How did you learn to read?
Can you remember? My gut feeling
is that most of us who contribute to this site will not remember struggling to
translate text into sound, or to make sense of letters, words and sentences.
But for children who do, the dyslexics, learning to read
will be such an achievement that the successes and failures, the praise, and
perhaps the occasional thoughtless rebuke, will stay with them for the rest of
their lives.
I’ve worked with dyslexics, and with teachers of dyslexia,
for many years. I’ve sought to
understand why dyslexia happens, and how to overcome it. Dyslexics often seem to be a personality
type – they are restless, intelligent, curious but often very demoralised. Despite schools having access to very
sophisticated technology, most classroom teaching is still very largely text
based. Dyslexics have a mountain to
climb.
Michael Morpurgo recently presented two excellent programmes
about learning to read, “Between the Lines” on BBC Radio 4. The first was dedicated to looking at the
‘real book’ movement, the second to synthetic phonics. Morpurgo’s gentle,
avuncular tone scratched away at the reasoning behind both, and, despite his
courtesy towards the phonic tribe I could hear a clear passion for putting a
love of books, of stories before anything else. I’m sure most of us share that with him. I find it very hard to be passionate about
synthetic phonics. For some children,
without doubt, phonics is the only way they will learn. But to use this as the primary means of teaching
children to read is something I can’t help but instinctively reject.
And yet governments in the UK, particularly the Welsh
Government, are becoming so prescriptive about how teachers should teach there
is a distinct danger something obvious will be overlooked. In Wales, the education minister has made it
quite clear that literacy and numeracy should be a school’s focus, and other
areas of the curriculum are subservient to this. I’ve always had the sense that
relegating, for example, creative subjects, to a second division of the
curriculum was a fundamental mistake, but could never reason why.
However it’s thanks to Morpurgo’s programme that I think
I’ve realised what it is.
During the second programme Morpurgo interviewed Usha Goswami, Professor of Cognitive
Developmental Neuroscience at Cambridge University. What she said made so much sense to me that I wanted to stand up
and applaud. In essence she thinks that
dyslexia is not a visual difficulty, but an aural one. Children who are dyslexic, for example,
often cannot hear stresses in words.
They don’t hear rhythm in speech as well as those of us who have never
experienced reading as a challenge.
Neurons responsible for replicating rhythm, and for developing rhythm in
speech, and therefore for following metre and syllable patterns in words, must
be kick started at an early age otherwise they will not trigger at all.
It is very
likely, she says, that there is a genetic disposition towards a child’s brain
not being receptive to patterns such as these, but there is also a large
element of nurture.
I wrote to
Professor Goswami, and she very kindly sent me some of her research
papers. She suggests that young
children who have difficulty keeping a steady rhythmic beat are more likely to
be dyslexic, and that early intervention, with music, dance and rhythm in
rhyme, could help the infant brain to prepare itself for reading.
Which
suggests that music could have a vital, pragmatic role in children’s learning.
Music, which has been shunting into a siding in the school curriculum for
years, and which in most recent times, particularly in Wales, has been rusting
and covered in weeds, should be given an overhaul, and dragged out into the
light.
To
education ministers of the world: pay more attention to music.
4 comments:
Music, art, craft, poetry, dance and theatre are all fundamental to learning.
I have taught children with multiple and profound learning difficulties and they can all learn something but they often learn it in a very different way.
Here in Australia there tends to be a view that all learning should be directly related to getting a job or some sort of politically correct topic. Music is no longer taught. Libraries are disappearing from schools. Art is too dangerous because paintbrushes and scissors are involved. Dance is "sissy" and theatre "a waste of time". I exaggerate of course - but not by very much.
I've fowarded the link to this to my son in Cambodia - he's been teaching English there and starts primary school teacher training in August. Thanks for posting!
Andrew, this post made me want to stand up & applaud.
Education is directed & controlled by people who have no interest in what learning is, what it's for, or how it happens, and they keep repeating the same mistakes. We need a revolution, and it needs to have songs!
I'm sure you're right. I'm married to a dyslexic husband who can't clap along to a rhythm however hard he tries. But my dyslexic daughter who enjoyed learning to play drums (although has now given up) hasn't struggled nearly as much as he did and does. Besides, music is just such an added joy in life, it should be there for all to enjoy. Why does it need any academic justification beyond its obvious private and social gifts?
Post a Comment