Learning to read by sight/whole word vs. phonics

[skueppers]

My daughter is learning to read, and as far as I can tell, operates primarily by memorizing the words. I work with her on reading almost every day, and find it quite interesting that phonics just doesn't seem to mesh with the way she thinks.

Anyway, I'm not particularly bothered by this, as I know I must have learned to read the same way (no one taught me to read, so I definitely received no phonics instruction). Being unfamiliar with the phonics rules on a conscious level never set me back in any way.

One thing I am curious about is spelling. It's frequently asserted here that kids who learn to read via phonics are better spellers than those who don't. I'm wondering where this idea comes from -- have there been studies on the subject? Are such studies even applicable to kids who have access to a variety of methods and are able to choose what works best for them?

One reason I'm interested is that I've always been an excellent speller. Misspelled words practically jump off the page at me, while some of the worst spellers I know received extensive phonics instruction in school.

[lach]

I can give you the results of my scientific study of one. Well, me

I never got phonics, and it was quite a problem when I was a kid because I was taught the phonics approach. I think now the accepted wisdom is that a combined phonics/sight word approach is best, but when I was a kid it was all or nothing. I just didn't "get" it. Some sort of mental block. I do remember having to learn all the rules, and that none of the rules made sense. I just had some sort of anti-phonics mental block that I can't explain. Finally towards the end of 2nd grade my parents made me some flashcards, and I went from there.

As for spelling, I think of myself as a bad speller but objectively I don't really think that I am. Other people's bad spelling annoys me. I'm pretty good at telling when the whole word looks wrong. The rules do still really confuse me. That whole i before e thing? I just don't get it. I spend ten minutes writing "neice niece neice niece" before I decide which one is the right one. But I think because I'm good at memorizing what words look like, I'm also pretty good at memorizing what they should look like? If that makes sense? I also have a pretty good vocabulary, and though I've never taking any ancient languages my vocabulary is good enough to have a basic understanding of a lot of root words so I can make an educated guess about how some long word I'm not overly familiar with is spelled.

I have read a lot of research on this, and I do believe that the vast majority of kids learn best from a phonics-based approach. But I also believe, from personal experience, that phonics doesn't work for everyone. The nice thing about being a sight word reader is that I've always been a VERY fast reader. I think that they're connected. I amaze friends and family, and when I was a kid my parents and teachers would refuse to believe I had actually read the book. I remember my mother trying to quiz me on books because she didn't think I had read them.

I do, however, still have some trouble with very long words, that I can't just glance at and recognize. Not words I'm liable to come across in most places, but if I'm reading something with long technical words or jargon, I think I spend much longer working out what the word is than someone who is used to breaking a word down into parts.

[ocelotmom]

My gut feeling is that most kids, taught one method, will eventually intuit the mechanics of the other method - a kid taught using phonics will eventually start memorizing words and become more of a sight reader, and a child who starts off with sight reading will see phonetic patterns and be able to figure out unfamiliar words.

However, some kids may need to be explicitly taught both methods in order to gain fluency or increased comprehension.

(Me, I'm a pretty fast reader and a middling speller. I'm not sure whether I was taught strictly phonics or a combination.)

[mamakay]

Originally Posted by ocelotmom

My gut feeling is that most kids, taught one method, will eventually intuit the mechanics of the other method - a kid taught using phonics will eventually start memorizing words and become more of a sight reader, and a child who starts off with sight reading will see phonetic patterns and be able to figure out unfamiliar words.

However, some kids may need to be explicitly taught both methods in order to gain fluency or increased comprehension.

(Me, I'm a pretty fast reader and a middling speller. I'm not sure whether I was taught strictly phonics or a combination.)

I agree, and think the main benefit of teaching phonics is that it circumvents the child needing to totally intuit all the phonics rules. So I think it's best to do both.

[taralv]

My oldest was a sight reader - I never talked about phonics with her until after she was reading proficiently. She is an excellent speller, and this is completely due to her experience reading and seeing words correctly spelled ( I assume because we have only recently started doing spelling words/lists and she's in the 3rd grade). My son is starting to read now, but I can tell that he is learning to do so through phonics as opposed to sight/memorization. He sounds words out - something my daughter would not do. So, IMHO, it depends on the child which method will work best. Reading a good variety of books exposes them to words and helps with spelling issues. I am an English major, and I never really realized just how tricky phonics/spelling rules are until I began teaching my own children to read!

Tara

[jessicaSAR]

If you want to read research studies then this is the best site I have found

http://www.childrenofthecode.org/interviews/index.htm

There are tons of interviews with all the major researchers in the field of reading, language and literacy. There are also links to their CV and you can find direct links to published articles in academic journals.

Essentially, the pp are correct. There is no one best way, since the human mind has not yet evolved to have only one way of reading (reading is a very very recent phenomenon in human evolution). Research seems to suggest that at least 60+% of students will require some systematic phonics instruction in order to learn to read adequately. And, yes, we all eventually become sight readers of a sort, but, it takes a minimum number of exposures to a word before we can recognize it at sight. So, sight reading can be as laborious as learning phonics, just in a different way.

[elizawill]

both of my children learn to read with a combination of both methods. this seems to work best for them, and i know most schools combine both methods as well. hth.

[skueppers]

Originally Posted by jessicaSAR

If you want to read research studies then this is the best site I have found

http://www.childrenofthecode.org/interviews/index.htm

Thanks, I'll see if they have anything about spelling!

[MissRubyandKen]

Its been my opinion, colored of course by my own experiences with my children, that children who learn to read by sight can intuitively pick up phonics without working at it or being taught. I'm certain there are children who benefit from phonics, but I'd guess more by games and fun and being read to than by instruction. There are children who have a harder time when being taught phonics. I've seen children laboriously attempting to sound out words that are tricky or just downright do not follow the rules. Even when they've seen the word before and been read it. I really can't recall telling my children the same word twice when they've asked what one was. I think its important to emphasize to children being taught phonics that this is part of reading, not the entirety.

[elus0814]

I learned to read with phonics and I'm a terrible speller. I don't read very fast but I have, and had as a child, an extensive vocabulary and great comprehension. I owe at least some of the comprehension to phonics because learning the rules and how to decipher word allowed me to deconstruct words and infer the meaning through the meanings of the component parts. I hope that makes sense.

I'm teaching my daughter to read now and I started with straight phonics. She was able to sound out words but then wouldn't understand what the word was. She just didn't get that she was actually reading. Then I started showing her some sight word flashcards for common words like and, the, is, etc. That boosted her confidence and helped her realize that she was reading, which led to her reading other words using phonics. It was great for her to be able to read an entire sentence, like those in the Bob books, and only have to sounds out a few words to do it. She has memorized some of the common words in those books but goes right back to her phonics for new ones.

[Citymomx3]

We are all over the place.

Dd-16 learned* with phonics at 4y/o. She's a voracious reader, bad speller.
Dd-13 learned with phonics at 3y/o. She hates to read, excellent speller.
Ds-8 learned with sight-word/whole language at 7-8 y/o. He took a lot longer to learn to read (mild-moderate dyslexia), but seems to enjoy it somewhat. He isn't a great speller, but he's still too young to know how that will change.
(I learned to read with phonics at 3 y/o. I am a voracious reader, excellent speller. Dh learned at 6 y/o. He hates to read, and is a so-so speller)

*I used "learned" to mean - could get through a book like Green Eggs and Ham by themselves.

[bandgeek]

I learned by sight reading for the first few years. I was a young reader (about 3) and learned much just from having people read to me. I don't remember knowing anything about phonics until about first grade. And then I was able to piece more of it together and went from dr. suess to chapter books almost overnight. Not everyone needs it I think. Some people do have that kind of memory where they store every speck of info for later use. And on some level I think even people who weren't taught phonics have a basic understanding of it just because they've pieced it together every time they read something. I say do what works now. If she has difficulty later, introduce the concept and see if it helps.