by Tom Middlehurst, ASCL Deputy Director of Policy

The story of reading over the past 15 years, like all really good stories, has had its highs and its lows, its heroes and its villains. 

In 2018, England scored its highest results in PISA reading tests, up to 13th in the world from 25th a decade earlier. Scores slipped in 2022 following the pandemic, but not as much as other OECD countries. 

Yet despite these international successes, and although reading has bounced back to the best since Covid in Key Stage 2 outcomes, a quarter of children left primary school this summer not meeting the expected standard in this subject. This trend only gets worse at the end of secondary school, where this year around 30% of young people did not achieve the so-called ‘standard’ pass of a grade 4 in English language.

ASCL members tell us the GCSE English qualifications are not fit for purpose, sucking the life out of what should be a glorious and exhilarating subject. Our members worry that fewer students are reading for pleasure, and that fewer want to study linguistics or literature in the future. This is reflected in the latest entry data for A levels, with entries into A level English language and/or literature dropping by almost 5% in a year.

Nobody doubts the importance of reading – it is the key that unlocks the wonders and joys of the rest of the curriculum. But it’s how the government co-authors this story with teachers, parents and students that will determine if the key fits the lock.

So, are the recently announced policies on phonics and Year 8 tests that key?

In principle, the government’s target for 90% of children to pass the phonics screening test in Year 2 is rightly ambitious. However, no matter how noble this ambition may be, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson was somewhat lacking in detail on how it will be achieved. 

It can’t be stated enough that this is a national ambition, not a school-level target; achieving 90% nationally means that some schools are likely to be significantly below this, and some schools above it. We therefore need a national plan to get there.

The quality of reception education and achievement in English are both national priorities for the new regional improvement for standards and excellence (RISE) teams, so it’s likely that this is the route that any government-backed training or funding will go through. 

But without more investment in already stretched school budgets this won’t be enough. A ten percentage-point rise over this parliament is certainly achievable, but will require more than just spirited speeches and ambitious aspirations.

Perhaps more controversial is the proposal for a new reading check in Year 8, which will assess fluency and comprehension. 

Almost all secondary schools undertake at least yearly reading tests throughout Key Stage 3, so many leaders will question why a DfE written test is needed.

There is some logic in having a nationally benchmarked assessment at this point in the key stage. We know that many readers who met the expected standard in primary school, coast or even go backwards during transition. Doing a check in Year 8 therefore allows enough time to see how students are progressing in secondary, and to target intervention for the weakest readers before they start GCSEs.

The focus on fluency and comprehension – rather than word recognition – is also welcome and reflects examples of good assessments in other jurisdictions. 

However, despite these potential benefits, concerns remain. Little has been said about what these tests will look like, when in the year they’ll be taken, and how schools are expected to administer them. Assuming that the DfE will avoid clashes with the main summer series of GCSEs and A levels, we may see a spring term check, which would put strain on both the space to conduct them, and on curriculum time.

The DfE has said these tests will be a snapshot, not requiring revision and not yet another accountability measure to bash schools with. But what may happen when this administration has shuffled off this political cycle?

It would be all too easy for future governments to flick the switch and publish a league table of school-level reading check results. Indeed, we understand that although the data won’t be published, the results will be shared with Ofsted. There is a thin line between a formative check that will help schools identify readers who need more support and provide targeted intervention, and an accountability lever. 

As soon as the latter is crossed over, the test will inevitably become less helpful, distort the curriculum, and add to leaders’ and teachers’ burdens. Sharing the data with Ofsted dooms the reading check before it has even begun its journey.

Tests and targets are easy to set but what would make the greatest difference in improving literacy is to ensure that schools are sufficiently funded and resourced to provide more support to children from disadvantaged backgrounds and those with special educational needs. As things currently stand, the financial situation is dire, and schools are having to cut provision. 

If the government reads the room – with fluency and comprehension – it might better understand the real challenges that need to be overcome.