Reading: Is it a war?

Like many others around the country, my local school district has recently moved away from a curriculum that encouraged a reading workshop model of instruction to one with an emphasis on phonics, a basal reader, worksheets, and direct instruction. The pendulum has again swung, and history is repeating itself regarding reading instruction. 

There’s been a lot of talk in the last couple of years about the reignited “reading wars.” The debate between whole language and systematic phonics instruction has continued among educators and educational researchers since the 1940s.  It is the “Coke or Pepsi debate” of the education world. 

One camp says children should be taught to read “from the ground up” by focusing on letter-to-sound correspondence (phonics) so they can sound out words. While the other camp believes that students should be taught “from the top down” and focus more on exposure to texts and the meanings of words embedded in stories (whole language). 

Balanced Literacy

A few decades ago, educators developed a balanced approach to reading instruction as a compromise. (The reading workshop framework is a balanced literacy approach.) The teacher exposes students to engaging texts, goes deep in comprehension, teaches letter-sound relationships, matches the reader to leveled books, and prioritizes independent reading. It focuses more on student-centered based-on-need instruction vs. whole-class direct and systematic instruction. 

I could go on and on about the arguments for and against these approaches–as there are many–but I won’t do that.  With a quick Google search, you can find loads and loads of blogs, articles, and videos supporting one side (and usually trash-talking the other).  It’s very political; there were some downright nasty attack publications last year. Some states have even recently passed laws to mandate how reading will be taught, despite concerns from the local teacher unions.

Can't we all just get along?

I think what makes me most frustrated through all of these “wars” is the unnecessary arguing amongst ourselves.  Both sides can use data to their advantage and make an argument for their case against the other. Many of the studies are flawed in some way or another, and while no one is saying kids shouldn’t understand phonics, the emphasis on it is continually the sticking point.  

Why are we debating instead of collaborating? Fighting wastes time when we want equitable access to literacy instruction for all kids. I was talking to an educator friend about this topic, and she mentioned that it isn’t a war, but a polarity. I thought that was an astute take on the situation. 

The dictionary definition of polarity is “the state of having two opposite or contradictory tendencies, opinions, or aspects.”  It is what we might call a dilemma, a tension, or a paradox. There isn’t a right or wrong answer.  It isn’t “either/or;” it is “both/and” thinking. These are things that we can’t solve and are ongoing.  Here are some familiar polarities: work/home, care for self/care for others, individuals/team, standardized/individualized, and tradition/innovation.

So when we think of the whole language/phonics polarity, we need both, and ignoring one negatively impacts students.  We must devise a way to deal with the tension between the two–but know there isn’t one “right” way.  We will never find a “one-size-fits-all approach.” It isn’t that simplistic. 

Need a resource to navigate this polarity in the classroom?  I suggest you read Shifting the Balance by Burkins and Yates and check out their website, The Six Shifts. These two educators expanded my mind on phonics instruction in a balanced literacy approach and have practical ideas to support your teaching. 

Where do you land on the “reading wars?”

I’d love for you to share your thoughts on Facebook or contact me page.