Literacy Now

Nell K. Duke, professor in literacy, language, and culture and in the combined program in education and psychology at the University of Michigan, School of Education, is the recipient of the William S. Gray Citation of Merit, recognizing ILA members who have made outstanding contributions to multiple facets of literacy development—research, theory, practice, and policy.

For some, the road to literacy work is a long, winding path. For others, like Nell K. Duke, it’s a calling. Duke’s love of learning and passion for teaching was awakened at an early age by equally dedicated teachers.

“I have been interested in language and literacy development since elementary school, actually, and I have read in this area ever since then,” she says. “As an undergraduate, my favorite topic in the teacher certification program was literacy development, and my undergraduate thesis focused on children’s writing.”

Now a professor in literacy, language, and culture and in the combined program in education and psychology at the University of Michigan, School of Education, Duke brings her deep commitment to social justice to her day-to-day work. Her research focuses on early literacy development, particularly among children of poverty, the development of informational reading and writing in young children, comprehension development, and issues of equity and access in literacy education.

In addition to her research, Duke teaches preservice, inservice, and doctoral courses in literacy education; speaks and consults widely on literacy education; and has served as coprincipal investigator on projects funded by Institute of Education Sciences, the National Science Foundation, the Spencer Foundation, and Lucas Education Research, among other organizations.

She is also the author and coauthor of numerous journal articles, book chapters, and books, including Inside Information: Developing Powerful Readers and Writers of Informational Text Through Project-Based Instruction (Scholastic) and Beyond Bedtime Stories: A Parent’s Guide to Promoting Reading, Writing, and Other Literacy Skills From Birth to 5 (Scholastic). She’s currently in the beginning phases of writing a book on developing literacy from birth to age 8.

Of all her accomplishments, Duke says she’s most proud of an article she published in 2000, titled, “For the Rich It’s Richer: Print Experiences and Environments Offered to Children in Very Low- and Very High-Socioeconomic Status First-Grade Classrooms,” which has laid the foundation for her career in advancing equity in literacy education.

“So often, people attribute educational inequity to homes and communities, but this article documents very specific ways in which schools perpetuate inequity from very early in schooling, even if unintentionally,” she says. “The article provides something of a roadmap of inequities in early literacy education on which I have worked over the course of my career.”

When asked about her future goals, Duke says she hopes to continue to learn from and support practitioners and policymakers who have a positive impact on the literacy development of young children, particularly those living in poverty.

“Some more specific goals include reducing the use of practices that are not effective in developing literacy, increasing the use of practices that are effective in developing literacy, developing new curriculum materials, and fostering the field’s understanding of pedagogy that provides civic as well as literacy education,” she says.

Duke thanks ILA for creating an award that bridges theory and practice.
“Especially meaningful to me is that the award considers practice and policy as well as research and theory,” she says. “It has always been my goal to have some impact beyond research and theory.”

Alina O'Donnell is the communications strategist at ILA and the editor of Literacy Daily.

Each year, ILA’s Literacy Leaders Awards ceremony and Research Awards and Grants recognize educators and researchers who go above and beyond their job descriptions and embrace their roles as agents of change.

A kindergarten teacher fosters student identity through writing workshops. A professor designs an open-access curriculum that drives achievement in low-income, historically underperforming districts. A literacy district educational specialist leads a literacy revolution in Hawaii.

Although they encompass a diverse range of backgrounds, ages, and areas of expertise, the visionary leaders on this list share a commitment to driving positive change in literacy education. Whether through research, teaching, or advocacy, they use their talents to dismantle systemic oppression, promote equity, and drive achievement—work that is central to ILA’s mission of literacy for all.

These 2018 award winners are:

Elena E. Forzani, assistant professor in literacy education at the Boston University Wheelock College of Education and Human Development, is the recipient of the Timothy & Cynthia Shanahan Outstanding Dissertation Award, given annually for a dissertation completed in reading or literacy.

After working as a first-grade teacher for two years, Elena Forzani realized that, although she loved teaching, she was more interested in the nuts and bolts of literacy learning.

“I just loved the process of learning—not just comprehension, but actually just decoding and binding words together,” she says. Today, Forzani is a professor of literacy education at Boston University, where her research focuses on the use of digital technologies for literacy learning, specifically the comprehension of online disciplinary texts, including the critical evaluation of online information. Through her work, she seeks to understand how to design and implement assessment and instruction that targets the needs of different kinds of learners within digital contexts.

Forzani’s dissertation, “How Well Can Students Evaluate Online Science Information? Contributions of Prior Knowledge, Gender, Socioeconomic Status, and Offline Reading Ability,” explored how seventh-grade students assessed the trustworthiness of science information found online.

Forzani recalls some of the highlights of her career, most notably the opportunity to work on ORCA (Online Research and Comprehension Assessment), a five-year research project to develop valid, reliable, and practical assessments of online reading comprehension for U.S. schools, with her advisor, Donald Leu.

“That work was very meaningful to me,” she says. “It taught me a lot of things in terms of how to work on a big project with multiple people collaborating and contributing different pieces.”

When asked about her current projects, Forzani spoke about her interest in creating a tool that helps educators better understand how readers evaluate information within an online research and comprehension task, specifically for younger readers. “Many students sort of know the kinds of things they’re supposed to look for, but don’t really know how to do that well,” she says. “They seem to know what to look at and I think that’s something we can build on.”

Sharon Walpole, professor at the School of Education at the University of Delaware, is the recipient of the Jerry Johns Outstanding Teacher Educator in Reading Award, honoring an outstanding college or university teacher of reading methods or reading-related courses.

A former high school history teacher, Sharon Walpole switched to the literacy field to gain insight into her students’ reading practices.

“I wanted to understand why my students couldn’t comprehend what they were reading,” she says.

Today, Walpole is a professor in the School of Education at the University of Delaware and director of the University of Delaware’s Professional Development Center for Educators, where she works with literacy coaches, reading specialists, and administrators to build schoolwide systems to support teachers, especially those working for children at risk.

In 2016, Walpole copublished with Mike McKenna of the University of Virginia a free, open-access, elementary ELA curriculum with more than 1,100 lesson plans. Dubbed “Bookworms,” it is unique in using “real,” tangible books rather than the large collections of books and lessons plans that come only with expensive reading packages. Now in its fifth year, there is promising evidence that the curriculum improves student achievement.

When asked about her future plans, Walpole says she hopes to broaden the scope of her work to include writing instruction.

“In my center, we’re designing resources for teachers who want to deepen their understanding of writing,” she says. “We’re trying to make sure that writing isn’t a stepchild of reading.”

Mark Conley, professor of instruction and curriculum leadership at the University of Memphis in Tennessee, is the recipient of the inaugural Leaders Inspiring Readers Award, sponsored by Achieve 3000, presented to a researcher or practitioner who has contributed significantly to advancing the knowledge base and instructional efficacy of educators in the focus area of struggling readers.

“The thing that impressed me very early in my career was how much knowledge and skill teachers had,” he says. “And recently, I think about how much our field really needs to take advantage of that knowledge and skill.”

Conley’s extensive portfolio of research centers on teacher education policy and practice, adolescent literacy, assessment, and human and artificial intelligence tutoring. Last year, Conley took a sabbatical to work with the National Center on Education and the Economy, researching educational systems in countries that are top-performing in reading, mathematics, and science on the Program for International Student Assessment.

Recently retired, he continues to elevate teacher expertise in his community and beyond. He says his goal is to develop a physical space that’s dedicated to building teacher leadership capacity.

“Throughout my whole career, teachers have always appreciated being able to talk to each other. We want to make that easier,” he says. “Identifying the great teachers in our community and engaging them in conversations about what they know and what needs to happen—that’s my first goal.”

Esmeralda Carini, literacy district educational specialist for the Windward District, Kailua-Kalaheo Complex Area, Hawaii Department of Education, is the recipient of the Corwin Literacy Leader Award, given annually to an administrator who has recognized the importance of building a culture of literacy within a school or district by offering literacy professional development, instructional resource support, or developing specific literacy programs to build capacity and increase student literacy achievement.

A first-generation U.S. citizen, Esmeralda Carini learned the power of language and literacy at a young age. A former EL student, she is grateful to the teachers who helped her develop the skills for language and literacy she has today.

“I’m a big advocate that barrier in language has nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with giving [students] the power of language. I think literacy changed my life,” she says. “I am where I am today because of my investment in my own literacy practice, and I want to give that opportunity to all kids—no matter where they grow up and what families they come from.”

Currently, Carini is the creator and facilitator of the Hawaii Lab Cohorts, which are teacher learning communities within districts and schools that offer an effective approach to professional growth, supporting schools’ efforts in growing their literacy practices. Carini continues to grow the lab across content areas, schools, and complex areas by mentoring other Lab Cohort facilitators.

When asked about her future goals, she says she hopes to continue to nurture and grow Hawaii’s burgeoning literacy community and to help design better PD and professional learning opportunities.

“If I could leave that mark on the field of education, I would be so thrilled,” she says.

Keith Garvert, a teacher at Highline Community School, Denver, Colorado, is the recipient of the Regie Routman Teacher Recognition Grant, which honors an outstanding K–8 classroom teacher dedicated to improving and enriching the teaching and learning of purposeful reading and writing across the curriculum.

Keith Garvert remembers the exact moment that defined his teaching philosophy. He had just read Katie Wood Ray’s About the Authors: Writing Workshop With Our Youngest Writers (Heinemann) and, riding a wave of inspiration, he decided to embrace a new method of writing workshop in his classroom.

“The following year, my whole writing workshop changed, and my first graders just blossomed into these writers. I didn’t know I could nurture that ability within them. I saw their eyes sparkle with the accomplishment of writing their first books,” he says. “That was when I learned that you have to teach kids instead of programs.”

Garvert has dedicated his career to exploring the connection between children’s identity and their performance as readers and writers. His practice is centered on sparking curiosity and learning through play.

In 2014, Garvert took a break from classroom teaching to serve as the district’s elementary literacy coordinator. When he returned to teaching at the kindergarten level last year, he says the short hiatus opened his eyes to the ways in which his lens of privilege impacts his teaching. Over the past two years, he’s been working to curate more mirrors and windows in his classroom, starting with the library.

“Winning this award, to me, means the opportunity to give back to children who haven’t had the opportunity to see themselves in literature,” he says. “I’m empowering kids to be the owners and curators of their classroom libraries.”

Julie Coiro, associate professor of reading in the School of Education at the University of Rhode Island, is the recipient of the Erwin Zolt Digital Literacy Game Changer Award, which honors literacy game changers in online collaboration who are making an outstanding and innovative contribution to the use of technology in literacy education.
 
“There’s a real danger that an entire generation of children will be unable to tell fact from fiction online,” says Julie Coiro.

A professor, researcher, writer, speaker, and advocate, Coiro seeks to examine the changing nature of technologies and how that intersects with literacy theory, students’ literacy development, reading comprehension assessment, professional development, and classroom instruction. Currently, her research focuses on developing a series of assessments to measure online reading comprehension proficiency in ways that inform classroom instruction.

Coiro has been published widely in venues such as Reading Research Quarterly, Journal of Literacy Research, The Reading Teacher, Educational Leadership, and Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. Her upcoming book, Planning for Personal Digital Inquiry in Grades K–5 (Stenhouse), will provide a framework for how teachers might use technology to their students’ advantage in inquiry-based learning.

“Inquiry-based learning can flexibly move from teachers using technology for giving information and prompting understanding toward students actively using technology to make, assess, and act on new content,” Coiro says.

Most recently, Coiro collaborates with researchers in both the United States and Finland to develop and test learning spaces designed to facilitate productive inquiry, social deliberation, participation, and reflection. With colleague Renee Hobbs, Coiro also codirects the Summer Institute in Digital Literacy, a six-day institute focused on how literacy is changing as a result of emerging media and technologies.

The Maryann Manning Special Service Award was presented to Diane Barone, foundation professor of literacy at the University of Nevada, Reno. This award is given annually to an individual who has demonstrated a lifelong commitment of exceptional and distinguished service to the field of literacy. For this award, ILA members apply or are nominated by peers.

Diane Barone will never forget her first longitudinal study: a four-year study of literacy development in children prenatally exposed to crack/cocaine. Though this study took place more than two decades ago, it continues to motivate her day-to-day work.

“For me, that really shattered a myth that these children weren’t going to do well in school,” she says.

This finding set the precedence for Barone’s long career in literacy research, which has centered on young children, especially those in high-poverty schools, and how they develop in literacy.
 
In addition to teaching courses in literacy and qualitative research methods, Barone, a past president of ILA, has published articles in journals such as Reading Research Quarterly, The Reading Teacher, and Journal of Literacy Research and has written several books including Teaching Early Literacy: Development, Assessment, and Instruction (Guilford), Narrowing the Literacy Gap: What Works in High-Poverty Schools (Guilford), and Children’s Literature in the Classroom: Engaging Lifelong Readers (Guilford).

Today, Barone is examining how children interpret different genres and how they relate to and make meaningful connections with texts. She is also interested in media literacy as well as children’s understanding of social justice issues, specifically interpretations of power and understandings of right versus wrong.

She thanks ILA for the award.

“Because it’s attached to the name Maryann Manning, it means a lot to me; I respected her a lot,” she says. “Having an award named after her is really special.”

Irene C. Fountas, a professor in the School of Education at Lesley University in Cambridge, MA, and Gay Su Pinnell, a professor in the School of Teaching and Learning at The Ohio State University, are the first recipients of the Diane Lapp & James Flood Professional Collaborator Award, which recognizes an ongoing professional collaboration between two or more people who regularly contribute to the professional knowledge base of literacy educators.

United in their goal to equip educators with the tools to teach children with reading challenges, Irene C. Fountas and Gay Su Pinnell have coauthored dozens of books, articles, and online resources that are now considered standards in the fields of literacy instruction and staff development. Their collective portfolio includes a cohesive classroom literacy system (Fountas & Pinnell Classroom), an intervention system (Leveled Literacy Intervention), an assessment system (Benchmark Assessment System), the Fountas & Pinnell Literacy Community, and an extensive professional book base. They are currently developing The School Leaders’ Literacy Handbook, a publication that will help school administrators create literacy opportunities for every child.

“I think we learn a lot from each other, and I think we have a lot of common perspectives around literacy and professional development,” Fountas says in a press release. “We’ve had a good friendship and a good professional relationship.”

Fountas, who studied under both Lapp and Flood (the latter passed away in 2007), says she considers them both mentors.

“To receive an award from people who played a significant role in my professional development was quite moving,” says Fountas. “They were two very brilliant and wonderful collaborators who made enormous contributions to the field.”

ILA recognized the outstanding achievements of all 2018 award winners during the ILA 2018 Conference in Austin, TX, in July. The full list of award categories and recipients can be found at literacyworldwide.org/about-us/awards-grants, but below are some additional highlights:

Primary Fiction Book Award
Winner: The Book of Mistakes. Corinna Luyken. 2017. Dial.
Honor: Little Fox in the Forest. Stephanie Graegin. 2017. Schwartz & Wade.

Primary Nonfiction Book Award
Winner: This Is How We Do It: One Day in the Lives of Seven Kids From Around the World. Matt Lamothe. 2017. Chronicle.

Intermediate Fiction Book Award
Winner: Train I Ride. Paul Mosier. 2017. HarperCollins.
Honor: The Notations of Cooper Cameron. Jane O’Reilly. 2017. Carolrhoda.

Intermediate Nonfiction Book Award
Winner: Martí’s Song for Freedom. Emma Otheguy. 2017. Lee & Low.

Young Adult Fiction Book Award
Winner: Words on Bathroom Walls. Julia Walton. 2017. Random House.
Honor: The Hate U Give. Angie Thomas. 2017. HarperCollins.

Young Adult Nonfiction Book Award
Winner: Obsessed: A Memoir of My Life With OCD. Allison Britz. 2017. Simon & Schuster.

Constance McCullough International Research Grant
Alan Crawford, California State University, Los Angeles
Charles Temple, Hobart & William Smith Colleges, Geneva, NY

Dina Feitelson Research Award
Maren Aukerman and Lorien Chambers Schuldt, Stanford University, Stanford, CA

Elva Knight Research Grant
Laura Tortorelli, Michigan State University, East Lansing

Helen M. Robinson Grant
Jungmin Kwon, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY

Jeanne S. Chall Research Fellowship
Shuling Yang, University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Steven A. Stahl Research Grant
John Strong, University of Delaware, Newark

Alina O'Donnell is the communications strategist at ILA and the editor of Literacy Daily.

In a new brief, the International Literacy Association (ILA) unpacks the 2017 reading scores released by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) earlier this year.

Commonly referred to as “the nation’s report card,” NAEP results provide a reliably accurate barometer of national academic achievement over time. Results from the 2017 reading assessment show that fourth and eighth graders in the United States have made little to no gains since 2015, continuing the trend of flat achievement in this area. The brief reviews the various suggestions for addressing this problem put forward at the release of the 2017 NAEP results and discusses systemic approaches to improving reading comprehension.

The brief emphasizes the significance of district and school leadership, funding, community engagement and formative assessment in improving student outcomes in reading. Topping the to-do list are teacher buy-in and a focus on internal communication and organizational structures.

“Too many schools are buckling under the weight of top-down, underfunded, and poorly communicated initiatives that don’t translate into day-to-day changes,” says ILA Executive Director Marcie Craig Post. “We need to see stronger infrastructures for implementation that support collaboration within and across schools and districts.”

Other recommendations include developing a “staircase curriculum” that builds year to year and cultivating a shared vision of the “excellent reader.”

Access the full brief here.

The following was written by William H. Teale, a past president of the International Literacy Association, to provide an international perspective on reading education for the Japan Reading Association (JRA). It will be included in a commemorative book later this year produced by JRA to mark their 60th anniversary.

It is reprinted here with JRA’s permission. Teale passed away unexpectedly in February 2018 shortly after completing it. It is the last piece he authored.

2018 marks my 49th year as a reading teacher. I have experienced many developments in reading education in my home country of the United States during that time, and I have observed many other developments as a result of my opportunities to participate in conferences and work with ministries of education and literacy scholars in 25 other countries around the world, including every continent except for Antarctica. This range of experiences I have been fortunate to have was no doubt influenced by my involvement not only in reading education but also in the fields of library and information science, children’s and young adult literature, and adult education. It was also the result of my involvement as an academic and teacher in the field as well as an officer of the International Literacy Association (board member, vice president, president, past president) over a period of six years and an editor and editorial board member of numerous literacy journals in the field.

I list this range of experiences so that you might better contextualize my remarks that follow, remarks intended to provide one international perspective on reading instruction. In doing so, I have not attempted to cover the past 60 years of reading education history which the Japan Reading Association is commemorating, but I do provide some historical context for what I see as major issues confronting us as reading educators who help build our societies by supporting our students in reading and writing so that they might participate as fully as possible as citizens of their countries and of the world.

Thinking both in contemporary terms and historically, I believe it is fruitful to consider that some issues related to reading education are similar across international contexts while others are quite different. In addition, some issues that are important today have been on the minds of reading educators for decades, while other have emerged over the years as a result of social, technological, or political developments.

Reading engagement (motivation to read)

I begin with the topic of reading engagement because it serves as the foundation of reading instruction—at all levels of schooling and in every country in the world. If we are to have any hope at all of succeeding in literacy education, we must get this piece right. It has been well documented for many years that students who spend more time reading achieve better in reading (Anderson, et al., 1988). Why is it that some students read more? Because they are engaged by reading; they get satisfaction from it and find the time that they spend reading to be rewarding.

Many people may think of this issue of engagement as “soft science” or touchy-feely. But you may be familiar with PISA, the Program for International Student Assessment, the quantitatively rigorous international assessment that measures 15-year-old students’ reading, mathematics, and science achievement in 64 countries in the world (OECD, 2016). What PISA found about reading engagement is that students who enjoyed reading the most performed significantly better in achievement than students who enjoyed reading the least. This is strong evidence that backs up what all good teachers have seen time and time again in their classrooms: If we pay attention to instilling in students the love of reading, the task of teaching students how to read is made so much easier.

The importance of quality literature

This discussion of reading engagement brings us face to face with the issue of what students are assigned to read for school and what they read on their own. To promote reading engagement, we should be helping our students interact with quality literature—from preschool through high school. That means employing quality literature in the lessons we teach, making sure our school and classroom libraries are stocked with quality literature, recommending quality literature for students’ out-of-school reading, making homework assignments that involve quality literature, and providing parents with recommendations of quality literature that they can obtain for their children.

Think of this as a dietary issue. Children and teenagers grow up healthy when they have a balanced diet of a variety of nutritious foods that supply needed vitamins, minerals, and proteins. Thoughtful minds are fed with a balanced diet of quality literature which includes stories, informational books, and other genres like concept books and poetry; print, digital, and audio books; books about people like them and situations that are familiar as well as books about people from other countries around the world who face a range of life circumstances different from their own; books with spectacular writing; and books with outstanding illustrations or photographs. In one essay I wrote, I went so far as to argue that without a literacy curriculum that includes high-quality literature, it is essentially impossible for students to become fully literate (see the May/June 2017 issue of the International Literacy Association’s publication Literacy Today).

And though the books themselves may differ from country to country or perhaps even from region to region or city to city within a country, the need to have quality literature as an integral part of the literacy curriculum and instruction is universal. Quality literature should play an indispensable role in teaching children to read, no matter who the students are, how old they are, or where they come from.

Effective methods for teaching reading

We have now discussed two issues crucial to reading education that I have argued apply equally across societies and school systems. But, this issue—effective methods for teaching reading—is something that needs to be considered context by context. In the United States, for example, there has been much discussion over the past two decades about research-based, or evidence-based, methods for reading instruction. National panels have been convened by the U.S. Congress to have scholars review the research literature and determine empirically the most effective methods for teaching beginning reading (National Reading Panel, 2000), early literacy (National Early Literacy Panel, 2008), and English language learners (August & Shanahan, 2006). Each of these efforts resulted in conclusions about how to teach reading. But even these rigorous efforts to answer the question of what works instructionally for teaching reading have been questioned by other scholars who point out the failure of such conclusions to take into consideration findings from rigorous qualitative literacy research or contextual factors that have been shown to impact reading instruction and therefore student reading achievement (e.g., see the 2010, vol. 39, no. 4 issue of Educational Researcher).

Now, consider the fact that this much dissension has occurred with respect to reading instruction in one language—English—and in one country. Small wonder, then, that when one looks at different languages, different writing systems, and different societal contexts, there can never hope to be consensus on what the most effective method is for teaching reading.

Much of the research that I conduct focuses on how young children—ages 3 to 6—learn to read and write and can effectively be taught to read and write in an alphabetic language, English. With respect to reading, the most difficult (and therefore the most researched) phase of that process is beginning reading, the time when children learn to “crack the alphabetic code” and understand how the sounds of language relate to the letters and letter combinations of the English alphabet. I’ve even written a chapter for teachers on the complexities of these relationships (see chapter 2 of McKay & Teale, 2015). But I distinctly remember the first time I spoke with a group of Japanese teachers and parents about that work. They were surprised that this was an issue of concern in the United States. To them, that early phase of learning to read was easy. In their experience, even 4-year-olds and most 5-year-olds could figure out how to “decode” the words in simple picture books. But, of course, they were coming from the perspective of a culture with a very different orthography. Hiragana makes it much easier for young children to “crack the code” because it is based on the syllable, not on the much more—for young children—abstract phoneme, as many alphabetic orthographies are. The harder part of learning to read in Japanese comes with Kanji, which occurs much later developmentally for students in Japan than for students in the U.S.

This is but one example illustrating the fact that, for reading educators, the issue of effective methods for teaching reading will always be inextricably tied to the national and local contexts in which the teaching is taking place. There is not, nor will there ever be, one right way of, or a most effective way of, or one best program for teaching reading and writing. Effective literacy instruction depends upon the wisdom of teachers applying what research indicates is effective and what their local classroom context dictates is needed to reach the children they see in front of them every day.

Family involvement/community involvement

The research is clear, consistent, and convincing: When schools succeed in working cooperatively with families, children experience academic and social benefits (Hill, et al., 2004: Jeynes, 2010). And these benefits include enhanced language and literacy for children. The strongest school–family partnerships work both ways. On the one hand, schools communicate with parents about their children’s literacy activities in school and about their progress in literacy. It is also important for the school to engage parents in discussions of how parents can support their children’s literacy learning at home. In the other direction, parents are welcomed into the school for the funds of knowledge and insights that they can bring. This may be special skills a parent has or knowledge about the community that would contribute to studies the children are engaged in or volunteer help in the school or classroom.

But it is also clear that in different societies there are vastly different relations between parents and the schools their children attend. In the United States, most elementary schools are not very successful at working collaboratively with the parents of the children who attend their school or with the larger community in which the school is located. And, the higher up the grade levels one goes, the less parental involvement one finds. Compare this to the types of relations between the school and parents in Japan. This is an important conversation for the school to have: What are the most productive ways that we can engage our families and community? And such a conversation is most successful when both the teachers and the school leaders take part together.

Digital literacies

Computers have been used for instruction in schools for several decades now, but it is only within the past 10 years that digital technologies have profoundly affected reading and reading instruction. What has made the difference is the proliferation of multimedia texts—texts that contain not only print or print and illustration, but also sound and moving images. And our students not only “consume” these texts; they also produce them because of the widespread availability of multimedia authoring tools. I believe it is fair to say that these developments in digital technologies have literally redefined literacy itself and what it means to be literate (NCTE, 2013), significantly changing the way students read, write, and access information.
Furthermore, I also believe that—ultimately—digital technologies will change human thinking. This change will happen in the way that the invention of writing changed human thinking. Before humans had writing, memory was a much more central—and needed—cognitive process. But with writing we had a system that enabled us to store ideas in a permanent way that accurately represented the message of the writer. It is important to keep in mind, however, that the changes in human thinking engendered by the invention of this tool—writing—took place over generations. And so it will be with digital literacy tools; we are only now at the very beginnings of their impact on literacy and on human thinking.

A useful distinction can be drawn between digital skills and digital literacies (see http://www.literacyworldwide.org/blog/literacy-daily/2016/02/03/knowing-the-difference-between-digital-skills-and-digital-literacies-and-teaching-both). Digital skills focus on how to use technological tools, whereas digital literacies are about the why, when, who, and for whom of such tools. What our students most need today is competencies related to digital literacies: to be able to critically assess digital texts (e.g., does that website contain credible information or is it biased and not factual?) and to compose digital texts that take into consideration the words, images, and sounds that will most effectively communicate with the audience they are addressing.

The impact of digital literacies on school reading instruction first took hold with older students and has gradually affected younger and younger grade levels. Now even preschool and kindergarten children are involved regularly in digital literacies because the biggest game changer of all for younger children—the tablet and its touchscreen technology—has enabled them to participate in ways that keyboard access never did. There is much being debated about “screen time” for young children (Council on Communications and Media, 2016), but the reality is that children today are growing up in their home and school environments interacting with digital technologies on a regular basis.

What this means is that teachers must now respond to the need to ensure that attention to digital literacies is embedded in all levels of literacy education and all curriculum subjects from preschool through high school. And, with respect to this topic, we need to think deeply about the different kinds of reading and writing that students do. When students need to read something deeply, many prefer to read print rather then something on screen. But, digital devices seem to be preferred for “quick” reading—news stories, social networking, looking up a piece of information. But, some texts are only available digitally. And more “buts” can be added as we think through the realities and educational implications of students’ literacy activities, considering also their reading and writing preferences. In the end, though, digital literacies is one of the most important instructional issues related to literacy, as well as being regarded by teachers as a “hot” topic (see results from the International Literacy Association’s 2018 What’s Hot in Literacy Report).

Conclusion

I believe that the preceding five issues—reading engagement, quality literature, effective methods for teaching reading, family and community engagement, and digital literacies—are currently of universal importance to literacy educators and literacy scholars the world over. But they are also local issues in that the literacy educators of Japan need to address them in conjunction with their own contexts, which will inevitably be different from those in Poland, Argentina, Finland, or the United States. Moreover, the contexts within Japan—Urasa, Osaka, Takayama, Sapporo, Tokyo, and so forth—need to be taken into account in thinking about these topics of literacy education. There is no “one-size-fits-all” approach to literacy education that will serve our students well. High-quality literacy education that helps students be contributing citizens is today, as it has been for the past 60 years and many more, teaching the children we have in our classrooms, rather than any literacy curriculum.

References

Anderson, R.C., Wilson, P.T., & Fielding, L.G. (1988). Growth in reading and how children spend their time outside of school. Reading Research Quarterly, 23,285–303.
August, D., & Shanahan, T. (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Council on Communications and Media. (2016). Media and young minds. Pediatrics, 138(5), 1–6.
Hill, N., et al. (2004). Parent academic involvement as related to school behavior, achievement, and aspirations: Demographic variations across adolescence. Child Development, 75(5), 1491–1509.
Jeynes, W. (2010). Parental involvement and academic success. New York: Routledge. 
McKay, R. & Teale, W. H. (2015). Not this but that: No more teaching a letter a week. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Publishing Company.
National Council of Teachers of English. (2013). The NCTE definition of 21st century literacies. Available from http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/21stcentdefinition.
National Early Literacy Panel (2008). Developing early literacy: Report of the National Early Panel. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.
National Reading Panel. (2000). 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. Washington, DC: NICHD & NIH.
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 results (Vol. 1: Excellence and equity in education. Paris: OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10/1787/9789264266490-en 

William H. Teale, a past president of the International Literacy Association, was a professor of education, a university scholar, and the director of the University of Illinois at Chicago’s Center for Literacy (CFL). His contributions to the field were immeasurable. Read two of ILA’s tributes to Teale here and here.

Instead of relying on the latest device or app, administrators should leverage the expertise of teachers to sustain classrooms that reflect the contexts of learning encountered in the real world, according to ILA's latest brief, Improving Digital Practices for Literacy, Learning, and Justice: More Than Just Tools.

In our increasingly technology-driven and globalized world, literacy instruction should prepare students to “produce, communicate, interpret and socialize with peers, adults and the broader world.” These skills require a mastery of written and spoken language as well as a familiarity with literary devices and rhetorical structures and must translate across digital and analog worlds.

“Intentionally building time for these online and offline literacy practices allows students to see themselves as agents of change across settings,” says the brief.

The brief discusses the importance of designing digital instruction that mirrors the kinds of work environments students will eventually encounter in their personal and professional worlds. This means a shift away from rote instructional practices, rooted in individual tools, and toward digital resources that inspire students to “make, play, design, hack and innovate.”  

The brief also explores technology’s potential role in perpetuating power structures and widening achievement gaps. When students do not have access to digital tools and resources, they are denied valuable forms of production and amplification that help spotlight areas of necessary advocacy.

“When school administrators take away students’ phones or tell them to put them away during class time, they are teaching implicit lessons about the kind of work environments these students are expected to enter. In this light, digital literacies are a matter of social justice.”

Instead of trying to disrupt inequality with “expensive devices,” the brief suggests that administrators invest in teacher knowledge of the contexts of literacy learning. This approach empowers students to participate in authentic learning activities that prepare them for real-world demands.

The brief closes with a list of limitations to what digital resources can do (i.e., act as a cure-all for legacies of inequity) and a set of next steps.

Access the full brief here.

Alina O'Donnell is the communications strategist at ILA and the editor of Literacy Daily.