There are several levels of planning for Primary English. Let us begin with the most global aspects and move towards the weekly and daily planning that guide everyday practice. The school’s agreed policy on English sets out the general principles on which the English curriculum is based and specifies the speaking and listening, reading and writing routines and resources for specific age ranges. The school’s long-term plan provides more details about the programme, again on a term by term basis for each year group. It is from this detailed document that teacher’s medium-term plans are developed (Myers and Burnett, 2004).
Medium-term plans are sometimes called ‘schemes of work’. Some teachers find it helpful to recognise three different aspects of medium-term plans – ‘blocked’, ‘linked ‘and ‘continuous’. ‘Blocked’ work refers to a series of lessons on one aspect of English, like discussing the role of imagery in poetry or learning about the linguistic features of persuasive writing as readers and writers. ‘Linked’ planning joins English work with other areas of the curriculum. Children might be learning about different kinds of first person writing in English and looking at the role of letters and diary entries as primary sources in history. Planning for aspects of English like learning to spell, to handwrite and punctuate which need considerable practice may be termed ‘continuous’ planning.
Short-term plans for each week’s work draw on medium-term plans. Teachers decide on a core of work together with appropriate resources for everyone and then plan for differentiation based on what they know about the capabilities of particular individuals.
In the United Kingdom first the 1998 Literacy Framework and then the 2006 renewed Framework have shaped literacy work in the primary years.
However, English is broader than literacy. Teachers of older primary children need to find time for extended reading and writing. Sometimes particular kinds of reading and writing that fulfil English aims are appropriate in lessons across the curriculum. For example writing reports can flow from geography and history lessons and procedural writing is a major genre in science.
Anne Washtell gives a clear explanation of the intention behind the Framework. It is ‘to ensure that all teachers have high expectations of their pupils and that children’s experience in literacy follows a clearly defined, progressive and well balanced sequence’ (Washtell, 1998). Particularly where it is followed with some flexibility, many teachers find a guiding framework helpful. However, it can inhibit a teacher from taking up learning opportunities that arise spontaneously and from spending more time on lessons where real progress is being made or where extra help is needed. The Primary Framework for literacy and mathematics (2006) aims for more flexibility and creativity, while offering support on the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority site: www.qca.co.uk.
Myers, J. and Burnett, C. (2004). Teaching English 3–11 London: Continuum.
Washtell, Anne (1998) ‘Routines and resources’, in Judith Graham and Alison Kelly (eds) Writing Under Control London: David Fulton.
This is the complete article, containing 497 words
(approx. 2 pages at 300 words per page).
