Latest News Archives - Page 11 of 31 - Reading Recovery Council of North America

Dr. Sam Bommarito interviews Dr. Billy Molasso, Executive Director of RRCNA

Dr. Sam Bommarito interviews Dr. Billy Molasso, Executive Director of RRCNA

KT Crandall2023-06-24T11:39:56-05:00June 24th, 2023|General, Latest News, Reflections and Commentary|

Dr. Billy Molasso, Executive Director of RRCNA, discusses Reading Recovery and how research demonstrates that it really works: An interview conducted by Dr. Sam Bommarito

Republished with permission of Dr. Sam Bommarito, author of Dr. Sam 7, Seeking Ways to Grow Proficient, Motivated, Lifelong Readers & Writers: https://doctorsam7.blog/2023/06/24/dr-billy-molasso-executive-director-of-rrcna-discusses-rr-and-how-research-demonstrates-that-it-really-works-an-interview-conducted-by-dr-sam-bommarito/

Dr. Billy Molasso is the Director of RRCNA. In this interview, he talks about various issues dealing with Reading Recovery. He focuses on dispelling misinformation and myths about RR, which are currently being presented by the folks supporting the social media version of the Science of Reading. The facts are that Reading Recovery is research-based and has decades of research demonstrating that it works Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE). Billy knows about that firsthand since he is the parent of two Reading Recovery children.

Dr. Sam’s thoughts about this interview:

In the past few months, I’ve discussed how many researchers and others have been pushing back against the social media version of the Science of Reading LINK, LINK. Billy Molasso has been prominent among those folks. On the one hand, the positive effects of RR on students are well-documented LINK. However, when a study was published indicating that the long-term effects were negative, Billy stepped in and questioned that study’s conclusions. He pointed out that particular study had a very high attrition rate. The final conclusions are based on only 25% of the total number of students in the study. I wrote a blog around what Billy had to say on that point LINK. That blog also talked about what others were saying about the misdirections and misunderstandings being promoted by the incomplete story told by some social media pundits.

I have written about the positive effects of RR many times LINK, LINK, LINK. I was trained in RR, taught RR, and found that the training has been invaluable to me throughout my education career. The Professional Development aspect of RR is sometimes overlooked, but it is powerful. RR-trained teachers learn various methods to help children (and yes that includes the various ways to teach phonics). RR-trained teachers are a valuable asset to any district. In the interview about her book Rubies in the Rubble, Jill Speering reported that the same folks who were trying to end a RR program at her district were concurrently trying to encourage teachers from that program to stay with the district because of the extensive literacy training those teachers had.

Let’s remember that RR isn’t for every student, but for those who it fits, it carries out its main function. That is to accelerate those students to catch up with the students in their building. When that happens, and the building has a working tier-one program, the effects of RR remain for the long term. Susan Vincent reported that fact in an interview I did with her LINK.

Recovery works. Recovery-trained teachers are an asset. Recovery has helped tens of thousands of children worldwide. I urge all educators to resist the attempt by some folks to eliminate their competition by outlawing recovery. Doing so will create a monopoly. Monopolies never help consumers. I hope everyone keeps all this in mind as we create legislation around the issue of how to teach reading. Thanks for listening.

Happy Reading and Writing.

Dr. Sam Bommarito (aka, the guy in the middle taking flak from all sides)

BTW more interviews coming up, including Jan Richardson, Gravity Goldberg and, later this summer P.D. Pearson

Open Letter to the Biden Administration, USDOE, and Secretary of Education Secretary Miguel Cardona

Open Letter to the Biden Administration, USDOE, and Secretary of Education Secretary Miguel Cardona

mfarynowski2023-06-19T10:50:46-05:00June 19th, 2023|Latest News|

Originally published June 19, 2023. Republished with permission by Paul Thomas, author of the blog Radical Scholarship. https://radicalscholarship.com/2023/06/19/open-letter-to-the-biden-administration-usdoe-and-secretary-of-education-secretary-miguel-cardona/

Reporting for NPR in 2018 about A Nation at Risk, Anya Kamenetz noted:

When it appeared in April 1983, the report received widespread coverage on radio and TV. President Reagan joined the co-authors in a series of public hearings around the country.

The report’s narrative of failing schools — students being out-competed internationally and declining educational standards — persists, and has become an entrenched part of the debate over education in the U.S.

What ‘A Nation At Risk’ Got Wrong, And Right, About U.S. Schools

In 2023, writing for The Answer Sheet in The Washington Post, James Harvey explains that the report under Reagan was “gaslighting” for political purposes, and not the clarion call to address education reform that media, the public, and political leaders claimed.

In short, A Nation at Risk was a “manufactured crisis.”

Yet, education reform has become a central part of the political process for governors and presidents since the 1980s, reaching a critical peak under George W. Bush who turned the discredited “Texas Miracle” into groundbreaking and bipartisan federal legislation, No Child Left Behind (NCLB).

In fact, public education in the US has been under an intense public and political microscope for forty years of high-stakes accountability. For educators, that accountability is indistinguishable regardless of the political party in the White House.

The Obama administration in many ways continued and even doubled-down on the crisis/miracle rhetoric found under W. Bush.

At the core of education crisis/miracle rhetoric has been the use and misuse of standardized test data.

For many decades, the media and public fretted over public education based on SAT data (and then ACT data), which represents the central issue of misunderstanding test scores (the College Board warns of not ranking states by SAT averages, yet the media persists) and misusing test data (SAT/ACT tests are designed to predict college success, not evaluate the quality of public education).

With the decrease in the influence of SAT/ACT testing, however, the media, public, and political leaders have focused more on National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data.

Since 2019, there have been NAEP-inspired claims of educational crisis based on 2019 reading scores, 2022 math scores, and 2022 history/civics scores.

As one powerful example, high-profile media, The New York Times, and journalist, Nicholas Kristof, proclaim:

One of the most bearish statistics for the future of the United States is this: Two-thirds of fourth graders in the United States are not proficient in reading.

Two-Thirds of Kids Struggle to Read, and We Know How to Fix It

However, despite warnings from 2016, Tom Loveless explains:

In February, 2023 Bari Weiss produced a podcast, “Why 65% of Fourth Graders Can’t Really Read” and Nicholas Kristof, New York Times columnist, wrote “Two-Thirds of Kids Struggle to Read, and We Know How to Fix It.” Both headlines are misleading. The 65% and two-thirds figures are referring to the percentage of 4^th graders who scored below proficient on the last reading test of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), administered in 2022.

The problem is this: scoring below proficient doesn’t mean “can’t really read” or “struggling to read.” It also does not mean “functionally illiterate” or identify “non- readers” as some of the more vituperative descriptions on social media have claimed. It doesn’t even mean “below grade level in reading,” one of the milder distortions.

Literacy and NAEP Proficient

Further, scholars Reinking, Hruby and Risko (2023), in fact, assert: “[T]here is no indisputable evidence of a national crisis in reading, and even if there were a crisis, there is no evidence that the amount of phonics in classrooms is necessarily the cause or the solution.”

Two problems currently exist with the stories being told about schools and the education reform movement—the data do not support claims of “crisis” and NAEP perpetuates the “crisis” myth by design.

Touted as the “Nation’s Report Card,” NAEP developed achievement levels that were designed to hold states accountable for having high standards, and as a result, “proficiency” on NAEP is “aspirational” but not representative of “grade-level proficiency.”

The US is now mired in decades of punitive education legislation (standards and high-stakes testing as well as third grade retention and VAM-based teacher evaluation) that has not worked because the central claim of “crisis” is simply not supported by the evidence.

Especially in the wake of the devastating impact of Covid on public education, students, and teachers, the Biden Administration has the historic opportunity to change direction in US public education reform.

This open letter, then, is an urgent call to do the following:

Acknowledge and reject the false narratives of manufactured public education “crises” and media-created education “miracles.”
Declare accountability-based, punitive reform a failure—despite good intentions—and call for equity-based, supportive reform that forefronts the impact of systemic forces outside and inside our public schools.
Reform dramatically NAEP testing so that test data better supports learning and instruction instead of driving a false story of education crisis (for example, reform the use of NAEP “proficiency” to represent “age-level proficiency”).

US public education has a long and inexcusable history of political negligence in terms of supporting the most vulnerable children in our society; that includes negligence of vulnerable students in our public education system.

Our children and the country deserve robust and substantive education reform, not false stories of failure and misguided blame and punishment.

Regretfully, the last forty years have been a perpetual cycle of manufactured crisis and punitive policy.

The Biden Administration—notably a rhetorical “friend” of education embodied by Dr. Jill Biden—can and should chose a different story about our schools, our students, and our teachers.

As celebrated author James Baldwin urged: “The challenge is in the moment, the time is always now.”

About Literacy Instruction: A Letter to the New York Times

About Literacy Instruction: A Letter to the New York Times

mfarynowski2023-06-12T13:15:38-05:00June 12th, 2023|Latest News|

Originally published June 12, 2023. Republished with permission of Dr. Sam Bommarito, author of Dr. Sam 7, Seeking Ways to Grow Proficient, Motivated, Lifelong Readers & Writers: https://doctorsam7.blog/2023/06/12/about-literacy-instruction-a-letter-to-the-new-york-times-by-dr-sam-bommarito/

To whom it may concern,

I have been in education for over five decades and have taught every grade from Kindergarten to Graduate school. I currently work as an education consultant and write a weekly blog about literacy. One important thing I have learned all this time is that what works with one child doesn’t always work with another. One size fits all solutions have never faired well. Yet recent articles and podcasts by the Times seem to support the notion that the social media version of Science of Reading has found such a solution and that folks like Lucy Calkins have done more harm than good. That makes for great public relations, especially for companies selling the alleged silver bullets. However, it is based on very bad science. It is bad science because it is incomplete science. It is bad science because it fails to consider all the research.

First, many top researchers have challenged the notion that it’s all settled science and that a silver bullet is ready for use. These researchers include P.D. Pearson, George G. Hruby, Rachel Gabriel, P.L. Thomas and Amanda Goodwin. Goodwin is the current co-editor of the prestigious Reading Research Quarterly. In a recent interview, she said

“But their RRQ article, Donna Scanlon, and Kimberly Anderson review 25 years of rigorous experimental studies in which kids were given systematic phonics instruction and also taught to use context cues to help them when they struggle to sound out words. And they found that kids tend to become more successful readers when they get both kinds of instruction, compared to those who get phonics alone. In short, they found that more resources are better. It’s self-defeating to insist on an either-or choice between phonics and context cueing, as though these practices were at war with each other. It’s much more helpful to treat them as complementary.”

By the way, one of the cornerstones of the social media version of SOR is to ban the use of context clues. That is part of their proposed ban on MSV. Please note that Goodman is not saying to abandon systematic phonics. She is saying that kids need both systematic phonics and the problem-solving approach Scanlon and Anderson use.

Second is SOR’s notion that everything that has come before in literacy instruction has failed to work and must be replaced. Balanced literacy doesn’t work. Folks like Lucy Calkins are vilified. Some SOR advocates claim she and others like her are hurting kids. But look at all the research before buying into that. Tim Pressley just published the 5^th edition of the book explaining and defending balanced literacy. That book contains much research-based evidence showing that Balanced Literacy can work and that it includes systematic phonics. Lucy has been incorrectly identified as the inventor of Balanced Literacy. The claim is made that Balanced Literacy teachers don’t teach phonics. It was actually the late Michael Pressley who invented the term Balanced Literacy. His son, Tim Pressley, just published the 5^th edition of the book about Balanced Literacy. There is plenty of evidence in that book that claims of failure are simply not true. The SOR folks are taking on a strawman version of Balanced Literacy rather than trying to deal with the real thing. In addition, regarding successful teaching using workshop, the ink isn’t dry on research showing that workshop works before the attacks on the data start. The attacks discount and discredit studies using criteria for success that are much more stringent than those being used to judge the research supporting their stance.

Third, the research supporting their stance is equivocal. LTRS training is not even close to a cure-all, yet the research demonstrating that is ignored. For years, England has used synthetic phonics- the SOR fleet’s flagship-. Yet a recent landmark study found it is not working. P.D. Pearson, one of the top literacy researchers of all time, has said all the SOR folks have really demonstrated is the ability to improve performance on word list tests. When it comes to improving comprehension, they have simply been unable to demonstrate that. Comprehension is the Achilles heel of the social media SOR movement.

Fourth- the claims of success made by these SOR advocatesin places like Florida and Mississippi have also been challenged. In a recent blog post-Diane, Ravitch explained how the NAEP scores are arbitrarily manipulated to uphold failure claims. Both she and P.L. Thomas have carried out work that shows the “miracle gains” in 3^rd-grade reading scores disappear in later grades. These gains are partly due to the retention of 3^rd graders, which temporarily boosts scores by removing them from the testing pool and giving them a second chance to take the test. Doing so actually hurts those students. The research shows they are more likely to drop out of high school. It also shows that kids who are not retained do just as well as the ones who are. Add to that the facts that it costs extra money to keep those kids in the system for one more year and that children of color are more likely to be retained. Given problems with the practice of using retention to raise scores, one must conclude it is a practice that should be ended. One more thing- Ravitch also points out that other improvements made in Mississippi, e.g., more funding, and smaller class sizes, may have played a significant role in raising the scores. Current reporting is silent on that point, giving credit only to using SOR.

In conclusion, why are we letting public relations spin doctors shape literacy policy while ignoring what major researchers have to say? For several years now, I have championed taking a centrist position. That means using the best of ALL sides. My position is rooted in P.D. Pearson’s idea of the “Radical Middle,” a position which he continues to develop. This is not a call to keep the old ways. It is, instead, a call to do something we’ve never done in the history of reading. Instead of listening to the folks on the extremes (phonics vs. no phonics), let’s adopt a middle-ground approach. Let’s use ALL the research, not just the research that sells particular phonics programs. Perhaps we can learn a lesson from recent events where taking a centrist position avoided a national calamity in the financial world. I’m calling on the Times and other media to report the whole story, not just the story the social media spin doctors want told. Let’s hear from folks like Pearson, Ravitch, Gabriel, P.L. Thomas, and others. Let’s take what they have to say more seriously. Perhaps then we can finally use ideas from all sides to stop pendulum swings in literacy discussions. Perhaps we can learn from one another. Dare to Dream.

Dr. Sam Bommarito

Reading Teacher

National Reading Consultant

The guy in the middle taking flak from all sides.

Dr. Sam Bommarito began his teaching career in 1970. During his career, he has taught every grade K-graduate school. His educational roles have included being a Title I reading teacher, Title I staff developer, Reading Recovery Teacher, and University professor. He is currently a national reading consultant and has presented at numerous local, state, and national reading conventions. Dr. Sam tweets about educational issues daily (@doctorsam7) and blogs weekly about reading (DoctorSam7.blog).

Having the Courage to Put Our Beliefs into Glorious Action

Having the Courage to Put Our Beliefs into Glorious Action

mfarynowski2023-06-09T08:01:11-05:00June 8th, 2023|Latest News|

By Mary Howard

A few days ago, I saw something that stayed in my head (which usually means I’ll eventually be compelled to put it in writing). I was leaving Ala Wai Harbor when a child about 8 years old ran frantically past me, almost knocking me down. She was holding a large fish in her hands as she ran. She seemed to be in a panic and yet she was undeterred by anything standing in her way. As I watched the scene unfold, she jumped into the shallow end of the dock where the tide was very low. She held lovingly onto that fish while moving toward the water. She bent over and gently put the fish in the water and then let it go. The fish didn’t move so she reached into the water and gently pushed it forward again. The fish still didn’t move. Her father said softly from the side of the dock, “The fish is dead honey. Just let it go”. She looked up and screamed, “He’s not dead. He’ll be okay.” The father looked on helplessly as this scene repeated itself like a slow-motion movie. No matter what the father said, she refused to listen.

All of a sudden, that fish surprised us all by moving ever so slightly as long as she gently nudged it forward. After a few times, it began swimming away slowly as we all looked on in utter shock. To be quite honest, he didn’t look great but then we didn’t see what happened after he was out of view. I choose to believe that he recovered. All I know is that everyone watching felt like we had just witnessed something beautiful. This young child believed that it would be okay and she was not going to give up on that fish no matter what anyone said.

Of course, everything I see and do comes back to education and this post is no different. The profession that we love feels as if it’s been dying a slow death for two years and counting. We have all watched in horror as common sense and professionalism are on its last breath; replaced by mandates driven by a political agenda and personal desire based on media-fueled opinion. Legitimate research seems to be dubbed the enemy as one-size-fits-all perspectives grounded in the make-believe world of ‘simple and settled’ are celebrated. We watch as scripted programs replace knowledge-driven professional decision-making. Add to that the increasing Twitter attacks on anyone who dares to speak up and you have the perfect storm.

Just like that fish, the literacy world we treasure is dying a slow death. We can either stand on the sidelines shaking our heads and talking about the good old days as we throw our hands in the air because it’s already dead or we can spring into glorious action. I believe that if we don’t take steps now and speak up, the beliefs we hold dear will not be as lucky as that fish and will die that slow death after all as we stand idly by.

I think about that little girl often. She could have passively willed the fish to swim off or shouted to the heavens to let it live, but in the end, it was her beliefs and commitment that spurred her into action – and THAT made all the difference. She loved that fish and she was willing to do whatever it took to bring it back to life even if everyone around her was telling her it was useless to even try. Who knows if the fish went on to live a long life since he wasn’t looking great as he swam out of view. But then again, who knows if he pulled it all together and made his way into the ocean sunset for a long life.

We are at a crossroads, my friends. The world of literacy is not doing well and it needs us to give it a gentle nudge back to life. We can sit back and shake our heads, lamenting how sad it is and how much we wish for the good old days or we can jump into action and stand up to what is happening around us. Just like that little girl, I believe we will be able to change the trajectory of what we see happening. Will it be easy? No way. Will we suddenly magically recover? Not a chance. But it’s a start that WILL take all of us who are willing to speak up. And I’m not talking about fighting with people on social media hellbent on demeaning anyone who has the audacity to disagree with them (I’m so over that). I’m talking about sharing our beliefs in any and every way we can, even if it’s done anonymously by writing to politicians. Everything counts and you can choose what it will be for you! It seems to me that we need to be just as intentional in sharing our beliefs as those who are perpetuating the opinion of a reporter who is a self-designated literacy expert and the echo chamber she has set in motion by those who just blindly follow.

Do we have the courage to put OUR beliefs into glorious action? I sure hope so since that crossroad looms large in our view…

Call me crazy, but I still believe in miracles!

Note: Put your energy where it counts; not on responding to personal attacks but sharing beliefs you hold dear in meaningful and purposeful ways. Pick your battles friends and don’t get sucked down a rabbit hole because right now, it’s at every turn!

Dr. Mary Howard is known throughout North America as a strong voice in literacy, presenting seminars as an independent consultant and for the Bureau of Education and Research (www.ber.org) in all fifty states and across Canada. An educator for more than 51 years (and still actively working in education), she combines years of classroom experience as an elementary grade 1-6 special educator, grade K-12 reading tutor, reading specialist, and Reading Recovery teacher with experiences as a reading consultant, university reading instructor, professional storyteller, author, and lecturer.

LitCon: Now Accepting Session Proposals

LitCon: Now Accepting Session Proposals

mfarynowski2023-05-30T07:57:23-05:00May 30th, 2023|Latest News|

It’s your time to take the spotlight! LitCon is accepting proposals for LitCon ’24, January 27 – 30. Submissions are due June 29, so mark your calendars!

LitCon is North America’s largest K-8 literacy conference for the broader K-8 literacy community. There are seven strands, or topical themes of presentations, featured at LitCon: Classroom Literacy (grades K-2, 3-5, and 6-8), Children’s Literature, Leadership in Literacy, Literacy Coaching, and Reading Recovery.

After proposals are submitted, a robust review process begins. Committees of teacher leaders, trainers, and educators from all levels of classroom instruction, including those from outside the United States, review all proposals. Acceptance notifications are sent out on August 3, and the LitCon countdown is on!

Are you interested and want to learn more? Check out more information on the LitCon website, including the submission guidelines. Whether you’re a seasoned presenter or a first-time speaker, we invite all literacy experts to share their innovative ideas at LitCon.

Exciting changes are happening this year at LitCon, such as modifying the schedule to lengthen concurrent presentations. This year, we are also encouraging more program submissions that cater to our middle-grade audience. Keep an eye out for some exciting speaker announcements in the upcoming weeks.

Whether you’re interested in sharing your knowledge on equity in education, strategies for struggling readers, or another literacy topic, we want to hear from you. “The program committee is off to a great start, working on a fantastic slate of keynote and featured speakers for January. We’re eagerly anticipating the innovative programs that will be proposed this year for LitCon 2024,” shares Director of Professional Learning Lori Sobota. We can’t wait to read your session proposal!

Previous 101112 Next

Search Reading Recovery