Editor’s note: This commentary is by Mack Gardner-Morse, a parent of dyslexic children who is a member of Decoding Dyslexia Vermont and is a research engineer in the Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation at the University of Vermont.
Around fourth grade is when that crucial shift from “learning to read” to “reading for learning” occurs. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has four achievement levels: “below Basic,” “at Basic,” “at Proficient,” and “at Advanced.” According to the NAEP, 32% of Vermont’s fourth graders are “below Basic.” U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos said, “Let’s be honest about what ‘below Basic’ really is: They can’t read. In case you’re missing the obvious: That, my friends, is the headline.” After three years of education, almost a third of our fourth graders cannot read!
What’s the response from education leaders? One is to downplay the tests. The tests “have no meaningful relationship with economic development” or are only “one metric of education outcomes.” These are true statements. However, skills-based tests such as the NAEP are very good at determining if students can or cannot read.
Education leaders also shift the blame away from our education system, citing societal ills instead – poor nutrition, lazy students, parents not reading to their children, single parent or broken homes, both parents working, screen time (television, computers and/or smartphones), mental health problems, drugs and/or poverty. While poverty does correlate with tests scores, correlation does not mean causation. Vermont’s poverty rate has been relatively flat since the end of the 2008 economic downturn (12.7% in 2010 to 11.3% in 2017). So if our poverty rate is relatively flat, why have our fourth grade reading scores been declining for 17 straight years? Stop downplaying the tests and shifting the blame. Vermont needs to change an education system where after three years of education, almost a third of our fourth grade students cannot read!
The balanced literacy approach and its predecessors have been the dominate teaching method for reading in Vermont for more than 40 years. My school district uses the Fountas and Pinnell Literacy program which is based on the balanced literacy approach to teaching reading. Recent reports note that this type of approach is not supported by cognitive science research. This approach may be harmful to some students and make reading remediation more difficult. In the upper grades, the books in Fountas and Pinnell Leveled Literacy intervention reinforce racial stereotypes.
Between 5% and 15% of students have dyslexia. According to the International Dyslexia Association (IDA), “The most difficult problem for students with dyslexia is learning to read. Unfortunately, popularly employed reading approaches, such as Guided Reading or Balanced Literacy, are not effective for struggling readers. These approaches are especially ineffective for students with dyslexia because they do not focus on the decoding skills [sequential phonics] these students need to succeed in reading.” So why is Vermont continuing to use a teaching approach that 1) fails to teach almost a third of our fourth graders to read, 2) has led to 17 straight years of declining reading scores, 3) is not effective for up to 15% of our students, 4) is not based on cognitive science research, 5) makes reading remediation more difficult, and 6) reinforces racial stereotypes?
For general reading instruction (Tier 1), the legislative report by District Management Group recommends, “Investing in the effectiveness of core reading instruction is critical for students in general education and students with disabilities, and can ultimately reduce the number of students in Tier 2 and special education reading interventions.” According to the IDA, “What does work is Structured Literacy, which prepares students to decode words in an explicit and systematic manner. This approach not only helps students with dyslexia, but there is substantial evidence that it is more effective for all readers.” Recently, the International Literacy Association has put out a new brief endorsing “systematic and explicit” phonics in all early reading instruction. Vermont needs to change to a Structured Literacy approach for teaching reading.
Making this change in literacy education requires all of Vermont to come together to improve the education for all of our young readers. Question your education leaders. Ask if your school uses a Guided Reading or Balanced Literacy approach, teaching little phonics? Or is your school using a Structured Literacy approach with explicit and systematic phonics? Make this change happen.
