“Out of Many, One” was the motto of the United States from 1782 until 1956, when it was replaced by “In God We Trust.” Even now, the Latin phrase, E Pluribus Unum, can be found on our $1 bills in the banner held by the eagle, on some of our coins, and on the flags and seals of both the Senate and the House of Representatives.   

Always aspirational, “Out of Many, One” was meant to signal to the world that the original 13 colonies were united.  Which they were in 1782 when faced with a common enemy, England.  

But they were clearly not united regarding slavery.  Pennsylvania outlawed the practice of owning other human beings in 1780, Massachusetts and New Hampshire in 1783, Connecticut and Rhode Island in 1784.  Vermont, not one of the original 13 British colonies because it had declared independence from Britain earlier, actually abolished slavery in 1777.

Slavery, America’s original sin, bitterly divided the new country and led to our Civil War, making “E Pluribus Unum” a hopeless cause.  In 1956, threatened by the specter of ‘Godless Communism,’ Congress dumped “E Pluribus Unum” and changed our motto to “In God We Trust.”  For good measure, it added the phrase “Under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance.

Those changes in the 1950’s were cosmetic, but Congress has tried to bring us together, most notably with the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, which Congress ratified in 1868 (along with the 13th and 15th Amendments).  The 14th Amendment provides for ‘equal protection under the law’ and prohibits states from taking away fundamental rights–which Southern white politicians were busy trying to do (and which an earlier Supreme Court decision, Scott v. Sanford, allowed!)

In Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857), the Supreme Court held that African Americans were not U.S. citizens, even if they were free.

The Fourteenth Amendment, however, guaranteed that everyone born or naturalized in the United States and under its jurisdiction would be a United States citizen. It also ensured that federal citizenship was also made primary, which meant that states could not prevent freed slaves from obtaining state citizenship and thus federal citizenship. As such, the Fourteenth Amendment effectively overturned Sanford v. Scott.

In simplest terms, the federal government always has a vested interest in Unum, while the States always lean toward Pluribus. That fundamental tension is built into our Constitution, which declares that any and all rights and powers not specifically enumerated as belonging to the central government therefore belong to the states. 

Education is a good example of the federal/state tension.  Because ‘education’ does not appear in the Constitution, that was reason enough for the US Supreme Court to rule (5-4) in 1973 that American citizens do not have a fundamental constitutional right to an education. Education, the court said, was up to individual states. 

End of story?

Well, No, it wasn’t, because the White House and the Congress, particularly when controlled by Democrats, wanted to improve the life circumstances of children and families living in poverty. Better schools, they felt, were the safest and least controversial way to do that. (Housing, health care, a guaranteed living wage, et cetera, were either too difficult or impossible.)

In 1979 President Jimmy Carter and Democrats in Congress created a Cabinet-level Department of Education, which Republicans have campaigned against ever since.  Ironically, however, it was a Republican President who went ‘a bridge too far’ for many American parents.  George W. Bush, former governor of Texas, worked with Democrats in Congress to create “No Child Left Behind.” Its  onerous rules and harsh penalties applied to virtually every US public school and led to a massive increase in machine-scored standardized testing in English and math…and the disappearance of art, music, physical education, and recess, as well as widespread cheating by adults whose jobs depended on higher test scores.

If “No Child Left Behind” got the camel’s nose into the tent, the Obama Administration’s “Race to the Top” put the entire camel squarely inside the structure.  In 2009, ‘the Great Recession’ prompted Congress to give Education Secretary Arne Duncan $4.35 billion in discretionary money, which was more money than all other Education Secretaries combined.  Congress did not earmark the money but left it to Duncan to decide how to distribute it.  Suddenly, Duncan had the power to make states–desperate for dollars–do whatever he and his advisors wanted them to do.  

As some noted at the time, Arne Duncan had declared himself the country’s de facto School Superintendent.  

He established four criteria, but for many in the states, the actual criteria weren’t the point. This was federal overreach, a usurpation of states’ rights.  And as soon as it could, a Republican Congress changed the rules, writing laws and regulations that hamstrung Duncan’s successors.  Trump’s Education Secretary, Betsy DeVos, did not have the authority to do much, although she pushed hard for programs like vouchers and charter schools that take away resources from traditional public schools.  President Biden’s Education Secretary, Miguel Cardona, has all but disappeared from the political scene, leaving education to the states.

And states are stepping up their push for power, not just in education but in virtually every way possible, including voting, health care, and a woman’s right to choose. I urge you to read Jamelle Bouie’s brilliant piece in the New York Times, which makes it clear that we are further away than ever from “E Pluribus Unum.”

But we cannot give up on national unity. 

Clearly, no single step or action would bring us together, but what if you had the opportunity to try to move us toward national unity?  Suppose you had the power to take that all-important first step toward bringing us together?  

What would you call for:  Mandatory Voting?  An inspirational and charismatic President?  Mandatory National Service for all?  A common enemy like Russia or China? A more equitable tax system? Or something else?

What do you think would have the best chance of healing our country, and why?

A few weeks ago in this space I rewrote Pastor Martin  Neimoeller’s “First they came for….” in an effort to sound the alarm about the increasingly strident hate campaign(s) being waged against transgender kids…and, by extension, all LBGTQ individuals and, eventually, everyone who dares to be even slightly different.  The pastor was warning about the rise of Naziism in Germany before World War II.  That’s what’s happening here, now.

The hate and hysteria are spreading, and the attacks are growing more vicious: The Republican-controlled legislatures of Montana and Kansas, the Governor of Oklahoma, the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and that state’s legislature…this list goes on and on.

It’s time to fight back. It’s time to organize.  I’m starting a national organization of straight people (and anyone else who is concerned) who are willing to stand up to these power-hungry men and women.  I’m calling it “FRIENDS OF GAYS, UNITED.”

The acronym is “FOG-U”@ 

(Alternatively, the group could be named “Friends of Queers, United,” or FOQ-U. Your decision.)

(My hope is that members of FOG–U will show up in significant numbers at rallies of people like DeSantis and shout out, “We are Friends of Gays, United.  Governor DeSantis, FOG-U”

Or, “Hey, Montana Republicans, FOG-U” 

Or, “Speaker McCarthy, FOG-U”

But a warning is in order.  Please pronounce FOG-U very, very carefully, or else it might sound like a socially unacceptable slur which my own sense of propriety prevents me from writing.  We would not want our intentions to be misunderstood.

Please join FOG-U…..or start your own local chapter.  T-shirts and ball caps are being designed as we speak.

Seriously, do not remain silent……

Learning the alphabet is a straightforward 2-step process: Shapes and Sounds.  One must learn to recognize the shapes of the 26 letters and what each letter sounds like.  There’s no argument about this, and certainly there has never been and never will be an “Alphabet War.” 

The same rule–Shapes and Sounds–applies to reading. Would-be readers must apply what they learned about Sounds–formally called Phonics and Phonemic Awareness–to combinations of letters–i.e., words.  They must also learn to recognize some words by their Shapes, because many English words do not follow the rules of Phonics. (One quick example: By the rules of Phonics, ‘Here’ and ‘There’ should rhyme; they do not, and readers must learn how to pronounce both.)  To become a competent, confident reader, one must rely on both Phonics and Word Recognition. 

Ergo, there’s absolutely no need, justification, or excuse for “Reading Wars” between Phonics and Word Recognition. None!  And yet American educators, policy-makers, and politicians have been waging their “Reading Crusades” for close to 200 years.  As a consequence, uncounted millions of adults have lived their lives in the darkness of functional illiteracy and semi-literacy.

Here’s something most  Reading Crusaders don’t understand: Almost without exception, every first grader wants to be able to read, because they understand that reading gives them some measure of control over their world, in the same way walking does.  And skilled teachers can teach almost all children–including the 5-20 percent who are dyslexic–to become confident readers.

Skilled teachers understand what the Reading Crusaders do not: Reading–again like walking–is not the goal. It’s the means to understanding, confidence, and control.  Children don’t “first learn to read and then read to learn,” as some pedants maintain. That’s a false dichotomy: they learn to read to learn.   And so skilled teachers use whatever strategies are called for: Phonics, Word Recognition, what one might call Reading as Liberation, and more. 

See for yourself how reading is taught:  Imagine that you’re sitting in the back of a classroom of First Graders, most of them 6-years-old, a few of them age 5. It’s early October, and the students already know their letters and the sounds they make.  First the teacher holds up what looks like a Stop Sign.  

Teacher: Children, what does this sign say?

Many hands go up, and a lot of the kids call out “Stop” and “It says Stop” and “That’s a Stop sign.”

“Maybe you recognized the sign because you’ve seen it on lots of street corners, but let’s read what this sign actually says. First, let’s take it apart, letter by letter.  The first letter, T, makes a sound.  What sound does T make?” 

The teacher then goes through the sounds the other three letters make, the children make the sounds and put them together, laughing when they realize their mistake.

Then she holds up a slightly different sign for her students to decode:   (this sign reads SPOT, but I am flummoxed by pasting graphics. Sorry)                                                                

They do, with increasing confidence because they’re enjoying the game the teacher is playing.

“OK, now let’s see what happens if we move the letters around again.” 

She holds up another sign:  (this one reads POST)

“Same four letters.  Let’s try to read it by sounding out each letter. Start with the first one.  What sound does P make?”

After they’ve decoded and pronounced POST, they are delighted when she brings out two more versions of the familiar sign:   

They take those words apart, then put the sounds together, eventually reading both words.  OPTS is the most challenging because the First Graders don’t know the word, leading to a discussion about OPTIONS, a noun, and OPT, a verb.  The teacher doesn’t move on until she’s sure everyone understands. Then she challenges her students to use those words in conversation during the day, or at  home that night. 

Finally, the real thing, which they decode with ease:

And for one more challenge, she holds up this sign,  STOP but with an E at the end. 

She tells them how it is pronounced and explains that, when the letter E follows a vowel, that vowel ‘says its own name.’  She tells them how to pronounce it, and then she writes several words on the blackboard: NICE, HOSE, and CASE.  The children sound them out. 

Then she holds up another image, a GO sign:  

“Who knows what this sign says?  Can anyone use it in a sentence?” (Many hands go up.)  “That’s good.”

After sounding out the two letters and putting the word together, the teacher asks the children, “What happens to GO if we replace the G with S or N?”

She writes SO and NO on the blackboard, next to GO, which the children figure out almost immediately.  

“But letters can be tricky things, children. What sound does ‘O’ make in STOP? Keep that in mind.”

She replaces the G with the letter T, making TO .  Some students automatically rhyme it with GO and SO, pronouncing it ‘TOE.’  Now she explains that in this new word, TO, the letter O has a different sound.  

“So we see that the letter O can make different sounds. English is tricky, but we will learn all the tricks.  Read this sentence: ‘SO I said NO, you must GO TO the STORE.’

Which word isn’t following the rules?”

They all seem to understand that TO is the exception.

“I warned you that letters were tricky!  But there are ways to figure out most letters, rules that work most of the time.  But not all the time, because English breaks a lot of its own rules.  I promise you we will have fun figuring all this out…”

The teacher is incorporating Word Recognition– often called “Look-Say” or Whole Language–techniques into her reading instruction. Because English is often non-phonetic, readers must learn to recognize quite a few words, as she is explaining to her First Graders.

Another time she writes two short sentences on the blackboard: COME HERE!  WHERE ARE THE MACHINES?

“OK, kids. On your toes now, because only one of these words follows the rules.”

She asks them to pronounce each word according to the rules they have learned. They do, pronouncing COME with a long O, WHERE with a long E, ARE with a long A, and MACHINES with a long I.  Then she pronounces them correctly, mystifying and delighting her students. 

“I told you English was tricky and sneaky, but we won’t let it beat us!”

She creates a list of other rule-breaking words to learn.These so-called ‘sight words’ include who, where, to, are, been, because, machine, and police.  The list will grow throughout the year.

She often asks her students to tell the class what words they want to be able to read.  Hands go up, and children call out,  ‘Bathroom,’ ‘Girl’s Room,’  ‘Boy’s Room,’ ‘Ice Cream,’ ‘Police,’ ‘Rocket Ship,’ and more.  By meeting them where they are and encouraging their curiosity, she’s empowering them.  

Another time she will ask her students what sentences they would like to write. “I love you, Momma” and “I miss you, Daddy. Please come home,” some call out. She writes the sentences on the board for everyone to read. 

Neither Phonics nor Word Recognition, this strategy is closer to the “Literacy as Liberation” practiced by Brazilian educator Paolo Friere.  Whatever the source, it’s a powerful motivation for young children, giving a strong sense of mastery.

When the year is nearly over, she will ask her children some questions: ‘Who are the three or four fastest runners in the class?’   The children call out five or six different names.  ‘OK, now who are the three or four best singers in the class?’ Again names are called out.  ‘And one more question. Who are the three or four tallest kids in our class?’  More names.

“I asked those questions because some of you are taller, some of you can run faster, and some of you can sing better, but that’s just how things are turning out. It’s not because you are better. You’re just different.  The same thing is true with reading. All of you are readers, good readers, but some of you can read better….because you got lucky at birth, not because you are a better person.”  

She is correct.  It turns out about 40 percent of young children absorb the basics of Phonics without difficulty and are able to decode and comprehend with ease.  But everyone–even ‘born readers–has to learn to read because reading is not a natural act. 

“You’re all readers now, and nobody can take that away from you….ever.  So please keep on reading, and writing, and thinking, and asking questions.” 

Full disclosure: That teacher isn’t one person but a mashup of marvelous First Grade teachers I encountered as an education reporter, all but one of them women.  Among the women was my own First Grade teacher, Mrs. Catherine Peterson at Hindley School in Noroton, Connecticut.  I went back and spent a day with Mrs. Peterson when I was in my late 30’s and working for NPR.   The man was Johnny Brinson, a First Grade teacher in Washington, DC.  Like all great teachers, they made reading a challenging game, and then did everything possible to see that their students ‘won’ the game.

Tragically, the Reading Crusades continue, with one faction now claiming victory under the banner of ‘The Science of Reading.’  But that’s a story for another column.