One of the ugliest facts of the US is many Americans believe poor children should (can) perform academically the same as affluent children *as if the poverty/affluence don’t matter*
Pay elementary teachers $100,000/yr? Sure
But *stop* spreading the lie they don't know how to teach reading
*Stop* forcing them to sit thru commercial retraining
*Stop* adopting scripted curriculum
Pay ***AND*** treat them as professionals
Since poor students score much lower than other students on ALL tests regardless of content area, maybe the issue isn’t how we teach any content but the poverty (which we refuse to address)
1. Take any normal worksheet with review questions.
2. Cut the sheet into slips.
3. Hide those slips in plastic eggs.
4. Toss the eggs in a trash can.
5. Stop wasting your time and your students' time with worksheets.
What if children entering K were healthy and had full access to healthcare, had a stable homes with parents working stable jobs with more than adequate pay, had access to books/texts in home, had the opportunity to live happily and play, loved books/reading for pleasure
What if . . . children entering K could write their names, say the name & sound for most alphabet letters, segment the 1st sound in a word, retell a book read to them, communicate w/ strong vocabulary & world knowledge. . . We CAN do this! Please join us:
I have been in education almost 40 years and we are making a huge mistake not to point out the complete nonsense being promoted by Republicans about education simply to gain political points
A thread
1/x
Edu-crisis rhetoric, the testing industry, and the education material/services products racket all serve each other. Not students. Not teachers. Not parents. Not society.
Here are 2 problems:
(1) US police forces are hyper-militarized and have been killing 1000+ people a year since 2013
(2) Blacks are killed at disproportionate rates compared to whites (B 30/million v. W 12/million) even though in the US there are 5-6 W for every B person.
1/x
Demanding ***more of children earlier*** while not demanding that adults address the inequities of children's lives is inexcusable. Pointing fingers at childhood literacy is often a distraction from the lack of political will in adults across the US
Dangerously wrong but also the logical outcome of seeing "reading" as some sort of technical sequence of skills
Many, if not most, children learn to love reading from being read to and looking at picture books before any decoding at all
What is the phonics rule for pronouncing
Wind
What part of speech is it?
(Oops. Cannot do these in isolation. Reading is not letter by letter, phoneme by phoneme, word by word. Reading is always in context.)
The
#scienceofreading
movement is yet another anti-teacher movement in education reform. Just like TFA, charter schools, and the VAM-era of Michelle Rhee. Bashing veteran teachers and teacher educators and coaxing new teachers with false blame and false narratives
Despites decades of scientific research, guess what you’ll never see catch on in edu-fads?
The science of poverty
The science of racism
What really impacts achievement the most …
@emrazz
In my ed foundations class today we discussed consent and students confirmed that male and female students STILL have drastically different definitions of consent. Women students deeply troubled by this ... so much work to do with men
The Science of Reading movement: The never-ending debate and the need for a different approach to reading instruction (NEPC Policy Brief) via
@plthomasEdD
Pro Tip:
Doesn't matter if you claim to be a Democrat or progressive, supporting a "back to basics" movement in reading with a hyper-focus on phonics-first/phonics for all is supporting a very CONSERVATIVE agenda that overlaps with the censorship movement
1/2
“Sports is the only job in the world where we let people call in who have never touched a ball give their opinion and we listen.
We wouldn’t do that if we were doctors.
Like, hey, let the public call in and talk to us about surgery. We would never do that.”
- Charles Barkley
“Good teaching, effective teaching, is not just about using whatever science says ‘usually’ works best. It is all about finding out what works best for the individual child and the group of children in front of you.” — Richard Allington, February 2005
After making a good faith effort to interact with SOR advocates (with one person responding thoughtfully and both of us coming to realize we have many big picture agreements), the responses turned nasty and then nastier (what I notice is common among many SOR folk)
1/x
Dear
@educationweek
:
If you persist in pushing the "science of reading," you must not prop up your arguments with ***unscientific surveys and anecdotes***.
Meet the standards you expect of others, and do the due diligence, or listen to the profession.
Science of reading advocates need to do WAY more that "Oops! We don't agree with M4L!"
SOR folk need to interrogate WHY all the extreme rightwingers LOVE SOR and then reconsider the SOR narratives that are essentially conservative talking points and not facts
States are spending 10s of MILLIONS of $$ to train teachers with LETRS without research showing training needed
LETRS increased teacher confidence but has NO IMPACT on student learning
Brilliant use of "science"
You know it is a grift when the SOR folk scream Units of Study and F&P are not scientific
But cite the PUBLISHERS' "research" when promoting the new reading programs
Been in education since 1984. Every single program and education resource has been research/evidence-based
#scienceofreading
support for structured literacy/scripted reading programs = de-professionalizing teachers/teaching
SOR policies requiring "all students must" = ignoring that students are INDIVIDUALS with different strengths and needs (including students with special needs)
Students suffer from teachers who do most of the work *for* them and call it writing instruction or feedback. Rubrics and marking everything for students are *not* effective for fostering students as writers. Students come to conflate "feedback" with doing the writing for them
What if, after the pandemic dip in NAEP scores, we admitted that standardized testing of student achievement is *mostly* a reflection of out-of-school factors—and not teacher quality, instructional methods, etc.?
[Narrator: Research always shows test data = 60-80% OOS factors]
As more people are coming to realize, the "science of reading" movement is built on a series of claims that are mostly fabricated and/or anecdotes that are circular reasoning.
See \/ the basic media narrative that lacks evidence
1/x
Sold a Story is not good journalism. If you are not willing to read and consider the sizable scholarly analyses that show it is misleading, false, melodramatic, and anecdotal, then you just want confirmation journalism for your assumptions
Reading program X is not the problem
Reading program Y is not the solution
The reading program merry-go-round is the problem
Get off that ride, teach children not programs
Systematic phonics for all students is a MARKET position
Not a scientific one
Reading program X failed is a MARKET position
Not a scientific one
2/3 students not proficient readers is a MARKET position
Not a scientific one
Revision is writing
Revision is learning
Submitting writing for a grade defies the value of both writing and learning
(My students are nearly incapable of writing or learning because of grade culture)
Took 40 years to acknowledge A Nation at Risk was politically skewed, flawed, and essentially gaslighting
I likely won't be here for that reckoning for the SOR movement but it is exactly the same misguided template for the crisis/miracle reform approach to politicizing schools
Just shared scientific research with SOR/dyslexia advocate. They responded by hoping I go to hell and burn for eternity
So. Science only if it is what they prefer … which ain’t science
Since a co-authored article of mine has triggered the SOR trolls and their only response is personal attacks and LIES, let me offer some clarifications on social media. Note that lies and attacks show they have no real rebuttals, just lies and attacks
a thread
1/
It is possible and necessary to refute this harmful work (her work is HURTING people and is MISINFORMATION) and to be compassionate about her anxiety (even as she herself is NOT being compassionate about those who work is hurting
As the report out of UCLA noted and as CR noted openly, the attack on education and teachers (and being "woke") is entirely "caricature" designed for gross political points and aims
4/x
The "science of" nonsense can't get more nonsenser.
People are posting this on social media and saying it is "new research" from SOR and "science of writing"
This is from Best Practice, newest ed 2012
If you are an SOR advocate
You cannot cite
Journalism
NCTQ
EdWeek surveys
Publishers
Louisa Moates
Podcasts
Your own experiences
None of that is scientific
None
Please recognize that for some of us, shorter daylight and earlier sunsets result in genuine negative physical and emotional consequences
The awful slide from now to the winter solstice is the worst time of year for me and I want to acknowledge this for those like me as well
A major flaw of the SOR reading movement is that SOR advocates are repeating an essential flaw in edu-debates for about a century+
Misrepresenting and incorrectly defining terms, approaches in order to discredit them
A thread
1/x
Since I have been discounted as "someone who has never raised reading achievement" I want to admit:
I have never claimed to raise "reading achievement" by training high-poverty children to pronounce nonsense words in order to boost my status as a reading "expert"
Curriculum and programs should be aligned with ***the students being taught***
And there is no silver-bullet, one-size-fits all, prepackaged way to do that
Not programs, standards, or trendy way to teach reading
As an educator/scholar/writer grounded in critical pedagogy/ literacy/ discourse analysis, I am *not* compelled by "camps" that advocate "my way is the right way"
"Critical" is not asserting/proving "my way" but constant questioning "are we sure this way is good enough?"
Take just a few minutes to scratch beneath the surface of "scientific"
SOR charade is filled with market interests (LETRS, CORE, O-G, etc.), think tank representatives (mostly right-wing), and no distinction between media articles/podcasts/surveys and scientific research
AND THEN put those professionals in teaching and learning conditions that they and their students can be successful
*Stop* demanding that students and teachers overcome impossible conditions
@michaelharriot
When being an introvert comes in conflict with being anti-authority ...
Don't *tell me* to stay away from people! (But I would prefer to stay away from people)
Scripted curriculum forces teachers to conform to demands of fidelity to the programs over the individual needs of students
The locus of authority is in the commercial program and policed by administration
Since before Covid shut down, I have presented about 40 times all over the US on SOR to 1000s of teachers
The main responses I get are thanking me for addressing media/political misinformation and urging me to continue
Teachers are tired of being lied TO and ABOUT
When we get serious about student reading proficiency, we will:
Stop the reading program shuffle
Address out-of-school factors (poverty, healthcare, access to book in home and community)
Address teaching/learning conditions
AND completely change reading assessment
1/
STOP recommending Sold a Story
It is melodramatic ***misinformation*** campaign
SOR marketing boondoggle ... Lacks historical and research grounding
Get the REAL and FULL story
A fundamental problem with systematic phonics or grammar instruction and reading or writing programs is that ACCOUNTABILITY inevitably focuses on whether or not teachers cover the material or implement the program.
Student learning becomes secondary, ignored, or often just data
K-12 educators are secretly a cabal of Marxists
K-12 educators are secretly committed to grooming children to be gay or trans
K-12 educators are teaching white children they are to blame for all racism
None of these claims make any sense in the context of who teachers are 3/x