Re: Reading First

[jimjceleb@aol.com]

Nancy is right on target that money went to line the pockets of the in crowd. There are many scripted programs and nonscripted programs that were promoted as necessary to get a Reading First Grant. I know that Dibels was a requirement after three applications were rejected in Ct before acceptance was gained with Dibels inserted.
?
However, we need to take care that we do not throw out all programs. We need to carefully define what is meant by scripted. In a loose sense all basals can be considered scripted. It is more how the program was adapted, if any adaptations were allowed, to fit the student population sitting in front of the teacher that defines script.
?
In my former district ( I resigned in February) we had no commercial program, but we were still scripted because our lesson plans were all sent to us from the central office. We were not allowed to vary from the design. For example, I had a cart with 15 working laptops in my room which I was not allowed to use because not everyone had technology available in every school in the district. SFA was used in Hartford for too many years. There were parts that were excellent, but it was abused as almost every program is eventually. In Hartford each teacher reported to their reading person what page they were on that day. The reading person then had to call central office to be sure that every fifth or whatever?grade was on the same page for that day. Writeups abounded for those who were not where they were supposed to be. Abuse of basals is well documented in numerous places which is one of the things that gave them a bad name. Scripted programs can succeed, but only if the teacher is allowed to work with their professional expertise to adapt them to the needs of their students.
When is the government going to realize that the teacher is the key in education. All success is built upon the successful relationships that are constructed between the teacher and the learner.

Jim Johnston

-----Original Message-----
From: Nancy Patterson <patterna@gvsu.edu>
To: middle-lit@interversity.org
Sent: Sat, 10 May 2008 6:39 pm
Subject: [middle-lit] Reading First



I know that as middle school teachers you may not directly feel the impact of 
Reading First, but you certainly are seeing students who have been the victims 
of RF.  In 2002 NCTE came out with a position paper that questioned the merits 
of RF saying that it relied too heavily on scripted commercial programs and 
privileged certain commercial programs owned by corporations that had ties to 
the Bush administration.  Well, it didn't go quite that far, but if you read the 
position paper you can certainly see the concerns.

About a year ago the GAO announced that there were some serious flaws in RF and 
that it indeed privilege friends of Bush who own systematic phonics or skills 
based programs like Open Court and Language! (owned by McGraw Hill).  It also 
talked about  DIBELS.  Today I got word that Ted Kennedy has published the 
following report (summarized below).  The whole thing can be found at 
http://kennedy.senate.gov/newsroom/press_release.cfm?id=3CC1E674-CB51-42C2-A4F9-90395A0DC291 


Read a summary below.  Billions of dollars have gone into Reading First.  A 
recent report found that RF has made little to no difference in reading 
abilities amongst poor children.  But the publishers and the Reading First 
directors have made a mint.  

It is all so very sad, and it has delayed the progress of literacy education for 
years.  I once thought NCLB and RF would go away when Bush left office.  But we 
are now finding that many states have implemented policies, standards, 
benchmarks, grade level expectations, whatever, that will keep NCLB around in 
one form or another for years to come.  

Nancy
--------------------------------------------------------------
KENNEDY RELEASES REPORT ON READING FIRST INVESTIGATION
17 page report details abuses in program
May 9, 2007

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

WASHINGTON, D.C.-Today, Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Chairman of the United States 
Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, released a detailed 
report regarding the conflicts of interest found within the Reading First 
program. Kennedy has an ongoing investigation into the Reading First program.

Senator Kennedy said, "The findings in this report underscore the need for the 
Department of Education to ensure that contractors, subcontractors, and 
consultants are free from conflicts of interest. The goal of the Reading First 
program is to help students learn to read and gain the skills they need for 
success and a lifetime of learning. Those implementing this program and other 
federal education programs must put the interests of students and schools before 
profits and politics."

The report shows that four of the five Reading First Regional Technical 
Assistant directors had significant financial ties to education publishers while 
they held Reading First positions that required them advise and provide 
technical assistance to States and school districts about which reading programs 
to chose and how to implement them. The four individuals profiled in this report 
had substantial conflicts of interest that this report reveals may have 
improperly influenced their actions while they were under subcontract with the 
Department of Education.

Attached is the Report; two PDFs, (1) Exhibits 1-22 and (2) Exhibits 23-42, 
available upon request.


Nancy Patterson, PhD
Literacy Studies Program Chair
College of Education
Grand Valley State University 
920 Eberhard Center
301 W. Fulton
Grand Rapids, Michigan 49504
616-331-6226
patterna@gvsu.edu 
http://faculty.gvsu.edu/patterna 


Nancy Patterson, PhD
Literacy Studies Program Chair
College of Education
Grand Valley State University 
920 Eberhard Center
301 W. Fulton
Grand Rapids, Michigan 49504
616-331-6226
patterna@gvsu.edu
http://faculty.gvsu.edu/patterna

---------------------------------------------------
Archives->
http://interversity.org/lists/middle-lit/archives.html