The Oklahoma State Department of Education announced earlier this month that it would be signing onto a controversial group鈥檚 new literacy effort鈥攋oining forces with Moms for Liberty, the conservative political organization whose local chapters have fought to challenge or remove books in districts across the country.
The new announcement promises to further complicate the thorny political landscape of the 鈥渟cience of reading鈥� movement, by linking what has been a bipartisan鈥攊f sometimes uneasy鈥攎ovement nationwide for improved instruction in foundational literacy to an explicitly political group.
State Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters, a Republican, followed Moms for Liberty in declaring the first week of October 鈥淭each Kids to Read Week.鈥� The moniker is a response to Banned Books Week, an annual event to bring attention to challenged books put on by the American Library Association and a coalition of other groups.
鈥淭wo-third of our nation鈥檚 4th graders are not reading at grade level, and instead of focusing on real literacy solutions for our students, the American Library Association and their partners choose [to] focus on their agenda of political indoctrination and so-called 鈥榖anned books,鈥欌�� Walters said, in a statement on Oct. 2.
Moms for Liberty, which some civil rights watchdogs have called an extremist group, has pushed to remove books and lessons from schools that focus on LGBTQ+ rights or the continuing legacy of racial discrimination. The group also promotes what co-founder Tiffany Justice has called a 鈥渂ack to basics approach鈥� to literacy instruction, focusing on foundational reading skills. The group has highlighted the work of several state literacy leaders, including during its June summit.
A complex political history of reading instruction
Many states and districts have recently revamped their approaches to early reading instruction, in efforts to more closely align teaching practices with the available evidence base on how young children learn to read. , with traditionally conservative and traditionally progressive states all passing new laws introduced by legislators across the political spectrum.
Still, several components of this movement鈥攅xplicit instruction in phonics, and a core foundation of knowledge taught in English/language arts classes鈥攈ave long been associated with conservative political priorities, in part because they often come with curricular and instructional mandates, said Sarah Woulfin, an associate professor of educational leadership and policy at the University of Texas at Austin who studies the relationship between education policy and equitable instruction.
Moms for Liberty has argued that a focus on diverse books in the classroom has crowded out basic skills as a priority.
鈥淲e鈥檙e failing kids everyday, and Moms for Liberty is calling it out,鈥� said Justice, in an interview with 澳门跑狗论坛. 鈥淭he idea that there鈥檚 more emphasis placed on diversity in the classroom, rather than teaching kids to read, is alarming at best. That鈥檚 criminal.鈥�
But pitting basic skills against culturally responsive practices is a false dichotomy, say some advocates for evidence-based reading instruction.
鈥淚t鈥檚 incumbent upon all of us who have been fighting for high-quality literacy instruction as a lever for equity to say, we have nothing to do with these folks,鈥� said Callie Patton Lowenstein, an educator who most recently worked as a bilingual elementary teacher in the District of Columbia school system. 鈥淲hat are we doing all of this reading for if we鈥檙e going to be pulling books off the shelves that kids should have access to?
鈥淔undamentally what they鈥檙e doing is trying to launder their reputation, and co-opt a movement that鈥檚 not their real motivation,鈥� she said.
Justice said that students鈥� reading proficiency and the way the subject is taught 鈥渉as always been a priority for Moms for Liberty.鈥�
The Oklahoma State Department of Education did not immediately respond to a request for comment, nor did major Oklahoma English/language arts groups.
Politics go beyond phonics to the canon
The politics of the science of reading movement have created some strange bedfellows.
Some Republican politicians have in advocating for stronger foundational skills instruction.
But other groups, such as the NAACP, also endorse explicit instruction in how to read words as a racial equity issue鈥攁 way to ensure that all students are receiving the kind of instruction that is most likely to help them be successful in schools.
It鈥檚 not just foundational skills that are politicized, though. Many science of reading advocates also support the idea of a knowledge-building curriculum鈥攗sing a series of materials that work together to systematically introduce students to certain topics. This focus derives from research that has found that students鈥� background knowledge is a key component of their comprehension abilities.
Reading well is a complex process, and teaching students to do so requires much more than just phonics, said Patton Lowenstein. Those who frame the movement as a 鈥渂ack to basics鈥� approach are misrepresenting that fact, she said.
Still, developing a set of core knowledge that all students should learn is an inherently subjective, often political endeavor. It means prioritizing some knowledge and some authors above others to fit into the limited amount of class time students have.
For some proponents of knowledge-building curricula, this means 鈥渂ack to the canon,鈥� said Rachael Gabriel, a professor of literacy education at the University of Connecticut鈥檚 Neag School of Education.
Patton Lowenstein thinks that some popular knowledge-building programs don鈥檛 include varied enough perspectives鈥攁nd that this is a legitimate critique from the left. Debates about just how to analyze whether a reading program is sufficiently diverse鈥攐r even what an ideal one would look like鈥攃ontinue.
鈥淚 think what鈥檚 not legitimate is saying that there鈥檚 something fundamentally conservative about holding our literacy instruction to higher standards, or being careful about the ways that our instruction aligns to research,鈥� Patton Lowenstein said.
