Training teachers for phonics and early reading: developing research-informed practice

Lists

Download

[thumbnail of Flynn et al. CENTAURaccepted version.pdf]

Preview

Flynn et al. CENTAURaccepted version.pdf - Accepted Version (369kB) | Preview

Tools

Flynn, N. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3710-9910, Powell, D. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3607-2407, Stainthorp, R. and Stuart, M. (2021) Training teachers for phonics and early reading: developing research-informed practice. Journal of Research in Reading, 44 (2). pp. 301-318. ISSN 1467-9817 doi: 10.1111/1467-9817.12336

Abstract/Summary

Background: In England, instruction in systematic synthetic phonics is the first approach to teaching children to read words. There is little research exploring what makes successful training for phonics teaching despite evidence teachers’ subject knowledge is limited. There is a persisting problem of under-achievement in reading in some regions of England, mirrored in the US and Australia. In 2017-18, the Department for Education (DfE) addressed poor reading outcomes in these regions by funding one-day training events. We report on one training model, developed, and delivered by a team of academics, addressing issues specific to an English context, but contributing internationally relevant insights into phonics teacher training. Methods: Research-informed “phonics roadshows” for training phonics teaching for early reading were devised for fourteen regions of England with weak performance on the Year 1 phonics screening check. 584 practitioners attended from 379 schools. Participants provided feedback in on-the-day written evaluations, and by survey one-year-on (100 responses). Local authority officials who attended were interviewed about impacts of the roadshow one-year-on (9 of 14). Qualitative data were analysed using a Constructivist Grounded Theory approach. Results: Quantitative data indicated positive responses to the events. Teachers found the day interesting, helpful, and likely to impact their practice. Qualitative analysis revealed the need for: consistent school-wide approaches to phonics teaching; follow-up training to develop teacher subject knowledge for teaching reading; developing teachers’ ability to assess children’s progress in developing phonic knowledge and to provide targeted interventions to tackle under-attainment. Local authority officials concurred with teachers’ perceptions, with some differences between them and between regions. Conclusions: Research-informed in-service training for phonics teaching can have beneficial impact, but must be closely partnered with local needs, and calibrated to teachers’ existing subject knowledge, to ensure professionals feel empowered to make sustainable changes and improvements to practice.

Altmetric Badge

Item Type	Article
URI	https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/94548
Item Type	Article
Refereed	Yes
Divisions	Arts, Humanities and Social Science > Institute of Education > Language and Literacy in Education Interdisciplinary Research Centres (IDRCs) > Centre for Literacy and Multilingualism (CeLM)
Uncontrolled Keywords	phonics teaching, professional development, teacher subject knowledge
Publisher	Wiley
Download/View statistics	View download statistics for this item

Download Statistics

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Deposit Details

Date Deposited:	25 Nov 2020 09:35	Date item deposited into CentAUR
Last Modified:	23 Jun 2024 05:30	Date item last modified

References

Bowers, J. S. (2020). Reconsidering the Evidence That Systematic Phonics Is More Effective Than Alternative Methods of Reading Instruction. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09515-y Bradbury, A. (2014). ‘Slimmed down’ assessment or increased accountability? Teachers, elections and UK government assessment policy. Oxford Review of Education, 40(5), 610-627. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2014.963038 Brooks, G., Beard, R., & Ampaw-Farr, J. (2019). ‘English has 100+ phonemes’: some errors and confusions in contemporary commercial phonics schemes. Research Papers in Education, 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2019.1646795 Buckingham, J., Wheldall, K., & Beaman-Wheldall, R. (2013). Why Jaydon Can't Read: The Triumph of Ideology Over Evidence in Teaching Reading [Article]. Policy, 29(3), 21-32. http://search-ebscohost-com.idpproxy.reading.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib,uid&db=bth&AN=91683355&site=ehost-live Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). Sage. Clarke, S., Schoepf, S., & Hatch, L. (2018). Exploring the use of personalised professional development to enhance teacher knowledge and reading instruction in the upper elementary grade. Journal of Research in Reading, 41(1), 30 - 47. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12130 Cohen, R. A., Mather, N., Schneider, D. A., & White, J. M. (2017). A comparison of schools: teacher knowledge of explicit code-based reading instruction. Reading and Writing, 30(4), 653-690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9694-0 Cordingley, P. (2015). The contribution of research to teachers’ professional learning and development. Oxford Review of Education, 41(2), 234-252. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2015.1020105 Cremin, T., Mottram, M., Bearne, E., & Goodwin, P. (2008). Exploring teachers' knowledge of children's literature. Cambridge Journal of Education, 38(4), 449-464. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640802482363 Cunningham, A. E., Perry, K. E., Stanovich, K. E., & Stanovich, P. J. (2004). Disciplinary knowledge of K-3 teachers and their knowledge calibration in the domain of early literacy [journal article]. Annals of Dyslexia, 54(1), 139-167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-004-0007-y Cunningham, A. E., Zibulsky, J., & Callahan, M. D. (2009). Starting small: Building preschool teacher knowledge that supports early literacy development [journal article]. Reading and Writing, 22(4), 487-510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9164-z Dagenais, C., Lysenko, L., Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Ramde, J., & Janosz, M. (2012). Use of research-based information by school-based practitioners and determinants of use: a review of empirical research Evidence and Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 8(3), 285-309. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426412X654031 DfE. (2010). Phonics teaching materials: core criteria and the self-assessment process. Department for Education. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/298420/phonics_core_criteria_and_the_self-assessment_process.pdf [Record #668 is using a reference type undefined in this output style.] DfE. (2013). National curriculum in England: primary curriculum. www.education.gov.uk/nationalcurriculum. DfE. (2018a). National curriculum assessments at key stage 1 and phonics screening checks in England, 2018. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/743499/Phonics_KS1_Text_1.2.pdf DfE. (2018b). National curriculum assessments at key stage 2 in England, 2018 (provisional). https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/743131/KS2_Provisional_publication_2018-Text.pdf DfE. (2019). Phonics screening check and key stage 1 assessments in England, 2019. D. f. E. O. f. N. Statistics. Duff, F. J., Mengoni, S. E., Bailey, A. M., & Snowling, M. J. (2015). Validity and sensitivity of the phonics screening check: implications for practice. Journal of Research in Reading, 38(2), 109-123. https://doi.org/doi:10.1111/1467-9817.12029 Easton, C., McCrone, T., Smith, R., Harland, J., & Sims, D. (2018). Implementation of Opportunity Areas: An independent evaluation. DfE/NFER. Ellis, S., & Moss, G. (2014). Ethics, education policy and research: the phonics question reconsidered. British Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 241 - 260. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3039 Flynn, N. (2019). Facilitating evidence-informed practice. Teacher Development, 23(1), 64-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2018.1505649 Hayes, L. L., & Robnolt, V. J. (2006). Data‐driven professional development: The professional development plan for a reading excellence act school. Reading Research and Instruction, 46(2), 95-119. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388070709558463 Johnston, R., & Watson, J. (2005). Accelerating the development of reading, spelling and phonemic awareness skills in initial readers. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 17(4), 327 - 357. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:READ.0000032666.66359.62 Joshi, R., Binks, E., Hougen, M., Dahlgren, M. E., Ocker-Dean, E., & Smith, D. L. (2009). Why Elementary Teachers Might Be Inadequately Prepared to Teach Reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(5), 392-402. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409338736 Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Hooper, M. (2017). PIRLS 2016 international results in reading. T. P. I. S. Center. Nation, K., & Snowling, M. (2004). Beyond phonological skills: broader language skills contribute to the development of reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 27(4), 342-356. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2004.00238.x NRP, & NiCHHD. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read : an evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction : reports of the subgroups. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health. OfSTED. (2012). Moving English Forward: Action to Raise Standards in English. London: OfSTED OfSTED. (2019). School Inspection Handbook. OfSTED. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/806942/School_inspection_handbook_section_5_060619.pdf Piasta, S. B., Connor, C. M., Fishman, B. J., & Morrison, F. J. (2009). Teachers' Knowledge of Literacy Concepts, Classroom Practices, and Student Reading Growth. Scientific Studies of Reading, 13(3), 224-248. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430902851364 Podhajski, B., Mather, N., Nathan, J., & Sammons, J. (2009). Professional Development in Scientifically Based Reading Instruction:Teacher Knowledge and Reading Outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(5), 403-417. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409338737 QSR, I. (2018). NVivo 12. QSR international Rose, J. (2006). Independent Review of the Teaching of Early Reading 0201-2006DOC-EN. DfES. Sailors, M., & Price, L. (2010). Professional Development That Supports the Teaching of Cognitive Reading Strategy Instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 110(3), 301-322. https://doi.org/10.1086/648980 Stainthorp, R. (2004). W(h)ither Phonological Awareness? Literate trainee teachers' lack of stable knowledge about the sound structure of words. Educational Psychology, 24(6), 753-765. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341042000271728 Stark, H. L., Snow, P. C., Eadie, P. A., & Goldfeld, S. R. (2016). Language and reading instruction in early years' classrooms: the knowledge and self-rated ability of Australian teachers. Annals of Dyslexia, 66(1), 28-54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-015-0112-0 Stuart, M. (2004). Getting Ready for Reading: A Follow-up Study of Inner City Second Language Learners at the End of Key Stage 1. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(1), 15 - 36. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709904322848806 Swan, A. (2003). Teachers as Learners: Professional Development in Early Reading Instruction. Reading Horizons;, 43(3), 141 - 160. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/reading_horizons/vol43/iss3/1 Tracey, L., Chambers, B., Slavin, R. E., Hanley, P., & Cheung, A. (2014). Success for All in England:Results From the Third Year of a National Evaluation. SAGE Open, 4(3), 2158244014547031. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014547031 Walker, M., Sainsbury, M., Worth, J., Bamforth, H., & Betts, H. (2015). Phonics screening Check Evaluation: Final Report.DFE-RR418A. Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research.

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Search Google Scholar