The new phonics checks for five and six-year-olds have been rejected as confusing for pupils and a waste of time by year 1 teachers.
A survey of professionals carried out jointly by three education unions heard that the phonics checks did not test children's reading ability and cost money to implement.
Almost 1,700 year 1 teachers responded to the survey, with 86 per cent calling for the tests to be scrapped and 91 per cent saying that the tests did not tell them anything new about their pupils.
The government has introduced the statutory year 1 phonics check in a bid to identify children who need extra help with their reading.
However, the test is controversial because the government has directed schools to use synthetic phonics, which focus on sounds rather than children recognising whole words. As such, the test requires children to read both real and made-up words to their teachers.
More than 88 per cent of the teachers said they practised reading “nonsense" words such as “spron", “geck", “fape" and “thazz" with pupils before the tests.
One year 1 teacher told the study: “Many children made mistakes trying to turn pseudo-words into real words – 'strom' became 'storm'. The lack of context meant many children made mistakes they would not have made if the word was in a sentence – such as reading 'shine' as 'shin'."
The three unions – the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL), National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT) and National Union of Teachers (NUT) – say they are not against synthetic phonics but argue that the method is just one tool in a teacher's arsenal.
Another year 1 teacher added: “Some able readers failed and some non-fluent, less able readers passed! What does that prove? It proves synthetic phonics is only part of a variety of strategies used in learning to read. Teaching phonics alone will not make fluent readers who enjoy the experience."
NAHT general secretary Russell Hobby said: “Synthetic phonics is an essential contribution to helping most children learn to read, which is why most schools already make heavy use of it.
“This test, however, is another matter. It is inaccurate and unnecessary. It distorts the teaching and measurement of reading," he added.