Daily BulletinDaily Bulletin

The Conversation

  • Written by Misty Adoniou, Associate Professor in Language, Literacy and TESL, University of Canberra

In the May budget, the federal government allocated money to buy England’s phonic screening test for six-year-olds in Year 1.

The screening test, introduced in England in 2012, tests students at the beginning of Year 1 and again at the start of Year 2.

There are 40 words in the test, and all can be easily sounded out, but only 20 are real words. The other 20 are pseudo words like “shup” or “doil”. The purpose of the test is to see if children can match sounds to letters.

The Australian government claims the test will address a decline in reading as measured in international tests of reading for 10- and 15-year-olds.

It aims to tie education funding to this phonics test and has threatened to withhold federal education funding for states and territories that do not implement it. The matter will be discussed at the meeting of state and territory education ministers with the federal education minister in December.

That is a lot of weight being given to just one part of the literacy puzzle.

Here’s why Australia should not follow the English model.

1. The impact on reading outcomes is underwhelming

The phonics test has been deemed successful because the children get better at doing it over the course of the year. This is not surprising as schools are required to use government-sanctioned phonics programs to teach to the test.

In some schools in England, literacy time is now spent learning how to read made-up words in order to do well on the test.

So the impact of the phonic screening test is clear. Six-year-olds in England are getting better at sounding out individual decodable words, including made-up words.

What isn’t yet clear is if they are getting better at reading.

2. A new phonics test doesn’t help answer the hard questions

Identifying the children who are struggling with phonics isn’t hard. It is very evident to teachers, and we already test for it. We don’t need another test to tell us what the problems are. We need solutions.

The challenge is understanding how a struggle with phonics fits in with other information we have about the student – and then understanding what teaching intervention is required.

An English Additional Language (EAL) learner’s struggle with phonics will be different from a native English speaker who has a language-processing problem.

An EAL learner will find some English sounds hard to hear and hard to reproduce, just as English speakers find the sounds of other languages hard to hear and reproduce.

That doesn’t mean they have a reading difficulty, it just means they have an accent.

Instead of spending money on a screening test that confirms what teachers already know, governments should fund professional learning for teachers to help them understand what to do with the copious data already collected on their children’s reading, writing and spelling.

3. We are jumping the gun

The last international test of reading for 10-year-olds – Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) – was in 2011. In that test, England was 11th on the league table and Australia was 27th.

This was prior to England’s mandatory phonics screening and accompanying phonics-first approach in the early years. It was also before the introduction of the Australian Curriculum and its very clear articulation of phonics in the early years.

PIRLS is not a phonics test. It is a reading comprehension test. Specifically, it assesses students’ ability to:

The highest-performing English-speaking country in the 2011 PIRLS was Northern Ireland, in fifth place. Northern Ireland was not running a phonics-only approach to reading, nor was it employing mandatory phonics screening tests.

While Australia was languishing at 27th, the scores for the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) were exactly the same as Northern Ireland’s – top five internationally.

The ACT was not running a phonics-only approach to reading in the early years. It still doesn’t. Yet it also consistently tops the National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) standardised tests in reading.

So we cannot even identify a correlation – let alone a causation – between a phonics screening test and later success in reading comprehension.

When our government insists it is intent on pursuing evidence-based approaches to education, one would hope that it would seek out all the evidence and consider it carefully.

4. Phonics is just one player in the literacy story

Phonic knowledge is an important part of learning to read, write and spell. But phonics is only one of the tools you need to read.

Being able to sound out letters in words doesn’t mean you can understand them.

To be a successful reader you also need strong spoken language, a wide vocabulary, a good understanding of how sentences are structured and lots of experiences that you can draw upon to make sense of what you read.

5. Monkey see, monkey do

It is worth understanding the historical background to England’s “back to basics” phonics push.

Key evidence for this policy emphasis was a longitudinal study conducted in a cluster of Scottish schools for the Scottish government.

The study reported improved phonic skills in schools where phonics was taught systematically and explicitly. However, the children from the study ultimately did not perform any better than any other school in Scotland’s national standardised reading test in Year 7.

The study did not undergo peer review and its method has since been negatively critiqued. Scotland itself did not pursue a phonics-first approach to literacy as a result of the study.

It seems England has decided to put all its “reading” eggs in a very shaky basket.

So should we be following England’s lead?

As my mother wisely counselled,

“And if your brother jumped off a bridge, would you too?”

Authors: Misty Adoniou, Associate Professor in Language, Literacy and TESL, University of Canberra

Read more http://theconversation.com/a-new-phonics-test-is-pointless-we-shouldnt-waste-precious-money-buying-it-from-england-69355

Turn off the porch light: 6 easy ways to stop light pollution from harming our wildlife


Australia's first service sector recession will be unlike those that have gone before it


A time to embrace the edge spaces that make our neighbourhoods tick


The Conversation


$1.8 billion boost for local government

The Federal Liberal and Nationals Government will deliver a $1.8 billion boost for road and community projects through local governments across Australia.   The package of support will help lo...

Scott Morrison - avatar Scott Morrison

Scott Morrison press conference

PRIME MINISTER: This is a tough day for Australia, a very tough day. Almost 600,000 jobs have been lost, every one of them devastating for those Australians, for their families, for their commun...

Scott Morrison - avatar Scott Morrison


Local economic recovery plans will help towns and regions hit by bushfires get back on their feet as part of a new $650 million package of support from the Morrison Government.   As part of th...

Scott Morrison - avatar Scott Morrison

Business News

An Increasing Demand Of Corporate Function Venues In Melbourne

With an increasing culture of corporate function venues Melbourne, there is a rising competition among professionals. In order to appreciate and honour hardworking employees, corporate owners gi...

News Company - avatar News Company

How to effortlessly promote your business

You've worked hard to build your business from the ground up, and as any successful entrepreneur will tell you brand promotion is everything. Not only do high-quality promotions build a sense of...

News Company - avatar News Company

Hotdesking might not be ‘dead’ after all

According to Christian Pistauer, Workplace Strategy director of Meta5 Group in Australia, COVID will dramatically change the commercial real estate sector in Australia for many years to come. ”...

Tess Sanders Lazarus - avatar Tess Sanders Lazarus

News Company Media Core

Content & Technology Connecting Global Audiences

More Information - Less Opinion