The persistent challenge of reading fluency among secondary school students is a longstanding issue that has been highlighted recently. Many students, particularly from disadvantaged backgrounds, enter secondary education unable to read proficiently, and this problem has become more pronounced over time.
As a secondary educator, I often find myself questioning the quality of literacy education provided in various primary schools. Every year, students transitioning into Year 7 arrive lacking the essential skills of decoding and fluency needed to engage with more advanced texts.
Effective secondary institutions immediately recognize the gravity of this situation during the transition period. Instead of merely providing superficial support, such as a weekly 30-minute session—which is common in some schools—top-performing institutions remove struggling students from certain subjects in Years 7 and 8 to comprehensively address their literacy deficiencies.
Intensive and focused literacy instruction is the only viable solution. If schools fail to implement significant measures to bridge these literacy gaps in Year 7, it will be too late for those students as they encounter the demanding curriculum of Key Stage 4. Many institutions attempt to remediate these issues in later years, which often proves to be ineffective.
In our Love of Learning initiative, we observe several primary schools across the nation that primarily serve white, economically disadvantaged communities. Numerous children face challenging home situations and typically arrive at school with limited skills, particularly in communication. However, by the time they graduate, their performance is at or above average, and they possess reading abilities.
These schools emphasize the importance of fostering relationships not only with students but also with their families and staff members. They prioritize a sense of belonging and strive to make learning engaging, active, creative, and enjoyable. These institutions place the needs of their students above accountability metrics—and still achieve positive outcomes. Is it too much to ask for this vision to be realized more broadly in education? It does not require additional funding, just a commitment to its importance.
Recent reports indicating that a significant proportion of disadvantaged white students leave primary school lacking the necessary reading fluency underscore the need for schools to be held accountable for the progress and experiences of all vulnerable students, not solely their overall performance metrics.
Since November, Ofsted’s revised inspection framework encourages inspectors to assess inclusion beyond just special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). Rather than focusing responsibility solely on an individual, like a SEND coordinator, inspectors are now evaluating how schools support all students facing learning and wellbeing challenges through leadership, culture, teaching practices, and pastoral care.
Feedback from inspectors suggests that this broader perspective is beneficial. It fosters more substantive discussions between inspectors and school leaders and allows for a better understanding of the contexts within which schools operate. Crucially, it acknowledges that educational success should not be defined solely by academic achievement, but also by whether children are enabled to participate, progress, and flourish.
Nonetheless, it is essential that professional evaluations are grounded in consistently high expectations. Understanding context should not lead to diminished standards for disadvantaged students. Instead, the expanded inspection framework should ensure that all schools are accountable for cultivating an inclusive environment where every child has the opportunity to succeed.
