My middle child is learning to read right now. He has learned "a", "the", "and", "he", and "it" without teaching them as sight words. I taught them phonetically. The more we read them, the easier they'll get and they'll *become* sight words for the child, but I do not want to TEACH them as sight words to begin with. The only words I will teach as sight words are those which break the rules (such as "one"). There are very few of those.

 

If you use a good phonics program, your child will learn the "sight words" phonetically and be able to read better than the child taught with sight words, who will eventually have trouble when they get to big words and have no clue how to sound them out (BTDT with my son who taught himself to read... he's learned phonics in the last year to correct that).

[TracyR]

It really doesn't matter when you introduce sight words. I found with my girls teaching them to start reading first and then introducing 'sight words' 2nd seemed to work just fine.

You may have some here that say " Don't teach sight words." But sadly in our English language there are more words that do NOT follow the rules than do. Teaching sight words at some point is inevitable. Plus eventually as I have learned with my daughers, once they start reading children no longer want to take the time to sound out each word they come across either. I noticed this around the age of when they start reading more fluently. LOL I can't give an age because my daughters have done this at different ages. LOL

 

I say keep your Abeka program. They have an excellent reading program. Then use this website : http://www.uniqueteachingresources.com/reading-sight-words.html

No need to dump what you already have.

 

But if you feel you need a program that teaches both sight and phonics:

 

Rod and Staff

Christian Light

Calvert's Reading program are a few that come to my mind that teach both. I have found that teaching a mixture of both makes very good readers. I found this approach when I first started homeschooling and my oldest had difficulty with reading. It wasn't until I blended both approaches ( sight words and phonics) did she finally take off in reading and now at the age of 13 reads well , comprehends , and just swallows up books as much as she can.

[Ellie]

You do not need to teach "sight words." Any good phonics method will automatically teach the words dc need to know to be able to read well.

 

FTR, the words your mil mentioned are not, in fact, "sight words." That is, all of them can be taught phonetically or with recognizable rules/exceptions. For example, "you" is not a sight word, because the sound "ou" makes is one of the four sounds made by that phonogram.

 

ABeka's phonics instruction is very good. If I may be blunt, don't second-guess yourself based on the comments of someone who works in the public schools, institutions which don't have an exemplary track record when it comes to teaching literacy, KWIM?

[Aurelia]

Don't worry about teaching sight words. IME, it's better to teach them phonetically so the child can have better word attack skills later on.

[JudoMom]

You do not need to teach "sight words." Any good phonics method will automatically teach the words dc need to know to be able to read well.

 

FTR, the words your mil mentioned are not, in fact, "sight words." That is, all of them can be taught phonetically or with recognizable rules/exceptions. For example, "you" is not a sight word, because the sound "ou" makes is one of the four sounds made by that phonogram.

 

ABeka's phonics instruction is very good. If I may be blunt, don't second-guess yourself based on the comments of someone who works in the public schools, institutions which don't have an exemplary track record when it comes to teaching literacy, KWIM?

 

:iagree:

 

I'm teaching my 5th son to read, and I've never taught a sight word. My older 4 boys can read nearly anything I place in front of them.

[Roadrunner]

PS teaches "like" and "play" and many more words as sight words. Not the best method :)

[fruitofthewomb]

Thanks for the quick replies! I am just sticking with my plans. I will figure out later if or when I will intro sight words. Sounds like it depends on the child.

 

Now for my MIL rant:

First, I adore her. She is a wonderful person and really helps me. But I really don't care what the public school is doing and I have already told her that several times (like when she saw my math program and said there was no way a K'er could do it and that is NOT what they do in K at public school-I said good, sounds like a picked a winner). She has finally warmed up to the homeschooling but I think she expects me to recreate her school at home. When she brought up sight words-I did not have an answer and that bothered me that I didn't know something. Which she then used to tell me how public school did it and that she would look at my program and see what I might need from the teachers at her school and she has lots of materials I can use, etc, etc. Ugh! She also tells me every time my dd is with her and makes a comment about being sad that she isn't going to school like everyone else (according to her, it is absolutely the most pitiful thing she has ever seen). Oh, and she wants me to bring her to the school at lunch and recess sometimes or when they have a special program so she doesn't miss out. I love her, but she just doesn't get it!

 

Ok, sorry for that! It's been bubbling all week long as I have tried to finalize my plans and get organized and have heard a few too many comments from family about our choices.

[Susie in MS]

While I agree that the ps is turning out some pretty bad track records, and I do agree that some words being taught as sight words are actually phonetically correct, I also agree with everything Tracy said too. There are a LOT of words that do not follow the rules. For those just teach them as sight words when they come up. I tell my dd that this is one of those bad words that is not following the rules. Bad, bad word! Hehe! I find that with my dd at least words are picked up by sight VERY easily. I only teach basic phonics and don't get into every teeny tiny rule. It is just too confusing.

[Ellie]

While I agree that the ps is turning out some pretty bad track records, and I do agree that some words being taught as sight words are actually phonetically correct, I also agree with everything Tracy said too. There are a LOT of words that do not follow the rules. For those just teach them as sight words when they come up. I tell my dd that this is one of those bad words that is not following the rules. Bad, bad word! Hehe! I find that with my dd at least words are picked up by sight VERY easily. I only teach basic phonics and don't get into every teeny tiny rule. It is just too confusing.

As a Spalding geek, I'd have to say that no, there really aren't many words that don't follow the rules. :-)

 

I wouldn't be so bothered at the thought of teaching children to just memorize a few words, even though it isn't the least bit necessary, if public schools were actually teaching phonics and could show that public school students were literate. That has not been the case, overall, for upwards of 50 years.

[TracyR]

Thanks for the quick replies! I am just sticking with my plans. I will figure out later if or when I will intro sight words. Sounds like it depends on the child.

 

Now for my MIL rant:

First, I adore her. She is a wonderful person and really helps me. But I really don't care what the public school is doing and I have already told her that several times (like when she saw my math program and said there was no way a K'er could do it and that is NOT what they do in K at public school-I said good, sounds like a picked a winner). She has finally warmed up to the homeschooling but I think she expects me to recreate her school at home. When she brought up sight words-I did not have an answer and that bothered me that I didn't know something. Which she then used to tell me how public school did it and that she would look at my program and see what I might need from the teachers at her school and she has lots of materials I can use, etc, etc. Ugh! She also tells me every time my dd is with her and makes a comment about being sad that she isn't going to school like everyone else (according to her, it is absolutely the most pitiful thing she has ever seen). Oh, and she wants me to bring her to the school at lunch and recess sometimes or when they have a special program so she doesn't miss out. I love her, but she just doesn't get it!

 

Ok, sorry for that! It's been bubbling all week long as I have tried to finalize my plans and get organized and have heard a few too many comments from family about our choices.

 

 

Yeah, I've been hearing the same things from my in laws. That my 13 yr old is sad and lonely. Umm, how can you be lonely with three other siblings? Plus I make a huge effort to find anyone I can for playdates , and we get out quite a bit. As for sad, well she's 13 and hormonal if you catch my drift. So moody and 13. But not lonely and sad. I swear its an emotional tatic used because they want to be controling. I asked my daughter if she was lonely and sad and she told me no that she's fine with homeschooling. So really its not the emotions of your child but the emotions of the parent/inlaws because they feel they are missing out on something ( which they really aren't).

[fruitofthewomb]

I was just reading some archives about sight words from the forum and understand the whole sight word vs phonics debate a little better. I guess that is why sight words never entered in my head-I thought you taught phonics first but my MIL comments threw me off. I didn't realize schools depended on them for reading so much. I just assumed the PS was heavy, heavy on phonics (mostly because my MIL talks about phonics all the time and that is what she does with remedial students). But looking at my nieces and nephews it explains a lot about how they read aloud to me. I always wondered why they seemed to be guessing so much or would misread a very "easy to read" word. Now I will say that all my neices and nephews are very good, fluent readers so I don't think sight words damaged them but I do see them guessing when it would be unneccesary if they read phonetically.

 

So interesting! Thanks for all the help guys!

[kristinannie]

My son was taught only sight words in Pre-K and it was disastrous. He refused to even try to sound out a word and just wanted me to tell him what the words were. It took me a couple of months to wean him off of that. I am not completely against sight words because I do think it helps fluency for children to learn some of the most common words before they get there phonetically, but I always explain the phonics of each sight word when we come upon it in reading. Honestly, I don't think you need to teach sight words, per se. Kids will pick them up as they see them frequently. Best of luck as you start out. We are just starting out as well. We have a fun and interesting journey ahead of us!!!!

[ClassicalTwins]

I sent two phonetic readers to school K, and brought home two kids who had given up on reading anything...6 months into K. So whatever the PS in my area is teaching...doesn't work.

[3peasinapod]

Rant away. I won't add anything, as I agree with all the posters. Don't worry about the sight words.

 

I've had comments when we first started directed at DD, how they were sorry she didn't get to go to preschool, etc., etc. It hasn't happened except at the very beginning. I'm thankful for that.

[Ellie]

I was just reading some archives about sight words from the forum and understand the whole sight word vs phonics debate a little better. I guess that is why sight words never entered in my head-I thought you taught phonics first but my MIL comments threw me off. I didn't realize schools depended on them for reading so much. I just assumed the PS was heavy, heavy on phonics (mostly because my MIL talks about phonics all the time and that is what she does with remedial students). But looking at my nieces and nephews it explains a lot about how they read aloud to me. I always wondered why they seemed to be guessing so much or would misread a very "easy to read" word. Now I will say that all my neices and nephews are very good, fluent readers so I don't think sight words damaged them but I do see them guessing when it would be unneccesary if they read phonetically.

 

So interesting! Thanks for all the help guys!

You should never assume anything. :lol:

 

Often public school teachers use the word "phonics" differently than what you and I would. Imagine Inigo Montoya saying, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." :lol:

 

The book which snapped me around was "Why Johnny Still Can't Read."

[FO4UR]

You do not need to teach "sight words." Any good phonics method will automatically teach the words dc need to know to be able to read well.

 

FTR, the words your mil mentioned are not, in fact, "sight words." That is, all of them can be taught phonetically or with recognizable rules/exceptions. For example, "you" is not a sight word, because the sound "ou" makes is one of the four sounds made by that phonogram.

 

ABeka's phonics instruction is very good. If I may be blunt, don't second-guess yourself based on the comments of someone who works in the public schools, institutions which don't have an exemplary track record when it comes to teaching literacy, KWIM?

 

:iagree: I know lots of HS kids (avid readers) who use(d) Abeka.

 

Thanks for the quick replies! I am just sticking with my plans. I will figure out later if or when I will intro sight words. Sounds like it depends on the child.

 

Now for my MIL rant:

First, I adore her. She is a wonderful person and really helps me. But I really don't care what the public school is doing and I have already told her that several times (like when she saw my math program and said there was no way a K'er could do it and that is NOT what they do in K at public school-I said good, sounds like a picked a winner). She has finally warmed up to the homeschooling but I think she expects me to recreate her school at home. When she brought up sight words-I did not have an answer and that bothered me that I didn't know something. Which she then used to tell me how public school did it and that she would look at my program and see what I might need from the teachers at her school and she has lots of materials I can use, etc, etc. Ugh! She also tells me every time my dd is with her and makes a comment about being sad that she isn't going to school like everyone else (according to her, it is absolutely the most pitiful thing she has ever seen). Oh, and she wants me to bring her to the school at lunch and recess sometimes or when they have a special program so she doesn't miss out. I love her, but she just doesn't get it!

 

Ok, sorry for that! It's been bubbling all week long as I have tried to finalize my plans and get organized and have heard a few too many comments from family about our choices.

 

 

Goodness, do a search for "bean dip" and check out the book "Boundaries" at your library. Say nothing to your MIL about HSing until you've done those 2 things.;)

 

 

 

And, I have never been a sight-word teacher...I'm a phonics gal (sympathetic with the Spalding Geek:tongue_smilie::D)...and I've got one dc who naturally guesses. I have to actively have him practice decoding (even with NO previous sight word training). It is better to be a late (phonetic) reader, than have those guessing habits fostered in order to get early "results."

 

In this town, they want Kindergarteners to already know lots of sight words before entering the school doors.:confused:

[Paula in MS]

Abeka Phonics, for the most part produces very strong readers. You have chosen a very solid, well respected reading program. Just be aware to use phonics-based readers with your child instead of sight word readers that you might get at the library. Abeka's readers go along with the phonics program. The PS method produces readers that can read books fast because they have memorized the high frequency words, but they lack the tools to figure out words that they have never seen before. That's where phonics comes in. You won't be disappointed.

 

Paula

[Tiberia]

:

 

Goodness' date=' do a search for "bean dip" and check out the book "Boundaries" at your library. Say nothing to your MIL about HSing until you've done those 2 things.;)

[/quote']

:iagree:

Homeschooling is a completely different animal than public schooling. Your MIL doesn't know anything different, so that's the foundation of her "helpfulness." She thinks you should replicate PS at home. Don't let her pressure you into that, even if it's subtle. She is probably a lovely woman who wants the best for her grandkids, but just doesn't "get" homeschooling.

 

Do your research, pick your curriculum, and trust yourself. You can change later if it isn't working. Trust yourself. MIL will probably be impressed later, but you may have to pass some bean dip in the meantime.

 

Best wishes,

Joann

[jenbrdsly]

I would just like to point out that in Chapter 4, page 34 of the third edition of The Well Trained Mind SWB and JW specifically recommend teaching sight words. I am in 100% agreement. Teaching sight words and teaching phonics are not mutually exclusive activities. Both have a valued place in teaching young children how to read.

[boscopup]

I would just like to point out that in Chapter 4, page 34 of the third edition of The Well Trained Mind SWB and JW specifically recommend teaching sight words. I am in 100% agreement. Teaching sight words and teaching phonics are not mutually exclusive activities. Both have a valued place in teaching young children how to read.

 

 

They recommend teaching the non-phonetic sight words in context, which I believe all of the pro-phonics folks already agreed with (the "rule breakers"). That is NOT what most schools do. I saw the Dolch sight word lists for K and first grade. They were riddled with perfectly phonetic (very easily phonetic) words. Those do not need to be taught as sight words. Why on earth should "it" be a sight word? Any child reading basic CVC words can sound out "it".

 

To quote that section:

And you don't want your beginning reader to memorize whole words as a habit, rather than sounding out the phonetic elements of the word.

They then go on to talk more about why you should use a systematic phonics program instead of teaching by "sight words" on p221. And while yes, the schools are now using a hybrid approach, it still produces a lot of children who guess at a word rather than having the tools to figure it out himself.

 

Yes, teach TRUE sight words in context. Obviously, you have to teach them somehow! The word "one" just has to be memorized, as it isn't phonetic. But MOST of the words on the Dolch sight word list are NOT true sight words. They're phonetic. My 4 year old with only a very brief intro to Webster's Syllabary was able to figure out a good chunk of the K level sight words: a, an, and, the, I, me, he, she, it... You don't need to teach those by "sight". They are phonetic. Have the child sound it out. They'll read wonderfully.

[2GAboys]

:iagree:

PS teaches "like" and "play" and many more words as sight words. Not the best method :)

 

 

Most "sight words" taught in PS are words that can be read phonetically. They are called sight words because they are high frequency words. Words that do not follow the rules (we call them disobedient-ala OPGTR) like "said", "busy" "eye", etc will be covered by a good phonics program. Use what you have.

[SnMomof7]

OK - seriously, DO NOT worry about this comment. A Beka does teach a few sight words in the readers - no biggie. We used A Handbook for Reading and the readers to teach DD #1 to read, and it worked great. When you get a sight word it will be in the reader as 'words to watch for', SO just point out the word and say, "Hey, look, this word says 'the'." Then get on with the reading aloud together. :)

 

A Beka reading works just fine and dandy :). Go mama go!

[FO4UR]

They recommend teaching the non-phonetic sight words in context, which I believe all of the pro-phonics folks already agreed with (the "rule breakers"). That is NOT what most schools do.

 

:iagree:I know at least one kindergartener who went in knowing sight words *before* learning the letter sounds! Backwards!!! Sure, the child is "reading" Dr. Suess by the summer, but can said child decode? Will this child get beyond that 4th grade slump? (google 4th grade slump ;))

 

 

 

The word "one" just has to be memorized, as it isn't phonetic.

 

 

Even the word "one" makes sense when learned along side "lone" and "alone" (Thank you, SWR.) ...poor "one" was all alONE...and the story can go from there and your child will never forget those 3 words.

 

"Two" can be remembered easily if learned with "twin" and "twelve."

 

 

 

Abeka is solid. Just read up on teaching reading so you can have a good discussion, or simply pass bean dip and move forward with your choice. You will 2nd guess yourself "until the cows come home" if you start now...just jump in. Let's humor this conversation with MIL next year at this time when your precious little one is reading already...:tongue_smilie:

[jenbrdsly]

They recommend teaching the non-phonetic sight words in context, which I believe all of the pro-phonics folks already agreed with (the "rule breakers"). That is NOT what most schools do. I saw the Dolch sight word lists for K and first grade. They were riddled with perfectly phonetic (very easily phonetic) words. Those do not need to be taught as sight words. Why on earth should "it" be a sight word? Any child reading basic CVC words can sound out "it".

 

To quote that section:

They then go on to talk more about why you should use a systematic phonics program instead of teaching by "sight words" on p221. And while yes, the schools are now using a hybrid approach, it still produces a lot of children who guess at a word rather than having the tools to figure it out himself.

 

Yes, teach TRUE sight words in context. Obviously, you have to teach them somehow! The word "one" just has to be memorized, as it isn't phonetic. But MOST of the words on the Dolch sight word list are NOT true sight words. They're phonetic. My 4 year old with only a very brief intro to Webster's Syllabary was able to figure out a good chunk of the K level sight words: a, an, and, the, I, me, he, she, it... You don't need to teach those by "sight". They are phonetic. Have the child sound it out. They'll read wonderfully.

 

When I taught PS with Open Court we used "outlaw" words, or the words that didn't break the rules. These were taught on sight. Then in the next district I taught in, we used a program I can't find anymore, called "Systematic Sequential Phonics They Use". It was part of the 4 blocks model. Sight words were taught similar to the Open Court method of using outlaw words.

However... with a really struggling K/1 reader, I would sometimes sit down with them and run through the dulche words just to build up their speed and fluency. I wasn't teaching them to learn words like "it" on sight. I was teaching them to recognize a word I had already taught them to sound out and say it quickly. For about 5% of the kids, this was a needed and effective approach.

[Guest vanessen.sarah]

Abeka in general is a more advanced program. So if you stick to it your kids will be ahead NOT behind the public school kids.

[farming_mum]

I got this from one of the lovely ladies on this forum and it explains everything to me. . . . . our flash cards will be burned tomorrow!!!!

 

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

[Down_the_Rabbit_Hole]

I think a good phonics program, like Abeka, and adding in sight words is fine. The site words Abeka gives for K will be all that is needed for their readers.

 

BJU uses phonics and service words. Service words are a combination of site words and words that are phonetically decoded but the phonics for them aren't taught at the time these words are needed. I found this to be a very good way to get the child reading more words and expanding their options when choosing books to read.

[angela in ohio]

However... with a really struggling K/1 reader, I would sometimes sit down with them and run through the dulche words just to build up their speed and fluency. I wasn't teaching them to learn words like "it" on sight. I was teaching them to recognize a word I had already taught them to sound out and say it quickly. For about 5% of the kids, this was a needed and effective approach.

 

This is not what most mean when they talk about teaching sight words; they mean having children memorize the Dolche list by sight without phonics instruction. What you are describing is practicing reading phonetically to increase fluency.

[morosophe]

BJU uses phonics and service words. Service words are a combination of site words and words that are phonetically decoded but the phonics for them aren't taught at the time these words are needed. I found this to be a very good way to get the child reading more words and expanding their options when choosing books to read.

 

THIS. I used Teach Your Child to Read in 100 Easy Lessons, which a lot of people don't like. It worked great for my son, though, because he was eager to GET READING. It does something similar.

 

I would recommend teaching some of the common words (like "the" and "a") by sight, so that they can head towards reading full sentences sooner rather than later. (Is there some phonics rule that fits "a"? "When a word is made up of one letter, a vowel, that vowel is long. 'I,' 'a,' and the archaic 'O' are three words that fit this 'rule.'" That's because they're the only one-letter words in the English language!) If you want to teach sight words "in context," by telling your child that the word is "the," "a," "I," or whatever when you run across it instead of giving them a little heads up before the reading part, that's fine, too. Also, when you teach the lesson on phonics that covers that word, use the word that they already know as an example. ("Remember, the 'th' in 'the' says 'th' just like that!) I think it helps the lesson "stick" a little better.

 

But then again, I've never been tempted to flashcard sight words. In fact, I hate flash cards so much that I bought my son a Flashmaster so he could drill himself on basic math facts. For me, sight words shouldn't be emphasized above the phonics--they should just be "gotten over" so that kids can use their phonics to start decoding all the new words on the page.

[boscopup]

I would recommend teaching some of the common words (like "the" and "a") by sight, so that they can head towards reading full sentences sooner rather than later.

 

I used Webster's Syllabary to teach DS2 early on. He knows open vs. closed syllables (eg, "ab" has a short /a/ sound, "ba" has a long /A/ sound). Because he learned this first, words like "a" and "the" were super easy to teach phonetically. I just had to teach the /th/ sound. The vowel sounds were expected, because they're both open syllables. ;) This is a child with speech and language delay, but he understood the open and closed syllables very easily from working through the syllabary.

 

He's not "reading" yet (he still sounds out every word in a sentence), but he can easily sound out those easy "sight words" without learning them as sight words. I'll definitely be going the Webster's Syllabary route with DS3 as well, because learning the long and short vowel sounds in this context has been wonderful!

[Guest IdahoMtnMom]

My DS is 4 and he is learing to read phonetically but as a result, he is also sight reading. He has also taught himself to sight read words like bank, verizon, spongebob (don't ask... i abhor that show), on, off, play, jeep, cat, leap frog, and many others related to his daily life.

 

I would not second quess your choice. I have a friend using Abeka K5 phonics and her son is doing fabulous with it! We have done no formal phonics/reading yet so I am not sure what we will use for kindergarten.

[momofabcd]

Someone mentioned Elizabeth B's phonicspage.org. Another site you can go to that gives A LOT of information about why phonics is superior to whole word memorization and why whole word memorization is so damaging. Isn't it ironic that PS teaches the so called "remedial" students sysematic Phonics? If they taught, true systematic phonics up front, there would be a lot less need for remediation, except in true cases.

You can't go wrong with Abeka. The program has a long track record of producing strong readers.