In his 2006 report, Sir Jim Rose said, 'The indications are that, when children do not get a really good start ['quality first', Wave 1, synthetic phonics teaching], they are likely to need interventions to enable them to 'catch up' and 'recover' ground that they should not have lost in the first place (Rose 2006.para 100)

Your Options -and what to avoid:

1. Rely on 'in school' support usually based on the content of an IEP (Individual Education Plan) which, presently, due to the wide-spread lack of knowledge of the most effective way to teach reading, often amounts to little more than learning the high frequency words as 'sight words'; ''I am working with some who know loads of the high frequency words but who cannot blend an unknown CVC word unaided'' (Y2 TA doing reading intervention work)

Ruth Miskin, an early reading expert, visited..'an Islington school of 400, 120 children were on the SEN register. 115 of these could not read. The SEN co-ordinator was so busy filling in Individual Education Plans that she had no time to teach them. Comments would be made such as ‘He needs to learn his sounds’. Ruth’s response was ‘Then teach them!’ Schools often want children on the SEN register: the more children it has there, the more excuse it has in OFSTED inspections. In two months, Ruth managed to get 80 children off the register '(RRFnewsletter 59 p21)

'Across the country more than one in five of all pupils are on 'Special Needs' registers - and in some schools the figure is as high as a staggering 55% or more' (Marks. RRF46. p12) The majority of the children with unstatemented SEN are on the register simply because they have not been properly taught how to read. All schools should have a PREVENTION strategy in place for those children who are slower, for whatever reason, learning to read. This should be more of the classroom synthetic phonics programme, or one that follows exactly the same principles, but done one-to-one for a short period daily for however long it takes to get the child 'up to speed', and keep them there.

The DCSF's own 'Wave 2' small group, intervention programmes (ELS /ALS) for the primary stage (KS1/2) were, pre-2007/8, based on whole-language/mixed methods.

- ELS was rewritten (2007) with the aim of bringing it in line with the Rose Report which stated that, 'High quality (synthetic) phonic work, as defined by the review, should be a key feature of the provision in each of these 'waves' (Rose 2006. para 133) The revised ELS appears to consist of the original whole-language programme bolted on to the DfE's early reading programme, Letters and Sounds, rather than a genuine rewrite. It still includes a miscue analysis assessment, uses whole language books (Recovery Recovery Book Bands) rather than phonically decodable texts, and contains unhelpful and time wasting 'busy-work' which will not help your child learn to read.

- ALS was transformed (Mar. 2007) into 'Year 3 Literacy Support (Y3LS/Sir Kit's Quest)' An experienced early years teacher commented, 'Who needs this boring load of tosh? All they've done is tweak it to make it look "Rose compliant" and bring it in line with the new strategy framework''

- The Wave 2 intervention programme, Better Reading Partnership (BRP), was, ''developed by Bradford Local Education Authority (LEA) in 1996 and is based on the Reading Recovery Programme''...''The reading partner notes the child's use of the three BRP reading strategies: grapho-phonic (visual), syntactic (structure) and semantic (meaning). Weaknesses are addressed through prompts: "Does that look right?", "Does that sound right?", and "Does that make sense?" (Dunford.LiteracyTrust) BRP is a non-systematic, multi-cueing programme.

Catch Up Literacy. A Wave 3, non-systematic, multi-cueing intervention. www.catchup.org
Dee Reid, 'the lead literacy consultant to Catch Up', gives advice to the mum of a struggling reader age 10:
''If Jayden gets stuck on a word, tell him what the word is and then ask him to repeat it. Give him a clue to remind him how to remember the word next time, e.g. ‘It’s in the picture’ or ‘Look at the letters at the beginning’' (D. Reid.Newsletter Sept 2011)

The DCSF's (Sept. 2009) Wave 2 intervention for KS3, 'Literacy Plus', was not designed to teach struggling or non-readers HOW to read, but simply to, ''move Year 7 and 8 pupils quickly from level 3 to level 4 in English''

There are, presently, no government-produced synthetic phonics intervention programmes available specifically designed for secondary age pupils or adults- see teenagers

In his 2006 report, Sir Jim Rose recommended that additional support in ALL the 'waves' of intervention should be fully compatible with mainstream practice (high quality, systematic synthetic phonics taught discretely) (Rose Review p70)) and he rightly rejected the NLS multi-cueing strategies. Ruth Kelly, Education Secretary at the time said, 'I accept all your recommendations and will ensure that they are implemented' (Kelly response to interim report 30/11/05) The DfES (now DfE) followed up by stating that, 'High-quality phonic work, as defined by the Rose review, should be a key feature of literacy provision in all the ‘waves’ of intervention' (DfES 2007 PNS) Sir Jim Rose described Reading Recovery as 'a multi-cueing, non-systematic approach' (Rose. 2009 Presentation to Speld). Despite this, outrageously, the same government continued to encourage and fund schools to use Reading Recovery (RR) as a Wave 3 intervention for Y1 children, and recommended that they 'layer' RR with a range of other whole language interventions, all found under the Every Child a Reader (ECaR) mantle. Caution: From 2011, schools using Reading Recovery are likely to change to 'cheaper to implement' close copies of RR as the government's formerly ring fenced ECaR funding has now been incorporated into the Dedicated Schools Grant.

Time to stop digging -independent assessment of Reading Recovery.
http://www.prometheantrust.org/admin/files/ECAR%20-%2001-09.pdf

Dr. Chris Singleton was a key contributor to the DCSF-commissioned Rose report on Dyslexia (Rose. 2009). On the subject of Reading Recovery, he said, ''Only 12%–15% of Reading Recovery children completing their programmes between 2003 and 2007 achieved a Level 2a or above in Key Stage 1 Reading National Curriculum assessments, the level at which children can tackle unfamiliar words and have therefore developed a self-sustaining word recognition system'' (Singleton 2009 p11)

Parliament's Science and Technology committee also questioned the use of Reading Recovery (and other whole language intervention programmes):
Dec 2009. Evidence Check on Early Literacy Interventions http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/44/4405.htm
Having checked all the evidence, the all-party committee said: ''Teaching children to read is one of the most important things the State does. The Government has accepted Sir Jim Rose's recommendation that systematic phonics should be at the heart of the Government's strategy for teaching children to read. This is in conflict with the continuing practice of word memorisation and other teaching practices from the 'whole language theory of reading' used particularly in Wave 3 Reading Recovery. The Government should vigorously review these practices with the objective of ensuring that Reading Recovery complies with its policy''.

2. Obtain a Statement. It is assumed that most children with less severe learning difficulties will receive 'in school' help for their difficulties with funding from the school budget, the type of help being specified in their IEP (Individual Education Plan) The only way to get extra LEA funding for more specialist help is to obtain a 'Statement'. This is a document that sets out a child's needs and all the extra help he or she should get. Statements for 'dyslexia' are notoriously difficult to obtain and the experience of trying to obtain one can be extremely stressful, time consuming and expensive. Also, unless you manage to employ the services of an educational psychologist to help you, who is keen and knowledgeable about evidence-based, phonic reading programmes, your child's statement is unlikely to result in your child being taught how to read and spell. It is the CONTENT of the statement which is important. By law, the content must be "specific, detailed and quantified". Unless it specifies the use of a fully evidence-based, remedial reading programme (see programmes) and there are trained personnel READY, ABLE and WILLING to deliver the specified content one-to-one, the statement will be of no use whatsoever..

3. Only for the wealthy, or for the few who can obtain a grant - an independent school with specialist 'dyslexia' teaching. This often involves the child boarding, which can be an extra trauma for an already unhappy child, and there is NO guarantee that the school will use the most effective remedial method (a high quality, synthetic phonic intervention programme) to teach reading. Some of the methods used to teach reading in these schools are decidedly 'quirky'. www.rrf.org.uk/messageforum/viewtopic.php?t=3432 Note that, ''Brooks (2007) has described ratio gains of between 1.4 and 2.0 as having ‘small impact’ and being ‘of modest educational significance’; ratio gains less than 1.4 he classes as being of ‘very small impact’ and ‘of doubtful educational significance’. On this basis all the results reported from studies in UK specialist [dyslexia] schools and teaching centres would be regarded as disappointing (or even disregarded altogether), since the largest ratio gain was only 2.0 (except at Moon Hall School [which uses a programme similar to the Sound Reading System]'' (italics added. Singleton p74)

4. Home education, possibly on a short-term basis only whilst the parents, or a tutor, concentrate on remediating the literacy problems -alongside a basic curriculum with activities that enthuse your child and restore their self-esteem- see UK Home Education.

5. Privately arranged specialist tuition. Carefully chosen remedial reading tuition can be the solution if it can be afforded, and as long as the child is happy to attend. For school-attending children, specialist tuition can take place legally off the school premises during school hours, at the discretion of the school, as an 'Approved educational activity off-site'. For the youngest children, 6-7 yr. olds, this is really essential as they are far too tired after school. Parents should approach the school in a spirit of co-operation and negotiate a mutually agreeable time to withdraw their child for tuition. It is, after all, in the school's interest to have their pupils able to read and write effectively.

In law it is always the PARENTS' duty to provide a SUITABLE education for their children, including catering for any special needs (Education Act 1996 Section 7). Normally parents delegate this duty to a school. If parents believe that the school is failing to provide their child with a 'suitable' education then the parents are obliged to do something about it. They would be acting irresponsibly if they didn't do so. By arranging specialist tuition during school hours, they are merely trying to fulfil their lawful duty by setting up what the school can't/won't provide. The school needs to have a very good reason to withhold consent - is the school able to provide equivalent tuition: a regular time, a quiet area for one-to-one, plus someone with expertise in using synthetic phonics remedially on the school premises, paid for by the school? Probably not! If the school refuses, then the parents should contact their LEA's SEN department and explain the situation.

A parent comments: 'The parents are stuck between a rock and a hard place. A position I experienced when my child was going through school.
THE ROCK. You want to do the best for your child and do what you can at home to support them. You look for private tuition, sit with them to do homework etc. However the child is often very difficult because they don't want to do the extra lessons at home, they don't want to do their reading etc. The constant battle to get homework done or even getting them to school etc creates a very stressful environment of arguments and tantrums and can have a negative effect on your relationship with the child and can affect other family members. The reason the child is being difficult at home is because they find school a very stressful place where they're constantly put under pressure to get work finished, struggling with reading, or are fighting emotions where they've been told their work is just not good enough. They're very much aware of their limitations when they compare themselves with their own peer group. They often keep their emotions in check in school and vent their frustrations, anger, upsets at home. The last thing they want is to come home and find it's a continuation of school, more reading, more work etc.
HARD PLACE. When the homework, reading practise etc fails to get done at home, you are viewed, by the school, as unsupportive parents. If you go into the school asking for help etc. you are viewed as "pushy parents" (quote with permission Sheridan Sharp)

Choosing a remedial reading tutor:

If you plan to use an independent tutor to help your child, then check the CONTENT and the TIME FRAME of the programme that the tutor will provide, extremely carefully. A good intervention programme will usually take between 15 - 30, one hour, one-to-one sessions (with equal home-work back-up time) to remediate effectively. A few children, who have been left very confused and damaged by whole-language reading practices, may take a little longer, as may those with additional learning difficulties. Specialist programmes for 'dyslexia' (Orton-Gillingham based) often take years to complete and leave many children still unable to read properly. They should be avoided for your child's (and your wallet's!) sake.

Make sure that the tutor uses a evidence-based, highly structured, intensive, synthetic / linguistic phonic programme -see main methods 3 as the basis for their teaching. Avoid any tutor who claims to 'tailor the lessons to a child's individual learning style' or uses a 'mixture of methods'. See- What NOT to do

The chosen programme must work rapidly with positive advances to the child's reading and writing skills being perceptible to all involved - parent, child and tutor - within a short time. Furthermore, the tutor should, 'Involve the parent... directly in homework so that she has a positive role and can maintain gains between sessions and after sessions have ended.' (D McGuinness WCCR p320)

http://www.rrf.org.uk/archive.php?n_ID=91&n_issueNumber=49 'Must read' article by an independent tutor N.B. This article is from 2002. Fiona Nevola went on to write her own linguistic phonics intervention programme, The Sound Reading System, based on the work on Prof. Diane McGuinness.

©