Leading Literacy

AWSA recently closed its 2022 Membership Satisfaction Survey, and literacy leadership was members' top priority for future AWSA academy development. For this reason, AWSA will be launching the Literacy for All academy this fall to support school leaders to accelerate literacy development in their buildings.

We are not interested in engaging in or exacerbating the reading wars, as we agree with the peer-reviewed literature on the topic that reading wars should NOT exist. Instead, our students should be exposed to systematic phonics instruction AND content and vocabulary-rich texts while developing their fluency and comprehension.

The 2000 report by the National Reading Panel is one of the most cited reports used against balanced literacy, but upon reading the report, the following stands out:

“…it is important to emphasize that systematic phonics instruction should be integrated with other reading instruction to create a balanced reading program… Phonics should not become the dominant component in a reading program, neither in the amount of time devoted to it nor in the significance attached.” p. 2.97

Similarly, in 2018 Castles, Rastle, and Nation stated the following:

“The term balanced literacy is in widespread use, often to describe programs with “a bit of everything” and typically involving limited and nonsystematic phonics instruction (see P. Snow, 2017). This is unfortunate because it is clear from our review that many different factors come together to produce a child who reads fluently for meaning and that instruction needs to consider all of them. In our view, it would be valuable to reclaim a term such as balanced instruction and recast it in a more nuanced way that is informed by a deep understanding of how reading develops. The guiding principle here would be that although there are many different aspects of reading that must be learned—alphabetic decoding, fluent word reading, text comprehension—this does not mean that instructional time should be devoted equally to all of them at all points in reading acquisition.” pp. 37-38

We agree with the views of these researchers that reading instruction should not be an “or” approach but rather an “and” approach. And schools that have experienced success can attest to an “and” approach to practice.

What do schools with success in reading and closing persistent achievement gaps have in common?

To start, it is not the curriculum. We have found schools with success using curricula aligned to the Science of Reading, traditional basals, units of study, or creating their lessons using the UbD framework. While curriculum adoption is not the answer to solving our literacy problems, if your school or district is at an adoption stage, selecting a curriculum aligned to standards can help. DPI, Wisconsin Center for Educational Research, and Wisconsin Evaluation Collaborative launched a tool to help schools make those decisions through https://wimaterialsmatter.org/.

Despite the lack of consistency in the curriculum used by schools that have had success, especially with diverse populations, we did find consistency in their systems and practices. For example, we found that schools with growing proficiency rates, high growth, and high gap closures in literacy had the following:

Essential Standards

Leaders and teachers worked together to identify the essential standards for each grade level and worked across grade bands to ensure vertical alignment. Essential standards provided clarity, focus and helped educators prioritize meaningful learning.

Curriculum Audit/Mapping

Leaders and teachers worked together to understand the strengths of the purchased curriculum and its limitations in addressing the essential standards. As a result, there was clarity about what curriculum components were mandatory, optional, should not be used, and areas that would need to be supplemented with outside resources.

Consistent and Continuous Professional Development

Professional development was embedded throughout the year and focused on implementing the curriculum, content, instructional practices, or strategies for supporting diverse learners. Prioritization for professional learning was evident, as every staff meeting, grade level meeting, or PLC focused on increasing teacher knowledge or developing teacher practices.

Monitoring

School leadership teams had a plan for monitoring the transfer of learning into classroom practices through walkthroughs or mini-observations. Information gathered was used to provide follow-up sessions, highlight practices in action, or provide tailored support.

Frequent Formative Assessments

Most schools implemented weekly formative assessments aligned to essential standards to review in teams. Teams discussed the effectiveness of lessons, instructional strategies, and plans to adjust upcoming lessons or reteach important content to the class or in small groups. Schools focused on closing gaps reviewed data by diverse student populations.

Coaching and Feedback

Observation, feedback, and additional support are necessary for teachers to transfer any strategy, skill, or concept into their classroom repertoire. Without this important step, we will continue to hear and ask, “Why are teachers not…?” Schools with strong academic plans and growth trajectories were more likely to have clear and observable coaching and feedback cycles.

It is also important to note that schools were strategic in their implementation of all the above, doing it in small bite-size steps. Many took a multi-year approach to implement these practices and systems.

While the reading wars will continue, and we expect to see them take center stage in the upcoming gubernatorial elections, we must not let this distract us from the important work we have to do in our buildings every day. Students should be exposed to systematic phonics instruction AND content and vocabulary-rich text while developing their comprehension and fluency.

We know this is hard work, but it is not impossible. AWSA will launch the Literacy for All academy this fall to support school leaders to accelerate literacy development in their buildings. The academy is designed for K-8 leaders, and we are currently exploring new support for 9-12 leaders.

By Yaribel Rodriguez, Director of Urban Leadership, AWSA