50 years ago in the journal of pediatrics: Why Johnny can’t read: Fact or fallacy

Abstract

Hobkirk, J. J Pediatr 1956;48:520-529.In his book Why Johnny Can’t Read, Rudulph Flesch identified poor teaching methods as the primary cause of reading failure in American schools. More specifically, he proposed that the problem was a lack of phonics instruction, a teaching approach in which students are taught to phonetically decode words through the process of linking speech sounds (“phonemes”) to letters (“graphemes”) and to blend the sounds together to produce words. Published in 1955 when a whole word method was popular in elementary schools, Flesch’s book garnered national attention and spurred criticism from advocates of the “look-and-say” approach, in which students learn to sight-read words through repeated exposure in text. Hobkirk’s article, in which she states, “Why Johnny Can’t Read is a partisan, argumentative discussion which generates a great deal more heat than it throws light on the subject,” provides an introduction to the so-called “reading wars” that ensued.For decades after the publication of Why Johnny Can’t Read, there remained vehement disagreement about how to teach children to read, and popularity rather than empirical support determined which instructional approach was employed. Then, in 1997, through a Congressional mandate, the National Reading Panel (NRP) was formed to systematically examine the available research literature on reading instruction using rigorous scientific methodology. In 2000, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development published the NRP report.1National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instruction: Reports of the Subgroups. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC2000Google Scholar Their conclusions, along with those in a consensus report of the National Research Council (NRC), Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children,2Snow C.E. Burns M.S. Griffin P. Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. National Academies Press, Washington, DC1998Google Scholar, 3McCardle P. Vinita C. The Voice of Evidence in Reading Research. Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co, Baltimore, MD2004Google Scholar have served as the basis for significant changes in public policy, which incorporate the central components of reading instruction identified by the NRP: explicit, systematic instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary development, and comprehension strategies.Despite this progress, results of the 2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), published by the National Center for Educational Statistics, indicate that 38% of American fourth graders fail to attain even basic levels of reading achievement; they are unable to understand the overall meaning of what they have read and lack the skills necessary to work proficiently at grade-level. Of the approximately 10 million American children who have difficulties learning to read, 10% to 15% eventually drop out of school. Given the high risk for poor outcomes in children with reading failure, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development considers literacy a national public health, rather than an educational, issue. Hobkirk, J. J Pediatr 1956;48:520-529. In his book Why Johnny Can’t Read, Rudulph Flesch identified poor teaching methods as the primary cause of reading failure in American schools. More specifically, he proposed that the problem was a lack of phonics instruction, a teaching approach in which students are taught to phonetically decode words through the process of linking speech sounds (“phonemes”) to letters (“graphemes”) and to blend the sounds together to produce words. Published in 1955 when a whole word method was popular in elementary schools, Flesch’s book garnered national attention and spurred criticism from advocates of the “look-and-say” approach, in which students learn to sight-read words through repeated exposure in text. Hobkirk’s article, in which she states, “Why Johnny Can’t Read is a partisan, argumentative discussion which generates a great deal more heat than it throws light on the subject,” provides an introduction to the so-called “reading wars” that ensued. For decades after the publication of Why Johnny Can’t Read, there remained vehement disagreement about how to teach children to read, and popularity rather than empirical support determined which instructional approach was employed. Then, in 1997, through a Congressional mandate, the National Reading Panel (NRP) was formed to systematically examine the available research literature on reading instruction using rigorous scientific methodology. In 2000, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development published the NRP report.1National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instruction: Reports of the Subgroups. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC2000Google Scholar Their conclusions, along with those in a consensus report of the National Research Council (NRC), Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children,2Snow C.E. Burns M.S. Griffin P. Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. National Academies Press, Washington, DC1998Google Scholar, 3McCardle P. Vinita C. The Voice of Evidence in Reading Research. Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co, Baltimore, MD2004Google Scholar have served as the basis for significant changes in public policy, which incorporate the central components of reading instruction identified by the NRP: explicit, systematic instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary development, and comprehension strategies. Despite this progress, results of the 2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), published by the National Center for Educational Statistics, indicate that 38% of American fourth graders fail to attain even basic levels of reading achievement; they are unable to understand the overall meaning of what they have read and lack the skills necessary to work proficiently at grade-level. Of the approximately 10 million American children who have difficulties learning to read, 10% to 15% eventually drop out of school. Given the high risk for poor outcomes in children with reading failure, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development considers literacy a national public health, rather than an educational, issue.