How to approach teacher about non phonics readers

[Jumpingshipquick]

So my 3rd child is now in reception. She has a brilliant teacher who has done a great job with the other 2. She teaches phonics thoroughly BUT sends home crappy guess the completely un-decodable word by looking at the pictures pm readers. In some ways it’s fine because I have bought/ know where to find decodable readers in the library and just use those instead. My child will be ok. It’s just so frustrating. The school is not following the national curriculum requirement for cumulative decodable readers, it’s not best practice, and it’s mixed messages for children and parents that just slows everybody down. There will be some children that this is harming their progress.

So how do I best tackle it? Slightly complicated by the fact I have links with the school as a secondary teacher in the town, so I need to be reasonably professional . (And I probably already have a name at the school for being arsey) I’ve tried ignoring because Dd3 will be fine, but the idealist in me can’t keep quiet.

I speak from personal experience. I actually couldn't learn with phonics. I still can't 'sound things out' and have little clue what sounds letters are supposed to make. Instead I learned a lot from sight reading.

Regarding words that can't be sounded, there are Internet pages full of irregular words.

Norest, please abstain :D

We have this issue with reading books. DS1 is in reception and has only had two books which are decodable all year. Everything else: a hotch-potch of old look and say based schemes- which don't even seem to come home in any kind of coherent order. As with your DD2 MiaowTheCat DS1 just responded to this by guessing/memorising, and it was a total disaster when he hadn't got the hang of decoding at all. We've bought our own books and are working through those and recording them in his reading record. Fortunately DS1's teacher is totally on board with this. But it's absurd- and utterly unfair to kids whose parents can't afford to buy phonics based reading books.

Jumping, I was in your shoes about 5 years ago when DD was in reception. I talked to a lot of knowledgeable Mumsnenetters who pointed me in the direction of other help. Thank you Mrz, Feenie, Maisie and all the other helpful posters.

I had the Reading Recovery conversation and the balanced approach conversation and some not very nice conversations with the school. It was actually an awful time,I tried to change things for the better for all the children but I made little if any difference and it made relationships with the school quite tense at times.

I quickly understood that I would need to teach my child myself. I used Sounds-Write which is brilliant and has more apps now and even an Udemy course now. I also like Phonics International, you must get their free alphabetic code charts!

The school was recently given Ofsted Outstanding. There are still issues with the phonics teaching, some of which are noted in the Ofsted Report.

Ofsted seem just as confused about phonics as many other people and teachers. If you are one of the people who brought in the National Literacy Strategy, which called for mixed methods, when you become an Ofsted inspector nothing is really going to change. If another Ofsted Inspector is mixed up with Reading Recovery what chance do you have?

My DD is fine but may of her classmates are not.

It's easy to improve on dire results. I wonder if we are at the same school...

I tried to change the school but realised I could only change what I could change. I helped my daughter and I talked to people, some think I am a nutter but I have helped others with information and guidance. I am now working undercover (insert phonics sleuth emoji) as I have turned a VIP with links to the school-we will see if we manage to do anything.

I suppose what I am saying is ignore the school and do it yourself. The faster you and your child can learn the less effects the schools mixed methods will have on them.

If you have money to throw at the problem do that. My DD hasn't read a school reading books since she brought one home about a hippopotamus in the November of reception. When the teacher writes int he home-school reading record that they need to know what books my DD has read I write them a list, it's just not a list books that the school have.

We used the phonically decodable Reading Chest books and got the most expensive subscription, we only needed it for about a year and then we could start on normal books. Mrz says that Sounds-Write do the books on-line now which would be brilliant. I was lucky enough to go on a Sounds-Write course, but you could maybe do the free Udemy.

I suppose I am saying my inner-idealist really tried to make a difference to all the children but shes taking a bit of a battering and isn't sure if she'd do it again in a hurry!

these are the Phonics International charts.
alphabeticcodecharts.com/

this is the SOunds-Write Udemy (a free on-line course) www.udemy.com/help-your-child-to-read-and-write

go here to look at reading books to buy and the iPad app
www.sounds-write.co.uk/page-8-books-and-resources.aspx

Miaow what would happen if the Biff and Chips that came home never made it back to school again?

Thank you. I am also a convert to phonics, partly due to feenie and Mrz (thank you) but also because it is my job trying to undo all the bad habits in my kids at the high school who can't read properly. I think that's why I'm so obsessed.

I bloody love those international phonics chart- I give them to every primary trainee I come in contact with.

Thanks for giving me the encouragement to carry on. I'll go back to the NC feenie- I couldn't quite face reading all 200 pages last night! I'll try and find it.

You are also totally right about Ofsted. His argument is that Ofsted will not comment on how phonics is being delivered but the impact, and because results have been improving there will be no criticism.

Tbf, the phonics teaching in reception and ks1 is good. I think he just won't face the fact that they wasted all that money on reading recovery and he'd have to find the money for new books. He's in denial!

I refuse to read the school books and have bought loads and get them from the library. The older 2 are fine. But I'm going to continue a bit of a campaign I think, because he's wrong, and whilst it's only a few kids that will be majorly disadvantaged, the idealist in me can't let it go.

And go miaow! Maybe we should swap stroppy letters!

.

Mrz you are amazing thank you

Sorry Jumping, I really went off on one there.

Yes, your head may not be that interested in changing anything if he is only interested in Ofsted and the KS2 SAT results. The KS2 results at our school are good and no one cares how they got that way. I think in our case it is some parental influence but also a lot of money thrown at the issue by the school in terms of small teaching groups.
Our school has a lot of money-at the moment.

Parents report that their children become "unstuck" when they enter the local secondary schools. I suspect that this is what you are finding when you are trying to sort out the poor habits that the children have been taught. Of course the child hasn't changed and the primary school was great so unfortunately it's the secondary school that gets the blame.

However it sounds as if you're head may really on the right page and just lacks money after an expensive mistake with the PM Readers. What scheme would the head like; Dandelion, Sounds-Write, RWI, Songbirds? There must be a money making scheme in the school to raise a class pack of these? It sounds as if your school may be open to donations of any phonically decodable books you've finished with? Then flog the PM readers on Amazon or ask the Institute of Education if they have any Reading Recovery teacher trainers who would like to buy some.

It is not the case that systematic synthetic phonics has been proven to be most effective.

In fact, the most recent review of AAL existing research shows that a mixed approach to learning to read is probably the most effective. So the OP's teacher is correct.

In a nutshell - the government dictated that systematic synthetic phonics should be the only approach in all primary schools in the absence of proper research proving this.

See www.educationuncovered.co.uk/news/131686/little-evidence-in-favour-of-systematic-synthetic-phonics-research-review-concludes-.thtml

(You have to register to view the article but well worth it.)

The review says that there is "insufficient evidence to justify a 'phonics only' teaching policy" and that "balanced instruction is indicated." I'm pretty sure "balanced instruction" does not mean teaching synthetic phonics in the classroom and then sending children home, where after all most of their reading practice takes place, with books which are completely non decodable, and providing parents with no instruction about how to approach these with their child.

That isn't "balanced instruction". That's a mess.

I'm afraid I think that's exactly what "a balanced approach" means Furry. Isn't it a mess?

Synthetic phonics is the body of knowledge a child needs to know to be able to pick the words off the page. Some children pick some of it up by themselves but as it's something we need to know it would be sensible for it to be taught. And if you're teaching it in one lesson but in another suggesting a child doesn't use this know she, but instead guesses, the teaching of phonics isn't very effective.

The problem is what is understood by 'research'. There is just the Clackmannanshire study that can be considered a Randomised Control Trial, which is the one quoted everywhere. The problem is RCTs are pretty much impossible in education. There's plenty of 'evidence' and 'research' that supports reading recovery- but when you look at how the research was conducted etc, who paid for it, what the drop out rate was, how long the effects lasted for, it's clear it's not reliable. The same can be said of other phonics programmes I'm sure.

But once we start looking at the research about how we read- it's first and foremost a phonological process- it's obvious that phonics is the right way to teach it. Added to the that, the history of failure associated with look and say and whole language methods, the evidence points to SSP as most efficient way to teach reading. True, as has been said, plenty of children read without it, but too many children also fail without it- and these are the children often already at risk of failure.

The biggest problem with SSP is that it requires a high level of expertise that is very difficult to get all teachers to deliver effectively, especially when we're still needlessly debating it.

Not helped by people misinterpreting 'balanced approach' with 'mixed methods'.

Incorrigibly - I haven't read the article, but I do know from Twitter that Warwick Mansell's expertise on the teaching of reading seems to rest on having listened to his own kids read a few times, having read a few reports, and having a bee in his bonnet about corrupt government procurement.

I do think you seem over invested in this. You have raised it and have received a response. You may think he is wrong but ultimately you are not on the management team or the governors and therefore have no say. Your own dd is doing well and is being taught phonics effectively. Maybe you should ask the PTA if they can buy some or offer to raise funds yourself or leave it and continue to get decodable books for your dd.

"I'm afraid I think that's exactly what "a balanced approach" means " fortunately it doesn't. Basically it means not taught in isolation. Phonics in a language rich curriculum. Reading requires vocabulary, language knowledge, background knowledge, literacy knowledge and verbal reasoning skills as well as phonological knowledge and phonics.

I do think you seem over invested in this.

How can you be over invested in wanting every child to learn to read?

Cansu- I'm always over invested. It's the idealist in me. He's wrong and it's really sad when children have to overcome avoidable difficulties. Reading in English is hard enough without undoing word guessing strategies later on when it no longer works.