More rubbish: anti-phonics straw that broke the camel's back
Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2014 10:29 am
As anyone can see from my various postings, and from scrutiny of the media, and from other sources, the battle about what 'method' to teach reading (or rather should I say 'not' teach reading when so many poor kids have been left to deduce the alphabetic code and to 'pick up' reading for themselves over the years) - CONTINUES.
Quite frankly, I am sick and tired of all the anti-phonics rubbish written by so many supposed academics and others which appears in the media constantly.
I am sick and tired of all the crummy surveys that the anti-phonics brigade generate seemingly as an effective way of gaining media attention to promote their views or, in the case of the article below, a reading programme of some description.
It seems that the mere mention of a survey about phonics with some negative responses (which are based on opinion when all said and done) will guarantee hoo-ha in the media - no doubt with all the phonics-detractor folks rubbing their hands with glee.
In fact, I can almost feel them slavering with delight as yet another piece appears in the press under which they can all group together with no real awareness of how little they really know about real children and really effective teaching.
It's never just about anti-phonics, though, is it.
It's also about anti-government 'interference' and anti-being-told-what-to-do.
After all, how dare governments who supposedly represent the people care whether ALL the people's children are literate or not.
And how dare the governments concern themselves as to whether ALL the teachers and teacher-trainers are up-to-date with the research on reading and how most effectively to teach ALL the children.
And how dare the governments introduce tests to find out whether ALL the children are reaching minimum standards in the basics of literacy or not.
The frustration is that everything mentioned in articles like the one below needs a proper, informed response - and other than winging off yet another 'reader's comment' which gets lost amongst so many other comments (often also anti-phonics ramblings), there is never a proper opportunity to do this.
I can vouch for this personally having been invited to appear on various television news programmes and to speak via the radio on quite a few occasions - only to be discover that the media people DON'T REALLY WANT TO KNOW.
They are NOT SERIOUS about wanting to be informed, or to inform the general public properly - they just have a programme to produce - and it is to their agenda.
I have been disgusted on a number of occasions to find the information I so wanted to impart to address the issues raised end up on the cutting-room floor (yes, I know these don't exist per se).
In fact, media people often dupe those they invite to speak - and I am confident that this is regardless of the topic and the facts and information to be imparted.
I spend more time nowadays endeavouring to provide proper information to address this stream of anti-phonics rubbish - or misinformation - than anything else and it is very wearing - and it should be entirely unnecessary.
But worst of all, it is very upsetting.
The collective time and effort to have achieved these serious investigations into how best to teach reading - in the USA, in Australia, in England - is immeasurable.
To have achieved sensible conclusions based on research and leading-edge programmes and practice has been a humungous feat.
And the window of opportunity to get our children off to the best possible start - and to maintain that start - is lost for every child who is not taught WELL by the features we have confirmed over and again are important.
Whilst all these anti-phonics pieces continue, the need for systematic synthetic phonics TAUGHT WELL is without doubt being undermined.
The issue should now be HOW WELL student-teachers are being trained, HOW WELL systematic synthetic phonics is REALLY being taught in our schools and this includes for the quicker-to-learn children and the children who may have greater struggles.
Sir Jim Rose pointed out very carefully that it is the SAME alphabetic code and phonics skills for reading and spelling that ALL children need to learn for life-long literacy skills.
It really is as simple as that.
He also pointed out, however, and this has been embodied in official guidance subsequent to the Rose Report (2006) that there are approaches which SHOULD NOT be embodied in practice.
These are the multi-cueing reading strategies which amount to guessing words.
And yet, these strategies are entrenched in various intervention programmes, notably Reading Recovery which is a HUGE established organisation - and it is these strategies which many of our slower-to-learn children will be subjected to through various intervention programmes and practices as the will to address this has not been fully sustained.
Just because something is established, and huge, and influential, doesn't make it right.
So, the issue is HOW WELL can we teach and support children to learn the English alphabetic code (the MOST complex ALPHABETIC code in the world) and the requisite blending and oral segmenting skills.
All of this...some children need it, some don't, some will be damaged by this type of teaching...
IS NONSENSE!
And, contrary to what Estelle Morris is quoted as saying, the Labour and Tory (Coalition) governments are right to have taken a serious interest in WHY we have so many pupils going through years of schooling with weak literacy skills, and WHY our prisons are full of people with weak literacy skills.
To not have investigated this scenario would have been entirely irresponsible.
The issue is of national and international importance.
I am so disgusted by this almost daily undermining of phonics that I shall address all the points raised in this appallingly irresponsible piece by Richard Garner and then at least my interpretation is on easy-record and I can at least Tweet it (or whatever the expression is).
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/educa ... 23729.html
Quite frankly, I am sick and tired of all the anti-phonics rubbish written by so many supposed academics and others which appears in the media constantly.
I am sick and tired of all the crummy surveys that the anti-phonics brigade generate seemingly as an effective way of gaining media attention to promote their views or, in the case of the article below, a reading programme of some description.
It seems that the mere mention of a survey about phonics with some negative responses (which are based on opinion when all said and done) will guarantee hoo-ha in the media - no doubt with all the phonics-detractor folks rubbing their hands with glee.
In fact, I can almost feel them slavering with delight as yet another piece appears in the press under which they can all group together with no real awareness of how little they really know about real children and really effective teaching.
It's never just about anti-phonics, though, is it.
It's also about anti-government 'interference' and anti-being-told-what-to-do.
After all, how dare governments who supposedly represent the people care whether ALL the people's children are literate or not.
And how dare the governments concern themselves as to whether ALL the teachers and teacher-trainers are up-to-date with the research on reading and how most effectively to teach ALL the children.
And how dare the governments introduce tests to find out whether ALL the children are reaching minimum standards in the basics of literacy or not.
The frustration is that everything mentioned in articles like the one below needs a proper, informed response - and other than winging off yet another 'reader's comment' which gets lost amongst so many other comments (often also anti-phonics ramblings), there is never a proper opportunity to do this.
I can vouch for this personally having been invited to appear on various television news programmes and to speak via the radio on quite a few occasions - only to be discover that the media people DON'T REALLY WANT TO KNOW.
They are NOT SERIOUS about wanting to be informed, or to inform the general public properly - they just have a programme to produce - and it is to their agenda.
I have been disgusted on a number of occasions to find the information I so wanted to impart to address the issues raised end up on the cutting-room floor (yes, I know these don't exist per se).
In fact, media people often dupe those they invite to speak - and I am confident that this is regardless of the topic and the facts and information to be imparted.
I spend more time nowadays endeavouring to provide proper information to address this stream of anti-phonics rubbish - or misinformation - than anything else and it is very wearing - and it should be entirely unnecessary.
But worst of all, it is very upsetting.
The collective time and effort to have achieved these serious investigations into how best to teach reading - in the USA, in Australia, in England - is immeasurable.
To have achieved sensible conclusions based on research and leading-edge programmes and practice has been a humungous feat.
And the window of opportunity to get our children off to the best possible start - and to maintain that start - is lost for every child who is not taught WELL by the features we have confirmed over and again are important.
Whilst all these anti-phonics pieces continue, the need for systematic synthetic phonics TAUGHT WELL is without doubt being undermined.
The issue should now be HOW WELL student-teachers are being trained, HOW WELL systematic synthetic phonics is REALLY being taught in our schools and this includes for the quicker-to-learn children and the children who may have greater struggles.
Sir Jim Rose pointed out very carefully that it is the SAME alphabetic code and phonics skills for reading and spelling that ALL children need to learn for life-long literacy skills.
It really is as simple as that.
He also pointed out, however, and this has been embodied in official guidance subsequent to the Rose Report (2006) that there are approaches which SHOULD NOT be embodied in practice.
These are the multi-cueing reading strategies which amount to guessing words.
And yet, these strategies are entrenched in various intervention programmes, notably Reading Recovery which is a HUGE established organisation - and it is these strategies which many of our slower-to-learn children will be subjected to through various intervention programmes and practices as the will to address this has not been fully sustained.
Just because something is established, and huge, and influential, doesn't make it right.
So, the issue is HOW WELL can we teach and support children to learn the English alphabetic code (the MOST complex ALPHABETIC code in the world) and the requisite blending and oral segmenting skills.
All of this...some children need it, some don't, some will be damaged by this type of teaching...
IS NONSENSE!
And, contrary to what Estelle Morris is quoted as saying, the Labour and Tory (Coalition) governments are right to have taken a serious interest in WHY we have so many pupils going through years of schooling with weak literacy skills, and WHY our prisons are full of people with weak literacy skills.
To not have investigated this scenario would have been entirely irresponsible.
The issue is of national and international importance.
I am so disgusted by this almost daily undermining of phonics that I shall address all the points raised in this appallingly irresponsible piece by Richard Garner and then at least my interpretation is on easy-record and I can at least Tweet it (or whatever the expression is).
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/educa ... 23729.html