Challenging Narrow Models of Reading: Working With Parents, Colleagues, and Policy Makers

• In Event: Decades of Reading Research: Challenging the Science of Reading

Abstract

Purposes
The final paper features a panel comprised of authors of papers 1-4. Our goal is to move from research into praxis. Specifically, we highlight strategies for challenging singular and assumedly universal approaches to teaching reading. We present talking points, political actions, and salient actions. This portion of the symposium will include brief suggestions from panelists and discussant comments followed by 30 minutes of audience discussion.

Perspective
Social networking platforms, the quick circulation of misinformation, and the simultaneous decline of professional journalism have contributed to a rise of misinformation and lack of effective channels for confronting the circulation of misinformation (e.g., Pickard, 2019). Misinformation related to education and literacy has challenged decades of educators (e.g., Why Johnny Can’t Read, Flesch & Sloan, 1955; Becoming a Nation of Readers, Anderson, 1985; The Bell Curve, Herrnstein & Murray, 2010). We recognize that confronting misinformation requires more than publishing in scholarly journals and presenting at conferences. In short action, is needed and this session is designed to provide educators with tools that can be used in schools, communities, and states to conform misinformation about the Science of Reading.

Methodology, Evidence Base, & Data Analysis
We base our presentation on related initiatives that have been successful in opening up critical conversations with people who are not reading experts and do not have a thorough understanding of the research base that informs reading education. Specifically, we draw on political action that has been used successfully to convince some politicians and Science of Reading advocates to temper their views and a nationally recognized website that challenges misinformation and provides correctives to singular and assumedly universal approaches to teaching reading. Finally we describe an international organization that has formed working groups to systematically address misinformation.

Findings
While each panelist will present strategies, in this proposal we describe work being done with the legislature in a Mid-Western State. Specifically, one panelist will remind participants that political bodies have political motivations and work to garner constituency support, which means that they are difficult to navigate. She recommends meeting with education committee members in the State legislature to affect policy before it is legislated and seek portals to decision-making processes. It is critical to identify educational consultants, who are listed on state websites. She also recommends that we must know what misinformation is being circulated in order to address it. Statistics, data, and quantitative research are particularly helpful. Many of the Science of Reading advocates talk with stories and call it science. Legislatures do not have the necessary knowledge and they generally cut and paste from policies being drafted in other states. Examples of social action will be accompanied by links to infographics and lists of talking points.

Scholarly Significance
While researchers often want to leave activism to others, knowledgeable activism, by people who understand the full research base upon which reading education is predicated, must challenge problematic and politically and economically driven claims that misrepresent literacy related research.

Author

• Kathryn L. Champeau, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee