Ellin, I have written some responses to your thoughts. Mine are in bold below yours. Maureen
I've read with interest your very interesting and relevant conversation about scripted programs and would like to share my thoughts. The most troubling issue, probably too obvious problem to even mention is that, by definition, no script or program or pre-planned lesson can be directly responsive to the immediate needs of the children any one of us serves. I think this issue is not mentioned often enough on the Literacy taskforces or committees in districts that are looking to "adopt" a series. Or if it is mentioned, it is brushed under the table with a quick, "of course we know not one size fits all, but it will be the basis for instruction and then the teacher will tailor the instruction for the students." In practice, the adopted program becomes the curriculum, and many teachers do not vary from it. I'm also concerned about the proliferation of these programs because of what they seem to indicate about teachers' knowledge base and professionalism. What assumptions do the programs and those who purchase them make about teachers' knowledge of reading theory and therefore, their ability to make timely, relevant instructional decisions? Obviously, they assume a very uneven (some teachers have superb knowledge base and others have big holes in their theoretical background due largely to the institutions where they did pre-service and graduate work) knowledge base among our colleagues. Here's the tricky question - DO we know enough to make those decisions? Really? Of course, I believe that our colleagues who interact on this list serv and many, many of those with whom we work, do know reading theory and can make the best decisions for their students on a day -to-day basis. The question that is more troubling to me relates to those teachers, who, through no fault of their own, have not had adequate background in reading theory. What do we believe about those colleagues? Reading research is not exactly reader-friendly nor is it very accessible for many in our field. How do we access the research and make sense of it when there are, quite simply, thousands of studies over decades, some of which are well done and others not? I believe this is exactly the question that leads many schools and districts to take the easy (though far more perilous) road. They simply make up for uneven by purchasing a program. One can almost see them dusting their hands of the problem with a quick "whew, that's taken care of". As a new adjunct prof in the graduate literacy dep't at two small colleges, I can attest to the fact that somehow teachers are making it into the classrooms with little or no theoretical base or even exposure to a variety of thoughts on the teaching of literacy. It is disheartening to say the least. I also see, in my capacity as a classroom teacher, new hires that follow the prescriptive programs to the letter from the beginning. I am not sure if they are insecure in their own abilities to make decisions, or they are scared, or that they are in teaching for the wrong reasons to begin with. It is rare to find a reflective, thoughtful newbie where I work just north of NYC. This is exactly why I wrote To Understand. I believe that those of us who no longer have daily classroom responsibilities owe it to our colleagues to stay abreast of the research and to present it in a manageable (we hope!!) and understandable way to colleagues who, by virtue of their daily responsibilities with children don't have the time or access to digest dozens of studies each year. For example, the What's Essential model in To Understand is a synthesis of decades of research on the most essential elements in reading content/curriculum that distills the studies I've read over the last 20 years or so related to what we should teach when we teach reading. Others have distilled other areas of the research and created models to help practitioners understand research trends and theoretical premises. Do I wish that our profession supported opportunities for all professionals to read and digest research? Of course I do, but that simply isn't realistic and I can't imagine how it ever will be. Those of us whose practice has taken us out of the classroom simply, in my view, have a responsibility to make this information available and create opportunities to discuss it on behalf of our colleagues. I will be buying a copy of this book and sharing it. Thank you so much for writing it! Will knowledge of the research lead to the demise of these programs? Of course it will not, but it will arm teachers with the knowledge base they need to argue thoughtfully and professionally with district policy makers when they are edging toward the decision to purchase a program. If we can provide the knowledge support for teachers to make their case I believe we can stave off many of these troubling decisions. This has been a battle for all of my 26 years in the classroom. I am ever the optimist, although it is the same uphill battle that has been going on for a long time. When I started teaching in the early 80's, I was lucky enough (or it was divine intervention) to be in Tucson where Whole Language was getting rolling. I met supportive colleagues and professors whose level of desire and need to understand the learning of language at the brain level was informing instructional decisions on a minute by minute basis. What needs to happen is that students at the earliest levels need to be taught to be metacognitive about their language learning. If this is fostered through high school and into college, then education programs will have to meet the challenging questions new teachers will ask, such as, "but how does the learningof language happen?" and "how do I support it and help students move to their next step on the continuum?" We cannot expect undergrad students and new teachers to suddenly become metacognitive just because they are going to enter the world of literacy instruction; and teachers MUST be reflective learners themselves in order to gain the knowledge base they need! _______________________________________________ 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.
