The American is Bob Titzer and there is at least one YouTube video showing what he does and its effect. It's debateable as to whether the children are reading or recognising (although they will be reading by 5). It's the same message that the lady who created the video is trying to tell us.
tahomax99 - there are several divided schools of thought on this. I too was certainly confused by sounds and names and I fully believe that it was down to the teacher(s) not explaining the difference between name and sound and when either should be used.
What conclusions do you have with those who still sound out the letter sounds after they are 10 years old? Oh yeah - that's nothing to do with the method... its' "somthing else". Give me a break. Yous still don't get what this mother successfully did do you? It's staring you in the face. Also, there is an American who is taking this even further.
...and Gemma Atkinson, the 13 year old and several pupils in the classes of the school that my children go to are living proof that "letter names later" doesn't work either (you'll rubbish this of course). It all comes down to how you are taught. But once again - this not the message of this video or website.
boxerrsing/tahomax99 - my conclusions are formed having taught children, having watched some children struggle unnecessarily with letter names/sound confusion. Having experimented over the years with introducing names later I believe that is the best way to go. I am obviously not alone, many teachers have found this to be true, especially when teaching synthetically.
Tahomax99 - I agree with you, the point of the website is a three letter word (well spotted). Woppetty still doesnt get it and despite what is posted will always feel that teaching letter names first will cause some children problems and that problems with phonic teaching is nothing to do with phonic teaching (or teahcing in general). C'est la vie I am afraid.
This is a cuh and this is a huh, together theu make the sound chuh. That confused me immensely... as I had to learn to recognise the characters first before putting them together. Still that's not the point of the video or the associated website.
Gemma is a full grown woman and appeared on "I'm a celebrity - get me out of here." Most school leavers can't spell very well or read fluently for that matter. Look-say is terrible and the only system that seems to work well is Ruth Miskin's synthetic phonics... and you need to know what the letters are first.
You are talking about the UK? I would think it HIGHLY unlikely that the problem with children (such as Gemma) is due to being taught letter sounds first (& only). After all until recently the UK was teaching mixed methods where phonics was secondary to letter names and 'look say'. However, if what you say is true, then I suppose as a 'teacher' you have to 'weigh up the odds'. Is it better to decode without problems or be able to spell by letter names to peers? I know which one I would pick.
boxerrsing I think woppetty still doesn't get it, but then teachers are stuck in their ways. On one hand she says that teaching the letters will cause confusion when decoding new words, but then brushed over the more obvious Gemma Atkinson problem that is now prevalent in half of teenagers in this country. A 13 year old this year spelled chameleon thus: curly cuh, aa, muh, eh, luh, luh, eh, oh, nuh. Classic. I bet the point of the video and the website is actually one word of three letters?
The problem with letter names (and I have seen it many, many, many times) happens when the child needs to decode a new word. Instead of sounds the child uses letter names which, as we all know, will NOT help you work out the word. Not all children do have problems flipping between name and sound, but many do and is it worth taking the risk that your child is one of the ones that will? Yes, I do teach.
boxerrsing - I never said it hinders 'development' which is such a global term. Seven is obviously a number and I am talking about literacy not numeracy. Unfortunately in the clip it doesn't have the child linking the symbol with a sound only a name. My point is that if parents see this clip and feel inspired (which hopefully they have) I just wish they would use the sounds. The 'game' would be no different, no less fun, they would just learn the sounds which they CAN use to read.
woppetty please explain how knowing the letter names 'hinders' development? Explain what phonetic sound number 7 makes? This is the letter K, it makes the sound cuh, which is clearly what would have happened with this child. I believe the point of this video is to show that you CAN teach children at a very early age, they learn to recognise symbols, recite their name AND it's fun. When I was at a "normal" learning age, all I wanted to do was play football (reading=chore). Are you a teacher?
Firstly, I think it is great that your parent got involved if all parents did it would make education much easier and worthwhile. Well done Mum. My point is that the heading of this clip is "Teaching Reading from an Early Age" and I disagree that reciting letter NAMES is reading. I also believe that letter names are not needed especially in the early years. When you are reading how do they help you? Knowing the name before the sound may not have hindered you, but it does hinder many.
I'm the little girl in the video. I remember that this method was a game and that this 'game' was on my terms. I was never pressurised into learning my letters and found that learning, in this environment, was highly beneficial to my education.
I would not change anything about the way I was taught. Learning the sounds after the letters came naturally to me.
I have known MANY people who have still used phonics at secondary school and have failed to remember the actual names of the letters.
Hi. I am the mother of the child in the video. I was the one responsible for the teaching, which was really easy because everything is game to children of this young age. I plead with people to teach your children the alphabet as a game. Teach that the letter A makes a sound aah, the same way you would point at a dog and tell you child it makes the sound woof. Simple phonics. This way a child does not have to re learn the alphabet letter names.
MY point is just why teach the sounds AFTER the name? What is the child going to do with letter names? Why not just teach the sounds for a start? At least with sounds they can do something with them e.g. start reading easy words m-u-m mum, d-o-g dog. Your example boxerrsing is a classic example of a poor child (now adult) who hasn't been taught the alphabetic code. Had they been taught it they would know that isn't the way our language works. Sad isn't it.
I think woppetty has missed the point completely. Watching the video you see the little girl say letter names (and getting one wrong) and then NUMBERS. Clearly recognising what she sees. Teaching of phonics would come easily after that. Also - anyone see the "I'm a celebrity" programme? Cringing wasn't it to see a grown woman spell 'height' like this: huh, ehh, ihh, guh, huh, tuhh. Teaching letters and phonics from an early age works for me!
What a clever little girl. Although one has to question whether it is worth teaching a child the letter names. Whilst letter names are great for dictionary use do they actually help a child 'unlock' the alphabetic code? Is she 'reading' or just recalling symbol names?
The American is Bob Titzer and there is at least one YouTube video showing what he does and its effect. It's debateable as to whether the children are reading or recognising (although they will be reading by 5). It's the same message that the lady who created the video is trying to tell us.
boxerrsing 4 years ago
tahomax99 - there are several divided schools of thought on this. I too was certainly confused by sounds and names and I fully believe that it was down to the teacher(s) not explaining the difference between name and sound and when either should be used.
boxerrsing 4 years ago
What conclusions do you have with those who still sound out the letter sounds after they are 10 years old? Oh yeah - that's nothing to do with the method... its' "somthing else". Give me a break. Yous still don't get what this mother successfully did do you? It's staring you in the face. Also, there is an American who is taking this even further.
tahomax99 4 years ago
...and Gemma Atkinson, the 13 year old and several pupils in the classes of the school that my children go to are living proof that "letter names later" doesn't work either (you'll rubbish this of course). It all comes down to how you are taught. But once again - this not the message of this video or website.
boxerrsing 4 years ago
boxerrsing/tahomax99 - my conclusions are formed having taught children, having watched some children struggle unnecessarily with letter names/sound confusion. Having experimented over the years with introducing names later I believe that is the best way to go. I am obviously not alone, many teachers have found this to be true, especially when teaching synthetically.
woppetty 4 years ago
Tahomax99 - I agree with you, the point of the website is a three letter word (well spotted). Woppetty still doesnt get it and despite what is posted will always feel that teaching letter names first will cause some children problems and that problems with phonic teaching is nothing to do with phonic teaching (or teahcing in general). C'est la vie I am afraid.
boxerrsing 4 years ago
This is a cuh and this is a huh, together theu make the sound chuh. That confused me immensely... as I had to learn to recognise the characters first before putting them together. Still that's not the point of the video or the associated website.
tahomax99 4 years ago
Gemma is a full grown woman and appeared on "I'm a celebrity - get me out of here." Most school leavers can't spell very well or read fluently for that matter. Look-say is terrible and the only system that seems to work well is Ruth Miskin's synthetic phonics... and you need to know what the letters are first.
tahomax99 4 years ago
You are talking about the UK? I would think it HIGHLY unlikely that the problem with children (such as Gemma) is due to being taught letter sounds first (& only). After all until recently the UK was teaching mixed methods where phonics was secondary to letter names and 'look say'. However, if what you say is true, then I suppose as a 'teacher' you have to 'weigh up the odds'. Is it better to decode without problems or be able to spell by letter names to peers? I know which one I would pick.
woppetty 4 years ago
boxerrsing I think woppetty still doesn't get it, but then teachers are stuck in their ways. On one hand she says that teaching the letters will cause confusion when decoding new words, but then brushed over the more obvious Gemma Atkinson problem that is now prevalent in half of teenagers in this country. A 13 year old this year spelled chameleon thus: curly cuh, aa, muh, eh, luh, luh, eh, oh, nuh. Classic. I bet the point of the video and the website is actually one word of three letters?
tahomax99 4 years ago
The problem with letter names (and I have seen it many, many, many times) happens when the child needs to decode a new word. Instead of sounds the child uses letter names which, as we all know, will NOT help you work out the word. Not all children do have problems flipping between name and sound, but many do and is it worth taking the risk that your child is one of the ones that will? Yes, I do teach.
woppetty 4 years ago
boxerrsing - I never said it hinders 'development' which is such a global term. Seven is obviously a number and I am talking about literacy not numeracy. Unfortunately in the clip it doesn't have the child linking the symbol with a sound only a name. My point is that if parents see this clip and feel inspired (which hopefully they have) I just wish they would use the sounds. The 'game' would be no different, no less fun, they would just learn the sounds which they CAN use to read.
woppetty 4 years ago
woppetty please explain how knowing the letter names 'hinders' development? Explain what phonetic sound number 7 makes? This is the letter K, it makes the sound cuh, which is clearly what would have happened with this child. I believe the point of this video is to show that you CAN teach children at a very early age, they learn to recognise symbols, recite their name AND it's fun. When I was at a "normal" learning age, all I wanted to do was play football (reading=chore). Are you a teacher?
boxerrsing 4 years ago
Firstly, I think it is great that your parent got involved if all parents did it would make education much easier and worthwhile. Well done Mum. My point is that the heading of this clip is "Teaching Reading from an Early Age" and I disagree that reciting letter NAMES is reading. I also believe that letter names are not needed especially in the early years. When you are reading how do they help you? Knowing the name before the sound may not have hindered you, but it does hinder many.
woppetty 4 years ago
I'm the little girl in the video. I remember that this method was a game and that this 'game' was on my terms. I was never pressurised into learning my letters and found that learning, in this environment, was highly beneficial to my education.
I would not change anything about the way I was taught. Learning the sounds after the letters came naturally to me.
I have known MANY people who have still used phonics at secondary school and have failed to remember the actual names of the letters.
ebg1000 4 years ago
Hi. I am the mother of the child in the video. I was the one responsible for the teaching, which was really easy because everything is game to children of this young age. I plead with people to teach your children the alphabet as a game. Teach that the letter A makes a sound aah, the same way you would point at a dog and tell you child it makes the sound woof. Simple phonics. This way a child does not have to re learn the alphabet letter names.
allisonepraxis 4 years ago
MY point is just why teach the sounds AFTER the name? What is the child going to do with letter names? Why not just teach the sounds for a start? At least with sounds they can do something with them e.g. start reading easy words m-u-m mum, d-o-g dog. Your example boxerrsing is a classic example of a poor child (now adult) who hasn't been taught the alphabetic code. Had they been taught it they would know that isn't the way our language works. Sad isn't it.
woppetty 4 years ago
I think woppetty has missed the point completely. Watching the video you see the little girl say letter names (and getting one wrong) and then NUMBERS. Clearly recognising what she sees. Teaching of phonics would come easily after that. Also - anyone see the "I'm a celebrity" programme? Cringing wasn't it to see a grown woman spell 'height' like this: huh, ehh, ihh, guh, huh, tuhh. Teaching letters and phonics from an early age works for me!
boxerrsing 4 years ago
What a clever little girl. Although one has to question whether it is worth teaching a child the letter names. Whilst letter names are great for dictionary use do they actually help a child 'unlock' the alphabetic code? Is she 'reading' or just recalling symbol names?
woppetty 4 years ago