This report will explore and contend the use of the Governments suggestion on the over emphasis of systematic synthetic phonics within the classroom. I will put together arguments that favour this approach as well as those that counteract with reference to policies, theory and practice. This report will take into account my own practice, particularly one experience involving a pupil and what he said in terms of the systematic approach that was used to make him a efficient reader. I will analyse the effectiveness of different approaches and theories that could make this individual a reader that enjoys reading and one that is confident.
The Government guidelines stress the importance of reading, but pay little emphasis on the role of phonics in children’s reading practices. Rose (2006) advocated systematic phonics stating: "Pupils should be taught... synthetic work as their first strategy... because... [it]... is the most effective systematic approach to teaching reading." This Statement was one of many that set a milestone in establishing this approach into schools. The over emphasis on this approach by the DfEs was not met with a huge welcome. It was seen as, risking losing sight of the complexity of learning to read and the variety of strategies that were pre-used. (quote)
Nonetheless this approach established itself at the forefront in aiding children to read and was further highlighted by the coalition Government in the white paper (2010). Views had not changed in this period of time and were backed by the new Government. However the Rose Report was based on a pragmatic view deciding that schools could not always wait for long term research. Nonetheless this does not mean that the report is flawed. Albeit the decision to focus more on a systematic approach to phonics was made on research already available principally the Clackmannanshire study in Scotland of 2004.
(DfEs. 2006: para.31)
The Rose Report also reflected upon the...