Schools must provide adequate reading programs and reading remediation for students who need more assistance. But the recent report on dyslexia recommending intensive phonics for all children by the PBS News Hour, through Education Week, is irresponsible, short on facts, and presents biased reporting.
Education Week receives grants from philanthropic groups that favor school privatization. Here are the funders:
- The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
- The Carnegie Corporation of New York
- The Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation
- The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust
- The Jack Kent Cooke Foundation
- The Joyce Foundation
- The Charles Stewart Mott Foundation
- The NoVo Foundation
- The Noyce Foundation
- The Raikes Foundation
- The Schott Foundation
- The Wallace Foundation
- The Walton Family
- The Chan Zuckerberg
This report took place in Arkansas, heavily influenced by the Waltons, who seek to privatize public education. Arkansas funds Teach for America. The state is anti-teachers and does not support teachers unions.
In the report, parents claim: We absolutely know that this is the best way to teach children to read! This approach works well for all students not just those with dyslexia. We know without a doubt that reading is not a natural process.
Numerous opinion pieces and articles have flooded the media recently, often through Education Week, about reading failure. Most are entrenched in misconceptions and refer to discredited sources like the 2000 National Reading Panel, and the astroturf National Council on Teacher Quality (an organization funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation). This threatens to damage how children learn to read, how teachers learn to teach reading, and public schooling.
How teachers have been teaching reading is wrongly blamed for low test scores in reading. There’s no consideration of other factors.
The PBS report, like most of these reports about reading, blame how teachers teach reading for low test scores. We repeatedly hear that teachers don’t know how to teach reading.
They usually refer to reading scores on the NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress), also known as the nation’s report card.
Jill Barshay recently described in The Hechinger Report reasons scholars and policymakers believe student reading scores have stagnated on the NAEP.
Here are the variables they consider:
- The 2008 recession and the decreasing lack of funding of U.S. schools.
- An increase in poverty among students.
- Demographic shifts in the U.S.
- Testing more Hispanic children who come from non-English-speaking homes.
- Policy changes since 2001 that include more annual testing.
- Less time for classroom instruction due to more testing.
- More demanding standards.
- Testing on computers.
- Common Core State Standards and curriculum.
They never emphasize teachers and how they teach reading!
Phonics is not new!
The claim is that teachers don’t know how to teach phonics.
But phonics isn’t new. I learned how to teach phonics in the ’70s while student teaching!
I taught third grade. My supervising teacher and the other third grade teachers placed students into groups according to the sounds students needed to learn. No student felt bad about the group they were in because students worked on skills. The groups often rotated. Teachers met and discussed individual students and their progress. Most students read fairly well. Some needed extra help with spelling. This was a public school near Detroit. The school closed years ago.
Later, as a reading resource teacher for students with disabilities (I have a M.Ed to teach students with learning disabilities), phonics programs were always part of our program.
Even if a university does not emphasize intensive phonics, district professional development can pick up the slack, especially for students who need more phonics.
It’s difficult to understand why teachers would say they never learned how to teach phonics.
Parents feel sad when a child has reading difficulties, but what are the other variables?
Children come to school with all kinds of reading backgrounds. In the PBS Program we are not told of the specific difficulties the children face.
Having taught students with reading disabilities the report raised many questions.
For example, one teacher says towards the end of the video “We are sending better readers to first grade now.” Are teachers and parents expecting kindergartners to learn how to read?
Here are my questions.
- When was formal reading introduced?
- Are children pushed to read too early?
- What are the reading expectations for each grade level?
- Why did the school not address dyslexia or reading disabilities originally?
- Who diagnosed the dyslexia? Who are the outside evaluators?
- Do these students have IEPs?
- Why were parents unhappy with the school evaluations?
- Does the school have a reading resource class?
- What kind of special education or remedial reading programs does the school offer?
- How large are the classes?
- Is there a gap between I.Q. scores and achievement scores?
- Is the child motivated to read?
- Are teachers getting the resources they need to teach reading?
- Does the school have a good library and a qualified librarian?
- What programs are they already using?
- Why do teachers say they never learned how to teach reading?
- What college did the teacher attend?
Is reading instruction being standardized?
Teachers who have worked with children who exhibit reading difficulties understand that there are no easy answers when it comes to reading disabilities or dyslexia.
But insisting that all children learn to read the same way with intensive phonics is problematic for several reasons.
- Children who already read and write might become bored or discouraged.
- Children with dyslexia or reading disabilities might be lost in the crowd and not get the individual attention they need.
- When one way of teaching is pushed, other helpful approaches are discarded.
- Children who have difficulty with sounds and phonics might be lost.
Usually children who learn to read need some phonics, but not intensive phonics. Children with dyslexia or reading disabilities usually need more phonics and lots of opportunities to read reading material they can master.
I’d ask more questions and look beyond the PBS News Hour and Education Week reporting on this issue.
No one is blaming teachers. Did you see both segments? You guys have had the stage long enough and look what has happened. Read brain research from the medical field before you jump in and start accusing. Until you have taught children, teenagers and/or adults to read using other evidenced based practices please do us a favor and remain silent and get out of our way and let us train teachers so they have the tools to teach reading!
Wow, Dee Dee,
How dare you tell any of us to shut up. The arrogance and who are YOU to determine how to train teachers.
Teachers know how to teach. Everything Nancy is saying is spot on.
But now I see how this works on your side. Just be nasty.
Brain research? How does it have anything to do with how reading is taught? That’s the huge leap those who study MRIs seem to make. This research suggests nothing other than what part of the brain lights up. Teachers actually do know how to teach reading to all kinds of kids. We know many kids are pushed to read too early which is a huge issue. But don’t ask actual degreed reading teachers. What do we know right?
First, Dee Dee, you say we have the stage. I would say teachers have not had the stage for years.
Also many of us have taught students with reading difficulties. We worked for years earning degrees to help children be better readers. I used to have a Resource Class with 8-15 students. What happened to that support? And I followed my student’s progress in their general ed. classes. I am saddened that those classes seem to have disappeared.
It saddens me to see students not getting the assistance they deserve. But it isn’t fair to impose intensive phonics on all children.
I also agree with Rosemarie and Stephanie. I don’t know how MRI’s prove intensive phonics is best for all students.
I can understand the concern for children, but we need to debate this issue fairly.
Please read this article from the Atlantic. Paradigms need to shift. http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/11/the-ignored-science-that-could-help-close-the-achievement-gap/506498/
Thank you for sharing. But first thing I see is reference to the NAEP which I question in the post I wrote.
Here are the other variables that could have affected the scores.
The 2008 recession and the decreasing lack of funding of U.S. schools.
An increase in poverty among students.
Demographic shifts in the U.S.
Testing more Hispanic children who come from non-English-speaking homes.
Policy changes since 2001 that include more annual testing.
Less time for classroom instruction due to more testing.
More demanding standards.
Testing on computers.
Common Core State Standards and curriculum.
Resource classes are gone. Interventionists are gone. ESE teachers are leaving.
I just got out of a meeting today, my son needs intensive phonics and he’s not getting it.
He tested out of phonemic awareness on iready but the psych report shows otherwise. They would not Qualify him. He will likely linger in Mtss until he drops out or fails.
They use horrible programs and it’s all whole word memorization
Phonemic awareness and phonological awareness needs to come before phonics
Playing wait to fail on another one of my kids
I’ve sat in meetings in high schools where the kids were reading on a 2/3 grade level. They are not getting proper, timely or intensive interventions.
Structured literacy works. My oldest reads at a high school instructional level thanks to structured literacy.
Hi Bethany, I’m sorry to hear this. I see a lot going on in your comment including the mention of iReady. Nor am I a fan of MTSS. I have written a lot about Response to Intervention which I think keeps students from the services they need. As you sadly point out.
I think your first sentence describes what I see as the biggest problem. Students are missing out on the services they need to succeed. We all can agree on that.
Thank you for your thoughtful blog and response to the PBS NewsHour/Education Week Report About Dyslexia.
Learning to read is a complex process and we need to avoid over simplifying it with overly simplistic approaches.
Please reference https://www.nap.edu/read/12882/chapter/7#88
My daughter, diagnosed having dyslexia, participated in a study involving numerous MRIs, testing before, mid, and upon completion of intensive instruction, including an entire year after the program ended. Proven progress accomplished and documented, but the study ended, including the continuation of intensive instruction resulting in regression. Explicit instruction from an accredited teacher consistently and intensive is the foundation to struggling readers. I wonder about the 1970s and 1980s instructional research as a comparison.
Phonics programs were much in play I think in the 1970s and 1980s for teachers working with elementary students with learning disabilities. Maybe not so much in general ed. classrooms. But one didn’t hear a lot about dyslexia. It was considered rare and not well understood.
Are you. Parent to a dyslexic or are you ?????
A few parents seem to think because of this post that I am unsupportive of students with reading disabilities which is not true.
But they ask this question. Like if I don’t have a child, or if I don’t have reading disabilities, I can’t know what it’s like. If I do, I guess they will see me as an expert.
Learning disabilities and reading were my area of study. I taught as a reading resource teacher, and though I am retired, I still read the research and try to better understand my area of training.
When you take your child to the doctor, do you demand that their child have the same illness before you accept their advice?
My son was blatantly academically failed by a large district in the state. We asked from PreK through 4th grade to test him for dyslexia. Because he “read on grade level” they would not until 4th grade. He can read a word bank that is grade level. They saw a phonological weakness but said he was fine. It’s phonemic awareness, fluency, coding, etc where he struggles. We had him independently tested in 5th grade and he was diagnosed with dyslexia, dysgraphia, and a math weakness but not enough to label dyscalcula. He is an end of the year 7th grader that reads on a 4th grade level. His new district which we Scool Choiced into is the first district to provide proper intervention. It is his third district. But yet there is a claim that all teachers know how to teach all children. If that was so, why couldn’t my son learn to read like his peers?
Could it be that the school was not funded properly? Many districts try to cut costs at the expense of those who do not fit into their state mandated boxes. Well funded districts usually employ people who know who needs help and get it to them. Poorly funded districts often try to shift the cost of teaching dyslexic or otherwise challenged students onto the parents.
I’m wondering why you thought your preschooler had dyslexia.
I also agree with Roy’s comment. I think the poorly funded districts might also be cutting Reading Resource Classes.
The idea is to give all students what students with reading disabilities need to cover instruction. Funding cuts matter.
I taught remedial reading in a district which was big on emphasizing phonics. If children didn’t learn to read well with phonics what did they give them? More phonics! Go figure!
Before I would comment on the political nature of a movement I would probably get a feel for the political landscape of the state. Every law we have passed regarding Literacy has been bipartisan…. just so you know this movement was started by a democrat state senator. That same senator is a retired teacher and ex-head of the union in one of the biggest districts in the state.
Look up Senator Joyce Elliott..
I don’t expect a correction. You know you are wrong is enough for me.
Audie, you will get no argument from me. Many democrats like charter schools too. I just question why the 2000 National Reading Panel report is always used since it was discredited. And all the other things I mention.
Tell me, why aren’t parents fighting to get resource classes for more individual assistance for their children, instead of making all children learn like they have dyslexia?
Phonics is not something new to many of us as I stated. It is baffling that teachers are admitting to not teaching phonics correctly.
I like to remind people of the old Hooked on Phonics program. Maybe you don’t remember it but it was around for many years.
Learning Dynamics is another. It is still advertised aggressively and it has been around since the 80s.
Also, my concern on my blog has always been about pushing children to read too early. Kindergarten really shouldn’t be the new first grade. Yet I read where so many parents expect their children to read earlier and earlier.
But time will tell. I wish you well, and I hope your children learn the joy of reading. If your phonics program works well I will eat humble pie.
I am amazed that the 80 year old Orrin-Gillingham of structured phonics is recommended by folks who also argue that O-G is “ research based.” Problem is that there exists not a single study demonstrating that “ structured phonics has ever improved any child’s reading performance. None! There is a single study demonstrating that kids who have had structured phonics can pronounce isolated single syllable nonsense words (e.g. fub, dat, rom, mot, etc) but pronouncing nonsense is not reading and pronouncing nonsense is not even a good predictor of reading proficiency.
So if an 80 year old approach has no research demonstrating it improves reading why is anyone advocating for its use?
Thank you! I’ve actually been searching and haven’t been able to find anything and wondered what I was missing!
I can send you before and after data
My severely dyslexic kiddo had intensive phonics and structured literacy and reads at an adult level. Which is more than I can say for the majority of kids in my district/state. The problem isn’t the funding . It’s the misspending .
Hi Bethany,
I’ve seen a lot of parents saying this about funding on Twitter. I don’t doubt that there is misspending in some school districts, but IDEA has been grossly underfunded since it first became law in 1975. This is a known fact. Parents do themselves, other parents, and children a disservice to say the problem isn’t funding.
Ask a teacher in a poor school district with a class size of 25-30 with students who have a variety of difficulties if money isn’t a problem.
https://ncld.org/news/policy-and-advocacy/idea-full-funding-why-should-congress-invest-in-special-education/
Dick is also correct about OG. It might be helpful, But as this article states, “It’s Complicated.”
http://www.nowprograms.com/orton-gillingham-its-complicated-part-i/
I’m glad your adult child found a program that works. I’m not sure what you mean by intensive phonics and structured literacy, because there are MANY specific programs.
I also know many parents who loved Reading Recovery. I know some parents also don’t like it. .
I have come to this article late and with that a comment. Anyway, I just finished a two year stint as a licensed K-5 Special Education Resource Room Teacher in a charter school. Their curriculum is ‘locked’ into a Phonograms program promoted by Hillsdale College which to my knowledge of is a hotbed of conservative school reform.
This charter school has been convinced, how I do not know but suspect, that this program is the ‘be all and end all’ solution to reading difficulties for every student. The trainer that presented the program could not adequately answer questions regarding the program and special needs students. So, I did some homework and I asked administration why we do not have content I found addressing Phonograms and special needs students on our teacher resource bookshelf; I was totally ignored on that matter. Likewise, the charter school itself did not offer any resource funding to help build reading skills with alternative strategies…their way or the highway: charters are unsafe at any speed.
My thanks to Diane Ravitch.
https://dianeravitch.net/2019/05/20/nancy-bailey-shame-on-pbs-for-its-misleading-program-on-reading-instruction/
Nancy poses 17 good questions. She raises further the question of what would the motivation of all the people who funded this report be. Another good question. Who is she to raise good questions?
Anyone should be honored as legitimate who raises good questions. If you ask me, a person who is completely ignorant of the techniques of teaching children to read, anyone who looks at a cabinet can weigh in on the matter of whether it looks like a good cabinet.
The difference is that Nancy has studied teaching reading, taught reading, and continued to study teaching reading. Sounds like someone who should question to me.
Thank you, Roy. I also want to be fair.
I really have problems with people who assume that because phonics instruction helped their child that it is the answer for all children. As a special education teacher, I never taught two students who needed the exact same instruction in any area. As a resource and self contained room teacher, I taught math, English and reading, and supported science and social studies (middle school). Phonics was extremely important for some of my students and not an issue at all for others. Most of my middle and high school students were well beyond the need for direct instruction in phonics but benefited from word analysis instruction interwoven with other less tedious (to most of them) activities. Heck, if we can narrow schooling down to a few techniques and tools why bother with teachers? All of that being said, I did find most parents who found the need to fight for their own child knew what they were talking about. Districts were not always open to parental insights when it meant $$$. Indeed, in one district, we were told point blank never to suggest a student needed a particular (/costly) intervention because the district would be required to provide it. On more than one occasion, I quietly told parents that if they wanted action they would need to be very persistent.
Your experience mirrors my own! I also agree that parents were sometimes ignored. However, my high school reading resource class position was started, I was told, based on a parent complaint! It was a great set-up and benefitted a lot of students who needed high school reading remediation.
Also, this statement of yours is worrisome to me. I think about online reading programs. I wonder it this is the ultimate goal.
“Heck, if we can narrow schooling down to a few techniques and tools why bother with teachers?”
Very thoughtful and appreciated. Under funding schools due to austerity budgeting has cause many districts to cut their qualified librarians – thanks for remembering us. We are an essential part of literacy learning.