Author: Kelly Love

The “Reading Wars” confuses the boogers out of me. I was encouraged to listen to “Sold a Story” by Emily Hanford, and was completely befuddled over…what? Three cueing what? Fountas & Pinnell were just writers of leveled texts, and I had no idea that phonics wasn’t being taught in some districts, etc. I haven’t listened to the podcast since my first listen, but I remember the overall sense that something was right about it. That tingly sense that while it was assembled as hard-hitting journalism, it is a documentary, and documentaries have bias. And whew, boy, is there a lot of bias.

And this is where things get tricky: that bias is important and led to a grand conversation about how to teach reading. But — maybe in my silly little Masters’ cohort of about a dozen or so adults obtaining their Masters in Ed., from a local university collaborating with a local school district, our mentor, Dr. Candy Schulhauser, was an absolute rock-star, genius, amazing provider of K-8 literacy instruction. We got it all: fluency, comphrension, neuroscience, read-alouds, reading intervention, instructional and recreational reading, the problems with whole language (which is something, I suspect, the warriors for the “Science of Reading” folks confuse with balanced literacy).

I don’t know what Dr. S is doing these days. I do know that almost 20 years later, I still have all the books, hand-outs, and the strong foundation of teaching children to read. The bonus outcome is helping them love to read, and become confident readers and critical thinkers.My Master’s Thesis was titled something along the lines of “Using Engaging Children’s Literature…” and I am still a hug fan of Grant & Wiggins, introduced by Dr. S, and Understanding by Design.

There is something about being a classroom teacher as long as I’ve been one: I’m at that point where I’ve seen things come and go, and folks panicking when new things come out, and putting aside the old. Sometimes the old needs to go, but sometimes it doesn’t. I feel like there is something else going on that we’re not ready to admit, and I’m not sure what that is yet. There are parents who did everything they were “supposed to do” to help their child read– reading aloud, having shelves of books, etc., and still their child struggled. And I’m just throwing out wonderings right now:

I wonder:

• Are we not providing enough context, background knowledge, and schema building for all students?
• Are we passing students too quickly instead of providing more art, PE, and creative time to help build their growing brains? Or just passing and putting them into more remedial help?
• Are we teaching to the test, meaning just a focus on isolated skills and not enough strategies to help students use and foster their metacognitive skills (know when they are lost)?
• Are we bypassing small motor skills and key brain development activities like handwriting practice and cursive?
• Are we not giving kids enough playtime and socializing time? Build the stories and their own narratives?
• When new practices or a review of prior practices are introduced, do most educators and parents panic instead of taking a nuanced and inventory of practices? (Thinking about how Visual Learning and Hattie’s work got so misunderstood and misused.)

Well, I am not sure. I have my opinions and my anecdotal observations. That and $4 will buy a latte and all that — however, I am grateful I had a sensible, knowledgeable expert to help me and the other educators in the cohort understand and become experts on literacy. Things change, and being a professional practitioner means keeping the good and learning about “new-good.” I just don’t think what Hanford had to sell was “new good” for me and the others who received better teaching instruction. (I must mention, I also appreciate Stephen Krashen’s work on diving into the points and issues with the Science of Reading folks.)

Some resources I’ll be diving into that will work for my students moving forward: