[Reading-hall-of-fame] Teacher Prep for Teaching Reading

[Colin Harrison]

Hi Tom

Thank you for this posting.

I have deep respect for your research and perspectives on adult literacy, but I do not share your views on elementary reading instruction and how best we might improve it.

As a number of NCTE reports and other reviewers have pointed out (see references below), NCTQ is an advocacy group, not a research institution, and in its highly selective research reviews it has consistently ignored the scholarly research of dozens of Reading Hall of Fame members, and presented ‘findings’ that unsurprisingly support a very shallow and selective perspective on literacy development.

As I argued some years ago (2006), and as NCTE have kindly noted, much of the public discourse surrounding literacy research in the USA is filtered through the lens of ‘necessary illusions’, one of which is that teacher education is fundamentally flawed, and needs to be radically overhauled (or even abandoned). Personally, and as someone who has visited many schools, and taught at two universities in the USA, and who has been a reading researcher now for 50 years, I would argue that at least four of the NCTQ ‘National findings’ that you cite  (1, 2, 3 and 5) are hopelessly inaccurate, and would not be sustained by a more thorough and less selective research review.

Respectfully,

Colin


Benner, S. M. (2012). Quality in student teaching: Flawed research leads to unsound recommendations. Retrieved from National Education Policy Center website: http://nepc. colorado. edu/thinktank/review-student-teaching.

Burke, K. J., & DeLeon, A. (2020). Wooden dolls and disarray: rethinking United States’ teacher education to the side of quantification. Critical Studies in Education, 61(4), 480-495.

Cochran-Smith, M., Stern, R., Sánchez, J. G., Miller, A., Keefe, E. S., Fernández, M. B., ... & Baker, M. (2016). Holding Teacher Preparation Accountable: A Review of Claims and Evidence. National Education Policy Center.

Dudley-Marling, C., Stevens, L. P., & Gurn, A. (2011). A critical policy analysis and response to the report of the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ). Retrieved December, 5.

Fuller, E. J. (2014). Shaky methods, shaky motives: A critique of the National Council of Teacher Quality’s review of teacher preparation programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(1), 63-77.

Harrison, C. (2006). Sustaining myths, necessary illusions, and national literacy policies: Some US and UK comparisons. The Elementary School Journal, 107(1), 121-131.

Hoffman, J. V., Hikida, M., & Sailors, M. (2020). Contesting science that silences: Amplifying equity, agency, and design research in literacy teacher preparation. Reading Research Quarterly, 55, S255-S266.

University of Kentucky (2012). University of Kentucky Response to the Teacher Preparation Review by the National Council for Teacher Quality (NCTQ) November 30, 2012.

From: Reading-hall-of-fame <reading-hall-of-fame-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk> on behalf of Thomas Sticht <tgsticht at gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, 4 July 2023 at 19:06
To: reading hall of fame <Reading-hall-of-fame at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>
Subject: [Reading-hall-of-fame] Teacher Prep for Teaching Reading
 Colleagues:  Here is a reference to a new report about “Teacher Prep Review: Strengthening Elementary Reading Instruction”. Though I have focused my work primarily on adult literacy education this report calls for  better reading instruction in the early grades so that there will not be many adults needing literacy instruction.
The report presents 6  National findings:
 • Finding 1: Only 25% of programs adequately address all five core components of reading instruction
• Finding 2: Phonemic awareness receives the least attention across programs
• Finding 3: Nearly one-third of programs do not provide any practice opportunities connected to the core components of reading
• Finding 4: With strong state policies, effective implementation, and accountability, states can improve the quality of teacher preparation in reading
• Finding 5: Programs provide little preparation in teaching reading to English learners, struggling readers, and speakers of English language varieties
• Finding 6: Distribution of program grades in 2023
It gives Recommendations for actions to improve readin instruction:
 • Actions for teacher preparation programs
 • Actions for state leaders
• Actions for school districts
 • Actions for advocates, teachers, and parents Promising practices
The citation is:
Ellis, C., Holston, S., Drake, G., Putman, H., Swisher, A., & Peske, H. (2023). Teacher Prep Review: Strengthening Elementary Reading Instruction. Washington, DC: National Council on Teacher Quality.
The report is available online at:
https://www.nctq.org/dmsView/Teacher_Prep_Review_Strengthening_Elementary_Reading_Instruction
Tom Sticht

[Image removed by sender.]<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virus-free.www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/pipermail/reading-hall-of-fame/attachments/20230706/9e802d41/attachment-0001.htm>