Phonics training for teachers

[mrz]

www.sounds-write.co.uk/docs/DfE%20Report%20on%20Sounds-Write%20Feb%202013.pdf

Looks good. How do you find teaching Sounds write compared to other programs?

As the Ofsted report says it is a "no frills" multi sensory method of teaching phonics. We are finding it very effective for reading and spelling including using it as an intervention.The children love it because it makes sense to them and they feel successful. We sent FS & KS1 staff to the training in the autumn and are hosting a training event in March so that all staff are fully trained.
My colleague who moved from KS2 said that this was the first phonics training he had attended that made sense to him and he feels really confident teaching phonics.

We had a Phonics International trainer in to train the whole school in January for the same reasons - she was v good too. Even our Head stayed he needed training the most really, normally known for hiding in his office, having far more important things to do.

Just out of curiosity why do you consider this to be better than RWI for example? I have no allegiance to any program but reading the web page it looks similar? Thanks in advance

I haven't attended RWI training so I can't compare.
The teaching method differs from that used by RWI which is one of the things that appealed to us as a school

Sorry to quiz you but could I ask how?
Both the school I work in and the school attended by my ds who is in year 1 use RWI and personally I find it quite dry but others think its great.

As a school we were looking for an effective programme that compliments our "creative" approach to reading and writing.

The S-W method starts from the sounds in words rather than teaching single sounds first. So on day one children are introduced to using phonics to read and spell words rather than learning "m".

I like SW better because:

• they don't do sounds by themselves, but always do them in words

• you aren't meant to follow a script to rhe same extent you are in RWI, so you can do much better differentiation.

• you don't do anything that's not actually reading or writing. So no mucking around with other multisensory stuff like writing on your partners back.

• it goes much faster than RWI

• phenomes which sound the same (eg ay ai a-e and a) are presented together instead of one a week in RWI.

Jolly Phonics, RWI, Sounds~Write, Sound Reading System, Sound Discovery, for instance, all excellent when teachers throughout primary understand synthetic phonics and teach their particular programme effectively. With Sounds~Write and the other major linguistic/synthetic phonics programme,Sound Reading System (btw SRS has v. informative website) the focus is on the logic of the code. Children learn quickly to understand alphabetic code logic and can rapidly progress to books which have more to offer than the paint by numbers type approach .... once they understand the rationale of the code and have some practice, the world is their oyster and endless word cards aren't necessary. Laborious explanations aren't either. The aim of learning to read is to get children into the habit of reading as soon as they can competently decode. In this way, they'll have acquired the reading habit, leading to sustained reading and an ability to tackle the secondary curricuoum.

Thanks Cinammonandcaramel ...as I've not taught RWI my experience of it is secondhand (as an observer and from parents) so I didn't feel qualified to compare.

It is a no "gimicks" approach, just good teaching and as I said from day one children are reading and spelling words.

I really like the sound of this - I've just been moved sideways to boost reading and it sounds, from the brief description, that I am doing a few similar things. I might see if I can suggest a training session for school!

You can get match funding for SW - and if you haven't heard match funding is now available for junior schools!

This is really interesting - I have just had lunch with a friend who was waxing lyrical about the Sound Reading System, is this a similar approach?

I'm very interested in this as an ex-primary teacher but also as a mum of a YR child who's just learning to read. He's now on Level 2 ORT and already finding his 'sounding out words' approach isn't working for anything above 'cat', 'mat', etc. I'm struggling to help him .

Is SRS the same as this approach then?

Yes they are both linguistic phonic programmes

Thing I really don't like about RWI (and JP) is how they have a picture, rhyme and action for each sound (eg ay - may I play, ea - cup of tea)

This sounds like it helps but is actually Information overload for a child who struggles.

Ie when they see 'team' you want them to think or say 't' ''ee' 'm' - teem. Not t - tiger, ea - cup of tea, m - mountain. So it's actually worse than letter names or putting 'uh' on the end of every sound.

Combine that with actions and they aren't thinking about how to read a word at all.

Plus the huge emphasis on stand alone sounds. 'ea' has no meaning outside of a word. It could be 'ee' or 'ae' depending on the word it's in! (team or great)

Cinnamon, this is our problem at the moment - DS is now hitting words where he sounds out all the individual letters, puts them together and comes out with entirely the wrong word!

May investigate getting training in one of these programmes. Mrz, are they starting to become more widely used in state schools?

Domestic - is he still at CVC words? Or onto harder ones?

Is he onto harder ones - words like fight and play, etc.

He has a very good memory so can generally remember words once he's read them a couple of times, but that doesn't help him decode new words!

DomesticCEO unfortunately we are the only school in my LEA using Sounds-Write at the moment (a number of schools are interested but waiting to see how well it works for us) but in other parts of the country it is more widely used with great success.
www.sounds-write.co.uk/events.aspx

Thanks mrz, will have a look at that.

I'm looking to get back into teaching in the next couple of years and would like to specialise in literacy issues - this could be an interesting avenue to explore.

www.piperbooks.co.uk (declared interest) work brilliantly well with Sound Reading System and with leading Synthetic Phonics programmes for children who really struggle.
If you want Sounds~Write or Sound Reading System training do look at their websites - both give outstanding traiining.

you don't do anything that's not actually reading or writing. So no mucking around with other multisensory stuff like writing on your partners back.

You don't get trained to do that in RWI, surely?

Do you teach it, C & C?

I don't teach RWI.

But both my kids have done 'drawing on a partners back' as part of their RWI lessons - at 2 different schools.

And RWI is very much 'follow a script lessons', so I concluded it was part of RWI.

I have certainly observed RWI being taught where there was lots of making actions every time you said a sound.

To be quite honest, I have never seen a RWI training, not have I seen it in action in an infant/primary session. Drawing letters on backs sounds like the wildest excesses of 'specialist dyslexia teaching' and has no useful purpose in learning to 'read'. But it may be being used in this context as a way of learning letter formation (the only reason I can think for it). Or it may not be part of the official training at all; just a twiddly bit introduced by a particular teacher to make the lessons 'fun'

As I understand it, the nmemonics relate to letter formation as well as the sounds. JP actions are just nmemonics for the sounds. They may seem absurd and overload to some people but don't forget that both JP and RWI are long established SP programmes with a very successful track record.

It would be very useful if there could be some proper research done on the different SP/LP programmes; it might determine just which aspects of them are most effective and enable programme developers to really fine tune their programmes. At the moment, all we know is that SP and LP programmes are the most effective way yet of teaching all but a tiny handful of children to read.