Page 3 | Can someone explain to me the big deal with phonics?

HowManyDucks · 2025-04-13T15:53:54+00:00

Why does the UK curriculum prioritise the phonics method for reading over other approaches eg. Look-say? Particularly interested in hearing from the perspective of teachers. Do you think it is the most effective method or would you prefer to use other methods? I have always thought that phonics are a usefulness supplement, important for understanding how to say unfamiliar words. Wouldn't look-say be more effective for early readers, especially given that English isn't considered a phonetic language? Happy to stand corrected.

Gettingacoffee · 16/04/2025 00:41

Audhdmum · 15/04/2025 23:47

There is a wealth of evidence that synthetic phonics is by far the best, most effective way to teach children to read. It’s as simple as that. Many primary schools that teach phonics well quickly achieve 100% literacy, giving children a huge advantage in their learning and lives.

Again, it doesn’t work for everyone.

It might be the best way for most.

It’s not for everyone.

0ohLarLar · 16/04/2025 00:19

The phonics check only tells us if children can sound out words. Not that they have strong reading skills.

You cannot be a strong reader unless you can fluently read unfamiliar words using phonics.

0ohLarLar · 16/04/2025 00:18

Phonics is still the most effective complete way to learn to read. But the curriculum and approach needs to allow differentiation in ks1 to recognise:

the massive range in maturity which no amount of teaching can change
the fact that some children will intuit phonic codes without needing instruction and we must not hold these children back and deny them more interesting texts
the fact that some children need quite a bit longer for phonics to click. I'm not against look and say type approaches here as a temporary measure (alongside continuing phonics instruction) to prevent frustration and enable a child to access text at school to give them independence in learning. This is as long as we are being honest that this is why we are doing it - and acknowledging that longer term their reading will be hindered until they master phonics, and they must do so.

Original poster

HowManyDucks · 16/04/2025 00:15

The phonics check only tells us if children can sound out words. Not that they have strong reading skills.

OP posts:

0ohLarLar · 16/04/2025 00:12

All evidence that suggests, not that phonics is a bad thing, or that it shouldn’t be taught, but that it is not the only way and too heavy a reliance on it does some children a major disservice.

No. Over 80% of children pass the phonics check in y1. We cannot teach bad habits like 3 cueing at the expense of the phonics instruction we all need eventually, to spare the feelings of a minority with dyslexia who will struggle with any method.

The decline in reading for pleasure is imho more linked to:

availability of screens
competition with other activities, more and more children lead very scheduled lives
cost of books and closure of public libraries
working parents having to use wraparound care where a wide range of books may not be available

Original poster

HowManyDucks · 16/04/2025 00:08

0ohLarLar · 16/04/2025 00:05

Which IMO is one of the main problems now in teaching reading, children don't spend enough time reading rich texts

I agree with this actually. In a lot of schools adults no longer hear individual readers and the text read in class tends to be an exerpt in a work book.

Too many schools also have subscribed to the notion that reading one same book all week builds automaticity. It doesn't (its actually a sneaky look and say ploy where the child is so familiar with the text after 5 reads they appear more fluent than they are). Reading varied material regularly achieves fluency better. Fluency is when you read a text you've never seen before with automaticity, not when you've memorised a book you've trudged through repeatedly all week.

Also, this is driven by the current political mindset of trying to reduce the spread, especially in y1 & 2, where given the opportunity, some more able readers will be ripping through roald dahl while other are still plugging away at short texts. So there's guidance that essentially tries to keep a whole class on one same reading level (utter nonsense at age 5/6/7), with books matched to the sounds taught that week. Its simultaneously not enough for the more able reader and too hard for the less.

I completely agree with everything you say here!

OP posts:

0ohLarLar · 16/04/2025 00:07

you can start basic comprehension skills before a child has even learnt to read a single word.

You are mixing up speaking and listening, with reading. Reading requires that there be text.

Original poster

HowManyDucks · 16/04/2025 00:06

Marmiteontoastgirlie · 15/04/2025 23:54

The podcast mentioned above goes into detail about how when children are taught the whole word/contextual method first their literacy will be damaged. I’m sad I can’t remember the details but there is a very clear explanation of the science and evidence in the pod!

Show quote history

But that is if they are taught to read using these methods exclusively. Phonics are important too.

OP posts:

0ohLarLar · 16/04/2025 00:05

Which IMO is one of the main problems now in teaching reading, children don't spend enough time reading rich texts

I agree with this actually. In a lot of schools adults no longer hear individual readers and the text read in class tends to be an exerpt in a work book.

Too many schools also have subscribed to the notion that reading one same book all week builds automaticity. It doesn't (its actually a sneaky look and say ploy where the child is so familiar with the text after 5 reads they appear more fluent than they are). Reading varied material regularly achieves fluency better. Fluency is when you read a text you've never seen before with automaticity, not when you've memorised a book you've trudged through repeatedly all week.

Also, this is driven by the current political mindset of trying to reduce the spread, especially in y1 & 2, where given the opportunity, some more able readers will be ripping through roald dahl while other are still plugging away at short texts. So there's guidance that essentially tries to keep a whole class on one same reading level (utter nonsense at age 5/6/7), with books matched to the sounds taught that week. Its simultaneously not enough for the more able reader and too hard for the less.

Audhdmum · 15/04/2025 23:59

It’s hardly a scandal that schools teach a system that has been shown to be by far the most effective at getting children reading. Reading for pleasure and comprehension can only happen after children can read!! Teaching reading does not preclude reading to children and encouraging them to enjoy books and stories.

Original poster

HowManyDucks · 15/04/2025 23:59

babybythesea · 15/04/2025 23:52

I know people are saying the evidence is that phonics is best but there is also evidence suggesting that it’s not, at least when used in isolation.

This was taken from the British Dyslexia Association website, referring to “The September (2921) meeting of the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Dyslexia and Specific Learning Difficulties heard from three eminent speakers”:
Their three presentations highlighted that there is substantial evidence spanning 35 years which demonstrates that up to 25% of children cannot learn to read just by learning phonics, including most children with dyslexia and other specific learning difficulties.
Children with reading difficulties benefit when a range of approaches to teaching reading are used alongside synthetic phonics. This includes other linguistic levels like onset-rime, syllable, and rhythm-based instructional approaches.

Another book I’m reading suggests waiting until 7 is not the right thing if a child is struggling, because they lose out on early intervention - I can’t find the book at the moment but will post if I can.

Other links:

https://www.dyslexia.com/davis-difference/davis-theory/when-phonics-doesnt-work/

And this quote comes from the article underneath:

Is this BDA against SSP?

No. We know that SSP is a highly developed way to teach reading, and a critically important part of the beginning reading programme, but it has its limitations, and it should not be the sole method of teaching reading. We are asking for SSP instruction to be integrated into broader reading schemes, rather than used as the only method.

https://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/news/systematic-synthetic-phonics-ssp-our-expert-panel-discusses-the-reasons-why-we-need-to-make-a-change

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-019-09515-y?fbclid=IwAR1uqRTXozQ5L_9ZIHtFsoMl9zGmbo8S63yum_-WroS9nYVdg7Jg7peDyvs

All evidence that suggests, not that phonics is a bad thing, or that it shouldn’t be taught, but that it is not the only way and too heavy a reliance on it does some children a major disservice.
And if our rates of reading for pleasure are declining so rapidly surely we need to look carefully at how we teach it. I cannot believe that reading for pleasure isn’t impacted by a reading system which makes the children read the same book five times even if they hate it. Surely that’s the fastest way to turn reading into a chore and put them off, however hard you try to counterbalance it with other activities?

Thank you. Great post.

OP posts:

Original poster

HowManyDucks · 15/04/2025 23:56

TempestTost · 15/04/2025 23:34

You need to be able to read before you can comprehend what you read. For some children these things come close together, for others you need to work at them longer, or even separately. If a child has learned to decide but not comprehend, there are a number of possible problems, but working on them is the answer. Sometimes they just aren't really reading well enough yet, they need more practice. (Which IMO is one of the main problems now in teaching reading, children don't spend enough time reading rich texts.)

Similarly, most children can understand texts that are much more complicated than they can read, and can compose texts at a much higher level than they can write. So at school they should continue to be ready to, and should be doing oral composition, at the same time they are working on things like reading, spelling, and handwriting.

Show quote history

Mmmm. I see where you are coming from. I have always thought of reading and comprehension as more closely intertwined. They grow together. As reading improves, comprehension depends, equally however, having an understanding of the context can improve reading skills.id even go as far as to say you can start basic comprehension skills before a child has even learnt to read a single word.

OP posts:

JustGotToKeepOnKeepingOn · 15/04/2025 23:55

PleaseDontFingerMyPouffe · 13/04/2025 17:02

A teacher friend told me that children who would do well learning to read under other models, still do well under a phonics approach, but the phonics approach is much more accessible and accommodating of learning styles, difficulties and disabilities.

So it's an equalising approach.

My DD could read from a very early age by sight. She couldn’t get her head around phonics at all. She failed all the phonics tests at school but her reading was fine. Her teacher said not to be worried about her not understanding phonics as some children just don’t learn to read that way.

It’s definitely a case of one size doesn’t fit all… so I don’t understand why the phonics method is pushed on all children, when it’s very clear that they don’t work for all.

My DD has since been diagnosed with ASD so the disabilities slant for phonics doesn’t ring true either!

Marmiteontoastgirlie · 15/04/2025 23:54

HowManyDucks · 15/04/2025 23:39

@0ohLarLar I repeatedly mention that I am not against phonics because I don't need people to persuade me of its importance or value. My issue is when phonics are hailed as the superior method and it's teaching is prioritised over other reading skills. Your points do not really engage with mine.

Yes a phonetic language, but a complex one with a deep orthography. We absolutely do read by interpreting context, everything from pronunciation, to emphasis, to meaning. (reCORD or REcord, the heteronyms : read, tear, wind etc.)

Interested to see your source for this

It works the other way. Phonics hides poor comprehension - they can read the words fluently but do not grasp the intended meaning of the text

4.the question is what is the balance and are schools under to much pressure to nail phonics that the neglect these other important areas

Not sure how this is relevant. I never said that reading was about remembering words?

We are in agreement that spelling comes from reading a lot. Relying on phonics creates confusion when it comes to spelling, though I accept your point that there are ways to mitigate this

look say books focus on the 300 most common words. Level 8-12 goes up to 2000 words. I like how they use full and dramatically correct sentences from the start in relateable scenarios

This is a good point. I think look say is a great for early reader eg. Before reception

The podcast mentioned above goes into detail about how when children are taught the whole word/contextual method first their literacy will be damaged. I’m sad I can’t remember the details but there is a very clear explanation of the science and evidence in the pod!

babybythesea · 15/04/2025 23:52

I know people are saying the evidence is that phonics is best but there is also evidence suggesting that it’s not, at least when used in isolation.

This was taken from the British Dyslexia Association website, referring to “The September (2921) meeting of the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Dyslexia and Specific Learning Difficulties heard from three eminent speakers”:
Their three presentations highlighted that there is substantial evidence spanning 35 years which demonstrates that up to 25% of children cannot learn to read just by learning phonics, including most children with dyslexia and other specific learning difficulties.
Children with reading difficulties benefit when a range of approaches to teaching reading are used alongside synthetic phonics. This includes other linguistic levels like onset-rime, syllable, and rhythm-based instructional approaches.

Another book I’m reading suggests waiting until 7 is not the right thing if a child is struggling, because they lose out on early intervention - I can’t find the book at the moment but will post if I can.

Other links:

https://www.dyslexia.com/davis-difference/davis-theory/when-phonics-doesnt-work/

And this quote comes from the article underneath:

Is this BDA against SSP?

No. We know that SSP is a highly developed way to teach reading, and a critically important part of the beginning reading programme, but it has its limitations, and it should not be the sole method of teaching reading. We are asking for SSP instruction to be integrated into broader reading schemes, rather than used as the only method.

https://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/news/systematic-synthetic-phonics-ssp-our-expert-panel-discusses-the-reasons-why-we-need-to-make-a-change

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-019-09515-y?fbclid=IwAR1uqRTXozQ5L_9ZIHtFsoMl9zGmbo8S63yum_-WroS9nYVdg7Jg7peDyvs

All evidence that suggests, not that phonics is a bad thing, or that it shouldn’t be taught, but that it is not the only way and too heavy a reliance on it does some children a major disservice.
And if our rates of reading for pleasure are declining so rapidly surely we need to look carefully at how we teach it. I cannot believe that reading for pleasure isn’t impacted by a reading system which makes the children read the same book five times even if they hate it. Surely that’s the fastest way to turn reading into a chore and put them off, however hard you try to counterbalance it with other activities?

Reconsidering the Evidence That Systematic Phonics Is More Effective Than Alternative Methods of Reading Instruction - Educational Psychology Review

There is a widespread consensus in the research community that reading instruction in English should first focus on teaching letter (grapheme) to sound (phoneme) correspondences rather than adopt meaning-based reading approaches such as whole language...

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-019-09515-y?fbclid=IwAR1uqRTXozQ5L_9ZIHtFsoMl9zGmbo8S63yum_-WroS9nYVdg7Jg7peDyvs&error=cookies_not_supported&code=753f48bc-b15b-4ada-8981-f3d5f18fcad0

Marmiteontoastgirlie · 15/04/2025 23:50

AndrogynousElf · 13/04/2025 17:27

There’s actually a podcast about this. In the US they used another method and loads of kids didn’t learn to read. It’s still happening.

open.spotify.com/show/0tcUMXBFMGMe8w79MM5QCI?si=FF5S7sVaQ1aOvZL1T1vT3A

Sold a story is an amazing podcast! I was gripped from start to finish

Original poster

HowManyDucks · 15/04/2025 23:48

Gettingacoffee · 15/04/2025 23:17

My child didn’t get it though.l @0ohLarLar.
7 was too late tbh as he’d developed a learning phobia instead by then. Literally ran from books. Subsequently diagnosed asd, adhd.

I wish I had that time back. I’d do things differently, including keeping him away from the phonics approach to learning to read.
I appreciate he is not typical.

"keep pushing with phonics until it's clear the child is a hopeless case and there must be something wrong with them - ie. it's not our fault they would have failed regardless of the method used" - this rigid thinking is EXACTLY what I am fighting against for the reason you describe. First and foremost, teachers should be encouraging a love for reading, not making children feel as though they are a failure before they've even got started. I'm sorry you had that experience.

OP posts:

Audhdmum · 15/04/2025 23:47

There is a wealth of evidence that synthetic phonics is by far the best, most effective way to teach children to read. It’s as simple as that. Many primary schools that teach phonics well quickly achieve 100% literacy, giving children a huge advantage in their learning and lives.

TheBirdintheCave · 15/04/2025 23:44

Yotoyoto · 13/04/2025 17:22

I have a reception aged young (August) child. I’ve been amazed at phonics. It’s my first experience of it as I had no idea what digraphs etc were, and the school invited us to a parents evening to learn the system. We also watched a classroom lesson and I was so impressed. My DD is now reading whole books (obviously at the reception level) blending in her head, so saying the words outright. It’s been so fast paced and amazing!

Our son is a pre-schooler and they start their phonics officially next term to prepare for reception. We were also invited to a phonics meeting for parents and it was really interesting to learn about how they teach it.

Son has always been interested in books so we started teaching him phonics ourselves a few months ago and it’s just amazing watching him read to us now :) They really do seem to pick it up very quickly!

TempestTost · 15/04/2025 23:42

0ohLarLar · 15/04/2025 23:03

Oh and I forgot!

Some teachers like look and say because the age at which children "get" phonics can vary. It will "click" for some children aged 3 (both mine were blending cvc words at 3) but others it will only "click" at 6 - no matter how much phonics teaching is provided. "Look and say" buys a teacher time to wait for a child to grow into understanding phonics. It gives a child for whom phonics has not clicked a means of engaging with text in the classroom - so that they can read a maths question, understand a task written on the board, follow a science instruction, read a worksheet etc (albeit possibly at the expense of consolidating phonics for a better foundation). It also relieves the frustration of sounding out for years and years because automaticity hasn't developed.

For sure, one of my children didn't read until age 7. Not a surprise as he was also a very late talker and has some significant speech issues. It all sorted itself out by the time he was 8.

However - I also chose to wait a year to enroll him in school because I though it would only cause trouble to have him not ready to read at an age when the school was pushing it.

I think a lot of the pressure to get them reading early isn't the natural things you mention, it's external - there isn't enough understanding that not all kids are ready at the same time, and there is pressure to meet external standards.

I think they need to build a little more flexibility in for timing in that age category.

Original poster

HowManyDucks · 15/04/2025 23:41

0ohLarLar · 15/04/2025 23:04

Gettingcoffee

Its really very rare. Most have got it by the end of y1 - many schools get 100% pass rates on the phonics check.

I'd recommend patience. If they get to 7 and really aren't getting anywhere, a dyslexia check.

Edited

I feel that this is very rigid thinking. Children are not statistics.

OP posts:

Original poster

HowManyDucks · 15/04/2025 23:39

@0ohLarLar I repeatedly mention that I am not against phonics because I don't need people to persuade me of its importance or value. My issue is when phonics are hailed as the superior method and it's teaching is prioritised over other reading skills. Your points do not really engage with mine.

Yes a phonetic language, but a complex one with a deep orthography. We absolutely do read by interpreting context, everything from pronunciation, to emphasis, to meaning. (reCORD or REcord, the heteronyms : read, tear, wind etc.)

Interested to see your source for this

It works the other way. Phonics hides poor comprehension - they can read the words fluently but do not grasp the intended meaning of the text

4.the question is what is the balance and are schools under to much pressure to nail phonics that the neglect these other important areas

Not sure how this is relevant. I never said that reading was about remembering words?

We are in agreement that spelling comes from reading a lot. Relying on phonics creates confusion when it comes to spelling, though I accept your point that there are ways to mitigate this

look say books focus on the 300 most common words. Level 8-12 goes up to 2000 words. I like how they use full and dramatically correct sentences from the start in relateable scenarios

This is a good point. I think look say is a great for early reader eg. Before reception

OP posts:

TempestTost · 15/04/2025 23:37

babybythesea · 15/04/2025 12:54

My other concern is that while children may be able to decode more effectively, our reading for pleasure rates are dropping off a cliff.
https://literacytrust.org.uk/reading-for-pleasure/#:~:text=Our%202024%20research%20report%2C%20taken,in%20the%20last%20year%20alone.

“Our 2024 research report, taken from the results of our annual literacy surveyof over 76,000 UK children and young people, records the worst levels in nearly 20 years.
Children and young people’s enjoyment of reading is at crisis point, falling drastically in the last year alone.”

It’s no good having amazing decoders if they actually don’t read. I think phonics schemes like our current one we use at school are partly to blame.

Read the books multiple times, even if you found it boring the first time round.
Read the books you are told to read in a set order with no choice.
Reading is a list of rules to be memorised.

You can have a ‘reading for pleasure’ book to take home but we need you to read this one to mum or dad, and if they’ve only got time or inclination to read one book with you it won’t be the fun one…

Phonics is definitely a key part of it but I’ll say it again, there need to be other strategies for the kids who don’t get it and that’s where we are failing with a total reliance on phonics.

That's happening to in places that don't use phonics based teaching. I think it has very little to do with teaching methods as such. More to do with kids spending 5 hours a day on devices so they are never in need of something else to do.

TempestTost · 15/04/2025 23:34

HowManyDucks · 15/04/2025 07:20

This is the main problem I see with phonics. Reading and writing is about comprehension. Being able to read out loud is one reading skill. Guessing words from the context is a step towards inferring the meaning of unknown words from context.
Again, there is nothing wrong with phonics. I think it's a useful reading skill but not the only reading skill.

Show quote history

You need to be able to read before you can comprehend what you read. For some children these things come close together, for others you need to work at them longer, or even separately. If a child has learned to decide but not comprehend, there are a number of possible problems, but working on them is the answer. Sometimes they just aren't really reading well enough yet, they need more practice. (Which IMO is one of the main problems now in teaching reading, children don't spend enough time reading rich texts.)

Similarly, most children can understand texts that are much more complicated than they can read, and can compose texts at a much higher level than they can write. So at school they should continue to be ready to, and should be doing oral composition, at the same time they are working on things like reading, spelling, and handwriting.

TempestTost · 15/04/2025 23:22

HowManyDucks · 13/04/2025 23:46

I also wonder how much actual comprehension is going on during the early reader stage when the effort is being made to decode individual words rather than appreciate the wider context.

I think phonics maybe a better approach for children who have not been read to a much with their parent or carer. For children that have seen words, and heard them in context etc. it I probably easier (and more meaningful) to learn those familiar words that keep cropping up. The advantage of the look say approach is that it teaches 70% of our everyday language, opening up a greater variety of texts from a younger age.
Phonics naturally has a place, but i can't see why it should be the only method.
Context is so important when reading, even down to emphasise. Eg. We are going to reCORD "ree-cord" a REcord "reh-cord" at the studio.

When you use a phonics method children naturally also memorize high frequency words, because they are just seeing them a lot. Most kids will also naturally use clues like pictures and context.

But in my experience, kids who are taught to rely on those methods have two possible outcomes. One is they are naturally able to intuit the phonics rules, and they go on to be good readers.

But the other is they don't intuit those rules and develop bad habits, and it's very difficult to correct them once established. Guessing being the number one problem. They often guess incorrectly of course, and that means they find it all frustrating.