Pa., N.J. educators aren’t being properly taught how to teach kids to read, new report says

Many of the nation’s colleges are missing the mark when it comes to training prospective educators on how to teach children to read, according to a new report by a national teacher quality group.

Only one-quarter of the teacher prep programs cover all five core areas for reading instruction, which the National Council on Teacher Quality says in its report are based on more than 50 years of scientific research. Another quarter don’t cover even one of those areas, the council said.

The five competencies associated with what is called “structured literacy” include phonemic awareness — the ability to identify sounds within spoken words, which allows children to link those sounds to the written word — phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. The council said it looked at how elementary teachers were prepared in these areas based on their course work, including instructional hours, assigned readings, assignments and assessments and practice opportunities.

» READ MORE: Pa. waived the basic skills requirement for educators. Will it work to attract more teachers?

New Jersey programs performed the worst in the nation on average in their coverage of the core competencies, the council said, though it was only able to obtain course materials necessary to evaluate 10 of the state’s 23 programs. Nine of them, including Rutgers New Brunswick and Rowan, got Fs. Montclair received a C.

Pennsylvania’s programs weren’t particularly strong, either. Twelve of 33 programs rated received Fs, including those at the University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of Education, Cabrini University, and Eastern University’s undergraduate program. Alvernia University in Reading and Commonwealth University of Pennsylvania’s Bloomsburg Campus got the only As.

“Prospective teachers — and certainly their students — deserve far better,” said Heather Peske, NCTQ president.

The report comes as reading instruction has been facing a reckoning amid the rise of the “science of reading” movement, which is grounded in cognitive science and calls for a more systematic approach to reading instruction. But experts say many of the findings haven’t made their way into classrooms — with some schools still favoring “balanced literacy,” which places more emphasis on exposure to literature and independent learning. It can also involve disproven strategies, including encouraging children to guess words rather than sounding them out.

“What has been in place for many children has not worked, or not worked well enough,” said Wiley Blevins, a reading specialist who has been working with New York City schools as they adopt new curricula.

Pennsylvania has directed teacher preparation programs to incorporate competencies in structured literacy — with an increased focus on the five core areas of reading — by August 2024.

“The Pennsylvania Department of Education is committed to putting well-trained, highly qualified teachers in every classroom,” spokesperson Taj Magruder said, adding that the report “does not appear to reflect these recent regulations.”

The New Jersey Department of Education did not respond to request for comment.

» READ MORE: The declining pipeline of educators-to-be has experts worried the teacher shortage will only get worse.

Like the dispute over reading instruction itself, the reactions to the report give a window into the lack of consensus around how to put the science into practice.

Many local colleges said the problem isn’t with how they teach reading, but the council’s assessment methodology, which doesn’t consider student teacher outcomes or include site visits for evaluation. The council’s analysis relies on the review of course syllabi, including items such as lecture slides or assignment descriptions, and background materials such as textbooks, articles, and videos.

“It is not possible to produce valid, accurate, and usable assessments of the quality of teacher preparation programs (or courses) based on syllabi and documents alone without also gathering other data through participant and faculty surveys, site visits, and other means that get at what programs actually do and how participants actually experience them,” Rowan University said in a statement.

And while some preparation program leaders say there is always room for improvement, they note their programs comply with state and federal regulations and are accredited. They said they don’t place much credence in the council’s findings.

“I question the ethics of publishing reviews about my program based on syllabi from five or more years ago,” said Patrick Sexton, executive director of teacher education programs for Penn’s graduate school of education. “The methodology that would allow you to do that is seriously questionable.”

(The council responded that it used Penn materials from 2019, the last time it was able to obtain them — Penn refused to participate this year ― and contended that was valid because most programs don’t update their curriculum that often.)

The five core components cited by the council, Sexton said, are infused in Penn’s program.

» READ MORE: This Philly-area elementary school saw test scores plummet. Now it’s putting all its resources toward catching up.

“We need to do better,” he acknowledged. “But I don’t need NCTQ to tell me the ways in which I need to get better.”

Penn, he said, is adding a literacy course because there isn’t enough time in the academic calendar to focus on the fundamentals of teaching reading and writing, a move in part that will address Pennsylvania’s new standards.

In response to the criticism, Peske acknowledged that syllabus and other paper materials “don’t capture everything that is going on in a course, but experts and practitioners agree that a review of these written materials does provide insight into the topics covered and the degree of that coverage.”

Many local colleges, including Temple University, Pennsylvania State University, and Rutgers-Camden, declined the council’s requests for information, and the council was not able to obtain information through other means, such as public records requests. The council said it was able to get materials to grade nearly 700 of the more than 1,000 teacher preparation programs in the country.

Some colleges said the council’s assessment takes too narrow of a view on what constitutes good reading instruction and that their programs rightly are broader and more textured.

Brooke K. Langan, dean of education at East Stroudsburg University, which got a D, said the school uses a “balanced literacy” approach that includes phonics and phonemic awareness but also nurtures students’ love of reading.

“If we continue to just push phonics and phonemic awareness, we are going to drive students away from the joy of reading,” Langan said.

The school, however, is looking at adding another reading course, in part to respond to the new Pennsylvania regulations, but also because more school districts are adopting a science-based reading approach.

Peske asserted that the council’s study was guided by a panel of literacy experts, researchers, teacher preparation leaders, policymakers, and others who weighed in after the last review in 2020. And it has gotten endorsement from some high-profile educators, including Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers.

“This report confirms what educators have been saying for years,” Weingarten said in the council’s news release. “To help our students become joyful and confident readers, we must understand that teaching reading is not just an art, but also a science.”

Founded in 2000, the council issued a report on teacher preparation programs in 2013, finding that many of them were inadequate. The council’s evaluation drew criticism for its methodology, including from the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE), which represents more than 800 post secondary institutions with educator preparation programs.

Since then, the council has come out with other reports targeting specific areas of teacher preparation, again yielding pushback.

Mark Seidenberg, a cognitive scientist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and leading expert in the science of reading, said the council’s latest report was based on dated literature.

“It doesn’t cover the relevant aspects of what you need to know,” Seidenberg said, adding that a teacher preparation program built around the council’s criteria “would be missing the boat.” He said teachers should be taught how reading works and how children learn, with courses in linguistics, developmental psychology, and cognitive science.

But one thing both Seidenberg and the council agree on is that teacher preparation programs have much room for improvement.

“The ed schools are not moving forward very rapidly on this at all,” Seidenberg said of the science of reading movement.

Peske, of the council, said improvement is critical, given recent national fourth grade reading test scores, only worsened by the pandemic. More than one-third of fourth grade students, about 1.3 million, can’t read at a basic level, according to recent national data. For students from underrepresented groups, those living in poverty and those with learning differences, the results are worse.

“That has nothing to do with the students themselves and everything to do with the fact that we are not giving students access to effective reading instruction,” Peske said.

Some states, such as Colorado and Mississippi, have put in place policies to promote the core reading components and have held teacher preparation programs responsible for meeting them, she said.

Peske said Pennsylvania’s recently adopted standards for teacher preparation programs were “a good step in the right direction,” as long as Pennsylvania holds the programs accountable.

West Chester University, one of Pennsylvania’s state schools, which received a B, one of the higher grades in the state, said it is proud when its programs are recognized as best practices.

“While we can’t speak fully to the methodology used, we welcome external review of our programs,” said Desha Williams, dean of the college of education and social work.

The council’s analysis also looked at whether the programs included instruction no longer considered to be scientifically based. Nationally, about 40% of programs do, the council said.

Many programs, the council said, also fail to employ proper strategies to help struggling readers. More than half of the programs devote less than two instructional hours on how to support students with dyslexia, while 71% offer the same for English language learners, the report said.