When was letters and sounds published

I have to say, it seems strange to me to be publishing materials on something which has been declared not fit for purpose, so I watch with interest what happens next. The decision by the DfE not to become involved with the publishing of programmes will allow teachers and schools to look at and evaluate for themselves the merits of the various independently researched schemes and choose one that suits their own experiences and preferences.

This is likely to mean a rise in attainment as teachers and schools follow their chosen programme more effectively, as they really believe in it, rather than picking a scheme just because they think it is the one inspectors or the government want them to.

Sara Wernham is the co-author of Jolly Phonics. Follow Jolly Learning on Twitter at jollylearning. Just possibly, says Sara Wernham Sara Wernham. Many of you will be aware of this and have adapted your teaching accordingly. The Department considered a variety of options for the future of Letters and Sounds and had originally commissioned a full SSP programme based on the Letters and Sounds handbook.

This would have included an updated order of progression addressing some of the flaws in the Letters and Sounds. They asked a group of outstanding schools, centred on Wandle and Little Sutton English Hubs in London, and overseen by trusted phonics experts, to produce this, alongside videos for home education during the Covid pandemic, and training materials for English Hub partner schools.

This means that the Department will not publish a full Letters and Sounds programme, nor an updated progression. For a number of years, effective teaching using Letters and Sounds has relied on schools themselves building a programme around the handbook. On 1st April , the Department launched a process to validate SSP programmes with a comprehensive and updated list of criteria, in order to create a new list of providers.

They are aware that a large number of schools continue to use Letters and Sounds, so are encouraging anyone interested in creating full SSP programmes based on Letters and Sounds to be tested at validation. Applications can be submitted now and a small panel with relevant expertise will review applications in June , November and March Schools should check that the approach taken is sustainable and works for all children, including the most disadvantaged.

There is no obligation to bring a programme for validation. Applications from schools wishing to share their good practice more widely, and who have the capacity to do so, are encouraged however. Schools can continue with their approach even if it is not validated. It is for individual schools to decide which approach to phonics teaching they use, although the Department recommends schools consider an SSP programme from the validated list, as these programmes will have met robust criteria and will have been tested and assessed to be of high-quality.

This expectation is consistent with the English programmes of study: key stages 1 and 2 National curriculum in England which states that pupils should read aloud accurately books that are consistent with their developing phonic knowledge and that do not require them to use other strategies to work out words. Schools choosing decodable reading material for pupils that is not included within or recommended by the SSP programme they are using should ensure it is fully decodable and only includes sounds pupils have already learnt and with which they are fully secure.

Schools can also seek support and advice from their nearest English Hub when choosing decodable texts to match a programme. Please note: the DVD which accompanied this document is no longer available.

Related content Learning to read through phonics Letters and sounds: principles and practice of high quality phonics Teaching phonics: information for schools Choosing a phonics teaching programme Research evidence on reading for pleasure. Explore the topic Phonics.

Is this page useful? Maybe Yes this page is useful No this page is not useful. Thank you for your feedback.