2.7.22

Opening a new class in Term 3? Keen to organise and decorate the room? Hold your horses!

Congratulations on your new appointment! Make your classroom organised, tidy and clean, but after that my advice is to then $$save your dollars$$ from being spent on ‘stuff’ for decoration and instead invest in your teaching knowledge. Your kids (and their families) will thank you for it. And you’ll get a buzz from their progress.

Decorating a room - possibly  ‘window-dressing’ - is nice, but it is not essential. I write this from the benefit of hindsight, being 17 years down the track from a beginner teacher, with most of my time spent in junior classrooms.


NZ public schools seem to be run on a ‘shoestring budget’ and a roll growth position seems to exemplify the worst-case scenario - empty rooms or a room with all the unwanted or tatty furniture  and a lack of manipulatives or play equipment.


Lessons learned the hard - expensive - way

With my first classroom, and to a degree each subsequent one afterwards, I ‘spent up large’ on setting up my room.


I cleaned every reachable surface and even washed and repaired the curtains! I bought a slim couch and floor cushions for the reading corner, a sheepskin rug for my teacher’s chair, and a lockable filing cabinet for my own camera and stereo (being extra cautious after having some of my possessions stolen during my final practicum!)


Yes, I supplied my own electronic resources, apart from a laptop. Yes, the couch was not essential, but the colourful covering and matching cushions said to my Y5/6 class “I care about you and want this space to be comfortable for you as well as for me.”


When I switched to new entrants, my wishlist and expenses grew: wooden blocks, puzzles, Duplo, stencils, stamps, bug catchers, magnifying glasses, boxed games, puppets, alphabet friezes, crayon pots, storage baskets and shelves etc, etc, etc…….


Occasionally, the junior team redistributed their ‘spare’ resources and sometimes I got to buy new boxed games paid for by the school. But overall, if I hadn’t paid for some of these things, the students would have missed out.


So I drew a line at making my classroom  ‘extra pretty’ or themed. Luckily, this was before the Pinterest era and I didn’t suffer from room envy. I never bought a roll of wall decals but I did buy a pot plant, and only one of them, not a ‘2022 collection’.


So, you get a bit of an idea about my values - if it was usable by the students or me, and supplemented my lessons, I did it; if it was just to look nice, I tried to avoid it. Nevertheless, I spent LOTS of my own money.


Low-cost tips for new teachers setting up new rooms

Now to the present, with hindsight, what do I recommend to new teachers:

  • Double-check your school budget for allowances for furniture e.g. correct height desks, office chair (in working order!), filing cabinet and a storage cupboard or shelf. You shouldn’t have to pay for these yourself, as I did. Also, these are an extra burden if you have to move schools, as you are likely to be doubly burdened with only a ‘fixed term contract’.

  • Double-check your allowance for art supplies and teacher’s consumables (pens, sticky notes, staples, clips, tape, velcro, and magnetic tape etc)

  • Ask your school if they have a team ‘Twinkl’ account, or similar. These can be shared by a group of teachers and saves on having a personal account.

  • Go environmentally-friendly by reducing new plastic purchases and make your tabletop pencil pots from tin cans (get your students to help decorate them) or reuse ice cream containers and the like. Storage boxes can also be made from recycled cardboard boxes, especially heavy-duty fruit boxes or wine boxes. Readymade cardboard magazine boxes are planet-friendly options, too.

  • Reduce laminating by investing in reusable heavy-duty, see-through plastic L pockets, for tucking in different worksheets for students to write over with whiteboard pens. These also wipe clean more easily than most whiteboards.

  • (If you dislike whiteboard pens, investigate chinograph or potter’s pencils.)

  • Rather than laminating all your kids’ name cards, word cards, or labels for wall displays, visit your local commercial printers and ask for any cardstock offcuts. They will often give these away for free.


Reflective teaching trumps ‘niceties’: Invest in teaching knowledge and practice

After doing the basic organising and tidying in your room, I highly recommend you invest your time and your money in upskilling yourself in how to teach reading and writing because, unless you have been fortunate to go to a Science of Reading aligned undergraduate university, it is likely you have lots of questions you need answering about:


 “How the heck do I actually teach kids to read and write?”


Fortunately, there is a warm and welcoming worldwide community of teachers who are helping other teachers to plug this knowledge gap, about what we think we know and what we need to know. 


Here’s some friendly signposts to help you on your teaching journey, as picked by me, Miss Anon :)


Science of Reading resources (a.k.a Structured Literacy)


Highly recommended VERY SHORT video:

  • **UFLI: ‘What is the Science of Reading?’** This brief video provides an overview of the science of reading and the different bodies of research that contribute to it. About 6m long

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnkJ6VvDr2M


Best easy-to-read Australasian-based summary:


Best video series for new entrant teachers:

  • Nat’s Foundation Year 2022 (by Natalie Campbell of Mossman Park Primary in Perth; Nat is a leading SoR facilitator in Australia and one of the admins of the Reading Science in Schools facebook page.) Very inspirational!

  • Here is a link to her ‘unlisted’ Youtube vlog: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBO8wRQx3gSZ1kyaqcbwY9H5G4gFjKztu


Favourite teaching resource sites, many FREE:










Local community learning groups a.k.a help groups!  

Have a question, just ask and it will be answered!






Top Australian sites/Australasian membership base:




Other NZ specific sites:



More collated lists:


Highly recommended videos:

  • **UFLI: ‘What is the Science of Reading?’ ** (As mentioned above.) This brief video provides an overview of the science of reading and the different bodies of research that contribute to it. About 6m long

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnkJ6VvDr2M



  • Leap into Literacy, lockdown literacy learning tips for families (and teachers) posted by Ideal/Learning Matters consultants in 2021:


Structured Literacy advocacy, working for systemic change in NZ classrooms:


…………………….


Hope you find this helpful or, at least some of it, a tiny step on your journey to becoming a more evidence-based, reflective teacher. :)


Welcome to the profession! 

Nga Mihi,

Miss Anon
at No comments:

29.5.22

The power of yet!

In recent years, in class, I have used a catchy tune from Sesame Street about the Power of Yet when discussing ‘The Learning Pit’.


For those not familiar with those terms, it basically means learning can be hard, we need to show resilience and we can boost our efforts by reminding ourselves we might not be able to do something now, but rephrase it by saying: “I can’t do it…yet! But I will keep trying!”


I think this has relevance for the transition to Structured Literacy in our schools.


Instead of saying my school, or my child’s school, doesn’t do SL, I think we instead could say: “My school doesn’t do Structured Literacy, yet!”


I was prompted to write this post after seeing some emails being sent to teachers from some previously well-respected literacy facilitators who were casting doubt on SL practices that they had ‘heard about’ from junior teachers: only using decodable books, throwing out predictable readers, long phonics lessons, no shared reading, ‘one size fits all’ teaching approaches. Then they referred to a report that they implied ‘backed up’ their negative comments about decodables and SL, the said report having been funded by the publishers of the most common predictable readers used in NZ schools until now! SIGH….[Edit- This kerfuffle happened more than a month ago, and I wrote this then but didn't post this until my anger had subsided...)


Some recipients of the email felt indignant because most of the aspersions are factually incorrect:

  • SL teachers still do shared reading of poems, big books and picture books

  • Students in SL classes still have access to library books and often browsing boxes or pick-box books of other school readers

  • Most SL schools still have their earlier reading series intact, but may be using them in other ways, or intending to repurpose them when they have more time. For instance, they are very good for using with English language learners or ESOL students, for practising oral vocabulary. (Source: Linda Farrell of Readsters.)

  • SL assessments are very detailed and help us learn about the needs of our individual learners in far more depth than our earlier ‘balanced literacy’ assessments, so to me that is ‘responsive teaching’ and not ‘one-size fits all’.


But I digress…this isn’t a defence of SL. I think the data does that and will continue to do that, in greater numbers. 


This is about how we, adopters of SL, cope with the backlash that is now happening in NZ.


The ‘balanced literacy’ camp appears to be getting louder and more defensive, but instead of us getting angry or upset in turn, I think we need to celebrate - then extend an olive branch.


Not long ago, many of us were just like them and teaching in ‘balanced literacy’ classrooms.


You see, these peddlers of ‘balanced literacy’ products are passionate teachers, they want to see students learn, but they need some guidance. They are defending their beliefs, their comfort zone, their businesses and possibly their livelihoods too.


But we need to help them see the benefits of SL and that they too need to defend the rights of all students to an equitable, inclusive education.


Yes, some children pick up a love of reading easily, with a smattering of analytic phonics; and yes, some children learn to find their personal voice and practise and refine spelling patterns with ease as they write in a variety of genres.


But many kids don’t, without explicit, direct instruction.


So remember, a student may learn to read with predictable readers; they may also write a page or more about what they did last weekend. ‘Balanced literacy’ can work for some children BUT the evidence shows it is not the most effective way to teach the majority of children.


I believe the tide is truly turning in NZ, with more and more parents beginning to question schools about, ‘’What the heck is going wrong for my kid? Why can’t they read or write well?”


And more and more teachers are going, “That’s not working, what will work? Show me some data.”


I’m now showing my age by having a flashback to the classic Rachel Hunter ‘Pantene’ shampoo advert: “It won’t happen overnight, but it will happen.”


One of the big publishers of ‘levelled’ texts in the US is rewriting its guidance for teachers, emphasising decoding skills over teaching 3-cueing strategies; the new Australian Curriculum has also removed this vestige of ‘balanced literacy’ from its latest version; and the MOE here has just funded a trial of a gold-standard Structured Literacy intervention for senior primary school students in 15 schools, based on the Ideal approach.


People and organisations with a vested interest in ‘balanced literacy’ are spooked by the ‘writing on the wall’. They’re not ready to embrace the SL pedagogy just yet.


But with our encouragement and sharing of data, the NZ education system will change, just not overnight.


The majority of NZ schools aren’t all doing Structured Literacy, yet…but it will happen.
at No comments:

14.4.22

Will a name change help the MoE embrace ‘Structured Literacy’ as it strives for world-class inclusive education ?

Pondering why the NZ Ministry of Education is slow to accept Structured Literacy as best literacy practice for ALL learners...

Source: Hattie, Visible Learning

Recently I read a good blog post Leaving the Balanced Literacy habit behind: A theory of change by a leading light in reading science, Dr Pamela Snow, in which she commented on how ‘balanced literacy’ seemed hard to argue against, due to the nature of the word ‘balance’ as who doesn’t like the idea of balance, harmony and equilibrium. It sounds inviting and wholesome, like eating a ‘balanced diet’.


Whereas ‘Structured Literacy’ sounds possibly rigid and constrictive, though it does mean orderly, organised and well-planned.


In schools, we work within timetables and are meant to plan our lessons to align with the NZ Curriculum. However, educational philosophies in recent years have given rise to a great belief in the power of autonomy in school decision-making processes.


Curriculum practices, from school to school and classroom to classroom, have sometimes become less orderly and in some cases more haphazard, in my observations, despite school leaders' individual attempts to stamp their ‘school brand’.


Sometimes as a teacher, it feels as if we are throwing in ‘everything but the kitchen sink’. Teaching is viewed by many as prone to ‘fads’.


When I first trained, the teaching style in vogue in the early 2000s was ‘Inquiry Learning’. Then this morphed into ‘play-based learning’ especially for the junior students. Some schools plumped for modern learning environments and some went ‘yeah, nah’.


The concept of a core curriculum didn’t go away, it just wasn’t put first and foremost in place of priority when discussing the needs of our struggling or target students, in my humble opinion.


I anticipate some kick-back from fellow teachers about this view. However, let me clarify - most teaching works, but some teaching works 'more effectively than others' and I'll pop a link to Kiwi educational researcher John Hattie in the links below to back up my claim. Expert teacher knowledge and teaching skills are what make the most difference. So why waste time and student engagement when some things will help them achieve success faster than other methods?


(As an aside, I do believe in the power of play and my junior classrooms were always set up with play-opportunities for my young learners. 


My concern is about meeting the needs of our learners in a clear, targeted way. For some, that means, a longer time building up oral language skills before they can tackle complex reading or writing skills. For others, they may be halfway to cracking the start of the alphabetic code, and will soon be reading, spelling and writing. Diagnostic and formative assessment is key, step-by-step, to becoming fully literate.


But I digress. This isn’t a debate about ‘play-based learning’ and its pros and cons.)


It is about the misguided notion of ‘structured’ literacy being bad and ‘balanced’ literacy being good.

…………..

So what if we changed the name?


‘Structured Literacy’, with capital letters, is in fact a trademarked term of the International Dyslexia Association. Lots of schools in Australia are teaching this way, but it is rarely called SL. Instead, they say they follow the ‘evidence-based science’ or sciences of reading and learning.


What if the MoE in NZ was able to embrace a term that sounded more like ‘us’, here in Aotearoa NZ?


I know the direct translation, English to Maori is:


Structured Literacy - Hanganga Reo Matatini


I wonder if something more poetic could be used, based on the imagery of the moon, reflecting our culture here:

Clear, Comprehensive Language - Te Reo Marama Aroa  (CCL for short)


Or, what about…

Equitable Language - Te Reo Tautika


Or…

Responsive Literacy - Te Reo Katoitoi


Which is catchy and has the best ring to it?

…………..


But then, if we have campaigned so far for Structured Literacy, would a change of name confuse matters? 


Or could it be a bridge, offered to the MoE, for it to adapt and join us on this journey, without losing face? 

…………..


Some in the MoE perhaps view SL as a step back in education, a return to old ways (much of it is good-old fashioned teaching) rather than the forward-looking, progressive approach to teaching, to meet individual needs, that it is when looked at in its entirety.


One other aspect to contend with is some misguided notions that ‘Structured Literacy’ is favoured by the political right or conservatives, or worse, by ‘Euro-centric’ private schools, when that is not the case here in New Zealand. (See Natalie Wexler article below for this criticism in the US).


Instead, in NZ, Structured Literacy is closing the gaps between ethnic groups and works just as well in low decile schools as it does in higher decile schools. (See school case studies below.)


Perhaps a local brand name will help explain this approach to the public more easily, across all political spectrums, and the MoE will be proud to say it responds to feedback and it welcomes the chance to meet our people’s needs?


I don’t really have the answer. But I do know that often what wins these sorts of campaigns is not changing people’s minds, but changing their hearts.


Could changing a few words help the MoE to embrace this equitable, inclusive approach?


After all, it outlines ‘Structured Literacy’ on its own MoE-approved ‘Inclusive Education’ site for best practice for special education.


If it’s considered best practice for struggling readers and writers, SL must certainly also work in mainstream classes?


Or, are we only ‘inclusive’ outside of the classroom rather than inside it? Beggars belief!


What do you think?

……………………………….


FYI

Here is more food for thought: these are our current, official, government-led priorities for education in NZ: National Educational and Learning Priorities



N National Education and Learning Priorities (NELPs) released in November 2020 are:

  • NELP 1: Learners at the centre – learners with their whānau are at the centre of education

  • NELP 2: Barrier free access – great education opportunities and outcomes are within reach for every learner

  • NELP 3: Quality teaching and leadership – quality teaching and leadership make the difference for learners and their whānau

  • NELP 4: Future of learning and work – learning that is relevant to the lives of New Zealanders today and throughout their lives

  • NELP 5: World class inclusive public education – New Zealand education is trusted and sustainable


References:

http://pamelasnow.blogspot.com/

Leaving the Balanced Literacy habit behind: A theory of change.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/nataliewexler/2022/04/12/lets-not-make-phonics-political-again/?sh=6494c27e122d&fbclid=IwAR045f2jzZxjYeqP_szq-LzjKGeweds1Hn0umG6vRCHCup42DQysE2j_-YE


https://www.education.govt.nz/our-work/overall-strategies-and-policies/the-statement-of-national-education-and-learning-priorities-nelp-and-the-tertiary-education-strategy-tes/

https://assets.education.govt.nz/public/Documents/NELP-TES-documents/FULL-NELP-2020.pdf

https://www.liftingliteracyaotearoa.org.nz/support/case-studies

https://www.learningmatters.co.nz/case-studies/

https://inclusive.tki.org.nz/guides/dyslexia-and-learning/understanding-structured-literacy/

https://www.slideshare.net/richardcookau/john-hattie-effect-sizes-on-achievement
at No comments:

1.4.22

A cry for help! - Read the research, read the words, read my face


 

After the launch of the government’s new literacy strategy last week- and no direct mention of Structured Literacy - several members of the dyslexia advocacy groups I belong to said they were tired, emotionally exhausted and they needed to take a break.

Like the struggling learners we support, there comes a time when - faced with seemingly insurmountable barriers - you just want to crawl back inside your protective shell.

For a while there, we were passionate and loud. We were like the kids, the struggling learners, who get disruptive in class.

Then we tried humour. We all know the ‘class clown’ gets attention. A few memes started being shared around. Perhaps they did not paint the Ministry of Education  (or Minister Hipkins) in a good light. But we certainly vented some of our frustrated passion with a laugh or too.

Then the joke fell flat. Some other advocates of SL, teachers not parents, accused us of being bullies. Bullies! That’s right. Parents advocating for their struggling learners, calling the MoE out for not publicly addressing their demands for the widespread adoption of Structured Literacy, were told they were being disrespectful.

For years, many of our students have been labelled by various ill-informed teachers ‘slow’, ‘difficult’, ‘needy’, and ‘disengaged’. So to be told, by a few more teachers, that we were not behaving nicely was difficult to hear.

  • Some of us have trawled the internet for years to find ways that we could help our learners learn how to read and write, because it wasn’t happening at school, in class time.

  • Some of us have spent thousands and thousands of dollars paying tutors to teach our children how to read and write.

  • Some of us gave up our jobs to ‘homeschool’ our children, so they could learn to read and write.

  • Some of us, years ago, have written long submissions to the government on the inclusive education strategy.

  • Some of us, years ago, have signed petitions advocating for Structured Literacy.

  • Some of us got active on Facebook education groups, to advocate for our learners.

  • Some of us have had meetings, face to face, with the MoE about our concerns.

  • Some of us have invited education bureaucrats and ministers to visit schools using Structured Literacy, to see it in action.

  • Some of us have made presentations to our school boards, requesting Structured Literacy.

  • Some of us have written even longer submissions to the government on the then proposed literacy strategy.

  • Some of us have signed a new petition advocating for dyslexics' right to an education.

  • Some of us have built shared drives and websites to advocate for Structured Literacy.

  • Some of us have been on the radio, interviewed on television and written about in newspapers.

  • Some of us want to cry: “Why are we and our children being ignored?”

  • Some of us just want to cry.

Some of us have had successes - our own children got the help they needed or we convinced a local school to make the shift to Structured Literacy.

But we were thinking big, ‘going for gold’…We wanted this not just for our own kids, but ALL kids; not just this generation, but the next one, too!

But we are tired. We need help. Maybe you do not have a child with dyslexia, but chances are you know someone who does. More than 1 in 5 New Zealanders struggle to read and write.

Can we pass the baton on to you in this tiring ‘race for gold’? (Please don’t hit us on the head with it.) 

Please ask your school-aged family members how they are getting on at school. How many of their classmates need a hand to read and write?

Can we help them?

Yes, we all can. We can ALL advocate for Structured Literacy and lift NZ’s ‘dire’ literacy rates.

Remember, those ‘dire’ statistics are not just numbers; they are people, they are workmates, they are children, they are classmates, they are yours and mine, and they need our help.

And spare a thought for those passionate - possibly angry - people, those ‘bullies’; after all, ‘acting out’ is a call for help, too. 

Some of us are just too tired to remember our best manners.
at No comments:

26.3.22

Respectfully, Chris, I disagree…

 Response to Minister of Education Chris Hipkins, in an interview on TVNZ, 1News 6pm (25.3.22, approx 6:25pm).

"Sounding out the words, and looking at the pictures - that's how kids learn to read, and this idea that you have to pick one or the other, is just such a red herring," said the Minister of Education, Chris Hipkins, after launching our new national literacy strategy, when interviewed by 1News.


My response, using teacher-talk: "Chris Hipkins, I feel upset that you do not know how I feel when you mock my teaching experience of a faulty way to teach reading."


I need to sit down with him and have a 'restorative chat'.


I jest, of course. Laughter, rather than tears. In fact, I’m furious.


Why? Because in the week a report tells us our country’s literacy rates are “dire”, and that we need to look to respected research for a way forward, our Minister of Education says things are going to change and then he trots out such a nonsensical statement.


My faith in the ‘powers-that-be’ in the MoE is fast eroding.


Children do not learn to read by looking at pictures. End of story!


They learn to read by learning the Alphabetic Principle. They learn that written language is a ‘code’ for the words they know and say.


So yes, they need to know how to talk. And yes, they need to know how to sound out words on a page and relate them back to words they have heard spoken. But do they need pictures to do this? No. 


So, following this basic logic, pictures are not needed for reading but sounding out words is an absolute must, therefore sounding out words MUST be picked as a preferential method if we want our children to learn to read. That’s not a red herring. That’s a fact.


‘Predictable texts’ with pictures, in early reading materials favoured by Balanced Literacy proponents (such as those advising the minister, it appears), currently teach children to guess a large part of what they are reading, rather than attending to each and every sound in each word.


(Pictures are, of course, a nice additional touch if you want to engage your students in further talking around the subject, after they have read the sentence or story. And, indeed, skilled teachers introduce their students to possibly unfamiliar vocabulary before reading a text. But the pictures should not be used to work out the words on the page. Sounds and spellings should be used, instead.)


When pictures become less frequent in older students' reading materials, if they have not been taught to decode, they will often start guessing randomly for any old word that might possibly fit in the sentence. Worse, they’ll look at the teacher’s face, at the walls, at the ceiling - in fact, all over the show, as they try to work out what they are meant to do. In simple terms, they have missed out on learning ‘how to read’.


Of course, some children ‘crack the code’ early on and the more explicit teaching, the ‘how to read’, is not essential for them. But Structured Literacy benefits them in other ways too; they become better spellers, more quickly, and their comprehension, written composition and access to other parts of the curriculum is accelerated. It's a win, win!


My husband, an engineer, said to me: "Would you drive over a bridge that was deemed only 70% safe? Why does the education system accept a 30% failure rate? It’s a faulty system.”


And he’s right. Our role as educators is to progress the learning journey for ALL the students in our care. We cannot count ourselves ‘successful’ educators if we have masses of low-achieving ‘target students’ each year, falling off the bridge to further learning. We are failing them if our systems are not safe, fit for purpose and educating the majority of them.


So, come on Chris Hipkins. Please actually READ the research.


Don’t rely on someone else telling you what’s what. 


But then maybe the education system failed you somewhere along the way and you struggle to read complex text?


I have a solution. Teach your children using Structured Literacy - it’ll improve your adult literacy skills, too. It’s never too late to learn to read and write effectively. Age is no barrier…


But, if you are short on time, how about you try a Youtube clip:


What Teachers Should Know About the Science of Reading


Other helpful links:
at No comments:

17.2.22

Teaching HFWs by sound before sight

Earlier this week I was concerned to read that an early years teacher new to Structured Literacy (SL) was saying she was ‘mixing it up', and combining elements of explicit, direct instruction in phonics as well as some ‘look and say’ high frequency word teaching using predictable readers.


I’m sure she is a well-meaning teacher and believes some of her methods of old are effective. However, in SL our teaching is meant to follow the evidence-based, peer-reviewed science and not just what we ‘feel’ works or the results we get with a particular set of students. SL is designed to work for the most children at any given time or place.


All the terminology to be used perhaps complicates understanding. For instance, common or high frequency words (HFWs) get called ‘sight words’ by some, and then there is the difference between decodable words and irregular words (or ‘heart’ words!) to learn, too.


There are a very few HFWs that beginner readers do need to be exposed to frequently as they begin to apply their phonics knowledge to hearing, saying, reading, and spelling or writing sounds. 


However, my understanding is that we need to still explicitly explain which parts of the high frequency word they could decode and which parts are ‘tricky’ or advanced code they have yet to learn, and need memorising at this stage by ‘heart ’= hence ‘heart words’.


Brain research shows that teaching words phonetically helps strengthen the pathways in the brain that lead to efficient and effective reading, whereas ‘look and say’ methods train the brain to read inefficiently, by treating whole words as pictures rather than a sequence of sounds. 


Why am I bothering to post about this? Because refining our teaching practice is a journey that takes time, but we can also take mis-turns or end up in cul de sacs if we ignore helpful navigation. Yet we have a duty of care to our learners to speed up our skills as soon as possible, so we shouldn’t waste time in personal experiments if there is a reliable method shown to get the best results.


So, I recommend, we do the PD readings and don’t skip over the background science when adapting our teaching practice from ‘balanced literacy’ to Structured Literacy. Know ‘why’ we do something this way, and not just ‘how’.


As to any teacher using predictable readers, I advise caution: while ‘look and say’ can help children learn HFWs, we want most of their words to be mapped orthographically, rather than through visual memory, as there is a limit to how much information children can store in their working memory.


It is far better to remember sound/spelling patterns, to build hundreds and thousands of words, rather than clogging up the working memory with only a few hundred rote memorised words. 


Furthermore, guessing words by context or picture clues undermines the role of teaching children to read phonetically. It is far more important to teach children to keep their ‘eyes on the words’.


Ten HFW to teach beginner readers: the, a, I, to, and, was, for, you, is, of


https://www.readingrockets.org/article/new-model-teaching-high-frequency-words



Further reading:

https://www.phonicbooks.co.uk/advice-and-resources/free-teaching-resources/phonic-high-frequency-word-chart/ HFWs sorted by phonetic difficulty, starting from CV pattern.


https://keystoliteracy.com/blog/high-frequency-sight-words/


https://www.reallygreatreading.com/content/make-tricky-sight-words-sticky-really-great-reading-blog


https://ufli.education.ufl.edu/resources/teaching-resources/instructional-activities/irregular-and-high-frequency-words/
at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Reading Recovery (RR) Refresh and AND + AND word games: A clean slate and evidence-based practices are still preferable

"New research shows controversial Reading Recovery program eventually had a negative impact on children Initial gains from first-grade ...