Oxford Word Lists 1 - 400
Emma Hartnell-Baker has orthographically mapped the words using the Code Mapping algorithm to show the word code. Letters that function as graphemes are displayed using her unique Code Mapping system. Split digraphs are shown in blue, as taught in the SSP Blue Code level.
The Oxford Wordlist may be used for instructional purposes for students at school and home.
If you wish to use the Oxford Wordlist in any other way, you must seek written permission from Oxford University Press.
Oxford WordList Plus
Code Mapped® to Show the Graphemes
If you would like these as editable word documents - to change the font - email us and say why you think it matters that children are shown the grahemes (the Word Code)
Email Mastery@WordMapped.com
The 2008 Oxford-derived frequency list can be created at https://www.oxfordwordlist.com/pages/report.asp
Both lists are “Oxford”, but they are not the same dataset, and they were built for different purposes at different times.
​
Why the lists are different
Oxford does not have a single fixed “Oxford Wordlist”. What exists are multiple frequency lists derived from different corpora, at different points in time, for different audiences.
The 2008 list is based on an older children’s written corpus, published around 2008. It reflects:
-
Children’s reading and writing at that time
-
Print-heavy sources such as early readers, storybooks, and school texts
-
Capitalisation and items like Sunday, Saturday, TV, etc., as they appeared in the source texts
The 2010 list we have Code Mapped are often referred to as Oxford Wordlist Plus or similar and these were:
-
Reworked and expanded
-
More heavily curated for instructional use in schools
-
Sometimes normalised (for example lowercasing, grouping, or removing some proper nouns)
-
Influenced by how words were being taught rather than just raw frequency
So the differences we see are not errors. They come from:
-
Different source corpora
-
Different dates
-
Different decisions about what counts as a “word”
-
Different instructional aims
Why this matters educationally
This is actually a perfect real-world example of one of my core points:
There is no single, stable, agreed list of “the words children must learn first”.
Even when the list is labelled Oxford, the ordering, inclusion, casing, and composition vary depending on:
-
Who the list is for
-
How the data was collected
-
Whether the aim was description or instruction
This is exactly why:
-
Treating word lists as fixed truths causes problems
-
Teaching based on memorisation or capped lists breaks down
-
Children need access to the full code, not a frozen subset
Bottom line
-
The 2008 list is a legitimate Oxford-derived frequency list
-
The 2010 list is also legitimate but instructionally curated
-
They differ because English use, corpora, and educational priorities differ
This inconsistency that sits underneath many phonics and “high-frequency word” practices.
Learners need to bond speech sounds, spelling, and meaning in the orthographic lexicon because this is how written words become permanently stored for accurate reading, spelling, and writing. When a word is mapped in this way, it can be recognised instantly without guessing, sounding out, or memorisation.
Speech sounds anchor the word to the learner’s spoken language, spelling captures how those sounds are represented in print, and meaning connects the word to understanding. If any part of this bond is weak or missing, the word remains unstable and is more likely to be misread, misspelt, or confused with other words.
Building these bonds supports self-teaching, allowing learners to independently acquire new words through reading and writing. It reduces cognitive load, improves fluency, and enables learners to focus on meaning rather than decoding effort. For learners who struggle, especially those with dyslexia or speech and language differences, explicitly supporting this bonding process is essential for secure, lasting literacy.