[senco-forum] Re literacy

Hi Eddie

I was trying not to advance the cause of APD specifically, as there are
other groups who have similar problems, I am a member of a UK Adult dyslexia
forum, and not all who have problems with phonics necessarily have APD, for
example both my youngest son and I are both Visual-Spatial Learners and this
is another large group who have problems with phonics. 
I have never said that teaching reading using synthetic phonics or any other
phonics program will not work for probably 65% of children, it is the other
35% who have the literacy problems caused by phonics only teaching, which
dominates the curriculum. 
I can read, but my combination of problems prevent me from reading aloud
without great difficulty, and I can only process small chunks of normal text
(usually one paragraph if I am lucky) So yes I am literate, but I can not
follow a learning text for too long, and I find following verbal instruction
near impossible. So what is the point of getting all to read if they are not
able to fully utilise the skill, 
Why not use alternative methods of communication so that all can follow what
is being explained. This domination of phonics is the big problem not just
in the teaching of reading but all teaching. 

Best wishes

Graeme

-----Original Message-----
From: senco-forum-bounces at lists.becta.org.uk
[mailto:senco-forum-bounces at lists.becta.org.uk] On Behalf Of Eddie Carron
Sent: 02 January 2007 22:16
To: senco-forum at lists.becta.org.uk
Subject: [senco-forum] Re literacy

Graeme

The choice of visual representations of sounds was a natural development
over thousands years which rendered literacy possible for the vast majority
of peoples.  I have never claimed that it is perfect and for you to suggest
that I have is frankly, disingenuous.  You also accuse me of making
assumptions without saying what these assumptions are. How on earth are you
advancing the cause of APD with such self-evidently inaccurate statements?

To Barbara

Of course, most of us have to decode complex words now and then. Even
children taught synthetic phonics still encounter the same minor difficulty
in saying very occasionally occurring, chemical or medical words but this is
not a significant barrier to progress.  Also of course, reading complex
things is unlikely ever to be a significant factor in the lives of the
children on whose behalf I am campaigning.  What I want for them is
functional literacy - the ability to read a page of a tabloid newspaper -
the information on a medicine bottle - the directions on a singpost and the
ability to complete a simple form.  At the moment, they leave school being
able to do none of these things.  This is eminently achievable and it is a
skill they are being denied by the very people who are paid to provide it.
I think we will have to agree to disagree about the ethics of teaching
children wholly unnecessary things - it is certainly not good teaching
practice to subject children to a great number of lessons on a subject for
which they have no need.  I was not taught by SP but I'm quite sure I was
not disadvantaged by this fact.  One infant teacher who 'lurks' said that
what I support is precisely what is done in her school and that only a very
small number of pupils are failed by it. These then  receive formal
assessment'  For her own reasons, she chooses not to make her views known of
the forum.

This forum represents those with collectively more experience of dealing
with failing readers than any other group in society and even we are still
spinning around in ever decreasing circles.  This is precisely why the DfES
can continue to heap one disastrous, illogical and ill-considered
'initiative' after another on us and why another hundred thousand UK
citizens will continue to graduate illiterate from school every year, quite
unnecessarily. In these circumstances,  to campaign for children to be
taught something that they have no need of would be a step to far for me and
I am have long been in favour of synthetic phonics.

Eddie C.