Association Method

Suzi,

That’s about all I know about the Association Method, too. I do wonder why they choose one of the more obscure programs, though. Seeing Stars by Lindamood Bell would be right for her or Phono-Graphix combined with some additional fluency work would, too. My child is pretty much the same, knows the code but is not decoding new words effortlessly.

Janis

The Association Method is no more obscure than Phono-Graphix or Seeing Stars — it all depends on your training. It almost sounds like (though to be honest, I’ve gotten too cynical to assume it’s true) they’ve looked at her strengths and weaknesses and chosen something based on that, as opposed to looking in their closet and figuring out what they have handy.

Dr. Ames at Shelton said they use 3 different methods there….The Association Method, SEE and after 2nd Grade Alphabetic Phonics. She was very knowledgable and we spent about 1 1/2 hours going over test results and concerns that I have. We have a meeting with the principal this next week, so hopefully we will get a chance to ask more about this and whether or not it is appropriate for our daughter.

Suzi

I don’t know this method at all but can tell you what I do that does work with kods at the level of yours:

First, I continue teaching phonics in various ways — workbooks, other workbooks, help sounding out words, spelling by sounds, etc. There is a concept called “overlearning”. Imagine learning to play the piano — you don’t practice until you get a piece 90% correct and then stop; that is where you start serious practicing. And when you get it 100% correct, you keep working on getting good expression into it. Or imagine learning a sport — skiing or swimming or tennis or golf. You don’t quit trying when you hit par or get down the hill or get the length of the pool or any just acceptable level; that is where you start really working, trying to master the sport and get style and grace and speed and more difficult variations. To get *good* at anything (as opposed to the bare minimum to scrape through a test and then forget) you practice and practice well beyond basic learning, until you can do it in your sleep, and then you use the skill some more in more advanced modes. This is vital. Most people quit phonics way, way too soon, just as it’s beginning to do some good.

Second, I do *massed practice* in reading. Several pages of reading-level work at least three times a week, daily if possible. Reading level is the most difficult the student can manage with a little help. As soon as possible, several hundred running words of pure text, beyond picture books. I stay with the student and am there to help sound out, and we alternate pages to give a break in long passages. but the student reads as independently as physically possible, for a mimimum of fifteen to twenty minutes. This is absolutely vital; you have to use the skill.

Third, I spend some time just talking over the reading with the student. This is very improtant for comprehension, and is also very motivational; the student gets interested in the how and why and wondering what is going to happen next — and I *never* tell, that;s the whole point of reading for yourself, to find out.

http://www.epsbooks.com/html/training.asp#4 — it has a linke there to even more information.

At http://www.ldonline.org/ld_indepth/reading/mssl_methods.html there’s a list of more or less “official” multi-sensory structured language programs. (Note that lots of good programs are conspicuously absent from this list - they aren’t as rigorously systematic or multisensory.) The Association Method is on the list.

Of course — the method is as good as the teacher… but with the teacher opting for this, that’s a good sign. I would inquire as to training in it — just being curious.

She has had about 6 hours of testing. We’ve gone over her strengths and weaknesses and I hope they will choose what will work the best for her. I’m very optimistic about her new school.

Suzi

Sue,

I think the Association method may be a bit more obscure due to the fact it was originally designed for hearing impaired. I certainly cannot prove it, but I’d imagine there are many more people trained in both Phono-Graphix and Seeing Stars as compared with the Association Method. Thus my assertion that it is a lesser known and used method. I did not mean to imply it was not good. I have never known anyone who used it.

Janis

I used the Association Method in the 1960s to teach language to aphasic children. Because I used it so long ago, I don’t remember all the details about it, and never learned how to use more than the beginning levels of the method.

What I liked about it was that it really helped children to learn sounds and to then put the sounds together to make words. Children would listen and identify sounds, write them, speak them, etc. It was highly structured and I personally liked it because it really helped children to learn. (And I’m generally not someone who likes highly structured methods.)

If a child knew “b” and “oa” and “t”, the child could put these sounds together and read “boat.”

Also, children were taught to point out varied letter combinations that made the same sound (oa, o-e, ow) and there were cues to differentiate combinations of letters that were the same, but were pronounced differently (e.g., “ow” in cow and “ow” in mow.) Because the method was so structured, sequential, and multi-sensory, our most severely impaired receptive aphasic children often did very well with this method. I would thus think that it would be an excellent way of helping children with less severe problems who could benefit from a structured, multi-sensory approach, particularly children who either had good auditory skills that could help them, or children who needed help in differentiating sounds and hearing the sequence of sounds in a word.

I’ve often wondered, when I hear about children who can’t learn to read, why methods like this are not used.