See Marilyn Jager Adam's piece here:
http://phonicstrainingonline.com/wp-con ... itudes.pdfTwo Solitudes
The three-cueing system is popular with teachers but researchers are barely aware of it.
By Marilyn Jager Adams
And now see my piece (July 2015) in 'SEN Magazine' which indicates that even in England, years later, when Systematic Synthetic Phonics with no multi-cueing reading strategies is official Government guidance, still many teachers persist with multi-cueing reading strategies and still the whole language intervention programme, Reading Recovery, is embedded in the Institute of Education - a leading University for teacher-training in England (Reading Recovery personnel in England insist that RR has changed, but where can we find literature to describe and confirm these changes? If anyone can enlighten us as to these 'changes', please contact IFERI as this is an important issue - VERY important):If the intended message of the three-cueing system was originally that teachers should take care not to over-emphasize phonics to the neglect of comprehension, its received message has broadly become that teachers should minimize attention to phonics lest it compete with comprehension.
If the original premise of the three-cueing system was that the reason for reading the words is to understand the text, it has been oddly converted such that, in effect, the reason for understanding the text is in order to figure out the words.
How did this happen?
The sobering revelation of this story is the profound breach in information and communication that separates the teaching and research communities. In the world of practice, the widespread subscription to the belief system that the three-cueing diagram has come to represent has wreaked disaster on students and hardship on teachers.
https://senmagazine.co.uk/articles/arti ... d-practice
Phonics screening check
The following are selected bullet points form the DfE Phonics screening check evaluation, Research report (NFER, May 2014).
“In the majority of schools, however, other strategies alongside phonics were also supported…”
“More than half (60 per cent) of schools reported that they taught systematic synthetic phonics ‘first and fast’, although teachers’responses regarding use of other methods to teach children to decode words were not wholly consistent with this data”.
What does schools’ phonics provision look like?
In England, the notion and promotion of systematic phonics is certainly not new. After years of successive governments promoting phonics and even funding systematic synthetic phonics (programmes, decodable books, resources and training), it would be understandable if all infant and primary teachers in England consider that they are well-equipped in terms of their professional understanding and their schools’phonics provision. But observation and analysis reveal some major differences between schools –and of course the question arises as to what effect different practices and professional understanding may have on the literacy results of the children, particularly the slowest-to-learn children who have the widest range of challenges and disadvantages.