Recently, on my Facebook page and Twitter page, I posted some results to a national survey Bob Probst and I conducted last year. The comments came flooding in immediately and they all said the same thing: “We can’t read this!”
Ah! You actually want to read the results. What a grand idea! I’m reposting here so that perhaps tiny font is now readable. These results are a part of the findings of our national survey of teachers grades 4-12. Other results will be shared in our forthcoming book titled Reading Nonfiction which will be published by our publisher, Heinemann, later this fall.
The results posted here reveal how about 1,000 teachers answered two questions: “What reading skills do you most often teach to skilled readers?” and “What reading skills do you most often teach to less skilled readers?” The slides showing results are below. Basically, teachers reported that they teach higher level skills to higher performing students and lower level skills to lower performing students.
At first glance, one could say that this seems to be expected – kids with problems in reading need help with the basics. But the reality is, if kids never have the chance to question the text, then they never learn to question the text. If their teacher doesn’t give them time to learn to question the author or make inferences, they don’t learn to do those things. More worrisome, they perhaps begin to assume that they should not question the text, not question the author, not look for biases, not make inferences.
Even more worrisome is when we take a look at who our highly skilled and less skilled readers are, we too often see that highly skilled readers are kids from higher-income families and less skilled readers are from lower-income families. And, in this country, this all too often means that the kids who sit in our classrooms designed for lower-skilled kids are often our kids of color.
As a consequence of that, what I see is a segregation of intellectual rigor that is every bit as shameful – and harmful – as segregation of color.
And that is worrisome, indeed.