Kids can’t read. At least that’s what we’ve been told to believe by folks trying to dismantle public education. Proponents of this refrain use frivolous things like standardized test scores with no reflection on what they’re conveying.
It’s a prickly discussion to have given our current educational environment, happening in the midst of a censorship movement against books perceived to be more racially and/or LGBTQIA+ inclusive, a critical eye on what’s been dubbed “the science of reading“, and the influx of asylum seekers across the country. As these battles persist, housing insecurity remains pernicious and perhaps exacerbated by the lack of a real plan for our most vulnerable youth. The nation is still under the aura of No Child Left Behind / technocratic solutions to the education field’s worst challenges.
Oh, and the advent of AI has only complicated the “reading” part of this because why read when a computer can do that for you, too?
In New York City, this also provides context for other dynamics at play. In the beginning of the school year, Chancellor David Banks mandated schools to choose between three reading curricula that focus on the “science of reading.” Mayor Eric Adams prioritized phonics over the controversial “balanced literacy,” a theory developed by Lucy Calkins and implemented across the city and the country in thousands of classrooms over the last three decades. On a basic level, balanced literacy prompts students to take a macro-level view of reading and writing that pushes them to write with a whole language approach. Critics point out how, in order for children to succeed within balanced literacy, they would need background knowledge to sound out words that they otherwise wouldn’t understand on their own.
But my question for everyone is: when was the last time you listened to the educators who believed in cultural responsiveness?
Subscribe to continue reading
Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.