UCL & Institute of Education supporting Reading Recovery?

[Alyosha]

Does anyone know why UCL apparently supports RR & trains RR teachers?

www.ucl.ac.uk/international-literacy/reading-recovery

Isn't it pretty well accepted now by most Ed Psychs that RR doesn't actually improve reading in the long term after the NZ & Australia experiences of this programme? It's particularly odd because the ICL (international centre for literacy) claims on its website to be an evidence based organisation that supports phonics!

Can anyone shed any light on this?

My point was supporting your point.

Bojo There is plenty of evidence that many primary schools are not teaching phonics properly. Medicine often doesn't work if you only take half the prescribed course, or if you mix it with other medicines that weaken its effect. Also, some children need much more practice at phonics than others, but they often don't get it.

Also, Reading Recovery is a very expensive, one-to-one intervention. It has never been trialed against a one-to-one similarly intensive phonics intervention, in order to see which is better. One has to ask why the Reading Recovery promoters are not willing to do this.

Even many of those schools who believe they are teaching phonics are teaching multicueing and mixed methods according to their responses to the NFER.

Alyosha We don't have any evidence from the Key Stage 2 SATS, because their format was changed shortly after the first phonics-taught cohort began taking them. There is evidence from the Key Stage 1 SATS, however.

The first cohort to be taught via systematic phonics (or more correctly, who were supposed to be taught that way) started school in 2007, which means the first group taught via phonics took their SATS in 2010. These are the relevant SATS results:

Number of children achieving the expected level of reading comprehension at the end of Year 2

2007-2009 – 84%
2010-2011 – 85%
2012 - 87%
2013 - 89%
2014 - 90%:

Note that this gradual rise began with the cohort who were in reception for the academic year 2007-08, that is, the first year that phonics teaching was introduced.

Number of children with SEN achieving the expected level of reading comprehension at the end of Year 2 (figures are not available for before 2011).

2011 - 52%
2012 - 55%
2013 - 58%
2014 - 60%:

For SEN children, that's a 15% increase in 3 years.

One key point about these results, is that they didn't suddenly jump up in 2010. Instead, the rise was gradual. What that indicates is that more schools, and more teachers, began gradually to get better at, and more committed to, teaching phonics well, over a period of years.

This is what is wrong with the argument used by Bojo above, about phonics failing children. There is plenty of evidence that even very recently too many schools still aren't teaching phonics properly. (Unfortunately, the recent change in the format of SATS means that we no longer have that source of data.)

We've taught Phonics for more than a decade and prior to the changes in KS2 assessment our reading SAT results were in the high 90%s even with the changes our results were significantly above national figures.

Kesstrel - it's a pity the benchmarks are changing, but good to see KS1 is going well so far!

As someone who hopes to have children in the future, what should parents be looking out for in schools?

A PSC of 95% or is that too ambitious? Or is it more about the attitude of the school (i.e. none of this "there are lots of ways of teaching a child to read, we use a holistic approach") I'm particularly concerned that future kids will have a very secure phonics grounding given my own history...

Thank you for starting this thread OP with a question I have asked myself.

The Institute Of Education with it's Reading Recovery leanings pushes its net wide. It trains teachers many of who will go onto teach in London schools, particularly in Camden where the IOE is based and has strong links with local schools.

My child is at school in Camden and I've come up against many of the Whole Language issues noted above. The schools use Reading Recovery ideas for many children, not just the 6 year olds chosen to take part in each year.

I joined the Reading Reform Foundation and there is a rant on their forum by me after having accidentally taken in the Reading Recovery teacher. I was completely shocked by the level of ignorance she expressed; backed up by the Head and Head of EYFS.

However who will take in the IOE? Ofsted don t seem interested in how individual schools teach reading so long as the screening tests and SAT results get better rather than worse. At the school I mentioned the results could only improve as the original screening checks were barely into double figures ( I jest not too much). My DC scored highly in both SATs and the screening check- boosting the schools results- but not down to their teaching. Down to my efforts after much help on here and via the RRF.

I'd be in with taking on the IOE if you want someone to hold your hand OP

Alyosha, I hate to say it but you might not have a chose of the type of reading instruction your child gets. Certainly all my local schools, state to private and public use Mixed Methods. Unless you live near Mrz that is, I think she's North West?!

I'd do it yourself. Get on the Phonics International website and also look at Sounds-write. If you don't have children yet you have time to get up to speed. I learnt along with my Dc during her reception year.

I live in a relatively deprived area of London and a browse of websites indicates that at least 3 near me only mention phonics on their website.

Only one actually gives their actual PSC score (95%!) though.

I think you're almost better off with a kid in an area with a lot of EAL, as schools will have much more of a reason and urgency to teach phonics.

I've been looking at Jolly Phonics but it seems to stop after reception!

Have also looked at Read Write, this seems to be the programme they use round my way...

Look at St George's Battersea a school with excellent phonics instruction (Sounds Write) I'm sure there are others

http://literacyblog.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/phonics-screening-check-results-from.html

Thanks Mrz, hadn't heard of Sounds Write before.

I think you might find living in a deprived area with a high level of EAL is a bit if a red herring. Teachers who "believe" in RR and mixed methods won't sudde my stop using it because its not working. Rather they will "blame" the child or the socioeconomic circumstances. Debbie Hepplewhite talks about this as blaming within child circumstances. I've seen it in my child's school- the children on free school meals who did RR and still can't read are accepted as not being able to read well; the children of the wealthy families who can't read well have dyslexia.

If you live near a school that gets 95% through the phonics check I'd look at their admissions criteria and do whatever to get your future child in there!

Read, Write Inc is I think the Ruth Miskin scheme. She was a headteacher in Towerhamlets, whitechapel I think, who made sure all her children could read. As with a lot of these schemes I've seen some schools not stick to them, so using the books in class but sending home the old ORT for look and guess at home. Or the red words are used as non-decodable words, which isn't what she says.

Unfortunately St George's in Battersea didn't do very well in its SATs last year. I can't remember off hand what they were but I had a conversation with the Head of DC school about it. I was pushing St George's and Sounds- Write but the Head said as their SaTs were a lot worse than our schools it shows phonics doesn't work. Our school did well in their SATS with all their mixed methods teaching.

How can SATs be good if the children haven't been taught using phonics?

Interesting YouMake! Yes the 95% one was actually in special measures only 2 years ago, it shows you how fast a school can be turned around! I think we are just in catchment where we are now - it's not oversubscribed.

Re SATS...who knows why! Maybe one class in your school was very MC so parental involvement overcame poor teaching...or that one St George's class had a blip, who knows.

The most important thing is the wide body of evidence showing that phonics works - a pity that your school's headteacher can't accept the evidence!

Yes, I think you are right. Fit a variety of reasons DCs school has some very middle class year groups. I wonder if there is a lot of tutoring going on, either parental or by tutors.

Our Head doesn't trust the evidence as they have x years of experience and knows what's best... I'm sure that happens often.

It's funny, all sorts of professions are like that, even Doctors.

Doctors in the US still give yearly mammograms to 35-50 year old women despite the evidence showing it doesn't cut death rates at all, and it increases morbidity.

People find it hard to trust things they don't already believe.

Thats interesting Alyosha, it does seem to go against received wisdom but you'd hope doctors were scientifically aware

"Unfortunately St George's in Battersea didn't do very well in its SATs last year." No they only achieved the national average on the new tests rather than their normal 90+%. I felt the test was a vocabulary test which may be a factor

Interesting Mrz, so the test would be easier for children who have a larger vocabulary, the more middle class/wealthy?

Theoretically - on the dashboards-my DC school and St George's have a similar intake. Similar in trerns of free school meals and SEN. As Alyosha said, I think there may be years in each school that squew the results.

I only know St George's by reputation but I'm given to understand they have high levels of EAL pupils (I assume this is true but don't know for certain).

You might find this interesting https://blogs.hertsforlearning.co.uk/2016/07/13/this-years-ks2-reading-test-a-secret-shared-and-some-questions-to-ask/

Great article Mrz - I find that really inspiring. What a great school that sounds!

Hopefully great reading skills + a wider vocabulary will help open up the world of reading to more kids.

Thank you Mrz, interesting article. I like the idea of vocabulary card to hold up if you're not sure of the word.

Vocabulary is a big issue for us (and I imagine many schools) with children arriving in the foundation stage with a vocabulary of a handful of words.