Jolly Phonics vs Read, write, inc??

[educator123]

My dds are in a school that used Jolly Phonics, but i have since read that Read, Write, Inc is much more effective!

Is this the case or are they both as effective as each other, jsut different schemes?

maizieD - In the Essex approach, initially there is lots of modelling and doing things "together" because some children will need this. As children become more competent there is less modelling. But at all stages children should get practise blending lots of different words. There's lots of other ideas that make up the Essex approach, not just direct instruction, which I agree, can be very effective.

are we talking about Jonathan Solity's work?

Yes. we are.

In the Essex approach, initially there is lots of modelling and doing things "together" because some children will need this.

I don't disagree. But see my previous comments about independence! Even if the teacher is modelling /ch/ /a/ /t/ - 'chat' there is no guarantee that the children will understand when they respond that they are saying the 'sounds' that the letters spell and blending them, nor that they will apply /ch/ /a/ or /t/ in dfferent places in a different word.

Do you teach ERR?

Hi MaizieD. No I don't teach ERR but I know a fair bit about it and in the past I've known quite a lot of teachers who use it. I'm interested in your point about independence, but I'm afraid that I don't quite understand it. Why do you think that children won't understand that they are saying the letter sounds, won't understand that they are blending and won't be able to transfer the skills? Have you taught ERR and if so, was that your experience?

I am by the concept of a massive divide between these methods. DC's school has RWI, JP, ORT and other resources and seem to use them all...

There isn't a massive divide between RWI & Jolly Phonics (RWI is prehaps more rigorous IMHO) which are just two commercial programmes using the same method ...ORT on the other hand is completely different.