The Rose Review: good or bad news for reading standards?
30 January 2009Add to My Folder
Rated 2/5 from 1 rating (Write a review)
Chris Jolly, Publisher of Jolly Phonics, has some strong reservations about the Rose Review and its potential impact on reading standards. Find out more in his letter to Literacy Time PLUS.
This week, Sir Jim Rose wrote to the Schools Secretary Ed Balls to update him on the progress made in children’s early reading over the last three years. The key to children’s reading success, he suggested, was in the quality of teaching, and progress made in the teaching of reading in the pre-school sector has not always been sustained in the infant classroom.
Sir Jim believes that the six broad areas of learning being proposing in his Primary Review, to replace individual subjects, will give teachers more flexibility, relieve the pressure of an ‘overloaded’ curriculum, and enable infant teachers to focus more closely on raising standards in reading.
Sir Jim’s comments, and many of his suggestions for a Primary Review, do not all sit well with Chris Jolly, Publisher of the leading UK synthetic phonics programme, Jolly Phonics. Chris sent Literacy Time PLUS the following response.
Good news and bad news
The proposals for a new primary curriculum by the independent primary review focus on ‘raising standards’. This is good news. Standards in literacy certainly need to rise and the emphasis on reducing the heavy prescription of recent years is welcome. But this is where the good news ends.