As a dyslexia teacher and mum, my aim is to support those with dyslexia. I am particularly interested in helping class teachers to get a better understanding of this rather abstract and complex difference. Sadly, dyslexic strengths often only appear after school life has ended. My dream would be for dyslexic children to thrive in school, both emotionally and academically. They can learn, if they can do it differently.
I’ve used the name ‘thinkpix’ because when my eldest son (now 10) was around 5 years old, he told me ‘I have a picture for everything’. I read ‘The Gift of Dyslexia’ shortly after and everything fell into place; why he was struggling at school, had been late to talk (3 years), could never remember nursery rhymes and had never been interested in the alphabet!
My first blog is on identifying dyslexia in the classroom. I will look at how to support these children in future blogs as well as other living and learning posts!
A few years ago, I sat down to try and identify the things I consider when teaching dyslexic learners. It can be hard to do this, as teaching becomes natural and unconscious through practice and refinement. It is a combination of creativity, knowledge, experience and an ability to reflect, adapt and change.
A teacher who is practised has a level of automaticity that frees them up to respond to situations and adapt. I like to assess formatively and during teaching am constantly assessing too.
I attended a BredEd some time ago and tried to convey these principles in my presentation:
My DREAM principles begin with ‘Dynamic’.
Dyslexic learners benefit from opportunities to move. We have 7 senses in all, with vestibular (balance) and proprioception (knowing where the body is in space) being the additional 2 that people know less about.
Sweller himself (of Cognitive Load Theory fame) is now interested in how movement might facilitate the acquisition of Biologically secondary knowledge (information which we have not evolved to acquire). The importance of movement has already been acknowledged within education with ‘active maths’ enjoying some popularity.
Movement is therefore important to aid arousal and to support memory:
My next principle is ‘Real Life’. Dyslexic learners benefit from examples which connect to real life, making the information less abstract and allowing them to utilise autobiographical memory which is typically strong in dyslexia. Dewey maintained that unless the initial connection was made between school activities and the life experiences of the child, genuine learning and growth would be impossible.
Richard Feynman himself said ‘What I cannot create I do not understand’.
Consider how much of the language we use already has a real life application e.g., operation in a medical sense and in mathematics. Be explicit about these differences but make the links:
Explicit brings me on to the next principle. Whilst I do use discover approaches that students enjoy, I am also explicit about the things they need to know. Dyslexic students are exploratory, tangential thinkers whose thinking does not always serve them well in an academic context where straight lined thinking is required.
When students achieve success, dopamine is released in the brain which is in turn a neurotransmitter – leading to greater success (dopamine is also released in the teacher’s brain). Students with dyslexia, especially those without a diagnosis, have experienced a lot of unexplained failure. Despite working hard, this is typically unnoticed, and simple tasks such as spelling their own name correctly, are beyond their reach. It confounds them that peers seem to read and write with ease and that these students receive plentiful praise. Keep targets small and measurable:
My final principle is ‘Mind’s Eye’. It can be very confusing to read some of the literature around dyslexia. Defined as ‘word blindness’ originally, the notion of dyslexia as a ‘visual’ difficulty is again en vogue. However, we read and perceive with our brains and not our eyes. Accurate reading requires a synthesis of sound and image, a grapheme-phoneme connection. In reading, the eyes hope in saccades requiring ocular motor control: the more a student reads, the smoother this becomes but for dyslexics, reading is effortful.
Through assessment, visual working memory is often found to be significantly stronger than auditory working memory. Without exception, dyslexic learners of all ages tell me that they benefit from visuals, my own son told me aged 4 that he ‘thinks in pictures.’
My final principle is ‘Mind’s Eye’. This is not simply a method of using visuals, it involves the imagination and visualising information, sometimes as a sequence or movie, sometimes static.
When learners are struggling to read a word on the page, I will often ask them to imagine it instead, or spell it in the mind’s eye.
When discussing a concept e.g., division, I will ask what they picture or think of first – in one case this was sharing on plates even though they were in KS2.
(Or, why I’m a ‘Trog’)
A recent twitter post got me thinking again about the Learning Style debate and how this has become a highly political issue.
A guaranteed way to garner approval, ensuring your tweet is buoyant with likes, is of course to criticise and renounce learning style (VAK) theory. I even read a tweet from one of the ‘learning scientists’ which claimed that seeing VAK (learning style) resources made her feel physically sick – not a very scientific response.
Before we explore learning style theory, it’s useful to understand the political climate in the edu twittersphere, which of course reflects attitudes in the teaching profession, albeit the more strident, polemical ones.
Those with traditional views (Trads) often come into conflict with those with more progressive views (Progs). These opposing views may be reflected in the different roots of the Latin for ‘education’: educere and educare.
Educare suggests to shape or mold (Trad), and educere: to draw or lead out (Prog).
The difference is well explained here in a blog by Matthew Gioia:
In an article which explores the dichotomy between the Trad vs Prog extremes, Oyler and Becker discuss the approach in which the student’s personal knowledge is neglected vs that in which the teacher’s achieved cultural knowledge is ‘an embarrassment’. They suggest a variant on the old metaphor: the rock and the soft place. The rock represents the teacher as the authority, the boss, the font of all knowledge, supported by the current Trad narrative of ‘expert vs novice’. The soft place represents the teacher as gardener, facilitator – providing opportunities for the student to work things out for themselves.
Where does learning style theory fit into this?
Learning styles theorist Neil Fleming developed the acronym, VARK, Visual, Aural, Reading/Writing, and
Kinesthetic, referring to the instructional preference in which students, or people in society
prefer to take in and give out information. According to Fleming, the Visual aspect of this
acronym refers to those who prefer to look at graphs, charts, hierarchies, symbols, and things that
other teachers use to represent words (in place of words). For a person with a visual instructional
preference, the layout, design, and colouring of a page give them meaning.
The Aural/auditory part of the acronym refers to those who have a speaking or hearing instructional preference. For example, these people learn best through group discussions, receiving feedback, phone calls, presentations, and through speaking with others.
The Reading/Writing part of this acronym refers to those whose instructional preference is working with words that are either read or written. Lastly, the kinaesthetic part of this acronym refers to those whose instructional preferences are through “learning by doing” for example, experiences, examples, and/or practice (Fleming, N. D., 2011).
Fleming was interested in inviting teachers to explore their own individual preferences, which in turn would help them to understand and meet the needs of their students.
Another theory originated from David Kolb, who published his learning styles model in 1984 from which he developed his learning style inventory.
Kolb’s experiential learning theory works on two levels: a four-stage cycle of learning and four separate learning styles. Much of Kolb’s theory is concerned with the learner’s internal cognitive processes.
Howard Gardner (1989) believed that students learn in ways that are identifiably distinctive.
Because of this, Gardner thought it would be best to assess learning in a variety of ways, which
is how he came up with the idea of multiple intelligences. Under the Gardner’s multiple
intelligences, he describes seven different and distinctive learning styles into which he believes
that students, and society for that matter, are categorised.
The commonality between these theories is that they are all student centred. This is at odds with the Trad perspective: that students should not be encouraged to express learning preferences and that to engage in this is somehow ‘damaging’ (see above tweet), that the teacher is expert and a disseminator of information.
The demonisation of learning style theory serves to shift pedagogy to the left, Trad view, with teachers claiming to be ‘socialist in principle and conservative in pedagogy’ (is this possible?). Instead, the theory is to be replaced with ‘cognitive science’ and Cognitive Load Theory – Sweller’s work which packages working memory theory with instructional design.
In doing so, what is lost?… perhaps the student voice and experience, which are crucial if we are to engage in metacognitive processes (another current buzz word).
Working memory theory is of course the link between Learning Style Theory and Cognitive Load Theory. If one accepts the construct of working memory, as comprised of a separate auditory and visual aspect, it makes sense that students who struggle to process and retain auditory input benefit from visuals.
In fact, it is possible to measure these abilities separately, and students with dyslexia typically have a strong visual memory; a poor auditory one.
Moreover, when talking with, and supporting students from Primary through to degree level, I find this to be the case: access to visuals helps them to retain auditory information.
The field of cognitive psychology focuses on processing deficits such as phonology, working memory and processing speed. Educational research tends to ignore dyslexia or to include it with other reading difficulties, making interpretation of the data difficult. Much of what does exist that adds to the discourse around the dyslexic experience, comes from autobiographies or collections of case studies outside academic research (Riddick, 1996).
Educational research focuses on ‘what works’ for all, when the truth might be that for learners with good arousal, strong memory and automatic skills of reading and writing, the quality or style of teaching has little impact. Instead, consider what works for the struggling learners, this is where the impact of effective teaching can be found.
As in the field of education, there is divide in the field of scientific research. The positivist approach is logical and mathematical, delivered with certainty and reliant on data, whereas an interpretivist approach focuses on finding meaning and exploring the human experience: reality is complex and multi-layered. In this approach researchers use interviews and observation.
In her article ‘Learning Style: Snake Oil or Solid Strategy’, Tilly Mortimore talks of the limitations of the Random Controlled Trial (RCT):
‘How can we avoid over-refining the context and eliminating any of the nuances of real life?How reliable are the instruments we develop to measure impact or change in an interventions study?Can we collect a sufficiently large and standardised sample and can we really divide it reliably into, for example a dyslexic group and a non-dyslexic control group? This kind of research may be effective and reliable with medical trials or neuroscientific work but lab rats are not complicated human beings’.
The rise in accountability measures and the commoditisation of education has triggered an exponential rise in the number of ‘experts’ and resource providers.
Does this serve to detract from, and undermine, the ‘teacher as expert’ narrative?
Simon Gibbs’ book Immoral Education suggests that teachers have been reduced to operators, with their professional identity eroded:
‘…the book provides a rationale that argues an essential ingredient of good education is the quality of teachers who have a reaffirmed sense of creativity, autonomy and agency. The book presents a role for educational psychology in informing educational and inclusive processes, filling a longstanding need for a text that delineates the way psychological phenomena underpin education.’
It makes sense that teachers have access to appropriate research on the science of learning during training to be a teacher, that they enter the workplace feeling equipped with knowledge and that they go on to develop a singular practice, with co-agency, purpose and a sense of autonomy.
The Learning Style backlash seems to serve to punish teachers for the one theory they tried to adapt and use in the classroom, further shaming and reducing them. Perhaps it is the resource providers and trainers that are to blame for misinterpreting and oversimplifying the theory – something that has happened with Mindset theory and is just as likely to happen with Cognitive Load Theory etc
Metacognition is thinking about thinking, understanding how we learn best is part of this and it helps to combat learned helplessness and passivity in the classroom. In the words of Steve Raynor, former Emeritus Professor, Newman University, UK:
‘The key theme for utilising the style construct theory is captured perfectly in the popular song, It is not what you do, it is the way that you do it. The point is not that content is unimportant but that being aware and knowing more about ‘how I tend to do it‘ can immeasurably help in my ‘doing it better‘. Steve Rayner (2015).
As an assessor and teacher of learners with dyslexia, I have a unique insight into how they think and learn. Moreover, I am curious and always ready to learn from them in turn. I neither feel that a learner is an empty vessel to be filled with knowledge, nor that a learner can acquire knowledge and skills solely through exploration and play. This misapprehension is particularly popular amongst early years practitioners and is deeply problematic.
On the prog/trad scale, I am somewhere in the middle – a Trog you might say.
As @paulgarvey4 says, it seems there is #thereisnobestwayoverall . The most strident advocates of each extreme, the ones engaged in the most aggressive debates, are usually the most poorly informed.
This does not bode well if these are the people we hope will foster critical thinking amongst our students.
Can we have the best of both worlds? Perhaps if we remain curious…
Haswell, Joanna, “A Close Look at Learning Styles” (2017). Honors Senior Capstone Projects. 23.
Mortimer, T (2019) Learning Style: Snake Oil or Solid Strategy? PATOSS Bulletin vol 32, no 2
Rayner, S. G. (2015) Cognitive Styles and Learning Styles, Newman University, Birmingham, UK., Elsevier Ltd
Oyler, C., and Becker, J., (1997) Teaching beyond the Progressive. Traditional Dichotomy: Sharing Authority and Sharing Vulnerability, Curriculum Inquiry, Vol. 27, No. 4 (Winter, 1997), pp. 453-467Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
The skills required to read polysyllabic words are typically not taught but acquired naturally by the more proficient readers in class. Readers for whom reading is effortless are of course likely to read more and therefore to improve reading fluency and accuracy. They typically have a good memory for spelling patterns/good word recognition and apply this readily from reading to writing.
How important is it to teach word attack skills, the skills to deconstruct and decode polysyllabic words?
In her talk at the PATOSS conference this year, Dr Marketa Caravolas talked about the importance of the Triple Foundation Model : Rapid Naming, Phoneme Awareness and Letter Knowledge.
These areas appear to be significant predictors of early reading across alphabetic orthographies (writing systems). Rapid naming measures the speed at which a student can access the name for an object – typically a noun – or glyph (such as a number or letter), this ability strongly correlates with word recognition.
Phoneme awareness measures a student’s ability to acknowledge and manipulate units of sound, and letter knowledge is knowing not just letter sounds, but the names of letters and how to recode the sounds in writing. Both of these elements improve with practice and explicit teaching.
Dr Caravolas shared research which suggests that as word reading becomes more efficient in more consistent orthographies (such as Spanish), its contribution to reading comprehension reduces and the role of oral language increases.
However, as English is low consistency, word reading is a stronger predictor of reading comprehension compared to e.g. Czech and Spanish.
The danger of using word reading/fluency skills as an indicator of higher-level comprehension skills was pointed out: code-related and oral language/comprehension skills are not necessarily correlated. This means that as Professor Wagner (author of the CTOPP) discussed, oral or listening comprehension may be higher than ready comprehension.
It was interesting to hear that word reading is not necessarily a predictor of comprehension in more transparent orthographies but that this skill does impact in English.
There is a move in the States led by people such as @natwexler, away from the importance of skills-based instruction, such as summarising, toward the importance of subject knowledge in reading comprehension based on research indicating that predominantly skills-based instruction does little to improve overall reading proficiency for many students.
In the baseball study which has created an impact, for example, Donna Recht and Lauren Leslie found that “struggling readers who knew a lot about baseball did better on a reading comprehension test about the topic than strong readers who knew nothing about the sport,” (Holly Korbey). Similarly, high school students who “met a basic knowledge threshold on a dense topic like ecosystems had much stronger performance on a reading test about ecosystems than those who didn’t,” Korbey notes. “For low-income students and students of color, these disparities were particularly pronounced.”
This makes sense of course and teachers are much better placed to teach knowledge than to teach reading (in which they receive no – or little – training). Nonetheless, single word reading is the driver for comprehension, particularly in a complex orthography like English.
How do we ensure that a reading comprehension test measures what is is supposed to measure – understanding – rather than the ability to decode?
Teach inference and prediction.
Whilst Reading Recovery has had a lot of bad press – it did not focus enough on phonics and was a very expensive intervention – longitudinal data shows that students go on to continue to make steady gains in reading. One of the reasons for this is probably because the skills of inference and prediction are coached and embedded.
By the way, I would NEVER say ‘Use the picture for a clue!’. Research here:
If skills of inference and prediction are taught, pupils are able to try and work out what the new vocabulary means, just as they do in spoken language, via multiple exposures to the words, in different contexts.
Furthermore, the tools used to measure comprehension ought to be broader in their scope, reflecting a broader range of experiences and not just white, middle class ones. Indeed, the construct of the ‘Word Gap’ which has been so popular, based on extrapolated data from seven families, might better reflect a gap in the tools used to measure vocabulary.
More about this here:
After the basics of reading are taught in KS1, reading is left to develop for most children with many of them getting lost as words grow in syllables and complexity.
Students tend to stop reading aloud after a point and develop bad habits such as skimming over new words and either replacing them with a non/made up word or for something similar, which may impact negatively on comprehension.
I word argue for a second wave of explicit teaching, aimed at single word strategies to include morphology (word structure) and syllable division – including the important role of vowels.
Tips for single word reading:
Teach the study of word structure (known as morphology), more on that here:
Teach how to split words into syllables and the role of open and closed syllables – do students know what the 5 vowels are and that they can make 2 sounds in words? Encourage them to trial both sounds if the word does not sound right (known as Set for Variability).
Where a vowel digraph or trigraph can be pronounced different ways, encourage students to trial both sounds to see what sounds right.
Where a word has prefixes and suffixes, encourage the student to identify these first, decode the rest of the word and then add them on at the end e.g., cious = /shus/
The process of decoding involves sounds being identified and sequenced (involving working memory), in order to pronounce the word, there is another step where sounds must be matched to a word in the individual’s lexicon (private dictionary).
Students with dyslexia often struggle here. It is not that they don’t know the word, but that they struggle to match the phonemes and pronounce the word from their lexicon AT THE SAME TIME.
Professor Richard Wagner (author of the CTOPP) spoke about this: in dyslexia, the semantic information (meaning of the word) often comes before the phonemes are in Long Term Memory.
Therefore, my next tip is to LOOK AWAY from the phonemes when pronouncing a known word (that they haven’t read before/ often) – they have decoded the word and know what it means, the phonemes are distracting as they need to access the semantic information from their lexicon in order to sequence them. This works.
Teach students to self-monitor – ‘Does what I have just read make sense?’.
Teach inference and prediction: What might the word mean in this context? What is the author going to say next?’
Teach etymology – if a student knows that ‘fort’ is French for strength, it gets them to ‘fortify’, ‘fortitude’ and ‘effort’.
For some students, it’s helpful for them to write the novel word out as they get to experience its structure in this way.
Teach single word reading together with spelling as part of word study, teach word class which will enhance the knowledge of word structure e.g., adding ‘tion’ can change a verb into a noun: inform -information.
I’ve always loved words and never ‘dumb down’ my language for children.
I had an early spat with one of the edu Queens of Twitter, who blocked me and called me ‘nasty’ because I said challenging vocabulary should be used and she… er disagreed:
The author of Wonder understands that children respond well to adults who don’t adapt their language:
There has been much interest in the ‘vocabulary gap’ which suggests that social disadvantage can be bridged with words. It was found that the number of words a child knows can be measured and children who know more words (usually middle class) do better. Social disadvantage and inequality within society is clearly a lot more complex than a vocabulary deficit within the student though.
Schools have primarily middle class mores and values.
The way they communicate these, and interact with parents and children, typically benefits the middle classes who know how to get the most out of the system. In my experience, this is even more pronounced during the Primary phase where competition is intense, a student’s trajectory is set by year 6.
SATs (when they occur) are used to predict GCSE grades.
The acquisition of language is a biologically primary function (we do it naturally). However, verbal ability is dependent to some extent on external factors i.e. an individual’s exposure to language, education and reading.
There are two verbal subtests in IQ related assessments: one explores the ability to define words, the other looks at analogies or relationships between words. These are primarily measures of receptive language – there are also measures of expressive language which require the participant to retrieve a word following a stimulus.
Performance here is affected by the ability to find a word quickly and can be related to difficulties with rapid naming (linked to reading difficulties).
The ability to retain speech sounds, and make semantic links ensuring vocabulary goes into long term memory is affected by working memory and the phonological loop (auditory rehearsal). Working memory in turn can be diminished due to poor sleeping patterns and diet. Low working memory affects a student’s ability to attend to lengthy auditory teaching input.
The ability to retain speech sounds is affected by the ability to feel the sounds in the first instance and for some children, proprioceptive feedback is low.
Studies suggest ways to facilitate language processing and acquisition: a pause after new vocabulary is introduced is beneficial, the orthographic representation of the word helps processing.
The visual aspect of working memory (Visuospatial sketchpad) can be strong and may be utilised to support low auditory memory – using a visual cue with the sound of the word. Actions also help with the processing of language and this is used to great effect in the early years – why not throughout the Primary phase?
The language of instruction, particularly in grammar, maths and science (in Primary) has Latin roots, and can be especially problematic- these words are frequently used but are also subject specific so confined to a particular lesson. They are often never explained so the students that need semantic knowledge struggle to master them. It’s not unusual for a KS3 student not to know what a noun is, let alone a subordinate clause (noun means ‘name’ in Latin. These students test teacher knowledge.
In maths, where new schema is often introduced, confusion can be caused e.g. in division, moving from ‘sharing’ on plates and repeated subtraction, to bus stop can leave students confused about what ‘division’ *is* (from Latin – to force apart, remove.)
Retention of vocabulary can be affected by syntax, clarity of speech and even tone:
Students with good memories do not need to be given semantic information- they retain the word – understand and use it, but may not be able to define it.
Students with dyslexia are assumed to have sequencing difficulties- in truth- they cannot learn without meaning attached. Simply chanting the seasons will not make them stick, same with days of the week, months and times tables. They need meaning.
1) Use actions and context, this example is based on the seasons:
In this example, actions are used to learn a quote from Shakespeare:
2) Use etymology:
3) link all aspects of a word: spelling and meaning (etymology here):
3) Use images:
5) A repertoire of strategies is required, different methods suit different words:
Vocabulary is best taught in context where it carries meaning and will be retained:
Students may struggle to process language for many reasons: they may be learning English, have lower SES, have low working memory or an ASD-type profile which impacts on the nuance of language.
Dyslexics process language differently- the full extent of this is not yet understood but the processing of language impacts on reading too:
A thread with some ideas:
Ultimately of course vocabulary knowledge impacts on reading comprehension. However, reading and vocabulary knowledge have a reciprocal relationship.
Encourage curiosity and stimulate enjoyment of our rich, varied and nuanced language- this is the best possible intervention.
I’ve never liked the word ‘intervention’. I first heard it with regard to my son; it seemed so clinical and impersonal.
There is the sense is it is being ‘done to’ the child, not with them. It is any wonder learners become passive?
In schools, the word is used to describe 1-1 or small group sessions wherein students receive support outside of the classroom to help them progress (usually ‘evidence’ based).
Do children even know what the word means?
A closer look at the history of the word does not reassure:
Inter = between, and venire = to come (to come between).
It doesn’t feel like a collaborative process does it?
Children will often refer to it as being ‘taken out’. They can’t miss a core subject so it is often during a lesson which is low in the hierarchisation of subjects, one which they enjoy or a have a talent in: art, drama, PE.
There was one particular child who did not like being ‘taken out’ and I realised that this active process wherein an adult was seen to extract him from the classroom and walk with him to our destination led to embarrassment for him. I considered a process which was less passive for him: an appointment card; supported by the teacher to be timely, he would come and find me at the allotted time.
Research into the efficacy of interventions suggests they are not effective, read more here:
The language comes from the medical model:
Intervention: The act of intervening, interfering or interceding with the intent of modifying the outcome. In medicine, an intervention is usually undertaken to help treat or cure a condition.
Of course, there are a great many talented practitioners who make interventions engaging and enjoyable for students. However, the knowledge is not always transferred to the classroom. Why?
Is it because the lessons are discrete and students see them as ‘other’?
Is it because there is not enough time for teachers to communicate with those intervening: to learn about strategies that work, or new learning targets, and embed them?
Teachers have the biggest impact on learning. Sensitive to the staff hierarchy, children often do not afford the same focus, effort and respect to support staff.
Clearly some children get behind in learning and need help. Focus should be on early identification: the Early Years phase. Practitioners are still reluctant to identify students in the EYFS phase. Why?
It is perhaps a phase which sees itself as separate (it has unique training and may be physically located separately); embattled by changes to its ways of working, entrenched. The phase is concerned with protecting the right to play and with a linear model of development, soandso is …’not THERE yet’.
Focus has been on Reception for good reason. It is here that learners start to fail and they don’t catch up. Research shows that quality teaching has a significant impact here:
We know a lot more about learning and cognition since Piaget. I am a huge advocate of leaning through play by the way.
Perhaps if children were identified and supported early: with working memory difficulties, dyslexia, speech difficulties there would be no need to ‘intervene’ later on.
There are many ways to encourage students to be active participants, facilitating metacognition (thinking about thinking and learning) :
Engage them in targets:
Embed teaching points within the classroom:
Ask for their feedback:
1. CONSIDER WHOLE CLASS DIRECTED DRAWING for younger children:
2 ACT EARLY:
3 INTEGRATE handwriting with vocabulary learning: reading and spelling, link this with a word’s meaning:
4 PRACTICE: develop a regular handwriting practice. Students need to know that practising can be enjoyable and leads to success!
5 SETTING: ensure the student is seated correctly (feet flat, paper angled slightly) and using the right tool for them:
See previous post:
Taking full and purposeful breaths is a wonderful way to calm the parasympathetic nervous system. Beneficial for student and teacher!
The techniques can be practised anywhere, but if seated, feet should connect with the ground, back straight so that the lungs are not compressed.
Take time each day to practise different techniques. Here are a few ideas:
My students showed me this technique, using the hand to track the breath:
Using a hoberman sphere; as the sphere expands encourage students to place their hands on the ribs and feel the lungs expand:
Using sense of smell:
Encourage chdn to breathe deeply by placing a toy or hands on the tummy – using the diaphragm to breathe deeply. Chdn will often shallow breathe when they’re upset which makes them panic.
Teach sound awareness:
Try linking patterns together with visuals:
A thread on digraphs and trigraphs:
Link the pattern eg from hair to chair, use colour:
Use mind maps:
Reinforce with picture books:
Use phonic frames:
Teach phonics in High Frequency Words, rather than ‘look say’.
Teach/discuss consonant blends:
Making the word into a picture can improve fluency, but remember to refer to phonics as well.
Link back/generalise the orthographic patterns:
Phonics provides the foundations for reading but there are many other elements and over-emphasis on phonics, in my opinion, can lead to poor comprehenders:
The schwa is the most common (non) sound in our language.
I posted a 3 part video back in 2018 modelling ‘pure’ sounds:
The etymology of ‘schwa’:
From Michael Rosen, this is why the schwa makes it difficult to blend (reading) or spell (writing):
For children who are effortless decoders and encoders (around 10 in every class) it doesn’t really have an impact – for the rest it does!
The schwa is not just connected to phonics and the making of ‘pure’ sounds but lurks in many words, making spelling so difficult.
This is why the teaching of affixes as units is so important:there’s a schwa in ‘ment’ and many other suffixes:
See this extract from Joe Moran’s excellent ‘First You Write a Sentence’: