Have you followed any of the news about reading instruction and programs coming out of New York? TLDR: the state is ditching a preeminent program for teaching reading as it has been found to not have a meaningful impact.
I was working as a principal when this program and its predecessor were introduced into education. I remember vividly how passionate our district office administrators were about the merits of adoption. I remember just as vividly how passionate many of my teachers were about the mistakes of such a program. I often found myself weighing each as I navigated how best to use/not use what was being mandated by my own supervisors.
In education you often hear teachers complain that the central/district office staff (and even their administrators) do not know what it is like in the classroom because they have not visited one in years; maybe decades. Is that how New York and many others found themselves implementing a program that has now impacted a generation of learners, widened achievement gaps, and lowered academic progress in many instances? Where did the post-secondary education preparatory programs and researchers stand on this? How did it take over a decade to acknowledge something was not working?
I’ve often said that education is a monolith to try and change. And yet, in some regards, it makes decisions blindly and then becomes so steadfast in those that their perceptions are immovable. Where is the adage “Fail fast; fail forward” represented in that mindset? It’s not.
Let’s bring some common sense back to education. Teachers and school principals typically know the sound instructional practices needed by students. They know how to review programs and offerings to evaluate if they meet the needs. They know their students; they know the gaps; they know what students need to know. Why not empower our teachers and school leaders to take ownership of those decisions? School A may be struggling with students who need basic needs met while School B wrestles with attendance. High school Y in an urban city is not going to benefit as much from opportunities with a focus on agriculture as High school Z in the plains of the Midwest. Furthermore, a Title 1 principal has a different set of priorities than the principal of a school in an affluent community. Education is not a one-size-fits-all; let’s stop treating it that way. Stop the insanity of forcing unproven programs on our schools; stop continuing programs that are not producing results; start allowing schools to make decisions that are best for them; start empowering educators with the authority to decide; start making schools about the kids and not the agenda.
Comentários