Back to Basics, Back to Phonics

Your editorial Sept. 8, “Schools Struggle for Quality With Help From Community,” addressed many of the challenges that had to be met to implement the smaller K-3 class sizes this fall.

There was concern that the rearrangement of classrooms, libraries and other areas would “not be an ideal situation for learning.” I grew up in the South. Our schools had no air-conditioning. On hot days, our teachers frequently held class outside. We learned absent any facilities at all.

Clearly facilities are a part of the “situation for learning,” but not one of the most important elements.

Another area of concern was having to lay off teacher aides and office assistants. In terms of the mission of education, what’s more important, three or four aides or one new-grad teacher?

With respect to the back-to-basics philosophy in the teaching of reading, your editorial made the observation, “Returning to a focus on phonics requires nifty mental gymnastics from teachers who may be accustomed to other methods of teaching reading.” This observation is one of the most powerful indictments of the state of public education today.

How can teachers be deficient in such a fundamental skill? The ability to teach phonics is as much a basic skill to an elementary school teacher as is calculus to an engineer.

That the “educrats” ever lost sight of that is appalling. It serves as a clarion call to not only get our secondary education curricula back to the basics, but to also get our college schools of education and credentialing programs there as well. And if teachers really want to head off the growing support for vouchers and school choice, they will insist that their union leaders abandon the current social engineering practices and lead the charge.

Lastly, I wholeheartedly agree with your statement, “Parental involvement remains of primary importance.” Were it not for parents who learned phonics, our kids might not be able to read at all!

BRUCE CRAWFORD

Fountain Valley