By Kathleen Cherry, school psychologist, Sooke, and Heather Trotter, teacher, Saanich
Literacy instruction has stepped into the spotlight for the 2024–25 school year, with added attention from government, universities, social media, and the BCTF.
This is evidenced by funding ear-marked for the early identification of students at risk of reading challenges through the BC Ministry of Education and Child Care. As well, the BCTF Executive Committee is tasked with reporting back to the 2025 Winter Representative Assembly around the literacy instruction provided in preservice teaching programs.
The discussion of preservice teaching programs was sparked by a motion raised at the BCTF AGM by the Saanich Teachers’ Association. The motion asked that the BCTF advocate to the Ministry that all approved teacher education programs in BC provide instruction on scientifically based research about reading and writing (see motion below).(1)
The Saanich Teachers’ Association made the motion with the recognition that many teachers are working incredibly hard to learn research-based practices to better meet their students’ needs. This is a heavy load for any educator, and it is feared that the absence of information around empirically validated models of literacy development in all preservice programs will make those first years more onerous for our new colleagues.
A BC Teachers’ Council survey of new teachers lends credence to this concern. When asked for feedback about their preservice programs, the lack of concrete teaching skills taught, especially in relation to literacy, was the issue most frequently cited. (2)
In aiming to further the discussion around literacy instruction, there needs to be clarity around literacy buzz words that trend on social media platforms yet may be poorly understood. One such term is the “science of reading.” The Reading League, an educational non-profit led by educators, experts, and researchers provides this definition:
“The Science of Reading is a vast, interdisciplinary body of scientifically-based research about reading and issues related to reading and writing. This research has been conducted over the last five decades across the world, and is derived from thousands of studies conducted in multiple languages.” (3)
It is also important to acknowledge that fads have been a frequent part of our educational landscape. This leads to concerns that the science of reading might be yet another “flavour of the month” or a single program providing instruction around a limited skill set.
However, as is noted in its definition, the science of reading is neither new, nor a program, but rather a body of scientific knowledge amassed over decades and in multiple languages.
Models like Scarborough’s Reading Rope (pictured below) have stood the test of time and provide a wonderful representation of the complexity of skills needed for reading competence. (4)
Neuropsychologist Reid Lyon summarizes current knowledge about how the brain learns to read and its impact on instruction. A key concept is the difference between primary and secondary biological skills. (5) Primary abilities have been wired within our brains over the millennia, like speaking, walking, and running. In contrast, our brains have learned secondary skills through building neural connections. Reading is a secondary skill. There is no one part of the brain wired to read.
Oral language, a primary skill, is the foundation of written language. However, the segue from speech to print requires that the brain develop new neural pathways. These connections are made as we discern the different sounds of language (phonemes) and link these to the letters or groups of letters representing these sounds (graphemes). This leads to decoding. Decoding leads to word recognition and eventually the ability to access the alphabetic code with automaticity.
This understanding of brain biology can inform teaching practice. For example, the phoneme-grapheme neural connection is a primary task for beginning readers. Strategies prompting early readers to look away from the letters toward other information divides attention, encourages guessing, and does not reinforce these neural pathways.
It is also important to know that, while the pathways required for literacy are similar across learners, the ease, effort, time, and explicit instruction required varies greatly. For some students, these connections occur with comparative ease. For others, it is an arduous process. This has huge instructional implications. When it comes to instruction, one size does not fit all.
A research-based university pre-teaching program should include an understanding of the science of reading, systemic and sequential approaches, and when and how to use direct and explicit teaching strategies. Given the differences in our students’ abilities and needs, differentiation through a multitiered system of supports (MTSS) should also be discussed.
This leads to the issue of funding and teacher preparation. Differentiation is key. As Scarborough’s rope illustrates, skilled reading requires many abilities, and we need to identify and target areas of challenge while also ensuring that all students thrive.
This is a huge job. It requires time, collaboration, professional development, in-service and systemic support! Teachers, and our entire education system, must be properly supported through monetary funding, preservice training, professional development, and access to research so that individual educators have the capacity to meet student needs and are provided with systemic support.
The Ministry of Education and Child Care has taken a step toward the MTSS model by providing funds to support evidence-based screening. Screeners identify children “at risk” of reading challenges. Those flagged as being “at risk” can then be given diagnostic assessments. These diagnostic tools serve to inform the intensity of intervention and identify skill deficits.
Through early identification, educators can capitalize on the neuroplasticity of young brains. An older child can absolutely learn but the “dosage” or “intensity” of the required intervention will be greater.
Early literacy intervention is also important for decreasing behavioural challenges, which take a huge toll on individual educators and school systems. There is research to suggest connection and reciprocity between behaviour and literacy challenges, identifying the most effective interventions as those targeting both literacy and behaviour. (6)
Throughout the screening process, it must be recognized that time is precious for student and teacher. Screeners and diagnostic tools must be quick and useful. This is not about more data but helpful data. Data must inform intervention and differentiation.
BC educators have a wealth of experience, dedication, and the desire to empower and to be empowered. There are differing views around reading instruction, but they are greatly outnumbered by commonalities. We share a vision that all students will become competent independent readers. We value a rich oral language as the very foundation of literacy. We believe that literacy instruction can and should meet the needs of individuals from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
Most of all, we care. We know that reading is a vital skill. It is also an escape (no batteries required), a solace, a joy, and a window into other worlds. It inspires. It gives hope. It opens doors.
It changes lives.
1 The following motion was brought to the BCTF 2024 AGM and referred to the Executive Committee for a report back at the Winter Representative Assembly:
That the Federation advocate to the Ministry of Education and Child Care to insist that all approved teacher education programs for elementary school teachers, middle school teachers, secondary English language arts teachers, English language learner teachers, and inclusive education teachers require a full-credit reading instruction course that teaches about how our brains acquire the ability to read, and about structured literacy, including systemic and sequential approaches to reading and spelling instruction that utilize direct and explicit teaching.
2 BC New Teacher Survey 2021/2022, BC Teachers’ Council, June 2023: www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/kindergarten-to-grade-12/teach/teacher-regulation/teacher-education-programs/bctc_survey_2021_report_results.pdf
3 The Reading League Announces New “Defining Movement” Coalition of Literacy Experts to Solidify the Science of Reading Definition, The Reading League: www.thereadingleague.org/2021/02/05/defining-movement-coalition-of-literacy-experts-to-solidify-the-science-of-reading-definition/
4 Holis S. Scarborough, “Connecting Early Language and Literacy to Later Reading (Dis)Abilities: Evidence, Theory, and Practice,” Handbook for research in early literacy, Guilford Press, New York, 2001: johnbald.typepad.com/files/handbookearlylit.pdf
5 Reid Lyon, “Ten Maxims: What We’ve Learned So Far About How Children Learn To Read,” Reading League, 2023: www.thereadingleague.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Ten-Maxims_What-Weve-Learned-in-50-Years.pdf
6 Dr. Kerry Hempenstall, “Literacy and Behaviour,” National Institute for Direct Instruction, 2012 (updated 2018): www.nifdi.org/news-latest-2/blog-hempenstall/405-literacy-and-behaviour#:~:text=Academic%20skills%20could%2C%20however%2C%20also,toward%20the%20teacher%20or%20classmates