Andrew Davis says imposition of phonics almost abuse (TES)
Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 11:01 am
http://news.tes.co.uk/b/news/2014/01/27 ... demic.aspx
Davis said:
In any event, it should not be down to the chance of who the teacher is, and the teacher's views and knowledge-base, when children go to school - we DO have research findings and leading-edge practice to inform us - but not everyone wants to 'hear' or has had the training and experience to be fully knowledgeable.
The fact that the teaching profession even abandoned teaching the alphabetic code of the English language demonstrates that what teachers teach in the field of reading instruction is beyond individuals' 'professional choices'.
I suggest that it would be remiss of governments in countries where there is illiteracy and weak literacy not to investigate the research and not to inform and influence the teaching profession.
This field is just far too serious.
by Helen Ward TESImposing synthetic phonics is 'almost abuse', says academic
Davis said:
“Teachers can learn a lot from educational research, but must be left to make professional decisions.”
If teachers are left to make 'professional decisions', the danger is that they are not studied well enough in the field of reading and spelling - choices must be fully informed and we know that teachers are not necessarily knowledgeable enough with regard to research findings, or perhaps experienced enough in synthetic phonics teaching, to be in a position to make informed choices.But Debbie Hepplewhite, one of the prime advocates of synthetic phonics and author of the Phonics International programme, said that she fundamentally disagreed with Davis.
“What is extraordinary and very worrying is that some academics think that teachers should have the autonomy not to teach the alphabetic code, the link between sounds and letters, or to teach it less thoroughly or just teach it to some children," Ms Hepplewhite said.
“It shouldn’t be controversial, teaching the alphabetic code should be like teaching the times tables. To use language like ‘child abuse’ just makes no sense.”
In any event, it should not be down to the chance of who the teacher is, and the teacher's views and knowledge-base, when children go to school - we DO have research findings and leading-edge practice to inform us - but not everyone wants to 'hear' or has had the training and experience to be fully knowledgeable.
The fact that the teaching profession even abandoned teaching the alphabetic code of the English language demonstrates that what teachers teach in the field of reading instruction is beyond individuals' 'professional choices'.
I suggest that it would be remiss of governments in countries where there is illiteracy and weak literacy not to investigate the research and not to inform and influence the teaching profession.
This field is just far too serious.