To join the conversation, go to www.ascd.org/blog. Comments are condensed for space or edited for clarity.
Readers responded to the debate in the February issue of EL between Judy Willis and Sally and Bennett Shaywitz on reading instruction:
Willis's comments ring true. I work with children who have not yet learned to read despite intensive phonics instruction. Self-esteem and confidence, which can't be measured by a functional MRI, are key. Every brain has its own unique organization. The Shaywitzes have only one piece of the puzzle. Phonics instruction helps many children learn to read, but what is going to help all the others? If phonics is the key, why are so many children having difficulty?
—Mary Ann Kettlewell
I do not agree with the punitive AYP requirements, but the research behind NCLB is right on target. I use a direct instruction phonics approach every day in a lively and engaging atmosphere of high-quality learning. We take failing students from schools that employ “whole language” approaches to both reading and writing and successfully teach these students much-needed literacy skills. My students' self-esteem improves dramatically when they realize it was their prior school's method, and not them, failing.
Reading and writing are not naturally acquired skills. Nothing is sadder or more motivationally challenging than facing a 5th or 6th grader years behind in reading. Failing students often simply need explicit skill instruction. I loved the response article by Sally and Bennett Shaywitz.
—Anna Travis
As a 4th grade teacher in an inclusion school, I collaborate with my team to provide effective reading instruction for our special education students. At grade levels when reading to learn is more the direction for instruction than learning to read, this instructional decision-making process becomes even more complicated. When students' energies are focused on decoding and fluency issues, their comprehension of text is often hampered. Addressing these instructional issues, while maintaining students' motivation to read, is a daily challenge. As a medical doctor and classroom teacher, Willis has recognized the complex facets of reading instruction in the classroom setting. Her article demonstrates a clear understanding of students and how they learn.
—Sue Shaw
While I agree with Willis's assertion that dry, rigid application of a “phonics-heavy reading program” is ineffective at best, the same could be said about such poor implementation of any content. The Shaywitzes never suggested that systematic phonics instruction should ignore the impact of emotion on learning. Research and teacher experience agree that you can't teach someone who is fearful or anxious as well as you can someone who feels safe and confident. But neither will a program focused solely on positive affect teach a child to read. Self-esteem is built on a foundation of competence.
I have seen frustration and anxiety provoked by teachers who assume students can intuit the structure of the English language if only you rub them up against it in a warm, fuzzy environment. The response to intervention model (RTI) may offer a way out of this constant bickering about how much phonics is enough. RTI requires teachers to sort out who needs more intervention and to increase that intervention until the right balance is found for each student.
—Leslie Buford
Readers responded to our online poll that asked, “Does the push for 100 percent proficiency help or hinder access to education for students with disabilities?”
Some students will never be able to meet high school graduation requirements no matter how hard they try. There is a student who has taken algebra many times over. This student only needs this class to graduate from high school. Is this a class that all students must pass to graduate? Do we need algebra in our day-to-day lives? How can this student find success in life if he feels he's a failure because of one class? What job can he get without a high school diploma?
—Sharon
Algebra is an important subject. But to mandate one-size-fits-all education is unrealistic and, as Sharon writes, counter-productive. In Texas, our governor has mandated that all students take a college-preparation curriculum. Sounds great, but it's completely unrealistic. We need a plan that guides all students into productive roles in society.
—Richard
In this debate, there are two issues: the right to an appropriate education and the meaning of a high school diploma. If the diploma signifies having reached a common standard, then all students receiving that diploma must meet the standard. Life is full of successes and failures. Should we grant a driver's license to someone who cannot pass the driving test?
—Fiina
