To be shocked that the national average reading age is 9-11

Those in the 30-35 age group are the most likely to have been exposed to the whole word/real books teaching of reading and then later to Searchlights or the 3-cueing method. Older people learned to read using phonics, so the older age groups will read much better.
Whole word is a method that assumes we do not read individual letters but whole words. Bear with me; this meant that children were taught words by sight using flash cards and reading books with predictive vocabulary (John hit the ball. Oh, John! Hit the ball' - that sort of thing, which was to some extent around in the 50s but children were also taught letter and sounds using flash cards, sitting in a circle around the teacher) and some tools to 'guess' words they did not know. This method was added to the Searchlights scheme under Blair's National curriculum system. There, the teacher, using a Big Book set on an easel, pointed to the words of the text as they read them and the children chimed in. They were also taught the 3 cues for identifying words (the Searchlights) which were the context e.g. what word is likely to come next in this sentence: 'the car sped down the -' word begings with 's', using the pictures to identify the word e.g. there is a picture of a dragon, so the word is 'dragon', and finally the least effective method, working out the sounds of the letters (phonics) e.g. 'get your mouth ready to say the 'sss' sound' etc. None of these methods are effective, although about 80% of children will probably learn to read anyway. The 20% who did not were told it would be sorted out in secondary school (it wouldn't, of course).
The teaching unions, education experts and some members of the profession were dragged kicking and screaming back to using phonics, specifically systematic synthetic phonics (SSP), along with the knowledge-rich curriculum that is needed to comprehend the words on the page when you have read them. To make sure that SSP was being used a phonics test was introduced at the end of year 1, containing 20 real words using phonics taught up till then, and 20 made up words - explained as being the names of alien creatures with pictures of those creatures - also using the phonics taught up to the end of year 1.
This check (it's not a test) has caused ructions among some teachers who think they need to teach nonsense words (they do not - the whole point of the nonsense words in the check is to see if the child can use phonics to read them) and that mechanics is being substituted for comprehension and enjoyment.
What comprehension and enjoyment anyone gets out of struggling to guess the words from the context (ok only for meaning), the pictures and what letter the word starts with, I cannot imagine. But use of those methods means a whole tranche of young people from the late 80s to the 2010s were deprived of the skill of reading - hence low overall reading age average.
Be warned, the teaching unions want the phonics check removed. Labour is likely to agree. Also likely to agree that other methods than SSP + knowledge rich curriculum can be used to teach reading.

You’re not the first person on this thread to criticize phonics, but I thought it was widely accepted now (having fought the good fight even)?

English is my DS’s second language and not taught in school so I am trying to get him reading and I defaulted to phonics methods even though I don’t think it’s how I learned. So if there is alternatives I would be interested in learning more and also what are the problems with phonics?

I'm dyslexic and in my 30s. I can read, and have quite an intellectual job. This doesn't surprise me. However, i didn't struggle much with reading, but did (and do) with writing and times tables. But for me primary school focused on reading, writing arythmtic, then secondary school focus was more analysing and understanding. In very general terms. I still feel stressed when trying to do primary school level things. Sometimes you get to a passable level and realise there's no point progressing further if it's too difficult and it's best to focus on your strengths instead. And, yes an average 9 year old should have a passable level of literacy.

On the education system, I think England starting literacy so young compared to many other countries (4 instead of 7) puts many children off loving learning.

I am not surprised as I've been aware of the stats for years, but I continue to find it shocking.
I am running a one woman campaign in my department to try and keep written information clear and straightforward. My colleagues are all great at reading and do love writing a complex sentence with fancy words.
They struggle to adapt their style to a public where many will struggle to read and others are reading English as a foreign language.

Some years ago, a primary school in my local area brought in speech therapists to help the pupils. This was a huge success because afterwards the pupils' written work improved dramatically!

Exactly what I was wondering. Sounds like a nonsense benchmark.

You're criticizing punctuation😆
Is there a 2 for one offer on commas🤣

keeping literacy levels low is of benefit to those in power
Aint that the truth!

It had a lot to do with it unfortunately.

The reading tests don't look at punctuation. It's all down to the number of words with more than two syllables and the number of words in a sentence.

I think part of the problem is actually sloppy writing. Your post, for example, OP, is poorly punctuated and I had to read it twice to be sure about what you meant. If we write things clearly, people are less likely to misunderstand.

She's giving the title page a good, hard read there.

https://literacytrust.org.uk/parents-and-families/adult-literacy/

Let's face it, if the likes of farage are becoming more popular, then a lot of people are pretty ignorant/thick.

I remember wondering on here if my dd was reading for the right age, she was year 2 and had read and re read A series of unfortunate events and understood it. I was repeatedly told she couldn't possibly understand it

This.

I used to prepare children for 11+ and Common Entrance exams and would encourage them to read children's classics as the vocabulary is much more advanced. This included children with dyslexic who can get the same benefits by listening to audiobooks.

Also, reading is not just about decoding words but inference, prediction, understanding the use of words in context, etc.

How do you think Brexit happened?

This, 100%.

That’s an amazingly long sentence.

Nail on the head there. So much is "normal" life for some people, as you say, like reading a car lease or preparing your own tax return, which is just out of the question for someone else.

It doesn't surprise me at all.
The reading scandal was brought to my own door with my dc, one dc had a reading and spelling age of 15 when in primary the other was almost the bottom of the class.
Same parents, upbringing, lots of books loads of audio books.
The difference which I discovered was simply one dc not getting phonics.
She she failed the test which means it becomes about even more phonics to pass the next one.
Actually learning to read becomes forgotten about!
Thankfully during covid I was able to take it in hand and get down to basics with different ways of learning to read and she went back fluent

However many dc won't have me or a resource like me and those poor buggers just get more and more phonics even though it's a barrier.

I'm extremely dismayed at Bridget Philipson doubling down on phonics.

@L1ghtP0ur

We’re talking about literacy standard. How does meeting the reading standard of the ks2 tests in English and maths mean a person is not functional? What in everyday life won’t they be able to do.

I think it helps to reframe your question:

"What sort of activities can be part of 'everyday life' for a person who has KS2 (or less, or more)?"

If you can confidently read a contract, understand workplace policies, read tax advice, board papers, etc then your 'everyday life' can be very different from someone who can't.

(If your answer is 'reading tax advice and board papers isn't everyday life' you are kind of illustrating my point).

Quoting a joke by Nancy Mitford about her father as proof of the UK being anti intellectual is rather ironic considering Nancy and Jessica are still widely read.

But anyway, the upper classes in the UK are not the intellectuals, they are the upper class because of (in) breeding and either being a good pal or illegitimate child of the king a long time ago. The intelligentsia in this country are middle class.

Still thinking about this wonderful comment and how correct it is. You are so right, it is like that as a whole, the whole country, and has been for a while, I think. Usually in other countries there is a very deep division between the lower (non-intellectual) and upper classes (intellectual) in this respect, but not in the UK - a semi-autobiographical book by Nancy Mitford depicts their circle's standard attitude to intellectual pursuits - her uncle Matthew “I have only ever read one book in my life, and that is White Fang. It's so frightfully good I've never bothered to read another. Also, it is thought that one of the reasons Prince Charles was so misunderstood and even derided by his family was his deep intellectual yearnings and his preference for books rather than hunting.

Shall I compare thee to a summer's day is 7.79.

Let me no to the marriage of true minds admit impediments is 10.13

The abstract of a scientific paper I wrote was 17.25

But the winner was this sentence from the opening chapter of a novel by Stephen Keeler who is one of the authors regularly described as the worst writer ever. It scored 27.37.

“It must be remembered that at the time I knew quite nothing, naturally, concerning Milo Payne, the mysterious Cockney-talking Englishman with the checkered long-beaked Sherlockholmesian cap; nor of the latter’s ‘Barr-Bag’ which was as like my own bag as one Milwaukee wienerwurst is like another; nor of Legga, the Human Spider, with her four legs and six arms; nor of Ichabod Chang, ex-convict, and son of Dong Chang; nor of the elusive poetess, Abigail Sprigge; nor of the Great Simon, with his 2163 pearl buttons; nor of – in short, I then knew quite nothing about anything or anybody involved in the affair of which I had now become a part, unless perchance it were my nemesis, Sophie Kratzenschneiderwumpel – or Suing Sophie.”