Literacy Launch aims to increase the number of early readers in Massachusetts – Boston News, Weather, Sports

The reading skills of children in Massachusetts and across the country are lagging behind.

In her State of the Commonwealth address earlier this year, Governor Maura Healey proposed a $30 million investment over five years to boost early childhood literacy efforts.

“Every child in this state must be able to read and read well – and we will work together to give them the means to do so,” she said in January to thunderous applause in the packed House chamber.

On Thursday, Healey, Education Secretary Patrick Tutwiler and K-12 and Early Education Commissioners Russell Johnston and Amy Kershaw took a victory lap at the launch of the program at Clinton Elementary School, celebrating securing state funding (albeit only $20 million) and a $38 million federal grant to support children's reading education.

On state tests last year, only 41 percent of students in grades three through eight scored “meets or exceeds expectations” in English language and literature. The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education said achievement declined more in grades three through five than in grades six through eight, “indicating difficulties in early literacy.”

The decline in literacy skills is partly attributed to learning losses caused by pandemic-related school closures, but former DESE Commissioner Jeff Riley said earlier this year, “We haven't taught reading effectively as a country in a long time.”

The ability to read has long-term economic and social consequences. Research shows that not being able to read well can drastically affect a person's future prospects.

Healey's $20 million Literacy Launch program aims to provide dozens of districts with higher-quality literacy materials that students hope will improve reading scores and the foundational skills on which all other learning depends.

Emily Brunelle, a fourth-grader at Clinton Elementary School, used a stepladder to reach the microphone at Thursday's press conference.

“Sometimes reading can be hard. But Appleseeds really helped me learn all the sounds so I could read fluently,” Brunelle said, referring to a package of teaching materials developed by DESE for basic reading skills for kindergarten through second grade. “I didn't know that 'ph' could sound like 'f,' but Appleseeds helped me learn that. And then I was able to decode so many words. And now I love reading and I like to read in my free time, and it helped me learn a lot in school.”

Tutwiler nodded as Brunelle spoke, and Healey shook the fourth-grader's hand briefly as she got off her chair.

“We've had a generation of students who have lived through a pandemic, who have been in school during a pandemic. A lot of kids have been at home. Especially for the youngest, virtual instruction has been challenging, it's been challenging for their parents and the teachers as well. So this is a great opportunity to address what we need to address and make sure that everyone has what they need in terms of the best materials, the best instruction, that teachers have the best support,” Healey said Thursday.

Healey said 45 districts will be eligible to receive grants for new “high-quality instructional materials” in the first year of the five-year program.

While educators at the government event on Thursday welcomed the funding of new reading materials, other educators warned that the discussion about reading instruction in schools is nuanced and there is no one-size-fits-all solution.

In a letter to Healey and lawmakers in February, more than 300 educators from across the state expressed their appreciation for the governor's commitment to literacy and their support for closing opportunity gaps for struggling readers – with reservations.

The signatories, which include school inspectors and principals as well as reading experts and classroom teachers, expressed concern that DESE should approve exactly what constitutes “high-quality” material, rather than leaving it up to teachers to find the most appropriate path for particular students.

“Teachers need different strategies to achieve the best outcomes for their students, and there is no proven curriculum that addresses the needs of every child,” the letter said.

It continues: “Teaching a child to read is a complex undertaking that is not well understood by the press or the general public. There will always be students who need help reading, and there are no quick fixes. Closing opportunity gaps will require a tailored repertoire of instructional strategies and systemic changes that require time, patience, training, and resources. To that end, we look forward to productive collaboration with our state partners and all others who remain committed to teaching all Massachusetts children to read and succeed.”

There has been a debate among educators and experts for decades about how to teach reading.

Some educators in recent years have advanced the “science of reading curriculum”—a school of thought that draws on research into brain development to teach children effective strategies for reading.

Reading Science is not a specific curriculum program that districts can purchase, but rather a collection of research based on phonics, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. This approach to teaching reading differs from previous approaches in part by emphasizing phonics instruction—teaching students to understand how letters and letter groups are linked to sounds and spelling patterns—though it is not entirely based on phonics.

The term “reading science” has been around for over a century, but recently it has become shorthand for discussing cognitive research into how children's brains work when they read and for devoting more classroom time to learning word pronunciation and working on reading comprehension.

One historical approach to teaching reading was known as “whole language” and focused on identifying words in literary context. The philosophy behind this teaching was that children learned phonics naturally and did not need to be guided through “decoding” words, but that words should be learned in context with the rest of the language.

In the conflict of the so-called “reading wars” between these two approaches, a compromise emerged that is often referred to as “balanced literacy.”

This teaching method was intended to make use of both teaching models, with the main goal being to get as many books into students' hands as possible, as quickly as possible. If children enjoyed reading, the assumption was that they would read more.

Catherine Snow, an expert in language and reading development in children and a professor at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, was one of the signatories of the letter sent in February.

She said she supported literacy training in schools and government funding for that training, but cautioned against allowing the government to have a say in what is “high quality” and what is not. She said she had conducted research on reading science, balanced literacy and other types of reading strategies, and that different learning styles are effective for different children.

“I'm very concerned when the government says, 'Okay, we're investing in you and giving you curriculum, but what's going on? Why aren't your grades improving?' That assumes there's a simple solution,” Snow said. “If there are 25 kids in a class, the ones who aren't making progress may be struggling for entirely different reasons.”

In response to a question about the letter and concerns about a one-size-fits-all approach at Thursday's press conference, Tutwiler said Literacy Launch is a voluntary program and not a requirement for districts.

“But I also want to say that this is based on very compelling, evidence-based research over a period of decades that shows very clearly that the evidence-based strategies that we're taking up in this program help meet the needs of all learners, right?” he said. “And it's our duty to really drive that forward and provide opportunities for professional development, for purchasing high-quality teaching materials, and for supporting prospective teachers in colleges of education so they can learn how to most effectively reach all learners.”

He added: “This is not something we will apologize for, and we will really go all out to make this opportunity available to as many districts as possible.”

Snow said it was “great that additional resources and attention are being devoted to the issue,” but there was a risk of “unintended consequences that can really harm a school and undermine teacher autonomy.”

When asked to respond to criticism of the scholarship program during Thursday's press conference, Healey said it was her responsibility as governor to provide funding for students and teachers.

“This program is not a mandate. It's meant to be an option. And it's meant to build on the skills and experience of educators, people who have been doing literacy work for a long time. It's meant to support, not replace,” she said. “I have a lot of respect and admiration for people who know their field, and I'm confident that our districts and administrations and our educators can all work together, supported by us in government, to deliver the best.”

(Copyright (c) 2024 State House News Service.