England: DfE Year One phonics screening check + results

Whether or not you are using the Phonics International Programme, feel free to visit this informal 'Chat' forum!
Here you will find all sorts of interesting articles, links to research and developments - and various interesting topics! Do join in!
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

It's a great shame that John Walker was unable to post his response (below) on to the UKLA site. It's important that people who are interested in these literacy issues appreciate that not everyone analyses the phonics screening check, or the advent of it, in the same way as UKLA and 'others' do!

John wrote this on the RRF message forum:

I've just tried to post a reply to the UKLA survey but wasn't allowed to because I'm not a registered member.
This is what I wrote:

Quote:
During the last year, we, at Sounds-Write, have trained over a thousand teaching practitioners. In that time we have not heard a single objection to the phonics screening check.

To take some of your alleged objections to the check:

Children are confused by nonsense words? As part of our programme of teaching children to read and spell, we have been using nonsense words for over ten years. Never has there been any suggestion that children are 'confused' by them. In fact, just the opposite is the case: mediated correctly, children think that nonsense words are fun, especially when teachers say that these words are words we haven't yet met.
The check ‘impedes successful readers’ or fails ‘a cohort of the most fluent readers’? How anyone can arrive at this conclusion is beyond me. If a child cannot read simple words accurately, then they can't read, much less read fluently! Fluent readers should be capable of reading every word in the check accurately. This objection sounds much more like special pleading on the part of those who advocate whole language and who fail to teach children to decode words correctly.

As for undermining children's confidence as readers, when delivered appropriately, there is no reason why a child should have any inkling how they do on the check.

On any of our trainings, before the course starts, it is a rare occurrence to meet a single teacher who has a clear and explicit understanding of how the sounds of the language relate to the spellings of those sounds. Much less do they know how the English alphabet code is structured conceptually, nor do they know the skills necessary to be able to use that knowledge. Moreover, most head teachers are even less informed about how to teach reading and spelling than their early years teachers.
I would suggest that your survey – it’s hardly likely that teachers in favour of the check are going to be falling over themselves to respond! – is nothing other than a blatant attempt to attack and undermine the value of phonics teaching at what you consider to be its weakest link.


_________________
John Walker
Sounds-Write
www.sounds-write.co.uk
http://literacyblog.blogspot.com
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/fi ... 13_001.pdf

In England - the official DfE Assessment and Reporting Arrangements for 2013.
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

Published in 'Teach Primary' (April 2013 issue):

'The Great Debate - Is it time to ditch the Y1 Phonics Screening Test?'

NO: Debbie Hepplewhite MBE FRSA

YES: David Reedy - United Kingdom Literacy Association


http://www.phonicsinternational.com/screener_debate.pdf
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

http://www.nonweiler.demon.co.uk/Y1_Phonics_Check.pdf

This PowerPoint by Elizabeth Nonweiler may be useful for sharing the 'issues' around the screening check to discuss them with colleagues.

I shall post this link on the 'debate' thread too. :wink:
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

http://www.oxfordphonicschecksupport.co.uk/login

Oxford University Press provides a free service to enable you to, very easily, generate words to decode - both real words and nonsense words.

All the nonsense words are provided next to quirky little creatures - just like the statutory Year One phonics screening check.

If you do want to provide your Year One children with a little bit of practice similar to the phonics check, try this free service! :D
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... _2013_.pdf

Here is an updated leaflet to inform parents about phonics and the Year One Phonics Screening Check.

I'm sorry to say I find it over-simplistic and patronising to say the least.

Letters do not say 'sounds' and it is surely time an official document from government level went beyond this.

Also, it is common place for people to talk about the 'simple sounds' and the 'complex sounds' but this is misleading language - incomplete and incorrect - and one wouldn't expect it from the highest authority - the Department for Education!

All the smallest sounds (phonemes) of speech are just 'sounds'. I think the 'simple sounds' description has come from the systematic synthetic phonics teaching which includes teaching the alphabetic code at a simple level at first - that is introducing all of the sounds (around 44 plus some units of sound which are combined phonemes) and mainly one spelling for all the sounds. Thus, early teaching consists of a simplified version of the complex English alphabetic code. It's not that the sounds themselves are 'simple'.

This notion of introducing a 'simple code' at first has been altered to introducing 'simple sounds' continuing to introduce 'complex sounds'. What is meant is surely the introduction of 'letter/s-sound correspondences of a simple alphabetic code' followed by the introduction of 'letter/s-sound correspondences of the 'complex' or 'extended' alphabetic code.

Perhaps I need to write a review of this leaflet for parents?

I also think that it is about time there was some mention of the accountability of the education system and the politicians within the teaching profession and in terms of informing the parents.

If the UK government has heavily promoted and used tax-payers money on synthetic phonics programmes, resources and training, then the government is accountable for what it promotes - and also needs to know how well the teaching is progressing in a language which causes untold difficulties at the basic skills level for so many learners.

The schools and local authorities also need to 'know' how effective their teaching is compared to other schools and local authorities. This underpins professional development in a fundamentally important subject - 'life chance stuff' as I frequently say.

So, why is there never any mention of this serious level of accountability and professional development?
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

From the Department for Education in England and flagged up on the UK Reading Reform Foundation message forum:

Research and analysis

Evaluation of the Phonics Screening Check: first interim report

http://rrf.org.uk/messageforum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5692
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/tea ... phon-malad

Announcement from the Department for Education about avoiding 'maladministration' of the Year One Phonics Screening Check.

The results for the 2012 check showed a large 'peak' at the threshold pass mark.
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

http://orderline.education.gov.uk/books ... 1783150700

The 2013 Year One Phonics Screening Check materials! :D
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

On a personal note, I just read this snippet from a primary school newsletter to parents. The exact results were 93% of the Year One children reaching the 32 out of 40 words 'threshold' mark. This is a significant increase from the 70% the year before - but even that mark was higher than the national average across England.

I invite schools to send me their results from the Year One Phonics Screening Check so that we can demonstrate what is readily achievable with the right kind of teaching and the right kind of pupil-practice!
Dear Parents/Carers,


This week, staff all over school have been celebrating as they’ve collated end of year assessment information. It has been wonderful to be an observer of the celebratory conversations between teachers and support staff as they have seen the children surpass targets, often making more than expected progress within the past academic year. This accelerated progress is down to effective partnership working between teachers, support staff, pupils and parents and is characterised by hard work, dedication and determination. Well done, one and all!



Phonics Screening Test


Chief amongst our causes of celebration are the outcomes of the Y1 phonics screening test. This national test was introduced last year and coincided with our brand new approach to systematic synthetic phonics. You may remember we welcomed leading practitioner and advisor to the government Debbie Hepplewhite into school to accelerate the pace at which we mastered this aspect of teaching and learning. Last year, we were delighted when 70% of our Y1 pupils secured the pass mark. Results for 2013, however, have far exceeded our expectations with over 90% of Y1 pupils this year securing the pass mark. Our dedication to phonics is no longer the work of Foundation and Key Stage 1, and the impact of this 30 minute strand of daily dedicated teaching and learning is really evident in the children’s reading and writing right across school. Many individuals spelling, in particular, has – frankly – been transformed as they have mastered the tricky alphabetic code. We will, of course, be sharing news of your child’s end of year attainment and progress in the reports which teachers are currently busy writing, but I will also share news of our whole school outcomes via the newsletter as soon as we have the full picture: watch this space!
Well done to the children, staff and parents at this primary school!

X
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

http://www.phonicsblog.co.uk/#/blog/456 ... ../6223512

Mike Lloyd-Jones writes about the findings of the NFER research team - that, worryingly, there is no shared professional understanding of systematic synthetic phonics as an approach - when it is clear that so many teachers still promote a range of reading strategies which amount to nothing more than 'word guessing' alongside their phonics teaching.

The vast majority of schools in England which used the government's 'matched funding' initiative, used the money for resources and not for training purposes.
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... gland-2013

Here are the results of the 2013 Year One Phonics Screening Check (of children who are mainly six) and the national curriculum assessments from the end of Key Stage One (that is, Year Two in England - of children who are mainly seven).

The results of 300 schools taking part in the 2011 Year One Phonics Screening Check pilot achieved an average of 32% reaching the threshold mark of 32 out of 40 words read correctly.

In the 2012 check, 58% of the children reached the threshold.

In the 2013 check, 69% of the children reached the threshold.

This suggests that when teachers' minds are sharpened regarding the effectiveness of their phonics provision, results rise accordingly! :wink:
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

Dorothy Bishop's blog:

good and bad news on the phonics screen

http://deevybee.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/ ... creen.html

Very thoughtful comments from Dorothy Bishop about the 'spike' in the 2012 and 2013 screening check results.
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/ed ... ating.html
School reading test overhauled to stamp out 'cheating'

A controversial reading test for six-year-olds is to be reformed amid fears teachers are attempting to cheat the system to inflate children’s results

The government will announce its plans to address the 'spike' in results of the statutory Year One Phonics Screening Check.

Here are my thoughts:

Whilst there is reference to the need for honest results to identify children requiring more phonics provision, what about the notion that the results may also help to identify teachers who need more training or schools that need better phonics programmes and practices?
A Department for Education spokesman said: “We have been clear the check will not be used to judge schools – it has been introduced to help every child become a strong reader.

“We expect teachers to take professional responsibility for the accurate marking of the test so the right children can be helped.”
So - what about helping the right teachers?
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

http://rrf.org.uk/messageforum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5814

This link takes readers to information about the NAHT survey results in England (National Association of Head Teachers). Apparently 92% of respondees want to scrap the Year One Phonics Screening Check in its statutory format.

I've added this link under a separate posting but wanted to add the information to this thread to provide a sustained picture over time - showing developments in England and possibly in other countries.
Debbie Hepplewhite
Post Reply