I am tired of the reading wars especially when the group with the loudest, most dogmatic of voices seems to be lead by psychologists, speech pathologists and special education teachers rather than reading experts or even experienced early years' teachers.

These same people are advising the Federal Minister for Education. Simon Birmingham’s panel is not ‘an expert education committee’ commissioned to independently evaluate the merits of a phonic testing program. It is a narrowly focused group with a shared view of how all children and their teachers require a prescriptive explicit synthetic phonic program despite evidence to the contrary. (See statistical data related to synthetic phonics released October 2017 by Education Department, England)

Some panel members have been involved with, and endorse, ‘Multilit’, an expensive, explicit and prescriptive program of instruction for low progress readers. Presumably this expensive program (or it's cousins, Minilit and Initialit) will be adopted by many schools if a synthetic phonic testing program is mandated. During my forty years of classroom teaching I found cupboards full of discarded programs of a similar ilk, some hardly used.

What I know from my own experience as a sixties trained teacher (TITC)is that children in a supportive, stimulating environment love to read and write. When children are engaged and excited by learning they use a range of strategies to make sense of print. In this context it is easy to identify the needs of individual learners and build on strategies accordingly. By listening to, discussing, observing, collecting work samples, assessing and recording it is easy to track the progress of individual learners and identify areas of need. Extra support for individual children in the classroom context is highly desirable.

Yes, some kids need one to one support and some of them may benefit from explicit phonics instruction, but the needs of a minority do not justify a massive investment in a national synthetic phonic program and testing for all children!

This test is unnecessary. It will be costly. Clqssroom teachers can already identify children in need. Money would be better spent supporting these children in the classroom context.

Summur sums up every reason why numeracy and literacy are going backward and why those so affected always do less well as a demographic than those with less pedantic teachers and administrators at the helm.

The teacher always knows best, is only true in the minds of agreeing teachers and not backed by actual outcomes, with kids left behind, effectively deserted and abandoned by a system that's supposed to prepare them for success/life.

Instead sees them vastly over represented in our prison systems/divorce courts. As members of dysfunctional families and new generations of disadvantage.

Yes, not all children need phonetics, therefore ipso facto, none will be offered nor the exams that alone actually identify those best assisted by old fashioned stuff that worked!

And the reason I and my siblings were able to read at all or learn as I did, learn to love libraries, the worlds, adventure and possibilities they opened up.

No not everyone is like me, therefore, ipso facto, they need to be denied the advantages accorded to me!

Which seems to be the central argument of those now rigidly welded to a changed and demonstrably failed, the teacher knows best, system!

And know to a virtual generic man, they will be exposed by universal exams where they aren't involved as pre exam groomers or checkers? And left to them, completely undermine the intentions and outcomes of those tests.

Which will as intended, allow those who control the purse strings to know where additional resources need to be preferences/shared or allocated from a single bucket of money!

And at the coalface rather than centralist, collating, administrative deep pockets. And why they're screaming their confected outrage and obfuscation!?
Alan B.

Alan.
No wants to deny children a chance to learn phonics or to be tested during their schooling. And as a product of a fair bit of that ‘old fashioned stuff’ I know there is much to value from the past.

The concern, in this case, is enormous amounts of money will be wasted to implement another national screening (test) at the end of grade one. We already have national tests at grade 3, grade 5 and grade 7 as well as VCE which is more than we had when I was at school in the 50’s and 60’s.

The proposed screening program is described as a ‘five minute test’ of each individual child. Even if each test could be administered in five minutes this time adds up to millions of dollars to free up teachers for testing. Then there are the administrative costs on top of this. And what will this test change? The money would be better spent helping children with literacy and numeracy.

And, whatever approach to literacy and numeracy they may use, every teacher I know is aware and concerned about the very social issues you raise. They work hard to address the increasing problems of disadvantage,dysfunctional families, illiteracy and a lack of access to libraries etc. Teachers are generally motivated to give every child the best opportunity in life.

It is this motivation that makes many of us wish to see money spent to support children in the classroom rather than on another national test. Teachers always test children informally. They know who is struggling in their first year of school. We would like to see the money spent directly on supporting these children and that may be with phonics as you and I knew it.

At the moment that extra support is unavailable in most schools due to a lack of funding for specialist teachers, psychologists and speech therapists to work in schools, collaborating with teachers and supporting school programs. We had them in the seventies.

Our kids are missing out and another test will not change the situation.

If Mr Birmingham and his ilk would get out of the classrooms and stop using little children to assist in their electioneering and let teachers do their jobs, then children would have time to learn to read.
As a teacher, I know that students learn at different rates and the constant presence of either politicians or their ridiculous testing devices do not allow time for children to progress in their own way.

Once ( a while ago I'll admit) politicians and political views were forbidden in the classroom. I'd like to see this happening again.
Education is not a production line but at present that is how it is seen by the ignorant and the uninformed.