For decades,
educators have been looking for the “best method” for teaching reading
and writing. With such a method, they believe, teachers will simply
deliver the program and the problems of literacy education will be
solved.
However, training
teachers to implement instructional methods when they don’t truly
understand the underlying rationale is futile. Without understanding,
teachers do not have the knowledge to adapt an instructional strategy
to address various student needs. Without understanding, teachers
become cogs in a machine, with neither the responsibility nor the
rewards of being in control. Without understanding, teachers can become
inflexible and dogmatic, unable to integrate new research-supported
practices into existing approaches.
Most teachers are motivated to do
their best in teaching students to read and write. Many recognize their
lack of understanding about literacy education and would like to learn
more. In a large-scale survey of new teachers in the United States,
more than 80 percent say they are not adequately prepared to teach
reading and writing. Even teachers with years of experience feel
inadequate in trying to meet the needs of all their students.
Clear Direction
Elementary school teachers want to
know the most effective ways of teaching their students to read and
write. But what do they need to know?
The best methods for teaching
elementary school children now are fairly well understood and are
reflected in two major research reviews produced by independent groups
of theoreticians and practitioners.
“Preventing Reading Difficulties in
Young Children,” published in 1998, and “Report of the National Reading
Panel: Teaching Children to Read,” published in 2000, conclude that
effective literacy programs include balanced and motivating instruction
in the following key components: phonemic awareness; systematic,
sequential phonics; fluent, automatic reading of text; vocabulary
development; text comprehension strategies; spelling and handwriting;
and written composition strategies.
Another clear theme in both reports
is that educators must understand when and how to implement these
components to provide effective literacy instruction. Thus, both
reports strongly recommend that the research should guide preservice
and in-service teacher education.
Although most teachers have a
general knowledge of the components of effective literacy programs,
many have not grasped key concepts well enough to implement them
effectively in their classrooms. As explained in the American
Federation of Teachers’ report, “Teaching Reading IS Rocket Science,”
what may on the surface seem relatively simple turns out to be complex.
Therefore, professional development focused on these concepts is
essential.
Whereas, in the past, beginning
reading and writing instruction vacillated between phonics and whole
language approaches largely based on the beliefs of educators and the
pronouncements of gurus, the findings of the Committee for the
Prevention of Reading Difficulties in Young Children and the National
Reading Panel provide clear direction concerning how reading and
writing should be taught in the early years.
The evidence is now in: The most
effective approaches involve phonemic awareness training and
systematic, sequential phonics instruction in kindergarten and 1st
grade. However, effective ways exist to teach these components, and the
findings should not be interpreted as a signal to return to the old
phonics approaches of 20 to 30 years ago.
Some recently developed teaching
strategies are more consistent with current views of how children
learn. Both teachers and students find the newer approaches more
stimulating and creative than the old-fashioned ones involving drill
and worksheets.
As well, it is important to
underscore the place of phonics in a beginning literacy program.
Systematic phonics instruction by itself does not help students acquire
all the processes they need to become successful readers and writers.
It needs to be combined with other essential instructional components
to create a complete and balanced program.
By emphasizing all of the processes
that contribute to literacy growth, teachers will have the best chance
of making their students readers and writers. A number of excellent
sources such as “Every Child Reading: A Professional Development Guide”
can help school administrators put these research findings into
practice through professional development. (See resource list.)
Theory into Practice
Five years ago, administrators in
the Bluewater School District in Ontario, Canada, were concerned about
the low literacy levels of many students. They launched an initiative
to raise reading and writing achievement levels across the entire
school district through staff development.
The launching of a literacy
initiative in Bluewater coincided not only with significant advances
concerning how children learn to read and write and how they can best
be taught, but also with a movement toward professional development of
teachers and school administrators as the key to literacy success in
schools. Thus, the project was timely and was guided by current
evidence concerning what teachers of reading should know and be able to
do, as outlined in the American Federation of Teachers’ report.
The professional development sessions were designed to provide the
theoretical and practical content teachers need to implement balanced
and effective literacy programs in their classrooms. Educators who had
previously thought of learning to read and write as a natural process,
like learning to talk, came to understand that the written language is
an invention. To develop successful readers and writers, teachers must
instruct children in how the alphabetic system works. To improve their
primary literacy programs they have to teach phonemic awareness and
systematic, sequential phonics, along with other essential
instructional components such as vocabulary development, fluency,
reading comprehension and written composition.
However, research-based content is
not enough to ensure effective change in literacy programs. The process
used to facilitate the change is at least as important as the content
in promoting lasting improvement in literacy education.
The Literacy Diet
As school administrators are well
aware, change does not happen overnight. Rather, it is a gradual
process that has definable stages.
For professional development to be
effective in promoting real, lasting change in schools, the process
also needs to involve ongoing, sustained professional development.
Frequent in-school meetings and teacher support groups encourage
implementation and promote teacher self-efficacy.
Professional development should be
offered in a variety of ways based on needs and should be guided by
ongoing assessment and a
theory-demonstration-practice-feedback-coaching cycle that includes
followup and maintenance to ensure lasting benefits.
The literacy initiative in the
Bluewater district combined these general principles for implementing
change with specific considerations affecting literacy programs in
elementary schools. The framework that guided the districtwide
professional development was one I first used in smaller-scale
initiatives.
One of the greatest challenges of
providing professional development opportunities for school teams is
providing meaningful content and instruction for each member of the
group, given their wide range of background knowledge and experience.
Another challenge is preventing the
professional development activities from becoming mired in the
emotional debate between phonics and whole language advocates. For
decades, this debate has been sustained by rhetoric and polarized
language. To avoid this problem, I embedded the professional
development in a common-sense framework, involving novel terminology.
This framework, which I call “The
Balanced and Flexible Literacy Diet: Putting Theory Into Practice,”
draws on familiar food pyramid concepts to help educators understand
the need to include all key components in their literacy programs to
ensure students’ growth in literacy. It also helps them see why some
components such as phonemic awareness and phonics instruction are
especially important early on—analogous to young children’s need for
calcium when their bones are growing.
Other literacy diet components, such
as the building of vocabulary and fluency and the development of
comprehension and composition strategies, gain importance at later
stages of literacy development. Through the use of the literacy diet
metaphor, teachers begin to think in terms of children’s literacy
nutrition. Other concepts logically follow.
For example, literacy activities
representing the key literacy component food groups are required on a
daily basis. A variety of activities can address each component and
interesting activities often combine several components. Some
individuals have special literacy diet needs. Balance is the key to
good growth in literacy, and flexibility is necessary to satisfy
personal preferences. Good teachers use approaches that are both
effective and motivating.
We focused the professional
development on raising all participants’ breadth and depth of knowledge
about literacy learning. Emphasis was on (1) promoting understanding of
the essential research-based components for growth in literacy; (2)
providing practical strategies for balanced, nutritious and appealing
literacy programs; (3) adjusting the balance in order to move children
through the stages of literacy development; (4) planning programs and
managing time in classrooms to ensure as much literacy nutrition as
possible for every child every day; (5) assessing students’ growth in
literacy and monitoring classroom practices to guide the change
process; and (6) understanding the nature of reading and writing
difficulties in order to adjust the literacy diet balance to meet
special literacy nutritional needs.
Presenting information within the
context of The Literacy Diet framework helped break old habits and open
minds to new information about literacy education. Discussions focused
on balance, flexibility and literacy nutrition instead of debate,
slogans and simplistic solutions. (To learn more about The Literacy
Diet principles, visit the website of the New Mexico Reading Initiative
at reta.nmsu.edu/reading/willows/index.html.)
The Infrastructure
When I first began using systematic
professional development in schools, I assumed that because I was
well-versed in what theory and research had to say about the content
required for successful literacy programs in schools and because I had
the practical knowledge of how to apply the theory—what programs to
include and how to teach it—the rest would follow.
Practical knowledge has helped. But
just as essential was the fact I was not working alone. As part of a
team I had the benefit of working with several outstanding change
experts, including superintendents and principals, who knew how to
bring about change in schools.
Since this first venture, I have
helped change school literacy programs in several large school
districts and now understand the pivotal role of school administrators
who combine wisdom, far-sightedness, commitment and passion with a deep
understanding of the complexity of the school context and the difficult
process of implementing change in schools.
The content and process of the
professional development must be supported by an infrastructure that
combines a well-articulated but flexible plan; long-term commitment
with sufficient funding; realistic and practical goals for change; the
involvement of everyone who affects student learning; adequate time
during school hours for professional development; alignment of all
aspects of curriculum and assessment; and the contribution of experts
both inside and outside the district.
The change process in the Bluewater
School District, with its 23,900 students, has been guided and nurtured
by a superintendent of elementary education, who, working closely with
several administrative colleagues, inspired educators districtwide to
want to learn and grow so they could lead their students to higher
levels of literacy.
In the beginning, obtaining buy-in
was not easy. Now, principals and teachers are asking to speed up the
process and involve teachers at higher grades levels. As we enter our
fifth school year, we see this experiment in literacy-related
professional development has worked. Reading scores are now at or above
the norms and school administrators, principals and teachers are
working together to maintain and improve their already successful
literacy programs.
Moving beyond the great debate and
implementing balanced, motivating and effective reading and writing
programs in the primary grades. The content, process and context
outlined here have been essential features in the successes in
Bluewater.
Across different settings the
details of successful professional development initiatives differ
somewhat, but the common thread has been a strong school administrator
with vision and drive who respects and inspires principals and teachers
and who cares deeply about children.
Dale Willows is a professor of human
development and applied psychology at the Ontario Institute for Studies
in Education, 252 Bloor St., Toronto, Ontario M5S 1V6. E-mail: dwillows@oise.utoronto.ca. She is a member of the National Reading Panel, a nonpartisan group appointed by Congress.