Sold a Story podcast

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My older daughter was "taught to read" using this shit approach and is STILL behind and not reading well. F_ her kindergarten teacher.

You could take part of the blame as well. It’s not all on teachers.

Why? This was my first child and I trusted the school to teach my child how to read, and I trusted them when I said "she can't read these specific beginner books, is that a problem?" and they said "nope, she's right where she should be." How was I to know any better? I think he moral of the story here is you can't trust educators, which is so, so sad.

Spot on, that's why parents have to be the primary source of teaching for their children until they can fly solo (hopefully by middle school). Listen to, be respectful, but take teacher feedback with some skepticism; you as a parent can (and should) independently assess your kid at a young age and draw your own conclusions in addition to teacher, to reduce risk.

That’s fine and all but in a two parent working household why all the high property taxes to fund schools whose employees now say ‘do it yourself’. If we are Home Depot’ing it than please let’s cut the 3 billion dollar budgets of MCPS and FCPS and we will redirect funds to teach ourselves the science of learning or find a tutor immersed in direct instruction, phonics, abacus method for math, et al.

No one is saying “do it yourself”. All the posts say things need to happen at school and home.

So what happens to the kids whose parents don't speak English well? Or read themselves? Or who work 80 hour jobs to put food on the table and don't have time for enrichment for their kids, or money to buy games and puzzles? We just assume those kids will fail? This is why public schools were created in America - to help ALL the kids learn - not just the ones whose parents can do part of the teaching at home.

You are using an example that is over 200 years old. Poor people and immigrants have always received less, in public education and in society. This is not a new problem - even in FCPS. You know what happens because it’s been going on forever. School is for all, but a superior education is for the rich. So now, what are you going to do about it? Public education is not changing any time soon.

The expectations were a lot lower back then. Kindergarten was a half-day and some kids never even went to kindergarten (my mom didn't; my grandfather said he wasn't going to send his kid to school to play). Now, the same age kids, are expected to be reading and writing. Now, the majority of students in public schools live in poverty. So they are further behind than kids used to be AND the expectations are much higher.

Expectations do not equal reality. No school district in the country is meeting parent expectations. And with the teacher exodus, it’s clear those expectations are not reasonable. Get tutors, go private, whatever.

Many parents would rather just keep on keeping on with their kid's fake grades.

This is not true. Parents want to trust the schools are accurately assessing their children. I’m a PP who shared about my kid having all 4s in reading and yet placed into intensive remediation the following year, albeit another school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Relevant quote from Steve Dykstra, PhD. Psychologist:

"The entire design of instruction under Whole Language and its close relative, Balanced Literacy, ensured that adults would succeed even if children did not. The vague role of the instructor means that so long as they provide enough books and opportunities, they have succeeded. If the child fails to read, the fault is with the child who didn't try hard enough, the family that didn't read to the child, the community that didn't fund the school, or society that couldn't eradicate poverty. The responsibility, and solution, lies elsewhere, never with the instruction.

A fundamental difference between Structured Literacy and Whole Language is where the responsibility falls when things go wrong. That shift in thinking and behavior can be very challenging, and feel like an attack."

That is fascinating to me as a teacher because no Balanced literacy gave teachers more leeway to fail and we were very definitely held accountable. That was the entire point of the testing movement.

The phonics programs are entirely scripted and delivered whole group. I taught Kindergarten with an entirely scripted Fundations like program, and read aloud literacy last year. Our small groups were also mostly scripted with room to substitute different letters children were working on during a lesson. I had no agency in what I was saying as I was teaching. How do I bear responsibility/accountability for success or failure when I made no instructional decisions?

Why do you need to make instructional decisions when you are teaching the very basics? I'm a parent - I'm very happy with the accountability in programs like Fundations. I know exactly what my kids are learning and how I can reinforce it at home -- isn't that what PPs are telling us we should be doing???

I’m not the PP I was responding to the person who was saying balanced literacy gave teachers no accountability. I’m saying I have no agency with the current phonics based instruction and therefore I can not now have accountability. If I am
Making no decisions logically I cannot be held accountable for decisions. Last year central office in my district gave us a list of kids who needed intervention. There were kids on the list who were reading after 3 months of kindergarten. There were kids not in the list who needed explicit integrated instruction. We had to fight to get the kids who needed help the help. But if you are right and I the person who knows the kids and sees them shouldn’t make instruction decision, then I have no accountability for what happens next. To be accountable for something you must have agency. With scripted phonics there isn’t agency so
I argue I have no accountability.

With a structured phonics program, the scope and sequence is defined. Each child’s place within that scope and sequence needs to be determined by skilled teachers who can provided additional instruction necessary to master the pattern or provide enrichment for those who have mastered the pattern. In many cases the lessons are scripted to protect the kids from teachers saying things like “when 2 vowels go walking, the first one does the talking”.

If teacher preparation programs taught them properly, scripted programs wouldn’t be necessary. But nobody holds professors in colleges of education accountable, so here we are.

No, so sorry but that is NOT how the current scripted phonics programs are working. If that were the case, that would be wonderful. We are NOT differentiating. Please understand that this IS the problem. Current scripted programs are whole group all kids getting the same thing. Teachers are NOT making decisions about where kids are on the scope and sequence. If we were, I would be OVERJOYED to do phonics. These phonics programs are whole group, everyone doing the same thing at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Relevant quote from Steve Dykstra, PhD. Psychologist:

"The entire design of instruction under Whole Language and its close relative, Balanced Literacy, ensured that adults would succeed even if children did not. The vague role of the instructor means that so long as they provide enough books and opportunities, they have succeeded. If the child fails to read, the fault is with the child who didn't try hard enough, the family that didn't read to the child, the community that didn't fund the school, or society that couldn't eradicate poverty. The responsibility, and solution, lies elsewhere, never with the instruction.

A fundamental difference between Structured Literacy and Whole Language is where the responsibility falls when things go wrong. That shift in thinking and behavior can be very challenging, and feel like an attack."

That is fascinating to me as a teacher because no Balanced literacy gave teachers more leeway to fail and we were very definitely held accountable. That was the entire point of the testing movement.

The phonics programs are entirely scripted and delivered whole group. I taught Kindergarten with an entirely scripted Fundations like program, and read aloud literacy last year. Our small groups were also mostly scripted with room to substitute different letters children were working on during a lesson. I had no agency in what I was saying as I was teaching. How do I bear responsibility/accountability for success or failure when I made no instructional decisions?

Why do you need to make instructional decisions when you are teaching the very basics? I'm a parent - I'm very happy with the accountability in programs like Fundations. I know exactly what my kids are learning and how I can reinforce it at home -- isn't that what PPs are telling us we should be doing???

I’m not the PP I was responding to the person who was saying balanced literacy gave teachers no accountability. I’m saying I have no agency with the current phonics based instruction and therefore I can not now have accountability. If I am
Making no decisions logically I cannot be held accountable for decisions. Last year central office in my district gave us a list of kids who needed intervention. There were kids on the list who were reading after 3 months of kindergarten. There were kids not in the list who needed explicit integrated instruction. We had to fight to get the kids who needed help the help. But if you are right and I the person who knows the kids and sees them shouldn’t make instruction decision, then I have no accountability for what happens next. To be accountable for something you must have agency. With scripted phonics there isn’t agency so
I argue I have no accountability.

With a structured phonics program, the scope and sequence is defined. Each child’s place within that scope and sequence needs to be determined by skilled teachers who can provided additional instruction necessary to master the pattern or provide enrichment for those who have mastered the pattern. In many cases the lessons are scripted to protect the kids from teachers saying things like “when 2 vowels go walking, the first one does the talking”.

If teacher preparation programs taught them properly, scripted programs wouldn’t be necessary. But nobody holds professors in colleges of education accountable, so here we are.

No, so sorry but that is NOT how the current scripted phonics programs are working. If that were the case, that would be wonderful. We are NOT differentiating. Please understand that this IS the problem. Current scripted programs are whole group all kids getting the same thing. Teachers are NOT making decisions about where kids are on the scope and sequence. If we were, I would be OVERJOYED to do phonics. These phonics programs are whole group, everyone doing the same thing at the same time.

Aren't you and PP agreeing? Or do you think differentiated whole language/balanced literacy was better because there was differentiation? Most of the phonics posters would not agree with that because the differentiation was just more of the same. There's research that reading recovery gains disappear a few years later.

I don't want scripted phonics, I want differentiated phonics. That's why there's still work to do at the system level, and it's terrible you are in this position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Relevant quote from Steve Dykstra, PhD. Psychologist:

"The entire design of instruction under Whole Language and its close relative, Balanced Literacy, ensured that adults would succeed even if children did not. The vague role of the instructor means that so long as they provide enough books and opportunities, they have succeeded. If the child fails to read, the fault is with the child who didn't try hard enough, the family that didn't read to the child, the community that didn't fund the school, or society that couldn't eradicate poverty. The responsibility, and solution, lies elsewhere, never with the instruction.

A fundamental difference between Structured Literacy and Whole Language is where the responsibility falls when things go wrong. That shift in thinking and behavior can be very challenging, and feel like an attack."

That is fascinating to me as a teacher because no Balanced literacy gave teachers more leeway to fail and we were very definitely held accountable. That was the entire point of the testing movement.

The phonics programs are entirely scripted and delivered whole group. I taught Kindergarten with an entirely scripted Fundations like program, and read aloud literacy last year. Our small groups were also mostly scripted with room to substitute different letters children were working on during a lesson. I had no agency in what I was saying as I was teaching. How do I bear responsibility/accountability for success or failure when I made no instructional decisions?

Why do you need to make instructional decisions when you are teaching the very basics? I'm a parent - I'm very happy with the accountability in programs like Fundations. I know exactly what my kids are learning and how I can reinforce it at home -- isn't that what PPs are telling us we should be doing???

I’m not the PP I was responding to the person who was saying balanced literacy gave teachers no accountability. I’m saying I have no agency with the current phonics based instruction and therefore I can not now have accountability. If I am
Making no decisions logically I cannot be held accountable for decisions. Last year central office in my district gave us a list of kids who needed intervention. There were kids on the list who were reading after 3 months of kindergarten. There were kids not in the list who needed explicit integrated instruction. We had to fight to get the kids who needed help the help. But if you are right and I the person who knows the kids and sees them shouldn’t make instruction decision, then I have no accountability for what happens next. To be accountable for something you must have agency. With scripted phonics there isn’t agency so
I argue I have no accountability.

With a structured phonics program, the scope and sequence is defined. Each child’s place within that scope and sequence needs to be determined by skilled teachers who can provided additional instruction necessary to master the pattern or provide enrichment for those who have mastered the pattern. In many cases the lessons are scripted to protect the kids from teachers saying things like “when 2 vowels go walking, the first one does the talking”.

If teacher preparation programs taught them properly, scripted programs wouldn’t be necessary. But nobody holds professors in colleges of education accountable, so here we are.

No, so sorry but that is NOT how the current scripted phonics programs are working. If that were the case, that would be wonderful. We are NOT differentiating. Please understand that this IS the problem. Current scripted programs are whole group all kids getting the same thing. Teachers are NOT making decisions about where kids are on the scope and sequence. If we were, I would be OVERJOYED to do phonics. These phonics programs are whole group, everyone doing the same thing at the same time.

Yes it’s whole group and it’s written by FCPS. I wouldn’t mind them choosing one curriculum for us to use but they like to write their own. Personally I do what works in whole group time and then I have small group to differentiate and 1:1 for kids who really need it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My older daughter was "taught to read" using this shit approach and is STILL behind and not reading well. F_ her kindergarten teacher.

You could take part of the blame as well. It’s not all on teachers.

Why? This was my first child and I trusted the school to teach my child how to read, and I trusted them when I said "she can't read these specific beginner books, is that a problem?" and they said "nope, she's right where she should be." How was I to know any better? I think he moral of the story here is you can't trust educators, which is so, so sad.

Spot on, that's why parents have to be the primary source of teaching for their children until they can fly solo (hopefully by middle school). Listen to, be respectful, but take teacher feedback with some skepticism; you as a parent can (and should) independently assess your kid at a young age and draw your own conclusions in addition to teacher, to reduce risk.

That’s fine and all but in a two parent working household why all the high property taxes to fund schools whose employees now say ‘do it yourself’. If we are Home Depot’ing it than please let’s cut the 3 billion dollar budgets of MCPS and FCPS and we will redirect funds to teach ourselves the science of learning or find a tutor immersed in direct instruction, phonics, abacus method for math, et al.

No one is saying “do it yourself”. All the posts say things need to happen at school and home.

So what happens to the kids whose parents don't speak English well? Or read themselves? Or who work 80 hour jobs to put food on the table and don't have time for enrichment for their kids, or money to buy games and puzzles? We just assume those kids will fail? This is why public schools were created in America - to help ALL the kids learn - not just the ones whose parents can do part of the teaching at home.

Presumably they end up dyslexic and incarcerated like they deserve for not attending school faithfully enough like a PP suggested.

I'm not fighting back against this crap only for my kid, it's for these kids. These people exist and lots of them are doing everything they possibly can and then some. They are not less worthy of a basic education than the rest of us.

Right, but remember that during the election when people attack CRT and reading programs. Sorry to make this political, but education is a mix of politics and money at all times.

Phonics is not going to cure poverty and dyslexia. Can it help to have more systematic phonics instruction? Yes a little
Is it going to rid the world of these issues? Absolutely not.

Republican strategy is to get upset about school decisions and say no one is listening to parents and parent rights should rule. Meanwhile laws have already been passed mandating phonics in Virginia.

The larger game is that Republicans are trying to get people to vote for Republicans under the premise that they will pass already passed laws and give “parent’s rights”. Once they are elected into the state legislature and school boards, the plan is give to school vouchers to private schools and open charters which will lead to the erosion of public school systems.

You can of course write this off crazy and are currently free to vote how you would like to. Republicans watched Youngkin win on this platform and it is working well for them in other places so they will continue to use it.

I'm not sure I follow this post, but I haven't kept up with who pushed the phonics legislation. But I agreeing with the PP that public schools should serve all. Are you saying Republicans pushed the phonics legislation through while also trying to dismantle the same public schools? If so, I didn't know that.

^^I meant I know they are pushing vouchers. I'm not following the rest of the post.

Sorry, I’m saying creating more discord around public schooling only serves Republican purpose more. (Hence the focus on CRT). Parents who are ragingly upset about phonics/reading instruction when legislation has already passed in VA are only serving to stoke those fires and outrage at this point. That may or may not be intentional on the part of parents/posters, but it is a consequence of the teacher, reading instruction and school bashing that happens here and other places.

I think Republicans are counting on the fact that no one realizes that legislation was already passed and want to tap into the outrage to garner votes. They do have a strong history of being able to do that.

Republicans are counting on the fact that suburban parents open their eyes and realize that the schools are not infallible. They jumped right on board the latest fad being pushed by the teacher colleges and they’re doing it again w grading for equity/std based grading. This whole literacy scandal should be a wake up call for parents. We must demand research and data when we see new trends being pushed.

Democrats are idiots for not jumping on the education bandwagon during the last gubernatorial election. Their strategists are morons, Terry McAuliffe is an idiot. I am just so angry at them for thinking they didn't need to do anything to win the election. If they had talked about reading education, I would have been thrilled. They're just dumb.

(I say this as a democrat who would never vote for a republican)

[Anonymous]

It is a great podcast.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is a great podcast.

It’s a docudrama.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s just one more way to point fingers at teachers instead of acknowledging that students are poorer and less likely to know English than ever before.

Just wanted to resurface this comment because really, this says it all. Apparently, kids can't read cause they don't know English and they're poor, so their parents don't want/don't have time to help them. These are public schools. You get what you get.


It's this kind of garbage that just makes me want to scream. IT IS NOT THE KIDS' FAULT. Veteran teachers have known for years that this Lucy Calkins crap doesn't work but administrators don't care. Kids aren't lab rats, I wish district administrators and school board members would stop treating them like them.

[Anonymous]

I am wealthy and my kids couldn’t learn to read with Lucy Calkin BS. So stop saying to is just the poor minority kids who have issues

And my kids had all the privilege- parents who read to them, expensive Nannie’s, expensive preschool, FCPS top rated school and all the experiences that come with wealth. Stop pretending g it is just the poor kids. The difference is we were able to hire an expensive tutor and not rely on the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am wealthy and my kids couldn’t learn to read with Lucy Calkin BS. So stop saying to is just the poor minority kids who have issues

And my kids had all the privilege- parents who read to them, expensive Nannie’s, expensive preschool, FCPS top rated school and all the experiences that come with wealth. Stop pretending g it is just the poor kids. The difference is we were able to hire an expensive tutor and not rely on the school.

I agree that phonics is important but no expensive tutors are not the difference. We are poor by DCUM standards and I taught my kids to read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Relevant quote from Steve Dykstra, PhD. Psychologist:

"The entire design of instruction under Whole Language and its close relative, Balanced Literacy, ensured that adults would succeed even if children did not. The vague role of the instructor means that so long as they provide enough books and opportunities, they have succeeded. If the child fails to read, the fault is with the child who didn't try hard enough, the family that didn't read to the child, the community that didn't fund the school, or society that couldn't eradicate poverty. The responsibility, and solution, lies elsewhere, never with the instruction.

A fundamental difference between Structured Literacy and Whole Language is where the responsibility falls when things go wrong. That shift in thinking and behavior can be very challenging, and feel like an attack."

That is fascinating to me as a teacher because no Balanced literacy gave teachers more leeway to fail and we were very definitely held accountable. That was the entire point of the testing movement.

The phonics programs are entirely scripted and delivered whole group. I taught Kindergarten with an entirely scripted Fundations like program, and read aloud literacy last year. Our small groups were also mostly scripted with room to substitute different letters children were working on during a lesson. I had no agency in what I was saying as I was teaching. How do I bear responsibility/accountability for success or failure when I made no instructional decisions?

Why do you need to make instructional decisions when you are teaching the very basics? I'm a parent - I'm very happy with the accountability in programs like Fundations. I know exactly what my kids are learning and how I can reinforce it at home -- isn't that what PPs are telling us we should be doing???

I’m not the PP I was responding to the person who was saying balanced literacy gave teachers no accountability. I’m saying I have no agency with the current phonics based instruction and therefore I can not now have accountability. If I am
Making no decisions logically I cannot be held accountable for decisions. Last year central office in my district gave us a list of kids who needed intervention. There were kids on the list who were reading after 3 months of kindergarten. There were kids not in the list who needed explicit integrated instruction. We had to fight to get the kids who needed help the help. But if you are right and I the person who knows the kids and sees them shouldn’t make instruction decision, then I have no accountability for what happens next. To be accountable for something you must have agency. With scripted phonics there isn’t agency so
I argue I have no accountability.

With a structured phonics program, the scope and sequence is defined. Each child’s place within that scope and sequence needs to be determined by skilled teachers who can provided additional instruction necessary to master the pattern or provide enrichment for those who have mastered the pattern. In many cases the lessons are scripted to protect the kids from teachers saying things like “when 2 vowels go walking, the first one does the talking”.

If teacher preparation programs taught them properly, scripted programs wouldn’t be necessary. But nobody holds professors in colleges of education accountable, so here we are.

No, so sorry but that is NOT how the current scripted phonics programs are working. If that were the case, that would be wonderful. We are NOT differentiating. Please understand that this IS the problem. Current scripted programs are whole group all kids getting the same thing. Teachers are NOT making decisions about where kids are on the scope and sequence. If we were, I would be OVERJOYED to do phonics. These phonics programs are whole group, everyone doing the same thing at the same time.

Yes it’s whole group and it’s written by FCPS. I wouldn’t mind them choosing one curriculum for us to use but they like to write their own. Personally I do what works in whole group time and then I have small group to differentiate and 1:1 for kids who really need it.

Ugh- I don’t believe there is anyone in FCPS qualified to write that sort of curriculum. How are you getting your decodable books aligned with the curriculum? Are they writing those too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Relevant quote from Steve Dykstra, PhD. Psychologist:

"The entire design of instruction under Whole Language and its close relative, Balanced Literacy, ensured that adults would succeed even if children did not. The vague role of the instructor means that so long as they provide enough books and opportunities, they have succeeded. If the child fails to read, the fault is with the child who didn't try hard enough, the family that didn't read to the child, the community that didn't fund the school, or society that couldn't eradicate poverty. The responsibility, and solution, lies elsewhere, never with the instruction.

A fundamental difference between Structured Literacy and Whole Language is where the responsibility falls when things go wrong. That shift in thinking and behavior can be very challenging, and feel like an attack."

That is fascinating to me as a teacher because no Balanced literacy gave teachers more leeway to fail and we were very definitely held accountable. That was the entire point of the testing movement.

The phonics programs are entirely scripted and delivered whole group. I taught Kindergarten with an entirely scripted Fundations like program, and read aloud literacy last year. Our small groups were also mostly scripted with room to substitute different letters children were working on during a lesson. I had no agency in what I was saying as I was teaching. How do I bear responsibility/accountability for success or failure when I made no instructional decisions?

Why do you need to make instructional decisions when you are teaching the very basics? I'm a parent - I'm very happy with the accountability in programs like Fundations. I know exactly what my kids are learning and how I can reinforce it at home -- isn't that what PPs are telling us we should be doing???

I’m not the PP I was responding to the person who was saying balanced literacy gave teachers no accountability. I’m saying I have no agency with the current phonics based instruction and therefore I can not now have accountability. If I am
Making no decisions logically I cannot be held accountable for decisions. Last year central office in my district gave us a list of kids who needed intervention. There were kids on the list who were reading after 3 months of kindergarten. There were kids not in the list who needed explicit integrated instruction. We had to fight to get the kids who needed help the help. But if you are right and I the person who knows the kids and sees them shouldn’t make instruction decision, then I have no accountability for what happens next. To be accountable for something you must have agency. With scripted phonics there isn’t agency so
I argue I have no accountability.

With a structured phonics program, the scope and sequence is defined. Each child’s place within that scope and sequence needs to be determined by skilled teachers who can provided additional instruction necessary to master the pattern or provide enrichment for those who have mastered the pattern. In many cases the lessons are scripted to protect the kids from teachers saying things like “when 2 vowels go walking, the first one does the talking”.

If teacher preparation programs taught them properly, scripted programs wouldn’t be necessary. But nobody holds professors in colleges of education accountable, so here we are.

No, so sorry but that is NOT how the current scripted phonics programs are working. If that were the case, that would be wonderful. We are NOT differentiating. Please understand that this IS the problem. Current scripted programs are whole group all kids getting the same thing. Teachers are NOT making decisions about where kids are on the scope and sequence. If we were, I would be OVERJOYED to do phonics. These phonics programs are whole group, everyone doing the same thing at the same time.

Yes it’s whole group and it’s written by FCPS. I wouldn’t mind them choosing one curriculum for us to use but they like to write their own. Personally I do what works in whole group time and then I have small group to differentiate and 1:1 for kids who really need it.

Ugh- I don’t believe there is anyone in FCPS qualified to write that sort of curriculum. How are you getting your decodable books aligned with the curriculum? Are they writing those too?

No they did buy those and then aligned the scope and sequence to match those. But they wrote the “scripts” themselves and pulled from other resources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Relevant quote from Steve Dykstra, PhD. Psychologist:

"The entire design of instruction under Whole Language and its close relative, Balanced Literacy, ensured that adults would succeed even if children did not. The vague role of the instructor means that so long as they provide enough books and opportunities, they have succeeded. If the child fails to read, the fault is with the child who didn't try hard enough, the family that didn't read to the child, the community that didn't fund the school, or society that couldn't eradicate poverty. The responsibility, and solution, lies elsewhere, never with the instruction.

A fundamental difference between Structured Literacy and Whole Language is where the responsibility falls when things go wrong. That shift in thinking and behavior can be very challenging, and feel like an attack."

That is fascinating to me as a teacher because no Balanced literacy gave teachers more leeway to fail and we were very definitely held accountable. That was the entire point of the testing movement.

The phonics programs are entirely scripted and delivered whole group. I taught Kindergarten with an entirely scripted Fundations like program, and read aloud literacy last year. Our small groups were also mostly scripted with room to substitute different letters children were working on during a lesson. I had no agency in what I was saying as I was teaching. How do I bear responsibility/accountability for success or failure when I made no instructional decisions?

Why do you need to make instructional decisions when you are teaching the very basics? I'm a parent - I'm very happy with the accountability in programs like Fundations. I know exactly what my kids are learning and how I can reinforce it at home -- isn't that what PPs are telling us we should be doing???

I’m not the PP I was responding to the person who was saying balanced literacy gave teachers no accountability. I’m saying I have no agency with the current phonics based instruction and therefore I can not now have accountability. If I am
Making no decisions logically I cannot be held accountable for decisions. Last year central office in my district gave us a list of kids who needed intervention. There were kids on the list who were reading after 3 months of kindergarten. There were kids not in the list who needed explicit integrated instruction. We had to fight to get the kids who needed help the help. But if you are right and I the person who knows the kids and sees them shouldn’t make instruction decision, then I have no accountability for what happens next. To be accountable for something you must have agency. With scripted phonics there isn’t agency so
I argue I have no accountability.

With a structured phonics program, the scope and sequence is defined. Each child’s place within that scope and sequence needs to be determined by skilled teachers who can provided additional instruction necessary to master the pattern or provide enrichment for those who have mastered the pattern. In many cases the lessons are scripted to protect the kids from teachers saying things like “when 2 vowels go walking, the first one does the talking”.

If teacher preparation programs taught them properly, scripted programs wouldn’t be necessary. But nobody holds professors in colleges of education accountable, so here we are.

No, so sorry but that is NOT how the current scripted phonics programs are working. If that were the case, that would be wonderful. We are NOT differentiating. Please understand that this IS the problem. Current scripted programs are whole group all kids getting the same thing. Teachers are NOT making decisions about where kids are on the scope and sequence. If we were, I would be OVERJOYED to do phonics. These phonics programs are whole group, everyone doing the same thing at the same time.

Yes it’s whole group and it’s written by FCPS. I wouldn’t mind them choosing one curriculum for us to use but they like to write their own. Personally I do what works in whole group time and then I have small group to differentiate and 1:1 for kids who really need it.

Ugh- I don’t believe there is anyone in FCPS qualified to write that sort of curriculum. How are you getting your decodable books aligned with the curriculum? Are they writing those too?

No they did buy those and then aligned the scope and sequence to match those. But they wrote the “scripts” themselves and pulled from other resources.

Wow- so instead of training the teachers and providing a proper curriculum, they reverse-engineered scripts from practice tools. Did they write their own assessment tools too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Relevant quote from Steve Dykstra, PhD. Psychologist:

"The entire design of instruction under Whole Language and its close relative, Balanced Literacy, ensured that adults would succeed even if children did not. The vague role of the instructor means that so long as they provide enough books and opportunities, they have succeeded. If the child fails to read, the fault is with the child who didn't try hard enough, the family that didn't read to the child, the community that didn't fund the school, or society that couldn't eradicate poverty. The responsibility, and solution, lies elsewhere, never with the instruction.

A fundamental difference between Structured Literacy and Whole Language is where the responsibility falls when things go wrong. That shift in thinking and behavior can be very challenging, and feel like an attack."

That is fascinating to me as a teacher because no Balanced literacy gave teachers more leeway to fail and we were very definitely held accountable. That was the entire point of the testing movement.

The phonics programs are entirely scripted and delivered whole group. I taught Kindergarten with an entirely scripted Fundations like program, and read aloud literacy last year. Our small groups were also mostly scripted with room to substitute different letters children were working on during a lesson. I had no agency in what I was saying as I was teaching. How do I bear responsibility/accountability for success or failure when I made no instructional decisions?

Why do you need to make instructional decisions when you are teaching the very basics? I'm a parent - I'm very happy with the accountability in programs like Fundations. I know exactly what my kids are learning and how I can reinforce it at home -- isn't that what PPs are telling us we should be doing???

I’m not the PP I was responding to the person who was saying balanced literacy gave teachers no accountability. I’m saying I have no agency with the current phonics based instruction and therefore I can not now have accountability. If I am
Making no decisions logically I cannot be held accountable for decisions. Last year central office in my district gave us a list of kids who needed intervention. There were kids on the list who were reading after 3 months of kindergarten. There were kids not in the list who needed explicit integrated instruction. We had to fight to get the kids who needed help the help. But if you are right and I the person who knows the kids and sees them shouldn’t make instruction decision, then I have no accountability for what happens next. To be accountable for something you must have agency. With scripted phonics there isn’t agency so
I argue I have no accountability.

With a structured phonics program, the scope and sequence is defined. Each child’s place within that scope and sequence needs to be determined by skilled teachers who can provided additional instruction necessary to master the pattern or provide enrichment for those who have mastered the pattern. In many cases the lessons are scripted to protect the kids from teachers saying things like “when 2 vowels go walking, the first one does the talking”.

If teacher preparation programs taught them properly, scripted programs wouldn’t be necessary. But nobody holds professors in colleges of education accountable, so here we are.

No, so sorry but that is NOT how the current scripted phonics programs are working. If that were the case, that would be wonderful. We are NOT differentiating. Please understand that this IS the problem. Current scripted programs are whole group all kids getting the same thing. Teachers are NOT making decisions about where kids are on the scope and sequence. If we were, I would be OVERJOYED to do phonics. These phonics programs are whole group, everyone doing the same thing at the same time.

Yes it’s whole group and it’s written by FCPS. I wouldn’t mind them choosing one curriculum for us to use but they like to write their own. Personally I do what works in whole group time and then I have small group to differentiate and 1:1 for kids who really need it.

Ugh- I don’t believe there is anyone in FCPS qualified to write that sort of curriculum. How are you getting your decodable books aligned with the curriculum? Are they writing those too?

No they did buy those and then aligned the scope and sequence to match those. But they wrote the “scripts” themselves and pulled from other resources.

Wow- so instead of training the teachers and providing a proper curriculum, they reverse-engineered scripts from practice tools. Did they write their own assessment tools too?

The assessments for Word Study are crap and written by FCPS. The PRF that replaced the DRA is from iReady, but the phonics diagnostics actually seem to be the best of all the fore mentioned.