Editorial: For local control

Those of us old enough recall when the Iowa Republican Party stood for local control of schools. It disturbs our nostalgia that the contemporary GOP controlling the statehouse has taken to prescribing specifically what shall not be taught, and how things are taught. Thou shalt not teach divisive concepts, for example. Up pops a bill this session endorsed by the governor that bans certain forms of reading instruction, and prescribes that children shall be taught on a system built around phonics.

This should be unsettling to us steeped in the old-fashioned conservative principle of letting school boards and the superintendent decide what is taught and how, in consultation with teachers, curriculum directors and principals. That was the system, apparently abandoned, that put Iowa Number One in literacy for generations.

It should make you nervous when legislators, some of whom have to have their clerks write their newsletters, decide how you teach reading and writing. Republican leaders assert a “science-based” reading protocol based on sounding out words: phonics. They want to ban other methods that teach reading based on context and meaning. It smacks of more politics in education and less local control.

This is actually a topic where we have standing. We were taught in phonics by the good Sisters who listened to no legislator, and we did well enough by it. We also were taught to read for context and meaning. That’s what leads to comprehension. Certain methods work better with Johnny than they do with Susie. Teachers told legislators that they prefer an all-of-the-above to teaching reading, which is what leads to clear writing. We should listen to the teachers who actually are working with students and know what works. We should be skeptical of legislators who worked with students 30 years ago.

The Iowa Department of Education sets curriculum standards under the governor’s control. Legislation is unnecessary. Reynolds is eroding her own authority by endorsing it.

Increasing reading comprehension is a multi-layered issue that starts with books and parents reading to children daily. It must receive adequate funding. We stress science and math often at the expense of reading, writing, the arts and social studies (if we were to pass a law requiring that something be taught, it would be civics to every eighth-grader). Teachers must receive support from, yes, Area Education Agencies to provide support specialists. We must encourage children to write because it helps them read, and vice versa. Phonics work. So does context. So does taking the handheld device from their hands and replacing it with a book. Reading comprehension improves when students are at least exposed to another language. Their writing improves along with it.

Reading and writing are not as simple as they sound. They are nuanced matters that involve mentors with an ability to understand what works, and giving each child the attention they need. Ordering up a nifty reading answer that has no cost, on its face, is irresistible. Trusting education professionals in a local setting — Storm Lake has different needs than Spencer — is what made Iowa the Education State. That was effective conservatism.