Nonsense Words

I'm a bit confused. In my college reading classes we were taught that teaching students nonsense words was a very bad idea. We were also told that stories that are written because of their phonetic lessons that didn't make a whole lot of sense wasn't good either.
Example--Nan gave a fan to the tan man.

The idea is that reading is making meaning of text. When students are taught to sound out nonsense words it is confusng and boring. When they read poorly written stories it turns them off to even want to learn to read.

Now with the Reading First programs, it seems like nonsense words are back in vogue. Students in our school are given nonsense word lists and have some pretty boring an confusing stories to read.

Maybe it is just the thing older teachers say. Wait a few years and it will come around again.

[Gabby]

I don't like using those kinds of materials but I don't know that it's that big a deal. I think there are better and more interesting things for kids to read. I've know it depends on the school and what's in vogue. I think good teachers can make any program work. I have seen more of this lately. Just the cycle coming back I guess.

[medako]

I really don't like the use of nonsense words. I'm sure the program has been tested and tested and shown to work in some lab, I just think kids would benefit from reading some more interesting stuff to keep their attention.

Amen to that. Reading needs to be interesting and make sense. There are lots of quality materials without resorting to that.

[JosieA1]

The words are bad. A sad lad had a mad dad. A tad silly don’t you think? Don't you think more natural text would be more interesting and help kids see the connection between letters and meaning?

[phoenyxstarr]

I've always hated the nonsense words or rhyming books... I really have issues with many of Dr. Suess's books. In my experience, the rhyming (or phonetic, whatever you want to call them) books do nothing but confuse the person trying to read them aloud. (Try reading near the end of 'Green Eggs & Ham' to see what I mean.)

That being said, my oldest daughter loved reading 'Cat in the Hat' when she was 3 & 4. I guess the rhyming made it easier for her to read, but she's a auditory learner. She's always learned best when she can hear something. Even now (she's 10) she will read her assignments out loud & get better grades than if she reads silently. So I let her read to her little sister for Reading. It helps them both...

[sigs]

i hate such nonsense words and would actually feel very glad if our children remain away from their usage.

[becklyn]

I think that nonsense words can help some readers but not all. I personally do not have a preference but rhyming gets stuck in my head and I tend to get grouchy when it won't leave my head....lol.

[magicdavek]

The primary value of nonsense words is in the area of assessment.

Nonsense words (e.g., blat, prup) allow classroom teachers to know how well children can sound out words phonically. If a child identifies a real word, you don't know if it's because he or she 1) already knew it, 2) guessed at it based on context, or 3) sounded it out. So, when a student correctly pronounces a nonsense word, you are assured 1) they didn't already know it (because it is a made-up word), 2) they didn't guess at it from context (it's typically presented in isolation), therefore 3) they genuinely sounded it out.

While there may be an assessment value to nonsense words, I'm not sure if there is any substantial research for or against the systematic use of nonsense words for normally developing readers. I suspect, however, that there may be some instructional benefit for struggling students who are weak in their sound-symbol skills (i.e., basic phonics).

Using phonograms in real words (e.g., sat, cat, hat, mat, etc.) appears to have great value at the very earliest stage of learning to read because it gets kids "up and running" more easily than straight phonics and whole word or Whole Language approaches. Consider it "training wheels" to real reading. Teachers and parents find it boring, but after 21 years working with beginning readers and struggling readers, let me assure you that kids are delighted that they can read such materials. Again, this applies to the earliest stage of reading because it is easier than phonics and the other classic approaches. After a few weeks of such materials, most students are ready to move on to "real" reading.

[LovestoRead]

While I don't think certain books teach anything, I've always found that Dr.Seuss' literature was always pretty sound. Very rarely did he use "nonsense" words; he just utilized the power of rhyme. I actually DO think it makes reading interesting for children. I know for a fact that it got me into reading.

I DO think they should produce better literature for children (story wise), but children's attention spans are so short. The older they get, the more patient (hopefully) they'll become. Depends on the person.