The Times Education Supplement, on 11^th February 2025, published a piece by Darren Leslie: ‘What impact could phonics-first approaches have in Scotland?’ Here, I reflect on what he says.

I share Darren Leslie’s dismay that so many young people in Scotland are facing difficulties in reading and writing independently. However, I am less convinced that systematic synthetic phonics (SSP) is the only answer to this.  Leslie claims that cueing is mixed with phonics to poor effect in many schools in Scotland, and I fully agree that encouraging children to ‘guess’ based on pictures or contexts is highly unsatisfactory. I’m less clear how often this practice is used, but its ongoing existence begs a question.  In a context where SSP is already widely used within Scottish schools, forms the basis of most additional support for learning interventions, is the backbone of literacy teaching in Initial Teacher Training for primary teachers, and if it’s the panacea that so many claim, why is anything else necessary?

In my own experience, whilst high quality phonics teaching meets the learning needs of many children, it does not meet the needs of all.  Even the British Dyslexia Association cautions against the use of SSP to the exclusion of all other methodologies: APPG: Phonics – and what does the evidence tell us? – British Dyslexia Association.

If the figure of 25% of children who do not respond to an SSP approach is accurate, then it behoves all of us as educators to consider alternatives and to deploy them as appropriate.  Fortunately, there are many options available.  Whether it is a whole-word reading approach such as the Ladybird Key Words reading scheme, an analytic phonics approach, or a morphological approach such as Morph Mastery or Davis Learning Strategies. 

Sadly, the pressures on class teachers often (and understandably) prevent an individuated approach being possible.  There is often simply not enough time to talk in sufficient depth with an individual learner to analyse how they learn best and therefore which approach would suit them.

It is one of the pleasures of working 1:1 with learners, that I have the privilege of being able to do exactly that.  I can spend time asking them how they feel and respond to certain activities.  I can listen carefully to their responses.  This then allows me to tailor a block of sessions which will play to their strengths, build their confidence, and navigate a path to success. (16 February 2025)