[senco-forum] Re Literacy

Barbara - I detect a note of cynicism in your use of the term 'in' words. Synthetic Phonics is not, as many suppose, just another piece of 'in jargon'   Decoding on its own is a core feature of analytic phonics which, as i'm sure you will know, is different from synthetic phonics.  Part of the problem which still surrounds the debate about 'phonics' is a lack of understanding of this difference which I suspect arises from our aversion to professionally defined technical terms  -  we seem to feel we don't need definitions. We just KNOW what everything means and that of course, is the hallmark of rank amateurism.

The practice employed in Jenny Pryor's school seems to me to be the optimum solution for all.

Year 1 - determine which children are not making normal rates of progress 

Year 2 - Move these children into classes which receive synthetic phonics tuition.

Year 3 - Any child still not making normal progress receives specialist intervention and appropriate remedial tuition. This group would probably be about 2% of the school population.

Where a child has a self-evident learning difficulty, this could of course be investigated at any stage. I regard this as much better than the blanket imposition of any particular strategy, however well founded.  I would certainly like to hear anyone describe a more productive strategy or more effective use of resources.   I don't worship at the altar of synthetic phonics. I just believe that it the most effective means of teaching children with a non-specific learning difficulty to read which we know of.  If anyone could demonstrate a more effective strategy, I would go along with that. I have no views on its effectiveness with children with very specific learning difficulties.

Eddie C.