Educators fell for “balanced literacy” and millions of children paid the price.

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

Phonics works. Balanced literacy is a worse approach. If your school uses it, you should complain and work to get it replaced by a phonics-fundamental approach. Do not fall for the “ but they’re the experts” rationalization.

The Daily: The Fight Over Phonics on Apple Podcasts

Show The Daily, Ep The Fight Over Phonics - Jun 6, 2023

podcasts.apple.com

The NYT is now reporting it so everyone can rest easy that this isn’t part of Trumpism. Or know-nothingism. This is data and science (has been for years, but people are finally admitting it).

 

[larsIU]

Phonics works. Balanced literacy is a worse approach. If your school uses it, you should complain and work to get it replaced by a phonics-fundamental approach. Do not fall for the “ but they’re the experts” rationalization.

The Daily: The Fight Over Phonics on Apple Podcasts

Show The Daily, Ep The Fight Over Phonics - Jun 6, 2023

podcasts.apple.com

The NYT is now reporting it so everyone can rest easy that this isn’t part of Trumpism. Or know-nothingism. This is data and science (has been for years, but people are finally admitting it).

Excellent. Now, do the math that uses boxes and leaves kids unable to answer simple(ish) math questions without getting out a piece of paper to draw their boxes!

 

[mcmurtry66]

Excellent. Now, do the math that uses boxes and leaves kids unable to answer simple(ish) math questions without getting out a piece of paper to draw their boxes!

It’s like they don’t want us to help our kids. Those Fing boxes

 

[larsIU]

It’s like they don’t want us to help our kids. Those Fing boxes

I just showed her how to do it the old fashioned way, to which she replied "that's way easier."

Duh.

 

[mcmurtry66]

I just showed her how to do it the old fashioned way, to which she replied "that's way easier."

Duh.

Exactly what I did

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

Excellent. Now, do the math that uses boxes and leaves kids unable to answer simple(ish) math questions without getting out a piece of paper to draw their boxes!

I think that’s part of the same problem with the educational establishment. They fall for fads without evidence far too easily.

The underlying reason for that, I believe, is that our best and brightest just don’t go into education. They go into finance, business, medicine, law, engineering, etc.

 

[8Stars5Banners]

I think that’s part of the same problem with the educational establishment. They fall for fads without evidence far too easily.

The underlying reason for that, I believe, is that our best and brightest just don’t go into education. They go into finance, business, medicine, law, engineering, etc.

not necessarily the case... sometimes the "brightest and the best" try to make a name for themselves by changing things that don't need changing

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

not necessarily the case... sometimes the "brightest and the best" try to make a name for themselves by changing things that don't need changing

That's the problem with the incentive structure within educational academia.

 

[zeke4ahs]

Phonics works. Balanced literacy is a worse approach. If your school uses it, you should complain and work to get it replaced by a phonics-fundamental approach. Do not fall for the “ but they’re the experts” rationalization.

The Daily: The Fight Over Phonics on Apple Podcasts

Show The Daily, Ep The Fight Over Phonics - Jun 6, 2023

podcasts.apple.com

The NYT is now reporting it so everyone can rest easy that this isn’t part of Trumpism. Or know-nothingism. This is data and science (has been for years, but people are finally admitting it).

Different kids learn different ways and with different methods. Teaching multiple methods helps assure you meet all of the kids’ needs. Phonics is probably the most important, but context clues, reading comprehension, language experience and more are all part of the puzzle. We went through a short period where we didn’t have much phonics instruction available and I pulled out some of my third grade books I still had. (Hoarder that I am) A big part of the problem is textbook companies who want you to think your method is outdated and try to sell you something new every five years.
I hate the boxes for math too, but it did help a few kids that couldn’t get it the other way.
And yes, the best and the brightest are not going to be entering education any longer, sadly. I can’t imagine anyone choosing it as a career in the current environment.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

Different kids learn different ways and with different methods. Teaching multiple methods helps assure you meet all of the kids’ needs. Phonics is probably the most important, but context clues, reading comprehension, language experience and more are all part of the puzzle. We went through a short period where we didn’t have much phonics instruction available and I pulled out some of my third grade books I still had. (Hoarder that I am) A big part of the problem is textbook companies who want you to think your method is outdated and try to sell you something new every five years.
I hate the boxes for math too, but it did help a few kids that couldn’t get it the other way.
And yes, the best and the brightest are not going to be entering education any longer, sadly. I can’t imagine anyone choosing it as a career in the current environment.

Listen to the podcast. Read the actual reports. Review the data. "Follow the science" about how the brain works. Phonics is the best way to teach reading that we know of. Balanced literacy is not. Even Lucy Calkins has ADMITTED this (while still peddling her garbage curriculum).

Any school system that taught balanced literacy instead of phonics (and it sounds like 50% of school systems in America signed on to this boondoggle) made a huge mistake (listen to the podcast and hear how those systems actually discouraged children from sounding out words to make sense of them!). They weren't intentionally trying to short change kids, but they did. They were the "experts" and they whiffed. In the real world, heads would roll and people would be fired. We all know that's not going to happen in public education, though.

 

[twenty02]

54% of the country is not literate to the 6th grade level?

Wtf.

55 US Literacy Statistics: Literacy Rate, Average Reading Level

Find the latest U.S. literacy statistics, including the U.S. literacy rate, average reading level, and more.

www.crossrivertherapy.com

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

The underlying reason for that, I believe, is that our best and brightest just don’t go into education. They go into finance, business, medicine, law, engineering, etc.

While I agree, has that actually changed much over the past century? Teacher pay may not have kept up with other fields, so there's that. But, did the best and brightest ever go into education vs. other fields?

Also, anecdotally, the people from IU that went into education (almost all women - can't think of a single man that I knew, but I'm sure there were some) were certainly not of the intellectual variety.

Lastly, I'll make one more related point - there is probably a trade off of sorts between intelligence and teaching ability. Meaning, some of the smartest or best at a specific field are rarely able to translate their knowledge as effectively as someone who isn't as smart or as good.

In addition, when it comes to the younger levels, patience has to be one of the top qualities. Lord knows I would quit in an hour of trying to teach, so kudos to those people who are able to use that to help calm, educate and direct kids.

 

[larsIU]

Teacher pay may not have kept up with other fields, so there's that. But, did the best and brightest ever go into education vs. other fields?

I wonder, out loud but to myself, if the women that today work in finance, medicine, etc. weren't kinda boxed into being teachers quite often. I suspect the long, slow fight for women's equality has left many traditionally female roles (teachers, nurses) lacking some of the best and brightest (b/c the best and brightest have always included women).

With men's labor participation rates falling, perhaps we should do something to get more young men into classrooms (in college - to learn - and teaching primary school level ed).

Just a showerthought.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

While I agree, has that actually changed much over the past century? Teacher pay may not have kept up with other fields, so there's that. But, did the best and brightest ever go into education vs. other fields?

Also, anecdotally, the people from IU that went into education (almost all women - can't think of a single man that I knew, but I'm sure there were some) were certainly not of the intellectual variety.

Lastly, I'll make one more related point - there is probably a trade off of sorts between intelligence and teaching ability. Meaning, some of the smartest or best at a specific field are rarely able to translate their knowledge as effectively as someone who isn't as smart or as good.

In addition, when it comes to the younger levels, patience has to be one of the top qualities. Lord knows I would quit in an hour of trying to teach, so kudos to those people who are able to use that to help calm, educate and direct kids.

I wonder, out loud but to myself, if the women that today work in finance, medicine, etc. weren't kinda boxed into being teachers quite often. I suspect the long, slow fight for women's equality has left many traditionally female roles (teachers, nurses) lacking some of the best and brightest (b/c the best and brightest have always included women).

With men's labor participation rates falling, perhaps we should do something to get more young men into classrooms (in college - to learn - and teaching primary school level ed).

Just a showerthought.

This is what I was going to point to in response to JDB's question. Both of your posts bring up good points.

JDB, on the ability of the intelligent to teach, I really think that if a smart person sets as his or her goal perfecting the ability to teach young kids, he or she will be able to do that better than someone not-so-smart.

I do think that politically liberal people probably fall for the newest "transformative" educational trends more than political conservatives--probably for the very reason that the conservatives are more hostile to change. But sometimes that can be a good thing.

My larger point in posting this is that the educational establishment--"the experts"--made a giant mistake on maybe the most important thing in K-12 education--teaching children how to read. We need an investigation by really smart, non-partisan people about how and why this happened, and that suggests ways to protect us from it happening again (or that it is happening in math, equitable grading, standards based grading, etc. as we speak).

 

[UncleMark]

While I agree, has that actually changed much over the past century? Teacher pay may not have kept up with other fields, so there's that. But, did the best and brightest ever go into education vs. other fields?

JDB, on the ability of the intelligent to teach, I really think that if a smart person sets as his or her goal perfecting the ability to teach young kids, he or she will be able to do that better than someone not-so-smart.

My shithouse theory is that it's not about intelligence as much as it is having a talent to teach, which is more theatrical and performance based than it is pedagogy. Look at motivational speakers or preachers or people like Dave Ramsey -- they're performers and motivators before they are teachers.

I'd look to steer kids who have a flair for drama and performance into teaching. Get them a good subject knowledge base, then get them trained for a year in honing the performance. No need for a four year degree on pedagogy. And you might have a better time finding new teachers and older people embarking on a new career.

 

[zeke4ahs]

Listen to the podcast. Read the actual reports. Review the data. "Follow the science" about how the brain works. Phonics is the best way to teach reading that we know of. Balanced literacy is not. Even Lucy Calkins has ADMITTED this (while still peddling her garbage curriculum).

Any school system that taught balanced literacy instead of phonics (and it sounds like 50% of school systems in America signed on to this boondoggle) made a huge mistake (listen to the podcast and hear how those systems actually discouraged children from sounding out words to make sense of them!). They weren't intentionally trying to short change kids, but they did. They were the "experts" and they whiffed. In the real world, heads would roll and people would be fired. We all know that's not going to happen in public education, though.

I will. But I’ve listened to tons of information on this for over 30 years. And as I said, phonics should have always been a vital part of instruction. I’ve also listened and learned about how the brain works and the different modalities, which is how I know a one size fits all approach doesn’t work with all kids. Never has and never will. Kids learn differently. LearNing styles, based on the way the brain works has been part of many schools for decades, There are kids who Are visual learner, auditory learners, kinesthetic learners, social learners and all of that needs to be taken into account. Phonics is also boring, so you have to do something to keep attention. I will listen to the podcast. I’m aware of Lucy Calkins and the controversy, but not so much her specific curriculum.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

I will. But I’ve listened to tons of information on this for over 30 years. And as I said, phonics should have always been a vital part of instruction. I’ve also listened and learned about how the brain works and the different modalities, which is how I know a one size fits all approach doesn’t work with all kids. Never has and never will. Kids learn differently. LearNing styles, based on the way the brain works has been part of many schools for decades, There are kids who Are visual learner, auditory learners, kinesthetic learners, social learners and all of that needs to be taken into account. Phonics is also boring, so you have to do something to keep attention. I will listen to the podcast. I’m aware of Lucy Calkins and the controversy, but not so much her specific curriculum.

That's not what the data says. These myths were debunked over 13 years ago:

Learning Styles Debunked: There is No Evidence Supporting Auditory and Visual Learning, Psychologists Say

Although numerous studies have identified different kinds of learning (such as “auditory" and “visual”), that research has serious flaws, according to a comprehensive report.

www.psychologicalscience.org

https://fee.org/articles/learning-styles-don-t-actually-exist-studies-show/

The Myth of ‘Learning Styles’

A popular theory that some people learn better visually or aurally keeps getting debunked.

www.theatlantic.com

Learning Styles as a Myth

Examples In addition to the three core styles, over 71 separate learning-style instruments and theories have been documented in education literature (Coffield et al 2004). 30 popular ones include (Pashler 2008): · convergers vs. divergers · verbalizers vs. imagers · holists vs...

poorvucenter.yale.edu

"[T}he overwhelming consensus among scholars is that no scientific evidence backs this “matching” hypothesis of learning styles (Kirschner 2017, Pashler 2008, Simmonds 2014). While all learners can develop subjective preferences for studying or digesting material, studies deny that students learn better through a self-reported learning style. Instead, scholars increasingly call for educators to replace ‘neuromyths’ with resources and strategies rooted in evidence from cognitive and adult learning theory."

 

[TomEric4756]

Balanced Literacy even sounds like an oxymoron

Jumbo shrimp became prawns so the could charge more for them.

 

[zeke4ahs]

That's not what the data says. These myths were debunked over 13 years ago:

Learning Styles Debunked: There is No Evidence Supporting Auditory and Visual Learning, Psychologists Say

Although numerous studies have identified different kinds of learning (such as “auditory" and “visual”), that research has serious flaws, according to a comprehensive report.

www.psychologicalscience.org

https://fee.org/articles/learning-styles-don-t-actually-exist-studies-show/

The Myth of ‘Learning Styles’

A popular theory that some people learn better visually or aurally keeps getting debunked.

www.theatlantic.com

Learning Styles as a Myth

Examples In addition to the three core styles, over 71 separate learning-style instruments and theories have been documented in education literature (Coffield et al 2004). 30 popular ones include (Pashler 2008): · convergers vs. divergers · verbalizers vs. imagers · holists vs...

poorvucenter.yale.edu

"[T}he overwhelming consensus among scholars is that no scientific evidence backs this “matching” hypothesis of learning styles (Kirschner 2017, Pashler 2008, Simmonds 2014). While all learners can develop subjective preferences for studying or digesting material, studies deny that students learn better through a self-reported learning style. Instead, scholars increasingly call for educators to replace ‘neuromyths’ with resources and strategies rooted in evidence from cognitive and adult learning theory."

Interesting. Most schools I’m familiar with still use learning styles, particularly with learning disabled and kids that are struggling in the classroom.

 

[zeke4ahs]

My shithouse theory is that it's not about intelligence as much as it is having a talent to teach, which is more theatrical and performance based than it is pedagogy. Look at motivational speakers or preachers or people like Dave Ramsey -- they're performers and motivators before they are teachers.

I'd look to steer kids who have a flair for drama and performance into teaching. Get them a good subject knowledge base, then get them trained for a year in honing the performance. No need for a four year degree on pedagogy. And you might have a better time finding new teachers and older people embarking on a new career.

It isn’t mainly about intelligence. Some of the smartest teachers I know were not very good teachers. Some things can be taught but others are innate. Especially for elementary, it seems like you either have a teacher personality or you don’t. It’s often pretty easy to spot, as early as job interviews. Not sure what I think about the training aspect. Nothing beats on the job experience, but at least at IU, we were doing field work by sophomore year. Some pretty quickly found out this wasn’t the career for them.