11. I have a concern about teaching "Scratch Sheet Spelling".

I have a concern about teaching "Scratch Sheet Spelling". At first, I thought it was a good idea since that's how I often figure out a difficult spelling (and I'm a good speller). One technique that I ran across (from Charlotte Mason) is to write the word on a chalkboard (or whiteboard in our case), have the child look at it carefully, erase it and try to recreate it. This way you can quickly correct an error before they get too used to seeing it that way (and they're less likely to make an error in the first place). You might also emphasize the code when they are initially looking to help them retain it.

The technique you're describing will lead to site word reading and spelling. I would not recommend it as you've described it, though with some changes it would actually be our existing Process Spelling lesson. If you do it as you've described PLEASE don't let anyone think it's Phono-Graphix.

Scratch Sheet Spelling on the other hand encompasses all the issues that are involved in spelling.

1. listen for the sounds

2. show the sounds in all the ways you can think of

3. think about which looks right

1. with an understanding that it looks right because you've seen it before in books and in the lessons etc.
2. and if you can't tell which looks right it means you need to notice more when reading

Remember, we're (Read America) not just messing about here. Scratch Sheet Spelling has been heavily pilot tested in our studies and was included in the original research. It works exceptionally well. It addresses the skill issues, code issues and the metacognitive memory issues in perfect harmony. It's a brilliant piece of pedagogy if I do say so myself.

Also please use process spelling as soon as the child is able to get the that level. It's equally brilliant and effective.

There was an article on spelling in the past issue of our magazine. Click here to view this article on-line.

12. Are there kindergartners who aren't ready to learn to read?...

All of the students in my kindergarten class, EXCEPT 4 CHILDREN, are doing very well with PGX. Some people tell me that these 4 students are just not ready to learn to read. I do not agree with them. I plan to continue to do word building and spelling practice with them on a daily basis. Any other advice or comments?

Good for you! What you've seen is nothing more than the Bell Curve in the real world. I'll bet you had four who did exceptionally well didn't you? Maybe they would have even just learned it on their own. And then there were those in the middle.

That's the curve. The issue you raise (and you're right) is that this doesn't mean they're not ready, it DOES mean they're not as good at it as the others are. The attitude that they're not ready does little more than leave kids behind. What those kids need is MORE, not less of what works. WELL DONE CHUCK!

As for suggestions, have you seen Word Work? It gives you LOTS of ways to teach the same stuff, so it's GREAT for those kids who get bored with the drill, but really need it. You can get a good description of WW from our office at 800-732-3868 (US) 352-735-9292 (CAN) or 0800-783-8824 (UK).

13. I understand vowel digraphs, but how do you explain the rest of the word, like the e in 'mouse?...

I am now in the Advanced Code section, covering the "ow" sound pictures. My question is how we explain that last "e" on "mouse, house" etc. I know we don't say it is a silent e, but the only reference I could find was the vowel plus e lesson, which doesn't really apply. Any words of advice, or do I just ignore it? Since my student is looking carefully at each letter in a word, I wanted to explain that last e to him!

There is no 'explanation', only sounds in the word and the pictures that we've inherited to show the sounds. In this word m ou se . The important lesson is to understand the nature of the code. One element of it's nature is that a sound can be shown with one or more than one letter. You've seen that the child will just accept that with <ou>, why do you assume that he needs explanation with <se>. It is the same issue, a sound shown with more than one letter. PERIOD! Any explanation is just a guess at what was going on in the heads of the inventors of our code. AND, it won't hold up over all the words. AND WORST of all... kids don't think in terms of explanations. Try explaining why the bed should get made every morning and see what happens. All the reasons are yours not your child's. He'll happily make his bed everyday when and only when the reasons are his. He'll end up preferring beds made because he lived in a house where you insisted the bed get made every day and so he got used to seeing it like that. Beds and codes are not too dissimilar really.

14. I am trying to get Phono-Graphix into my school system which is currently using Project Read as a remedial method. Can you tell me how does Phono-Graphix compare to Project Read?

I suggest the book Dyslexia originally written by Diana Clark, and revised by Joanna Urhi when Diana died about five years ago. It's published by York Press and available from the International Dyslexia Association (previously the Orton Dyslexia Association). It addresses the various programmes and will give you a good overview. I personally don't go in for 'differences'. I just focus on the nature of the code and how Phono-Graphix teaches it. That approach has worked for Read America all over the English speaking world; I suggest you consider it as well. Taking that turn does require knowledge of other methods though. You need to be very aware of how bad they are before you decide you're just not willing to talk about them and that PG is in a league of it's own. Again I recommend the book Dyslexia.

15. What is your stance on dyslexia?

We don't have a 'stance' on dyslexia. It simply means 'not reading' in Greek. We just teach the child to read. Simple. I've given that answer in probably 20 interviews. It appeared in a BBC documentary. It's very popular. Geoff and I disapprove of attacks on the validity of dyslexia. It's unnecessary and disrespectful. Every week we have children come to our clinic from all over the world who are 'not reading' aka 'dyslexic'. I can't imagine telling their parents that it's just not true... there is no such thing as 'not reading'.

We would argue the notion that once you've taught a child to read he is still dyslexic. This is not so. He is now 'reading', so if you want to use Greek you can say he is 'lexic', but it would be wrong to say he is 'dyslexic'. We also argue the notion that co-occurring conditions are used as part of the diagnosis. If a child is a sloppy writer he's a sloppy writer, if you want to say it in Greek it's 'dysgraphia', not 'dyslexia'.

There was an article on the diagnostic criteria for dyslexia and learning disabilities in a past issue of our magazine. Click here to view this article on-line.

16. We've been doing Reading Reflex for a month and my eight year old has gaps in his code knowledge.

The lessons in Reading Reflex are intended to teach the concepts that comprise the nature of the code very explicitly while they offer exposure to the actual code. BUT, the real saturation and recognition of the code comes after the child has done some text reading in real books. Have you had him reading much? You should use PG error corrections when you read with him. These are explained after each lesson, or you can get a complete list of them and some guidelines for using them in text in our last issue of parenTeacher magazine. You can request this from our office at 800-732-3868 (US) 352-735-9292 (CAN) 0800-783-8824 (UK), or by e-mail at contact@readamerica.net. Also, have you been doing the word analysis lesson, sound searches, and the scratch sheet spelling lessons? These are critical to building code knowledge. And finally, remember it's just been a month. Give yourself more time and use these other lessons and reading in text.

REALLY READING BOOKS!