Phonics International Forum Index Phonics International
an International Online Synthetic Phonics Programme
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The quality and content of training in our universities:

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Phonics International Forum Index -> Fancy a Chat?
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
debbie



Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 425
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 10:35 am    Post subject: The quality and content of training in our universities: Reply with quote

http://rrf.org.uk/messageforum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4521

The link above leads to a response by Susan Godsland (UK Reading Reform Foundation) to a piece by Justine Earl on the 'Teacher Training Resource Bank'.

Justine's piece draws attention to an old Teachers TV video which features myself and Ruth Miskin amongst others. Some of Justine's comments raise questions about her bias and undermining of commercial programme writers and of the personal integrity of Ruth and myself.

The question is as to whether Justine's piece is a reflection of many other academics in our universities or limited to her own particular viewpoint.

Meanwhile, other university lecturers have approached me and the Reading Reform Foundation seeking phonics experts who can provide training workshops for student teachers. This is good news!

Is it going to continue to be a matter of 'chance', then, as to the content and quality of training in reading instruction received by students in our teacher-training establishments?

Susan Godsland's website is extremely informative and kept well up-to-date:

www.dyslexics.org.uk
_________________
Debbie Hepplewhite
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
debbie



Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 425
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Jul 01, 2010 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have received reassurance from the new government about the training of student teachers in the universities. Below are some extracts from the letter I received including reference at the bottom regarding Justine Earl's piece on the Teacher Training Resource Bank (TTRB) which I queried with the government:

Here is part of the response I received:

Quote:
....Initial Teacher Training (ITT) providers are fully accountable to the Secretary of State for the quality of the teacher training which they provide. The Secretary of State’s requirements for accredited providers of ITT stipulate that they must ensure ‘training is designed to enable trainee teachers to demonstrate that they have met all of the Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) standards.’ Standard Q15 requires those recommended for QTS to ‘know and understand the relevant statutory and non-statutory curricula and frameworks, including those provided through the national strategies for their subjects/curriculum areas, applicable to the age and ability range for which they are trained.’ For primary teachers this includes early reading using phonics.


Quote:
In terms of the training of teachers to use synthetic phonics, this has been an explicit expectation since 2006. The TDA guidance accompanying the QTS standards sets out the expectation that 'All primary trainees must have the knowledge, skills and understanding to teach early reading using the Simple View of Reading, in accordance with the recommendations of the independent review of the teaching of early reading’ (the Rose Review, March 2006). This wording reflects the core expectation of a systematic approach to synthetic phonics, currently based on the National Strategies ‘Letters and Sounds’ as the key resource.


Quote:
The purpose of the Teacher Training Resource Bank (TTRB) is to provide access to providers of ITT to a reliable source of evidence to inform high quality training. It provides a ready mechanism for effective communication of emerging priorities, although fresh commissions are embargoed at present in line with Cabinet Office guidelines on market communications activity.


Quote:
The TDA are currently undertaking a major review of the site content. All materials relating to the teaching of phonics and mathematics, are being reviewed in a fast-track process, to be complete in a matter of days, and any which appear to conflict with current or emerging policy will be removed. The Teachers’ TV clip and the accompanying review will be removed immediately, and a banner placed on the site, in line with other government funded services and agencies, stating that as a new government took office on the 11th May, the content on the site may not reflect current government policy.


Update about training in two Universities:

Further good news is that I enjoyed a busy two days trip to the University of Cumbria where I presented Phonics International and was able to speak about synthetic phonics teaching in general terms to three student groups and two groups of leading literacy teachers. Although these sessions were brief, nevertheless I was enabled to speak to nearly 400 people in this way at two different campuses - Carlisle and Lancaster.

A close colleague of mine was also invited to a University in London this week and she was able to speak to around 120 students about synthetic phonics teaching. She introduced them to several reputable synthetic phonics programme to raise their awareness about their choices.

It would be really good if more universities called upon the services of independent synthetic phonics trainers to present good programmes and talk about synthetic phonics teaching to student teachers. Wink

The staff I liaised with at the University of Cumbria described their goal of encouraging student teachers to evaluate phonics programmes in addition to the UK government's Letters and Sounds. This is exactly what I would suggest is necessary and right.

Currently, the pressure on Universities appears to be to account only for a focus on the government's Letters and Sounds document which is put forward as a 'programme'. My suggestion is that this is to fall short of the level of 'training' that student teachers require. The very fact that Letters and Sounds is considered to be a 'programme' is worrying when it is really guidance with some details and no resources - this does not stand up to scrutiny as a 'full programme'.
_________________
Debbie Hepplewhite
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Phonics International Forum Index -> Fancy a Chat? All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group