[senco-forum] Re Standards site

My point was not one of complexity... but one of development.  There are
stages in Frith's model and children move from one to the other. Sight words
are the end product or orthographic stage.  Phonics and phonological
awareness are the intermediate stage or alphabetic.  Reading needs all
stages.  So everyone is right - just which bit of the elphnat is anyone
speaking of as they think of reading?

Philippa

On 2/7/07, Eddie Carron <eddiecarron at btconnect.com> wrote:
>
> Yes of course Phillipa, there can legitimatelyh be many diametrically
> opposing views of the same object but reading is not an object that can be
> viewed from different perspectives - it is  simply the skill of recreating
> the sounds represented by very specific graphemes.  Learning difficulties
> are complex and in some cases, very complex but that does not make reading
> complex.
>
>
>
> Perhaps another analogy is called for. Most people would agree that at a
> practical level, walking is a simple skill. The evidence for this would be
> the fact that 99.9% of children have it mastered by the age of one.
> However the fact that anyone with only one leg would have enormous
> difficulty in learning to walk is not evidence that walking is a complex
> skill.
>
>
>
> Many teachers are attracted by the notion that reading is a complex skill
> but surely the success of SP shows in the clearest way possible, that this
> cannot the case. We need a common, professional perception of what reading
> is and greater appreciation of the process. Those of us whose professional
> interest is in those with reading difficulties need to reminded ourselves
> occasionally that the vast majority of children have no difficulty
> whatsoever in learning to read.
>
>
>
> Best wishes
>
>
>
> Eddie C.
>