Editorial: A push for better reading instruction

When Minnesotans ponder what smart, affordable steps could be taken now to secure a stronger future for this state, they should consider this: If every child could read well by third grade, within a few years Minnesota would enjoy higher worker productivity, lower crime and incarceration rates, and fewer costly social ills.

They should also know that in 2007, the National Assessment of Educational Progress reported that almost two-thirds of Minnesota's fourth- and eighth-graders were not "proficient" in reading. Further, national studies show that those not reading proficiently by third grade have only a 25 percent chance of ever catching up.

Minnesota has much room to improve students' literacy, and much to gain from doing so. That's the vision that has been propelling a dedicated cadre of parents, educators and legislators to infuse the latest research-based methods into reading lessons in Minnesota schools.

Their work, now several years old, is only beginning. But it is already producing strong results in some schools and winning national notice. Last week, two Minnesota state senators and three citizen lobbyists were presented awards by the National Association for Reading First for their work in enacting literacy education proficiency requirements for pre-K and elementary teacher certification. Sens. Kathy Saltzman, DFL-Woodbury, and Gen Olson, R-Minnetrista, were honored, along with Susan Thomson of Orono, founder of the advocacy group Moms on a Mission; John Alexander, head of school at Groves Academy in St. Louis Park, and Bette Erickson, a Minneapolis teacher and parent.

They were saluted at a State Capitol ceremony that also featured a report from Mike Savage, education coordinator at Forest Hills Elementary School in Eden Prairie, on significant gains in test scores at that school, at which half of the students are from low-income homes. When teachers began using the research-based methods advanced by the National Reading Panel, he said, reading proficiency rates among black and Hispanic students jumped from about 45 percent to 70 to 80 percent.

"I tell teachers: 'Check your own great ideas at the door, and do what the research says works,'" Savage said.

A consensus among educators about how to teach reading has emerged in recent years, after years of disagreement among proponents of "whole language" vs. phonics approaches. The research gleaned and disseminated by the National Reading Panel in 2000 says that both approaches have value, but they should be used sequentially. Start with phonics, then move to vocabulary and fluency instruction. It also stresses the value of individualized lessons, frequent monitoring of progress, and mastery of one phase of the learning process before moving to the next.

Many educators consider Minnesota's new literacy education requirement for teacher licensure a crucial transformative step.

"The whole question of teacher education is key," said former Minneapolis Superintendent John B. Davis, a longtime advocate for improved literacy. "There's a logical procedure, a science, to teaching reading. That needs to be emphasized."

But for Minnesota to realize the benefits of a more literate population, better training for new teachers is only a start. "What we've done is a necessary but not sufficient step to make progress," said parent-advocate Thomson.

The state's large cadre of mid-career teachers also needs exposure to research-based methods, while the lessons new teachers bring to their classrooms are updated and reinforced. School principals need to be convinced of the importance of methodical reading education. Federal grants have helped bring new teaching methods to selected schools with large populations of at-risk students. Now more ways should be found to bring them into wider use.