DD failed her phonics screening - any advice?

[formerdiva]

I know there's another big thread on the screening, but it mostly seems to be debate about whether the test is worthwhile or not. I just wanted a bit of advice about what my strategy should be? To give some context:

I trust the school - the teaching staff seem good, and the other children don't seem to have an issue
They've told me that DD is immature (she's an August baby, but to be fair her friends who are summer babies don't seem to have issues)
She doesn't concentrate or focus very well at all
We do her homework every day and read to/with her every day

I feel really anxious for her. Any advice about what our next steps should be?

I was going to go with a

"She still struggles with b/d etc, but I can't tell if they're getting less or not. Certainly as her reading gets more fluent they stand out more."

Most poor readers get muddled like this. Other very common errors include what/that. when/then, I/A, a/the and so on. Somewhere along the line they never really learnt thoroughly enough and so there is constantly a choice to be made. Some programmes introduce the correspondences together, whilst others keep them far apart in the instruction so that one becomes embedded before the similar looking one is introduced.
I've had students with other muddles of similar pairs - like on/off, yesterday/today.

I have a few similar pair errors I still make at the age of 60, unless I make a concerted effort.

But if you adopt a precision teaching method for learning /b/ and /d/ you can count corrects against errors in timed practice and then you and the student will know if learning is taking place. (see/say for reading and hear/write or see/write for writing)

"however we do ever finish all these vision exercises and her reversals disappear then I'll know it was a vision problem"

• not really, unless you stop doing any further reading practice. No doubt you are continuing to do reading practice so you would not know for sure which it was.

The vision therapy could make reading less stressful, making more sustained reading possible, in which case it would be two contributing factors, impossible to tease out.

"However the research I'm currently reading seems to indicate that b/d reversals is a phonological issue."

Then that research is not up to date. Same for the pseudo words.

mrz - hmmmm. I don't think I'm going to get on with Shaywitz :)

You can't separate cause or effect from images of people's brains......

maleuca - I know you can never prove anything to anyone.

Which is why I said I'll know.

After 5 years of practising reading, the odds that the 6th year will suddenly be the magic year when it all comes together seems very slim.

The odds that it was the 'something different' (ie vision exercises) that we were doing being the magic ingredient are far higher.

But you're absolute right, it won't be scientific enough to be considered proof.

The Literate Brain: The Relationship between Spelling and Reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 23:5, 1180-1197
Online publication date: 1-May-2011.

A test of the role of the medial temporal lobe in single-word decoding. NeuroImage 54:2, 1455-1464
Online publication date: 15-Jan-2011.

But if you adopt a precision teaching method for learning /b/ and /d/ you can count corrects against errors in timed practice and then you and the student will know if learning is taking place.

Unfortunately, you will also know if learning isn't taking place, which becomes very disenheartening for both me and DD.

Which is why we stopped doing precision teaching.

As teachers keep on saying 'weighing a pig doesn't make it fatter', so I try not to do too testing of DD, cause all it does is proves beyond doubt how bad she is.

"Obviously novices make more errors than more experienced readers. More experienced readers tend to be older, but it is the learning, not the aging that is the key factor. You're confusing correlation with causation."

Yes, I agree with malaleuca. Children stop reversing b/d, p/q etc because, with practice, their brain learns to switch off the mirror mechanism when they read print. Learning to write (penmanship) helps greatly with this and this is one area where I think that the French approach to literacy is superior to the English approach. French children spend much of grande section (Y1) drilling letters before they really start to learn phonics (in CP/Y2). It all seems to come together very quickly - most DCs are reading by Christmas of Y2 and also taking dictation in lovely cursive handwriting (with an inkpen).

I think you might find that many children in the UK are taught handwriting from reception and can write independently with beautiful cursive handwriting with a pen too.

I'm not sure, mrz. There are many, many schools that don't concentrate on penmanship, how to hold pen/pencil, writing style.

I think that you and your school are still the exception. This is perhaps one reason why if you pay an arm and a leg and go private you're much more likely to get the sort of attention to detail that Bonsoir observes in French schools.

DS failed the test but is reading above what is expected at his age. I think the tests are fundamentally flawed. If she is progressing in reading I would just encourage her, buy books for home that she is interested in, read with her lots, read signs etc when you are out and about.

I don't think we are an exception there are many, many schools that do teach handwriting (look at the threads on MN from parents complain their child is expected to do cursive writing)

obviously with the new KS2 test the others will have to improve

We actually had a teacher from a school in Paris visit before Easter he visited our school and the local secondary and thought our system better than at home.

I don't in a general way find the French approach to literacy superior to the English approach. When you break down the specifics, however, I do think that the rigorous drilling of handwriting is a good thing.

I go to England very regularly and often visit bookshops where I am at the terrible handwriting of the children from local schools who have written book reviews on postcards which are then displayed on the walls of the shops - in a highly privileged part of the SE.

I did have some of my (reception) class's writing on my profile but it seems to have vanished

And I am sure it was beautiful, mrz.

My dd2 got every one right on the test but she doesn't know that. We have been using Mr Thorne teaches phonics for the last year or so to support her learning at school and her school teaches phonics with split Y1 and Y2 groups. Dd2 is in the 2nd of 5 groups and is working well. I did blush slightly when we were in sainsbury's and she told me that wine was a split digraph. I think she'd used it in an example at school as well.

better than a spilt digraph

As an adult, who has read an awful lot, I can think of quite a few times when I have been embarrassed by words which I have read phonetically and therefore pronounced in the same way-incorrectly.

English is not an entirely phonetic language and although I agree that it is immensely important in teaching children to read, it cannot form the whole solution as they get older.

I have a child (Yr2) who is given brown books at school, but reads Harry Potter at home and can recount the story and discuss the plot. She also occasionally reads a word incorrectly. It doesn't detract from her comprehension.

Conversely, I have heard children read at school who can read very difficult words precisely, but have no comprehension at all of what they are reading.

Surely this test is one of 'decoding', which can be, however you look at it, only one aspect of reading?

I agree.

"Surely this test is one of 'decoding', which can be, however you look at it, only one aspect of reading?"

Correct. And you'll find that's exactly what it is billed as. Only those who want to knock the test try to criticise it for not being something it was never meant to be!

Reading in the wider sense is tested in SATS. This is a phonics test which shows whether a child can decode to a satisfactory level, as this is a vital early skill which lays the foundations of becoming a truly good reader.

NiceViper- Well in that case, it doesn't seem worth arguing about. If you have a child who can clearly read, recount, comprehend and discuss, why should it matter if they can read 'pib'? Perhaps they have moved beyond that?

That, is in no way to 'mock the test'.

If they are secure in deciding, they won't "forget" how to do it. It's much more likely that they cannot decode well in the first place. It's an essential building block skill, which if lacking (as pointed out far more eloquently by other posters) will limit their reading ability. Fluent automaticity in decoding is an important skill, the very basis of reading.

And this test means, for the first time, that all children in every state school are checked to the same standard, and all those whose skills are shown to be below expectation should receive additional support whilst still in KS1.

As I said earlier in the thread, I learnt by a 'look and say' method, but will 'decode' when I come across a new word. My decoding, however, differs from that of a very early reader.

As reading skills develop, in addition to using phonics, 'decoding' skills expand to include knowledge of root words, understanding of suffixes and prefixes, some idea of etymology, Greek and Latin derivations, patterns, rhymes, etc, all which help us 'read' unknown words. With my enhanced knowledge, as well as the context of the word, I may even be able to have a pretty good guess as to what it means.

I believe that phonics is indeed an important part of early reading, but it can't be the be all and end all, otherwise we'd never know what these perfectly read words meant when they were strung together in a sentence!