Eng and elsewhere: Where do we witness 'Orwellian Double Guidance' for teachers and parents?
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2020 5:00 pm
Unfortunately, it's looking like there is a lack of joined-up thinking and action even in England despite the incredible advances made to promote evidence-informed systematic synthetic phonics provision within a language and literature rich environment in England.
Since the pandemic and coronavirus lockdown in England, the government has provided advisory links to various programmes and intervention.
For foundational literacy ('English'), the 'DfE validated' systematic synthetic phonics programmes are flagged up here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... es#english
But an extremely concerned person sent me information to show that for literacy special needs, that is for 'intervention', the government coronavirus links lead to suggestions from the Education Endowment Foundation with none of the high quality systematic synthetic phonics programmes included! The EEF has entitled their intervention list the 'Promising Projects List'.
Please note that the DfE validated systematic synthetic phonics programmes are not just initial teaching, or 'mainstream' programmes - they are also intervention programmes. Any parent with a child or children identified as having literacy special needs should be very concerned indeed as, more often than not, they need high quality systematic synthetic phonics provision as a priority.
I was provided with evidence to illustrate these worrying connections (or should I more aptly say 'disconnections'). I circulated this evidence so officials could be alerted to this (23rd June 2020) - see here:
https://iferi.org/wp-content/uploads/20 ... covery.pdf
The Department for Education in England, and Ofsted (the schools' inspectorate) have been informed about this very worrying state of affairs. Are they doing anything about it?
It's very clear that pioneers for evidence-informed reading instruction in America and Australia (and other countries) - often associated with dyslexia organisations - are fighting a corner for systematic synthetic phonics provision for both mainstream and intervention provision.
I'm coining the phrase 'Orwellian Double Guidance'.
This idea is coming from the notion of Orwell's 'Doublethink' and 'Doublespeak':
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak
Because what are teachers to understand for their professional understanding of reading instruction whether for mainstream provision or intervention? They keep being given official and authoritative mixed messages. This LEAVES TO CHANCE what teachers (and others) 'understand' and what they provide for children. It's contradictory, shameful and unaccountable.
The forum of the International Foundation for Effective Reading Instruction already has many examples in its various threads of contradictory guidance given to teachers. This is a universal problem. This is a current reading war.
There is no shared professional knowledge and understanding in any of our countries. And there should be. We have decades of research findings - and we have very promising and effective phonics programmes and provision in our countries.
Unfortunately, as anyone can see via our message forum, it is almost impossible to hold anyone in authority to account.
And even in England, where so many advances have been made in statutory guidance, it's still looking like a mess with no joined-up thinking - not even from the Department for Education.
Since the pandemic and coronavirus lockdown in England, the government has provided advisory links to various programmes and intervention.
For foundational literacy ('English'), the 'DfE validated' systematic synthetic phonics programmes are flagged up here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... es#english
But an extremely concerned person sent me information to show that for literacy special needs, that is for 'intervention', the government coronavirus links lead to suggestions from the Education Endowment Foundation with none of the high quality systematic synthetic phonics programmes included! The EEF has entitled their intervention list the 'Promising Projects List'.
Please note that the DfE validated systematic synthetic phonics programmes are not just initial teaching, or 'mainstream' programmes - they are also intervention programmes. Any parent with a child or children identified as having literacy special needs should be very concerned indeed as, more often than not, they need high quality systematic synthetic phonics provision as a priority.
I was provided with evidence to illustrate these worrying connections (or should I more aptly say 'disconnections'). I circulated this evidence so officials could be alerted to this (23rd June 2020) - see here:
https://iferi.org/wp-content/uploads/20 ... covery.pdf
The Department for Education in England, and Ofsted (the schools' inspectorate) have been informed about this very worrying state of affairs. Are they doing anything about it?
It's very clear that pioneers for evidence-informed reading instruction in America and Australia (and other countries) - often associated with dyslexia organisations - are fighting a corner for systematic synthetic phonics provision for both mainstream and intervention provision.
I'm coining the phrase 'Orwellian Double Guidance'.
This idea is coming from the notion of Orwell's 'Doublethink' and 'Doublespeak':
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak
Because what are teachers to understand for their professional understanding of reading instruction whether for mainstream provision or intervention? They keep being given official and authoritative mixed messages. This LEAVES TO CHANCE what teachers (and others) 'understand' and what they provide for children. It's contradictory, shameful and unaccountable.
The forum of the International Foundation for Effective Reading Instruction already has many examples in its various threads of contradictory guidance given to teachers. This is a universal problem. This is a current reading war.
There is no shared professional knowledge and understanding in any of our countries. And there should be. We have decades of research findings - and we have very promising and effective phonics programmes and provision in our countries.
Unfortunately, as anyone can see via our message forum, it is almost impossible to hold anyone in authority to account.
And even in England, where so many advances have been made in statutory guidance, it's still looking like a mess with no joined-up thinking - not even from the Department for Education.