Evidence-Based Instruction/Reading Programs

Some questions sent to me on Facebook:  What’s the latest on evidence based curriculum in reading? I am doing a paper on the whole part whole approach to learning reading. Also doing a lot of research about the DIBELS testing and the Reading First part of NCLB.  Anything new you learned that I would be shocked to hear?

Well Sarah, I don’t think I have anything to “shock” you with.  As a resource teacher, I use Leveled Literacy Intervention (LLI).  This model comes from Fountas/Pinnell (the writers of what I call the Literacy Bible – “Guiding Readers and Writers”).  LLI is similar to Reading Recovery in many ways, but is designed for instruction of up to 3 or 4 students at a time.  This makes the program more cost effective to school districts because Reading Recovery was designed for a 1:1 teacher to student ratio.  I’ve found that LLI is a very systematic and effective intervention for students struggling in reading.

If the students I see don’t seem to be showing the growth I’d like to see in LLI, then I try the Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing Program (LiPS).  When using LiPS, you talk with students about how sounds feel.  What is your tongue doing when you say “t”?  You use names like Tip Tappers, Tongue Scrapers, and Lip Poppers to describe the sounds that the letters represent.  I personally see this as a more intense intervention to be used sparingly, but I’ve heard of people using it with an entire class.

However, both of these programs are interventions.  In the RtI model, they would likely be Tier 2 instruction.  This tier of instruction is for students who were not successful when taught with an evidence based core curriculum in the whole class setting.  You mention Reading First.  I honestly am not very familiar with this program, but know teachers who are a part of Reading First schools.  From what I hear, it is research-based and is also a very scripted and supervised program.  However, I recently learned that “Evidence-based” doesn’t necessarily mean a packaged program.

This week I was at Indiana’s Response to Intervention Academy for three days in Indianapolis.  According to a couple of the presenters, evidence based instruction (at the Tier 1 level/all students) has the following components:

-Teachers use multiple data sources to know the students – Essential skills and strategies are taught – Differentiated instruction is taught based on assessment results – Explicit and systematic instruction with lots of practice (a spiraling curriculum) – Opportunities are provided to apply skills in a meaningful context with teacher support – Student progress is monitored regularly and re-taught as necessary

So, it’s conceivable to have an evidence-based core reading curriculum, without having a packaged program if the criteria above are being met.  As you can see, this will require getting some good data and DIBELS may be one of those sources.  I’ve never used DIBELS, but I hear it gives some good information.  Unfortunately, I also hear that it really doesn’t tell you anything about comprehension.  So, a teacher might want to give a Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) in conjuction.  I use the Fountas & Pinnell Benchmarking System because it correlates with LLI.  Marie Clay’s Observation Survey yields some great information as well.  There are also some great software programs out there like NWEA, Success Maker, and Waterford for primary students.

Sorry for the long post!  I’ll try to get some links to some of the names I’ve mentioned.  Feel free to keep the conversation going by commenting or asking more questions.  I certainly don’t have all the answers, but together we can at least become a bit more informed!

Fight or Flight OR…

Today I was trying to explain to a co-worker why I want to pursue leadership in schools, even though I struggle with “the system.”  I was saying how 5 years ago, I wanted nothing to do with administration because I didn’t want to be a part of the system.

As I’ve though more about this today, I’ve come to some realizations.  One is that, if you are a teacher, you ARE a part of the system, like it or not.  You can say that you are not responsible for policies set forth by the leadership, but you are part of it, nevertheless.

I also found that there are two reactions one experiences when there is a discrepancy between the way things are and the way things could potentially change for the better.  This is the old “fight or flight” theory as it relates to conflict.  One can escape or one can choose to struggle to improve the situation.  I guess that’s how I look at my journey toward school leadership.  I am not naive enough to believe I can fix all the problems in a system or that I won’t make mistakes.  However, I think many teachers,students, and parents feel victimized by school systems.  The very word “system” conjures up images of a cold machine in my mind.  Schools are more organisms that systems.  They are in a constant state of change – different students and teachers, new curricula, different amounts of funding, different leaders and dynamics of relationships.  Therefore, in order to stay healthy, schools must adapt to their environment, as all living things do.

I guess fight or flight are not the only two categories.  Some educators may embrace the system and fail to find its flaws.  I would venture to say this is a very rare breed.  And then there are those who see the problems inherent in systems and, out of fear, can neither flee nor fight.  They cannot risk the financial cost of finding a new career and will not risk the emotional toll of struggling to improve the quality of education.  They are powerless pawns living as if predestined to be a cog in the giant machine.

Anyone with this mindset has lost confidence in the importance of their position as a teacher, or possibly never understood their role to begin with.  I’ve gone a little long on this one, but will comment soon on ways to empower ourselves as educators and improve the overall health of our organizations.  Please feel free to add any of your own thoughts to this post!