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

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

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

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]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. [/quote]

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. [/quote]

Ok but reading is so important they should have bought the Cadillacs. They can buy unicycles for social studies and whatever for all I care. [/quote]

I don't really understand this attitude, to be honest. Most kids can and do learn to read with the current approach. Some need a specialized approach, which MCPS seems to finally be ready to provide. I'm not mad that some kids are getting OG when my kids learned to read with 2.0. For the same reason, I'm not mad that some kids get a 1-to-1 aide or speech therapy. In a public education system, I think it is perfectly fine to use an approach (a Honda Civic) that works on the lower-needs kids, and to save the resource-intensive approaches (the Cadillacs) for kids who need something different. [/quote]

I would agree that if they were identifying and providing more intervention to all kids that need it, but that’s not really what happens.  A lot of kids fall through the cracks, those who dont learn under the current system but don’t get the benefit of the specialized instruction.  There simply aren’t enough resources- our ES only has one reading specialist for 600+ kids.[/quote]

The problem is not one reading specialist as not every kid requires a reading specialist.  The problem is that foundational skills in reading and math take time, attention and practice.  Items generally better delivered and retain on a 1-1 or small group basis.  Unfortunately, K-2 classes where these skills are taught have 20+ kids, one teacher and kids all over the spectrum.  A K teacher might have one group of students cementing the basic constant and short vowel  sounds, another group working on digraphs, long vowels, and reading at mid 1st grade, and yet another group working or trigraphs, special phonemes, and reading at early 2nd.  And this is only if the teacher has three groups.  Many have 4 or 5 both because of levels and tongice each student attention and a chance to read aloud.[/quote]

Well that's sort of the point- with that sort of ratio, fewer kids get pulled out to work with a reading specialist and the classroom teacher has to manage these struggling kids on their own along with those at or above grade level.  My sister is a reading teacher in a school with only 200 students plus she has a tutor (a retired reading teacher) to help.  So she can work with a higher percentage of the kids who do need extra help.[/quote]

No I think you missed the point.  My example mentioned nothing about kids struggling, there’s just a lot of them and they are at different levels.  A Reading Specialist isn’t necessarily required in this example just an assistant teacher or class Para who can help on a consistent basis each day.  Additionally teachers need training in Phonics and every K-2 class should have a set of workbooks that they can pull/copy from.  I’m consistently amazed (across multiple states mind you) that there are K-2 teachers that don’t know phonics nor even have a basic set of books/workbooks  in their class that could help them should they get a kid that behind/ahead.  Then I go volunteer in a classroom or tutor and after 1-2 sessions is like little Johnny needs to practice hearing the “g” sounds and needs work on blends and diagraphs.  Invariably I get a strange look or question like “well which ones do you see he needs to review?”  🤔 Hmm wouldn’t it just be easier to do then all. The ones he knows will be review and will help him get the rest.
 [/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