Madam, - As authors of the forthcoming report on the literacy standards of pupils in designated disadvantaged schools, which gave rise to an Editorial in your issue of August 16th, we wish to comment on your reporting of our work. Your readers may be unaware that the report has not yet been finalised, that your item is partially inaccurate, and that the solutions proposed in the Editorial to address low literacy levels do not represent our views.
Firstly, there are some errors in the reporting of the survey results. For example, the Editorial states that only a small minority of 12-year-olds had a positive view of their own reading achievement. In fact, the vast majority of children we surveyed enjoyed reading, regularly read books for enjoyment, believed that they were as good as their classmates at reading, and had high educational aspirations. Our survey did find worryingly high percentages of children (27 per cent to 29 per cent across class levels) with low reading achievement relative to pupils in general, but not the more than 30 per cent with severe literacy problems that you report.
Secondly, your Editorial implicitly supports some standard solutions (e.g. reduced class sizes and more teachers) to address low literacy levels. In fact, the schools we surveyed already benefit from reduced class sizes, as well as the services of Home School Community Liaison co-ordinators and Learning Support and Resource teachers, while some also have the services of Breaking the Cycle co-ordinators and Language Support teachers, among others. Indeed, our report shows that between one-third and one-quarter of pupils are already receiving learning support or resource (special needs) teaching. For these reasons, among others, our report will argue that a "more of the same" approach is not appropriate for schools where large numbers of pupils are in need of additional support.
We are disappointed that one of the few people with access to the draft report saw fit to leak it to the press. No doubt your readers will also be disappointed to learn that The Irish Times has based an Editorial on inaccurate and incomplete information. - Yours, etc.
EEMER EIVERS,
GERRY SHIEL,
FIONNUALA SHORTT,
NICK SOFRONIOU,
Educational Research Centre,
St Patrick's College,
Dublin 9.