Ted
331 posts
NEW ARTICLE: Restorative justice- it doesn’t restore and it isn’t just. Apart from that, I like it. My article in @Education_NI latest quarterly. Link below.
@C_Hendrick The study quoted only looks at Maths. A major study by Simon Burgess et al shows this is NOT so for English. Matching teaching styles to GCSE achievement, English & Maths differed. research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publication…
@Suchmo83 The report states MANY not some -
In his recent writing, and especially this talk with @ehanford, @markseidenberg is remarkably direct about the phonics overteaching problem that emerged in the Science of Reading era. “Typically developing children might not need all the instruction that was being specified in structured literacy, but — this is an important point — people said, "Well, that's okay, because it's not going to be harmful. if the kid gets extra instruction on these things or if they get extra opportunities to practice what they know." So there was indeed a sense that there wasn't much danger of too much of a good thing, so if it's good for dyslexics, it's going to be good for everyone. So what's happened? Well, if you treat everyone like they might be dyslexic, you get an intensive, slow, incremental approach to instruction, with no stone left unturned. In practice, what it's meant is a barrage of explicit instruction. So I would say the science of reading has an overteaching problem. Is all this explicit instruction necessary? No, because children don't only learn from explicit instruction. Moreover, the opportunity costs of doing all this instruction are huge. Instruction time in schools is limited. Teachers have enormous demands on their time. Over-teaching the components of reading eats into time for other learning activities, such as reading itself. So, I want to be clear here. Some explicit instruction is needed to help beginning readers get off the ground. There's no question. The whole language balanced literacy approach that came before did not do an adequate job with this. That had to be corrected. But the science of reading has overshot the target, because most kids aren't dyslexic, and most of the knowledge that supports reading isn't actually learned from instruction, as I'm going to illustrate. If you try to teach it all, you're interfering with or taking away from other learning opportunities that kids need.” @C_Hendrick @MeganGierka @ReadSimplified
How to reverse the drop in children reading for pleasure? Experts have made four recommendations, including giving it a ‘higher profile’ within the curriculum tes.com/magazine/news/…
It's very unlikely that we will ever be able to make learning to read *easy* for every child. But we can make it *easier*. That's the aim, and that's why podcasts like 'Sold a Story' are worth listening to.
@MrZachG But if teachers are just told that they need to avoid over-teaching phonics and that they need to get kids learning with real texts - and no actual practical advice is forthcoming on how to do this and the nature of the challenge - then we end up back at square one.
@oldandrewuk @nunez_cabeza @JRowe_7 @LizzyZeel @RogersHistory @cierzo1 @learymay So that just proves my point more - Ur interaction with Andy Leary-May was on clearly on Dec 22nd this X post linking ur interview is Dec 25 - So again Ur interaction with Andy was before the interview. I copied the live YouTube date which was Dec 24th
