Do All Kids Need Scientifically Based Curriculum?

Here is a story.
There's a guy with asthma. Doctors at his local hospital recently took part in a course about a new, intensive treatment for asthma, and they decide to start using it on all of their patients with asthma. So, every day, for five hours a day, the guy goes to the hospital and undergoes a treatment that is time consuming and uncomfortable. He can't really do other daily activities, because his whole day is planned around getting this treatment. The doctors tell the man and his wife that 60% of people who undergo this treatment are eventually able to climb mountains and run marathons without asthma symptoms.
The man says, "But I don't want to run marathons or climb mountains. I just want to go through a leisurely hike through the woods with my wife. I want to walk through museums and go to farmer's markets. Or just stay home and play Yahtzee. Just give me an inhaler, and let me live my life."
The doctors reply, "You must be able to run marathons and climb mountains. Everyone needs to be able to run marathons and climb mountains."
So the man continues getting the treatment every day, until eventually he grows old and dies.

That is sort of a silly story! But I love metaphors! This story is a metaphor for scientifically based reading and math curriculums, which are often used for children with learning disabilities or children who are struggling in school.

One year when I was a teacher, I had four 3rd and 4th grade boys on my caseload. Three of them had the ability to read, a few years below grade level, but their behavioral issues kept them from participating in class. The other boy had no behavioral issues, but had a severe reading disability and struggled even with three-letter words. I decided to start reading funny novels with them. I started with "Sideways Stories From Wayside School," which is a silly book full of nonsense stories about a weird school. I remembered how much my brother and I loved that book. I started reading it aloud to them. Each day we'd read a chapter or two. In order to comply with school requirements, I added a vocabulary lesson at the beginning of each chapter, and a few comprehension questions at the end. But really, I didn't need to do that. The boys were fully engaged in the stories. They naturally made connections, and made predictions, and discussed the stories, without me having to prompt them. We got through a large part of the school year with me reading these stories. The boys in my group had very few behavioral issues while we were reading.

With two of these boys who ended up being in my class full time for a while, I started reading a graphic novel. I had several copies of it, so I suggested that we each be a character as we read. They loved it. They made silly voices when they read, and participated fully, and acted like model students.

What I was trying to do here was get them to enjoy literature, to the point where they would seek it out on their own. The goal was to keep them wanting more. If I got them to see that reading could be fun, and playful, they would be more likely to practice reading on their own. Even the boy with almost no ability to read would possibly look for ways to access literature, such as by listening to audio books.

An administrator who observed me told me to stop reading these books. She advised me to use a "fast-paced, scientifically based curriculum" with them instead. These curriculum materials all go something like this.

Teacher: "This is A. Touch A. This is A. Touch A. This is S. Touch S. This is S. Touch S. Touch A. Touch S. Good! This is T. Touch T. This is T. Touch T. Touch A. Touch S. Good!"

Eventually kids may be able to physically read. But will they read? They may read enough to survive, enough to struggle through a menu in a restaurant or the directions for how to set up their wifi connection. Will they ever pick up a book? Will they ever read for joy, or to learn?  Probably not.

Scientifically based curriculums are proven to be successful for many children. But that success is measured by their ability to get higher scores on standardized tests. Scientifically based curriculums don't follow a student into adulthood to measure their quality of life. They don't measure whether a student found subjects they were passionate about, or whether they loved visiting the library, or whether they used books to find out more when they were diagnosed with an illness, or whether they grew up and read books to their own children every day. They only measure test scores.

Another thing people may not realize is that success in reading in a traditional school setting is often based on how quickly a student can read. Struggling students are expected to read as many words as they can in one minute, with the goal being that they will eventually be able to read whatever number of words is expected of a student in their grade level. This is measured by having the student do a "cold read," or read aloud a grade level passage that they have never seen before. A teacher listens, marking any words the student reads incorrectly, and stopping them after one minute. The teacher then charts how many total words the student read, and their percentage of accuracy. To improve, the student is often told to read the same passage aloud over and over again. A child who reads slowly and carefully, or a child who can read in their head but mispronounces the words aloud, is considered unsuccessful. This makes me wonder... is the speed of reading important? I know many very intelligent people who read thick, intellectual books. It takes them forever. But they read the books, and think carefully about what they read. They do not read aloud as quickly as they can and keep track of how many words they read.

So, back to the guy with asthma. Does everyone need to be able to climb a mountain or run a marathon? Should a person only be considered successful if they are able to do everything at the exact same level, and speed, as their peers? Can life be lived fully by meandering through forests and museums, instead of racing through?

At Someday School, we think so. What do you think?

More AERO Conference Reflections: Literacy

One of the workshops I went to at the AERO Conference was about literacy in self-directed learning settings, and how and when to intervene when you suspect a child may have dyslexia. The person leading the workshop was a reading specialist who works at Village Free School in Portland. Some of the things she said would probably set traditional school reading specialists' hair on end! But it was extremely interesting and helpful to me.

The first thing she discussed was the fact that, in traditional schools, children are expected to begin reading in kindergarten. If they have not at least gotten a strong start at reading by the time they finish kindergarten, they are often considered to be "at risk." That often means that they will have participate in multiple special reading programs during and after school. They may work 1:1 with a reading specialist, go to a small group for reading instruction, and go to a tutoring group after school... all because they aren't learning to read at the expected pace. 

Is it vital that children learn to read at a very young age? Many people believe that. After all, we always hear that a young child's brain is like a sponge, and we know that early childhood is often the best time for children to learn a second language. However, when looking at all of human evolution, reading is a pretty new process. While most children are hardwired to learn how to crawl, walk, and meet other milestones, reading is not that kind of skill. Learning to read is more similar to learning how to use a cellphone than learning how to walk. It is something our society created, not something that we are biologically programmed for. 

So why all the emphasis on learning to read in kindergarten and first grade? There are several reasons. 

• Traditional classroom teachers often work with children in small groups, and the children who are not in the group have to be able to work independently at something. If they can read, they can independently do worksheets and read instructions. 
• Children need to be able to read in order to participate in standardized tests. 
• Standardized curriculums emphasize the need for children at certain ages to read at certain levels. 

All this pressure is put on children to learn to read. Children are naturally intrinsically motivated to learn. But when they are pressured to learn to read, they lose that intrinsic motivation. It is no longer about learning to read because reading is exciting or interested, but because they want to earn the approval of the teacher or their parents, or they want to earn a prize from the classroom treasure box. 

In the best cases, children do learn to read for one reason or another. They may even enjoy reading. Often, that isn't the case. A child who does not quickly pick up on reading may start to feel ashamed about not being at the same level as her peers. She  may have no interest in reading, or see no purpose in it. Often, standardized reading curriculum materials are very dry, and children, especially those with attention challenges, get bored quickly. If they do have a learning disability, they may grow to associate reading with anxiety and embarassment. A child who hates reading, even if they do learn how, is at a disadvantage. He is denied all sorts of information, experiences, and ideas. 

In a self-directed learning situation, such as homeschooling or a school like Someday School, children begin learning how to read when they are ready for it. If they are interested in reading and excited about it, they will often learn very quickly. The role of an adult is to read aloud to the child, and to model reading themselves. They should also initiate conversations about reading, and what doors it can open. 

In the case that a child does have dyslexia, special reading programs such as Orton-Gillingham can have a place in self-directed learning. What makes it different from in a traditional school is that the child has to be a willing and invested participant. Self-directed learning does not mean the child always has to teach himself. It just means the child has to be the one to make the decision to learn. 

A child with dyslexia should be helped to own it, instead of being ashamed of it. Adults should help them realize that their brain works differently, and that they can learn how to make it work at its best. One interesting fact we learned is that 35% of enterpreneurs have dyslexia.

Something else to keep in mind is that reading is the act of absorbing information from a text... somehow. There are three types of reading. The first one is eye reading, which is what you are most likely doing right now to absorb the information on this text. The second one is ear reading, which you may be doing if you have a text-to-speech app, and which you may do if you ever listen to books on Audible. The third is finger reading, or Braille, which I doubt you are doing because I don't think technology has made it possible for computer screens to translate text to braille. Each one of these methods is equally valid. Being able to eye read is particularly helpful in our society because so much information is exclusively available for eye readers. Billboards, street signs, the labels of products in the grocery store, and instruction sheets on products are all designed for eye readers. However, if someone is able to absorb information through ear or finger reading, it should never be considered cheating or taking a short cut. 

To sum it up, at Someday School we will do everything we can to show children the benefits and joys of reading, and we will support them in learning to read when they are ready... but we will never force them to learn to read.