There is no one right order for everyone
Search around and you will find confident claims that phonics must come first, or that conversation must come first. In practice, the right starting point depends on your child's age, interests, current ability and actual goal.
Rather than looking for the one universally correct method, matching the approach to where your child actually is tends to make it stick better.
What to check before deciding where to start
- What is the actual goal: keeping up with school English, working toward EIKEN eventually, or just enjoying it?
- What can she already do: can she read letters, how much vocabulary does she have?
- What does she actually enjoy: songs and picture books, or games and apps?
- Is there any resistance to speaking out loud?
- How much time can the family realistically commit at home, consistently?
Three common starting profiles
Roughly grouping where a child currently stands makes the starting point clearer.
Comfortable with spoken English, but not yet reading
Listening rarely feels like a barrier here, but the connection between letters and sounds may not be settled yet. Phonics-style practice linking letters to sounds can be a genuine help in building reading ability for this profile.
Can read, but resists speaking out loud
She can read words and simple sentences but isn't used to actually speaking. Short exchanges and reading aloud, starting small, tend to build comfort without much pressure.
Starting from close to zero on both
When English is close to entirely new, working through everyday vocabulary and simple expressions (covering meaning, sound and usage together rather than one at a time) tends to split the load into manageable pieces.
What actually keeps it going
Packing in too much content from the start tends to wear out both the child and the parent. Building up what she understands, can say and can read a little at a time tends to last much longer.
Naming a specific thing achieved today, such as “you can say this word now,” works far better as motivation than a vague “keep it up.” Concrete wins are easier for a child to hold onto than abstract encouragement.
Learning research has repeatedly shown that short sessions repeated with gaps in between stick better. The review by Dunlosky and colleagues (2013) rates practice testing and distributed practice as high-utility methods, and the synthesis by Cepeda and colleagues (2006) also confirms the benefit of spacing reviews. The best gap depends on how long you need to remember something, so there is no fixed number of days. Most of this research involves university students rather than primary-school children, which is worth keeping in mind. For many families, 10 to 20 minutes a day is easier to sustain than two hours at the weekend.
When to start: earlier is not automatically better
You will often hear that an earlier start is an advantage. In settings like school lessons, where contact with English is limited, the research is more cautious.
The Barcelona Age Factor (BAF) project compared students who began English at ages 8, 11, 14 and 18 or older, at the points where they had reached 200, 416 and 726 hours of instruction. The older starters progressed faster in the early stages (Muñoz, ed., 2006). The researchers explain this by suggesting that the natural, implicit learning ability attributed to young children does not have enough input to work with in instruction-based settings with limited exposure.
Nikolov and Mihaljević Djigunović's (2011) review likewise sets out both the reasons an early start is seen as beneficial, under what conditions, and the possible drawbacks. The start age alone does not decide the outcome; what matters is the environment and how long the child keeps going.
What follows is that total exposure and its quality matter more than the age at which a child began. Starting in kindergarten or the early grades, build around keeping it enjoyable; starting from the middle grades, build around understanding how letters and sentences work. This is a rule of thumb drawn from the research, not a prescription.
These studies mostly involve European schools, so they do not necessarily apply directly to home study in Japan, and results can differ between listening/speaking and reading/writing.
How school English changes by grade in Japan
What to add at home or through lessons depends on how much school covers. The current course of study and the class-hours table in the School Education Act Enforcement Regulations (Appendix 1) set out the following.
| Grade | English at school | What to consider at home or in lessons |
|---|---|---|
| Grades 1-2 | No nationally set class hours for foreign languages (depends on the school's own programme) | Create regular, enjoyable contact with English |
| Grades 3-4 | Foreign language activities: 35 hours a year, centred on listening and speaking, getting used to the sounds and basic expressions | Reading and writing are not covered in depth, so decide whether to cover letter-sound links at home |
| Grades 5-6 | Foreign language as a subject: 70 hours a year, adding reading and writing to listening and speaking | Choose a focus based on homework, tests and goals such as Eiken |
Each grade's aims are set out in MEXT's course of study commentary (foreign language activities and foreign languages). How lessons actually run varies by school.
A first observation checklist
This is not a formal assessment, just notes to help choose a starting point. Watch for a few days and tick what applies.
Five learner profiles and first priorities
| Profile | First priority | Do not over-prioritise yet | Progress to look for in the first weeks |
|---|---|---|---|
| A. Speaks but cannot read | Linking letters to sounds | Long reading passages | Tries to sound out new words |
| B. Decodes but does not understand | Vocabulary and checking meaning | Reading speed | Can summarise a sentence in Japanese |
| C. Understands but rarely speaks | Short exchanges and chances to speak | Fine grammar accuracy | Replies more often even when wrong |
| D. Needs schoolwork support now | Understanding current materials and homework | Broadening to new areas | Homework takes less time with fewer sticking points |
| E. Complete beginner | Everyday words and phrases through sound and meaning | Rushing reading and writing | Joins in happily |
An example of the first four weeks
A sample framework, not a fixed curriculum.
| Week | Focus | Check |
|---|---|---|
| Week 1 | Current experience and what feels comfortable | Which activities are enjoyed? |
| Week 2 | Repeat the chosen priority briefly (e.g. sounds, speaking) | Is the same activity easier than before? |
| Week 3 | Use learned words in new sentences or situations | Does the child use them unprompted? |
| Week 4 | Review progress and reset priorities | Continue or widen next month? |
When to change the approach
- The child consistently does not understand
- The work is far too easy
- They cannot use English outside drills
- School needs have changed
- The activity format does not suit them and motivation drops
Related articles and tutors
See phonics, conversation and school English, how to choose a tutor who fits and when Japanese support helps. Tutors who work with elementary-age students include Hannah, Dayun, Maya and Haruka. See also English for beginners.
How Petra Tutors approaches this
For a child just starting English, we first check current experience, what is being covered at school, and what genuinely interests her.
From phonics, vocabulary, conversation and school English, we choose the combination that fits and suggest a pace the family can sustain.
References
- Muñoz (ed.) | Age and the Rate of Foreign Language Learning (Multilingual Matters, 2006)
- Nikolov & Mihaljević Djigunović | All Shades of Every Color: An Overview of Early Teaching and Learning of Foreign Languages (2011)
- MEXT | Elementary School Course of Study (2017) commentary: Foreign Language Activities and Foreign Languages
- e-Gov Law Search | School Education Act Enforcement Regulations, Appendix 1
- Dunlosky et al. | Improving Students' Learning With Effective Learning Techniques (2013)
- Cepeda et al. | Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks (2006)
