Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Primary education

Join our Primary Education forum to discuss starting school and helping your child get the most out of it.

Original poster

Yr 1 reading/phonics

284 replies

RunsWithScissors · 20/05/2015 10:10

Hello,

DD (5.5) seems to be doing pretty well. Nearer the top end of reading in her class (on orange band, I know not stunning based on MN standards ;-) but she's moved up leaps and bounds from the beginning of the year.

The phonics test is this week, and her teacher caught me yesterday to say she doesn't think she'll pass it. I know it's for the school to see how she's doing, etc. she's moved her into a different phonics group to help her out.

I'd noticed she doesn't tend to sound things out much, I think she remembers words/word recognition?

I didn't learn phonics growing up, but can't recall the learning process of reading that I went through. I've always loved reading, as does DD.

So, my questions are:

Is the lack of ability/knowledge going to make it harder for her? She seems to be progressing really well with her reading, and has wonderful comprehension of what she reads. Very expressive when she reads a book for the first time, so I know she is understanding it. I'm just wondering if a better grasp of phonics would make it easier for her, or do some children naturally read in a different way?

Secondly, although her spelling is also progressing really well I do notice that some misspelled words reflect her speech (which we are having assessed) eg. 'Wiv' for 'with'. Her hearing test was fine last year, she has a great vocabulary and can explain things really well.

I am a bit confused tjough, as she seems to use sounding out to spell. Is this not a similar skill to reading by sounding out?

I know the school will do a great job to support her, and we are thrilled with her progress this year. I just want to ensure we are doing what we can to support her, and that we aren't missing out on things that might make it easier for her/be a more natural fit for her style of learning.

Thanks if you've read this far!

OP posts:
mrz · 23/05/2015 09:16

"The elg just says read phonetically decodable words and simple sentences. My phase 2 children can do that!"

"I couldn't, with good conscience, say a child who can read simple sentences from phase 2 has not achieved their ELG. That's what i've decided after years of being told that by my LEA anyway."

The opinions of two different reception teachers ...

mrz · 23/05/2015 09:18

Sorry wrong thread

Baddz · 23/05/2015 09:18

I would be shocked if Ds2 failed tbh.
But, yes, not all phonics teaching is equal!
Ds1 went to 2 primary schools and the first was dreadful. It was soooo obvious he had literacy issues but they just weren't interested "until he is 7" (I assume they meant until year 2 sats!?)
His second primary just didn't seem to know how to help him tbh.
The senco left, it was all a bit shambolic.
Much as I hate gove et al he does seem to have made schools more accountable wrt their Sen kids.

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 23/05/2015 09:22

It is a flawed test, it's well documented that advanced readers struggle with it.

Are you sure about that? The 2014 ks1 results taken in conjunction with the 2013 psc results strongly dispute that. The proportion of level 3+ readers that failed the psc in both year 1 and year 2 is so small it rounds to 0%. 95% of them passed in year 1. That doesn't seem to support your argument at all.

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 23/05/2015 09:27

I think the by 7 thing is becwuse there's a pervasive myth that some children are just slower to develop and they all catch up by 7, so it's just a case of waiting until they do. Obviously if they don't then they have an issue that needs investigating. It's particularly bad if you also happen to be an August born boy.

Baddz · 23/05/2015 09:37

Ds1 was June born.
Also had developmental delay as a baby/toddler.
I told them this. They just weren't interested.
I would do things sooo differently if I had my time again :(
But....he is doing well. It would just have saved him years of feeling like he was failing and not good enough.

BeerBird · 23/05/2015 09:46

Do we know the pass mark this year?!

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 23/05/2015 09:49

I assume they'll do the same as last year and keep it until after the test. It was quite successful at getting rid of the suspicious clumping of marks around the pass mark.

Baddz · 23/05/2015 09:50

Does anyone know when the test is?
Is it like SATS and the same date for every school in the country or do the schools do it when they want to?

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 23/05/2015 09:54

It's the week of the 15th of June I think.

mrz · 23/05/2015 09:56

The "pass mark" will be published on the 29th June

Baddz · 23/05/2015 09:57

Thank you

mrz · 23/05/2015 10:01

The check period is the 15th -25th June.

A moderator turned up to watch me on the first day last year and I wasn't administering the check (we've got visitors in on the first day again this year so hope they don't come back).

Newrule · 23/05/2015 15:37

Interesting. By the way, I don't think Maizie was berating parents.

Tapasfairy · 23/05/2015 20:08

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-25917646

Yes I'm sure. Phonics won't fit all children and many will have raced ahead of confusing, pointless nonsense words.

mrz · 23/05/2015 20:16

So your child could work out ebullient, garrulous and titian from the context of the sentence?

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 23/05/2015 20:21

Oh, that's Andrew Davis again. He's not an expert in anything, much less the teaching of reading.

The solid evidence shows that high ability readers pass the screening check, not thwt they fail it. And the data set for that is over half a million children, so not insignificant. Any teacher that tells a parent that it's known that able children don't pass this test is seriously misinformed.

mrz · 23/05/2015 20:29

His own university publicly disagreed with his views

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 23/05/2015 21:48

Representatives from his own university disagreed with his views in the article Tapas linked to Grin

Not forgetting that this research, which is just a very very long opinion piece, was published in a journal that co-incidentally happened to be owned, reviewed and edited by him.

mrz · 23/05/2015 22:00

Andrew Davis has said he's opposed to it purely on a philosophical level rather than pedagogical

Moonwatching · 23/05/2015 22:01

Can anyone explain what is meant by 'reading for meaning' as said by Davis? It seems bizarre and suggests that using phonics is purely about reading letters and putting together the sounds, with no comprehension of the text Hmm
Surely, the best way of understanding any text is being able to read it accurately rather than guess at its contents.

mrz · 23/05/2015 22:09

I think most people would agree with you. If you can't read the words it's difficult to extract any meaning.

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 23/05/2015 22:25

That's what I think he does mean. It's a commonly used argument against phonics. It's the phonics is barking at print thing, just rephrased. Rosen uses it a lot.

If you look at the simple view of reading, there are two parts. Decoding and comprehension. Phonics advocates use phonics only to teach the decoding alongside a language rich environment and normal comprehension activities to develop understanding. The reading is about meaning thing is a nice soundbite that gets repeated but is a totally fallacious argument because no one has ever suggested that phonics is the only reading teaching a child should have. It's not like we stop asking children questions about a text, or to retell a story just because it's a decodable reader.