When will MCPS adopt an evidence-based early reading curriculum?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've not met a single teacher in this country who is prepared to teach children to read - only retired teachers who considered it a part of their job.

My kids are in HS so this is not a recent discovery. When each of them were in K-5 it was all about "testing" their reading, not teaching it. That was considered to be parent's work. So we did it at home, like everyone else.

I'm having a hard time following this- so teachers, who have gone through years of training and time in the classroom, aren't prepared to teach kids to read, but parents with no such training or practical experience should know how to do it at home? What curriculum should we be using?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any teachers or experts out there have a recommended alternative to benchmark?

When they were choosing curricula, there were 5 or so that they were considering for ES ELA. Only one of them was recommended by the nonprofit Wd Reports. People assumed they would go with that. But nope, they went with one that was not recommended.

Does anyone have this list of what was recommended?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any teachers or experts out there have a recommended alternative to benchmark?

When they were choosing curricula, there were 5 or so that they were considering for ES ELA. Only one of them was recommended by the nonprofit Wd Reports. People assumed they would go with that. But nope, they went with one that was not recommended.

Does anyone have this list of what was recommended?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any teachers or experts out there have a recommended alternative to benchmark?

When they were choosing curricula, there were 5 or so that they were considering for ES ELA. Only one of them was recommended by the nonprofit Wd Reports. People assumed they would go with that. But nope, they went with one that was not recommended.

Does anyone have this list of what was recommended?

I was trying to find the thread where this was discussed a few years ago and couldn't. However, there was a cross-post from the that thread to another thread, which included the following - they were only looking at one curriculum that was recommended by Ed Reports, and that was Ready Gen--and still the person posting said it was "only slightly better than mediocre." It sounds like there are better curricula out there, but MCPS wasn't considering them last time around. I think parents/teachers would want to find a stronger curriculum, perhaps by examining options in Ed Reports.

Anyway, here is from that thread (which can be found here: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/775359.page)

"Here is an email posted to a parent list serve. The parent is a public school curriculum professional. Based on her feedback, 4 of 5 programs are terrible for literacy but all are good for math.

"Here is my recommendation on what to do about the curriculum selection.

"I have about 100 opinions and have done a ton of research on these (and already know a bunch of them from my day job). Not sure how interested/involved you want to be but figured I'd share my two cents. For middle school it isn't quite as horrible. But 2/3 of the elementary choices are bad and one is mediocre, so if you are inclined to say/do anything, I'd suggest you click on the links for feedback put negative responses on the rating scale (literally three clicks).

"Also, for the record, the math choices are all strong, so we have that going for us!

"So, if you have five minutes, here's what I would do (before Dec. 9!). Click to provide feedback on 'Wonders' and put in negative ratings (the open ended responses are optional, but you could add, if you want, "Ed Reports does not rate Wonders all green." I'd also likely put in mediocre (middle rating) feedback on Benchmark, and higher feedback on ReadyGen (that's our best bet and it is only slightly above mediocre, honestly). Here is the page for feedback links for each program:
MCPS Curriculum Review – Vendor Presentations webpage.

"To put this in perspective, I think the program called 'Wonders' they have listed here is on par with what I see in some of the lowest performing, weakest districts in the country; in fact, we'd be better in terms of curriculum sending our kids to Baltimore City Schools. Seriously their materials for reading and literacy are better and more rigorous. Some of these are actually programs I actively superintendents against using. Wonders is so low level and boring that I would seriously consider private school.

"One of my main sources was an independent review consortium called Ed Reports (actually called out in the RFP from MoCo for curriculum). Both Wonders and Benchmark are not rated 'all green' on their ratings. Just in case you wanted one of my back up sources! You can click here if you are so inclined."

[Anonymous]

PP here. I actually did find the longer thread from 2018 on the curriculum selection process. That thread is here: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/759597.page

Also, this is the MCPS curriculum review page, but I am not sure there is anything useful there anymore: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/curriculum-review.aspx

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've not met a single teacher in this country who is prepared to teach children to read - only retired teachers who considered it a part of their job.

My kids are in HS so this is not a recent discovery. When each of them were in K-5 it was all about "testing" their reading, not teaching it. That was considered to be parent's work. So we did it at home, like everyone else.

I'm having a hard time following this- so teachers, who have gone through years of training and time in the classroom, aren't prepared to teach kids to read, but parents with no such training or practical experience should know how to do it at home? What curriculum should we be using?

NP here. As absurd as it sounds, this has been documented.

Hard Words: Why aren't kids being taught to read?
https://www.apmreports.org/episode/2018/09/10/hard-words-why-american-kids-arent-being-taught-to-read

"A big part of the problem is at the university level, in schools of education, according to the authors of a 2016 article in the Journal of Childhood & Developmental Disorders. "Faculty have ignored the scientific knowledge that informs reading acquisition," the authors wrote. "As a result, the pre-service teachers who are being educated at these institutions fail to receive the necessary training."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid went through 2.0 from beginning to end. I hated it, but she came out just fine. Your kids will too.

Unless they aren’t. You work for MCPS, don’t you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've not met a single teacher in this country who is prepared to teach children to read - only retired teachers who considered it a part of their job.

My kids are in HS so this is not a recent discovery. When each of them were in K-5 it was all about "testing" their reading, not teaching it. That was considered to be parent's work. So we did it at home, like everyone else.

I'm having a hard time following this- so teachers, who have gone through years of training and time in the classroom, aren't prepared to teach kids to read, but parents with no such training or practical experience should know how to do it at home? What curriculum should we be using?

Really its not that hard to teach your kids to read except if they have a learning disability. Try it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm new to MoCo, and my kid is still in daycare (4). Where should I be expressing my concern regarding the lack of phonics-based instruction?

If you want phonics, teach your child yourself. Actually, you should teach your child to read either way. Not all kids learn with phonics. Some do better with phonics, some do better with sight reading so a multi-approach is best.

Actually, not true. “Sight reading” is not reading, and misunderstanding that fact is part of the problem. Ask me how I know — teachers telling me for years DC was a “sight reader” until we finally paid of out pocket for a private eval and discovered they had dyslexia.

Your child had a reading disorder. That's very different. My child learned to read early and did it all through sight reading. You cannot say no child can learn through sight reading because yours did not. Kids learn different ways and that is why the one fit all approach doesn't work. And, you should have known if your child was reading and gotten an evaluation/help earlier.

Bollocks! That’s like saying we have evidence based learning out there but we aren’t going to use it - and oh by the way you fund 3 billion a year for schools but parents reading is on you. Yes this parent had a child with a reading disability but if evidence based were used at first then child would have been identified and assisted earlier. Either you are professionals and follow the best evidence based research or you aren’t. You can’t have it both ways. Frankly you are normalizing the corruption that’s inherent in MCPS. First with Pearson (2.0) now with Benchmark. Don’t be surprised if Discovery Channel reading is next since Dr. McKnight was on their payroll prior to her selection as interim superintendent...kids will be taught to read via old Shark Week videos from 1999!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've not met a single teacher in this country who is prepared to teach children to read - only retired teachers who considered it a part of their job.

My kids are in HS so this is not a recent discovery. When each of them were in K-5 it was all about "testing" their reading, not teaching it. That was considered to be parent's work. So we did it at home, like everyone else.

I'm having a hard time following this- so teachers, who have gone through years of training and time in the classroom, aren't prepared to teach kids to read, but parents with no such training or practical experience should know how to do it at home? What curriculum should we be using?

NP here. As absurd as it sounds, this has been documented.

Hard Words: Why aren't kids being taught to read?
https://www.apmreports.org/episode/2018/09/10/hard-words-why-american-kids-arent-being-taught-to-read

"A big part of the problem is at the university level, in schools of education, according to the authors of a 2016 article in the Journal of Childhood & Developmental Disorders. "Faculty have ignored the scientific knowledge that informs reading acquisition," the authors wrote. "As a result, the pre-service teachers who are being educated at these institutions fail to receive the necessary training."

+1. The education-industrial complex is real. There is serious profit in these reading curricula Ed schools create and peddle...that’s the key point. You don’t just pivot when your beach house may be purchased with your next Lucy Caulkins creation that you ‘think’ works...also most Ed PhD’s are politicians and would be hard pressed to read a flow chart let alone understand and follow bench research on the science of reading. The lower third of our college classes go into the profession sadly...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've not met a single teacher in this country who is prepared to teach children to read - only retired teachers who considered it a part of their job.

My kids are in HS so this is not a recent discovery. When each of them were in K-5 it was all about "testing" their reading, not teaching it. That was considered to be parent's work. So we did it at home, like everyone else.

I'm having a hard time following this- so teachers, who have gone through years of training and time in the classroom, aren't prepared to teach kids to read, but parents with no such training or practical experience should know how to do it at home? What curriculum should we be using?

Really its not that hard to teach your kids to read except if they have a learning disability. Try it.

Ok I’d love to, but don’t want to mess it up by using the wrong method or materials. Is there a step-by-step program I can use? TIA!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've not met a single teacher in this country who is prepared to teach children to read - only retired teachers who considered it a part of their job.

My kids are in HS so this is not a recent discovery. When each of them were in K-5 it was all about "testing" their reading, not teaching it. That was considered to be parent's work. So we did it at home, like everyone else.

I'm having a hard time following this- so teachers, who have gone through years of training and time in the classroom, aren't prepared to teach kids to read, but parents with no such training or practical experience should know how to do it at home? What curriculum should we be using?

Really its not that hard to teach your kids to read except if they have a learning disability. Try it.

Ok I’d love to, but don’t want to mess it up by using the wrong method or materials. Is there a step-by-step program I can use? TIA!

Recommendations:

Logic of English (very child friendly, lots of games)
All About Reading followed byAll About Spelling

Both are systemic, explicit phonics instruction and accessible for a parent to use

If you have skid with (severe) dyslexia, then Barton Reading and spelling

[Anonymous]

As a reading teacher in MCPS, I'm thrilled to see parents becoming more aware of how Benchmark does not follow the science of how children learn to read. The county does use some structured literacy intervention programs, such as Orton Gillingham lessons and programs such as Really Great Reading's BLAST and HD Word. Unfortunately, these programs are often only available to students who are significantly below grade-level and vary from school to school. I know of teachers who are asking to be trained in Orton Gillingham, but the county won't pay for their training. I decided to pay for the training out of pocket because I felt it was critical for helping struggling readers. I believe we could eliminate some students' reading difficulties and identify other students who need support earlier if we switched to a structured literacy curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Recommendations:

Logic of English (very child friendly, lots of games)
All About Reading followed byAll About Spelling

Both are systemic, explicit phonics instruction and accessible for a parent to use

If you have skid with (severe) dyslexia, then Barton Reading and spelling

I agree with these recommendations. I've personally used All About Reading with several students during Covid and saw great results.

[Anonymous]

We've started (last week) with Siegfried Engelmann's Teach Your Child to Read in 100 Easy Lessons.
It's early yet for me to provide feedback on how it works, but the system the book uses is very logical and it's completely scripted, so you, as the parent, don't have to figure out how to explain something. It's just open and go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a reading teacher in MCPS, I'm thrilled to see parents becoming more aware of how Benchmark does not follow the science of how children learn to read. The county does use some structured literacy intervention programs, such as Orton Gillingham lessons and programs such as Really Great Reading's BLAST and HD Word. Unfortunately, these programs are often only available to students who are significantly below grade-level and vary from school to school. I know of teachers who are asking to be trained in Orton Gillingham, but the county won't pay for their training. I decided to pay for the training out of pocket because I felt it was critical for helping struggling readers. I believe we could eliminate some students' reading difficulties and identify other students who need support earlier if we switched to a structured literacy curriculum.

Thanks for sharing. I know a few schools have moved the entire curriculum to OG but, as you say, those are the most struggling schools.

To the poster wondering about graft/kickbacks, I'd honestly look at cost before I look at a flawed procurement. Like any big organization, MCPS almost certainly approaches procurement from a "value for money" perspective.

So, Benchmark is a Honda Civic in this analogy. It will get the majority of kids from here to there, and is relatively cost effective.

OG is a Cadillac in this analogy. It will ALSO get the majority of kids from here to there, but is overkill for a lot of kids and much less cost effective.

So MCPS appears to have decided to buy a fleet of Civics and then a handful of Cadillacs. I'm not saying that's the right choice, but it does make sense to me as someone who does big procurements for a living. Sometimes we don't get the A+ solution. We get the "better than nothing" solution that is more cost effective.