28th January 2026 – I received some questions from Tess who is undertaking my Phonics Training Online course. I thought her questions would be very interesting for people in the wider domain so I asked Tess if I could use her message and answer her questions via my literacy blog – therefore available for anyone to read. (I’m aware that some of my answers will already be obvious to Tess herself – but I’m answering in full for the benefit of others.) Tess kindly gave me her permission – so here goes…
“Dear Debbie,
My name is Tess, and I hope you don’t mind me getting in touch. I am currently following your online phonics course and have just completed Module Part 2. I wanted to thank you first of all for the clarity and coherence of the approach. As a teacher, it has been both reassuring and challenging in the best possible way.
I am writing to you for two main reasons: one personal and one professional, which are, in my case, very closely connected.
On a personal level, I am a mother raising my one-year-old baby bilingually following the OPOL method. I speak English to him at all times, while my husband speaks Spanish to him and to me. We live in the Basque Country, where he attends a nursery that is officially trilingual (Spanish, Basque and English), although in practice the dominant language there is Spanish. This means that, apart from nursery, his only consistent exposure to English is through me and the audiobooks and songs we play at home throughout the day.”
Debbie: Brilliant! Your son is being exposed to age-appropriate activities and the full range of sounds within natural speech in the English language as well as in Spanish. Spoken English at home and in the nursery will be tuning his ear into the range of sounds in English of which there are far more ‘phonemes’ (the smallest readily-identifiable sounds in speech) than in the Spanish language – nearly twice as many! There is a short explanatory video where I illustrate the stark contrast between the number of ‘sounds’ in the English language compared to Spanish – including showing this difference visually via tangible ‘overview Alphabetic Code Charts’ for English and for Spanish. I think it is important that everyone is aware of the significant differences in the various sounds of languages certainly at the point when teachers are charged with the duty of formally teaching reading and spelling.
Tess: “When the time comes, I would very much like to teach him to read and write in English using a Systematic Synthetic Phonics approach, ideally following your system as faithfully as possible. Given that he will also be learning the Spanish alphabetic code at some point (and possibly Basque too), I would really appreciate your guidance on a few points:
1. At what age would you recommend starting SSP in a bilingual/trilingual context like this?
Debbie: [When you refer to my ‘system’, I think you are referring to my ‘Two-pronged systematic AND incidental phonics teaching and learning‘ approach, if so, I’ve provided a link to this for the benefit of other people.]
The internationally popular ‘systematic synthetic phonics’ (SSP) programme, Jolly Phonics, advertises the programme for children aged 3+. Originally, Jolly Phonics did not provide cumulative, decodable reading books – therefore focused on teaching the letter/s-sound correspondences with an effective child-friendly, catchy mnemonic system (‘aid to memory’). This consists of bright illustrations, songs, actions and themes linked to the letters and some letter groups for the ‘simple code’ stage (all the sounds, mainly one spelling), easy-to-use resources such as frieze and ‘finger books’ and word-level additional resources. Over time, and following requests and the growing trend for ‘matched reading books’ to enable children to have plenty of practice, Jolly Phonics published cumulative, decodable reading books as part of the programme. I suggest, however, that a typical SSP programme introducing a combination of letters linked to vowel sounds and consonant sounds following an ‘order’ such as s /s/, a /a/, t /t/, p /p/, i /i/, n /n/, enables a really extensive range of cumulative, decodable words. Add in the word ‘the‘ and/or the th (voiced and unvoiced /th/) and this enables plenty of early sentences too. In other words, a full SSP programme, or body of work, may have too much expectation of 3+ year olds. It goes ‘too fast’ into extensive word and sentence/text level work. I would therefore recommend that ‘full’ programmes are probably better aimed at 4+ for English-speaking children, and perhaps even later still for children for whom English is a brand new language in that they have to become familiar with spoken English along with learning the alphabetic code. Phonics programmes and their resources, and videos can still be appropriate, effective, child-friendly when children are exposed to them at 3+ which sets the scene for a later, formally-planned SSP programme. I provide a rationale for the more gentle introduction to letters and sounds for our extensive free Teeny Reading Seeds range of resources.
Tess:
2. Is there any need to delay English phonics because of the introduction of Spanish literacy, or can they comfortably coexist?
Debbie: I have heard from friends and associates in Spanish-speaking contexts (whether English is a new language or in bilingual contexts) that there is no need to delay English phonics – and it seems to me that ‘comfortably coexist’ is a good way of describing such scenarios. Indeed, I heard from one lady in Costa Rica that the English phonics was enabling the children to write freely in their Spanish language! She sent me writing examples and they were amazing (never underestimate the children). In her school, they also utilised England’s statutory Year One Phonics Screening Check and the children gained higher results than the national average of children in England that year! Having said all that, however, we must recognise that there are many different contexts in which teachers may be charged with teaching English for reading and spelling, and those teachers need to be supported accordingly and the different contexts taken into account.
I would also like to add with regard to the age of very young children, it can be a good idea to simply focus on the alphabet letters linked to initial sounds – both capital and lower case letters – (as mentioned earlier) for a number of reasons. In some contexts, for example, the coded writing system of the country may use a completely different script and method from Roman alphabet letters – and the spoken language of various countries can be significantly different from the English language. Thus, introducing the restricted range of 26 capital letters and 26 matched lower case letters linked to sounds at first is not as overwhelming as a full SSP programme – and there isn’t the launch into extensive word and sentence level practice. Simple printed words and sentences can still be shown, however, to exemplify what a ‘word’ is and what a ‘sentence’ is and to match words and sentences to the spoken language. We provide an extensive range of free nursery resources that can be used both ‘systematically’ (Phonics and Talk Time) AND ‘incidentally’ (Teeny Reading Seeds). Phonics International Ltd also provides some nursery resources that can be bought as ready-made resources linking alphabet letters to sounds. The sounds, or phonemes, are not restricted as any and all of the sounds (phonemes) of the English language are used for demonstrating oral blending (a sub-skill of decoding for reading) and oral segmenting (a sub-skill for encoding for spelling). With this ‘systematic AND incidental phonics drip-feeding approach’ for very young children, I make it clear that my rationale is ‘exposure, experience but NO expectation‘. Now, in the world of education, many people may be horrified by my reference to ‘NO expectation’ as the norm is ‘HIGH expectations’ of ourselves and the children. But with these teeny children, they will pick up what they are naturally able to pick up by exposure to any of life’s experiences. We are simply exposing them to letter shapes and linked sounds, tuning their ear to oral blending and oral segmenting of any phoneme-level sounds (along with any typical nursery experiences of rhyming, alliteration – as we always have done) – andthey will, literally, absorb, repeat, and eventually understand, what they are each capable of. If the very youngest children are introduced to alphabet letters and sounds, and learn some or all of them, I still suggest they would start a full SSP programme from the beginning. Okay, they may well know those first letter-sound correspondences to automaticity in the planned, systematic programme, but that will give them a confident head-start, and they will soon be provided with extensive word banks, sentences, texts and reading books to apply and practice their existing letter-sound knowledge.
Just to clarify, I am NOT advocating that all children should be launched into phonics via the approach of alphabet letters linked to sounds at first. They of course can be started on a full SSP programme but not, I suggest, at the age of 3+ if the programme’s word and text level content is too challenging. If the phonics programme being selected has a content-rich full ‘body of work’, parents/tutors/school leaders need to investigate the actual ‘body of work’ to evaluate whether it is suitable in their context for their learners. There are many SSP programmes to choose from nowadays – but teachers should at least try to compare some of these to understand not just similarities, but differences too. I write about some stark differences, for example, comparing my emphasis on ‘paper-based’ rich content for children (wherever possible for their ‘core’ resources and practice) with a well-known programme in England that states as its ethos ‘Strictly no worksheets or workbooks‘. [Note that I do not apologise for my ‘partial critique’!]
Tess:
3. Once started, how long should SSP teaching realistically be maintained? In Module Part 2 you stress the importance of keeping phonics teaching going well beyond the early years, even into secondary education, which I found particularly thought-provoking.
Apart from being a mother, I am a secondary English teacher at my child’s school, and I am also the English coordinator in Primary, and eventually Secondary. Phonics, however, are very lightly touched on in our English provision, especially beyond the very early stages. The school follows its own methodology where vocabulary, grammar and project-based learning are introduced very early on, even in the first years of Primary. Pupils also work with a digital reading platform from a young age, which, from a phonics-informed perspective, feels illogical and potentially counterproductive.
Debbie: This is indeed a fundamentally important question in my opinion. And it looks as if I largely go against what most educators believe and promote. I welcome the chance to put forward my personal thoughts – and experience and observations. You see, ‘phonics’ provision has been a battle for many years. Dr Joyce Morris many decades ago coined the phrase ‘phonicsphobia’ such was the hostility to phonics provision. She describes how sensible teachers had to do phonics ‘behind closed doors’. Thus, promoters of systematic phonics provision had to fight a corner (for a long time – known as ‘the reading wars’) based on the measured results of much research comparing approaches such as ‘whole word’, ‘whole language’, ‘multi-cueing word-guessing strategies’ and ‘incidental’ or ’embedded phonics’ (in so-called ‘authentic’ literature or ‘real’ books). But a downside of this protracted academic and practical battle has been the introduction of systematic phonics teaching in an almost apologetic way – simply fighting a corner for phonics. Thus, the argument has been that phonics sessions only require limited periods during the day (often just 20 minutes), and the planned introduction of phonics was put forward as ‘time-limited‘ (for example, two years of infant teaching). I point out that initial teaching of phonics isn’t so much about ‘time-limited’ as TIME INTENSIVE at first. In other words, it needs to be routine, daily if possible – and, as you know, I promote phonics ‘incidentally’ as required and as arises in the wider curriculum (not just the ‘systematic’ phonics lessons). To summarise the history of phonics, then, the very word ‘phonics’ is considered to be time-limited, and only as much as necessary because not all children are deemed to need phonics as such (or as much phonics provision as others), and totally associated as INFANT provision. This means any older children considered to need phonics ‘intervention’ (for their special needs), will be perceived as needing INFANT content and teaching. The teachers, the parents and carers, the learners themselves ALL perceive that they are getting INFANT provision. This is TOTALLY WRONG in my opinion – and seriously damaging and unhealthy to learners’ self-esteem. You see, there are phonics programmes that really are designed only for infants – their mnemonic systems, the style of the illustrations, the level of vocabulary and the nature of the reading books are for younger children. These are INFANT programmes. But, ‘phonics’ is in ALL words forever. Many adults call upon their phonics decoding and encoding skills for new, longer and more challenging words to read and spell sub-consciously. They may never have actually rationalised or understood that they are using ‘phonics’ (even if at the level of syllable chunks or letter strings and patterns) to read and spell at least now and again. If adult readers cannot apply their alphabetic code knowledge and phonics decoding skill to new printed words NOT IN THEIR SPOKEN LANGUAGE, then how can they come up with a pronunciation when faced with new printed words to ADD to their SPOKEN language? They can actually deduce the MEANING of new words in the literature but if they word-skip and don’t come up with a pronunciation (either silently in their heads or aloud), then they cannot grow their own vocabulary. So you see, I promote that the alphabetic code (English has the most complex alphabetic code in the world with multiple spelling alternatives and multiple possible pronunciation alternatives) is in ALL words FOREVER and is simply not just the domain of infant teaching and infant learning.
This is why I promote AS THE STARTING POINT, the benefits – indeed need – for all stakeholders to fully understand the nature and complexities of the English alphabetic code (including compared to other codes) and to use the ever-present, overview, Alphabetic Code Charts as a standard resource throughout our schools – just like Times Tables charts, Alphabet Posters, the Periodic Table, the orbit of Planets – are fundamentally ‘standard’ in education. With this ever-present Alphabetic Code Chart, teachers are able to support learners’ spelling as a continuum across the curriculum in an ‘incidental’ and ‘drip-drip’ way. Any support that is required to be given by teachers, teaching assistants, parents and carers will not present as ‘infant stuff’ because it is understood how complex the English code is and because the code is now not being presented by infant-styled frieze and infant-designed mnemonic pictures and words. It is now presented as the lifelong domain of ADULTS – not just the infants. And this is why our Phonics International programme can be used successfully beyond the infant stage – because it is designed that way. Learners will be readers and spellers long before the end of the programme, but part of the design is to ‘build up knowledge of spelling word banks’ and this includes a good level of vocabulary throughout the body of work, too. Teaching for older learners once they are indeed already reading and writing, does not need to be so often (not once a day or multiple times per week), it could be once or twice a week focusing on a particular part of the alphabetic code and accompanying vocabulary. The illustrations in Phonics International are cartoon-like, not baby pictures and mnemonics, and the key picture-words are consistent with our overview Alphabetic Code Charts. Indeed, provision for older learners may be entirely ‘incidental’ with the use of the Alphabetic Code Charts and may not require or benefit from any phonics programme or body of work.
ADDITIONALLY, I recommend using the language of ‘the code’ and not baby or infant language. By this I mean, avoid using what is often the common terminology of letters ‘making sounds’ or ‘saying sounds’. Thus, don’t ask the question, ‘What sound does that letter make?’ – as it makes no sound and this is the language often associated with infant phonics provision. The letters and letter groups ARE CODE FOR the various sounds. And by adopting the sifting and sorting of the code in specific words and groups of words, try to adopt the language of, ‘In this word, these letters are code for the sound /…/’ And, ‘In some words, this letter is code for the /…/ sound.’ This means you routinely start with the word, ‘In…’ – that is, ‘In some words…’ and ‘In most words…’ and ‘In a very few words…’. It is a mistake to start teaching the English alphabetic code as if it is in tablets of stone. It’s not. It is historic (teach some history of the English language and the spelling system, it’s intellectually very interesting), and the code is quirky and complex. This terminology and approach also lends itself to‘incidental’ phonics teaching and support. And for spelling, this kind of language can be helpful for incidental spelling as a continuum. At some point during my information and training videos you will hear me referencing ‘Alice’. At four years old during the very first ‘planned’ phonics lesson in a Reception class, I was teaching the letter shape s ‘as in snake’, saying the sound, showing the letter formation, modelling how reading and writing works, when Alice protested thus, ‘Mrs Hepplewhite, I’ve got that sound in my name but I haven’t got that letter’. I was amazed – and then I took Alice through the routine of writing down her name (which she recognised of course) and working out ‘where’ the sound was in her spoken name, and which two letters ‘are code for the /s/ sounds in your special name, Alice’. I then referenced the /s/ sound on my Alphabetic Code Chart, ran my finger along the row until we came to –ce ‘as in palace‘. I gave further examples of ‘words spelt that way’ and reassured Alice, ‘I will teach you more about that bit of code later’. This is an example of real-life incidental teaching. So for my own learning journey as a teacher, I began to really understand the potential of the big picture of overview Alphabetic Code Charts (which are really spelling reference charts), the need to THINK ON MY FEET, and the need for ‘incidental’ teaching – as required. If I had a Josh in my class, he would have that letter shape but not that sound, so I would have to say to Josh, ‘This is so interesting! In your special name, Josh, these two letters together are code for the sound /sh/’. Can you see how easy it is to be caught out from the get-go and not know how to address questions and contradictions and inconsistencies in the code as they arise?
Tess: I am currently considering writing a report for the school leadership team on the importance of systematic phonics teaching, starting from kindergarten, and continuing in a structured and purposeful way through the later years. Before doing so, I would love to hear your advice:
1.What key arguments or evidence would you prioritise when explaining the necessity of SSP to schools that already believe they are “doing reading”
Debbie: As in my response above – that the English alphabetic code is in all words forever and is the most complex alphabetic code in the world. Also, teachers need to be fully aware about this notion of ‘word-skipping’ when reading silently. Even literate adults may be too lazy to come up with a pronunciation for words such as dinosaur names they didn’t know already, or Latin plant names, and so on – but, as teachers, are they fully aware about the silent reading habits (reading reflex) – or capability – of all their learners? How many might be resorting to word-skipping to get by? Is the notion of ‘word-skipping’ shared between teachers, learners and their parents and carers? How familiar are all staff members with the complexities of the English alphabetic code? Does the school inform parents and carers about the English alphabetic code and how challenging both reading and spelling accurately can be in English? Can the school improve their ongoing support for spelling in English across the curriculum? What evidence is there on classroom walls of support for common words with unusual spellings and spelling word banks for subject-specific words? In my training, I describe how no phonics programme can provide all the words and word posters that teachers and learners encounter in their curriculum – so teachers need a tray of plain paper and a pack of felt pens to create their own word posters at any time – as required. You will find in my training that I take people through reflecting on how they are coming up with a pronunciation for a new printed word that they are unlikely to know in their spoken language, and how they spell a word that they’ve never heard or seen before. They then realise that they do, indeed, invariably use ‘phonics’ for reading and spelling new words even as adults. BINGO! Code knowledge and phonics application is lifelong ADULT STUFF.
Tess:
2. Are there any particular recommendations you would make for introducing phonics in a context where it has historically been marginalised?
Debbie: Yes indeed. Start here with my comments and rationale in this blog post, and also share with them the video and free charts. International and well-known bi-lingual phonics trainer, Coral George, is the lady who pointed out to me just how very helpful my overview Alphabetic Code Charts are for her world-wide teacher-training. In South America, Grace Vilar appreciated the role of these charts and went on to include them in all her teacher-training events. She also went on to develop her own SSP programme for Spanish and following the design ideas from the Phonics International programme and charts, she designed this chart for her Spanish programme. And I’ve already linked to the blog post ‘confusion to clarity’ featuring the findings of teaching English in bi-lingual contexts – here it is again.
Tess:
3. Do you have any guidance for teachers working in EFL or multilingual settings who want to realign their practice with SSP principles?
Debbie: Well – a thorough look around our Phonics International website will provide a lot of information and outstanding resources – all free. And, totally free, are the videos which provide some training – the ones on our homepage and those at the bottom of this page, one of which has full ‘course notes’.
We have a ‘hub’ website that links to all our work – free and to buy – and via that site you can also find the link to the ‘International Foundation for Effective Reading Instruction‘ which has a wealth of information – see the blog and in particular, the MESSAGE FORUM.
You shouldn’t need to provide or find any specific research as such when you are able to signpost websites such as ours with a wealth of information and resources, and the ‘International Foundation for Effective Reading Instruction’ with its wealth of information, evidence and links.
Tess: I appreciate that this is a long email, and I am very grateful for your time. Your work has already had a significant impact on how I understand reading instruction, both as a teacher and as a parent, and I would value your insight enormously.
Thank you very much for reading, and for the work you continue to do in this field.
Kind regards,
Debbie: Thank you very much for your kind words, Tess. And if you thought your email was ‘long’, I’m afraid my comments are much longer still! I hope you will find them useful and at least thought-provoking.
Best wishes,
Debbie