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

Sensible approach to literacy teaching

Discussion in 'Primary' started by mashabell, Dec 23, 2011.

  1. You're wrong. A decade ago schools were still bring instructed to use searchlights. It wasn't until 2007 that schools were told they must use sp as the main methodology. I can see your grasp of maths is weak, but by my reckoning that's 4 years, not a decade.
     
  2. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    because it isn't being taught correctly ... and as many schools have just begun to teach phonics (apparently in the last year) it isn't going to show in Y6 for years. Combine that with ITT institutions who are not providing their students with adequate tuition to teach reading (whether by SP or other methods 2 days devoted to reading is a joke)
    you seem to be assuming the 27% of schools teaching phonics well weren't doing so prior to the pilot ... even you must realise that if they have always taught well they are not going to influence stats
    not in most schools and not in most year groups (letters & sounds was published in 2007 - 4 years ago... and as you have pointed out many times you don't know how the schools you work with have taught reading previously or indeed if they used phonics are you now saying that you do know?

     
  3. This can surely only mean that many teachers remains unsure as to what the best way of teaching children to read and write is?
     
  4. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    or they use a commercial programme or they are knowledgeable enough to produce their own
    or staffdidn't have the knowledge/skills or as is often the case don't have the resources needed to deliver it correctly


     
  5. I am afraid I have to agree with Eddie, that in many schools, I think there is a real abandonment of those children who do not achieve 'at expected levels' in KS1. For political reasons, many teachers feel they can only give time and resources for those children who have a 'real chance' of 'achieving' at an appropriate level, which for many, means those who don't achieve level 2, are largely ignored in KS2 - more likely if there's little home support, and absolutely if there isn't real progress by Year 4. Those who didn't achieve level 3, are rarely pushed to achieve level 5 in KS2 etc etc.
    It is wrong, but I have seen this numbers game in several schools myself, and know a couple of teachers who left the profession because of similar pressure in their own schools.
    Some schools are better equipped and resourced to deal with the stubbornly underperforming children. Mine (for example) isn't one of them, and it is increasingly difficult in upper KS2 to devote the time and resources to those children who have consistently been behind (yes, often since KS1). My Head would rather spend time on those children who achieved a level 3 in KS1, and are in danger of not making a level 5 in Year 6, or those children who achieved level 2 in KS1, but may not make a Level 4. There is NO support for children who left KS1 without a Level 2, who will be given what intervention they can be in Year 3 and 4 from their class teacher, but little beyond that, and nothing like the amount of co-ordinated intervention they really need.

     
  6. CarrieV

    CarrieV Lead commenter

    Then they are shooting themselves in the foot because OFSTED will be looking for similar progress for all groups of children and especially so for " vunerable" groups-which would include those who performed poorly at KS1. So those leaving KS1 on L1 are expected to make 2 levels progress too.
    In addition level 3 to 5 and level 2 to level 4 is only classed as"expected progress", schools need to be showing "better than expected progress" to be considered successful!
     
  7. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    Then I consider myself to be very lucky to work with teachers who give up their own time to ensure children aren't written off because they are slow starters.
     
  8. minnieminx

    minnieminx New commenter

    Not better resourced, just have better priorities.

    I'm sure there probably are terrible schools out there where children are abandoned...but let us not begin to imply these are in any way a majority, nor even a significant minority. The Daily Mail and its ilk can do that for us.

    It is in a school's best interest to get children reading and writing well as soon as possible and keep them progressing. Political value added league tables mean all children and their progress matters. It is a nonsense and hugely insulting to the profession to suggest otherwise.
     
  9. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    I am so pleased to see that I'm not alone in being horrified by the idea that some children should be abandoned for the sake of league tables.
     
  10. CarrieV

    CarrieV Lead commenter

    No child should be abandoned for any reason, it is our job to teach every child to their mamimum potential, whether this is a level 1,2,3,4,5,or higher shouldn't matter in the slightest. But it is also wrong to say that these children are "abandoned" for political reasons. They aren't ( simply because politically and in league table terms, their progress is as "valuable" as anyone elses) These children are being abandoned <u>by some</u> because they are harder to teach, require more attention, more time or different methodologies to "mainstream" children and some heads/teachers clearly can't be bothered to make the effort.
     
  11. No child should be abandoned. But it is a mistake to assume that this doesn't happen, or that it doesn't happen often. My experience is that it does - far too often. It's wrong, but there you have it. There are plenty of Heads out there, who will 'sacrifice' the children they 'know' are not going to make 'enough' progress to matter to the figures, and will concentrate their time, energy and money, on those children where they feel they can make a difference which will show on their end of key stage stats.
    Classic example of this, is the extra tuition given to those children who are 'borderline' next level material. At my school, in practice, this means that a child in Y6 working at a level 4b in Maths, gets an hour one to one time each week, while the child working at a level 2b in the same year group doesn't. The former kid will do OK in life whether or not he gets that extra hour; the latter will leave primary school functionally innumerate, but the former child got a level 3 in KS1, so that's what qualifies him for extra support!.
     
  12. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    or conversely they could make enough progress to make VA look amazing if they were only given the chance.
    I'm so pleased I don't work in your school ... in mine staff are giving up lunch breaks to support the slow starters
     
  13. You've forgotten that 'Progression in Phonics' was published in1999. While paying lip service to the searchlights model it stresses that problems can arise if the phonics searchlight is not given enough weight and says, " it is essential ... that children learn from the outset ...that they [words] are composed of letters set out in particular combinations to correspond with spoken sounds, and which letter combinations correspond with which sounds". 'Progression in Phonics' suggests a discrete 15 minutes per day spent on phonics with the code introduced in specific numbered stages (systematic). It suggests some strategies which might be interpreted as more analytic than synthetic in nature, but is a clear precursor to Letters and Sounds. Teachers using the document would be delivering a discrete phonics session each day with a progression through the GPCs using many of the same games suggested by 'Letters and Sounds'. This was the way I used it when it arrived at my school, and I remember arranging for all the resources to be photocopied and laminated for each class up to Y3. You should note, also, that Jolly Phonics , a synthetic phonics programme, was first published in 1992. his could be seen as the beginning of the SP enthusiasm in schools which has now reached such a level of true believer acceptance. The children I taught using 'Progression in Phonics' in reception in 2000 will be 15/16 now. Most of them enjoyed the 'Progression in Phonics' games and made sure progress, but there were a small number who were still struggling at Y6 with remembering GPCs and HFWs and blending successfully. SATs analysis showed that children who could apparently decode well were not reflecting on sentences and texts enough to answer comprehension questions about what they were reading.If you consider that the move towards a greater e mphasis o. The searchlight of phonics started in 1999 you would expect a gradual improvement I. KS2 results since 2005. I see no signs that this has happened.
     
  14. CarrieV

    CarrieV Lead commenter

    But the child at level 2b STILL needs to make 2 levels progress! We use our 1:1 tuition in groups, so we have a group who are aiming for level 2, another group aiming for level 3, one for level 4 and one for level 5. Those aiming for level 6 get me at lunchtime!
     
  15. minnieminx

    minnieminx New commenter

    Well that is an example of your school having terrible priorities. It certainly is not indicative of the state of primary education in general.

    In my school the paid 1:1 tuition has been given to those working at a 3c at the start of year 6. They got the ten hours as per the programme and then the teachers concerned are continuing for the rest of the year. The same happened last year, with teaching staff giving up their free time.

    Those working below a 3c at the start of year 6 all have 1:1 or 1:2 tuition with senior staff a couple of times a week and again have this all year, with the DH or AH.
    If your school chooses to ignore the low attainers, then that is their poor practice. Please don't tar us all with the same brush.

    And to be honest if your school has written off those who won't get 5s, then they wouldn't be interested in Eddie's research programme anyway! The ones your school writes off are exactly the ones his programme is aimed at.
     
  16. minnieminx

    minnieminx New commenter

    Maybe milliebear1's school is going for 'average' progress. If the high attainers make three levels progress, then they can have some low attainers with just one level. I dunno, sounds stupid but maybe works.

    LOL If I'd had more to drink we could then discuss writing off the high attainers! Our top ones get me after school and I don't even teach year 6 this year!
     
  17. It is fairly appalling that teachers are giving up their spare time to tutor children, and an indictment of the present education system.
     
  18. minnieminx

    minnieminx New commenter

    Far less appalling than the schools that apparently abandon them!
     
  19. Msz

    Msz Established commenter

    no one has asked or expects us to give up our lunch time we do it because we care
     
  20. CarrieV

    CarrieV Lead commenter

    I'd better not mention the summer school I ran for a week for those who wanted to brush up on their maths and writing before they moved onto secondary school then![​IMG]
     

Share This Page