Shifting to teaching reading via phonics ¹

At-A-Glance

Current behavior:

Teachers teach reading using the whole language approach.

Desired behavior:

Teachers teach primarily using phonics.

Change approach:

Encouraged teachers to “test out” the new approach, provided instructional coaches, gave teachers additional time to plan lessons, and held collaborative learning sessions.

Impact:

Teachers became comfortable teaching phonics, and district grade reading proficiency rose by eleven percent over three years.

Implications for implementing partners:

Spend significant time addressing the emotional and self-identity factors that change can bring up; provide safe environments to test out the new approach in ways that will make users see results and support it.

Implications for supporting partners:

Provide implementing partners the research, support, and leeway to address the emotional aspects of behavior change.

Children are commonly taught to read largely through the “whole language” approach, which trains them to identify words by their context and appearance, not by the function of individual letters. Research has shown that focusing on the alternate approach – phonics – enables better reading, since it prioritizes the relationships between letters and sounds. However, phonics fell out of fashion and whole language became the default for many educators (sometimes as the dominant factor in the “balanced literacy” approach).

When Ohio adopted the Common Core standards, the Mad River district realized it needed a unified reading curriculum; previously there was no district-wide curriculum and each teacher pieced together their own lessons.

The district committed to an intensive multi-year program to support teacher adoption. They brought instructional coaches, gave teachers additional time for lesson-planning, and convened collaborative learning sessions for educators to brainstorm and workshop ideas together.

Many teachers initially resisted the new approach: some felt that it was an indictment of years of their prior practice, while others were scared they could not successfully implement it. Many also complained that it felt too scripted and restrictive: “I like to add my own flair, and it felt limiting to me,” said one educator.

“Teaching is very personal and emotional. This [change] pushes you to reflect on yourself. It was scary, and it brought me to my knees.”

All of this made teachers ask tough questions about their own self-identity and role “Teaching is very personal and emotional. This [change] pushes you to reflect on yourself. It was scary, and it brought me to my knees,” said another educator. The coaches spent significant time listening and learning from teachers’ concerns and provided as much moral support and encouragement as new skills.

The teachers were urged to test out the curriculum even if they were still skeptical of its impact. Once they started, many noticed their students progressing faster. Seeing this evidence with their own eyes won many teachers over. Test results have also shown signs of progress – district grade reading proficiency rose from 53 percent to 64 percent between 2016 and 2019.