Planning For Cll

[Susan]

AND I too would advocate using Jolly Phonics and do! But there is still a place for PWS, especially with our younger children.

[Steve]

Ok chaps - calm it down please!

 

The debate is good, but the tone needs to stay positive. I'm certainly learning new stuff and I'd like to go on doing so, but I'd like to see it being conducted in the way it usually is here - as members of a community.

 

Thanks!

[Guest]

hear hear Steve!

 

I would have thought having the views of a leading member of the educational community on this site ( albeit through me) would be a positive aspect.

 

Regards

[Helen]

Here's a good document

 

It's a summary of the evidence for and against each of these methods, and I found it a very interesting read. I think I'm becoming clearer about the differences between the two; I think the main one seems to be that synthetic phonics requires a "first and fast" approach without clouding the teaching of phonics by any other simultaneous method. Children are also only taught to read through texts fully within their phonological ability. The NLS/Playing with Sounds uses phonics teaching along with a variety of other methods, eg the searchlights idea, analytic phonics, etc. Am I right so far?

A significant statement in the report states,

"We accept Dr. Stuart's conclusion that there has not so far been any decisive research evidence determining the value of dedicated synthetic phonics programmes drectly compared to the mixture of phonics and other strategies in the NLS"

 

The Committee go on to say that they recommend the Government should undertake an immediate review of the NLS, commissioning a large-scale comparative study between the two approaches.

 

I have to say that seems like a great idea..........

[catma]

I clearly know nothing.........................but i do know with PWS I would be introducing sounds and letters together in order to blend and segment for reading and spelling. Whether or not that is synthetic or analytic I really don't care and will never lose sleep over......but it works for me and the children I teach.

 

Cx

[Guest]

I have just been working with some of my lower ability children, following some training I had in a synthetic phonics scheme called Sounds-Write. (I don't think the type of the scheme is so important as the idea of using a synthetic phonics approach). I've only been teaching reception for 4 years, but I've never had such good writing from lower achieving (and also younger, incidentally!) children. They were hearing and writing (not always accurately!) all the sounds in 4 and 5 sound words, and felt ever so proud of thier own achievements!

 

I would recommend to anyone that they check out synthetic phonics or the Reading Reform Forum as Mousebat has suggested. This stuff works!

 

Dianne xxx

[Guest]

Hi Dianne

You're absolutely right, it isn't which scheme you use but the teaching of the synthetic phonic approach which is important. It's good to hear from someone who is trying this method and seeing great results.

 

Thanks for the support Dianne.

 

Just to add, I think some teachers feel as though THEY personally are being critised, hence some of the rather brusque responses, but that's not the case it's the METHOD that is being critised.

 

Regards