Refusing to put dc on next reading level or even assess

[Blueschool]

Dc in in year 2. Has been on same reading level since September.

My dc may not be good at a lot at school, but reading is dc strong point. Not the top of class but quite advanced. Not just my opinion but her previous teachers and helpers.

Her current level is not a challenge anymore. Mentioned this weeks ago. Given a huge list basically telling me why dc is a crap reader in teachers opinion. Very surprised as one area always was praised on reading.

Took it on chin and we worked hard to resolve the issues like "not enough expression".

Dc reading is just fine. I can not find not fault.

My comment I wrote last week was the "book was not a challenge". Teacher took a whole page up in dd reading record to again tell me how crap dc is.

I felt the comments were utterly unfair and do not reflect reality at all. She also told me I could buy books to read at home! Very unfair assumption dc reads for pleasure all the time and has 100+ at home.

She said IF she wants she will assess her after Christmas she will.

My issues are

• I thought parents and teachers were meant to be in partnership with education. How is this a partnership?

• IF dc is genuinely reading badly at school WHY? Why is there such a difference? Why is her educational environment not making her feel confident and supported to show her real abilty?

• Another parent has told me they have had similar issues as the teacher gets herself stressed. Im sorry, but holding a child back because you are stressed is quite something.

What should I do?

" I couldn't ask the children to do the independent tasks I set without the guided group that sets them up to do them - in terms if having read the text, having already started to think about characters, in terms of simply having set up and explained the task."

So what do the groups do who are still waiting their turn to read the text?

Brycie,

It works on a cycle. So today one group was working on tasks linked to the text (remember, each group will be working on a diufferent one, as they are different levels) they read last Friday, one group on a text they read last Thursday, one group on a text that they read yesterday etc.

I plan the 'most complex, most closely linked to our discussion' tasks on day 1 and 2 after the guided group, other tasks may well require less detailed knowledge.

Simpson,

Our (grand)parent volunteers read with all the children in turn, as their role is to provide additional reading rehearsal and the experience of reading to a variety of audiences.

The TA does specific reading intervention programmes - which mostly include some 1 to 1 reading though not always from books - as part of the individual provision for every SEN child or child with additional needs.

I read with every child in reading lessons, and as discussed above do some 1 to 1 in particular circumstances.

And, for what it is worth, Ofsted would much rather see the sort of set-up teacher describes than to see the class teacher anchored to one child reading a scheme book for up to half an hour at a time. It's not best practice, nor the most efficient use of time/resources. Also, it is not proven to be more effective at raising standards. As many have said on here already, 1:1 reading is an additional benefit provided by TAs/parent helpers/others.

teacher I would be happy for my dd to be taught in your class in the way you describe. I can't see how replacing your methods with 5 minutes a week with somebody's grandma would be preferable.

Clam - Its all well and good ofsted preferring this system but what happens when a child is incorrectly labelled as being behind because of it. If the same child gives different results when reading one to one because the pressure is off in having to speak in front of their peers. I can honestly see this happening with my ds. He was assessed by year 1 teacher in May as being a level 1a reader. His current year 2 teacher still says he is level 1a. When I asked if he would reach the expected level e.g 2b by the end of year 2 she said that she felt that he would really have to put in a lot of work as he really wasnt that confident with his reading and had a long way to go to get to that level. I have since found out that her assesment is based on guided reading alone and he has never read to her or the class ta this year. Last year he was reading one to one with the senco 3 times a week. He did do guided reading sessions with the class teacher but this was not the sole assesment tool used. He went from not reading at all at end of reception (wasnt interested) to ort stage 6 and nc 1a at end of year 1 so I do not think it a tall order for him to be able to progress from a 1a to a 2b this year. However, if guided reading is all he is going to get from the school then I can see that it is a real possibility that he will show as having made no progress at all.

Isabelle, to be fair I don't think that was the argument.

I think that some posters are suggesting that instead of my 'guided reading leading to linked activities plus 1 to 1 for specific purposes' method, it would be preferable to have 5 minutes per child with the teacher and then 'unlinked' activities that could be carried out without teacher input.

As I say, our school data indicates that guided reading has raised standards and accelerated progress dramatically, and as clam says, more national data indicates that 1 to 1 reading has not been shown to improve standards.

Cassgate, I presume that Clam is talking about our 'whole' system (which does include targeted 1 to 1 as I described in detail much earlier). A rigid system that only relied on guided reading on every occasion for all readers isn't what we do .... Guided reading is our main 'reading lesson' approach, but it's not the only tool in the toolbox IYSWIM?

Mrz can I ask something quickly - is there some special training required for guided reading which you have not had. When I did guided reading as a parent helper we had none, so the sessions were as good as you could make them, ie extremely meh, extremely meh, compared to one to one sessions. Do teachers need to have training in guided reading - is this why you don't.

I don't find what Ofsted requires to be a particularly convincing argument to be honest.

You did guided reading as a parent helper?

Yes

Brycie, in that case it explains why you have a less than good view of it. A guided reading session is a reading lesson - and I would not ask a parent to tach any other type of lesson, why would I expect them to take a reading lesson????

We would NO WAY involve a parent helper in guided reading - no more than we would ask them to teach a lesson in e.g. maths.

I don't think there is much to say about that, as a teacher I would never expect a parent to take a session and would not think highly of a school that allowed it.

Possibly. It could also have something to do with the fact that out of the eight primary schools my children attended, the ones with the best results were enthusiastic about one to one and made sure the children had plenty of it. These were all NC schools, all abilities intake. Some of them only used "quality" guided reading, reading lessons as teacher described. The ones where one to one wasn't valued were just a bit mediocre. It especially helped where there was a very large ESL intake.

"It" there meaning one to one.

Certainly though I can say with some confidence that the guided reading I child-minded once a week in one particular school was an utter waste of time. Parents offered to go in an do one to one instead. But no - it had to be guided reading. Now that was what I called a fetish. Articulate, well educated parents offering to go in any day of the week, any time for one to one reading and turned down for the head to desk experience of our "guided" group. That is certainly where some of my jaundice comes from.

Having googled guided reading, I have to say I'd be fairly appalled if my dc's school were expecting parent helpers to take guided reading sessions.

For that matter, I'm a qualified teacher & I'd want to do a fair bit of getting my head round it/observing an experienced practitioner before I felt confident to attempt taking a session.

Targeted 1-1 I think can be invaluable, but as a global strategy I'd consider it a shockingly inefficient use of teaching time.

teacherwith2kids's last point makes complete sense to me.

In a group with other children, children have the opportunity to get a sense of how their peers view a story, read with expression, infer, take note of punctuation etc. Invaluable learning material.

Guys - it's ok I get it - all the teachers agree, including the ones who don't even do guided reading. It's not news. First it was because there was simply nothing for the rest of the class to do (except there was) then it was because one to one reading has no value (except it does) then it was because one to one reading has to be done for five hours in a row unlike guided reading (except it doesn't) then it was because outcomes are better (even though all that was in place before were "hasty" badly organised one to one sessions).

"Guys?" where did that dreadful dreassing room talk come from

Who has said:

'simply nothing for the rest of the class to do '

or

'one to one reading has no value '

or

'one to one reading has to be done for five hours in a row '?

These are all hyperbolic or specious.

I can't remember off the top of my head exactly so apologies if the names are wrong

but it's all here on the thread raven if you want to read it I wouldn't

Feenie said what would the other children do for the five hours it took, mrz said what would they do for the hours it took

Isabelleringing said it had no value unless children did not read at home

I was asked "what do you expect them to do while the teacher is reading one to one" as if there was nothing that could be any value, and suggested the only possible tasks were time-killing tasks

Of course you don't have to believe me - I'm not, after all, a teacher.