For any parents of small kids here, I have to mention the book Teach Your Child to Read in 100 Easy Lessons. We went through it while my kid was in kindergarten, and after that, I absolutely believe what I've heard from parents who did it successfully a bit earlier. And it didn't prevent my kid from figuring out how to use context or recognize full words. Reading English is a lot, and kids are resourceful; if we teach the 'slow' but reliable way to read, they'll be happy to feel out shortcuts.
The toughest thing was getting a reliable bit of time each day to sit down and do it. Routine, cajoling, and rewards were all involved. So was keeping it lighthearted; the kid has to be on board! Each lesson has straightforward exercises then a brief story, very short at first, longer later in the book. We'd do the exercises and one read of the story, then kid would read the story to my partner. We started in September, and I remember by Halloween the kid was reading candy wrappers. After finishing it, the next big thing was finding stories the kid genuinely liked to keep it going. Continuing to read together after the lessons ended helped: for a while, kids will keep running into lots of new exceptions to the usual rules, etc.
English spelling and pronunciation are a lot, and the book is also, implicitly, a catalog of the tricks English plays on kids and other learners. Part of the book uses a semi-phonetic alphabet where e.g. ee and sh/ch/th have distinct glyphs, but it all still looks enough like English that the jump to regular writing later in the book is doable for the kid. Even with that alphabet, the book has to teach common words like "is" and "was" as exceptions (with s sounding like z). Decades later one can forget little kids deal with all this and eventually handle it like second nature.
The book's originator thought that you could teach math with a broadly similar approach--breaking things down into very small steps and practicing them in isolation then in larger tasks--and doing that was part of his career, but I haven't found similar teach-your-kid book for arithmetic/basic math. If such a book did exist I'd've given it a try!
It's not a book, but you might find this interesting: https://mathacademy.com
It's a (paid) online platform that breaks down mathematics (from 4th grade to university level) down into very small steps/skills, makes you drill them periodically, and also integrate them in increasingly advanced skills. The platform tracks your successes and failures to give you just the right amount of training at just the right time (in theory). You can see the exact skills they train as these really huge interconnected graphs, all created manually.
I read their pedagogy https://www.mathacademy.com/pedagogy and it seems to line up a lot with that philosophy. To use their language, they emphasize "finely-scaffolded steps" and "developing automaticity".
I always love to see more projects or initiatives in this area. I also know of https://physicsgraph.com that was inspired by it, but for physics.
I don't know that my personal n=1 anecdote adds much to this discussion, but FWIW...
My mom taught me to read when I was young (pre kindergarten), but as far as I know she wasn't specifically trying to teach me to read. She just read to me a lot, where I could see the page she was reading from. Mostly she read me comic books. I loved the DC characters back then - Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Flash, Aquaman, Green Lantern, etc. and so she read me that stuff many many times. I mean, yeah, I had some of those "Little Golden Books" and stuff around as well, although I don't pointedly remember reading those the way I do the comic books. Anyway, she did all that and when I started kindergarten at 4 (due to being a summer baby) I was already reading. And then stayed well above my grade level on the reading tests all through school.
So I dunno. Maybe it was dumb luck that things worked out that way for me. Maybe there is a genetic element. Or maybe more than anything what mom conveyed to me was a passion for reading (she was a very avid reader herself). Maybe part of it was just that there were always plenty of books around the house and so reading felt like a very natural thing to do. Or maybe it was that whole Pizza Hut BOOK IT thing they had back in the day. Who knows?
In either case, I feel very fortunate in this regard, as reading has remained a big part of my life ever since, and still is to this day.
So the reason some kids seem to read with some instruction, even if it's not formal and super explicit, is that they have a good phonemic system. That is, they quickly understand that words are made up of smaller units (e.g. cat is /k/ + /a/ + /t/) and can manipulate them without much trouble. That ability is essential to map words efficiently in long term memory for effortlessly retrieval, which in turns creates a sight vocabulary (a large bank of words that are instantly recognized).
Kids with phonemic deficits, on the other hand, cannot efficiently develop a sight vocabulary. Even if they are taught phonics and can decode, that decoding is effortful and leaves little room for more complex tasks.
For what it's worth, a pivotal moment for keeping reading going after the lessons was when my partner picked up a comic book at a library event. For a few weeks after the end of the lessons, reading time had been traditional early readers and some of the books we'd previously read to them--even with us offering rewards, there had been ups and downs. As soon as kid started that comic, though, they were pushing right through our protests that it was bedtime, and chewing through the whole series. Luckily we managed to find another series to start before running out of the first one. As parents we can nudge or put stuff on the menu but but kid is pretty much in the driver's seat about what to read next.
In retrospect, of course! The kid just hadn't liked reading those books and things took off once we found stuff they liked. Best first readers are whatever your kid actually wants to read!
So direct instruction (the philosophy behind this book) has been shown to only have modest gains compared to the best interventions, which have more than double the effect size.
It works fine (not the best) for kids with no reading difficulties, but it completely lacks the understanding and the tasks that fix phonemic deficits, the actual source of most reading difficulties.
It's not entirely a bad book, but won't be of too much use for kids with reading difficulties. Since it's only a few bucks, it's not a bad investment. Just be aware of its limitations. If your kid is not developing fluent and effortless reading (not just decoding), you will need to use a method that is aware of how to fix phonemic deficits.
See my other comments in this page for more.
trane_project is selling a $20/mo subscription or $1000 perpetual license to their own reading program and folks should read this and their other comments aware of that context. It's disappointing to tell a personal story, come back, and see it was someone's jumping-off point for just slightly indirect self-promotion.
Sure, no problem in pointing it out. I did not hide the fact and I invite anyone to do their own research. The comments mostly draw from David Kilpatrick’s book “Essentials of Assessing, Preventing, and Overcoming Reading Difficulties”.
It’s a very academic book and I didn’t see anyone in the comments aware of orthographic mapping. The critique of direct instruction can also be found there. No intervention that does not train phonemic awareness to the advanced level had the massive results of those which do. That also applies to OG, which was mentioned in the thread.
Not selling anything yet, that page is a placeholder. But I will have a free and untimed version that should be enough to fix most reading difficulties caused by phonemic deficits.
Which I can do without worrying about cannibalizing my own business because I am not selling a reading app, but a complete path to mastery of reading and writing to college level and beyond. That hopefully helps clarify the difference in price.
Why? Obviously the person who replied to you has experience and a POV. I think that's a useful addition to the conversation.
Plus, I wouldn't have even thought to check out the profile if you hadn't mentioned it. It's not slightly indirect self-promotion, it's not self-promotion at all.
I saw a very similar timely appeal here on Hacker News a few years ago and taught my son with this book at the age of 4. It has become my go-to comparison when prompting chat bots on what I want in a teaching material for other subjects. I listened to the entire article posted here and it makes me wonder if schools are getting something as foundational as reading wrong how can we trust the attention to research on anything else they're teaching? Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to pull my kid out of school but I'll dig a little deeper into how well he's learning. For math, we've been doing the Beast Academy books. It has gone... Okay. I like that they approach problems from many different ways which simulate the many different ways math is hidden in our interactions with the world. For my younger son I've recently started Teaching Your Child... because of how well it went for his brother but for math I may try something else to have a new data point. Something that occurred to me listening to the article is I wonder if certain skills are learned much faster with one on one instruction like the book has you do. Our schools pretty much never teach that way out of efficiency, though home schools often do. It may not be true for most subjects though or home school students would be so far ahead by college and that's not the impression I have.
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to pull my kid out of school
Why not? I did and it has worked out really well. One is an adult, the other is nearly and adult so its pretty much all done now.
I certainly think its an option worth considering
What was the alternative you went with?
For math you'll want the Saxon Math books, but they have to be the old ones from before they were bought out and turned into yet another New Math or whatever they call it now.
Second this! My daughter stopped around lesson 53 when she was 4, but it stuck now at 6 years old she's able to read full books on her own, with her reading speed and ability increasingly exponentially.
TL;DR version of the article, and our experience with kids' reading, is that phonics is probably the best way to teach reading but people have tried many other crackpot techniques that don't work very well.