Sold a Story and Phonics instruction

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some kids need a good does of phonics as initial scaffolding and then need less as time goes on. Some kids a good deal more. Other don’t need it at all. But it hurts no one and helps most (even if not with reading, certainly with spelling. And it doesn’t be require that much time to implement along side broader reading comprehension works. So seems like a win-win.

This is it! It is important to teach all children the reading building blocks.

True but the problem is that kids who are already reading don’t need as nauseam basic phonics instruction. Time is better spent on analysis, comprehension, writing, etc…..

It’s the lower performing bottom who needs repetitive phonics instruction and why DCPS is extending it into 2nd grades.

Don’t get me wrong, I support phonics instruction and it’s needed for kids reading chapter books. It really doesn’t help with spelling. What helps is actually having weekly spelling lists or learning actual spelling diagrams. The basic phonics being taught in DCPS is not it.

What you are getting wrong is that it makes no sense to label kids who are still learning/ have been poorly taught phonics “the lower performing bottom”.

What you are getting wrong is that instead of force feeding phonics to the majority of kids who are already reading by 1st and definitely by 2nd, DCPS should do either pull out or push in for the kids who can’t read, have dyslexia, etc…

But of course above is not happening.

The 2nd grade Fundations lessons are 15 minutes at the beginning of the day. My kid has a Lexile score around 1000 and doesn’t complain about them.

My kids were both reading early and Fundations was the most hated, wasted part of their day.

I think phonics are great, except for the kids who are already good readers and spellers. They should do something else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some kids need a good does of phonics as initial scaffolding and then need less as time goes on. Some kids a good deal more. Other don’t need it at all. But it hurts no one and helps most (even if not with reading, certainly with spelling. And it doesn’t be require that much time to implement along side broader reading comprehension works. So seems like a win-win.

This is it! It is important to teach all children the reading building blocks.

True but the problem is that kids who are already reading don’t need as nauseam basic phonics instruction. Time is better spent on analysis, comprehension, writing, etc…..

It’s the lower performing bottom who needs repetitive phonics instruction and why DCPS is extending it into 2nd grades.

Don’t get me wrong, I support phonics instruction and it’s needed for kids reading chapter books. It really doesn’t help with spelling. What helps is actually having weekly spelling lists or learning actual spelling diagrams. The basic phonics being taught in DCPS is not it.

What you are getting wrong is that it makes no sense to label kids who are still learning/ have been poorly taught phonics “the lower performing bottom”.

What you are getting wrong is that instead of force feeding phonics to the majority of kids who are already reading by 1st and definitely by 2nd, DCPS should do either pull out or push in for the kids who can’t read, have dyslexia, etc…

But of course above is not happening.

The 2nd grade Fundations lessons are 15 minutes at the beginning of the day. My kid has a Lexile score around 1000 and doesn’t complain about them.

My kids were both reading early and Fundations was the most hated, wasted part of their day.

I think phonics are great, except for the kids who are already good readers and spellers. They should do something else.

my kid was a very high reader and never complained about Fundations. DCPS wastes so much time with non-academic stuff. I have zero concerns about 20-30 minutes of focused phonics/day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some kids need a good does of phonics as initial scaffolding and then need less as time goes on. Some kids a good deal more. Other don’t need it at all. But it hurts no one and helps most (even if not with reading, certainly with spelling. And it doesn’t be require that much time to implement along side broader reading comprehension works. So seems like a win-win.

This is it! It is important to teach all children the reading building blocks.

True but the problem is that kids who are already reading don’t need as nauseam basic phonics instruction. Time is better spent on analysis, comprehension, writing, etc…..

It’s the lower performing bottom who needs repetitive phonics instruction and why DCPS is extending it into 2nd grades.

Don’t get me wrong, I support phonics instruction and it’s needed for kids reading chapter books. It really doesn’t help with spelling. What helps is actually having weekly spelling lists or learning actual spelling diagrams. The basic phonics being taught in DCPS is not it.

What you are getting wrong is that it makes no sense to label kids who are still learning/ have been poorly taught phonics “the lower performing bottom”.

What you are getting wrong is that instead of force feeding phonics to the majority of kids who are already reading by 1st and definitely by 2nd, DCPS should do either pull out or push in for the kids who can’t read, have dyslexia, etc…

But of course above is not happening.

The 2nd grade Fundations lessons are 15 minutes at the beginning of the day. My kid has a Lexile score around 1000 and doesn’t complain about them.

PP here. Ok but your kid and all the other kids in 2nd grade who can read would be much better served by actually spending those 15 minutes on doing a spelling lists, learning actual grammar and sentence structure, or doing compositional writing.

I would also argue that 15 minutes of phonics is also not enough time to target the kids who are not reading by 2nd grade. They actually need much more time than that and really should be in pulled out groups.

Lastly, I also suspect that kids in poorly performing schools, where majority are not reading, are not getting just 15 minutes of phonics. The overwhelming majority of the time in ELA is likely spent on phonics.

Fundations lessons are scripted. It could take a bit more time to get through them at a school where almost no students could follow the exercizes, but we're really talking 30 minutes max. They could do other phonics work, of course, but that's not actually the Fundations curriculum itself. Also, if the majority of kids cannot read, more phonics instruction is a good thing in my book. Yes, absolutely, at that point good readers should be pulled for different small group work... but that's exactly what's happening at most good schools.

I also think you're vastly overestimating the percentage of UMC who get no benefit from Fundations/phonics at the beginning of 2nd grade. Even kids who read well can lack certain fundamentals that can be useful for decoding unfamiliar technical words (e.g., science vocab) later on. Phonics also absolutely assist with spelling and our school introduces spelling & vocab lists in 3rd grade that are still largely based on phonics principles. That's also when they start a separate writing class, which focuses on all the things you want. It sounds like you want that to start in 2nd rather than 3rd grade, but even at our non-T1 EOTP DCPS, the majority of 3rd graders struggle at the beginning of the year. (Also my 2nd grader actually did a fair amount of writing last year in small group, but didn't have formal writing instruction like she has now.)

Really the idea that in the course of a DCPS ES day 15 minutes of phonics is a waste of time is just baffling to me. I think you haven't spent enough time in the classroom to see how many 15 minute chunks are just entirely wasted if this is the fight you're picking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some kids need a good does of phonics as initial scaffolding and then need less as time goes on. Some kids a good deal more. Other don’t need it at all. But it hurts no one and helps most (even if not with reading, certainly with spelling. And it doesn’t be require that much time to implement along side broader reading comprehension works. So seems like a win-win.

This is it! It is important to teach all children the reading building blocks.

True but the problem is that kids who are already reading don’t need as nauseam basic phonics instruction. Time is better spent on analysis, comprehension, writing, etc…..

It’s the lower performing bottom who needs repetitive phonics instruction and why DCPS is extending it into 2nd grades.

Don’t get me wrong, I support phonics instruction and it’s needed for kids reading chapter books. It really doesn’t help with spelling. What helps is actually having weekly spelling lists or learning actual spelling diagrams. The basic phonics being taught in DCPS is not it.

What you are getting wrong is that it makes no sense to label kids who are still learning/ have been poorly taught phonics “the lower performing bottom”.

What you are getting wrong is that instead of force feeding phonics to the majority of kids who are already reading by 1st and definitely by 2nd, DCPS should do either pull out or push in for the kids who can’t read, have dyslexia, etc…

But of course above is not happening.

The 2nd grade Fundations lessons are 15 minutes at the beginning of the day. My kid has a Lexile score around 1000 and doesn’t complain about them.

PP here. Ok but your kid and all the other kids in 2nd grade who can read would be much better served by actually spending those 15 minutes on doing a spelling lists, learning actual grammar and sentence structure, or doing compositional writing.

I would also argue that 15 minutes of phonics is also not enough time to target the kids who are not reading by 2nd grade. They actually need much more time than that and really should be in pulled out groups.

Lastly, I also suspect that kids in poorly performing schools, where majority are not reading, are not getting just 15 minutes of phonics. The overwhelming majority of the time in ELA is likely spent on phonics.

Fundations lessons are scripted. It could take a bit more time to get through them at a school where almost no students could follow the exercizes, but we're really talking 30 minutes max. They could do other phonics work, of course, but that's not actually the Fundations curriculum itself. Also, if the majority of kids cannot read, more phonics instruction is a good thing in my book. Yes, absolutely, at that point good readers should be pulled for different small group work... but that's exactly what's happening at most good schools.

I also think you're vastly overestimating the percentage of UMC who get no benefit from Fundations/phonics at the beginning of 2nd grade. Even kids who read well can lack certain fundamentals that can be useful for decoding unfamiliar technical words (e.g., science vocab) later on. Phonics also absolutely assist with spelling and our school introduces spelling & vocab lists in 3rd grade that are still largely based on phonics principles. That's also when they start a separate writing class, which focuses on all the things you want. It sounds like you want that to start in 2nd rather than 3rd grade, but even at our non-T1 EOTP DCPS, the majority of 3rd graders struggle at the beginning of the year. (Also my 2nd grader actually did a fair amount of writing last year in small group, but didn't have formal writing instruction like she has now.)

Really the idea that in the course of a DCPS ES day 15 minutes of phonics is a waste of time is just baffling to me. I think you haven't spent enough time in the classroom to see how many 15 minute chunks are just entirely wasted if this is the fight you're picking.

phonics helps me every day crush Wordle - I think people just don’t have priorities straight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some kids need a good does of phonics as initial scaffolding and then need less as time goes on. Some kids a good deal more. Other don’t need it at all. But it hurts no one and helps most (even if not with reading, certainly with spelling. And it doesn’t be require that much time to implement along side broader reading comprehension works. So seems like a win-win.

This is it! It is important to teach all children the reading building blocks.

True but the problem is that kids who are already reading don’t need as nauseam basic phonics instruction. Time is better spent on analysis, comprehension, writing, etc…..

It’s the lower performing bottom who needs repetitive phonics instruction and why DCPS is extending it into 2nd grades.

Don’t get me wrong, I support phonics instruction and it’s needed for kids reading chapter books. It really doesn’t help with spelling. What helps is actually having weekly spelling lists or learning actual spelling diagrams. The basic phonics being taught in DCPS is not it.

What you are getting wrong is that it makes no sense to label kids who are still learning/ have been poorly taught phonics “the lower performing bottom”.

What you are getting wrong is that instead of force feeding phonics to the majority of kids who are already reading by 1st and definitely by 2nd, DCPS should do either pull out or push in for the kids who can’t read, have dyslexia, etc…

But of course above is not happening.

The 2nd grade Fundations lessons are 15 minutes at the beginning of the day. My kid has a Lexile score around 1000 and doesn’t complain about them.

PP here. Ok but your kid and all the other kids in 2nd grade who can read would be much better served by actually spending those 15 minutes on doing a spelling lists, learning actual grammar and sentence structure, or doing compositional writing.

I would also argue that 15 minutes of phonics is also not enough time to target the kids who are not reading by 2nd grade. They actually need much more time than that and really should be in pulled out groups.

Lastly, I also suspect that kids in poorly performing schools, where majority are not reading, are not getting just 15 minutes of phonics. The overwhelming majority of the time in ELA is likely spent on phonics.

Fundations lessons are scripted. It could take a bit more time to get through them at a school where almost no students could follow the exercizes, but we're really talking 30 minutes max. They could do other phonics work, of course, but that's not actually the Fundations curriculum itself. Also, if the majority of kids cannot read, more phonics instruction is a good thing in my book. Yes, absolutely, at that point good readers should be pulled for different small group work... but that's exactly what's happening at most good schools.

I also think you're vastly overestimating the percentage of UMC who get no benefit from Fundations/phonics at the beginning of 2nd grade. Even kids who read well can lack certain fundamentals that can be useful for decoding unfamiliar technical words (e.g., science vocab) later on. Phonics also absolutely assist with spelling and our school introduces spelling & vocab lists in 3rd grade that are still largely based on phonics principles. That's also when they start a separate writing class, which focuses on all the things you want. It sounds like you want that to start in 2nd rather than 3rd grade, but even at our non-T1 EOTP DCPS, the majority of 3rd graders struggle at the beginning of the year. (Also my 2nd grader actually did a fair amount of writing last year in small group, but didn't have formal writing instruction like she has now.)

Really the idea that in the course of a DCPS ES day 15 minutes of phonics is a waste of time is just baffling to me. I think you haven't spent enough time in the classroom to see how many 15 minute chunks are just entirely wasted if this is the fight you're picking.

You need to get out of your generalization and bubble. Most schools EOTP are not pulling out readers for small group with more advance work while teaching the rest of the majority of kids phonics. Most schools are not giving out spelling and vocabulary lists.

[Anonymous]

The folks here complaining because their kids are oh so advanced need to take a deep breath. One DC has always read probably 4-5 years above grade level, another has great challenges reading but is very talented in other ways.

Both children benefited from rigorous phonics education. Sure, the first one may have skated by with learning to read by themselves, but they benefitted from a true understanding of word structure from phonics.

But this whole line that your first grader reading Harry Potter can’t benefit from phonics is a little silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone else listened to the Sold a Story podcast?

Does anyone have any insight into how DCPS teaches reading or what curriculum it uses?

The podcast is very compelling, but really puts reading instruction into a black and white debate, which is unhelpful. Reading instruction and readers are very complex. Some of the claims in the podcast are inaccurate and do not reflect the reality of teaching in the classroom. Good balanced literacy programs do not consist of one element of reading and shouldn't.

The podcast has created a new discussion about what is best policy for districts. However, teachers make 1000s of decisions each day based on the strengths and weaknesses of each student in their classroom.

Teachers have so many data points about student progress, particularily if the student is a struggling reader. I would suggest you ask to see the data and understand if the student is progressing (everyone also progresses at different rates). The cirriculum in DCPS can shift year to year and each teacher can emphasize different aspects of the cirriulum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The folks here complaining because their kids are oh so advanced need to take a deep breath. One DC has always read probably 4-5 years above grade level, another has great challenges reading but is very talented in other ways.

Both children benefited from rigorous phonics education. Sure, the first one may have skated by with learning to read by themselves, but they benefitted from a true understanding of word structure from phonics.

But this whole line that your first grader reading Harry Potter can’t benefit from phonics is a little silly.

The folks claiming that what worked for their kid will work for every kid need to take a deep breath.

My kid with ADHD and dyslexia hated phonics instruction and it turned him off to reading. What saved him was a DCPS elementary teacher who told us to keep reading to him, listening to audiobooks, letting him read books like Captain Underpants and Calvin and Hobbes silently, and allowing him to spell phonetically. As predicted, he figured out reading and, slightly later, spelling. Now he’s a literature major who complains that professors don’t allow enough pages in his writing assignments to really dig into topics. Not saying this is a recommended approach, but it worked for my kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some kids need a good does of phonics as initial scaffolding and then need less as time goes on. Some kids a good deal more. Other don’t need it at all. But it hurts no one and helps most (even if not with reading, certainly with spelling. And it doesn’t be require that much time to implement along side broader reading comprehension works. So seems like a win-win.

I agree with this. My oldest has a photographic memory and learned to read very early so phonics was a waste of time for him, but now he is learning another language and it is coming in handy. My youngest started kindergarten last month with zero reading ability and his teacher is using the OG method for the whole class. He is already sounding out words and read me his first book (a baby board book) this week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sad part of Lucy caulkins was that she tried to equate developing a passion for reading with how to learn how to read.

We teach kids math, we don’t simply expect them to develop a passion for it.

Great point about teaching phonics simply because it's good for kids. They don't have to love it. It's like eating broccoli or learning to play scales on the piano. But if kids are learning how to decode and are simultaneously exposed to the "romantic" aspects of reading -- the book nooks, storytime, etc., most kids will come to love reading at some point.

I do have to say that the SoldaStory podcast was an eye opener regarding Lucy Calkins. Calkins herself explains her motivations.
They are definitely mixed as motivations usually are...but there was a lot going on that seemed to be about her personal needs -- not what was best for children. Listen to these segments of the story:"The Superstar" and "The Company" and "The Reckoning". https://www.apmreports.org/episode/2022/11/03/sold-a-story-e4-the-superstar.

And speaking of doing what's best for children, I hope the extremes won't start politicizing the teaching of phonics. Saw this headline today - "With Moms for Liberty Endorsement, ‘Science of Reading’ Faces More Political Controversy". No! A more balanced view: "How to Ensure the Phonics Renaissance Succeeds" https://raisingamericans.substack.com/p/the-american-reading-crisis-and-how

Yup, it’s devastating to “politicize” phonics. It does not belong to a political party for godsakes. Those moms for liberty can stuff it. Lol

If you think it matters what the Moms for Liberty group thinks about phonics instruction, then you’re the one politicizing it. You can not like someone and still find yourself agreeing with them on some things.

If you listen to the Sold a Story podcast, viewing reading instruction through a political lens is part of what got us to this point. This knee-jerk reaction to object to everything the “other side” believes in is a problem. Follow the truth about how kids learn to read. That’s the important part, not who’s endorsing what style of instruction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is not a single DMV school district that teaches reading well. Concerned? Possible dyslexia? ASDEC tutor. Of course get a neuropsychology exam first but don’t blame the school districts. Remember they are jobs programs for the lower third of every graduating class. MCPS particularly bad in this regard so don’t think moving will aide your issue. -dyslexic parent

What an awful assumption about teachers. I’m an elementary school teacher with an undergrad the University of Notre Dame and a Masters from Harvard. Move along with your assumptions.

And yet you don't know "Masters" should be lowercase and you missed "from" earlier in the sentence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The folks here complaining because their kids are oh so advanced need to take a deep breath. One DC has always read probably 4-5 years above grade level, another has great challenges reading but is very talented in other ways.

Both children benefited from rigorous phonics education. Sure, the first one may have skated by with learning to read by themselves, but they benefitted from a true understanding of word structure from phonics.

But this whole line that your first grader reading Harry Potter can’t benefit from phonics is a little silly.

The folks claiming that what worked for their kid will work for every kid need to take a deep breath.

My kid with ADHD and dyslexia hated phonics instruction and it turned him off to reading. What saved him was a DCPS elementary teacher who told us to keep reading to him, listening to audiobooks, letting him read books like Captain Underpants and Calvin and Hobbes silently, and allowing him to spell phonetically. As predicted, he figured out reading and, slightly later, spelling. Now he’s a literature major who complains that professors don’t allow enough pages in his writing assignments to really dig into topics. Not saying this is a recommended approach, but it worked for my kid.

Your child is the absolute exception if they truly are dyslexic. I am a Orton Gillingham certified reading interventionist with 20 years of experience. Research is clear that structured programs like OG or Wilson are highly successful at helping people with dyslexia learn how to read. In my personal experience, people with reading difficulties do not learn to read by listening to audiobooks and reading graphic novels. Read "Overcoming Dylexia." It explains the science behind the dyslexic brain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The folks here complaining because their kids are oh so advanced need to take a deep breath. One DC has always read probably 4-5 years above grade level, another has great challenges reading but is very talented in other ways.

Both children benefited from rigorous phonics education. Sure, the first one may have skated by with learning to read by themselves, but they benefitted from a true understanding of word structure from phonics.

But this whole line that your first grader reading Harry Potter can’t benefit from phonics is a little silly.

The folks claiming that what worked for their kid will work for every kid need to take a deep breath.

My kid with ADHD and dyslexia hated phonics instruction and it turned him off to reading. What saved him was a DCPS elementary teacher who told us to keep reading to him, listening to audiobooks, letting him read books like Captain Underpants and Calvin and Hobbes silently, and allowing him to spell phonetically. As predicted, he figured out reading and, slightly later, spelling. Now he’s a literature major who complains that professors don’t allow enough pages in his writing assignments to really dig into topics. Not saying this is a recommended approach, but it worked for my kid.

Your child is the absolute exception if they truly are dyslexic. I am a Orton Gillingham certified reading interventionist with 20 years of experience. Research is clear that structured programs like OG or Wilson are highly successful at helping people with dyslexia learn how to read. In my personal experience, people with reading difficulties do not learn to read by listening to audiobooks and reading graphic novels. Read "Overcoming Dylexia." It explains the science behind the dyslexic brain.

NP. Ok but what gets me are the vocal parents at our school with kids with dyslexia. All they want is phonics, phonics, phonics at the cost of all else. We already have a string phonics program and it’s just one aspect of the ELA curriculum but not the be all and end all. But to them it is.

I can’t even have a discussion with some of them about other aspects of balanced literary. They don’t get that it’s not all about their kid. The school is not focusing on 1 kid, they are focusing on what is good for the group and the majority of kids don’t have dyslexia AND there is already a phonics program in place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The folks here complaining because their kids are oh so advanced need to take a deep breath. One DC has always read probably 4-5 years above grade level, another has great challenges reading but is very talented in other ways.

Both children benefited from rigorous phonics education. Sure, the first one may have skated by with learning to read by themselves, but they benefitted from a true understanding of word structure from phonics.

But this whole line that your first grader reading Harry Potter can’t benefit from phonics is a little silly.

The folks claiming that what worked for their kid will work for every kid need to take a deep breath.

My kid with ADHD and dyslexia hated phonics instruction and it turned him off to reading. What saved him was a DCPS elementary teacher who told us to keep reading to him, listening to audiobooks, letting him read books like Captain Underpants and Calvin and Hobbes silently, and allowing him to spell phonetically. As predicted, he figured out reading and, slightly later, spelling. Now he’s a literature major who complains that professors don’t allow enough pages in his writing assignments to really dig into topics. Not saying this is a recommended approach, but it worked for my kid.

Your child is the absolute exception if they truly are dyslexic. I am a Orton Gillingham certified reading interventionist with 20 years of experience. Research is clear that structured programs like OG or Wilson are highly successful at helping people with dyslexia learn how to read. In my personal experience, people with reading difficulties do not learn to read by listening to audiobooks and reading graphic novels. Read "Overcoming Dylexia." It explains the science behind the dyslexic brain.

NP. Ok but what gets me are the vocal parents at our school with kids with dyslexia. All they want is phonics, phonics, phonics at the cost of all else. We already have a string phonics program and it’s just one aspect of the ELA curriculum but not the be all and end all. But to them it is.

I can’t even have a discussion with some of them about other aspects of balanced literary. They don’t get that it’s not all about their kid. The school is not focusing on 1 kid, they are focusing on what is good for the group and the majority of kids don’t have dyslexia AND there is already a phonics program in place.

And the school is providing push in services for dyslexia too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some kids need a good does of phonics as initial scaffolding and then need less as time goes on. Some kids a good deal more. Other don’t need it at all. But it hurts no one and helps most (even if not with reading, certainly with spelling. And it doesn’t be require that much time to implement along side broader reading comprehension works. So seems like a win-win.

This is it! It is important to teach all children the reading building blocks.

True but the problem is that kids who are already reading don’t need as nauseam basic phonics instruction. Time is better spent on analysis, comprehension, writing, etc…..

It’s the lower performing bottom who needs repetitive phonics instruction and why DCPS is extending it into 2nd grades.

Don’t get me wrong, I support phonics instruction and it’s needed for kids reading chapter books. It really doesn’t help with spelling. What helps is actually having weekly spelling lists or learning actual spelling diagrams. The basic phonics being taught in DCPS is not it.

What you are getting wrong is that it makes no sense to label kids who are still learning/ have been poorly taught phonics “the lower performing bottom”.

What you are getting wrong is that instead of force feeding phonics to the majority of kids who are already reading by 1st and definitely by 2nd, DCPS should do either pull out or push in for the kids who can’t read, have dyslexia, etc…

But of course above is not happening.

The 2nd grade Fundations lessons are 15 minutes at the beginning of the day. My kid has a Lexile score around 1000 and doesn’t complain about them.

PP here. Ok but your kid and all the other kids in 2nd grade who can read would be much better served by actually spending those 15 minutes on doing a spelling lists, learning actual grammar and sentence structure, or doing compositional writing.

I would also argue that 15 minutes of phonics is also not enough time to target the kids who are not reading by 2nd grade. They actually need much more time than that and really should be in pulled out groups.

Lastly, I also suspect that kids in poorly performing schools, where majority are not reading, are not getting just 15 minutes of phonics. The overwhelming majority of the time in ELA is likely spent on phonics.

Fundations lessons are scripted. It could take a bit more time to get through them at a school where almost no students could follow the exercizes, but we're really talking 30 minutes max. They could do other phonics work, of course, but that's not actually the Fundations curriculum itself. Also, if the majority of kids cannot read, more phonics instruction is a good thing in my book. Yes, absolutely, at that point good readers should be pulled for different small group work... but that's exactly what's happening at most good schools.

I also think you're vastly overestimating the percentage of UMC who get no benefit from Fundations/phonics at the beginning of 2nd grade. Even kids who read well can lack certain fundamentals that can be useful for decoding unfamiliar technical words (e.g., science vocab) later on. Phonics also absolutely assist with spelling and our school introduces spelling & vocab lists in 3rd grade that are still largely based on phonics principles. That's also when they start a separate writing class, which focuses on all the things you want. It sounds like you want that to start in 2nd rather than 3rd grade, but even at our non-T1 EOTP DCPS, the majority of 3rd graders struggle at the beginning of the year. (Also my 2nd grader actually did a fair amount of writing last year in small group, but didn't have formal writing instruction like she has now.)

Really the idea that in the course of a DCPS ES day 15 minutes of phonics is a waste of time is just baffling to me. I think you haven't spent enough time in the classroom to see how many 15 minute chunks are just entirely wasted if this is the fight you're picking.

You need to get out of your generalization and bubble. Most schools EOTP are not pulling out readers for small group with more advance work while teaching the rest of the majority of kids phonics. Most schools are not giving out spelling and vocabulary lists.

But then your complaint is that your school is bad, not that it spends 15 minutes a day on phonics. If your school doesn't do anything else right, then it seems like a scripted 15-30 minute/day phonics lesson is particularly needed.