K-2 Teacher Support Document to be used with Reading Reflex and Super Speller. Phono-Graphix Supplemental Guide. Phono-Graphix What happens every. Find out more about Reading Reflex by Carmen Mcguiness, Geoffrey Mcguiness at Simon & Schuster. Read book reviews & excerpts, watch author videos. PDF download for Book Review: Reading reflex - the foolproof method for teaching your child, Article Information. No Access. Article Information. Volume:
|Language:||English, Spanish, Dutch|
|Genre:||Fiction & Literature|
|ePub File Size:||19.83 MB|
|PDF File Size:||11.76 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Regsitration Required]|
[DOWNLAD] PDF Reading Reflex: The Foolproof Phono-Graphix Method for Teaching Your Child to Read Reading Reflex: The Foolproof Phono-Graphix. Reading is the single most important skill for any child to develop. And the key to learning how to read effectively is recognizing the sounds that letters and words. Download Phono-Graphix Worksheets - Reading Reflex book. FREE Fry's First Words Snakes and Ladders Games x 6 - PDF file6 pages designed.
After only eleven weeks of exposure, the average reading age of the children on the standardized Woodcock Reading Mastery Test, was first grade, first month. This Phono-graphix is really extremely powerful if implemented correctly. Phonics begins by teaching children the sounds for all the letters. You'll recall that phonetics describes the various sounds in a given language, and that phonics was a nickname for phonetics. He wasn't abusive.
Put them in an envelope and into a sheet protector. Story make multiple copies to pass out for kids to consume. Take all these words; write the word ship on the backs of the picture of ship and the 3 slips of paper and color. Do this for the rest. By now, most of the kids can do all the skills of segmenting, blending, or auditory processing ic phoneme manipulation.
Even if they are not solid move on to the code.
It is ok for them to be in various levels at once. Then, whenever you can keep going back and do phoneme manipulation and word building until they can segment, blend, and phoneme manipulation perfectly. They get this by sorting the sound, reading the lists of words, and then putting them into the stories. Error correction is critical. Please study this section carefully. This will make or break your program and can not be stressed enough.
Also, note that segmenting must be perfect. Close is NOT good enough here. Perfect segmenting please. In a small group by now, four or five weeks into school all my kids who started on the first day of school are doing this.
You can do a retest every so often. Keep moving.
Teacher Introduces a Sound and tells student this is one of the 44 sounds that you knew when you came to school. We have 44 sounds and only 26 letters so this makes it tricky at times. The child is going to write all these words on a page in different groups.
In the Classroom version, there are Sound Sorts with Stories for each sound. Once the kid can blend, segment, and manipulate phonemes, you just plug away through the code. As each kid can segment, blend, and manipulate phonemes, you drop the kid from individual Skill WORK such as segmenting, blending, and phoneme manipulation work and move to small group code work.
You hit the code hard and fast. You introduce a sound for the day. The flash cards all contain the sound of the day all represented with different letters. They go back to finish their sound sort. They take their sound sort page home to practice along with the story of the day. They bring the sort and story back and I stick them back into the plastic sheet protectors for the next kid to save paper. I throw away the sound sort that the kid sorted as it has been consumed. I throw in some review as needed.
Meanwhile, I find real books that correlate with easy code that has been introduced. The pace may need to be altered. This is only a guide to make sense of Reading Reflex. Then try small group. Just a note, I have a kid who had to go to an alternative school.
He was so frustrated that he could not read, he would throw chairs etc.. He was reading at a primer level when I met him the 3rd week of school this year as he just started phasing to our school slowly for a few hours a day.
He already is at the 3rd grade level after only a few weeks. He is on fire and is now reading for pleasure. He is a 5th grader. You should have heard him encouraging my new kid.
I wish I could have video taped it for future use. Seeing is believing. This Phono-graphix is really extremely powerful if implemented correctly. You will just die when you see how stupid the stories are but, hang tight. It is be only for a while.
You can always make up your own decodable if you hate them. My ED phasing from the alternative school is already reading chapter books, real books, great books. This program is awesome once you get good at it. Bare with it. Give it a fair shot. Try it on your hardest kiddo. If successful, try a small group. If you experience success, weave in into whole class, not as a program but as a way to decode multi-syllable words whenever needed. All Rights Reserved. Learn more.
You are here: Author Message Anonymous. Nov 03, Posts: Posted Sep 25, at How to adapt Reading Reflex to a small group or one on one. How to adapt Reading Reflex to a small group remedial: Jack's way of coping was to compete. He once said to me, "At tennis I'm a winner. Soon after Jack was Tina, the dependent. In all situations Tina would immediately notify those involved that she couldn't read. This limited their expectations of her and allowed her to be cared for.
Some time later there was Thomas, the specializer. Thomas could read at a fourth-grade level and was extremely intelligent. He coped by becoming an expert at breeding and training exotic birds. My current adult client is Jill, the survivor. Jill, a forty-eight-year-old convenience store district manager, has managed to become just competent enough at most everything to allow her to get by. With a reading age at intake of third grade, she set up a color-coded filing system so that all fourteen of the stores in her district were consistent in their filing system.
This allowed her to avoid having to read the labels on the files. Each of these people has brought me a renewed sense of urgency. The time to learn to read is so precious to our children. Although these people lie at the bottom of the reading ranges, we mustn't lose sight of the fact that they are not atypical.
There are many at the bottom range. A U.
Department of Education study revealed that 42 percent of our school-age children are below basic competency in reading. These numbers are staggering. They're so staggering that it's tempting not to think of them at all. It's tempting to pretend that our children are safe from these frightening statistics, that it will be someone else's child who will have problems, not ours.
But there is no assurance of that. Based on the prevailing trend, two in every five children will not learn to read to a level of basic competency. They will become the Jacks, the Tinas, the Thomases, and the Jills. They will fill the spaces of their lives with coping. Once we move beyond the doubt and accept that the risk to our child is real, it's equally tempting to rationalize our child out of the failed numbers. This is easily done by assigning some level of blame to the failed reader. But these rationalizations simply aren't true.
In fact the adult nonreaders that I've worked with all came from good homes, and were exceptionally hard working. They were of average or above average intelligence, and they all reported having wanted very, very much to learn to read during their school years. They were not the problem. So what exactly was the problem? And what is the problem? How is it that our society keeps failing its children in the area of reading instruction?
Could it be the method of instruction used to teach reading? That line of reasoning is equally tempting to a parent. Simply find out which method produces the best results, save up thousands of dollars, and put your child in a private school that teaches that method.
Or, if you can't save up thousands of dollars, find a public school that teaches that method and move halfway across the country into that particular school district. Well, for many or most of us, these are not options. But for those who are actually considering these steps, I suggest a review of the available methods. To do this, let's look at the history of reading in the United States. Let's see if we can find a method that's worth the move from anywhere.
The History of Reading In the s and s there was one way to teach a child to read. Noah Webster's Blue-Backed Speller sold over one hundred million copies in the years from to the s. The Blue-Backed Speller focused on teaching the correspondences between the various English letters and the sounds they were intended to represent. So children learned the sound for each letter in the alphabet and then they practiced reading the sounds and making words.
For instance, children were taught that generally when two vowels are side by side in a word, it is the sound of the first vowel that is read. She was taught that this sound was a "long e sound" as opposed to the "short e sound" in the word 'met.
This phonetic approach of teaching letter-sound correspondences, along with rules for all the exceptions to the rules, soon came to be known as phonics. Phonics was a nickname for phonetics, which is the term used to describe the sounds of a given language.
In the s, and today, phonics deals in letters and the sounds they represent. This requires memorization of two arbitrary items that are only paired because somebody says they should be. This kind of arbitrary memorization of two seemingly unrelated items is called paired associate learning. Paired associate learning is very difficult for young children. It is only made easier by somehow making the two items meaningful. Let's look at language acquisition as an example.
When your two-year-old fusses for no apparent reason you start trying things. You might say, "Are you hungry? If that doesn't work you might ask, "Do you want a drink? Suddenly baby stops fussing and reaches for the item that you just labeled 'drink. This occurred not because he's a genius, as you might suppose, but because the experience of getting the two items the drink and the word 'drink' together while he was appeased, was very meaningful to him.
The problem with teaching the various sounds that letters represent in a pair like this, is that there is no relevance in a sound alone. It has no meaning until it is placed in a word. Phonics tended, and still does, to teach the sounds of the alphabet for a long time before the learner is taught how to read and spell words with the sounds.
So, one problem with phonics is that it relies heavily on paired associate learning, which is difficult for young children unless some relevance is introduced in the learning formula.
An additional problem lies in the use of rules to teach the sounds that groups of letters represent. This kind of contingent logic is called "propositional logic.
In fact, you may have even found it confusing when you just read it. It's difficult, and especially so for young children. Not only is the logic difficult to follow, but it is also frequently wrong. In fact, this rule only works in English 40 percent of the time.
These, of course, would be labeled "exceptions to the rule. As if all this isn't confusing enough, phonics also teaches adjacent consonants as units. So instead of leaving a child alone once he knows the sound to symbol relationship of sounds like 'f' and 'r', it goes on to teach him 'fr', as if it were something altogether different. You might look at the previous paragraph and think, My goodness, this is really confusing.
How and why did the instruction become so confusing? Well, phonics evolved from the idea that the English written language is so confusing that it needs rules, regulations, and contingencies, in order to be learned.
Never did the innovators of phonics ask if maybe it was the rules that were confusing, rather than the written code.
In fact, these rules are so confusing that by the late s, with phonics firmly in place, the illiteracy rate was tottering around 33 percent. Big Books Take Over Reading Instruction By the turn of the decade "whole language" arrived on the scene in a big way. Even the books were big. From "big books" large-format books that displayed the same old story in large print to "invented spelling" the notion that any approximation of a word is acceptable , classroom teachers embraced the principles of whole language from the beginning.
With all the rules they had been subject to and had subjected their students to under the phonics regime, it's no wonder they loved whole language. The theory behind whole language was that children do not need to know the code to read the English language. In fact, the inventors of whole language believed that the English written code is too unpredictable to be learned.
Whole language innovators believed that children could learn to recognize an infinite number of whole words. Credos like,"We recognize words in the same way that we recognize all the other familiar objects in our visual world -- trees and animals, cars and houses, cutlery, cookery, furniture and faces -- on sight" Smith, F. Literature was used to excite the child about learning to read so that he began to memorize the many words he saw in books.
Workshops sprang up around the country, with classroom teachers sharing their ideas and experiences with "language-rich" environments. Teacher creativity was overwhelmingly recognized as the best asset of our classrooms and schools.
In addition to workshops, teachers began writing articles for teaching magazines, and even books that laid out their whole language successes. Teachers were, for the first time in the history of mandatory education, not just allowed to be innovative, but actually encouraged to be so. The momentum passed quickly from the colleges to the classrooms, and the teachers became the leaders of whole language innovation.
All that sounds great, but what about the reading scores? Well, the problem with whole language is that it doesn't work. Children do not "recognize whole words like they recognize other familiar objects in their visual world" Smith, In fact, reading isn't even based on a visual stimulus, but on an oral one, the sound.
It is the sounds that our forefathers were attempting to represent when they invented the written code, not the other way around. Human beings can't even recall that many arbitrary images with no meaningful attributes. Despite these facts whole language was all the rage. And what became of phonics? Out with the old and in with the new? Yes and no. When whole language came on the scene around an entire generation of teachers had been teaching phonics for the previous decade or two, and the newer teachers had been raised on phonics.
A survey of teachers conducted by Patrick Groff of San Diego State University in , and published in the Orton Annals of Dyslexia in , reveals that phonics never really left the classroom. Groff questioned classroom teachers on their agreement or disagreement with various whole language credos. To the statement, "Intensive phonics instruction makes the task of learning to read inordinately difficult, if not impossible" Weaver, C.
To the statement, "English is spelled too unpredictably for phonics to work" Smith, , 11 percent agreed, 72 percent disagreed, and 17 percent were undecided. An independent observational study conducted by the Read America Clinic in and found phonics practices well in place and mixed with whole language practices in sixteen out of seventeen randomly selected public schools in five Central Florida counties.
Based on these discoveries, it would seem that phonics and whole language have been "mixing it up" eclectically for quite some time now. Yet in the fall of , newspapers and magazines were printing article after article about a return to phonics. Jean Chall, author of Learning to Read: The Great Debate McGraw Hill, NY, , said that in the previous three-month period she had been interviewed by over twenty national publications on the topic of a return to phonics.
So what's all the fuss about? Why are school boards adopting a curriculum that never left the classroom? Why are newspapers writing about the return of a method that never went away? Instead, we see headlines like Hark!
So, coming as no surprise to those of us who have been paying attention, phonics is still here or back or, as the kids say, "whatever. What has been gained? According to the U. Department of Education bombshell released in , not percentage points on a reading test. Under the eclectic mix of whole language and phonics, the illiteracy rate has soared to 43 percent! What Now? The complaints of the late s are still valid.
Phonics is tedious and difficult.
The rules associated with phonics instruction are boring and frequently incorrect. New complaints have joined the problems associated with phonics. We now know, from a twenty-year mountain of research, that phonemic awareness being able to separate and blend sounds in words , alphabet code knowledge knowing the correspondence between the sounds and the symbols , and an early start five years at learning to read are the three strongest determinants of future reading success, including comprehension.
But now with a new shot at impressing the public, phonics still does not teach phonemic awareness, teaches only about 50 percent of the alphabet code, and teaches that 50 percent using methods that are logically inappropriate to a child under nine years of age. So, why give a failed method another try? Because it's "sort of" right, but then so is whole language, which says read to your kids, suround them with books. So, is the answer this eclectic mix that we seem to be caught in? Logically speaking, just because two methods are partially valid does not mean that together they are completely valid.
Mixing phonics and whole language assumes that the 67 percent success rate of the last phonics era and the 57 percent success rate of the whole language era, when mixed will equal a percent complete method, all bases covered. In fact what it does equal is an averaged 62 percent success rate. That's not acceptable. Furthermore, it may be that whatever is causing the 33 percent failure rate of phonics and the 43 percent failure rate of whole language is so damaging that it is hurting children, creating Jacks, and Tinas, and Thomases, day by day, year after year, decade after decade.
What exactly is "sort of" right about phonics and whole language? Well, whole language credos which promote the use of literature are great. We should have our kids reading good children's literature as soon as they are able. And integrated curriculum is wonderful. Teachers should strive to make books meaningful across curriculum areas. But first we must teach children to actually be able to read these wonderful "big books.
You'll recall that phonetics describes the various sounds in a given language, and that phonics was a nickname for phonetics.
Well, phonics was correct in recognizing the importance of teaching the phonetics of the English writing system. And that is precisely all it was correct about.
From that point on, phonics is confusing, often wrong, and developmentally inappropriate to young children. Phonics begins by teaching children the sounds for all the letters. This orientation from letter to sound, from which phonics comes, is wrong. This is not a matter of opinion. This is fact. The sounds in our language existed long before the letters. The written symbols of our language were invented to represent the sounds we had been speaking for centuries.
Phonics instruction is driven from the letter to the sound, as if the sounds exist to suit the letters. This direction of instruction fails to allow the child to use what he already possesses, the sounds. By age five, when somebody starts to teach him to read, he is a master of sounds. He is completely intimate with his language.
It is native to him. For him to learn to read, he needs instructional activities which encourage him to learn the symbols that were invented to represent the sounds that, as we've pointed out, he already knows. This knowledge is like a magical key to written language.
But phonics throws the key away and starts from scratch, teaching him the sounds as if they were something new. The wrong direction from which phonics sets out causes problems long after the child has learned all the single-letter sounds. The entire remainder of the code, the double letters which represent sounds, is taught using developmentally inappropriate activities and tedious and inaccurate rules.
For instance, the instructional example from Webster's Blue-Backed Speller mentioned earlier explains that the first vowel in a vowel digraph is the vowel that should be sounded. Developmental psychologists have known for fifty years that young children under nine cannot manage propositional logic.
Any parent knows instinctively that children cannot handle contingencies very well. Not only does this line of instruction require the use of propositional logic, but it is often wrong house, spoon, said, bread. These are called "exceptions to the rule" or "rule breakers. So What's a Parent to Do? It has been researched and proven to work on children age four to adult nonreaders. It takes what the child knows, the sounds of his language, and teaches him the various sound pictures that represent those sounds.
It does this through developmentally appropriate lessons that do not rely on propositional and other logic that children cannot understand. Linguistically based Phono-Graphix has been researched and proven to teach reading in one-tenth the time of phonics and with a percent success rate. In a University of South Florida clinical study of Phono-Graphix, thirty-seven learning disabled students and forty-eight garden variety bad readers, subjects were taught to read in just twelve sessions with a 98 percent success rate.
In a pilot study conducted at two childcare centers in Central Florida, the same method was used on kindergartners from September 1st to mid-November. After only eleven weeks of exposure, the average reading age of the children on the standardized Woodcock Reading Mastery Test, was first grade, first month. This average score is over nine months above grade level.
The worst readers were reading at grade level, and the best readers were reading at first grade, sixth month -- over a year above grade level. In a study conducted at the Millhopper Montessori School in Gainesville, Florida, twenty-four first- and second-graders received Phono-Graphix instruction in reading groups of four to nine children for ten to fifteen minutes per day. At the time of the pretest, using the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test, twenty-five percent of the children were reading below grade level, thirty-four percent were reading at grade level, and forty-one percent were reading above grade level.
This group was already well above the national norms, with only twenty-five percent of the children below grade level compared to the forty-three percent that is our national average. After using Phono-Graphix for eight months their scores improved dramatically. At the time of posttesting none of the children scored below grade level, seventeen percent scored at grade level, twenty-one percent were within a year above grade level, and sixty-two percent were over a year above grade level.
With children who were in trouble at pretest scoring dramatically above grade level at posttest, these studies not only indicate the invention of a perfect method for correcting reading failure, but indicate that average readers can become super readers!
Now that we've found the perfect method, the really great news is that you needn't save the thousands of dollars for private school, or move halfway across the country. You can teach your child to read in the convenience of your own home. We assume, by the the fact that you've purchased this book, that when confronted with a problem you are a doer, not a wait-and-see type. Well, the first thing to do, now that you know there is something that can be done, is to follow the lessons in this book to the letter, or in this case, to the sound.
You must read the following, rather technical, explanation of what reading is, and come to understand it theoretically. Because in order to teach someone to do something, anything, you must understand that thing. You must know how to do that thing yourself. I would not presume to teach children to play the piano.
I don't know how to play the piano. I did, however, just last week, teach my twelve-year-old how to make wheat bread. The event went fairly well. There were a few things she needed help with.
She did not, for example, know what the word "knead" meant. I explained it to her, but soon discovered it required showing her. She caught on quickly. Once I told her what they meant she did fine. Basically, what she lacked was subskill practice and some code knowledge. She had never kneaded before a subskill of bread making. Although it is based on the English sounds, Phono-Graphix's point of departure is a degree difference from phonics.
Instead of teaching children the sounds that letters make, we recognize that letters do not make sounds, they represent sounds.
This is no subtle distinction. Almost anything you could want to learn or teach has relevant subskills and codes. Subskills are the skills required before you can perform the task.
The code is the symbols used to communicate when performing the task. When I was eighteen my cousin took me waterskiing. It was my first trip. I soon discovered that the ability to balance one's body over two planks of wood while being pulled forward by eighty-five Evenrude horses is a subskill I needed lots of practice with. When I finally mastered this subskill and found myself being pulled at a speed I found unnerving, I realized that no matter how many times or how loudly I yelled "slow down," the driver and passengers could not hear me.
What I lacked was the code. After I let go, was rescued, and voiced my frustration, they told me the code: It seemed simple once I knew. Later that day, when my legs stopped buckling under me and my frustration had ebbed a bit, it occurred to me that my cousin hadn't thought to instruct me about how to stand or what to do if I wanted to slow down because it was all second nature to him.
He and his friends had been skiing expertly for years. For them it was like walking. Watching them ski, I understood that they were on automatic pilot when they did it. They had reached a level of expertise at which they didn't even have to think about what they were doing. Being able to do the thing you wish to teach is not the only prerequisite of being able to teach it. To teach a thing well, the teacher should understand the processes and subskills involved in doing it. As a parent who wishes to teach your child to read, it's important that you realize that you have reached a level of expertise at reading at which it is second nature to you, just like waterskiing was second nature to my cousin.
You are unaware of the subskills needed, and your knowledge of the code is mostly subconscious. The main goals of this book are to: Teach the subskills and give you ways to help your child practice them Tell you what the code is and show you how to teach it to your child Let's look at each of the subskills of reading and as we do, we'll check to be sure that Phono-Graphix is teaching them in a manner that a young child can understand.
Children of five and older can understand that the code moves in one direction. They may need to be reminded of the particular direction from time to time. Children of five and older can do this paired associate learning as long as relevance is added to the formula. Phono-Graphix teaches only eight sound pictures at a time, using those sound pictures to read and spell real words. By actually using these eight sound pictures to read and spell, children begin to understand why they need to know the code.
Ability to blend discrete sound units into words. As we've proven in our kindergarten study, children of five and older can blend sounds into words, once they have been shown, by example, what it is you expect of them. Ability to segment sounds in words. Our kindercare study also shows that children of five and older can segment sounds in words once you have shown them, by example what you expect of them.
Ability to understand that sometimes two or more letters represent a sound. For example, sh.