Initial teacher training in initial literacy. Dominican Republic

The regional research of the Red para la Lectoescritura Inicial de Centroamérica y el Caribe [Network for Initial Literacy in Central America and the Caribbean – RedLEI] set out to investigate the training provided to teachers who will go on to teach reading and writing to children in the early grades. It sought to make recommendations on how to ensure consistency between what the research evidence suggests teachers need to know and be able to do, and what they learn during their training. This research focused on the training in initial literacy given to students studying for an undergraduate degree in primary education at higher education institutions in the Dominican Republic.

The study was qualitative and sought to answer the following research questions: how closely does the initial teacher training curriculum align with current evidence on how children learn to read and write, and what should teachers know and be able to do to successfully teach initial literacy? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the initial teacher training curriculum in terms of initial literacy, with respect to current evidence on teaching reading and writing? Finally, how does the prescribed initial teacher training curriculum differ from the curriculum that is actually applied to teach initial literacy to trainee teachers?

The findings indicate that, in terms of its requirements, the curriculum is aligned with the scientific evidence on teaching initial literacy. Several strengths in the curriculum were identified, as well as some weaknesses. Strengths include clear requirements around the theoretical approach to teaching in general (constructivist) and initial literacy (cognitive and communicative); opportunities to practice in real-life settings; and the inclusion of most of the areas identified by the scientific evidence. In terms of weaknesses, differences were observed between institutions in terms of the initial literacy training some teachers received, leading them to adopt an approach that was more focused on grammar than on cognitive and communicative processes, and more oriented towards theory than practice. As for the differences between the prescribed curriculum and how it is applied, some disparities were noted with respect to the weighting of theory versus practice. The programmes require more practical than theoretical credits, but in the classes observed, this was not always the case.