Phonics question about blends

[redquilthorse]

I am going through various phonics curricula, trying to decide what to use. I have noticed that some curricula teach vowel/consonant blends (like -at, -an, etc.). But others don't teach those explicitly as blends. They only teach consonant blends. Which method is better? I am not sure which to use with my 5 year old who is just starting to read CVC words. Also, does anyone know whether AAR teaches vowel/consonant blends? I looked at their sample online, and it does not appear that they do. But the sample is only a portion of the teacher's manual.

[theYoungerMrsWarde]

I don't know what AAR does, but I don't consider vowel/consonants to be blends. But that could just be what I'm using (OPG, supplemented with HOP.) I know there are consonant blends and vowel teams. :confused:

[boscopup]

Those are not "blends". They are word family parts.

[redquilthorse]

Sorry to use the wrong terminology. So, regardless of what they are called, I have noticed that some resources teach short vowel words by teaching the child to recognize -an, -am, -et, -at, etc., by having them replace the first consonant. Starfall does this, and if I remember right from when I used it years ago, Sing Spell Read and Write does this. Abeka also teaches "blend ladders" that teach the kids beginning sounds like ba, be, bi, bo, bu. But other resources don't do this and jump straight from teaching individual letter sounds into teaching three letter words (100EZ lessons, for example) .

 

So my question is, which methods seem to work best?

[Farrar]

I think questions like that depend on the kid. I don't think either method is necessarily better and I've certainly never seen anyone here quote research about it. I also think that most kids have a lot of starts with learning to read so you might start with one method, try another one, then go back to the first one. And then it may depend on when it hit them as much as what you used to teach.

[forty-two]

Dd6 needed to start with -an, -at, -ad, etc. She knew all her letter sounds, but too many different combinations thrown at her at once threw her off. She needed to work through each possible -an combo to fluency before adding in -at words, then work those -at words to fluency before adding -ad words, etc. We spent thirty-six lessons gradually adding in all the different cvc combinations and practicing them to fluency - probably the equivalent of 75-100 beginner Bob books, in terms of amount of text - before adding in blends, and she needed every bit of it.

 

(I figured out she needed that much practice through experience with faster programs.)

[eloquacious]

This methodology was used long ago for syllable reading, not word families. So closed syllables (with short vowels) would be compared to open ones (with long vowels). This method teaches he, me, we, be, go, no, so, I, a, etc completely phonetically from the very beginning, so there's something to be said for it. ;)

[boscopup]

This methodology was used long ago for syllable reading, not word families. So closed syllables (with short vowels) would be compared to open ones (with long vowels). This method teaches he, me, we, be, go, no, so, I, a, etc completely phonetically from the very beginning, so there's something to be said for it. ;)

 

 

Though there are several phonics curricula that don't use it that way. Blend Phonics, MFW K and R&S Phonics are three that I know of - they start with "ba" with a short /a/, then teach "bat" from there.

 

Websters's Speller and other Syllabaries are the only ones I've seen teaching "ba" with a long /A/ sound. I used it for my middle son, and I love that it taught so many of those short so-called "sight words" that kids need to learn right away when reading sentences.

 

I don't think it really matters which way you teach phonics, as long as you are consistently teaching phonics. Some of these methods may make it easier for a child not already blending. I never started a phonics program before my child was capable of blending, so it didn't really matter to my kids whether we did b-at or ba-t or b-a-t. If a child is needing help learning to blend, I think doing -at or ba- could be very useful, and it's still solid phonics.

 

The only reason I've shied away from programs that start with "ba-" as a short /a/ sound is because I already taught this child (DS2) the open syllables from Webster's Speller. I think it would confuse him. He's also beyond that now and has no problem sounding out any CVC, CVCC, CCVC, etc. word or CV or V words (he, she, me, the, a, I, no, go, etc.). So we just plug away, revealing one phonogram at a time (using a notched card), and he's doing really well.

 

So don't get hung up on the style unless your kid actually needs it. Many kids can learn any of the three ways, and all 3 ways are used in various solid phonics programs. Pick one that matches your teaching style and you think would work well for your child. I they have samples online of the first pages, try a few pages out to see how your kid does with it. Blend Phonics is completely free, so that would be a good one to try.