What do you think of the Education White Paper?

[Shamster]

Our head went through the key points at last nights staff meeting and the effect was pretty depressing. Sounds stupid but two of us almost started crying! Just wondered if anyone has read it for themselves, rather than picking up whichever bits each paper decides to highlight according to their leanings. If you have; what do you think?

Feenie - the teacher does mean reading scheme books, but that means that DD is not allowed to read through books at her own pace as 'sh', 'th' etc are introduced almost immediately in ORT and DD has finished the introductory ones. Most children in the class are given a week to learn one word ('and' say) and this is boring some of them rigid. (Said teacher then contradicts herself by suggesting that we can find our own books for DD to read.)

You are clearly dubious of what Shamster has to say, but let me tell you that I'm seeing some very poor teaching technique (from more than one teacher).

Exactly greattimesahead. SEN children quite often do not get on with Phonics. Also some fluent readers who have been exposed to lots of books at home actually slow down when they start phonics as they start to break down every word, even the ones they know or can guess through context. I am not aginst them as such, but believe in a wide variety of strategies to suit a wide variety of learning styles.

I quite agree about ASD (or other SEN) and phonics. I suspect DD is quite a visual learner. I'l be all for phonics if the children were learning Czech or Russian or some other phonetically written language, but the exceptions appear immediately in English.

Yes, English isn't exactly the most phonetic language is it?

'Quiet often, some children simply don't get phonics and need another way in.'

Er..what way in would that be?

I'd worry if my kids were in your class. For a start, you obviously have no idea what p[honetic means and that's about the most basic concept of all.

'I do know what I'm talking about and am going off experience. '

Let's see...your 'experience' versus the evidence base.

Who's going with what?

Ok. I'm not sure what to make of that one. There are many ways into reading: picture clues, word length, word shape, rhyming text, onset and rime. Phonemes play a part yes, but just a part. What I meant to say, and I'm sorry if I wasn't clear, is that English is not a phonetically regular language. Does that please you more? That is what I specifically meant to write. But hey, what do I know. I'm only a teacher and SENCo. Obviously a crap one in your opinion but hey ho.

Moondog, personal experience is all I can go off. When papers are published based on 'evidence' they tend to decide what they want to prove and then find a way of proving it. For every evidence based paper, there will be another one that disagrees. I tend to believe what I see with my own eyes. I'm not suer how this thread ended up being just about synthetic phonics. That isn't the main point of the paper.

Yes it is, actually, once the phonetic,code is learned. Lots,of Sen children struggle with reading full stop - you can't place the blame on phonics alone. There are only two strategies, really - whole word and phonics. Whole word - sight reading - works for lots of children, but phonics works for most children. Mixed methods invariably confuse children who struggle.
What scheme is your dd reading, chaotica? Most schemes need following sequentially (prefer a mixed variety I'd phonic based schemes myself) but none preclude reading other non-scheme books.

'Phonemes play a part yes, but just a part.'

What's the other 'part' then in your opinion?

The statement is utterly ridiculous. It's a given that one has to have something to read about.

Phonetically regular.
Well, that's an improvement on what you said last time.

I read this today.
I think she's talking about peopel like you.
Here.

Re: permanent exclusion. I have read the White Paper in full, and work in a related area. As far as I can understand, there will be a pilot to see if making schools financially responsible for excluded pupils works. Otherwise, and nationwide, the Ind Appeal Panel could direct a financial contribution to education otherwise. The most worrying thing for me is that the Ind Appeal Panel will no longer be able to direct reinstatement.

I am concerned that the use of force is to be revisited, with guidance issued.

Some of it seemed quite good - I approve of teachers only being funded if they have a 2:2 or higher for example.

'Moondog, personal experience is all I can go off. When papers are published based on 'evidence' they tend to decide what they want to prove and then find a way of proving it. For every evidence based paper, there will be another one that disagrees. I tend to believe what I see with my own eyes. I'm not suer how this thread ended up being just about synthetic phonics. That isn't the main point of the paper.'

Jesus Christ.
It's frightening to think people like you are entrusted with something as important as teaching kids to read, it really is.

Oh my lord. I'm off to the shops. I shall return to see who else has called me ridiculous. Grumpy pants; I agree that there are some good parts. But to me more bad than good. Thanks for posting about the overall paper and not just the phonics argument.

I would tend to agree, moondog, but wasn't going to be quite so rude.

Hmmm - 'other' methods you cite, Shamster - picture clues - that's guessing, Shamster - I am gobsmacked a SENCO is advocating this as a serious strategy. Word length - guessing. Word shape - are you serious? Rhyming text - same sound patterns? That's phonics, dear. Onset and rime - a strategy cucked out ages ago because everyone realised it was crap.

chucked

'Some are simply immature and only some have a very obvious diffculty that your guts tell you will be a long lasting isssue. By the time children get to Year 3, quite often they are fine and if not, it will have been highlighted earlier by the teacher and hopefully, interventions will be put in place.'

So, in your school does it all work on your 'gut feeling' and the assumption that 'hopefully' something will be done if your 'gut' isn't as accurate as you would like it to be?

Please tell me the Sham indicates you are joking

No prob, but can see it all phonics now. Will bow out - was quite interested in whole thing, but can see informed phonics discussion taking place (not something I am qualified to join in with)

I haven't read the paper yet (off on ML at the moment, have it downloaded to read through) but I just wanted to say Shamster as a Reception teacher myself, that what you are saying makes a lot of sense even if it is being picked apart here.

Any Early Years teacher who does daily guided reading sessions will know of course that children use a wide range of strategies to begin reading including using picture clues- that's not just 'guessing' Feenie, that's helping children recognise the shape of word/arrangement of letters and connect it to something (a picture) they recognise. Many will remember the shape/arrangement of letters connected with that word. Other strategies Shamster has cited are used all the time to help children learn to read.

It's not an exact science because of course (as Shamster says) English is not a phonetically regular language. I do teach children to read primarily using Letters and Sounds phonics- and agree that most begin to read using this method.

However, I too have seen teachers follow phonics packages to the letter and if anything it has prevented children from progressing because they 'must' be learning these key words one week and/or these sounds the next. Parents become utterly confused.

A lot of good teachers follow their gut when considering how to support their pupils with progression. God knows we have enough tests/ objectives to cross off/photographic evidence/profile books/written observations to provide to show that we know what we're talking about. And that's just for the 4 and 5 year olds. I suspect it will all change anyway. I can't wait to work out my exit strategy.

Using picture clues is guessing, and does a child absolutely no favours whatsoever.

English is a phonetically regular language - it's really worrying that two Reception teachers on this thread insist it isn't.

as an "any Early Years teacher" I have to say children only use picture clues and guessing if someone teaches/encourages them to so guess I don't know what you both know.
One good thing about the white paper is that those teachers following L&S to the letter will know what they are doing in future instead of spending half of the reception year on phase 1

Really? I would expect most children to be at the end of Phase 3 at the end of Reception- I am in inner city London school.

I would expect most children to be at the end of Phase 4 by the end of reception if teachers are following L&S

no wonder they are having to guess

Feenie, I really don't know how to repond to somebody who claims that English is a phonetically regular language . Mrz, we do use Letters and Sounds and do guided reading aswell as individual reading. I'm getting tired of this now. Thank you Sandytoes. I agree with you. Perhaps some people like to spend their evenings throwing insults. No, the Sham is not a joke. It's a genuine nickname. If anyone has anything to say about the paper as a whole, I'd be interested.