Like many parents in my situation (Year 1 son involved in the first year of the process) I continue to be somewhat mystified by the Government (not schools, I realise the teachers I talk to are in broadly the same boat)
Our son is a good reader, we can see and hear that, the class teacher has told us, and recently when he was “benchmarked” he went up two levels. He has a solid knowledge of phonics, but as Michael Rosen continues to highlight, this approach doesn’t aid any reading for meaning, or more importantly a lack of understanding of the texts we read.
Our little lad takes great joy in telling us what he has found out when he reads, he loves factual books at the moment.
What was interesting and mystifying was his school report in reading. He achieved more than the “minimum standard” that Sir Jim Rose constantly mentions, 34/40. The Government facts show that 68% of our Year1 pupils won’t achieve this standard, thus the average pupil has to below the standard set by the Government.
Our son’s report has him down as a reader at the “expected level” and explains that this is the average
Confused? He is well above the minimum standard, thus in the top 20% (from my stats GCSE) but is only average in his report, which the Government has shown that the average pupil is below the minimum expected level?
Confused doesn’t start to begin to explain my feelings!
We think he’s had a good year at school, I’m taking him out to a well deserved “boys day out” tomorrow……..unless you know otherwise.
- Phonics screening test “pass rates” (kipmcgrathashford.wordpress.com)
- Sir Jim Rose criticises children’s authors in phonics row (telegraph.co.uk)
- Michael Rosen’s letter from a curious parent (guardian.co.uk)