Thank you

Moderators: Debbie Hepplewhite, maizie, Lesley Drake, Susan Godsland

User avatar
Debbie Hepplewhite
Administrator
Posts: 3642
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Berkshire
Contact:

Re: Thank you

Post by Debbie Hepplewhite » Fri Feb 26, 2016 1:14 am

Papermover, if you can describe your experience and worries as a 'parent' in a RR school, I'm sure we can use it not only via the RRF site but also via the IFERI site where we have built up a head of steam about the efficacy - or lack thereof - here:

http://www.iferi.org/iferi_forum/viewto ... ?f=2&t=532

It would be very good to have a parent's perspective and experience - and might encourage other parents to write something - or at least be forewarned.

Papermover
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 1:05 pm

Re: Thank you

Post by Papermover » Wed Mar 02, 2016 2:55 pm

Ok, I'll get on to it.

Although to be fair to RR some of the problems I have seen may be down to being a school linked to the Institute of Education, it does seem difficult to untangle the two.

User avatar
Debbie Hepplewhite
Administrator
Posts: 3642
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Berkshire
Contact:

Re: Thank you

Post by Debbie Hepplewhite » Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:51 pm

RR is based at the Institute of Education I believe.

How the Institute can promote both the statutory systematic synthetic phonics and the multi-cueing reading strategies of RR is a mystery and a confusing message to give to teachers.

Here is what was written by the Department for Education and Skills about multi-cueing back in 2006 but this advice is still current:
"...attention should be focused on decoding words rather than the use of unreliable
strategies such as looking at the illustrations, rereading the sentence, saying the first
sound or guessing what might 'fit'. Although these strategies might result in intelligent
guesses, none of them is sufficiently reliable and they can hinder the acquisition and
application of phonic knowledge and skills, prolonging the word recognition process and
lessening children's overall understanding. Children who routinely adopt alternative cues
for reading unknown words, instead of learning to decode them, later find themselves
stranded when texts become more demanding and meanings less predictable.
(Primary National Strategy, 2006b, p.9)."

kenm
Posts: 1495
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Berkshire

Re: Thank you

Post by kenm » Thu Mar 03, 2016 7:17 pm

Is there any way to discover RR's present methods other than going on an expensive and time-consuming training course?
"... the innovator has as enemies all those who have done well under the old regime, and only lukewarm allies among those who may do well under the new." Niccolo Macchiavelli, "The Prince", Chapter 6

User avatar
Debbie Hepplewhite
Administrator
Posts: 3642
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Berkshire
Contact:

Re: Thank you

Post by Debbie Hepplewhite » Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:49 am

Not so long ago, I asked a Reading Recovery 'National Leader' for an electronic link, or some information, to describe how RR has modified in light of the guidance for reading instruction in England.

I was told that there would be no point in the Masters' course if all the information was provided.

It's always been on my 'to do' list to write to the Institute of Education to ask for a link, or some information, to account for RR 'changes' in England.

The Science and Technology select committee back in 2009 concluded that RR should come in line with Government acceptance of the Rose recommendations in 2006.

volunteer
Posts: 755
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:46 pm

Re: Thank you

Post by volunteer » Fri Mar 04, 2016 2:08 pm

You don't have to do the MA - can do it this way for a mere £3,000:

http://ilc.ioe.ac.uk/rr/1485.html

Papermover
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 1:05 pm

Re: Thank you

Post by Papermover » Sun Mar 06, 2016 7:40 pm

Yes, RR does seem to be at the IOE. The IOE has links with the schools in my area as the schools and the IOE work in partnership to train teachers. The students then start working at local schools as NQTs. The message these teachers are getting is that mixed methods, RR methods, whatever they are called, are the best way.

Well that message and the one that good teaching should be tailored to a child's learning style, I sat quietly through a parents meeting on that last week. Apparently the children at the school can't spell because there hasn't been enough teaching for the visual learners.

Look, cover, visualise, write, check

User avatar
Debbie Hepplewhite
Administrator
Posts: 3642
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Berkshire
Contact:

Re: Thank you

Post by Debbie Hepplewhite » Mon Mar 07, 2016 6:59 pm

Dearie me, it gets worse.
that good teaching should be tailored to a child's learning style, I sat quietly through a parents meeting on that last week. Apparently the children at the school can't spell because there hasn't been enough teaching for the visual learners.
The 'Learning Styles' theory has been debunked and Dan Willingham does a good job to describe the need for subject fit-for-purpose activities - rather than planning activities according to 'learning styles' or preferences.

volunteer
Posts: 755
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:46 pm

Re: Thank you

Post by volunteer » Tue Mar 08, 2016 11:02 am

Our primary school sent out a survey to parents re. homework the other day ..... the worst set of survey questions I have ever seen in my life, but that's by the by .......... one of the questions was, "What type of learner is your child?" (visual, aural, kinaesthetic ). The question after this was if the homework catered for the child's learning style.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests