https://www.education.gov.uk/publicatio ... -RB159.pdf
This makes interesting reading.
The Year 1 (learners aged six or nearly six) Phonics Screening Check is a very important development in England.
It marks the serious intent of the government to promote the need for systematic, synthetic phonics teaching.
In addition, the UK government is providing match funding (up to £3,000 to match any infant school's contribution of up to £3,000) for systematic, synthetic phonics programmes, resources and teacher-training which has been rigorously evaluated according to the government's 'Core Criteria' for reading instruction.
The Phonics International programme and the Oxford Reading Tree Floppy's Phonics Sounds and Letters programme have passed the evaluation process and will be advertised in the forthcoming ESPO catalogue to be rolled out nationally.
The 'Debbie Hepplewhite Synthetic Phonics Training' provision has also fulfulled the requirements and will appear in the ESPO catalogue.
Evaluation of Year 1 Phonics Screening Check Pilot (England)
Evaluation of Year 1 Phonics Screening Check Pilot (England)
Debbie Hepplewhite
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-15491763
The UK Literacy Association critics hit out at the UK government's proposed age six phonics test.
I suggest that this criticism is unwarranted and yet another sign of the anti-phonics campaign which has ruined the life-chances of so many pupils in English-speaking countries for a very long time and left generations of teachers who have had no phonics experience when they themselves were pupils.
In any event, surely the UK government needs to be fully accountable for its very strong promotion of Systematic Synthetic Phonics teaching in our infant schools and the use of public money to provide 'match funding' for schools with Key Stage One (infants) in England.
This 'match funding' potentially amounts to £3,000 per school and it is absolutely right that the government takes action to look at the effect of the changes to reading instruction in our schools.
I wonder how many people in the UK Literacy Association have any personal experience of teaching with the Synthetic Phonics Teaching Principles?
That, I suggest, is at the root of the problem. Teachers who have tried synthetic phonics teaching commonly describe results as "amazing" and would never return to whole language teaching or mixed methods.
Such teachers want to know the results of their teaching and the children's learning - and they want to know how well the children are doing compared to others.
They are committed and concerned and have healthy doses of professional curiosity and accountability deep in their hearts!
The UK Literacy Association critics hit out at the UK government's proposed age six phonics test.
I suggest that this criticism is unwarranted and yet another sign of the anti-phonics campaign which has ruined the life-chances of so many pupils in English-speaking countries for a very long time and left generations of teachers who have had no phonics experience when they themselves were pupils.
In any event, surely the UK government needs to be fully accountable for its very strong promotion of Systematic Synthetic Phonics teaching in our infant schools and the use of public money to provide 'match funding' for schools with Key Stage One (infants) in England.
This 'match funding' potentially amounts to £3,000 per school and it is absolutely right that the government takes action to look at the effect of the changes to reading instruction in our schools.
I wonder how many people in the UK Literacy Association have any personal experience of teaching with the Synthetic Phonics Teaching Principles?
That, I suggest, is at the root of the problem. Teachers who have tried synthetic phonics teaching commonly describe results as "amazing" and would never return to whole language teaching or mixed methods.
Such teachers want to know the results of their teaching and the children's learning - and they want to know how well the children are doing compared to others.
They are committed and concerned and have healthy doses of professional curiosity and accountability deep in their hearts!
Debbie Hepplewhite