help

Everything You Know is Wrong: Reading Edition

2023-08-24T08:38:03-05:00August 24th, 2023|Latest News|

Originally published August 23, 2023. Republished with permission by Paul Thomas, author of the blog Radical Scholarship. https://radicalscholarship.com/2023/08/23/everything-you-know-is-wrong-reading-edition/

As a teenager in the 1970s, I was turned on to The Firesign Theater, and in those days, it was listening to their extended faux radio skits on vinyl (or as we said then, “albums”). One of their album titles lingers in my mind often: Everything You Know Is Wrong.

In fact, thinking about that title inspired me to post a couple polls on social media:

The first set of questions speaks to how we are often trapped in presentism, especially in the stories told by the media and messages perpetuated by politicians.

As I document in my reading policy brief and my book on reading wars, there has not been a single moment in the history of the US since at least the 1940s that we have not in the media and by politicians lamented low reading proficiency in students; as well, no standardized measurement of reading proficiency has ever been substantially different than now.

As with all measurements of student learning, reading proficiency has never been good enough and reading test scores have always correlated strongly with poverty, race, and gender

Therefore, crisis rhetoric around reading is another manufactured crisis that is dismantled once we step back for historical perspective.

The second poll exposes how powerful media misinformation is, and how common it is for a claim to get into the public rhetoric without every being interrogated.

The correct answer is “unknown,” although 30-35% not at grade level proficiency can be viewed as a credible estimate.

60-70% is definitely wrong, but represents the power of media messaging (based on not understanding NAEP). In 2018, Emily Hanford established this false claim: “More than 60 percent of American fourth-graders are not proficient readers, according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, and it’s been that way since testing began in the 1990s.”

Then in 2023, Nicholas Kristof jumped into the long line of journalists who simply repeat this misinformation without ever checking the facts: “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.”

We in the US love criticism of schools, students, and teachers, and making a negative claim about any of those will likely go unchecked.

Notice anything familiar about Susan O’Hanian’s experience at the Educator Writers Association (EWA) conference in 2003?:

Kati Haycock, though, was the one who really came up to the table for No Child Left Behind, reiterating these points:

  • Colleges of education are still teaching reading the way we thought it should be taught ten years ago.
  • There’s a “scientific” way to teach reading and teachers should be trained to do it.

The Press: All the News about Public Schools They Feel Like Printing

The rhetoric and claims of those who want and need an education crisis are consistent, reaching back, again, to the 1940s, but also as recent as just 20 years ago when NCLB legislated “scientifically based” instruction and codified the National Reading Panel (NRP).

The media has taken a term, “proficiency,” and carelessly misinformed the public (because most journalists have little or no background in education, testing, statistics, etc.).

NAEP uses “proficiency” for achievement well above grade level, as is explained at the NAEP website (see also for a full explanation Loveless, 2023Loveless, 2016):

NAEP student achievement levels are performance standards that describe what students should know and be able to do. Results are reported as percentages of students performing at or above three NAEP achievement levels (NAEP Basic, NAEP Proficient, and NAEP Advanced). Students performing at or above the NAEP Proficient level on NAEP assessments demonstrate solid academic performance and competency over challenging subject matter. It should be noted that the NAEP Proficient achievement level does not represent grade level proficiency as determined by other assessment standards (e.g., state or district assessments). See short descriptions of NAEP achievement levels for each assessment subject.

Scale Scores and NAEP Achievement Levels

NAEP “basic” is closer to what states have established as “grade level proficiency”; however, to further complicate the matter, the US has no standard definition for “grade level proficient,” and most people have never confronted that we should actually be using “age level proficiency.”

Thus, 60-70% is, in fact, absolutely not how many students are not reading at grade level. If we trust NAEP basic, it may be fair to say that about 30% or so are not at grade level.

But the most accurate claim we can make is that we have no real idea because we have failed to create the structures needed to know.

Why?

To be blunt, media and politicians benefit from constant education crisis, and if we actually implemented effective education reform, the profit of perpetual reform would disappear.

More historical perspective: None of the reforms have worked over the past 40 years of high-stakes accountability.

None.

The manufactured crises were all lies, and the solutions had little to do with education.

Reading crisis?

Nope.

Once again, the crisis rhetoric is a lie and the reforms benefit almost anyone except students and teachers.

Thanks to media and political misinformation, everything you know is wrong.


Paul (P. L.) Thomas, Professor of Education (Furman University, Greenville SC), taught high school English before moving to teacher education. He is author of How to End the Reading War and Serve the Literacy Needs of All Students.


RRCNA Membership Spotlight: Leslee Valencia

2023-08-22T11:11:13-05:00August 22nd, 2023|Latest News|

Learn about your colleagues from across the country who do whatever it takes as part of the Reading Recovery Community!


What is your favorite thing about Reading Recovery?

If I had to pick one thing that I enjoy most about Reading Recovery, it would be growth. Growth for students in addition to growth for me as a learner. Through planned lessons, followed by analysis and reflection of lessons, we begin to see changes in reading and writing. My students end their lesson series differently but all on a more solid foundation which aids them in becoming more capable readers and writers.

My own professional growth has truly been changed for the better because of the behind the glass sessions both as a participant and observer. I am continuously attempting to integrate theory, and learning by doing as well as by watching the teaching moves of others. The network of support is also amazing both with my immediate colleagues and the Reading Recovery network as a whole. I can watch MaryAnn McBride or Pam Grayson model or discuss a topic and then after reflection see how and when I can use it during my own teaching.


Share a favorite Reading Recovery memory.

A few years ago we invited students who had participated in Reading Recovery to attend a school board meeting to showcase program highlights. Students had an opportunity to be recognized for their participation in the program. They also had the opportunity to read to a board member. Students and parents/guardians felt so proud that night! I was amazing, one parent in particular spoke before the board about attending a Behind the Glass in which her child was doing a lesson with her Reading Recovery Teacher. The mom commented to the board about the level of commitment of the Reading Recovery team as well as the expertise that the individuals have and share with others (the teacher who is behind the glass as well as others watching/learning from the lesson).


What is your favorite book?

Choice Words by Peter Johnston


What do you like to do for fun?

Now that the weather is finally cooling off in Southern Arizona I like to go hiking with my family. It is amazing to wake up early and see a beautiful Arizona sunrise. For me, it is a great way to start my day.

Data Dives with IDEC: Delving Deeper into Student Growth

2023-08-15T10:29:52-05:00August 15th, 2023|Latest News|

By Dr. Kate Nelson and Dr. Susie Mauck

In our last post, we explored student growth with Observation Survey (OS) Total Scores for students with an outcome status of Accelerated Progress and Progressed. In this post, we’ll dig deeper into student growth by examining the change in OS Total Scores over time and their growth on two of the OS tasks in 2021–22.

When examining data, we want to both zoom out and zoom in. Zooming out, Figure 1 shows the change in average growth in OS Total Scores for students in the two years prior to the pandemic and the two years after the start of the pandemic. Overall, scores for children with an outcome status of Accelerated Progress remained steady, achieving year-end scores of about 550, on average, despite starting the school year with lower average scores since the pandemic. In 2020–21 and 2021–22, children with a status of Accelerated Progress started the year with average OS Total Scores that were 40 points lower than those of typical first graders but finished the year with higher average OS total scores. Children with an outcome status of Progressed made similar growth, averaging just under 13 months growth for the two years combined. On average, they began the year with OS Total Scores that were 65 points lower than the typical first grader and finished the year just 17 points lower than the typical first grader. Since the pandemic, children with an outcome status of Recommended started the year with OS Total Scores that were 89 points lower on average than the typical first grader. Their average growth rate was just over 10 months, and they ended the year with average scores that were 72 points lower than the typical first grader.

Figure 1

Next, we’ll zoom in, narrowing our focus to the Hearing Sounds in Words task and the Text Reading Level task on the Observation Survey for 2021–22. In Figure 2, we see the average months growth in Text Reading Level scores for students with outcome statuses of Accelerated Progress, Progressed, and Recommended compared to the typical first grader. Overall, all Reading Recovery children began the year at similar text levels, but children with an outcome status of Accelerated Progress made the strongest gains. Children with an outcome status of Accelerated Progress averaged 12.8 months growth. Their average text reading level in the fall was 1.3 and they ended the year just below level 20. Compared to typical first graders, on average, these students started the year almost four text reading levels lower and ended the year with text reading levels that were almost two levels higher. Children with an outcome status of Progressed averaged 8.5 months growth, starting the year with an average below level one (i.e., 0.8,) and ending the year with an average text reading level just above 12 (i.e., 12.2). Children with an outcome status of Recommended started the year with an average text level of 0.5 and ended the year at level 5.9, averaging 4.1 months growth.

Figure 2

Figure 3

In Figure 3, we examine the average growth on the Hearing and Recording Sounds and Words task for children with an outcome status of Accelerated Progress, Progressed, and Recommended, compared to the typical first grader.  Overall, children with an outcome status of Recommended had the most growth, averaging 20.2 months, followed closely by children with an outcome status of Progressed, averaging 19.7 months growth. Children with an outcome status of Accelerated Progress averaged 16.0 months growth, ending the year with an average score of 36.0 (out of 37).  Meanwhile, children with an outcome status of Progressed ended the year with an average score of 34.4, almost reaching the average of the typical first grader, and children with an outcome status of Recommended made almost two years’ growth, ending the year with an average score of 29.5.  The typical first grader started the year with a score of 25.0 and ended with a score of 34.5.  This indicates that all three groups of Reading Recovery students made great progress, especially compared to the typical first grader.

Children in Reading Recovery made significant growth that resulted from their reading intervention. Looking at Figure 1, we see that growth for children with outcome statuses of Accelerated Progress and Progressed averaged 13 months or more, and children with Accelerated Progress maintained a year-end OS Total Score of about 550. Drilling down on two of the OS tasks, we see that children with an outcome status of Accelerated Progress made great progress in the Text Reading Level task, beginning the year below the typical first grader yet surpassing them by the end of the year, on average. For the Hearing and Recording Sounds and Words task, Reading Recovery children in all three categories made significantly more growth than the typical first grader, with Recommended and Progressed students averaging approximately 20 months growth. This task requires an important subset of literacy skills pertaining to letter-sound associations while the Text Reading Level task requires children to orchestrate all their literacy skills simultaneously to process text. This could explain why stronger growth is seen across all three groups in the Hearing and Recording Sounds and Words task while stronger growth is seen in just the Accelerated Progress group for the Text Reading Level task. Across all three sets of data, we see that children in Reading Recovery made significant growth in their literacy skills.


Kate Nelson is the IDEC International Data Evaluation Center Manager at The Ohio State University. She has a background in literacy, research, and teaching, and earned her Ph.D. in literacy education from The Ohio State University. At OSU, she received training in Reading Recovery and supervised children with reading difficulties in the university reading clinic. She worked with Dr. Lea McGee and colleagues to investigate first graders’ strategic use of information over time, resulting in a Reading Research Quarterly publication, as well as the International Literacy Association’s Dina Feitelson Research Award. She has experience in data analysis and research, as well as working with teachers in professional development and students in K-12 and higher education.


Susie Mauck was a public elementary school teacher before completing her doctorate at OSU in the College of Education and Human Ecology (EHE), Quantitative Research, Evaluation, and Measurement program. She specializes in quantitative methodology and has been supporting the work of the faculty and students in EHE since 2015.


Book Lovers Day: LitCon Keynote Jason Reynolds

2023-08-09T11:19:15-05:00August 9th, 2023|Latest News|

Celebrate National Book Lovers Day by watching this interview with LitCon 2024 Keynote Speaker Jason Reynolds, where he joins The View to discuss banned books and how to pass on a loving of reading to children.

Jason Reynolds is a #1 New York Times bestselling author of many award-winning books, including Look Both Ways: A Tale Told in Ten Blocks, All American Boys (with Brendan Kiely), Long Way Down, Stamped: Racism, Antiracism, and You (with Ibram X. Kendi), Stuntboy, in the Meantime (illustrated by Raúl the Third), and Ain’t Burned All the Bright (with artwork by Jason Griffin). The recipient of a Newbery Honor, a Printz Honor, an NAACP Image Award, and multiple Coretta Scott King honors, Reynolds is also the 2020-2022 National Ambassador for Young People’s Literature. He has appeared on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, The Daily Show with Trevor Noah, Late Night with Seth Meyers, CBS Sunday Morning, Good Morning America, and various media outlets. He is on faculty at Lesley University for the Writing for Young People MFA Program and lives in Washington, DC.

Rise to the Challenge: A Message from RRCNA President

2023-08-01T12:27:53-05:00August 1st, 2023|Latest News|

By RRCNA President Debra Rich

Greetings Reading Recovery Community,

What a wonderful time to be a Reading Recovery, Literacy Lessons, Descubriendo la Lectura (DLL), or L’intervention préventive en lecture-écriture (IPLE) Teacher, Teacher Leader, Trainer, Site Coordinator, and advocate for students learning to read and write! I’m sure you agree with me that we have the best job in the world. How rewarding it is to empower students to take charge of their learning and send them on the road to success. Many say our work is life-changing and I truly believe it is. Over 2.4 million children have benefited from caring, skilled Reading Recovery teachers!

Yet as a community, we face challenges. This is the fourth cycle of “Reading Wars” during my educational career. What was once considered ideological differences debated among academics has now spread to mainstream media due to politics, corporate greed, and a need to trend on social media. Bullying behavior is running rampant. But remember that bullying is often a front for insecurity when the programs you’re hawking are narrow in focus, aren’t backed by research or data, and simply don’t work with students. All you have left is to attack, deflect, and project misinformation. It’s logical that Reading Recovery comes under the bully’s attack because it is the intervention with the greatest success, one that has stood the test of time year after year after year.

I will not be deterred by this distraction. I am reminded of the word for “crisis” in Japanese 危機 (Kiki), which is written with symbols representing “danger” and “opportunity.” We have a choice. We can become victims of external pressures, or we can rise to the challenge this opportunity provides us.

Reading Recovery has a strong theoretical base.
https://readingrecovery.org/what-is-reading-recovery/early-literacy-processing-theory/

Reading Recovery has the research.
https://readingrecovery.org/scientific-research-base/

Reading Recovery has the data.
https://readingrecovery.org/what-is-reading-recovery/idec-national-summary-reports/

Reading Recovery (LL, DLL, and IPLE) works with students.
https://readingrecovery.org/legislative-resources/community-stakeholders/voices-from-the-field/

What can we do?

Bring your A+ game to every lesson. Recognize and build on each child’s unique strengths. Execute astute teaching moves based on close observations of each child’s literacy behaviors. Reflect daily on teaching and seek support from colleagues as necessary. YOU make a difference because YOU do whatever it takes!

Be an advocate. Share your story at the local, state, and federal levels.
https://readingrecovery.org/act-now/
https://readingrecovery.org/resources/responding-to-critics/
https://readingrecovery.org/legislative-resources/

Be a learner. Engage in your own professional development through the wide reading of professional texts, journals, and resources.
https://readingrecovery.org/resources/journals/ Members only
https://readingrecovery.org/resources/learning-center/ Members only
https://community.readingrecovery.org/viewdocument/listening-library?CommunityKey=77c9d978-5cc7-43d9-b2b3-6c7130aeaee1&tab=librarydocuments
https://readingrecovery.org/resources/research-article-database/
https://readingrecovery.org/resources/effective-literacy-practices-video-library/
https://readingrecovery.org/resources/professional-learning-toolkits/

Engage in professional conversations with the wider literacy community.
https://literacyconference.org/
https://community.readingrecovery.org/home

Support your organization. The Reading Recovery Council of North America is only as strong as the community we support. Be a member!
https://readingrecovery.org/join/

I hope you join me in seizing this opportunity!

Wishing you a wonderful year ahead. Make it the best one yet!

Deb Rich, Ed.D.

Trainer, Saint Mary’s College of California

President, Reading Recovery Council of North America


Debra Rich is a Reading Recovery Trainer, Comprehensive Literacy Model Trainer, Comprehensive Intervention Model Trainer, and Assistant Director of the Comprehensive Literacy Center at Saint Mary’s College of California. She currently serves as the President of the Reading Recovery Council of North America, is a member of the Reading Recovery Executive Council, and is on the leadership committee for LitCon. Deb is a member of the Iowa Association of Area Education Agencies (IAAEA) Executive Board of Directors and is President of the Central Rivers (Iowa) Area Education Agency Board of Directors which provides educational services to 53 public and 18 non-public school districts in north-central Iowa. Deb has served as a building principal and held central office roles in multiple districts as a K-6 language arts coordinator and a K-12 curriculum director. She has been a regional K-12 literacy consultant, Reading Recovery, and classroom teacher. Deb is committed to equity and inclusion and actively advocates for access to literacy as a fundamental right for all children.