Readit NewsDeleted Comment
Here are my reasons why this "upgrade" is, in experience, a huge downgrade for Plus users:
* The quality of responses from GPT-5 compared to O3 is lacking. It does very few rounds of thinking and doesn't use web search as O3 used to. I've tried selecting "thinking", instructing explicitly, nothing helps. For now, I have to use Gemini to get similar quality of outputs.
* Somehow, custom GPTs [1] are now broken as well. My custom grammar-checking GPT is ignoring all instructions, regardless of the selected model.
* Deep research (I'm well within the limit still) is broken. Selecting it as an option doesn't help, the model just keeps responding as usual, even if it's explicitly instructed to use deep research.
Projects seem broken as well. Does not follow instructions, talks in Spanish, completely ignores my questions, and sometimes appears to be having a conversation with itself while ignoring everything I say. I even typed random key presses and it just kept on giving me the same unwanted answer, sometimes in Spanish.
Finally got access to it. It's so awful. I asked it something, answered in Spanish with something completely different. In another conversation, it kept giving me completely different answers to something I didn't even ask. Telling it to stop doesn't do anything. It ignores it and continues a conversation with itself.
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.
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 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!
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.
APM keeps pushing phonics, but the UK tried it and it's been a disaster: reading ability craters after a couple years. It's not the solution.
https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.10...
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2022/jan/19/focus-on-p...
See my other, more detailed, comment on this thread, but the reason for this is that phonics is part of the solution, but it's not what creates fluent readers.
Most phonics programs do not treat automaticity as the goal, so kids with effortful and slow decoding count as "reading". The science is very clear on what causes this lack of automaticity and what exercises best correct it, but most programs ignore it.
So kids with no deficits will develop mostly fine, but those with them will look to be "reading" but will have trouble once the material requires too much of them.
I'll keep the self-promotion to a minimum, but I have been spending lots of time reading on the science consensus on how children actually become fluent readers as part of my upcoming product Pictures Are For Babies (https://picturesareforbabies.com), a literacy program that uses a deliberate practice engine I created to teach literacy from A-B-C to post-secondary level.
Phonics is all the rage, and I was planning to make it central to my pedagogy, but it turns out the answer is a bit more complicated, especially if you want to work with children with reading difficulties.
Phonics is part of the answer, but it's only the first step. Introducing children to the explicit mapping of graphemes to phonemes (letter to sounds) teaches decoding, but skilled reading is not decoding.
Actual reading is developed through a process called orthographic mapping. The result of this process is storing the grapheme to phoneme mappings in long-term memory for immediate retrieval. The words stored in this way form a sight vocabulary that spans tens of thousands of words in fluent readers.
When taught only phonics, kids run the risk of plateauing in later grades. It's not evident at first because the material they are given is simple and deals with concrete subjects (e.g. "Mike got a bunny for his birthday"). Later material uses many more words that don't follow phonics "rules" and deal with abstract material. Under these circumstances, decoding is too slow and effortful and leaves little remaining capacity to deal with harder tasks like comprehension.
The main cause of issues in developing this sight vocabulary is phonological deficits, not IQ, motivation, intelligence, visual processing, or attention like one might imagine. Kids with these deficits have trouble understanding that words are made up of smaller sound units and cannot work with them. Because of that, they cannot store the mapping efficiently and their vocabulary and fluency is limited.
Thankfully, the best interventions that fix these deficits are not too complicated and can correct the issues with as little as a dozen of hours of correct instruction. The main drawback is that finding and targeting those deficits is time-consuming for the instructors, but my program deals with that through the practice engine, which automates all that work.
The bad news is that most teachers are not aware of this and are simply being moved to phonics, which will not work for all children unless those phonemics deficits are identified and remediated. Worse news is that most commercial products that claim to be evidence-based or backed by the "science of reading" still use phonics and make no mention of orthographic mapping, the actual process that produces fluent readers. Again, phonics instruction is part of the answer, but nowhere near the entire story.
You can look at my pedagogy document for more info. Although it's meant to be about my product, it still contains a primer of the actual research on how full literacy (not just reading, but writing as well) is developed: https://picturesareforbabies.com/home/pedagogy/
I learned about the literacy crisis and figured creating a literacy program would be cost-effective and impactful. After researching the science of reading and writing acquisition, I created Pictures Are For Babies, a literacy program that integrates Trane with a full curriculum to teach literacy to the college level and best-in-class pedagogy.
Two products are being released today. A Lite version available for free with no time limits and no payment required. And a Full version that aims to develop true mastery of literacy at the college level and beyond. The Full version is available via a $1000 one-time payment or a $20/month subscription with lifetime software and content updates included.
The first release of the Full version is the first step to accomplishing the ambitious goal of developing literacy to the highest level. It includes the completed curriculum for reading and writing at the symbol, word, and sentence levels. Upcoming releases will add the remaining tracks of the curriculum, focused on reading comprehension of a variety of text types and explicit writing instruction at the sentence and paragraph levels.
The Lite version includes the first levels of the curriculum. The value of the Lite version goes well beyond its content. By integrating the correct pedagogy from the ground up, it serves as a complete and professional tool for detection, prevention, and remediation of reading difficulties in early readers.
From its very first version, Pictures Are For Babies goes beyond all other literacy programs in its scope, depth, and ambition across multiple dimensions:
- By integrating Trane, the student receives a personalized learning experience that enables them to practice at the edge of their current abilities, all at the click of a button. It enables the student to learn more efficiently and the tutor to focus on delivering instruction and support instead of managing scheduling.
- It is one of the few programs that incorporates the concept of orthographic mapping from the ground up. Orthographic mapping is the process by which words are stored in long-term memory for instant retrieval. Programs that incorporate these findings develop true fluency, fix most reading difficulties, and deliver effect sizes that are multiples of those delivered by phonics-only programs.
- It includes a comprehensive and systematic curriculum that covers the entire journey from learning letter names and sounds to reading and writing sentences of college-level complexity. The initial curriculum contains over 1,200 lessons and teaches over 18,000 unique words.
- It includes no pictures, and does not engage in any form of gamification or other distractions. The choice is not arbitrary. Orthographic mapping research shows that reading and writing acquisition are at their core phonological processes. By removing these distractions and focusing on fostering the conditions for deliberate practice, Pictures Are For Babies shows respect for the science and for students as capable learners who can rise to the challenges and learn to love literacy for its own sake.
Let me know what you think! I am happy to answer any questions about the product and about the science behind it. For screenshots of the software, please visit the user interface page at https://picturesareforbabies.com/manual/user-interface/.