Seems to make sense and goes with Kilpatrick's work

[happycc]

https://www.apraxia-kids.org/apraxia_kids_library/children-with-apraxia-and-reading-writing-and-spelling-difficulties/

 

https://therapyinsights.com/products/grapheme-phoneme-correspondence-cards

Edited October 20, 2020 by happycc

[PeterPan]

Those are incomplete. LIPS would be way better. Your real problem is that those aren't going to get a dc reading and aren't going to help a dc with speech/sound issues. He's going to need help to distinguish the vowels, which means he'll need to understand the production.

If you think he won't understand the faces, you don't have to use the faces. You can figure it out. But those cards are using implicit phonics, where they tell the dc to *infer* the sound by saying the word. We need more EXPLICIT phonics where we actually say this is how it feels, this is what it looks like, this is how it sounds.

[happycc]

8 hours ago, PeterPan said:

Those are incomplete. LIPS would be way better. Your real problem is that those aren't going to get a dc reading and aren't going to help a dc with speech/sound issues. He's going to need help to distinguish the vowels, which means he'll need to understand the production.

If you think he won't understand the faces, you don't have to use the faces. You can figure it out. But those cards are using implicit phonics, where they tell the dc to *infer* the sound by saying the word. We need more EXPLICIT phonics where we actually say this is how it feels, this is what it looks like, this is how it sounds.

He gets the faces. I have LIPS at home but not completely sure it would work for him. Not sure what will. Too many components in LIPS from what I remember. 

Edited October 20, 2020 by happycc