John Bald/language and literacy

Sir Jim Rose Review of Dyslexia. Reply

As reported below, Sir Jim did not receive my submission to his review on dyslexia. He has now sent me this response (this is the complete text of his email).

 

John

I may well have seen your first submission but cannot now recall the precise points you made. On the Dyslexia Review, I was correct in saying that I had not seen your submission. I have now spoken with (civil servant) and we think that it may have been lost in transit to the researcher who was not based in the Department. Obviously, I very much regret whatever caused the omission.

On the important point about the teaching of regular and irregular patterns, I certainly agree that the latter should be carefully taught but I remain convinced that children should meet with early success in decoding and encoding, which the introduction of regular patterns secures. That was all too evident in what we saw in the case of well-taught Jolly Phonics, and in the Clackmannanshire programme where the s/a/t/p/i/n starter was invariably successful in switching children (and teachers) on to phonics - simple but effective.

As you know, Ruth Miskin's Programme is similarly structured but with a different set of starter letters. I have long supported Ruth Miskin's work. I invited Ruth to run the phonics training of all the National Strategy Literacy Consultants, which she did with consumate knowledge and skill. Her trainers also featured in the training video which was widely distributed to primary schools. Far from being tangential, her work has been central to raising awareness of the importance of securing high quality teaching of phonics. I suspect Ruth would agree, that much of this has been a needlessly acrimonious battle at times and one that has yet to won.

Best wishes,

Jim

So, Sir Jim accepts that irregular patterns in English need to be carefully taught. This point is not made in his reports, and is a new development. From all of my experience, it is, alongside phonics, the key to teaching people to read in English, and the answer to those who would argue, as Michael Rosen has, that those of us who see phonics as the basis of learning to read in English are presenting a distorted view of the language.

It is a pity indeed that the evidence I sent to his review did not reach him, and that tens of millions of pounds have been spent on mis-training teachers on the basis of evidence that was incomplete at best, and, at worst, deliberately distorted by people who wanted their own view to prevail. 

 

 

Ebacc - a major change for the better

Michael Gove's Ebacc - and it is unequivocally his idea - has brought about immediate improvements in the numbers of teenagers given the opportunity to follow properly demanding courses at GCSE. The Telegraph has the details here. This is only just in time, after people were talking last week about the "terminal decline" in languages. A first step in returning education to its proper purposes - now we can start to tackle the real problem, which is opening up achievement to everyone, as a matter of right. We are lucky to have Sir Michael Willshaw, and a growing number of like-minded headteachers, to take up the fight.

 

Guardian and Grade Inflation.

The Guardian, Polly Toynbee apart, is less predictable than most newspapers. One minute it is printing dangerous nonsense telling people to lie about their qualifications, and the next it is telling the truth about grade inflation here.  Grade inflation has been carefully managed by examining boards that are unsound, as they operate as commercial companies and not academic authorities. They create nice little earners for themselves by publishing their own textbooks, dedicated to their own examinations and often written by chief examiners, a sort of mini version of the MacDonald's University - everything by, from and for the company, and no place whatever for independence of mind or intellect. Life, as usual, is made more complicated by the fact that these textbooks are not all bad - see the review below.

The problem has been made worse by a fundamental dishonesty that leads them to manipulate results according to what suits them - they dishonestly mark down candidates in their final piece of coursework too, if it means avoiding more A grades than they want. This "system" may be retrievable by means of urgent and fundamental reform, with an improved role for universities - the few of them that are not corrupt themselves - and probably also for legitimate business. Fiddling grade boundaries and marks is not a legitimate business. 

 

Peter Buckroyd: How to Achieve a C or above in GCSE AQA A English (Heinemann)

This is a very sensible book for anyone looking to make progress in English from around Y9 onwards. It has good advice on the way pupils need to move from a basic understanding of a text to a well-organised and accurate answer to the kind of question likely to arise in any GCSE English paper. Lots of good examples of answers achieving grade C, and generally clear explanation of the additional requirements of grade B. Alongside BBC Bitesize, highly recommended for anyone not quite sure of a C grade - I'm glad I bought it. 

A happy parent

Hi, John, do you remember Michael? I brought him to see you five years ago for help with reading and maths. 

I do remember - Michael's father, a local clergyman, had given me the idea of throwing down pairs of cards to speed up Michael's recognition of number combinations. He was in a drudge of a primary school, doing nothing but practising writing for SATs all day.

He's just finished his GCSEs, and got A in both English papers and A in maths. He found a maths teacher he really clicked with. I thought you'd like to know, and that he might be of help to other children who have problems. He's going to sixth form college, and wants to be an actor.

Thanks for the call, Stephen. You've cheered me up. If you read this,  sorry I had to change your names. And well done, Michael.

Dispatches, 2005, Dyslexia.

Karina McLachlain has found a link to this very useful programme , which points out the disparities between the "common view" of dyslexia and scientific evidence. It features several of the best researchers in the field of reading and learning difficulties -  Professors Keith Stanovitch, Margaret Snowling and Dorothy Bishop, and also Professor Julian (Joe) Elliott of Durham University, who approaches the topic as a straightforward but ungullible academic who wants to see propositions supported by evidence. The programme is very well worth viewing for anyone new to the subject or worried about their child. 

Still, I do not believe that the evidence supports the view that there is "no such thing as dyslexia". There are some things that we do not fully understand, even with the best of evidence, and these should, I think support a definition. I suggest the following, which is as valid now as it was in the late nineteenth century, when the issue was first noticed (nobody threw rude words like "anecdotal" at those who first observed it - people recognised disciplined observations for what they might lead to in those days). 

Dyslexia is a difficulty with reading and other aspects of literacy that cannot be explained by current scientific evidence.

Once a problem is pinned down by science - whether it be visual stress, slow or weak intellectual processing, clumsiness, weak awareness of sounds (whether social or medical in origin), poor teaching, very low general intelligence, aka severe general learning difficulties - then we can have a clear understanding of what we are dealing with. These difficulties and their consequences can be explained as well as described, and hence we do not need an umbrella term to cover them.   

Over time, as our scientific understanding increases, our ability to select the correct teaching for the individual problem facing us will improve, and the range of issues covered by the definition will shrink. Matching teaching to learning needs should be the main focus for teacher training, and it is not.

Nevertheless, as Grace Fernald found in the 1940s, the right teaching will enable anyone to read and write within the limits of their inherent ability to understand what they are reading.

This limitation, illustrated in the work and subsequent school experience of Cushla, in Dorothy Butler's Cushla and Her Books, is not dyslexia. (Cushla, born with multiple handicaps, received from birth an intensive and inspiring introduction to books from her parents and grandparents. She responded extraordinarily well, to the extent that some people did not believe her to be handicapped. This turned out not  to be true, and she never exceeded the reading expected of a seven year old. Source: personal communication from Dame Marie Clay). Cushla's difficulties were, of course, different in nature from the those of children who receive a very limited experience of language in early childhood, and so do not develop the vocabulary they need in order to succeed in school. These difficulties are social in origin, and not inherent.

Definitions, particularly of what we don't fully understand, are rarely perfect. But at least this one might rid us of our current mass-misdiagnosis, and its associated expensive "solutions". The programme is useful as an introduction to Professors Stanovitch and Snowling's emphasis on developing vocabulary and understanding as well as decoding. Many thanks to Ms McLachlain for digging it out. 

 

Joanna Macgregor, Bach Goldberg Variations. Wonderful

I've always found Bach's Goldberg Variations difficult, no, impossible to listen to with any enjoyment. I've heard the most famous recordings, including Glenn Gould's, and felt put upon by the sheer weight of the music, its complexity, and the difficulty musicians have in playing it. 

So, Joanna Macgregor's lightness, speed, tone and above all her consummate understanding are a revelation. Letting Bach breathe  is a particular challenge in these pieces, and Ms Macgregor achieves this from the first bars, replacing the tension that comes through most performances with peace. She matches pace, tone and technique flawlessly to the widely varying demands of each movement, realising each as a distinct work of art and  as part of the whole. It never flags, is never too fast, above all never boring. Bach said he wanted to set free the soul of the musician. This is the result.

Google, Luvvies and Boffins

Eric Schmidt attacks the UK's arts - science divide here (full text, courtesy of The Guardian) and he has a point. Much of this weblog, and all of the rest of my work, is kept up to date by my wife Enid's searching of New Scientist and other sources to ensure that I don't miss key brain research. It would not exist, and I could not work, without computers - they enable me to communicate on the same basis as large corporations, and with something of the same presentational quality. (I don't exaggerate this. I'm not as good at graphics as I'd like to be). So, perhaps Michael Gove can take some satisfaction from the balance of arts and science subjects in his Ebac. 

Treating children like lumps of coal.

A friend and his son call at the house. He's doing Spanish next year (Y8). But you did some French with him, and he was doing really well at French. Seems silly.

It's worse than silly. The school has decided that all of its lower-attaining children will switch from French to Spanish. If it had started them all on Spanish, that would have been different. But this young man liked French and was getting on well. No one took any notice when his dad said so. He has just been shovelled into a Spanish class like a lump of coal. He's not happy, and neither is his dad. What do they know? What do they matter compared with the might and wisdom of a secondary school?  I'll try to help him, but at times I despair.

Rick Jones, The Guardian. How not to do uniform.

There is no point chivvying children about uniform, says Mr Jones, here.

I could not agree more. What you do is enforce it. A uniform infringement, in the opinion of the adult, not the pupil, should bring an immediate detention. If they choose to repeat the exercise, double the detention, and so on.  You don't argue, you don't chivvy, you just enforce. They will soon do up their top button or wear skirts of a suitable length. If you accept their refusal to wear their uniform properly, you live with constant defiance of your authority in a way that prevents you from forming the proper relationship between teacher and pupil. This new detention legislation is forty years overdue. Mr Jones's solution is to get rid of the uniform. Mossbourne's is not to tolerate the defiance.