Reply to Reading Groups

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "Reading Groups"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]A lot of parents wanted a phonics based LA program. I was ecstatic when I heard that they were going to be doing word studies and focusing on spelling and grammar this year. The method that they were using worked for a small group of kids and left a lot of other kids struggling, not just the kids with dyslexia. DS is a smart, capable kid who has not had any corrections to his spelling or grammar in LA for the first 5 years he was in school. That is ridiculous. He knew how to spell the words correctly, we asked him to spell words for us when we saw papers from school, he wasn't doing it because the Teacher didn't correct it and he didn't care. It only started improving when we started making him redo work at home.

At the very least, the way FCPS had been teaching LA was allowing kids to be lazy and that was impacting their writing and reading as they got older. At worst, kids who were slow to read or had LDs struggled for a longer period of time then they needed to. That can cause issues with a kids self esteem and desire to learn.

I have no problem at my 5th grader who is ahead in reading and does well with comprehension and the like (high iReady's and Pass Advanced on the 2 SOLs he has taken, not that either of those are great measures) will be a better reader and writer with what they are doing now. Kids who are ahead in reading will still be in a higher reading group and will still be working on reading comprehension. He reads a lot at home and we discuss what he is reading. He is going to be fine. [/quote]

[b]What parents don’t understand is that phonics, spelling and grammar work should be combined with comprehension and understanding. [/b] Whatever, you are going to get phonics and spelling, but “content-rich” push is coming from companies that are pushing their curriculum.  I

Know also that the reason why we don’t have science and social studies is that parents 15 years ago wanted to make sure all kids were reading and doing math, so they lobbied for more reading and math time and science and social studies were cut. Parents get what they ask for eventually, so be careful what you ask for because the education companies and legislature is listening. Because of this public schools will always leave something out for someone. As a previous poster said, “the pendulum has swung” enjoy that you are happy with its direction for the time being.[/quote]

That is LITERALLY what those of us who are praising the science of reading are saying. It's just that reading comprehension lady can't comprehend this, LOL!![/quote]

“Reading comprehension lady”, aka me, has a masters in teaching and actually taught elementary in FCPS for years. I know what balanced literacy looks like. The fact is kids need both phonics and reading comprehension skills. As kids get older, though, the focus needs to be more on comprehension. What I am seeing at my child’s school right now is not balanced. I am seeing a mad rush to catch up on stuff that should have been done in K-2. My child is now way past that and is at ceiling with phonemic awareness. She doesn’t need to know open and closed syllables now. Other kids might, but she is bored. Her scores on nonfiction and fiction sections of standardized tests indicate she may need work on those areas. Not a disability by any means, but she needs to be practicing comprehension and answering questions about texts. I’m not seeing that at all so far. The fact is teachers are now catering to the lowest readers.[/quote]

You taught elementary in FCPS for years? So you're part of the problem. You "taught" children how to read with "balanced literacy" aka Lucy Calkins. So nope, not seeing you as an expert. [/quote]

Never used Lucy Calkins. I also didn’t teach kids to read. I taught upper level elementary where we focused on comprehension. We met in reading groups and discussed chapters. We answered comprehension questions. We made predictions and connections and summaries. Those skills are important once the child reaches the upper grades. There is less emphasis on phonics by then because all the kids know how to read already.[/quote]

I have to laugh that people think Lucy Caulkins=balanced literacy :lol:  It screams I'm not an educator and I don't really know what balanced literacy is.[/quote]

+1 yep. They can keep screaming at each other while us real teachers know exactly what’s up. Lol. Upper grade teachers know the kids need reading groups to discuss books. [/quote]

What is Lucy Calkins, then? Serious question. NY Times says she's a pre-eminent leader of balanced literacy.[/quote]

You believe everything the NYT says?![/quote]

Here's an opinion piece she wrote where she calls balanced literacy "our approach" so she says so herself.[/quote]

^^ https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/02/the-right-approach-to-reading-instruction/balanced-literacy-is-one-effective-approach[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics