Head
to head: Synthetic phonics? 
England's
schools are being told to change the way they teach children to read, with the
government calling for greater use of a system called synthetic phonics. At
the moment, guidance is that phonics should be used as one of four methods of
teaching children to read. Now
former Ofsted director Jim Rose has said phonics - where children learn the sounds
of all the letters and combinations of letters first - should be taught "first
and fast" to young children. CHRIS
WOODHEAD, FORMER CHIEF INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS IN ENGLAND "About
time too. It was clear in 1997 when the national literacy strategy was introduced
that synthetic phonics - that is the teaching of the letters of the alphabet and
the sounds associated with them and teaching children to blend the sounds into
words - was how children should be taught to read. Why
has it taken the government eight years to realise it? Jim Rose, who wrote the
report, was working with me at Ofsted in 1997 and he argued for synthetic phonics
and he was defeated. David
Blunkett, who was secretary of state at the time wanted to listen to ideologues,
the advisors, on the other side who believed that children learnt to read by a
process of magic osmosis. Phonics
was there but it was there amongst various other methods and did not have the
centrality it should have had. The
national curriculum should be revised the national literacy strategy should be
revised and teacher trainers should be instructed to teach phonics to all young
teachers who are entering. Many
teacher trainers are very resistant to teaching phonics. Phonics
has been there in the national curriculum and there are teachers who have continued
to teach in a traditional way whatever the fads and the politicians are telling
them to do, but it hasn't been as central and at the heart of the teaching of
reading as it should have been. As
a result we have 25% of 11-year-olds who continue to leave primary schools not
able to read well enough to deal with the demands of a secondary school curriculum." DR
BETHAN MARSHALL, SENIOR LECTURER IN ENGLISH EDUCATION AT KINGS COLLEGE, LONDON
UNIVERSITY "I
think that what they've listened to is a very, very powerful lobby with an enormous
commercial interest who are set to make a great deal of money out of schools having
to change their reading schemes. There
was a big survey done by the national reading panel in the States which showed
absolutely no difference whatsoever between success rates in synthetic and analytic
phonics. The
Clackmannanshire study (which prompted calls for a review) was an extremely small
study. They used
reading schemes like the Oxford Reading Tree which relies heavily on analytic
phonics. So it
was a very blurry study and a very small one. It would be a misunderstanding to
say phonics was not fairly central to the literacy strategy. What we have got
now is rather 'angels on a pinhead' - it's a particular type of phonics teaching
rather than phonics in general. I
don't think a consensus (on reading) in the education establishment is possible,
nor should it be, because children do not all learn to read in the same way. So
if you teach young teachers only one method and you come across children who are
not going to learn in that way and you have no other strategies to help them to
read, then you are going to disadvantage as many children as you advantage." With
many thanks to the excellent 'BBC
News' website - the best source of news about education! 
|