I agree with Nancy. I am so sick and tired of the "supported by
research" claim that I could scream. One of my principals sent out an
email a few weeks ago with a link and an article that showed research
about student achievement with Saxon math. ick. So I read it, and it
referred basically to test scores AND also mentioned that Saxon math
did not do well in problem-solving, which was better addressed with a
different program that was studied. I think it was three or four math
programs that were compared, and maybe it was Everyday Math that was
better at problem-solving, but please don't quote me. Anyway, the
point is that it truly is like a game of telephone. Perfect analogy,
Nancy.
Renee
On Mar 13, 2010, at 3:22 AM, [email protected] wrote:
In a message dated 3/10/2010 11:59:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
Could you give me a reference for that research?
So I'm behind on email, but don't see a response. I find often that
something that is supposedly "supported by lots of research," is
kind of like the
telephone game. Everyone has heard that there is, but no one quite can
pinpoint it. Just the fact that people say there is research makes
it so? I
agree with Maureen. I have seen a lot of evidence that often
students who read
slowly and methodically with prosidy, rereading and thinking
carefully,
are way better at comprehension than those who are trying to beat
the egg
timer.
Nancy
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
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.
