Hameray Publishing Group offers 15 all-new titles by the award-winning and critically-acclaimed author of children's books, Joy Cowley. With a devoted following among educators worldwide, the Joy Cowley Collection is very popular among educators and students alike.
All the books in the series are leveled for 1st grade and 2nd grade students.
We use the STAR Early Literacy test and STAR Reading test as our universal screener in our RtI program. Ren. learning came out with a new progress monitoring tool this summer. Please, is anyone using it that you can share some info on it? Is it an effective tool for monitoring every 2 weeks? Thanks!
On 11/06/09, sincere wrote: > Do you think they have never been taught these skills, or that > they were taught and "didn't get it"? Will they get it now??? > I teach children that "just don't get it" no matter what I do... > > > On 11/04/09, and guess what? wrote: >> I've had to teach more basic skills this year than every >> before (I teach 5th grade). For the first time ever, here >> is a short list of "firsts" for my students... >> - many didn't know their vowel sounds - short or long. >> - many did not know the difference between a consonant and >> a vowel. >> - many had no idea about how locate points on a map with >> latitude and longitude, or many other basic map skills -- >> like the fact the equator is zero degrees latitude. >> - many did not know the difference between a state, a >> country and a continent. >> - I'm teaching writing skills like how to capitalize the >> first letter in a sentence and how to use ending >> punctuation. >> - a large number of them are reading fluently and have >> absolutely no idea what they are reading. >> Yikes!!!!!
On 11/08/09, OP wrote: > I think this is a result of the "just keep the pace and they'll > get it eventually" philosophy of Reading First. I've been > teaching for 20 years -- and I've never seen such a rapid and > drastic drop in students' abilities since Reading First came to > our school. In 5th grade -- we're not under the strict mandates > of the RF grant, and even though the administrators try their > best to make us adhere to these horrible practices -- I just > close my door and teach, and hopefully the students will have a > greater understanding when they leave 5th grade. > > > On 11/06/09, sincere wrote: >> Do you think they have never been taught these skills, or that >> they were taught and "didn't get it"? Will they get it now??? >> I teach children that "just don't get it" no matter what I > do... >> >> >> On 11/04/09, and guess what? wrote: >>> I've had to teach more basic skills this year than every >>> before (I teach 5th grade). For the first time ever, here >>> is a short list of "firsts" for my students... >>> - many didn't know their vowel sounds - short or long. >>> - many did not know the difference between a consonant and >>> a vowel. >>> - many had no idea about how locate points on a map with >>> latitude and longitude, or many other basic map skills -- >>> like the fact the equator is zero degrees latitude. >>> - many did not know the difference between a state, a >>> country and a continent. >>> - I'm teaching writing skills like how to capitalize the >>> first letter in a sentence and how to use ending >>> punctuation. >>> - a large number of them are reading fluently and have >>> absolutely no idea what they are reading. >>> Yikes!!!!!
For those who have survived Reading First, what are you doing now? Are you continuing to teach reading first with a reading coach? Did your school district absorb the cost of reading first? Is there another reading program that is taking the place of reading first?
emmaWe are now in what is called the "sustainability" mode. We are continuuing to have the 3 tiers for reading time and the 2 hours devoted to it. We still have to use the program chosen for our core reading time. However, we are given more leeway when it comes to what we use for intervention-- as long as it's working for the struggling readers. We sti...See MoreWe are now in what is called the "sustainability" mode. We are continuuing to have the 3 tiers for reading time and the 2 hours devoted to it. We still have to use the program chosen for our core reading time. However, we are given more leeway when it comes to what we use for intervention-- as long as it's working for the struggling readers. We still have the walk-through and more thorough observations by the principal and reading coach but they are not as critical as they had been before. We no longer have the state reading coach breathing down our necks all the time. We don't have to adhere to so much data anymore. However, we still have to progress monitor our kids using DIBELs. Actually, I've become used to it, but the pacing calendar sure does box me in a lot. There is much good that has come from Reading First. We don't waste the time that we have done in the past. We have well-trained interventionists now instead of just bodies in a room. I can see the positives about it but I am glad there is not so much pressure to "perform" all the time. I was sick of that.
On 11/14/09, Kinder Gal wrote: > For those who have survived Reading First, what are you > doing now? Are you continuing to teach reading first with > a reading coach? Did your school district absorb the cost > of reading first? Is there another reading program that is > taking the place of reading first?
On 11/20/09, emma wrote: > > We are now in what is called the "sustainability" mode. We > are continuuing to have the 3 tiers for reading time and the > 2 hours devoted to it. We still have to use the program > chosen for our core reading time. However, we are given more > leeway when it comes to what we use for intervention-- as > long as it's working for the struggling readers. We still > have the walk-through and more thorough observations by the > principal and reading coach but they are not as critical as > they had been before. We no longer have the state reading > coach breathing down our necks all the time. We don't have > to adhere to so much data anymore. However, we still have to > progress monitor our kids using DIBELs. Actually, I've > become used to it, but the pacing calendar sure does box me > in a lot. There is much good that has come from Reading > First. We don't waste the time that we have done in the > past. We have well-trained interventionists now instead of > just bodies in a room. I can see the positives about it but > I am glad there is not so much pressure to "perform" all the > time. I was sick of that. > > > > > > > On 11/14/09, Kinder Gal wrote: >> For those who have survived Reading First, what are you >> doing now? Are you continuing to teach reading first with >> a reading coach? Did your school district absorb the cost >> of reading first? Is there another reading program that is >> taking the place of reading first?
Win A FREE LICENSE for The First 4,000 Words for your Class and your School!
The First 4,000 Words is an interactive web-based program used to teach the 4,000 most frequently used English words to English Language Learners and struggling readers in grades 1 through 4. This research-based and field-tested program helps students develop the necessary reading skills to succeed in school.
The First 4,000 Words, requires little teacher time beyond student setup, contains 355 interactive and individualized web-based lessons organized into 8 levels of proficiency. Students access their lessons through an engaging world of words called the Vocabitat. Animated woodland characters guide the students through the lessons, which use game-like scenarios and speech recognition technology to teach, reinforce, and assess vocabulary listening, reading, and pronunciation.
Winning Teachers Receive: A one-year license to the program for one teacher account (available for up to 30 students) 25 vocabulary tests to assess students' reading and listening vocabulary Student web site for delivery of the lessons Teacher web site for tracking, monitoring and reporting student progress Teacher's manual
Winning Schools Receive: A one-year license to the program for one school account (unlimited number of teachers) 25 vocabulary tests to assess students' reading and listening vocabulary Student web site for delivery of the lessons Teacher web site for tracking, monitoring and reporting student progress Teacher's manual
I am a kindergarten teacher in a Reading First classroom. Does anyone out there have suggestions for organizing reading groups and literacy centers that actually work well?
What are your responsibilities as the reading specialist?
...See MoreI am considering becoming a reading specialist since I just received my reading teacher license. Before I go on further with this license (and pay more), could you answer any of these questions for me? I just want to know more about what I might be getting in to. Thanks so much!
What are your responsibilities as the reading specialist?
Do you spent more of your day working with students or staff?
What does your typical day look like?
What are your favorite assessments?
What does the district expect from you?
Did you develop your district’s reading program? If yes, please tell me about it. If not, who had the responsibility?
What would you consider a great resource for directing and supervising a reading program?
What are the strengths/weaknesses of your program?
When you first became a reading specialist, what were your biggest challenges and how did you overcome them?
What advice would you give to a new reading specialist?
This post is in response to: "There are far more interesting ways to teach children to read (rather than Reading Mastery), there are wonderful computer programs as well as ipad apps. Children need high interest ways to learn. This program feels like you are teaching in the 60's." ----------------------------------------------------------- Hmmmmmmmm............ Why not teach like in the 60's? It seems like there were more teachers using phonics, which research has proved to be more effective than whole language.
In 1967, Harvard Professor Jeanne Chall released her review of reading methods with the conclusion that:
"[The phonics approach (code emphasis) produces] better results, at least up to the point where sufficient evidence seems to be available, the end of the third grade. The results are better, not only in terms of the mechanical aspects of literacy alone, as was once supposed, but also in terms of the ultimate goals of reading instruction - comprehension and possibly even the speed of reading."
In 1973, Dr. Robert Dykstra, professor of education at the University of Minnesota, reviewed 59 studies and concluded that:
"We can summarize the results of 60 years of research dealing with beginning reading instruction by stating that early systematic instruction in phonics provides the child with the skills necessary to become an independent reader at an earlier age than is likely if phonics instruction is delayed or less systematic."
From the early 1960's to the mid 1980's, the Reading Reform Foundation was in the forefront of efforts to apply research findings to the teaching of reading. Since that time, hundreds of teachers and thousands of children have benefited from the practical application of the sound, proven, techniques of reading instruction the Reading Reform Foundation has promoted.
In 1993, The National Right to Read Foundation picked up the phonics torch and is carrying the message to the nation, that direct, systematic phonics is an essential first step in teaching reading. Below are just a few of the success stories that can be told, and the implication for the nation's schools should be crystal clear.
If children are taught intensive, systematic phonics at an early age, until it is automatically applied in the reading process, then illiteracy is dramatically reduced, comprehension improves, and remediation is virtually unnecessary, except for very few.
All children will benefit from READING MASTERY and many children require systematic, direct instruction in the elements of the alphabetic code.
A SCHOOL THAT TURNED ITSELF AROUND WITH READING MASTERY It was around the year 2000 that the Butte school district in Montana found itself in trouble. In 2001, the district started a pilot program in five classrooms using a program called Reading Mastery, which emphasized phonetic awareness - especially in the younger grades - and fluency, comprehension, vocabulary and other skills.
Developed by a scientist, Reading Mastery was resisted by teachers who weren't sold on the new curriculum.
[Here's where that "philosophy" business rears its ugly head.]
"It's scripted and it's very strict," said Judy Jonart, the district's curriculum director.
The system provides a script from which teachers read and lessons are plotted, leaving some teachers feeling robbed of creativity and spontaneity. The program also requires total devotion or "fidelity," meaning teachers must not stray from the boundaries.
[Let's weigh the pros and cons.) Con: teachers feeling robbed of creativity. Pro: kids learning how to read.
Yeah, that's a tough winner to pick. Creativity to do what? Misteach kids how to read? isn't that waht it boils down to when you look at the statistics? Such calls for "creativity" really ought to be made in front of a greek chorus of students "reading" from a grade-level book.]
"People I have great respect for didn't agree with me," Jonart said. But the results from five pilot classrooms convinced the district that Reading Mastery was the best route.
"They were way ahead of everyone else," Jonart said.
[Again, this is the predictable result. On average there should be about a standard deviation increase in effect size.]
Although it seems having a scripted program would result in less work for teachers and administrators, it's not the case. In fact, Jonart said the program requires more of teachers. The program is targeted toward children's abilities, which are categorized as intensive, for readers most in need of help, and strategic, for children on their way toward meeting benchmark goals for their age groups.
It puzzles me why a teacher would choose "wonderful computer programs as well as ipad apps" as the chosen method for their struggling readers. Choosing a "warm and fuzzy" reading intervention curriculum is not for the benefit of the students. Students who are struggling to learn to read will be motivated by the quick progress and self esteem boost that is to be gained by instruction in programs like Reading Mastery.
When confronted with a choice of material, teachers often don't know how to pick out the material that will teach the important skills. Better to keep the slower learners occupied and docile, rather than go through the effort of teaching them. Projects and activities are good at keeping kids occupied and let teachers put in a touch of cuteness and creativity.
Most professionals don't like failing, but for some reason educators are the exception to the rule. Seems they'd rather stick to a failed philosophy than change.
A BLOGGER ON D-Ed Reckoning (KDeRosa) PUT IT THIS WAY:
"It seems to me that the primary reason why many kids fail to learn to read on a timely basis is because many educators don't want to put in the effort necessary to teach them. When given a choice, they will invariably pick the reading program and activities that require the least amount of teaching and effort. The actual needs of the students are secondary. Kids who don't learn under these educator-favored programs are labeled "learning disabled" and shuffled off to a reading intervention. It is hard to imagine any other profession getting away with such shenanigans.
Could you imagine a surgeon who only performed easy procedures, regardless of their efficacy, because he didn't want to put the work in necessary to perform the difficult procedures that were more effective? Could you also imagine this surgeon then labeling all the patients he failed to cure as "healing disabled" and referring them to another surgeon? Of course not."