Did you know that it is important that high school teachers understand just why primary teachers teach primary students the names and sounds of the letters of the alphabet?
It comes as a shock to me, but so claims Oregon's new K-12 Literacy Framework! This claim is troubling for a number of reasons, the most onerous of which is that it is clearly written to mislead those who don't know anything about the sounds associated with the letters of the alphabet! The implication that there is some sort of simple, direct relationship between letters of the alphabet and the sounds of the spoken language is just silly...especially to those who are learning to read. They quickly learn that almost no letters make the same sound under all circumstances, almost no sounds are always made by the same letter or combination of letters, and many letters and letter combinations hold no clue to the sounds they make until a person already knows how to pronounce words like though, through, enough, bough...
There are a number of other reasons not to greet the publication of the New K-12 Literacy Framework as good news.
My primary concern is that it reflects a thorough misunderstanding of how children learn to read. It drags out the National Reading Panel report and seems to accept it as other than the political enterprise that it was. Perhaps the most influential claim of the National Reading Panel, which drives much of the Literacy Framework, is that the panel identified the "Five Pillars" of reading instruction. These five 'essentials' have been uncritically published, cut and pasted into virtually every official document regarding literacy since the publication of the report. The five 'essentials' have, however, no firm basis research...ironic for a publication that places all of its eggs in a deeply flawed research basket! This 'research' generates a lot of business, and where it has been faithfully implemented, there is no conspicuous surge in reading achievement.
The K-12 Literacy Framework includes no minority report. There is no room for thinking...only for implementation. Nothing from Richard Allington, Frank Smith, Nancie Atwell, Mem Fox, Stephen Krashen, Joanne Yatvin (who sat on the National Reading Panel and carefully articulated her concerns regarding its final report). Educators are expected simply to accept and implement this framework based, evidently, in the credentials of its authors...no, wait, that would be an argument ad hominem, that can't be right.
Is there someone in the state who really believes that this framework will improve reading achievement? Those who want to believe so face a decidedly steep climb. Because while the document is all dressed up in scientific fashion (or, if you prefer, fad) there is no scientific evidence to support its claim that implementation of the framework will improve reading achievement for a single student. None. Zero.
So what's the scoop? Why publish these 200-plus pages? Is it a political document? A budget document? An attempt to beef up Oregon's next federal grant application? Whatever it is, serious practitioners should consider letting the politicians make of the framework what they will while focusing their own energies on educating children. Take a break from teaching reading and let the kids read awhile. Read along with them. Giant win-win. And doesn't require a 200-page rational(e)(-ism).
