1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Any better proof that the Phonics Experiment is driven by screaming nutters?

Discussion in 'Primary' started by nomad, Feb 20, 2011.

  1. nomad

    nomad Star commenter

  2. So it will assess how pupils try to decode unfamiliar words. Sounds good to me. I think they should use real, unusual but decodable names, however.
  3. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    you probably hadn't noticed but the non- words were included in the Letters & Sounds publication in 2005 http://nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/downloader/6960cc634a5524d0c311326a3a759f8e.pdf
    og pim reb cag
    ab ket nud meck
    liss hin

    dar veng gax chee
    zort jigh hish yurk
    sair quoam koob waiber
    kear doit fowd thorden

    plood dreet skarb kelf
    grint bamp shreb pronk
    theest fowsping spunch glorpid
    page 14 /15 assessments the only change is that it is going to be a formal test

  4. My son (12) is a good reader, but struggles with spelling. We have
    invented our own non-word spelling game. This has highlighted his
    difficulty in discriminating between the sounds made by the vowels 'e'
    and 'i'. As he says "I can hear the difference when you say them
    individually, but not when they are parts of words".
    The change
    in sounds in relation to the sounds that precede and follow them, and
    children's ability to make generalisations from those changes (or not)
    has been noted by researchers. Google
    Patricia Kuhl Cracking the language code
    for information that might be to your advantage...
  5. Whilst I don't agree with non-words being included in the test, I understand why they have been. There are more than enough real words that could be used to check decoding skills. Checking a decoded against meaning is an important skill ( e.g. how would you pronounce "read" out of context?) and using non-words undermines this. However, as many schools pay only lip-service to systematic synthetic phonics preferring to teach multi-cueing methods, using non-words in a national test is one way to give these schools a wake-up call.
  6. I can't see how you can test decoding by using words. The child might be able to read the word, to be sure, but might use multiple cues to do so and give the impression of being able to decode accurately simply by scoring higher than chance in a word reading test.
  7. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    But surely that is the purpose of learning to decode ...being able to read words.
    If the test consists of a list of words (or non words) how can the child use multiple cues?

Share This Page