Learning to read debate in full swing
For several years, Ontario children have been performing poorly relative to other developed countries on international literacy and numeracy tests. Public discussion is long overdue given the pivotal importance of literacy and numeracy to lifelong learning and Canada’s competitiveness. Recent Spectator articles — Jeff Butters, May 5 and 6, Pat Dickinson, May 18 and Henry Chumienski, May 27 — present several sides of the learning to read debate which, along with numeracy, is a crucial pillar of sound primary school education.
Parents have long expressed frustration related to the literacy and numeracy performance of their children, but the government response is usually to import a new reading approach or math curriculum, sometimes constructed over a summer, and present it as “problem solved.” Neither the literacy nor the math problems related to children’s overall performance has been solved by this or earlier governments.
Tinkering around the edges of schooling and calling it “change” does not answer the larger systemic problem. Public school education requires a monumental upheaval and rebuild from the ground up. Patchwork repairs do not address the immense change since the system was designed for the Industrial Age well over a century ago. Numerous alarming manifestations of distress in the schools are now aggravated by increased violence in classrooms. Urgent special needs, the explosion of access to information and technologies, deepening socioeconomic inequality, and threats posed by heightened competitiveness among nations are among many societal disrupters that radical education reform should factor in.
State-of-the-art teacher education and training fills gaps in the preparation of primary school teachers who are mandated to promote and verify all children’s progress toward achievement of literacy and numeracy outcomes. Ontario teacher education for the primary division no longer meets this standard nor delivers on this mandate. The Ministry of Education has not resolved the many crises related to curriculum, policies and practices that have persisted for years. Reducing bloated bureaucracy there and in the school system would recoup wasted dollars. Innovation is needed in educational delivery systems, grading and evaluation approaches remain outdated, and school design still clings to Industrial Age models. Updated curriculum requires reconfigured classrooms that fully support indoor/ outdoor programming and interactive learning.
Children are challenged in primary school is to build their “academic” skills; fluent reading and number competence are essential for success in school and lifelong. Basic learning-to-learn skills such as persistence, resilience and ability to attend or focus should be actively taught, practised and assessed from kindergarten through Grade 3. Together they form the bedrock for learning progress and accomplishment. Social-emotional health and security, physical fitness and wellbeing and a sense of belonging also play critical supporting roles. When the bedrock gives way, the whole system crashes which is what we are witnessing.
In teaching reading, start with the assumption that nearly all children can learn to read. How fluent they become depends on factors such as interest and motivation, mitigation of disabilities and perceptual delays, the child’s individual learning pace, direct teaching and individual coaching as needed, and plenty of practice in many contexts. Dickinson maintains there are few experts and learning to read is not a onesize-fits-all proposition. Butters lists theories tried over many decades that have culminated in the notion of “balanced literacy” (BL) which implies if Plan A doesn’t work, try Plan B. The science-based approach assumes that reading does not come naturally to humans and building the neural pathways for reading should be “intentionally created.” Chumienski proposes the use of reliable data collected provincially on the outcomes of various teaching approaches to guide educators toward viable solutions. Butters highlights five components of learning to read: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension that are facilitated by “explicit and sequential teaching.” Active teaching of phonology and phonics has become too tall an order for schools today although respectable research still says it works best.
A discussion has been engaged. Government should sponsor broad public, parental and professional consultation as a prelude to primary education reform.