Preface to the Greg Ashman Series
This Evening News series examines the writings and claims of Greg Ashman, an educator whose views on literacy and reading instruction have gained attention in Australia and beyond. I have chosen to respond to his posts not because he is my adversary, but because he represents a wider pattern in education: confident assertions made without confronting the real reasons children fail to read.
Across these chapters, I place Greg’s words side by side with my commentary. The purpose is not personal attack, but public accountability. When educators recycle slogans, ignore evidence, or block questions, they contribute to the persistence of illiteracy. By documenting these exchanges, I aim to show how silence, avoidance, and misplaced confidence prevent progress.
This series is therefore both a critique of Greg Ashman and a case study in how the education establishment resists uncomfortable truths. Each post builds toward a conclusion: until we confront the confusion created by flawed instruction, no amount of phonics checks, interventions, or rhetoric will reduce illiteracy.
The “Right Method” That Never Arrives
Greg Ashman writes:
“There is a very small percentage of children who have cognitive impairments that will always make reading a struggle (some estimates claim around 5%), but the overwhelming majority of kids, including many of those labelled as dyslexic can, with the right methods, learn to read.”
My Comment: What is this “right method”? If Greg has discovered it, why has it not been implemented in Australia—or anywhere else in the Anglophone world? Since 2018, I’ve explained that children disengage when confused by the wrong teaching of consonant sounds. Greg refuses to ask for clarification, preferring instead to mute dissent.
Behaviour Problems: Old Lessons Ignored
Greg Ashman writes:
“This perhaps explains a link between reading and behaviour problems seen in research. And it also likely explains the prevalence of literacy issues among young offenders.”
My Comment: David Boulton’s multi-million-dollar study already established this more than a decade ago. Shame avoidance drives behaviour. Why recycle old findings without acknowledging the root cause—confusion in early reading instruction?
Systematic Phonics: A Failed Experiment
Greg Ashman writes:
“Firstly, children should receive systematic phonics instruction.”
My Comment: The UK has taught systematic phonics for over a decade. Functional illiteracy rates remain stubbornly high. So what “systematic phonics” is Greg referring to? If phonics is already in place, why are children still failing?
Response to Intervention: Kitchen Sink Thinking
Greg Ashman writes:
“We need screening assessments and a graduated set of tiered interventions, based on Response to Intervention, where we throw the kitchen sink at those few holdout students.”
My Comment: We’ve heard this rhetoric for decades. The real question is: why does initial instruction fail in the first place? If children have no acuity problems, failure points directly to flawed teaching methods.
Phonics Checks: Warning Signs Without Fences
Greg Ashman writes:
“We need an early phonics check, like the one trialled in South Australia, to ensure that readers are not lost to literacy early.”
My Comment: Desmond Tutu said: “Stop pulling people out of the river. Go upstream and find out why they’re falling in.” I’ve gone upstream. The problem lies in teaching consonant sounds incorrectly. How can South Australia run phonics checks when schools don’t teach sound-symbol skills properly?
Curriculum vs. Teaching Method: A False Choice
Greg Ashman writes:
“None of my proposals relate to the way teachers teach… I don’t think it is as important as curriculum.”
My Comment: This is contradictory. Wrong teaching methods—especially mispronunciation of consonant sounds—are precisely why children “fall off the cliff.” Curriculum without correct teaching is a fence with holes.
Vested Interests and Ego: The Real Barrier
Greg Ashman writes:
“None of the proposals I have outlined will happen in Australia. Too many people have invested time and credibility in the current system.”
My Comment: Yes, vested interests block reform. But ego plays a bigger role. Influential educators like Jennifer Buckingham and Pamela Snow refuse to accept the truth—or are controlled by those with stakes in the status quo. Effective teaching motivates every child. Every child can succeed if taught properly in the foundational years.
Critical Thinking: Beyond Credentials
Greg Ashman writes:
“You need to know a lot of stuff in order to think critically about it.”
My Comment: Not always. Outsiders often see what insiders miss. Engineers dismissed my sinkhole reasoning, yet none disproved it. Doctors ignored my critique of the Vantage blood monitoring system until one young doctor listened. The Chinese saying captures it best: 当局者迷，旁观者清 — “The person on the spot is baffled, the onlooker sees clear.”
Children, free of preconceived notions, often think more clearly than experts bound by ego. Professors who cling to “phonological awareness deficit” ignore the obvious: my students read Malay and Hanyu Pinyin fluently, using the same letters as English. The problem is not awareness—it is confusion in instruction.
Silence in the Halls of Education
Greg Ashman writes:
“Surely, Scott must be aware of Finkel’s views and yet he has made no attempt to counter or rebut them.”
My Comment: No surprise here. Other than three professors, nobody has ever attempted to counter or rebut my posts—whether on my blog, Facebook, or LinkedIn. Instead, the default response is silence, deletion, or dismissal.
Professors often ask: “What are your credentials? Where is your data? Where is your scientific evidence?” Yet some educators, like Elizabeth Nonweiler of the UK Reading Reform Foundation, have admitted that anecdotal evidence can suffice.
Still, many deleted their comments and my responses. Others ignored my questions entirely. Why not engage? Why not ask for elaboration? I have always invited people to grill me—because that is how we learn from one another.
Chinese wisdom says it best: “He who asks a question is a fool for five minutes; he who does not ask a question remains a fool forever.”
The Reading Reform Foundation: A Case Study in Silence
In November 2018, Debbie Hepplewhite of the UK Reading Reform Foundation (RRF) invited me to write to her. I did. I sent a detailed email explaining that most children labelled “dyslexic” are in fact instructional casualties. I backed my findings with corroborative evidence.
Her response? Postponements. Silence. No discussion. No rebuttal.
The RRF claims to campaign for better teaching of reading. Its website states:
“All children need knowledge of the alphabetic code and the skills of blending sound for reading and segmenting the spoken word for spelling.”
Yet when confronted with evidence that current methods are flawed, the committee chose not to engage. What are they afraid of? Who are they protecting?
Closing Note
Illiteracy will not be reduced by slogans, silence, or deference to “Living Gods.” It will only be reduced when educators confront the real reason children disengage from learning to read: confusion created by flawed instruction.
Until that truth is faced, the campaign for “better teaching of reading” remains a hollow promise.
Epilogue
This post marks the closing chapter of my Evening News series on Greg Ashman. His words, and the silence that follows when challenged, illustrate the deeper problem in education: avoidance of uncomfortable truths. By documenting not only his claims but also the refusal to engage, I have shown how illiteracy persists behind a wall of blocked conversations. While this concludes my focus on Greg, the Evening News will continue — there are others whose ideas, actions, and silences deserve equal scrutiny.
No comments:
Post a Comment