Article One: Looking Back, Looking Forward

Dear Simmons Friends,

Hello again. I have been reading from our book Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading - Fifth Edition by Robert Ruddell and Norman Unrau. Below I have shared some thoughts from the first article. Please feel free to post your thoughts or any additional important information that you feel will add to the completion of a summary. Again, this is a new adventure that we are taking together. Your ideas are more than welcome. We are in this together. Many minds make for great things. I have no idea if that is a real quote or even makes a lot of sense, but the more the merrier. I look forward to hearing from you.

Thanks for your time,
Debbie Shanks : )

Looking Back, Looking Forward: A Conversation About Teaching Reading in the 21st Century

This first article written by Richard l. Allington and Anne McGill-Franzen is an interesting conversation between the authors. After a brief introduction, each author speaks via representation of their initials.

Important notes (please add your notes too):
*1890 -10% of students were enrolled in secondary schools, compulsory attendance was spotty.
*1920 -Universal high school education was required in most states, however 2/3 students failed to graduate.
*1954-Brown v: Board of Education of Topeka undid the separate but equal doctrine and lead for U.S. Federal government involvement in education.
*1959 - The National Defense Education Act added guidance counselors to support gifted students and funded teachers to work specifically in low-income communities.
*1960‘s-1970’s - Skills-mastery curriculum models and materials
*1964 - The Civil Rights Act
*1965 - Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)-federal intervention in local schools.
*1970‘s-1980’s - Minimum competency testing implemented. Often unsatisfactory in schools enrolling many students from lower income families.
*1971 - National Assessment of Education (NAEP) initiated by federal government to monitor student achievement in basic skills.
*1980’s - Schema theory and emphasis on comprehension .
*1980 - Release of A Nation at Risk and Becoming a Nation of Readers bring to forefront need for more federal involvement in education.
*Late 1980’s -1990’s - Implementation of literature-based instruction, process approaches to writing, and integration of language arts .

It was interesting to me that throughout this article and throughout time, educators have faced many of the same battles. One such battle is the need for education to raise the skills of students for global competition where more highly skilled workers are needed. This need was noted in the early 1900‘s in the article and continues to hold true today. In the 1930’s and 1940’s the press found fault with current instructional practices. This has a very familiar ring to it. Throughout the 1930’s, 1940’s and 1950’s consistent complaints about U.S. schools were touted and reform plans were implemented one after another. Today’s schools continue with this frenzied cycle. Many veteran educators are heard saying that new reform plans are the same old thing with a new name. Same ole story, different day.

Another same story but different day trend is Title One remediation typically beginning in third grade or later. Intervention at this late date is counter productive. Although some slow, steady improvements have been noted for improving achievement of economically disadvantaged students through Title One, early intervention is most effective. Another trend that seems to be cyclical is the trend to retain students that are having difficulty with basic skills or additional identification of students with disabilities in order to curtail low-performing students from grades that require state testing; therefore skewing test results. State or city takeovers of low-performing, often low-income districts and fear of public humiliation of poor test results may be to blame for this trend. Poor children and children of color are more likely to be held accountable for districts not performing well on standards. The same ole story, different day trend continues.

Amazingly, another trend throughout this article and other readings we have been assigned is that the most effective teachers teach children, not materials. We continually read that effective teachers know what to be explicit about and when. The curriculum is designed by students and the knowledge they bring to the classroom and by teachers and their understanding of the students in their charge and materials available for use. Exemplary teachers use multiple curriculum materials, teacher made as well as prepackaged curricular. The practice of special programs largely segregated from the core curriculum and the general classroom needs to be a thing of the past. The ideal classroom of the future will place an emphasis on an in-class model where there is collaboration among general education and special programs personnel. More professional development will be offered for teachers to improve instruction of disadvantaged as well as all students in their classes. Finally, out-of-school programs like after school, extended day and summer school programs will be implemented for students that require additional support with their academic needs.

All in all, this article coupled with what we have been learning through Simmons is a step in the right direction. Our knowledge, when shared with colleagues, administrators and parents will not only benefit our students, but hopefully will rid education of the cyclical trend of the same ole story, different day practices mentioned above.