It now seems we are in the full funeral procession for Reading First.  In today’s USA Today’s dueling editorials, the nation’s newspaper of record calls for Reading First to be brought back from the dead.  USA Today notes (http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/07/our-view-on-lit.html#more) that the program works, evidenced by the growing number of statements from educators and from recent studies — such as those released last month by CEP — that demonstrate improvement.  And RF offices in states from Idaho to Ohio to Alabama have added their voice to save the necessary program. 

The latest defense of the program can be found in yesterday’s Boston Herald (http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view.bg?articleid=1105503), in a passionate piece from the head of the Bay State Reading Institute.

Eduflack has said it once, and I’ll say it again.  RF works.  It has boosted student reading achievement, as demonstrated by student assessments in states across the nation.  It has improved reading teacher development, empowering teachers to use data to target specific interventions at the students who need them.  And it has focused SEA and LEA spending on programs that work, demanding solid, research-based proof.  After flatlining for decades, achievement is on the rise, and improvements are due, in large part, to the direct and indirect impact of Reading First and the embrace of scientifically based reading.

Unfortunately, such results don’t seem to be enough for some people.  Case in point — Stephen Krashen’s opposition-editorial (http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/07/hooked-on-phail.html#more) to USA Today’s cogent stance.  Krashen reheats many of the same misguided stances of years past.  He embraces the urban legends and conspiracy theories of NRP attacker Elaine Garan.  And he reiterates the fallacy that RF is all about phonics, and nothing about reading comprehension (an untruth we all should know to be false).

Krashen raises two points, though, that merit continued discussion.  The first is the notion that 99 percent of Americans (adults and kids) can read and write at basic levels.  He uses this to say there is no literacy crisis, and thus no need to change the way we teach or increase our worry about student reading achievement.  99 percent?  Really? 

First, we must look at his term “basic.”  In our 50 states, we define reading ability by students who are proficient or better.  Basic does not mean proficient.  It means a fourth grader reading at a first grade level, or an adult with third grade literacy skills.  In today’s society, basic doesn’t cut it.  We need proficient readers.  And like it or not, 40 percent of today’s fourth graders are not proficient readers.  That should signal crisis to every teacher, parent, business leader, or elected official in this country. 

More disturbing, though, are Krashen’s closing comments.  Of course he applauds the death blow to RF.  In doing so, he advocates that the money should be spent on libraries in urban areas. A noble goal, yes, but it demonstrates a complete naiveté when it comes to federal appropriations.  The death of RF means the elimination of federal reading funding.  It does not mean we get to propose new programs to fund.  Nor does not mean we now have a bucket of $300 million or $1 billion of education funding that can now be spent on other programs.  The checkbook is closed.  The well is dry.  This is a bad thing.

For more than a decade now, reading instruction has received hundreds of millions of dollars from the federal government.  Funding started under the Clinton Administration and America Reads in 1997.  It increased in 2002 with the passage of RF.  Since then, billions of dollars has been directed to the LEAs to improve reading instruction in the communities that need it most.

Over the past two years, that money has been cut.  This year, Congress is zeroing out the funds.  For the first time in more than a decade, the federal government will not be supporting reading instruction in this country.  And that is a cryin’ shame.  For folks like Dr. Krashen — who have dedicated their professional lives to literacy — they should be embarrassed that RF has been defunded.  They should be offended that reading instruction is no longer a federal priority.  Instead of celebrating their defeat of RF, they should be outraged that a program supported by everyone from the IRA to the U.S. Department of Education has prematurely come to end.  They should be fighting to save reading funding for teachers and schools, not throwing parties because a program supported by their opponents in the faculty senate has been dealt a defeat.

But why should we expect that?  That would put kids and teachers above research dollars, professional reputations, and “ideological” camps.