Phonics Test

[SnowieBear]

DS (6) came back yesterday from school with a slip of paper saying that after being tested against the government's phonic test, he had not reached the standard required and will be receiving additional support with his reading.

DS is a rather good reader and has progressed all the way to stage 9 ORT since the start of Y1. However, I am not surprised he didn't do well at the test, as he finds it difficult to decode words he cannot adscribe meaning to. In general, that's not a problem as he is a very wordy kid, but it was always going to be the spanner in the works for the phonics test.

Am I right to be utterly unconcerned about it? (Well, as utterly unconcerned as someone can be that then goes on to post under the primary education thread...).

Thank you. mrz

No, I don't think his bilingualism played a part. His dominant language is English, I haven't attempted to consistently get him to read Spanish as I don't want to confuse him, I've just tried him every so often with a few words to reassure him it's easier than English (it's written as it sounds, i.e. alphabetical letter sounds, with very few exceptions).

Seeker 'Nobody has yet told me in a way that makes sense why anyone could possibly object to a simple diagnostic tool that finds out cheaply and effectively whether or not a child has grasped the basic building blocks of literacy. It just seems like a no brainer to me!'.

Because, arguably, it can be seen as a marketing tool - to sell books and tat, and books full of tat and training in what to do with the books and tat.

Ultimately, will the 'phonics check' improve children's reading and writing, or is it an extremely costly (in time and money) distraction?

Snowiebear - it is possible to get to this point and be a good reader but still not clear on phonics However, come the end of Y2 and into Y3 upwards it becomes far more noticeable. Also phonics is also about spelling, not just reading - and again this will become more apparent as time goes on. I know this can definitely be the case. My own DD is/was an excellent reader and that masked lots of underlying issues which I didn't pick up on at home and it took school a while too. Luckily it was picked up on but it has since taken a lot of hard work on DD's part to go back and really learn those phonic sounds well. She's in Y5 now and we are still continuing with the additional support on some of the more complex sounds - her reading is still really really good, but the phonics has made a massive difference to how she tackles new words (I think before she was unsure, asked and memorised rather than sounding out) and how they are then retained, and even more so in her written work. Even bright children who can read need the structure of phonics for reading AND writing imo.

zebedeee do you mean like Biff Chip and Kipper ?

zeb - anything can be an excuse to sell books.

most books for that age are educational - it won't just be pages upon pages of made-up words to decode, but a selection of phonics aimed at that age that will be decodable, and how to decode it.

Snowie - you need to know what words he struggled on.
maybe you have a specific amount of time to decode each word, and if you don't, they move onto the next one?

or maybe he took too long over each word that he couldn't complete the test?

or maybe he did try to read the words in context and as there wasn't one, he struggled?
(maybe he didn't see the alien symbol?)

There wasn't a time limit and the child could have as many attempts as they needed but the teacher had to accept the final answer.
There isn't a context because there were four large words one under the other list form on a page.

ah.

'it can be seen as a marketing tool - to sell books and tat, and books full of tat and training in what to do with the books and tat.'

Oh come on Zebedee!
Is that the best you can come up with?!
That people might make some dosh out of it.
Clutching at straws rather.

It's the exact opposite-reading stripped bare, no hiding behing glossy books or quirky finger puppets or associated whistles and bells activities.
Can the kid actually read?
That's all that is being asked and measured.

or maybe he did try to read the words in context and as there wasn't one, he struggled?

If a child cannot read words both in and out of context they are less likely to become skilled readers. Ability to read single words is not the step after reading for meaning, it is the step before it.

An inability to read words out of context should be a cause for concern, not congratulation 'because they read for meaning'.

That your dc could 'read for meaning' would be no consolation on a day in the future when they ignore a 'stop' sign (because they don't 'do' single word reading) and drive into the path of an incoming car.

Well said Maizie.

'Can the kid actually read?
That's all that is being asked and measured.'

Moondog, it was billed as a phonics check not a reading check. However, there were twenty words to 'read' and twenty 'pseudo words' to 'decode'. Its design and purpose was confused.

MaizieD, words are generally written within a context. In fact I'm hard pressed to think of an example, except at school in contrived instances, when words are encountered without context. The 'stop' sign would be attached to a red warning triangle, or within a red hexagon or written on the road at a junction. Let's hope that a child in the future who has been trained to ignore context, doesn't drive into the path of an oncoming car when they fail to stop because it says 'top' after the s has been covered by a muddy puddle.

Let's hope that a child in the future who has been trained to ignore context

Who are these children?

Children are not trained to ignore context - they are trained to read with or without it, and not to use it as a crutch to help guess a word, instead of reading it.

Do you teach reading, zebedeee?

"Ultimately, will the 'phonics check' improve children's reading and writing, or is it an extremely costly (in time and money) distraction?"

No of course the ccheck itself won't improve fading! But it will identify those children who, for whatever reason, have missed out on an important stage so they can go back and fill in the gap. And I don't see why it would be costly in time or money.

I repeat, the only people who seem to be objecting are the mothers of "advanced" readers who are worried that their child will turn out not to be quite as advanced as they thought!

I come across a great many children in my work in many different settings.
It is chilling to watch so many of them 'reading' and to see that the 'reading' is nothing more than memorising a text or guessing from context.

I find it astounding that many trained teachers can't see what is going on right in front of their noses, but they tell me time and time again that they were not taught the basics of reading.

"I find it astounding that many trained teachers can't see what is going on right in front of their noses, but they tell me time and time again that they were not taught the basics of reading."
Well of course, teachers are not necessarily 'trained', nevertheless it is not always clear what is going on in a child's head, especially if it looks like reading and sounds like reading. The phonics check is the game changer, thank you MichaelGove.

And sometimes it looks like reading and it sounds like reading then you turn two pages instead of one and discover they are reciting the page before and haven't a clue where to begin reading the page they have in front of them... So I would suggest there is a flaw in your theory.

All our "good" readers passed with maximum scores because not only can they read fluently with understandingthey have the skills to tackle new words when they meet them without resorting toguesswork.

I think people are opposed to it because they perceive it as some sort of "pooh trap for heffalumps"- as somehow Not Fair. "little Tarquin is reading Harry Potter- how dare you suggest he is not practically perfect in every way?"

I can understand a poorly equipped teacher freaking a bit but a parent??

I've in the past had to stop teachers giving my children books to bring home because there is a mismatch between their decoding skills and comprehension.
Being an s/lt, it is easy for me to assess this and an s/lt would be invaluable in a class to untangle what is gonig on with the excellent decoderd but poor comprehenders.

From reading with lots of children as a volunteer, I would say that the weakest readers I have read with are most definitely those who are still guessing lots of words from the context by the time they are in Key Stage 2. The more complicated the books, the more words they end up guessing inaccurately, so it becomes more and more noticeable. If an adult did that, and regularly misread words as a result, I would think they were an atrociously bad reader.

Besides which, if you aren't looking at the words properly, but just guessing from context, then how are you ever going to learn to read them or spell them properly - you've never actually read them, just assumed their existence...

Children are being trained to ignore context if they are being taught to read nonsense words by people generating lists of nonsense words over on TES

Do you want me to be proud now that my daughter knows how to read bon spoot mal quak bickie

but she can't read and write her own name and address?

learnandsay, I thought your DD could read? Or are you just being sarcastic about not reading her name?