Re: Reading First, Dibels, NCLB

by Kgrace

Aug 17, 2008

I've taught 3rd and 4th grade for 18 years. I am worried that Reading First and Dibels are actually reducing student literacy in this country. Here are my reasons: 1. A reader is successful when they comprehend text. 2. Dibels tests oral fluency, which is only a part of the reading process. 3. When students are Dibels tested, they get the message that fast oral fluency is the same thing as reading. It is not. (Some adults have the same misconception.) 4. Dibels is practically mandated by Reading First. School districts must record Dibels scores to get money. ( The phrase "scientifically proven assessment" is used to justify this mandate. I strongly question how this was proven. ) 5. Reading First is part of the NCLB, Some of the people who designed Reading First also benefitted financially from the use of Dibels. 6. While the goal of NCLB is great, the program is riddled with political and profit-seeking interests. I believe these interests are trying to make money off education the wa...See More

Comment

(11)

report post

view previous comments

LIBBY ING On 8/21/08, 3rdChicago wrote: > My fears are similar to yours. I've seen our 3rd grade scores > drop DRAMATICALLY on our state test since RF and DIBELS have been > implemented. They tell us time and time again that DIBELS is > only an indicator, yet at the end of the year we were TORN APART > because our DIBELS scores were not higher...See MoreOn 8/21/08, 3rdChicago wrote: > My fears are similar to yours. I've seen our 3rd grade scores > drop DRAMATICALLY on our state test since RF and DIBELS have been > implemented. They tell us time and time again that DIBELS is > only an indicator, yet at the end of the year we were TORN APART > because our DIBELS scores were not higher. So really, it's being > used to assess us. I am about to enter my 3rd year of RF and > this year cannot end soon enough. I hate RF more than I can > possibly say. Tessa - I envy you that you said you got to be > creative with RF. At my school, that was the first thing to go > when we got RF. I feel like all the autonomy I had as a teacher > to be creative, to teach "my way", to follow student interests > has all been pushed aside for RF. Now, we must follow our basal > with "high fidelity," are not allowed to use novels to teach > reading (except outside of our 90 minute block and 30 minute > intervention), and must use their materials to the best of our > ability before we bring in anything outside. > > I'm not a teacher anymore. I'm a puppet for Reading First. > > > On 8/19/08, Tessa- FL wrote: >> On 8/17/08, Kgrace wrote: >>> I've taught 3rd and 4th grade for 18 years. I am worried >>> that Reading First and Dibels are actually reducing >>> student literacy in this country. Here are my reasons: >>> 1. A reader is successful when they comprehend text. >>> 2. Dibels tests oral fluency, which is only a part of the >>> reading process. >> >> Exactly. Also, the "scientifically-based blah-blah-blah" >> reading programs do not teach comprehension. They pretend >> to, with their super-simplistic question-and-answer part of >> the script, but there is no substance to the story or >> questions. Comprehension is not valued by reading first. The >> teacher has to squeeze it in herself/himself. >> >> This is a huge flaw with reading first, although I didn't >> mind it because I had fun being creative with graphic >> organizers, reading a-z.com, read-alouds, and author/genre >> studies. Now that I'm non-reading first I miss being >> creative. We have a comprehensive program now (read: we must >> read lousy books not of our choosing and cannot create our >> own units because the program has created lame units for >> us), and it stinks. I liked reading first better because >> when we got through with the phonics instruction, it was my >> time to be creative! >> >> Oh well. Teachers must do what we're told, not what we know >> is best. We are basically told just shut up and follow the >> program. :(

Apr 26, 2011

report post

Kinder Gal I was in the same boat that you are describing. What you are doing is learning "how" to teach reading (again.) You are using DIBELS as an idicator. As you go through the professional development part of reading first, you will see how it all ties together. We are in our 4th year and out of the grant (when you have the grant, you have to jump throug...See MoreI was in the same boat that you are describing. What you are doing is learning "how" to teach reading (again.) You are using DIBELS as an idicator. As you go through the professional development part of reading first, you will see how it all ties together. We are in our 4th year and out of the grant (when you have the grant, you have to jump through their hoops whether you agree with them or not.) Now that we are out of the grant, we can do as we need and know what is right. Hang in there....it will get better

On 4/26/11, LIBBY ING wrote: > On 8/21/08, 3rdChicago wrote: >> My fears are similar to yours. I've seen our 3rd grade scores >> drop DRAMATICALLY on our state test since RF and DIBELS have been >> implemented. They tell us time and time again that DIBELS is >> only an indicator, yet at the end of the year we were TORN APART >> because our DIBELS scores were not higher. So really, it's being >> used to assess us. I am about to enter my 3rd year of RF and >> this year cannot end soon enough. I hate RF more than I can >> possibly say. Tessa - I envy you that you said you got to be >> creative with RF. At my school, that was the first thing to go >> when we got RF. I feel like all the autonomy I had as a teacher >> to be creative, to teach "my way", to follow student interests >> has all been pushed aside for RF. Now, we must follow our basal >> with "high fidelity," are not allowed to use novels to teach >> reading (except outside of our 90 minute block and 30 minute >> intervention), and must use their materials to the best of our >> ability before we bring in anything outside. >> >> I'm not a teacher anymore. I'm a puppet for Reading First. >> >> >> On 8/19/08, Tessa- FL wrote: >>> On 8/17/08, Kgrace wrote: >>>> I've taught 3rd and 4th grade for 18 years. I am worried >>>> that Reading First and Dibels are actually reducing >>>> student literacy in this country. Here are my reasons: >>>> 1. A reader is successful when they comprehend text. >>>> 2. Dibels tests oral fluency, which is only a part of the >>>> reading process. >>> >>> Exactly. Also, the "scientifically-based blah-blah-blah" >>> reading programs do not teach comprehension. They pretend >>> to, with their super-simplistic question-and-answer part of >>> the script, but there is no substance to the story or >>> questions. Comprehension is not valued by reading first. The >>> teacher has to squeeze it in herself/himself. >>> >>> This is a huge flaw with reading first, although I didn't >>> mind it because I had fun being creative with graphic >>> organizers, reading a-z.com, read-alouds, and author/genre >>> studies. Now that I'm non-reading first I miss being >>> creative. We have a comprehensive program now (read: we must >>> read lousy books not of our choosing and cannot create our >>> own units because the program has created lame units for >>> us), and it stinks. I liked reading first better because >>> when we got through with the phonics instruction, it was my >>> time to be creative! >>> >>> Oh well. Teachers must do what we're told, not what we know >>> is best. We are basically told just shut up and follow the >>> program. :(

May 2, 2011

report post

Did you come awaay any different...better...because of all t On 5/02/11, Kinder Gal wrote: > I was in the same boat that you are describing. What you are doing > is learning "how" to teach reading (again.) You are using DIBELS as > an idicator. As you go through the professional development part of > reading first, you will see how it all ties together. We are in our > 4th year and out of the ...See MoreOn 5/02/11, Kinder Gal wrote: > I was in the same boat that you are describing. What you are doing > is learning "how" to teach reading (again.) You are using DIBELS as > an idicator. As you go through the professional development part of > reading first, you will see how it all ties together. We are in our > 4th year and out of the grant (when you have the grant, you have to > jump through their hoops whether you agree with them or not.) Now > that we are out of the grant, we can do as we need and know what is > right. Hang in there....it will get better > > > > On 4/26/11, LIBBY ING wrote: >> On 8/21/08, 3rdChicago wrote: >>> My fears are similar to yours. I've seen our 3rd grade scores >>> drop DRAMATICALLY on our state test since RF and DIBELS have been >>> implemented. They tell us time and time again that DIBELS is >>> only an indicator, yet at the end of the year we were TORN APART >>> because our DIBELS scores were not higher. So really, it's being >>> used to assess us. I am about to enter my 3rd year of RF and >>> this year cannot end soon enough. I hate RF more than I can >>> possibly say. Tessa - I envy you that you said you got to be >>> creative with RF. At my school, that was the first thing to go >>> when we got RF. I feel like all the autonomy I had as a teacher >>> to be creative, to teach "my way", to follow student interests >>> has all been pushed aside for RF. Now, we must follow our basal >>> with "high fidelity," are not allowed to use novels to teach >>> reading (except outside of our 90 minute block and 30 minute >>> intervention), and must use their materials to the best of our >>> ability before we bring in anything outside. >>> >>> I'm not a teacher anymore. I'm a puppet for Reading First. >>> >>> >>> On 8/19/08, Tessa- FL wrote: >>>> On 8/17/08, Kgrace wrote: >>>>> I've taught 3rd and 4th grade for 18 years. I am worried >>>>> that Reading First and Dibels are actually reducing >>>>> student literacy in this country. Here are my reasons: >>>>> 1. A reader is successful when they comprehend text. >>>>> 2. Dibels tests oral fluency, which is only a part of the >>>>> reading process. >>>> >>>> Exactly. Also, the "scientifically-based blah-blah-blah" >>>> reading programs do not teach comprehension. They pretend >>>> to, with their super-simplistic question-and-answer part of >>>> the script, but there is no substance to the story or >>>> questions. Comprehension is not valued by reading first. The >>>> teacher has to squeeze it in herself/himself. >>>> >>>> This is a huge flaw with reading first, although I didn't >>>> mind it because I had fun being creative with graphic >>>> organizers, reading a-z.com, read-alouds, and author/genre >>>> studies. Now that I'm non-reading first I miss being >>>> creative. We have a comprehensive program now (read: we must >>>> read lousy books not of our choosing and cannot create our >>>> own units because the program has created lame units for >>>> us), and it stinks. I liked reading first better because >>>> when we got through with the phonics instruction, it was my >>>> time to be creative! >>>> >>>> Oh well. Teachers must do what we're told, not what we know >>>> is best. We are basically told just shut up and follow the >>>> program. :(

Feb 25, 2012

report post

Kinder Gal Yes, I did. We push letter naming at the beginning of the year. I do not introduce letters as per the core. I find that the sooner kids learn the letters and sounds, then the skills in the core become more successful for them as they have the prior knowledge and it makes sense to them. My interventions are based on what the kids do on their AIMSweb...See MoreYes, I did. We push letter naming at the beginning of the year. I do not introduce letters as per the core. I find that the sooner kids learn the letters and sounds, then the skills in the core become more successful for them as they have the prior knowledge and it makes sense to them. My interventions are based on what the kids do on their AIMSweb/DIBELS scores. My groups are always moving. Those who have benched move on to Reading Eggs, a language arts program on computer. They are really sailing. Now to get the rest of my students (8) on board., Sighhhhh

On 2/25/12, Did you come awaay any different...better...because of all t wrote: > On 5/02/11, Kinder Gal wrote: >> I was in the same boat that you are describing. What you are doing >> is learning "how" to teach reading (again.) You are using DIBELS as >> an idicator. As you go through the professional development part of >> reading first, you will see how it all ties together. We are in our >> 4th year and out of the grant (when you have the grant, you have to >> jump through their hoops whether you agree with them or not.) Now >> that we are out of the grant, we can do as we need and know what is >> right. Hang in there....it will get better >> >> >> >> On 4/26/11, LIBBY ING wrote: >>> On 8/21/08, 3rdChicago wrote: >>>> My fears are similar to yours. I've seen our 3rd grade scores >>>> drop DRAMATICALLY on our state test since RF and DIBELS have been >>>> implemented. They tell us time and time again that DIBELS is >>>> only an indicator, yet at the end of the year we were TORN APART >>>> because our DIBELS scores were not higher. So really, it's being >>>> used to assess us. I am about to enter my 3rd year of RF and >>>> this year cannot end soon enough. I hate RF more than I can >>>> possibly say. Tessa - I envy you that you said you got to be >>>> creative with RF. At my school, that was the first thing to go >>>> when we got RF. I feel like all the autonomy I had as a teacher >>>> to be creative, to teach "my way", to follow student interests >>>> has all been pushed aside for RF. Now, we must follow our basal >>>> with "high fidelity," are not allowed to use novels to teach >>>> reading (except outside of our 90 minute block and 30 minute >>>> intervention), and must use their materials to the best of our >>>> ability before we bring in anything outside. >>>> >>>> I'm not a teacher anymore. I'm a puppet for Reading First. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 8/19/08, Tessa- FL wrote: >>>>> On 8/17/08, Kgrace wrote: >>>>>> I've taught 3rd and 4th grade for 18 years. I am worried >>>>>> that Reading First and Dibels are actually reducing >>>>>> student literacy in this country. Here are my reasons: >>>>>> 1. A reader is successful when they comprehend text. >>>>>> 2. Dibels tests oral fluency, which is only a part of the >>>>>> reading process. >>>>> >>>>> Exactly. Also, the "scientifically-based blah-blah-blah" >>>>> reading programs do not teach comprehension. They pretend >>>>> to, with their super-simplistic question-and-answer part of >>>>> the script, but there is no substance to the story or >>>>> questions. Comprehension is not valued by reading first. The >>>>> teacher has to squeeze it in herself/himself. >>>>> >>>>> This is a huge flaw with reading first, although I didn't >>>>> mind it because I had fun being creative with graphic >>>>> organizers, reading a-z.com, read-alouds, and author/genre >>>>> studies. Now that I'm non-reading first I miss being >>>>> creative. We have a comprehensive program now (read: we must >>>>> read lousy books not of our choosing and cannot create our >>>>> own units because the program has created lame units for >>>>> us), and it stinks. I liked reading first better because >>>>> when we got through with the phonics instruction, it was my >>>>> time to be creative! >>>>> >>>>> Oh well. Teachers must do what we're told, not what we know >>>>> is best. We are basically told just shut up and follow the >>>>> program. :(

Mar 16, 2012

report post

I also began to think about it and realized that many people have superhuman abilities. And for example, psychics connect https://www.lux-review.com/best-online-psychic-reading-websites-and-apps-in-2021/ is also something unusual. There are many applications that you can find on the internet that will allow you to watch psychic reading. But if you ...See More

Mar 23, 2022

report post