]]>
]]>
Most adults read almost everything by sight - only new words will be sounded out, but they have had a lot of practice to do this. I do believe that both methods need to be used. I also believe that if you are teaching reading a very young child (less than 2 years old) that you HAVE to use sight words as blending seems to come after this and the whole word is the first unit that a child will understand (c-a-t means nothing, but cat they can understand)
Doman believes that if babies are taught enough sight words very young they will automatically know phonics rules (just as children learn grammar rules without anyone teaching them just by hearing the spoken word) I have not found this to be true for most children and babies however which is why I believe in a balanced approach using both methods.
Statistics: Posted by Tanikit — Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:21 am
]]>
]]>
Nearly every child learns some sight reading naturally, but if one relies heavily on this method, when the child is challenged with a new word, he simply cannot decode that word on his own. He must rely on someone else providing the pronunciation for him and that works with young children because they are constantly asking and being told what this and that word is. However, it does not work well later on in the adult world.
As to signs, it is rather more likely that the sight reader would associate the sign itself with the word. I have seen many people who readily identify the golden arches of a McDonald's restaurant and yet cannot read the word "McDonald" in a book. At the same time, my daughter at 4yo was sounding out and decoding words on signs without needing to ask and memorize.
Stepping out now...
Statistics: Posted by seekingmyLord — Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:25 am
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
An overemphasis on sight reading is just one of the main reasons why the public school system is producing kids who can't read. This is one of those few instances where I'm just going to say a certain learning style is wrong, and you can agree or disagree with me from there as you wish.
Statistics: Posted by Theodore — Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:06 pm
]]>
]]>
]]>
I still disagree
, I think it can be quite beneficial to use both methods simultaneously (and any other method that works, for that matter). I use various methods with my son and I don't notice any signs of him preferring one thing over another for the reasons of taking the easy way out, so to speak. I don't view memorisation of the word as "guessing". as I mentioned before, I think we actually naturally memorise many words and when we read them again in different contexts it doesn't mean that we are guessing them, it means that we have simply learned them in a different way. We recognise the word and know its' meaning and THAT is the main thing!Just to give an example (I know it's not directly related but on one level I am talking from experience here) when I was learning English at 14 years of age I found transcription (writing out english words in special russian characters that represent sounds, similar to phonems) unbearable and learned most words by sight reading. A lot of the time, my spelling at school was better than that of my aussie classmates.
Statistics: Posted by bright_tomato — Sun Feb 10, 2008 5:17 am
]]>