Technolandy

Day 102 (of 2024/25) science (?) of reading vs test results – thanks Jill Barshay

https://apple.news/Ad3TRQ67ATD6inwH-Zr6t8g

I always chuckle when we use ‘old formats’ to analyze and assess new strategies and approaches… and this article regarding the Science of Reading is a good example… not that I am against SoR – but that I still believe, much as I did on day one-ish of my own teacher training, that ‘learning to read’ is much more complex than “a” single approach for all. I do love the phocus on phonological awareness – fonix is an important part of reading. I also appreciate the ‘anchor’ it presents to help people with the interdisciplinary work SoR shares. 

I like the key concepts that the SoR emphasizes of effective reading instruction: Phonics, Phonemic Awareness, Fluency, Vocabulary, and Comprehension. Now, admittedly I was trained by an OG of the Whole Language approach (which wikipedia shares is a ‘discredited education method’) and while ‘then’ (and now) there is a big fight over phonics phirst/only with explicit teaching… ‘whole means whole’ according to my mentor and of course we would use phonics based approaches… wait for it… depending on learner needs. I like the approaches that notice Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development – waiting for the right time to give a nudge (or a new book) to encourage an evolution in thinking and doing. 

I do have some worries when people rely on prepackaged content… because (imo) reading is so much more than ‘that’. Though I will also admit that not all teachers receive the same training… and unless you do a dive into ‘reading (and writing)’ there are some steps that are easily missed (I am a huge Montessori fan, but even I use direct instruction at time – again, when my Vygotsky sensor goes off). But much like math, I worry when we are too reliant on ‘a’ program… because I channel my inner Todd Rose and note that when we aim for an average of everyone, we indeed miss everyone… 

Full disclosure: it was also this professor who helped us focus on holistic measurements (a key part of whole language) and started me down the route of portfolios over report cards.

And I laughed at “the latest study” when a paper showed that students did better on tests of the topics and words that were taught compared to the others who learned reading as usual and weren’t exposed to these topics… but did no better in tests of general language, vocabulary development or listening comprehension – in other words kids who were taught to a test did better on said test. shocker

This is where I still have my ‘beta glasses’ on when I look at SoR – I worry that it will devolve into how math textbooks are used (today its page 163) rather than focusing on teachable moments (aka readiness) to accelerate when appropriate. I love a lot of the skills and strategies SoR is helping embed… but I’m not sure that it’s going to lead to life long reading… as I chide – I still don’t hear students referring to any of the blackline masters or other (publisher name redacted) books designed for grade levels as starting anyones love for reading… 

Overall, I am glad that articles like this continue to point out some of the flaws to any one program for all learners… cuz in education – often if something seems like it makes sense (eg everyone at same age learns same way/rate/interest) we often need to do the opposite. 

Keep modelling reading and do even more think-alouds than you do read-alouds!