Skip to main content

Phonics row escalates over charge of bias

I read with interest your article about Ruth Miskin's involvement in the development of phonics in Years 1 and 2 ("Phonics expert on national curriculum review accused of conflict of interest", 3 June).

I have had the privilege of discussing the Government's idea of the phonics screener or check with literally hundreds of teachers, special educational needs co-ordinators and specialist SEN teachers. Not one supported it.

They have nothing against the teaching of good-quality synthetic phonics, but to impose it is potentially damaging to children. Phonics is one strategy to help children along the reading journey - it does not teach reading for meaning and understanding or engender a culture of a love of reading. It will merely create a generation of children who are able to decode a written text, but who have appalling spelling and are unable to read more deeply for meaning.

Ruth Miskin clearly has a conflict of interest and to say she does not is like saying a cheese factory based in Cheddar is unbiased towards cheese. Her bias is explicit.

There are very many reading specialists based within schools and universities who would willingly fulfil the role - but perhaps they won't be saying what the Government wants to hear.

Pearl Barnes, President of Nasen (formerly the National Association for Special Educational Needs).

Log in or register for FREE to continue reading.

It only takes a moment and you'll get access to more news, plus courses, jobs and teaching resources tailored to you