Is 'synthetic phonics' a different way of teaching phonics from other phonic schemes?

[slotnicki]

I've read a couple of articles over the past few weeks about an apparently very successful experiment in Scotland where children were taught to read using 'synthetic phonics'.

As these were not detailed articles, I am unclear as to whether synthetic phonics actaully differs in some way from schemes like Jolly Phonics or whether reading in Scotalnd is usually taught using a system that differs from phonics.

I'd be really interested in hearing from the 'phonics experts' on this.

TIA

Catflap

I'm not trying to say phonics doesn;t work - I know it does. But I also think it's a bit misleading to say that it's a sure-fire way of getting any child to read in a matter of weeks. You yourself just said that children do need to be able to hear words. I understand that part of the scheme is developing this ability - but this can takes months and until this has developed there's no point even teaching letter recognition let alone how to make words.

I would dispute that children can't recognise whole words - most people I know who have non-reading children still know their children can recognise their names, and also usually their siblings' names and other very common words such as 'mummy' and 'daddy' in whatever context they appear (I don't regard recognising the Tesco or McDonalds logos as reading btw).

Don't get me wrong I like phonics, but I also like children reading/looking at books and looking at whole words too. And apart from my own children I come from a family of teachers (I rebelled!) who have had 50+ years of teaching children to read, not just 5 classes.

Well, it's not misleading, I'm afraid; it's fact.

And teachers ahve always taught children to read - that's how generations of adults can do it, so I'm not disputing your family's range of experiences. However, 25% of chldren have always failed and in teh 5 classes I have taught, none have. Sometimes quality is better than quantity.

I also never actually said children can't recognise whole words - they very frequently do; as you said, their names and those of their family. Many children with a strong visual memory do learn to read like this first - they make sense of the phonics side of it almost incidentally as they go along.

I also value looking at/sharing books - and of course whole words has its place, as I said in my last post... but for all children to succeed, research and current prcitce shows that it really is sensible - and best practice - to make use of and develop children's phonological awareness matching and blending letters and working up to the whole word.

Just to say that I think synthetic phonics is tremendous! My DS1 goes to the same school as doddle's, where they do the Ruth Miskin Literacy scheme. He brought home a Level 11 book (an Oxford Reading Tree one) last week and much to my surprise he could read it pretty well. He's five and a half.

Catflap

I'm not disagreeing with you - I'm just saying that I think it is misleading to say that any child who does this will be able to read in w week as you said:
'This means, at the end of the first week, children can read adn write the words is, it, in, at, an, as, sat, sit, sap, sip, sin, tap, tan, tip, tin, pit, pat, pin, pan, nip, nap, snip, snap, ant, ants, taps, tins, pits, pins, pans.'.

My point is that this could only happen when the child is ready to hear words and blend the sounds. There is no way on this earth that my ds, aged just 4, would be able to do this - even if you spent a week doing it one-to-one with him. He is just not yet able to hear the sounds yet. Once a child has developed this far then yes great.

I'm glad that your classes have all left you able to read. My mother and her sister between them only ever had three children who left their classes unable to read - and all three had special needs. They used a mixture of phonics and word recognition. Betweeen them they had a lot more than 5 classes!

You seem well versed on the research, so you must recognise that 5 classes, is a very small sample, especially when your children's ability to read before they started with you isn;t mentioned. Presumably you have never either had a child with dyslexia who cannot even recognise the letter shapes?

Catflap I'm honestly not having a go but you write such long and convincing posts that you're giving the impression of beng an authority on how children read and I just feel that it's necessary to put a slightly different view across - especialy when your experience is so limited and we know noting about the ability or motivation of your children.

DS2 is still pretty young, and I really only started with the intention of teaching him the letter sounds - I wasn't going to go as far as digraphs etc. For a few weeks, though he could hear initial sounds, he couldn't blend, and then suddenly 3 weeks ago he just could - and now he can blend words like "fluff", "stamp", "frock" etc. He already seems to be recognising the initial consonant blends such as "st" and "sl" and will sound them as one item when he sees them now. So of course this is not a representative sample at all (!), but I can see how he will be able to work out unfamiliar words much more easily than his brother could at the same stage of reading (ie a couple of months in). I find it all fascinating, coz I am a voracious reader myself and can't remember how I learnt to read!

Hi titchy - no, i'm not sure we are disagreeing in the most part; just a few points to clarify. I always like a good discussion, though!

I realise 5 classes is a ludicrously small sample. I have taught more classes - just only 5 SP. (I have also tutored.) I mentioned it just to cite some personal experience rather than just spouting stuff I'd read. However, mush as it is great to read of successful stories - such as all these here on this thread - it is the countless success stories on classes throughout the years and up and down the country which are the most telling. Those that have been used in the studies which have formed the research to show how much more successful SP is. Teachers have been believing for decades they have been successfully teaching chidlren to read - but the illiteracy rates show that something has gone wrong somewhere.

The main point you have issue with

• being able to read all thsoe words after a week - probably does need some clarifying. I would be incredibly naive if I was believing that all chidlren could read all these words after 1 week of being exposed to JP. Of course they can't. What I meant in my original post was that by using letters and sounds such as these and focussing on phonological awareness at the same time you are equipping children with the knowledge and skills to be able to read that list of words wwhich is possible from the letters and sounds introduced so far. Many will be able to read the whole list - most will manage most; some, of course, will take longer. Although the most effective teachiing method out there, children still progress at a variety of rates.

Now, the dyslexia issue is a whole new discussion!
There is much research to claim that dyslexia is just a product of mis-teaching. It has been shown that dyslexia only exists in children learning English and it is because our language is that much more complicated than others and therefore an effective method of teaching has yet to be consistent. I have tutored a dyslexic child and a SP appraoch worked for him. I also know of many other tutors who use SP methods in the remedial sense to support children with dyslexic issues and they find that reading is a skill that can be managed by all. But, as I said, a whole new - huge! - discussion.

I don't claim to be an authority on the subject at all - but I do know more than most just because the information is not offered freely to teachers and I have read fairly widely on it myself. I have learnt an awful lot of stuff that teachers are just not trained in at uni and I have trained people myself. It's just so shocking that the Governemtn continues to promote methods which have been proved to be less effective - even OFSTED recognise this - that I just like to try and get the message out there a bit more widely - particularly in light of all the latest media attention.

I'm sure you're not having a go at me - and like I said, I'm always happy for some healthy discussion!

Hi Catan - I'm sorry I've been delayed in responding to you; i write this hoping you are still watching this thread!

I'm not totally familiar with the Ruth Miskin scheme personally - but as a synthetic phonics scheme, I am surprised you are focussing on initial souNDs only as SP is an 'all-through-the-word philosophy, so you work on discriminating and blending sounds all through a word, not just in a specific place.

This may be your trouble - some children find the first sound particulalry hard to hear. You may be waiting for them to achieve this before moving on, whereas they could progress quite a way if taught to work with the sounds in a whole word.

I personally use Jolly Phonics as I love the picture references to the sounds. I like each phoneme having a picture and action that reminds the children of the sound itself without them having to relate it to something that begins with it. I do a lot of phonological awareness work in a couple of weeks before introducing letters so I am sure children can identify sounds all through a word - then all they have to do is rememebr which letter goes with which sound.

After initial introduction and reinforcement, usually just lots of daily practice with sound/letter correspondence and blending in words is all that's needed - some chldren will take longer.

HTH

Hi Catan - I'm relaly surprised RM seems to follow a 'traditional' phoics approach. I have seen this fail so many children in the past.

I am so sad that JP has been 'banned' in your school! Whyever would that be??!! I know some reasons why it is disliked - but all the evidence and research points to it being so, so successful. Can you incorporate some of its philosophies surreptitiously?!

I wonder what legitimate reasons your SMT could give for it being banned???