A child's individual differences, abilities, and experience are very important in the learning process, and learning to read is no exception. That's why new legislation based on the mistaken assumption that there is only one way to teach reading is so dangerous for California students. Although well-intentioned, the measure would prevent teachers from addressing children's diverse learning needs and lead to even greater illiteracy.
Introduced by Assemblywoman Blanca Rubio (D-Baldwin Park) with the support of several advocacy groups, Assembly Bill 2222 would strictly limit approaches to language and literacy instruction from kindergarten through eighth grade . It would also limit the type of training and resources available to educators.
Despite its flaws, AB 2222 is written in persuasive terms, promoting a curriculum based on the “science of reading” and prohibiting all other ways of teaching the subject. Who would object to following science?
In fact, the term “science of reading” lacks a clear definition. It is rather a misleading marketing strategy and ideological slogan that a research subset or teaching methodology. Consequently, reading experts are concerned about the way such policies are being implemented in schools.
Researchers agree that learning to read is a complex process. But curricula that claim to be aligned with the science of reading tend to oversimplify the process, overemphasize and isolate critical skills like phonics (the correlation between letters and sounds), overlook oral language as a foundation for reading and ignore the importance of writing. In other words, they misrepresent the “science” part of the “science of reading.”
Learning to read this way would be like learning to pedal a stationary bike and then being expected to cycle through Los Angeles traffic without understanding balance, direction, speed, and the rules of the road. Some children (especially wealthier ones) will already have some of those additional skills, but many others will not.
Placing too much emphasis on foundational skills can take away from classroom time in writing, language development, science, and social studies. Foundational skills are extremely important for young students, but they are insufficient to develop critical thinking, reading, and writing. When schools focus too much on basic skills, wealth and family background play an even greater role in education, increasing inequity.
As a former bilingual teacher in a largely Spanish-speaking community, I am particularly concerned about the implications of AB 2222 for English learners. Researchers and educators on all sides of the so-called reading wars agree that English learners need additional supports designed specifically for language development, the process of learning to understand language and use it to communicate.
Approaches characterized as following the “science of reading” tend to overlook the needs of English learners. They may learn to decode words, but if they are prevented from acquiring sufficient background knowledge through science and other subjects, their comprehension will be limited – the purpose of reading.
Researchers have asked Greater attention to linguistic and social factors for bilingual students. in literacy. This is particularly important in California, where 19% of students are classified as English learners and 40% speak a language other than English at home.. That suggests this legislation ignores the needs of a substantial portion of California students.
Literacy certainly needs improvement in California, which has one of the highest illiteracy rates in the country. But imposing a mandatory curriculum is the opposite of what we should be doing to address it. Instead, we should better prepare our teachers and provide them with differentiated, research-based training and lifelong learning opportunities. which has proven to be an effective strategy. We should provide more, not less, support to our educators to meet the diverse needs of every student, regardless of her native language.
Limiting teachers' ability to use a variety of strategies will only make it more difficult for them to learn to teach children who might have difficulty learning to read and write. Why would we do that?
While learning a language is innate for humans, literacy is not. Literacy, governed by cultural and sometimes seemingly arbitrary rules, is difficult to learn and teach well. Pretending otherwise will not help anyone learn to read.
Allison Briceño is an associate professor at the Connie L. Lurie College of Education at San Jose State, editor of Reading Teacher, and a Public Voices Fellow with the OpEd Project.
