I teach a program (PAL) similar to REACH. Even though we are a title school, we can still use this model for first graders... Interestingly enough, I just came back from a training in the Voyager Program. We are using it for our district SEI/ELL Summer School. Talk about a scripted program! I have mixed feelings about it. I think for summer school it will be o.k., but I'm not sure as a Reading Specialist, that I would be able to use this type of program during the school year. Has anyone had experience using Voyager? What are your thoughts? :) Mary
----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 10:39 AM Subject: [MOSAIC] teacher expertise was off topic math conversation > > Bonita > You are the best...truly! > > What a fascinating and thoughtful question! I will reply and ask you to > consider cross-posting a version of it on the To Understand list where there are > some other souls who might be interested in discussing the topic. (I am > hoping that those of you on both lists will understand why that might be a good > thing to do.) > > Your post is of personal interest to me right now. We have had, up to this > point, a fantastic reading intervention in our district called Reach. Reach was > a reading recovery clone which pulled many, many first and second graders to > a proficient or better level. We never had the money as a district to become > truly reading recovery...we used highly trained instructional assistants to > implement the program under the direction of reading specialists. There was > continual staff development including "behind the glass" sessions where we > helped build their knowledge of how to teach reading and how reading developed. > These assistants read Marie Clay...gave running records, leveled their books > and just did a fantastic job all around. For years it was universally > acknowledged that this intervention was successful...not for every student, but > about 75% of all our kids in the program would meet and continue to meet grade > level standards. > > Well, under NCLB and the resulting current state guidelines, Reach is not a > 'researched based' program. Can you tell where this is going??? Rumor has it > that the title one schools in our area will no longer be using Reach...they > will be going instead to a scripted heavily phonics based program. Now I will > tell you that I absolutely do NOT condemn this choice...the schools really > have no choice. If they don't use a research based program, there is no chance > to appeal when schools fail to meet adequate yearly progress. I know these > scripted programs do work to build decoding skills for some kids...and I know > that the reading specialists in our district understand the need for balance > and will ensure that these kids get comprehension instruction as well. > > What saddens me is that we are handing these instructional assistants > scripts and not putting our resources into helping them understand the nature of > how reading develops and how to make good choices in instruction. It won't > matter for a few years...these ladies (mostly they are women who are willing to > work for little pay) already know a lot from the time we have invested in > building their expertise...but as they retire or move to greener pastures, we > will have moved the focus from teaching assistants to technicians. > > I am lucky...I am not in a title one school and I can keep going with > Reach...albeit without the district level training and support. But...I am feeling > the pressure to at least explore the researched based programs and train > folks in one so that I can ensure that the positive affects of using a scripted > program outweigh the great number of negatives. Using a researched based > program in addition or as a supplement to Reach may be required to keep us out of > AYP jail within a very few years. > > Bonita, a colleague of mine always says that a good, quality curriculum is a > floor...not the ceiling. We need that...but we also need even more, teachers > who understand how kids learn to read, how to respond to the different needs > of the children in front of them. Lesson study, to me, would fill the second > requirement, but not the first. Lesson study is about the process of > teaching, to me, not a way to find out what to teach. > As a beginning teacher, I would have been lost without my anthology teachers > guide. It is a floor...but by now, I don't even crack open the covers...and > there is no way I feel that I know enough to say I have the ceiling in sight! > > Hmmm... I don't think I am even beginning to answer all your questions...I > guess my first thoughts here are that we need a quality curriculum to start > with...and then highly trained teachers who know how to build from that to meet > the needs of their kids. > Jennifer > > > > > > In a message dated 5/3/2008 12:36:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > Sorry Jennifer, > > I always forget that the Mosiac list tries to keep true to reading > comprehension. When a topic is raised where I have thoughts or passion, I tend to jump > in. That said, I will now make the connection between all this math talk and > reading comprehension. > > Do teachers require materials that dictate day to day instruction in order > to teach reading comprehension (in any subject) and teach it well? Is > comprehension something in which we are so versed we do "not need" the support of a > specific text? Is comprehension so fundamentally different from other > subjects (like math or science) that we should be left to fish around and do it our > own way without articulation through the grades? I ask this honestly, > because I do not know or even have an idea of the answer. The difference, to me, > it seems, is that reading comprehension does not develop in any sort of > linear fashion. That we are all teaching "all of comprehension" at all grade > levels. Am I correct in this thinking? > > I am playing devil's advocate here. I know, Jennifer, that you are involved > in lesson study on comprehension, a very in-depth process of professional > development that is teacher-driven (not district "assigned"). Would such > teacher development be enough to assure quality comprehension instruction at all > grade levels? Could it inform us where, developmentally, certain comprehension > should and should not be taught? > > :)Bonita--trying to get back on track ;) > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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. > > > > > > > > > **************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family > favorites at AOL Food. > (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001) > _______________________________________________ > 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. > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG. > Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.5/1399 - Release Date: 4/26/2008 2:17 PM > _______________________________________________ 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.
