DS1 failed the Year 1 Phonics test. Is he alone?

[AnnieMated]

Shocked and upset actually. Trying my hardest not to be, but he's a pretty good reader and is finishing ORT level 6 and reading fluently with no trouble.

He got 28 out of 40 and the pass mark is 40.

What I most concerned about is that the school didn't even inform parents their children were going to be tested, we just got a bland, round-robin letter today in their book bags with the results.

Anyone like to reassure me? Don't want to ask the other mums from the school but will have a chat with the teachers tomorrow if I can...

Is that you professional opinion having administered the test to a class of children masha?

OP - my DD2 only just passed with 33. Personally, I've decided to take this test with a pinch of salt. DD2 is an excellent, expressive and enthusiastic reader (has been reading 'chapter' books for a year, Roald Dahl etc). I can see the point of phonics and the point of assessing to check understanding. But don't see the sense of nonsense words or why phonics assessment has to be done as a TEST and all the surrounding hoo-ha. DD2 learnt to read fairly naturally and easily in a very similiar way to my DD1 (11) (and me I think). DD1 has certainly not come 'unstuck' by her low reliance on phonics as some other posters imply, so I'm not unduly concerned about DD2. My concern would be if the school started teaching to this test.

the schools definitely are teaching to the test - ds2 wasn't heard to read once between Easter and Summer, because they were spending the whole time practising nonsense words.

..they were spending the whole time practising nonsense words.

Well, you might just find that this pays didvidends in Y2 if the children are confident with decoding any unknown letter string (word) they encounter. And they won't have to practise decoding any more pseudo words (except the ones they come across in the normal course of their reading) so they can concentrate on improving their text reading skills.

If schools teach decoding they don't need to practise for the test

"his own patent look and say method - eg 'Mummy what does that say?' 'Well, let's sound it out c-a-t, cat' 'ok"

This is an exact description of phonics, not look and say!

DSs school most definitely did not teach for the test, they have used nonsense words as part of their teaching methods, they did this when DS was in Y1, not sure when it was introduced but certainly way before the phonics test was even announced I'm sure.

Mumtutu surely your DDs have learnt some phonics at school so I am guessing they still use some phonics knowledge. You can't be certain they have just learnt every single words that exists by memory?! I am in my 30's and we were taught basic phonics (letter sounds as opposed to letter names, I am not sure how indepth it was compared to now) which is how I knew how to teach my DS before school.

If schools teach decoding they don't need to practise for the test

Just looking for a silver lining, mrz

and I'm saying that after a morning assessing Y2s phonics (including pseudo words)

Well said kesstrel! Warrah, why oh why do people that are anti phonics keep insisting that real literature is denied is a phonics classroom. Of course children should be given reading books that are accessible for them- there is barely any dispute over this hence biff chip and kipper are banded, as are phonics readers. If children want to try other books, like from the library then thats great. The scissors drawer analogy is just bizarre as is the ridiculous notion that anyone teaching phonics is discouraging enjoyment of books.
There is sound reasoning behind 'pushing' phonics. It leads to a 95 percent plus success rate, even with children that don't get the literature rich environment that most of our children have. Mixed methods doesnt lead to children picking the method that suits them - it leads to too many getting an over reliance on the quickest way to 'get meaning' which is guessing as that is the path of least resistance but it leads to an unacceptably high failure rate. it is an irony that in attempting to help more children by offering other methods you actually fail more.

There are a handful of children that really don't get on with phonics (as opposed to just prefering to guess as its easier and predictable texts encourage this) but because phonics is so integral to spelling and writing the children that genuinely struggle with phonics will often have real challenges with literacy. They need phonics to write and spell and because they don't 'get it' they often struggle later.

"There are a handful of children that really don't get on with phonics"
I've encountered 4 including my son ...interestingly all were ASD.

We teach phonics systematically and well. (88% 'pass rate' - 4 form entry school)

We did not teach to the test and we do not teach nonsense words - ever! Instead, when we are looking at specific sounds we will use unusual or more sophisticated words which will be unknown to many children. This enables us to work on decoding skills and widen vocabulary at the same time whilst still making it clear that words carry meaning. So, for the long a sound (split digraph) we might decode words such as migrate, bale or indicate - or similar words that will be unfamiliar to many 5 year olds. I don't see the need for nonsense words when there are such a wealth of real words to choose from.

Our miscues were mostly from pseudo words - the biggest problem being that if they miscued real words eg saying 'doil' instead of 'boil' (not in the test, but you know what I mean) they looked again and self corrected. However, with pseudo words they didn't expect it to make sense and thus didn't look back to double check. They're 5 and 6 I wouldn't expect them all to have the maturity to do so.

I am a big supporter of the teaching of phonics, my job includes supporting the senior leaders in many schools to manage their phonics provision but I don't think we should get hysterical about the screening. You do need to analyse your results and look at individuals to understand why they scored as they did, and look at their foundation stage score for linking letters/sounds to see what progress is being made. Obviously provision must be put in place for children who still lack phonics knowledge and skills but we mustn't lose sight of the fact that the ultimate goal of reading is comprehension. Phonics is a means to an end.

I've met 3 children only - and 2 were ASD.

Interesting, my ASD son just scored a big fat zero on the phonics test

"The complexity of the reading process needs to be appreciated so that an oversimplified view of the matching of sounds is prevented and the need for alternative pathways to meet individual requirements is understood."

Every child still matters. ASD children need as many footholds as they can get when approaching text. I'd advocate starting with phonics then incorporating other strategies to enable readers to check and confirm their attempts (and, naturally, this would apply to writing as well).

EdithWeston ""his own patent look and say method - eg 'Mummy what does that say?' 'Well, let's sound it out c-a-t, cat' 'ok"

This is an exact description of phonics, not look and say!"

You misunderstand me - he would ask what a word was, I would sound it out, as described above (because he was supposed to be learning phonics), he would look at the word, clock that it was 'cat' and learn it that way. He just couldn't blend, but if told a word once, he knew it forever. Just the way his brain works - he can also tell you all the sporting results from one particular sport for the last 20 years....my brother is the same, it's just the way they're wired up!

Ds1 is entirely NT, he just has the sort of brain that is much more visually orientated, and he just couldn't blend, until, as I said earlier, end of Y2. Achieved L3 at KS1, L5 at KS2, and loves reading. He is the same across the board, he definitely responds to visual cues rather than auditory ones.

Practising nonsense words - no idea if it will pay dividends in Y2, tbh, for ds2 I doubt it, because he is so able with words already, and entirely secure with the phonics anyway, he just wants to read loads of books! But his teacher did admit he was miles ahead of the rest of the class, and I'm not enough of a narcissist to imagine she can tailor the class to suit him! I can see that for children not quite as far on, it could be a useful tool.

I don't see any reason to practise nonsense words for the test if a child is being taught to decode words because whatever their "learning style" phonics is an important skills for both reading and writing.

Talking from a different point of view I am a volunteer adult reading coach. Currently teaching an older lady to read. She is dyslexic and back in her day was totally failed by the school system, there was no phonics teaching then. After 4 sessions, she has gone from not reading anything to now being on sentences, a miracle for her. I am using the phonics with her and she got the hang of them straight away.
Phonics is so important for our children to learn, I hope that no child will ever leave school unable to read. If this screening even just picks up a few children that need a bit of help early on to move forward with their reading then its really worthwhile.

UsedtobeLou - sorry for late reply. Didn't mean to imply that DDs didn't need phonics at all, they do of course. As well as 'look and say', we sort of naturally used simple phonics at home ('c-a-t') - but the phonics they do at school is much more developed, as you say. I just meant to point out that for some children, phonics is not the sole route to becoming a reader and that a relatively low score on this new test was not necessarily indicative of a child's reading ability - now or in the future. We ARE all wired-up differently -surely we should tailor the method to the child, not vice versa. I am also at the idea of texts comprised of only phonetic words for children learning to read. Have I got this right?

Mumtutu -some of the schemes have gorgeous books with really great stories and lovely illustrations too. The children love them! Take a look at these for example .

Of course, as they become more competent other books beyond the reading scheme are introduced. The schemes do seem very useful in ensuring that all phonics sounds are practised, and there are opportunities to spot clearly which ones children need more practise with (one-letter, two-letter, and three-letter etc, so a lot more than just the cat type word in the earliest books. Apologies for my lack of lingo, I'm a mere parent not a teacher ). Even children who like more challenging texts as they become competent often still enjoy these books, and it really doesn't take long to read each one.

And they don't have to repeat vocabulary over and over like a look and say scheme.

mrz - because I would guess that the three she did not get were all made-up words? Strom/Storm sounds like a perfect example - she would have read it as storm almost certainly.

And I know plenty of children who haven't got on with phonics and none of them have ASD. It's the one size fits all philosophy that I hate.

in fact, sorry, what mumtutu just said.
And now I will step away from this thread as phonics threads just wind me up. On the other hand I am always pleased to see others think like me, at one point I thought I was the only person on MN who didn't think phonics were the bees knees and worried that it was because I am getting on in years for a mother of a primary-school age child....

AnnieMated my dds are not in Y1, so not experienced the test personally, but know many good readers have also 'failed' at our school - they tend to be the children who don't like made-up words (eg my friend's little ds, who is simply outraged by 'not real words' at this stage - am sure it won't last!) or the ones who get nervous and panic, or the ones who are tired on that day, etc etc. In other words, useful test for schools to do to check on their phonics teaching - but not necessarily useful in judging individual child's phonics learning! Though of course can throw up issues if patterns are noticed - useful in that way, too.

Hopefully it will become more of a routine, useful one-tool-in-the-tool-box kind of assessment, rather than The Test it appears to be atm.....