It took only a matter of weeks for Lesley Robertson to realise that the gamble had paid off. The learning development officer for Clackmannanshire council had been instrumental in setting up a project to introduce synthetic phonics into local schools in 1997 in a bid to boost literacy levels.
"I didn't expect the results we got," says Robertson. "It wasn't long before teachers were phoning us up and saying, 'You must come out and see what my children can do'. Children were reading sentences which before they would not have been expected to. It was amazing to witness." A landmark study would later confirm Robertson's first impressions of synthetic phonics – where children learn to sound out the single and combined sounds of letters. By the end of primary school, the Clackmannanshire children were three-and-a-half years ahead of their peers in reading and almost two years ahead in spelling.
More than a decade on, the Clackmannanshire programme is still in use, and continues to inform and influence the teaching of phonics in the UK. In England, in particular, the concept has been put at the heart of primary education. But critics say this has been done in such a way that many of the benefits have been lost.
England introduced synthetic phonics lessons for primary schools in 2007 following a review by Sir Jim Rose, which was prompted by the successes in Clackmannanshire. It was a controversial move, not least because it was required rather than optional, and had been championed by an articulate and vocal lobby of supporters.
Two years on, however, reading attainment appears to have remained static. Last year, the government was criticised after the key stage 1 test results showed that reading standards among seven-year-olds had not changed from the previous year, with 84% of pupils reaching the expected level 2 in reading this year, the same proportion as in 2008.
A spokesman for the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) says that phonics was never intended as a quick fix. Since 1997, the spokesman says, there has been a "massive" rise in reading and writing results and assessments at primary level, with a 17% jump in the number of children achieving the expected standard for their age in the key stage 2 English tests. "We never expected to see an immediate impact on national-level results, given that this is down to individual teachers and departments embedding this across 17,500 primary schools," says the spokesman.
"This is a big culture change for some schools, so it is likely to take time to become fully embedded – that's why we rolled out the Communication, Language and Literacy Development programme to all local authorities this year so all children experience best practice in the teaching of early reading and phonics."
David Reedy, president of the UK Literacy Association, says that while it would be wrong to use the key stage 1 results to suggest that phonics is not working, the jury is still out. "I think we have to say it is inconclusive at the moment, really," he says. "More attention needs to be paid to the other elements of what it means to become a reader as well as the phonics element. Phonics is necessary, but it is not sufficient to become a reader in a rounded sense."
Scotland, meanwhile, has taken a more hands-off approach. Despite the success of the Clackmannanshire programme, and arguably even more impressive results in West Dunbartonshire, where synthetic phonics helped the local authority to eradicate pupil illiteracy, the Scottish government has left it up to local authorities to adopt phonics if they wish.
Guidance from Learning and Teaching Scotland, the government body that supports schools in delivering the curriculum in Scotland, simply says it is "now accepted that phonics is one of the essential components of a balanced approach to the teaching of reading". It is thought that at least 27 out of 32 Scottish local authorities are using phonics in some form. Literacy levels, however, remain a concern. Just last month, a study by the Literacy Commission found that 18.5% of children in Scotland left primary school functionally illiterate.
Susan Ellis, a reader in child and primary education at Strathclyde University, says there are historical reasons for the different approaches taken in England and Scotland, but sees flaws in both of them.
"In England you have a very centralised curriculum where the government, the policymakers, have to be seen to be doing something, but are often quite distant from the people who have to make their decisions work," she says. "In Scotland, there is a much more devolved system where decisions are made much closer to those who will have to implement them.
Ellis says most current research shows that children need literacy teaching that is tailored to the individual. "I don't think the English [phonics] system works particularly well," she says. "Those from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds need good, sharp, upfront teacher-driven interactive phonics right from the minute they start school. Middle-class kids who come with quite a lot of book knowledge do better when they are given self-directed activities at the beginning, and a more sharp, hard input of more complex phonics later. The English approach saying 'Everyone has to do it that way' is not going to meet all these different needs. The Scottish approach, saying 'It is up to you' while not giving very clear advice, does not help either."
Tom Burkard, an expert in phonics and director of the educational charity the Promethean Trust, thinks that of the two, the English system is less likely to deliver results. "Any programme introduced in a top-down managerial way is doomed to failure," he says. "In England, we are stuck with a programme that simply is not addressing the real problems. When you have someone who tells you exactly what to do, you tend to follow it in a mechanical manner. Right now, with all the various policies put down by the DCSF, they are so detailed and so comprehensive that in the end what teachers really do tends to be a bit of cherry-picking of the things they feel comfortable with. It is not being done with any real conviction."
This view is echoed by John Bangs, head of education at the National Union of Teachers. The introduction of phonics in England, he says, was too politicised, and schools have become confused. "What we need is a bit of pragmatism and depoliticisation. There is an issue about the systematic approach of teaching of phonics. It has to be based on deep knowledge; there is no one-size-fits-all, 2D solution to it."
Even the Clackmannanshire study, says Bangs, recognised the need for further research on areas such as comprehension, something the system adopted in England has not taken into account, he says.
Helen Nellis, head of early intervention at West Dunbartonshire council, says the key to success should be encouraging and inspiring people to become involved, rather than insisting that they do. "Anything that is imposed on people, in my opinion, tends to be more difficult to put into place," she says. "What we did at the start was a pilot project and then schools bought into it themselves."
The West Dunbartonshire phonics experiment was launched in 1997, at the same time as the Clackmannanshire scheme, with the aim of eradicating pupil illiteracy within a decade. At the time, the area had one of the poorest literacy rates in the UK, with 28% of children leaving primary school at 12 functionally illiterate. In 2007, the council reached its target of full literacy, the first education authority in the world to do so.
Synthetic phonics was at the core of the scheme, but was only one strand in a 10-step programme that included extra time in the curriculum for reading, home support for parents, and the fostering of a "literacy environment" in the community.
"A lot of people came and asked us about what we were doing," says Nellis. "We said the main thing you must do is adapt it to the children you are working with and the area where you are."
There is a belief among some within the education sector in Scotland that this message has not been taken on board south of the border, and that synthetic phonics has become an end in itself, rather than a key building block in a more comprehensive literacy strategy.
"People have taken it and used it for their own ends," says one educationist. "And where it has been more politicised, some of the elements have become lost."
Robertson, now Clackmannanshire's education service manager, says they had always taken the view that synthetic phonics in itself was not a magic bullet, and have resisted entreaties to become involved in the debate south of the border. "We would see it as an important component of learning to read, but it is not the only component. That's the difference between Scotland and England."
The system used in Clackmannanshire has changed only a little since the early days. "It has evolved in some respects, but the key elements are still the same," says Robertson. "Schools have flexibility to decide when they start, which is different from England. It is not a mad dash to get it done in a certain number of weeks. It is their professional judgment as to when youngsters are ready to move on."
Robertson insists the programme is still working. "We have definitely reduced the number of pupils we could describe as functionally illiterate."
And she would have no hesitation in encouraging others to follow Clackmannanshire's lead, provided they are prepared to take a tailored, relevant approach. "My advice is: be flexible enough to adapt it to suit the needs of your specific cohort. If it is not about meeting the needs of the children, then what is it about?"