This article supplied by Troy Media.

By Michael Zwaagstra

One Manitoba school division is proving phonics works

If students don’t learn how to read in school, not much else that happens there is going to matter.

This might be a harsh way of putting it, but it’s the truth. Being unable to read makes it nearly impossible to function in society. Reading is
foundational to everything, even mathematics.

That’s why Canadians across the country should be paying attention to what’s been happening in Manitoba’s Evergreen School Division. Located in the Interlake region, including communities like Gimli, Arborg and Winnipeg Beach, Evergreen has completely overhauled its approach to reading instruction—and the early results are promising.

Instead of continuing with costly and ineffective methods like Reading Recovery and balanced literacy, Evergreen has adopted a structured literacy approach, putting phonics back at the centre of reading instruction.

Direct and explicit phonics instruction teaches students how to sound out the letters in words. Rather than guessing words from pictures or context,
children are taught to decode the language itself. It’s simple, evidence-based, and long overdue.

In just one year, Evergreen schools saw measurable gains. A research firm evaluating the program found that five per cent more kindergarten to Grade 6 students were reading at grade level than the previous year. For a single year of change, that’s a significant improvement.

This should not be surprising. The science behind phonics instruction has been clear for decades. In the 1960s, Dr. Jeanne Chall, director of the Harvard Reading Laboratory, conducted extensive research into reading methods and concluded that systematic phonics instruction produces the strongest results.

Today, this evidence-based method is often referred to as the “science of reading” because the evidence overwhelmingly supports its effectiveness. While debates continue in many areas of education, this one is largely settled. Students need to be explicitly taught how to read using phonics—and the earlier, the better.

Yet Evergreen stands nearly alone. Manitoba’s Department of Education does not mandate phonics in its public schools. In fact, it largely avoids taking a stance on the issue at all. This silence is a disservice to students—and it’s a missed opportunity for genuine reform.

At the recent Manitoba School Boards Association convention, Evergreen trustees succeeded in passing an emergency motion calling on the association to lobby education faculties to ensure that new teachers are trained in systematic phonics instruction. It’s a critical first step—and one that should be replicated in every province.

It’s a travesty that the most effective reading method isn’t even taught in many teacher education programs. If new teachers aren’t trained in phonics, they’ll struggle to teach their students how to read—and the cycle of failure will continue.

Imagine what could happen if every province implemented structured literacy from the start of Grade 1. Students would become strong readers earlier, be better equipped for all other subjects, and experience greater success throughout school. Early literacy is a foundation for lifelong learning.

Evergreen School Division deserves credit for following the evidence and prioritizing real results over educational trends. But it shouldn’t be alone in this. If provinces across Canada want to raise literacy rates and give every child a fair shot at academic success, they need to follow Evergreen’s lead—and they need to do it now.

All students deserve to learn how to read.

Michael Zwaagstra is a public high school teacher and a senior fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

Troy Media is dedicated to empowering Canadian community news outlets with independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in fostering an informed and engaged public by delivering reliable content that strengthens community ties, enriches national conversations, and deepens Canadians’ understanding of one another.

From the Fraser Institute

By Michael Zwaagstra and Matthew D. Mitchell

Obviously, when students feel that their grades are at risk, they will be far less likely to express their genuine opinions or even ask questions during class discussions. Not only does this make classes less interesting, it also undermines the entire purpose of a university education.

Universities should be places where all ideas are welcomed and explored. In many Canadian university classrooms, however, only the “correct” viewpoint is heard.

According to a new survey (conducted by Leger and published by the Fraser Institute) of 1,200 Canadian university students and recent graduates, politically left-of-centre students were far more likely than their right-of-centre classmates to report that their views were welcomed and encouraged in class.

For example, 83 per cent of right-leaning students believe that professors advocate a left-of-centre view—and 45 per cent of left-leaning students agree with them.

Forty-two per cent of right-leaning students say they experienced a university classroom environment that limited discussion and questions on controversial topics to only one side of the argument. In contrast, only 29 per cent of left-leaning students felt the same way.

To make matters worse, 50 per cent of right-leaning students said they sometimes felt uncomfortable expressing their opinions due to the views of the professors leading the class. Only 36 per cent of left-leaning students reported the same experience.

Interestingly, when asked whether there was a “safe” point of view on controversial topics in university classes, a majority from both groups answered “yes” with little difference between right-leaning students (58 per cent) and left-leaning students (51 per cent).

A significant number of right-leaning students (37 per cent) also said they feared formal consequences for expressing honest thoughts, opinions or even asking questions in their classes. Among right-leaning students who expressed this concern, 74 per cent feared their professors would lower their grades for expressing the “wrong” opinion in class.

Obviously, when students feel that their grades are at risk, they will be far less likely to express their genuine opinions or even ask questions during class discussions. Not only does this make classes less interesting, it also undermines the entire purpose of a university education.

Other studies also reveal the politically one-sided nature of university campuses. For example, a 2022 survey published by the Macdonald-Laurier Institute found that 88 per cent of Canadian university professors vote for parties of the left and only 9 per cent support parties on the right. No wonder students feel their class discussions are consistently one-sided.

Similarly, a 2024 survey published by Heterodox Academy and College Plus found that more than half of students were reluctant to discuss certain issues such as the current Israel/Hamas conflict and transgender identity, and nearly half were reluctant to even broach the subject of politics. More alarmingly, a majority of students favoured limiting free expression on campus.

While many university professors are quick to describe themselves as strong supporters of diversity, this does not seem to include diversity of thought. A truly diverse campus would welcome a variety of intellectual perspectives in the spirit of open and scholarly debate. A campus where everyone looks different but thinks the same is not meaningfully diverse. As economist and philosopher John Stuart Mill argued many years ago, we are all impoverished when we silence one perspective.

It’s concerning that most students feel there’s a “safe” political view on controversial topics, particularly when students who hold a minority viewpoint feel the least safe expressing their views.

Of course, things won’t change overnight. But the first step to dealing with a problem is to admit that you have one. In that light, university administrators, professors and politicians should acknowledge that the current lack of viewpoint diversity on campus is a serious problem for all Canadians. Democracies function best when people freely express, and vigorously debate, competing ideas. As institutions of higher learning, universities should exemplify what free and open discussion looks like.

While there’s nothing wrong with professors holding political views and sharing those views with their students, they should not restrict free and open debate in their classrooms. This means ensuring that all students, including those whose opinions are in the minority, are guaranteed the right to share their views without fear of reprisal.

Michael Zwaagstra

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute

Matthew D. Mitchell

Senior Fellow in the Centre for Human Freedom, Fraser Institute