Politics, Reading, and the Washington Post

Everyone seems to be talking about “The Science of Reading,” and I do mean everyone including The Washington Post. I admit I was surprised when I saw The Washington Post article’s “Cut The Politics. Phonics Is The Best Way To Teach Reading.” I didn’t expect a publication like The Post to jump into a topic like this or for them to frame the subject in this way, but here we are. To illustrate their point, The Post spent the first three paragraphs pitting teachers’ unions against politicians, publishers against academics, Democrats against Republicans, and progressives against conservatives. Hmmmm…

Politics, Teachers, and Reading

I bring this up, not to pick on a well-respected newspaper (though I’d love to analyze the article further), but to add perspective to the term “Science of Reading.” For it appears that Science of Reading (sometimes known as SoR) is the data-driven elephant of the literacy world and the newest political hot-take.

SoR’s supporters seem to take the attitude of, “Oh, look! The answer was here all along but you stubborn teachers were too blind to see it!” Well, I am a teacher, and I’ve spent my career thinking, researching, contemplating, and observing. I love discussing how children learn, and I love teaching reading! So why does the term ‘Science of Reading’ cause me to shudder?

Politics, Phonics, and Reading

In its present use, SoR (Science of Reading) is shorthand for phonics. Lots of phonics. YEARS of phonics, delivered to all children, regardless of need. State legislatures around the country are passing law after law dictating what must be taught, when it’s taught, and who it’s taught too (And sometimes, what can’t be taught, which is more than a little bit troubling). And in their legislative fervor, politicians are ensuring phonics are taught as the gold standard. But are phonics really that good?

What phonics are very good at is being black and white. A student either has phonic skills or they don’t. Because of this, phonics skills are easily tested, and they can be developed into a curriculum that can be delivered by anyone. This ease of use and implementation makes phonics a fan favorite of politicians (who can claim re-election by showcasing better standardized test scores in their district), and it’s a favorite of major book publishers.

Because phonics skills are easy to test, they’re easy to sell. Publishers can make phonics curricula that, for political reasons, schools will have to buy. Plus, publishers can make even more by selling thousands of dollars of accompanying materials alongside the core curricula, materials such as decodable texts.

Decodable texts are just that- decodable. They’re books where you can sound out almost all of the words. These decodable books are filled with sentences like “Sam and Nan are pals. They gab at the mall.” And though these books make easier tests, they make terrible books. To create a fully decodable book like this, you must use stilted, artificial, un-natural language. Yes, this language may be easy to sound out, but, in my personal experience, it can actually cause more confusion for beginning readers. It’s kind of like asking Siri or ChatGBT to teach kindergarteners how to read.

Balanced Phonics and Reading

Now, no one is arguing that phonics isn’t a crucial part of learning to read. Of course it’s important to teach phonics. But phonics are just a single component of reading. It’s not the end-all-be-all of reading. Just like having balanced nutrition, having a balanced reading curriculum and a variety of teaching methods are essential for early readers. Yes, phonics skills are important, but equally critical are other reading skills like fluency, comprehension, writing, genre study, and metacognition (awareness of thought processes).

But I feel the most important reading skill is learning to love reading in general. Having superior phonic skills doesn’t matter, if you never read. Reading takes work and effort. It’s a struggle for many kids and adults. So, if reading is already hard for children and then they have to read such stilted books as their introduction to reading, why would they want to continue? Why would they develop a love of reading and literature and fiction and nonfiction if they’re stuck reading “Sam and Nan are pals. They gab at the mall” over and over and over again.

Because politicians and publishers are not teachers, they often don’t understand the long-view perspective of learning. Yes, I want my kindergarten class to test well, but what I want more is for those kindergarteners to test well in first grade, second grade, freshmen, sophomore, and college. And the only way to do that is to instill good habits and a genuine love and interest in learning itself. Kids need to love reading, not just be hooked on phonics. They need an emotional attachment to reading, not just the science of reading.