letter about Reading First corruption

[Peter Farruggio <pfarr@cal.berkeley.edu>]

Below is a letter submitted to her local paper by 
Carole Edelsky, Prof of Language & Literacy at 
Arizona St Univ, and a renowned expert on 
literacy pedagogy for language minority 
children.  One wonders why the mainstream press 
has been so slow to pick up on this story.  They 
usually love to report on scandals and 
corruption, and this Reading First conflict of 
interest is surely that: involving billions of 
tax dollars, and incalculable harm done to so 
many children with bogus "reading" 
programs.  Yet, despite the magnitude of the 
problem, RF is allowed to continue operating 
because the press is not doing its job of honest 
reporting and pressuring the new Congress to do 
something .  Could it be a conflict of interest 
between the owners of the press and the textbook publishers?

Too bad the OIG investigation focused on the 
corruption and not the phony nature of RF's 
"scientifically based" research, which is based 
on sounding out words on a list and not reading 
for comprehension.  (But the report does detail 
how federal guidelines were violated in the 
selection of the Natl Rdg Panel, which started 
the whole process of biased review of the research)

Here are 3 links to the story, and the original OIG report.

Pete Farruggio

http://www.thompson.com/libraries/titleionline/news_desk/tio060922.html

http://www.districtadministration.com/pulse/commentpost.aspx?news=no&postid=17185

http://www.susanohanian.org/show_research.html?id=94

http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oig/aireports/i13f0017.pdf

> > From: Carole <edelsky@earthlink.net>
> > Date: November 23, 2006 11:18:39 PM MST
> > To: opinions@arizonarepublic.com
> > Subject: letter to editor
> >
> > please consider publishing this letter.
> > thanks.
> > carole edelsky
> >
> >
> > ************
> 11/23/06
>
> To the Editorial Staff of the Arizona Republic:
>
> It has been over a month since the Office of the Inspector General
> report came out showing mismanagement and outright fraud in Reading
> First.  Despite the enormous effect of Reading First (and associated
> NCLB programs) on students, teachers and administrators throughout
> Arizona, the Arizona Republic has devoted very little space to
> reporting on the OIG exposé, to encouraging conversations about this
> report in its opinion pages, or to documenting the impact of Reading
> First on classrooms in Arizona.
>
> The OIG report documented conflicts of interest, no-bid contracting,
> stacking of panels and witnesses, misrepresentations, and pressures on
> states to use questionable materials in order to receive Reading First
> funds.  Arizona?s Reading First proposal (Arizona Reads) is one of
> those suffering from just these problems; indeed, it was mentioned in
> the OIG report.  Given such systematic problems, a moratorium should be
> placed on Arizona Reads, in particular on its requirements for
> instruction via scripted programs and assessment via DIBELS.  Moreover,
> Arizona should demand that, in light of the OIG report, the content of
> its proposal be revised to avoid what directly contradicts Reading
> First legislation.  The public needs to become knowledgeable about the
> kinds of unethical?and even illegal?activities forced on schools by
> Reading First and other programs associated with NCLB.  The Arizona
> Republic is not meeting its obligation to sufficiently inform the
> public in this regard.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Carole Edelsky
> Phoenix, AZ