Whole Words v. Phonics

My personal views about reading instruction tend to mirror the position spelled out in this article.

Basically, neither mode of instruction is the holy grail. Both ways of teaching should be made available to all children, and while they are sorting out a way to view and think about print on a page according to their own learning style, it should be made fun, engaging, and relevant.

Many try to superimpose the argument against whole language instruction in a classroom setting with children age 5 and up and apply it to children 4 and younger who are receiving whole language instruction in their home environments. I think it is a big mistake to conflate the two.

Was he reading?

This morning TJ pointed to his nose when the word "nose" flashed on the screen BEFORE the narrator said the word or the image of the little girl pointing to her nose. I wonder, was he reading the word or did he just know that "nose" was coming up next??? Either way, I think TJ is getting very close to reading, he is distinguishing words and participating actively in the videos. We've miss maybe 1 or 2 showings a week, and I don't think it is going to make any sort of big impact on his progress.

My Personal Early Reading Experiences

I learned to read at home. At the time I went to kindergarten, I was 5 (turning 6 the following month) and at the neighborhood public school there was no reading curriculum for kindergarten. Meaning we did not have readers, or reading groups, or anything like that. I'm sure we reviewed the alphabet, but the bulk of my memories of kindergarten are of playing outdoors. No one else in my kindergarten class could read. So I believe my parents and siblings took it upon themselves to teach me to read at home. I do not know what method they used to teach me to read, but I think that I was read to until I memorized many of the early readers we had at home. At the end of my kindergarten year, my teacher had me read one of my books aloud to my class as well as the other kindergarten class, and gave me a Bernstein Bears book as a gift. I remember finding the Bernstein Bears book hard to read. I do not remember ever having been taught phonics, but it's possible some one showed me how to break down/sound out words at some point. By the time I went to first grade, I was an advanced reader in a pullout program at another school. I also remember my younger sister being in kindergarten at the new school and she had a reader that they used to teach kindergartners, I guess the school I went to for K was just no good in that respect. I'm sure that I became a fluent reader some time between kindergarten and 1st grade but I don't have many other specific memories.

I just wanted to write this out to say that reading "late" at age 6 or 7 was not a bad experience for me, I never struggled, and I became advanced very quickly after my family got involved in teaching me. I just don't want to be "alarmist" about early reading. I think reaching fluency by 1st grade is more than an adequate early start, and that working with your kids by exposing them them to print early on will help to achieve that.

Transition

I am doing a bit of research and planning on how to get your baby from reading single words on the TV screen or flashcards that come with the program, to reading books and grappling with new reading materials. Dr. Titzer seems to claim that after enough words are taught, babies deduce phonics. I can see how that is possible, but I'm not sure if I should just assume TJ will deduce phonics. There is a website called Starfall and it seems to be excellent for alphabet and phonics type activities. I will probably start incorporating this part of the way through the program when I am pretty sure he is picking up the new words quickly. Right now, I sing the alphabet song to him several times a day, and he tries to sing it back, but it mostly sounds like "babble babble babble GEEEEE!" It's very cute, I will have to get that on video too.

Funny thing, but I am sitting watching Run's House: Hawaiian Vacation on MTV right now, and the mother and grandmother are flashing "Your Baby Can Read" flashcards at the kitchen table with their little girl. I'm so out-done!!! Cutest thing I saw all day! My little Bubal fell asleep at 7:15 so he didn't get a chance to watch the video (or bathe, or finish his milk). I think he had a tummy ache today and that kept him from napping like he normally does.

Why not just read to him?

This is a pretty simple question. In his book "How to Teach a Baby to Read" Glenn Doman, the pioneer of the flashcard method for teaching children to read, states the very simple answer. Most children with normal eyesight do not have the ability to clearly see small print. The great majority of children's books have print that is just too small for a baby. Lots of people believe that reading to a child is a legitimate method of teaching the child to read. I don't believe many children age 4 or under have ever been taught to read by being read to. At some point, children have to be exposed to print large enough for them to see if they are to read at such a young age. Hence, the effectiveness of the DVDs where the print shown is large, clear, and unambiguous.

The Cons

It seems to me that the pros of teaching a baby to read are fairly obvious. At the very least, if a baby learns to read early he can occupy his time with the activities of his choosing later in childhood, age 5-6 when most other kids are spending their time learning to read. At best, the brain is molded and shaped in preparation for higher level of thinking earlier.

I have read a few books, essays, and on line articles on the subject of the negatives of teaching a baby to read. There seems to be at least two major trains of thought. One takes the view that the child has more important developmental tasks to accomplish first before reading can or should happen. Some are more blunt, and say that you are taking a child's childhood away by introducing academics at such an early age. The second train of thought is that learning to read early is detrimental to reading later.

I am not well-versed enough in childhood development to deconstruct these arguments, I am just a Mom. However, I can say that the first reasoning, that babies should only pursue non-academic play, is purely a matter of opinion. It is a parenting choice that a parent makes once they learn that babies can learn to read (not everyone knows this), and they choose not to pursue teaching their babies. I think this is a perfectly fine parenting choice. My parents did not know babies could learn to read, did not teach us as babies, and my siblings and I all are excellent readers with post-graduate education. I have found that teaching my baby to read, so far, has not taken up much time and since he is engaged in play for the rest of the entire day, I don't think he is missing out on much at all. Viewing the videos takes up about 40 minutes, and I feel that he has fun "singing" the songs, and pointing to his nose.

The second point, that reading early makes children poor readers later is just counter-intuitive. The claim is that whole word reading causes dyslexia, or exacerbates the issue with dyslexic children. Or, the claim is that whole word reading is not really reading at all, but rather it is memorization or training.

The first claim I cannot really comment on other than I have not seen any citations to any proof, or even any anecdotal claims. The second claim is combination silliness and denial at its finest. The proponents of this claim is that using phonics, BKA "sounding out words" for the rest of us, is reading and memorizing the shape and look of a word is not reading.

I don't want to rant because that is not the purpose of this blog, but I used to tutor some very young early readers several years ago. There was one infinitely cute little Cambodian girl whose parents did not speak English who would need a couple of hours of help with her homework nearly every day. She could sound words out. It was laborious, frustrating, and once she cried. She would struggle to get through a passage, sounding out every word, then have absolutely no idea what she just read. The comprehension just was not there. After this process, I would read the passage to her, then sometimes have her read it aloud or to herself again. Even if I read the comprehension questions to her, she would still often have very low comprehension and I would point to the answer in the passage for her to read once again. If she had at least some words memorized by sight, perhaps she would have reached fluency earlier, but at least at the time I was tutoring her she was so far from that I was pretty worried for her. I am not against the phonics approach, but saying that phonics is reading and sight memorization is not reading seems to me to be agenda oriented and not taking into account the realities and results of each type of approach.

Sandra Boynton Never Met TJ

READ to your baby!

This has become practically a rule in this day and age. You must READ to your children so that they will see and hear lots of words, learn to understand language, see lots of pictures, and learn to appreciate books. It's accepted guidelines endorsed by every baby development book, pediatricians, super Moms, and even your child-free friends.

But, I am here on my blog willing to state the truth about reading to babies: Most babies do not want to be read to! I know, I know. It's blasphemy, of course babies want to be read to and if your baby is not wanting to hear story after story every night then something is wrong with you or your baby!

I was always baffled as to why reading to my baby never came naturally. I like to read, and bought tons of the most highly rated baby books on Amazon and got the full Dr. Suess collection. When my baby was young, he would settle into my lap and decide he wanted to nurse instead. Later, he would see a book and have only one thing on his mind, tasting it! If I would refuse to relinquish the book and insisted on continuing to read, it made him cry. So, why was I doing this again? What was the point?

The reason why most babies do not want to be read to is because they see a book that is brightly colored, with moving parts, and rip-able pages. It is a toy. You are essentially asking your child to hold still and watch while you play with one of the most interesting toys in the house. The chewable edges, flapping pages, and smooth surface that makes it the perfect push toy for creepers. The thinness makes it fit so perfectly in all the best hiding places: under beds, couches, closed doors and even between furniture and walls. I am here to warn you that this advice is setting you up for failure, because most mothers and babies will fail at this activity as it is envisioned by the smart baby authorities. I am here to outline a new rule for books and infants.

1) Pull out a book to read every day. Open it show your baby the picture and try your best to read the first page. Point to the words as you are reading them if at all possible. If your baby has other ideas about what he wants to do with the book, let him.
3) If at all possible, memorize the book and just recite the book as your baby is playing with it.
2) Choose books that have no narrative plot. If your baby opens to a particular page, just read that page. Don't get anything invested in having the "story" stay in sequence.
4) Play peek-a-boo with the book instead.

Do not give up reading because your baby seems disinterested. The advice to read to your baby is good advice but no one ever outlines the stumbling blocks that will eventually be presented as you introduce this activity to you child. Eventually many young toddlers become practically obsessed with books and want the same book to be read to them repeatedly. Until that time, do not believe that there is anything wrong with you or your baby, and don't let anyone make you feel that you are failing at your job as a mother because your baby is not getting his daily dose. The advice is good, but incomplete without taking into account the temperaments and behaviors of our babies.

Yesterday, TJ picked up his nursery rhyme book, and brought it over to me as though he wanted me to read it. I opened it to the first page, and read the rhyme as a song. As I got ready to start the next page, he took the book back and put it on the seat of the high chair. That was our reading for the day.