Learning to read and write: Who is it for and who should take responsibility?

This week the press made a big thing about our children's low levels of literacy, which set me off thinking

.

We need to distinguish between 'literacy' and English teaching. We need to know what is it that we do to develop literacy as a society? Who has a role to play beyond teaching staff in schools? When does learning to be literate begin? When does any individual reach their peak in terms of literacy? Can too much of a focus on literacy make reading and writing a chore? Is the assessment of literacy too demanding, and does it make learning to read and write a means to enhance and enrich life, or is it a means to a more vocational end?

The All-Party Parliamentary Group for Education, back in 2011 identified key players in the nation's quest to produce competent readers and writers. Parental support was seen to be key. Listening to stories, and picking up by osmosis that to read a book you start at the top of the left hand page, and proceed downwards, and then to the top of the right hand page provides a start. Also, reading can give great pleasure – children need to learn that the written text contains humour, fun, stories, useful information, and sparks the imagination

I remember in the 1980s, car stickers saying 'If you can read this, thank a teacher', which makes me wonder if teachers themselves placed too much emphasis on their own contribution. Children's centres and dedicated programmes, such as Sure Start and BookStart, show partners how they can contribute. Primary schools pick up on the process and help children develop a link between letters and sounds, phrases and meanings, texts and stories.

There has long been a debate on how to achieve this. The use of synthetic phonics as an approach to teach and learn sounds represented by letters has been favoured. Structured approaches through 'Literacy Hour' provided plans for teachers – a rigid and linear structure to learning experiences. My daughter was one of the first to experience literacy hour, and announced at the age of seven that she found it boring, and would rather have read a book!

The older children get, the more their reading habits change. We know from research that, in general, boys read for a purpose, and often give up on fiction, focusing on non-fiction, including football magazines, hobbies and even trade magazines. Girls, it seems, proceed with fiction and poetry.

Those who often complain the loudest are employers. Perhaps they have a responsibility to provide stimulating reading materials?

I remember – again in the eighties - employers in Plymouth Dockyard complaining that school leavers could not handle numbers well. Some discussions revealed that in the dockyard weights and measures there followed the imperial system, whereas pupils learnt a metric system! Who was behind the times there then? Maybe similar problems relate to reading. We have to decide what the 21st century requires us to teach and what we are trying to assess.

Reading is also about pleasure. We learn so much by reading that cannot be immediately identified – use of the imagination, strange facts and figures, imagery, tenses, descriptions – all higher level skills. If however we spend too much time teaching and assessing sounds, structures, spelling, punctuation and grammar, are we running the risk of making reading and writing boring?

We also have information available to help us identify groups of children who appear to perform less well than others. There is a strong link between socio-economic class and reading and writing skills. In these days of cost cutting and austerity measures, can we guarantee access to libraries for all children? Do we invest heavily enough in reading recovery schemes? The evidence suggests that these schemes are not just about playing 'catch up' but the benefits are felt for many years to come.

I don't want to suggest that teachers have no role to play. Evidence shows that relative standards in reading drops as pupils leave primary school and progress through secondary. One question we need to ask is whether enough attention is paid to reading skills, or are secondary teachers too focussed on subject content. Children with reading difficulties in any subject will find it difficult to engage, and are likely to lose motivation. Perhaps we need greater consistency through a more holistic approach to developing literacy skills in the secondary school.

Another recommendation is that in learning to read and write, pupils need to have a degree of choice. Unless they can choose what they read, we will not develop a culture of reading for pleasure. Too great a focus on subject content, can make, for some, reading and writing dull and uninspiring. A focus on testing can lead to neglect in relation to more holistic skills. SATs are seen by many as unsuitable for the age range they are assessing, as old-fashioned and unhelpful. Teacher assessment is a better indicator of achievement. Many teachers describe the bureaucracy and tick-box culture that exists, as not allowing them to treat children as individuals.

This short think piece only scratches the surface of the issue. As a society we need to work together to develop a variety of consistent responses to the problem. We should avoid blaming each other (as Her Majesty's Chief inspector seems to be doing). Learning to read and write serves many purposes and is the responsibility of many groups. To promote one single way of working is not the answer, nor is treating all children in the same way rather than as individuals. Teachers and teacher trainers have a crucial role to play, but they will not succeed unless others work with them. Parents, early years workers, teachers, teacher assistants, library services, policy makers, employers and of course, children themselves must work together!