By Dee Rosenberg, Sr Director of Literacy Solutions and Educator Success
The longstanding national reading crisis in America isn’t going away anytime soon, particularly as achievement gaps inflicted by remote learning during the pandemic intensified both the challenges and public debate over literacy education. It’s clear a scientific approach to teaching reading that follows the science must be more prevalent in our schools.
During my 40 years as a regular and special educator and administrator, I have witnessed the enormous negative effects that students experience when they struggle in learning to read. Like many teachers today, my pre-service training did not include instruction on what to teach, why, or how; I didn’t learn how the brain “reads,” what dyslexia or Structured Literacy was, or how to apply this knowledge in the classroom. Making matters worse, conflicting messages in academia concerning effective foundational literacy pedagogy have only confused teachers.
The good news is that many states and school districts are rethinking the methods used to improve students’ reading achievement.
The science tells us reading is not natural. However, proven methods enable us to effectively teach students to read. For example, we know good readers utilize a variety of word recognition and language comprehension skills and strategies when reading. Learning to read is complex, teaching reading is also complex, and Structured Literacy acknowledges both of these facets.
Teachers need to trust that their instruction will be effective, but educators are often inundated with curricula claiming to represent the “science of reading” – without any clarity what that science may be. Often these curricula do not give teachers what they need to teach most effectively: a proven program that comes from a scientific base of accumulated evidence that proves its benefits to students.
Comprehensive Structured Literacy instruction provides highly explicit and systematic teaching of all the domains of language: phonemic awareness, phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics as they relate to patterns and conventions of written language (orthography). Instruction in word recognition and reading comprehension is integrated with spelling and written expression. Concepts are clearly explained and modeled in a cumulative, well-organized sequence, building upon previously taught skills. Instruction is interactive, diagnostic, and prescriptive, leading to mastery. Additionally, instruction provides continual review and immediate feedback.
Like many, I was overwhelmed by the enormity of my work when I first started teaching. I depended on what I learned in college, the curriculum I was given, and the generous sharing of my colleagues in order to create what I thought constituted excellent reading and writing lessons. Despite all of these resources, however, many students struggled to read and write.
That changed after almost 15 years in the field, when I became a resource room teacher in a high school in which my supervisor was an expert in the components of Structured Literacy.
It was there that I was trained to use the Wilson Reading System– my first insight into the “Science of Reading,” and the components and benefits of a Structured Literacy lesson. It took time to learn all that I needed to understand about the English language and how to translate that knowledge; finally, my students made substantial progress in reading and spelling.
I consider myself lucky to have been given the tutelage of a knowledgeable supervisor, but it shouldn’t take the luck of the draw for a teacher to know about effective literacy instruction.
To raise the level of our students’ reading achievement, teachers need to know how the brain develops before they walk into a classroom, how the domains of the English language influence literacy, and how to teach reading skills explicitly and systematically. This will not be easy for so many reasons; incorporating transformative change requires time and support structures to better prepare teachers.
There is no reason for educators to accept as inevitable the low reading achievement that characterizes student performance across the country. We know that Structured Literacy is a highly effective instructional approach for all students and essential for those students who have dyslexia. A number of districts are already implementing Structured Literacy with evidence-based instructional materials and students are excelling. With informed teacher knowledge and tools that include evidence-based curricula, we all can expect positive progress. There is no time to waste.
Dee Rosenberg, M.A., LDT-C, has over 40 years of experience in public and independent schools as a regular and special education teacher, diagnostician (Learning Disabilities Teacher Consultant, LDT-C), and administrator. She co-founded the Laurel School in Princeton, New Jersey, for students with dyslexia and served as Director of the Robinowitz Education Center and Newgrange School in New Jersey for students with dyslexia for 20 years. Dee also co-founded the NJ Chapter of the Reading League and co-authored the NJ Dyslexia Handbook. She currently serves as the Senior Director of Literacy Solution and Educator Success at Wilson Language Training.