beginning phonics question

[mom2Hh]

I just started Logic of English Foundations with my almost 6 yr old son.  I used Hooked on Phonics with his older brother at age 5 (now 8.5) which so far has worked well for him. (though he is now using AAS for learning spelling).  I know that HOP is considered incomplete phonics.  But my concern is that teaching all the phonograms for each letter up front from the start seems confusing.  I actually don't remember for example at what point HOP taught that "c" also says /s/ but there was no issue it with the other sounds for my first son.  When a child is taught right away /k-s/ for "C", how does he know which sound it should make when he encounters it?  I looked ahead in LOE Foundations and when it finally teaches cvc words and immediately includes spelling, the lesson has them spell" sad".  How does the child know whether to use a "c" or an "s"? 

I've already seen my son getting confused by the multiple phonograms for some letters. I may be asking for trouble but I also started the first book of HOP with him recently (old version- the kind in 5 or 6 separate diff. colored boxes with cassette tapes which we don't use- I sit down and do it with him as I did with my first son).  My son wants so badly to learn to read and was feeling that LOE Foundations was too slow.  While  he actually likes doing the lessons (he gets to hop, jump, shout, etc.) he realizes he isn't actually learning to read words on a page yet.  I understand why LOE starts much more slowly than HOP and I had several reasons for choosing it, but he seems ready to start reading at least a few things.  HOP teaches which sound to use (shows an apple for "a" and pig for "p" and then they blend it /a-p/.  There is no confusion of whether it is long a or the "ah" a. 

 

so my question is, do children get confused when teaching the multiple phonograms for each letter (though it seems that the top programs teach that way).

Can anyone send me a link that explains that method simply?

Has anyone used Logig of English Foundations and found a way to speed things along initially for a child who already knows all the first sounds/phonograms of each letter?

 

 

[73349]

C actually has a rule: it says /s/ in front of e, i, and y but /k/ in front of a, o, and u (and other consonants except h). But there are some phonograms you have to try out by sounding out the word two different ways. Eventually you memorize the spellings of common words.

 

We started Foundations with B because DS did know those sounds. I'm focusing on the phonics rather than the spelling (and omitting the handwriting in favor of HWOT).

 

[mom2Hh]

C actually has a rule: it says /s/ in front of e, i, and y but /k/ in front of a, o, and u (and other consonants except h). But there are some phonograms you have to try out by sounding out the word two different ways. Eventually you memorize the spellings of common words.

 

We started Foundations with B because DS did know those sounds. I'm focusing on the phonics rather than the spelling (and omitting the handwriting in favor of HWOT).

 

yes, but I don't think they teach that rule in the beginning when the child is first learning to read cvc words.  "Sad" is one of the first words they introduce.  Maybe I just don't get it yet because I was looking ahead.  I know the rules from doing AAS with my older son.  But it would seem highly confusing to teach a child just learning how to read that rule.  ??  or am I wrong?  And I do understand why they teach spelling at the same time as reading.  That was a weakness with HOP and thus when my older son finished all the levels and was reading really well I realized he couldn't spell at all.  :blushing:  But now I see where the rules could just prove to be "too much" to handle in the beginning for some kids. 

[73349]

There's a difference between using the information to read (if you see S, say /s/ or /z/) and using it to spell (if you want /s/, use S or sometimes C). I expect DS to need less guidance for reading, since he can usually tell whether a word makes sense, and more for spelling (it can be phonetically accurate without being correct).

I guess that's why a lot of programs are meant for reading before spelling? Other LOE users, what say you?

[Ellie]

yes, but I don't think they teach that rule in the beginning when the child is first learning to read cvc words.  "Sad" is one of the first words they introduce.  Maybe I just don't get it yet because I was looking ahead.  I know the rules from doing AAS with my older son.  But it would seem highly confusing to teach a child just learning how to read that rule.  ??  or am I wrong?  And I do understand why they teach spelling at the same time as reading.  That was a weakness with HOP and thus when my older son finished all the levels and was reading really well I realized he couldn't spell at all.  :blushing:  But now I see where the rules could just prove to be "too much" to handle in the beginning for some kids. 

 

Over time, methods like this have proven to be very effective, so no, it isn't confusing to teach children all the sounds of the letters at one time.

 

It isn't that LOE is teaching children to spell at the same time they are learning to read; it is that LOE (and Spalding and SWR and Phonics Road) are teaching children to read by teaching them to spell. See the difference?

 

Not everything is a "rule." For example, that "a" has three sounds is not a rule; that it says its second sound at the end of a short word or syllable is. Children learn the rules in context with the words they are learning to write and spell.

[forty-two]

Fwiw, learning all the sounds for each phonogram at once was confusing for dd7.5, and so I went away from WRTR/SWR to a program that did one sound at a time. Took longer but she needed it. But we're about to do an intensive phonemic awareness program (LiPS) because she still can't differentiate between several sounds, so she might not be neurotypical here.

 

I've read that's one of the big differences between straight up Orton-Gillingham programs and O-G inspired programs, actually - how fast all the sounds are introduced. Apparently kids who have difficulties learning to read tend to get tripped up when too many sounds are introduced too quickly. True enough here, certainly.

[nature girl]

It isn't that LOE is teaching children to spell at the same time they are learning to read; it is that LOE (and Spalding and SWR and Phonics Road) are teaching children to read by teaching them to spell. See the difference?

 

Is that what they're doing by, in the beginning levels, asking the teacher to write the word first for the child to copy, rather than expecting the child to figure out the spelling on his own? So they're basically learning both to read and spell the words at the same time, rather than solely figuring out through rules how they should be spelled? (Although, I'm not sure why they'd be spelling CVC words since there are simpler ways for kids to learn how to read them.)

[mom2Hh]

Fwiw, learning all the sounds for each phonogram at once was confusing for dd7.5, and so I went away from WRTR/SWR to a program that did one sound at a time. Took longer but she needed it. But we're about to do an intensive phonemic awareness program (LiPS) because she still can't differentiate between several sounds, so she might not be neurotypical here.

 

I've read that's one of the big differences between straight up Orton-Gillingham programs and O-G inspired programs, actually - how fast all the sounds are introduced. Apparently kids who have difficulties learning to read tend to get tripped up when too many sounds are introduced too quickly. True enough here, certainly.

 

This is what I'm starting to wonder about my son.  He is delayed in some areas- haven't had good, thorough test results yet.  He was tested at a university speech and hearing clinic by a graduate student (which was a disaster if you ask me).  What I got from that is that he is delayed in some areas of expressive language.  He has speech issues in a few areas, some age typical like "r" and "L" but also in a few others that are more subtly like "sh" and some other soft sounds.  I'm not sure how that all is impacting his learning to read but all along I knew there were going to challenges compared to my first son.   I'm already seeing some issues with my younger son that I didn't see with my first.  I think that he might also do well initially with hooked on phonics but then I'm afraid I'll see more problems further down the road that will be harder to deal with if I don't teach him the "other" way (LOE/Spaulding, etc.)  He just really, really wants to be reading.  And he is all excited with HOP having read his first "story" already and a "book".  He wants to just go right through the whole level (but he wants to move faster than he should be.)  I really don't know what to do.  :confused1:

I chose LOE because of the high level of phonemic awareness, kinesthetic learning, and help/suggestions with pronunciation (which are so far not helping at all because I just get him to understand what his tongue is supposed to be doing.) I liked that it incorporated spelling and handwriting.  but... so far I've been skipping the handwriting because it seems too hard for him. (and because I haven't taken the time to make a sand tray or other sensory type writing methods). 

 

 

[forty-two]

I think that he might also do well initially with hooked on phonics but then I'm afraid I'll see more problems further down the road that will be harder to deal with if I don't teach him the "other" way (LOE/Spaulding, etc.) He just really, really wants to be reading. And he is all excited with HOP having read his first "story" already and a "book". He wants to just go right through the whole level (but he wants to move faster than he should be.) I really don't know what to do. :confused1:

I chose LOE because of the high level of phonemic awareness, kinesthetic learning, and help/suggestions with pronunciation (which are so far not helping at all because I just get him to understand what his tongue is supposed to be doing.) I liked that it incorporated spelling and handwriting.

I don't know what to *do* about speech issues, but my understanding is that that can definitely impact learning to read - you might want to ask on the learning challenges board here, as I know several people here have posted about those sorts of difficulties.

 

I was all gung-ho WRTR/SWR, wanted to teach my dc "right" ;), but while I stuck with pure phonics despite the fact that dd7.5 would have learned to read via sight words so much faster (and I felt bad at times for teaching reading via her weaknesses instead of her strengths), I gave up on the explicit rules approach, because it was just too much. I did a purely phonetic approach that taught via implicit patterns instead - figured that I could always do WRTR/SWR for spelling. And I am happy with that decision. We might have lost out on some brain training, but learning to read phonetically was hard enough for dd7.5 - you can only build so many connections at a time, kwim?

 

but... so far I've been skipping the handwriting because it seems too hard for him. (and because I haven't taken the time to make a sand tray or other sensory type writing methods).

 

 

Random thought - maybe you could have him air write his words - big arm motions - to get some of the kinesthetic writing benefits?

[mom2Hh]

...

. And I am happy with that decision. We might have lost out on some brain training, but learning to read phonetically was hard enough for dd7.5 - you can only build so many connections at a time, kwim?

 

Random thought - maybe you could have him air write his words - big arm motions - to get some of the kinesthetic writing benefits?

 

yes- that is what I'm starting to think too.  that perhaps my son is a kid who can't make as many connections at one time as other kids...  it seems so much harder having had a somewhat advanced child first! it was so easy to teach him- he teaches himself!

 

[Ellie]

Is that what they're doing by, in the beginning levels, asking the teacher to write the word first for the child to copy, rather than expecting the child to figure out the spelling on his own? So they're basically learning both to read and spell the words at the same time, rather than solely figuring out through rules how they should be spelled? (Although, I'm not sure why they'd be spelling CVC words since there are simpler ways for kids to learn how to read them.)

 

I don't think it's as effective for children to figure out the rules on their own as it is to tell them what the rules are as they apply to words they are learning to spell (and remember that not everything is a rule).

 

The children are learning to spell; reading just happens.

[forty-two]

yes- that is what I'm starting to think too. that perhaps my son is a kid who can't make as many connections at one time as other kids... it seems so much harder having had a somewhat advanced child first! it was so easy to teach him- he teaches himself!

At least for dd7.5 it wasn't so much that she couldn't make as many connections at one time as other kids, but that she had so many *more* connections she had to make than most kids. Her phonemic awareness was bad enough that she couldn't do any of the beginning phonemic awareness activities in reading programs - they all required skills the typical kid automatically develops that she never did. I thought she'd finally got it, when she seemed to start blending, but it turns out she just got better at compensating for her lack of it (as I found out when she failed the Barton pre-screening - thus why we are doing LiPS).

[a27mom]

I use Foundations :). I have been using A w/ both my girls because of the phonemic awareness activities. I double up lessons and skip some of the activities. (Only my oldest does the handwriting, and she already prints nicely, so we are just using it for cursive. My youngest just writes her spelling words in capitals since she can do those, and I do have her do the handwriting large motor activities ). We are going through A pretty quickly, and should start B soon.

 

When you dictate the spelling list it is ok to tell them what letter to use if it is confusing, although A uses all 1st sounds so you could point that out first. For words w/ K or C I tell them it is a tall /k/, if it is a K. (My kids would usually default to c at this point)

 

I also would recommend watching the logic of English teacher training videos on you tube. They are excellent. They were made before foundations came out, but they still give you a lot of good info.

 

In my case my older daughter needed all the sounds to read. She needs to English to be as much like a math equation as possible.

 

Oh about the salt box. I just keep a separate Baggie of salt and pour it on a plate for them to "write" on. Dump it back in the bag when we are done, very easy and quick.

[FromA2Z]

My ds just finished Foundations C we started w/ A last year at 4.75 y.o. He had absolutely no problems with learning all the sounds up front. (But that just may be him). I really believe that it has been a help to him. He is the type that say for example we were at the zoo and he saw a sign that said giraffe and I told him it was giraffe he would argue that it couldn't be b/c g says /g/ not /j/. He would not get why I hadn't told him before that it also says /j/.

 

Back to LOE, In level A you will only learn words that use the first sounds of letters. You could (but I wouldn't recommend) teaching only the first sounds until you got to B (where you learn words with the long and broad vowels) then teach those. I believe that my ds had such an easy time transitioning to long and broad vowel words b/c he was not blindsided all of a sudden that vowels had other sounds. He was aware of the other sounds now he was learning where to use them.

 

With regards to spelling.. You dictate the phonograms to the child, they write the correct letter for the sounds. So for sad, you would say /s/ /z/ (the sounds for s) they write S b/c they know the sounds for s, you say /a/ (the short, long, and broad) they write a, you say /d/. They do not guess which letter the /s/ sound is using ... You tell them by the sounds you say. C is /c/ /s/. Spelling is used (I believe) as a reinforcement to learn reading. (You are learning audibly, visually and kinesthetically. You are also working on encoding and not just decoding. It's like working an equation forwards and backwards. At this stage there is no "spelling test" and I would not expect my ds to spell every word we've done without me giving him the correct sounds to do so. (Though he can for a lot of words - it's just not my main objective). I will work on spelling "permanence" more in 2nd-3rd grade.

 

As far as handwriting - we did a lot of air writing and white board. My ds still does all his spelling words BIG on the whiteboard. This summer we're going to practice on paper before starting 1st. He's got all his letter formation down, now it's time to employ those fine motor skills.

 

As for the time. When I started A, we were also chomping at the bit to start reading. I believe by the end of A you are reading four letter words. If you do the 5 lessons a week that's 8 weeks - which isn't bad going from nothing to 4 letter words. I know it seems like forever. I started my ds last Jan and with time out for early pregnancy, summer, and childbirth my ds is now reading at a 2nd grade level. I did add in AAR readers for my ds for level A. (Just b/c they're so pretty.)

 

I'm so pleased with LOE b/c not only can my son read, he "gets" the language and he's not intimidated by new words he has not seen.

 

That being said no curriculum or method is right for all.

[Lecka]

I think if you want, you can use HOP first and then use LOE. You see what is working in your home.

 

There are approaches that learn one sound first and focus on blending and phonetically-regular words.  

 

There are approaches that teach all the sounds and from the beginning.

 

There are pros and cons both ways.  I don't think there is any definitive thing that one way is a lot better or worse.  If you see the sounds being confusing, then you can come back to that later, after he is established in blending.  

 

As for how it is taught -- when I used Abecedarian Level B, my son learned one sound but then was quickly introduced to a second sound, and would have practice testing out the two sounds to see which sound made a word.

 

He is one where I went back and got him solid on one sound per letter -- he needed that.

 

But a lot of kids don't need that, and end up doing well with multiple sounds being introduced at the same time.

 

For "it is confusing, when there is the word sad" that is part of the argument for people who do multiple sounds.  They want kids to understand from the beginning that that is a part of the written English language, they bring it in from the beginning so that kids know and can start learning about it.

 

Personally, I think it is fine for kids having an easier time, I don't care for it for kids having a harder time.  

 

But I also think LOE Is a good program, and it is good to have explicit instruction in the other sounds.  But I do think it would be fine to do more HOP first, even though LOE is supposed to be better.  It is more complete, but I think it could be second.  

 

Just my opinion.  

 

(My son had a lot of trouble learning all his letter sounds.  He also had a lot of trouble learning to blend.  We also saw a need for more OG than OG-inspired like a previous poster.  But I think that is just from kids doing well with different things that are both solid -- some need slower introduction, some are fine with faster.)  

 

[mom2Hh]

...

 

(My son had a lot of trouble learning all his letter sounds.  He also had a lot of trouble learning to blend.  We also saw a need for more OG than OG-inspired like a previous poster.  But I think that is just from kids doing well with different things that are both solid -- some need slower introduction, some are fine with faster.)  

 

I don't have a lot of background with all the different methods of teaching reading (other than phonics vs. whole language). I'm not exactly sure what needing more OG than OG-inspired means.  A slower pace?  Could someone tell me what some OG programs are vs. OG-inspired programs?

 

It like how also the last poster thinks that some programs can be better for some kids than others, etc.  It can be frustrating as a home educator when a program or those who use and like it make it seem as if is the best or the "right" way to teach something.  I don't have a strong background in teaching reading so I guess I don't have many opinions yet... not until I dive in and try it out.  But then can tend to feel like something is "wrong" with my child's learning if they aren't learning by the "best" methods, thought might do well learning a different way.  Not sure if I'm making sense.  It's all just confusing sometimes!   I don't do well bouncing back and forth between programs either.  But might have to in this case.