Tonia Williams | Reading between the lines

ANOTHER SCHOOL, another headline. Jamaica’s literacy issue is likely far worse than recent Pembroke Hall or Holy Trinity reports suggest. If we take CSEC rankings as a proxy for literacy, we can assume there are at least 60 schools with similar or worse outcomes, representing about 9,000 grade seven students who may not be able to read. That’s more than the capacity of the National Arena, in just one grade. Add in younger children and other struggling high schoolers and the scale becomes alarming.

This reveals a twofold problem: failure to teach reading effectively, and a failure to detect struggling readers early enough. Our content-heavy curriculum sits central to both points. We’ve built a system that prioritises memorising subject-related facts, while hiding poor literacy skills and delaying the interventions children need.

SYSTEM BLIND TO READING ISSUES

The Primary Exit Profile (PEP) scores won’t tell you if a child can read. Foundational reading skills like phonics, letter-sound recognition and fluency, must each be tested separately with face-to-face assessments – not on paper.

However, our current system leans heavily on written answers and multiple choice questions that test children’s ability to memorise. These types of tests can hint that something is wrong, but can’t tell us what exactly. As a result, children who can’t read, inadvertently get lumped in with those who lack content knowledge or motivation, leaving serious literacy issues unidentified and unaddressed.

It’s easy to assume forgetfulness or carelessness when met with low or dismal test scores, especially when a child clearly knows the answer. We mistakenly equate recall with reading – not checking for difficulties unless there are obvious gaps both in conversation and on paper. And that’s how even the most attentive parents and teachers can miss issues. A child might explain a concept like ‘evaporation’ perfectly when asked aloud, yet struggle during the exam because they can’t read the question or write the response.

TEACHERS CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE

In our curriculum, children learn to read by grade three, and read to learn thereafter. This transition is unforgiving. Basic reading instruction disappears and teachers must focus on preparing children for exams. There is no room to assess or revisit reading basics; no time to check if each child can read ‘evaporation’, before teaching what it is.

The truth is, our curriculum is not built to catch struggling readers early. In younger grades, large class sizes, limited resources, and policies barring ‘repeating’ make it hard for teachers to identify students that are falling behind, let alone provide them individual help. In later grades, without tools, time and resources, teachers are forced to choose between covering the syllabus and giving students the help they need.

WRONG METHOD, WRONG TIME

Despite the government’s strong hold on primary testing, including multiple assessments from Grades 4 to 6, none of their tests actually evaluate if children can read. There is no oral reading, phonics or decoding. Instead, the tests assume that children can read.

Take for example the Grade 3 Diagnostic Test, which requires children to read questions like “Which word rhymes with bear?”, and select answers accordingly. However, a child who doesn’t understand rhyming and one who can’t even read the question may both guess the same response. But one is illiterate, and the other isn’t. Without assessments that can truly tell the difference, thousands of children will continue to fall through these same cracks unnoticed.

To make matters worse, the “literacy” tests come far too late. By Grade 3, basic reading instruction is essentially over. The students flagged by these tests are unlikely to get the extra help they need. They’ll move to Grade 4 where reading is just assumed; left to sink or swim in a curriculum that has already moved on without them.

WHAT NOW?

Without early reading diagnostics, our otherwise well-justified curriculum creates a dangerous illusion: disguising reading issues as poor memory and low effort, as literacy slips through the cracks. We need national reading assessments in grades one to three that explicitly test phonics, word decoding, and fluency. The results shouldn’t just fill filing cabinets. They should guide interventions, support responsive teaching practices, and shape future curriculum planning,

If even 9,000 students in one grade are poor readers, we should all be alarmed. If we are serious about addressing Jamaica’s illiteracy issue, early detection must be our first move.

Tonia Williams is an educational researcher and PhD candidate in experimental psychology at the University of Oxford, specialising in literacy, language development and early learning systems. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com