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


Discussion in 'Primary' started by ROSIEGIRL, Feb 21, 2012.

  1. I have read all these arguments with great interest- I can see phonics creates great passion in teachers!
    I feel very strongly about phonics, having witnessed at first hand how really good synthetic phonics teaching has turned around the fortunes of several schools and therefore the lives of many children. I do however have enough of a sense of humour to find Michael Rosen's blog very funny, as I also cannot see the point of testing 5 and 6 yr olds using nonsense words. As he says, it is not reading.
    The proof of the pudding should come at year 2- if the current year 1 children do better in KS1 SATs, then it will be clear phonics teaching is making a difference. Reading however is not just about decoding and the schools that are successful are using phonics as a tool, not an end goal in it's own right. Read the OFSTED report Reading by Six (2010) as it is a very clear document that shows how the best schools do it. It is not just about teaching phonics- though all the good schools had that in common.
    Finally, all those opponents of phonics teaching need to be aware that OFSTED will be looking very closely at phonics teaching and the teaching of reading in general. Not agreeing with it is not gonig to be a sufficient excuse!
  2. I happen to still have the PIP book. Some consonants are taught first, heard, said and recognised as initial letters, over a timescale which is 'not possible to determine'; consonants continue to be taught over following 2 - 3 weeks and pupils are taught to hear, say and identify final letters in words, with the introduction of final position 'ss' 'ck' etc. Vowels and remaining basic consonant sounds introduced over following 5 to 6 weeks and pupils work on medial sounds and letters, blending and segmenting. Over the following 3 -4 weeks children work on the last few consonants and segment and blend CCVC and CVCC for reading and spelling. Over the next 3-4 weeks children worked on digraphs, learning one representation of each of ten vowel phonemes. Children then start working on remaining vowel digraphs and trigraphs on a time scale 'not possible to determine'. So, the main part of the programme is completed over 17 weeks. I found the emphasis on hearing initial sounds initially helped to kick start understanding of what needs to be listened for, what a sound is and how it relates to a word, which is, I think, why this initial process was left open-ended in the programme. Once that is established children are ready to go. I don't think it is a particularly fantastic programme, but does have its good points in the way letters and sounds are introduced and consolidated. Additionally, the photocopiable resources for the games were in the book, making it very easy to get the whole thing established quickly and cheaply. Incidentally, the games are basically the same as the ones used in Letters and Sounds. But my main point, Maizie , is that phonics was being taught, and being taught in a structured and systematic manner before 2007. And yet functional literacy is still a concern for large numbers of the generation of children who experienced it.
  3. Have you come across any opponents of phonics teaching on this thread jfharris?
  4. Mostly lurk around here, but this is an interesing discussion that raises many questions. Hopefully someone can or will answer.
    Do any of those who use SP as the primary method for teaching reading (MsZ, Maisie) teach pupils who are learners of English? Particularly beginners? If so, what have you noticed with regards to their learning and application of phonic skills, and in what ways has this method affected their retelling and comprehension skills?

    Ta. [​IMG]
  5. mystery10

    mystery10 Occasional commenter

    Wouldn't SP (or LP indeed) be a very straightforward way of learning to decode the words in any language that s phonetically based? Of course until one knew what the words actually meant it would be "meaningless" (same as for an English child with very poor vocabulary) but it would work as a method.
  6. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    It works well for basic decoding
  7. So much to read, but we need to agree that many English people cannot read very well.
    Good phonic education certainly helps. Have not seen any reference to thrass!

Share This Page