Last month, an audio documentary and article provocatively titled 鈥溾�� sent shockwaves through the education community.
The premise of the story, reported by American Public Media鈥檚 Emily Hanford, is that scientific research has shown how children learn to read. But many teachers either don鈥檛 know that science or resist it.
鈥淢ost teachers nationwide are not being taught reading science in their teacher-preparation programs because many deans and faculty in colleges of education either don鈥檛 know the science or dismiss it,鈥� . 鈥淎s a result of their intransigence, millions of kids have been set up to fail.鈥�
Research shows that to learn how to read, children first need to be taught how letters represent speech sounds. But in many classrooms, teachers don鈥檛 spend enough time on phonics, preferring to let students guess words from context clues and develop a love of reading through practice, rather than rote instruction, Hanford reported.
The 鈥渨hole language versus phonics鈥� reading wars have been raging for decades: Do we need to explicitly teach students how to read, or will they pick it up through enough exposure to good books? Studies have 鈥渇ailed to find a positive relationship between encouraging reading and either the amount of reading or reading achievement,鈥� states . On the other hand, the federally funded report concluded that phonics lessons do help students become better readers. (There has been limited widescale research on the subject since then.)
Now, many educators advocate for , an approach to reading instruction that emphasizes student choice of texts, independent reading (also known as sustained silent reading), and group discussions. The approach includes some phonics, but does not make that a focus.
That approach is still the norm in many classrooms and teacher-preparation programs, Hanford reports. For instance, in 2014, the former New York City schools chancellor .)
While Hanford鈥檚 piece has , it has struck a chord among teachers and other education advocates online. Some have begun sending open letters to the deans of their schools of education, complaining that they were not adequately taught how to teach reading.
Patricia James, a teacher who majored in elementary and special education at Arkansas State University, on Arkansas鈥� Decoding Dyslexia Facebook page.
鈥淲hile I feel like most of my teacher preparation was very good, I can say I was totally unprepared to teach reading, especially to the struggling readers that I had at the beginning of my career in my resource classroom,鈥� she wrote.
Reading, James said, should not be a guessing game, and it becomes one with the balanced literacy approach. She concluded: 鈥淚 find it disheartening and sad that teachers in the field are more knowledgeable about current research and practices than your professors.鈥�
After that, Robert Pondiscio, a senior fellow at the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute, followed suit, , where he received his teaching credential.
鈥淭o earn my degree, I had to demonstrate my 鈥榩assionate commitment to learning鈥� and show proof that I was a 鈥榬eflective practitioner,鈥欌�� he wrote. "[T]here鈥檚 no visible evidence, in my portfolio or in my memory, that suggests any attention to psychology, cognitive science, language development, or the rich body of research in those fields that might shape our views of teaching and learning.鈥�
On Twitter, teachers shared similar stories :
I find this so interesting that almost all of us were not taught to teach reading in our programs. I thought it was just me. We learned about read-alouds and vocabulary strategies, but were pretty much told if we get the child to enjoy reading, they will read.
-- J.D. Ramsey (@writerramsey)
I was taught almost nothing of any real use about how to teach reading. Most of what I鈥檝e learned was PD I paid to take or self-taught. I teach 2nd now and I鈥檓 a firm believer in a balanced literacy program. And yes, my 2nd graders still need systematic, explicit phonics.
-- Vix in NV (@vix_cee)
It was a sad mix of 鈥渉istory of literacy the wars鈥�...followed by extensive focus on how to do a good 鈥渞ead aloud鈥�....and finally how to use a writers notebook. In short, we were told many things theoretically about reading but never once looked at explicit phonics instruction.
-- Mr. G (@MrGmpls)
According to the National Council on Teacher Quality, appear to be teaching scientifically based reading methods to preservice teachers.
Teachers, do you feel like your college of education adequately prepared you to teach reading? Did you learn phonics instruction? Let us know in the comments.
Image via Getty