Bit disappointed about the phonics test

[Campaspe]

Have read with DD religiously just about every day, and we've spent plenty of time at home going over phonics. She came home today and told me she struggled with a lot of the words, and the teacher had a list of the ones she got wrong. So, it sounds as if in spite of her best efforts, DD didn't pass the check.

We read every night. We sound out words. She likes books and stories. She knows her sounds really well, but gets muddled when putting them back into words. We've worked together on this, but it just hasn't clicked yet. In class, she reads purple books and her teacher hasn't mentioned any concerns.

I feel disappointed that after all DD's (and mine!) work, it just hasn't clicked yet. What more can I do? Will it just sort itself out? Does it really matter?

My Y2 statemented child who read the words as variations of 'poo' and 'wee' last year , walked out with 14 words perfectly read, and all attempted properly.

Only 16 of my 30 'passed' (since it's not a test, I figure they can't pass or fail it!). However, one of the Y2s who had to be retested went from 14 last year to only 9 correct this year...no wonder she's on my list for statutory assessment!

Why does your school get such poor results?

Isn't postmanpat talking about a whole class of SEN children?

The phonics test does not matter a jot or smidgen. It's one of those insanities that some educationalists come up from time to time (like i.t.a. back in the 1970s).

This one is incredibly stupid, because a hight percentage of the words in it are not real words. It should never have been introduced at all.

During the trialling stage many fluent reader got many of the nonsense words wrong, because they were not clearly instructed not to try and make sense of all the words (as they normally would).

Reading is about deriving meaning from words and texts. Having to suspend this for a test is just plain stupid.

If all English letters/graphemes had just one sound, it might be more justifiable, but with many letters having variable sounds (fat - father, kindle - kind, go - do, cool - wool, cut - put ....) it is a complete waste of time.

No parent whose child enjoys reading and is clearly making progress should give a fig for this very stupid test.

One of those insanities like changing the English spelling system, Masha?

It's a screening for decoding competence, not a reading test.

Nonsense words are required to ensure that it is decoding that is being used.

If maladministration is widespread, that is indeed a cause for concern. But the problem with the assessor, not with the test.

masha
Moderate as ever!

Nope, not a whole class of SEN - I have 30 children, one of whom has a statement and she scored above the threshold. However, 29 of my 30 have a background other than White British and of those 25 speak at least one other language. Some joined Reception with no English at all.

tiggytape, surely all schools are prepping their children for it? What are the ones that don't teach decoding doing?

My children don't have a white British background and it doesn't seem to be a problem as far as reading is concerned, nor does speaking another language. But, if it is a problem I suppose the screening check has just pointed it out, which is what supporters would say it's supposed to do. I'd be inclined to wonder if it suggested more about the children's parents than the children themselves.

Nonsense words are required to ensure that it is decoding that is being used.

That's not strictly true, obscure real words could be used instead.

You'd have to use very obscure but short and fairly easily decodable words though - quite difficult to come up with 20 different appropriate ones every year I'd have though?

Not for a screening test. For no matter how obscure the word, you may find pupils who have encountered it before.

But obscure words are likely to be novel for most, so there is a virtuous circle of introducing lots of them to practice novel decoding and to enrich vocabulary. And given that this is for 5/6 year olds, the words needn't be that obscure to widen vocabulary and reinforce skills.

My dictionary is 1200 pages long and I don't see any shortage of short and obscure words in it. But of course the argument could centre around how obscure is obscure.
abaft
abib
ablet
ablush
aberr
ablaut

and that's just the top of page 3

It would be a strange child who was familiar with all of them!

It would indeed be a strange child. But generally it's better to run screenings to the highest standards, and that includes removing potential confounders wherever possible.

Abib might as well be Obib though. Not sure why abib is better?

They're just (more or less) in the order I came across them in the dictionary.

OK, but if you need to find such obscure words that there is no chance a 6 year old will have come across it, so a word that doesn't appear in children's fiction or non-fiction books, a word that isn't on any signs, isn't used in conversation, doesn't appear in magazines or newspapers - then what is the point?

Alien names seems much more meaningful and relevant to a young child than incredibly obscure "real" words - they are much more likely to come across alien names/words in books.

OP she might have done well- the way its recorded is a tick for every word but there is a correct column and a not correct column! Perhaps she just thought every time the teacher made a mark it was wrong? Teachers shouldn't be commenting on how many they got right or otherwise. Please don't stress

really should have read whole thread! Glad she did well

I really disagree with this test. I call it a test as that is how it was described to dd and her class. She was very stressed leading up to it as they were told you need to pass it to get into year 2. She was off ill a couple of days and was in a flap that she had missed it. When she did the test she was told she scored 39. She came out of school in terms that day thinking that because she had missed one poxy mark that she would not be going up with her friends.

I had to get the teacher to explain that she had passed. Personally I think this is too much too young!

< gets off soapbox >