As a parent of a child with cognitive delays, a child delayed since birth, I am always fearful that we are reaching for a way to 'fix' the kid, a box with a tidy little solution, a program that will turn out to be the magic key.
Our son is twenty and I am so proud of his accomplishments (an active four year choir member, a Special Olympian, a B honor roll student (modified classes) and now, a young man employed part-time and looking forward to a move to assisted living. All along the way, teachers--both those in regular classrooms and those in the exceptional education system--played a critical role in contributing to the young man he has become. A young man with a chromosomal condition, a tested IQ that is less than 60, and a citizen who functions to the best of his ability. All that said, be a special ed parent and self-appoint activist for kids in the system, the honest truth is that teachers don't always rise to serve these kids in the best way possible and some are pretty quick to be searching for a label, when a label isn't going to change things. Bev, I agree completely here with your reaction to the quoted section of the text, but I do believe in my heart that ALL teachers want to do right by ALL students and sometimes lack the tool box to do so. If Rti can become a process to support more seamless support of both the teachers and the students without serving as a roadblock to children like my own--kids that will benefit from strong instructional practice, devoted teachers and patience, then as a former classroom teacher and a special needs parent--HURRAY! But let's do it without insulting or demeaning teachers. A teacher unsure of how to deal with classroom challenges is not necessarily a weak teachers or bad people. I am always fearful that many children who deserve Special Education Support (and have a legal right to it) will be denied those services. I am reassured by our local RtI team and consultants that that is not the case, but believe me, I will be watching. Lori On 9/2/08 10:09 PM, "Beverlee Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > from Response to Intervention: A Framework for Reading Educators (Fuchs, > Fuchs, and Vaughn-editors), p. 78 - M.J. McLaughlin writes that - "many > consider students with LD, behavior disorders, and mild mental retardation > labels to be products of a general education system that has failed 'to > adequately support individual differences.'" Although she allows that most of > these children perform very poorly in school, she argues that (a) they are not > disabled and don't require 'vastly different and highly specialized curriculum > or instruction'; (b) their 'disabilities' are little more than social > constructions; and (c) the 6.6 million children currently served by special > education across the nation may be reduced by 75% to 1.65 million, or from 13% > of the general population to 3.25%." p. 79, "McLaughlin states that > standards-driven reforms, expressed with increasing clarity and conviction in > a succession of federal documents for more than a decade, make it clear that > most children currently identified as disabled will become nondisabled with > the 'right' general education in place." > > So Carrie asks us all what we are doing to help. What we are doing to insert > some sense into the current state of affairs. > > And Debbie hopes that we can continue to live "above the fray" (my > characterization, not hers) and share positive teaching ideas to improve > instruction. > > Unfortunately, as unnatural as I believe it to be for many dedicated teachers, > "politics" sometimes become inevitable when our positive teaching ideas are > mutually exclusive from the practices recommended--no, demanded--by those > currently in power. I don't say "in fashion" or "a trend" because, for > possibly the first time in American education, practice is changing through > the use of power, and it isn't just the swinging of the pendulum by and of > educators; it's power outside education altogether. And that wouldn't even be > so hard to take if we could even pretend that it was not predicated on corrupt > financial interests, cronyism, and elitism. > > I've been basically apolitical my entire life. Like most of you, I've just > plain been too busy to dabble in politics. But this isn't a time we can all > "hold hands and sing kumbaya." As much as I hate to accept the responsibility > Carrie is pleading for us to accept, it's finally become inescapable. > > As you can infer from McLaughlin's comments above, she believes that if we > would all just shape up and do our job and be accountable, we could be all > things to all people. And we call that view "progress"? One of the leading > voices in the RtoI movement? Can we really swallow she wants better for our > kids? our teachers? > > What strategies would we teach our children to use to comprehend passages such > as above? > > Believe me, I didn't volunteer to be so shrill and seem so reactionary and > defensive. But sometimes someone just needs to stand up and say that there's > something rotten in ... Denmark?? > > WWES? > > > >> Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 22:33:38 -0400> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: >> mosaic@literacyworkshop.org> Subject: Re: [MOSAIC] RtI> > > If people are >> afraid of RTI it seems to me that they don't understand it. RTI = response to >> intervention. Isn't that what all of us reading teachers have been asking for >> for years???? A way to provide services to kids we know are struggling are >> struggling but who will not qualify for sped because of the discrepency >> model? I, for one, am thrilled to be able to provide support to those kiddos. >> If RTI isn't working, it's not because of the model, it's because of how the >> model is being delivered. RTI doesn't have to be just DIBELS and fluency. >> Other assessments/screening tools can and should be used either instead of or >> along with DIBELS. Poor fluency is not a reading deficiency, it is a symptom >> of a reading deficiency. I have often had teachers tell me that a student's >> fluency was poor, but never had that been a reason for referral to my Title I >> class. Now that we are using DIBELS, I am seeing many kids who struggle with >> fluency. I am finding that it isn't just that they can't say the words >> fluency and with appropriate expression, they can't "think" the words fluency >> or with the appropriate expression. And that is the key to understanding what >> they read. I don't think you will find very many good readers (a very vague >> term, and not able to be objectively measured) who are not also fluent. I do >> find fluent word-callers who do not have any idea what they read. While >> DIBELS may not identify these children, the other measures we have in place >> will (DRA2, common assessments, etc.) I don't take offense to anyone asking >> me to be accountable for teaching ALL aspects of reading - which is more than >> fluency, more than comprehension, more than phonics, more than phonemic >> awareness, and more than vocabulary - it's all of them. I welcome the >> accountability factor that is being placed on the schools/teachers in this >> area. I have spent too many parent conferences trying to explain why darling >> Johnny needs to be in my reading class when his classroom teacher has given >> him a B or better in reading on his grade card. I am so pleased to be ale to >> show parents the data on their child. It helps them better understand what >> support the child needs. > > Maybe I am just extremely fortunate to be in a >> district that seems to "get it", and support the true balance of literacy >> instruction. Our building reading cadre last year taught the 7 strategies >> from Mosaic and 7 Keys and this year we are following the timeline for >> teaching found on the mosaic site. The teachers are really excited about >> teaching them and all the kids are talking about metacognition. We have hand >> signals and it's like a big "secret" in the school that only our students >> know - they have taken such pride and ownership in their learning. With the >> classroom teachers taking on this huge responsibility I am freed up to help >> those kids with the other things, like, uh.... fluency :) (and vocabulary and >> phonics, phonemic awareness) > > Our teachers were already used to being held >> accountable and had to turn in guided reading lists every quarter so that >> principal could see how "fluid" the groups were and DRA/RR levels had to be >> reports quarterly as well. We keep an assessment wall in our conference room >> that does not show teacher or student names on the front of each card, but it >> is a great visual for keeping us all tuned in to how many kids are having >> trouble and how much trouble they are having. With these accountability >> pieces already in place, they are ready to move to the DRA2 and anxious to >> learn more about fluency instruction/remediation and what they can do to >> improve that during their guided reading lessons. > > It doesn't seem >> appropriate to condemn the RTI model because a district may not be >> implementing it properly. Just like every other "trend", RTI will swing back >> and forth a little before settling in to where it belongs.> > I am hoping >> that this listserve will not become a political forum (even though I am >> guilty with this post), and that we will remain focused on sharing positive >> ideas for improving instruction for the kids.> > Debbie> > > ----- Original >> Message -----> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: mosaic@literacyworkshop.org> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 2, 2008 8:17:20 PM (GMT-0600) America/Chicago> >> Subject: Re: [MOSAIC] RtI> > > RTI---just like NCLB--- is a good idea gone >> very, very wrong. What has to > happen is data collection. We need to collect >> evidence and document the damage > done and share it with whoever will >> listen. Data can be a double edged sword. > Let's use it for the good of >> children. It doesn't have to be numerical > data...it just needs to be clear >> and convincing evidence presented to the press, > administrators, >> politicians, anyone who will listen.> > I read two books on RTI this summer >> because our district is starting to move > this direction. One very positive >> part of RTI...as it is originally > intended...is that we can identify kids >> for extra help without using the discrepancy > model. It always drives me >> nuts that I have to wait until a child is two > years behind before he or she >> qualified for extra help. By then, it is almost too > late and it becomes >> incredibly HARD to help the child. What saves us in my > district is that we >> get NO Reading First money and no mandate to implement RTI > as many of you >> have described here. We have the chance here to try to > improve classroom >> instruction and find extra time and new ways to use personnel to > target >> children who need the most help. > > My students need extra time and work in >> comprehension, so we will be using > Soar to Success as an intervention. From >> what I can tell, this program does > NOT seem to be contradictory to best >> practices as we have discussed here on the > listserv. I do not have to use a >> script...I can use what I know about these > kids to plan lessons for THEIR >> needs. And I can tweak lessons...so far the > 'fidelity police' have not made >> it to this corner of Maryland.> > SO...having said that...thanks to those who >> have sent synthesis > ideas...Anyone have any great synthesis lessons for >> primary aged kids---grade 2 and 3? > Good book ideas? I can't be the only one >> who has struggled with this!> Jennifer> > > > In a message dated 9/2/2008 >> 11:54:18 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> writes:> > >From Beverly:> > ..............if we just ignore the RtI-ers, we >> are able to teach in the> way we see is best for our kids. :-( > > > > >> Beverly and others:> > I am an administrator and I am having a very hard time >> "ignoring" RtI -> it is a law in my state - in fact our law has gone above >> and beyond the> federal guidelines. I do not have a classroom where I can >> just shut my> door and teach the way I believe - which is also supported by >> tons and> tons of research. So, what do I do? Our state is requiring that an> >> enormous amount of resources be put toward this "law" without the first> idea >> of what it means and how it is ruining our kids' education! I am> extremely >> concerned and I have been saying so for over a year with> little to no >> response from anyone. I feel like people are just> following the herd - like >> they've just given up and feel they are doomed> to state oversight and WORST >> practice in education as opposed to best> practice. I would hope that those >> who subscribe to this listserv are> the professionals that could actually do >> something about this. It won't> happen if we just moan and groan - teachers >> pointing fingers at> administration and administrators pointing fingers at >> the state. What> are people out there really doing about this?!?!?!?! > > > > >> Carrie> > K-8, IL> > > > > > > **************It's only a deal if it's where >> you want to go. Find your travel > deal here. > >> (http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)> >> _______________________________________________> Mosaic mailing list> >> Mosaic@literacyworkshop.org> To unsubscribe or modify your membership please >> go to> >> http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org.> > >> Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive. > > > > >> _______________________________________________> Mosaic mailing list> >> Mosaic@literacyworkshop.org> To unsubscribe or modify your membership please >> go to> >> http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org.> > >> Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get ideas on sharing photos from people like you. Find new ways to share. > http://www.windowslive.com/explore/photogallery/posts?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Photo_ > Gallery_082008 > _______________________________________________ > Mosaic mailing list > Mosaic@literacyworkshop.org > To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to > http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org. > > Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive. > -- Lori Jackson District Literacy Coach & Mentor Todd County School District Box 87 Mission SD 57555 http:www.tcsdk12.org ph. 605.856.2211 Literacies for All Summer Institute July 17-20. 2008 Tucson, Arizona _______________________________________________ Mosaic mailing list Mosaic@literacyworkshop.org To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org. Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive.
