You are probably aware of the current political and public furore surrounding children’s reading development and the decades-long reading wars. The reading skills and behaviours of young Australians are a cause of major concern for parents and carers, teachers and teacher educators, and future employers and education stakeholders. For 15 years, NAPLAN reading test results have been flatlining. As well, the Australian results for the international PISA reading test have been declining steadily for 22 years. 

The mystifying magic bullet

Recent reports suggest that as many as 30% of young Australians are not reading at a proficient level. These reports often promote phonics instruction as the primary magic bullet solution. This emphasis is puzzling since standardised tests predominantly assess reading comprehension. If comprehension test results are lower than expected, shouldn’t greater attention be given to fostering comprehension and deep meaning-making?

Phonic knowledge is undoubtedly important for developing strong decoding skills. However, over-emphasising phonics may only improve phonics skills—not necessarily reading comprehension. As one professor astutely observed, “Teaching more phonics will only make children better at phonics.” 

Problems of biblical proportion

Two well-known phenomena in the research literature, both drawn from biblical references, offer insights into classroom reading instruction challenges. In light of the current overemphasis on phonics, I propose a third.

Firstly, the notorious Matthew effect is based on a rich-get-richer and poor-get-poorer phenomenon. It draws on Matthew 25:29,. “For to all those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away”. In the contemporary classroom context, it describes how individual differences in early years reading abilities lead to widening gaps over time; struggling young readers falling further behind their peers.

Secondly, the lesser-known Peter Effect is based on the idea that people can’t give what they don’t have. It draws on Acts 3:6 “But Peter said, “I have no silver or gold, but what I have I give you”. In the contemporary classroom context, it refers to the problem of teachers who are not enthusiastic readers themselves struggling to instil a love of reading in their students. This difficult predicament has been alerted by UNESCO. 

Here, I am proposing a third phenomenon─the Martha Effect. This problem is based on the lack of attention to the most important matters. It draws on Luke 10:41-42.

“Martha, Martha, you are worried and distracted by many things; there is need of only one thing”. In the contemporary classroom context, it refers to the prioritising of a narrow view of reading, and disregard of the vital matter of fostering students’ reading motivation and enthusiasm. The Martha effect highlights the potential pitfalls of an overly mechanistic approach to reading instruction, which neglects the richer, deeper, more meaning-full aspects of reading.

Evidence from research

In the midst of ongoing debates and government reports about improving children’s reading development, one crucial aspect is often overlooked; student engagement in reading for enjoyment. Around the world, this is referenced in interchangeable terms such as: reading for pleasure or volitional reading, or reading for aesthetic purpose. 

Decades of international research demonstrate the significant bidirectional impact of students’ reading enjoyment on reading attainment, amongst a myriad of associated personal and social benefits. Its importance is acknowledged as positively associated with reading performance in the international PISA reading tests. Children’s right to read books for enjoyable purpose is endorsed in the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child, Article 17. The International Literacy Association validates this vital prerogative in its Children’s Rights to Read advocacy document.

The really good news is that the Australian Curriculum: English endorses this evidence-based entitlement. Its Aims specify enjoyment and aesthetic appreciation of literature. Across all year level descriptions from Prep to 10 it clearly states: “Students engage with a variety of texts for enjoyment”. 

The really bad news is that this significant student entitlement is sidelined and silenced. In fact, the term “aesthetic purpose” has been dropped from the previous version (v.8.4) year-level descriptions because…  well no official explanation has been given. Perhaps there is some misunderstanding around its verified educative and transformative value?

Classroom reading for enjoyment entails evidence-informed, purposeful pedagogic approaches and practices. It needs, like all other aspects of reading instruction, to be well taught. Notably, teachers who have enacted a reading-for-pleasure pedagogy have found that reading for enjoyment actually enhances reading comprehension.

The “Martha Effect” in Practice

The recently released parliamentary report on The state education system in Victoria is a prime example of the Martha Effect in action. Across 330 pages, it references NAPLAN 110 times, phonics 96 times, and comprehension just six times. Its first recommendation sets a benchmark of 90% of students achieving strong or exceeding NAPLAN results. Not once does it reference the really important matter, which is consistently evidenced in global research, of reading for enjoyment.

Similarly, the recent Queensland Department of Education Reading position statement that commits the state to every student realising their reading potential, makes zero commitment to student engagement in reading for enjoyment. That is despite a restricted mention of a “love of reading”.

The recent Grattan Institute Reading guarantee also sets its first of many recommendations around 90% of students achieving strong or exceeding NAPLAN results. It also includes a limited acknowledgment of reading enjoyment related to the books Jane Eyre (Bell/Bronte, 1847) and A Tale of Two Cities (Dickens, 1859) as books carefully selected to be enjoyable to read. It fails, however, to make any specific recommendations around student engagement in reading for enjoyment as intentional pedagogic practice. 

Martha, Martha…

Addressing the “Martha Effect”

The educative and transformative potential of reading for enjoyment needs to be prioritised. This involves embracing the “Super Seven” aspects of reading instruction, rather than the Big Six:

1. Comprehension
2. Fluency
3. Oral language
4. Phonic knowledge
5. Phonological awareness 
6. Vocabulary
7. Reading for enjoyment – Literary appreciation/aesthetic engagement

A call to action: the super seven aspects of reading instruction

To combat the Martha Effect, all education stakeholders must act:

• Members of parliament should safeguard policy and practice recommendations addressing all seven aspects of reading instruction and development.
• School system directors should oversee implementation of policy and practice recommendations that address the super seven.
• School principals and leadership teams should resource, implement and monitor enactment of the super seven.
• Classroom teachers should ensure that students learn the super seven aspects of reading, and get adequate time to actually read and practice these.

Children need to learn to enjoy reading and, consequently, read more.

Perhaps then, reading test results will finally improve.