Reading for kids.

[Tycer]

Most schools today use the Balanced Literacy Model to teach reading.
The "Systematic Phonics Model" will better prepare your progeny to be excellent readers.

Here's a site that has free books for beginning readers to learn systematic phonics.

http://www.funphonics.com

A child who has learned systematic phonics will do fine in a balanced literacy model classroom. The opposite is not true.

[7.62 Precision]

This is good advice. We read by word recognition - we learn to recognize the shape of words. But we learn to read and we read seldom read or new words using phonics. We also need to understand phonics to understand the mechanics of words and pronunciations. So teaching kids to read by word recognition puts them at a severe handicap.

Learning to read without learning phonics is like learning to drive a truck without knowing how it works. You might get along ok generally, but when the engine dies on the beach and the tide is coming in, you don't know what to do.

[Grizz]

I read one chapter and it's OK. I hope there is no kinkiness in any of the lessons. Because I sent it on to my grandkids.

I agree that phonics is the best way to learn to read, and the earlier the child starts, the better the learning curve. reading to the kids from day one is also crucial for their minds.

watching t.v. is all the data we need for what happens when these things are not done this way.

[7.62 Precision]

. . . watching t.v. is all the data we need for what happens when these things are not done this way.

Actually watching TV is all we need. Reading is now unnecessary. All needed information, correct political, social, and religious philosophies, and instructions for life are provided via TV, right in you living room.

Reading is an archaic skill. Why should our kids mess with books in school? Just give them all laptops and iPads.

[Grizz]

well, maybe, with caveats, I can partlally accept the notion for youtubeuniversity.

[AJMD429]

. . . watching t.v. is all the data we need for what happens when these things are not done this way.

Actually watching TV is all we need. Reading is now unnecessary. All needed information, correct political, social, and religious philosophies, and instructions for life are provided via TV, right in you living room. Reading is an archaic skill. Why should our kids mess with books in school? Just give them all laptops and iPads.

Our friends all were 'shocked' that we raised our four kids (still one in high school) without television. Our 'television' consisted of renting Netflix DVD's three at a time, and whichever kid was the best (chores, homework, attitude) got to pick the Friday-night movie from among them. We'd have a 'guy' one, a 'kid' one, and a 'girlie' one. The other two would get watched Saturday evening. No regular television, no cable, and no streaming internet.

Funny thing - our kids all learned to read when very young, and all actually did stuff, instead of just watching movies about stuff, and all have a firm grasp of political and social reality.

Television has the ability to make people think they're 'experts' because they take it in differently than written words, which they realize is someone's opinion, but the visual 'reality' of television makes them almost believe they've really 'been there' and that what they see is always the truth.

Kinda creepy.

[samb]

We had an iPad free day today. Went for a picnic lunch down by the river it was 70 F today so had to get out and enjoy one last warm day. Then out to the mountains for the afternoon. Explored by the river and made a campfire. Had a good day.
Thanks for sharing, will use them to teach my son.

[Rusty]

My son reads because his mother and I read. Growing up he saw us reading so he assumed it was the natural thing to do. Before the internet came along my monthly news stand bill was rather high at times and I had to limit myself. If you are a reader the world is at your feet.
It's funny, just yesterday I was talking to a very smart young black lady at a tourist shop in Charleston,SC. She told me "my mother always told me if you want to hide something from a black person, just put it in a book." I told her you must have a very wise mother.

[octagon]

Started reading bedtime stories to my son when he was a little guy, following the words with my finger. Every nite, 30 minutes. At age three, he picked up a book and started reading it, he was not taught, he just followed the finger. In kinder they tested him at a mid fourth grade reading level, and now at 12, he he straight A's, and a reads daily like all family members.

All family members read to him after a while, not just me, and all used the finger under the word, he just picked it up. I have posted this before. Reading and music are great gifts for a kid, as is hunting and fishing and a code to live by.

[Grizz]

Octagon, that is how I learned to read. I can remember the exact moment I started reading. My Mom was surprised and wondered if I had memorized the words so she handed me a newspaper. I could sound out words I had never seen. Reading is wonderful.

[stretch]

My son reads because his mother and I read. Growing up he saw us reading so he assumed it was the natural thing to do.

Exactly!! My kitchen table is always covered with books, newpapers, and
magazines. That makes an impression on kids.

Same with my kids. My oldest skipped the 8th grade as a result.
He reads just fine, thank you!

My 9-year-old still loves to be read to. We're working our way through
The Jungle Books, and it's great fun for both of us. I found a copy at
Barnes & Noble for only $5.95! Still brilliant writing for kids - and it's
120 years old.

-Stretch

[jeepnik]

For an entire generation or more, "See Spot run" books taught folks to read just fine.

Some of you recall the math teaching revelation called New Math. Wherein, the idea was to understand groups of ones, tens, hundreds, etc., not whether or not you got the correct answer. http://vimeo.com/9100270

Now its phonics, which by the way isn't phonetic or else it would be spelled fonics.

What I've gotten from all this is that we are raising a generation that can't read, can't spell, can't do math, and for Pete's sake, can't write in cursive beyond their signature.

Frankly, going back to the three R's, yea, I know one starts with a "W" and another with an "A", would likely prepare kids much better than the current load of horse manure.

In many areas, mine included, giving a failing grade isn't allowed. You simply aren't allowed to keep a child back a grade because they haven't learned the necessary material because it might "damage" their self esteem.

[Tycer]

For an entire generation or more, "See Spot run" books taught folks to read just fine.

Some of you recall the math teaching revelation called New Math. Wherein, the idea was to understand groups of ones, tens, hundreds, etc., not whether or not you got the correct answer. http://vimeo.com/9100270

Now its phonics, which by the way isn't phonetic or else it would be spelled fonics.

What I've gotten from all this is that we are raising a generation that can't read, can't spell, can't do math, and for Pete's sake, can't write in cursive beyond their signature.

Frankly, going back to the three R's, yea, I know one starts with a "W" and another with an "A", would likely prepare kids much better than the current load of horse manure.

In many areas, mine included, giving a failing grade isn't allowed. You simply aren't allowed to keep a child back a grade because they haven't learned the necessary material because it might "damage" their self esteem.

Now it's phonics?. Teaching phonetically was the standard in our country before the dumbed down Dick and Jane readers of the look-say method trashed the reading skills of two generations. If you read Dick and Jane and can read something more in depth than USA Today you learned to read in spite of Dick and Jane and Spot. Today, Common Core's heavily touted and well sold balanced literacy is a far cry from teaching literacy. Trash systematic phonics all you like. Cheers. And yes, New Math was a disaster that was well chronicled by Morris Kline in Why Johnny Can't Add: the Failure of the New Math, a successor to Rudolf Flesch's 1955 Why Johnny Can't Read" which clearly shows how poorly the Dick, Jane and your beloved Spot taught literacy.

[7.62 Precision]

Exactly, Dick and Jane were part of the move to away from phonics to word recognition.

Take a look at education methods used in the late 1700s, for example, and the resulting education people received then, compared to today.

They taught phonics back then.

If you understand phonics, you will know why phonics is spelled phonics and not fonics; why there is a P in pneumonia; how consonants modify the sound of vowels, etc. We communicate by taking thoughts and ideas and crafting them into something that is expressed using language. Like any craft, you carefully and purposely use the basic materials and form them into the end result, with the skill of the craftsman determining the perfection, beauty, and effectiveness of the finished product.

Knowing how to use the tools and materials is key. Instead of just teaching kids words in a language, we should teach them the mechanics of the language.

Phonics teaches part of the how and why, and also brings you what the word is. Word recognition teaches the shallow memorization of what the word is.

Pick up almost any gun magazine today and see how poorly many articles are written, and you will see the importance of skill in using language.

[mark]

"In many areas, mine included, giving a failing grade isn't allowed. You simply aren't allowed to keep a child back a grade because they haven't learned the necessary material because it might "damage" their self esteem."

I recall trying to decipher a prospective student's record of attainment from another state.

After grappling with the jargon, i.e. bull...t on the award I determined that the lad had:

"Achieved a very limited level of competence in all of the subjects for which he had been awarded his Certificate".

It goes on and on.

As per the statement, "It might "damage" their self esteem", the kids know, smart and not so smart, into which category they fall. However, it doesn't necessarily determine their outcome in life.

Even Forrest Gump knew that he wasn't the sharpest knife in the draw.

All the best, Mark

[jeepnik]

For an entire generation or more, "See Spot run" books taught folks to read just fine.

Some of you recall the math teaching revelation called New Math. Wherein, the idea was to understand groups of ones, tens, hundreds, etc., not whether or not you got the correct answer. http://vimeo.com/9100270

Now its phonics, which by the way isn't phonetic or else it would be spelled fonics.

What I've gotten from all this is that we are raising a generation that can't read, can't spell, can't do math, and for Pete's sake, can't write in cursive beyond their signature.

Frankly, going back to the three R's, yea, I know one starts with a "W" and another with an "A", would likely prepare kids much better than the current load of horse manure.

In many areas, mine included, giving a failing grade isn't allowed. You simply aren't allowed to keep a child back a grade because they haven't learned the necessary material because it might "damage" their self esteem.

Now it's phonics?. Teaching phonetically was the standard in our country before the dumbed down Dick and Jane readers of the look-say method trashed the reading skills of two generations. If you read Dick and Jane and can read something more in depth than USA Today you learned to read in spite of Dick and Jane and Spot. Today, Common Core's heavily touted and well sold balanced literacy is a far cry from teaching literacy. Trash systematic phonics all you like. Cheers. And yes, New Math was a disaster that was well chronicled by Morris Kline in Why Johnny Can't Add: the Failure of the New Math, a successor to Rudolf Flesch's 1955 Why Johnny Can't Read" which clearly shows how poorly the Dick, Jane and your beloved Spot taught literacy.

Funny, everyone I went to school with learned from Dick and Jane, yet we seemed to do well enough when we went into "higher" education. Perhaps, most of my generation was just somehow smart enough to learn in spite or our poor teaching. I doubt it, but you never know, perhaps we were a "cluster" of smart folks.

[jeepnik]

Exactly, Dick and Jane were part of the move to away from phonics to word recognition.

Take a look at education methods used in the late 1700s, for example, and the resulting education people received then, compared to today.

They taught phonics back then.

If you understand phonics, you will know why phonics is spelled phonics and not fonics; why there is a P in pneumonia; how consonants modify the sound of vowels, etc. We communicate by taking thoughts and ideas and crafting them into something that is expressed using language. Like any craft, you carefully and purposely use the basic materials and form them into the end result, with the skill of the craftsman determining the perfection, beauty, and effectiveness of the finished product.

Knowing how to use the tools and materials is key. Instead of just teaching kids words in a language, we should teach them the mechanics of the language.

Phonics teaches part of the how and why, and also brings you what the word is. Word recognition teaches the shallow memorization of what the word is.

Pick up almost any gun magazine today and see how poorly many articles are written, and you will see the importance of skill in using language.

Funny, I learned all that stuff without phonics. Once again, I must be smarter than the average bear.

[jeepnik]

"In many areas, mine included, giving a failing grade isn't allowed. You simply aren't allowed to keep a child back a grade because they haven't learned the necessary material because it might "damage" their self esteem."

I recall trying to decipher a prospective student's record of attainment from another state.

After grappling with the jargon, i.e. bull...t on the award I determined that the lad had:

"Achieved a very limited level of competence in all of the subjects for which he had been awarded his Certificate".

It goes on and on.

As per the statement, "It might "damage" their self esteem", the kids know, smart and not so smart, into which category they fall. However, it doesn't necessarily determine their outcome in life.

Even Forrest Gump knew that he wasn't the sharpest knife in the draw.

All the best, Mark

Ahh, Forrest was a fictional character, so the writer could make things come out any way he wanted for his character.

[Ysabel Kid]

I was not a reader (for pleasure) until high school. Then I found things I enjoyed reading and never stopped! One of the the best courses I ever took was "Latin and Greek Derivitives". Understanding why our language is set up the way it is and the roots to most words really opens ones mind and enhances their reading skills.

[Old Ironsights]

I never learned Phonics.

My momma had me sound out words.

I was reading the encyclopedia and playing chess by age 6.

I read "Ben Hur" and "The Robe" (original editions) for grade school book reports.

Dick and Jane meant Dick to me.

[7.62 Precision]

My momma had me sound out words.

Amazing how well this works when your written language uses an alphabet that is just a code that represents sounds.

You can make any word out of it, and you can use it to read any word, if you just know the code!

You would think that everyone would teach the code, wouldn't you?

[Old Ironsights]

My momma had me sound out words.

Amazing how well this works when your written language uses an alphabet that is just a code that represents sounds.

You can make any word out of it, and you can use it to read any word, if you just know the code!

You would think that everyone would teach the code, wouldn't you?

Yep.

Think about it: If I have you read:

"Emm eye crooked-letter crooked-letter eye crooked-letter crooked-letter eye humpback humpback eye"

- you could probably spell the word.