Will raising PSC pass rates improve reading?
 

The UK government states that early reading is “the foundation for everything else” and has set an ambition for 90% of pupils in England to meet the expected standard in the Year 1 Phonics Screening Check (PSC). The check was introduced in 2012 to assess whether children can decode a short list of real and pseudo-words using phonics.
 

Since its introduction, the proportion of pupils meeting the expected standard has increased substantially. In 2012, 58% of pupils met the expected standard. In recent years around 80% of pupils pass the check in Year 1, rising to close to 90% by the end of Year 2 after the resit (Department for Education, 2024).
 

However, rising PSC pass rates have not been accompanied by comparable improvements in national reading attainment. For more than a decade, around one in four pupils in England has continued to leave primary school without reaching the expected standard in reading and writing at the end of Key Stage 2 (Department for Education, 2023).
 

The PSC measures whether pupils can decode a short list of real and pseudo-words using grapheme–phoneme correspondences typically taught in early phonics programmes, commonly around 85 to 100 correspondences. The check therefore assesses whether pupils can recognise these correspondences and blend the sounds to read individual words. It does not assess reading fluency, comprehension, vocabulary knowledge, or the ability to read connected text.
 

Researchers examining phonics policy in England have also highlighted the limited scope of the check. Analyses of literacy policy note that the PSC focuses on decoding isolated words and therefore provides only a narrow measure of reading ability (Wyse & Bradbury, 2022). Studies examining how the check operates in schools have similarly shown that it emphasises performance on phonics tasks rather than broader reading development (Bradbury & Roberts-Holmes, 2017).
 

If increasing the number of pupils who pass the PSC were enough to improve reading outcomes, we would expect to see this reflected in national attainment data. Instead, the data shows that large numbers of pupils continue to struggle with reading and writing despite rising PSC pass rates.

Could part of the reason so many children struggle to pass what should be a simple check, and why passing it has not improved reading levels, be the way phonics is being taught? Let’s find out.
 

The Phonics Screening Check page has a practical purpose. If schools and policy makers expect children to pass the PSC, then parents should understand what the check actually measures and how children can succeed in it. We show parents how children can learn to identify the sounds in words and connect those sounds to letters using a speech-to-print approach. This approach supports phonemic awareness and helps children map speech sounds, spelling and meaning, facilitating self-teaching. Once children start self-teaching, they will read and spell without difficulty.
 

Passing the PSC does not in itself make a child a reader, particularly when teaching follows a one-size-fits-all approach and teachers are told to follow programmes “with fidelity” with little autonomy. However, understanding how speech sounds map to print using the Core Code can not only help children pass the check but also develop the skills they need to become independent readers. Perhaps then we can start talking about phonics reform.

References
 

Bradbury, A., & Roberts-Holmes, G. (2017). The datafication of primary and early years education: Playing with numbers. Routledge.

Department for Education. (2023). Key stage 2 attainment: National statistics. London: Department for Education.

Department for Education. (2024). Phonics screening check attainment: England. London: Department for Education.

Wyse, D., & Bradbury, A. (2022). Reading wars or reading reconciliation? A critical examination of robust research evidence, curriculum policy and teachers’ practices for teaching phonics and reading. Review of Education, 10(1), e3314. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3314