Bush school plan puts thinking on hold
(Reprinted from the Providence Journal of Sept. 23, 2003.)
Where are current literacy practices taking America's children in the new political push for scripted, teacher-proof reading and testing programs?
Unfortunately, much is being left behind -- including thinking -- as schools, teachers and administrators rush to keep pace with the demands of high-stakes testing, which looks at very small pieces of reading and thinking processes.
Thoughtful engagement in reading has been replaced by skimming and scanning with an eye toward test performance.
Despite arriving in Washington with a dismal education record in Texas, George W. Bush has been declared the "education president." Bolstered by the enactment of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, he has promoted the plan as a cure-all for America's education woes. While it makes for an easy sound bite, the plan is really a lousy one for literacy -- and for America's future. If we look closely at the NCLB Act, we find that it is not particularly caring toward children, and actually leaves many more behind than have previous education initiatives.
Recent revelations about the initiative's destructive impact upon students, teachers and schools has prompted the Bush administration to commission a $500,000 U.S. Department of Education public-relations team to promote NCLB and perpetuate the Bush-as-education-president image. A half-million dollars have been earmarked for PR at a time when school budgets are being slashed across America.
Current reading legislation, fueled by NCLB and the distorted interpretations of the limited report of the National Reading Panel, has left more than thinking behind. Thoughtful research is also left behind, as researchers whose work doesn't support the initiatives of the Bush administration and commercial publishers fail to receive funding.
Instead, we can look forward to more "scientific evidence" derived from studies designed by commercial publishers of the current reading programs, which often provide the research base for their own systems. Statewide textbook adoption ensures wide dissemination and hefty profits for these commercial systems.
Tragically, the enormous cost of these programs drains school funds that could be used to buy real literature and excellent reading materials. Taxpayers, teachers, students, school districts and parents are the big losers here.
As schools turn to packaged skill-and-drill programs to prepare for assessments, thoughtful engagement in real literature is left in the dust. Instead of developing reading comprehension, critical thinking and literature interpretation, students now gather bits of information with which to answer test questions.
In leaving deep, critical thinking behind, reading lessons become preparation for later performance, rather than a mind-engaging process. Under the Bush reading agenda, the definition of reading as a deep, connected thinking process has been supplanted by a view of reading as accurately saying the words.
Related to this superficial view of reading are the ridiculous assessments in vogue that ask students to read pages of nonsense syllables and words -- endless strings of gibberish. Incredibly, these tests are called "reading assessments."
A steady diet of decodable texts and the reading of nonsense words fixes readers' attention at the letter, sound and word, developing destructive habits of "word calling" and slow, plodding reading. When readers "word call," they skim the surface, accurately saying the words with little understanding.
Real, purposeful writing is also being sacrificed, as connections between reading and writing are played down or ignored by the National Reading Panel Report and the recommendations of the NCLB Act. When students write daily, for sustained periods, choosing topics meaningful to them, they can write their way into reading. This approach has helped American students on all levels for decades.
Not anymore. The writing process has been replaced by writing to "prompts," such as "describe your day if you woke up and your neck were as long as a giraffe's." We hand students these one-size-fits-all prompts; expect them to care about them; measure the results against each other; see who comes out on top; and punish those that don't.
These practices demand the most progress from those with the furthest to go -- then focus blame on the students, teachers and schools when the test scores are not high enough.
In a world that demands reflection and innovation, we are dumbing down America's curriculum -- reducing learning to a stimulus response. What is needed is not more testing, and the accompanying test prep, which takes so many hours of valuable teaching and learning time. What is needed is a central commitment to educators' professional development, so that teachers have the strategies, skills and knowledge they need to meet each child's needs.
Instead of investing billions of dollars in testing materials and one-size-fits-all commercial reading programs, schools should invest in children's literature and the latest and best nonfiction reading materials.
Instead of wasting hours of time preparing for tests, teachers should be providing time for the students' engagement with ideas -- so that they develop the analytical thinking and strong reading and writing skills so critical in today's world.
When parents see these elements missing in their children's schools, they should not be silent. The should ask questions about how the schools provide for the teachers' continuing education. If a school uses a scripted commercial program (in which teachers are given exactly what they should say for each lesson), parents should ask questions about student and teacher boredom, as well as the erosion of the teachers' professionalism.
Since research has clearly demonstrated that no single program works for all students -- that children learn best through a variety of approaches -- parents should also ask pointed questions about how each student's needs are being met.
Mary Lee Griffin is an education professor at Wheaton College. She has helped establish K-12 literacy programs in schools throughout New England.