On Jul 8, 2007, at 10:07 AM, kimberlee hannan wrote: > I don't have all the research to back me up. I just have several > years' > experience. Experience tells me that with most kids: When a kid > understands what he/she is reading, fluency shows it. I use myself as > an > example. I see fluency as a performance.......
Frankly, I don't think we need "research" to back up everything we say and I'm tired of having my own classroom observations and experience tossed aside because some obscure "research".... especially that research which is done by the company which wants to sell its product..... says that "this" is the "best" way to do something. In the case of fluency, the problem as I see it is that for some people.... and that includes many administrators and curriculum directors overseeing assessment committees ..... fluency comes down to speed. We can talk and talk and talk on this listserv about how fluency includes "prosidy" or whatever you want to call it, but for those looking at numbers, it often comes down simply to speed. More words per minute with no mistakes = higher fluency level. I'm not buying it. As a member of a district assessment committee a few years ago, when we were deciding on what would constitute proficiency for a variety of things, I remember having to argue and argue and argue.... unfortunately to no avail.... to look at more than number of words per minute in assessing fluency. Renee (who's in kind of a mood) "You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him to find it within himself." ~ Galileo _______________________________________________ Mosaic mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org. Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive.
