not impressed with vertical phonics, cursive first only philosophy for my kids

[lacell]

I started out being a supporter of vertical phonics (teaching all the letter sounds at first). I was told that if I didn't teach my children all the letter sounds at the same time, even from a young age, even if they have learning disabilities, that I would be setting them up for confusion and later doubting our phonetic system. I was told to avoid letter names, which along with the idea about not using horizontal phonics,  ruled out many helpful things like Starfall, v-tech laptop and Leapfrog Letter Factory. So I taught my children 3 sounds of A, 4 sounds of U, 2 sounds of C, 2 sounds of G, 2 sound of S, etc. But now I am noticing something quite troubling. My oldest is almost 7. He has been taught these sounds for almost 3 years. When asked what C, G, and S say or when reading those sounds on a page, he often chooses the SECOND letter sound to try first. I figured this would happen at first, so I just reminded him that " 'Yes, "C" can say "sss" but it usually says "kuh" '. But time after time, he wants to say "sss" for c. If slowed down and asked to think carefully about what order of frequency, he can answer correctly, but it's not his automatic response. When he was first learning to read, he would go through all the sounds for each letter. We were able to move him past that pretty quickly once he understood each letter could only say one of its sounds at a time. But I've noticed he has never been quick and confident to respond to what any of the letters say if that letter has multiple sounds taught. The ones with only one sound have been easier for him, though admittedly not as easy as for most kids I suspect.

 

I thought that is was only my oldest. Now my middle child, when asked what C, G, and S say also has a GO TO response of the second letter! I'm beginning to think that, at least for young children or children with learning disabilities, the brain may remember the last sound heard as being prominent. For these kids, I think it would be better for them to learn all the sounds later. I understand the benefits of teaching all the sounds at once, but for some, it's just too much. So here's what I've started doing now that I refuse to drink the "this is the only way to do it cool aid". I'm playing the Leapfrog tape. We are doing Starfall. I am planning to use mneumonics via Recipe for Reading - gasp! I am going to allow my children to trace or write manuscript letters. I am still teaching all the letter sounds during our phonics drill. But, I am also doing a separate activity after in which we say the FIRST sound of every letter as we point to it. We do this first with the Leapfrog song, and then without music or extra words. So they know that the other sounds are possible, but the first sound gets extra attention. I'm hoping this will be the best of both worlds. I am continuing the cursive instruction but am now going to have them trace and maybe write manuscript as well and not wait until later. I'm sharing this because I'm hoping someone else will benefit. I regret listening to the rigid notions. I don't doubt the intentions are good, but it's holding some people back I'm afraid.

[almondbutterandjelly]

You just explained something to me that I never understood.  My dd was in 1st grade, and in them trying to teach her to read, they would have her learn all the different sounds each vowel could possibly make.  She never understood why or when to choose what sounds.

 

I pulled her out and taught her to read with Abeka Phonics.  There were some very clear rules:  When there is one vowel in a word, it usually makes its short sound.  When there are two vowels in a word, the first vowel says its name and the second vowel is silent.

 

I'm thinking Abeka uses the "horizontal" phonics, which I had never heard called that before.  Interesting.

 

Do whatever works for your kid.

[MerryAtHope]

For young students it can help to stair-step the information. In AAR, students learn just the first sounds at first--then after they have used those for awhile, they learn the additional sounds. It's important for kids to know all of the sounds fairly early because they are used in many early readers (consider: hot-go-to-love, or cat-ice, or sit-is...), but it's also helpful to let them get used to the act of sounding out some words first. Instruction should be explicit once additional sounds are added--try the first sound first, when certain additional sounds are used (if there is any related rule that helps), and so on. You do want kids to have complete information so that they can sound out unfamiliar words though. But I think a time of using just the first sounds can ground kids in the idea to try that one first. It's definitely a process!

[73349]

Maybe it will help to tell them that C only says sss in front of E, I, or Y? Or do they keep forgetting that part?

 

Mine is doing fine with reading (mostly via Logic of English products) but spelling is not following close behind. It must be so much easier to teach elementary school with a language with closer to 1:1 for phoneme:sound.

[ElizabethB]

Well taught vertical phonics works well for some, but I get a number of remedial students from them with that exact problem, especially young boys. The good thing is that they do not suffer from guessing problems like my remedial students who have been taught sight words so not as much retraining is necessary. A good mastery program like Blend Phonics usually clears them up quicker than my other remedial students who need extensive guessing remediation.

 

I also get a few remedial students from poorly taught WRTR, it is confusing, and the use of high frequency words when poorly taught can lead to guessing problems which requires more extensive retraining and remediation.

[Ellie]

I started out being a supporter of vertical phonics (teaching all the letter sounds at first). I was told that if I didn't teach my children all the letter sounds at the same time, even from a young age, even if they have learning disabilities, that I would be setting them up for confusion and later doubting our phonetic system. I was told to avoid letter names, which along with the idea about not using horizontal phonics,  ruled out many helpful things like Starfall, v-tech laptop and Leapfrog Letter Factory. So I taught my children 3 sounds of A, 4 sounds of U, 2 sounds of C, 2 sounds of G, 2 sound of S, etc. But now I am noticing something quite troubling. My oldest is almost 7. He has been taught these sounds for almost 3 years. When asked what C, G, and S say or when reading those sounds on a page, he often chooses the SECOND letter sound to try first. I figured this would happen at first, so I just reminded him that " 'Yes, "C" can say "sss" but it usually says "kuh" '. But time after time, he wants to say "sss" for c. If slowed down and asked to think carefully about what order of frequency, he can answer correctly, but it's not his automatic response. When he was first learning to read, he would go through all the sounds for each letter. We were able to move him past that pretty quickly once he understood each letter could only say one of its sounds at a time. But I've noticed he has never been quick and confident to respond to what any of the letters say if that letter has multiple sounds taught. The ones with only one sound have been easier for him, though admittedly not as easy as for most kids I suspect.

 

I thought that is was only my oldest. Now my middle child, when asked what C, G, and S say also has a GO TO response of the second letter! I'm beginning to think that, at least for young children or children with learning disabilities, the brain may remember the last sound heard as being prominent. For these kids, I think it would be better for them to learn all the sounds later. I understand the benefits of teaching all the sounds at once, but for some, it's just too much. So here's what I've started doing now that I refuse to drink the "this is the only way to do it cool aid". I'm playing the Leapfrog tape. We are doing Starfall. I am planning to use mneumonics via Recipe for Reading - gasp! I am going to allow my children to trace or write manuscript letters. I am still teaching all the letter sounds during our phonics drill. But, I am also doing a separate activity after in which we say the FIRST sound of every letter as we point to it. We do this first with the Leapfrog song, and then without music or extra words. So they know that the other sounds are possible, but the first sound gets extra attention. I'm hoping this will be the best of both worlds. I am continuing the cursive instruction but am now going to have them trace and maybe write manuscript as well and not wait until later. I'm sharing this because I'm hoping someone else will benefit. I regret listening to the rigid notions. I don't doubt the intentions are good, but it's holding some people back I'm afraid.

 

In methods such as Spalding, we don't just teach children the sounds. We teach them the sounds, then we teach them to analyze and spell words that use the sounds. We don't leave them at the letters/phonograms. They know that the first sound of c is /k/, and is used most often; and that c followed by e, i, or y says /s/. They know that the first sound of g is /g/, and that g followed by e, i, or y *may* say /j/. They learn to read by learning to spell, and they don't have the problems that you are having.

 

I'm not a fan of cursive first; Spalding teaches manuscript first, and as soon as the children are writing legibly, then we teach them to connect the letters to make cursive.

 

[lacell]

In methods such as Spalding, we don't just teach children the sounds. We teach them the sounds, then we teach them to analyze and spell words that use the sounds. We don't leave them at the letters/phonograms. They know that the first sound of c is /k/, and is used most often; and that c followed by e, i, or y says /s/. They know that the first sound of g is /g/, and that g followed by e, i, or y *may* say /j/. They learn to read by learning to spell, and they don't have the problems that you are having.

 

I'm not a fan of cursive first; Spalding teaches manuscript first, and as soon as the children are writing legibly, then we teach them to connect the letters to make cursive.

 

 

Yes, and I truly think that is fantastic. I love spelling rules. I think my children will benefit from them later. But right now, my son doesn't seem to absorb them. I think repetition, seeing the pattern and lots of dictation will improve that.

[lacell]

Well taught vertical phonics works well for some, but I get a number of remedial students from them with that exact problem, especially young boys. The good thing is that they do not suffer from guessing problems like my remedial students who have been taught sight words so not as much retraining is necessary. A good mastery program like Blend Phonics usually clears them up quicker than my other remedial students who need extensive guessing remediation.

 

I also get a few remedial students from poorly taught WRTR, it is confusing, and the use of high frequency words when poorly taught can lead to guessing problems which requires more extensive retraining and remediation.

 

I love blend phonics! I'm using the lite version with vowels in red to start. My son enjoys making up stories with each word.

[Ellie]

Yes, and I truly think that is fantastic. I love spelling rules. I think my children will benefit from them later. But right now, my son doesn't seem to absorb them. I think repetition, seeing the pattern and lots of dictation will improve that.

 

Spalding doesn't teach children to memorize rules out of context. We dictate words to the children, and we analyze each word for phonograms used, syllables, rules (if any; not all words will have rules applied).

 

Here's an example: the single letter "a" has three sounds. That is not a rule. It will say its second (or "long") sound at the end of a short word or syllable. *That* is a rule. Both ai and ay say /A/ ("long" sound of a), that is not a rule. Ai is never used at the end of a word, because English words don't end with i. *That* is a rule.

 

There are no "patterns" involved. There are phonograms and rules analyzed in context with each word, but no patterns.

[lacell]

My son has benefited from seeing words in groups, which is what I mean by patterns. Blend phonics is organized that way. Eventually, I think it will be good for him to mix it all up, but right now it seems he needs one thing at a time.

[lacell]

Ellie, did you see my Spalding question on the other post :001_smile: ?

[FO4UR]

The good news is that you are figuring this out while the kids are still very young. 

 

Many of the "This is the only sure way to teach your child to read and spell!" programs out there are geared towards beginning readers, yet use *LOGIC STAGE* methodology.  As a new teacher, we look and drool...seems perfect (for someone our age).  Little children are in a different developmental stage, most don't have the ability to sort and sift the 5 (or 9???) rules for the silent 'e.'  They just need to know why the silent 'e' doesn't say anything in this word.

 

 

So, Spalding for mom.  It really is a great way to learn the phonograms and rules.  Build your own notebook.

 

But, for the kids, try Dancing Bears or Charlotte Mason style lessons.  With CM, you can just pick a favorite word from a favorite book.  Explain why it is spelled the way it's spelled.  Put it in a special Word Book, and search for other words with the same patterns (fill the page with these words). (Review his favorite Word Book each morning.) You create a special bond with those words...lather rinse repeat daily...and soon he'll build up a large store of favorite words.  If YOU know your stuff, this is very very easy to do without any curric.  Just use books he loves.

 

Dancing Bears focuses on one sound at a time until it progresses along, and by then the child knows the words well enough that the 2nd sounds don't trip them up.

 

[Ellie]

Ellie, did you see my Spalding question on the other post :001_smile: ?

 

No. :-) But I answered your PM. :-)

[Hunter]

The good news is that you are figuring this out while the kids are still very young.

 

Many of the "This is the only sure way to teach your child to read and spell!" programs out there are geared towards beginning readers, yet use *LOGIC STAGE* methodology. As a new teacher, we look and drool...seems perfect (for someone our age). Little children are in a different developmental stage, most don't have the ability to sort and sift the 5 (or 9???) rules for the silent 'e.' They just need to know why the silent 'e' doesn't say anything in this word.

 

 

So, Spalding for mom. It really is a great way to learn the phonograms and rules. Build your own notebook.

 

But, for the kids, try Dancing Bears or Charlotte Mason style lessons. With CM, you can just pick a favorite word from a favorite book. Explain why it is spelled the way it's spelled. Put it in a special Word Book, and search for other words with the same patterns (fill the page with these words). (Review his favorite Word Book each morning.) You create a special bond with those words...lather rinse repeat daily...and soon he'll build up a large store of favorite words. If YOU know your stuff, this is very very easy to do without any curric. Just use books he loves.

 

Dancing Bears focuses on one sound at a time until it progresses along, and by then the child knows the words well enough that the 2nd sounds don't trip them up.

YES!!! Just because WE find logic and rhetoric stage explanations of primary topics and skills interesting and beneficial, doesn't mean our beginners are ready for that.

 

In the big push to get kids to do things earlier, many of them are incorrectly being labeled with learning disabilities they don't have. Then the logic level remediation is being used to try and teach normal but rushed children.

 

Since these curricula are so expensive and time-consuming, I'm actually glad to see them fail so miserably, as they give no incentive to low-income moms to adopt them, mistakenly thinking they are "better". They are not even good enough. :lol:

[FO4UR]

YES!!! Just because WE find logic and rhetoric stage explanations of primary topics and skills interesting and beneficial, doesn't mean our beginners are ready for that.

 

In the big push to get kids to do things earlier, many of them are incorrectly being labeled with learning disabilities they don't have. Then the logic level remediation is being used to try and teach normal but rushed children.

 

Since these curricula are so expensive and time-consuming, I'm actually glad to see them fail so miserably, as they give no incentive to low-income moms to adopt them, mistakenly thinking they are "better". They are not even good enough. :lol:

 

 

What would you do if you had no curriculum and only a few good children's titles?  You know, deserted island or stuck in a bunker during a nuclear crisis or the house is on fire and you can only grab 3 books.  What would you do?

 

Drop your curric and DO THAT!!!!  

 

 

Sometimes not being able to afford curriculum is a blessing!!!  That is assuming that mom has a decent education.

 

 

 

 

ETA:  I'm not advocating actually going with no curric just for sake of going rogue.  (So no flames!  LOL)  Just think through...is this reasonable?  Can I picture my child handling this workload?

Edited January 9, 2016 by 4blessingmom

[blondchen]

Maybe someone will benefit from my experience with this.

 

I taught my oldest to read via OPGTR, which teaches and practices one sound at a time for each letter. Worked beautifully.

 

By the time I started my second child in OPGTR, I had started using LOE with my oldest for just spelling. We had bought the LOE Doodling Dragons book and my second child was enamored with it, so I decided to go ahead and introduce all the letter sounds to her at once from the beginning. BIG MISTAKE. It caused a lot of unnecessary confusion. She often defaulted to the second (long) vowel sound even in CVC words, and I could tell she was struggling with the choices at times in ways that my oldest never did. I realized, too late, that I didn't want her to have to consider options in order to read a simple CVC word. It really bogged down her reading process, which is exactly what I was trying to avoid by using a program like OPGTR rather than LOE/Spalding/SWR. Anyway, she is reading well now, finally, but it was more of a struggle for her than it needed to be and I regret that.

 

So, my conclusion was that using LOE as designed (doing reading and spelling at the same time) would have been okay, despite my personal preference against it, but teaching all the sounds at once apart from the programs that utilize that methodology is a bad idea.

 

Now I am starting my third child (4yo) in OPGTR and we are sticking with learning one sound at a time. She knows from shadowing her sisters that the vowels make more than one sound, but I am telling her that for now each vowel only says its short sound.

[Ellie]

 

So, my conclusion was that using LOE as designed <snip>, but teaching all the sounds at once apart from the programs that utilize that methodology is a bad idea.

 

 

This.

 

[lacell]

For some children, whether or not you use the program as designed, they are going to struggle more with vertical phonics than with a more incremental approach. Just IMO.

[HomeAgain]

For some children, whether or not you use the program as designed, they are going to struggle more with vertical phonics than with a more incremental approach. Just IMO.

I think you're right. I'm a huge believer in the 'usable information' philosophy that Montessori is built on. Here is a chunk of information, here's how to use it. Here's another chunk that builds on the first, here's how to expand to include that. It makes so much sense to kids and is natural extension of how they learn anyway. Too much or too little never helps anyone.

[Heathermomster]

I started out being a supporter of vertical phonics (teaching all the letter sounds at first). I was told that if I didn't teach my children all the letter sounds at the same time, even from a young age, even if they have learning disabilities, that I would be setting them up for confusion and later doubting our phonetic system. I was told to avoid letter names, which along with the idea about not using horizontal phonics,  ruled out many helpful things like Starfall, v-tech laptop and Leapfrog Letter Factory. So I taught my children 3 sounds of A, 4 sounds of U, 2 sounds of C, 2 sounds of G, 2 sound of S, etc. But now I am noticing something quite troubling. My oldest is almost 7. He has been taught these sounds for almost 3 years. When asked what C, G, and S say or when reading those sounds on a page, he often chooses the SECOND letter sound to try first. I figured this would happen at first, so I just reminded him that " 'Yes, "C" can say "sss" but it usually says "kuh" '. But time after time, he wants to say "sss" for c. If slowed down and asked to think carefully about what order of frequency, he can answer correctly, but it's not his automatic response. When he was first learning to read, he would go through all the sounds for each letter. We were able to move him past that pretty quickly once he understood each letter could only say one of its sounds at a time. But I've noticed he has never been quick and confident to respond to what any of the letters say if that letter has multiple sounds taught. The ones with only one sound have been easier for him, though admittedly not as easy as for most kids I suspect.

 

I thought that is was only my oldest. Now my middle child, when asked what C, G, and S say also has a GO TO response of the second letter! I'm beginning to think that, at least for young children or children with learning disabilities, the brain may remember the last sound heard as being prominent. For these kids, I think it would be better for them to learn all the sounds later. I understand the benefits of teaching all the sounds at once, but for some, it's just too much. So here's what I've started doing now that I refuse to drink the "this is the only way to do it cool aid". I'm playing the Leapfrog tape. We are doing Starfall. I am planning to use mneumonics via Recipe for Reading - gasp! I am going to allow my children to trace or write manuscript letters. I am still teaching all the letter sounds during our phonics drill. But, I am also doing a separate activity after in which we say the FIRST sound of every letter as we point to it. We do this first with the Leapfrog song, and then without music or extra words. So they know that the other sounds are possible, but the first sound gets extra attention. I'm hoping this will be the best of both worlds. I am continuing the cursive instruction but am now going to have them trace and maybe write manuscript as well and not wait until later. I'm sharing this because I'm hoping someone else will benefit. I regret listening to the rigid notions. I don't doubt the intentions are good, but it's holding some people back I'm afraid.

So basically, you started teaching your oldest child to read when he was a late 3 yo and are troubled that the reading program you chose was ineffecttive.  Did it ever occur to you that he was not developmentally ready to read?  I cannot imagine how that is ANY reading program's fault.

 

I am no super fan of LOE, but I have used it.  I certainly would not recommend it for every student.  As teachers, we are in control.  We can slow the curriculum down, teach the material incrementally, adjust to our students, or buy new stuff.  It is not like there is a team of curriculum commandos sitting outside your house waiting to kick your windows out and shoot you should you decide to pop in a Leap Frog video.  This thread is so weird.   

Edited January 10, 2016 by Heathermomster

[FO4UR]

So basically, you started teaching your oldest child to read when he was a late 3 yo and are troubled that the reading program you chose was ineffecttive.  Did it ever occur to you that he was not developmentally ready to read?  I cannot imagine how that is ANY reading program's fault.

 

I am no super fan of LOE, but I have used it.  I certainly would not recommend it for every student.  As teachers, we are in control.  We can slow the curriculum down, teach the material incrementally, adjust to our students, or buy new stuff.  It is not like there is a team of curriculum commandos sitting outside your house waiting to kick your windows out and shoot you should you decide to pop in a Leap Frog video.  This thread is so weird.   

 

 

That's not how I read her posts at all. 

 

To the bolded, there are some currics out there that hammer at this strange idea that THEIR way is the ONLY right way to teach a child to read and right. The OP is discovering that she is in control...I went through the same process a few years ago.  SWR especially is pretty dogmatic about not veering away from the perfect way.  A newbie who picks SWR and believes what she reads in the TM is, in fact, NOT in control.  

 

Kudos to the OP for being sensitive to her children's needs and questioning.

 

 

Some kids are really ready to read at 3.  It's not something I'd push, but I've had one of those kids.  Teaching them becomes a matter of trying to catch up with them, preventing bad habits before they set in, and hanging on for the ride.  It's even more daunting to then be trying to use a curric that is geared for logic stage kids with a high guilt-trip-factor if you dare think of switching or tweaking or supplementing.

 

This thread might be weird, but it is cyclical. This same basic conversation happens at least every two years...and over the same currics.

[lacell]

So basically, you started teaching your oldest child to read when he was a late 3 yo and are troubled that the reading program you chose was ineffecttive.  Did it ever occur to you that he was not developmentally ready to read?  I cannot imagine how that is ANY reading program's fault.

 

I am no super fan of LOE, but I have used it.  I certainly would not recommend it for every student.  As teachers, we are in control.  We can slow the curriculum down, teach the material incrementally, adjust to our students, or buy new stuff.  It is not like there is a team of curriculum commandos sitting outside your house waiting to kick your windows out and shoot you should you decide to pop in a Leap Frog video.  This thread is so weird.   

 

No, no. All we were doing were games with flashcards - bingo, that sort of thing. I have been overly laid back in fact.

[lacell]

 

 

I am no super fan of LOE, but I have used it.  I certainly would not recommend it for every student.  As teachers, we are in control.  We can slow the curriculum down, teach the material incrementally, adjust to our students, or buy new stuff.  It is not like there is a team of curriculum commandos sitting outside your house waiting to kick your windows out and shoot you should you decide to pop in a Leap Frog video.  This thread is so weird.   

 

I am speaking more about SWR than LOE. If you have never been involved in their program, their message boards, their books, you won't understand. There is a lot of very adamant stuff told to parents. To inexperienced parents, it sounds scary. The message is that you will screw your kids entire academic future up if you teach letter names first, etc.

[lacell]

 

 

I am no super fan of LOE, but I have used it.  I certainly would not recommend it for every student.  As teachers, we are in control.  We can slow the curriculum down, teach the material incrementally, adjust to our students, or buy new stuff.  It is not like there is a team of curriculum commandos sitting outside your house waiting to kick your windows out and shoot you should you decide to pop in a Leap Frog video.  This thread is so weird.   

 

I am speaking more about SWR - not LOE. If you have never been involved in their program, their message boards, their books, you won't understand. There is a lot of very adamant stuff told to parents. To inexperienced parents, it sounds scary. The message is that you will screw your kids entire academic future up if you teach letter names first, etc. I didn't want to name names of curricula, but I kind of feel I had to now.

[FO4UR]

If you have never been involved in their program, their message boards, their books, you won't understand. There is a lot of very adamant stuff told to parents. To inexperienced parents, it sounds scary. The message is that you will screw your kids entire academic future up if you teach letter names first, etc.

 

 

:iagree: